Abstract
Drought events and water use conflicts drive the need for more efficient water management in rice-growing areas of the Brazilian Cerrado. Recent studies have shown the advantages of adopting water-saving irrigation in the region but a comprehensive assessment is needed. This study aims to model the performance of rice cultivation and water productivity in the tropical floodplains of the Cerrado biome of northern Brazil in response to irrigation management under contrasting seasonal rainfall levels. Twenty-seven scenarios of rice cultivation, resulting from the combination of three sites, three irrigation treatments, and three rainfall regimes, were simulated with the calibrated and validated hydrological model SWAP/WOFOST. The rainfall levels high (1501 mm), intermediate (952 mm), and low (510 mm) were relative to 120 days and obtained from weather stations located in the region. Two irrigation methods (flooding and water-saving irrigation) were compared against rainfed cultivation. Actual transpiration of the flooding and water-saving irrigation was 9 % and 4 % higher in the intermediate and high rainfall scenarios while it was 30 % and 20 % higher in the low rainfall scenario compared to the rainfed treatment. The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario, whereas the lowest one was 349 mm for the rainfed treatment in the low rainfall scenario. Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %. Water productivity based on bottom flux increased on average by about five times (high rainfall scenario) to ten times (low rainfall scenario) when comparing flooding with water-saving irrigation. Results suggest that saving irrigation based on crop transpiration can reduce deep percolation losses and increase water productivity in the rice-growing areas of the Brazilian Cerrado.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Flood irrigation raised rice transpiration by 9% versus rainfed cultivation in intermediate and high rainfall scenarios.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0 - Treatment
- floodinge0
- Outcome
- Actual transpiratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 9 %e0
- Qualifier
- intermediate and high rainfall scenariose0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual transpiration of the flooding and water-saving irrigation was 9 % and 4 % higher in the intermediate and high rainfall scenarios while it was 30 % and 20 % higher in the low rainfall scenario compared to the rainfed treatment”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-saving irrigation raised rice transpiration by 4% versus rainfed cultivation in intermediate and high rainfall scenarios.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Actual transpiratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4 %e0
- Qualifier
- intermediate and high rainfall scenariose0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual transpiration of the flooding and water-saving irrigation was 9 % and 4 % higher in the intermediate and high rainfall scenarios while it was 30 % and 20 % higher in the low rainfall scenario compared to the rainfed treatment”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Flood irrigation raised rice transpiration by 30% versus rainfed cultivation in low rainfall.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- floodinge0
- Outcome
- Actual transpiratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 30 %e0
- Qualifier
- low rainfall scenarioe0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual transpiration of the flooding and water-saving irrigation was 9 % and 4 % higher in the intermediate and high rainfall scenarios while it was 30 % and 20 % higher in the low rainfall scenario compared to the rainfed treatment”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Water-saving irrigation raised rice transpiration by 20% versus rainfed cultivation in low rainfall.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Actual transpiratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 20 %e0
- Qualifier
- low rainfall scenarioe0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual transpiration of the flooding and water-saving irrigation was 9 % and 4 % higher in the intermediate and high rainfall scenarios while it was 30 % and 20 % higher in the low rainfall scenario compared to the rainfed treatment”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Flood irrigation had the largest deep percolation loss, 12700 mm per season, in low rainfall.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- flood irrigatione0
- Outcome
- deep percolation losse0
- Direction
- largeste0
- Value
- 12700 mm per seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfed cultivation had the lowest deep percolation loss, 349 mm, in low rainfall.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- rainfed treatmente0
- Outcome
- deep percolation losse2
- Direction
- loweste0
- Value
- 349 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“whereas the lowest one was 349 mm for the rainfed treatment in the low rainfall scenario”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Switching from flooding to water-saving irrigation increased rice water productivity by an average of 9%.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione0
- Outcome
- water productivitye0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- 9 %e0
- Comparator
- floodinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 %”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Switching from flooding to water-saving irrigation decreased relative rice grain yield by 5–12%.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione1
- Outcome
- relative grain yielde0
- Direction
- decreasese0
- Value
- 5–12 %e0
- Comparator
- floodinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Bottom-flux-based water productivity increased about fivefold with water-saving irrigation in high rainfall.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Water productivity based on bottom fluxe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- five timese0
- Qualifier
- high rainfall scenarioe0
- Comparator
- floodinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water productivity based on bottom flux increased on average by about five times (high rainfall scenario) to ten times (low rainfall scenario) when comparing flooding with water-saving irrigation”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
Bottom-flux-based water productivity increased about tenfold with water-saving irrigation in low rainfall.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- water-saving irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Water productivity based on bottom fluxe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- ten timese0
- Qualifier
- low rainfall scenarioe0
- Comparator
- floodinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water productivity based on bottom flux increased on average by about five times (high rainfall scenario) to ten times (low rainfall scenario) when comparing flooding with water-saving irrigation”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
t0“rice in Brazil”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest transpiration-based water-saving irrigation can reduce deep percolation losses in Cerrado rice areas.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Outcome
- reduce deep percolation lossese0
- Setting
- Brazilian Cerradoe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Results suggest that saving irrigation based on crop transpiration can reduce deep percolation losses and increase water productivity in the rice-growing areas of the Brazilian Cerrado”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest transpiration-based water-saving irrigation can increase water productivity in Cerrado rice areas.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae0
- Outcome
- increase water productivitye0
- Setting
- Brazilian Cerradoe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Results suggest that saving irrigation based on crop transpiration can reduce deep percolation losses and increase water productivity in the rice-growing areas of the Brazilian Cerrado”
e1“Changing from flooding to water-saving irrigation increases water productivity by an average of 9 % and decreases relative grain yield by 5–12 %”
e2“The largest deep percolation loss was 12700 mm per season for flood irrigation in the low rainfall scenario”
The same questions in other papers
flooding · physiology: gas exchange · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
irrigation · physiology: gas exchange · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
349 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- negative
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.