Abstract
Andalusia is the main rice producing region in Spain (40,000 ha). During the last decade it has suffered several years of water shortage leading to a decrease in crop area. In this work, studies have been performed to optimise water delivery and energy costs, comparing three flooding management systems: 1) irrigating seven days a week (control system: traditional continuous flooding system), 2) five days a week and 3) four days a week (maintaining the traditional irrigation management until 55 days after seeding in both tested systems). Total water used (water delivery) in 2000 corresponded to 44,917 cubic m haE1 (traditional), 34,445 cubic m haE1 (five days a week) and 29,209 cubic m haE1 (four days a week). In 2001 these values were 45,607, 34,271 and 28,958 cubic m haE1 respectively. No significant differences (LSD > 0.05) were found among the three flooding management systems in rice growth and yield. In 2000, irrigating five days a week, 23.31% of pumping energy was saved, and 34.97% when irrigating four days a week. In 2001 these values were 24.86% and 36.51%, respectively. These improvements, combined with the generalisation of integrated production procedures, will render Andalusian rice production more sustainable.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigating five days a week saved 23.31% of pumping energy in 2000.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativae0 - Treatment
- five days a weeke3
- Outcome
- pumping energye3
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede3
- Value
- 23.31%e3
- Qualifier
- In 2000e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant differences (LSD > 0.05) were found among the three flooding management systems in rice growth and yield”
e3“In 2000, irrigating five days a week, 23.31% of pumping energy was saved, and 34.97% when irrigating four days a week”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigating four days a week saved 34.97% of pumping energy in 2000.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- four days a weeke3
- Outcome
- pumping energye3
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede3
- Value
- 34.97%e3
- Qualifier
- In 2000e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant differences (LSD > 0.05) were found among the three flooding management systems in rice growth and yield”
e3“In 2000, irrigating five days a week, 23.31% of pumping energy was saved, and 34.97% when irrigating four days a week”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigating five days a week saved 24.86% of pumping energy in 2001.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- five days a weeke3
- Outcome
- pumping energye3
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede3
- Value
- 24.86%e4
- Qualifier
- In 2001e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant differences (LSD > 0.05) were found among the three flooding management systems in rice growth and yield”
e3“In 2000, irrigating five days a week, 23.31% of pumping energy was saved, and 34.97% when irrigating four days a week”
e4“In 2001 these values were 24.86% and 36.51%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigating four days a week saved 36.51% of pumping energy in 2001.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- four days a weeke3
- Outcome
- pumping energye3
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede3
- Value
- 36.51%e4
- Qualifier
- In 2001e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant differences (LSD > 0.05) were found among the three flooding management systems in rice growth and yield”
e3“In 2000, irrigating five days a week, 23.31% of pumping energy was saved, and 34.97% when irrigating four days a week”
e4“In 2001 these values were 24.86% and 36.51%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The three flooding management systems did not differ in rice growth and yield.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- three flooding management systemse0
- Outcome
- rice growth and yielde0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant differences (LSD > 0.05) were found among the three flooding management systems in rice growth and yield”
The same questions in other papers
cultivation system · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 125 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
150 papers more in this group
See all 154 papers →flooding · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
92 papers in the same direction as this paper · 193 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
282 papers more in this group
See all 286 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.