Abstract
The tillering, lodging and yield of two types of direct-seeded rice (dry and water seeding), under deep water (DW) and ordinary water treatment (OW), were compared in 1994 and 1995. The percentage of productive tillers to maximum tiller number under DW was 85% for transplanted, 60% for water-seeded and 84% for dry-seeded rice (mean 76%), while that under OW was 59, 50 and 74% (mean 61%), respectively, in both years. By DW, longer culm length and fresh weight tended to be increased, thus elevating bending moment, but the culm diameter and culm-breaking weight were increased showing the lower lodging index. In water-seeded rice, the suppression of the development of non-productive tillers by DW was relatively weak compared to that in dry-seeded or transplanted rice. Although the number of panicles was similar under DW and OW, 1000-grain weight and percentage of grain filling were significantly improved by DW. The grain yield was higher under DW, and the mean grain yields of the two years were 4.82 t ha−1 under DW and 4.48 t ha−1 under OW.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
Deep water had higher productive tiller percentages than ordinary water in transplanted, water-seeded and dry-seeded rice.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativae0 - Treatment
- DWe0
- Outcome
- percentage of productive tillers to maximum tiller numbere0
- Value
- mean 76%e0
- Qualifier
- mean 61%e0
- Comparator
- OWe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The percentage of productive tillers to maximum tiller number under DW was 85% for transplanted, 60% for water-seeded and 84% for dry-seeded rice (mean 76%), while that under OW was 59, 50 and 74% (mean 61%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep water tended to increase culm length and fresh weight.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- DWe0
- Outcome
- culm length and fresh weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- tended to bee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“By DW, longer culm length and fresh weight tended to be increased”
t0“Deep Water Treatment in Direct-seeded Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep water elevated bending moment.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Deep Water Treatmentt0
- Outcome
- bending momente0
- Direction
- elevatinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“thus elevating bending moment”
t0“Deep Water Treatment in Direct-seeded Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep water increased culm diameter and culm-breaking weight.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Deep Water Treatmentt0
- Outcome
- culm diameter and culm-breaking weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the culm diameter and culm-breaking weight were increased”
t0“Deep Water Treatment in Direct-seeded Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep water lowered the lodging index.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Deep Water Treatmentt0
- Outcome
- lodging indexe0
- Direction
- lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“showing the lower lodging index”
t0“Deep Water Treatment in Direct-seeded Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep water suppressed non-productive tiller development less in water-seeded than in dry-seeded or transplanted rice.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Material
- water-seeded ricee0
- Treatment
- DWe0
- Outcome
- suppression of the development of non-productive tillerse0
- Direction
- relatively weake0
- Comparator
- dry-seeded or transplanted ricee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In water-seeded rice, the suppression of the development of non-productive tillers by DW was relatively weak compared to that in dry-seeded or transplanted rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Panicle number was similar under deep and ordinary water.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the number of panicles was similar under DW and OW”
t0“Deep Water Treatment in Direct-seeded Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep water significantly improved 1000-grain weight and grain filling percentage.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- DWe0
- Outcome
- 1000-grain weight and percentage of grain fillinge0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“1000-grain weight and percentage of grain filling were significantly improved by DW”
t0“Deep Water Treatment in Direct-seeded Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield was higher under deep water, averaging 4.82 t ha−1 versus 4.48 t ha−1.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- DWe0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4.82 t ha−1e0
- Qualifier
- 4.48 t ha−1e0
- Comparator
- OWe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The grain yield was higher under DW, and the mean grain yields of the two years were 4.82 t ha−1 under DW and 4.48 t ha−1 under OW”
t0“Deep Water Treatment in Direct-seeded Rice”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · growth · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
221 papers in the same direction as this paper · 62 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
287 papers more in this group
See all 291 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.