Carbon storage in irrigated and rainfed sugarcane production systems with vinasse application

ABSTRACT

Improper soil management for the development of important crops worldwide can jeopardize carbon (C) storage and soil organic matter (SOM) health. It was postulated that the application of vinasse to sugarcane soil under the control of agricultural machinery could increase C stocks and improve aggregate stability index, soil porosity and density, thus ensuring better root penetration. Therefore, in this study, the management system of sugarcane based on rainfed with vinasse application (RV), irrigated (I) and irrigated with vinasse application (IV) was studied in a tropical environment to determine the C stocks and the physical and chemical properties of the soil. The experimental design was randomized blocks with five replicates, and the organic C contents and stocks, soil density, total porosity, soil resistance to root penetration, and aggregate stability index (ASI) of sugarcane within rows and between rows were analyzed at 0–10- and 10–20- cm depth. The RV and IV treatments promoted the same potassium concentrations in the row and between the rows of sugarcane cultivation. The IV exhibited the highest soil ASI (74% at 0–10- and 77% at 10–20-cm depth) and stored approximately 70% more carbon than the I management. The use of sugarcane vinasse preserved the physical conditions of the soil, particularly in the inter-row area, by reducing surface layer compaction and increasing soil moisture and porosity, thereby representing a more sustainable long-term management system.

Key words
soil compaction; soil organic matter; fertigation; crop machinery

INTRODUCTION

Agricultural production systems are responsible for the emission of greenhouse gas and soil carbon depletion (Severiano et al. 2021), exacerbating climate change and resulting in global biodiversity loss (Price 2024). Conservation agricultural management based on no-till, minimum tillage, or organic and fertilized farming, when properly used, can preserve the physical structure of aggregates, store carbon (C), and reduce carbon dioxide (CO₂) without damaging the crop yield (Lal 2018, Silva et al. 2018).

Carbon depletion has a negative effect on the economic and environmental balance (Lal 2018). Tillage practices make soils more susceptible to degradation processes that disrupt aggregates and expose their labile organic C content to microbial decomposition, thereby increasing CO2 emissions and reducing nutrient cycling and organic matter (OM) quality (Loke et al. 2019). Furthermore, the use of agricultural machinery in crop production promotes soil compaction, which reduces porosity and negatively affects water infiltration (Loke et al. 2019). All these conditions lead to soil erosion and considerable loss of agricultural potential.

To minimize negative impacts on the climate and soil health and to comply with the 2030 agenda based on sustainable development goals (Lal et al. 2021), farmers have promoted management systems by using organic fertilizers of residual origin, such as vinasse, in crops with high economic potential, such as sugarcane (Júnnyor et al. 2019, Shukla et al. 2020). However, the impact on soil C dynamics under controlled traffic, with agricultural machinery moving only between rows throughout the crop cycle, needs to be evaluated in the irrigated or rainfed management system (Esteban et al. 2020).

Sugarcane is the second most economically important crop in Brazil, accounting for more than 40% of total world production (CONAB 2024). The northeastern region is the third largest producer in the country. The sugarcane production chain generates waste, such as vinasse, and it is estimated that approximately 15 L are generated to produce 1L of ethanol (Del Gobbo et al. 2019). The use of this residue as a fertilizer and soil conditioner provides plants with high levels of potassium, calcium, and magnesium (De Melo et al. 2018). However, its use must be controlled according to the technical recommendations for crop fertilization, as excessive applications can lead to an increased risk of salinization, changes in soil pH, and leaching of nutrients and/or contaminants into water bodies (Da Silva et al. 2021, Stephen et al. 2024).

It was postulated that the application of vinasse to sugarcane soils under the control of agricultural machinery could increase C stocks and improve the aggregate stability index (ASI), soil porosity (TP), and soil density (SD), thus ensuring better root penetration. The objectives of this study were to quantify the C stocks and investigate the relationship between these stocks and the physical and chemical characteristics of sugarcane soils cultivated under irrigated and rainfed conditions, and the application of vinasse under controlled machine traffic. The results will provide access to the possibilities of sustainable sugarcane management in a region of northeastern Brazil with full sugar and alcohol potential.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted in a sugarcane farm of Miriri Bioenergia e Alimentos S/A, situated in the municipality of Santa Rita, state of Paraíba, in the northeastern region of Brazil (Fig. 1). The region is dominated by a humid tropical forest under the Atlantic Forest biome (Jacomine et al. 1972). The climate is As-tropical humid with a dry period in summer according to Köppen-Geiger (Alvares et al. 2013). The average annual rainfall is 1,600 mm, and the average temperature is 26°C (Souza et al. 2007). The management was selected in as soil class (Yellow Argisol), according to the Brazilian Soil Classification System (Santos et al. 2018), and Ultisol (IUSS Working Group WRB 2015), with a sandy texture, under similar conditions of controlled traffic of agricultural machinery, mechanized harvesting, and in the phenological phase of the crop (fourth leaf) (Table 1).

