Claim · model-written summary
Sprinkler irrigation applied more water than estimated flooded-rice evapotranspiration.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0 - Outcome
- applicationse0
- Direction
- exceedede0
- Value
- 331 to 571 mme0
- Comparator
- ET e of flooded ricee0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentSettingQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These applications exceeded the ET e of flooded rice by 331 to 571 mm.”
t0“Rice”
Title
Sprinkler vs. Flood Irrigation in Traditional Rice Production Regions of Southeast Texas
G. N. McCauley Agronomy Journal 1990. doi:10.2134/agronj1990.00021962008200040006x
Other claims from this paper (8)
- Intervention effect Sprinkler irrigation reduced plant height by 0.09 to 0.28 m compared with flooding.
- Association Heading time varied with cultivar and irrigation treatment.
- Intervention effect Irrigation treatment did not affect harvest timing.
- Intervention effect Irrigation did not influence milled grain.
- Intervention effect Treatment 100 sprinkler irrigation reduced average yield by more than 20% compared with flooding.
- Intervention effect Key cultivar yields were reduced by 28% under sprinkler irrigation.
- Mechanism Yield loss under Treatment 100 was attributed to fewer florets and fertile florets per panicle.
- Recommendation The authors conclude sprinkler irrigation is not viable in traditional rice-growing areas with yield losses over 20%.