3. Introduction.
Mechanism of nitrogen losses.
Nitrate pollution.
Effect of nitrate pollution.
Precision water and nutrient management.
Conclusion.
Future line of work.
7/11/2015 3
4. Introduction
Area (lakh hectares) Production (million tones) Yield (kg/hectare)
427.53 105.24 2,462
Annual Report 2013-14, Dept.of Agri.&Co.,MOA,GOI
Rice is one of the most staple food crop of India in
term of both area and production. India is the second largest
producer and consumer of rice in the world.
• Irrigated Rice
• Rainfed Lowland
• Upland Rice
• Flood prone
Different Rice Eco SystemIn India
7/11/2015 4
7. Recommended fertilizer
They want good Green crop & Yield
BUT…
Bhadra command area 100:50:50 Kg NPK/ha
Cauvery command area 125:62.5:62.5 Kg NPK/ha
ENVIRONMENT ?
7/11/2015 7
8. •Plant uptake
• Denitrification
• Volatilization
• Immobilization
• Leaching losses
• Run off losses
N cycle
Nitrogen mobility in
soil
7/11/2015 8
11. Nitrate interfere with oxygen carrying capacity of blood causing cyanosis
in infants (Methemoglobinaemia)
Nitrate reduce to nitrite in human & cattle's body by intestinal Bactria,
causes cancer and other diseases.
Normally healthy person has 0.8% of Methoglobin is present, when it has
20% causes headache and giddiness, more than 60% leads to
unconsciousness finally death occur at 80% methoglobin content
Recently WHO reported that nitrate level in Rajasthan is 800mg/litre .
Which is much higher than the permissible limit of 45mg/litre.
Nitrate poisoning in grazing animals have been reported in Nagpur.
Avoid use of
excess
fertilizers…..
7/11/2015 11
13. Hungabee Lake (left), in the Canada. In contrast, Lake Taihu (right) in China.
Eutrophication
7/11/2015 13
14. Reasons for nitrate pollution
• Excess application of nitrogen fertilizers
• Indiscriminate use of irrigation water
• Lack of knowledge about
Method of application of fertilizer & water
Time of application
7/11/2015 14
16. Precision Agriculture
• The term Precision Farming means the
application of technologies and principles to
manage spatial and temporal variability
associated with all aspects of agricultural
production
(Pierce and Nowak, 1999)
7/11/2015 16
18. Objectives of Precision Farming
• Increased Production
• More Efficient Input Usage
• Energy Conservation
• Soil and Ground Water Protection
7/11/2015 18
19. Misconceptions about precision agriculture
• Precision farming can not be done without the aids of RS, GPS
and GIS
• Precision farming is only for crop management
7/11/2015 19
23. Table 2: Total leaching loss of nitrogen (kg/ha) as influenced by establishment techniques in
rice.
Treatments
Total leaching loss of nitrogen
Kharif Summer Pooled
Establishment techniques
M1: Transplanting 5.13 6.29 5.71
M2: SRI 4.87 5.98 5.42
M3: Aerobic 3.29 4.03 3.66
S.Em± 0.01 0.02 0.02
C.D. at 5% 0.05 0.09 0.05
ARS, Kathalagere Jayadeva and Prabhakara Setty (2006)
7/11/2015 23
24. Treatment Grain
yield
(t/ha)
No. of
irrigation
Irrigation
water use
(mm)
Rain fall
during crop
growth (mm)
Total water
saving (%)
Conventional
transplanting
5.23 21 1,150 470.8 _
SRI 5.13 21 730 470.8 25.91
Aerobic rice 4.81 21 525 470.8 38.56
SEm± 0.07 _ _ _ _
LSD (p = 0.05 0.29 _ _ _ _
Soumya et al. (2012)New Delhi
Table 3: Effect of planting methods on water use and its saving
7/11/2015 24
26. Treatments
Total leaching loss of nitrogen
Kharif Summer Pooled
S1: Urea 4.49 5.50 5.00
S2: Ammonium sulphate 4.39 5.37 4.88
S3: Complex fertilizer
(17:17:17) and top
dressing with urea
4.53 5.57 5.05
S4: Large sized urea
granules
4.32 5.28 4.80
S.Em± 0.03 0.02 0.02
C.D. at 5% 0.10 0.06 0.05
Table 4: Total leaching loss of nitrogen (kg/ha) as influenced by sources of
nitrogen in rice.
