Influence of moisture stress management practices on growth, yield and quality of sugarcane

Introduction

Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) is an important commercial crop, and the sugar industry is the second-largest agro-based industry in the country. Sugarcane is a backbone of the Indian agricultural economy and supports around 50 million cane growers. Specifically, the crop plays a pivotal role in South Gujarat's agrarian economy, where it remains a primary cash crop for thousands of farmers (Shah, 2026) [1] . Beyond its direct contribution to farm income, sugarcane production is deeply woven into the region's socio-political fabric, with Gujarat producing approximately 13.3 million tonnes of cane annually (Chauhan et al., 2025) [2] . Despite its economic significance, the crop often faces severe moisture stress during its formative growth stage, particularly when soil moisture deficits coincide with the intense heat of the summer season (Pooja et al., 2019) [3] . This vulnerability during the initial establishment phase often leads to poor germination and tiller suppression, which are key determinants of final stalk population and overall crop yield. The sugarcane crop faces a major setback due to unpredictable monsoon behaviour and climate changemoisture stress coupled with high temperatures results in poor germination, reduced tillering, and higher tiller mortality. In the South Saurashtra region of Gujarat, the sugarcane crop faces water-deficit conditions due to a declining groundwater table and reduced availability of irrigation water from seasonal rivers and canals during the summer season. When this crop is sown during January-February, it experiences moisture stress during the formative phase of crop growth, which coincides with the summer months. Sugarcane is most vulnerable to moisture stress during the formative stage, which affects tillering, reduces stalk population, and limits initial stalk growth. Low atmospheric humidity during the formative stage (April-June) adversely affects the crop. A dry spell during the formative phase affects cane population and consequently reduces cane yield (Singh et al., 1980) [4] . Singh et al. (1997) [5] also reported that soil moisture stress during the formative phase significantly increased stomatal diffusive resistance, thereby decreasing transpiration rate, sucrose per cent in juice, and cane yield. Sugarcane is adaptable to a wide range of agricultural conditions, but abiotic stresses generally limit its productivity. Drought combined with high temperatures during the summer months is known to reduce cane yields in both tropical and subtropical climates. To counter these limitations, implementing advanced agro-techniques-such as optimized irrigation scheduling, mulching, and strategic row spacing-is essential to preserve soil moisture and stabilize crop performance. Overcoming the adverse effects of moisture stress requires moisture-conservation techniques and other agro-techniques to increase sugarcane productivity. Many workers have advocated several low-cost agro-techniques, such as trash mulching and foliar nutrient sprays, to use available soil moisture efficiently. Trash mulching is a useful technique for conserving soil moisture and reducing the adverse effects of moisture stress. It also moderates soil temperature and improves germination, tiller survival, and growth. Sundra (1985) [6] reported that trash mulching soon after planting, combined with urea spray @ 2.5%, gave higher cane and sugar yields. Singh et al. (2008) [7] concluded that combined use of lime soaking of setts, FYM, trash mulch, foliar spray of urea and KCl and an additional dose of potassium at 170 DAP produced significantly higher yield and improved juice quality. Patil et al. (2009) [8] obtained maximum cane yield with the foliar spray of kaolin (6%) followed by soil application of K 2 O and foliar spray of KCl. By integrating these agronomic interventions, farmers can effectively mitigate evaporative water losses and maintain soil fertility, thereby fostering sustainable yield improvements in water-limiting environments (Singh et al., 2025) [9] . Furthermore, adopting water-efficient irrigation management strategies and selecting drought-resilient genotypes are vital for sustaining productivity. The tillering phase is the most moisture-sensitive stage in sugarcane (Mahadevaiah et al., 2021) [10] . In this context, the present investigation was conducted to identify suitable agrotechniques to mitigate the adverse effects of water-deficit conditions during the formative stage of crop growth and improve sugarcane growth, yield, and quality.

