Paper · 2021 · Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Sciences

Water-Saving Irrigation and Nitrogen Fertilizer Use Efficiency for Irrigated Rice in the Red River Delta, Vietnam

Ngo Thanh Son; Nguyen Thu Ha

9
claims
17
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The objective of this research was to quantify the effects of water-saving regimes and fertilizer application improvement on water productivity, N-use efficiency, and rice yield. The results showed that the tested water treatments did not have significant effects on the growth and development, yield components, and final grain yield, but water productivity was significantly increased from 1.28 kg grain m-3 (W0) water to 1.74 kg grain m-3 water (W1) and 1.94 kg grain m-3 water (W2). In addition, the percentage of total irrigation water saved from W1 and W2 were 25.24-44.52% compared to continuous flooding. Fertilizer deep placement (FDP) combined with organic compost significantly increased the grain yield of the tested hybrid rice variety. Average grain yield increased quickly from 2847 kg ha-1 with 0 kg N ha-1 to 5263 kg ha-1 with 120 kg N ha-1 under the fertilizer deep placement method. The highest total nitrogen uptake, agronomic nitrogen efficiency (ANE), and nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUE) were obtained from alternate wetting and drying at a -20cm water depth and the fertilizer deep placement method (W1N2). In addition, it also gave the highest income in comparison with the other treatments. Therefore, alternate wetting and drying at a -20cm water depth and fertilizer deep placement method should be encouraged for implementation in other regions of Vietnam.

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 resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water treatments did not significantly change rice growth, yield components or grain yield.

Treatment
tested water treatmentse0
Outcome
growth and development, yield components, and final grain yielde0

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

“tested water treatments did not have significant effects on the growth and development, yield components, and final grain yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 207–334 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water productivity increased from W0 to W1.

Treatment
W1e0
Outcome
water productivitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
1.74 kg grain m-3 watere0
Qualifier
1.28 kg grain m-3e0
Comparator
W0e0

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 productivity was significantly increased from 1.28 kg grain m-3 (W0) water to 1.74 kg grain m-3 water (W1) and 1.94 kg grain m-3 water (W2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 340–485 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water productivity increased from W0 to W2.

Treatment
W2e0
Outcome
water productivitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
1.94 kg grain m-3 watere0
Comparator
W0e0

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 productivity was significantly increased from 1.28 kg grain m-3 (W0) water to 1.74 kg grain m-3 water (W1) and 1.94 kg grain m-3 water (W2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 340–485 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W1 and W2 saved irrigation water relative to continuous flooding.

Treatment
W1 and W2e0
Outcome
total irrigation watere0
Direction
savede0
Value
25.24-44.52%e0
Comparator
continuous floodinge0

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

“percentage of total irrigation water saved from W1 and W2 were 25.24-44.52% compared to continuous flooding”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 504–611 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Deep fertilizer placement with organic compost increased grain yield.

Treatment
Fertilizer deep placement (FDP) combined with organic composte0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0

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

“Fertilizer deep placement (FDP) combined with organic compost significantly increased the grain yield of the tested hybrid rice variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 613–748 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain yield rose from 2847 to 5263 kg ha-1 as nitrogen application rose to 120 kg N ha-1 with deep placement.

Treatment
120 kg N ha-1e0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
5263 kg ha-1e0
Qualifier
2847 kg ha-1e0
Comparator
0 kg N ha-1e0

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

“Average grain yield increased quickly from 2847 kg ha-1 with 0 kg N ha-1 to 5263 kg ha-1 with 120 kg N ha-1 under the fertilizer deep placement method”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 750–900 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W1N2 gave the highest total nitrogen uptake, agronomic nitrogen efficiency and uptake efficiency.

Treatment
alternate wetting and drying at a -20cm water depth and the fertilizer deep placement method (W1N2)e0
Outcome
total nitrogen uptake, agronomic nitrogen efficiency (ANE), and nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUE)e0
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

“The highest total nitrogen uptake, agronomic nitrogen efficiency (ANE), and nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUE) were obtained from alternate wetting and drying at a -20cm water depth and the fertilizer deep placement method (W1N2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 902–1129 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

W1N2 gave the highest income among treatments.

Treatment
W1N2e0
Outcome
incomee0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
the other treatmentse0

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

“fertilizer deep placement method (W1N2). In addition, it also gave the highest income in comparison with the other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1090–1215 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend alternate wetting and drying at -20cm with deep fertilizer placement in other Vietnamese regions.

Outcome
alternate wetting and drying at a -20cm water depth and fertilizer deep placement methode0
Setting
other regions of Vietname0

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

“alternate wetting and drying at a -20cm water depth and fertilizer deep placement method should be encouraged for implementation in other regions of Vietnam”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1228–1384 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–81 · show in text ↑

irrigation · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

36 papers: 32 positive, 4 negative or no effect

31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

32 papers more in this group

See all 36 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

220 papers: 202 positive, 18 negative or no effect

201 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

216 papers more in this group

See all 220 papers →

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

2,045 papers: 1,803 positive, 242 negative or no effect

1,802 papers in the same direction as this paper · 193 in the opposite direction · 49 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

2,041 papers more in this group

See all 2,045 papers →

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

3,455 papers: 3,183 positive, 272 negative or no effect

3,182 papers in the same direction as this paper · 207 in the opposite direction · 65 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

3,451 papers more in this group

See all 3,455 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.