Jayadeva and Prabhakara Setty (2006)ARS, Kathalagere
7/11/2015 26
27. Nitrification inhibitors
There are chemicals, which can retard the process of nitrification
and reduces the losses by leaching and denitrification.
N –serve (2-chloro 6trichloromethyl pyridine)
AM (2-amino 4chloro 6methyl pyrimidine)
DCD(dicyadiamide)
ST(sulphathiazole)
7/11/2015 27
29. Treatment
N uptake
(kg/ha)
NUE
(kg grain/kg N
added)
Apparent N
recovery (%)
Prilled urea 61.62 22.66 50.88
Urea super
granule(USG)
67.05 29.67 61.92
Large granule
urea(LGU)
61.96 21.30 51.85
Orissa Panda (1993)
Table 5: Effect of sources of N uptake, NUE, apparent N recovery and production
efficiency of N by rice in coastal soils (mean of two year)
7/11/2015 29
31. Total and average of nitrate leaching in different treatments of urea
application amount (50, 125, 200 and 275 kg/ha) in different split number (1,
2 and 3)
Iran Forough et al. (2014)
Fig: 3
7/11/2015 31
32. The average of nitrate leaching in different split treatments and the basal
application treatment
Forough et al. (2014)Iran
Fig: 4
7/11/2015 32
33. Treatments Grain yield
(Kg/ha)
AEN (Kg/Kg) WUE
(Kg/ha-cm)
T1 6760 44.5 76
T2 11447 86.4 105
T3 6628 43.3 77.5
T4 11333 85.4 114.5
T5 11375 88.1 111.5
T6 11216 84.3 123
T7 8015 58.1 38.5
S.Em± 570.14 5.45
CD@5% 1642.0 15.70
T1= Irrigation @1.5Epan throughout growth stages
T2= Irrigation @2Epan throughout growth stages
T3= Irrigation @1.25Epan to tillering + 1.5Epan tillering to
maturity
T4=Irrigation @1.25Epan to tillering + 2Epan
tillering to maturity
T5= Irrigation @1.5Epan to tillering + 2Epan
tillering to maturity
T6= Irrigation @ 1.25Epan to tillering + 5Epan tillering to
panicle emergence + 2Epan panicle emergence to
maturity
T7= surface irrigated puddle transplanted rice
Table 6: Drip irrigation scheduling on grain yield, AEN, WUE of aerobic rice with
surface irrigated puddle transplanted rice
UAS, Bengaluru Anusha (2015)
7/11/2015 33
35. Treatments
Initial N
(kg ha-1)
N
through
fertilize
r
(kg ha-
1)
Total
(kg ha-1)
Uptake
of N by
crop
(kg ha-1)
Expecte
d
balance
(kg ha-
1)
Actual
balance
(kg ha-1)
Net loss
(-) or
gain (+)
T1:Surface irrigation with soil application of RDF 292.4 100.0 392.4 83.4 309.0 265.0 -44.0
T2:50% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through
DF with NF)
292.4 50.0 342.4 89.3 253.1 223.0 -30.1
T3:75% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through
DF with NF)
292.4 75.0 367.4 97.9 269.5 240.0 -29.5
T4:100% RDF (50% basal with NF +50%top dress through
DF with NF)
292.4 100.0 392.4 105.7 286.7 262.0 -24.7
T5:50% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through
DF with WSF)
292.4 50.0 342.4 101.7 240.7 215.0 -25.7
T6:75% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through
DF with WSF)
292.4 75.0 367.4 126.5 240.9 230.0 -10.9
T7:100% RDF(50% basal with NF+50%top dress through
DF with WSF)
292.4 100.0 392.4 131.0 261.4 256.0 -5.4
T8:50 % RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 292.4 50.0 342.4 117.8 224.6 213.0 -11.6