Materials and Methods

The field experiment was conducted at Main Sugarcane Research Station, Junagadh Agricultural University, Kodinar, Gujarat (India) to determine the suitable agro-techniques for improving growth, yield and yield components and quality of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) under moisture stress conditions, particularly during the formative stage during 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17. The research station is located at 20.82° N latitude and 70.68° E longitude, at an elevation of 15 m above mean sea level. The experimental site soil was clayey, with pH 7.77, EC 0.55 dSm -1 , organic carbon 0.66%, available P 2 O 5 24.75 kg/ha, and K 2 O 455.33 kg/ha. The experiment was laid out in randomized block design with four replications. The treatments comprised two mulching levels (M 1 -Without mulch and M 2 -Trash mulch @ 5 t/ha) and four chemical spray treatments (S 1 -Control, S 2 -KCl @ 2.5%, S 3 -Urea @ 2.5%, and S 4 -Urea + KCl each @ 2.5%). The recommended dose of fertilizers, viz. 250, 125 and 125 kg/ha N, P 2 O 5 and K 2 O, respectively, was applied to the crop. Sugarcane variety CoN 91132 was planted during the first week of February in each year and harvested during the first fortnight of February of the following year. Trash mulching was applied four to six days after planting and incorporated into the soil during earthing up. The water-deficit condition was imposed from 60 to 150 days after planting by applying irrigation once every 15-20 days. The crop was treated as a normal crop for irrigation before 60 and after 150 days after planting. The chemical sprays were applied at 60, 80, and 100 days after planting. Other agronomic practices and disease and pest management were followed as per the recommendations. Growth parameters, including germination, millable cane height and stalk diameter, were recorded at the respective stages of crop growth. At harvest, five millable canes were selected randomly from each plot to assess yield attributes and juicequality parameters. Cane juice was extracted with a sugar cane crusher, and juice quality was evaluated according to the method described by Spencer et al. (1955) [11] . Sugar yield was calculated as:

Sugar yield (t/ha) = CCS % × cane yield (t/ha)/100. Juice extraction per cent was calculated as:

Juice extraction (%) = Weight of juice (kg) Weight of cane (kg) × 100. The relative leaf water content was estimated by the method prescribed by Barrs et al. (1962) [

. Benefit-cost ratio (B: C) was calculated by dividing the gross returns by the total cost of cultivation and was used to compare treatment profitability. Data collected over the three consecutive years were statistically analyzed using standard statistical procedures (Gomez et al., 1984) [13] . The critical difference (CD) was computed to determine statistically significant differences between treatments. Year-to-year variation was minimal and not statistically significant for most parameters; therefore, data from the three years were combined and presented as pooled means.

Results and Discussion

Growth parameters

The pooled data from the three-year study (Table 1) indicated that germination percentage was not significantly influenced by either mulching or foliar application of agrochemicals. However, trash mulch @ 5 t/ha significantly increased millable cane height, stalk diameter, and single cane weight compared with no mulch. This response may be attributed to improved soil-moisture conservation and moderation of soil temperature in the mulched plots. These effects are particularly important during the formative stage, when moisture stress can restrict stalk elongation, cane weight, and the number of millable canes. These results conform to the findings of Rana et al. (2003) [14] , who also observed improvements in shoot height, shoot dry matter, cane length, cane girth, and cane yield with trash mulching over no mulching. Further review of pooled data (Table 1) indicated that foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5% significantly increased millable cane height and single cane weight over the control. However, millable cane height remained on par with KCl spray @ 2.5%. The favourable response to potassium under moisture stress may relate to its role in stomatal regulation and plant-water relations, which could help to maintain tissue hydration and physiological activity when soil-water availability was limited. These results are in agreement with the findings of Hunshal et al. (1996) [15] , who reported that foliar application of muriate of potash spray (2.5%) and foliar spray of muriate of potash (2.0%) + urea (2.0%) recorded maximum single cane weight. However, foliar application of the agrochemicals did not significantly affect stalk diameter.