Figure 1
Geographic location of the study site in the northeastern region of Brazil.

Table 1
Sugarcane management in the northeastern Region of Brazil.

Soil management	Properties
Rainfed sugarcane cultivation with vinasse	Sugarcane is cultivated under rainfed conditions. The needed water is in accordance with the rainfall regime of each crop. The sugarcane was in the phenological stage of the fourth leaf. The cane is harvested mechanically with a harvester, and the average productivity is 39.5 tons of sugar per hectare1,2,3.
Irrigated sugarcane cultivation	Sugarcane cultivation is irrigated with 50% of the crop evapotranspiration, and the crop water needs are supplied every eight days via a central pivot. Sugarcane was in the fourth leaf phenological stage. The cane is harvested mechanically with a harvester. The average productivity is 78.7 tons of cane stalks per hectare2,3.
Irrigated sugarcane cultivation with vinasse	Sugarcane cultivation is irrigated with 50% of the crop evapotranspiration, and the crop water needs are supplied every eight days via a central pivot. Sugarcane was in the fourth leaf phenological stage. The cane is harvested mechanically with a harvester, and the average productivity is 68.6 tons of cane stalks per hectare1,2,3.

• ¹
  Vinasse is applied at the beginning of each production cycle. Fifteen days after harvest, a 35-mm layer is applied via irrigation using a hydro-roller.
• The same procedure is repeated to ensure cane regrowth;
• ²
  management was introduced approximately 10 years ago;
• ³
  fertilization is carried out annually in accordance with the fertilization recommendation for the crop based on the chemical analysis of the soil, and, if necessary, the acidity of the soil is corrected with agricultural limestone.

Soil sampling was done in the planting within rows and between rows at 0–10- and 10–20-cm depths for each management system, with five replications. The distance between each sampling point was 5 m, with all samples in the same sugarcane row and the adjacent row. Samples were collected with a Dutch-type auger and stored in plastic bags. They were then transported to the laboratory for chemical and physical analysis. For soil density, undisturbed bulk soil was collected with an Uhland-type auger and volumetric rings (height = 50 mm; diameter 50 mm).

The soil samples were air-dried, crushed, and sieved at 2 mm. Particle size fractions were determined using the densimeter method (Gee and Or 2002), modified and described by Almeida (2012). Soil bulk density (BD) and total porosity (TP) were determined based on Teixeira et al. (2017). Soil penetration resistance was determined using a bench electronic penetrometer (MA – 933) in samples with soil moisture equivalent to 60 hPa matrix suction. The percentage of ASI was estimated based on mean weight-diameter (MWD) wet (w) and dry (d) (Teixeira et al. 2017) (Table 2).

Table 2
Granulometric characterization of the soil of sugarcane crops in the northeastern region of Brazil*.

Soil management		Depth cm	Sand	Silt	Clay	Soil texture
			g·kg-1
RV	WR	0–10	833 ± 17	29 ± 10	138 ± 12	Sandy loam
	BR		828 ± 22	30 ± 10	142 ± 15
	WR	10–20	827 ± 11	23 ± 4	151 ± 8
	BR		825 ± 11	28 ± 10	146 ± 16
I	WR	0–10	909 ± 9	23 ± 4	68 ± 10	Sand
	BR		893 ± 4	39 ± 7	68 ± 8
	WR	10–20	909 ± 18	27 ± 18	64 ± 12
	BR		904 ± 12	28 ± 15	67 ± 10
IV	WR	0–10	848 ± 9	23 ± 5	129 ± 9	Loamy sand
	BR		833 ± 23	42 ± 4	125 ± 20
	WR	10–20	828 ± 21	26 ± 7	145 ± 23
	BR		841 ± 21	26 ± 8	134 ± 27

• RV: rainfed sugarcane cultivation with vinasse application; I: irrigated sugarcane cultivation; IV: irrigated sugarcane cultivation with the application of vinasse; WR: within row; BR: between rows;
• ^*
  data represented as mean ± standard deviation.

The pH was measured in water (1:2.5). The exchangeable cations Ca²⁺, Mg²⁺, and Al³⁺ were extracted by KCl 1 mol·L^-1 and measured by atomic absorption spectrophotometry (Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺) and titration (Al³⁺). Na⁺ and K⁺ cations were extracted with Mehlich^-1 solution and quantified by flame photometry (Teixeira et al. 2017). The extraction of H + Al was performed with Ca acetate buffered at pH 7 and quantified by volumetric analysis with a NaOH solution in the presence of phenolphthalein as an indicator. Organic carbon was determined by oxidation with K dichromate (Teixeira et al. 2017) (Table 3). Soil C stocks were calculated and adjusted according to the equivalent soil layer (Sisti et al. 2004) and presented as Eq. 1:

$\text{ Soil C stock }\left(\text{ ton }\cdot {\mathrm{ha}}^{-1}\right)=\mathrm{TOC}\left(\mathrm{g}\cdot {\mathrm{kg}}^{-1}\right)\times \mathrm{BD}\left(\mathrm{g}\cdot {\mathrm{cm}}^{-3}\right)\times \text{ Depth }\left(\mathrm{cm}\right)$ (1)

where: TOC: total organic carbon; BD: bulk density.

