EFFECT OF IRRIGATION SCHEDULING ON

0 downloads 0 Views 4MB Size Report
Jun 18, 2015 - Effect of different irrigation schedules on plant height. (cm) at various ...... The experiment was laid out in Strip Plot Design. Each main plot ..... and dry matter accumulation where plants from second border rows were selected.
EFFECT OF IRRIGATION SCHEDULING ON GROWTH, YIELD AND QUALITY OF DIRECT SEEDED BASMATI RICE (Oryza sativa L.) VARIETIES By KARTIKEYA CHOUDHARY (J-14-M-358)

Thesis submitted to Faculty of Postgraduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE AGRONOMY

Division of Agronomy Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Jammu Main Campus, Chatha, Jammu 180009 2016

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Gratitude takes three forms “A feeling from heart, an expression in words and a giving in return”, I sincerely thank all those who directly or indirectly made this thesis possible. First of all I would thank God Almighty for His grace and mercy which made it possible for me to complete this present venture. It is my privilege to express my deepest sense of gratitude and indebtedness to my Major Advisor, Dr. Vijay Bharti, Senior Scientist, (Agronomy) Water Management Research Centre, SKUAST-J, Chatha. His guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis and also for his kind and constant cooperation, critical evaluation of this manuscript through his scholarly eyes and deep indulgence throughout the course of this study for her keen interest, valuable guidance and providing the necessary working facilities during the course of investigation. I emphatically extend my heartiest thanks to the worthy members of my advisory committee, Dr. Anil Kumar, Prof. and Associate Director Research, Advance Centre for Rainfed Agriculture, Dr. Abhijit Samanta, Senior Scientist (Soil Science), Water Management Research Centre, Dr. R. K. Srivastava, Associate Professor, Division of Agricultural Engineering (Dean’s Nominee), for their valuable suggestions, generous help, sincere advice, and excellent encouragement in conducting this research work. I also wish to thank Dr. B.C. Sharma, Prof. and Head, Division of Agronomy for his valuable guidance, constant encouragement and facilitating the study and providing necessary facilities. I am highly thankful to Dr. D. P. Abrol, Dean, FoA, Chatha for providing the necessary facilities for successful completion of the research work. I may be failing in my duty if I will not thank to Prof. P. K. Sharma, Hon’ble Vice Chancellor, SKUAST-J; Dr. Dileep Kachroo, Registrar; Dr. J. P. Sharma, Director Research; Dr. T.A.S. Ganai, Director Education and Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap (Associate Director Education) for allowing me to pursue my Master’s Degree in Agronomy. I do extend my respectful thanks and warm regards to the faculty members of Division of Agronomy, Dr. Meenakshi Gupta (Associate Professor), Dr. A. K. Gupta (Associate Professor), Dr B. R. Bazaya (Associate Professor), Dr. M. C. Dwivedi (Assistant Professor), Dr. R. Puniya (Assistant Professor), Dr. Anuradha Saha (Assistant Professor) and Dr. Neetu Sharma (Assistant Professor) for their dedicated professionalism, tenacious efforts and cheerful cooperation and constant support during the period of study and research work. Special Thanks are also due to the faculty members of Water Management Research Centre, Dr. A. K. Raina (Head) and Er. N. K. Gupta (Senior Scientist) for their valuable help. I shall fail in my duty if I don’t thanks the non teaching staff members, Mr. Dinesh Khajuria (Computer Assistant), Mr. Sumit (FCLA), Mr. Omprakash (FCLA) of Division of Agronomy and S. Sarwan Singh (FCLA), Mr. Manmohan Sharma (FCLA), S. Jagmohan Singh, Mr. Romesh Abrol (FCLA), Mr. Ashok Kumar, Mr. Gulshan, Mr. Kashiram, S. Jagjeet Singh and S. Baiyanta of the Water Management Research centre, who were always ready to help me as and when required.

CONTENTS Chapter

Particulars

Page No.

I

INTRODUCTION

1-3

II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

4-25

III

MATERIALS AND METHODS

26-45

IV

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

46-78

V

DISCUSSION

79-87

VI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

88-91

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

VITA

LIST OF TABLES Table No.

Particulars

Page No.

3.1

Mechanical and chemical properties of the soil of the

28

experimental field 3.2

Physical properties of soil profile of the experimental field

29

3.3

Cropping history of the experimental field

29

3.4

Treatment details of the experiment

30

3.5

Gross and net plot size

31

3.6

Schedule of different cultural operations carried out

32

during experimentation 3.7

Irrigation and rainfall events during the crop season,

35

kharif 2015 3.8

Details of method employed for chemical analysis of plant

41

samples 3.9

Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

45

4.1

Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic plant height of

48

different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.2

Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic leaf area index

50

of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.3

Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic number of

52

tillers of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.4

Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic dry matter accumulation of different basmati rice varieties under

54

direct seeded conditions 4.5

Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic crop growth

56

rate of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.6

Effect of irrigation scheduling on yield attributes of

59

different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.7

Effect of irrigation scheduling on grain yield, straw yield

62

and harvest index of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.8

Effect of irrigation scheduling on net water expense,

65

volume of water use and water productivity of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.9

Effect of irrigation scheduling on quality parameters of

68

different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.10

Effect of irrigation scheduling on N, P and K uptake of

71

different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.11

Effect of irrigation scheduling on soil status after harvest

73

of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.12

Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic soil moisture

75

status of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions 4.13

Effect of irrigation scheduling on relative economics of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions

78

LIST OF FIGURES Figure No.

Particulars

3.1

Weather parameters recorded during crop growing

After Page No. 27

season (Kharif, 2015) 3.2

Layout of field experiment

30

4.1

Effect of different irrigation schedules on plant height

48

(cm) at various crop growth stages 4.2

Plant height of different basmati rice varieties at

48

various crop growth stages 4.3

Effect of different irrigation schedules on leaf area

50

index at various crop growth stages 4.4

Leaf area index of different basmati rice varieties at

50

various crop growth stages 4.5

Effect of different irrigation schedules on number of

52

tillers m-2 at various crop growth stages 4.6

Number of tillers m-2 of different basmati rice varieties

52

at various crop growth stages 4.7

Effect of different irrigation schedules on dry matter

54

accumulation at various crop growth stages 4.8

Dry matter accumulation of different basmati rice

54

varieties at various crop growth stages 4.9

Effect of different irrigation schedules on crop growth

56

rate at various growth stages 4.10

Crop growth rate of different basmati rice varieties at various crop growth stages

56

4.11

Effect of different irrigation schedules on grain yield

62

and straw yield of direct seeded basmati rice 4.12

Grain and straw yield of different basmati rice varieties

62

at various crop growth stages 4.13

Effect of different irrigation schedules and varieties on

75

soil moisture status at 0-20 cm depth 4.14

Effect of different irrigation schedules and varieties on

75

soil moisture status at 20-40 cm depth 4.15

Effect of different irrigation schedules on relative

78

economics of direct seeded basmati rice 4.16

Relative economics of different basmati rice varieties at various crop growth stages

78

INTRODUCTION

1

CHAPTER-I INTRODUCTION A Chinese proverb says, “Most precious things are not jade and pearl but rice grains” underlies the importance of rice. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of the most important cereal crops grown globally on an area of about 162.5 million ha with production of about of 749.8 million tonnes and average productivity of 46.1 q ha-1 (FAO, 2015). In India, rice ranks first among all the crops occupying 43.95 million ha and production of 106.54 million tonnes of rice with average productivity of 24.24 q ha-1. The area, production and productivity of rice in Jammu and Kashmir is 265.88 thousand ha, 454.8 thousand tonnes and 17.11 q ha-1 (Economic Survey, 2014-15). In Jammu region of J & K state total area under rice is 116 thousand ha with the production of 328.4 thousand tones, out of which 40 thousand ha (35 %) area is under aromatic rice i.e. basmati which has a average yield of about 26 q ha-1 (Anonymous, 2013-14). Rice is the staple food of about 3 billion people and the demand is expected to continue to grow as population increases (Carriger and Vallee, 2007). Rice occupies a pivotal place in Indian agriculture and is grown under diverse ecologies throughout the year in one or the other part of the country. Rice is highly nutritive crop as it contains carbohydrate (74.8%), protein (8.4%), fat (2.6%), minerals (phosphorus, calcium, iron etc.), amino acids, thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, pigments and dietary fiber. Out of 5000 available varieties of rice, basmati rice occupies a prime position on account of its extra long superfine slender grains, pleasant exquisite aroma, fine cooking quality, sweet taste, soft texture, length-wise elongation with least breadth-wise swelling on cooking and tenderness of cooked rice (Bhattacharjee et al., 2002). Indian basmati, also called the “Rice Queen” is possibly the world‟s most sought after rice because of its alluring fragrance and it can fetch three times more price than other coarse rice grains. It can play pivotal role for crop diversification because of its different growth habit, nutritional and irrigation demands than the coarse rice. Popularly known as Basmati, in Indian Subcontinent both India and Pakistan have a monopoly over its production and marketing in the world markets.

2

Rice is commonly grown by transplanting seedlings into puddled soil due to benefits like lesser water percolation losses, effective weed control and easy seedling establishment but it requires lot in terms of energy in form of tillage and high water use and it also has adverse affects like detioration in soil physical properties such as reduced permeability, destruction of soil aggregates and formation of hard-pans at shallow depth (Sharma et al., 2003). Rice is a water guzzling crop and requires on an average more than 5000 liters of water to produce 1 kg of rice (Bhuiyan et al., 1994; Bouman, 2009). Due to this, there is depletion of water table as a result of excessive pumping during peak summer (Hira, 2009) and also there is labour problem owing to scarcity making rice cultivation less profitable. Looming water crisis, water intensive nature of rice cultivation, after effects of anaerobic conditions of flooded puddled soils, increasing labour scarcity are forcing the farmers to shift from puddled-transplanted rice production system to direct seeding. Direct seeding of rice is a crop establishment method which consists of sowing seeds directly to the main field rather than replanting of seedlings grown in nurseries to puddled field as practiced in conventional transplanting method. Globally, 23 per cent rice is direct seeded and in Asia, 29 million ha area is grown as direct seeded rice which is approximately 21 per cent of total rice area in the region (Pandey and Velasco, 2005). In India, rice is direct seeded in about 7.2 million ha area (Gangwar et al., 2008) in parts of several states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Chattisgarh, Orissa, West Bengal, Kerala, Karnataka, Mizoram and the hill state of Uttranchal (Patil et al., 2005). Researchers are developing water-saving technologies such as alternate wetting and drying, continuous soil saturation (Borell et al., 1997), direct dry seeding, ground cover systems (Lin et al., 2003) and system of rice intensification (Stoop et al., 2002) but all these systems use prolonged periods of flooding and hence water losses still remain high. Shifting from conventional flooded system or alternate water saving option to irrigation by pressurized irrigation system viz., sprinkler, surface drip and micro-sprinkler irrigation in non puddled, non flooded conditions can reduce more water 50 per cent of the water

3

requirements for rice production by reducing seepage, percolation and evaporation losses (Medley and Wilson, 2008). Demand for basmati is increasing due to growing quality consciousness among rice consumers and profitability among farmers as it fetches 3-4 times higher price over the coarse varieties (Bali and Uppal, 1995). The traditional tall varieties like Basmati-370 and Type 3 have got great demand due to their aroma but their productivity is very low (Gangaiah and Prasad, 1999). Newer basmati varieties having high yield potential and less water requirement need to be evaluated under direct seeded conditions. Standardizing location specific basmati varieties under direct seeded conditions could result in significant improvement in water productivity of irrigated rice. The adoption of rice under direct seeded condition so far has been very limited and there are not many studies on the comparative performance of basmati varieties under such situations. Therefore, an investigation envisaging “Effect of irrigation scheduling on growth, yield and quality of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties” was initiated during kharif, 2015 at Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Jammu with the following objectives: 

To evaluate the irrigation scheduling in different basmati varieties under direct seeding conditions



To access the growth, development, productivity and quality parameters under different treatments



To workout the water productivity and economics of different treatments

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

4

CHAPTER-II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Generally rice is grown in Jammu as transplanted crop. Even under irrigated lowland conditions often transplanting of crop is delayed on account of labour scarcity, delayed monsoon and nursery failure caused by inclemental weather conditions. An attempt has been made to review the work done on the study entitled “Effect of irrigation scheduling on growth, yield and quality of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties” under the following sub-headings: 2.1

2.2

Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) v/s Puddled Transplanted Rice (PTR) 2.1.1

Effect on growth and yield attributes

2.1.2

Effect on crop productivity

2.1.3

Effect on water use

2.1.4

Effect on nutrient uptake

2.1.5

Effect on quality of rice

2.1.6

Effect on relative economics

Effect of Irrigation Scheduling 2.2.1

Effect on growth and yield attributes

2.2.2

Effect on crop productivity

2.2.3

Effect on water use

2.2.4

Effect on nutrient uptake

2.2.5

Effect on quality of rice

2.2.6

Effect on relative economics

5

2.3

Effect of Varieties 2.3.1

Effect on growth and yield attributes

2.3.2

Effect on crop productivity

2.3.3

Effect on water use

2.3.4

Effect on nutrient uptake

2.3.5

Effect on quality of rice

2.3.6

Effect on relative economics

2.4

Interaction

2.1

Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) v/s Puddled Transplanted Rice (PTR) Direct seeding of rice offers many advantages like labour saving, faster and easier

planting, timely sowing (Sharma et al., 1995), less drudgery, early crop maturity by 7-10 days (Singh et al., 2002b and Gill et al., 2006a), less water requirement (Bhuiyan et al., 1995, Wang et al., 2002; Mann and Ashraf, 2004), low production cost and more profit (Budhar and Tamilselvan, 2002) and reduced methane emission (Singh et al., 2009). 2.1.1

Effect on growth and yield attributes The DRS in moistened soil produced taller plants, more dry matter, lower

chlorophyll content, specific leaf weight, more panicles and sterile spikelets than transplanted rice (Sarkar et al., 2003). The direct sowing recorded more yield of rice in alluviual sandy clay loam soils of low land of Mahanadi delta. The more yield was associated with taller plants and more panicles m-2 and greater dry matter production by the direct sown than transplanted crop (Sharma and Ghosh, 1999). In direct seeded rice, the panicles m-2 were significantly more than transplanted rice whereas panicle length and 1000-grain weight remained statistically at par (Goel and Verma, 2000). It is thus clear that direct seeding of rice proved as good as transplanted technique on account of more tillers and panicle number.

6

2.1.2

Effect on crop productivity Direct seeding of rice saves irrigation water and labour but it has been found that

grain yield suffered depending upon the rainfall, water and crop management and soil type (Farooq et al., 2006a and Farooq et al., 2006b). Several scientists reported similar or even higher yield of DSR with good management practices (Farooq et al., 2011). On sandy clay loam soils of Ghaghraghat, Uttar Pradesh, Singh and Singh (1993) recorded maximum yield (30.4 q ha-1) under direct seeded rice than the transplanted crop due to many reasons like line sowing in direct seeded conditions, poor vigour of seedlings due to the uplifting shock and less root penetration due to hard soil after puddling in transplanted crop as compared with established direct-seeded crop. On-farm trials in India revealed comparable rice yields in some DSR and PTR systems when weed control was adequate (Farooq et al., 2011). Bhushan et al. (2007) conducted two year field experiment in Indo-Gangetic plains evaluating different establishment systems and observed that the yield of rice under PTR and DSR on puddled or non puddled flat bed systems were similar. The comparable yields were obtained under puddling followed by transplanting of rice (77.2 q ha-1), puddling and broadcasting of sprouted seed (75.8 q ha-1) and zero tillage transplanting (73.9 q ha-1) (Singh et al., 2005a). However, Gill et al. (2006a) at PAU, Ludhiana studied the performance of various methods of rice seeding and revealed that maximum grain yield (48.3 q ha-1) was recorded in direct seeding which was significantly more than the transplanting (43.8 q ha1

) with a margin of 4.5 q ha-1. Choudhary and Singh (2007) carried out an experiment at

New Delhi during rainy season of 2002 and 2003 on aerobic rice cultivated on raised beds under different soil moisture regimes (field capacity, 20 and 40 kPa tension). The yield was considerably less on raised beds, varying from 12 to 24 per cent at field capacity to 40 to 46 per cent in beds irrigated at 40 kPa soil water tension as compared with direct seeded flat at 20 cm row spacing. The productivity of direct seeded rice and puddled transplanted rice were compared by Qureshi et al. (2006) and they found that the average crop yield of 33 and

7

37 q ha-1 was obtained for direct dry seeded and transplanted rice, respectively. The loss in yield to the tune of 10 per cent was mainly attributed to the high infestation of weeds in direct seeded rice. The grain and straw yield of scented rice were significantly higher under transplanted rice culture than direct seeded puddled rice culture (Chander et al., 2005). In another study, Singh et al. (2005b) found that transplanting resulted in higher grain yield (49.2 q ha-1) followed by broadcasting of sprouted seeds (45.7 q ha-1) which was significantly higher over dry seeding (40.8 q ha-1). In one study, Sanjay et al. (2006a) enumerated that grain yield of rice was significantly higher in line transplanting (55.3 q ha-1) as compared with direct broadcast sowing (30.5 q ha-1). But in another study he found that, the direct seeding using drum seeder recorded significantly higher grain (61.7 q ha-1) and straw yield (112.7 q ha-1) as compared with line transplanting grain yield of 57.1 q ha-1 and straw yield of 105.3 q ha-1 (Sanjay et al., 2006b). Gill et al. (2006b) at PAU, Ludhiana concluded that maximum grain yield (68.6 q ha-1) was recorded with transplanting method which was however, at par with wet direct seeding (64.6 q ha-1). It is also important to note that the performance of direct seeded rice can also vary from location to location within a country. In the North-Western Indo-Gangetic plains, there is a tendency of a yield penalty with dry-direct seeded rice (Jat et al., 2009 and Saharawat et al., 2009) but not in the eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains (Singh et al., 2009). A possible reason for this differential performance in North-Western versus Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP) was lower rainfall in the former (400-750 mm year-1) than in the later (10001500 mm year-1) (Gupta and Seth, 2007). Flooding of rice after successful establishment can alleviate nutrient deficiencies of Fe and Zn and soil-borne diseases. Also, in the Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP), current yields of CT-PTR are much lower than those in the North-Western Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP), therefore, it is easier to achieve equivalent yield with DSR. Yields of both DSR and PTR declined when the soil was allowed to dry to higher tensions than 20 kPa and yield of DSR declined more rapidly as tension increased to 40 and 70 kPa (Sudhir-Yadav et al., 2011b). On a marginally sodic silt loam soil at

8

Modipuram, yield of DSR declined significantly (by 15 per cent) as the threshold for irrigation increased from 10 to 20 kPa at 20 cm soil depth (Sharma et al., 2002). The grain yields were similar (>70 q ha-1) in DSR and PTR during welldistributed rainfall in first year (Bhushan et al., 2007) due to much higher tiller and panicle density and lower floret fertility in DSR compared with PTR whereas, yield of DSR was significantly lower than PTR in the second year (by 13 per cent). Kumar and Ladha (2011) reviewed and found that the yields of dry DSR in India were significantly lower (9.2-28.5 per cent) than PTR. 2.1.3

Effect on water use Reports from North-West India on DSR under non-puddled conditions revealed

that 35-37 per cent of savings in irrigation water were observed by Sharma et al. (2002) and Singh et al. (2002a). Sudhir-Yadav et al. (2011a) and Sudhir-Yadav et al. (2011b) observed that the amount of irrigation water applied to DSR was 30-50 per cent lower than that applied to PTR while yields in daily irrigated and irrigation at 20 kPa in DSR gave similar yields as compared with continuously flooded PTR. Qureshi et al. (2006) compared water productivity and found that the 21 per cent higher value in direct dry seeded rice than traditional rice. In a study on sandy loam soil, irrigation with one day interval between infiltration of ponded water and the next irrigation saved about 28 per cent water over the continuous sub-mergence, water use efficiency increased from 1.8 to 2.4 kg ha-mm-1 without affecting rice yield (Ahuja et al., 1984). Narayansamy et al. (1993) from Tamil Nadu reported that direct seeded rice used 275-283 mm less water than transplanted rice in clay loam soils. In another experiment, Gupta et al. (2006) observed that the DSR on raised beds have 13-30 per cent water saving but at the expense of 14-25 per cent yield loss. Bouman and Tuong (2001) conducted an experiment on field water management to save water and increase its productivity in irrigated lowland rice. He observed that water saving increased water productivity up to a maximum of about 1.9 g grain kg -1 water, but decreased yield. Direct seeded rice required 19 per cent less water than PTR during the crop growth period and increased water productivity by 25-48 per cent as

9

compared with continuous standing water conditions (Tabbal et al., 2002). It was also found that under water saving irrigations i.e. keeping the soil continuously around saturation, wet seeded rice yielded higher than transplanted rice by 6-36 per cent and was a suitable establishment method to save water and retain higher yields at Philippines. Bouman and Tuong (2001) also observed that most of the water-saving technologies including DSR resulted in some yield losses and concluded that water productivity is a better indicator for making a comparison of different technologies in terms of their effective use of irrigation water and food production (Molden, 1997 and Tuong, 1999). Water use was maximum with transplanted rice due to extended land preparation and nursery raising. Continuous sub-mergence of 2.5 cm in wet-seeded rice recorded the highest water productivity and saved 25 per cent and 24 per cent versus transplanted rice in the kharif and rabi seasons, respectively without impairing productivity and net returns at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore (Balasubramanian et al., 2001). Normally, puddled transplanting requires 35 to 40 per cent more irrigation water than no-tillage direct-seeded rice. Compared with conventional puddled transplanting, direct seeding of rice on raised beds had a 13 to 23 per cent saving of irrigation water, but with an associated yield loss of 14 to 25 per cent (Bhushan et al., 2007). 2.1.4

Effect on nutrient uptake A study was conducted at New Delhi by Chander and Pandey (1997) regarding

nutrient removal by scented rice and they found that total nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium uptake by rice was evidentially higher in transplanted rice culture as compared to direct-seeded puddled rice. 2.1.5

