ENHANCING THE YIELD POTENTIAL OF RICE …prr.hec.gov.pk/jspui/bitstream/123456789/540/1/410S.pdfcv =...

ENHANCING THE YIELD POTENTIAL OF RICE (ORYZA SATIVA L.) THROUGH DIFFERENT

AGRONOMIC TECHNIQUES UNDER THE AGRO-CLIMATIC CONDITIONS OF DERA ISMAIL KHAN-PAKISTAN

By

IMAM BAKHSH M.Sc (Hons.) Agronomy

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in

Agriculture (Agronomy)

DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY, FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE, GOMAL UNIVERSITY

DERA ISMAIL KHAN-PAKISTAN 2008

To The controller of Examination, Gomal University, D.I. Khan.

Subject: SUBMISSION OF Ph.D. DISSERTATION We, the supervisory committee, certify that the contents and form of dissertation submitted by Mr. Imam Bakhsh have been found satisfactory and recommended that it be processed for evaluation by the external examiners for award of degree. Dr. Haji Himayat Ullah Khan Advisor Department of Agronomy Faculty of Agriculture Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan. Dr. Mohammed Ayaz Khan Member Department of Agronomy Faculty of Agriculture Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan. Dr. Inayat Ullah Awan Member Department of Agronomy Faculty of Agriculture Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan. Dr. Ejaz Ahmad Member Department of Agronomy Faculty of Agriculture Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan. Dr. Haji Himayat Ullah Khan Chairman Department of Agronomy Faculty of Agriculture Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan.

i

Acknowledgements

First of all I praise Almighty Allah who has bestowed me courage and

entrusted to undertake research work in the light of His first and foremost

message underlined in “IQRA” revealed onto our prophet Muhammad (SAW).

It was a challenging task for me as I was having little translucent concept to

the significance of my work.

It would have been difficult for me to complete this assignment without my

Supervisor Dr. Haji Himayat Ullah Khan chairman, Department of Agronomy,

Faculty of Agriculture, Gomal University; Dera Ismail Khan has not funneled

me through very incoherent modes of research, and scrutinized my thesis. I

am extremely indebted to him for his generous supervision, guidance, moral

and principled support, and counseling.

No less thanks to Prof. Dr. Muhammad Qasim Khan, Dean, Faculty of

Agriculture, Gomal University, D. I. khan who despite having numerous

commitments spared some times to guide and streamline my research work. I

also stand indebted for his altruistic help in providing a precision device for

measuring irrigation water, which proved very useful to my research work.

Dr. Mohammad Ayaz Khan, Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy,

Faculty of Agriculture, Gomal University, D. I. Khan has been guiding and

landing me in carrying out my practical research work. His gaudiness was of

absolute worth. His selfless exchange of views and sharing of expertise

succeeded into receiving accurate and precise results of immense

importance. I fully utilized his counseling in achieving my target. I stand highly

obliged for his sincere guidance.

I feel immensely grateful to my parents who always remember me in their

prayers for my success, and bowed their heads down for blessing whenever

they perceive the gravity of my commitment and dedication to work. I

understand whatever I may be and whichever position I may attain, I’d ever

ii

remain in seek of their benediction. Almighty Allah may bless them with long

life and happiness.

In the end I bow to Almighty Allah that He may bless me the devotion of

dispersing the knowledge outcome from this piece of work so that this could

become a girder of enlightenment and a tread for future guideline.

Imam Bakhsh

iii

ABBREVIATIONS atm = atmosphere

cv = cultivar

DASm = Depletion of Available Soil moisture

DAT = Day After Transplanting

DM = Dry Matter

EC = electrical conductivity

EM = effective micronutrients

Fig. = Figure

G = Plant Growth Regulator GA = Gibralic Acid

H.I. = Harvest Index

Ha = Hectare

ha-1 = per hectare

HDG = High Density Grain

hill-1 = per hill

IAA = Indole Acetic Acid

IRRI = International Rice Research Institute

K = potassium

kg = kilogram

m-2 = per meter square

mg = milligram mm = millimeter

N = nitrogen

NAA = Naphthalene Acetic Acid

P = phosphorus

Panicle-1 = per panicle

ppm = parts per million

smt = soil moisture tension

S.S.P. = Single Super Phosphate t = tonnes

iv

Chapter No. Title Page No.

I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS … i

II ABSTRACT … xiv

1 INTRODUCTION … 1

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE … 6 2.1 Irrigation water regimes … 6 2.2 Fertilizer response (Phosphorus) … 14 2.3 Plant growth regulator … 22

3 MATERIALS AND METHODS … 30 3.1 Location and Agro-metrological conditions … 30 3.2 Physico-chemical characteristics of soil … 31 3.3 Land preparation … 31 3.4 Water management … 31 3.5 Plant growth regulator (NAA) … 32 3.6 Variety … 32 3.7 Seed preparation … 34 3.8 Nursery sowing … 34 3.9 Nitrogen fertilizer … 34 3.10 Transplanting … 34 3.11 Layout and design … 35 3.12 Weeds and pests control … 35 3.13 Statistical analysis … 35 3.14 Observations recorded … 35 3.14.1 Plant height at maturity (cm) … 35

3.14.2 Number of productive tillers m-2 … 36

3.14.3 Number of panicles m-2 … 36

3.14.4 Number of spikelets panicle-1 … 36

3.14.5 Sterility percentage … 36

v

3.14.6 Normal kernel percentage … 36

3.14.7 1000- grain weight (g) … 37

3.14.8 Biological yield (t ha-1) … 37

3.14.9 Paddy yield (t ha-1) … 37

3.14.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) … 37

3.14.11 Water productivity … 37

3.14.12 Fertilizer use efficiency … 38

3.14.13 Harvest index % … 38

3.14.14 Economic analysis and Benefit Cost Ratio … 38

3.15 Experimental details. … 38

Experiment No.1 … 38 Experiment No.2 … 39 Experiment No.3 … 40 Experiment No.4 … 41

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS … 42 4.1 Effect of phosphorus levels and irrigation

regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

Abstract … 42 Introduction … 42 4.1.1 Plant height at maturity (cm) … 44




4.1.5 Sterility percentage. … 52


4.1.7 1000- grain weight (g) … 56

vi



4.1.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) … 62


4.1.12 Fertilizer use efficiency … 66



4.2 Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) levels and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.





4.2. 5 Sterility percentage. … 82


4.2. 7 1000- grain weight (g) … 86



4.2.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) … 92




vii

4.3 Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) and phosphorus levels on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.





4.3.5 Sterility percentage … 110


4.3.7 1000- grain weight (g) … 114



4.3.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) … 121



4.4 Effect of plant growth regulator levels (NAA) at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice.





4.4.5 Sterility percentage. … 136

viii


4.4.7 1000- grain weight (g) … 140



4.4.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) … 146


5 SUMMARY … 150 6 CONCLUSIONS … 152 7 LITERATURE CITED … 153 8 APPENDICES … 161

ix

Table No. Title Page

No. 3.1 Physio-chemical characteristics of soil. … … … 33

4.1.1 Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 45

4.1.2 Number of productive tillers m-2 as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 47

4.1.3 Number of panicles m-2 as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 49

4.1.4 Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 51

4.1. 5 Sterility percentage as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 53

4.1.6 Normal kernel percentage as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 55

4.1. 7 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 57

4.1.8 Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 59

4.1.9 Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 61

4.1.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 63

4.1.11 Water productivity as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 65

x

4.1.12 Fertilizer use efficiency for grain yield (kg-1 kg-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 67

4.1.13 Harvest Index percentage as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 69

4.1.14 Economic analysis and BCR as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 71

4.2.1 Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation water regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 75

4.2.2 Number of productive tillers m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 77

4.2.3 Number of panicles m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 79

4.2.4 Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 81

4.2. 5 Sterility percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 83

4.2.6 Normal kernel percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 85

4.2.7 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 87

xi

4.2.8 Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 89

4.2.9 Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 91

4.2.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 93

4.2.11 Water productivity as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 95

4.2.12 Harvest Index percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 97

4.2.13 Economic analysis and BCR as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 99

4.3.1 Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 103

4.3.2 Number of productive tillers m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 105

4.3.3 Number of panicles m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 107

4.3.4 Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 109

4.3. 5 Sterility percentage as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 111

xii

4.3.6 Normal kernel percentage as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 113

4.3. 7 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 115

4.3.8 Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 117

4.3.9 Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 120

4.3.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 122

4.3.12 Harvest Index percentage as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 124

4.3.13 Economic analysis and BCR in transplanted coarse rice as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 126

4.4.1 Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 129

4.4.2 Number of productive tillers m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 131

4.4.3 Number of panicles m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 133

4.4.4 Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 135

4.4. 5 Sterility percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 137

xiii

4.4.6 Normal kernel percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 139

4.4. 7 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 141

4.4.8 Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 143

4.4.9 Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 145

4.4.10 Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 147

4.4.11 Economic analysis and BCR in transplanted coarse rice as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages during 2004 and 2005.

… … … 149

xiv

Enhancing the Yield Potential of Rice (Oryza sativa L.) through different Agronomic Techniques under the Agro-climatic conditions of Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan.

ABSTRACT

A research project was initiated at Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan, and

NWFP, PAKISTAN during 2004 - 2005; to provide appropriate rice cultivation

technologies that are agronomically practicable and economically viable under

the agro-climatic conditions of the area. The research project was based on

field-oriented problems faced by the paddy growers. Four field experiments

were conducted and were laid out in a Randomized Complete Block Design

(RCBD) with split-plots arrangements, replicated 4 times. 1st experiment was

“Effect of Phosphorus Levels and Irrigation Regimes on the Yield and Yield

Components of Transplanted Coarse Rice” in which five P2 O5 levels were

maintained in main plots while the four irrigation regimes were kept in sub-

plots. The sub-plot size was 3 × 5 m2. The 2nd trial pertaining to “Effect of

Plant Growth Regulator (NAA) Levels and Irrigation Regimes on the Yield and

Yield Components of Transplanted Coarse Rice” was also laid out in RCBD

with split plot arrangement, keeping four levels of NAA plant growth regulator

in main plots while the four irrigation regimes were kept in sub-plots. Third

experiment was on “Effect of Phosphorus and Plant Growth Regulator (NAA)

Levels on the Yield and Yield Components of Transplanted Coarse Rice”

having four levels of NAA plant growth regulator in main plots and in sub plots

five P2O5 levels maintained. In forth experiment “Effect of Plant Growth

Regulator (NAA) Levels at Different Growth Stages of Transplanted Coarse

Rice” the growth stages of rice of crop were kept in main plots and four levels

of (NAA) plant growth regulator were kept in sub plots. Well-adapted coarse

rice variety IR-6 was used in the research project. Thirty-five days old rice

nursery was used in the all experiments. Data were recorded on various

growth and yield parameters like plant height (cm), productive tillers m-2,

unproductive tillers m-2, panicles m-2, spikelets panicle-1, sterility and normal

kernels percentage, 1000-grain weight (g), paddy yield (t ha-1), straw yield (t

ha-1) and harvest index.

xv

In experiment 1, the combination P3I2 (150 kg ha-1 P2O5 with 10 irrigations

containing 750 mm water (distributed in 10 irrigations)), proved the best

combination for getting maximum paddy yield. In experiment 2, it was

determined that significantly higher (8.50 and 8.60 t ha-1) paddy yield was

recorded in the plots treated with G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth

regulator and 10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively and the

lowest paddy yield was recorded in treatment G0I1 (without plant growth

regulator level with 8 irrigations) with the values of 3.60 and 3.75 t ha-1 during

1st and 2nd year, respectively. While in experiment 3, it was observed that the

treatment G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulators level with 100 kg ha-1

phosphatic fertilizer was on top with maximum paddy yield (8.70 and 8.90 t

ha-1) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. In forth experiment it was found that

paddy yield of the treatment S2G2 (panicle initiation stage with plant growth

regulator level of 90 ml ha-1) produced maximum paddy yield of (9.00 and

9.20 t ha-1) during both the years of study

On the basis of research findings, it is concluded that for getting maximum

yield of paddy under agro climatic conditions of Dera Ismail Khan the farmer

should apply 750 mm water, 90 ml plant growth regulator (NAA) on panicle

initiation stage. However while applying the plant growth regulator the farmer

can reduce the P2 O5 dose up to 100 kg ha-1 instead of 150 kg ha-1 and vice

versa.

1

Chapter-1

INTRODUCTION

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of the oldest crops on the earth. The

sophisticated rice cultivation in Zhejiang province of southern china existed at

least 7000 years back. It is the staple food for nearly half of the world’s

population, most of them living in developing countries. The crop occupies

one third of the world’s total area planted to cereals and provides 35-60

percent of the calories consumed by 2.7 billions peoples. World’s rice

production of 490 million tones is estimated by 2000 and 758 million by 2020

to meet the increase of 65 percent in population rates. More than 90 percent

of the world’s rice is produced and consumed in Asia where 85 percent of the

peoples lives (Guerra, et al 1998). Vietnam is one of the top countries with

annual rice consumption of 240 kg per person followed by Thailand with 204

kg. Rice is also taken as a major food component in Middle East. It is also

consumed by hundreds of millions of peoples of Africa and Latin America.

The consumption of rice in Pakistan is very low, only 20.7 kg per person

which is possibly due to high cost of rice as compared to wheat flour (Shaikh

and Kanasro, 2003). Despite the diversity under which it is produced, only 4

percent of the world production of rice is traded across national borders, by

imposing certain degree of government interventions. Nevertheless, Pakistan

is the 5th largest rice exporting country after Thailand, Vietnam, U.S.A. and

India, and exports 1/3 of its total rice production (Anonymous, 2002).

In Pakistan, rice is high valued cash crop, and accounts for 5.7 percent of

value added items in Agriculture, 1.2 percent in G.D.P. and 6.1 percent of

total export earning as a major item. During 2001-2002, Pakistan exported

1.916 million tones of rice and earned $ 540 million in foreign exchange,

where contribution of basmati and coarse rice in exports was 54 percent and

46 percent respectively. During 2006-2007, the area under rice in Pakistan

was 2581.0 thousand hectares with total production of 5438.0 thousand

2

tonnes and average yield of 2107 kg ha-1 (Anonymous, 2007). At present, the

yield level harvested by the farmers in Pakistan is very low as compared with

other rice growing countries of the world like Japan (6.277 tones ha-1), China

(5.869 tones ha-1), India (2.817 tones ha-1). In spite of all efforts, the yield of

this crop for last few years has not increased to a desired extent.

Rice is grown in all of the provinces of Pakistan. The Province wise area

under rice cultivation is 1754.2, 543.9, 59.9, and 161.50 thousand hectares in

Punjab, Sind, NWFP, and Baluchistan, respectively. Total 24 percent area of

NWFP is under paddy cultivation, which includes 71 percent of total area of

D. I. Khan Division (Anonymous, 2007).

Water is essential for sustaining quality of life on earth. This finite asset has a

direct bearing on almost all sectors of economy, whereas a stable water

supply is a strong driving force behind green revolution. Now about 70% or

2,504 km3 of the world’s annual fresh water usage out of 3,572 km3 is for

agriculture, and about 70% of this is used mainly for rice paddy agriculture in

Asia. Sound and sustainable irrigated agriculture is indispensable for

humankind to survive in future. Irrigated agriculture provides an essential

environment for high yield, so that improved varieties of crops can be fully

utilized. From 1961 to 2002 global irrigated agriculture land roughly doubled

from 139 million to 277 million hectares, while total land for arable and

permanent crops expanded slightly from 1,357 million to 1,534 million

hectares. Global population and cereal have also become double from 3,080

million to 6,225 million and from 877 million tones to 2,029 million tones

respectively. Irrigated land, which accounts for about 18% of agriculture land

area, produces about 40% of the food for the global population, contributing

considerably to the alleviation of global poverty and starvation (Nakamura,

2004).

Importance of efficient use of water in Pakistan is more than ordinary due to

agrarian nature of economy of the country. The share of agriculture sector in

3

the Gross Domestic Production (GDP) of Pakistan is about 24%. Since

agriculture is a major user of water, timely and adequate supply of water is

required to make sustainable agriculture. The increasing pressure of

population and industrialization have already placed greater demands on

water causing an ever increasing number and intensity of local and regional

conflicts over its availability and use hazardously. The high aridity index of the

country is adding further to the significance of water for the developmental

activities. Though once a water-surplus country with huge water-resources of

the Indus River system, now became a water-deficit country. At present, the

annual per capita water-availability is about 1,100 m3, whereas a chronic

water stress level begins below 1,000 m3. The existing situation indicates that

the country is nearing condition of chronic water stress. Meanwhile the gape

between demand and supply of water has increased to a level creating unrest

among the federating units. The expanded drought during recent years

reduced fresh water supplies of the country, which has highlighted the

importance for the development of new water sources and adopting water-

conservation measures for extremely judicious use of the finite quantity of

water (Akram and Majid, 2004).

Besides water, the fertilizer is also vital and costly input in irrigated

agriculture. Wisdom for fully utilizing water and fertilizer has continuously

been the fundamental element of human activities since ancient civilization.

The economic use demands that maximum yield should be obtained by the

application of such inputs. Imbalance and under rate fertilizer uses are

equally responsible over 50 percent decrease in rice crop yields. Judicious

and proper use of fertilizer is expected to bring about a break-through in rice

production. It has now been realized that various fertilizer components display

independent as well as inter-related effects on growth and associated

functions of plants. One of the most important components of fertilizer is

phosphorus without which the plants neither can grow nor flourish. The

phosphorus is an essential component of several well-known bio-compounds

like ATP that drive energy-requiring biochemical processes linked with uptake

4

and transport of nutrients, and their assimilation. Phosphorus is also essential

component of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA, genetic inheritance), and

ribonucleic acid (RNA, that directs protein synthesis). Plant nutrition as a

whole, enhances many aspects of plant physiology including fundamental

process of photosynthesis, nitrogen fixation, flowering, fruiting (including seed

production), and maturation. Root growth, particularly development of lateral

roots and fibrous rootlets, is encouraged by phosphorus (Khasawaneh, et al.

1980). Soils in Pakistan are deficient in nitrogen and phosphorus fertility

elements and some areas for potassium too. There are hardly any soils,

which provides adequate amount of these nutrients and hence can’t afford

high yield over prolong period without adding fertilizer. Mineral fertilizers are

best to mention soil fertility but their high cost is an important consideration for

farmers. This warrants using all inputs in a balance manner.

The plant growth regulators / hormones are another class of organic

compounds synthesized in one segment of the plant in very low concentration

and translocated to another part wherein causing physiological responses

even modifying the plant characteristics. The availability of exogenous bio-

regulators has added a new dimension to the possibility for promoting plant

growth and associated attributes and hence offers great opportunity (Kato, et

al. 2004).

Since the demand for rice is increasing steadily despite the fact that the water

resources are getting limited it becomes imperative to produce more rice with

least water wastage yet on economical basis. Under the prevailing situation

there is very much scope for research work on rice in D. I. Khan region. Dera

Ismail Khan Division is situated at a very remote and backward area of

NWFP, where per hectare yield is very low as compared to the other regions

of the country. The soil of Dera Ismail Khan is hard clay and salt affected;

however, it is somewhat suitable for paddy cultivation as compared to other

cereals. With the commissioning of Chashma Right Bank Canal, the area

under crop is expected to increase further. However, the future of rice

5

production depends heavily on adopting the developmental strategies that will

use water efficiently in irrigation scheme. This requires changing policies and

practices for rice production by replacing and complimenting the traditional

rice farming techniques with available modern technology.

The aim of my research work is to optimize irrigation practices and find out

interaction between irrigation and phosphorus fertilizer for rice crop

production. Moreover the impact of exogenous bio-regulators will also be

explored in order to improve yield and yield components of rice. The findings

will of course help to development this remote and backward region of the

country, and assist in boosting up the economy of the nation significantly.

Following are the main objectives of this research work:

1. To investigate the integrated effect of irrigation water, Phosphorus and

plant growth regulator (NAA) in decreasing the water requirements of

the rice crop.

2. To develop appropriate phosphatic fertilizer management technology

for rice crop.

3. To determine the efficiency of plant growth regulator through different

doses and time of application at different growth stages of rice crops.

4. To recommend the most efficient package of technology for increasing

the yield of rice crop.

6

Chapter -2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Results of some experiments conducted under different edaphic and climatic

conditions on irrigation, phosphorus, plant growth regulator and their

interactive effect on rice productivity is reviewed as follows.

2.1: Irrigation water regimes

The amount of water added to rice crop under most irrigation systems is very

high (2500 mm as against 480 mm of evaporation). Accurate determination of

the optimum time to apply irrigation water is of prime importance in improving

the water use efficiency and reducing production cost of rice. This is

especially important in Pakistan, where the subtropical climate is

characterized by a very clear dry season from April to July with comparatively

wet season from July to September. In order to make most efficient use of

irrigation water, question of when to irrigate and how many irrigations are

necessary become the vital concern to the farming community. The research

work reported about the effect of moisture regimes on growth, yield and yield

components of rice is briefly reviewed in the following pages.

Karim et al. (1996) carried out a field experiment to assess grain yield,

water requirements and weed control for boro rice cultivation. Limited

irrigation, mentioning a moisture regime between a field capacity and

saturation, significantly reduce grain yield. However, irrigation leading to

standing water shows no significant difference in grain yield, irrespective of

the depth of water and gave grain yield of 4.5-5.0 t ha-1. The water

requirement for boro rice was 620-700 mm from transplanting to harvest.

Water use efficiency was higher for irrigation with minimum standing water

between saturation and 1 cm or for moisture regime between field capacity

and saturation.

7

Borrell et al. (1997) conducted a field experiment to maximize rice

grain yield by optimizing its functional components: water use, efficiency of

water use for dry matter production and harvest index, five methods of

irrigation were studied in wet and dry season. Applying permanent flooding at

sowing, the 3-leaf stage (traditional) and prior to panicle initiation compared

with two un-flooded methods: saturated soil culture (SSC) and intermittent

irrigation at weekly intervals. The results of these studies showed that it is not

necessary to flood rice to obtained high grain yield and quality and were no

significant difference in yield and quality between SSC and traditional flooded

production, although SSC about 32% less water in both seasons and higher

water use efficiency.

Anbumozhi et al. (1998) studied rice crop growth and yield as

influenced by changes in ponding water depth, water regimes and fertigation

levels. They noted that an optimum ponding depth of 9 cm can improve paddy

growth and production conditions compared to too shallow or too deep

ponding water depths. High value of water productivity was found at 9 cm

ponding water depth under different water regimes and fertigation levels. The

yield reduction occurred at shallower depth than that of deeper ponding

depths.

