Rice Crop establishment techniques in South Asia by Pardeep Sagwal CCS HAU Hisar

1,191 views
1,003 views

Published on

Rice being a global crop grown widely across the world with varying methodologies and techniques. so do we have option for south Asia which is the hub for rice production. do we have enough resources to continued production of rice with lesser availability of water and Labour which are the most limiting factor in the region.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,191
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
8
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
96
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Rice Crop establishment techniques in South Asia by Pardeep Sagwal CCS HAU Hisar

  1. 1. Crop Establishment Techniques in Rice Pardeep Sagwal Research Scholar Dept. of Agronomy CCS HAU Hisar
  2. 2. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of most important food crop and nearly one-half of the worlds population dependent on it. 2 Rice 2011-12 Area (m ha) Production (m tones) Productivity (kg/ha) India 42.86 95.98 2239 Haryana 1.23 3.75 3044 Source: Dept. of Agri. and Cooperation, Govt. of India Source: Food and agriculture organization Production share (2012)
  3. 3. Challenges in rice production • Water • Weed • Labour • Energy • Soil health • Climate change • Cost of cultivation 3 Source: Kumar and Ladha, 2011 Advances in Agronomy
  4. 4. It is estimated that one hectare of productive land is lost every 7.67 seconds. 4
  5. 5. Fig. 1. Trend of farm labour wages (US $ day -1) in selected Asian countries 5 Source: Kumar and Ladha, 2011 Advances in Agronomy
  6. 6. What is crop establishment ? • It is a sequence of events that includes seeding, seed germination, seedling emergence and development to the stage where the seedling could be expected to grow to maturity • It’s a complex interaction 6 Source: Jat et al., 2010 Technical Bulletin CIMMYT
  7. 7. Crop Establishment Techniques in Rice 7 Transplanting Manual Mechanical System of rice intensification Parachute rice Direct seeded rice Drum seeding Zero tillage DSR Aerobic rice DSR in prepared soil
  8. 8. 8
  9. 9. Rice Ecosystems I. Irrigated lowland(55%) II. Rainfed lowland (30%) III. Rainfed upland(12%) IV. Deep water (3%) 10 Source: Pathak et al., 2011 Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences Fig. 2. Distribution of rice area under various water management practices in India
  10. 10. Fig. 3. Factors affecting the choice of rice establishment methods. Source: Farooq et al.,2011 Soil & Tillage Research TPR: transplanting WS: wet seeding DS: dry seeding. 11
  11. 11. Table 1. Yield attributes and yield of rice as affected by establishment methods and varieties (Pooled data of 2 years) Treatments No. of tillers/m2 Grains/ panicle Plant dry weight/m2 Grain yield (q/ha) Straw Yield(q/ha) Crop establishment methods Direct seeding 243.91 67.46 673.25 32.48 42.66 Drum seeding 254.91 84.41 737.91 38.50 51.67 Transplanting 262.16 95.25 777.66 40.18 53.04 CD (P= 0.05) 9.36 3.71 16.10 0.88 4.35 Varieties Taraori Basmati 227.66 73.66 700.54 25.67 38.24 Pusa Basmati 1 251.11 79.72 725.67 38.98 49.87 Pusa Sugandha 4 262.55 86.00 736.68 40.82 52.12 Pusa Sugandha 5 273.33 90.11 755.55 42.74 56.66 CD (P= 0.05) 6.87 2.46 10.50 0.90 5.30 12 Source: Yadav et al., 2013 at BijnorIndian Journal of Agricultural Sciences