Effect on quality of rice The quality of scented rice cultivar Pusa Basmati was studied under varying rice

cultures by Chander et al. (2005). Protein content and protein yield were significantly higher under transplanted rice culture than direct seeded rice culture. Hulling, milling and head rice recovery (per cent), grain length, breadth (mm) and length/ breadth ratio before

10

and after cooking were statistically identical under different rice cultures. In another study conducted by Singh et al. (2002b) at Ludhiana, it was found that transplanting of different genotypes produced significantly higher total rice recovery, head rice recovery, brown rice, milled rice and amylose content as compared to their direct seeding. However, for grain length/breadth ratio this difference was non-significant. 2.1.6

Effect on relative economics Ali et al. (2006) observed that during both wet and dry seasons, DSR yielded the

same as PTR and dry seeding had higher benefit: cost ratio. In a study on economics of direct seeded rice in eastern India by Singh et al. (2008) for on-farm trial at Pantnagar for two years showed that DSR was profitable for farmers, giving net returns of ì 13,350 ha-1 for dry-seeded rice and ì 11,592 ha-1 for wet-seeded rice compared with ì 10,343 ha-1 for transplanted rice. Likewise, in another study by Tripathi et al. (2014) based on economics of rice production at Karnal, Haryana recorded 3.36 per cent higher gross returns in TPR. But, 2.89 per cent higher net returns were obtained in DSR than TPR method. This was mainly due to reduction in the cost of cultivation by 13.45 per cent in DSR method. Similar study by Pandey and Velasco (2002) also revealed that profitability is higher in DSR than TPR due to considerable reduction in the cost of tillage operations. The cost incurred to produce a kilogram of rice was ì 5.68 and ì 6.34 in DSR and TPR, respectively. The cost of grain production was lower by 10.44 per cent in DSR as compared to TPR method. The farmers of the study region started adopting DSR as an alternative method of cost saving in rice production. The benefit-cost ratio of 2.92 was observed in DSR as against 2.61 in TPR method. 2.2

Effect of Irrigation Scheduling Appropriate scheduling of irrigation i.e. when and how much water is vital for

optimizing the rice yield. Continuous standing water is suggested for higher yield but under paucity of water, judicious management of water is essential for utilizing water economically (Dhar et al., 2008). Different methods of irrigation to economize water aim

11

at increasing the interval between two successive irrigations without any detrimental impact on productivity. Generally, irrigation is scheduled at 3 days of disappearance of ponded water in rice or irrigation at 7 days interval excluding non rainy days under Jammu conditions but little information is available on irrigation scheduling for direct seeded rice. Soil matric potential may be a criterion for irrigation since variable atmospheric vapour pressure deficit, soil texture, cultural practices and water management affect rice irrigation water requirements. Frequent and light irrigation through sprinkler irrigation based on evaporation losses can be another criterion for scheduling irrigation. 2.2.1

Effect on growth and yield attributes Narolia et al. (2014) in a study on the effect of irrigation schedule of direct seeded

rice in South-Eastern Rajasthan recorded plant height (114 cm), dry matter accumulation (658 g m-2), tillers m-2 (341), panicle length (28.3 cm), panicle weight (2.67 g) and test weight (23.1 g) at harvest significantly higher for the irrigation at 150 per cent CPE compared to other two irrigation regimes viz. irrigation at 75 per cent CPE and irrigation at 100 per cent CPE. Balamani et al. (2012) conducted a study at Water Technology Centre, Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, to evaluate the effect of irrigation scheduling viz. 1.0 IW/CPE ratio up to panicle initiation and 1.5 IW/CPE ratio up to remaining period, 1.5 IW/CPE ratio up to panicle initiation and 2.0 IW/CPE ratio for remaining period, 1.5 IW/CPE ratio for entire period and soil matric potential -20 kPa to -30 kPa up to panicle initiation and -10 kPa to -20 kPa for the remaining period and reported that highest plant height (69.5 cm), tillers m-2 (357), dry matter production (568 g m-2), panicles m-2 (349) and panicle length (20.09 cm) were recorded with 1.5 IW/CPE ratio up to panicle initiation and 2.0 IW/CPE ratio for remaining period. To test the response of adopted upland rice varieties, Matsumato et al. (2014) conducted a field experiment in sub-Saharan Africa with five treatments of irrigation i.e. water applied at 21 mm week-1 or 3 mm day-1 and total water application 378 mm, 28 mm week-1 or 4 mm day-1 and total water application 504 mm, 35 mm week-1 or 5 mm day-1

12

and total water application 630 mm, 42 mm week-1 or 6 mm day-1 and total water application 756 mm and 49 mm week-1 or 7 mm day-1 and total water application 882 mm. He recorded higher dry matter accumulation (16.3 t ha-1), no. of panicles m-2 (376), no. of grains panicle-1 (113.6), per cent grain filling (55.5) and 1000 grain weight (28.8 g) with water applied 49 mm week-1 and total water application was 882 mm. Likewise, Pal et al. (2013) conducted a field experiment at Faizabad to study the response of irrigation scheduling on scented rice. The three irrigation schedules were application of 7 cm water depth at 1, 4 and 7 days after disappearance of ponded water. The treatment 7 cm irrigation day after disappearance of ponded water recorded significantly higher growth parameters viz. plant height, leaf area index, dry matter plant-1 over 7 cm irrigation at 4 and 7 DADPW, respectively. In a field trial to study the response of aerobic rice on irrigation scheduling (100 per cent PE, 150 per cent PE and soil saturation) Reddy et al. (2013) recorded significantly higher plant height, tillers m-2 at 30 and 60 days after sowing, panicle m-2, filled grains panicle-1 and panicle length at harvest with soil saturation. Sandhu and Mahal (2014) in a study at Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana evaluated the effect of four irrigation schedules (Irrigation after 1 day, 2 day, 3 day after disappearance of water and at soil suction of 150±20 cm measured by tensiometer) on the performance of rice. They revealed that maximum values of growth parameters were recorded at irrigation schedule of irrigation at 1 day after water disappearance, which was statistically at par with irrigation at 2 days after disappearance and irrigation based at soil suction of 150±20 cm and these three irrigation schedules resulted in significantly higher values of growth parameters than irrigation at 3 days after water disappearance. A field experiment conducted on silty clay loam soil at Pantnagar by Sharma et al. (2012) to study the effect of three water regimes (continuous flooding of 5 cm, flooding to saturation and rainfed) on rice crop revealed that water regimes of rainfed plots produced significantly higher number of tillers m-2 and dry matter accumulation throughout the growth period followed by flooding to saturation and continuous flooding.

13

Shekara et al. (2011) conducted a field experiment on red sandy loam soil to study the effect of irrigation scheduling at IW/CPE ratios of 2.5, 2.0, 1.5 and 1.0 on growth and yield of rice. Irrigation schedule at IW/CPE of 2.5 recorded highest plant height (89.29 cm), dry matter accumulation (104.55 g), productive tillers hill-1 (25.74), filled spikelet panicle-1 (129.17) and panicle weight (3.30 g). 2.2.2

Effect on crop productivity Akinbile et al. (2007) evaluated the yield response of upland rice under different

water regimes at Ibadan, Nigeria and reported highest grain yield (1.36 t ha-1) under application of water through sprinkler 7 times in a week whereas lowest yield was obtained in the treatment applied with water 4 times a week. Likewise, another study by Akinbile (2011) to evaluate the effect of four irrigation schedules i.e. applying water 7 times continuously in a week (Full ET), 6 times in a week (0.75 ET), 5 times in a week (0.50 ET) and 4 times in a week (0.25 ET) on crop water use response of upland rice to differential water distribution under sprinkler irrigation system revealed that highest grain yield (1.36 t ha-1) was obtained with irrigation 7 times continuously in a week (Full ET). Balamani et al. (2012) conducted a field experiment on sandy clay loam soil at Rajendranagar, Hyderabad to study the effect of irrigation methods and irrigation scheduling on rice productivity using two irrigation methods and four irrigation schedules viz. 1.0 IW/CPE ratio up to panicle initiation and 1.5 IW/CPE ratio up to remaining period, 1.5 IW/CPE ratio up to panicle initiation and 2.0 IW/CPE ratio for remaining period, 1.5 IW/CPE ratio for entire period and soil matric potential -20 kPa to -30 kPa upto panicle initiation and -10 kPa to -20 kPa for the remaining period. The grain yield (3.04 t ha-1) obtained in furrow irrigated raised bed was significantly higher compared to grain yield (2.95 t ha-1) recorded with flood irrigated flat beds. The results further indicated that in aerobic rice higher rice yield and water use efficiency was possible through bed furrow method and irrigation scheduling at 1.5 IW/CPE till panicle initiation and 2.0 IW/CPE for the remaining period.

14

Brar et al. (2012) conducted a field experiment on sandy loam soil to study the production potential as influenced by cut off timings

of last irrigation (days after

flowering) in basmati rice and irrigation scheduling of succeeding wheat. Cut off timings at 28 and 35 days after flowering while being mutually at par recorded higher yield than cut off timing of irrigation 21 days after flowering. Dhar et al. (2008) evaluated the effect of six irrigation regimes (continuous submergence, alternate irrigation, irrigation 3 days after disappearance of water (DADW), 5 DADW, 7 DADW and 9 DADW) on the performance of kharif rice grown under different establishment method on sandy loam soil at Chatha, Jammu and reported that maximum grain yield (5280 kg ha-1) was recorded when the crop was irrigated 7 DADW which was significantly superior to other treatment except continuous submergence (4957 kg ha-1) and alternate irrigation (4934 kg ha-1). Kukal et al. (2005) evaluated the effect of soil moisture potential based 6 irrigation schedules (80±20, 120±20, 160±20, 200±20, 240±20 and 2 days irrigation interval) on rice at Ludhiana and revealed that highest grain yield (6.64 t ha-1) was obtained with irrigation at 80±20 soil matric potential. Likewise, Kukal et al. (2010) conducted an study on deep alluvial sandy loam and loam soil in Punjab on scheduling of irrigation viz. intermittent interval of 2 days and soil matric tension based irrigation (10±2, 16±2, 20±2 and 24±2) and found that highest grain yield (6.44 t ha-1) of rice was obtained in 10±2 kPa. Increasing soil matric suction to 20±2 and 24±2 kPa decreased rice grain yield non-significantly by 0-7 % and 2-15 %, respectively. Irrigation at 16±2 kPa soil matric suction saved 30-35 % irrigation water compared to that used with the 2 days interval irrigation. Kumar et al. (2015) in a similar study based on soil moisture tension concluded that irrigation in rice to be given only when soil moisture tension at 15 cm depth reached -30 kPa which may be reduced to -10 kPa to prevent spikelet sterility. Kaur and Mahal (2014) evaluated the effect of three irrigation schedules (30, 50 and 70 mm CPE) on the yield of direct seeded basmati rice cultivar Pusa Basmati 1121 on a loamy sandy soil at Ludhiana and revealed that the maximum grain yield (38.4 q ha-1) and straw yield (116.7 q ha-1) was obtained with irrigations at 30 mm CPE.

15

Matsumato et al. (2014) a field experiment was conducted to study the response of upland rice varieties adopted in Sub-Saharan Africa with five treatments of irrigation rate i.e. water application (21 mm week-1 or 3 mm day-1 and total water application 378 mm), (28 mm week-1 or 4 mm day-1 and total water application 504 mm), (35 mm week-1 or 5 mm day-1 and total water application 630 mm), (42 mm week-1 or 6 mm day-1 and total water application 756 mm) and (49 mm week-1 or 7 mm day-1 and total water application 882 mm) and recorded higher grain yield (6.69 t ha-1), total dry matter (16.3 t ha-1) and 1000 grain weight (28.8 g) with water applied 49 mm week-1 (total water application was 882 mm) and estimated that an additional water application of 1 mm increased rice yield by 11-12 kg ha-1 for upland varieties. In a study conducted at CRRI, Cuttak by Ghosh and Singh (2010) to determine the threshold regime of soil moisture tension for scheduling irrigation in tropical aerobic rice for optimum crop and water productivity, four treatments comprising irrigation application at soil moisture tension of 0 (soil saturation), 20, 40 and 60 kPa at the root zone depth of 30 cm were evaluated highest grain yield (4.50 t ha-1) was recorded in irrigation at 0 kPa (soil saturation) soil moisture tension. Likewise, in an experiment conducted by Subramanian et al. (2008) at Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, highest grain yield was recorded with IW/CPE-1.2 than the other treatments viz.

IW/CPE-0.8, IW/CPE-1.0 and microsprinkler irrigation. While

studing the influence of irrigation schedule on yield and water use efficiency of rice in kharif season, Husain et al. (2008) observed that three days drainage period after disappearance of ponded water significantly yielded higher (5880 kg ha-1) than that of continuous submergence throughout the crop season (5744 kg ha-1). A study at Ludhiana, Punjab was conducted to evaluate the effect of two irrigation schedules viz., irrigation after 2 and 3-day intervals on yield of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa) cultivars, Basmati 370 and Super Basmati. It was found that irrigation at 2-day intervals gave significantly more yield (3.69 t ha-1) than 3-day intervals due to significantly higher values of effective tillers and number of grains panicle-1 (Gill and Singh, 2008).

16

Direct seeded rice systems can reduce water application by 44 per cent relative to conventional transplanted system by reducing percolation, seepage and evaporative losses while maintaining yield at an acceptable level (60q ha-1) (Wang et al., 2002 and Bouman et al., 2005). 2.2.3

Effect on water use Water is one of the essential inputs for crop production as it affects plant

development by influencing its vital physiological and biochemical processes as well as augments nutrient uptake. For realizing potential yield of any crop, water stress should be avoided at any critical growth stage and efficient utilization of water should aim at getting higher yield per unit of water applied. There is possibility of reducing water requirement of rice without affecting the grain yield in comparison to the continuous submergence practice. After germination of direct seeded rice (DSR), irrigation can be delayed for around 7-15 days depending on soil texture. Delayed irrigation facilities and deeper rooting makes seedlings resistant to drought. Since, DSR crop does not require puddling and ponding of water, irrigation frequency of 3-7 days after the disappearance of water from the field can be practiced. Under limited water supply and drought situations, irrigation could be delayed up to 10-15 days, but irrigation was crucial once tillering has begun (Singh et al., 2005a). An experiment was conducted by Husain et al. (2008) at Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh on sandy loam soil to study the effect of irrigation schedules on yield and water use in rice. The irrigation schedule having three days drainage period yielded higher rice with maximum water use efficiency compared to continuous sub-mergence at critical stages (tillering, panicle initiation, flowering and milking). The irrigation schedules having four or five days drainage periods were found to be detrimental. Balasubramanian et al. (2001) conducted a field experiment at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, with nine levels of irrigation found that water use was maximum with the transplanted rice due to extended land preparation and nursery raising. Whereas in field experiments conducted on DSR to study effect of different water

17

management practices on water use, the result revealed that the water use efficiency was better with continuous submergence of 2.5 cm depth throughout the crop period as the irrigation regime was not significantly different from higher water regimes (Balasubramanian and Krishnarajan, 2001). In similar study by Balasubramanian and Krishnarajan (2000) continuous submergence at 2.5 cm throughout the crop period not only gave good growth and yield but also saved nearly 25 per cent of irrigation water as compared to application of 5 cm depth ponded water one day after disappearance in transplanted rice. On the basis of a field study on rice using three irrigation regimes viz. continuous water submergence, one day drainage and three day drainage, conducted for two years at New Delhi, Ramakrishna et al. (2007) reported that field water use efficiency was higher in case of one day drainage which needed 33.3 per cent less water than continuous water submergence. Parihar (2004a) in Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), reported that rice irrigated at 1, 3, 5 and 7 days after infiltration of applied water required 116.63, 110.87, 109.07 and 97.93 cm of water and resulted in 47.03, 47.89 and 47.08 kg ha cm-1 of water use efficiency. In Iran, Rezaei et al. (2009) on the basis of trial conducted on rice with 3 different irrigation management (full irrigation, 5 and 8 day interval irrigation) concluded that increasing interval irrigation decreased water use, but water productivity in 5 and 8 day interval irrigation was increased by 40 and 60 per cent, respectively, in comparision to full irrigation, without any yield loss. On clay loam soil in Punjab, Sudhir-Yadav et al. (2011b) in field experiment during year 2008 and 2009 studied the irrigation water use and water productivity of dry DSR. There were four irrigation levels based on soil matric tension ranging from saturation to alternate wetting and drying (AWD) with irrigation treatments of 20, 40 and 70 kPa at 18-20 cm depth and found that irrigation water productivity was higher in AWD than in daily irrigated treatments. Due to large reductions in irrigation water amount from 40 and 70 kPa irrigation schedules, there was reduction in the grain yield. There was a large effect of both treatments on irrigation water productivity (WPI), which ranged from 0.3 to 1.6 g kg-1 in 2008 and from 0.2 to 1.4 g kg-1 in 2009. In both years, WPI of rice irrigated at 20 kPa was significantly higher than

18

all other treatments. Input water productivity (WPI+R) was much lower than WPI in the respective treatments each year due to the large amount of rainfall each year, which ranged from 0.22 to 0.58 g kg-1 in 2008 and 0.22 to 0.63 g kg-1 in 2009. Matsuo and Mochizuki (2009) evaluated four water management practices in rice in Japan viz. continuously flooded paddy (CF), alternate wetting and drying system (AWD) in paddy field and aerobic rice systems in which irrigation water was applied when soil moisture tension at 15 cm depth reached -15 kPa (A15) and -30 kPa (A30) and it was found that total water input was 2145 mm in CF, 1706 mm in AWD, 804 mm in A15 and 627 mm in A30. Shekara et al. (2010) on the basis of 2 years mean found that the irrigation scheduled at IW/CPE ratio of 1.0 recorded higher water use efficiency (52.09 kg grain ha cm-1) using total water (91.84 cm) and 41.31 kg grain ha cm-1 with IW/CPE ratio of 2.5 using total water (154.8 cm). 2.2.4

Effect on nutrient uptake The effect of irrigation (0.8, 1.2 and 1.6 IW/CPE) and N application (40, 80 and

120 kg ha-1) on the yield and N uptake of basmati rice was studied by Jadhav and Dahiphale (2005) in Parbhani, Maharashtra. The outcome of the research showed that N uptake by both grain and straw increased with increasing IW/CPE ratios. In Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu), Edwin and Anal (2008) reported that highest N, P and K uptake in rice was observed in plots applied with irrigation of 5 cm depth on the day of disappearance of ponded water which was statistically at par with irrigation at one day after disappearance of ponded water. Parihar (2004a) carried out a field experiment on rice at Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) to found the effect of irrigation scheduling viz. irrigation at 1, 3, 5 and 7 days after infiltration of applied water on N, P and K uptake. N uptake at 3 and 5 days after infiltration of applied water, P uptake at 1, 3 and 5 after infiltration of applied water and K uptake at 1 and 3 after infiltration of applied water were statistically at par with each other.

19

Field experiments were conducted in the wet-land clay loam at soil farms of Tamil Nadu to study the effect of water management practices on nutrient uptake, availability and balance of nutrients by direct sowing of rice crop by Balasubramanian and Krishnarajan (2001). The highest levels of soil available nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) as per balance sheet were recorded with irrigation to 2.5 cm depth three days after disappearance of ponded water, due to lower crop uptake. The highest actual soil available nutrients were recorded with irrigation to 5 cm depth one day after disappearance of ponded water except for soil available potassium which had its highest availability in soil with irrigation to 2.5 cm depth three days after disappearance of ponded water. Water management influenced the N uptake in rice. According to Mallareddy and Padmaja (2013) significantly higher N uptake was recorded under flooded compared to aerobic condition with respect to both grain and straw. Belder et al. (2005) also reported relatively low uptake of nitrogen under aerobic conditions compared to flooded conditions, which was reflected by the relatively low fertilizer N recovery under aerobic conditions. 2.2.5

Effect on quality of rice In a field investigation on rice, Huang et al. (2008) studied three irrigation

regimes, i.e. well-watered (WW), moderate dry-wet alternate irrigation (MD: soil was rewatered when the soil water potential reached -20 kPa) and severe dry-wet alternate irrigation (SD: soil was re-watered when the soil water potential reached -40 kPa), the treatments were imposed from 7 days after heading up to maturity and it was found that WW, MD significantly increased brown rice rate, milled rice rate and head rice rate whereas SD significantly reduced these parameters. Jadhav et al. (2003) conducted a field experiment in Parbhani, Maharashtra to determine the effect of irrigation on the yield and quality of rice cultivar Basmati-370. The treatments comprised of irrigation at critical growth stages, 0.8, 1.2 and 1.6 IW/CPE ratio. 1.6 IW/CPE ratio showed the highest kernel length and breadth and cooked kernel length while the highest head rice recovery was obtained with irrigation at critical growth

20

stages. The highest amylose content was obtained with 0.8 IW/CPE ratio and irrigation at critical growth stages in first and second year, respectively. 2.2.6

Effect on relative economics Remunerative economic returns play a key role in adoption of any refined version

of agro-techniques. Profitable agro-techniques have great degree of adoptability by farming community. Singh et al. (2013) in a study on different irrigation schedules at Chhatisgarh recorded significant differences in cost of cultivation, net returns and benefit: cost ratio. Highest B: C ratio (2.65) was recorded in 75 per cent CPE which was significantly superior then 100 per cent CPE and 150 per cent CPE. Irrigation scheduling based on climatological approach (IW/CPE) by Shekara et al. (2011) resulted highest gross returns, net returns and B: C ratio (2.47) with IW/CPE ratio of 2.5. Other irrigation schedules viz. IW/CPE ratio of 2.0, IW/CPE ratio of 1.5 and IW/CPE ratio of 1.0 also gave good economic results. However, IW/CPE ratio of 2.0 and IW/CPE ratio of 1.5 resulted in higher B: C ratio (2.46 and 2.13 respectively) than IW/CPE ratio of 1.0. 2.3

Effect of varieties The rice varieties suitable for direct seeded conditions must possess the ability to

withstand stress conditions and should have high yield potential. Existing varieties used under transplanting do not appear to be well adopted therefore, research is under way to screen out varieties suitable for direct seeded conditions which can give comparable yield to transplanted rice. 2.3.1

