Abstract
The current water scarcity and world population increase cause the need for more food, pushing the demand on water resources due to crop production such as rice. Increasing agricultural water productivity by reducing the amount of irrigation water without affecting the yields, especially in paddy rice, is necessary. This is possible with alternate wetting and drying (AWD) irrigation. This study was conducted under greenhouse conditions at Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Japan to evaluate the response of yield, water productivity and harvest index with different water regimes. The experiment was performed in pots with four water regimes as treatments and three replications, making 12 pots. The water regimes were continuous flooding irrigation as control and three AWD conditions—AWD5, AWD10 and AWD15—in which pots were irrigated when water reached 5, 10 and 15 cm soil depth, respectively, after the disappearance of surface ponding water. Yield components, harvest indexes and water productivity showed no significant difference (p < 0.05) between irrigation treatments. In this research, as there is more than a 25% reduction in water use and only 6.4% in grain yield, AWD15 was considered the best irrigation practice among the other treatments. This study provides data reference for theoretical scientific knowledge and understanding of safe AWD practice for countries facing water shortages.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Yield components did not differ significantly among irrigation regimes.
- Taxon
- Paddy Ricet0
- Treatment
- irrigation treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Yield componentse0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Yield components, harvest indexes and water productivity showed no significant difference (p < 0.05) between irrigation treatments.”
t0“Paddy Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Harvest indexes did not differ significantly among irrigation regimes.
- Taxon
- Paddy Ricet0
- Treatment
- irrigation treatmentse0
- Outcome
- harvest indexese0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Yield components, harvest indexes and water productivity showed no significant difference (p < 0.05) between irrigation treatments.”
t0“Paddy Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Water productivity did not differ significantly among irrigation regimes.
- Taxon
- Paddy Ricet0
- Treatment
- irrigation treatmentse0
- Outcome
- water productivitye0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Yield components, harvest indexes and water productivity showed no significant difference (p < 0.05) between irrigation treatments.”
t0“Paddy Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
AWD15 reduced water use by more than 25%.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“more than a 25% reduction in water use”
e1“AWD15 was considered the best irrigation practice”
t0“Paddy Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
AWD15 had only a 6.4% grain yield reduction.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“only 6.4% in grain yield”
e1“AWD15 was considered the best irrigation practice”
t0“Paddy Rice”
Claim · model-written summary
AWD15 was considered the best irrigation practice among the treatments.
Verbatim
e0“AWD15 was considered the best irrigation practice among the other treatments.”
t0“Paddy Rice”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: water · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 350 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
376 papers more in this group
See all 380 papers →irrigation · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
264 papers in the same direction as this paper · 906 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.