Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS Badawi A. Tantawi Rice Research Program, field Crops Research Institute, Agricultural.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS Badawi A. Tantawi Rice Research Program, field Crops Research Institute, Agricultural."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS Badawi A. Tantawi Rice Research Program, field Crops Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Giza, 12619, EGYPT

2 2 Table (1): Actual consumptive use (Eta) and water requrment of the rice and its component as will as potantial evapotranspiration in mm /day as calculated by different methods. ETp Eta(E+T)W.R mm mmC.U Pmm/dayTmm/day E mm/day Period (day) (day) Pan Blaney & Criddle Penman July (27 day) Aug.(31day) Sep.(30 day) Oct. (31 day) Nov. (10 day ) Total (129 day) > The varity used Giza 172. E = EvapoTranspiration (mm/day), T = Transpiration (mm/day), P= Percolation (mm/day), C.U = Consumptive Use (mm), and W.R = Water Requirment (mm). P= Percolation (mm/day), C.U = Consumptive Use (mm), and W.R = Water Requirment (mm). > Total amount of evapotranspiration calculated by the different methods from transplanting to harvesting.

3 3 Table(2):Average monthely water consumptive use valued (cm), actual evapotranspiration ETa, potential evapotranspirtion ETp and rice coefficient valus Kc. Irrigation every 8 days Irrigation every 4 days Month Kc ETp (mm/ day) ETa (mm/ day) C.UKc ETp (mm/ day) ETa (mm/ day) C.U(cm) June (20 days) July (31days) Aug. (31 days) Sept. (12 days) > The varity used Giza 178. C.U = Consumptive Use (mm), ETa =actual evaporationtranspiratio (mm/day), ETp=potential evaporationtranspiratio (mm/day), and Kc = rice coefficient > The values were measured after transplanting up to harvesting process.

4 4 Table(3) :Some water relations for some rice varieties as affected by irrigation treatments. WUE kg/m 3 kg/m 3Watersaved %Total water use (m 3 /ha) IrrigationtreatmentsVariety ( duration) Continuous flooding Continuous flooding Continuous saturation Continuous saturation Irrigation every 6 days Irrigation every 6 days Sakha 101 (135 days) Continuous flooding Continuous flooding Continuous saturation Continuous saturation Irrigation every 6 days Irrigation every 6 days Sakha 102 (120 days) Continuous flooding Continuous flooding Continuous saturation Continuous saturation Irrigation every 6 days Irrigation every 6 days Giza 171 (155 days) > WUE = water use efficiency

5 5 Table (4): Effect of irrigation treatments on grain yield of some rice varieties. mean Giza 176 Giza 175 Giza 181 Giza 171 Treatments Irrigation every 6 days (IE 6 D) Irrigation every 12 days IE 6 D shifting to 12 days for 36 days during tillering IE 6 D shifting to 18 days for 36 days during tillering IE 6 D shifting to 12 days for 36 days during PI IE 6 D shifting to 18 days for 36 days during PI IE 6 D shifting to 12 days for 36 days during flowering IE 6 D shifting to 18 days for 36 days during flowering Continuous flooding (chek) L.S.D 5% > PI = panicle initiation

6 6 Table(5):Effect of irrigation withholding at different Productivity times of Sakha 102 rice variety Yield t/ha Treatments 6.92 e 6.91 e 7.85 bc 7.79 bcd 7.76 bcd 7.49 cd 7.77 bcd 8.21 ab 8.01 ab 8.38 a 7.33 de 8.00 ab 12 days withholding, 2 weeks AT 12 days withholding, 3 weeks AT 12 days withholding, 4 weeks AT 12 days withholding, 5 weeks AT 12 days withholding, 6 weeks AT 12 days withholding, 7 weeks AT 12 days withholding, 8 weeks AT 12 days withholding, 9 weeks AT 12 days withholding,10 weeks AT continuous flooding irrigation every 6 days alternate 4 days on + 6 days off AT = After transplanting > AT = After transplanting

7 7 Table (6): Yield reduction and some water relations under different irrigation regimes Total water used m 3 /ha Water saved % Yield reduction % Irrigation intervals Irrigation every 3 days Irrigation every 6 days Irrigation every 9 days Irrigation every 12 days