Effect on growth and yield attributes The performance of different rice varieties differed under direct seeded

conditions. Plant height, number of tillers m-2, days to 50 per cent flowering, dry matter accumulation etc. are influenced by several biotic, aboitic, agronomic and management practices besides genetic makeup of varieties. Neelima and Kumar (2011) evaluated the performance of 15 rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars viz. NDLR 7, NDLR 21, NDLR 25, NDLR 38, NDLR 145, RDR 977, RDR 982, RDR 989, RDR 996, RDR 1004, RDR 1010, RDR 1013, NDLR 8, BPT 5204 and MTU 4870 under direct seeded conditions at

21

Regional Agricultural Research Station, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Nandyal, Andhra Pradesh and reported variability in growth parameters. However, the highest plant height (73.3 cm), days to 50 per cent flowering (133) and days taken to maturity (163) were recorded with cultivar RDR 1004, whereas highest plant population per m-2 (46) was recorded with NDLR 145 cultivar. Likewise, study on comparative performance of four cultivars viz. Vasundhara, Sonamashuri, Vijetha and Sambamashuri by Murthy et al. (2012) showed significantly higher plant height by Vasundhara over Vijetha and Sambamashuri but statistically at par with Sonamashuri which produced plants of shortest stature. Reddy et al. (2012) revealed that the performance of the rice varieties differed significantly under aerobic condition. The number of tillers m-2 (404) produced at 30 DAS was significantly higher for the variety WGL-32100 compared to other three varieties viz. MTU-1001, WGL-14 and Keshava. At 60 DAS, highest number of tillers m-2 (513) was recorded with WGL-14. More number of filled grains panicle-1 (250) were recorded with WGL-32100 which was significantly superior to other varieties and higher test weight (29.67 g/1000 seeds) was recorded with MTU-1001. Significant varietal difference with respect to plant height, number of tillers m-2 and panicle length were noticed by Parashivamurthy et al. (2012). The variety Doddabyranellu showed higher plant height (127.0 cm and 123.6 cm), number of tillers hill-1 (29.2 and 22.7) and panicle length (22.6 and 21.1 cm) during kharif 2005 and summer 2006 respectively as compared to Vikash, Thanu, Rasi and BPT-5204. This might be attributed to efficient accumulation of photosynthates in the vegetative plant part. Further, the plant height and other attributes being genetic characters caused varietal differences. The variety BPT-5204 took significantly more number of days to 50 per cent flowering. Mahajan et al. (2012) conducted a field experiment at Ludhiana to find out the cultivar response, in dry direct seeded rice and concluded that highest leaf area index at tillering, panicle initiation and flowering were recorded in PR-120 rice cultivar as compared to IR-64, PAU-201 and IET-20653 whereas plant height was recorded highest

22

under IET-20653. Relative water content and days to 50 per cent flowering were also recorded highest in PR-120. Baghel et al. (2013) evaluated the effect of varieties at New Delhi and reported significantly higher plant height, numbers of tillers and dry matter accumulation, root volume, no of panicles m-2 in „Pusa Sugandh 5‟ as compared to „Jaldi Dhan 13‟, „Anajli‟ and „Pusa 834‟ at harvest stage. Pradhan et al. (2014) evaluated the response of rice varieties to different levels of nitrogen under rainfed aerobic ecosystem and reported that rice variety Tulsi and Poornima had significant higher plant height and leaf area index than Annada and Swarna. Highest root volume (24.3 cc hill-1), dry matter production at harvest (12.6 t ha-1), panicles m-2 (178.5) were recorded with Tulsi followed by Poornima and other varieties viz. Annada and Swarna. Ismaila et al. (2011) observed that rice tillering ability was significantly influenced by variety. NERICA-1 was significantly more prolific than FARO-46. 2.3.2

Effect on crop productivity Neelima and Kumar (2011) evaluated the performance of 15 rice (Oryza sativa

L.) cultivars viz. NDLR 7, NDLR 21, NDLR 25, NDLR 38, NDLR 145, RDR 977, RDR 982, RDR 989, RDR 996, RDR 1004, RDR 1010, RDR 1013, NDLR 8, BPT 5204 and MTU 4870 under aerobic conditions at Andhra Pradesh. Results revealed that different varieties showed different pattern of yield attributes as per their ability to perform in particular environment. The variety MTU 4870 recorded significantly higher grain yield (4.8 t ha-1) than all other cultivars barring RDR 1010 (4 t ha-1) and RDR 977 (3.9 t ha-1). Further, test weight recorded with MTU 4870 (18.4 g) was also significant superior over all other varieties except RDR 1010 (17.8 g) and RDR 977 (17.2 g). The number of days required for 50 per cent flowering in RDR 1010 (93 days) and RDR 977 (94 days) was significantly less compared to all other cultivars. Significantly higher straw yield was noticed with NDLR 21 (4.1 t ha-1) over all other cultivars but was on par with NDLR 8 (3.5 t ha-1).

23

Ramanjaneyulu et al. (2014) evaluated different rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes under aerobic conditions on Alfisols of Andhra Pradesh and concluded that JGL11727 produce significantly higher grain yield and straw yield over other cultivars viz. JGL 1798, JGL 3844, JGL 384, BPT 5204, M 7, MTU 1010, MTU 1001, JGL 3828 and Tellahamsa but harvest index and 1000-grains weight of JGL 11727 were at par with MTU 1010 and MTU 1001. 2.3.3

Effect on water use Water can also be saved by using varieties of short duration however, this may

not be possible for basmati varieties as quality is main consideration. Reinke et al. (1994) argued that reducing duration could save up to 10 per cent of irrigation water, whereas, Williams et al. (1999) concluded that reduced duration will always reduce yield potential and hence water productivity. However, recently varieties with higher yield potential and short duration have been developed (Reinke et al., 2004). Short duration varieties also facilitate increased water use efficiency of the farming system. For example, earlier maturity allows earlier harvest, increasing the chance of timely establishment of a winter crop after rice and making more efficient use of stored soil water and winter rainfall instead of losing it as deep and surface drainage or transpiration by weeds. 2.3.4

Effect on nutrient uptake Nutrient uptake also differed according to the genetic makeup, yield and

respective nutrient content in dry matter of the cultivars and varied in different varieties. Murthy et al. (2012) reported that nitrogen uptake of „Sonamashuri‟ was in parity with „Vijetha‟, which in turn was comparable with „Sambamashuri‟, which recorded the lowest uptake of nitrogen by grain and straw. Nitrogen uptake by the grain was significantly higher with MTU-1001 but WGL-32100 registered significantly increased uptake of N both by grain and straw followed by MTU-1001 (Reddy et al., 2012). Mahajan et al. (2012) revealed that N uptake varied among the cultivars of rice viz. IR-64, PAU-201, IET-20653 and PR-120. Higher N uptake by grain and straw was recorded in IET-20653. Pradhan et al. (2014) also reported variation in N uptake with different rice varieties. The highest uptake of nitrogen by grain and straw was recorded

24

with „Tulsi‟, which was significantly higher than all other varieties viz. Swarna, Poornima and Annada. The uptake was about 27.5 and 45.5 kg N ha-1 in grain and straw, respectively. 2.3.5

Effect on quality of rice Quality of rice is affected by rice cultivars due to their genetic ability. Quality is

considered to be an important factor in basmati rice. Grain shape, size, milling percentage, head rice recovery and aroma are the most important characters and quality of rice is affected by rice cultivars due to their genetic ability. Gururani (1997) also observed the better quality in terms of milling and head rice recovery, in tall photosensitive variety (Basmati-370) than semi dwarf photo-insensitive cultivars (Pusa Basmati-1 and Haryana Basmati-1). Sharma et al. (2012) reported Pusa Basmati-1121 gave higher hulling per centage (76.6 per cent), kernel length and length breadth ratio compared to Pusa Basmati-1, CSR-30, HKR03-408 cultivars of basmati rice due to different genetic constitution of the cultivars. Ya-jie et al. (2012) evaluated the two rice cultivars viz. Zhonghan-3 and Yangfujig-8 under dry cultivation in China for quality parameters and showed that milled rice rate (73.67 per cent), head rice rate (71.65 per cent), chalky grain rate (41.92 per cent), chalkiness degree, L:B ratio of grain (2.79), amylose content (17.61 per cent) and protein content (7.96 per cent) were higher in Zhonghan-3 whereas, brown rice recovery was higher in Yangfujig-8. 2.3.6

Effect on relative economics Different varieties showed significant differences in relative economics not only

due to their seed rate, price of seed and grain yielding ability but also due to seed quality and market prices. Mallareddy and Padmaja (2013) recorded significant differences in cost of cultivation, net returns and benefit:cost ratio. Highest B:C ratio (1.32) was recorded in variety WGL 32100 which was significantly superior than WGL 14, WGL 3825 and MTU 1001. This was due to the higher net returns of ì 21090 ha-1 with WGL ì 32100.

25

Pradhan et al. (2014) also reported highest gross return, net return and B:C ratio (4.01) with Tulsi cultivar due to higher grain yield of this cultivar. Other cultivars viz. Poornima, Annada and Swarna also gave good economic returns. Poornima and Annada resulted in higher B: C ratio (3.53 and 3.38 respectively) than Swarna. Baghel et al. (2013) from Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi concluded that B:C ratio increased even under higher cost of cultivation. The rice variety Pusa Sugandh 5 produced significantly higher net returns and B: C ratio under higher cost of cultivation than other cultivars viz. Jaldi Dhan 13, Anjali, Pusa 834. This was due to high yielding ability of cultivar as well as good market price. 2.4

Interaction effect Patel et al. (2010) evaluated the influence of irrigation (aerobic and flooding) on

yield and and physiological attributes of high yielding rice varieties (IR 72176, DRRH 1, Kasturi, BPT 5204, Jaya and Sahsarang) under aerobic and flood irrigated management practices in mid hills ecosystem and concluded that interaction between water management and varieties was found significant in respect to water use efficiency and non-significant for all other parameters. The maximum difference of WUE between aerobic and normal water management was observed in variety IR 72176 which was at par with Jaya. All other varieties recorded non-significant variation in WUE values between water management practices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

26

CHAPTER-III MATERIALS AND METHODS The present investigation entitled “Effect of irrigation scheduling on growth, yield and quality of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties” was conducted at the Research Farm of Water Management Research Centre, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Jammu during Kharif, 2015. The details of the materials used, experimental procedures followed and techniques adopted during the course of investigation have been presented in this chapter. 3.1

Experimental Site

3.1.1

Location The field experiment was conducted at Water Management Research Centre‟s

research farm of SKUAST-J, Chatha. Geographically, the experimental site was located at 32o40‟ North latitude and 74o58‟ East longitude with an altitude of 332 meters above mean sea level in the Shiwalik foothills of North-Western Himalayas. 3.1.2

Climate and weather The meteorological data with respect to rainfall, temperature and relative

humidity were obtained from meteorological observatory of university which is located very close to the experimental area which reveals that the experimental site was mainly sub-tropical in nature endowed with hot and dry early summers followed by hot and humid monsoon seasons. The mean annual rainfall of the location varied from 1050-1115 mm and 75 per cent of it is received from June to September. However, the total rainfall and its distribution was subjected to large variations. The open pan evaporation was 630.2 mm during crop growing period. The meteorological data for the crop growing period from 25th June to 18th November 2015 have been presented graphically in Fig 3.1 and is numerically cited in Appendix I.

27

3.1.3

Rainfall (mm) The data revealed that a total of 845.7 mm of rainfall was received during kharif,

2015. About 700.9 mm of rainfall was received during last week of June to first week of September and only 141 mm of rainfall was received during the second week of September to October. The maximum rainfall received was recorded 146.9 mm during the standard week 28th (9 -15 July) while only 0.8 mm rainfall was received during the standard week 45th (5 -11 November). However in standard weeks 35, 37, 39, 40, 41 and 46 no rainfall was recorded. 3.1.4

Temperature (oC) The mean weekly maximum temperature ranged from 36.7 oC in 26th (25 June -1

July) standard meteorological week to 26.7 oC in 46th (12 - 18 November) standard meteorological week. Similarly, minimum temperature ranged from 23.6 oC in 26th (25 June -1 July) standard meteorological week to 10.6 oC in 46th (12 -18 November) standard meteorological week. 3.1.5

Relative humidity (%) Mean weekly maximum and minimum relative humidity ranged from 67 and 48

per cent in 26th (25 June -1 July) standard meteorological week to 92 and 47 per cent in 46th (12- 18 November) meteorological week and highest (93 and 91 per cent) in 45th (511 November) meteorological week, respectively during 2015. 3.2

Soil Characteristics

3.2.1

Mechanical and chemical properties In order to assess the nature and composition of the soil, six representative

samples from 0-15 cm depth were collected randomly from the experimental field and the composite samples were obtained by mixing them layer wise. These samples were subjected to mechanical and chemical analysis. The results of soil analysis presented in Table 1 reveal that the soil was sandy loam in texture, slightly alkaline in reaction, low in

R.H.: Relative Humidity, Max. Temp: Maximum Temperature, Min. Temp: Minimum Temperature Fig 3.1: Weather parameters recorded during crop growing season (Kharif, 2015)

28

electrical conductivity, low in organic carbon, available nitrogen and medium in available phosphorus and potassium. Table 3.1: Mechanical and chemical properties of the soil of the experimental field Soil Properties

Depth 0-15

(cm)

Analytical method used

Mechanical Properties Sand (%)

64.30

Silt (%)

22.06

Bouyoucous Hydrometer method

Clay (%)

13.64

(Piper,1966)

Textural Class

Sandy loam

Chemical Properties pH

8.23

1:2 Soil water suspension measured with glass electrode pH meter (Jackson,1973)

EC (dS m-1)

0.18

1:2 Soil water suspension measured with conductivity meter (Jackson,1973)

3.6

Walkley and Black‟s rapid titration method (Jackson, 1973)

231.17

Modified alkaline potassium permangnate method (Subbiah and Asija,1956)

13.21

0.5 M Sodium bicarbonate extractable method (Olsen et al., 1954)

142.17

Ammonium acetate extractable K method (Jackson, 1973)

Organic Carbon (g kg-1) Available N (kg ha-1) Available P (kg ha-1) Available K -1

(kg ha ) 3.2.2

P

Physical properties The soil samples were collected layer wise viz. 0-15, 15-30 and 30-45 cm depth at

three different spots from the experimental field. The samples of respective depth were composited to determine the soil moisture properties. The moisture content at field capacity and at permanent wilting point were determined by Pressure plate apparatus using method given by Richards and Weaver (1943). The field capacity (-0.3 bar) and permanent wilting point (-15 bar) of 0-45 cm were 20.3 and 11.3 per cent, respectively

29

(Table 2). The maximum water holding capacity of soil was medium (29.3 per cent) determined by Keen Raczkowski box method (Keen and Raczkowski, 1921). The bulk density of soil was determined by Core sampler method as proposed by Bodman (1942) and particle density was determined by Pycnometer method (Blabe et al., 1986). The average bulk density of soil was 1.41 g cm-3 and particle density was 2.55 g cm-3 (Table 2). Table 3.2: Physical properties of soil profile of the experimental field

Soil

Field

depth (cm)

capacity (%)

0-15

3.3

Permanent wilting point

Maximum water holding capacity

Particle

Bulk density

density

-3

(g cm )

(g cm-3)

(%)

(%)

21

12

30

1.42

2.49

15-30

20

11

29

1.41

2.57

30-45

20

11

29

1.41

2.60

Avg.

20.3

11.3

29.3

1.41

2.55

Cropping History The detail of the crops and the cropping system followed on the experimental

field for the last few years prior to start of the experiment have been given in the Table 3. Table 3.3: Cropping history of the experimental field Year

3.4

Season Kharif

Rabi

2013-14

Rice

Wheat

2014-15

Rice

Wheat

2015-16

Basmati rice (Experimental)

Wheat

Experimental Details The details of the field experiment conducted for the present study are as given in

Table 4.

30

3.4.1

Treatment details The details of the treatments and symbols used are as given in Table 4.

Table 3.4: Treatment details of the experiment S. No. Vertical Plots

Treatments Irrigation Scheduling

1

Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice)

I1

2

Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth*

I2

3

Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth*

I3

4

Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE (Pan evaporation) for 2 days)

I4

Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % 5 PE (Cumulative value of PE (Pan evaporation) for 2 days) * Suction measured by Tensiometer installed at 15 cm depth Horizontal

Varieties

Plots

3.4.2

Symbols

I5

Symbol

1

Basmati-370

V1

2

Pusa-1121

V2

3

Pusa-1509

V3

Experimental design The experiment was laid out in Strip Plot Design. Each main plot was surrounded

by a buffer of 1.5 m width whereas subplot was surrounded by 0.5 m width to protect the plots from accidental irrigation and gain of water through seepage. The treatments were replicated three times. Number of treatments

:

15

Number of replications

:

3

Total number of plots

:

45

Vertical Plots Irrigation Scheduling I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125% PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150% PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days)

N W

E S

Horizontal Plots Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509

Design: Strip Plot Replication: Three Gross plot size: 5x2 m2 Net plot size: 4x1.2 m2

Farm Road R1

R2

R3

I3V1 I3V3 I3V2

I1V1 I1V3 I1V2

I4V1 I4V3 I4V2

I4V3 I4V1 I4V2

I5V3 I5V1 I5V2

I1V3 I1V1 I1V2

I3V1 I3V2 I3V3

5m

I1V1 I1V2 I1V3

I2V1 I2V2 I2V3

I5V1 I5V2 I5V3 2m

Fig. 3.2: Layout of the field experiment

1.2 m

2m

4m

Gross Plot

I2V3 I2V1 I2V2

Sub irrigation channel

I5V1 I5V3 I5V2

Sub irrigation channel

1.5 m

Border row

I4V1 I4V2 I4V3 5 m

Net Plot

I3V3 I3V1 I3V2

Border row

I2V1 I2V3 I2V2

Sampling row

Main irrigation channel

31

3.4.3

Plot size The gross and net plot sizes are given here in Table 5.

Table 3.5: Gross and net plot size Crop Rice

Gross plot 5 m x 2 m=10 m2

3.5

Varietal Characteristics

3.5.1

Basmati-370

Net plot 4 m x 1.2 m= 4.8 m2

Basmati-370 was released from Rice Farm, Kalashah Kaku (Now in Pakistan) in the year 1976. It is a very tall (140-150 cm) basmati rice variety that takes 145-150 days from seed to seed. The grain are superfine, highly aromatic and elongate almost double upon cooking. It is susceptible to lodging. Average grain yield ranges from 2.5-3.2 t ha-1. 3.5.2

Pusa-1121 Pusa-1121 was developed by IARI, New Delhi in the year 2003. It is a semi

dwarf (97-105 cm) basmati rice variety that takes 135-140 days for seed to seed maturity. Average grain yield ranges 5.5-6.5 t ha-1. Quality wise, this genotype has extra ordinary grain length (9.2 mm) for a single grain, and has the longest grain in the world, non sticky, aromatic with intermediate alkali-spreading value and intermediate amylose content (23.87 per cent). 3.5.3

Pusa-1509 Pusa-1509 was developed by IARI, New Delhi in the year 2013. It is a semi

dwarf (95-100 cm) basmati rice variety with sturdy stem, lodging resistant, nonshattering of grains and takes 115-120 days for seed to seed maturity. Average grain yield is ranges from 4.2-6.5 t ha-1. Quality wise, this genotype posses aromatic extra long slender grains (8.41 mm) with very occasional grain chalkiness, good kernel length after cooking (19.1 mm) and intermediate amylose content (21.24 per cent). 3.6

Details of Cultural Operations The details of various cultural operations carried out during the crop growing

period have been given in Table 6.

32

Table 3.6: Schedule

of

different

cultural

operations

carried

out

during

experimentation Date of operation

Remarks

Field preparation

18-06-15

Primary tillage was done with disc harrow while the secondary tillage operations were performed with the help of cultivator, rotavator and planker

Layout, preparation of bunds and channels

22-06-15

Field layout was done manually with the help of spade, rope and liners

Direct seeding and nursery raising

25-06-15

Manual line sowing by liner for direct sowing and manual nursery sowing for transplanting method

Fertilizer application

25-06-15

Application of one third dose of N and full dose of P and K manually.

26-06-15

Application of pre-emergence herbicide (Pendimethalin @ 1 kg a.i./ha)

25-07-15

Application of post-emergence herbicide at 30 DAS (Bispyribac sodium @ 30 g ha-1)

21-07-15

Manual transplanting was done

Operation

Herbicide application

Transplanting

4 & 19-09-15

Application of fungicide (Propiconozole @ 200 ml ha-1) to control brown spot disease

6 & 23-09-15

Application of fungicide (Copper oxychloride @ 500 g ha-1) to control bacterial leaf blight

17-10-15

Harvesting of Pusa-1509 was done manually

30-10-15

Harvesting of Pusa-1121 was done manually

13-11-15

Harvesting of Basmati-370 was also done manually

25-10-15

Threshing of Pusa-1509 was done manually

7-11-15

Threshing of Pusa-1121 was done manually

20-11-15

Threshing of Basmati-370 was also done manually

Plant protection

Harvesting of crop

Threshing of crop

33

3.6.1

Field preparation Initially the field was prepared with the help of tractor drawn implements by

giving one deep ploughing with disc harrow and finally with cultivator and rotavator to break the clods and bring the soil to the desired tilth. The plots were prepared manually for sowing the rice crop. 3.6.2

Direct seeding/ Nursery raising Furrows were opened manually with the help of liners at a specified row to row

distance of 20 cm during kharif 2015. The seeds were sown in furrows opened with liners manually by kera method and then the seeds were covered with soil. Seed rate of 40 kg ha-1 for Basmati-370, Pusa-1121 and Pusa-1509 was used for direct sowing. Nursery of each variety was raised for conventional transplanting treatment @ 40 kg ha-1. 3.6.3

Uprooting and transplanting of seedlings Seedlings of 26 days age were uprooted on 21st July gently to avoid root injury

after irrigating the nursery field and washed in water to remove the mud. In conventionally transplanted plots, puddling was done manually and transplanting was done at 20 x 15 cm row to row and plant to plant spacing. 3.6.4

Fertilizer application The dose of fertilizers as per the recommendation for each variety was applied

through urea for nitrogen, di-ammonium phosphate for phosphorus and murate of potash for potash. Full di-ammonium phosphate, potash and 1/3 part of urea were applied at the time of manual sowing by broadcasting and 2/3 part of urea was broadcasting in the three equal splits after sowing on 21st July (27 DAS), 13th August (49 DAS) and 7th September (73 DAS). Also, zinc was applied as zinc sulphate @ 20 kg ha-1. Iron and manganese were applied as ferrous ammonium sulphate heptahydrate and manganese sulphate (both LR grade) through 2 foliar sprays of 1 per cent.

