P R O C E E D I N G S
American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists
Volume 10 - Papers for 1963
This is the tenth volume of proceedings of the Society which has been published since its founding in 1938.
The first volume published in 1941 included papers presented during 1938, 1939 and 1940. Mr. Walter Godchaux, Jr., the then Secretary-Treasurer, edited that edition.
The second volume published in 1946 included papers presented during 1941-1945 inclusive. Dr. E. V. Abbott, Secretary-Treasurer, edited that edition.
The third volume published in 1953 included papers presented during 1946-1950 inclusive. A fourth volume was published in 1955 and presented papers for the years of 1950 through 1953.
Volume five contains papers for the years of 1954 and 1955. The sixth volume included papers presented during 1956. The third through the sixth volumes were edited by Dr. Arthur G. Keller.
The seventh volume, which is in two parts, 7A and 7B, contains papers presented during 195 7 through 1960 inclusive. The eighth and ninth volumes contain papers presented during 1961 and 1962 respectively. These volumes, as well as this, the tenth volume, which includes papers for the year 1963, have been compiled by
Denver T. Loupe Secretary-Treasurer December, 1963
I N D E X
Agricultural Section - February 1963 PAGE Cane Quality Determination in Louisiana.
John J. Seip 1 Studies of the Physical Properties of Selected Soils in the
Sugarcane Area of Louisiana. Wm, H. Patrick, Jr.,
Ronald Wyatt, and E. C. Simon 12 Cultural Practices in Sugarcane. Leo P. Hebert 19
Cane Harvest in Australia and Hawaii, movies, (no paper for publication) . Russell Ramp
Manufacturing Section - February 1963 Summary of Special Clarification Tests in USDA Pilot Plant
During 1960-62 Crops. E. E. Coll, W. F. Guilbeau,
B. A. Smith, and J. T. Jackson 25 Experiences with the Crusher. L. A. Suarez 32
Agricultural Section - June 1963 Summary of Remarks to be Made at the American Society of
Sugar Cane Technologists. W. D. Carpenter 34 The Storage of Sugar Cane Pollen. J. R. King 38 Producing Sugar Cane in Louisiana without Putting It on the
Off-Bar. S. J. Rodrigue 39 Manufacturing Section - June 1963
Non-Metallic Mill Bearings. William S. Patout : 44
CANE QUALITY DETERMINATION IN LOUISIANA John J. Seip
Chemical Engineering Department Louisiana State University
During the June meeting we covered different methods of cane quality determination in general usage. This material was a pre- liminary to the specific subject of cane quality determination in Louisiana. Firstly, let us define cane quality determination to include:
1. Sampling - that is withdrawing the sample of cane from the shipment.
2. Testing - or analyzing the sample.
3. Evaluating the test results in terms of the quality of the cane.
Next we might briefly review the different methods of cane quality determination which were covered previously in detail.
Sampling Cane in the Carrier (Indirect Cane Quality Determination) With the exception of Louisiana and Hawaii, cane is predominately hand harvested. Cane washing installations at the factory are not present and cane is sampled in the carrier.
The Java Ratio: In this earliest, simplest, and still very common method of direct cane quality determination, cane quality is determined from crusher juice inspections.
Sucrose % Cane = Java Ratio x Sucrose % Crusher Juice
(Grower) (Grower) where: Java Ratio = Sucrose % Cane
Sucrose % Crusher Juice Factory
The Java Ratio directly - or with modifications - is used in South Agrica, Jamaica, and the Philippines. In addition to the Java Ratio, various other methods of cane quality determination also utilize the crusher juice inspections.
The Addition of Fiber; From the fiber content of a cane sample, the quantity of extractable juice in the sample may be inferred. Most systems which use fiber in cane evaluation, utilize formulas in which the yield of raw sugar is predicted from the crusher juice inspections and the fiber content of samples of cane removed from the carrier.
Such systems are used in Australia, Reunion, and Mauritius.
Sampling Cane Before the Carrier (Direct Cane Quality Determination) The increasing incidence of mechanical harvesting has necessitated consideration of washing cane in the carrier. The expedient of washing cane necessitates removing samples before the carrier. Unfortunately, the majority of cane sampling systems for cane payment are still wedded to crusher juice samples, and we thus have an anamoly where economic considerations call for mechanical harvesting with subsequent cane washing at the carrier, but the cane sampling systems cannot accommodate this expedient. Correspondingly, we find that most systems of direct cane quality determination for cane payment are still in the experimental stage. Other such systems which should find application in the direct method, are still being utilized primarily for agronomic yield studies.
The Cold Water Extraction Process; The cane sample is chipped and then extracted with tap water in a container with rapidly rotating blades. Sucrose or pol. Brix, and fiber per cent cane are determined from the residue and extract. Such systems are in the experimental stage in
Queensland (Australia), and in South Africa. Only in Hawaii is this system used commercially.
The Three-Roll Sample Mill: The Houma, Louisiana, USDA Experimental Station uses a small hydraulically loaded three-roll sample mill for varietal yield studies.
This mill is a prototype of the large commercial three- roll mill.
THE LOUISIANA SYSTEM
The practice of washing the cane entering the carrier, the small size of the individual cane deliveries relative to the capacity of many of the factories, and the fact that most cane is delivered during the daylight hours - these factors have resulted in the almost universal use of the three-roll sample mill for direct cane quality determination for cane payment. Briefly, the Louisiana system includes:
1. Removing a sample for trash determination from which net cane is calculated.
2. Removing another sample for processing in a three- roll sample mill.
3. From the inspections of the juice extracted in the sample mill, determining the quality of the net cane in terms of the normal juice sucrose and purity.
Samples are removed from the cane conveyance or the feeder table by hand or by mechanical grab. The latter equipment is a hydraulically operated device which is capable of handling a sample of 40 to 120 pounds of cane. Although sampling by coring (in which a core is removed from the bundle by a rapidly rotating toothed cylinder) was investigated at the Audubon Sugar Factory in 1957 and 1958, this expedient has not found commercial application in the state. However, it has subsequently been adopted in Hawaii.
The frequency of sampling for trash and for sucrose and purity - and the prescribed methods of testing - are specified in the procedure published annually by the Sugar Division titled Sampling, Testing, and Reporting Procedure to be Followed by Louisiana Sugar Mills Under the Sugar Act Determination. Practically, because of the wide variation in factory capacity and in the number of growers delivering to each factory, the sampling frequency of the individual factories varies.
This is illustrated in Table 1 which shows for 14 factories the number of shippers supplying the factory, the average number of shippers deliver- ing daily, the average frequency of sampling for trash and for sucrose
2 and purity, and the cost of the trash and the sucrose and purity tests.
Trash: If the bundle is placed on the feeder table, a 50-100 pound is removed by mechanical grab or by hand. If the bundle is placed on the ground, a 50-100 pound sample is removed by hand. The gross cane is weighed, detrashed, and the net cane is weighed. From these data the per cent trash is determined.
Sucrose and Purity: Several methods are used in sampling for sucrose and purity:
Individual Stalk Samples: Several stalks of cane are removed from the conveyance and composited with other samples from the same grower. The composite is ground in the sample mill at the end of the day. Quite commonly, every truck entering the cane yard is sampled in this manner.
Mechanical Grab: A sample is removed from the opened bundle on the feeder table and ground directly. It is obviously impossible to sample every truck in this manner; hence, the results of the sample are applied
to several truck deliveries.
