Abstract
This experiment was done to assess the effect of different direct seeding methods and transplanting of rice (Oryza sativa L.), cv. Naveen on growth, grain yield and its yield components. The water-use efficiency of the production systems, comparative weed growth as well as labour requirements under each method was also studied. The different direct seeding methods of planting like dry seeding by broadcast (DSB), wet seeding by broadcast (WSB), wet seeding by broadcast followed by beushening (WSBB), wet seeding in line (WSL) and wet seeding in spots (WSS) were compared with the traditional transplanting (TPR) method. WSS gave significantly higher yield (11.8%) compared to TPR due to higher tillering, more panicle, and better grain filling. Weed population under DSB, WSB, and WSS were 5, 4, and 2 times more than that under TPR, respectively. Total water requirement for growing rice crop under transplanting, wet seeding and dry seeding methods of planting were 1041.2, 941.5 and 915.0 ha-mm, respectively. Water use efficiency (WUE) was lowest under dry seeding and highest under wet seeding in spots. WSL and WSS showed 9.7 and 24.0% higher WUE, respectively, than traditional TPR method. However, commonly adopted wet seeding method, i.e. wet seeding by broadcast (WSB) showed 10% less WUE than TPR. Wet seeding reduced 5-20% labour requirements compared to TPR. In lines and spots seeding more labourers were required for the sowing, but weeding was found easier and less labour intensive in these methods. The labour requirement of wet-seeded and dry-seeded rice cultivation was also found less coinciding with the peak demand of labourers during the transplanting season. The results clearly indicate that wet seeding spot method of rice planting is an improved method that gives higher yield with less requirement of water and labour and easy weed management than the existing methods.
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Wet seeding in spots raised grain yield by 11.8% versus transplanting.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WSS gave significantly higher yield (11.8%) compared to TPR due to higher tillering, more panicle, and better grain filling”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher tillering, more panicles and better grain filling accompanied the WSS yield advantage.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0 - Outcome
- higher tillering, more panicle, and better grain fillinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“due to higher tillering, more panicle, and better grain filling”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed population under dry broadcast seeding was five times that under transplanting.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- DSBe0
- Interactor
- Weede0weed
- Outcome
- Weed populatione0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 5e0
- Comparator
- TPRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed population under DSB, WSB, and WSS were 5, 4, and 2 times more than that under TPR, respectively”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed population under wet broadcast seeding was four times that under transplanting.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- WSBe0
- Interactor
- Weede0weed
- Outcome
- Weed populatione0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 4e0
- Comparator
- TPRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed population under DSB, WSB, and WSS were 5, 4, and 2 times more than that under TPR, respectively”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed population under spot wet seeding was twice that under transplanting.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- WSSe0
- Interactor
- Weede0weed
- Outcome
- Weed populatione0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 2 timese0
- Comparator
- TPRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed population under DSB, WSB, and WSS were 5, 4, and 2 times more than that under TPR, respectively”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Transplanting required 1041.2 ha-mm of water.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- transplantinge0
- Outcome
- Total water requiremente0
- Value
- 1041.2e0
- Qualifier
- ha-mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total water requirement for growing rice crop under transplanting, wet seeding and dry seeding methods of planting were 1041.2, 941.5 and 915.0 ha-mm, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Wet seeding required 941.5 ha-mm of water.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- wet seedinge0
- Outcome
- Total water requiremente0
- Value
- 941.5e0
- Qualifier
- ha-mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total water requirement for growing rice crop under transplanting, wet seeding and dry seeding methods of planting were 1041.2, 941.5 and 915.0 ha-mm, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Dry seeding required 915.0 ha-mm of water.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- dry seedinge0
- Outcome
- Total water requiremente0
- Value
- 915.0 ha-mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total water requirement for growing rice crop under transplanting, wet seeding and dry seeding methods of planting were 1041.2, 941.5 and 915.0 ha-mm, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Water use efficiency was lowest under dry seeding.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- dry seedinge0
- Outcome
- Water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- loweste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water use efficiency (WUE) was lowest under dry seeding and highest under wet seeding in spots”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Water use efficiency was highest under spot wet seeding.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- wet seeding in spotse0
- Outcome
- Water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- higheste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water use efficiency (WUE) was lowest under dry seeding and highest under wet seeding in spots”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Line wet seeding had 9.7% higher water use efficiency than transplanting.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WSL and WSS showed 9.7 and 24.0% higher WUE, respectively, than traditional TPR method”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Spot wet seeding had 24.0% higher water use efficiency than transplanting.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WSL and WSS showed 9.7 and 24.0% higher WUE, respectively, than traditional TPR method”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Broadcast wet seeding had 10% less water use efficiency than transplanting.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- wet seeding by broadcast (WSB)e0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 10%e0
- Comparator
- TPRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wet seeding by broadcast (WSB) showed 10% less WUE than TPR”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Wet seeding reduced labor requirements by 5-20% versus transplanting.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Wet seedinge0
- Outcome
- labour requirementse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 5-20%e0
- Comparator
- TPRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wet seeding reduced 5-20% labour requirements compared to TPR”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Line and spot seeding required more sowing labor.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Outcome
- labourers were required for the sowinge0
- Direction
- moree0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In lines and spots seeding more labourers were required for the sowing”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Weeding was easier and less labor intensive with line and spot seeding.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Outcome
- weedinge0
- Direction
- less labour intensivee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weeding was found easier and less labour intensive in these methods”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Wet and dry seeding required less labor during the peak transplanting period.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Outcome
- labour requiremente0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Qualifier
- peak demand of labourers during the transplanting seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The labour requirement of wet-seeded and dry-seeded rice cultivation was also found less coinciding with the peak demand of labourers during the transplanting season”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors identify spot wet seeding as an improved rice planting method with higher yield, lower water and labor needs, and easier weed management.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Outcome
- wet seeding spot method of rice planting is an improved methode0
- Qualifier
- higher yield with less requirement of water and labour and easy weed managemente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wet seeding spot method of rice planting is an improved method that gives higher yield with less requirement of water and labour and easy weed management than the existing methods”
The same questions in other papers
transplanting · physiology: water · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 66 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
71 papers more in this group
See all 75 papers →transplanting · weed · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 129 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
142 papers more in this group
See all 146 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.