34

3.6.5

Irrigation application After one pre-sowing irrigation in direct sowing, no irrigation was applied during

July and August. In transplanting after 15 cm of irrigation for puddling, no irrigation was applied during establishment phase (15 days) due to sufficient rainfall and afterwards irrigation at 7 days interval (rainfall of 45 mm in 1 or 2 days during interval is considered as day „0‟) was applied. This is as per the recommendations of Water Management Research Centre, SKUAST- Jammu. Later on, the differential irrigation were applied as per the treatments and are given in Table 7 along with rainfall distribution. Irrigation in treatment I1 (Control) was calculated volumetrically through depth of application whereas in I2 and I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 and 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth) irrigation volume was calculated through water head of Parshall flume (Parshall, 1950) (liter sec-1) and stopped at zero tension of vaccum guage in tensiometer. In I4 and I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 and 150 per cent PE) sum of proceeding two days pan evaporation values were considered as depth 125 and 150 per cent of the depth was applied through sprinklers as per the discharge. Cut off time for irrigation was 15 days before harvest in each variety.

35

Table 3.7: Irrigation and rainfall events during the crop season, kharif 2015 Treatments

Dates of irrigation June

July

I1

August

October

Total

8,15,22

1,5,9

9*

I2

3,10,17,24

1,8

6

I3

3,11,29,26

4,10

6

I4

5,10,13,16,19

1,3,6,9,12

10

I5

5,10,13,16,19

1,3,6,9,12

10

2(10.2), 6(20.6),

6(28.8), 22(34.6),

15(8.6), 19(4.2),

841.7 mm (including

9(80.5), 10(44.2),

7(36.2), 8(22.6),

23(73)

20(6.2), 25(4.4),

rain during sowing and

11(2.8), 12(17.4),

9(16), 12(6.2),

26(9.8)

after

13(2), 17(96.2),

15(19),

18(6.4), 23(26.2),

20(15.2),

24(30.2), 25(1),

24(23.2)

Rainfall (mm)

15,23,31

September

30(89.8) 6(29.4), 8(2.4),

termination

of

irrigation application)

26(5.6), 28(63.2), 30(5.6) *First irrigation of 15 cm used for puddling in transplanting treatment Figures in parenthesis are rainfall in mm on that date. Pre-sowing irrigation of 7 cm was given in all the direct seeded treatments.

36

3.6.6

Weed control In direct seeded basmati crop, the pre-emergence application of pendimethalin @

1 litre a.i. ha-1 was followed by bispyribac sodium @ 30 g a.i. ha-1 after 30 days of sowing for chemical weed control. In transplanted rice, Butachlor 5 G @ 30 kg ha-1 was applied just after transplanting. 3.6.7

Plant protection measures A close watch was kept on the crop throughout its growing period. Spray of

fungicide propiconazole @ 200 ml ha-1 mixed in 500 litres water was done on 4th and 19th September to control brown spot disease. Fungicide Copper Oxychloride @ 500 g ha-1 mixed in 500 litres water was applied on 30th September and 8th October to control bacterial leaf blight. 3.6.8

Harvesting and Threshing

3.6.8.1 Harvesting of crop The crop was harvested manually with serrated edge sickles at physiological maturity. Two rows from either side of the plots and 50 cm from the proximal and distal ends of the rows of individual plots were harvested separately to eliminate the border effects. The crop plants after cutting from the ground level were allowed for sun drying for 2-3 days and tied in bundles. After 4 days, the bundle weight was recorded with the help of spring balance. 3.6.8.2 Threshing of crop The sun dried produce of the crops from each plot was threshed manually by beating the bundles on stone tiles. The grains of rice was separated and cleaned with the help of hand fan “Supa”. The weight of grain was recorded on pan balance.

37

3.7

Observations Recorded

3.7.1

Growth parameters For all the growth and development studies during the crop growth period, five

plants were selected randomly and tagged in each plot except for that of leaf area index and dry matter accumulation where plants from second border rows were selected for recording observations. Initially, the growth parameters were recorded at 30 days after sowing/transplanting and subsequent observations were taken at an interval of 30 days upto 90 days after sowing/transplanting and lastly at harvest. 3.7.1.1 Plant height (cm) Plant height of all the five tagged plants was measured with the help of metre scale rod from the ground surface to the tip of the upper most fully opened leaf from net plot area of each plot. The observations were averaged to work out the mean plant height per plot. 3.7.1.2 Leaf area index Five plants were selected randomly from the second border rows of crop from each plot and were cut close to the ground. All the leaves were removed from these plants, counted and categorized into three groups of large, medium and small leaves. A representative leaf from each category was chosen and its leaf area was measured with the help of leaf area meter and the leaf area was worked out which was then multiplied with the total number of leaves obtained from all the five plants and average leaf area plant-1 was worked out. Further, the leaf area index was worked out by using the formula as given here under Land area plant-1 = Row distance x plant distance Leaf area index (LAI) = Leaf area plant-1 (cm2) Land area plant-1 (cm2)

38

3.7.1.3 Number of tillers (m-2) Two spots of one metre row length were selected and marked in each plot. The number of tillers from each selected spot within the plot was counted and expressed as number of tillers m-2 at respective stages. 3.7.1.4 Dry matter accumulation (g m-2) Dry matter accumulation by the crop was recorded periodically at respective stages using plant destructive method. The plants were cut from the base from 50 cm row length. The plants were taken from the second row of each plot to assess the increase in biomass overtime. The collected plant biomass was first sun dried and then oven dried at 65±5°C till constant weight and it was expressed as g m-2. 3.7.1.5 Crop growth rate The increase in plant material per unit time or cumulative crop growth rate (CGR) was calculated as per the formula given by Radford (1967) and was expressed as g m-2 day-1. (W2 – W1) CGR= (t2 – t1) Where, W1=Total dry matter of crop plant at the time interval t1 W2=Total dry matter of crop plant at the time interval t2 3.7.2

Yield attributes and yield

3.7.2.1 Number of panicles m-2 The number of panicles in one meter row length at two selected spots were recorded at maturity and were averaged to arrive at the mean number of panicles m-1 row length and finally they were converted to number of panicles m-2.

39

3.7.2.2 Number of grains panicle-1 The total number of grains from the randomly selected ten panicles from the tagged plants of sampling rows were counted and averaged to arrive at the number of grains panicle-1. 3.7.2.3 1000-grain weight (g) One thousand grains were randomly taken from the bulk produce of each net plot and were counted and weighed. The weight was expressed as 1000-grain weight in grams after converting it into the 14 per cent moisture content. 3.7.2.4 Grain yield (t ha-1) Harvested produce from the net plot was threshed manually and grain yield was recorded in kilograms. It was then converted to t ha-1 at 14 per cent moisture content using the following formula.

Y

Net plot yield (kg) 100 - Mx x 10 x 2 Net plot size (m ) 100 - 14

Where, Y

= Adjusted grain yield in t ha-1 at 14 per cent moisture content

Mx = Moisture content of grain (per cent) at the time of recording yield in the field 3.7.2.5 Straw yield (t ha-1) The total biological yield (grain + straw) from the net plot was recorded and straw yield was worked out by subtracting the grain yield from the biological yield and expressed in t ha-1 at 14 per cent moisture content. 3.7.2.6 Harvest index (%) The ratio of economic yield to the biological yield (harvest index) was computed using the following formula given by (Nichiporovich, 1967).

40

Economic yield (grains) Harvest index (per cent)

=

x 100 Biological yield (grain + straw)

3.8

Soil Studies

3.8.1

Processing of soil After harvesting of rice crop, individual soil samples from all the plots were taken

from the surface (0-15 cm) for determination of available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. The samples were dried under shade, grounded and passed through 2 mm sieve and were analyzed. 3.8.2

pH pH was determined by suspension of soil and water (1:2) using glass-calomel

electrode (Jackson, 1973). 3.8.3

EC EC was determined by salt bridge measurement from the suspension used for pH

determination (Jackson, 1973). 3.8.4

Organic Carbon Organic carbon was determined by Walkley and Black‟s rapid titration method

(Jackson, 1973). 3.8.5

Available nitrogen Available

nitrogen

was

determined

by

modified

alkaline

potassium

permanganate method (Subbiah and Asija, 1956) and was expressed in kg ha-1. 3.8.6

Available phosphorus Available phosphorus was determined by using 0.5 M sodium bicarbonate

extractable P method (Olsen et al., 1954). The intensity of colour developed by stannous chloride was measured at 660 nm on spectrophotometer and was expressed as P kg ha-1.

41

3.8.7

Available potassium Available K was extracted with ammonium acetate extractable K method

(Jackson, 1973) and potassium was determined by flame photometer and expressed as K kg ha-1. 3.9

Soil Moisture Studies Soil moisture was measuring at 0-20 cm and 20-40 cm depth before and after each

irrigation and at harvest by using frequency domain reflectometry (FDR) given by Munoz-Carpena et al. (2006). 3.10

Uptake Studies in Crop The plant samples were taken from each plot at the time of harvesting for

estimation of N, P and K concentration. The samples were oven dried, then finely grounded with electric grinder and analyzed for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium concentration. N, P and K uptake in grain and straw samples were calculated by multiplying per cent nutrient content with their respective dry matter accumulation as per the formula given below: Nutrient content (%) x dry matter accumulation (kg ha-1) Nutrient uptake (kg ha-1) = 100 Table 3.8: Details of method employed for chemical analysis of plant samples

S. No.

Nutrient assessed

1.

Nitrogen

2.

Phosphorus

Vanadomolybdo phosphoric acid method (Jackson, 1973)

3.

Potassium

Flame photo meter method (Jackson, 1973)

Method employed Modified microkjeldhal method (Piper, 1966)

42

3.11

Water Use Studies

3.11.1 Irrigation water applied from sowing/transplanting to harvest (cm) Total irrigation water (cm) applied from sowing/transplanting to harvest of crop was calculated by multiplying number of irrigations with depth of each irrigation. The depth of each irrigation was 7 cm for transplanting method whereas depth/volumes in other treatments varies as per the method. 3.11.2 Total water expense Total water expense was calculated as sum of irrigation water applied to nursery and main field plus total rain received during crop season (including nursery) in conventional transplanting. In direct seeded plots, it was calculated as sum of irrigation water applied to the field as per the treatment including pre-seeding irrigation plus total rain received during the crop season. It was expressed in cm. 3.11.3 Net water expense Net water expense was calculated by the formula NWE = IW + RF – WL Where, NWE = Net water expense of the crop (cm) IW

= Amount of irrigation water applied (cm) during nursery raising, puddling (in case of transplanting) or pre-seeding irrigation (in DSR) and during the crop period

RF

= Rainfall during the crop growth period (cm)

WL

= Amount of water left in the soil profile at the time of harvesting (cm)

Amount of irrigation water applied was measured with the help of Parshall flume (Parshall, 1950). Volume of water required to fill the plots up to the zero suction of tensiometer were calculated through time required to deliver that volume which was

43

determined from the rate of flow of water head on the Parshall flume. In sprinkler treatments, depth of irrigation was applied through sprinklers as per the discharge. Total irrigation water applied was calculated by adding the depth of water applied in each irrigation for the respective treatments and then converted into volume. Amount of water left in the soil profile at the time of harvesting (cm) was determined by FDR (Frequency Domain Reflectometer) (Moisture Probe, Delta-T, UK) from 0-20 and 20-40 cm depth. 3.11.4 Volume of water use (m3 ha-1) Volume of water use was calculated on the basis of net water expense (cm). At first, net water expense (m3 ha-1) was converted in meter by dividing 100 and then the value was calculated by multiplying with 10,000.

Volume of water use (m3 ha -1 ) 

Net water expense x 10000 100

3.11.5 Water productivity (kg grain m-3) Water productivity was calculated by dividing grain yield (kg) with the volume of water applied (m-3). It is expressed as kg grain m-3 of water. Yield (kg) Water productivity = Volume of water (m-3) 3.12

Qualitative Studies

3.12.1 Kernel length Average length of ten dehusked grains before and after cooking from random samples of the produce in each replication were recorded in milimeters (mm). 3.12.2 Kernel breadth Average length of ten dehusked grains before and after cooking from random samples of produce in each replication were recorded in millimetres (mm).

44

3.12.3 Length/Breadth ratio Length/breadth ratio was calculated by dividing the grain length by grain breadth. 3.12.4 Amylose content Paddy grains were cleaned, dried and dehusked for the estimation of amylose content. The iodine was absorbed within the helical coils of amylose to produce a blue coloured complex which was measured colorimetrically by spectrophotometer at 590 nm (Juliano, 1971). 3.12.5 Aroma Aroma in rice samples was detected by smelling decorticated rice grains, following Organoleptic test. To 5 g of rice 15 ml of water was added, soaked for 10 min and cooked for 15 min, transferred into a petri dish and placed in refrigerator for 20 min. Then the cooked rice was smelled by a random panel: strongly scented (SS); mild scented (MS); non scented (NS) (Anonymous, 2004). 3.13

Relative Economics

3.13.1 Cost of cultivation The cost of different operations was calculated for different treatments on the basis of existing market prices of inputs and operations and the total cost was calculated by adding the expenditure involved in all kinds of operations as per treatment on per hectare basis in ì ha-1. 3.13.2 Gross returns The gross returns were calculated by multiplying the total grain and straw yield with prevalent market prices of the items and then they were presented on rupees hectare1

basis as per the treatments.

45

3.13.3 Net returns Treatment wise net returns were computed by deducting the total cost of cultivation from the gross returns. 3.13.4 Benefit: Cost Ratio Benefit: Cost ratio was calculated by dividing net returns with the cost of cultivation for each treatment. Net returns (ì ha-1) Benefit: Cost ratio = Cost of cultivation (ì ha-1) 3.14

Statistical Analysis The data obtained on various parameters was tabulated and subjected to statistical

analysis following Analysis of Variance (Table 9) techniques as described by Cochran and Cox (1963) to identify the treatment effects. The interpretation of the treatment effects were made on the basis of 5 per cent level of significance. The key for degrees of freedom used in analysis of variance (ANOVA) is given below: Table 3.9: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) Source of Variation

Degree of Freedom

Replications (r)

3-1= 2

Irrigation Schedules (i)

5-1= 4

Error (r-1) (i-1)

(3-1) (5-1) = 8

Varieties (v)

3-1= 2

Error (r-1) (v-1)

(3-1) (3-1) = 4

ixv

(5-1) (3-1) = 8

Error (r-1) (i-1) (v-1)

(3-1) (5-1) (3-1) = 16

Total (riv-1)

45-1 = 44

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

46

CHAPTER-IV EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS The results obtained during the course of investigation entitled “Effect of irrigation scheduling on growth, yield and quality of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties” during kharif 2015 are presented in this chapter. Effects of imposed treatments on observations recorded during the investigation have been elucidated in the chapter through appropriate data and graphical illustration wherever necessary. The experimental results are presented under following broad headings:

4.1

4.1

Crop growth studies

4.2

Yield attributes and yield

4.3

Observations regarding water use

4.4

Quality parameters

4.5

Nutrient uptake

4.6

Soil studies

4.7

Relative economics

Crop Growth Studies The growth of rice crop was measured in terms of plant height, no. of tillers, dry

matter accumulation, crop growth rate and leaf area index. 4.1.1

Plant height (cm) Plant height is a reliable index of growth and development representing the

infrastructure build-up over a period of time. Periodic plant height recorded at 30, 60, 90 days after sowing (DAS) and at harvest is presented in Table 10 and Fig. 4.1 & 4.2. The data showed that plant height continued to increase with the advancement of crop age and

47

this increase was rapid during early crop growth period and thereafter, a slow rate of increase in plant height was observed. Plant height recorded significant variation with different irrigation schedules at all the growth stages except at 60 DAS. At 30 DAS, among the different irrigation schedules I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) recorded significantly higher plant height over I1 (Control) but was statistically at par with all the other treatments. However, at harvest stage, I1 (Control) recorded highest (111.31 cm) plant height whereas lowest (82.22 cm) plant height was recorded with I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). At 90 DAS and at harvest, I1 (Control) recorded plant height statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) but significantly superior over I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). Also, varieties showed significant variation in plant height at periodic intervals. At harvest stage, variety V1 (Basmati-370) recorded highest (109.48 cm) plant height followed by V2 (Pusa-1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509). At same stage, variety V1 (Basmati370) recorded significantly higher (109.48 cm) plant height over V2 (Pusa-1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509). However, both V2 (Pusa-1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509) were found to be statistically at par with each other. Almost a similar trend was observed at 30, 60 and 90 DAS in rice crop. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant.

48

Table 4.1: Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic plant height of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Interaction (I x V)

30 DAS

Plant height (cm) 60 DAS 90 DAS

At harvest

18.67

72.38

99.98

111.31

30.32 29.24

72.98 71.31

89.20 80.33

97.53 82.22

29.69

72.78

86.20

93.42

30.73

74.64

96.29

106.62

0.95 3.11

1.05 NS

1.40 4.58

1.89 6.16

30.30 27.13 25.77 0.83 2.68

76.53 72.37 69.55 1.01 3.19

98.08 88.61 84.51 1.31 4.11

109.48 94.81 90.37 1.38 4.51

NS

NS

NS

NS

120.00

Plant height (cm)

100.00

80.00 I1 I2 I3 I4 I5

60.00 40.00

20.00 0.00

30

60

90

At harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.1: Effect of different irrigation schedules on plant height (cm)at various crop growth stages

120.00

Plant height (cm)

100.00 V1

80.00

V2 60.00

V3

40.00

20.00 0.00 30

60

90

At harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.2: Plant height of different basmati rice varieties at various growth stages

49

4.1.2

Leaf Area Index Leaf area index is an important plant growth index which determines the capacity

of the plants to trap solar energy for photosynthesis. A thorough examination data in Table 11 and Fig. 4.3 & 4.4 revealed that leaf area index increased exponentially from 30 DAS to 90 DAS of the crop and thereafter it decreased. Significant difference in leaf area index (LAI) was noticed under various irrigation schedules. Significantly higher (0.63) LAI at 30 DAS was recorded with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE), which was at par with I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) but superior over I1 (Control). At 60 DAS, non-significant difference was observed in LAI with respect to irrigation schedules whereas at 90 DAS maximum LAI (3.75) was observed in I1 (Control) which was statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) but significantly superior over I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). Almost, a similar trend for LAI in response to irrigation schedules was recorded at harvest. In case of varieties, LAI recorded at different periodic intervals of rice crop was significantly higher with variety V3 (Pusa-1509) over V1 (Basmati-370) but was statistically at par with V2 (Pusa-1121). The interaction effect as a result of imposition of different irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be non-significant.

50

Table 4.2: Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic leaf area index of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

30 DAS

Leaf area index 60 DAS 90 DAS At harvest

0.39

2.38

3.75

1.32

0.61 0.54

2.49 2.42

3.24 2.85

1.10 0.88

0.57

2.47

3.20

1.04

0.63

2.47

3.62

1.25

0.04 0.13

0.05 NS

0.11 0.34

0.04 0.13

Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

0.45 0.57 0.63 0.03 0.09

2.30 2.49 2.55 0.05 0.16

3.16 3.36 3.48 0.06 0.18

1.02 1.14 1.19 0.03 0.09

Interaction (I x V)

NS

NS

NS

NS

4.00 3.50

Leaf area index

3.00 2.50

I1

I2

2.00

I3

1.50

I4 I5

1.00 0.50 0.00 30

60

90

At harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.3: Effect of different irrigation schedules on leaf area index at various crop growth stages

4.00

Leaf area index

3.50 V1

3.00

V2

2.50

V3

2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 30

60

90

At harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.4: Leaf area index of different basmati rice varieties at various growth stages

51

4.1.3

Number of tillers (m-2) The number of tillers per unit area recognized as crucial determinant that

markedly affect the yield of cereals crop. Tillers m-2 were recorded periodically at 30, 60, 90 DAS and at harvest (Table 12 and Fig. 4.5 & 4.6) and data revealed that tillers showed increasing trend up to 90 DAS and declined thereafter. Among the different irrigation schedules at 30 DAS, I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) recorded significantly higher (189.22) number of tillers m-2 at 30 DAS over I1 (Control) but was statistically at par with I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE), I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) treatments. At 60 DAS, nonsignificant difference was observed for number of tillers m-2. However, at 90 DAS and at harvest stage, I1 (Control) accrued maximum number of tillers which was statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) but significantly superior than the rest of the treatments. In case of varieties, V3 (Pusa-1509) outnumbered other two varieties i.e. V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370) in terms of tillers m-2 at all the stages of rice and recorded maximum number of tillers m-2 (314) at harvest. Significantly higher number of tillers m-2 were recorded by variety V3 (Pusa-1509) over V1 (Basmati-370) but was statistically at par with V2 (Pusa-1121) at all the stages of crop growth. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant.