Gowda and Rudraradhya (1998) studied four irrigation regimes 60 cm,

75 cm, 90 cm and 105 cm and concluded that treatment having 75 cm

irrigation water produced maximum yield and yield determinants followed by

90 cm irrigation water treatment having paddy yield of 10.70 and 10.10 t ha-1,

respectively with fixed dose of 150 kg P2O5 along with basal dose of 150 kg N

and 50 kg K2O ha-1.

Khunthasuvon et al. (1998) conducted seven experiments to quantify

irrigation, fertilizer and their combine effects on crop growth and grain yield of

low land rice under rainfed conditions, while there was not always standing

water in the rainfed paddy, no severe water stress develop in any experiment.

8

Fertilizer application improved growth and yield under both rainfed and

lowland conditions in all experiments, and was partially effective under rainfed

conditions.

Nwadukwe and Chude (1998) observed the effect of manipulating

irrigation scheduling on grain yield, water use efficiency and irrigation

efficiency. They found that the best yields, water use efficiency and irrigation

efficiency were achieved when the soil moisture regime was held at saturation

rather than at field capacity or at submergence.

Lalu and Yadev (1999) conducted an experiment for the optimization of

moister regimes and NP levels on direct seeded rice. The moister regimes

were I1 (700 mm), I2 (800 mm), I3 (900 mm) and I4 (1000 mm). While the N:P

levels were F1, 0-0 kg NP ha-1, F2, 70-70 kg NP ha-1, F3, 130-130 kg NP ha-1

and F4, 190-190 kg NP ha-1 They concluded that the interaction of I3 and F3

was significant on grain yield. It was due to more tillers, spike length, filled

grain, less unfilled grain and high thousand grain weight.

Bali and Uppal (1999) irrigated the Basmati-370 2 or 4 days after

infiltration of previously ponded water and irrigation was with drawn 7, 14 or

21 days after 50% flowering. They concluded that irrigation 2 and 4 days after

infiltration of ponded water gave grain yields of 2.45 and 2.07 t ha–1, total

water use of 141 and 123 cm and water use efficiency of 17.4 and 16.8 kg

ha–1 cm–1, respectively. Mean yield was 1.85, 2.38 and 2.57 t ha–1 when

irrigation was withdrawn 7, 14 and 21 days after flowering with water

consumption of 126, 131 and 139 cm. They further observed that protein

content and percentage recovery of hulled, milled and headed rice were

highest when irrigation was with drawn 21 days after flowering.

Sharma and Sharma (1999) studied sustainable use of poor quality

water with proper scheduling of irrigation and nitrogen levels for a rice crop.

Irrigation scheduling was based on the period of submergence ranging from 0

to 6 days. The nitrogen doses vary from 0 to 180 kg ha-1. Both irrigation and

9

nitrogen had a positive effect on yield, which increasing from 1729 kg ha-1 to

4522 kg ha-1.

Lu et al. (2000) examined the effects of various regimes of water

consumption in a well puddled paddy field, as well as dry matter production

and physiological responses of the plants. Continuous flooding irrigation

treatments (CSF); three intermittent irrigation treatment, designated 11-0, 11-

1, 11-2, in which plants were re-irrigated when the water potential of the soil

below 0, 1-0 and –20 kpa at the depth of 5 cm. They reported that there were

no significance difference in dry matter production and grain yield between

CSF and 11-0, but both were significantly greater than in case of 11-1, 11-2.

Therefore water use efficiency increased in the following order: 11-0, CSF,

11-2, 11-1, although the difference was very small between 11-1 and 11-2.

Pandey et al. (2000) studied the response of medium land rice to

sowing methods, moisture regimes and nitrogen levels. The study indicated

that transplanting recorded 22.35% higher grain yield (48.00 q/ha) than line

sowing (39.23 q/ha). Irrigation at 7 cm one day after disappearance of ponded

water (7 cm 1 DADPW) showed its superiority in terms of grain yield (49.10

q/ha) which was 28.90% superior over rainfed. Interaction of sowing methods

and moisture regimes significantly affected the dry matter accumulation,

number of grains/panicle, test grain weight and straw yield.

Balasubramanian and Krishnarajan (2000) conducted field

experiments to study the effects of different water management practices on

growth, water use and water use efficiency of direct seeded rice. The results

revealed that continuous submergence at 2.5cm through out the cropping

season gave good growth and yield, higher water use efficiency and save

25% of irrigation water when compared to the application of 5 cm depth one

day after disappearance of ponded water for transplanted rice.

Shi et al. (2002) conducted three experiments in China to understand

the performance of rice under different water management practices.

10

Experiment one was carried out in rainproof containers to study the response

of different varieties (Sanyou 10 and 923 and Zhenshan 97B) to three water

treatments (flooded, intermittent and dry cultivation). Calculated grain yield in

dry cultivation treatments amounted to 6.3, 6.0 and 3.7 t ha-1 for the varieties

Sanyou 10 and 923 and Zhensan 97B, respectively. Under intermittent

irrigation, yields of Sanyou 10 and 923 were 8% and 10% higher, 9.5 and 8.8

t ha-1 respectively, than under flooded conditions. In experiment three

consisted of two-field demonstration trails, each with flooded and intermittent

irrigation treatments received 48 and 68 mm of irrigation water (i.e. 27% and

37%) less than the flooded conditions, where as grain yields increased by 4%

to 8%.

Shimono et al. (2002) conducted field trials to determine the response

of biomass and grain yield to water temperature at three stages of crop i.e.

vegetative, reproductive and early grain filling stage and reported a severe

reduced yield by low temperature of water (below 20 0C) during reproductive

stage which resulted due to low spikelet fertility. Crop growth rate was

reduced by low water temperature during all the stages.

Balasubramanian and Krishnarajan (2003) conducted a field

experiment with nine irrigation regimes: irrigation to 5 cm depth 1 day after

disappearance of ponded water (DADPW) (T1), irrigation to 5 cm depth 3

DADPW (T2), continuous submergence in 2.5 cm deep water throughout the

crop period (T3), irrigation to 2.5 cm depth 1 DADPW (T4), irrigation to 2.5 cm

depth 3 DADPW (T5), saturation through out the crop period (T6), maintaining

5 cm depth water during critical stages and maintaining saturation during

other stages (T7), maintaining 2.5 cm depth of water during critical stages and

maintaining saturation during other stages (T8), and irrigation of transplanted

rice to 5 cm depth 1 DADPW (T9). The treatment in T1 and T9 recorded

higher grain yield of 5.5 and 5.3 t ha-1 respectively due to increase in yield

attributes. However, with T3 saving of irrigation water was 340 mm and 308

11

mm ha-1. Therefore it can be calculated that continuous submergence of 2.5

cm as compared to 5 cm is desirable practice to achieve higher paddy yield.

Yang et al. (2003) stated that three levels of soil water potential, well

water (WW), moderate water deficit (MD), and severe water deficit (SD), were

imposed from 9 days after anthesis to maturity in both pot and field

experiments. Results showed that chlorophyll content and photosynthesis

rate of the flag leaves declined more quick as plants approached to maturity

for MD and SD plants than for WW plants, indicating the water deficit

enhanced plant senescence. The water deficit treatment shortened the grain

filling by 5 to 17 days and increased the grain-filling rate by 0.09 to 0.27 mgd-2

grain-1. The grain yield of MD plants in both experiments was increased by 8.2

to 10 % that of SD and WW plants in both experiments. They concluded that

if water deficit is properly controlled during the grain filling, whole-plant

senescence is enhanced. The enhanced senescence can facilitate to

accelerate grain filling rate, and increase grain yield.

Joseph (2003) studied that water used with scientific management was

saved 44 % and 40 % of water that used with farmer management and no

yield increased was observed, this additional water input was simply wasted.

The farmers realized that these could have used this precious irrigation water

to bring about a considerable area under cultivation, water use efficiency in

both years was also lower than the farmers’ practices: 12 and 12 vs. 21 and

21 kg ha-1 cm-1.

Thomas et al. (2003) to examine the response of upland rice to

different levels of irrigation I1-544 mm, I2-456 mm, I3-214 mm and three levels

of nutrient management that is F1-20-10-15, F2-40-20-30 and F3-60-30-45 kg

ha-1 in humid conditions. The results indicated that the factors irrigation and

nutrition and their interaction (I x F) had a significant influence on grain yield,

I1 gave the highest grain yield (2.676 t ha-1). This increase in yield was due to

the concomitant increase of yield attributes at higher levels of irrigation.

12

Further the drastic reduction in yield under moisture stress was due to the

increase in number of unfilled grains panicle-1 rather than a reduction in

panicles per unit area.

Iqbal (2004) a field experiment was conducted to quantify nitrogen,

phosphorus and water use and their combined effects on biomass and yield

of rice. A routine management practice was performed in rice fields to

maintain a water depth that would suppress weeds growth during the growing

season. Both water and fertilizer (N and P) had a positive effect on yield and

biomass of rice. Further he concluded that the yield of rice increased 50-60%

in response to the application of N and P interaction with water.

Belder et al. (2004) conducted field experiment in China and

Philippines to compare the effects of alternately submerged, non-submerged

and continuous submergence on rice performance and water use. There rain

fall plus irrigation water inputs were 600-960 mm. Their results were typical

for poorly drained irrigated lowlands in Asia and that alternate submerged-

non-submerged can reduce water use up to 15% without affecting yield when

the shallow ground water stays with in about 0-30 cm.

He et al. (2004) conducted pot experiments in a glass house to

investigate the effect of soil water content and phosphorus supply on

biomass, phosphorus uptake by rice cultivated in soils with different water

regimes and soil available phosphorus. Results showed that phosphorus

applications rates had greater effect than soil moisture content. Yield of rice

grain were not significantly decreased when soil moisture contents were kept

at 60% of water holding capacity while the yields of rice grain were not

significantly different when soil moisture were remained at 80% of water

holding capacity and water logged. This means that it was possible for paddy

rice variety to be cultivated in aerobic soil under the conditions of sufficient

water supply. The highest biomass of rice and highest P uptake by rice was

found in treatment with 0.0300 g P kg ha-1 of P applications rate and with 80%

13

of water holding capacity. Soil available P content decreased with the

decrease of both the soil moisture content and the P applied.

Xiaoping et al. (2004) conducted an experiment to introducing the

technology of water saving irrigation for paddy rice is studied. Test results

showed that dry-foot paddy irrigation saves 48.5% of water, and increased

from 8.9 to 12.9% of paddy yield, increasing 1302 Yaun of profit per hectare,

compared to traditional flooding irrigation. The technology has the clear index,

notable effectiveness of water saving, reduction of soil loss and high

production; besides, the rice is of good quality and the investment is

economical.

Sarwer and Khanif (2005) studied the effect of different water levels on

rice yield and Cu and Zn concentration. There were five treatments

stimulating different water depths and duration namely: W1, W2, W3, W4 and

W5. The effect of water levels was not significant for tiller number, panicle

number, grain yield (t ha-1), straw yield (t ha-1), grain per panicle and 1000-

grain weight. They further concluded that it is highly possible to produce rice

under low water input, which is capable of saving between 25-30% of water

without any effect of nutrient.

Li et al. (2005) conducted an experiment in China to study the effect of

phosphorus application for saving irrigation water. Application of phosphorus

increased nitrogen and phosphorus uptake, shoot biomass, head number,

seed number and grain yield and increased soil water used and seasonal

evopotranspiration. The lower the volume of irrigation water applied, the more

obvious were these effects. Winter wheat was basally fertilized with 88.5 kg

P2 O5 ha-1 and irrigated with 90 mm at the joining stage, the highest P use

efficiency, P recovery and net profit ( due to irrigation and / or fertilizer P)

were obtained. The results suggested that fertilizer P should be used for

saving irrigation water in North China plains.

14

2.2: Fertilizer response (Phosphorus)

Phosphorus is an essential component of deoxyribonucleic (DNA), the

seat of genetic inheritance, and of ribonucleic acid (RNA), which directs

protein synthesis both plant and animal which play a critical role in circular

membrane, are another class of universally important phosphorus

compounds. Adequate phosphorus nutrient enhance many aspects of plant

physiology, including the fundamental process of photosynthesis, nitrogen

fixation, flowering, fruiting (including seed production) and maturation.

(Khasawneh, et al. 1980)

Hassan et al. (1996) carried out an experiment with five rates of N (0,

62, 124, 185 and 247 kg ha–1), four of P2O5 (0, 74, 148 and 222 kg t ha–1) and

three of K (0, 74 and 148 kg ha–1) in different combinations of rice cv. BAS-

385, at 40 locations in Punjab. The crop responded significantly to application

of N and P showing a quadratic trend, whereas only the maximum dose of K

(148 kg ha–1) significantly increased paddy yield. Maximum paddy yield of

4025 kg ha–1 was obtained at 124:222:74 kg NPK ha–1.

Asif et al. (1997) carried out an experiment on rice cv. BAS-385, grown

at the experimental farm of University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. The NPK

were applied at the rates of 130:67:67 and 180:90:90 kg ha–1. Paddy yield

was high with 130:67:67 kg NPK ha–1.

Rafiq et al. (1998) observed the response of BAS-385 to four levels of

NPK, i.e. (70:67:67, 100:67:67, 130:67:67 and 160:67:67 kg ha–1). Results

showed that application of 130:67:67 kg NPK ha–1 significantly increased yield

and yield components as compared to other treatments.

Asif et al. (1999) studied the influence of NPK levels and split N

application on grain filling and yield of fine rice. The treatments consisted of

three nutrient levels F1-60-0-0, F2 120-67-67, and F3 180-90-90 kg NPK ha-1

and three N application times, N1 all at transplanting, and N2 1/2 at

15

transplanting +1/2 at early tillering and N3 each at transplanting + panicle

initiation. The results showed that F2 and N3 increased the number of panicle

m-2, normal kernels %, 1000-grain weight, paddy yield and reduce sterile

spikelets.

Mohammad (1999) long-term effect of fertilizers and an integrated

nutrient supply system were studied in a rice-rice sequence for 8 years.

Nutrient uptake and seed yield improved with increase in fertilizers up to the

recommended dose of 120, 60, 40 kg ha-1, N, P2O5 and K2O in the rainy and

post rainy season during the 8 years sequence cycles.

Kalita et al. (2000) observed the response of rice crop of three plant

population and 5 different doses of NPK fertilizer. They observed that higher

magnitude of plant height and harvest index was recorded at wider spacing

while more tiller number m–2 as well as grain and straw yield were at closer

spacing. A consistent increase of all growth parameters, yield and harvest

index was observed with each incremental dose of NPK fertilizer.

Dutta et al. (2001) conducted a field experiment to analyze the growth

pattern of rice under different treatments in rice-prawn dual culture system in

rainfed intermediate deep-water situation (0.50 cm). The study revealed that

application of organic (FYM) or inorganic fertilizers (Urea, SSP and Mop) to

rice in rice-prawn dual culture significantly increased plant height, dry matter,

leaf area index, crop growth rate and number of tillers m-2 as compared to rice

crop grown alone (control).

Stevens et al. (2001) conducted an experiment to study the effect of

various soil pH levels on phosphorus uptake in rice. The treatments with

phosphorus fertilizer increased yield but lime reduce rice yield.

Maqsood et al. (2001) a field experiment was conducted to evaluate

the effect of different nitrogen and phosphorus levels on growth and yield of

rice (Basmati-385). The treatments were F0 0-0, F1 40-20, F2 60-40, F3 80-60,

16

F4 100-80 and F5 120-100 kg ha-1, respectively. The results showed that the

treatment F4 produced maximum panicle bearing tillers and maximum normal

kernels were produced by the treatment F5. The various levels of NP

significantly influenced 1000-grain weight and paddy yield over control. The

treatment F5 was the most economical to obtained high yield.

Mian et al. (2001) conducted a field experiment to investigate the

effects of P and zinc fertilizer on the yield of wheat and rice. They used two

levels of P (100 and 200 kg ha-1) and three levels of zinc i.e. 0, 3.5 and 7 for

wheat and 0, 5 and 10 kg ha-1 for rice. The yield data revealed that high P

level (200 kg ha-1) had increased the paddy yield significantly while zinc at the

rate of 5-10 kg ha-1 was not economical for rice yield.

Saleque et al. (2001) conducted a field experiment to study the effects

of P deficiency on the mineral nutrition of modern rice high yielding rice

varieties. The results suggested that the P deficiency in soil dose not only

affect the P nutrition of rice but may also positively affect the uptake of other

nutrients especially that of K and Mg.

Singh et al. (2001) conducted an experiment in a split plot design

consisting of five main plots treatments: M1-Green manure, M2-Moong legume

straw 51 t ha–1, M3-farmyard manure, (5 t ha–1), M4-rice straw (5 t ha–1) and

M5 weedy fellow; and five sub-plot treatments: F0 control, F1- 50% N, F2-50%

NP, F3-50% NPK and F4 -100% NPK of the recommended dose (120 kg N,

26.5 kg P and 49.8 Kg K), the result showed that chemical fertilizer

significantly increased yield compared with fertilizer control. The minimum

yield of 2 .0 t ha–1 was in control which increased to 3.21 t ha–1 in F1, 3.6 t ha–

1 in F2, 4.0 t ha–1 in F3 and 4.7 t ha–1 in F4.

Timsina et al. (2001) conducted field experiments to find the effects of

two water regimes (rainfed and irrigated) and three N regimes (0-180 kg ha–1)

on growth and productivity for rice-wheat system. Mean grain yields of rice

and wheat were greatest (4.9 and 3.1 t ha–1, respectively) during the first and

17

smallest (2.52 and 2.4 t ha–1, respectively) during the third year. They further

concluded that the results emphasize regular monitoring of weather, crop

performance, irrigation water, and soil and plant mineral N for further

understanding the growth productivity, N-use efficiencies and balance in rice-

wheat system.

Tran et al. (2001) a pot and field experiment was conducted to

investigate the effect of water submergence depth on radial oxygen loss

(ROL), soil solution chemistry and rice growth performance in acid sulphate

soils. In pot experiment 5, 10 and 15 cm water depth were kept. Rice yields

were higher at 5 cm as compared to 10 or 15 cm submergence. In field

experiment, with a dry season rice crop, yield was also higher at shallow

submergence depth than at greater depths.

Ahmad et al. (2001) conducted a field experiment on rice genotypes,

which differed significantly in their growth response. Growth response in

terms of paddy yield was influenced by P application, genotype and their

interaction. The genotypes K, Basmati, NAB-6, IRRI-6, Basmati-370 and

KSK-282 showed positive response to P applications. Mostly genotypes with

high P concentration had low P uptake, low phosphorus use efficiency and

hence low paddy yield. NIAB-6, IRRI-6 and K rice genotypes were responsive

and productive with P application.

George et al. (2001) conducted a field experiment to evaluate the

effects of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash. The treatments were, control, 50

kg P205 ha-1, 100 kg N ha-1 and 50 kg K2So4. They concluded that phosphorus

fertilization increased average grain yield 20%, total biomass 27% and

phosphorus uptake 53% kg ha-1. It is further stated that upland rice trails

responded to phosphorus, with a large proportion of biomass partition to grain

(i e. higher harvest index).

Nathan et al. (2002) conducted a field experiment to evaluate the

response of phosphorus fertilizer applied at different times. Three rates of

18

phosphorus (9.8, 19.6 and 39.1 kg P ha-1) were applied at four different times

during the growing season including emergence, pre-flood, 5 to 10 days post

flood or at midseason and compared with an untreated control. Grain yields

were maximum with the application of 19.6 kg P ha-1 with the increase of 24-

41%. Applications of phosphorus fertilizer pre-emergence, pre-flood and post-

flood were superior to midseason and control.

Begum et al. (2002) reported that the seedling raised in polythene

covering of seed bed produced the highest plant attributes in boro rice.

Recommended NPK fertilizer, ash + cow-dung were produce the highest

grain yield (5.5 t ha-1) and also showed better performance in plant height,

bearing tillers hill-1, straw yield than other treatments.

Fageria and Santos (2002) conducted a green house experiment to

evaluate 12 genotypes of lowland rice, using an inceptisol (Typic

Haplaquepts). The P treatments were low (0 mg P kg–1), medium (100 mg P

kg–1 and high 400 mg P kg–1. Among the yield components, panicle length

and harvest index were significantly affected by P level. However, panicle

number, harvest index and panicle length were significantly (P<0.01) related

to grain.

George et al. (2002) studied to examine where high and stable rice

yields could be obtained in aerobic soil. In four experiments, lime, N, P were

inputs for wet-season upland rice ‘UPLRi-5’ in a favorable rainfed Oxisol. In a

three years experiment consisting of two crops per year in an irrigated Ultisol,

different lowland and upland varieties were grown in lined and fertilized

aerobic soil. They noted that increasing upland rice yield in Asia would require

genotypes with higher harvest index in addition to P fertilizer.

Nadeem and Ibrahim (2002) studied the P requirement of rice crop

grown after wheat, under submerged condition. The P was applied @ 0, 25,

50, 75 kg ha-1 along with basal dose of N (135 kg ha-1). The results of paddy

yield indicated that the highest paddy yield was obtained from the treatment

19

where 37.5 kg (50%) P was applied. Sahrawat and Sika, (2002) a field

experiment was conducted to evaluate the response of four rice cultivars to

direct and residual P. Fertilizer P was applied at 0, 45, 90,135 and 180 kg P

ha–1 once in 1993 and the crop was grown during 1993 to 1998 without any

fresh application of phosphorus. The relationship between Bray 1 P and

fertilizer P added in the initial P build up phase were described by a linear

regression equation (R=0.895). The relationship between soil P test and P

uptake were closer than between soil P and grain yield. The result suggested

that Bray 1 P indicate the availability of P to rice corps and can be used for

determining the long term fertilizer requirements of upland rice in the

determining the long term fertilizer requirements of upland rice in the ultisol.

Sahrawat et al. (2002) conducted a field experiment under rainfed

condition to determine the response of P, Ca, and Mg, nutrient combination.

Phosphorus alone or combination with Ca and Mg significantly increased the

yield and agronomic and physiological P efficiencies and improved harvest

index of the crop.

Slaton et al. (2002) established field studies in six commercial rice

fields to evaluate rice response to P fertilizer applied at different times. Three

rates of P (9.8, 19.6 and 36 kg P ha–1) were applied at four different times

during growing season including pre-emergence (PRE), pre flood (PF), 5 to

10 days post flood (POF), or at midseason (MS) and compared with an

untreated control. Significant grain yield increases were measured at two of

the six locations. Grain yields were maximized by application of 19.6 kg P

ha–1 at the two highly responsive of 24 to 41%. Application of P fertilizer PRE,

PF and POF were superior to MS applications which were not different to the

control. Application of P fertilizer between seedling and active tillering were

equally effective at increasing rice yields.

