Paper · 2020 · Journal of Plant Production

Soil Nutrients Availability, Rice Productivity and Water Saving under Deficit Irrigation Conditions

A. Ghoneim

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
13
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Two field experiments were carried out at Rice Research and Training Center, Sakha, Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt during 2018 and 2019 cropping seasons. Experiments aimed to determine the impacts of different deficit irrigation treatments on the available soil nutrients, N, P, K and Zn uptakes, rice yield and water use efficiency. The field experiments were laid out in a strip-plot design with four replications. The horizontal plots were devoted to the four irrigation treatments: continuous submergence (W1), intermittent irrigation at 6-day intervals (W2), intermittent irrigation at 9-day intervals (W3) and intermittent irrigation at 12-day intervals (W4), while vertical plots were occupied by the three rice genotypes, namely Giza 177, Giza 179 and GZ10154. Intermittent irrigation at 6-days intervals (W2) treatment, recorded the highest available NH4+-N, NO3--N and K concentrations in the soil. The highest values of available-N and available-P concentrations in the soil were obtained with (W1) while (W4) recorded the lowest values. The N, P, K and Zn uptakes were significantly affected by the prolonged irrigation intervals. Rice yield and its attributes decreased significantly as irrigation intervals increased up to 12-day (W4) in both seasons. The highest values of plant height, number of panicles m-2, panicle weight (g), 1000-grain weight (g), number of filled grains panicle-1, grain and straw yields were obtained with (W1) followed by (W2) treatment, except panicle length and number of unfilled grains panicle-1 in both seasons. Water saved (%) ranged from 8.90% to 26.46% and from 17.47% to 27.25% in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively.

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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W2 gave the highest available soil ammonium, nitrate and potassium concentrations.

Treatment
Intermittent irrigation at 6-days intervals (W2)e0
Outcome
available NH4+-N, NO3--N and K concentrations in the soile0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Intermittent irrigation at 6-days intervals (W2) treatment, recorded the highest available NH4+-N, NO3--N and K concentrations in the soil.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 760–899 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W1 gave the highest available soil N and P.

Treatment
W1e0
Outcome
available-N and available-P concentrations in the soile0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
W4e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest values of available-N and available-P concentrations in the soil were obtained with (W1) while (W4) recorded the lowest values.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 900–1039 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W4 gave the lowest available soil N and P.

Treatment
W4e0
Outcome
available-N and available-P concentrations in the soile0
Direction
loweste0
Comparator
W1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest values of available-N and available-P concentrations in the soil were obtained with (W1) while (W4) recorded the lowest values.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 900–1039 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Longer irrigation intervals significantly affected rice N, P, K and Zn uptake, without a stated direction.

Treatment
prolonged irrigation intervalse0
Outcome
N, P, K and Zn uptakese0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The N, P, K and Zn uptakes were significantly affected by the prolonged irrigation intervals.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1040–1133 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Rice yield and yield attributes declined significantly as intervals lengthened to 12 days.

Treatment
irrigation intervals increased up to 12-day (W4)e0
Outcome
Rice yield and its attributese0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
both seasonse0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Rice yield and its attributes decreased significantly as irrigation intervals increased up to 12-day (W4) in both seasons.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1134–1256 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W1 had the highest plant height and panicle traits, followed by W2, with stated exceptions.

Treatment
W1e0
Outcome
plant height, number of panicles m-2, panicle weighte0
Direction
higheste0
Qualifier
except panicle length and number of unfilled grains panicle-1 in both seasonse0
Comparator
W2e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest values of plant height, number of panicles m-2, panicle weight (g), 1000-grain weight (g), number of filled grains panicle-1, grain and straw yields were obtained with (W1) followed by (W2) treatment, except panicle length and number of unfilled grains panicle-1 in both seasons.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1257–1548 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W1 had the highest grain weight, filled grain number, and grain and straw yields, followed by W2.

Treatment
W1e0
Outcome
1000-grain weight (g), number of filled grains panicle-1, grain and straw yieldse0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
W2e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest values of plant height, number of panicles m-2, panicle weight (g), 1000-grain weight (g), number of filled grains panicle-1, grain and straw yields were obtained with (W1) followed by (W2) treatment, except panicle length and number of unfilled grains panicle-1 in both seasons.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1257–1548 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water saving ranged from 8.90% to 26.46% in 2018.

Outcome
Water savede0
Value
8.90% to 26.46%e0
Qualifier
2018e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Water saved (%) ranged from 8.90% to 26.46% and from 17.47% to 27.25% in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1549–1658 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water saving ranged from 17.47% to 27.25% in 2019.

Outcome
Water savede0
Value
17.47% to 27.25%e0
Qualifier
2019e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Water saved (%) ranged from 8.90% to 26.46% and from 17.47% to 27.25% in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1549–1658 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33 · show in text ↑

irrigation · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

1,171 papers: 906 positive, 265 negative or no effect

264 papers in the same direction as this paper · 906 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. 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.