THE number of varieties cultivated is a crude indicator of genetic diversity on farmers’ fields as well as a means of avoiding risk of complete crop failure which may happen if only one variety is planted.

Overall, sample farmers were found cultivating more than 25 sugarcane varieties. About three-fifths of the farmers had planted only one variety whereas one-third had planted two varieties. A very small proportion of the farmers planted three or more varieties. More than 25 varieties of sugarcane were cultivated by sample farmers in the study area during the years 2006-07 and 2007-08. These cultivars are grouped as recommended and non-recommended varieties in different provinces. The varieties under cultivation from recommend group were: Thatta-10, CP-77-400, BL-4, HSF-240, SPSG-26, SPF-234, Gulabi-95, CPF-237, NIA-98, L-113, PR-1000, HSF-242, L-116, CP-43-33, SPF-213, L-118 and COJ-84. The non-recommended varieties found on farmers’ fields were Triton, CPF-238, SPSG-79, CO-1148, CP-70, CO-245, Bansi, Pona and others. Overall, more than 70 per cent of total sugarcane area was planted under recommended varieties during 2006-07, which was improved by nearly six percentage points in the following year of 2007-08..

In Sindh, more than fourth-fifths of total sugarcane area were planted under recommended varieties.. Among them, the largest proportionate area was panted under varieties like Thatta-10 followed by BL-4, SPSG-26, CPF-234, Gulabi-95, NIA-98, L-113, PR-1000 and L-116. In non-recommended group, the proportionate varietal area in declining order was Triton, CP-70, Bansi and Pona. In Punjab, 30.4 per cent of total sugarcane area was planted under recommended varieties during 2006-07 and an increase of 21 percentage points took place in the following year --- 2007-08. From the recommended group, the varieties most planted were HSF-240, CPF-237, SPSG-79, CP-77-400, HSF-242, CP-43-33, SPF-234, SPF-213, SPSG-26, L-118 and COJ-84.

The non-recommended varieties falling in decreasing order of per cent sugarcane area planted in Punjab were CPF-238, SPSG-79, CO-1148 and Triton. In NWFP, nearly 985 of total sugarcane area was under CP-77-400, the only one recommended variety. From the non-recommended group, CO-1148 was the only major variety planted in the study area. As per expectations, the proportionate area under recommended sugarcane varieties increased from small to large farm size groups. Large sized farmers planted relatively more area under Thatta-10, BL-4, HSF-240 and CP-77400. The small and medium- sized farmers devoted relatively more area to CP-77-400, Thatta-10, BL-4 and HSF-240. From non-recommended category, the more area occupying varieties on medium and large farms were Triton and CPF-238 whereas on small farms, CPF-238 and SPSG-79 were relatively most planted.

Considering distribution of sugarcane varieties across tenancy groups, the per cent area under recommended sugarcane varieties was much higher on tenants and owner-operators’ farms than the owner-cum-tenants. Between 2006-07 and 2007-08, largest improvement in percentage points in recommended varieties’ area was noticed on owner-cum-tenants’ farms. Thatta-10 was relatively dominant recommended variety on owner operated farms while CP-77-400 variety was relatively more planted on other two tenancy categories’ farms. In non-recommended group, Triton and CPF-238 had occupied relatively higher proportion in the total sugarcane area. This leads to conclusion that owner-cum-tenants and tenants have little access to recommended varieties and perhaps varietal choice is strongly influenced by tenancy status.

The sugarcane varietal distribution across different farming categories is discussed in different cropping zones of the country.

Southern Sindh: Thirteen sugarcane varieties are found planted by sample sugarcane growers in Sindh province. In terms of per cent of total sugarcane area allocated to these varieties, varieties fall in decreasing order are Thatta-10, Triton, BL-4, Gulabi-95, SPSG-26, SPF-234, CP-70, NIA-98, PR-10, CP-245, L-116, L-113 and Pona. From these, varieties like Triton, CP-70, Pona, CO-245 and CP-20/72 are not recommended by the Department of Agricultural Extension Sindh. All three dominant varieties (i.e. Thatta-10, Triton and BL-4) from recommended group are considered relatively more sucrose containing varieties and their share in total sugarcane area accounts 81.5 per cent in 2006 and 81.8 per cent in 2007. This implies that more than four-fifth of total sugarcane area in sample districts was under relatively high sucrose containing sugarcane varieties. However, plantation of Triton variety over a notable area is worrisome.