Awan et al (2003) conducted a field experiment to observe the effect of

applying N, P and K fertilizer at different rates and combinations on growth

20

and yield of rice line PB-95. The fertilizer treatments comprised the T1

(control), T2 (0-75-75), T3 (60-75-75), T4 (120-75-75) T5 (180-75-75), T6 (120-

0-75), T7 (120-500-75), T8 (120-100-75), T9 (120-75-0), T10 (120-75-50) and

T11 (120-75-100) NPK kg ha-1. The results showed that application of NPK

significantly increased the crop yield and maximum paddy and straw yield

were obtained from plots fertilized 120-100-75 NPK kg ha-1. Phosphorus

physiological efficiency index decreased while P efficiency increased with

increasing P levels.

Sovuthy et al. (2003) reported that six combinations of P fertilizer

applications at 16.5 kg P ha-1 were made: either no crop to all crops, or to

first, second, third or forth crop only. Moreover the responses of the crops and

soil P fractions quantified. Freshly applied P increased rice grain yield by

95%. In the first and second crops using residual P fertilizer, yields increased

by 62% and 33% relative to the nil P plot. Grain yields in the third crop using

residual P dropped to levels obtained in the nil-P soils.

Kumar and Reddy (2003) studied the effect of nursery seeding date

and phosphorus fertilization on rice seedling growth and concluded that 2.0

kg P2O5 100 m-2 resulted in greater root length, seeding height and shoot dry

weight compared with 0.5 kg P2O5 and 1.00 kg P2O5 m-2 100 m-2, though it

was on a par with 1.5 kg P2O5 100 m-2. Application of phosphorus at high

level increase seedling height and dry weight.

Yaduvanshi (2003) conducted a field experiment to evaluate the effect

of NPK fertilizers and in combination of green manure or farm yard manure in

rice-wheat cropping sequence. Application of NPK and its combination with

green manuring and farm yard manure increased the rice yield significantly.

Dwivedi et al. (2004) conducted an experiment to examine how

demands of rice-wheat cropping systems might be met with heavy initial

dressing of phosphate rock. Treatments were; (i) Rice-wheat cycle where P

was applied as phosphate rock to each successive rice crop (54 kg P ha-1) to

21

rice and 24 kg P ha-1 to wheat); (ii) rice-wheat cycles where P was applied as

phosphate rock to alternate rice crops (108 kg P ha-1); and (iii) rice-wheat

cycles where P was applied as phosphate rock to the initial rice crop (162 kg

ha-1). They concluded that higher level of phosphorus increase the rice yield

significantly over control and lower rates of applied phosphorus.

Sudhakar et al. (2004) conducted an experiment to study the effect of

silicon sources and fertility levels. The experiment was laid out in a split plot

design with four fertility levels (F1: 80-40-40-16-0.25 N-P-K-S; F2: 120-60-60-

24-0.50; F3: 160-80-80-32-0.75; and F4: 200-100-100-40-1.00 kg ha-1). The

fertility levels significantly affected dry matter production during both years.

Grain and straw yield increased with an increase in fertility levels up to F4 but

the differences were significant only up to F3.

Qadar and Ansari (2006) an experiment was conducted at various pH

values (8.0, 9.3, 9.7 and 9.9) with vary levels of phosphorus fertilization (P0 0,

P0.2, P0.4, P0.6, and P0.8 kg hm-2) showed that phosphorus requirement of

rice increased with increases in sodicity stress. At a pH of 8.0, 4.3 mg kg-1

Olsen’s P was sufficient for survival of the seed hugs but not for grain weight

(6.3 mg kg-1). Seeding required 7.0 and 9.5 mg kg-1 Olsen’ P to survive at pH

9.7 and 9.9 respectively. Similarly, high P levels were needed for more total

and fertile tillers and spikelets numbers. 1000-grain weight and grain yield

responded to 6.3, 7.7, 8.8, and 10.4 mg kg-1 Olsen’s P at pH values of 8.0,

9.3, and 9.9 respectively.

Prakash et al. (2007) conducted an experiment to evaluate the effect of

rice hull ash (RHA) as a source of silicon and phosphatic fertilizers in a

randomized complete block design with nine treatments NPK (T1:

recommended N and K without P; T2: T1: + RHA at 2 Mg ha-1; T3: T1 + RHA

at 4 Mg ha-1; T4: recommended NPK (P as DAP); T5:T4+RHA at 2 Mg ha-1;

T6: T4 +RHA at 4 Mg ha-1; T7: recommended NPK (P as RP); T8: T7+RHA at

2Mg ha-1 and T9: T7+RHA at 4 Mg ha-1) with three replications. They reported

22

that addition of P with and without RHA increase grain and straw yield. The

yield increase was largely brought about by the advantage gained in grain

filling and grain weight because of better translocation of Photosynthates.

2.3: Plant Growth Regulator

In today's world, a widening gap between food production and demand

for food has intensified the quest for maximizing production per unit land area

and per unit of time. For most of the densely populated areas of tropical Asia,

where rice is the staple food crop, the primary avenues open for increasing

food production are crop intensification and higher yields for there is less

possibility of bringing more land into cultivation.

Apart from genetic factors and cultural management practices, plant

characteristics can some times be modified by the application of growth

regulators. At appropriate concentrations, growth regulators like naphthalene

acetic acid (Auxin group) can stimulate increased activity of key chemical

processes, which are reflected by increased growth, ultimately resulting in

increased yields.

Plant growth regulators had potentially powerful effects in modifying

growth and development in desired directions, especially straw shortening

and increasing standing power leading to increased yield. Different plant

growth regulators are thought appropriate for rice plant to see their effect on

enhancing the photosynthetic activities of the leaves and other growth

characteristics (Kato, 2004).

Singh and Singh (1982) sown treated seeds of rice cv. Jaya with IAA. It

significantly increased the final yield. Further they found amylase, invertase,

total soluble sugar and starch in developing grains of rice cv. Jaya, sampled

10-40 days after anthesis treated with IAA, GA3, kinetin or ethylene. Amylase

and invertase activities decreased with advancement of grain development.

They also recorded that maximum activities of both enzymes were found in

23

grain from GA3 treated plants followed by IAA treated plants. They further

reported that kinetin caused maximum accumulation of starch in grains and

significantly increased the number of grain per panicle and 1000-grain weight.

Kinetin also increased the number of grains per panicle.

Singh et al. (1984) observed that spraying of IAA GA3, Kinetin and

Ethephon at 5, 25, 10 and 25 ppm respectively on yield of rice cv. Jaya at

anthesis and again 1 week later; IAA and Kinetin increased the number of

grains per panicle, percentage of filled spikelets, 1000-grain weight and thus

final yield.

Harda et al. (1985) reported that rice cv. Suweon-258 grown in boxes

was given 200 ml of 0.1-10 ppm GA3 per box at 2nd / 3rd leaf stage. GA3

increased dry matter and number of tillers per plant.

Kuar and Singh (1987) noted that application of IAA, GA3 and Kinetin

significantly increased spikelets panicle-1, percentage of filled gain and 1000-

grain weight in three dwarf and a tall variety of rice. The increase in leaf

longevity and retardation of senescence may affect the yield and quality of

rice through continued photosynthetic activity for a longer period.

Awan et al. (1989) studied the effect of plant growth regulators in pot

experiment laid out in a complete randomized block design with four

replications. IR-6 seedlings were transplanted at 30 days after seeding, 3

seedling / 240-mm diameter, 300-mm-deep pot. An aqueous solution of 100

ppm Gibberellic acid (GA3) and 100 ppm Indole acetic acid (IAA) were

sprayed at 3 ml /plant at panicle initiation. Application of growth regulators at

panicle initiation significantly affected plant height, tillers/plant, grains/panicle,

1000-grain weight, sterility percentage and grain yield.

Dengon et al. (1996) studied the effect of various doses of plant growth

regulator on the productivity of rice. Among four levels of plant growth

regulator (NAA) viz. 0 ml ha-1, 70 ml ha-1, 100 ml ha-1 and 130 ml ha-1. The

24

dose of 100 ml ha-1 performed well in improving the yield and yield attributes

like productive tillers m-2, panicles m-2, spikelets panicle-1, normal kernels

percentage, 1000-grain weight (g), paddy yield (t ha-1) and straw yield (t ha-1).

Razi and Sen (1996) conducted an experiment using nitrogen fertilizer

and plant growth regulators. Since N2-fixing bacteria produce plant growth

substances, the effect of foliar application of active strain of Klebsiella sp.

(KUPOS) in IR-50 rice was examined using three foliar sprays applied at 10-

days intervals. Irrigation once every three days was essential for plant growth.

Application of KUPOS and 40 kg N ha-1 improved grain yield of water

stressed plants from 330-1300 kg ha-1 along with an improvement in several

growth variables and yield determinants. IAA, Kinetin and GA3 in a mixture of

10-4 M of each, were less effective than KUPOS in alleviating stress effects.

Ghoshi and Rama (1997) conducted field experiments to study the

effects of various growth hormones on paddy yield and its contributing

components on rice and concluded that sterility % age was reduced with

application of NAA (@ 80 ml ha-1) as it improved seed setting, 1000-grain

weight (g), paddy yield (t ha-1) and straw yield (t ha-1) as compared to IAA and

ABA. While the effect of all plant growth regulators was positive over control

Zahir et al. (1998) conducted a field experiment to assess the influence

of L- tryptophan on growth and yield of rice. Results showed that specific

growth and yield parameters were significantly promoted in response to

various L-TRP treatments. L-TRP application @ 10-5m significantly increased

the plant height (4.15%), paddy yield (41.5%) number of tillers (29.4%) and

number of panicles (27.9%) compared to control. Results of this study

showed that the growth and yield of rice may be enhanced with the

application of an auxin precursor L-tryptophan.

Anwar (1999) while studding production of growth hormones and

nitroganse use by diazotrophic bacteria and their effect of plant growth

concluded that effect of growth hormones being extracted from bacteria.

25

Filtrated and pure growth hormones (IAA and GA) were found to be plant

species specific as the effect of 2 ug/ml of IAA was different on rice and

wheat. However he further concluded that pure IAA and GA concentration at

the rate of 1-2 ug/ml increased root area and plant biomass of rice.

Awan et al. (1999) conducted a pot experiment to study the application

of growth regulators Gibberellic Acid (GA) and Indole Acetic Acid (IAA) on rice

at panicle emergence stage/ just at flowering stage, affected the plant height,

number of tillers per pot, sterility (%), number of spikelets per panicle and

paddy yield increased significantly. Maximum reduction in sterility (%) was

recorded in IAA and GA, applied at panicle emergence stage as compared to

check (control). The reason for this might be the delayed senescence and

prolong functionality of plant leaves, allowing the vital physiological processes

of the plant like photosynthesis and translocation of carbohydrates for a

longer period of time as compared to the pots where no growth regulator was

applied.

Khan and Zia (2000) wire house pot culture experiments were

conducted to monitor the effect of organic amendments and effective micro-

organisms (EM) on the reclamation of a saline soil material, using canal and

brackish water for rice crop. Application of green manuring with EM had a

significant influence on the vegetative growth of rice, panicle bearing tillers,

straw and grain yield.

Zahir et al. (2000) conducted field and pot experiments to evaluate the

effect of an auxin, L-tryptophan on the growth and yield of rice, wheat,

soybean, potato and tomato. Rice (cv-Basmati-385) seedling treated with

10-2, 10-6 M and 10-1, 10-5 M LTRP by dipping seedling roots in respective

solutions for one hour gave maximum paddy yield and number of panicle per

hill at 10-5 M and 10-1 M L-TRP. In nutshell, L-tryptophan applications to

different crops significantly increased all the yield components.

26

Pandey et al. (2001) conducted an experiment to study the effect of

certain growth regulators on growth, yield and quality of rice. The study

revealed that plant height was significantly reduced by higher concentration of

both CCC and Alar. The higher dose of IAA @ 50 ppm had significantly

increased plant height and produced higher grain yield of 5533 kg ha-1

against 4720 kg ha-1 in the control. The increase in grain yield was mostly

contributed by increased chlorophyll content, panicles per plant, grains per

panicle, grain weight per plant and improved harvest index.

Yang et al. (2002) conducted a pot experiment to study the regulation

of senescence-initiated remobilization of carbon reserves in rice by abscisic

acid and cytokinins using two rice cultivars with high lodging resistance and

slow remobilization. The plants were grown in pots and either well-watered, or

water-stressed from 9 days after anthesis till they reach maturity. Water-

stressed plants enhanced senescence shortened the grain-filling period and

increased the grain-filling rate than well-watered plots. Spraying abscisic acid

enhances sucrose phosphate synthase activities and remobilization of carbon

reserves. The results suggested that both ABA and cytokinins are involved in

controlling plant senescence and an enhanced carbon remobilization in rice

subjected to water stress during grain filling.

Chenniappan et al. (2004) conducted an experiment for maximizing of

seed set in hybrid rice through chemical manipulation. The chemicals were

GA3, Brassinolide (0.3 ppm), Salicylic acid (100 ppm), Spent Wash 20 ml,

combination of nutrients [ZnSO4 (0.5)+Boric acid (0.2%)+DAP (2%) MOP

(1%)]. The chemicals were applied as foliar spray. GA3 resulted in better

panicle exertion than the other chemicals. Foliar spray of GA3 recorded higher

seed set (34.4%) followed spent wash (33.8%) and GA3 + Brassinolide (33.0

%) which it was lowest in control (27.5%). The higher seed setting has been

accomplished through more panicle exertion resulting in increased number of

fertile spikelets. The grain yield ranged from 121.6 g/m-2 (control) to 160 g/m-2

(GA3 treatment).

27

Kato et al. (2004) conducted two experiments to evaluate the effect of

gibberellin, in first experiment gibberellin was applied at tillering, panicle

formation heading stages. As a result gibberellin may play a possible role to

regulate a number at every early stage of panicle formation. In second

experiment gibberellin was applied at just before panicle differentiation stage

or at late spikelets differentiation stage, the result showed that GA at early

stage of panicle formation is essential to regulate rachis-branch and spikelets

differentiation in rice.

Watanabe and Siagusa (2004) conducted an experiment to evaluate

the effects of two plant growth regulators, Gibberellic acid (GA3) and

Ethephon (ET) on seedling growth under flooded conditions. Seedling growth

was increased by a single treatment of GA3 or ET over that of control.

However, effects of combined application of GA3 and ET were more

pronounced than that of GA3 or Et alone.

Yang et al. (2004) determined the interaction between absisic acid and

ethylene may be involved in mediation the effects of water stress on grain

filling. Two high lodging resistant rice cultivars were pot-grown. Three

treatments, well watered, moderate water-stressed and severe water-

stressed, were imposed from 9-day post-anthesis until maturity. Grain filling

rate and grain weight were significantly increased under medium stressed but

decrease under severe stressed plant.

Islam et al. (2005) conducted an experiment to find out the effect of

flag leaf clipping and GA3 on hybrid rice seed yield. Four treatments were

applied: T1 = control, T2 = GA3 application without flag leaf clipping, T3 = flag

leaf clipping without GA3 application and T4 = GA3 application with flag leaf

clipping. GA3 was applied at 75g ha-1 in two splits. The first spraying GA3 was

done 2 day after the first spray. They concluded that highest plant height was

observed in T2 where GA3 was applied without flag leaf clipping.

28

Yadav et al. (2005) studied some homeopathic medicine on human

reproductive systems, a number of these resources were tried to explore their

usefulness in enhancing out crossing of parental lines of hybrid rice. Pulsatilla

200 (SBL) at a concentration of 1: 10 (chemical and water) was applied

before heading, whereas GA3 (60 g ha-1) was applied at 5-10% panicle

emergence on female lines. Seed yield was obtained on a per plot basis.

Pulsatilla 200 (SBL) was found most effective in improving significantly seed

set, seed yield and other parameters over control and GA3.

Ezekiel et al. (2006) conducted an experiment to evaluate the effect of

plant growth regulators on two rice varieties. Two plant growth regulators,

Chlormequat (applied at 30 mg per pot) and Ancymidol (applied at 1.5 mg per

plot) were tested on two rice cultivars (early maturity, tall OS-6 and late

maturing, dwarf IR-5) after treatment to three N rates (0, 2.5 and 4.5 mg N per

kg) in an effort to evaluate PGRs and N effects on rice crop performance and

N-use efficiency. OS-6 variety had its height, number of fertile tiller and grain

yield increased by PGRs.

Gormani et el. (2006) conducted a pot experiment to asses the role of

abscisic acid (ABA), Benzyleadinine (BA) and cycocel (CCC) on growth, yield,

ion accumulation and in prolin production in three rice cultivars, a super

Basmati, Shaheen Basmati and IR-6 differing in yield. Seeds of each cultivar

were soaked prior to sowing with ABA and BA each at 105 M and CCC at

106M for 24 hours. They concluded that the ranking of growth regulator for

their effect on grain yield and 1000 grain weights were ABA >BA>CCC.

Higher gain yield and 1000 grain weight were recorded by IR-6.

Zahir et al. (2007) conducted an experiment to study plant growth

regulators like IAA, GA3 and kinetin were blended with compost organic

wastes and their bioavailability to affect the growth and yield of wheat was

evaluated in a field trail. The compost was prepared from fruit and vegetable

waste material and enriched with 25% of full dose of N fertilizer (100 g kg-1

29

compost). Each of indole 3-acetic acid (IAA), gibberellic acid (GA3) and kinetin

were added @ 1.0 mg kg-1 compost. Effectiveness of IAA/GA3 or kinetin-

blended N-enriched compost was compared in the presence of 50% of full

dose of N fertilizer for improving growth and yield of wheat. Compost was

applied @ 300 kg ha-1 and full P and K fertilizers (@100-60 kg ha-1) were

applied as basal dose to all plots. Full dose of N fertilizer (120 kg ha-1) was

used for comparison. Results indicated that IAA-blended N-compost with half

dose of N fertilizer was comparable with full dose of N fertilizer for improving

growth and yield of wheat, saving 25% N fertilizer. However, application of

kinetin blended N-enriched compost increased the grain yield (9.1%) and

uptake of nutrients i.e. NPK uptake (5.6, 8.6, and 7.0%, respectively) over full

dose of N fertilizer.

30

Chapter - 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A research project on “Enhancing the yield potential of rice (Oryza sativa L.)

through different agronomic techniques under the agro-climatic conditions of

D. I. Khan” was undertaken at the Postgraduate Agriculture Research Farm,

Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan, NWFP, Pakistan, during rice growing

seasons of 2004 and 2005. The following experiments were conducted:

EXPERIMENT NO. 1

Effect of irrigation regimes and phosphorus levels on the yield and yield

components of transplanted coarse rice.

EXPERIMENT NO. 2

Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) levels and irrigation regimes on the

yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

EXPERIMENT NO. 3

Effect of phosphorus and plant growth regulator (NAA) levels on the yield and

yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

EXPERIMENT NO. 4

Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) levels at different growth stages of

transplanted coarse rice.

3.1: Location and Agro-meteorological conditions

Dera Ismail Khan is situated in the extreme south of North West Frontier

Province (NWFP) of Pakistan and lies between 31º N latitude and 71º E

longitude and an altitude of 171m.The irrigated area of Dera Ismail Khan is

31

about 14.73 % of the total area. The soils of the area are calcareous in

nature, deficient in organic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus and adequate to

marginal in potassium. The climate is arid to semi-arid. It is hot and dry in

summer with moderate spells during monsoon season. The elevation ranges

from 121 to 1210 meter above sea level. The mean maximum temperature in

summer and mean minimum temperature in winter are 45 and 8 oC,

respectively. The mean annual precipitation ranges from 15-25 cm and

relative humidity varies from 51% in June to 78% in October. Meteorological

data during the crop seasons are given in appendix 1

3.2: Physico- chemical characteristics of soil

The experiments were carried out in fields of Postgraduate Agriculture

Research Farm, Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan. The physico-chemical

characteristics of the soil are shown in Table 3.1.

3.3: Land preparation

The experimental field was prepared by giving one deep ploughing followed

by spring tined cultivator and planking. The waste matter (roots, leaves etc) of

previous crop was incorporated into the soil. The land was then kept open for

drying and killing soil-borne insects and pathogens.

3.4: Water Management

In experiment 1 and 2, four irrigation levels / moisture regimes, 8 irrigation in

60 cm, 10 irrigation in 75 cm, 12 irrigation in 90 cm and 14 irrigation in 105 cm

were maintained accordingly till the maturity to meet the water requirements

of the crop. Depth of 7.5 cm of each irrigation was maintained through out the

crop growing period to maintain moisture contents in root zone of crop at field

capacity by the following equation (Chaudhary, 2001).

R = (FC-MC) X BXD

100

32

R = water requirement on the day of soil moisture sampling (cm).

FC = Percent moisture content at field capacity on the weight basis

MC = Percent moisture content on weight basis as determined on the day of

sampling.

B = Bulk density of soil (g/cm3)

D = Depth of root zone (cm)

R = (FC-MC) X B X D

100

R = (32.45-16) X 1.23 X 37cm = 7.5 cm / 30cm.

100

The amount of water was measured with the help of current meter and

stopwatch after calculating the required volume as under.

The required volume of water = Width X Length X Depth

= 3x5x0.075m = 1.25 m3

In experiment 3 and 4, water depth at the time of transplanting was

maintained 3.5 cm as too low or too high water depth may result in drying or

submergence of seedlings. After one week of transplanting, a water depth of

5+2 cm was maintained till maturity to meet the requirements of the crop and

to avoid the weed growth.

3.5: Plant growth regulator (NAA)

Phytofix (Naphthalene Acetic Acid) was applied by hand pump sprayer with

the concentration of 4.5% in sodium salt in four different doses at the time of

tillering, flowering and grain formation.

3.6: Variety

Well adapted, non-aromatic coarse rice variety “IR-6” was used in all the

trials, which belongs to the Indica rice group.

33

Table 3.1. Physio-chemical characteristics of soil at Postgraduate Agriculture Research Farm, Gomal University, Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan.

Values Determination Unit

2004 2005

Mechanical analysis

Sand % 12.00 10.00

Silt % 30.50 34.50

Clay % 57.50 55.50

Texture class Clay Clay

Chemical analysis

pH (1:5) 1-14 8.1 7.9

Ec2 dSm-1 2.80 3.0

Ca++ + Mg++ Meq/L 2.2 3.1

Organic Matter % 0.46 0.56

N % 0.030 0.032

P Ppm 8.00 8.50

K Ppm 80.00 92.50

Source: Soil Chemistry Laboratory, Agricultural Research Institute, Dera Ismail Khan, NWFP, Pakistan.

