Effects of impulse drip irrigation systems on physiology of aerobic rice

Parthasarathi, T.; Vanitha, K.; Mohandass, S.; Senthilvel, S.; Vered, Eli

doi:10.1007/s40502-014-0131-6

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These were significantly increased under SDI and DI methods, irrespective of emitter discharge rates, over the conventional method. These results were consistent with the findings of previous studies, which found that the drip irrigation had improved the production potential of rice under non-flooded irrigation ( He et al , 2013 and Parthasarathi et al , 2015 ). The total dry mass of rice did not differ significantly between drip irrigation and conventional irrigation up to 30 DAS, although after anthesis (70 DAS), it significantly improved under SDI + 1.0 lph DRE practice ( Figure 3a ).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

“…The total dry mass of rice did not differ significantly between drip irrigation and conventional irrigation up to 30 DAS, although after anthesis (70 DAS), it significantly improved under SDI + 1.0 lph DRE practice ( Figure 3a ). This was mainly related to enhanced dry mass accumulation after anthesis, which explained by Parthasarathi et al (2015) and Parthasarathi et al (2018) , who reported drip irrigation increased the plant height and leaf photosynthetic rates of rice during post-anthesis. TDMA showed a moderate change during the early growth and vegetative phase of rice under SDI and DI methods ( Figure 3b ), which reasoned for the lesser emission of methane over conventional.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mitigation of methane gas emission in rice by drip irrigation

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Rice farming faces major challenges, including water limitation, drought and climate change in the current scenario of agriculture. Among the innovative water-saving techniques, drip irrigation is a forerunner, with maximized water-saving potential, increased grain yield and methane mitigation. Methods: A field experiment was conducted comprising four different drip irrigation practices: (i) sub-surface drip irrigation (SDI) with 1.0 litre per hour (lph) discharge rate emitters (DRE) (SDI+1.0 lph DRE) (ii) SDI+0.6 lph DRE, (iii) surface drip irrigation (DI) with 1.0 lph discharge rate emitters (DI+1.0 lph DRE), (iv) DI+0.6 lph DRE and were compared with (v) a conventional flood aerobic irrigation (considered conventional). Results: The estimated grain yield of rice was found to be 23.5%, 20.3%, and 15.1% higher under SDI+1.0 lph DRE, SDI+0.6 lph DRE and DI+1.0 lph DRE practices, respectively, than the conventional method. A water saving of 23.3% was also observed for all drip practices compared with conventional practices. Seasonal methane emission flux declined 78.0% in the drip methods over the conventional irrigation: better mitigation than previously reported values (alternate wetting and drying (47.5%) and system of rice intensification (29.0%) practices). Continuous soil aeration and enhanced soil methanotrophs (P<0.05) limit the peak methane emission in rice during the flowering phase in drip irrigation, which is reflected in the methane emission flux values. Consequently, the equivalent CO2 (CO2-eq) emissions and yield-scaled CO2 eq-emission were found to be significantly lower in SDI (43.8% and 49.5%, respectively), and DI (25.1% and 26.7%, respectively) methods as compared with the conventional that ensures better methane mitigation and future climate-smart rice production systems. Conclusions: Drip irrigation could reduce the cumulative methane emission in aerobically grown rice. SDI + 1.0 lph DRE practice can be applied in areas with inadequate water availability and effective in reducing the CO2-eq emission with better yield than conventional.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Mitigation of methane gas emission in rice by drip irrigation

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are also several reports on soybean cultivation using DI showing high water productivities and yields [14]- [17]. In rice, DI system has begun in India [18]- [20] and China [21]- [23], showing high WP and almost similar and/or higher grain yield compared to those of the continuous flood system. However, these trials have just begun and are not established yet.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rice Cultivation under Drip Irrigation with Plastic Film Mulch in the Kanto Area of Japan

