Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at Agricultural Research Institute Rajendranagar, Hyderabad during kharif 2014 to study the “Water management for different systems of rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivation in puddled soils”. The treatments comprises of three systems of cultivations (direct seeding with drum seeder, transplanting with machine and conventional transplanting) as main treatments and four irrigation regimes (irrigation of 5 cm, when water level falls below 5 cm from soil surface in field water tube, irrigation of 5 cm, when water level falls below 10 cm from soil surface in field water tube, irrigation of 5 cm at 3 days after disappearance of ponded water and recommended submergence of 2-5 cm water level as per crop stage). Machine transplanting recorded significantly higher grain and straw (6088 and 6954 kg ha-1, respectively) yields over drum seeding method (5308 and 6295 kg ha-1, respectively) and was on par with conventional transplanting method (5926 and 6886 kg ha-1, respectively). Significantly higher water use efficiency (4.7 kg mm-1) was recorded with machine transplanting compared to drum seeding (4.0 kg mm-1) and was on par with conventional transplanting (4.5 kg mm-1). Among different irrigation regimes Recommended submergence of 2-5 cm water level (I4) recorded significantly higher grain and straw yield (6148 and 7039 kg ha-1, respectively) and was on par with irrigation of 5 cm when water falls below 5 cm from soil surface in field water tube (I2) (5751 and 6872 kg ha-1, respectively). There was saving of water to the extent of 28.5 (1271.7 mm), 40.4 per cent (1085.0 mm) and 36.5 (1154.7mm), by I1, I2 and I3 respectively compared to recommended practice of irrigation (1819.7mm), though there was reduction of grain yield by 5.4, 12.5 and 6.5 per cent, under I1, I2 and I3 respectively.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Machine transplanting increased grain yield compared with drum seeding.
- Taxon
- Rice
Oryza sativat0 - Treatment
- Machine transplantinge0
- Outcome
- graine0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 6088e0
- Qualifier
- 5308e0
- Comparator
- drum seeding methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Machine transplanting recorded significantly higher grain and straw (6088 and 6954 kg ha-1, respectively) yields over drum seeding method (5308 and 6295 kg ha-1, respectively) and was on par with conventional transplanting method (5926 and 6886 kg ha-1, respectively).”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Machine transplanting increased straw yield compared with drum seeding.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Machine transplantinge0
- Outcome
- strawe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 6954 kg ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 6295 kg ha-1e0
- Comparator
- drum seeding methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Machine transplanting recorded significantly higher grain and straw (6088 and 6954 kg ha-1, respectively) yields over drum seeding method (5308 and 6295 kg ha-1, respectively) and was on par with conventional transplanting method (5926 and 6886 kg ha-1, respectively).”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Machine transplanting raised water use efficiency over drum seeding, and was on par with conventional transplanting.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- machine transplantinge0
- Outcome
- water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4.7 kg mm-1e0
- Qualifier
- 4.0 kg mm-1e0
- Comparator
- drum seedinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significantly higher water use efficiency (4.7 kg mm-1) was recorded with machine transplanting compared to drum seeding (4.0 kg mm-1) and was on par with conventional transplanting (4.5 kg mm-1).”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Recommended submergence gave higher grain yield than other irrigation regimes.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Recommended submergence of 2-5 cm water levele0
- Outcome
- graine0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 6148e0
- Qualifier
- 5751e0
- Comparator
- irrigation of 5 cm when water falls below 5 cm from soil surface in field water tubee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Recommended submergence of 2-5 cm water level (I4) recorded significantly higher grain and straw yield (6148 and 7039 kg ha-1, respectively) and was on par with irrigation of 5 cm when water falls below 5 cm from soil surface in field water tube (I2) (5751 and 6872 kg ha-1, respectively).”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Recommended submergence gave higher straw yield than other irrigation regimes.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Recommended submergence of 2-5 cm water levele0
- Outcome
- straw yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 7039 kg ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 6872 kg ha-1e0
- Comparator
- irrigation of 5 cm when water falls below 5 cm from soil surface in field water tubee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Recommended submergence of 2-5 cm water level (I4) recorded significantly higher grain and straw yield (6148 and 7039 kg ha-1, respectively) and was on par with irrigation of 5 cm when water falls below 5 cm from soil surface in field water tube (I2) (5751 and 6872 kg ha-1, respectively).”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
I1 saved 28.5 in water use relative to recommended irrigation.
- Treatment
- I1e0
- Outcome
- saving of watere0
- Direction
- savinge0
- Value
- 28.5e0
- Qualifier
- 1271.7 mme0
- Comparator
- recommended practice of irrigatione0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“There was saving of water to the extent of 28.5 (1271.7 mm), 40.4 per cent (1085.0 mm) and 36.5 (1154.7mm), by I1, I2 and I3 respectively compared to recommended practice of irrigation (1819.7mm)”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 saved 40.4 per cent in water use relative to recommended irrigation.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- I2e0
- Outcome
- saving of watere0
- Direction
- savinge0
- Value
- 40.4 per cente0
- Qualifier
- 1085.0 mme0
- Comparator
- recommended practice of irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was saving of water to the extent of 28.5 (1271.7 mm), 40.4 per cent (1085.0 mm) and 36.5 (1154.7mm), by I1, I2 and I3 respectively compared to recommended practice of irrigation (1819.7mm)”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
I3 saved 36.5 in water use relative to recommended irrigation.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- I3e0
- Outcome
- saving of watere0
- Direction
- savinge0
- Value
- 36.5e0
- Qualifier
- 1154.7mme0
- Comparator
- recommended practice of irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was saving of water to the extent of 28.5 (1271.7 mm), 40.4 per cent (1085.0 mm) and 36.5 (1154.7mm), by I1, I2 and I3 respectively compared to recommended practice of irrigation (1819.7mm)”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
I1 reduced grain yield by 5.4 per cent relative to recommended irrigation.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was reduction of grain yield by 5.4, 12.5 and 6.5 per cent, under I1, I2 and I3 respectively”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 reduced grain yield by 12.5 per cent relative to recommended irrigation.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was reduction of grain yield by 5.4, 12.5 and 6.5 per cent, under I1, I2 and I3 respectively”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
I3 reduced grain yield by 6.5 per cent relative to recommended irrigation.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was reduction of grain yield by 5.4, 12.5 and 6.5 per cent, under I1, I2 and I3 respectively”
t0“Rice (Oryza sativa L.)”
The same questions in other papers
transplanting · physiology: water · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
65 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
71 papers more in this group
See all 75 papers →flooding · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
192 papers in the same direction as this paper · 82 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
282 papers more in this group
See all 286 papers →transplanting · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
921 papers in the same direction as this paper · 132 in the opposite direction · 24 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
1,074 papers more in this group
See all 1,078 papers →irrigation · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 201 in the opposite direction · 64 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
1,167 papers more in this group
See all 1,171 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.