34

3.7: Seed preparation

Seeds of IR-6 variety were selected at specific gravity of 1.13 in salt water,

prepared by dissolving about ½ kg of salt (Sodium Chloride) in 10 liters of

water. The seeds that sink in salt water were selected for sowing and other

light floating and un-viable seeds were discarded. After rinsing the salt water,

the seed was kept immersed in water for 24 hours and then under moist

gunny bags for 36 hours to a pigeon breast like shape.

3.8: Nursery Sowing

Certified and treated seed of coarse rice variety IR-6 was procured from the

department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Gomal University, Dera

Ismail Khan. Nursery was sown by adopting dry sowing method in 1st week of

May each year for the experiment. The plot was prepared in the watter

condition, after broadcasting the pre-germinated seed, the plot was irrigated

immediately. Irrigation water was applied till the seedlings were ready for

transplanting. A recommended dose of fertilizer @ 120kg N and 100-kg P ha-

1was applied in the nursery. The nursery was kept free of weeds and pests by

the application of Ronstar and Furadon respectively.

3.9: Nitrogen Fertilizer

The experiment was fertilized with recommended dose of nitrogen and

phosphorous that is 120kg N ha-1 and 100kg P ha-1 in the form of urea and

SSP respectively. Phosphorus was applied at the time transplanting while half

of the nitrogen was applied at the time of transplanting, while the remaining

half at the time of panicle initiation.

3.10: Transplanting

Transplanting was done in standing water by skilled laborers on 15th June

using 35 days old seedling in the standing water, using row-row and plant-to-

35

plant spacing of 20x20 cm in the experiment. After transplanting gap filling

was done at the time of second irrigation in each experiment.

3.11: Layout and Design

All the field experiments were laid out in a Randomized Complete Block

Design (RCBD) with split plot arrangements having 4 replications. The sub-

plot size was 5 x 3 m2 using the line planting with a plant-to-plant and row-to-

row spacing of 20 cm in all the experiments.

3.12: Weeds and pests control

Weeds and pests controlled chemically applying the recommended dose of

weedicide Ronstar @ 1 liter /ha at the time of second irrigation in standing

water and pesticide Fauradon granules @ 20 kg/ ha was applied at the time

of panicle initiation.

3.13: Statistical Analysis

The data recorded during the crop seasons of 2004 and 2005 were analyzed

statistically using analysis of variance technique and subsequently Least

Significance Test (LSD) was applied for comparing the treatment means, by

M Stat-C computer software program (Steel and Torrie, 1980).

3.14: Observation recorded

The following parameters were recorded during the course of investigation.

The methodology used for recording individual parameter is described as

under:

3.14.1: Plant height at maturity (cm)

Ten plants were selected at random from each plot at maturity. Their height

was measured from the soil surface to the tip of panicle / flag leaf with the

help of a meter rod and average height was calculated.

36

3.14.2: Number of productive tillers m-2

Productive and unproductive tillers were counted randomly from each plot at

harvest, using 1 m2 quadrate.

3.14.3: Number of panicles m-2

Total numbers of panicles m-2 in each plot were counted at harvest from fixed

places earmarked for recording tillers.

3.14.4: Number of spikelets panicle-1

Spikelets per panicle were averaged from 10 randomly selected panicles

taken from each plot. The panicles were collected from the same places

earmarked for recording tillers.

3.14.5: Sterility percentage

The sterility / empty spikelets were calculated from 10 randomly selected

panicles from each plot at harvest. After averaging the total spikelets

panicle-1, the sterility percentage was calculated. The empty seeds were

designated as sterile and the rest were considered as normal kernels.

100spikelets of No. Total

spikelets SterilepercentageSterility ×=

3.14.6: Normal kernels percentage

The normal kernels % was calculated from 10 randomly selected panicles

from each plot at harvest. After averaging the total spikelets per panicle, the

normal kernels percentage was calculated.

Normal Kernel percentage = Normal kernels x 100 Total number of kernels

37

3.14.7: 1000-grain weight (g)

From the dry seed lot of each plot, samples of 1000-grain weight (g) were

taken and weighed, using Mettle electronic precision balance PE 1600 USA.

3.14.8: Biological yield (t ha-1)

Biological yield from each plot was weighed and recorded randomly from one

meter square area by using triple beam balance. The biological yield was

expressed in t ha-1 by the same formula used for calculating paddy yield.

3.14.9: Paddy yield (t ha-1)

An area of m-2 was harvested from each plot at random avoiding border

effects. Paddy yield was weighed by triple beam balance at 14 % moisture

level. The yield of clean rough rice was expressed to t ha-1 by using the

following formula:

1000)(m size Plot0000 1 (kg) yieldPlot)ha (t dPaddy yiel 2

1-

××

=

3.14.10: Straw yield (t ha-1)

Straw yield from each plot was weighed and recorded after sun drying for 7

days by using triple beam balance. The yield of straw was expressed in t ha-1

by the same formula used for calculating paddy yield.

3.14.11: Water productivity

Water productivity was calculated through following formula

(Anbumozhi,et al. 1998).

Water productivity = Yield (kg ha-1) Amount of irrigation applied (mm)

38

3.14.12: Fertilizer use efficiency

Fertilizer use efficiency was calculated through following formula (Barber,

1976).

Fertilizer use efficiency = Fertilized Yield (kg ha-1) - Control Yield (kg ha-1) Amount of fertilizer applied (kg) 3.14.13: Harvest Index %

It was calculated with the following formula

Harvest Index % = Economic Yield x 100 Biological yield 3.14.14: Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR)

Benefit Cost Ratio was calculated by using the following formula:

production of cost Totalincome NetRatio Cost Benefit =

3.15: Experimental details

The specific experimental protocol of each experiment is given as under:

Experiment 1: Effect of irrigation water regimes and phosphorus levels on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

In this experiment phosphorus levels were kept in main plot while irrigation

regimes were kept in sub plot. Irrigation regimes were 8,10, 12 and 14

irrigations, keeping the depth of 7.5 cm per irrigation with the amount of

irrigation started from 60 to 105 cm with the increase of 15 cm in each

irrigation levels, where as interval of irrigation was decreased from 14, 12, 10

and 8 days between each irrigation.

39

Main Plot Sub Plot

(Phosphorus Levels) (Irrigation regimes)

P0 = 0 Kg ha-1. I 1 = 8 Irrigations.




P4 = 200 Kg ha-1.

Observations recorded:

Following parameters were recorded during the course of study.

1. Plant height at maturity (cm)

2. Number of productive tillers m-2

3. Number of panicles m-2

4. Number of spikelets panicle-1

5. Sterility percentage

6. Normal kernel percentage

7. 1000- grain weight (g)

8. Biological yield (t ha-1)

9. Paddy yield (t ha-1)

10. Straw yield (t ha-1)

11. Water productivity

12. Fertilizer use efficiency

13. Harvest index %

14. Economic analysis and BCR

Experiment- 2: Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

The experiment was laid out in a RCB design with split plot arrangements,

replicated 4 times. The plant growth regulator doses were kept in main plot

and irrigation regimes were maintained in sub plot. The irrigation regimes

40

were same as in 1st experiment while plant growth regulator doses and its

application is described as under:

Plant growth regulator Application:

Phytofix (Naphthalene Acetic Acid) was applied by hand pump sprayer. Four

different levels of NAA i.e. 0, 60, 90, and 120 ml ha-1 were applied at the time

of panicle initiation stage. Where as recommended doses of NP were applied

at the rate of 120 kg ha-1 in the form of urea and 100 kg P ha-1 in the form of

SSP. The full dose of phosphorus was applied at the time of transplanting,

while nitrogen was applied in two split doses, half at the time of transplanting

and remaining half at the time of panicle initiation. The details of treatments

are as follows:

Main plot Sub plot (Growth regulator levels) (Irrigation regimes) G0 = 0 ml ha-1. I 1 = 8 Irrigations

G1 = 60 ml ha-1. I 2 = 10 Irrigations G2 = 90 ml ha-1. I 3 = 12 Irrigations

G3 = 120 ml ha-1. I 4 = 14 Irrigations

Observations recorded

All the observations were recorded as per procedures given in experiment 1.

Experiment- 3: Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) and phosphorus levels on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.


replicated 4 times. Phytofix (Naphthalene Acetic Acid) was applied by hand

pump sprayer. Four different levels of NAA i.e. 0, 60, 90, and 120 ml ha-1

were applied at the time of panicle initiation stage. The plant growth regulator

doses were kept in main plot and phosphorus levels were maintained in sub

plot. The details of treatments are as follows:

41

Main Plot Sub Plot (Growth regulator levels) (Phosphorus levels) G0 = 0 ml ha-1 P0 = 0 Kg ha-1.

G1 = 60 ml ha-1 P1 = 50 Kg ha-1.

G2 = 90 ml ha-1 P2 = 100 Kg ha-1.

G3 =120 ml ha-1 P3 = 150 Kg ha-1.

P4 = 200 Kg ha-1.



Experiment- 4: Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice.


replicated 4 times. The plant growth stages were kept in main plot and plant

growth regulator levels were kept in sub plot. The details of treatments are as

follows:

Main Plot Sub Plot (Growth stages) (Plant growth regulator levels) S1 = Tillering G0 = 0 ml ha-1.

S2 = Panicle initiation G1 = 60 ml ha-1.

S3 = Grain formation G2 = 90 ml ha-1.

G3 = 120 ml ha-1



42

Chapter – 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Experiment 4.1: Effect of phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to find out the optimal level of phosphatic fertilizer

under various irrigation regimes for increased productivity of rice under the agro-

climatic conditions of Dera Ismail Khan. The experimental design was RCB with split

plot arrangements. Main plot consisted of five levels of phosphatic fertilizer viz. 0 kg

ha-1, 50 kg ha-1, 100 kg ha-1, 150 kg ha-1 and 200 kg ha-1 in form of single supper

phosphate (SSP) while sub-plots contained 8, 10, 12 and 14 irrigations containing

water amount of 600 mm, 750 mm, 900 mm and 1050 mm, respectively. Data were

recorded on plant height (cm), productive tillers (m-2), panicles (m-2), spikelets

panicle-1, sterility and normal kernels percentage, 1000-grain weight (g), paddy yield

(t ha-1), straw yield (t ha-1) and harvest index. Various doses of phosphatic fertilizer,

different irrigation regimes and their interaction affected significantly most of the yield

attributes studied. However the interaction P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations

containing 750 mm water amount) proved the best combination.

Introduction

In 2001, IRRI started experimenting on aerobic rice for the Asian tropics (IRRI, 2001)

to quantify the water savings potential of aerobic cultivation of rice and to evaluate

the performance, yield stability, and water productivity of tropical varieties under

continuous aerobic conditions.

Traditionally, during the rice growth period, farmers try to irrigate to maintain the

depth of water near to 10 cm in order to control weeds and reduce the frequency of

irrigation in Korea. Therefore, the amount of water usually irrigated is much more

than the actual rice requirement. This leads to a high amount of surface runoff, and

seepage and percolation (Bouman, 2001). Korea has a relatively high annual rainfall

43

(1,283 mm) at 1.3 times of the world average (973 mm). However, the average

amount of rainfall per capita per annum (2,700) shows only 10 percent of the world

average (26,800) because of the high population density. Water demand has been

steadily increasing for the last several decades due to increase in population,

irrigation area and industries, as well as the rapid expansion of urban areas. The

water use in 1998 amounted to about 33.1 billion, which comprises 7.3 billion of

municipal use, 2.9 billion of industrial use, 15.8 billion of agricultural use and 7.1 km

billion of in-stream flow augmentation (Cheong, 2003). However, as the demand for

water for domestic, municipal, industrial, and environmental purposes rises in the

future, less water will be available for agriculture. But the potential for new water

resource development projects and expanding irrigated area are limited. Therefore,

this study was conduced to find ways to increase water productivity by water

management. The aim was to find water saving irrigation systems without yield

losses and to examine the response to lodging, root distribution and rice quality.

Phosphorus is generally most available to the plants when the soil pH is between 6.0

and 6.5. When the soil pH is < 6.0, the potential for P deficiency for most crops

increases. The soil P is bound with Fe and Al phosphates which are essentially

insoluble under aerobic and upland conditions, however rice is grown under a

continuous flood for most of the season that results in anaerobic soil conditions. In

anaerobic soils, the Fe phosphate compounds are reduced and are subsequently

converted into a soluble, plant availability form.

Phosphorus deficiency is considered a major soil constraint to increased yield, but

little quantitative information is available. Now to explore the best optimal dose of

Phosphatic fertilizer under best suitable moisture condition, this experiment was

conducted, in which various doses of phosphatic fertilizer were tested under different

irrigation regimes.

44

4.1.1: Plant height (cm)

The data recorded on plant height (cm) are presented in Table 4.1.1. The data

indicated that effect of various doses of phosphatic fertilizer irrespective to irrigation

regimes on plant height differed significantly from each other during both the

cropping seasons. The data revealed that the fertilizer dose of P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1)

showed maximum plant height (115.3 cm) during 2004 and (118.0 cm) during 2005.

It is obvious from the data that smallest plants were recorded in plots with no

fertilizer application, which means that fertilizer application increase the plant height.

As for as the effect of irrigation regimes on plant height of rice crop is concerned it

was observed that various irrigation levels irrespective to phosphorus doses

significantly affected the plant. During both the years of experimentation the tallest

plants were recorded in the treatment with I2 (10 irrigations) followed by I3 (12

irrigations) treatment. While during both the years of studies the smallest plants were

observed in the plots applied with I1 (8 irrigations).

The interaction of phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes was highly significant

during both years of study with respect to plant height. The treatment having P3 (150

kg P2O5 ha-1) with I2 (10 irrigations) was on top in plant height parameter with 126.0

and 128.0 cm plant height during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The smallest plants

were noticed in treatment with P0 (0 kg P2O5 ha-1) of phosphatic fertilizer and I1 (8

irrigations) with 80.0 and 82.5 cm plant height during 1st and 2nd year of study,

respectively.

The water supply in I2 (10 irrigations) treatment having water amount of 750 mm with

P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) phosphatic fertilizer dose produced the tallest plants. It seems

to be due to prolonged vegetative growth duration which resulted due to increase in

water supply along with the availability of phosphatic fertilizer needed. He, et al.

(2004) also stated that rice plant did grow very well in the treatment combination of

80% water holding capacity and P application of 0.0300 mg kg-1, even better than

the combination of water logged soil with P application of 0.0300 mg kg-1.

45

Table 4.1.1: Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 2.13% CV= 1.41% LSD0.01 =1.743 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =2.950 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =1.859 (Irrigation Regimes) LSD0.01 =1.266 (Irrigation Regimes) LSD0.01 =4.158 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =2.830 (Interaction) Means followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

2004 2005

Phosphorus Levels Phosphorus Levels Irrigation Regimes

P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 Means P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 Means

I1 80.0 N

86.0 M

91.0 KL

108.0 EF

102.0 GHI

93.4 D

82.5 M

88.00 L

94.0 K

111.0 DEF

105.0 H

96.1 D

I2 99.0 I

108.0 EF

113.0 CD

126.0 A

110.0 DE

113.2 A

101.0 I

110.0 EF

119.0 C

128.0 A

123.0 B

116.2 A

I3 92.0 K

98.0 IJ

105.8 FG

117.0 BC

120 B

104.6 B

95.0 K

103.5 HI

108.8 FG

120.0 C

111.8 DE

107.8 B

I4 87.0 LM

94.0 JK

100.0 HI

110.0 DE

104.0 FGH

99.0 C

89.6 L

97.9 J

104.0 H

113.0 D

106.0 GH

102.1 C

Means 89.5 E

96.5 D

102.4 C

115.3A

109.0B

92.0 E

99.84D

106.4 C

118.0A

112.3B

46

4.1.2: Number of productive tillers m-2 Among yield components, productive tillers are very important because the final

yield is mainly a function of the number of panicles bearing tillers per unit area. The

data recorded on the number of productive tillers on different doses of phosphatic

fertilizer are presented in Table 4.1.2. The data indicated that various doses of

phosphatic fertilizer irrespective to irrigation regimes differed significantly from each

other during both the cropping seasons regarding the number of productive tillers. It

was noted that the fertilizer dose of P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) showed maximum

productive tillers (361.8 m-2) during 2004 and (369.5 m-2) during 2005. It is obvious

from the data that least number of productive tillers were recorded in plot with P0 (0

kg P2O5 ha-1) fertilizer application.

As far as the effect of irrigation regimes on the number of productive tillers of rice

crop is concerned it was observed that various irrigation regimes irrespective to

phosphorus doses significantly affected number of productive tillers during both the

years of experimentation. However the maximum number of productive tillers (m-2)

were recorded in the treatment with I2 (10 irrigations) followed by I3 (12 irrigations)

treatment. While during both the years of experimentation, the lesser number of

productive tillers (m-2) were observed in the plot applied with I1 (8 irrigations).

The interaction of fertilizer doses and irrigation regimes was highly significant during

both years of study with regards to productive tillers. The treatment combination of

P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) with I2 (10 irrigations) was on top in producing maximum

number of productive tillers (m-2) with 372.0 and 380.0 during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. While the lowest number of productive tillers 320.0 and 325.0 were

recorded in treatment with no dose of phosphatic fertilizer and I1 (8 irrigations) during

1st and 2nd year of study respectively.

More panicle bearing tillers in the treatment P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10

irrigations) may be attributed to adequate supply of these inputs at these levels and

due to easy availability of moisture. The results are also supported by the findings of

He, et al. (2004).

47

Table 4.1.2: Productive tillers m-2 as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 320.0 L

327.0 K

340.0 HI

354.0 DE

350.2 F

338.2 D

325.0 L

331.6 K

344.0 H

360.0 DE

354.0 F

342.7 D

I2 344.0 G

352.0 DEF

363.0 B

372.0 A

366.0 B

359.4 A

350.0 G

358.0 DE

370.0 B

380.0 A

371.0 B

365.9 A

I3 337.0 IJ

343.0 GH

351.0 EF

363.0 B

355.0 CD

349.8 B

342.0 HI

350.0 G

357.0 EF

372.0 B

362.0 D

356.7 B

I4 329.0 K

336.0 J

344.0 G

358.0 C

353.0 DEF

344.0 C

335.0 J

340.0 I

348.0 G

366.0 C

362.0 EF

349.3 C

Means 332.5 E

339.5 D

349.5 C

361.8A

356.0B

338.3E

344.9D

354.8 C

369.5A

361.0B

48


The data given in Table.4.1.3 regarding the number of panicles per unit area

indicated that various doses of phosphatic fertilizer differed significantly from each

other regarding the number of panicles m-2 during both the cropping seasons. It

revealed that the fertilizer dose of P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) showed maximum number

of panicles (306.0 m-2) during 2004 and (322.8 m-2) during 2005. It is obvious from

the data that least number of panicles m-2 were recorded in plots without fertilizer

application during both the experimental years Fageria and Santos, (2002) reported

similar results.

As far as the effect of irrigation regimes on the number of panicles m-2 is concerned,

it was observed that various irrigation levels irrespective to phosphatic fertilizer

significantly affected it during both the years of study. The highest number of

panicles m-2 were recorded in the treatment with I2 (10 irrigations) followed by I3 (12

irrigations) treatment producing 309.2 and 317.0 number of panicles m-2 during 2004

and 2005 respectively. While during both the years of experimentation, the lowest

number of panicles m-2 were recorded in the plot applied with I1 (8 irrigations) during

both the years.


both years of study with respect to number of panicle m-2. The treatment P3I2 (150 kg

P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) produced maximum number of panicles (323.0 and

337.0 m-2) during both years of experimentation. While the lowest number of

panicles m-2 were recorded in treatment without phosphatic fertilizer level and least

number of irrigations with 266.5 and 271.0 during 1st and 2nd year of study,

respectively. The present results aligned with dose of Khunthasuvon et al. (1998),

reported that the combined effect of fertilizer with irrigation was positive on panicle

numbers.

49

Table 4.1.3: Number of panicles m-2 as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 266.5 N

274.0 M

284.0 KL

293.0 GH

287.0 JK

280.9 D

271.0 M

279.0 L

290.0 IJK

311.0 CDE

296.0 HI

289.4 D

I2 295.0 G

303.0 E

310.0 C

323.0 A

315.0 B

309.2 A

300.0 GH

309.0 DEF

315.0 CD

337.0 A

324.0 B

317.0 A

I3 285.0 K

289.0 IJ

299.0 F

309.0 CD

306.0 DE

297.6 B

289.0 JK

296.0 HI

304.0 FG

327.0 B

315.0 CD

306.2 B

I4 277.0 M

281.0 L

291.0 HI

299.0 F

295.0 G

288.6 C

278.0 L

288.0 K

295.0 HIJ

316.0 C

305.0 EFG

296.4 C

Means 280.8 E

286.8 D

296.0 C

306.0A

300.8B

284.5E

293.0D

301.0 C

322.8A

310.0B

50


The data in Table 4.1.4 revealed that phosphatic fertilizer doses significantly affected

the number of spikelets panicle-1. The data on number of spikelets panicle-1

indicated that various doses of phosphatic fertilizer differed significantly from each

other during both the cropping seasons. The fertilizer dose of P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1)

produced highest number of spikelets panicle-1 (159.5 and 165.8) during 2004 and

2005 respectively. Asif et al. (1999) in an experiment on influence of NPK levels

reported non significant results regarding number of spikelets panicle-1 but

numerically higher number of spikelets panicle-1 were recorded in the treatment with

P1 (90 kg ha-1). It is obvious from the data that lowest numbers of spikelets panicle-1

were recorded in treatment with no fertilizer application during both the years.

The irrigation regimes significantly affected the number of spikelets panicle-1 during

both the years of study. The highest number of spikelets panicle-1 were recorded in

the treatment with I2 (10 irrigations), followed by I3 (12 irrigations) treatment

producing 156.8 and 161.0 spikelets panicle-1 during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

While the lowest number of spikelets panicle-1 were recorded in the plots applied

with I1 (8 irrigations) during both the years. Pandey, et al. (2000) reported that

moisture regimes significantly affected the number of grains panicle-1.


both years of study with regards to number of spikelets panicle-1. The treatment P3I2

(150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) produced maximum number of spikelets

panicle-1 170.0 and 177.0 during both years of experimentation. While the lowest

number of spikelets panicle-1 (112.0 and 116.0 during 2004 and 2005 year of study,

respectively) were recorded in plots with no dose of phosphatic fertilizer and least

number of irrigations. The interaction of phosphorus levels of P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1

and 10 irrigation regimes) seems to be good combination, which utilized the

available nutrition and soil moisture most efficiently.