Hand Grab: Many of the factories have increased capacity to the extent that the feeder tables and carrier cannot be adapted to sampling by mechanical grab on the feeder table without the expenditure of considerable money. As a compromise, hand grabe of 20 to 40 pounds of cane are removed from the opened bundle of cane on the ground.
These samples are ground directly.
Samples from the Trash Determination: From the trash mechanical grab samples, individual stalks are removed and composited or a hand grab is removed and ground directly.
Types of Sample Mills: The type of sample mill varies widely throughout the state. All are three-roll and motor driven; however, at one extreme we find old fixed setting syrup mills which can handle at the most two to three stalks of cane at a time. At the other extreme are hydraulically loaded mills which can handle as many as 10 to 15 stalks at a time.
The extraction severity varies correspondingly. With the less efficient mills the juice extraction ranges from 20 to 35 per cent on cane, while some of the highly efficient mills show a better extraction than the commercial crushers. Several factories use two three-roll mills in tandem to obtain greater extraction severity.
Testing and Evaluation
The juice samples from the sample mill (as well as those from the factory tandem) are analyzed for apparent sucrose (pol) by the H o m e ' s dry lead method and for Brix by hydrometer. (Technically, while we use the term sucrose in referring to cane quality in Louisiana, the value is properly pol in the correct sense of the word.)
The Normal Juice Concept: Cane quality in Louisiana is based on the concept of normal juice, and the grower is paid on the basis of his normal juice sucrose and purity.
Normal juice is defined as juice extracted from sugar cane by a mill tandem when no maceration water is used.
Since maceration water is used to increase the milling efficiency, it is necessary to calculate the factory normal juice inspections by the application of factors to the sample mill and crusher juice inspections. Simi- larly, the grower's normal juice quality is determined from factors which relate the average sample mill juice quality to that of the factory normal juice.
Since the grower's normal juice quality is related to that of the factory, let us first discuss the determination of the factory normal juice quality through the various factors which are involved.
The Dilution Compensation Factor: The use of wash water on the carrier necessitates determination of "undiluted"
crusher juice quality - or what the crusher juice would have been without the addition of wash water.
Factory "Undiluted" = Dilution Compensation x Sample Mill Crusher Juice Brix Factor Juice Brix where: the sample mill juice Brix is a 24-hour average and:
Dilution "Undiluted" Crusher Juice Compensation = Brix Factor Sample Mill Juice Brix as determined from periodic milling tests on cane with no wash water.
The Dry Milling Factor: The factory normal juice Brix is determined from the "undiluted" crusher juice Brix and another factor:
Factory Normal = Dry: Milling x Factory "Undiluted"
Juice Brix Factor Crusher Juice Brix where: Dry Milling Factor = Normal Juice Brix
"Undiluted" Crusher Juice Brix
Either the dry milling factor of 0.97 is used or the factory may run periodic dry milling tests in which no maceration and wash water is used.
The factory normal juice sucrose is then determined by the following calculation:
Factory Normal = Factory Normal x Factory Mixed Juice Sucrose Juice Brix Juice Purity The grower's normal juice sucrose and purity are calculated from the sample mill inspections and factors which relate the average sample mill results to the factory normal juice quality.
The Sample Mill Brix Factor: The grower's normal juice Brix is determined from his sample mill inspections and a sample mill factor:
Grower's Normal = Sample Mill x Grower's Sample Juice Brix Brix Factor Mill Juice Brix where: The sample mill brix factor is determined by
comparing for the same 24 hour period the average sample mill and the factory results as follows:
Sample Mill = Factory Normal Juice Brix Brix Factor Sample Mill Juice Brix The Sample Mill Sucrose Factor: The grower's normal juice sucrose is determined in a similar manner:
Grower's Normal = Sample Mill x Grower's Sample Juice Sucrose Sucrose Factor Mill Juice Sucrose
where: the sample mill sucrose factor is determined in a manner similar to that for the Brix factor.
The grower's normal juice purity is then calculated as follows:
Grower's Normal Grower's Normal Juice Juice = Sucrose x 100 Purity Grower's Normal Juice
The grower's cane quality is determined in terms of standard cane by means of the following cane quality formula which relates the standard of cane quality as standard cane to his normal juice purity and sucrose.
Grower's Standard = Net Cane, x Quality x Purity Cane, Tons Tons (Sucrose) Factor
where: Net Cane is determined from the trash inspections.
The quality factor relates the grower's normal juice sucrose to standard cane. (12.00 sucrose % normal juice is unit standard cane.) The purity factor relates the normal juice purity
to standard cane.
The quality and purity factors are determined from tables which accompany the annual Cane Price Determinations. These factors were developed many years ago, and theoretically reflect the actual raw sugar yield at the corresponding normal juice sucrose and purity levels.
The payment to the grower for sugar is subsequently determined from a cane payment formula:
Payment = Grower's Basic Price Cane to Grower Standard x For Standard plus Transportation
Sugar Cane Sugar Cane Allowance where: the basic price for standard sugar cane is based
on the sugar cane pricing factor and the weekly or season's average price of raw sugar as deter- mined by the New Orleans Sugar Exchange. The sugar cane pricing factor sets the distribution of returns for sugar between the grower and the factory and is published in the annual fair price determinations,
Dilution Compensation Factor: 0,9601 Dry Milling Factor: 0.9700
24-hour average sample mill Brix: 18,05 24-hour average sample mill Sucrose: 14.40
"Undiluted" Crusher Juice Brix: 18.05 x 0.9601 - 17.33 Factory Normal Juice Brix: 17.33 x 0.9700 = 16.81
Factory Mixed Juice Purity (from the control records): 76,21 Factory Normal Juice Sucrose (as calculated): 16.81 x 0.7621 = 12.81 Today's Sample Mill Brix Factor: 16.81 divided by 18.05 = 0.9313 Today's Sample Mill Sucrose Factor: 12.81 divided by 14.40 = 0.8896 Average of six preceeding days'
Sample Mill Brix Factor (assumed): 0.9219 Average of six preceeding days'
Sample Mill Sucrose Factor (assumed): 0.8800
Grower A Sample Mill Brix (from his sample inspections): 18.01 Grower A Sample Mill Sucrose (from his sample inspections): 14.20 Grower A Normal Juice Brix: 18.01 x 0.9219 = 16.60
Grower A Normal Juice Sucrose: 14.20 x 0.8800 = 12.50 Grower A Normal Juice Purity: 12.50 divided by 16.60 x 100 = 75.30 Grower A Delivery: 204.360 Gross Tons
Grower A Trash (from his trash test): 8.5%
Grower A Net Tons: 204.360 - (204.360 x 0.085)= 186.989
Grower A Quality Factor: 1.050 Grower A Purity F a c t o r : 0.985
Grower A Standard Tons: 186.989 x 1.050 x 0.985 = 193.393 Time does not permit a discussion of the shortcomings of the Louisiana system to include the concept of normal juice, the multiplicity of factors of doubtful accuracy, and the failure to include the amount of extractable juice in the cane. A discussion of these factors and revisions to the system which are being considered will have to be deferred until the next technical meeting.
Seip, John J. "A Study of Methods of Cane Quality Determination for Cane Payment," Paper delivered before the American Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, June 7, 1962.
•Progress Report No. 2 - A study of Sampling and Methods of Deter- mining Sucrose, Purity, and Fiber Content of Sugar Cane. USDA Contract No. 12-25-010-558 with the Audubon Sugar Factory (Louisiana State University), P. 15.