Table 3
Chemical characterization of the soil of sugarcane crops in the northeastern region of Brazil.

Soil management		Depth cm	pH (H2O)	K+	Na+	Ca2+	Mg2+	H++Al3+	Al3+
				cmolc·Kg-1
RV	WR	0–10	7.2 ± 0.21	2.67 ± 1.1Aa	0.55 ± 0.09Aa	0.16 ± 0.05	0.06 ± 0.01	0.9 ± 0.02	0
	BR		7.4 ± 0.21	3.03 ± 1.08Aa	0.70 ± 0.10Aa	0.15 ± 0.04	0.06 ± 0.01	1,0 ± 0.01	0
	WR	10–20	7.3 ± 0.19	3.63 ± 1.16Aa	0.62 ± 0.06Aa	0.17 ± 0.04	0.05 ± 0.01	0.5 ± 0.01	0
	BR		7.6 ± 0.14	3.29 ± 0.68Aa	0.65 ± 0.08Aa	0.17 ± 0.06	0.06 ± 0.01	0.5 ± 0.02	0
I	WR	0–10	7.4 ± 0.13	0.69 ± 0.29Ba	0.14 ± 0.08Ba	0.15 ± 0.10	0.07 ± 0.02	0.2 ± 0.00	0
	BR		7.5 ± 0.32	0.47 ± 0.21Ba	0.16 ± 0.05Ba	0.23 ± 0.09	0.05 ± 0.02	0.5 ± 0.02	0
	WR	10–20	7.0 ± 0.35	0.23 ± 0.16Ba	0.11 ± 0.06Ba	0.14 ± 0.04	0.06 ± 0.01	0.5 ± 0.02	0
	BR		7.4 ± 0.24	0.28 ± 0.16Ba	0.11 ±0.06Ba	0.10 ± 0.04	0.04 ± 0.02	0.5 ± 0.02	0
IV	WR	0–10	7.1 ± 0.54	2.64 ± 1.29Aa	0.50 ± 0.08Aa	0.18 ± 0.09	0.10 ± 0.03	0.9 ± 0.06	0
	BR		7.1 ± 0.42	2.47 ± 1.03Aa	0.67 ± 0.09Aa	0.18 ± 0.08	0.09 ± 0.02	1.1 ± 0.03	0
	WR	10–20	7.1 ± 0.26	2.64 ± 1.10Aa	0.50 ± 0.09Aa	0.18 ± 0.04	0.10 ± 0.02	0.9 ± 0.03	0
	BR		6.9 ± 0.26	2.33 ± 1.58Aa	0.54 ± 0.13Aa	0.16 ± 0.06	0.06 ± 0.02	2.1 ± 0.13	0

• RV: rainfed sugarcane cultivation with vinasse application; I: irrigated sugarcane cultivation; IV: irrigated sugarcane cultivation with the application of vinasse; WR: within row; BR: between rows;
• ^*
  average values followed by the same lowercase letter do not present statistical differences between rows and rows within each management, according to Scott-Knott’s test (p ≤ 0.05).
• Data represented as mean ± standard deviation. Different uppercase letters indicate statistical significance between the management systems.

The Shapiro-Wilk’s test (p ≤ 0.05) was performed to test the normality of the data. Comparisons in and between administrations were performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). When ANOVA showed significance (p ≤ 0.05), means were compared using the Scott-Knott’s test (p ≤ 0.05). Comparisons between treatments were carried out independently, comparing all rows and between rows separately for each layer analyzed. The data were analyzed using version 5.6 of Sisvar (Ferreira 2019).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Treatments RV and IV exhibited the highest K concentrations in the row and between rows of sugarcane at both depths evaluated in comparison to treatment I. Potassium is the main chemical component of vinasse and is essential to increase sugarcane productivity in various environments (Elgharbawy 2021). Potassium helps maintain cellular osmotic pressure, which allows for efficient uptake of water and nutrients. It also acts as a cofactor in numerous enzymes involved in photosynthesis and cellular respiration, increasing the efficiency of glucose production and sucrose accumulation (Jaiswal et al. 2021). Adequate fertilization of vinasse in irrigated systems contributes to K availability at depth, triggering resistance and more robust root development that maximizes soil exploration (Bhatt et al. 2024).