  12. 12. Table 2. Agronomic parameters of rice as affected by different establishment techniques Source: Baloch et al., 2007 at Dera Islam Khan Rice Science Treatments and parameters Direct seeding on flat Transplanting on flat Direct seeding on ridges Transplanting on ridges Parachute planting Plant population (seedlings/m2) 30.5 a 21.0 b 22.5 b 12.0 d 17.0 c No. of panicles per m2 424.5 b 710.5 a 307.5 c 463.0 b 677.5 a No. of spikelets per panicle 152.5 b 192.5 a 150.5 b 193.0 a 196.2 a Spikelet sterility 15.7 a 11.4 bc 12.0 b 9.2 c 9.2 c 1000-grain weight 30.3 32.0 30.7 31.2 31.8 Grain yield (t /ha) 4.0 b 6.5 a 5.1 ab 6.5 a 6.5 a 13
  13. 13. Table 3. Economic evaluation for stand establishment techniques in rice 14 Treatments Grain yield (t/ha) Variable cost (Rs/ha) Gross income (Rs/ha) Total cost (Rs/ha) Net income (Rs/ha) B:C Direct seeding on flat 4.08 560 20900 16340 4470 1.27 Transplanting on flat 6.58 1800 33400 17670 15730 1.89 Direct seeding on ridges 5.10 560 26000 16430 9570 1.58 Transplanting on ridges 6.50 1800 33000 17670 15330 1.86 Parachute planting 6.55 2580 33250 18450 14800 1.80 Source: Baloch et al., 2007 at Dera Islam Khan Rice Science
  14. 14. Table 4. Effect of establishment methods on yield components, grain yield, straw yield and economics in rice Establishment methods Panicle m-2 Grains/ panicle Grain yield (t ha-1) Growth duration (days) Gross return ($ ha-1) Gross margin ($ ha-1) B:C Aman 2006 CT-DrumR 323 a 87 b 6.0 a 135 c 1042 625 2.5 CT-TPR 1 244 b 118 a 6.1 a 151 a 1035 595 2.4 CT-TPR 2 248 b 114 a 6.1 a 143 b 993 590 2.5 Boro 2006-07 CT-DrumR 392 a 77.8 c 6.4 a 141 c 1126 680 2.5 CT-TPR 1 327 b 87.4 b 6.0 b 162 a 1057 552 2.1 CT-TPR 2 328 b 96.2 a 6.5 a 152 b 1125 654 2.4 15 Source: Rashid et al., 2009 at Gazipur Field Crop Research CT: Conventional tillage TPR: Transplanted rice
  15. 15. Table 5. Yields and protein content in grain and straw as influenced by crop establishment methods in rice Methods of crop establishment Yield (q ha-1) 2003 Yield (q ha-1) 2004 Protein content in grain (%) Protein in straw (%) Grain Straw Grain Straw 2003 2004 2003 2004 Dry seeding 37.26 47.15 38.41 42.53 7.36 7.07 3.25 3.33 Drum seeding 54.53 65.61 50.62 58.57 7.36 7.05 3.27 3.33 Zero tillage 44.53 53.23 42.27 48.27 7.45 7.03 3.38 3.40 Transplanting 54.72 66.02 55.29 63.94 7.43 7.13 3.30 3.38 C.D. at 5 % 1.31 1.56 4.12 4.43 NS NS NS NS 16 Source: Yadav et al., 2010 at Faizabad Pakistan Journal of Weed Science Research
  16. 16. Table 6. Effect of different stand establishment techniques on rice yield and its attributes. Treatments Plant height Productive tillers/m2 Number of grains/ Panicle 1000 grain wt.(g) Yield (t/ha) ZT transplanting 136.1 a 219.0 ab 96.50 a 23.17 a 4.80 a Direct seeding 126.6 c 231.7 a 72.67 b 22.17 b 3.36 c Brown manuring 128.2 bc 186.3 c 93.83 a 22.83 ab 4.23 b Transplanting on bed 129.2 bc 206.7 abc 95.73 a 23.17 a 4.43 b Conventional transplanting 130.2 b 200.2 bc 98.57 a 23.50 a 4.72 a LSD (0.05) 2.782 26.65 8.851 0.9676 0.2844 17 Source: Aslam et al., 2008 at Sheikhupura Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences ZT: Zero tillage