Yield attributes and yield

Perusal of the three-year pooled data presented in Table 1 revealed that trash mulching influenced cane yield and yield attributes at the level of significance. Application of trash mulch @ 5 t/ha recorded significantly higher cane yield (100.05 t/ha) as compared to no mulch (88.10 t/ha), increasing yield by 13.56%. This improvement may be attributed to the more favourable soil micro environment created by the mulch. Trash mulching reduces direct soil-water evaporation, suppresses weed growth, and moderates fluctuations in soil temperature, improving soil moisture availability during periods of water deficit. Rana et al. (2002) [16] , Dahiya et al. (2008) [17] , and Kumar et al. (2015) [18] also reported a positive influence of trash mulching on cane yield. Such conservation measures are recognized as important components of sustainable sugarcane production under water-limiting conditions. The improved moisture regime may have supported tiller survival, stalk elongation, and final millable cane production. Further perusal of pooled data indicated that trash mulching produced significantly higher commercial cane sugar (11.65 t/ha) than no mulching (10.08 t/ha). A similar trend was observed for the number of millable canes. Mathew et al. (2003) [19] stated that mulching significantly enhanced cane length, cane weight, cane girth, number of millable canes and cane yield. Pooled data (Table 1) showed that foliar application of urea + KCl, each @ 2.5%, recorded significantly higher cane yield (105.53 t/ha) than the control (82.80 t/ha). The combined spray of urea + KCl increased cane yield by 27.45, 9.61, and 14.69% compared with the control, KCl, and urea sprays alone, respectively. Jaybal et al. (1990) [20] , Manickam et al. (2009) [21] , and Patil et al. (2009) [8] have earlier reported the favourable effect of urea + KCl sprays in enhancing cane yield under moisture stress. Cane yield results from additive and complementary effects of plant growth and yield-attributing characters. The combined spray of agrochemicals favourably influenced all growth-and yield-attributing characters; therefore, their cumulative effect also increased cane yield. Adequate potassium availability appears to contribute significantly to growth and yield improvement under drought conditions. Potassium regulates stomatal opening and closure and supports osmotic adjustment, thereby helping plants main-tain water balance under moisture stress. Foliar spray of urea may have complemented this response by supplying nitrogen directly to the foliage and supporting chlorophyll formation, photosynthetic activity, and biomass production. The combined availability of nitrogen and potassium may therefore have improved canopy development and sustained assimilate production during the stress period. Urea enhances potassium absorption in leaf tissue, thereby positively influencing shoot population and final cane production (Manoharan et al., 1992) [22] . Mohan Naidu et al. (1983) [23] also reported that foliar-applied potash was more effective when combined with urea. In another study, it was found that spraying urea (2.5%) + KCl (2.5%) enhanced the leaf area, and this increased leaf area was maintained during water stress, which ultimately helped in increased cane yield (Rao et al., 2002) [24] . The highest commercial cane sugar was obtained with foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5% (12.34 t/ha) over control (9.40 t/ha), KCl @ 2.5% (11.08 t/ha) and urea @ 2.5% (10.63 t/ha). The highest number of millable canes was obtained under foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5% over the control, followed by KCl @ 2.5%. These results indicated that the treatment improved both cane productivity and sugar recovery primarily through its positive effects on stalk population and individual cane growth.

Quality parameters

The pooled data of three years presented in Table 2 indicated that trash mulching did not significantly affect quality parameters, including brix, sucrose, purity, commercial cane sugar, and juice-extraction percentage. Rana et al. (2002) [16] reported similar results, noting that trash mulching did not significantly affect any sugarcane quality parameters. The absence of a significant quality response suggested that trash mulching primarily improved cane productivity through moisture conservation and growth enhancement rather than through changes in juice composition. Further reference to data (Table 2) showed that different foliar agrochemical treatments had no significant effect on juice quality parameters. Thus, the higher cane yield obtained with the combined urea + KCl spray was not accompanied by a significant alteration in brix, sucrose, purity, or juice-extraction percentage. This is important under water-deficit conditions because moisture stress can affect both cane growth and quality, depending on its timing and intensity.

Physiological parameters

Trash mulching @ 5 t/ha significantly improved relative leaf water content at 65, 95, and 125 days after planting compared with no mulching. The higher relative leaf water content indicated that trash mulching improved plant-water status during the imposed moisturestress period. This response is scientifically consistent with the capacity of surface residues to reduce evaporative water loss and maintain greater soil-water availability in the crop root zone. Improved leaf hy-dration would help to maintain cell turgor, stomatal function, leaf expansion, and photosynthetic activity, thereby supporting tillering and stalk development during the formative stage. Further perusal of data indicated that significantly higher relative leaf water content was recorded under foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5 % as compared to control at 65, 95 and 125 days after planting and remained at par with the foliar spray of KCl @ 2.5 % (Table 2). These results conform to the findings of Hunshal et al. (1996) [15] .