51

Table 4.1.4: Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 112.0 M

131.0 K

141.0 I

150.0 F

146.0 GH

136.0 D

116.0 L

134.0 JK

146.0 HI

160.0 CDE

151.0 GH

141.4 D

I2 142.0 I

151.0 EF

158.0 C

170.0 A

163.0 B

156.8 A

145.0 I

155.0 EFG

163.0 CD

177.0 A

165.0 BC

161.0 A

I3 135.0 J

143.0 HI

150.0 F

164.0 B

157.0 CD

149.8 B

137.5 J

145.0 I

152.0 FG

169.0 B

160.0 CDE

152.7 B

I4 125.0 L

133.0 JK

144.0 HI

154.0 DE

149.0 FG

141.0 C

130.0 K

136.0 J

145.0 I

157.0 EF

158.0 DE

145.2 C

Means 128.5 E

139.5 D

148.3 C

159.5A

153.8B

132.1E

142.5D

151.5 C

165.8A

158.5B

52


Data presented in Table 4.1.5 revealed that during both the planting season

phosphatic fertilizer affected sterility percentage significantly. The data showed that

significantly higher sterility (36.00 and 34.63 %) was noted in the plots where no

dose of phosphatic fertilizer was applied. Asif et al. (1999) also reported higher

sterility percentage in treatment with out phosphorus application. While lowest

sterility percentage 24.65 and 24.00 % was observed in the plot where P3 (150 kg

P2O5 ha-1) was applied during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

The irrigation regimes significantly affected the number of sterility percentage during

both the years of study. The highest sterility percentage was recorded in the

treatment with I4 (14 irrigations) during both the years with 33.10 and 32.30 %,

respectively. While the lowest sterility percentage was noted in the treatment with I2

(10 irrigations) treatment showing 26.00 and 25.40 % sterility respectively during

2004 and 2005, respectively.

The interaction of phosphatic fertilizer doses and irrigation regimes was highly

significant during both years of study regarding sterility percentage. The treatment

P0I4 (0 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 14 irrigations) showed the highest sterility percentage of

40.00 and 39.00 % during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The treatment P3I2 (150 kg

P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) proved to be the best combination. This may be due to

the reason that optimum availability of the plant nutrients particularly P and soil

moisture at the time of flowering kept the plants vigorous, physiologically active and

helped in reducing the sterility in comparison to the other combination of the

treatments where sterility increased on account of their inadequate availability.

Similar results were reported by Lalu and Yadev, et al. (1999).

53

Table 4.1.5: Sterility percentage as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 35.00 C

30.00 E

28.00 F

23.00 I

25.00 GH

28.20 C

34.00 C

29.00 E

27.00 FG

22.50 K

24.50 IJ

27.40 C

I2 30.00 E

27.50 F

25.50 G

24.00 HI

23.00 I

26.00 D

28.50 EF

26.50 GH

25.00 HI

23.00 JK

24.00 IJK

25.40 D

I3 39.00 A

35.00 C

30.00 E

25.60 G

28.00 F

31.52 B

37.00 B

34.00 C

29.00 E

25.00 HI

27.00 FG

30.50 B

I4 40.00 A

37.00 B

33.00 D

26.00 G

29.50 E

33.10 A

39.00 A

36.00 D

32.00 D

25.50 GHI

29.00 E

32.30 A

Means 36.00 A

32.38 B

29.13 C

24.65E

26.38D

34.63A

31.38B

28.38 C

24.00E

26.13D

54

4.1.6 Normal kernels percentage

The data presented in Table 4.1.6 elucidated that phosphatic fertilizer levels

significantly affected the normal kernels percentage irrespective to irrigation regimes

during both the planting years. The crop being supplied with P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1)

showed maximum normal kernels percentage (82.50 and 83.00 %). While the lowest

normal kernels percentage (59.75 and 58.25 %) was observed in the plots with out

phosphatic fertilizer during 2004 and 2005, respectively. Asif et al. (1999) reported

similar sort of results with P application of 90 kg ha-1 under agro ecological

conditions of Faisalabad.

The irrigation regimes irrespective to phosphatic fertilizer significantly affected the

normal kernels percentage during both the years of study. The highest normal

kernels percentage was recorded in the treatment of I2 (10 irrigations) with 80.2 and

81.0 %, respectively. While the lowest normal kernels percentage (65.0 and 66.6 %)

was noted in the treatment with I1 (8 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

The interaction of phosphatic fertilizer doses and irrigation regimes was highly

significant during both years of study with regards normal kernels percentage. The

treatment P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) showed the highest normal

kernel percentage of 91.00 and 92.00 % during 2004 and 2005, respectively. While

the lowest normal kernel percentage was recorded in plots without phosphatic

fertilizer dose and I1 (8 irrigations) during both years of study. Thomas, et al. (2003)

stated that irrigation and nutrients interaction was positive in yield attributes.

55

Table 4.1.6: Normal kernel percentage as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 53.00 M

60.00 KL

66.00 IJ

75.00 EF

71.00 FGH

65.00 D

52.00 M

62.00 KL

70.00 HI

77.00 DE

72.00 FGH

66.60 E

I2 68.00 HI

75.00 EF

82.00 BC

91.00 A

85.00 B

80.20 A

67.00 IJ

77.00 DE

83.00 BC

92.00 A

86.00 B

81.00 A

I3 62.00 JK

70.00 GHI

76.00 DE

84.00 BC

81.00 BC

74.60 B

60.00 L

71.00 GHI

76.00 DEF

85.00 B

80.00 CD

74.40 B

I4 56.00 LM

62.00 JK

68.00 HI

80.00 CD

73.00 EFG

67.80 C

54.00 M

65.00 JK

71.00 GHI

78.00 DE

75.00 EFG

68.60 C

Means 59.75 E

66.75 D

73.00 C

82.50A

77.50B

58.25E

68.75D

75.00 C

83.00A

78.25B

56


Data in Table 4.1.7 revealed that during both the years of experimentation, 1000-

grain weight was significantly affected by phosphatic fertilizer during both the years

of study. Treatment with the fertilizer dose of P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) produced highest

1000-grain weight of 22.02 g and 22.19 g during 2004 and 2005 respectively. It is

obvious from the data that lowest 1000-grain weight was recorded in treatment

without fertilizer application during both the experimental years. Similar results were

given by the Slaton, et al. (2002) who reported that application of optimum

phosphatic fertilizer was effective at increasing yields.

The irrigation regimes significantly affected the 1000-grain weight during both the

years of study. The highest 1000-grain weight was recorded in the treatment with I2

(10 irrigations) producing 21.61 g and 21.75 g during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

While the lowest 1000-grain weight during both the years was recorded in the plot

applied with I1 (8 irrigations).

The interaction of phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes was highly significant

during both years with regards to 1000-grain weight and the treatment P3I2 (150 kg

P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) produced maximum 1000-grain weight of 22.60 g and

22.75 g during both years respectively. While the lowest 1000-grain weight was

recorded in plots having no dose of phosphatic fertilizer and I1 (8 irrigations) during

both years of the study with 17.80 g and 18.00 g during 1st and 2nd year of study

respectively. The results are in accordance with Lalu and Yadev (1999) who

reported that increased 1000-grain weight with P application of 130 kg ha-1 and

water quantity of 900 mm.

57

Table 4.1.7: 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse Rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 17.80 F

19.00 DEF

20.40 ABCDE

21.35 ABC

20.75 ABCD

19.86 C

18.00 H

19.25 G

20.50 EF

21.50 CD

21.00 DE

20.05 D

I2 20.25 BCDE

20.80 ABCD

21.90 ABC

22.60 A

22.50 AB

21.61 A

20.50 EF

21.00 DE

22.00 BC

22.75 A

22.50 AB

21.75 A

I3 19.90 CDEF

20.00 CDEF

21.40 ABC

22.45 AB

21.80 ABC

21.11 AB

20.00 F

20.30 F

21.50 CD

22.50 AB

21.98 BC

21.25 B

I4 18.20 EF

19.75 CDEF

20.85 ABCD

21.70 ABC

21.35 ABC

20.37 BC

18.50 H

20.00 F

21.00 DE

22.00 BC

21.50 CD

20.60 C

Means 19.04 E

19.89 D

21.14 C

22.02A

21.60 B

19.25E

20.14 D

21.25 C

22.19A

21.47B

58


The data in Table 4.1.8 depicted that irrespective to irrigation regime various doses

of phosphatic fertilizer differed significantly with regards to biological yield t ha-1

during 2004 and 2005. The plots applied with P3 (150 kg ha-1) phosphatic fertilizer

produced significantly higher biological yield (16.13 and 16.92 t ha-1), followed by

application of phosphatic fertilizer dose of P4 (200 kg ha-1) with 15.50 and 16.25 t ha-

1 biological yield during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

It is further revealed from the data that during 2004 and 2005, biological yield was

significantly different among irrigation regimes. Plot received I2 (10 irrigations)

resulted in higher biological yield of 16.78 and 17.32 t ha-1, followed by I3 (12

irrigations) with 16.00 and 16.62 t ha-1 during both the experimental years.

The interaction between phosphatic fertilizer doses and irrigation regimes was

significant during both years of study with regards to biological yield. However the

highest biological yield of 18.20 and 19.00 t ha-1 was recorded in treatment of

phosphatic fertilizer P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. However the lowest biological yield was noted in treatment with no

phosphatic fertilizer and I1 (8 irrigations) with 10.50 and 10.80 t ha-1 during 1st and

2nd year of the study, respectively. He, et al. (2004) in a trial on soil moisture

contents and phosphorus application reported that highest biomass of rice and

highest P uptake were found in the treatment with 0.030 g P kg-1 application and 80

% water holding capacity, which is almost similar to the protocols of our treatment.

Iqbal, (2004) also resulted that both water and fertilizer (N and P) had a positive

affect on rice biomass.

59

Table 4.1.8: Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 10.50 K

12.00 J

13.00 HI

13.40 GH

13.30 HI

12.44 D

10.80 O

12.50 N

13.20 LMN

13.80 KL

13.50 KLM

12.76 D

I2 14.30 EF

16.50 C

17.30 B

18.20 A

17.60 AB

16.78 A

14.70 IJ

17.00 DE

17.70 CD

19.00 A

18.20 BC

17.32 A

I3 14.00 FG

15.30 D

16.20 C

18.00 A

16.50 C

16.00 B

14.00 JK

15.80 GH

16.60 EF

18.70 AB

18.00 BC

16.62 B

I4 12.70 I

13.30 HI

13.50 GH

14.90 DE

14.60 EF

13.80 C

13.00 MN

13.50 KLM

14.20 JK

16.20 FG

15.30 HI

14.44 C

Means 12.88 E

14.27 D

15.00 C

16.13A

15.50B

13.13E

14.70D

15.43 C

16.92A

16.25B

60


The data presented in Table 4.1.8 indicated that phosphatic fertilizer levels

significantly affected the paddy yield during both the planting years. The crop

supplied with P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) showed maximum paddy yield (6.66 and 6.70 t

ha-1). While the lowest paddy yield of 3.90 and 3.98 t ha-1 was recorded in the plot

without phosphatic fertilizer during 2004 and 2005, respectively. Similar sort of

results were also reported by George, et al. (2001) along with the possible reason of

a larger proportion of biomass partitioned to grain, which ultimately increased the

rice yield.

The irrigation regimes significantly affected the paddy yield during both the years of

study. The highest paddy yield (6.60 and 6.77 t ha-1) was recorded in the treatment

with I2 (10 irrigations) during both the years. While the lowest paddy yield of 3.96

and 4.16 t ha-1 was noted in the treatment with I1 (8 irrigations) during 2004 and

2005, respectively. Results are partially supported by the findings of the Xiaoping, et

al. (2004) as they reported dry foot irrigation saves water along with increase in

paddy yield and the treatment giving maximum yield is much closer to our top

yielding treatment.

The interaction of phosphatic fertilizer levels and irrigation regimes was highly

significant during both years of study with regards paddy yield. The treatment P3I2

(150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) produced the highest paddy yield of 7.80 and

8.00 t ha-1 during both the experimental years. While the lowest paddy yield was

recorded in plots without phosphatic fertilizer and I1 (8 irrigations) with (3.00 and

3.25 t ha-1) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The more grain yield obtained in the

treatment of P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) was attributed to more

number of panicle, number of spikelets panicle-1, normal kernel percentage and

1000-grain weight. This improvement in yield component is due to the fact that in

interaction of P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) increased availability of

phosphorus in root zone, enabling a more efficient utilization of applied phosphorus.

Sovuthy, et al. (2003) also reported that with the application of phosphorus 95%

increased rice yield over nil-P plot. Iqbal, (2004) concluded that the yield of rice

61

increased 50-60 % in response of N and P interaction with water. He, et al. (2004)

also stated that grain yield of rice was increased with the increase of P application

rates under the condition of 80% water holding capacity than that cultivated in water

logged soil condition.

Table 4.1.9: Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 3.00 M

3.25 L

4.15 IJ

4.90 G

4.50 H

3.96 D

3.25 J

3.50 J

4.34 I

5.00 H

4.70 HI

4.16 D

I2 4.80 G

6.20 D

6.90 C

7.80 A

7.30 B

6.60 A

4.65 HI

6.50 E

7.20 CD

8.00 A

7.50 BC

6.77 A

I3 4.30 HI

5.50 F

6.20 D

7.70 A

7.00 C

6.14 B

4.50 I

5.60 G

6.30 EF

7.80 AB

7.00 D

6.24 B

I4 3.50 K

4.00 J

5.00 G

6.25 D

5.80 E

4.91 C

3.52 J

4.40 I

4.80 HI

6.00 FG

5.80 G

4.90 C

Means 3.90 E

4.74 D

5.56 C

6.66 A

6.15 B

3.98 E

5.00 D

5.66 C

6.70 A

6.25 B

62


Data pertaining to straw yield (table 4.1.10) revealed that it was significantly affected

by different doses of phosphatic fertilizer during 2004 and 2005. The plot with the

dose of P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) produced significantly higher straw yield of 13.98 and

13. 57 t ha-1, followed by 200 kg P2O5 ha-1 dose of fertilizer with straw yield of 12.38

and 12.71 t ha-1 during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The lowest straw yield (7.60

and 7.80 t ha-1) was recorded in plots having no fertilizer.

It is further revealed from the data that during 2004 and 2005, straw yield was

significantly affected by various irrigation regimes, however, treatment I2 (10

irrigations) resulted in higher straw yield (13.16 and 13.18 t ha-1), followed by I3 (12

irrigations) with (12.80 and 12.39 t ha-1) during both the experimental years.


significant during both years of study with regards to straw yield. The highest straw

yield (16.40and 16.00 t ha-1) was recorded in treatment having phosphatic fertilizer

dose of P3I2 (150 kg ha-1 with 10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

However the lowest straw yield was noted in treatment without phosphatic fertilizer

and I1 (8 irrigations) with (5.90 and 6.00 t ha-1) during 1st and 2nd year of study,

respectively. The increase in straw yield recorded in treatment heaving P3I2 (150 kg

ha-1 with 10 irrigations) that encouraged vegetative growth of plant resulting in more

straw yield. The results are in line with the findings of Khunthasuvon, et al. (1998)

who reported that the positive effect of fertilizer and irrigation was mostly through

greater total dry matter production.

63

Table 4.1.10: Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 5.90 L

7.26 K

8.00 J

9.80 GH

9.00 I

7.99 D

6.00 L

7.50 K

8.50 J

10.00 H

9.30 I

8.26 D

I2 9.30 HI

11.70 E

13.50 D

16.40 A

14.90 BC

13.16 A

9.50 HI

11.40 EF

14.00 C

16.00 A

15.00 B

13.18 A

I3 8.20 J

10.00 FG

12.00 E

15.20 B

13.60 D

12.80 B

8.50 J

10.70 G

13.00 D

15.00 B

14.75 B

12.39 B

I4 7.00 K

9.00 I

10.50 F

14.50 C

12.00 E

10.60 C

7.20 K

9.20 I

11.00 FG

13.30 D

11.80 E

10.50 C

Means 7.60 E

9.49 D

11.00 C

13.98A

12.38B

7.80E

9.70 D

11.63 C

13.57 A

12.71B

64


Table 4.1.11 showed the effect of treatments on water productivity for grain yield.

Water productivity was significantly affected by different doses of phosphatic

fertilizer during 2004 and 2005. The plot with P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1) phosphatic

fertilizer showed significantly higher water productivity for grain yield (8.25 kg ha-1

mm-1 and 8.32 kg ha-1 mm-1), followed by dose of P4 (200 kg P2O5 ha-1) with (7.619

kg ha-1 mm-1 and 7.756 kg ha-1 mm-1) water productivity during 2004 and 2005

respectively. The poorest water productivity for grain yield (4.86 and 4.96 kg ha-1

mm-1) was recorded in plot having no dose of phosphatic fertilizer during 2004 and

2005, respectively.

It is further revealed from the data that during 2004 and 2005, water productivity was

significantly affected by various irrigation regimes for grain yield, however treatments

receiving I2 (10 irrigations) resulted in higher water productivity (8.78 kg ha-1 mm-1

and 8.99 kg ha-1 mm-1), followed by I3 (20 irrigations) applied plot with (6.82 and

6.89) during both the cropping seasons. Borrel, et al. 1997 found that WUE was

greater in soil saturation culture than flooded condition, Lu, et al. (2000) also stated

similar results.


significant during both years of study with regards to water productivity. The highest

water productivity for grain yield (10.35 and 10.60 kg ha-1 mm-1) was recorded in

treatment having phosphatic fertilizer dose of P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10

irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, followed by the treatment having phosphatic

fertilizer dose of P4I2 (200 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations). The results are in line

with Anbumozhi, et al. (1998) reported that high values of water productivity were

found at 9 cm ponding water depth under different water regimes and fertigation

levels.

65

Table 4.1.11: Water productivity as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 4.98 L

5.40 K

6.92 H

8.15 E

7.45 G

6.58 C

5.375 HI

5.82 GH

7.28 EF

8.32 C

7.85 D

6.93 B

I2 6.38 I

8.25 DE

9.20 C

10.35 A

9.72 B

8.78 A

6.20 G

8.60 C

9.58 B

10.60 A

9.95 B

8.99 A

I3 4.78 L

6.10 IJ

6.88 H

8.55 D

7.80 F

6.82 B

4.95 IJ

6.20 G

6.98 F

8.62 C

7.72 DE

6.89 B

I4 3.32 N

3.80 M

4.70 L

5.96 J

5.50 K

4.66 D

3.30 L

4.20 K

4.58 JK

5.70 H

5.50 H

4.66 C

Means 4.86 E

5.89 D

6.92 C

8.25 A

7.62 B

4.96 E

6.21 D

7.10 C

8.32 A

7.76 B

66

4.1.12: Fertilizer use efficiency

The data (table 4.1.12) indicated that fertilizer use efficiency (kg-1 kg-1) for grain

yield was significantly affected by different doses of phosphatic fertilizer during both

years of experimentation. The plot treated with P3 (150 kg ha-1) phosphatic fertilizer

showed significantly higher fertilizer use efficiency for grain yield (18.34 kg-1 kg-1)

however it showed common letter with P3 and P4 (50 and 100 kg P2O5 ha-1) doses

during 2004, while during 2005 it was (20.25 kg-1 kg-1). The P4 (200 kg P2O5 ha-1)

remained on bottom with lowest value of fertilize use efficiency (11.25 and 11.33 kg-1

kg-1) during 2004 and 2005 respectively. The difference between fertilizer use

efficiency values among the years might be due to different residual phosphorus

levels in soil and other climatic differences over the year 2004 and 2005.

It is further revealed from the data that during 2004 and 2005, fertilizer use efficiency

for grain yield was significantly affected by various irrigation regimes. The treatments

receiving I2 (10 irrigations) resulted in higher fertilizer use efficiency (20.37 kg-1 kg-1

and 24.77 kg-1 kg-1) closely followed by I3 (12 irrigations) with the value of (19.74 and

18.59 kg-1 kg-1) during 2004 and 2005, respectively Sahrawat et al. (2002) stated

that P application improve the agronomic efficiencies.


significant during both years of study with regards to fertilizer use efficiency for grain

yield. The highest fertilizer use efficiency for grain yield (28.00 and 37.00 kg-1 kg-1)

was recorded in treatments P1I2 (50 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations) during 2004 and

2005, respectively. Poorest performance regarding fertilizer use efficiency for grain

yield was shown by the treatments with out phosphatic fertilizer in all the

combinations with irrigation regimes. Timsina et al. (2001) reported that regular

monitoring of water and minerals improve the N-use efficiencies.

67

Table 4.1.12: Fertilizer use efficiency for grain yield (kg-1 kg-1) as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 0.00 I

5.00 H

11.50 FG

12.63 FG

7.50 GH

9.16 C

0.00 H

5.00 G

10.88 EF

11.65 EF

7.25 FG

8.694 D

I2 0.00 I

28.00 A

21.00 BC

19.98 BCD

12.50 FG

20.37 A

0.00 H

37.00 A

25.50 B

22.35 BC

14.25 DE

24.77 A

I3 0.00 I

24.00 AB

19.00 BCD

22.48BC

13.50 EF

19.70 A

0.00 H

22.00 BC

18.00 CD

22.00 BC

12.38 EF

18.59 B

I4 0.00 I

10.00 FGH

15.00 DEF

18.30 CDE

11.50 FG

13.70 B

0.00 H

17.80 CD

12.90 DE

12.45 E

11.45 EF

13.65 C

Means 0.00 C

16.75 A

16.63 A

18.34 A

11.25 B

0.00 D

20.25 A

16.25 B

16.75 B

11.33 C

68

4.1.13: Harvest index %

The data presented in Table 4.1.13 indicated that the phosphatic fertilizer doses,

irrigation regimes and their interaction differed significantly during both the years.

Among phosphatic fertilizer doses, maximum harvest index percentage of 40.47,

38.84 and 39.49, 38.26 was calculated in the treatment with P3 and P4 (150 and 200

kg P2O5 ha-1) during both years of study, having the same letters, followed by the

treatment supplied with P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) dose of phosphatic fertilizer. Higher

harvest index percentage with the application of P was also reported by George et

al. (2001) due to a larger proportion of biomass partitioned to grain. Sahrawat et al.

(2002) also given the same results.

Highly significant differences among harvest index percentage were recorded due to

different irrigation regimes. The highest harvest index was noted in plot with I2 (10

irrigations) with 39.09 and 38.79 %, during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The lowest

harvest index was recorded in plots of treatment with I1 (8 irrigations) having values

of 30.58 and 32.06 % during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

As far as the interaction of phosphatic fertilizer doses and irrigation regime was

concerned it significantly affected the harvest index percentage during both the

experimental years. Significantly higher (42.89 and 42.11%) harvest index was

calculated in the plot treated with the dose of P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10

irrigations) during 2004 and 2005 respectively.