52

Table 4.3: Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic number of tillers of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Varieties V1: Basmati-370 V2: Pusa-1121 V3: Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Interaction (I x V)

30 DAS

Number of tillers m-2 60 DAS 90 DAS

At harvest

89.33

271.11

333.11

328.11

186.33 177.22

297.33 291.33

313.33 298.33

295.00 286.11

186.00

289.67

303.00

290.00

189.22

299.56

324.33

314.33

4.16 13.72

7.04 NS

7.56 25.65

7.81 26.17

156.20 166.27 174.40 2.83 9.08

272.60 293.13 303.67 4.91 16.55

297.00 318.20 328.07 6.48 21.60

286.40 307.60 314.13 6.20 20.18

NS

NS

NS

NS

350.00

Number of tillers m--2

300.00 250.00 I1 200.00

I2 I3

150.00

I4 100.00

I5

50.00 0.00 30

60

90

At harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.5: Effect of differentirrigation schedules on number of tillers m-2 at various crop growth stages

350.00

Number of tillers m-2

300.00 250.00

V1

V2

200.00

V3 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 30

60

90

At harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.6: Number of tillers m-2of different basmati rice varieties at various crop growth stages

53

4.1.4

Dry Matter Accumulation (g m-2) Dry matter accumulation is an important index indicating the photosynthetic

efficiency of the crop which ultimately influences the crop yield. It is a direct index of plant proliferation. Dry matter accumulation increased progressively with advancement in crop age as presented in Table 13 and Fig. 4.7 & 4.8. Dry matter accumulation varied significantly in response to irrigation schedules and varieties at all stages except at 60 DAS where non-significant difference was observed for irrigation schedules. Crop accumulated dry matter at faster rate upto 90 DAS and thereafter, slower rate was reported. Data at 30 DAS revealed that all the irrigation schedules except I1 (Control) accumulated dry matter (g m-2) statistically at par with each other but were significantly superior over I1 (Control). At 90 DAS and at harvest stage of crop growth, the trend differed and I1 (Control) recorded maximum dry matter accumulation which was also significantly superior to all the other treatments. However, I1 (Control) was found to be statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE). Variety V3 (Pusa-1509) produced maximum dry matter at harvest to the tune of 667.27 g m-2. Data at harvest reveals that V3 (Pusa-1509) recorded dry matter at par with V2 (Pusa-1121) but showed significant difference over V1 (Basmati-370) and the per cent increase in dry matter accumulation realized with V3 (Pusa-1509) as compared to V1 (Basmati-370) was found to be 9.48. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant.

54

Table 4.4: Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic dry matter accumulation of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Interaction (I x V)

Plant dry matter accumulation (g m-2) 30 DAS 60 DAS 90 DAS At harvest 73.33

243.67

631.22

688.09

98.54 92.22

262.22 253.44

587.00 542.67

632.06 584.86

94.11

257.78

576.67

620.21

98.33

265.89

619.89

669.27

6.06 19.76

6.50 NS

7.34 23.95

9.14 29.81

83.72 93.95 96.25 2.97 9.32

238.93 259.13 271.74 4.07 13.44

557.87 598.33 618.27 6.20 20.96

604.00 645.42 667.27 7.34 24.90

NS

NS

NS

NS

Dry matter accumulation (g m-2)

800.00 700.00 600.00 I1

500.00

I2

400.00

I3 300.00

I4

200.00

I5

100.00 0.00 30

60

Days after sowing

90

At harvest

Fig 4.7:Effect of different irrigation schedules on dry matter accumulation at various crop growth stages

Dry matter accumulation (g m-2)

800.00

700.00 600.00 V1

500.00 V2 400.00

V3

300.00 200.00

100.00 0.00 30

60

90

At harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.8: Dry matter accumulation of different basmati rice varietiesat various crop growthstages

55

4.1.5

Crop growth rate The crop growth rate (CGR) increased with the advancement of crop age up to 90

DAS and thereafter it showed a declining trend (Table 14 and Fig. 4.9 & 4.10). This parameter reflects the efficiency of plant to accumulate biomass per unit time. Maximum crop growth rate was observed at 60-90 DAS in irrigation schedules and varieties. The per cent increase in CGR recorded at 60-90 DAS with irrigation schedules and varieties over 30-60 DAS was recorded as 50.62 and 50.64 per cent whereas, it was 44.81 and 44.76 per cent over 0-30 DAS, respectively. Significant variation existed among different irrigation schedules at all the stages except at 30-60 DAS and 90 to at harvest. Also, varieties showed significant response at all the stages. At 0-30 DAS, CGR under all the irrigation schedules except I1 (Control) were statistically at par with each other but significantly superior over I1 (Control). At 60-90 DAS, CGR was recorded significantly higher in I1 (Control) over all the other irrigation schedules but was at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE). In case of varieties, V3 (Pusa-1509) recorded significantly higher CGR over V1 (Basmati-370) but was statistically at par with V2 (Pusa-1121) at all the stages. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be non-significant.

56

Table 4.5: Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic crop growth rate of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

0-30 DAS

Crop growth rate (g m-2 day-1) 30-60 DAS 60-90 DAS

90-At harvest

2.44

5.68

12.92

1.51

3.28 3.07

5.46 5.37

10.83 9.64

1.37 1.23

3.14

5.46

10.63

1.34

3.28

5.59

11.80

1.36

0.20 0.66

0.29 NS

0.44 1.45

0.33 NS

Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

2.79 3.13 3.21 0.08 0.31

5.17 5.51 5.85 0.19 0.73

10.63 11.31 11.55 0.23 0.88

0.89 1.24 1.96 0.29 1.15

Interaction (I x V)

NS

NS

NS

NS

14.00

CGR (g m-2 day-1)

12.00 10.00 I1

8.00

I2 6.00

I3 I4

4.00

I5

2.00 0.00 0 to 30 DAS

30 to 60 DAS

60 to 90 DAS

90 to at Harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.9:Effect of different irrigation schedules on crop growth rate of basmati rice

14.00

CGR (g m-2 day-1)

12.00 10.00 8.00

V1 6.00

V2 V3

4.00 2.00 0.00 0 to 30 DAS

30 to 60 DAS

60 to 90 DAS

90 to at Harvest

Days after sowing Fig 4.10: Crop growth rate of different basmati rice varieties at various crop growth stages

57

4.2

Yield Attributes and Yield Data on the effect of irrigation schedules and varieties on various yield attributes

of basmati rice have been presented in Table 15. 4.2.1

Number of panicles (m-2) The number of panicles m-2 is the most important component amongst the yield

attributing characters. Different irrigation schedules significantly affected the number of panicles m-2 as is clearly depicted in Table 15. Number of panicles m-2 was significantly influenced with irrigation schedules and varieties. Highest number of panicles m-2 in rice were recorded with I1 (Control) which were followed by the values observed with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE), I2 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth) recording 255, 230, 221.56 and 195.11 number of panicles m-2, respectively. Statistically I1 (Control) recorded significantly higher number of panicles m-2 over all other irrigation schedules except I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) which was found to be at par with I1 (Control). In case of varieties, V3 (Pusa-1509) produced panicles m-2 (245.13) significantly higher as compared to V1 (Basmati-370) but was statistically at par with V2 (Pusa-1121). The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant. 4.2.2

Number of grains panicle-1 The grains are fertilized, fully ripened ovules of spikelet in a panicle and excludes

sterile spikelets panicle-1. The number of filled spikelets (grains) panicle-1 are the real number of grains that ultimately contributes to grain yield. The data regarding number of grains panicle-1 in Table 15 with respect to irrigation schedules exhibited that number of grains contained in panicles of I1 (Control) were statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 %

58

PE) but was significantly better than rest of the treatments. The lowest number of grains panicle-1 (51.44) was obtained in I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). Among different varieties, significantly highest number of grains panicle-1 (61.33) was recorded in variety V1 (Basmat-370) whereas V3 (Pusa-1509) recorded lowest (55.40) number of grains panicle-1. However, V2 (Pusa-1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509) recorded significantly lesser number of grains panicle-1 over V1 (Basmat-370) but both were found to be statistically at par. The interaction effect was found to be non-significant. 4.2.3

1000-grain weight (g) Thousand grain weight indicates the nature and extent of grain development. It is

a function of various production factors that influences grain development and filling pattern. The perusal of data in Table 15 indicates the effect of different treatments on 1000-grain weight. Different irrigation schedules applied to rice crop failed to be exhibit significant difference in 1000-grain weight. However, different varieties responded significantly. Highest 1000-grain weight (26.76 g) was recorded in variety V3 (Pusa-1509) which was statistically at par with variety V2 (Pusa-1121) but was significantly superior to V1. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant.

59

Table 4.6: Effect of irrigation scheduling on yield attributes of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05) Interaction (I x V)

No. of panicles m-2

No. of grains Panicle-1

1000-grain weight (g)

272.89

63.33

25.06

230.00 195.11

57.22 51.44

24.73 24.14

221.56

54.68

24.65

255.00

62.54

24.90

7.26 24.18

0.86 2.81

0.28 NS

223.73 235.87 245.13 3.02 9.96

61.33 56.80 55.40 1.02 3.36

21.01 26.32 26.76 0.17 0.54

NS

NS

NS

60

4.2.4

Grain yield (t ha-1) Grain yield is a function of various growth and yield attributing parameters like

dry matter accumulation, effective tillers, panicle length, number of grains panicle-1 and 1000-grain weight. It is the most important parameter to compare effectiveness of different treatments. Influence of irrigation schedules and varieties on grain yield are embodied in Table 16 and depicted in Fig. 4.11 and 4.12. Significantly higher (3.37 t ha-1) grain yield of rice was recorded in I1 (Control) which was 39.8, 24.4 and 15.8 per cent higher than I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), respectively. The treatment I1 (Control) was at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) which recorded grain yield value of 3.22 t ha-1. Significantly lower grain yield of rice as compared to I1 (Control) was recorded in treatment I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) recording grain yield of 2.91, 2.71 and 2.41 t ha-1, respectively. Varieties also influenced significantly grain yield of rice. Significantly higher grain yield of 3.24 t ha-1 was observed with variety V3 (Pusa-1509) which was at par with V2 (Pusa-1121). However, significantly lesser grain yield was observed with V1 (Basmati-370). The per cent increase by V3 (Pusa-1509) over V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370) was observed to be 8.64 and 20.67 per cent, respectively. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found nonsignificant. 4.2.5

Straw yield (t ha-1) The data regarding straw yield in Table 16 and depicted in Fig. 4.11 and 4.12,

revealed that straw yield of rice followed a similar trend as that observed with respect to grain yield with different irrigation schedules but behaved differently in case of varieties. Significantly higher (6.03 t ha-1) straw yield of rice was recorded in I1 (Control) which was 32.8, 19.2 and 14.6 per cent higher than I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15

61

cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), respectively. The treatment I1 (Control) was at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) which recorded straw yield value of 5.71 t ha-1. Significantly, lower straw yield of rice as compared to I1 (Control) was recorded in treatment I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) recording grain yield of 5.26, 5.06 and 4.54 t ha-1, respectively. Non-significant effect of varieties was observed on the straw yield. However, numerically highest straw yield (5.41 t ha-1) was observed with variety V3 (Pusa-1509). The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant. 4.2.6

Harvest index Harvest index is an important criteria which determines the proportion of

economic yield expressed as per cent of biological yield. The data regarding harvest index is embodied in Table 16. Irrigation treatments in general recorded the lowest (34.64 per cent) value of harvest index in I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) whereas I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) recorded the highest (36.08 per cent) value. However, treatment means failed to show any significant differences amongst themselves. In case of varieties, harvest index of rice was found to be significant. Significantly higher (37.47 per cent) harvest index was recorded with V3 (Pusa-1509) as compared to V1 (Basmati-370) but it was statistically at par with V2 (Pusa-1121). The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found nonsignificant.

62

Table 4.7: Effect of irrigation scheduling on grain yield, straw yield and harvest index of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Grain yield (t ha-1)

Straw yield (t ha-1)

Harvest index (%)

3.37

6.03

35.87

2.91 2.41

5.26 4.54

35.62 34.64

2.71

5.06

34.79

3.22

5.71

36.08

0.09 0.28

0.12 0.39

0.92 NS

Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

2.57 2.96 3.24 0.08 0.28

5.36 5.19 5.41 0.13 NS

32.52 36.21 37.47 0.84 2.81

Interaction (I x V)

NS

NS

NS

Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

7.00 6.00

Yield (t ha-1)

5.00 4.00 Grain yield

3.00

Straw yield

2.00 1.00 0.00 I1

I2

I3

I4

I5

Irrigation Schedules Fig 4.11: Effect of different irrigation schedules on grain yield and straw yield of basmati rice

6.00

Yield (t ha-1)

5.00 4.00 Grain yield

3.00

Straw yield 2.00 1.00 0.00 V1

V2

V3

Varieties Fig 4.12: Grain and straw yield of different basmati rice varieties at various crop growth stages

63

4.3

Observation regarding water use The data in respect of water use are presented in Table 17.

4.3.1

Irrigation water applied (cm) from sowing to harvest The data embodied in the Table 17 revealed that the I1 (Control) required

maximum amount of the irrigation water (63 cm) followed by I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) recording values as 43.89 and 40.50 cm, respectively. The least amount of irrigation water was applied in I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) which was 82.19 and 78.61 per cent lesser than I1 (Control). 4.3.2

Total water expense (cm) The data presented in Table 17 indicated that the total water expense was highest

(163.47 cm) in I1 (Control) followed by I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) and I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE). Overall, different irrigation schedules applied under direct seeded conditions saved 27.54 per cent total water expense as compared to control. Treatmentwise, I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE), I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE), I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) and I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth) recorded total water expense values as 102.39, 104.64, 131.67 and 135.06 cm which were 37.36, 35.98, 19.45 and 17.37 per cent lesser as compared to I1 (Control), respectively. 4.3.3

Water left in the soil profile (cm) The water left in the soil profile showed same trend as observed in total water

expense. Highest value of (21.30 cm) water left in the soil profile was observed in I1 (Control). However, treatmentwise, I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE), I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I5 (Irrigation at 2 days

64

interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) and I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth) recorded values for water left in the soil profile as 10.73, 12.21, 12.25 and 14.33 cm which were 49.62, 42.67, 42.48 and 32.72 per cent lesser as compared to I1 (Control), respectively. 4.3.4

Net water expense (cm) The net water expense also recorded similar pattern. The net water expense was

highest (142.17 cm) in I1 (Control) followed by I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) and I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) which were 120.73, 119.46, 92.39 and 89.66 cm, respectively. 4.3.5

Volume of water use (m3 ha-1) The volume of water use is presented in Table 17. Volumewise, I1 (Control)

consumed highest (14217 m3 ha-1) amount of water followed by I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) and I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) which were 12073, 11946, 9239 and 8966 m3 ha-1, respectively. 4.3.6

Water productivity (kg grain m-3) The water productivity is a important parameter which provides information about

the total water used by the crop for production of economic part. A thorough examination of data in Table 17 revealed that the maximum water productivity of 0.34 kg m -3 was recorded with treatment I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) followed by I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE), I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I1 (Control) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) and the values recorded were 0.30, 0.24, 0.23 and 0.20 kg grain m-3 of water, respectively.

65

Table 4.8: Effect of irrigation scheduling on net water expense, volume of water use and water productivity of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions

Treatments

Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days)

Irrigation water applied (cm) from sowing/ transplanting to harvest

Total water expense* (cm)

Water left in the soil profile (cm)

Net water expense (cm)

Volume of water use 3 (m ha-1)

Water Productivity (kg grain m-3)

63.00

163.47

21.30

142.17

14217

0.23

43.89 40.50

135.06 131.67

14.33 12.21

120.73 119.46

12073 11946

0.24 0.20

11.22

102.39

10.73

89.66

8966

0.30

13.47

104.64

12.25

92.39

9239

0.34

* includes rainfall (84.17 cm) and irrigation water applied to nursery (1.30 cm) and puddling (15 cm) in case of transplanting and pre-sowing irrigation (7 cm) in case of direct seeding

66

4.4

Quality Parameters The effects of various irrigation schedules and varieties on quality parameters are

being presented in this section under the relevant headings. 4.4.1

Kernel length (mm) The data in Table 18 revealed that different irrigation schedules did not influence

significantly kernel length (KL) before cooking and after cooking but varieties responded significantly. Significantly, higher KL before cooking and after cooking (9.27 and 16.96 mm) was recorded with V2 (Pusa-1121) as compared to varieties V3 (Pusa-1509) and V1 (Basmati-370), respectively. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant. 4.4.2

Kernel Breadth (mm) Kernel breadth (KB) before and after cooking also could not produce significant

results amongst irrigation schedules but numerically highest KB before cooking (1.99 mm) and after cooking (3.04 mm) was observed in I1 (Control) treatment. However, varieties showed significant impact on increase in KB before and after cooking. Highest KB before (2.12 mm) and after cooking (3.24 mm) was recorded with V3 (Pusa-1509) followed by V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370). The interaction was found to be non-significant. 4.4.3

Length: Breadth ratio Data in Table 18 revealed that length: breadth (L: B) ratio before cooking and

after cooking was not influenced by irrigation schedules but numerically highest L:B ratio before cooking (4.38) and after cooking (4.65) was observed with I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth).

67

Different basmati rice varieties significantly influenced the L: B ratio. The highest L: B ratio before (5.31) and after cooking (6.05) was observed with V2 (Pusa-1121) than V3 (Pusa-1509) and V1 (Basmati-370). The interaction was found to be non-significant. 4.4.4

Amylose content Amylose content is important as it has a marked effect on the cooking and

palatability characteristics. The perusal of data as presented in Table 18 indicated that the irrigation schedules and varieties significantly influenced the amylose content of milled grains. Amongst different irrigation schedules, I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) recorded significantly higher (22.21 per cent) amylose content over all the other irrigation schedules except at par with I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) whereas lowest amylose content (21.05 per cent) was recorded with I1 (Control). In case of varieties, highest amylose (22.73 per cent) was observed with V2 (Pusa-1121) as compared to V3 (Pusa-1509) and V1 (Basmati-370). However, V2 (Pusa1121) was found to be significantly superior to V1 (Basmati-370) and V3 (Pusa-1509), respectively. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant. 4.4.5

Aroma Aroma of rice plays a dominant role in consumer acceptability and it draws

premium price in market. The data depicted in Table 18 revealed that V1 (Basmati-370) recorded strong aroma as compared to mild aroma in V2 (Pusa-1121) and V3 (Pusa-1121).

68

Table 4.9: Effect of irrigation scheduling on quality parameters of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions

Treatments

Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

Kernel length (mm) Before After Cooking Cooking

Quality Parameters Kernel breadth Length: breadth (mm) ratio Before After Before After Cooking Cooking Cooking Cooking

Amylose content (%)

Aroma

8.39

13.82

1.99

3.04

4.26

4.58

21.05

-

8.33 8.29

13.70 13.54

1.95 1.91

3.00 2.97

4.33 4.38

4.62 4.65

21.75 22.21

-

8.31

13.61

1.93

2.99

4.36

4.60

22.06

-

8.37

13.76

1.97

3.03

4.28

4.58

21.68

-

0.03 NS

0.09 NS

0.02 NS

0.02 NS

0.04 NS

0.04 NS

0.11 0.36

-

Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

6.82 9.27 8.92 0.06 0.22

10.07 16.96 14.04 0.05 0.19

1.98 1.75 2.12 0.04 0.14

2.97 2.80 3.24 0.07 0.26

3.45 5.31 4.21 0.08 0.28

3.42 6.05 4.35 0.09 0.31

20.58 22.73 21.94 0.08 0.26

Strong Mild Mild -

Interaction (I x V)

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

-

69

4.5

Nutrient Uptake Studies

4.5.1

Nitrogen uptake (Grain and Straw) The uptake of nutrient is a function of soil properties, plant density, amount of dry

matter accumulated by crop and amount of fertilizer applied. Nitrogen uptake is a product of biomass and nitrogen content. The scrutiny of data on nitrogen uptake by grain, straw and total is presented in Table 19. Both irrigation schedules and varieties had significant impact on nitrogen uptake by crop. Significantly higher total nitrogen uptake, N uptake by grain and straw was recorded with I1 (Control) which was statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) but superior than all the other treatments. Among the varieties, V3 (Pusa-1509) recorded significantly higher N uptake values for grain, straw and total over other two varieties except at par straw uptake values recorded by V2 (Pusa-1121). The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant. 4.5.2

Phosphorus uptake (Grain and Straw) The examination of the data on phosphorus uptake by grain as well as straw and

total depicted in Table 19 revealed the phosphorus uptake was influenced by different irrigation schedules. Significantly higher total phosphorus uptake (grain + straw) was recorded by I1 (Control) which was statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) but showed superiority as compared to rest of the irrigation schedules. Almost a similar trend was observed in case of phosphorus uptake by grain and straw. Variety V3 (Pusa-1509) recorded highest phosphorus uptake by grain, straw and total to the magnitude of 7.62, 8.89 and 16.51 kg ha-1, respectively. Also, same variety V3 (Pusa-1509) was found to be significantly superior as compared to V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370) except at par values with V2 (Pusa-1121) for straw uptake. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant.

70

4.5.3

Potassium uptake (Grain and Straw) The data of potassium uptake by grain, straw and total depicted in Table 19

indicated significant variation among irrigation schedules and varieties except nonsignificant variation by varieties for straw uptake. Irrigation schedule I1 (Control) recorded the maximum uptake values for grain, straw and total (16.15, 100.03 and 116.18 kg ha-1) which was significantly superior as compared to I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) but statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE). In case of varieties, grain uptake by V3 (Pusa-1509) was significantly superior to V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370). However, non-significant variation was exhibited for straw uptake by the varieties. Total uptake exhibited the different pattern in case of varieties. V3 (Pusa-1509) recorded significantly higher value as compared to V1 (Basmati-370) but was statistically at par with V2 (Pusa-1121). Also, V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370) were found to be statistically at par with each other. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant.

71

Table 4.10: Effect of irrigation scheduling on N, P and K uptake of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

Nitrogen (kg ha-1) Grain Straw Total

Phosphorus (kg ha-1) Grain Straw Total

Potassium (kg ha-1) Grain Straw Total

37.35

23.74

61.09

9.11

10.59

19.70

16.15

100.03

116.18

27.23 19.41

15.27 8.03

42.50 27.44

5.63 3.02

7.14 4.85

12.78 7.86

11.72 7.45

83.51 67.96

95.23 75.41

24.50

12.89

37.39

4.85

6.59

11.43

10.14

79.15

89.29

33.96

21.60

55.56

8.14

9.35

17.48

14.80

95.34

110.14

0.97 3.22

0.88 2.81

1.60 5.47

0.54 1.77

0.22 0.71

0.69 2.29

0.63 2.11

1.97 6.57

1.86 6.12

Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

23.08 29.17 33.22 0.68 2.27

13.18 17.08 18.66 0.56 2.21

36.26 46.26 51.87 0.98 3.86

4.21 6.61 7.62 0.22 0.85

6.21 8.01 8.89 0.23 0.91

10.43 14.62 16.51 0.33 1.31

10.03 12.07 14.05 0.38 1.49

83.71 82.25 89.63 2.52 NS

93.74 94.31 103.68 2.77 9.69

Interaction (I x V)

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

72

4.6

Soil Studies

4.6.1

pH, EC and organic carbon Soil data after harvest of rice presented in Table 20 indicates that there was

negligible variation in soil pH, EC and organic carbon as a result of application of different irrigation schedules and varieties. The range of pH, EC and organic carbon ranged from 8.20-8.23, 0.16-0.19 dS m-1 and 3.58-3.87 g kg-1, respectively. 4.6.2

Available N, P and K Available soil N, P and K data presented in Table 20 revealed that both irrigation

schedules and varieties differed significantly. Among the irrigation schedules, higher available N (227.33 kg ha-1), P (12.66 kg ha-1) and K (138.95 kg ha-1) in soil after harvest of rice was noticed in I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) as compared to other treatments. In case of varieties, significantly higher available N (221 kg ha-1), P (11.58 kg ha1

) and K (136.18 kg ha-1) was noticed with V1 (Basmati-370) as compared to V2 (Pusa-

1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509). However, both V2 (Pusa-1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509) were found to be at par with each other. The interaction effect of irrigation schedules and varieties was found to be nonsignificant.