Interaction effect

The interaction effect between sugarcane trash mulching and foliar spray of agrochemicals significantly affected cane yield. The pooled analyzed three-year data (Table 3 and Fig. 1) indicated that treatment combination M 2 x S 4 (Trash mulching @ 5 t/ha and foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5 %) produced the highest cane yield (109.68 t/ha) and was significantly superior to the other treatment combinations. The second highest yield was recorded with over other treatment combinations with M 1 S 4 . These findings are in agreement with Rao et al. (2002) [24] , who observed that trash mulching coupled with spraying urea (2.5%) + KCl (2.5%) at 1:1 concentration and split application of potash significantly improved the cane yield under soil moisture stress. The superiority of M 2 x S 4 on cane yield might also be attributed to the conservation of soil moisture and, as such, the nutrient uptake by the crop, which leads to the vigorous growth of the crop. Trash mulch likely maintained a more favourable root-zone moisture regime, while the combined foliar spray supported nutrient availability and physiological activity during the stress period. Improved plant-water status, nutrient uptake, tiller survival, and stalk development would collectively contribute to greater cane yield. The integrated use of conservation practices and nutrient management is therefore particularly relevant for stabilising sugarcane productivity in water-limiting environments (Singh et al., 2025) [9] .

Economics

The three-year mean data (Table 4) showed that the cost of cultivation and net return of sugarcane were strongly influenced by various treatment combinations. Among the treatments, M 2 S 4 (trash mulching @ 5 t/ha and foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5%) produced the highest net return of Rs. 182,111, with a benefit-cost ratio of 2.97.

This was followed by 𝑀 1 𝑆 4 , which recorded a net return of Rs.

164,084 and a benefit-cost ratio of 2.83. The greater profitability of 𝑀 2 𝑆 4 was primarily associated with its higher cane yield and the resulting increase in gross returns. In water-limited production systems, these technologies conserve soil moisture while improving yield, which can enhance both water productivity and economic sustainability.

Conclusion

Based on the results over three years, trash mulching @ 5 t/ha combined with foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5% produced the highest cane yield. Considering cane yield, net returns, and the benefit-cost ratio, application of trash mulching @ 5 t/ha and foliar spray of urea + muriate of potash each @ 2.5 % at 60, 80 and 100 days after planting was found superior over other treatment combinations. Accordingly, the treatment combination M 2 S 4 (trash mulching @ 5 t/ha and foliar spray of urea + KCl each @ 2.5 %) may be recommended for farmers growing sugarcane under water-deficit conditions. Thus, trash mulching @ 5 t/ha and foliar application of urea + KCl (Muriate of potash) each @ 2.5 % (2.5 kg urea + 2.5 kg KCl in 100 liters of water) at 60, 80 and 100 days after planting can help to secure higher cane yields and net returns, particularly when moisture stress occurs during the formative stage.

Based on the study conducted over three years, it may be concluded that application of trash mulch @ 5 t/ha, four to six days after planting, combined with foliar application of urea + muriate of potash each @ 2.5 %, at 60, 80 and 100 days after planting is recommended for spring-planted sugarcane under water deficit conditions, particularly during the formative stage for securing higher cane yield and net return.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors are thankful to the Director of Research, Junagadh Agricultural University, Junagadh, for providing the necessary facilities throughout the investigation. *************