T9:75 % RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 292.4 75.0 367.4 131.0 236.4 230.0 -6.4
T10:100% RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 292.4 100.0 392.4 141.2 251.2 250.0 -1.2
Table 7: Nitrogen balance (kg ha-1) in the soil after the harvest of aerobic rice as
influenced by drip fertigation
Rekha (2014)UAS, Bengaluru7/11/2015 35
36. Genotypes Aerobic rice surface
irrigation
Aerobic rice drip
irrigation
Puddle transplanted rice
Grain
yield
NUE WU
E
Grain
yield
NUE WUE Grain
yield
NUE WUE
Rasi 5411 54.1 50.8 7379 73.8 101.3 6078 60.8 41.3
MAS 946-1 5900 59.0 51.9 7765 77.7 96.3 6393 63.9 41.2
Grain yield (Kg/ha), NUE (Kg/Kg), WUE(Kg/ha-cm)
Table 8: Effect of different methods of irrigation on grain yield, NUE, WUE of
different genotypes
Anusha (2015)UAS, Bengaluru
7/11/2015 36
42. STCR equations for rice in different regions :
Suitable region S T C R equation
Tamil Nadu FN= 2.54 T – 0.54 SN
Madurai FN = 7.94 T – 0.46 SN
Karnataka FN = 3.45 T – 0.29 SN
Kurnool FN = 6.28 T – 0.40 SN
Madhya Pradesh FN = 2.78 T – 0.27 SN
Punjab FN = 3.02 T – 0.63 SN
West Bengal FN = 3.28T – 0.18 SN
Delhi FN = 3.44 T – 0.31 SN
FN = Fertilizer N to be applied (kg ha-1)
SN = Soil Nitrogen (kg ha-1)
(Yellamanda Reddy and Sankara Reddi)
7/11/2015 42
43. STCR equation for rice ( Jaya and other HYV)for
Bengaluru, Thumakuru and Kolara district
FN= 7.26T- 129SN
FP2O5= 4.05T-2.52SP2O5
FK2O= 3.15T-0.29SK2O
7/11/2015 43
46. Table 12: Effect of SSNM on fertilizer N use efficiency, fertilizer
cost and gross return in 21 farms of China.
Parameters Treatment
SSNM Farmer’s fertilizer practice
AEN (kg grain/ kg N) 11.4 6.4
REN (kg N /kg N) 0.29 0.18
PPN (kg grain/ kg N) 49 37
China Wang et al. (2001)
7/11/2015 46
48. Cultivar (year) Treatment Total N
applied(k
g ha-1)
Rice
grain
yield(t
ha-1)
Total N
uptake(
kg ha-1)
AEN REN
PR120 (2009) No–N control 0 3.37 52.5 - -
120 kg N ha-1 applied in 3 equal split dose sat
0, 21and 42 DAT of rice
120 8.23 150.2 40.6 81.4
30 kg N ha-1 at transplanting + 45 kg N ha-1 at
21 DAT + sensor guided N dose at 42 DAT
103 8.33 144.6 48.2 89.4
HKR 127 (2009) No–N control 0 5.01 71.2 - -
120 kg N ha-1 applied in 3 equal split dose sat
0, 21and 42 DAT of rice
120 7.26 125.4 18.7 45.1
30 kg N ha-1 at transplanting + 45 kg N ha-1 at
21 DAT + sensor guided N dose at 42 DAT
101 7.38 123.8 23.5 52.1
LSD (p = 0.05):
cultivar
0.194 7.11 6.76 4.20
Fertilizer treatment 0.320 6.20 4.62 5.46
Cultivar × fertilizer
treatment
0.453 8.77 6.53 6.53
Table 13: Evaluation of Green Seeker optical sensor based site-specific N
management with blanket recommendation for fertilizer N in rice
Ludhiana Bijay Singh et al. 2009
7/11/2015 48
51. 7/11/2015 51
For more information contact
Dr. Sai Bhaskar Reddy
Co-ordinater ClimaAdopt project
Email-
saibhaskarnaka@gmail.com
Mobile No. 09676799191
52. Improving Water Use Efficiency in Punjab
Agriculture:
The Case of Tensiometers
7/11/2015 52
54. Conclusion
• Urea super granules or slow releasing fertilizers are best way to
minimize nitrate loss than use of prilled urea.