75

4.6.3

Soil moisture studies The data presented in Table 21 represents the volumetric soil moisture content

observed before and after irrigation. 4.6.3.1 Soil moisture status at 0-20 cm depth The cursory examination of the data (Table 21 and Fig. 4.13) shows that there was constant increase in volumetric soil moisture content at 0-20 cm depth over the initial value in all the irrigation schedules. Overall, there was 36.40 per cent increase in volumetric soil moisture content at 0-20 cm depth after irrigation over the initial average value of 13.37 per cent recorded before start of irrigation schedules. Treatmentwise after irrigation, I1 (Control) recorded highest volumetric soil moisture content followed by I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE), I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125% PE) and I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). 4.6.3.2 Soil moisture status at 20-40 cm depth The analysis of moisture reveals a similar trend for volumetric soil moisture content as observed at 0-20 cm depth. However, overall there was 9.86 per cent increase in soil moisture content at 20-40 cm depth (Table 21 and Fig. 4.14) after irrigation over the initial average value of 14.53 per cent recorded before start of irrigation schedules. Treatmentwise after the irrigation, I1 (Control) recorded highest volumetric soil moisture content followed by I2 (Irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) and I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125% PE).

76

Table 4.12: Effect of irrigation scheduling on periodic soil moisture status of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions

Treatments

Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days)

Treatments

Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days)

03/09/2015 Before irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

05/09/2015 After irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

13/09/2015 Before irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

15/09/2015 After irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

21.30

19.65

25.00

21.95

22.82

19.77

28.20

22.60

11.50 11.59

13.30 13.47

19.30 16.20

19.55 17.52

13.55 12.12

14.80 13.80

19.45 16.47

19.60 17.72

11.05

13.15

17.22

11.70

14.12

9.50

17.65

10.40

11.45

13.10

22.20

12.70

17.62

10.23

22.15

11.23

23/09/2015 Before irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

04/10/2015 After irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

6/10/2015 Before irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

14/10/2015 After irrigation 0-20 20-40 cm cm

23.30

19.95

28.00

22.95

23.82

20.27

28.20

23.60

13.70 12.49 14.55

14.90 13.47 9.75

19.80 16.20 17.22

17.75 15.62 10.61

14.25 12.72 14.61

15.30 13.80 8.82

20.05 16.37 18.35

18.05 16.22 10.80

17.85

10.35

22.20

11.76

17.92

10.53

22.15

11.93

Volumetric Soil Moisture Content (%)

30 25 20 I1 I2

15

I3 I4

10

I5 5 0 before

after

before

after

before

after

before

after

Irrigation

Volumetric Soil Moisture Content (%)

Fig 4.13:Effect of different irrigation schedules and varieties on soil moisture status at 0-20 cm depth

25

20

I1

15

I2 I3

10

I4 I5

5

0 before

after

before

after

before

after

before

after

Irrigation Fig 4.14:Effect of different irrigation schedules and varieties on soil moisture status at 20-40 cm depth

77

4.7

Relative Economics Treatmentwise, economic returns were worked out by calculating operational cost

of individual treatment. The data obtained is presented in Table 22 and Fig. 4.15 & 4.16 with the details of operational cost in Appendix- IV. 4.7.1

Cost of cultivation A perusal of data presented in Table 22 and Appendix-II, III and IV indicates that

the highest cost of cultivation (ì 28443 ha-1) was recorded with irrigation schedule I1 (Control) which was ì 3348 ha-1 more than treatment I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE). In case of varieties, highest cost of cultivation (ì 27304 ha-1) was recorded with V3 (Pusa-1509) followed by V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370). 4.7.2

Gross returns Highest gross returns (ì 63907 ha-1) was found with I1 (Control) which was

followed by I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) and I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE). However, lowest gross returns (ì 45750 ha-1) was found with I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). Among the different varieties, variety V1 (Basmati-370) fetched maximum gross returns (ì 67164 ha-1) followed by V3 (Pusa-1509) and V2 (Pusa-1121). 4.7.3

Net returns Among the different irrigation schedules, I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through

sprinkler at 150 % PE) fetched maximum net returns of ì 35585 ha-1 which was closely followed by the treatment I1 (Control) recording net returns of ì 35463 ha-1. However, the lowest net returns (ì 20283 ha-1) was obtained with irrigation schedule I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth).

78

A variation in net return was also found among different basmati rice varieties. Variety V1 (Basmati-370) fetched more net returns (ì 42793 ha-1) followed by V3 (Pusa1509) and V2 (Pusa-1121) recording net returns as ì 23469 ha-1 and ì 22089 ha-1, respectively. 4.7.4

Benefit cost ratio Among the different irrigation schedules, the highest B: C ratio of the magnitude

1.44 was obtained with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) which was followed by I1 (Control) with B: C ratio of 1.27. The lowest B: C ratio of 0.81 was recorded with irrigation schedule I3 (Irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). Among the varieties, V1 (Basmati-370) registered its supremacy in obtaining highest B: C ratio of 1.75 followed by V3 (Pusa-1509) with B: C ratio 0.86 and 0.85 registered by V2 (Pusa-1121).

79

Table 4.13: Effect of irrigation scheduling on relative economics of different basmati rice varieties under direct seeded conditions Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) Varieties V1 : Basmati-370 V2 : Pusa-1121 V3 : Pusa-1509

Cost of cultivation (ì ha-1)

Gross returns (ì ha-1)

Net returns (ì ha-1)

B:C ratio

28443

63907

35463

1.27

25467 25467

55173 45750

29706 20283

1.19 0.81

25095

51309

26214

1.06

25095

60681

35585

1.44

24371 26067 27304

67164 48155 50773

42793 22089 23469

1.75 0.85 0.86

70000 60000

Rupees

50000 40000 COST OF CULTIVATION GROSS RETURNS

30000

NET RETURNS 20000 10000 0 I1

I2

I3

I4

I5

Irrigation Schedules Fig 4.15:Effect of different irrigation schedules on relative economics of direct seeded basmati rice

80000 70000

Rupees

60000 50000 COST OF CULTIVATION

40000

GROSS RETURNS

30000

NET RETURNS 20000 10000 0 V1

V2

V3

Varieties

Fig 4.16: Relative economics of different basmati rice varieties at various crop growth satges

DISCUSSION

80

CHAPTER-V DISCUSSION The experimental results presented in the previous chapter gave a detailed account of the “Effect of irrigation scheduling on growth, yield and quality of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties”. The significant experimental findings obtained during the course of experimentation are discussed below with possible explanations and evidences wherever necessary in order to find out the cause and effect relationship among the treatments with respect to various attributes studied and sorted out information of practical value. The growth and yield performance of a crop is a function of metabolic processes taking place in the plant body, which in turn is affected by a variety of inherent and environmental factors to which the plant is exposed. The yield of a variety is no doubt depends on the genotype from which it could be built up but it can be further modified by practicing suitable agronomic practices in which optimum irrigation application is of prime importance. Under this situation, it becomes imperative to evaluate the irrigation schedules and varieties in view of maintaining sustainability of the staple food of the country besides food security. 5.1

Crop growth studies Growth characteristics of direct seeded rice were significantly influenced by

different irrigation schedules and varieties. At 30 DAS, all the irrigation schedules were found to be significantly superior for plant height, number of tillers m-2, leaf area index, dry matter accumulation and crop growth rate as compared to I1 (Control) but all of them were found to be statistically at par with each other. This is due to the reason that in I1 (Control) treatment rice seedlings were just transplanted 5 days earlier and were still in the establishment phase. However, at 90 DAS and at harvest stage, I1 (Control) recorded significantly higher values for all the growth parameters as compared to I2 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth). But, this treatment was found to be statistically at par with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days

81

interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE). The increased plant height and higher dry matter in treatment I1 (Control) and I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) might be due to higher moisture availability which favored development of plant infrastructure. Significantly inferior treatments could not compete with these two treatments due to reduction in soil moisture content below the field capacity. These findings are in harmony with those reported by Das et al. (2001) and Shekara et al. (2010). Similarly, number of tillers m-2 and leaf area index revealed a similar trend for irrigation schedules. At 30 DAS, the maximum tiller density and leaf area index was recorded by direct seeded rice as compared to transplanted rice. However at harvest the trend was opposite. This might be due to the higher senescence, tiller mortality and degradation of chlorophyll content in direct seeded rice at later stages. The decreasing values of these parameters at later stages is due to the lesser availability of moisture after the imposition of irrigation schedules after 60 days which coincides with the cessation of monsoon period. These findings are in conformity with those observed by Sudhir-Yadav et al. (2011a), Ramakrishna et al. (2007), Schnier et al. (1990), Islam et al. (1994), Islam (1999) and Rahman et al. (2002). The data presented in Table 10-14 indicated that variety V3 (Pusa-1509) outperformed the other two varieties i.e. V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370) for various growth characteristics except plant height. V3 (Pusa-1509) showed superior values for leaf area index, number of tillers m-2, dry matter accumulation and crop growth rate at periodic intervals which was closely followed by variety V2 (Pusa-1121). This might be due to genetic makeup of the cultivar and high tillering capacity of the variety V3 (Pusa-1509). Similar results were reported by Parashavimurthy et al. (2012), Sowmyalatha et al. (2012), Mahajan et al. (2012), Baghel et al. (2013) and Ramanjaneyulu et al. (2014).

82

5.2

Yield attributes and yield

5.2.1

Yield attributes The significant variation in growth characteristics as a result of differential

application of irrigation and varieties further led to marked variation in yield attributes of rice crop. In general, irrigation schedules and varieties improved the yield attributes viz. number of panicles m-2, number of grains panicle-1 and 1000-grain weight except for nonsignificant variation in 1000-grain weight in case of irrigation schedules. Irrigation schedule, I1 (Control) recorded significantly higher values for number of panicles m-2 and number of grains panicle-1 as compared to other irrigation schedules except for statistically at par values with I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE). Panicle number was positively correlated with tiller numbers (Sarkar et al., 2003). In directly sown crop, higher number of tillers and vigorous plant growth during early stages of crop growing resulted in intra plant competition at later stages which ultimately resulted in more tiller mortality as a result of lesser moisture content and thus resulted in statistically inferior number of effective tillers in other irrigation schedules. Water stress conditions after imposition of irrigation schedules resulted in the lesser number of panicles m-2 due to unfavorable conditions generated with the drying of rhizosphere. These conditions might have obstructed the full development of plant resulting in lesser number of tillers m-2 and further lesser number of panicles m-2. These results are in conformity with those reported by Das et al. (2000), Rahman et al. (2002) and Parihar (2004b). The grains under transplanted conditions were statistically more than the different irrigation schedules. This might be due to higher panicle density and excessive vegetative growth of direct seeded rice which caused nitrogen dilution during reproductive phase and later on hindered spikelet differentiation thereby resulting in fewer grains panicle-2 in direct seeding methods. The results are supported by the facts reported by Saharawat et al. (2010) that number of grains panicle-2 were lesser in direct seeded rice due to mutual competition among plants compared to transplanted rice. Decrease in number of grains panicle-2 with increased water stress were also reported by Ramakrishna et al. (2007) and Shekara et al. (2010).

83

In case of varieties, number of panicles m-2 and 1000-grain weight were found to be significantly higher with variety V3 (Pusa-1509) compared to V1 (Basmati-370). In case of grains panicle-1, V1 (Basmati-370) showed significant superiority over V2 (Pusa1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509). However, for number of panicles m-2, number of grains panicle-1 and 1000-grain weight, V2 (Pusa-1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509) showed statistically at par values. This might be attributed to capability of the variety to produce more number of tillers m-2 in early growing period followed by differential availability to utilize the inputs, enhanced assimilate export ability from the vegetative part to reproductive part during the reproductive phase. The results corroborate the findings by Dingkuhn et al. (1991a) and Dingkuhn et al. (1991b). Higher number of grains panicle-1 recorded in the variety V1 (Basmati-370) might be due to more panicle length and lesser spikelet sterility. Variation in number of grains panicle-1 with varieties was also reported by Ramanjaneyulu et al. (2014) and Mahajan et al. (2012). Reddy et al. (2012) and Ghasal et al. (2015) reported variation in spikelet sterility among the different cultivars. 5.2.2

Grain yield, straw yield and harvest index Yield of the crop is the resultant of growth and yield contributing characters. It

was observed that growth characters (Table 10-14) and yield attributes (Table 15) were influenced due to congenial edaphic conditions which can be related to more availability of moisture in I1 (Control) and I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) treatments. This can also be judged from the moisture content values in Table 21 which clearly shows that soil moisture content in these two treatments always remained above or near to field capacity and hence more available water. I1 (Control) recorded significant superiority over all other irrigation schedules except for I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) which was statistically at par. Similar results were obtained for straw yield. The decrease in grain and straw yield in other treatments was due to the decreased soil water content as a result of differential irrigation schedules and hence showed greater sensitivity for biomass production, leaf area and tillers production. There was a consistent trend of decline in grain and straw yield as the irrigation threshold increased from 0.3 to 0.4 bar. Lower yield of direct seeded rice under greater water deficit was largely due to reduced panicle density, higher tiller mortality

84

and reduction in fertility which could be due to abnormal pollen development as a result of insufficient availability of assimilates under higher stress conditions as reported by Sudhir-Yadav et al. (2011a), Zubaer et al. (2007) and Venuprasad et al. (2007). Application of irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE resulted in comparable yield to transplanted rice. This was due to the availability of moisture near to field capacity at 0-20 cm depth after irrigation scheduling which resulted in more availability of nutrients in soil solution form and almost a similar pattern of growth, dry matter accumulation and leaf area index due to higher rainfall received in earlier stages (Appendix-I). Grain yield and harvest index obtained by variety V3 (Pusa-1509) was found to be significantly higher as compared to V1 (Basmati-370) but was statistically at par with V2 (Pusa-1121). This might be due to greater vegetative growth and better light interception which resulted in higher leaf area index and later on higher dry matter partitioning towards economic part. Yield variability among rice cultivars could also be attributed to genetic characters. Ramanjaneyulu et al. (2014) revealed that phenotypic expressions largely depended upon genotypic ability. The variation in harvest index due to varieties could be attributed to dry matter partitioning towards the economic plant part. Reddy et al. (2010) also reported increased harvest index in hybrids due to faster mobilization of dry matter towards grains under aerobic conditions. 5.3

Observation regarding water use The data embodied in Table 17 revealed that irrigation schedule I1 (Control) had

maximum value for irrigation water applied, total water expense, water left in the soil profile, net water expense and volume of water use whereas, I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) recorded the lowest values for these parameters. I1 (Control) recorded maximum values due to more irrigation water required for special operation like puddling and maintenance of ponded conditions during every irrigation. The next best treatment I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) resulted in maintaining soil moisture content in the upper most 0-20 cm depth near to field capacity which is uppermost limit of available water and thus this treatment produced comparable yield to I1 (Control).

85

The large irrigation water savings (27 per cent) in direct seeded rice applied with differential irrigation schedules compared to continuous flooding conditions was consistent with the findings of many other studies reviewed by Humphreys et al. (2010) and Singh et al. (2002a). The improved water productivity (0.34 kg grain m-3) in I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) as compared to I1 (Control) indicates better water use efficiency. These results are in conformity with those reported by Gill et al. (2006b). 5.4

Quality parameters The data presented in Table 18 revealed that out of quality parameters only

amylose content was significantly affected by differential irrigation schedules. However, in relation to varieties all the quality parameters viz. kernel length, kernel breadth, length: breadth ratio, amylose content and aroma varied significantly. The highest amylose content was recorded in irrigation schedule I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth) whereas I1 (Control) recorded the lowest. This is due to the fact that moisture stress increases amylose content of grains and there is a negative correlation of amylose content in the rice grains under moisture stress conditions (Fofana et al., 2010). In relation to varieties, V2 (Pusa-1121) outperformed V3 (Pusa-1509) and V1 (Basmati-370) in terms of quality characteristics except aroma. This might be due to differential ability to produce various sized seeds and genetic makeup of cultivars to increase their length and breadth after cooking. The results corroborate the findings of Baghel et al. (2013) and Ramanjaneyulu et al. (2014). The strong aroma recorded in V1 (Basmati-370) might be due to the inherent capacity of the cultivar (Anonymous, 2008). 5.5

Nutrient uptake studies Uptake of nutrients (N, P and K) by crop is a function of the nutrient content in

plant and dry matter accumulation per unit area. The data presented in Table 19 revealed that there was significant variation for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium uptake by grain and straw. Significantly, higher nitrogen and phosphorus uptake values were

86

recorded in I1 (Control) as compared to all the other irrigation schedules but for potassium uptake by grain and straw, almost a similar trend was observed except statistically at par values for I1 (Control) and I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE). This might be due to the fact that under adequate soil moisture there is more solubilization of nutrients particularly phosphorous and thereby increasing more availability to plants and hence increased uptake (Sandhu and Mahal, 2014). Varieties also exhibited significant variation where V3 (Pusa-1509) showed nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium uptake values by grain and straw superior as compared to V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370) except non-significant variation for potassium uptake by straw. However, total N, P and K uptake was recorded significantly higher by V3 (Pusa-1509) in comparison to V2 (Pusa-1121) and V1 (Basmati-370). This might be because of reason that V3 (Pusa-1509) being high yielding variety recorded higher N, P, K content and more dry matter accumulation that led to higher nutrient uptake values. Similar observations were recorded by Mallareddy and Padmaja (2013) and Mahajan et al. (2012). 5.6

Soil studies

5.6.1

Available nutrient The data in Table 20 revealed that there was no significant effect of irrigation

schedules and varieties on soil pH, EC and organic carbon whereas, available N, P and K in soil after harvest of crop differed significantly. Highest available soil N, P and K values recorded with irrigation schedule I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) and lowest in I1 (Control). This might be due to differential uptake of N, P and K with irrigation schedules. Lack of sufficient moisture availability resulted in lesser solubilization of nutrients and thus lower uptake values in the treatment I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth). In case of varieties, significantly higher available N, P and K values in soil after harvest of crop were recorded with variety V1 (Basmati-370) as compared to V2 (Pusa1121) and V3 (Pusa-1509) but both were statistically at par. This might be due to differential uptake of N, P and K by rice cultivars. Fageria et al. (2010) also reported

87

difference in soil nutrient status after harvest of rice crop and observed that highest available N, P and K in soil was recorded with variety having significantly lower N, P and K uptake values for both grain and straw. 5.6.2

Soil moisture studies Soil moisture studies at 0-20 and 20-40 cm depths showed that I1 (Control) had

highest average soil moisture content throughout the crop period after the imposition of irrigation schedules. Among the other irrigation schedules, I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) recorded the highest average moisture content followed by I2 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth) > I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) > I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) at 0-20 cm depth. But at 20-40 cm depth, different trend was observed and showed the pattern of soil moisture content as I2 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth) > I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth) > I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) > I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE). This was due to fact that at 0-20 cm depth application of ponded water under puddled conditions in I1 (Control) created favorable condition in retention of soil moisture. More availability of soil moisture in I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) after I1 (Control) was due to higher frequency and lesser depth of irrigation by using sprinkler. At 20-40 cm depth lesser availability of soil moisture with I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) was due to the reduced downward movement of soil water as sprinkler application water in form of simulated rainfall. 5.8

Relative economics The practicability and usefulness of a treatment is judged ultimately in terms of

net returns. Among the irrigation schedules, I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) proved to be more remunerative followed by I1 (Control), I2 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth), I4 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE) and I3 (Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm

88

depth) which was ultimately due to the variation in grain and straw yields. The highest net returns and benefit: cost ratio in I5 (Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE) was due to the lesser cost of cultivation as a result of exclusion of special operations like puddling and transplanting in I1 (Control). The highest net returns and benefit cost ratio were also affected by different varieties as presented in Table 22. Variety V1 (Basmati-370) provided highest net returns and benefit cost ratio as compared to V3 (Pusa-1509) and V2 (Pusa-1121). This can be attributed to highest selling price of V1 (Basmati-370).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

89

CHAPTER-VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A field experiment entitled “Effect of irrigation scheduling on growth, yield and quality of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties” was under taken at Research Farm, Water Management Research Centre, SKUAST-J, Chatha during kharif, 2015. The soil of experimental field was sandy loam in texture, slightly alkaline in reaction with EC in safe range, low in organic carbon and nitrogen but with medium phosphorus and potassium. The experiment was laid out in Strip Plot Design with three replications comprising of five irrigation schedules viz. Control (Normal transplanting with water management practice), Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth, Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth, Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE and Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE as one factor in vertical plots and three varieties (Basmati-370, Pusa-1121 and Pusa1509) as second factor in horizontal plots. The salient findings of the present investigation are briefly summarized as under: 6.1

Effect of irrigation schedules The irrigation schedules, control and irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler

at 150 % PE though at par had a significant influence on plant height, number of tillers m2

, leaf area index, dry matter accumulation m-2 and crop growth rate at almost all the

stages of rice crop followed by irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth, irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE and irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth. Yield attributes and yield were also significantly affected by irrigation schedules. Irrigation schedule, viz. control and irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE recorded higher number of panicles m-2, number of grains panicle-1, grain yield and straw yield. Amongst irrigation schedules, control recorded highest amount of irrigation water applied, total water expense, water left in the soil profile, net water expense, volume of

90

water use and soil moisture content but highest water productivity and comparable soil moisture content at 0-20 cm depth was observed in irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE. Qualitatively, significantly highest amylose content was noticed with irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth. Nutrient uptake by grain and straw was also significantly influenced by different irrigation schedules. Irrigation treatment, control showed significantly highest nutrient uptake by grain and straw but potassium uptake remained statistically at par with irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE. After the harvest of rice crop, no significant variation in soil pH, EC and organic carbon was observed with the application of different irrigation schedules. The availability of nutrients in soil after rice harvest showed significant build up of soil available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth as compared to all the other irrigation schedules. Relatively highest net returns were obtained with the irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE which was comparatively similar to control. The highest benefit cost ratio (B: C ratio) was registered with irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE. 6.2

Effect of varieties Varieties had significant by different growth characteristics viz. plant height, leaf

area index, number of tillers m-2, dry matter accumulation m-2 and crop growth rate. Pusa-1509 and Pusa-1121 showed significant supremacy over Basmati-370 in terms of all the growth characteristics except for plant height which was found to be significantly higher with Basmati-370. Yield attributes and yield also differed significantly among varieties. Except for number of grains panicle-1, Pusa-1509 and Pusa-1121 recorded significantly higher number of panicles m-2, 1000-grain weight, grain yield and harvest index as compared to Basmati-370. Non significant variation for straw yield was noticed with varieties. Qualitatively, except for kernel breadth, Pusa-1121 recorded highest kernel length, length: breadth ratio before cooking and after cooking and amylose content. Among the varieties, Basmati-370 recorded the strong aroma but the other varieties

91

recorded mild aroma. Pusa-1509 recorded significantly highest nutrient uptake. Soil pH, EC and organic carbon after harvesting of crop were found to be non significant in relation to varieties whereas significant build-up of soil available N, P and K by variety Basmati-370 was registered. Highest net returns and B:C ratio were obtained with Basmati-370 and proved to be more remunerative as compared to Pusa-1509 and Pusa-1121. CONCLUSIONS On the basis of one year study, it may be concluded that: 

Scheduling of irrigation in direct seeded basmati rice at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE produced at par values for growth characteristics, grain yield and straw yield with control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice).



