Abstract
Sugarcane root systems are poorly studied and understood due to the perennial nature, tall stature, and the long cropping cycle. Whilst some field studies gave insights into sugarcane root traits, there is no detailed description of root and root system traits available. The objectives of our work were to establish a baseline of sugarcane root trait values that will serve for future studies, and to characterize the degree of root system resilience when restricting tiller number. We first conducted an initial screening for root trait diversity on a collection of twenty cultivars representative of sugarcane breeding from 1930 to now. Then we investigated the effect of reduced tillering, via manual de-tillering, on the plant root and root system traits of five varieties grown under optimal conditions in a glasshouse for 1700°Cd. In addition to establishing baseline means and variation for sugarcane root trait values that could serve as a reference for crop models, we demonstrated that the sugarcane root mass fraction was extremely resilient to drastic reduction in tiller number. Restricted plants were effectively maintaining their root system configuration (opening angle) by dramatically increasing the number of nodal roots produced per tiller as well as maximizing total root length by increasing the specific root length. Using this knowledge of sugarcane root traits in combination with the specific agronomic constraints for sugarcane will now underpin the development of a root system ideotype for sugarcane to enable targeted root trait selection for improving crop productivity.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Twenty sugarcane cultivars provided baseline means and variation for root traits.
Not reportedValue
Verbatim
e0“establishing baseline means and variation for sugarcane root trait values that could serve as a reference for crop models”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane root mass fraction was highly resilient to a drastic reduction in tiller number.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“the sugarcane root mass fraction was extremely resilient to drastic reduction in tiller number”
Claim · model-written summary
Restricted sugarcane plants maintained their root system opening angle.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanet0
- Treatment
- Restricted plantse0
- Outcome
- root system configuration (opening angle)e0
- Direction
- maintaininge0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Restricted plants were effectively maintaining their root system configuration (opening angle)”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Restricted sugarcane plants dramatically increased nodal roots produced per tiller.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanet0
- Treatment
- Restricted plantse0
- Outcome
- number of nodal roots produced per tillere0
- Direction
- dramatically increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Restricted plants were effectively maintaining their root system configuration (opening angle) by dramatically increasing the number of nodal roots produced per tiller”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Restricted sugarcane plants maximized total root length by increasing specific root length.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“maximizing total root length by increasing the specific root length”
t0“Sugarcane”
e1“Restricted plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Restricted sugarcane plants increased specific root length.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“increasing the specific root length”
t0“Sugarcane”
e1“Restricted plants”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · growth · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.