Optimal Harvest Moisture Contents for Maximizing Milling Quality of Long- and Medium-Grain Rice Cultivars

Siebenmorgen, T. J.; Bautista, R. C.; Counce, Paul A.

doi:10.13031/2013.23476

Cited by 56 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For HRY maximization, optimal HMC ranged from a low of 17 (CL XL745) to a high of 22% (CL XL729). This is close to the range found by Siebenmorgen et al (2007), where the optimal HMCs varied from 19 to 24% for the long-grain cultivars. On average, the conventional lines were found to have higher HRY and lower MRY, which is consistent with previous research .…”

Section: Head and Milled Rice Yield Modelssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Similarly, Siebenmorgen et al (2007) found that the effects of high nighttime temperatures during the grain-filling stage could be responsible for variations in HRY for a given HMC by estimating HRY as a function of HMC. Variations in HRY for a given HMC could be due to the effects of high nighttime temperatures during the grain-filling stage.…”

Section: Optimal Harvest Moisture Content For Maximizing Mid-south Rimentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Conversely, harvesting with a low HMC can save in drying costs but can also decrease HRY due to fissuring. Moreover, the literature is rich (Kunze and Prasad, 1978;Siebenmorgen and Jindal, 1986;Siebenmorgen et al, 2007) on the effects of HMC on HRY, but our research on the impact of high nighttime temperatures shows that neglecting heat stress can lead to omitted variable bias when estimating HRY (Asaoka et al, 1984; Counce Cooper et al, 2008;Fitzgerald and Resurreccion, 2009). Thus, this study combines two determinants of HRY-HMC and high nighttime temperatures-to estimate how HMC is related to these variables.…”

Section: Conculsionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Previous research (Siebenmorgen and Jindal, 1986;Juliano and Perez, 1993) highlights the existence of an optimal HMC at which milling yield peaks in a convex fashion with regard to HRY. Siebenmorgen et al (2007) found that the optimal HMCs for maximizing HRY varied from 18.7 to 23.5% across rice cultivars and types. Although it seems like producers would want to harvest their rice at an MC that achieves optimal HRY, the drying costs associated with different HMCs must be taken into account.…”

Section: Optimal Harvest Moisture Content For Maximizing Mid-south Rimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Th ese immature kernels are typically thinner, weaker, and more susceptible to breakage during milling than fully mature kernels; thus, there is a convex relationship between HRY and HMC. Furthermore, Siebenmorgen et al (2007) found that each rice cultivar and type (long grain, medium grain, and short grain) has a diff erent optimal HRY and MC that maximizes the HRY. Siebenmorgen et al (1992) showed that signifi cant losses in HRY arise when long-grain rice in Arkansas is harvested at MCs <15% or >22%.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Optimal Harvest Moisture Content for Maximizing Mid‐South Rice Milling Yields and Returns

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A gronomy J our n al • Volume 10 8 , I ssue 2 • 2 016 701 R ice (Oryza sativa L.) is unique from other major row crops in the United States in that it requires postharvest milling before pricing. As a result, profi tability is based on both mass yield and kernel integrity. Broken rice (also called "brokens"), which is typically either ground into fl our or used in pet food, is currently valued at 68.5% of unbroken kernels, or head rice yield (HRY) (USDA-FAS, 2014). Studies have shown that although kernels of some rice cultivars are genetically more susceptible to breakage during milling, the rice moisture content (MC) at the time of harvest (HMC) and exposure to high nighttime air temperatures during critical stages of production can directly aff ect the ratio of unbroken rice (i.e., HRY) to broken rice on milling.Other studies indicate that fi ssures in the kernel will develop when rice at low MC (£15%) is exposed to conditions that cause the dry rice kernels to rapidly absorb moisture (Kunze and Prasad, 1978;Siebenmorgen and Jindal, 1986). Subsequently, fi ssures form within the rice kernel when internal stressors exceed the material tensile strength of the kernel. Th ese fi ssures are fault lines where the kernel breaks during milling, which in eff ect reduces the number of intact kernels and increases the associated number of brokens. Similarly, harvesting rice at a high MC (>22% for long-grain cultivars) also creates a large proportion of broken kernels as a result of milling a greater number of immature kernels (Siebenmorgen and Qin, 2005;Siebenmorgen et al., 2006;Bautista et al., 2007). Th ese immature kernels are typically thinner, weaker, and more susceptible to breakage during milling than fully mature kernels; thus, there is a convex relationship between HRY and HMC. Furthermore, Siebenmorgen et al. (2007) found that each rice cultivar and type (long grain, medium grain, and short grain) has a diff erent optimal HRY and MC that maximizes the HRY. Siebenmorgen et al. (1992) showed that signifi cant losses in HRY arise when long-grain rice in Arkansas is harvested at MCs <15% or >22%. However, maximizing HRY is not necessarily a profi t-boosting strategy because drying costs are a necessary component of profi tability, with the charges depending on the ABSTRACTRice (Oryza sativa L.) is unique from other major row crops in the United States in that it requires postharvest milling before pricing. As a result, profi tability is based on mass yield (paddy yield) and kernel integrity, or head rice yield (HRY). A common dilemma rice producers confront is the selection of a harvest moisture content (HMC) to begin harvesting. Although harvesting with a high HMC can improve HRY, it also increases drying costs at the mill. Conversely, harvesting with a low HMC can save in drying costs but decreases HRY due to fi ssuring. Th is study determines the optimal harvest HMC that maximizes net value, accounting for both HRY and drying costs per megagram of rice, considering genetic diff erences across cultivars and th...