Across districts, Mirpur Kas district farmers planted recommended varieties at most of their sugarcane area whereas Badin district farmers devoted nearly 55 per cent of total sugarcane area to recommended varieties. Further among recommended varieties, the cultivars occupied most part of total sugarcane area in decreasing order were Thatta-10 followed by Gulabi-95, SPSG-26 and BL-4 in Mirpur Khas district during 2006. In the following year, Thatta-10 remained at the top while the order of other three varieties was changed as BL-4, SPSG-26, and Gulabi-95. In Badin district, Thatta-10 and BL-4 were more popular varieties from the recommended group while Triton was most popular in the non-recommended category. No mentionable change was noticed on sample farms in area allocation during 2006 and 2007.

Considering farming size groups, Thatta-10 was the most area occupying variety on all farm types in both the years. However, its area declined by more than three per cent on large farms during 2007 compared to 2006. On the other hand, Triton was the most planted non-recommended variety on all farm size categories. Turning to varietal adoption by tenancy groups, again Thatta-10 was dominant on all farm types, particularly tenants who devoted nearly four-fifth of total sugarcane area to this variety. Triton, a non-recommended variety was second most sugarcane area occupying variety.

In conclusion, the allocation of a very low proportion of total sugarcane area to recommended varieties in Badin district compared to Mirpur Khas needs due consideration of extension department and the sugar mills of the area. The farmers of all farm sizes and tenancy status should be considered in efforts of promoting planting more sugarcane area under recommended varieties.

Central Punjab: Fifteen sugarcane varieties were planted by sample growers in Punjab province. In terms of per cent of total sugarcane area allocated to these varieties, varieties fall in decreasing order are CPF-238, HSF-240, CPF-237, SPSG-79, CP-77-400, CO-1148, HSF-242, CP-43-33, SPF234, SPF-213, SPSG-26, L-118, Triton, COJ-84 and others/non-descriptive. From these varieties like CP-238, CP-77-400, CO-1148, Triton, L-118 and other are not recommended by the Department of Agricultural Extension Punjab. The ratio of recommended to non-recommended varieties was 33:67 in year 2006-07 and 52:48 during 2007-08. This implies an improvement of 18.7 percentage points in the area under recommended varieties during 2007-08 compared to previous years. HSF-240 remained the only dominant variety in the recommended group whereas CPF-238 is the only major variety from non-recommended group during both the years.

Across districts, the proportionate area under recommended varieties was much higher in Jhang than Faisalabad. Although an increase in percent area under recommended varieties was observed in both districts, but it was higher in Jhang (22.2 per cent) than Faisalabad (7.5 per cent) during 2007-08 as compared with previous year. The improvement in area under recommended varieties is mainly due to significant substitution of area under CPF-238 (a dominant non-recommended variety) to the recommended variety --- HSF-240. Similar substitution was also noticed in Faisalabad by its magnitude was very small. This implies that serious efforts are needed to promote cultivation of recommended varieties in Faisalabad district.

Central NWFP: Only three sugarcane varieties namely CP-77-400, CO-1148 and others were found cultivated by farmers in central NWFP. Out of these, CP-77-400 is the only recommended variety by the provincial Department of Agricultural Extension. CP-77-400 occupied nearly 98 per cent of total sugarcane area on sample farms in the study area. The medium and large sized farms as well as owner operators planted entire area under this variety. Nothing worth mentioning in area substitution between recommended and non-recommended varieties was noticed between 2006-07 and 2007-08. This implies that varietal adoption situation is quite satisfactory in central NWFP.