69

Table 4.1.13: Harvest index percentage as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 28.61 IJ

27.14 J

31.96 FGH

36.36 DE

33.85 EF

30.58 C

30.12 IJ

27.94 J

32.86 GHI

34.52 FGH

34.85 EFGH

32.06 D

I2 33.58 EFG

37.61 CD

39.89 ABC

42.89 A

41.47 AB

39.09 A

31.63 HI

38.28 BCD

40.70 AB

42.11 A

41.22 AB

38.79 A

I3 30.73 GHI

35.94 DE

38.30 CD

42.78 A

42.75 A

38.10 A

32.15 HI

35.44 DEFG

38.04 BCDE

41.11 A

38.90 ABC

37.25 B

I4 27.55 J

30.07 HIJ

38.90 BCD

39.83 ABC

39.88 ABC

35.25 B

27.07 J

32.65 GHI

33.81 FGH

37.03 CDEF

38.08 BCDE

33.73 C

Means 30.12 D

32.69 C

37.26 B

40.47A

39.49A

30.24D

33.58 C

36.35 A

38.84 A

38.26 A

70

4.1.14: Economic analysis and BCR

Cost of production and other economic details are given in Appendix-6. Economic

analysis and BCR pertaining to the effect of phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes

on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice during both the years

are presented in Table.4.1.14. It is clear from the data that maximum net income of

Rs. 19464 and 20464 ha-1 was obtained from treatment with P3I2 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 x

10 irrigations (750 mm)) and exhibited BCR of 0.97 and 1.02 during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. It was followed by the treatment with P3I3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 x 12

irrigations (900 mm)), which exhibited BCR of 0.93 and 0.96 during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. The outcome was quite disappointing in terms of net income and BCR

found in the treatment with P0I1 (0 kg P2O5 ha-1 x 8 irrigations (600 mm)) and P1I1 (50

kg P2O5 ha-1 x 8 irrigations (600 mm)) during 2004 and 2005. Though it is the matter

of fact that the paddy yield of the treatment P1I1 (50 kg P2O5 ha-1 x 8 irrigations (600

mm)) was higher than P0I1 (0 kg P2O5 ha-1 x 8 irrigations (600 mm)) but due to

increased total cost their net income was same hence BCR values were common.

71

Table 4.1.14: Economic analysis and BCR as affected by phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

2004 2005 Phosphorus levels +

Irrigation regimes Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1

Gross Income Rs. ha-1

Total Cost

Rs. ha-1

Net Income Rs. ha-1

BCR Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1


Total Cost

Rs. ha-1

Net Income Rs. ha-1

BCR

P0 (0 kg ha-1) 3.90 0 20000 15486 4514 0.29 3.98 0 20405 15486 4919 0.32 P1 (50 kg ha-1) 4.74 1250 24190 16736 7454 0.44 5.00 1250 25500 16736 8764 0.52 P2 (100 kg ha-1) 5.56 2500 28315 17986 10329 0.57 5.66 2500 28795 17986 10809 0.60 P3 (150 kg ha-1) 6.66 3750 33810 19236 14574 0.76 6.70 3750 34000 19236 14764 0.77 P4 (200 kg ha-1) 6.15 5000 31250 20486 10764 0.52 6.25 5000 31750 20486 11264 0.55 I1 (600 mm) 3.96 640 20300 16126 4174 0.26 4.16 640 21290 16126 5164 0.32 I2 (750 mm) 6.60 800 33500 16286 17214 1.05 6.77 800 34350 16286 18064 1.11 I3 (900 mm) 6.14 910 31200 16396 14804 0.90 6.24 910 31700 16396 15304 0.93 I4 (1050 mm) 4.91 1120 25050 16606 8444 0.51 4.90 1120 25025 16606 8419 0.51 P0 X I1 (0kg ha-1 X 600mm) 3.00 640 15500 16126 -626 -0.04 3.25 640 16750 16126 624 0.04 P0 X I2 (0kg ha-1 X 750mm) 4.80 800 24500 16286 8214 0.50 4.65 800 23750 16286 7464 0.46 P0 X I3 (0kg ha-1 X 900mm) 4.30 910 22000 16396 5604 0.34 4.50 910 23000 16396 6604 0.40 P0 X I4 (0kg ha-1 X 1050mm) 3.50 1120 18000 16606 1394 0.08 3.52 1120 18125 16606 1519 0.09 P1 X I1 (50kg ha-1 X 600mm) 3.25 1890 16750 17376 -626 -0.04 3.50 1890 18000 17376 624 0.04 P1 X I2 (50kg ha-1 X 750mm) 6.20 2050 31500 17536 13964 0.80 6.50 2050 33000 17536 15464 0.88 P1 X I3 (50kg ha-1 X 900mm) 5.50 2160 28000 17646 10356 0.59 5.60 2160 28500 17646 10854 0.62 P1 X I4 (50kg ha-1 X 1050mm) 4.00 2370 20500 17856 2644 0.15 4.40 2370 22500 17856 4644 0.26 P2 X I1 (100kg ha-1 X 600mm) 4.15 3140 21250 18626 2624 0.14 4.34 3140 22190 18626 3564 0.19 P2 X I2 (100kg ha-1 X 750mm) 6.90 3300 35000 18786 16214 0.86 7.20 3300 36500 18786 7714 0.41 P2 X I3 (100kg ha-1 X 900mm) 6.20 3410 31500 18896 12604 0.67 6.30 3410 32000 18896 13104 0.69 P2 X I4 (100kg ha-1 X 1050mm) 5.00 3620 25500 19106 6394 0.33 4.80 3620 24500 19106 5394 0.28 P3 X I1 (150kg ha-1 X 600mm) 4.90 4390 25000 19876 5124 0.26 5.00 4390 25500 19876 5624 0.28 P3 X I2 (150kg ha-1 X 750mm) 7.80 4550 39500 20036 19464 0.97 8.00 4550 40500 20036 20464 1.02 P3 X I3 (150kg ha-1 X 900mm) 7.70 4660 39000 20146 18854 0.93 7.80 4660 39500 20146 19354 0.96 P3 X I4 (150kg ha-1 X 1050mm) 6.25 4870 31750 20356 11394 0.56 6.00 4870 30500 20356 10144 0.50 P4 X I1 (200kg ha-1 X 600mm) 4.50 5640 23000 21126 1874 0.09 4.70 5640 24000 21126 2874 0.14 P4 X I2 (200kg ha-1 X 750mm) 7.30 5800 37000 21286 15714 0.74 7.50 5800 38000 21286 16714 0.78 P4 X I3 (200kg ha-1 X 900mm) 7.00 5910 35500 21396 14104 0.66 7.00 5910 35500 21396 14104 0.66 P4 X I4 (200kg ha-1 X 1050mm) 5.80 6120 29500 21606 7894 0.36 5.80 6120 29500 21606 7894 0.36

72

Experiment 4.2: Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) levels and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

Abstract

Studies were initiated to chalk out the effect of various levels of plant growth

regulator and irrigation regimes on the productivity of coarse rice under the agro-

ecology of Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan. The experimental design was RCB with split

plot arrangements. Main plot consisted of four levels of plant growth regulator viz. 0,

60, 90 and 120 ml ha-1 while sub-plots contained 8, 10, 12 and 14 irrigations. Data

were recorded on plant height (cm), productive tillers m-2, panicles m-2, spikelets

panicle-1, sterility and normal kernels percentage, 1000-grain weight (g), paddy yield

(t ha-1) and straw yield (t ha-1). The effect of plant growth regulator and irrigation

regimes (variable factors) were found to be significant in most of the growth

parameters examined. These variable factors also differed significantly in affecting

the yield parameters.

Introduction

Growth and development of plants can be manipulated, to some extent, by

modifying the mini-environment, provision of water and nutrients. Plants can regulate

their growth through internal growth mechanisms involving the action of extremely

low concentrations of chemical substance called plant growth regulators. The

introduction of chemical growth regulators has added a new dimension to the

possibility for improving the plant growth. In principle, the availability of exogenous

bio-regulators to modify plant growth offers great opportunity. Besides affecting plant

growth substantial increases in yield of cereals by the application of these

substances have been reported by many researchers. The yield increments have

regularly been brought about by regulation of growth and metabolic process in such

a way that there is increased production of photosynthates and more efficient

translocation of assimilates from the photosynthesizing plant parts to the organs of

economic yield.

73

Other aspect studied in this experiment was irrigation, which is a major constraint for

assured crop production. Jensen, et al. (1980) defined irrigation as artificial

application of water to soil for the purpose of supplying moisture essential to plant

growth. Traditionally rice is grown under a continuously flooded condition and hence

most conventional water management practices aim to maintain a standing depth of

water in the field throughout the season. Now due to scarcity of irrigation water it is

required to find out the optimal water requirement for economical production of rice.

Because of the increasing scarcity of water the cost of its use and resource

development are increasing as well. Therefore, farmers and researchers alike are

looking for ways to decrease water use in rice production and increase water

productivity. The fundamental approach is to start at the field level where water and

rice interact. Farmers with no control over the availability or distribution of water

beyond their farm gates, the crucial question to be addressed is “what are the

options to cope with decreasing water supply (or the increasing cost of it) at the farm

or field inlets”. To answer this question, we have to look at the flow of water in rice

fields and understand where reductions in water use can be achieved without

impairing yield.

In this part of the country, where experiment was conducted, the flow of water in

irrigation canals remains below its capacity during peak summer season and

majority of the growers (70%) have to irrigate their rice fields after 4-8 days interval

(Baloch, et al. 2004). Therefore, the present experiment was planned to study the

effect of plant growth regulator on growth, yield and yield attributes of rice along with

exploration of optimal level of irrigation for economical production of rice.


The data recorded on plant height (cm) are presented in Table. 4.2.1. The data

indicated that the effect of different doses of plant growth regulator (NAA) on plant

height differed significantly from each other during both the years of study. The data

revealed that the plant growth regulator level of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed maximum

plant height of 119.5 and 120.0cm during 2004 and2 2005, respectively. Increased

plant height was also reported by Pandey, et al. (2001) with IAA @ 50 ppm. It is

74

obvious from the data that smallest plants were recorded in plot treated with G0

(without application of growth regulator), which means that it affected the plant

height.

The effect of irrigation regimes on plant height of rice crop is concerned it was

observed that various irrigation levels significantly affected the plant height. The

tallest plants were recorded in the treatment with I2 (10 irrigations), followed by I3 (12

irrigations) with the value of 113.3 and 117.4 cm, during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. Anbumozhi, et al. (1998) also reported similar results with 9cm depth,

while our depth was 7.5 cm, this difference may be due to soil or other climatic

condition’s variability. However, during both the years of studies the smallest plants

were observed in the plot applied with I1 (8 irrigations).

The interaction of plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes on plant height

was highly significant during both years of study. The treatment G2I2 (90 ml ha-1

plant growth regulator level with 10 irrigations) was on top in plant height parameter

130 and 132 cm during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The smallest plants were noted

in treatment G0I1 (without application of plant growth regulator with 8 irrigations)

heaving 87.00 and 89.00 cm height during 1st and 2nd year of study, respectively.

The treatment combination of G2I2 (90ml ha-1 of growth regulator with 10 irrigations)

increased the plant height. The increase in plant height was due to increase in

internodal length. Razi and Sen, (1996) stated that plant growth regulators and

irrigations increased the plant height.

75

Table 4.2.1: Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 1.50% CV= 2.48% LSD0.01 =1.742 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =2.211 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =1.512 (Irrigation Regimes) LSD0.01 =2.543 (Irrigation Regimes) LSD0.01 =3.023 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =5.085 (Interaction) Means followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

2004 2005

Plant Growth Regulator Levels Plant Growth Regulator Levels Irrigation Regimes

G0 G1 G2 G3 Means G0 G1 G2 G3 Means

I1 87.00 J

96.00 I

106.0 E

90.00 J

94.75 D

89.00 I

98.00 FG

107.0 E

91.00 HI

96.25 D

I2 102.0 FG

116.0 CD

130.0 A

105.0 EF

113.3 A

105.0 E

119.5 C

132.0 A

113.0 D

117.4 A

I3 94.00 I

113.0 D

123.0 B

107.0 E

109.3 B

95.50 GH

114.0 D

125.0 B

106.0 E

110.1 B

I4 90.00 J

100.0 GH

119.0 C

97.00 HI

101.5 C

92.00 HI

102.6 EF

116.0 CD

98.00 FG

102.2 C

Means 93.30 D

106.3 B

119.5 A

99.75 C

95.40 D

108.5 B

120.0 A

102.0 C

76


Among yield components, productive tillers are very important because the final

yield is mainly a function of number of tillers bearing panicles (productive tillers) per

unit area. The data recorded on the number of productive tillers at different levels of

plant growth regulator are presented in Table 4.2.2. The data indicated that the

effect of levels of plant growth regulator on the number of productive tiller m-2

differed significantly during 2004 and 2005. Plots treated with growth regulator level

of G2 (90 ml ha-1) produced significantly higher productive tillers (364.7 and 369.8 m-

2), followed by G1 (60 ml ha-1) with 358.8 and 360.0 productive tillers m-2 during 2004

and 2005, respectively. The lowest productive tillers (345.8 and 347.0 m-2) were

noted in plot without application of plant growth regulator. Increased number of

productive tillers with the application of plant growth regulator (GA and IAA) was also

reported by Awan, et al. (1989).

It is further revealed from the data that during 2004 and 2005, there was significant

variation among irrigation regimes, however plots receiving I2 (10 irrigations) resulted

in higher number of productive tillers (366.2 and 370.0 m-2), followed by I3 (12

irrigations) with the value of 355.9 and 359.3 during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

Balasubramanian and Krishnarajan, (2003) stated that continuous submergence of

2.5 cm as compare to 5 cm increased grain yield due to increase in yield attributes.

The interaction between plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes on

number of productive tiller was significant during both years. The maximum number

of productive tiller (373.8 and 381.0 m-2) were recorded in treatment G2I2 (90 ml ha-1

with 10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively, followed by G3I2 (90 ml ha-1

with 12 irrigations). The treatment G0I1 (without application of plant growth regulator

with 8 irrigations) was on bottom during both years of the study.

77

Table 4.2.2: Number of productive tillers m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 336.0 L

352.0 HI

357.0 FG

340.0 K

346.3 D

338.0 K

353.0 HI

360.0 FG

342.0 K

348.3 D

I2 359.0 EF

368.0 B

373.8 A

364.0 CD

366.2 A

361.0 F

371.0 BC

381.0 A

367.0 CD

370.0 A

I3 347.0 J

360.0 EF

366.0 BC

350.5 I

355.9 B

349.0 IJ

362.0 EF

372.0 B

354.0 H

359.3 B

I4 341.0 K

355.0 GH

362.0 DE

345.0 J

350.8 C

340.0 K

356.0 GH

366.0 DE

348.0 J

352.5 C

Means 345.8 D

358.8 B

364.7 A

349.9 C

347.0 D

360.0 B

369.8 A

352.8 C

78


It is revealed from the data given in Table.4.2.3 that number of panicles m-2 were

significantly affected by plant growth regulator levels during 2004 and 2005. The

data manifested that the panicles m-2 were maximum (352.6 and 354.3) in plot

treated with G2 (90 ml ha-1 of plant growth regulator level) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. Maximum number of panicles per plant was reported by Pandey, et al.

(2001) using the application of Indole Acetic Acid @ 50 ppm. While the treatment

without application of plant growth regulator produced minimum number of panicles

m-2 (328.5 and 330.6) during both the years of experimentation.

Similarly, irrigation regimes significantly affected the number of panicles m-2, which

ranged from 326.8 to 352.4 during 2004 and 328.0 to 354.8 during 2005. The

highest number of panicles (352.4 and 354.8 m-2) were recorded in I2 (10 irrigations)

treatments during 2004 and 2005. Sarwer and Khanif, (2005) reported similar

results.

The interaction of plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes significantly

affected the number of panicles during both years of study. The highest number of

panicles (365.0 and 368.0 m-2) were recorded in plots treated with G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 of

plant growth regulator and 10 irrigation) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The

increased in number of panicles may be due to the treatment combination of G2I2 (90

ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator with 10 irrigation) application by improved the

photosynthetic and other physiological function.

79

Table 4.2.3: Number of panicles m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 316.0 L

330.0 HIJ

337.0 GH

324.0 JK

326.8 D

318.0 J

332.0 H

338.0 G

324.0 I

328.0 D

I2 342.0 EFG

354.6 BC

365.0 A

348.0 CDE

352.4 A

345.0 E

357.0 B

368.0 A

349.0 CD

354.8 A

I3 335.0 GHI

345.0 DEF

358.5 AB

340.0 FG

344.6 B

337.0 G

346.0 DE

360.0 B

344.0 EF

346.9 B

I4 321.0 KL

340.0 FG

350.0 CD

328.0 IJK

334.8 C

322.0 I

341.0 FG

351.0 C

330.0 H

336.0 C

Means 328.5 D

342.4 B

352.6 A

335.0 C

330.6 D

344.0 B

354.3 A

336.8 C

80


Data given in Table 4.2.4 revealed that plant growth regulator levels significantly

affected spikelets panicle-1 during 2004 and 2005. During both years G2 (90 ml ha-1

level of plant growth regulator) produced significantly higher spikelets panicle-1 160.8

and 162.8, respectively than other treatments. Singh, et al. (1984) reported similar

results. Awan, et al. (1989) also reported, increase in the number of spikelets per

panicle through application of Giberellic acid and Indole acetic acid.

As far as the effect of irrigation regime on the number of spikelets panicle-1 was

significantly affected during both the year of study. The data presented in Table

4.2.4 regarding number of spikelets panicle-1 indicated that I2 (10 irrigations) gave

higher number of spikelets panicle-1 (160.3 and 163.0) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. Pandey, et al. (2000) stated similar results.

Interaction between plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes differed

significantly and the treatment combination of G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth

regulator with 10 irrigations) gave significantly higher number of spikelets panicle-1

(170.0 and 173.0) during both the cropping seasons. While, minimum number of

spikelets panicle-1 (127.0 and 129.0) were recorded in the treatment G0I1 (without

application of plant growth regulator with 8 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. The increased in number of spikelets panicle-1 was due to reduced

sterility observed in 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator levels and 10 irrigations

applied plots. The results and supported by Singh, et al (1984).

81

Table 4.2.4: Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 127.0 J

141.0 H

152.0 E

134.5 I

138.6 D

129.0 J

143.0 GH

154.0 E

135.5 I

140.4 D

I2 152.0 E

163.0 B

170.0 A

156.0 CD

160.3 A

155.0 E

166.0 B

173.0 A

158.0 DE

163.0 A

I3 143.0 GH

154.0 DE

163.0 B

148.0 F

152.0 B

145.0 FG

155.0 E

164.0 BC

149.0 F

153.3 B

I4 130.5 J

146.0 FG

158.0 C

142.0 H

144.1 C

133.0 IJ

148.0 F

160.0 CD

140.0 H

145.3 C

Means 138.1 D

151.0 B

160.8 A

145.1 C

140.5 B

153.0 B

162.8 A

145.6 C

82


Data pertaining to sterility percentage (table 4.2.5) revealed that during both the

planting seasons’ plant growth regulator differed significantly. The results presented

in Table. 4.2.5 showed that significantly lower sterility percentage (27.12 and 27.89

%) was observed in treatment G2 (90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator) was applied

during 2004 and 2005, respectively. Chenniappan, et al. (2004) recorded higher

seed set (34.40%) due to lower sterility with the spray of GA3, plant growth regulator

of same group to whom NAA belongs.

The effect of irrigation regimes on sterility percentage was also significant during

both the years of study. The sterility percentage was higher in treatment applied with

I1 (8 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. While lowest sterility percentage

(27.50 and 27.63%) was observed in I2 (10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. Shimono, et al. (2002) reported similar results.

The interaction between plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes

indicated that the treatment without plant growth regulator and lowest irrigation level

I1 (8 irrigations) produced the maximum sterility (38.00 and 37.00 %), followed by

treatment G3I1 (120 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator with 8 irrigations) during

both the years of study. Lowest sterility percentage was recorded significantly in

plots where G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator with 10 irrigation regimes)

was applied 2004 and 2005, respectively. The reason may be that seed set was

highest and required level of irrigation water was also available during pollination

and seed setting which decreased sterility percentage.

83

Table 4.2.5: Sterility percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005


2004 2005



I1 38.00 A

32.50 D

27.00 I

36.50 B

33.50 A

37.00 A

32.00 CDE

28.00 G

35.00 AB

33.00 A

I2 30.01 F

29.00 G

24.00 J

27.00 I

27.50 D

29.50 EFG

28.00 G

25.00 H

28.00 G

27.63 C

I3 31.00 E

30.00 F

28.00 H

29.00 G

29.50 C

30.00 DEFG

29.00 FG

28.58 FG

28.50 FG

29.02 B

I4 33.00 D

31.50 E

29.50 FG

35.05 C

32.26 B

32.50 BCD

31.00 CDEF

30.00 DEFG

33.50 BC

31.75 A

Means 33.00 A

30.75 D

27.13 C

31.89 B

32.25 A

30.00 B

27.89 C

31.25 AB

84


Normal kernels do not stop growing in the way during development phase and attain

normal dimension, normal starch compaction and full weight. The data presented in

Table.4.2.6 elucidated that plant growth regulator levels significantly affected the

normal kernels percentage during both the planting years. The crop treated with G2

(90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator) had more or less uniform normal kernels

(83.25 and 84.13%) and significantly higher than all the other levels of plant growth

regulator applied during both the years. The lowest normal kernels were noted in

plot without application of plant growth regulator (67.75 and 69.50 %) during both the

cropping seasons. Singh and Singh, (1982) reported similar results.

As far as the irrigation regimes are concerned significant variations were observed

among normal kernel percentage. However, more normal kernels were recorded in

plots with I2 (10 irrigations), followed by I3 (12 irrigation) during both the years.

Balasubramanian and Krishnarajan, (2003) showed similar results.

The analysis of the data further revealed that interaction between variables was

significant during 2004 and 2005 (table.4.2.6). The plots treated with G2I2 (90 ml ha-1

level of plant growth regulator with 10 irrigations) gave maximum normal kernels

(89.00 and 89.25 %) during both the years of experimentation. While minimum

normal kernels percentage was recorded in G0I1 (without application of plant growth

regulator and lowest irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The increased

percentage of normal kernels due to increase in leaf duration which ultimately

affected the photosynthetic activities therefore increased the productive activities

and increased the normal kernels percentage.

