Paper · 2025 · Water Practice & Technology

Optimizing water footprints and yield sustainability in Boro rice through alternate wetting and intense drying: A climate-resilient strategy for Bangladesh

Md. Touhidul Islam; Md. Asibur Rahman Abir; Nusrat Jahan; et al.

10
claims
24
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

ABSTRACT Climate change and water scarcity pose significant challenges to rice production in Bangladesh, necessitating water-efficient practices. This study, conducted during the 2024 Boro rice season in Mymensingh, Bangladesh, compared the impacts of alternate wetting and intense drying (AWID), with irrigation at a 20-cm water level drop, against continuous flooding (CF) and alternate wetting and moderate drying (AWMD), with a 15 cm drop. The AWID resulted in 46.12% water savings and a 43.1% increase in crop–water productivity, yielding 5.10 t/ha, while AWMD saved 38.64% water with a yield of 6.13 t/ha. Despite a 22.7% yield reduction compared to CF (6.60 t/ha), AWID's superior water efficiency underscores its potential as a sustainable option in water-scarce regions. Excluding the first 15-day crop establishment phase, the water footprint was lowest for AWMD (1003.83 L/kg) and AWID (1079.68 L/kg) compared to CF (1439.00 L/kg). Climate projections for the 2040 and 2070s indicate increased temperatures, decreased rainfall, and higher evapotranspiration, potentially raising irrigation demands by up to 30% under RCP 8.5 scenarios. These water-saving techniques offer promising strategies for sustaining rice production while conserving water resources. Further research is recommended to optimize these practices across diverse agro-ecological zones, enhancing climate resilience in rice cultivation.

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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWID saved 46.12% irrigation water.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWIDe0
Outcome
water savingse0
Direction
savingse0
Value
46.12%e0
Comparator
continuous flooding (CF)e1

Verbatim

e0

“AWID resulted in 46.12% water savings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 448–485 · show in text ↑
e1

“against continuous flooding (CF) and alternate wetting and moderate drying (AWMD)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 342–423 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWID increased crop–water productivity by 43.1%.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWIDe1
Outcome
crop–water productivitye0
Direction
increasee0
Value
43.1%e0
Comparator
continuous flooding (CF)e2

Verbatim

e0

“a 43.1% increase in crop–water productivity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 490–533 · show in text ↑
e1

“The AWID resulted in 46.12% water savings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 444–485 · show in text ↑
e2

“against continuous flooding (CF) and alternate wetting and moderate drying (AWMD)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 342–423 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWID yielded 5.10 t/ha.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWIDe0
Outcome
yieldinge0
Value
5.10 t/hae0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“AWID resulted in 46.12% water savings and a 43.1% increase in crop–water productivity, yielding 5.10 t/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 448–553 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWMD saved 38.64% water.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWMDe0
Outcome
watere0
Direction
savede0
Value
38.64%e0
Comparator
continuous flooding (CF)e1

Verbatim

e0

“AWMD saved 38.64% water with a yield of 6.13 t/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–610 · show in text ↑
e1

“against continuous flooding (CF) and alternate wetting and moderate drying (AWMD)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 342–423 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWMD yielded 6.13 t/ha.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWMDe0
Outcome
yielde0
Value
6.13 t/hae0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“AWMD saved 38.64% water with a yield of 6.13 t/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–610 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWID yield was 22.7% lower than continuous flooding, which yielded 6.60 t/ha.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWIDe1
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
reductione0
Value
22.7%e0
Qualifier
6.60 t/hae0
Comparator
CFe0

Verbatim

e0

“22.7% yield reduction compared to CF (6.60 t/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–670 · show in text ↑
e1

“AWID's superior water efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 672–704 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWMD water footprint was 1003.83 L/kg outside the establishment phase, lowest among regimes.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWMDe0
Outcome
water footprinte0
Direction
loweste0
Value
1003.83 L/kge0
Qualifier
Excluding the first 15-day crop establishment phasee0
Comparator
CFe0

Verbatim

e0

“Excluding the first 15-day crop establishment phase, the water footprint was lowest for AWMD (1003.83 L/kg) and AWID (1079.68 L/kg) compared to CF (1439.00 L/kg)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 780–941 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AWID water footprint was 1079.68 L/kg outside the establishment phase, below CF.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Treatment
AWIDe0
Outcome
water footprinte0
Direction
loweste0
Value
1079.68 L/kge0
Qualifier
Excluding the first 15-day crop establishment phasee0
Comparator
CFe0

Verbatim

e0

“Excluding the first 15-day crop establishment phase, the water footprint was lowest for AWMD (1003.83 L/kg) and AWID (1079.68 L/kg) compared to CF (1439.00 L/kg)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 780–941 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativeprojected

Claim · model-written summary

Projected climate changes may raise rice irrigation demand by up to 30% under RCP 8.5.

Taxon
Boro ricet0
Outcome
irrigation demandse0
Direction
raisinge0
Value
up to 30%e0
Qualifier
under RCP 8.5 scenariose0

Verbatim

e0

“Climate projections for the 2040 and 2070s indicate increased temperatures, decreased rainfall, and higher evapotranspiration, potentially raising irrigation demands by up to 30% under RCP 8.5 scenarios”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 943–1145 · show in text ↑
t0

“Boro rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 56–65 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend more research to optimize water-saving practices across agro-ecological zones.

Outcome
optimize these practices across diverse agro-ecological zonese0

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

“Further research is recommended to optimize these practices across diverse agro-ecological zones, enhancing climate resilience in rice cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1269–1415 · show in text ↑

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

114 papers: 88 positive, 26 negative or no effect

87 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

110 papers more in this group

See all 114 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.