Among the irrigation scheduling treatments, the maximum yield (3.22 t ha-1) was recorded at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE which was significantly higher than irrigation at 0.3 bar suction at 15 cm depth, irrigation schedule of irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE and irrigation at 0.4 bar suction at 15 cm depth without compromising the quality of basmati rice.



The irrigation scheduling at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE resulted in saving of about 36 per cent total water and 32.35 per cent higher water productivity as compared to control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice).



Economically, irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE recorded highest B:C ratio and net returns.

92



Pusa-1509 and Pusa-1121proved to be most promising rice varieties suitable for direct seeded conditions and recorded significantly higher values for growth parameters, yield attributes, grain yield and straw yield as compared to Basmati370.



On the basis of B:C ratio and net returns, Basmati-370 outperformed Pusa-1509 and Pusa-1121. From the overall appraisal of the study, it can be concluded that the direct seeded

basmati rice with good quality attributes can be raised by providing irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE. It consumed approximately 36 per cent less water than the transplanted rice without any significant loss in yield. Among the varieties, Pusa1509 and Pusa-1121 proved to be most promising varieties for obtaining significant grain yield under direct seeded conditions. However, economically Basmati-370 proved to be better with respect to rupees earned per rupee invested owing to the fact that this variety attracted higher market price as compared to other varieties besides recording significantly lower grain yield.

REFERENCES

93

REFERENCES Ahuja, T. S., Singh, B., Khera, K. L. and Sandhu, B. S. 1984. Response of rice to differential irrigation at growth stages on a sandy loam soil in Punjab. Indian Journal of Ecology, 11: 71-76. Akinbile, C. O. 2011. Crop water use responses of upland rice to differential water distribution under sprinkler irrigation system. Advances in Applied Science Research, 1(1): 133-144. Akinbile, C. O., Sangodoyin, A. Y., Alintayo, L., Nwilene, F. E. and Futakuchi, K. 2007. Growth and yield responses of upland rice (NERICA 2) under different water regimes in Inbandan, Nigeria. Research Journal of Agronomy, 1(2): 71-75. Ali, M. A., Ladha, J. K., Rickman, J. and Lales, J. S. 2006. Comparision of different methods of rice establishment and nitrogen management strategies for lowland rice. Journal of Crop Improvement, 16: 173-89. Anonymous. 2004. Laboratory Manual on Rice Grain Quality Procedure. Directorate of Rice Research, Rajendra nagar, Hyderabad, India, pp. 1-20. Anonymous. 2008. State level training manual. Directorate of Rice Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, India. Anonymous. 2013-14. Rice Knowledge Management Portal. Status Paper on Rice in Jammu and Kashmir. Baghel, J. K., Singh, Y. V., Kumar, D., Abraham, G. and Singh, S. 2013. Effect of varieties and nitrogen management on nematodes infestation and productivity of aerobic rice. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 58(3): 427-429. Balamani, K., Ramulu, V., Reddy, M. D. and Devi, M. U. 2012. Effect of irrigation methods and irrigation schedules on aerobic rice. Journal of Research ANGRAU, 40(4): 84-86.

94

Balasubramanian, R. and Krishnarajan. J. 2000. Influence of Irrigation regimes on growth, water use and water use efficiency of direct seeded rice. Research on Crops, 1: 1-4. Balasubramanian, R. and Krishnarajan. J. 2001. Yield and correlation studies in direct seeded rice as influenced by irrigation levels, Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, 35: 3. Balasubramanian, R., Krishnarajan. J. and Ramesh, S. 2001. Economical use of water for direct seeded rice research for food security and poverty alleviation. Proceeding International Rice Research Conference. Los-Banos, Philippines, 31 March-3 April, 2000. pp. 511-20. Bali, A. S. and Uppal, H. S. 1995. Effect of date on transplanting and water management practices on yield of Basmati rice (Oryza sativa). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 40(2): 186-192. Belder, P., Bouman, B. A. M., Spiertz, J. H. J., Peng, S. and Castaneda, A. R. 2005. Crop performance, nitrogen and water use in flooded and aerobic rice. Plant and Soil, 273: 167-82. Bhattacharjee, P., Singhal, R. S. and Kulkarni, P. R. 2002. Basmati rice: a review. International Journal of Food Sciences and Technology, 37: 1-12. Bhuiyan. 1994. In: Int. Workshop on Constraints, Opportunities and Innovations for Wet Seeded Rice, Bangkok, p.19. Bhushan, L., Ladha, J. K., Gupta, R. K., Singh, S., Tirol-Padre, A., Saharawat, Y. S., Gathala, M. and Pathak, H. 2007. Saving of water and labor in a rice-wheat system with no-tillage and direct seeding technologies. Agronomy Journal, 99: 1288-96. Blabe, G. R., Hartge, K. H., Klute, A. 1986. Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods, American Society of Agronomy, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA, pp. 377-382.

95

Bodman, G. B. 1942. Nomogram for rapid calculation of soil density, water content and total porosity relationship. Journal of American Society of Agronomy, 34: 885903. Borell, A., Garside, A. and Fukai, S. 1997. Improving efficacy of water use irrigated rice in a semi arid tropical environment. Field Crops Research, 52: 231-48. Bouman, B. A. M. 2009. How much water does rice use? Rice Today, 8: 28-29. Bouman, B. A. M. and Tuong, T. P. 2001. Field water management to soil water and increase its productivity in irrigated lowland rice. Agricultural Water Management, 49: 11-30. Bouman, B. A. M., Peng, S., Castaneda, A. R. and Visperas, R. M. 2005. Yield and water use of tropical aerobic rice systems. Agricultural Water Management, 74: 87-105. Brar, A. S., Mahal, S. S., Buttar, G. S. and Deol, J. S. 2012. Production potential and water productivity of basmati rice-wheat sequences as influenced by irrigation termination of basmati rice and irrigation scheduling of succeeding wheat. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 83(1): 31-36. Budhar, M. N. and Tamilselvan, N. 2002. Effect of stand-establishment techniques on yield and economics of lowland irrigated rice (Oryza sativa). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 51: 123-27. Buiyan, S. I., Sattar, M. A. and Tabbal, D. F. 1995. Wet seeded rice: water use efficiency and productivity and constraints to wider adoption. In Moody K (ed) Constraints, Opportunities and innovations for wet seeded rice, IRRI, Los Banos, Phillipines pp: 143-55. Carrigr, S. and Vallee, D. 2007. Rice Today, 6(2): 10-13. Chander, S. and Pandey, J. 1997. Nutrient removal by scented basmati rice (Oryza sativa) and associated weeds as affected by nitrogen and herbicides under different rice cultures. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 42: 256-60.

96

Chander, S., Pandey, J., Sharma, K. C. and Kumar, P. 2005. Yield and quality of scented rice Pusa Basmati-1 (Oryza sativa L.) as influenced by nitrogen and herbicides under varying rice cultures. Annals of Agricultural Research, 26: 113-17. Choudhary, B. U. and Singh, A. K. 2007. Performance of rice (Oryza sativa) planted on raised bed under different soil moisture tension. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 52: 305-10. Cochran, W. G. and Cox, G. M. 1963. Experimental Designs. Asia Publishing House, Bombay, India. Das, J. C., Barkakoty, P. K. and Sarmah, N. N. 2001. Performance of direct seeded rice under different irrigation regimes and sowing methods. Journal of Agricultural Science Society of N-E India, 14: 126-28. Das, J. C., Sarmah, N. N., Barkakoty, P. K. and Choudhury, A. K. 2000. Effect of irrigation regimes on transplanted summer (Ahu) rice in Assam. Annals of Agricultural Research, 21: 481-84. Dhar, R., Gupta, N. K. and Samanta, A. 2008. Effect of irrigation scheduling on the performance of kharif rice grown under different establishment methods. Journal of Research, SKUAST-J, 7(2): 277-280. Dingkuhn, M., Penning de Vries, F. W. T., De Datta, S. K. and Van Laar, H. H. 1991a. Concepts for a new plant type for direct seeded flooded tropical rice. In “Direct Seeded Flooded Rice in the Tropics”, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Los Banos, Philippines pp. 17-38. Dingkuhn, M., Schnier, H. F., De Datta, S. K., Dorffing, K. and Javellana, C. 1991b. Relationships between ripening-phase productivity and crop duration, canopy photosynthesis and senescence in transplanted and direct-seeded lowland rice. Field Crops Research, 26: 327-345. Economic Survey. 2014-2015. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Jammu and Kashmir.

97

Edwin, L. and Anal, P. S. M. 2008. Effect of irrigation regimes and nitrogen management practices on uptake of nutrients and grain yield in hybrid rice (Oryza sativa L.). Environmental Ecology, 26: 1146-48. F. A. O., Rice Market Monitor. April 2015, Volume XVIII- Issue No. 1. For peace and prosperity. Proceeding of 26th International Rice Research Conference, pp.89100. Fageria, N. K., Morais, O. P. D. and Santos, A. B. D. 2010. Nitrogen use efficiency in upland rice genotypes. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 33: 1696-1711. Farooq, M., Basra, S. M. A. and Wahid, A. 2006a. Priming of field-sown rice seed enhances germination, seedling establishment, allometry and yield. Plant Growth Regulators, 49: 285-94. Farooq, M., Basra, S. M. A., Tabassum, R. and Afzal, I. 2006b. Enhancing the performance of direct seeded rice by seed priming. Pl Production Sciences, 9: 446-56. Farooq, M., Kadambot, H. M., Siddique, Rehman, H., Aziz, T., Dong-jin Lee and Wahid, A. 2011. Rice direct seeding: Experience challenges and opportunities. Soil Tillage Research, 111: 87-98. Fofana, M., Cherif, M., Kone, B., Futakuchi, K. and Audebert, A. 2010. Effect of water deficit at grain repining stage on grain quality. Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology and Sustainable Development, 2: 100-07. Gangaiah, B. and Prasad, R. 1999. Response of scented rice (Oryza sativa) to fertilizers. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 44: 294. Gangwar, K. S., Tomar, O. K. and Pandey, D. K. 2008. Productivity and economics of transplanted and direct-seeded rice (Oryza sativa) based cropping systems in Indo-Gangetic plains. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, 78: 655-58. Ghasal, P. C., Shivay, Y. S. and Pooniya, V. 2015. Response of basmati rice (Oryza sativa) varieties to zinc fertilization. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 60(3): 403-409.

98

Ghosh, A. and Singh, O. N. 2010. Determination of threshold regime of soil moisture tension for scheduling irrigation in tropical aerobic rice for optimum crop and water productivity. Explorer Agriculture, 46(4): 489-499. Gill, M. S. and Singh, M. P. 2008. Grain yield and water productivity of direct seeded basmati rice (Oryza sativa) under various seed rates, weed control and irrigation schedules. Environmental Ecology, 26: 594-97. Gill, M. S., Kumar, A. and Kumar, P. 2006a. Growth and yield of rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars under various methods and times of sowing. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 51: 123-27. Gill, M. S., Kumar, P. and Kumar, A. 2006b. Growth and yield of direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.) as influenced by seedling techniques and seed rate under irrigated conditions. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 51: 283-87. Goel, A. C. and Verma, K. C. 2000. Comparative study of direct seeding and transplanting of rice. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, 34: 194-96. Gupta, R. and Seth, A. 2007. A review of resource conserving technologies for suitable management of the rice-wheat cropping systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP). Crop Protection, 26: 436-47. Gupta, R. K., Ladha, J. K., Singh, S., Singh, R. J., Jat, M. L., Saharawat, Y., Singh, V. P., Singh, S. S., Sah, G., Gill, M. S., Alam, M., Mujeeb, H., Singh, U. P., Mann, R., Pathak, H., Singh, B. S., Bhattacharya, P. and Malik, R. K. 2006. Production technology for direct seeded rice. In: Rice Wheat Consortium Technical Bulletin 8, New Delhi, India. Gururani, J. 1997. Performance of Semi Dwarf Aromatic Rice Varieties Under Different Dates of Transplanting. M.Sc. Thesis, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttrakhand, India. Hira, G. S. 2009. Water management in northern states and the food security of India. Journal of Crop Improvement, 23: 136-157.

99

Huang, D. F., Xi, L. L., Wang, Z. Q., Liu, L. J. and Yang, J. C. 2008. Effects of irrigation regimes during grain filling on grain quality and the concentration and distribution of cadmium in different organs of rice. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 34: 456-64. Abstr in CAB abstracts, AN:20083092610. Humphreys, E., Kukal, S. S., Christen, E. W., Hira, G. S., Balwinder-Singh, SudhirYadav, Sharma, R. K. 2010. Halting the ground water decline in north-west IndiaWhich crop technologies will be winners? Advances in Agronomy, 109: 155-217. Husain, M. F., Shamim, M. and Pal, S. 2008. Influence of irrigation schedule on yield and water use efficiency of rice in kharif season. International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 4(1): 332-334. Islam, M. T. 1999. Plant water relation studies in diverse rice cultivars under Bangladesh climatic conditions. Ph.D. dissertation. Institute of Agronomy and University Agriculture Science, Vienna. Islam, M. T., Salam, M. A. and Kauser, M. 1994. Effect of soil water stress at different growth stages of rice on yield components and yield. Progressive Agriculture, 5: 151-56. Ismaila, U., Kolo, M. G. M. and Gbanguba, A. U. 2011. Effect of varieties and weeding regimes and performance of two aerobic rice varieties. South Asian Journal of Experimental Biology, 1(3): 121‐130. Jackson, M. L. 1973. Soil chemical analysis. pp. 165-167. Asia publication house, Bombay. Jadhav, A. S. and Dahiphale. V. V. 2005. Effects of irrigation and nitrogen on yield and nitrogen uptake of basmati rice in vertisols. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural University, 30: 368-69. Jadhav, A. S. Dhoble, M. V. and Chavan, D. A. 2003. Effect of irrigation and nitrogen on yield and quality of basmati rice. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural University, 28: 187-88.

100

Jat, M. L., Gathala, M. K., Ladha, J. K., Saharawat, Y. S., Jat, A. S., Kumar, V., Sharma, A. S. and Gupta, R. K. 2009. Evaluation of precision land leveling and double zero-till systems in the rice-wheat rotation: Water use, productivity, profitability and soil physical properties. Soil Tillage Research, 105: 112-21. Juliano, B. O. 1971. A simplified assay for milled rice amylose. Cereal Science Today, 16: 334-341. Kaur, J. and Mahal, S. S. 2014. Effect of irrigation schedules and nitrogen levels on direct seeded scented basmati rice. Journal of Research Punjab Agricultural University, 51(2): 119-123. Keen, B. and Raczkowski, H. J. 1921. Relationship between clay content and certain physical properties of the soil. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 11: 441-449. Kukal, S. S., Hira, G. S. and Sandhu, A. S. 2005. Soil matric potential based irrigation scheduling to rice (Oryza sativa L.). Irrigation Sciences, 23: 153-59. Kukal, S. S., Humphreys, E., Yadav, S. and Singh, Y. 2010. Irrigation water productivity of rice grown with resource conservation technologies. 19th World Congress of Soil science, Soil Solution for a Changing World. 1-6 August 2010, Brisbane, Australia. Published on DVD. Kumar, S., Dwivedi, S. K., Singh, S. S. and Sundaram, P. K. 2015. Aerobic rice: Growing rice successfully in water-shortage areas of eastern India. Indian Farming, 64(10): 10-12: 15. Kumar, V. and Ladha, J. K. 2011. Direct seeding of rice: recent developments and future research needs. Advances in Agronomy, 111: 297-413. Lin, S., Tao, H., Dittert, K., Xu, Y., Fan, X., Shen, Q. and Sattelmacher, B. 2003. Saving water with the ground cover rice production system in China. Technological and institutional innovations for sustainable rural development. In: Conference on International Agricultural Research for Development, Deustscher Tropentag, October 8-10, 2003, Gottingen.

101

Madley, J. C. and Wilson, L. T. 2008. The use of subsurface drip irrigation in rice. Paper presented at 32nd Rice Technical Working Group Meeting, Westin San Diego 400 West Broadway San Diego, CA February, 18-21. Mahajan, G., Timsina, J., Jhanji, S., Sekhon, N. K. and Singh, K. 2012. Cultivar response, dry matter portioning and nitrogen use efficiency in direct seeded rice in northwest India. Journal of Crop Improvement, 26: 767-790. Mallareddy, M. and Padmaja, B. 2013. Response of rice varieties to nitrogen under aerobic and flooded conditions. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 58(4): 500-505. Mann, R. A. and Ashraf, M. 2004. Improvement of Basmati and its production practices in Pakistan. In: Duffy et al. (eds) Specially rices of the world: breeding, production and marketing. Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations, Rome, Italy. pp 134-140. Matsumoto, S., Tsuboi, T., Asea, G., Maruyama, A., Kikuchi, M., Takagaki, M. 2014. Water responses of upland rice varieties adopted in sub-sahara Africa : A Water application experiment. Journal of Rice Research, 2: 121. Matsuo, N. and Mochizuki, T. 2009. Growth and yield of six rice cultivars under three water saving cultivations. Plant Production Science, 12: 514-25. Molden, D. 1997. Accounting for water use and productivity. SWIM Paper No. 1 International Irrigation Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Munoz-Carpena, R., Shukla, S. and Morgan, K. 2006. Field devices for monitoring soil water content. Regional Extension Bulletin no. SR-IWM-2. The Irrigation Water Management Team of the Southern Regional Water Program. USDA-CSREES. Available at: http:// www. Bea.ncsu.edu/topic/go_irrigation/docs/Field-devicesmonitoring-.pdf Murthy, K. V. R., Reddy, D. S. and Prabhakarareddy, G. 2012. Response of rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties to graded levels of nitrogen under aerobic culture. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 57(4): 367-372.

102

Narayansamy, R., Palaniappan, S. and Veerabadran, V. 1993. Effect of seeding environment on irrigation requirement and yield of Kurvai rice in double cropping lowlands in Thanjavar. Madras Journal of Agriculture, 80: 639-40. Narolia, R. S., Singh, P., Prakash, C. and Meena, H. 2014. Effect of irrigation schedule and weed-management practices on productivity and profitability of direct-seeded rice (Oryza sativa) in South-eastern Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 59(3): 398- 403. Neelima, S. and Kumar, K. S. 2011. Performance of different rice cultivars under aerobic conditions. Plant Resource Management, 2(2): 215-217. Nichiporovich, A. A. 1967. Aims of research on photosynthesis of plants as a factor of soil productivity. In: Nichiporovich, A. A. (Ed.). Photosynthesis of productive system. Israel Programme Science Trans Jerusalem. pp.3-36. Olsen, S. R., Cole, C. V., Watanable, F. S. and Dean, L. A. 1954. Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extracting with sodium bicarbonate. United State Department of Agriculture Circulation, pp. 939. Pal, V., Singh, M. M., Kumar, R. and Verma, S. S. 2013. Response of irrigation scheduling and integrated nutrition on scented rice. Bioinfolet, 10(4C): 15281530. Pandey, S. and Velasco, L. 2002. Economics of direct seeding in Asia: Patterns of adoption and research priorities. In: Pandey S, Mortimer M, Wade L, Tuong, T P, Lopez K and Hardy B (ed.). Direct Seeding: Research Strategies and opportunities, Proceedings of International workshop on direct seeding in Asian rice systems, Jan. 25-28, 2000 held at Bangkok, Thailand, IRRI, Los Banos, Philippines, pp 3-14.