The soil sodium concentration showed a significant difference between treatments with and without vinasse application, regardless the irrigation use, with the highest Na⁺ concentrations of 70 and 67 cmol_c·kg^-1 found in treatments RV and IV, respectively (Stephen et al. 2024). The elements K⁺, Ca²⁺, Mg²⁺, and Na⁺ generally show positive correlations with vinasse application, consequently providing an increase in the soil fertility levels (high base saturation) (Fuess et al. 2021). However, the excessive use of vinasse may cause an increased risk of soil salinization and/or sodification, mainly depending on the chemical composition of the applied residue (Fuess et al. 2017). The highest values of TOC were found in the RV and IV treatments, while the lowest values were found at 0–10-cm depth (9.1 g·kg^-1) in treatment I. Between the rows of sugarcane soils, treatment IV presented 15.3 g·Kg^-1 of TOC at 10-cm depth. Conversely, treatment I presented the lowest values (9.4 g·Kg^-1). In the 20-cm layer, there was a decrease in the C content of ± 0.5 g·kg^-1 (Table 4).

Table 4
Average total organic carbon content (TOC) and predictive attributes of the soil of sugarcane crops in the northeastern region of Brazil*.

Soil management		Depth cm	TOC (g·kg-1)	BD g·cm-3	TP m3·m-3	SPR MPa	ASI %
RV	WR	0–10	13.6 ± 0.89Aa	1.59 ± 0.12	0.35 ± 0.02	1.00 ± 0.10	30.36 ± 3.12
	BR		13.0 ± 1.29Aa	1.68 ± 0.05	0.34 ± 0.04	1.40 ± 0.08	37.05 ± 3.64
	WR	10–20	12.1 ± 0.64Aa	1.74 ± 0.09	0.33 ± 0.02	1.44 ± 0.12	53.2 ± 6.23
	BR		11.5 ± 0.88Aa	1.72 ± 0.05	0.34 ± 0.03	1.53 ± 0.14	32.44 ± 2.89
I	WR	0–10	9.1 ± 0.81Ba	1.56 ± 0.06	0.38 ± 0.01	0.65 ± 0.05	48.77 ± 4.18
	BR		9.4 ± 1.26Ba	1.75 ± 0.07	0.36 ± 0.03	1.24 ± 0.10	85.21 ± 8.49
	WR	10–20	6.7 ± 1.18Ba	1.72 ± 0.05	0.35 ± 0.03	1.29 ± 0.13	45.12 ± 3.15
	BR		6.9 ± 0.75Ba	1.76 ± 0.04	0.33 ± 0.02	1.17 ± 0.08	44.13 ± 2.66
IV	WR	0–10	14.7 ± 0.90Aa	1.45 ± 0.07	0.42 ± 0.04	0.42 ± 0.08	73.99 ± 5.65
	BR		15.3 ± 0.81Aa	1.69 ± 0.08	0.38 ±0.02	1.09 ± 0.07	74.19 ± 8.46
	WR	10–20	13.6 ± 1.12Aa	1.51 ± 0.04	0.39 ± 0.03	0.48 ± 0.05	77.53 ± 3.98
	BR		11.9 ± 0.95Aa	1.76 ± 0.08	0.33 ± 0.02	0.95 ± 0.04	54.99 ± 3.17

• RV: rainfed sugarcane cultivation with vinasse application; I: irrigated sugarcane cultivation; IV: irrigated sugarcane cultivation with the application of vinasse; WR: within row; BR: between rows; TOC: total organic carbon; BD: bulk density; TP: total porosity; SPR: soil penetration resistance; ASI: aggregate stability index;
• ^*
  average values followed by the same lowercase letter do not present statistical differences between rows and rows within each management, according to Scott-Knott’s test (p ≤ 0.05).
• Data represented as mean ± standard deviation. Different uppercase letters indicate statistical significance between the management systems.

The controlled traffic of agricultural machinery preserved the planting lines during all cultural treatments and harvesting because the entire load exerted by the weight of the harvesting machine was applied to the rows between the treatments (Da Luz et al. 2023). This may increase the rate of aggregate decomposition in the upper soil layer due to reduced root distribution. It is known that sugarcane has 70% of the root dry mass to a depth of 0.40 m, in which there is a greater impact of compaction from agricultural machinery traffic (Lovera et al. 2021).

Anthropogenic activities are the main causes of the significant increase in soil density, as they compromise entire aggregate sizes due to the breakdown of the physical structure, thus leading to carbon decomposition and consequent high COsions (Six et al. 2002). It is imperative to avoid the use of agricultural implements such as harrows, plows, scarifiers, and subsoilers in conventional soil management systems to ensure the physical occlusion in which particulate organic C is stored associated with minerals, therefore enhancing C storage at depth (Six et al. 2004, Song et al. 2019).

Several studies reported the ability of vinasse fertigation plots to present higher soil organic carbon (SOC) contents, since an increase in OM content was found due to the P, Ca, and N present in the vinasse composition, which favors the mineralizing activities of soil microorganisms (Nunes et al. 2023). This condition can be observed in sugarcane management under irrigation or rainfed. Therefore, it can be stated that the application of vinasse according to the fertilization recommendations (Carpanez et al. 2022) promotes an increase in the availability of nutrients in the soil due to the improvement in the stabilization of soil aggregates (Da Silva et al. 2021, Del Pino et al. 2022).