  17. 17. Table 7. Effect of different stand establishment techniques on economic returns in rice 18 Establishment methods Paddy yield (t/ha) Cost (Rs/ha) Income (Rs/ha) Profit (Rs/ha) Benefit cost ratio ZT transplanting 4.80 59660 114000 35643 1.91 Direct seeding 3.36 55057 79800 5793 1.14 Brown manuring 4.23 60402 100462 21310 1.66 Transplanting on beds 4.43 60452 105212 26010 1.74 Conventional planting 4.72 61045 104975 25180 1.72 Source: Aslam et al., 2008 at Sheikhupura Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences ZT: Zero tillage
  18. 18. Table 8. Yield of direct seeded rice and wheat under various tillage sequences 19 Tillage sequence Rice yield (Mg ha -1) Wheat yield (Mg ha-1) 2006 2007 2008 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 ZT-ZT 1.06 b 1.84 b 2.94 a 2.725 a 3.72 a 4.45 a ZT-CT 1.06 b 2.16 ab 2.59 ab 1.850 b 3.92 a 3.62 b CT-ZT 1.31 a 2.10 ab 2.47 ab 2.373 a 3.98 a 3.31 b CT-CT 1.31 a 2.26 a 2.35 b 1.910 b 3.80 a 3.86 ab Source : Mishra and Singh, 2012 at Jabalpur Soil & Tillage Research CT: Conventional tillage ZT: Zero tillage
  19. 19. Table 9. Effect of tillage sequence on economic returns and energy efficiency in direct seeded rice-wheat system 20 Tillage sequence Economic returns Energy parameters Total variable cost ($ ha-1) Net returns ($ ha-1) B:C Input energy (Mj ha-1) Output energy (Mj ha-1) Output- input Energy ratio ZT-ZT 537.3 b 1086.7 a 2.97 a 33906 c 106872 a 3.18 a ZT-CT 577.5 a 780.5 b 2.33 b 35979 b 91287 b 2.53 b CT-ZT 545.9 b 709.9 c 2.27 b 35979 b 84961 c 2.35 b CT-CT 283.9 a 786.1 b 2.33 b 38187 a 91272 b 2.38 b Source : Mishra and Singh, 2012 at Jabalpur Soil & Tillage Research
  20. 20. Table 10. Rice grain yield under different establishment systems over different years Establishment System Grain yield (kg ha-1) 2004 2005 2006 2007 Mean WS conventional 10,652 8170 8874 7859 8954 a WS stale 9437 7342 8265 8047 8273 b WS no-till stale 10,420 8175 8352 9029 8994 a DS conventional 10,802 8410 9117 8398 9130 a DS no-till stale 10,294 8292 10,042 9454 9520 a ANOVA results NS NS NS NS 21 Source: Pittelkow et al., 2012 at Devis Field Crop Research WS: Water seeded DS: Drill seeded
  21. 21. Table 11. Vegetative growth and yield parameters of paddy as influenced by mechanical and manual transplanting Source: Manjunatha et al., 2009 at Gangavati Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Science Parameters 2003-04 2004-05 Mean data Machine Manual Machine Manual Machine Manual Plant Height(cm) 47.8 46.0 46.0 45.0 46.9 45.5 No. of tillers/hill 17.26 17.40 18.64 17.86 17.94 17.64 No. of panicles/m2 476.5 483.6 460.0 473.2 468.2 478.4 No. of grains/5 panicles 374 385 382 379 378 382 Grain yield (q/ha) 59.45 59.85 48.58 47.70 54.01 53.77 Straw Yield (t/ha) 6.92 6.11 7.48 6.76 7.20 6.43 Harvest Index 0.46 0.49 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.45 Gross returns (Rs/ha) 37,400 37435 31018 30310 34209 33872 22