103

Pandey, S. and Velasco, L. 2005. Trends in crop establishment methods in Asia and research issues. In “Rice Is Life: Scientific Perspectives for the 21st Century” (K. Toriyama, K. L. Heong, and B. Hardy, Eds.), International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, Philippines and Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences, Tsukuba, Japan, pp. 178–181. Parashavimurthy, S., Prashad, R., Lakshmi, J. and Ramachandra, C. 2012. Influence of varieties and fertilizer levels on growth, seed yield and quality of rice under aerobic conditions. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 46(3): 602-609. Parihar, S. S. 2004a. Influence of nitrogen and irrigation schedule on yield, water use and economics of rice in summer season. Annual Plant Soil Research, 6(1): 29-31. Parihar, S. S. 2004b. Effect of crop-establishment method, tillage, irrigation and nitrogen on production potential of rice (Oryza sativa)-wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 49: 1-5. Parshall, R. L. 1950. Measuring water in irrigation channels with Parshall flumes and small wiers. Soil Conservation Serv. US Department of Agricultural Circular, pp. 843. Patel, D. P., Das, A., Munda, G. C., Ghosh, P. K., Bordoloi, J. S. and Kumar, M. 2010. Evaluation of yield and physiological attributes of high yielding rice varieties under aerobic and flood irrigation management practices in mid-hills ecosystem. Agricultural Water Management, doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2010.02.018. Patil, S. G., Sivaprasad, B., Aladakakatti, Y. R., Siddalinga, D., Gupta, R. and Ladha, J. K. 2005. Agronomic Practices and Production Economics of Direct-Seeded Rice in Karnataka, India. Rice –Wheat Consortium for the Indo-Gangetic Plains, Paper Series 18. pp 36, New Delhi, India. Piper, C. S. 1966. Soil and Plant Analysis, Hans Publishers, Bombay.

104

Pradhan, A., Thakur, A. and Sonboir, H. L. 2014. Response of rice varieties to different levels of nitrogwn under rainfed aerobic ecosystem. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 59(1): 76-79. Qureshi, A. S., Masih, I. and Turral, H. 2006. Comparing land and water productivities of transplanted and direct dry seeded rice for Pakistani Punjab. Zeitschrift-furBewasserungswirtschaft. 41: 47-60. Radford, P. J. 1967. Growth analysis formulae their use and abuse. Crop Science, 3: 171176. Rahman, M. T., Islam, M. T. and Islam, M. O. 2002. Effect of water stress at different growth stages on yield and yield contributing characters of transplanted aman rice. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 5: 169-172. Ramakrishna, Y., Singh, S. and Parihar, S. S. 2007. Influence of irrigation regime and nitrogen management on productivity, nitrogen uptake and water use by rice (Oryza sativa L.). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 52: 102-06. Ramanjaneyulu, A. V., Gourishankar, V., Neelima, T. L and Shashibhushan, D. 2014. Genetic analysis of rice genotypes under aerobic conditions on alfisols. SABRAO Journal of Breeding and Genetics, 46(1): 99-111. Reddy, M. A., Shankhdhar, D., Shankhdar, S. C. and Mani, S. C. 2010. Effect of aerobic cultivation on yield, biochemical and physiological characters of selected rice genotypes. Oryza, 47(1): 22-28. Reddy, M. M., Padmaja, B., Veeranna, G. and Reddy, D.V.V. 2012. Evaluation of popular kharif rice varieties under aerobic conditions and their response to nitrogen dose. Journal of Research ANGRAU, 40(4): 14-19. Reddy, M. M., Padmaja, B., Veeranna, G., and Reddy D. V. V. 2013. Response of aerobic rice to irrigation scheduling and nitrogen doses under drip irrigation. Research Notes Journal of Research ANGRAU, 41(2): 144-148.

105

Reinke, R. F., Lewin, L.G. and Williams R. L. 1994. Effect of sowing time and nitrogen on rice cultivars of differing growth duration in New South Wales. 1. Yield and yield components. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 34: 933-938. Reinke, R. F., Snell, P. and Fitzgerald, M. 2004. Rice development and improvement. Farmer‟s Newsletter Large Area No. 165: 43-47. Rezaei, M., Vahed, H. S., Amiri, E., Motamed, M. K. and Azarpore, E. 2009. The effects of irrigation and nitrogen management on yield and water productivity of rice. World Applied Science Journal, 7: 203-10. Richards, L. S. and Weaver, L. R. 1943. Fifteen atmospheric pressure as related to the permanent wilting percentage. Soil Science, 56: 331-39. Saharawat, Y. S., Gathala, M., Ladha, J. K., Malik, R. K., Singh, S., Jat, M. L., Gupta, R. K., Pathak, H. and Singh, K. 2009. Evaluation and promotion of integrated crop and resource management in the rice-wheat system in northwest India. In: Ladha, J. K., Singh, Y., Erenstein, O. and Hardy, B. (eds) Integrated Crop and Resource Management in the Rice-Wheat System in South Asia. IRRI, Los Banos, Philippines, pp. 133-150. Saharawat, Y. S., Singh, B., Malik, R. K., Ladha, J. K., Gathala, M., Jat, M. L. and Kumar, V. 2010. Evaluation of alternative tillage and crop establishment methods in a rice-wheat rotation in North Western IGP. Field Crops Research, 116: 26067. Sandhu, S. S. and Mahal, S. S. 2014. Performance of rice under different planting methods, nitrogen levels and irrigation schedules. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 59(3): 392-397. Sanjay, M. T., Prabhakaran Shetty, T. K. and Najappa, H. V. 2006a. Enhancing productivity of rice (Oryza sativa) under different crop establishment methods through weed management practices. Crop Research, 31: 192-97.

106

Sanjay, M. T., Prabhakaran Shetty, T. K. and Najappa, H. V. 2006b. Soil test crop response approach in rice (Oryza sativa) under different methods of crop establishment. Crop Research, 31: 346-49. Sarkar, R. K., Sanjukta, D. and Das, S. 2003. Yield of rainfed lowland rice with medium water depth under anaerobic direct seeding and transplanting. Tropical Science, 43: 192-98. Schnier, H. F., Dingkuhn, M., De Datta, S. K., Mengel, K. and Faronilo, J. E. 1990. Nitrogen fertilization of direct seeded flooded vs transplanted rice: I Nitrogen uptake, photosynthesis, growth and yield. Crop Science, 30: 1276-84. Sharma, A. R. and Ghosh, A. 1999. Sub-mergence tolerance and yield performance of lowland rice as affected by agronomic practices in eastern India. Field Crops Research, 63: 187-98. Sharma, P. K., Bhushan, L., Ladha, J. K., Naresh, R. K., Gupta, R. K., Balasubramanian, B. V. and Bouman, B. A. M. 2002. Crop-water relations in rice-wheat cropping under different tillage systems and water management practices in a marginally sodic medium textured soil. In: Bouman, B. A. M., Hengsdijk, H., Hardy, B., Bihdraban, B., Toung, T. P. and Ladha, J. K. (eds) Proceeding of the International Workshop on Water-wise Rice Production, IRRI, Los Banos, Phillipines, pp: 223-35. Sharma, P. K., Ladha, J. K. and Bhushan, L. 2003. Soil physical effects of puddling in rice-wheat cropping systems. In “Improving the Productivity and Sustainability of Rice-Wheat Systems: Issues and Impacts” (J. K. Ladha, J. E. Hill, J. M. Duxbury, R. K. Gupta, and R. J. Buresh, Eds.), ASA, CSSA, SSSA, Madison, WI, ASA Special Publication 65, pp. 97–113. Sharma, P., Abrol, V. and Kumar, R. 2012. Effect of water regimes and nitrogen levels on the rice crop performance and nitrogen uptake. Indian Journal of Soil Conservation, 40(2): 122-128.

107

Sharma, R. S., Thakur, C. L. and Agrawal, K. K. 1995. Comparison of transplanted and direct seeded rice for productivity, profitability and physical properties of soil. Oryza, 32: 183-87. Shekara, B. G., Bandi, A. G., Shreedhala, D., Shranappa and Krishnamurthy, N. 2011. Effect of irrigation schedules on growth and yield of aerobic rice under varied levels of farm yard manure. Oryza, 48(4): 324-328. Shekara, B. G., Sharnappa and Krishnamurthy, N. 2010. Effect of irrigation schedules on growth and yield of aerobic rice (Oryza sativa L.) under varied levels of farmyard manure in Cauvery command area. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 55: 35-39. Singh, A. K., Choudhury, B. U. and Bouman, B. A. M. 2002a. Effects of rice establishment methods on crop performance, water use and mineral nitrogen. In: Bouman, B. A. M., Hengsdijk, H., Hardy, B., Bihdraban, B., Toung, T. P. and Ladha, J. K. (eds) Proceeding of the International Workshop on Water-wise Rice Production, IRRI, Los Banos, Phillipines, pp: 237-246. Singh, A. S., Pandey, N., Ahmad, A. and Verma, N. 2013. Nutrient uptake and economics of rice under aerobic condition in CPE based irrigation schedules and nutrient level in Raipur, India. JNKVV Research Journal, 47(1): 42-44. Singh, B. N., Rao, K. S. and Pande, K. 2002b. Yield potential of irrigated rice varieties under direct seeded wetland condition at higher N level. CRRI Annual Report 2001-2002: Irrigated Rice Ecosystem pp: 42. Singh, G. and Singh, O. P. 1993. Effects of method of seeding and levels of nitrogen on yield and yield attributes of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under flood-affected conditions. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 38: 551-54. Singh, H. S., Sidhu, M. S. and Sardana, V. 2005a. Effect of nitrogen and lodging management on growth and yield of basmati rice varieties. Haryana Journal of Agronomy, 21: 78-79.

108

Singh, S. K., Bharadwaj, V., Thakur, T. C., Pachauri, S. P., Singh, P. P. and Mishra, A. K. 2009. Influence of crop establishment methods on methane emission from rice fields. Current Science, 97: 84-89. Singh, S. P., Orr, A., Singh, S. and Singh G. 2008. The economics of direct seeded rice in eastern India. Direct seeding of rice and weed management in the irrigated ricewheat cropping system of the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute, and Pantnagar (India): Directorate of Experiment Station, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, pp.272. Singh, S. P., Rani, N. S., Krishnaveni, B. and Subbaiah, S. V. 2005b. Effects of date of planting and nitrogen levels on yield and grain quality of scented rice varieties. Oryza, 42: 78-80. Sowmyalatha, B. S., Ramachandra, C., Shivakumar, N. and Manjunatha, K. B. 2012. Effect of methods of cultivation and fertility levels on growth and yield of rice hybrids. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 46(1): 171-173. Stoop, W., Uphoff, N. and Kassam, A. 2002. A review of agricultural research issues raised by the system of rice intensification (SRI) from Madagascar: opportunities for improving farming systems for resource-poor farmers. Agricultural Systems, 71: 249-274. Subbiah, B. V. and Asija, G. L. 1956. A rapid procedure for the estimation of available nitrogen in soil. Current Science, 25: 259-260. Subramanian, E., Martin, G. J., Suburayalu, E. and Mohan, R. 2008. Aerobic Rice: Water Saving Rice Production Technology. Agricultural Water management, 49(6): 239-243. Sudhir-Yadav, S., Gill, G., Humphreys, E., Kukal, S. S. and Walia, U. S. 2011a. Effect of water management on dry direct seeded rice and puddled transplanted rice Part 1: Crop perfrormence. Field Crops Research, 120: 112-22.

109

Sudhir-Yadav, S., Gill, G., Humphreys, E., Kukal, S. S. and Walia, U. S. 2011b. Effect of water management on dry direct seeded rice and puddled transplanted rice Part 2: Water balance and water productivity. Field Crops Research, 120: 123-32. Tabbal, D. F., Bouman, B. A. M., Bhuiyan, S. I., Sibayan, E. B. and Sattar, M. A. 2002. On-farm strategies for reducing water input in irrigated rice: Case studies in the Philippines. Agricultural Water Management, 56: 93-112. Tripathi, R. S., Raju, R. and Thimmappa, K. 2014. Economics of direct seeded and transplanted methods of rice production in Haryana. Oryza, 51(1): 70-73. Tuong, T. P. 1999. Productive water use in rice production: Opportunities and limitations. Journal of Crop Production, 2: 241-64. Venuprasad, R., Lafitte, H. R. and Atlin, G. N. 2007. Response to direct selection for grain yield under drought stress in rice. Crop Sciences, 47(1): 285-293. Walkley, A. and Black, I. A. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chronic acid titration method. Soil Science, 37: 29-38 Wang, H. Q., Bouman, B. A. M., Zhao, D. L., Wang, C. and Moya, P. F. 2002. Aerobic rice in northern China: opportunities and challenges. In: Bouman, B. A. M., Heengsdijk, H., Hardy, B., Bindraban, P. S., Tuong, T. P. and Ladha, J. K. (Eds.). Proc of the International Workshop on water wise rice production, 8-11 April 2002, IRRI, Los Banos, Phillipines, pp. 143-54. Williams, R. L., Farrell, T., Hope, M. A., Reinke, R. and Snell, P. 1999. Short duration rice: implications for water use efficiency in the New South Wales Rice Industry. In „Rice Water Use Effeciency Workshop‟ (Ed Humphreys E): 41-44. Proceedings of a workshop at Griffith, 12 March 1999. (Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Rice Production, Yanco, Australia). Ya-jie, Z., Jing-jing, H., Ya-chao, L., Ying-ying, C. and Jian-chang, Y. 2012. Effect of phosphorus on grain quality of upland and paddy rice under different cultivation. Rice Science, 19(2): 135-142.

110

Zubaer, M. A., Chowdhury, A. K. M. M. B., Islam, M. Z., Ahmad, T. and Hasan, M. A. 2007. Effects of water stress on growth and yield attributes of aman rice genotypes. International Journal of Sustainable Crop Production, 2: 25-30.

APPENDICES

111

Appendix-I Weekly meteorological data from June to November 2015 Standard Date and meteorological month weeks 26 25 June -1 July

Max. Temp. (0C) 36.7

Min. temp (0C) 23.6

R.H. % R.H.% Total (morning) (Evening) Rainfall (mm) 67 48 89.8

27

2-8 July

36.5

26.0

75

55

31.8

28

9-15 July

33.5

24.0

85

64

146.9

29

16-22 July

33.5

26.4

83

71

102.6

30

23-29 July

34.5

24.9

84

62

126.2

31

30 July -5 Aug

33.4

25.5

82

67

15.8

32

6-12 Aug

32.5

25.0

91

73

101.6

33

13-19 Aug

34.5

25.9

78

63

19.0

34

20-26 Aug

34.0

27.4

84

69

38.4

35

27 Aug -2 Sept

35.2

24.9

75

55

0

36

3-9 Sept

34.6

22.6

78

53

28.8

37

10-16 Sept

35.1

23.6

80

53

0

38

17-23 Sept

32.0

21.2

86

61

107.6

39

24-30 Sept

32.0

19.7

87

56

0

40

1-7 Oct

30.0

18.4

84

48

0

41

8-14 Oct

31.9

20.6

85

51

0

42

15-21 Oct

30.2

16.7

85

44

19.0

43

22-28 Oct

27.6

14.2

83

68

14.4

44

29 Oct-4 Nov

27.0

13.8

90

81

3.0

45

5-11 Nov

25.2

14.6

93

91

0.8

46

12- 18 Nov

26.7

10.6

92

47

0

Source: Agromet observatory, Division of Agronomy, SKUAST-J, Chatha

112

Appendix-II Fixed cost of cultivation (ì ha-1) Quantity S. Input -1 No. ha 1. Land preparation Tractor (1 deep ploughing, 12 2 harrowing & 1 planking) Layout 10 2. Fertilizer application 4 3. Weed control Pendimethalin 3.33 Bispyribac sodium 300 4. Application of herbicides 6 5. Harvesting of crop and 25 threshing 6. Miscellaneous (carriage, rent of land) 7. Total fixed cost

Unit

Rate (ì unit-1)

Total cost (ì ha-1)

Hour

350

4200

Man days Man days

186 186

1860 744

L Ml Man days

300 6 186

1000 1800 1116

Man days

186

4650 1000 16370

Selling of price produce Variety Basmati-370 Pusa-1121 Pusa-1509

Grain (ì per t) 23000 14500 14000

Straw (ì per t) 1500 1000 1000

113

Appendix-III Treatment wise variable cost of cultivation (ì ha-1) Particulars

Treatment combinations

I1V1

Quantity

Unit

Rate (ì unit-1)

Seed Transplanting Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 22 48.02 43.47 16.67 18

Kg Man day Kg Kg Kg Man day

37.5 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Transplanting Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 22 61.44 65.21 16.67 18

Kg Man day Kg Kg Kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Transplanting Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 22 139.89 86.96 33.34 18

Kg Man day Kg Kg Kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Total cost (ì ha-1)

Total

I1V2

Total

I1V3

I2V2

Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

12 48.02 43.47 16.67 12

Man day Kg Kg kg Man day

Total 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 61.44 65.21 16.67 12

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 139.89 86.96 33.34 12

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 48.02 43.47 16.67 12

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

37.5 186 5.5 24 17 186

Total 7554.78

Total

I2V3

Total

I3V1

Total

1500 4092 264.11 1043.28 283.39 3348 10530.78 2600 4092 337.92 1565.04 283.39 3348 12226.35 2600 4092 769.40 2087.04 566.78 3348 13463.22 1500 2232 264.11 1043.28 283.39 2232 2600 2232 337.92 1565.04 283.39 2232 9250.35 2600 2232 769.40 2087.04 566.78 2232 10487.22 1500 2232 264.11 1043.28 283.39 2232 7554.78

114

I3V2

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 61.44 65.21 16.67 12

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 139.89 86.96 33.34 12

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 48.02 43.47 16.67 10

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

37.5 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 61.44 65.21 16.67 10

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 139.89 86.96 33.34 10

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 48.02 43.47 16.67 10

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

37.5 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 61.44 65.21 16.67 10

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Seed Sowing Urea DAP MOP Irrigation

40 12 139.89 86.96 33.34 10

kg Man day kg kg kg Man day

65 186 5.5 24 17 186

Total

I3V3

Total

I4V1

Total

I4V2

Total

I4V3

Total

I5V1

Total

I5V2

Total

I5V3

Total

2600 2232 337.92 1565.04 283.39 2232 9250.35 2600 2232 769.40 2087.04 566.78 2232 10487.22 1500 2232 264.11 1043.28 283.39 1860 7182.78 2600 2232 337.92 1565.04 283.39 1860 8878.35 2600 2232 769.40 2087.04 566.78 1860 10115.22 1500 2232 264.11 1043.28 283.39 1860 7182.78 2600 2232 337.92 1565.04 283.39 1860 8878.35 2600 2232 769.40 2087.04 566.78 1860 10115.22

115

Appendix-IV Treatment wise cost of cultivation (ì ha-1) Treatment Fixed cost Variable cost Total cost combinations (ì ha-1) (ì ha-1) (ì ha-1) I1V1

16370

10530.78

26900.78

I1V2

16370

12226.35

28596.35

I1V3

16370

13463.22

29833.22

I2V1

16370

7554.78

23924.78

I2V2

16370

9250.35

25620.35

I2V3

16370

10487.22

26857.22

I3V1

16370

7554.78

23924.78

I3V2

16370

9250.35

25620.35

I3V3

16370

10487.22

26857.22

I4V1

16370

7182.78

23552.78

I4V2

16370

8878.35

25248.35

I4V3

16370

10115.22

26485.22

I5V1

16370

7182.78

23552.78

I5V2

16370

8878.35

25248.35

I5V3

16370

10115.22

26485.22

116

Appendix-IV Economics of different combinations

I1V1

Cost of Cultivation (ì ha-1) 26901

I1V2

28596

56234

27638

0.97

I1V3

29833

56891

27058

0.91

I2V1

23925

67922

43997

1.84

I2V2

25620

47639

22019

0.86

I2V3

26857

49959

23102

0.86

I3V1

23925

54858

30933

1.29

I3V2

25620

39853

14232

0.56

I3V3

26857

42541

15683

0.58

I4V1

23553

61391

37839

1.61

I4V2

25248

44086

18837

0.75

I4V3

26485

48451

21966

0.83

I5V1

23553

73055

49502

2.10

I5V2

25248

52965

27717

1.10

I5V3

26485

56022

29537

1.12

Treatment combinations

Gross Returns (ì ha-1)

Net Returns (ì ha-1)

B:C ratio

78595

51694

1.92

117

Appendix-V Effect of irrigation schedules and varieties on N, P and K concentration in grain and straw of basmati rice Treatments Irrigation Schedules I1 : Control (Normal transplanting with recommended water management practice) I2 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.3 bar suction at 15cm depth I3 : Irrigation/Saturation at 0.4 bar suction at 15cm depth I4 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 125 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) I5 : Irrigation at 2 days interval through sprinkler at 150 % PE (Cumulative value of PE for 2 days) SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

Nitrogen (%) Grain Straw

Phosphorus (%) Potash (%) Grain Straw Grain Straw

1.25 1.07 0.92

0.48 0.36 0.21

0.31 0.22 0.14

0.22 0.17 0.13

0.54 0.46 0.35

2.03 1.94 1.82

1.02

0.31

0.20

0.16

0.42

1.91

1.19

0.45

0.28

0.20

0.52

2.00

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.01

0.02

0.02

0.09

0.07

0.05

0.02

0.05

0.05

1.01 1.11 1.15 0.02 0.07

0.29 0.39 0.41 0.01 0.03

0.18 0.25 0.26 0.01 0.04

0.14 0.18 0.20 0.00 0.02

0.43 0.46 0.48 0.01 0.02

1.89 1.92 2.01 0.02 0.08

Varieties V1: Basmati-370 V2: Pusa-1121 V3: Pusa-1509 SEm (±) LSD (p=0.05)

VITA

VITA Name

:

Kartikeya Choudhary

Father’s name

:

Sh. Phoola Ram Choudhary

Mother’s name

:

Smt. Manju Devi

Date of Birth

:

28-11-1992

Nationality

:

Indian

Address

:

Plot No.: 18-A, Keshav Nager-Ist, Murlipura Scheeme, Distt: Jaipur, Rajasthan

Mobile No.

:

9928123930

E-mail

:

[email protected]

Bachelor’s degree

:

B. Sc. (Hons.) Agri. & MBA in Agribusiness

University

:

Mahatma Jyoti Rao Phoole University,

Educational Qualification

Jaipur Year of passing of UG

:

2014

OGPA in Under Graduation

:

6.35/10

Master’s Degree

:

Master of Science in Agriculture (Agronomy)

University

:

Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Jammu

Year of passing of PG

:

2016

OGPA in Post Graduation

:

7.95/10