Recent studies have shown that the presence and development of sugarcane roots contribute significantly to soil structure by promoting the formation of more stable aggregates (Lovera et al. 2021, Lopes Sobrinho et al. 2024). This stability is essential for improving water infiltration and soil C storage, aspects that are critical in sustainable agricultural practices. When irrigation management is optimized, as in the case of the irrigation treatments studied here, sugarcane roots help create a microenvironment that favors microbial activity, which promotes the mineralization of OM and, consequently, increases soil C storage (Ramalakshmi et al. 2023). Thus, adequate irrigation not only supports healthy root growth but also ensures that soil moisture remains at levels that maximize soil aggregation, allowing for better root development.

The RV and IV treatments showed similar C stocks (21.7 Mg·ha^-1 at 0–10-cm and 20.09 Mg·ha^-1 at 10–20-cm depth). The lowest values were found in irrigated management (I treatment) without vinasse application (14.1 Mg·ha^-1 and 11.4 M·ha^-1 at 0–10- and 10–20-cm depth, respectively) (p ≤ 0.05). Between rows, only treatment IV showed higher C stocks at 0–10 cm compared to the sugarcane row (25.8 Mg·ha^-1) (p ≤ 0.05) (Fig. 2).

Figure 2
Average carbon stocks in sugarcane management in the northeastern region of Brazil.

These C stocks are according to the global average annual range proposed for tropical environments of 0.41 ± 0.03 Mg·ha^-1·year^-1 in the 0–20-cm soil depth layer (Chien and Krumins 2022). Tropical agricultural systems featuring sugarcane cultivation, especially those employing irrigation methods combined with vinasse application, controlled traffic of agricultural machinery, and maintenance of OM through straw, have demonstrated significant potential to enhance C stocks (Pinheiro Junior et al. 2024). This C storage capacity is not only important for soil fertility but also for reducing C emissions to the atmosphere. Furthermore, increases in soil C stocks are closely linked to improvements in soil structure, which enhances water infiltration and resistance to erosion, thereby facilitating nutrient cycling between soil and plant (Button et al. 2022).

The results indicated that, even with controlled traffic, there was no significant reduction in C stocks between cultivated areas. However, when comparing the rows between each management separately, a significant difference was found between the areas with vinasse application and those without. It is therefore considered that the application of vinasse ensures the preservation of the physical attributes of the soil between the rows through less compaction and greater moisture retention and porosity, thus confirming that this management system has provided greater protection in the surface layer of the soil.

The application of vinasse promoted high correlations (r > 0.8) between the variable TOC and the evaluated physical attributes (Fig. 3a). However, this correlation (r < 0.8) was not observed without the application of vinasse (Fig. 3b). Regarding the application of vinasse, a negative correlation occurred between total organic carbon, soil density, and soil penetration resistance. Additionally, TOC was positively correlated with TP (0.85) and ASI (0.88). SD was negatively correlated with the quantified physical attributes, except for soil penetration resistance (0.75), as well as porosity with ASI (0.75).

Figure 3
Pearson correlation matrix of the soil physical attributes in a sugarcane plantation under different management systems: (a) with the application of vinasse and (b) without vinasse.

Considering the application of vinasse, TOC demonstrated potential as an indicator of soil quality compared to other physical attributes. TOC is often associated with soil quality parameters, such as structure, water conservation, and water movement in the soil (Page et al. 2020, Voltr et al. 2021). Increases in organic carbon concentrations can also benefit the soil, such as greater water storage capacity and lower soil resistance to root penetration, directly reflecting on crop productivity (Castioni et al. 2019, Jimenez et al. 2021).

CONCLUSION

The C storage capacity of the irrigated and vinasse management systems is characterized by the following descending order: RV > IV > I. It is imperative to obtain long-term assessments to certify the C storage potential in soils under sugarcane planting systems in a tropical environment.

In addition, vinasse application increases soil moisture retention by enhancing the water-holding capacity of the soil. The OM in vinasse contributes to the aggregate stability in soils, which not only improves porosity but also enhances water infiltration. Increased soil porosity allows for better drainage and aeration, reducing the risk of waterlogging and promoting a healthier root environment.

In general, vinasse improves the physical-chemical conditions of the soil and reduces costs for farmers, especially in regions where sugar cane cultivation is emerging.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful to Miriri Alimentos e Bioenergia S/A, for providing the collection areas and for all support during the collection period. We are also grateful to Dr. Pedro Henrique Neves de Souza (agronomist engineer from the Miriri Alimentos e Bioenergia S/A) and Prof. Emidio Cantídio de Oliveira, for providing helpful suggestion about the management systems.