Name of Factory
A B C D E F G H J K L M N 0
TABLE FREQUENCY AND
No, of Cane Shippers Total Av,/Da,
41 34 36 301 568 32 220 41 44 110 185 122 204 45
26 31 20 120 225 21 45 20 6 80 98 34 138 24
COST OF SAMPLING 58 CROP
Testing Cane for Trash Av, Tons Av. Cost Cane Test per Test
61.15 52.95 43.45 26.48 33.38 48.85 29.01 39.30 61.03 50.74 43.84 34.32 23.10 44.11
$1.26 0.86 0.73 0.74 0.61 1.30 1.09 1.08 0.39 1.48 1.29 0.67 1.09 1.410
Testing Sucrose Av. Tons Cane/Test
54.72 73.87 15.97 11.02 91.61 29.01 30.92
52.21 14.34 34.32 5.55 88.81
& Purity Av, Cost per Test
$0.87 1.79 0.46 0.55 1.04 0.36 0.42
0.64 2.82 0.65 0.56 1.47
Studies of the Physical Properties of Selected Soils in the Sugar Cane Area of Louisiana Wm. H. Patrick, Jr., Ronald Wyatt, and E. C. Simon
This report deals with recently completed soils research in the sugar cane area of Louisiana. Two studies are covered in this report: (1) The effect of various sugar cane rotations on the yield of sugar cane and on soil organic matter and structure, and (2) chemical and physical properties of the important sugar cane soils along Bayou Teche.
The Effect of Various Rotations on the Yield of Sugar Cane and on Soil Organic Matter and Structure
This experiment was established on a Mhoon clay loam soil at the L.S.U. sugar farm in 1954. Four rotations involving sugar cane were com- pared as to their effect on soil properties and sugar cane yields. These rotations ranged from soil depleting to soil building cropping systems. All rotations ran in a seven year cycle. The most soil depleting rotation (Rotation 2) has three years of sugar cane followed by one year in which the land was summer fallowed. Sugar cane was then grown again for a three year period. No legumes were grown in this rotation and the cane trash was burned after harvest. This rotation returned a minimum amount of organic matter to the soil. The rotation designed to add the most organic matter to the soil (Rotation 3) consisted of four years of a white clover-dallisgrass sod followed by three years of sugar cane. After cane harvest the trash was chopped and turned under. There were two other rotations that were inter- mediate in their effect on soil properties. One of these rotations (Rotation was similar to the first rotation described except that Melilotus indica was grown during the first winter of plant cane and soybeans were grown and turned
under in the year that the land was not in sugar cane (the fourth year). In this rotation cane trash was burned. The other rotation (Rotation 4) used in this study was very similar to the one just described except that the cane trash was chopped and turned under instead of being burned. A detailed listing of the treatments used in this study is shown in Table 1.
Table 1.--Description of rotation used in experiment on Mhoon clay loam.
Rotation 1: Standard Rotation with Legumes.
Trash Burned . Year
1 2 3 4 5-7
Plant cane with M.
Same as Years 1-3.
Rotation 2: Soil Depleting Rotation. Trash Burned.
Year 1 2 3 4 5-7
Plant Cane. No legume.
Same as Years 1-3.
5 6 7
Grass- Plant Cane.
clover sod .
Year 1 2
ion 4: Standard Rotation with Cane. Trash Chopped and Turned Under.
Plant cane with M. indica.
Same as Years 1-3.
The yield and sucrose content of sugar cane from the various treat- ments are shown in Table 2 for the 1959 through 1961 seasons, and in Table 3 for the 1961 season. The 1959 through 1961 seasons represent the three years that sugar cane was grown following the turning under of the sod in Rotation 3. As may be seen in Table 2, the yield of sugar cane was signifi- cantly higher following the dallisgrass and white clover sod than where the Rotation 3: Cane Rotated with Sod
Crops to Build up Organic Matter and Soil Structure.
Trash Chopped and Turned Under.
soil depleting rotations were used. However, the sucrose of Rotation 3 was lower than sucrose from the other rotations. The lowest yield of sugar cane was obtained from Rotation 2 which was the most soil depleting rotation.
Table 2.--Cane Yields and Sucrose Content. Average for 1959-61 Seasons,
Rotation Tons per Acre Sucrose - %*
1 33.84 11.53 2 31.23 11.58 3 35.53 10.87 4 32.35 11.23 L.S.D. at 5% 2.62
The yield and sucrose values shown in Table 3 for the 1961 season are similar to those listed in Table 2. The highest yield and the lowest sucrose was again obtained from Rotation 3.
Table 3.--Cane Yields and Sucrose Content for 1961 Season.
Rotation Tons per Acre Sucrose - %*
1 33.7 11.44 2 33.8 11.40 3 35.7 11.18 4 32.0 11.32
The soil organic matter content and soil aggregation values measured at the end of the first seven years of the rotation experiment are shown in Table 4. Where cane trash was turned under (Rotations 3 and 4) the organic Table 2.--Cane Yields and Sucrose Content. Average for 1959-61 Seasons,
Rotation Tons per Acre Sucrose - %*
1 33.84 11.53 2 31.23 11.58 3 35.53 10.87 4 32.35 11.23 L.S.D. at 5% 2.62
matter content was considerably higher than where the cane trash was burned (Rotations 1 and 2 ) . The values in Table 4 indicate that turning under cane trash may have caused a slight increase in soil organic matter content.
It will be necessary to carry this experiment through another seven year cycle before definite information on this can be obtained.
Although the differences in soil aggregation were not as pronounced as the differences in organic matter content, Rotations 3 and 4 also resulted in the highest percentage of stable soil aggregates, as may be seen in Table 5.
From 1959 through 1961, three years in which the plots were in sugar cane, there was a gradual decrease in aggregation for all of the treatments.
Growing cane for three years obviously resulted in the destruction of many of the stable soil aggregates.
Table 4.--Organic Matter Content of Mhoon Clay Loam.
Rotation 1959 1960 1961 1 1 . 7 7 % 1 . 8 3 % 1 . 8 2 %
2 1.72 1.79 1.85 3 1.92 2 . 1 8 2 . 1 3 4 1.93 2 . 0 1 2 . 1 0
Table 5.--Aggregation (Per cent aggregates greater than 0.21 mm. diameter) of Mhoon Clay Loam.
R o t a t i o n 1959 1960 1961 1 31.97= 27.6% 2 6 . 1 % 2 3 3 . 9 2 9 . 0 2 8 . 5 3 3 8 . 8 3 3 . 2 3 0 . 3 4 3 6 . 2 3 3 . 6 3 0 . 3
The important findings that have resulted so far from this study are:
(1) In rotations where sod crops were grown or where cane trash was chopped and turned under, organic matter content and soil aggregation were higher than in the rotations where sod crops were not grown or cane trash was burned.
(2) In the rotation where sugar cane followed a legume-grass sod, sugar cane yields were higher than in other rotations, although part of this yield increase was offset by a slightly lower sucrose content.
(3) The standard rotation in which soybeans were grown during the year that the land was out of sugar cane resulted in a higher yield than the rotation in which the land was summer fallowed.
Definite conclusions from a study of this type are likely to be obtained only after a number of years of following the same rotations. This experi- ment is being continued and will run through another seven year rotation.