85

Table 4.2.6: Normal kernel percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 60.00 G

67.00 EF

79.00 C

70.00 E

69.00 D

61.00 G

68.00 EF

80.00 CD

70.00 EF

69.75 D

I2 75.00 D

84.00 B

89.00 A

78.00 CD

81.50 A

79.00 CD

85.00 AB

89.25 A

80.00 CD

83.31 A

I3 70.00 E

80.00 C

84.00 B

74.50 D

77.13 B

71.00 E

81.50 BC

85.25 AB

76.00 D

78.44 B

I4 66.00 F

75.00 D

81.00 BC

68.00 EF

72.50 C

67.00 EF

76.00 D

82.00 BC

66.00 F

72.75 C

Means 67.75 D

76.50 B

83.25 A

72.63 C

69.50 D

77.63 B

84.13 A

73.00 C

86


It is revealed from the data given in Table.4.2.7 that 1000-grain weight was

significantly affected by plant growth regulator levels during 2004 and 2005. 1000-

grain weight was significantly higher (21.98 and 22.03 g) in the treatment G2 (90 ml

ha-1 level of plant growth regulator) while lowest 1000-grain weight (19.73 and 19.88

g) was recorded in the treatment without application of plant growth regulator during

both the years of experimentation. Higher 1000-grain weight due to application of

plant growth regulator was also reported by Pandey, et al. (2001).

Similarly, the effect of irrigation regimes on 1000-grain weight differed significantly

during both the years and higher 1000-grain weight (22.14 and 22.28 g) in the plots

supplied with I2 (10 irrigations) was recorded. While the lowest 1000- grain weight

was recorded in the treatment with I1 (8 irrigations). Pandey, et al. (2000) stated that

irrigation at 7 cm one day after disappearance of ponded water improved the test

grain weight.

As for as the interaction of plant growth regulator and irrigation regime is concerned

it significantly affected the 1000-grain weight during both experimental years.

Significantly higher (23.35 and 23.13 g) 1000-grain weight was recorded in treatment

combination of G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator and 10 irrigations)

during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The lowest 1000-grain weight was recorded in

treatment G0I1 (without application of plant growth regulator and 8 irrigations) with

the values of 18.00 and 17.50 g during 2004 and 2005, respectively. In treatment

combination of G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator with 10 irrigations)

increased in 1000-grain weight may be due to increased in production of

photosynthetic by plant growth regulator application, because of stimulation of

enzymatic activities of treated plant and well water availability to the plant.

87

Table 4.2.7: 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 0.86% CV= 1.90% LSD0.01 =0.11 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.43 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.16 (Irrigation Regimes) LSD0.01 =0.38 (Irrigation Regimes) LSD0.01 =0.33 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =0.76 (Interaction)

Means followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

2004 2005



I1 18.00 I

19.70 G

21.25 D

18.80 H

19.44 D

17.50 H

20.00 F

21.50 CD

19.00 G

19.50 D

I2 21.60 C

22.30 B

23.35 A

21.30 CD

22.14 A

22.00 BC

22.50 AB

23.13 A

21.50 CD

22.28 A

I3 20.80 E

21.20 D

22.00 B

20.30 F

21.08 B

21.00 DE

21.50 CD

22.00 BC

20.50 EF

21.25 B

I4 18.50 H

20.25 F

21.30 CD

20.00 FG

20.01 C

19.00 G

20.50 EF

21.50 CD

20.00 F

20.25 C

Means 19.73 D

20.86 B

21.98 A

21.10 C

19.88 C

21.13 B

22.03 A

20.25 C

88


The data in Table 4.2.8 depicted that levels of plant growth regulator differed

significantly as regards to biological yield during 2004 and 2005. The plant growth

regulator G2 (90 ml ha-1) produced significantly higher biological yield (19.50 and

19.89 t ha-1), followed by G1 (60 ml ha-1) with (18.03 and 18.26 t ha-1) biological yield

during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The results are supported by the findings of

Awan, et al. (1999). They reported approximate 40-50% increase in biological yield

of rice due to application of plant growth regulators. The lowest biological yield

(13.90 and 14.36 t ha-1) was recorded in plots having no spray of plant growth

regulator.


significantly different among irrigation regimes, however plots receiving I2 (10

irrigations) resulted in higher biological yield (19.78 and 20.26 t ha-1), followed by I2

(12 irrigations) with (18.63 and 18.80 t ha-1) during both the experimental years.

The interaction between plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes was

significant during both years of study with regards to biological yield. The highest

biological yield (22.00 and 21.75 t ha-1) was recorded in treatment G2I2 (90 ml ha-1

with 10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively, followed by G1I2 (60 ml ha-1

plant growth regulator with 10 irrigations). However the lowest biological yield was

noted in treatment G0I1 (without application of plant growth regulator and 8

irrigations) with 10.30 and 11.00 t ha-1 during 1st and 2nd year of study, respectively.

89

Table 4.2.8: Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 10.30 I

13.30 G

15.00 F

11.75 H

12.59 D

11.00 K

13.45 I 15.25 H

12.00 J

12.93 D

I2 17.00 E

21.13 B

22.00 A

19.00 C

19.78 A

17.60 F

21.50 B

22.75 A

19.20 D

20.26 A

I3 15.30 F

19.40 C

21.60 A

18.20 D

18.63 B

15.60 H

19.60 CD

21.75 B

18.25 E

18.80 B

I4 13.00 G

18.30 D

19.40 C

17.20 E

16.98 C

13.25 I

18.50 E

19.80 C

16.60 G

17.04 C

Means 13.90 D

18.03 B

19.50 A

16.54 C

14.36 D

18.26 B

19.89 A

16.51 C

90


It is evident from the data presented in Table. 4.2.9 that the effect of plant growth

regulator levels on paddy yield differed significantly during both the years. Maximum

paddy yield (7.16 and 7.22 t ha-1) was produced by the plots sprayed with G2 (90 ml

ha-1 dose of plant growth regulator) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. Highest

paddy yield was due to application of Indole Acetic Acid @ 50 ppm was also

reported by Pandey, et al. (2001).

It is further revealed from the data that during both the years of study paddy yield

was significantly different among irrigation regimes. The paddy yield was higher

(7.12 and 7.38 t ha-1) in the plots supplied with I2 (10 irrigations) during 2004 and

2005, respectively. While the lowest paddy yield was recorded in plots treated with I1

(8 irrigations) with 4.32 and 4.39 t ha-1. Karim, et al. (1996) also reported similar

results and concluded that 620-700 mm irrigation water gave maximum yield.

Bouman, et al. (2001) also reported that typical daily and seasonal rates of water

use for rice production in dry season is 600-700 mm. while our results also indicated

that 750 mm irrigation level proved to be the most productive.

As for as the interaction of plant growth regulator and irrigation regime is concerned

it significantly affected the paddy yield during both the experimental years.

Significantly higher 8.50 and 8.60 t ha-1 paddy yield was recorded in treatment of

G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator with 10 irrigations) during 2004 and

2005, respectively. The lowest paddy yield was recorded in treatment G0I1 (without

plant growth regulator and 8 irrigations) with the values of 3.60 and 3.75 t ha-1 during

2004 and 2005, respectively. Razi and Sen, (1996) reported that yield and yield

determents improved by the interaction of plant growth regulators and irrigation

regimes. Further stated that IAA, Kinetin and GA3 in a mixture of 10-4 M of each were

effective in alleviating stress effects.

91

Table 4.2.9: Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 3.60 J

4.40 I

5.30 GH

4.00 IJ

4.32 D

3.75 I

4.60 GH

5.20 FG

4.00 HI 4.39 D

I2 6.00 EF

7.60 B

8.50 A 6.40 DE

7.12 A

6.60 CDE

7.70 B 8.60 A

6.60 CDE

7.38 A

I3 5.15 GH

6.70 CD

7.85 B 5.60 FG

6.32 B

5.20 FG

6.85 CD

7.90 AB

5.82 EF

6.44 B

I4 4.30 I

6.20 E

7.00 C

5.00 H

5.62 C

4.20 HI 6.30 DE

7.20 BC

5.20 FG

5.72 C

Means 4.76 D

6.22 B

7.16 A

5.25 C

4.94 D

6.36 B

7.22 A

5.41 C

92


The data presented in Table 4.2.10 showed that straw yield was significantly affected

by different levels of plant growth regulator, during 2004 and 2005. The plots with G2

(90 ml ha-1) produced significantly higher straw yield (13.35 and 13.46 t ha-1),

followed by G1 (60 ml ha-1) with 12.34 and 12.45 t ha-1 during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. The lowest straw yield (10.32 and 10.50 t ha-1) was recorded in plots

without spray of plant growth regulator. Harda, et al. (1985) and Dangon, et al.

(1996) also reported similar results.


significantly affected by various irrigation regimes, however treatments receiving I2

(10 irrigations) resulted in higher straw yield (13.99 and 14.15 t ha-1), followed by I3

(12 irrigations) plots with (13.06 and 13.19 t ha-1) during both the experimental

years. Tran, et al. (2001) stated that 5 cm water depth increased yields as compared

to 10 cm and 15 cm water depth.


significant during both years of study with regards to straw yield. The highest straw

yield (15.70 and 15.80 t ha-1) was recorded in treatment G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 with 10

irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively, followed by G1I2 (60 ml ha-1 growth

regulator with 10 irrigations). However, the lowest straw yield was noted in treatment

G0I1 (without application of plant growth regulator and 8 irrigations) with 7.50 and

7.70 during 1st and 2nd year of study, respectively.

93

Table 4.2.10: Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 7.50 K 8.75 I

9.00 I

8.00 J

8.31 D

7.70 K 8.90 I

9.15 I

8.20 J

8.49 D

I2 13.15 EF

14.20 C

15.70 A

12.90 F

13.99 A

13.30 EF

14.40 C

15.80 A

13.10 F

14.15 A

I3 11.65 H

13.40 DE

15.00 B

12.20 G

13.06 B

11.80 H

13.50 DE

15.10 B

12.35 G

13.19 B

I4 9.00 I

13.00 F

13.70 D

11.70 H

11.85 C

9.20 I

13.00 F

13.80 D

11.65 H

11.91 C

Means 10.32 D

12.34 B

13.35 A

11.20 C

10.50 D

12.45 B

13.46 A

11.32 C

94


The data presented in Table 4.2.11 indicated that water productivity was significantly

affected by different levels of plant growth regulator during 2004 and 2005. The plots

with plant growth regulator G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed significantly higher water

productivity (8.92and 8.94 kg mm-1), followed by G1 (60 ml ha-1) with (7.71 and 7.88

kg mm-1) water productivity during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The lowest water

productivity (5.94 and 5.84 kg mm-1) was recorded in plots without application of

plant growth regulator, respectively.

It is further revealed from the data that during 2004 and 2005, water productivity was

significantly affected by various irrigation regimes, however treatments receiving I2

(10 irrigations) resulted in higher water productivity (9.52 and 9.83 kg mm-1),

followed by I3 (12 irrigations) and I1 (8 irrigation) with the value of 7.04, 7.21 and

7.16, 6.93 kg mm-1 respectively during 2004 and 2005. The results are in line with

Karim, et al. (1996), Nwadukwe and Chude, (1998) and Joseph, (2003) who

reported that maximum water productivity was calculated with optimum application

of water.


significant during both years of study with regards to water productivity. The highest

water productivity (11.40 and 11.48 kg mm-1) was recorded in treatment G2I2 (90 ml

ha-1 with 10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively, followed by G1I2 (60 ml

ha-1 growth regulator with 10 irrigations). However the lowest water productivity was

noted in treatment G3I4 (120 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator and 14 irrigations)

having values of (4.75 and 4.96 kg mm-1) during 1st and 2nd year of study,

respectively. Anbumozhi, et al. stated that the highest water productivity occurred at

9 cm ponding water depth with different irrigation regimes as compared to other

treatments.

95

Table 4.2.11: Water productivity as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 6.00 H

6.00 H

8.86 C 6.65 G

7.21 B

4.75 GH

7.65 CD

8.65 C 6.68 DE

6.93 B

I2 8.00 DE

8.00 DE

11.40 A

8.55 CD

9.52 A

8.80 BC

10.25 AB

11.48 A

8.80 BC

9.83 A

I3 5.75 H

5.75 H

8.75 C 6.22 GH

7.04 B

5.80 EFG

7.62 CD

8.78 BC

6.45 DEF

7.16 B

I4 4.10 J 4.10 J 6.68 G

4.75 I

5.36 C

4.00 H 6.00 EFG

6.85 DE

4.96 FGH

5.45 C

Means 5.94 D

7.71 B

8.92 A

6.54 C

5.84 D

7.88 B

8.94 A

6.72 C

96


The data presented in Table 4.2.12 indicated that the plant growth regulator levels

and irrigation regimes differed significantly during both the years and their interaction

also differed significantly with regards to harvest index percentage.

Among plant growth regulator levels, maximum harvest index percentage (36.60 and

36.19 %) was calculated in the treatment G3 (120 ml ha-1 dose of plant growth

regulator) during 2004 and 2005, followed by G0 (without application of plant growth

regulator). Higher harvest index percentage was also reported by Pandey, et al.

(2001) with higher dose of IAA @ 50 ppm.

Highly significant differences among harvest index percentage were recorded due to

different irrigation regimes. The highest harvest index was noted in plots with I2 (10

irrigations) with 35.84 and 36.38 % during 2004 and 2005, respectively. While the

lowest harvest index percentage was recorded in plots treated with I1 and I4 (8

irrigations and 14 irrigation). Xiaoping, et al. (2004) stated that dry-foot paddy

irrigation has the clear index as compare to flooding irrigations.

As far as the interaction of plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regime is

concerned it significantly affected the harvest index percentage during both the

experimental years. Significantly higher (38.65 and 37.80%) harvest index was

calculated in treatment combination of G2I2 (90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator

and 10 irrigations) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The lowest harvest index

percentage was recorded in treatment G3I4 (120 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator dose

and 14 irrigations) with the values of 29.06 and 31.36 % during 2004 and 2005,

respectively.

97

Table 4.2.12: Harvest index percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels and different irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



I1 33.35 BCD

33.08 CD

35.35 BC

34.04 BCD

33.95 B

34.11 BCD

34.21 ABCD

34.24 ABCD

33.39 CD

33.99 B

I2 35.05 BC

35.98 ABC

38.65 A

33.69 BCD

35.84 A

37.49 AB

35.82 ABC

37.80 A

34.43 ABCD

36.38 A

I3 33.66 BCD

34.54 BC

36.35 AB

30.91 DE

33.86 B

33.35 CD

34.89 ABCD

36.34 ABC

31.28 D

33.96 B

I4 35.04 BC

33.88 BCD

36.08 ABC

29.06 E

33.51 B

31.70 D

34.06 BCD

36.39 ABC

31.36 D

33.38 B

Means 34.27 B

34.37 B

36.60 A

31.93 C

34.16 B

34.74 B

36.19 A

32.62 C

98


Economic analysis and BCR pertaining to the effect of plant growth regulator (NAA)

levels and irrigation regimes on the yield of transplanted coarse rice during both the

years are presented in Table 4.2.13 Cost of production and other economic details

are given in Appendix 7. The data depicted that maximum net income of Rs. 24231

and 24731 ha-1 was obtained from treatment G2I2 (90 ml Plant growth regulator ha-1

with 10 irrigations)) with BCR of 1.29 and 1.32 during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

The second highest net income was shown by the treatment G2I3 (90 ml Plant

growth regulator ha-1 with 12 irrigations mm) which exhibited BCR of 1.10 and 1.12

during both the years. The lowest net income was found in treatment without

application of plant growth regulator and 8 irrigations.

99

Table 4.2.13: Economic analysis and BCR as effected by plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes in

transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

2004 2005 Plant growth regulator levels +

irrigation regimes Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1


Total Cost Rs. ha-1

Net Income Rs. ha-1

BCR Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1


Total Cost

Rs. ha-1

Net Income Rs. ha-1

BCR

G0 (0ml ha-1) 4.76 0 24310 17924 6386 0.35 4.94 0 25190 17924 7266 0.40 G1 (60ml ha-1) 6.22 30 31625 17954 13671 0.76 6.36 30 32315 17954 14361 0.80 G2 (90ml ha-1) 7.16 45 36310 17969 18341 1.02 7.22 45 36625 17969 18656 1.04 G3 (120ml ha-1) 5.25 60 26750 17984 8766 0.49 5.41 60 27530 17984 9546 0.53 I1 (600mm) 4.32 640 22125 18564 3561 0.19 4.39 640 22435 18564 3871 0.21 I2 (750mm) 7.12 800 36125 18724 17401 0.93 7.38 800 37375 18724 18651 0.99 I3 (900mm) 6.32 910 32125 18834 13291 0.70 6.44 910 32720 18834 13886 0.74 I4 (1050mm) 5.62 1120 28625 19044 9581 0.50 5.72 1120 29125 19044 10081 0.53 G0X I1 (0ml ha-1X 600mm) 3.60 640 18500 18564 -64 -0.00 3.75 640 19250 18564 686 0.04 G0X I2 (0ml ha-1X 750mm) 6.00 800 30500 18724 11776 0.63 6.60 800 33500 18724 14776 0.79 G0 X I3 (0ml ha-1X 900mm) 5.15 910 26250 18834 7416 0.39 5.20 910 26500 18834 7666 0.41 G0X I4 (0ml ha-1X 1050mm) 4.30 1120 22000 19044 2956 0.16 4.20 1120 21500 19044 2456 0.13 G1X I1 (60ml ha-1X600mm) 4.40 670 22500 18594 3906 0.21 4.60 670 23500 18594 4906 0.26 G1X I2 (60ml ha-1X 750mm) 7.60 830 38500 18754 19746 1.05 7.70 830 39000 18754 20246 1.08 G1 X I3 (60ml ha-1X 900mm) 6.70 940 34000 18864 15136 0.80 6.85 940 34750 18864 15886 0.84 G1 X I4 (60ml ha-1X 1050mm) 6.20 1150 31500 19074 12426 0.65 6.30 1150 32000 19074 12924 0.68 G2X I1 (90ml ha-1X 600mm) 5.30 685 27000 18609 8391 0.45 5.20 685 26500 18609 7891 0.42 G2X I2 (90ml ha-1X 750mm) 8.50 845 43000 18769 24231 1.29 8.60 845 43500 18769 24731 1.32 G2 X I3 (90ml ha-1X 900mm) 7.85 955 39750 18879 20871 1.10 7.90 955 40000 18879 21121 1.12 G2X I4 (90ml ha-1X 1050mm) 7.00 1165 35500 19089 16411 0.86 7.20 1165 36500 19089 17411 0.91 G3 X I1 (120ml ha-1X 600mm) 4.00 700 20500 18624 1876 0.10 4.00 700 20500 18624 1876 0.10 G3 X I2 (120ml ha-1X 750mm) 6.40 860 32500 18784 13716 0.73 6.60 860 33500 18784 14716 0.78 G3 X I3 (120ml ha-1X 900mm) 5.60 970 28500 18894 9606 0.51 5.82 970 29625 18894 10731 0.57 G3 X I4 (120ml ha-1X 1050mm) 5.00 1180 25500 19104 6396 0.33 5.20 1180 26500 19104 7396 0.39

100

EXPERIMENT 4.3: Effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) and phosphorus levels on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

Abstract

This experiment was initiated to study the effect of plant growth regulator and

phosphatic fertilizer levels on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse

rice. The experimental design was RCB with split plot arrangements. Main plot

consisted of four levels of plant growth regulator viz. 0, 60, 90 and 120 ml ha-1 while

sub-plots consisted of five levels of phosphatic fertilizer viz. 0, 50, 100, 150 and 200

kg ha-1 in form of single supper phosphate (SSP). Data were recorded on plant

height (cm), productive tillers m-2, panicles m-2, spikelets panicle-1, sterility and

normal kernels percentage, 1000-grain weight (g), paddy yield (t ha-1), straw yield (t

ha-1) and harvest index. The different levels of plant growth regulator and phosphatic

fertilizer affected significantly the yield and yield components. However the

interaction of plant growth regulator level of 90 ml with 100 kg P2O5 ha-1 proved the

best combination.

Introduction

Rice is one of the most important food crop of the world and 2nd one in Pakistan.

Pakistan is 5th rice producing country of the world. It is the 3rd important crop after

wheat and cotton in share of area (2581 thousand hactare) and production (5438

thousand tonnes). It has average yield of 2107 kg ha-1 during 2006 and 2007

(Anonymous 2007), which is very low as compare to other rice producing countries.

There are many factors responsible for low yield. The use of plant growth regulators

in the field of agriculture has become commercialized in some advanced counties

like Europe, USA and Japan. The current uses for plant growth regulator is not only

in a high value horticultural crops but it also increase crop yield directly either by

increasing total biological yield or the harvest index. Such compounds provide

economic benefit by enhancing crop yield or aid in efficient crop management.

Growth substances can be divided in to five classes as Auxin, Gibberellins,

Cytokinins, Abcisic acid, and Ethylene. Naphthalene Acetic Acid (NAA) belongs to

synthetic forms of auxins. Auxins play key role in cell elongation cell division

101

vascular tissue differentiation, root initiation, apical dominance, leaf senescence, leaf

and fruit abscission, fruit setting and flowering (Davies, 1987). Growth and yield

parameters of rice significantly promote in response to various Axine levels (Zahir, et

al. 1998). Application of NAA @ 20ppm increased the straw and grain yield of wheat

cultivars (Alam, et al. 2002). Planofix (Naphthalene Acetic Acid) had a significant

effect on plant height, number of fruiting branches, volume of boll and yield in cotton

(Abro, et al. 2004). The other reason for low yield is the imbalance use of nutrients.

Phosphorus after nitrogen is the key element for crop production. Its availability is

seriously affected due to alkaline calcarious nature of soils in Pakistan which is very

much clear from its low recovery efficiency of 15-20% (Zia, et al. 1991) the

remaining 80-85% phosphorus is left as non available. It is important for root

development, increased resistant to lodging, reduced flower shedding, increased

grain weight, improved seedling vigor and seed quality (Henry, 1995). Therefore

there is a need to improve its efficiency in crop productivity.

Agricultural scientists are focusing their attention to maximize the crop productivity

with low inputs technology. A lot of research has been conducted and reported using

various agricultural inputs in order to increase crop productivity however, there is a

lake of information regarding the use of phosphorus along with plant growth

regulators to improve phosphorus management and maximize its efficiency.

Therefore, the objective of present study is to introduce low inputs technology for

enhancing the yield potential of coarse rice by the use of phosphatic fertilizer in

conjunction with plant growth regulator.

102


The data recorded on plant height (cm) are presented in Table. 4.3.1. The data

indicated that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly from each

other in relation to plant height during both the cropping seasons. The data

revealed that the plant growth regulator dose of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed

maximum plant height (129.4 and 131.4 cm) during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

It is obvious from the data that smallest plants were recorded in plots without

plant growth regulator application. Islam, et al. (2005) also reported that the

highest plant height was observed where GA3 was applied @ 75 g ha-1.