• How to cite: Nunes, J. A., Fracetto, F. J. C., Leal, L. Y. C., Nunes, C. C. C. G., Paulino, M. K. S. S. and Souza, E. R. (2025). Carbon storage in irrigated and rainfed sugarcane production systems with vinasse application. Bragantia, 84, e20240249. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4499.20240249
• FUNDING
  Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
  Grant No.: 305136/2021-6
  Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
  Finance code 001
  Fundação Agrisus
  Grant No.: 3107/21
  Fundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de Pernambuco
  Grant No: IBPG-1984-5.01/21

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

REFERENCES

• Almeida, B. G., Donagemma, G. K., Ruiz, H. A., Braida, J. A., Viana, J. H. M., Reichert, J. M. M. and Teixeira, W. G. (2012). Padronização de métodos para análise granulométrica no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Embrapa Solos. Comunicado Técnico, 66.
• Alvares, C. A., Stape, J. L., Sentelhas, P. C., Gonçalves, J. D. M. and Sparovek, G. (2013). Köppen’s climate classification map for Brazil. Meteorologische zeitschrift, 22, 711-728. https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2013/0507
  » https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2013/0507
• Bhatt, R., de Oliveira, M. W. and Freitas Santos, D. (2024). Improving sugarcane (Saccharum spp. Hybrid complex) growth, yield and quality through balanced fertilization: an overview. Revista de Gestão e Secretariado, 15, 3781-3781. https://doi.org/10.7769/gesec.v15i6.3781
  » https://doi.org/10.7769/gesec.v15i6.3781
• Button, E. S., Pett-Ridge, J., Murphy, D. V., Kuzyakov, Y., Chadwick, D. R. and Jones, D. L. (2022). Deep-C storage: Biological, chemical and physical strategies to enhance carbon stocks in agricultural subsoils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 170, 108697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108697
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108697
• Carpanez, T. G., Moreira, V. R., Assis, I. R. and Amaral, M. C. S. (2022). Sugarcane vinasse as organo-mineral fertilizers feedstock: Opportunities and environmental risks. Science of the Total Environment, 832, 154998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154998
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154998
• Castioni, G. A. F., Cherubin, M. R., Bordonal, R. D. O., Barbosa, L. C., Menandro, L. M. S. and Carvalho, J. L. N. (2019). Straw removal affects soil physical quality and sugarcane yield in Brazil. BioEnergy Research, 12, 789-800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-019-10000-1
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-019-10000-1
• Chien, S. C. and Krumins, J. A. (2022). Natural versus urban global soil organic carbon stocks: A meta-analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 807, 150999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150999
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150999
• [Conab] Companhia Nacional de Abastecimento (2024). Boletim da safra de cana-de-açúcar. Brazil: Conab. Available at: https://www.conab.gov.br/info-agro/safras/cana/boletim-da-safra-de-cana-de-acucar Accessed on: Apr. 12, 2024.
  » https://www.conab.gov.br/info-agro/safras/cana/boletim-da-safra-de-cana-de-acucar
• Da Luz, F. B., Gonzaga, L. C., Castioni, G. A. F., Lima, R. P., Carvalho, J. L. N. and Cherubin, M. R. (2023). Controlled traffic farming maintains soil physical functionality in sugarcane fields. Geoderma, 432, 116427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2023.116427
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2023.116427
• Da Silva, J. J., da Silva, B. F., Stradiotto, N. R., Petrović, M., Gros, M. and Gago-Ferrero, P. (2021). Identification of organic contaminants in vinasse and in soil and groundwater from fertigated sugarcane crop areas using target and suspect screening strategies. Science of the Total Environment, 761, 143237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143237
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143237
• De Melo, T. R., Ferreira, R. R. M., Navroski, D., Feltran, C. T. M. and Filho, J. T. (2018). Physico-chemical attributes of a Cambisol under pasture managed with annual burns after sugarcane vinasse application. International Journal of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture, 7, 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40093-018-0193-y
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s40093-018-0193-y
• Del Gobbo, L. M., Villegas, L. B. and Colin, V. L. (2019). The potential application of an autochthonous fungus from the northwest of Argentina for treatment of sugarcane vinasse. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 365, 820-826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.11.071
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.11.071
• Del Pino, A., Casanova, O., Hernández, J., Takata, V. and Panissa, G. (2022). Vinasse for sugarcane crop nutrition: accumulation and efficiency in the use of nutrients. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 16, 1107-1116. https://doi.org/10.21475/ajcs.22.16.09.p3617
  » https://doi.org/10.21475/ajcs.22.16.09.p3617
• Elgharbawy, A. (2021). A review on vinasse A by-product from sugarcane industry. Trends in Petroleum Engineering, 1, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.53902/TPE.2021.01.000506
  » https://doi.org/10.53902/TPE.2021.01.000506
• Esteban, D. A. A., de Souza, Z. M., da Silva, R. B., de Souza Lima, E., Lovera, L. H. and Oliveira, I. N. (2020). Impact of permanent traffic lanes on the soil physical and mechanical properties in mechanized sugarcane fields with the use of automatic steering. Geoderma, 362, 114097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.114097