The study in hand was aimed to indirectly investigate into the potential of saving land and water resources by re-allocating sugarcane area to relatively more productive recommended sugarcane varieties. Second, this exercise shall also provide feedback to researchers in sugarcane crop as well as sugar mills for accessing the types of varieties performing well relative to other ones. In this way, this study can help them to reform the research and development agendas of scientists and sugar mills, respectively. For these purposes this sugarcane varietal adoption study was conducted.

The salient findings reiterated are: The sugarcane production in Sindh is in the hands of relatively large sized farmers, mostly owner-operated and cultivating this crop entirely on canal water. In Punjab, the average farm size of sugarcane growers is much lower than Sindh and sugarcane is produced by both owners and owner-cum-tenants by irrigating with both canal and tubewell waters. In NWFP, the average farm size of sugarcane growers is close to small farm size limit, majority of them is composed of owner-cum-tenants and tenant operators and sugarcane is mainly grown by canal water application.

Overall, nearly one-fifth of total farm area is allocated to sugarcane crop. This proportion is highest in NWFP (41 per cent). Small-sized farmers and tenant operators are devoting relatively more proportionate area to sugarcane crop than their respective counterparts.

Regarding sugarcane varietal spread, a majority of the farmers planted only one variety. The cultivation of two varieties was more common in southern Sindh, large farmers and to some extent at owner operators’ farms. Across sample districts, one variety plantation was common in all sample districts except Badin. Similarly, one variety cultivation was more common on small farms in all three provinces whereas a relatively larger proportion of medium-sized farmers in Sindh are planting two varieties at a time. By tenancy categories, two varieties were planted by relatively higher proportion of owner-operators in Sindh whereas one variety plantation was common on all tenancy categories’ farms in Punjab.

Overall, more than 70 per cent and 76 per cent of total sugarcane area was planted under recommended varieties during 2006-07 and 2007-08, respectively. Among recommended varieties, Thatta-10 and CP-77-400 captured 45 per cent and 43 per cent of total sugarcane area in 2006-07 and 2007-08, respectively. Thatta-10 in Sindh, HSF-240 in Punjab and CP-77-400 in NWFP were largest area capturing recommended sugarcane varieties. By farming categories, CP-77-400 on small, medium, OCT and tenants operated farms, Thatta-10 on large and owner-operators’ farms captured the highest proportionate area.

Comparing the values of varietal diffusion indicators between 2006-07 and 2007-08 crop production years revealed that although an improvement was taken place in most of the indicators, however, their magnitude is quite small indicating slowness of varietal diffusion. Great variations in varietal diffusion indicators were observed across provinces, farm size and tenancy status categories.

Comparing changes in varietal diffusion indicators across districts, farm size and tenancy status between two consecutive cropping years (2006-07 and 2007-08) revealed that in Sindh and NWFP, although no significant changes were observed on overall basis, however, some developments were noticed within farming categories in Sindh province only. In central Punjab, for majority of the indicators, Jhang district is well advanced than Faisalabad, large farmers and owner-operators were at much better position than their respective counterparts.

In conclusion, major proportion of total sugarcane area is planted under recommended varieties. Despite this, sugarcane varietal choice, adoption and allocating area to different varieties found greatly varied across provinces, sample districts and farming categories. Overall, non-significant improvements in varietal diffusion indicators signifies that varietal diffusion process among sugarcane growers all over the country is taking place on informal grounds and is extremely slow. Therefore, strong institutional efforts from agricultural extension department as well as sugar mills is needed to diffuse more recently released varieties among the farmers.

More specifically, the farmers in Badin and Faisalabad need urgent attention a situation in these districts is very poor. The sugarcane growers in NWFP are suggested to increase varietal diversity on their farms in order to avoid any risk of complete crop failure due to insect, pest or disease attack.

Sugar mills in NWFP province are suggested to take serious note of cultivation of entire area under only one variety in central NWFP. Varietal diversity in NWFP is in the interest of both the farmers and the mills. In general, sugar mills in all three provinces are suggested to take serious note of status of adoption of different sugarcane varieties through a collective action in their respective provinces.