8 8 Table(7):Water used, water saved and water use efficiency of some rice varieties as affected by water regime Water Relations Treatments Water use efficiency (WUE) Water saved % Water used m3/ha* Continuous Flooding: Giza 182 Giza 182 Egyptian Jasmine Egyptian Jasmine Sakha 103 Sakha 103 Sakha 104 Sakha Mean Continuous Saturation: Giza 182 Giza 182 Egyptian Jasmine Egyptian Jasmine Sakha 103 Sakha 103 Sakha 104 Sakha Mean Irrigation every 6 days: Giza 182 Giza 182 Egyptian Jasmine Egyptian Jasmine Sakha 103 Sakha 103 Sakha 104 Sakha Mean Irrigation every 9 days: Giza 182 Giza 182 Egyptian Jasmine Egyptian Jasmine Sakha 103 Sakha 103 Sakha 104 Sakha Mean > Including the amount of water used before applying treatments ( through nursesries and land preparation) > RRTC (2001).

9 9 Table(8):water use, water saved % and water use efficiency kg/m3 as affected by different irrigation intervals and organic manure of Sakha 101 rice variety Table(8):water use, water saved % and water use efficiency kg/m3 as affected by different irrigation intervals and organic manure of Sakha 101 rice variety. Mean Organic manure rates t/ha IrrigationIntervalscharacters Cont. flooding Cont. flooding 6 days 6 days 9 days 9 daysWater used m Cont. flooding Cont. flooding 6 days 6 days 9 days 9 daysWater saved % saved % Cont. flooding Cont. flooding 6 days 6 days 9 days 9 days Water use efficiency (WUE) kg/ m3

10 10 Table (9) Effect of cut of irrigation dates on grain yield of some rice cultivars Grain yield (T/ha) Treatments Rice cultivars ( V ) : Sakha 101 Sakha 101 Sakha 102 Sakha 102 Sakha 104 Sakha 104 L.S.D 5 % Cut of irrigation dates (C): At complete heading (CH) At complete heading (CH) 1 week after CH. 1 week after CH. 2 weeks after CH. 2 weeks after CH. 3 weeks after CH. 3 weeks after CH. L.S.D 5 % Source : RRTC(2002 &2003)

11 11 Table(10) Effect of the interaction between cut of irrigation dates treatments and cultivars on grain yield. Sakha 104 Sakha 102 Sakha 101 Treatments At complete heading (CH) 1 week after CH 1 week after CH 2 weeks after CH 2 weeks after CH 3 weeks after CH 3 weeks after CH 0.25 L.S.D 5 % L.S.D 5 %

12 12 Table(11)water use efficiency (WUE) kg /m3 of Giza 177 and Sakha 102 rice varieties as affected by land preparation and planting methods Sakha 102 Giza 177 Treatments Land preparation: Disk + Leveling Disk + Leveling Chisel + Disk + Leveling Chisel + Disk + Leveling Chisel + Leveling Chisel + Leveling Mold + Disk + Leveling Mold + Disk + Leveling Planting methods: Drilling Drilling Dibbling Dibbling Broadcastinig Broadcastinig Manual Transplanting Manual Transplanting Mech. Transplanting Mech. Transplanting

13 13 Table(12):Total water requirement and water use efficiency as affected by land preparation and irrigation interval. Water used efficiency Total water used used Treatment Sakha101Giza177Sakha101Giza Land Preparation: Land Preparation: Chisel plough (2 passes) + wet leveling Chisel plough (2 passes) + wet leveling Chisel plough (1 pass) + dry leveling Chisel plough (1 pass) + dry leveling Moldboard plough + disk + dry leveling Moldboard plough + disk + dry leveling Zero tillage Zero tillage Irrigation interval: Irrigation interval: Every 3 days Every 3 days Every 6 days Every 6 days Every 9 days Every 9 days Every 12 days Every 12 days

14 14 Table (13):some of water relations for Giza 178 and Sakha 102 rice varities as affected by irrigation regimes and different planting methods. WUE kg /m 3 Water saved % Total water use m 3 /ha Irrigation treatments Planting method method mean Sakha 102 Giza 178 mean Sakha 102 Giza 178 mean Sakha 102 Giza I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4 Maual transplanting I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4Broadcasting I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4 Mech. Drilling I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4I1I1I2I2I3I3I4I4Dibbling I 1 = 4days on + 6 days off, I 2 = 4days on + 8 days off, I 3 = 4days on + 10 days off, I 4 = 4days on + 12 days off