  22. 22. Table 12. Yield components in rice under various tillage and seeding treatments. Treatments Panicle number(m-2) Number of grains (Panicle-1) 1000-grain weight 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 Puddled TPR 253 b 242 b 117.6 a 121.0 a 26.8 27.2 Unpuddled TPR 249 b 236 b 117.3 a 121.2 a 26.8 27.1 No-till TPR 244 b 238 b 116.8 a 119.2 ab 26.7 26.8 Puddled drum seeded rice 274 a 266 a 108.0 b 116.2 b 26.2 26.9 No-till drum seeded rice 269 a 260 a 105.3 b 111.8 b 26.1 26.5 23 Source: Saharawat et al., 2010 at Kaul Field Crop Research TPR: Transplanted rice
  23. 23. Table 13. Yield of rice and wheat with various tillage and seeding treatments Treatments Grain Yield(Mg ha-1) Average net returns of system (US $ ha-1) Rice Wheat System 2005 2006 2005-06 2006-07 2005-06 2006-07 Puddled TPR 7.28 a 7.06 a 4.93 b 4.74 12.21 ab 11.80 a 686 c Unpuddled TPR 7.23 a 6.92 ab 5.14 ab 4.81 12.37 a 11.73 a 712 b No-till TPR 7.16 a 6.86 ab 5.32 a 4.92 12.48 a 11.78 a 721 a Puddled drum seeded rice 6.73 b 6.61 b 5.32 a 4.86 12.05 b 11.47 ab 704 b No-till drum seeded rice 6.67 b 6.52 b 5.33 a 4.92 12.00 b 11.44 b 720 a 24 Source: Saharawat et al., 2010 at Kaul Field Crop ResearchTPR: Transplanted rice
  24. 24. 25 Fig. 4. Effect of tillage systems on total weed biomass at crop harvest WS12: Wet season 2012 (a) DS13: Dry season 2013 (b) CONT: Conventional tillage ZT: Zero tillage Source: Chauhan, 2013 at Los Banos Crop Protection
  25. 25. 26 Source: Chauhan, 2013 at Los Banos Crop Protection WS12: Wet season 2012 (a) DS13: Dry season 2013 (b) CONT: Conventional tillage ZT: Zero tillage Fig. 5. Effect of tillage systems on rice panicle numbers
  26. 26. 27 Fig. 6. Effect of tillage systems on rice grain yield WS12: Wet season 2012 (a) DS13: Dry season 2013 (b) CONT: Conventional tillage ZT: Zero tillage Source: Chauhan, 2013 at Los Banos Crop Protection
  27. 27. Table 14. Effect of planting methods on different traits of rice Yield parameters Planting methods D1 TPR D2 DSR D3 DSR D4 DSR Plant height (cm) 140.86 a 128.11 b 132.82 b 122.7 b Effective tillers/m2 272.89 b 372.24 a 336.76 ab 328.9 ab Panicle length 27.67 a 26.11 b 27.12 a 27.06 b No. of grains/panicle 121.74 a 96.71 b 101.82 b 101.79 b Sterility % 7.91 b 11.87 a 12.62 a 12.06 a 1000-grain weight 25.91 a 26.80 a 26.62 a 26.26 a Grain yield 496.16 a 412.29 bc 461.99 ab 67.12 c 28 Akhgari and Kavaini, 2011 at Rashat(Iran) African Journal of Agricultural Research D1: Transplanted Rice D2: Broadcasted DSR D3: Linear DSR D4: Hill DSR
  28. 28. Table 15. Comparative performance of direct seeded rice(DSR) and conventional puddled transplanted rice(PTR) Parameters PTR DSR Human Labour (Man days) 55-60 35-40 Tractor(Hours) 10-12 5-6 Crop Duration (days) 140-150 130-140 Benefit (Rs/ha) 14000-17000 17000-20000 No. of irrigation 20-25 14-17 Global Warming potential(Mg Co2 eq.) 2.0-4.5 1.3-3.0 29 Pathak et al., 2011 at Jalandhar Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences
  29. 29. Fig. 7. Global warming potential of transplanted and direct seeded rice 30 Pathak et al., 2011 Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences