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.114097
• Ferreira, D. F. (2019). SISVAR: A computer analysis system to fixed effects split plot type designs. Brazilian Journal of Biometrics, 37, 529-535. https://doi.org/10.28951/rbb.v37i4.450
  » https://doi.org/10.28951/rbb.v37i4.450
• Fuess, L. T., Altoé, M. E., Felipe, M. C. and Garcia, M. L. (2021). Pros and cons of fertirrigation with in natura sugarcane vinasse: Do improvements in soil fertility offset environmental and bioenergy losses? Journal of Cleaner Production, 319, 128684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128684
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128684
• Fuess, L. T., Rodrigues, I. J. and Garcia, M. L. (2017). Fertirrigation with sugarcane vinasse: Foreseeing potential impacts on soil and water resources through vinasse characterization. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A, 52, 1063-1072. https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2017.1338892
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2017.1338892
• Gee, G. W. and Or, D. (2002). 2.4 Particle‐size analysis. Methods of soil analysis: Part 4 physical methods, 5, 255-293. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.4.c12
  » https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.4.c12
• IUSS Working Group WRB (2015). World reference base for soil resources 2014, update 2015 International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps. Rome: FAO. World Soil Resources Reports, n. 106.
• Jacomine, P. K. T., Ribeiro, M. R., Montenegro, J. O., da Silva, A. P. and Melo Filho, H. F. R. (1972). I. Levantamento exploratório-reconhecimento de solos do Estado da Paraíba. II. Interpretação para uso agrícola dos solos do Estado da Paraíba. Rio de Janeiro: Equipe de Pedologia e Fertilidade do Solo.
• Jaiswal, V. P., Shukla, S. K., Sharma, L., Singh, I., Pathak, A. D., Nagargade, M. and Masto, E. (2021). Potassium influencing physiological parameters, photosynthesis and sugarcane yield in subtropical India. Sugar Tech, 23, 343-359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00905-z
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00905-z
• Jimenez, K. J., Rolim, M. M., de Lima, R. P., Cavalcanti, R. Q., Silva, Ê. F. and Pedrosa, E. M. (2021). Soil physical indicators of a sugarcane field subjected to successive mechanized harvests. Sugar Tech, 23, 811-818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00916-w
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00916-w
• Júnnyor, W. D. S. G., Diserens, E., De Maria, I. C., Araujo-Junior, C. F., Farhate, C. V. V. and Souza, Z. M. (2019). Prediction of soil stresses and compaction due to agricultural machines in sugarcane cultivation systems with and without crop rotation. Science of the Total Environment, 681, 424-434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.009
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.009
• Lal, R. (2018). Digging deeper: A holistic perspective of factors affecting soil organic carbon sequestration in agroecosystems. Global Change Biology, 24, 3285-3301. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14054
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14054
• Lal, R., Bouma, J., Brevik, E., Dawson, L., Field, D. J., Glaser, B., Hatano, R., Hartemink, A. E., Kosaki, T., Lascelles, B., Monger, C., Muggler, C., Ndzana, G. M., Norra, S., Pan, X., Paradelo, R., Reyes-Sánchez, L. B., Sandén, T., Singh, B. R., Spiegel, H., Yanai, J., and Zhang, J. (2021). Soils and sustainable development goals of the United Nations: An International Union of Soil Sciences perspective. Geoderma Regional, 25, e00398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2021.e00398
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2021.e00398
• Loke, P. F., Kotzé, E., Du Preez, C. C. and Twigge, L. (2019). Dynamics of soil carbon concentrations and quality induced by agricultural land use in Central South Africa. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 83, 366-379. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2018.11.0423
  » https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2018.11.0423
• Lopes Sobrinho, O. P., Santos, L. N. S. D., Teixeira, M. B., Soares, F. A. L., Gonçalves, I. Z., Barbosa, E. A. A., Nazário, A. A., Matsura, E. E., Vitorino, L. C., Reis, M. N. O. and Bessa, L. A. (2024). How does irrigation with wastewater affect the physical soil properties and the root growth of sugarcane under subsurface drip? Agronomy, 14, 788. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14040788
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14040788
• Lovera, L. H., de Souza, Z. M., Esteban, D. A. A., de Oliveira, I. N., Farhate, C. V. V., de Souza Lima, E. and Panosso, A. R. (2021). Sugarcane root system: Variation over three cycles under different soil tillage systems and cover crops. Soil and Tillage Research, 208, 104866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104866
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104866
• Nunes, J. A., Rodrigues de Souza, E., Muylaert Locks Guimarães, R., Claudino Grangeiro Nunes, C. C., dos Santos, M. A. and Schaffer, B. (2023). Effect of controlled traffic on maintaining physical soil quality in sugarcane fields under different crop management systems. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 69, 3266-3283. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2023.2217746
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2023.2217746
• Page, K. L., Dang, Y. P. and Dalal, R. C. (2020). The ability of conservation agriculture to conserve soil organic carbon and the subsequent impact on soil physical, chemical, and biological properties and yield. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4, 31. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00031