15 15 Table (14): Grain yield (t/ha) as influenced by irrigation treatments and different planting methods. Grain yield (t / ha) Treatments Irrigation regimes ( I ) : Cont. flooding I 1 Cont. flooding I 1 Cont. saturation I 2 Cont. saturation I 2 6- day off I 3 6- day off I 3 8- day off I 4 8- day off I 4 L.S.D 5 % L.S.D 5 % Planting methods (P): Broadcasting P1 Broadcasting P1 Drilling P2 Drilling P2 Mech. Transplanting P3 Mech. Transplanting P3 Transplanting P4 Transplanting P4 L.S.D 5 % L.S.D 5 %

16 16 Table (15A): Some of water relations of Sakha 104 rice cultivar as affected by irrigation treatments and methods of planting. Water saved % Total water used 1000 m 3 /ha Planting methods Mean P4P4P4P4 P3P3P3P3 P2P2P2P2 P1P1P1P1Mean P4P4P4P4 P3P3P3P3 P2P2P2P2 P1P1P1P Cont.floodingCont.saturation 6- day off 8- day off Water used before treatments m 3 /ha P1=Broadcasting, P2= Drilling, P3= Mech. Transplanting, P4 = Transplanting.

17 17 WUE Kg /m 3 Yield reduction % Planting Mean P4P4P4P4 P3P3P3P3 P2P2P2P2 P1P1P1P1Mean P4P4P4P4 P3P3P3P3 P2P2P2P2 P1P1P1P1 methods Cont. flooding Cont. flooding Cont. saturation Cont. saturation 6- day 6- day 8- day 8- day Mean P1=Broadcasting, P2= Drilling, P3= Mech. Transplanting, P4 = Transplanting. Table (15 B): Grain yield (t/ha) as influenced by irrigation treatments and different planting methods.

18 18 Table (16): Weed dry weight as influenced by regime, row spacing, and number of seedling in manually transplanted rice. Weed dry weight (g/m 2 ) * Water regime 4-days on days off 4-days on + 6- days off ContinuousfloodingSeedlingno/hillSpacing(cm) 288 c 167 d 14 b 3 10x de 129 ef 0.0 b e 100 f 0.0 b dc 227 c 17 b 3 20x c 183 d 12 b d 156 de 7 b e 328 a 56 a 3 20x b 263 b 28 ab b 218 c 15 b 9 * Means followed by a common are not significantly at the 5% level by DMRI

19 19 Table 17 Dry weight of weeds and grain yield of transplanted rice (Sakha 101 cv) as influenced by conventional weed control treatments MBCRYield(t/ha)Weeds(g/m2)Treatments (Hreebicides kg a.i/ha) A. Improved weed control (10x20 cm) 1- Continuous flooding for 15 days: 1- Continuous flooding for 15 days: Butachlor (1.1) - Butachlor (1.1) Weedy check - Weedy check 2- Continuous flooding for 15 days: 2- Continuous flooding for 15 days: Butachlor (1.1) - Butachlor (1.1) Weedy check - Weedy check B. Conventional weed control (20x20 cm) 1- flooding every 6 days: 1- flooding every 6 days: Hand weeding twice - Hand weeding twice Thiobencarb (2.4) - Thiobencarb (2.4) Butachlor (2.4) - Butachlor (2.4) Weedy check - Weedy check

20 20CONCLUSION In order to increase the efficiency of the irrigation water in rice fields the following alternatives should be used 1.Substituting long duration varieties with short duration varieties in all rice growing areas. 2.Convince farmers to use the laser technique and dry leveling in land preparation. 3.Use the optimum plant density with the specific rice varieties. 4.Use the drought tolerance varieties such as Giza 178 at the end of canals. 5.Withholding irrigation water for short time at medium tillering stage and during late grain filling stage. 6.Improving the irrigation and drainage system to minimize water losses. 7.Extensive public awareness campaign on the importance of the water and the possible methods for saving. 8.Other water resources have to be developed such as ground water particularly for the reclaimed areas.

21 21


Download ppt "1 INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS Badawi A. Tantawi Rice Research Program, field Crops Research Institute, Agricultural."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google