  30. 30. Table 16. Methane emission as influenced by establishment techniques Establishment techniques Methane emission (mg plant-1 day -1) 30 DAS 40 DAS 50DAS 60DAS 70 DAS 80 DAS 90 DAS Total Transplanting 0.104 2.17 2.60 4.42 5.38 5.80 4.10 24.57 SRI 0.161 2.31 2.71 3.29 4.29 5.30 3.96 22.01 Aerobic rice 0.116 1.54 1.66 2.27 2.69 3.10 1.81 13.18 C.D. at 1% 0.007 0.26 0.26 0.66 0.67 1.43 1.22 1.23 31 Source: Jayadeva et al., 2009 at Kathalagere Agricultural Science Digest
  31. 31. 32 Source: Kumar and Ladha, 2011 at Modipuram Advances in Agronomy Fig. 8. Nitrous oxide emission from rice under alternate tillage and crop establishment methods during 2007 and 2008
  32. 32. Table 17. Yield, water productivity and profitability of rice under different crop establishment techniques Crop establishment methods Yield (t ha-1) Water use (m3 ha-1) Water productivity (kg grain m-3) Net profit (Rs ha-1) Western Uttar Pradesh Conventional puddle TPR 7.56 18,720 0.40 19,440 ZT DSR 7.19 17,550 0.41 21,915 RT DSR 7.50 17,550 0.43 22,185 Haryana Conventional puddle TPR 4.36 16,013 0.29 19,200 RT DSR 4.20 12,532 0.37 22,339 33 Source: Pathak et al., 2011 Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences ZT: Zero tillage RT: Reduced tillage DSR: Direct seeded rice TPR: Transplanted rice
  33. 33. Fig. 9. Cracking intensity at 18–20cm soil depth in PTR (Puddled transplanted rice) and DSR(Direct seeded rice). 34 Source: Sudhir-Yadav et al., 2011 at Ludhiana Field Crop Research
  34. 34. Fig. 10. Field situation after rice harvest under different establishment systems 35 Source : CIMMYT-CCAFS Participatory strategic research platform, Taraori (Karnal) Puddled transplanted Zero Tillage DSR
  35. 35. Table 18. Depth of irrigation and grain yield as affected by irrigation intervals in basmati rice under different establishment methods Establishment methods Irrigation interval (days) Grain yield (kg/ha) Depth of irrigation (cm) 2010 2011 2010 2011 PTR conventional 3212 2620 a 125.5 145.7 DSR 7X + 5Y 3262 2670 a 99.9 136.5 DSR 7 + 7 3135 2540 a 73 119.2 DSR 7 + 10 3085 2196 b 68.1 99.6 DSR 15 + 5 3205 2607 a 102.4 131.1 DSR 15 + 7 3023 2490 a 69 113.9 DSR 15 + 10 2981 2004 b 63.2 94.4 LSD (P=0.05) NS 249 36 X= First post sowing irrigation; Y= Subsequent post sowing irrigation DSR: Direct seeded rice PTR: Puddled transplanted rice Godara, 2013 at RRS, Karnal Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Agronomy, CCS HAU, Hisar
  36. 36. 37 Fig. 11: Grain yield (t ha−1) of rice as affected by establishment method and irrigation schedule in 2008 (a) and 2009 (b). Source: Sudhir-Yadav et al., 2011 at Ludhiana Field Crop Research
  37. 37. Fig. 12. Irrigation water productivity (WPi) as affected by establishment method and irrigation schedule in 2008 (a) and 2009 (b). 38 Source: Sudhir-Yadav et al., 2011 at Ludhiana Field Crop Research
  38. 38. 39 Conclusion • Transplanting is better option under sufficient water and labour availability. • Direct seeded rice is an alternate production system with increased resource use efficiency and profitability with efficient water and weed management.
  39. 39. 40 Thank U

×