Physical and Chemical Properties of the Mississippi Terrace Soils along Bayou Teche
Because of the importance of the soil physical properties in determin- ing the suitability of a soil for sugar cane production, an investigation was made in which the chemical and physical properties of certain important sugar cane soils were studied in detail. This study was made on the Mississippi Terrace soils in St. Mary parish. The soil survey of St. Mary parish prepared by S. A. Lytle and his associates was used in selecting the sites for study.
Three representative soil series were studied: The Cypremort, Baldwin and Iberia series. These soils are alluvial in nature and were deposited from the overflowing of the Mississippi River when it occupied the channel now occupied
by Bayou Teche. The Mississippi River abandoned this channel about 2000 years ago and the soils on the natural levees have been developing since that time without the addition of more alluvium. Twenty-five representative samples of the surface soil of each of these three series were collected and analyzed for various chemical and physical properties.
The results of these analyses are shown in Figures 1 and 2. The data show that the better drained Cypremort soils, which occur at the highest elevation and closest to the stream channel, had the coarsest texture, the lowest organic matter content, the lowest aggregation, and the lowest levels of available nutrients. The low lying Iberia soils, which generally occur farthest from the main channel, were highest in clay content, organic matter content, aggregation and available nutrients. Irrespective of the high values for organic matter and available nutrients for the Iberia series and the low values of organic matter and nutrients for the Cypremort series, the Iberia is the least productive of the three series studied and the Cypremort is the most productive. The low position and poor internal drainage caused by high clay content result in the Iberia soils usually producing lower cane yields than the Cypremort soils. The Baldwin soils were intermediate in phy- sical and chemical properties and productivity between the Cypremort and the Iberia soils except for available potassium content, which was highest in the Baldwin soils.
A study was also made of the dependence of soil aggregation on other soil properties. It was found that soil aggregation was largely determined by both the organic matter content and the clay content. Organic matter and clay were about equal in their effect on aggregation. The higher the contents of organic matter and clay the higher was the aggregation.
This study provides basic data on the physical and chemical properties of these soils which should be of value in determining the suitability of these soils for both agricultural and non-agricultural uses.
Figure 1.--Certain physical and chemical properties of the Cypremort, Baldwin and Iberia soil series.
Aggregation Organic Matter Clay Exchange Capacity Base Sat.
percent percent percent m.e./100 g soil percent
Figure 2.--Available nutrients and pH of the Cypremort, Baldwin and Iberia soil series.
p.p.m. pH Phosphorus p.p.m.
CULTURAL PRACTICES IN SUGARCANE By
Leo P. Hebert, Research Agronomist, Crops Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, U . S . Department of Agriculture
Obtaining the maximum yield of sugarcane depends on many factors.
Weather, soil, varieties, fertilizers, cultural practices, insects and diseases, all affect the outcome of the crop.
This paper presents the results of experiments on cultural practices which have been conducted at the Houma station for several years, and their application by sugarcane growers.
The question of shaving sugarcane is controversial. Many growers contend that shaving is necessary to remove excess dirt from the seed piece. Others assert that the primary shoots must be removed to stimulate suckering or tillering for maximum yield. Still another claim for shaving is the need to remove weeds and to clean the surface of the row to facilitate application of herbicides.
The subject has been studied in a number of experiments at Houma and 2 recent publications summarized results of some of the trials (4, 7 ) . Briefly, the conclusions reached are as follows: (1) It is not necessary to shave summer plant cane even if the advanced growth has been killed back. The dead portion of plant need not be removed to permit germination of lower "eyes" or buds, and in fact may protect them by insulating them from cold (2) Stubble need not be shaved. If the cane has not germinated, stubble diggers can be used to remove dirt and if it has germinated, shaving would only sacrifice some growth (3) Fall plant cane may fail to germinate if covered with too much dirt. This may be removed with a shaver in a scraping operation, or it may be removed with rotary hoes
available for that purpose. Heavy winter weed growth that cannot be eradicated with chemicals must be removed with a shaver or with mechanical hoes.
The row is off-barred in early spring to destroy some weeds and to prepare the row for application of fertilizer. Turning plows or disc cultivators are used for that purpose. Results of studies showed that it is not necessary to leave the row on the off-bar furrow as was formerly done (8) but that the row can be rebuilt immediately. Treatments in which the modified method of off-barring with disc cultivators was used and the row was immediately rebuilt, did not differ in yield from those off- barred in the conventional manner with turning plows. Rebuilding the row immediately improves drainage and leaves it in better physical condition for the application of anhydrous or aqua ammonia.
Dirting and Cultivating
Growers are not in agreement in regard to the time of dirting young cane in the spring. Noble varieties formerly grown in Louisiana were slow in tillering and could not be dirted until a good stand was established. Varieties now grown tiller much earlier in the spring and can be dirted sooner without important effect on yields. Studies have shown that, although early heavy dirting materially reduced the number of shoots or tillers in the spring, especially in early suckering varieties such as C. P. 36-105, yields of cane per acre were not greatly affected (6). Yields of cane per acre and of sugar per ton were not significantly different when an early-tillering variety, C. P.
36-105, a late-tillering one, C. P. 48-103, and an intermediate one, C, P. 44-101, were dirted to cover all tillers less than 6 inches tall
early in April than when the same 3 varieties were dirted back in April.
The need for replenishing the organic material in the soil is well known and cannot be over emphasized. The manner in which this is done may result in a net disadvantage when fields are infested with johnsongrass and soybeans are grown as a green manure crop. This weed pest multiplies rapidly, especially in a field of soybeans where it has very little competition for light and receives nitrogen from the legume crop. Results of long-time studies show that yields of cane can be maintained either by (1) turning under soybeans, (2) turning under cane trash (leaves, tops, roots), or (3) adding nitrogen (5).
Cane farmers can take advantage of the fallow year to eradicate johnsongrass by repeated plowings and supplementing the loss of soybeans with additional nitrogen fertilizer and turning under cane trash.
Hybrid varieties presently grown in Louisiana survive the winter much better than the noble varieties (Saccharum officinarum)
formerly grown. The wild parents (S. spontaneum) impart a certain degree of cold tolerance to the progenies. Cane planted in August usually establishes a good root system before winter and is able to survive the winter (9).
In some years when an early freeze occurs there is danger of stand losses if the cane is killed after the seed piece has been exhausted of its food reserve and before it has established a good root system.
Since the date of the first freeze cannot be predicted a portion of the acreage should be planted in August to use the labor supply more efficiently and to take advantage of the better germination and increased yield that
can usually be expected from cane planted in August.
Each soil type and area of the state differs in available nutrient, physical properties and to some extent in environment. Variety recommendations are made for specific areas and soil types (1). Some varieties respond better to early plantings than others. It is not the purpose of this report to make specific recommendations for each area, but it can be said in general that N. Co. 310 should not be grown where mosaic is prevalent (2).
Some early-maturing varieties should be grown for early harvest. C. P. 48-103 and C. P. 47-193 are early-maturing varieties which could be grown for that purpose. C. P. 48-103 is not recommended for heavy or weed-infested soils because of its relatively low vigor. C. P. 47-193 is adapted to both light and heavy soils and is especially recommended for planting on heavy soil.
C. P. 44-101 and C. P. 52-68 are adapted to light and heavy soils and perform well on both types but mature later than the other 2 varieties.
Sugarcane, a perennial crop, remains on the same bed for 2 or 3 years.