show abstract

Section: Head and Milled Rice Yield Modelssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Optimal Harvest Moisture Content For Maximizing Mid-south Rimentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Conculsionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Optimal Harvest Moisture Content For Maximizing Mid-south Rimentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Optimal Harvest Moisture Content for Maximizing Mid‐South Rice Milling Yields and Returns

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Nitrogen management of furrow‐irrigated rice on clayey soils

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Furrow‐irrigated rice (Oryza sativa L.) (FIR) has garnered increasing attention in Arkansas and across the Mid‐South, as more than 15% of Arkansas’ rice crop now utilizes furrow irrigation water management. Because of this recent interest, little data exists on FIR production management. Studies were conducted from 2018 to 2020 to determine the optimum nitrogen (N) management program for FIR production on clayey soils. Nine N management strategies were studied in 2018 and 2019, including one‐ to four‐way applications and several rates, with one additional approach in 2020. Five site‐years were utilized where grain yield, milling yield, and total nitrogen uptake (TNU) were examined. Grain and milling yield were consistently maximized with a three‐way split consisting of 84 kg N ha–1 at V5–V6 (pre‐irrigation), 84 kg N ha–1 2 wk later, and 52 kg N ha–1 1 wk after the second application. Grain yield averaged 10,307–12,585 kg ha–1 while head rice yield averaged 52.2–62.1% under the 84/0/84/52 kg N ha–1 split. Total N uptake was greatest where three to four applications and/or a higher total N rate were utilized across all years, while a two‐way split or greater maximized TNU in 2020 alone. Recovery efficiency of nitrogen (REn) and agronomic efficiency of nitrogen (AEn) were generally higher with a greater number of split applications. Average REn for the 84/0/84/52 kg N ha–1 split was 34.4–50.6%. Results suggest that an additional 52–67 kg N ha–1 and/or additional N applications are warranted to maximize FIR production on clayey soils compared to recommendations in a traditional flooded system.

show abstract

Nitrogen management for furrow‐irrigated rice produced on silt‐loam soils

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rice is typically produced under flooded conditions, but upward of 120,000 ha of furrow-irrigated rice (FIR) were produced in Arkansas and Missouri in 2020. Nitrogen management will inherently vary under FIR production due to greater N loss potential, especially via nitrification-denitrification stimulated by wetting and drying cycles of the soil. A series of trials were conducted from 2018 to 2020 to determine the optimum N management program for FIR grown on a silt-loam soil. Eight sites were used in a split-plot design, with the whole-plot factor being location within the field (top vs. bottom) and the split-plot factor being N management regime. The N management regimes ranged from a single application to a four-way split. Trial results suggest that multiple N management programs can maximize rice grain yield, including those with a greater number of N applications or season total N rate. The recovery efficiency of N ranged from 53.6 to 76.2% and the agronomic N efficiency ranged from 8.3 to 29.3 kg kg -1 . The findings suggest that three weekly applications of 52 kg N ha -1 will allow FIR producers across the Mid-South to optimize their N management program, potentially increasing yield and decreasing environmental effects resulting from the transition to FIR.

show abstract

Optimal Harvest Moisture Contents for Maximizing Milling Quality of Long- and Medium-Grain Rice Cultivars

Cited by 56 publications

References 16 publications

Optimal Harvest Moisture Content for Maximizing Mid‐South Rice Milling Yields and Returns

Optimal Harvest Moisture Content for Maximizing Mid‐South Rice Milling Yields and Returns

Nitrogen management of furrow‐irrigated rice on clayey soils

Nitrogen management for furrow‐irrigated rice produced on silt‐loam soils

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About