References

1. Shah GB. An advanced econometric analysis of sugarcane cultivation in the south region of Gujarat. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology. 2026;11(1):8261829.
2. Chauhan YR, Khodifad PB, Patel RA. Technological gap and its relationship with profile characteristics of sugarcane growers in recommended sugarcane cultivation technologies. Gujarat Journal of Extension Education. 2025;39(2):173-183.
3. Pooja, Nandwal AS, Mehar Chand, Kumari A, Rani B, Goel V, Singh S. Genotypic differences in growth behavior and quality parameters of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) varieties under moisture stress conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2019;89(1):65-72.
4. Singh S, Reddy MS. Growth, yield and juice quality performance of sugarcane varieties under different soil regimes in relation to drought resistance. Proceedings of International Society of Sugarcane Technologies. 1980;17:541-555.
5. Singh S, Tiwari TN, Srivastava RP, Singh GP. Effect of potassium on stomatal behaviour yield and juice quality of sugarcane under moisture stress condition. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology. 1997;3(4):303-305.
6. Sundra B. Effect of trash mulching, urea spray and late application of potassium on sugarcane grown under limited irrigation. Indian Sugar. 1985;35:211-219.
7. Singh AK, Lal Menhi, Singh I, Yadav RL, Yadav DV. Effect of planting method and drought management technique on growth, yield and quality of sugarcane (Saccharum hybrid complex) under limited irrigation. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 2008;53(3):200-204.
8. Patil RP, Chetti MB, Hiremath SM. Influence of agrochemicals on morpho-physiological characters, yield and yield components of sugarcane under moisture stress. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2009;22(4):759-761.
9. Singh J, Bhat MA, Dhaliwal SS, Kaur N, Yousuf A, Dhillon BS, Chhina RS. Management interventions for sustainable sugarcane production under water-limiting environment. Title of Book Climate Smart Sugarcane Cultivation. 2025;33.
10. Mahadevaiah C, Hapase P, Sreenivasa V, Hapase R, Mahadeva Swamy HK, Anilkumar C, Mohanraj K, Hemaprabha G, Bakshi Ram. Delineation of genotype × environment interaction for identification of stable genotypes for tillering phase drought stress tolerance in sugarcane. Scientific Reports. 2021;11:18649.
11. Spencer GL, Meade GP. Sugarcane Handbook. London: John Wiley & Sons; 1955.
12. Barrs HD, Weatherly PE. A re-examination of the relative turgidity for estimating water deficits in leaves. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences. 1962;15:413-428.
13. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. Edn. 2. New York: Wiley-InterScience Publication, John Wiley & Sons; 1984.
14. Rana N, Singh AK, Sanjay Kumar, Sandeep Kumar. Effect of trash mulching and nitrogen application on growth, yield and quality of sugarcane ratoon. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 2003;48(2):124-126.
15. Hunshal RS, Khot RS, Gaddankeri SA. Management practices for moisture stress during summer in sugarcane. Bharatiya Sugars. 1996;21(9):43-48.
16. Rana NS, Singh AK, Tomar TPS. Juice quality and sugar yield in sugarcane ratoon as influenced by trash mulching and nitrogen levels. Annals of Agricultural Research. 2002;23(3):419-422.
17. Dahiya R, Jhorar BS, Malik RS, Pannu BS, Dahiya DS. Sugarcane trash and Sesbania aculeata effects on soil physicochemical properties under ratoon sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.). Environment and Ecology. 2008;26(2):489-493.
18. Kumar S, Chand G, Mandal D, Kumar A, Kumar S. Effect of trash mulching on quantitative and qualitative parameters of sugarcane. Ecology, Environment and Conservation Paper. 2015;21(Suppl August):141-143.
19. Mathew T, Alexander D, Illengovan R, George B, Kuriakose JM, Sreekumar K. Studies on the nutritional need of sugarcane ratoon with and without trash mulching. Cooperative Sugar. 2003;34(6):483-485.
20. Jaybal V, Chokalingam S. Studies on drought management in sugarcane. Cooperative Sugar. 1990;21(8):571-574.
21. Manickam G, Jayachandran M, Balasubramanian V, Panneerselvam R, Rajendran B. Effect of integrated drought management practices on yield and quality of sugarcane. Cooperative Sugar. 2009;41(1):41-43.
22. Manoharan ML, Ramaswami C, Ramakrishnan MS. Management of sugarcane under moisture stress conditions. Madras Agricultural Journal. 1992;79(8):464-467.
23. Mohan Naidu K, Srinivasan TR, Michael Raj S. Varietal behaviour and management practices for improvement of sugarcane yield and quality under moisture stress conditions. In: Workshop on Drought Management of Sugarcane Crops and Drip Irrigation, South India Sugar and Sugarcane Technologists Association and Tamil Nadu Cooperation Sugar Federation. 1983:47-52.
24. Rao MCH, Rao KSP, Vijaykumar M, Jayaprakash M, Raghavaiah R. Management of sugarcane under soil moisture stress/drought during the formative stage. Proceedings of South India Sugar and Sugarcane Technologists Association. 2002;75-76.
25. How to cite this article: Kumawata P, Bhuva H, Vadhel H, Bamaniya V, Bhuriya K. Influence of moisture stress management practices on growth, yield and quality of sugarcane. International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2026;9(10):134138. doi: https://www.doi.org/10.33545/2618060X.2026.v9.i10S b.6805