It is important that this bed be in very good tilth for best results both with respect to seedcane germination and to control weeds. A poor stand in the plant cane is carried over into 2 stubble years and not only affects cane yield but also results in increased weed infestation. More time should be spent on preparing the seed bed to make conditions as favorable as possible for obtaining a good stand. A good seed bed is one that is free of large clods, coarse plant residues and weeds. Good drainage is essential for best results.
Seed piece size
Although very short seed pieces give a higher percentage of germination than the longer ones the young plants do not survive the winter as well and do not yield as much as the longer seed pieces. On the other hand whole stalks germinate slowly and in many cases the lower buds are completely suppressed. The best compromise is to plant 5- or 6-eye seed pieces or usually segmenting a 10 to 12-eye stalk into 2 pieces (3). Planting 2 continuous stalks plus a 10 percent overlap plants 36,000 to 40,000 buds per acre. Usually not more than 25 percent of the buds germinate, but 9,000 to 10,000 shoots per acre constitute a good stand.
Depth of Seed Placement
Deep placement of seed pieces is recommended for summer or early fall planting (9). Mechanical injury to the crop often results from shallow planting. The seed material should be placed approximately 2 inches above the furrow. For late October or November planting the seed cane should be placed 6 inches above the furrow. Shallow covering is recommended, especially in August and September. Good drainage is essential in all cases.
Depth of Covering
Many stand failures are due to excessive covering. The cane should be covered with only 2-3 inches of soil in the summer or early fall to insure rapid germination and emergence (9). When the cane begins to grow it should be dirted to control weeds and to protect it from cold. More covering is necessary for cane planted in the late fall when 4-6 inches of dirt should be used.
1. Anonymous. 1961. 1961 Sugarcane variety recommendations for Louisiana.
Sugar Bull. 39(23):286-289.
2. Abbott, E. V. 1960, Studies of the mosaic problem in Louisiana.
Sugar Bull. 39(2):23-27.
3. Hebert, L. P. 1956. Effect of seed-piece size and rate of planting on yields of sugarcane, and nitrogen fertilization on yield of seed- cane in Louisiana. Internat. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. Proc. 9:301-310.
4. Hebert, L. P. 1962. Effect of shaving C. P. 44-101 second stubble or yields of cane and sugar in 1961. Sugar Bull. 40(9):94-96.
5. Hebert, L. P. and Davidson, L. G. 1959. Effect of cane trash and legume crops with nitrogen on yields of cane and sugar, and on organic matter content of sugarcane soils in Louisiana. Internat.
Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. Proc. 10:565-579.
6. Hebert, L. P. and R. J. Matherne. 1963. Effect of time of spring dirting on yields of sugarcane and sugar in Louisiana.
Sugar Bull. 41(8):97-101.
7. Hebert, L. P. and R. J. Matheme. 1953. Results of tests conducted over a number of years to determine the effect of shaving sugarcane on yields. Internat. Soc. Sugarcane Technol. Proc. 8:253-260.
8. Hebert, L. P. and R. J. Matherne. 1957. Comparison of the usual off-barring with a modified method of off-barring on yields of sugarcane in Louisiana. Sugar Bull. 35(9):119-120, 123.
9. Hebert, L. P. and R. J. Matherne. 1959. Effect of depth of placement of seed piece and date of planting on yields of cane and sugar from C. P. 36-105 and C. P. 44-101 at Houma, La. Sugar Bull. 37(20):260-265.
SUMMARY OF SPECIAL CLARIFICATION TESTS IN USDA PILOT PLANT DURING 1960-62 CROPS
E. E. Coll, W. F. Guilbeau, B. A. Smith and J, T. Jackson Southern Regional Research Laboratory!'
New Orleans, Louisiana INTRODUCTION
Special pilot plant clarification tests made during the last three Louisiana crops are summarized in this report. All clarifying agents investigated are commercially available products that have novel physical and chemical properties, or those reported to improve clarification in commercial practice. Results of the 1960-61 tests were reported earlier (1), (2), along with the results of parallel control tests. All controls were included in the standard cane variety processing tests described and reported in other publications (3), (4), (5).
Results with the following products are summarized in the report:
(1) Separan AP 3 02 /, a water soluble anionic resin product of the Dow Chemical Company.
(2) Panther Creek Bentonite2/, a calcium bentonite product of the American Colloid Company.
(3) Polyox2/, a water soluble nonionic resin product of Union Carbide Chemical Company.
One of the laboratories of the Southern Utilization Research and Development Division, Agricultural Research Service, U. S.
Department of Agriculture.
It is not the policy of the Department to recommend the products of one company over those of any others engaged in the same business
(4) Reten 2052/ , a water soluble cationic resin product of the Hercules Powder Company, Inc.
(5) UCAR C-1492/ , a water soluble cationic resin product of Union Carbide Chemical Company.
(6) Potato starch.
(7) Magnesium hydrate2/ , a product of the Michigan Chemical Corporation.
(8) Calcined magnesite (magnesia)2/, a product of Basic, Inc.
(9) Sodium aluminate.
Separan AP 30 was tested extensively to determine optimum dosage rates for clarification. The summarized data in Table I do not show
Table I (1960-62 Crops) No. of
Separan, p.p.m. on Juice
Percent of Control Clarified Juice
Clarity Filterability 13 2.2 116 100 110 6 4.4 122 97 111 2 6.0 136 92 108 1/ High ratio represents low mud weight.
variations between individual tests, but are intended to represent the overall performance under various conditions of cane quality. The majority of tests were on juice from hand harvested cane samples that are not representative of commercial operations. Separan is most beneficial when processing cane of inferior quality, whether the quality deterrent be cane variety or maturity, soil in juice, trash, delay in milling, or the growing season. Mud weight and clarity of processed
juice decreased with each increase in Separan dosage. By limiting the Separan to 2 to 3 p.p.m. on cane, a 15 to 20 percent improvement in mud weight can be expected with very little sacrifice in clarity. Filter- ability of clarified juice was improved about 10 percent at all Separan levels. Additional work is planned for the 1963 crop to obtain more information in the 4 to 6 p.p.m. Separan range.
Six tests were to determine the value of bentonite added to mixed juice before liming, with Separan added at the flash tank to prevent an increase in mud volume. Results are summarized in Table II on commercial
Table II (1961-62 Crops)
No. Bentonite Separan Percent of Control
of Lbs./Ton p.p.m. Mud Clarified Juice Clarification Tests Cane on Juice Weight1/ Clarity Filterability Efficiency Hand Harvested Cane:
2 0.4 3.8 166 101 114 103 1 0.6 2.1 94 114 167 117 Commercial Cane:
2 0.4 3.2 109 103 82 104 1 0.6 2.2 103 107 132 111
— High ratio represents low mud weight.
and hand harvested cane samples. Two levels of bentonite treatment were used, with the higher levels of Separan corresponding to the lower bentonite rates. Processed juice quality was improved over controls with respect to clarity, filterability and clarification efficiency, with no appreciable change in mud volume, while using 0.6 pounds bentonite per ton cane and 2.2 p.p.m. Separan. With 0.4 pounds bentonite and
3.5 p.p.m. Separan, the results were quite different. Mud volume improved 9 percent on commercial and 66 percent on hand harvested samples. Processed juice improvement was slightly better on the hand harvested samples, but was inferior to that obtained with 0.6 pounds bentonite per ton cane for both commercial and hand harvested canes.
No further work is planned with bentonite until clean, unburned fresh cane becomes available for processing.