  » https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00031
• Pinheiro Junior, C. R., Carvalho, J. L. N., Canisares, L. P., Cerri, C. E. P. and Cherubin, M. R. (2024). Soil carbon stocks in sugarcane cultivation: An evidence synthesis associated with land use and management practices. GCB Bioenergy, 16, e13188. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.13188
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.13188
• Price, J., Warren, R. and Forstenhäusler, N. (2024). Biodiversity losses associated with global warming of 1.5 to 4°C above pre-industrial levels in six countries. Climatic Change, 177, 47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03666-2
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03666-2
• Ramalakshmi, C. S., Sreelatha, T., Sireesha, A. and Kumari, M. B. G. S. (2023). The potential impact of succeeding crops on soil carbon pools, carbon sequestration, beneficial microbes and enzyme activities under intensive sugarcane-based cropping systems. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science, 71, 41-49. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-0228.2023.00007.5
  » https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-0228.2023.00007.5
• Santos, H. G., Jacomine, P. K. T., Anjos, L. H. C., Oliveira, V. A., Lumbreras, J. F., Coelho, M. R., Almeida, J. A., Araujo Filho, J. C., Oliveira, J. B. D. and Cunha, T. J. F. (2018). Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação de Solos. Brasília: Embrapa, 5, 356.
• Severiano, R. M., Pierangeli, M. A., Santos, N. D. S. and Xavier, V. (2021). Soil organic carbon in no-tillage systems of different ages in Southwest Mato Grosso, Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, 25, 250-255. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v25n4p250-255
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v25n4p250-255
• Shukla, S. K., Jaiswal, V. P., Sharma, L., Pathak, A. D., Singh, A. K., Gupta, R., Awasthi, S. K., Gaur, A., Zubair, A. and Tiwari, R. (2020). Sugarcane yield using minimum tillage technology through subsoiling: beneficial impact on soil compaction, carbon conservation and activity of soil enzymes. Sugar Tech, 22, 987-1006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00860-9
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00860-9
• Silva, J. C., Silva, A. R., Veloso, C. A., Dantas, E. F. and Sacramento, J. A. (2018). Aggregation, carbon, and total soil nitrogen in crop-livestock-forest integration in the Eastern Amazon. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, 22, 837-842. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v22n12p837-842
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v22n12p837-842
• Sisti, C. P., dos Santos, H. P., Kohhann, R., Alves, B. J., Urquiaga, S. and Boddey, R. M. (2004). Change in carbon and nitrogen stocks in soil under 13 years of conventional or zero tillage in southern Brazil. Soil and Tillage Research, 76, 39-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2003.08.007
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2003.08.007
• Six, J., Bossuyt, H., Degryze, S. and Denef, K. (2004). A history of research on the link between (micro) aggregates, soil biota, and soil organic matter dynamics. Soil and Tillage Research, 79, 7-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2004.03.008
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2004.03.008
• Six, J., Conant, R. T., Paul, E. A. and Paustian, K. (2002). Stabilization mechanisms of soil organic matter: implications for C-saturation of soils. Plant and Soil, 241, 155-176. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016125726789
  » https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016125726789
• Song, K., Zheng, X., Lv, W., Qin, Q., Sun, L., Zhang, H. and Xue, Y. (2019). Effects of tillage and straw return on water-stable aggregates, carbon stabilization and crop yield in an estuarine alluvial soil. Scientific Reports, 9, 4586. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40908-9
  » https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40908-9
• Souza, C. B. D., Silva, B. B. D. and Azevedo, P. V. D. (2007). Crescimento e rendimento do abacaxizeiro nas condições climáticas dos Tabuleiros Costeiros do Estado da Paraíba. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, 11, 134-141. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662007000200002
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662007000200002
• Stephen, G. S., Shitindi, M. J., Bura, M. D., Kahangwa, C. A. and Nassary, E. K. (2024). Harnessing the potential of sugarcane-based liquid byproducts—molasses and spentwash (vinasse) for enhanced soil health and environmental quality. A systematic review. Frontiers in Agronomy, 6, 1358076. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2024.1358076
  » https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2024.1358076
• Teixeira, P. C., Donagemma, G. K., Fontana, A. and Teixeira, W. G. (2017). Manual de métodos de análise de solo. Brasília: Embrapa.
• Voltr, V., Menšík, L., Hlisnikovský, L., Hruška, M., Pokorný, E. and Pospíšilová, L. (2021). The soil organic matter in connection with soil properties and soil inputs. Agronomy, 11, 779. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11040779
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11040779

Edited by

• Section Editor:
  Osvaldo Guedes Filho https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8550-8505

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  03 Mar 2025
• Date of issue
  2025

History

• Received
  13 June 2024
• Accepted
  27 Jan 2025