• Nitrogen management using chlorophyll meter at critical value
35 recorded higher grain yield and Agronomic nitrogen use
efficiency compared to farmers practice.
• Aerobic method of rice cultivation with drip irrigation helps in
increasing water use efficiency than puddle transplanted rice.
• Nitrogen application based on Leaf colour chart at critical value
4 is the optimal N fertilization strategy for rice, since it gives
higher grain yield besides saving of N as compared to blanket N
recommendation.
• Drip fertigation with water soluble fertilizer increases nitrogen
use efficiency compared to surface irrigation with soil
application of recommended fertilizer.
7/11/2015 54
55. Future line of work
• Intensive work on use of remote sensors in
precision water and nutrient management in
Indian contest need attention.
• Quantification of nutrient losses under micro
irrigation is required.
7/11/2015 55
57. Treatments
Cost of
cultivati
on
(Rs. ha-
1)
Gross
returns
(Rs. ha-1)
Net
returns
(Rs. ha-1)
B:C
T1:Surface irrigation with soil application of RDF 38520 65126 26606 1.69
T2:50% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with NF) 38720 65905 27185 1.70
T3:75% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with NF) 39695 75190 35496 1.89
T4:100% RDF (50% basal with NF +50%top dress through DF with
NF)
41260 82891 41632 2.01
T5:50% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with
WSF)
45632 78394 32762 1.72
T6:75% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with
WSF)
50945 105093 54148 2.06
T7:100% RDF(50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with
WSF)
56261 114365 58104 2.03
T8:50 % RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 55213 91766 36553 1.66
T9:75 % RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 63716 106452 42736 1.67
T10:100% RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 72223 121222 48999 1.68
Rekha, (2013)UAS, Bengaluru
Table 15: Economics of aerobic rice as influenced by drip fertigation
7/11/2015 57
58. Treatments
Irrigation
water
used
(mm)
Total water
used IR+ER
(mm)
Water
productivi
ty (kg ha-
cm-1)
T1:Surface irrigation with soil application of RDF 846.00 1073.0 31.45
T2:50% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with NF) 487.15 714.5 47.47
T3:75% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with NF) 487.15 714.5 54.51
T4:100% RDF (50% basal with NF +50%top dress through DF with
NF)
487.15 714.5 60.18
T5:50% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with
WSF)
487.15 714.5 57.48
T6:75% RDF (50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with
WSF)
487.15 714.5 78.38
T7:100% RDF(50% basal with NF+50%top dress through DF with
WSF)
487.15 714.5 85.99
T8:50 % RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 487.15 714.5 68.02
T9:75 % RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 487.15 714.5 79.27
T10:100% RDF through drip fertigation with WSF 487.15 714.5 91.01
S.Em ± - - 4.39
CD @ 5% - - 13.05
CV (%) - - 11.63
Table 16: Total water used (mm) and water use efficiency (kg ha-cm-1) of aerobic
rice under drip fertigation
Rekha (2014)UAS, Bengaluru
7/11/2015
58