Results of the remaining 13 exploratory tests are summarized in Table III. The water soluble flocculating agents Polyox (nonionic),
Table III (1961-62 Crops) No.
Additive, p.p.m. on Juice
Percent of Control Clarified Juice Clarity Filterability
Clarification Efficiency Polyox:
3 3.5 96 109 72 109 Reten 205:
3 3.1 85 100 118 104 UCAR C-149:
2 4.3 100 100 108 100 Potato Starch:
2 60 90 100 105 100 Magnesium hydrate (Substitute for hydrated lime):
1 - 130 69 42 60 Magnesia - Lime (38% magnesia - 62% hydrated lime):
2 - 97 89 85 89 Sodium aluminate— - lime - Separan: 2/
1 2.33/ 136 67 47 57
1/ High ratio represents low mud weight.
2/ 0.33 pounds per ton cane added continuously to liming tank feed.
Reten 205 (cationic), and UCAR C-149 (cationic) have ionic characteristics that may be expected to improve clarification to a greater degree than Separan AP 30, which is nonionic in acidic and neutral solutions and anionic in alkaline solutions, since the colloids in cane juice are principally negatively charged. The flocculating agents were added to the process as recommended by the manufacturer, i.e., continuously to the flash tank in a 0.05 percent water solution (like Separan). Test results were neutral to negative for all three flocculants.
The results of one test on potato starch addition to the flash tank were negative. An increase of 10 percent in mud volume was obtained with no improvement in processed juice quality. Sixty p.p.m. starch on cane was added in a 1 percent solution.
Magnesia was substituted for lime at two levels, i.e., 100 percent and 38 percent of the CaO requirement. Michigan Chemicals Company furnished magnesium hydrate for the 100 percent substitution, and calcined magnesite from Basic, Inc., was the source material in two 38 percent substitutions. Poor clarification was obtained with complete substitution. Juice quality factors averaged only 60 percent of control, although there was a 30 percent improvement in mud volume. Mud improve- ment was partially due to 6 percent of the total insoluble solids remaining in the clarified juice. Juice quality was only 10 or 15 percent below controls, with no mud quantity improvement, on the 38 percent' substitution tests. In the later tests Mg/Ca ratios in clarified
juice were 0.50 and 0.75 for controls and tests respectively, with identical totals of Mg plus Ca. The substitution of a small amount of magnesia for lime, about 20 percent, may help alleviate the evaporator scaling problem without lowering the clarification efficiency appreciably.
A good flocculating agent may also improve the juice clarity.
Results were unsatisfactory on one test with standard liming following the continuous addition of sodium aliminate at the rate of 0.33 pounds per ton cane. Juice quality and mud values paralleled closely those obtained by 100 percent substitution of magnesia for lime.
The work was made possible through the continued support and cooperation of Louisiana sugarcane growers and processors, and members of the following organizations: The American Sugarcane League, Audubon Sugar Factory of Louisiana State University, Southdown, Inc., St. James Sugar Coop., and St. Gabriel Plantation. Mr. Lloyd Louden of the League and personnel of St. Gabriel Plantation deserve special thanks for their efforts in cultivation and harvesting of the cane samples furnished by the League.
(1) Coll, E. E., Jackson, J. T., and Guilbeau, W. F., Sugar Bull. 39(24):
298-303 (Sept. 15, 1961).
(2) Coll, E. E., Guilbeau, W. F., Fort, C. A., and Jackson, J. T., Sugar Bull. 41(9): 110-115 (Feb. 1, 1963).
(3) Guilbeau, W. F., and Martin, L. F., Sugar J. 16(1): 12, 14-15 (June 1953).
(4) Guilbeau, W. F., Coll, E. E., Fort, C. A., and Jackson, J. T., Sugar Bull. 39(16): 186-191 (May 15, 1961).
(5) Coll, E. E., Guilbeau, W. F., Fort, C. A., and Jackson, J. T., Sugar Bull. 40(17): 181-185 (June 1, 1962).
EXPERIENCES WITH THE CRUSHER L. A. Suarez Glenwood Sugar Factory Napoleonville, Louisiana
First of all I must say that our experiences might not hold good for other factories or even help us from year to year, because of the remarkable variations in mud, trash, type of cane, fiber, etc.
However, it was decided to write about these experiences, hoping that in some way it could be useful to others.
About five years ago the crusher at Glenwood was completely overhauled. All the journals were metalized with stainless steel.
New Stainless steel housing wearing plates, all new bearings, with the top bearing bolted together in one place were installed. This complete job was done at Nadler's Foundry, including the metallizing.
We were using three inch pitch grooving. The pitch was not changed, but the angle was reduced from 60° to 40°.
After this overhauling we experienced that the pressure on the crusher had to be reduced to between 120 and 150 tons to make the top roll float. Under this condition and with typical variations of trash and mud, etc., the crusher at times would lift too much, almost emptying the cane in the chute and immediately the man feeding the cane, would increase the feed, choking Mill No. 1. This would happen more readily with constant pressure accumulators,
Because of this situation, pressure was increased on the crusher so that it would not float. The opening on the crusher was increased and we always had enough cane in the chute to assure extraction.
The past crop hydraulic equipment was bought from Edward Engineering Corp. to automatically control the speed of the cane carrier and the feed to the crusher.
Under this new conditions the pressure of the crusher was lowered so that the top roller would move. The pressure was kept at around 150 tons and although at times it would float more than 3/4", due to a continuous regulated feed of cane, it would drop down and never choke Mill No. 1.
At first we were operating at 43'/min. and at that speed we were getting a great deal of slippage, although the pressure had been lowered. After several changes we decided to open the crusher and reduce the speed to 30'/min. and at this point operation was satisfactory.
In short, I will like to say that with different cane prepara- tions, speed opening and pressure have to be varied. No doubt there would be a point where the operation of the crusher would be more satisfactory, and if at this point we also have automatic feeding, we would not experience difficulties with overfeeding of the mills as a result of poor judgement by the man feeding the crusher.
Mill Setting at Glenwood
Crusher 42.0 Cubic ft/min when floating 3/8"
Mill #1 30.00 Cubic ft/min when floating 3/8"
Mill #2 25.00 Cubic ft/min when floating 3/8"
Mill #3 20.00 Cubic ft/min when floating 3/8"
Mill #4 16.00 Cubic ft/min when floating 3/8"
Mill #5 14.5 Cubic ft/min when floating 3/8"
SUMMARY OF REMARKS TO BE MADE AT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTS W. D. Carpenter
Monsanto Chemical Company St. Louis, Missouri
I would like to spend my time telling you of how we go about finding new herbicides - weed killers for sugar cane. I know that as you see your fields covered with Johnson grass, you wonder what in the world the chemical companies are waiting on. You've got a problem; you're willing to pay for a solution; and the problem is big enough that this represents a large market.
Well, we are aware of your problem. We are very anxious to solve it for you, and we are devoting large amounts of time and money to solving it, and hope we are closer than we were.
When you see a weed killer for Johnson grass or other weeds on your sugar cane, you are looking at the end result of many years of work by a large group of people. These people represent the chemical companies such as Monsanto who initiate the work, the Experiment Station workers of the U.S.D.A. and Louisiana State University such as Dr. Stamper and Dr. Millhollon, and finally people such as you who are the end users. At any place along the way the chemical could prove to be unsuccessful for any number of reasons.