Park¹,

Nishikoji²,

Takahashi³

et al. 2021

ujar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A drip irrigation system with plastic mulch film was evaluated in terms of growth, yield, and water productivity (WP) using three leading paddy rice cultivars (Japonica) in the Kanto area of Japan. A cultivation with drip irrigation and plastic film mulch in the upland field (DI) and continuous flooding cultivation in a paddy field (CF) were conducted in 2015 (DI) and 2016 (DI and CF). The amounts of irrigation and total water supply (irrigation and precipitation) were 715 mm, 599 mm, and 905 mm and 1620 mm, 1379 mm, and 1687 mm for DI in 2015, DI in 2016, and CF in 2016, respectively. The percentages of irrigation for DI in 2015 and 2016 compared to those of CF were 79% and 66%, respectively. The grain yields in 2015 were higher than those in 2016 for DI. The DI in 2016 showed significantly lower grain yields compared to those of CF, representing 74% to 85% of the CF which were attributed to lower leaf area indexes in DI. There was no significant difference in WP between DI and CF, between years and among cultivars, ranging from 0.25 to 0.30 kg m -3 , showing an offset of the reduction in irrigation water by lower yields in DI. The rice cultivation system under drip irrigation with plastic film mulch showed a large water-saving effect, no physiological damage due to water stress and a slight reduction of grain yield compared to that of the paddy field.

show abstract

“…In addition, an increase in Water Productivity (WP= 0.23-0.61 kg m -3 ) has been determined. Parthasarathi et al (2015) stated that the lateral depth of 0.15 m and the dripper range of 0.30 m was the best choice. In this study, three different lateral spacing (0.6, 0.8, and 1.0 m) and two different dripper flow rates (6 and 1.0 L h -1 ) were examined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, water productivity (WP) in DI was obtained as 0.52 kg m -3 , twice the conventional production. Parthasarathi et al (2015), in the production of paddy irrigated with DI irrigation (ADT (R) 45 varieties yielded an average of 4834 kg ha -1 ) in India, the WP value calculated by including the contribution of falling rainfall in the irrigation season was determined as 0.84 kg m -3 . Similarly, in the Baldo variety, Arbat et al ( 2018) obtained 5565 kg ha -1 yield and 0.60 kg m -3 WP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Production Cost and Water Savings of Paddy Produced by Drip Irrigation

Taş¹

2021

CTNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although there are different opinions on climate variability and global warming, it is a common idea in all hypotheses that water will become even more scarce. The water used in the production of paddy, which is one of the most important food sources for the majority of the population in the world, is too much due to the irrigation method. The average global water footprint of paddy production is reported as 1.391 billion m3/year. Considering this amount, it can be seen that paddy has an enormous environmental footprint. Excessive water use causes both waste of scarce resource water and numerous environmental problems during production. The most important reason for flooded production is the ability of paddy to grow/develop in water and to have a less competitive capacity with weeds. However, when rice is grown with drip irrigation, which is one of the irrigation methods that save water with high efficiency, significant increases in both yield and quality occur. Studies are showing that 50-74.6% water saving is achieved in paddy production with drip irrigation depending on the region, climate, soil, variety, producer habits, and similar situations. In addition, the cost of one kilogram of paddy produced in the drip irrigation system in the conditions of Canakkale province of Turkey has been calculated as 0.35 $. This value has been calculated as 0.44 $ in the flooded method. In addition, methane, carbon dioxide, and Nitrous oxide emissions are significantly reduced due to the transition from anaerobic to aerobic conditions. In this way, greenhouse gas emissions, other environmental negative effects, and especially groundwater pollution caused by paddy production can be reduced.

show abstract

Effects of impulse drip irrigation systems on physiology of aerobic rice

Cited by 13 publications

References 21 publications

Mitigation of methane gas emission in rice by drip irrigation

Mitigation of methane gas emission in rice by drip irrigation

Rice Cultivation under Drip Irrigation with Plastic Film Mulch in the Kanto Area of Japan

Production Cost and Water Savings of Paddy Produced by Drip Irrigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About