In fact, we would come up with the perfect herbicide for sugar cane with recommendations by Dr. Stamper and Dr. Millhollon and it won't be a bit better than the way it is applied by the man who actually puts it on in the field.
I thought you would be interested in hearing how a new herbicide is developed for use in sugar cane from the time it comes from some chemist's mind to the application of the first pound to go on sugar cane.
Monsanto has many areas in which chemical research is going on - plastics, synthetic fibers, foods, detergents and agriculture. Our chemists
are constantly preparing new compounds for all of these different uses. Every one of these compounds go to our Agricultural Research Center where it is evaluated for possible use in agriculture. Thousands of these newly invented compounds go there every year. Each one is looked at to see if it has possibili-
ties not only as a herbicide, but also as an insecticide, fungicide, defoliant, animal feed additive or in any way where chemistry can aid agriculture.
The story of the herbicide, then, is the same for the other agricultural chemicals.
When a chemical comes in to our Agricultural Chemical Laboratories, it is assigned a code number and this number is used until the material becomes commercial. With some of these chemical names being as long as they are, it is easier to remember a number.
We take a large number of important weeds and crop seeds from all over the United States - field bindweed from the West, wild oats from the Northwest, giant foxtail from the Mid-West, morning glory and smartweed from the East.
From the South we have Johnson grass, nut grass and crab grass. Crops are also planted. Then these pans are sprayed with several rates of each chemical. Each crop and weed specie are watched for several weeks to see what plants were killed, stunted, delayed, sprouting, and at what rates this happened. This is done for pre-emergence (seeds) and for the established post-emergence plants. We set very high standards in these tests, because we know it is easier to control weeds in a greenhouse than under field conditions. As a result, most of our chemicals never get by the first test. If they look promising, they are put through more greenhouse tests at lower rates against different crops and weeds and for longer periods of time. (I then will discuss controlled climate rooms.) By now, it is over a year from the time the chemical left the chemist's bench and was delivered to the biologist. Perhaps one out of a thousand survive
these tests. If it still continues to look good, we then go to the field on our experimental farm and to a few selected universities and experiment stations across the United States for limited field studies on a variety of crops. Once again, this is done at several rates both pre- and post-emergence to both crops and weeds. Once again, most of the compounds bite the dust, and perhaps two or three survive to carry over into the third year.
Let us say that one of the chemicals looks good in the field on sugar cane the second year. The third year the chemical is sent to more places - Louisiana, Hawaii, Florida, Puerto Rico, etc., and on larger field tests. If the results continue to be satisfactory, arrangements are made to obtain samples of the crop in order that our chemist can determine if the product carries over into the raw sugar, or the molasses, or the bagasse. While this is going on, our chemist would be making radioactive derivatives of the herbicide in order that our biochemist can follow the chemical when it is placed in the soil or on the plants both cane and weeds. We determine whether it is leached away by rain, does sunlight break it down, do the soil organisms break it down? Methods are devised to test for the presence of the herbicide in very small amounts in all parts of the cane and the end products of cane.
Somewhere about this time extensive studies are started to determine the fate of the compound when fed to animals over long periods of time.
Usually this will be done for several animals, such as rats, rabbits, dogs, etc., and for a wide range of rates of chemical feed for periods up to two years. Sometimes it is done for more than one generation. Weight gains, appetite, appearance - all of these factors are considered. The effects on the skin of the animals are studied; what happens when the material is accidently swallowed or is spilled in the eyes is investigated.
Also, the studies of formulation of the herbicide have begun. Should it be an emulsifiable concentrate, should it be a wettable powder, or granules?
Does the activity or toxicity change when we change the formulation? How does it survive storage tests, freezing, heat and long shelf life? What effect does it have on the equipment; is it abrasive or corrosive?
By now, our engineers and chemists have begun to study how to make this material. What type of plant needs to be built, where should it be built, and how big should the plant be to meet the needs?
The Sales people must start planning on how to market this material.
What sort of advertising, what sort of literature do we need, what size of containers, where will we sell first?
The Research and Development people accumulate the information to present to the U.S.D.A. and F.D.A. to show the effectiveness, safety and procedures of analysis of the new herbicide, and approval is obtained from the Federal Agencies and recommendations from the various herbicide authorities such as Drs. Stamper and Millhollon.
A label has to be approved which shows the safety, precaution, contents and directions for use. These will have been worked out with Drs. Stamper, Millhollon and you during the years we have been testing as to rates, volumes, timing, method applications, weeds controlled, etc.
And the next year a new product will be on the market.
This procedure generally takes 4 to 7 years at a cost of 1/2 to 1 million dollars for most herbicides with the combined efforts of us, the University, and Experiment Station workers and progressive sugar cane planters such as you. With all of this hard work, the chemical will work no better than the manner in which it is used.
THE STORAGE OF SUGARCANE POLLEN J. R. King
Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architect Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, Louisiana AN ABSTRACT
The extension for many months of the germinability of sugarcane pollen would be of particular value in the breeding of sugarcane by making possible the long-distance shipment of viable pollen among cane breeding projects throughout the world and by the storage from season to season of the germ-plasm of desirable late blooming selections.
A new approach to the problem of cane pollen storage is now being made by the freeze-drying method. Encouraging results are reported in the production of seedlings from pollinations made at the Northern Sugar Experiment Station, Gordonvale, Queensland, Australia, with freeze- dried cane pollen processed four months earlier at Louisiana State University. The experiments are being continued during 1963 and 1964.
PRODUCING SUGAR CANE IN LOUISIANA WITHOUT PUTTING IT ON THE OFF-BAR
S. J. Rodrigue Gold Mine Plantation, Inc.
So that you can realize the results that we are getting with this practice of producing cane without putting it on off-bar -- I will give you a short history of the Gold Mine Plantation where I have been carrying out this and other practices to help obtain the yields we get.
All of the land on this plantation has been in sugar cane production for the last 60 years or more in a crop rotation of cane, corn and peas;
or soybeans and peas or soybeans. During the past 13 years, we have brought in a livestock program and changed this rotation to where we put about 5 percent of out land in pasture for about three years and hog-off about 25 acres of corn each year before it goes into sugar cane. The rest of the land still has a rotation of cane three years, then corn and soybeans, soybeans, clover for one year.
Our livestock consists of 24 brood sows, 350 market hogs a year, 400 ewes, 200 lambs, 40 brood cows and 25 yearling steers and heifers.
We have a total land area of 890 acres, with measured crop land of 700 acres, of which 40 acres is heavy soil and the balance sandy to light mixed.
Prior to 1940, we grew 500 acres more or less of cane and 200 acres of corn and peas or soybeans, producing 13 tons of sugar cane per acre and 15 bushels of corn per acre. Before 1950 we had a full infestation of Johnson grass and, because of the need of corn for mule and hog feed, we had very little land that we could fallow plow. Therefore, we did not make much progress in Johnson grass control under the fallow plowing program and soon gave it up.
We have had our best grass control with our livestock, particularly the sheep, with the help of chemicals. We also have improved our drainage with land crowning and good ditches.
Having to produce corn along with sugar cane -- and in those days of poor production we had a very limited working power -- we were at a loss as to what work to do first in the spring. We knew that if we delayed in off-barring, dirting the cane, and applying fertilizer, the cane crop would suffer. And by the same token, if we delayed in our land preparation
for corn, our corn crop would fail. Every year we were faced with the same problem, and never found a better solution.
While reading Extension Circular Number 151, titled "Sugar Cane Production for South Louisiana", I got the idea for the method of cultivation which we are now doing. From this circular, under the title of "Cultivation", I quote:
"But the off-bar furrow should not be run until the cane has clearly shown that it is approaching the stage when we can expect it to come to a stand. This is particularly true in the case of stubble cane and it is true because the off-bar furrow has to prune the greatest portion of the old root system. Experiments have shown conclusively that this old root system functions in feeding the young cane until it has established its own root system and for that reason, as much of it as is possible should be left intact as late in the season as is practicable." End quote.
With this information I felt I was right in trying off-barring and dirting back in the same operation without using stubble diggers and hoeing. In 1948 we tried this on a small acreage with a double chopper.
Results were good so we gradually increased use of this method on additional acreage every year. By 1952 we were cultivating our entire crop in this
manner. This method was a big help in the early spring, as it gave us a chance to get our corn land ready without delaying the cane work.
In 1955 I designed an implement to apply the fertilizer in the same operation. This implement consists of two light subsoiler shanks 26 inches apart mounted on a tool bar to apply the anhydrous ammonia. The ammonia is released on both sides of the subsoiler point, which places the ammonia 12 to 14 inches below the top of the row. I also release a small amount of ammonia six to eight inches below the top of the row against the stubble, for early growth. On the same tool bar to which the subsoilers are mounted, I have a conventional dry fertilizer box, which is ground driven,
to apply potash. The potash is placed 6 to 12 inches deep in each side of the row in the subsoiler opening. I installed two 26 inch notched coulters in front of the subsoilers to cut the cane roots so that the subsoilers would not pull up the stubble and would not leave too large an opening on each side of the stubble. Thirty inch coulters would have been better, but they are not available at present. On a tool bar 19 inches back of the front one, I have one cultivator disc gang for each side of the row to bring the soil back to the stubble. Two gauge wheels, which also act as press wheels, seal the ammonia in the soil.
In this one operation we broke the soil 12 to 14 inches deep on each side of the row, applied anhydrous ammonia at two levels and in six areas, applied a dry fertilizer at two levels, put the row back up, and pressed the soil on each side of the row. We have done that without putting the cane on the off-bar furrow and have waited to do it until after the cane was up. Out plant cane is off-barred and dirted back in one operation with a double chopper to which we have the conventional ammonia applicators attached, with a conventional dry fertilizer box
mounted on the chopper frame to apply the fertilizer in this one operation.
I have used this method on our entire crop for the last five years and have averaged above 30 tons each year, 37 tons for the '62 crop, without the varieties of N. Co, 310, C. ?. 52-68 and with only 20 acres of C. P. 44-101.
During that five year period we have maintained one third of our cane acreage in plant cane, one third in 1st year stubble, and one third in second stubble.
The plant cane was planted at the end of September and in early October following a corn crop.
Besides the number of trips around the field this method of cultivation eliminated, I find it is a big help in grass control because the same soil that was on top in the middles during the plant cane year is still more or less on top during the stubble crops. We clean it during the plant cane year so there are less seeds to germinate daring the stubble, crops, Also, we do not burn the trash left in the middles from the harvested crop. That helps build the organic matter in our soils.
We use 175 units of nitrogen ir. our second year stubble and 1.50 units in the first year stubble. This gives the cane lots of growth and therefore when we harvest we have to top very low to get a standard sucrose. Because of this high rats of fertiliser, we left 15 percent of the harvested crop in the field last year by topping low. But we still averaged 37 tons per acre.
Some of the advantages of this high rate of fertiliser application are:
1) high tonnage of organic matter put in the soil to improve it.
2) Delivery of clean cane to the mill, that is cut and burned the same day because all the green leaves are cut off. Because the cane is tall, heavy and grew fast there is very little grass in the middles.
3) With all this extra growth, we have better protection from an average Louisiana freeze.
4) The fertilizer is applied deep so that the cane gets it instead of the grass and, being as the cane is growing rapidly it soon shades out the grass.
We are controlling the Johnson grass on our ditches by mowing until September and following the mowing with grazing by sheep.
We use for seed only plant cane that has been rogued for Mosaic and heat-treated for Ratoon Stunting Disease (RSD). We have made yields of 45 tons with second stubble on land where we followed the livestock and pasture rotation and believe that in the near future we can average 50 tons per acre.
May I suggest that anyone trying this method of cultivation with the subsoilers do it on a small acreage, especially in the heavy soils because of the danger of the subsoiler leaving a hollow in the ground on the sides of the stubble. It is better to leave the row of stubble as is than to chop it before coming in with the fertilizer applicators. The ammonia will stay in better in firm soil.
I thank you.
NON-METALLIC MILL BEARINGS William S. Patout M. A. Patout & Sons, Ltd.
In April of 1961, while employed at Olokele Sugar Co., I started correspondence with the Gakte Corporation, exploring the possibility of installing a nonmetallic Gatke "Hydrotex" water lubricated bearing liner on the off side of the discharge roll of No. 4 mill. It was my thinking at the time, that because the "Hydrotex" material developed by the Gatke Corporation is water lubricated, it might be possible to get away from the inherent lubricating problems of most automatic or drip type oil systems and thus use only a spray of water on the roll journal as the only lubricant. I was later advised by the engineering staff of Gatke Corporation that their material is primarily a heat insulator with a thermal conductivity of .17 BTU per hour SQFT/°F/Ft. This is less than the conductivity of water, which is approximately .39, and it is 200 times less than the conductivity of most bearing metals such as brass, bronze and babbitt.
Because of its insulating characteristics all frictional heat built up in the bearing must be removed at the journal surface as rapidly as it develops, as the maximum temperature at which the bearing can operate over a prolonged period before deterioration (carbonization) starts is 300 degrees F. It was further recommended that as the speed (feet per minute) of a mill roll journal is too slow to provide adequate film lubrication with water alone, it would be necessary to use some lubricant which would be introduced directly onto the journal.
During the month of September 1961, it was decided to go ahead with the installation using a liner that was designed for only 148° arc. The
existing brass liners were a full 180 degrees. This was made necessary because the design of the housing limited the space available for
installing the spray headers and also it allowed a greater journal surface area for the water (coolant) to come in contact with bearing. The liner upon arrival was put into a solid cast iron quarter-box and held in place by two bolted steel keeper stips. A chamfered oil groove of V shape was not used in the liner (non-metallic) as the oil was dripped onto the exposed portion of the journal. One 3/8" water line was installed directly over the journal with six Oliver filter misting jets. The top edge of the liner was slightly lowered so that the water would drain away from the mill and into a receiving pan. The amount of water being sprayed onto the journal was reduced until it was found that 1.50 gpm were sufficient for dissipating the heat. It is interesting to note that the brass bearings on the feed and discharge rolls were using between 4 to 7 gpm for cooling.
It is felt at this that there might be a possibility that the liner could be operated with water being the coolant and only lubricant. Plans have been made for a test at the start of the 1963 crop.
In conclusion, I will say that we have been completely satisfied with the performance of the liner, which has now been in operation for 3,585 hrs.
During this time the tandem has ground or crushed 389,300 tons of net cane.
I feel that the non-metallic Gatke "Hydrotex" liner is superior to the standard brass liner because of the following reasons:
1. The liner can be supplied ready for installation for less than one- half the cost of an equivalent brass liner.
2. The liner has all surfaces moulded, thus clearance and tolerance are not as critical as when using a metal liner.