As far as the effect of phosphatic fertilizer doses on plant height of rice crop is

concerned it was observed that various doses of phosphatic fertilizer significantly

affected the plant height. During both years the tallest plants (131.8 and 135.0

cm) were recorded in the treatment with P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) followed by P3 and

P4 (150 and 200 kg P2O5 ha-1). However during both years of the studies

smallest plants were observed in the plots without phosphatic fertilizer

application. Kumar and Reddy, (2003) reported that application of P at high-level

increased seedling height.

The interaction of plant growth regulator levels and phosphatic fertilizer was

highly significant during both the years. While during 2004 and 2005 the

treatment combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg P2O5 ha-1) was on top with

139.0 and 142.0 cm plant height. The smallest plants were noted in treatment

without plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer application with 95.00 and

97.00 cm height during 1st and 2nd year of study, respectively.

103

Table 4.3.1: Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 2.29% CV= 2.30% LSD0.01 =2.957 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =2.336 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =2.631 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =2.689 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =5.263 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =5.378 (Interaction) Means followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

2004 2005

Plant Growth Regulator Levels Plant Growth Regulator Levels Phosphorus Levels


P0 95.00 J

106.0 I

118.0 GH

107.0 I

106.5 D

97.00 K

108.0 J

120.0 GH

109.0 J

108.5 D

P1 110.0 I

116.0 H

127.0 BCD

117.0 H

117.5 C

113.0 IJ

118.0 HI

130.0 CDE

119.0 H

120.0 C

P2 125.0 DE

131.0 BC

139.0 A

132.0 B

131.8 A

128.0 DE

134.0 BC

142.0 A

136.0 B

135.0 A

P3 119.0 FGH

125.0 DE

131.0 BC

124.0 DEF

124.8 B

121.0 FGH

128.0 DE

132.0 BCD

126.0 EF

126.8 B

P4 120.0 EFGH

126.0 CD

132.0 B

123.0 DEFG

125.3 B

122.0 FGH

130.0 CDE

133.0 BCD

125.0 EFG

127.5 B

Means 113.8 C

120.8 B

129.4A

120.6 B

116.2C

123.6B

131.4 A

123.0B

104


The data recorded on the number of productive tillers are presented in Table. 4.3.2.

The data indicated that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly from

each other with regards to productive tillers during both the cropping seasons. The

data revealed that the plant growth regulator dose of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed

maximum number of productive tillers (363.6 and 366.0 m-2) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. It is obvious from the data that lowest numbers of productive tillers m-2

were recorded in plots without growth regulator application. Zahir, et al. (1998)

depicted similar results by the application of Tryptophan @ 105 M.

The phosphorus levels also significantly affected the number of productive tillers

during both years of study. Maximum number of productive tillers m-2 were recorded

in the treatment P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) with 362.3 and 364.3, followed by P3 and P4

(150 and 200 kg P2O5 ha-1) bearing common letters in LSD. However during both the

years of studies the lowest numbers of productive tillers were observed in the plots

without phosphatic fertilizer. Similar results were observed by Qadir and Ansari,

(2006) who reported that high P levels are needed for more, total and fertile tillers.

The interaction of plant growth regulator levels and phosphatic fertilizer was highly

significant on the number of productive tillers during 2004 and 2005. The treatment

combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg P2O5 ha-1) was on top with maximum

number of productive tillers (374.0 and 376.0 m-2) during both the experimental

years. The lowest number of productive tillers were noted in treatment G0P0 (without

plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer) showing 325.0 and 324.5 m-2 during

1st and 2nd year of study, respectively.

105

Table 4.3.2: Number of productive tillers m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 1.18% CV= 0.94% LSD0.01 =3.224 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =3.005 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =3.929 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =3.136 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =7.858 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =6.271 (Interaction)


2004 2005



P0 325.0 J

338.0 I

355.0 CD

340.0 HI

339.5 D

324.5 J

340.0 HI

358.0 CD

342.0 HI

341.0 D

P1 337.0 I

346.0 EFGH

360.0 BC

347.0 EFGH

347.5 C

336.0 I

350.0 EFG

363.0 BC

349.0 EFG

349.5 C

P2 350.0 DEFG

362.0 BC

374.0 A

363.0 B

362.3 A

352.0 DEF

364.0 BC

376.0 A

365.0 B

364.3 A

P3 344.0 FGHI

352.0 DE

364.0 B

350.0 DEFG

352.5 B

346.0 FGH

354.0 DE

366.0 B

352.0 DEF

354.5 B

P4 343.0 GHI

351.0 DEF

365.0 B

349.0 DEFG

352.0 B

345.0 GH

353.0 DE

367.0 B

351.0 EFG

354.0 B

Means 339.8 C

349.8 B

363.6 A

349.8 B

340.7 C

352.2 B

366.0 A

351.8 B

106


The data recorded on number of panicles m-2 are presented in Table. 4.3.3. The

Table depicted that the number of panicles m-2 were affected significantly by

different levels of plant growth regulator during both the cropping seasons. The


maximum number of panicles (346.6 and 348.2 m-2) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. It is obvious from the data that lowest number of panicles m-2 were

recorded in plots with no plant growth regulator application. Zahir, et al. (1998)

depicted similar results by the application of Tryptophan @ 105 M.

As far as the effect of phosphatic fertilizer doses on number of panicles m-2 of

rice crop is concerned it was observed that various doses of phosphatice fertilizer

significantly affected the number of panicles. During both years the maximum

number of panicles m-2 were recorded in the treatment with P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1)

with the value of 347.5 and 349.5, followed by P3 and P4 (150 and 200 kg P2O5

ha-1) having common letter in LSD. However during both the years of studies the

lowest number of panicles (317.8 and 319.3 m-2) were observed in the plots

without phosphatic fertilizer. The results are in line with Begum, et al. (2002) who

reported that highest bearing tillers hill-1 were recorded from the seedling raised

with recommended NPK due to proper nutrients availability.


highly significant with respect to number of panicles during 2004 and 2005. The

treatment combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer)

was on top in with maximum number of panicles (360.0 and 362.0 m-2) during

both the experimental years. The lowest number of panicles were noted in

treatment G0P0 (without plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer) with

298.0 and 300.0 m-2 during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

107

Table 4.3.3: Number of panicles m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.



2004 2005



P0 298.0 N

315.0 LM

340.0 CDEF

318.0 KL

317.8 D

300.0 M

316.0 KL

341.0 CDE

320.0 JK

319.3 D

P1 310.0 M

325.0 JK

348.0 B

328.0 HIJ

327.8 C

312.0 L

326.0 IJ

349.0 B

330.5 FGHI

329.4 C

P2 336.0 DEFG

346.0 BC

360.0 A

348.0 B

347.5 A

339.0 DE

347.0 BC

362.0 A

350.0 B

349.5 A

P3 328.0 HIJ

335.0 EFGH

342.0 BCDE

333.0 FGHI

334.5 B

330.0 GHI

336.0 EFG

344.0 BCD

335.0 EFGH

336.3 B

P4 327.0 IJ

336.0 DEFG

343.0 BCD

330.0 GHIJ

334.0 B

329.0 HI

337.0 EF

345.0 BCD

332.0 FGHI

335.8 B

Means 319.8 C

331.4 B

346.6 A

331.4B

322.0C

332.4B

348.2 A

333.5 B

108


The data recorded on number of spikelets panicle-1 are presented in Table. 4.3.4.

The data revealed that doses of plant growth regulator affected the number of

spikelets panicle-1 significantly during both the cropping seasons. The data

revealed that the plant growth regulator dose of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed

maximum number of spikelets panicle-1 (154.8 and 155.8) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively, followed by plant growth regulator dose of G3 (120 ml ha-1) with the

values of 142.2 and 142.1 and it is obvious from the data that lowest number of

spikelets panicle-1 (128.0 and 128.0) were recorded in plots without growth

regulator application during 2004 and 2005. Kato, et al. (2004) also reported that

increased number of spikelets panicle-1 with the application of GA.

While the phosphatic fertilizer doses significantly affected the number of spikelets

panicle-1 during both years. The maximum number of spikelets panicle-1 were

recorded in the treatment P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) with the value of 153.3 and

153.8. However during both the years of studies the lowest number of spikelets

panicle-1 (128.8 and 131.0) were observed in the plots without phosphatic

fertilizer. Similar results were observed by Qadir and Ansari, (2006) who stated

that high P levels are needed for more spikelets numbers.


highly significant with regards to number of spikelets panicle-1 during 2004 and

2005. The treatment combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg ha-1 phosphatic

fertilizer) was on top in with maximum number of spikelets panicle-1 (166.0 and

168.0) during 2004 and 2005. The lowest number of spikelets panicle-1 were

noted in treatment G0P0 (without plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer

application) with 109.0 and 112.0 spikelets panicle-1 during 2004 and 2005,

respectively.

109

Table 4.3.4: Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



P0 109.0 K

128.0 IJ

148.0 CDE

130.0 IJ

128.8 C

112.0 K

130.0 I

148.0 CD

134.0 GHI

131.0 D

P1 125.0 J

138.0 FGH

156.0 B

142.0 EF

140.3 B

120.0 J

138.0 EFGH

155.0 BC

142.0 DEF

138.8 C

P2 142.0 EF

150.0 BCD

166.0 A

155.0 BC

153.3 A

140.0 EFG

153.0 BC

168.0 A

154.0 BC

153.8 A

P3 131.0 HIJ

141.0 EF

154.0 BC

144.0 DEF

142.5 B

132.0 HI

142.0 DEF

156.0 B

143.0 DEF

143.3 B

P4 133.0 GHI

145.0 DEF

150.0 BCD

140.0 FG

142.0 B

136.0 FGHI

144.0 DE

152.0 BC

137.0 EFGH

142.4 B

Means 128.0 C

140.4 B

154.8 A

142.2 B

128.0 C

141.4 B

155.8 A

142.1 B

110


The data recorded on sterility percentage are presented in Table. 4.3.5. The Table

depicts that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly from each other

with regards to sterility percentage during both the cropping seasons. The data

revealed that the plant growth regulator dose of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed minimum

sterility (17.2 and 16.04 %) during 2004 and during 2005, respectively. It was

followed by plant growth regulator doses of G1 and G3 (60 and 120 ml ha-1). It is

obvious from the data that highest sterility (22.31 and 20.24 %) was calculated in the

plots without plant growth regulator application during 2004 and 2005. Awan, et al.

(1989) who observed that lowest sterility % was recorded with the application of GA3

and IAA. Goshi and Rama, (1997) stated that NAA, IAA and ABA reduce sterile

spikelets.

As far as the effect of phosphatic fertilizer doses on sterility percentage is concerned

it was observed that sterility percentage was affected significantly by various

phosphorus levels. During both the years the minimum sterility percentage was

recorded in the treatment P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) with the value of 18.29 and 17.41 %.

However during both the years of studies the highest sterility (22.25 and 19.94 %)

were observed in the plots without phosphorus application. The results are in line

with Begum, et al. (2002) who reported that lowest sterile spikelets panicle-1 were

found using recommended level of NPK.


significant during 2004 and 2005 with regards to sterility percentage. The treatment

combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg P2O5 ha-1) showed minimum sterility

(16.00 and 15.00 %) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The highest value of

sterility percentage was noted in treatment without plant growth regulator and

phosphatic fertilizer application showing 25.70 and 22.00 % during 2004 and 2005,

respectively.

111

Table 4.3.5: Sterility percentage as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.



2004 2005



P0 25.70 A

23.40 B

17.50 JK

22.40 C

22.25 A

22.00 A

21.00 AB

16.25 JK

20.50 BC

19.94 A

P1 23.60 B

21.25 E

17.00 K

21.80 D

20.91 B

21.00 AB

20.25 BCD

16.00 KL

19.50 CDEF

19.19 B

P2 21.00 EF

18.55 I

16.00 L

17.60 J

18.29 D

19.75 CDE

17.63 HI

15.00 L

17.25 IJ

17.41 D

P3 20.75 EF

20.00 GH

17.60 J

20.50 FG

19.71 C

19.25 DEFG

18.50 FGH

16.50 JK

19.00 EFG

18.31 C

P4 20.50 FG

19.70 H

17.90 J

20.70 F

19.70 C

19.20 EFG

18.35 GH

16.45 JK

18.85 EFG

18.21 C

Means 22.31 A

20.58 B

17.20C

20.60B

20.24 A

19.15B

16.04 C

19.02 B

112


The data recorded on normal kernels percentage are presented in Table. 4.3.6. The

data in Table depicted that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly from

each other with regards to normal kernels percentage during both the years. The


maximum normal kernels (77.75 and 79.20 %) during 2004 and 2005, respectively,

followed by plant growth regulator dose of G1 and G3 (60 and 120 ml ha-1). It is

obvious from the data that lowest normal kernels (57.80 and 59.60 %) was

calculated in the plots without plant growth regulator application during both the

years of study. Chenniappan, et al. (2004) reported that foliar application of GA3

recorded higher seed set.

While the phosphatic fertilizer doses significantly affected the normal kernels

percentage during both years. Maximum normal kernels percentage was recorded in

the treatment with P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) with the value of 77.25 and 78.69 % during

2004 and 2005, respectively. However during both the years of studies the lowest

normal kernels (59.25 and 61.25 %) were observed in the plots without phosphatic

fertilizer. The results are in line with Prakash, et al. (2007) who reported that addition

of P increase the number of normal kernels.


significant during 2004 and 2005 with regards to normal kernels percentage. The

treatment combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer)

showed maximum normal kernels (88.00 and 87.00 %) during the year 2004 and

2005. The lowest value of normal kernels percentage was noted in treatment without

plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer application with the value of 50.00

and 52.00 % during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

113

Table 4.3.6: Normal kernels percentage as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.



2004 2005



P0 50.00 K

58.00 IJ

67.00 FGH

62.00 HI

59.25 D

52.00 I

60.00 H

69.00 DEF

64.00 FGH

61.25 D

P1 56.00 J

68.00 FG

72.00 DEF

71.00 EFG

66.75 C

58.00 HI

70.00 DEF

74.00 CDE

73.00 DE

68.75 C

P2 66.00 GH

77.00 BCD

88.00 A

78.00 BC

77.25 A

68.00 EFG

79.75 BC

87.00 A

80.00 BC

78.69 A

P3 60.00 IJ

72.00 DEF

79.75 B

70.00 EFG

70.44 B

62.00 GH

73.00 DE

82.00 AB

72.00 DE

72.25 B

P4 57.00 IJ

74.00 CDE

82.00 B

68.00 FG

70.25 B

58.00 HI

75.00 CD

84.00 AB

70.00 DEF

71.75 BC

Means 57.80 C

69.80 B

77.75A

69.80B

59.60C

71.55B

79.20 A

71.80 B

114


The Table 4.3.7 revealed that doses of plant growth regulators differed significantly

from each other during both the cropping seasons with respect to 1000-grain weight.

It revealed that the plant growth regulator dose of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed maximum

1000 grain weight (20.65 and 20.70 g) during 2004 and during 2005 respectively,

followed by plant growth regulator dose of G1 and G3 (60 and 120 ml ha-1) and it is

obvious from the data that lowest 1000-grain weight (19.37 and 19.61 g) were

recorded in plots without growth regulator application during 2004 and 2005. Zahir,

et al. (2000) reported that L-Tryrophan application two different crops significantly

increased all yield components.

As far as the effect of phosphatic fertilizer doses on 1000-grain weight is concerned

it was observed that 1000-grain weight was significantly affected by various

phosphatic fertilizer doses during 2004 and 2005.Maximum 1000-grain weight was

recorded in the treatment with P2 (100 kg ha-1) with the value of 20.62 and 20.77 g,

followed by P3 (150 kg P2O5 ha-1). However during both the years of studies the

lowest 1000 grain weight (19.44 and 19.67 g) were observed in the plots without

phosphatic fertilizer. The results are similar with Qadir and Ansari, (2006).


significant during 2004 and 2005 with respect to 1000-grain weight. The treatment

combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer) was on top in

with maximum 1000-grain weight (21.46 and 21.50 g), followed by G2P3 (90 ml ha-1

with 150 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer) with the value of 20.60 and 20.70 g during both

years, respectively. The lowest 1000-grain weight was noted in treatment without

dose of plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer application with the value of

18.80 and 19.00 g during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

115

Table 4.3.7: 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



P0 18.80 I

19.20 H

20.44 C

19.33 H

19.44 D

19.00 I

19.50 H

20.60 BC

19.60 H

19.67 E

P1 19.30 H

19.75 F

20.36 C

19.85 F

19.82 C

19.50 H

19.90 G

20.29 DE

20.00 FG

19.92 D

P2 20.20 D

20.35 C

21.46 A

20.46 C

20.62 A

20.40 CD

20.60 BC

21.50 A

20.60 BC

20.77 A

P3 19.30 H

20.15 D

20.60 B

20.18 D

20.06 B

19.60 H

20.20 DEF

20.70 B

20.25 DE

20.19 B

P4 19.25 H

20.00 E

20.40 C

19.50 G

19.79 C

19.55 H

20.10 EFG

20.40 CD

20.20 DEF

20.06 C

Means 19.37 C

19.89 B

20.65 A

19.86 B

19.61 C

20.06 A

20.70 A

20.13 B

116


Data in Table 4.3.8 showed that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly

from each other during both the years of study with respect to biological yield. It

revealed that the plant growth regulator dose of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed maximum

biological yield (15.27 and 15.82 t ha-1) during 2004 and 2005 respectively, followed

by plant growth regulator dose of G1 and G3 (60 and 120 ml ha-1) with the value of

14.38, 14.70 and 14.52, 14.89 t ha-1. It is obvious from the data that lowest biological

yield (13.44 and 13.76 t ha-1) were recorded in plots without growth regulator

application during 2004 and 2005. Goshi and Rama, (1997) stated similar results.

The effect of phosphatic fertilizer doses on biological yield was also affected

significantly during both years of study. Maximum biological yield t ha-1 was recorded

in the treatment with P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) with the value of 15.51 and 15.92 t ha-1,

followed by P3 and P4 (150 and 200 kg P2O5 ha-1) levels. However during both the

years of studies the lowest biological yield (13.45 and 13.91 t ha-1) were observed in

the plots without phosphatic fertilizer. Dutta, et al. (2001) founded that application of

organic manure (F.Y.M.) or inorganic (Urea, SSP and MOP) to rice significantly

increased dry matter accumulation.


significant during 2004 and 2005 with respect to biological yield t ha-1. The treatment

combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer) was on top in

with maximum biological yield (16.30 and 16.80 t ha-1) during 2004 and 2005, it was

followed by treatment combination of G2P3 and G2P4 (90 ml ha-1 with 150 and 200 kg

ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer). The lowest biological yield was recorded in treatment G0P0

(without plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer application) with 12.60 and

13.00 t ha-1 during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

117

Table 4.3.8: Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 2.39% CV= 2.49% LSD0.01 =0.2559 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3590 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3258 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3497(Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =0.6515 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =0.6994 (Interaction)


2004 2005



P0 12.60 K

13.00 JK

14.40 EFG

13.80 GHI

13.45 D

13.00 L

13.50 JKL

14.90 DEFG

14.25 GHI

13.91 C

P1 13.00 JK

13.60 HIJ

14.80 DEF

14.00 GHI

13.85 C

13.30 KL

13.70 IJK

15.40 CDE

14.50 FGH

14.23 C

P2 14.35 EFG

15.60 BC

16.30 A

15.80 AB

15.51 A

14.80 EFG

16.00 BC

16.80 A

16.35 AB

15.99 A

P3 13.80 GHI

14.70 EF

15.40 BCD

14.80 DEF

14.68 B

13.70 IJK

14.80 EFG

16.20 AB

15.00 DEF

14.93 B

P4 13.45 IJ

15.00 CDE

15.45 BCD

14.20 FGH

14.52 B

14.00 HIJ

15.50 CD

15.80 BC

14.35 FGHI

14.91 B

Means 13.44 C

14.38 B

15.27 A

14.52 B

13.76 C

14.70 B

15.82 A

14.89 B

118


Data in Table 4.3.9 shows that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly

from each other during both the years of study with respect to paddy yield t ha-1. It


paddy yield (7.54 and 7.62 t ha-1) during 2004 and 2005 respectively, followed by

plant growth regulator dose of G1 and G3 (60 and 120 ml ha-1) and it is obvious from

the data that lowest paddy yield (5.52 and 5.70 t ha-1) were recorded in plots

without growth regulator application during 2004 and 2005. The results are in line

with Zahir, et al. (2000). The findings are also supported by Kaur and Singh, (1987)

who established that GA3 and IAA increased grain yield by increasing vascular

bundles in peduncle, resulting in better translocation of metabolites.

The phosphorus levels also significantly affected the paddy yield during both years

of study. Maximum paddy yield was recorded in the treatment with P2 (100 kg P2O5

ha-1) with the value of 7.62 and 7.82 t ha-1, followed by P3 and P4 (150 and 200 kg

P2O5 ha-1). However during both the years of studies the lowest paddy yield (5.40

and 5.61 t ha-1) were observed in the plots without phosphatic fertilizer. The results

are in line with Maqsood, et al. (2001) who reported that higher paddy yield was

obtained in plots receiving 120-100 kg NP ha-1 than the plot having 40-20, 60-40,

100-80 kg ha-1. The higher paddy yield increase of 120-100 kg NP ha-1 was probably

due to significant higher number of filled grain and kernel weight panicle-1. The

increased level of phosphorus also increased the phosphorus availability to plant in

the root zone which stimulated plant growth and resulting improvement in yield

components that contributed an increase in grain yield. Another reason for increased

grain yield may be increase in P availability stimulated enzymatic activities and

increase the rate of bio-chemical process. This enhanced bio-chemical activities of

plant my have resulted in better grain yield. The results are also at par, Sudhakar, et

al. (2004) and Qadir and Ansari, (2006) they stated that high P levels needed for

grain yield.


significant during 2004 and 2005 with respect to paddy yield t ha-1. The treatment

119

combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg P2O5 ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer) was on

top in with maximum paddy yield (8.70 and 8.90 t ha-1) during 2004 and 2005. The

lowest paddy yield t ha-1 was noted in treatment G0P0 (without plant growth regulator

and phosphatic fertilizer application) during both years of study with 4.60 and 4.75 t

ha-1 during 2004 and 2005 respectively. Ezehiel, (2006) also reported that grain yield

increased by N and plant growth regulators. Prakash, et al. 2007 reported that

addition of P with or without rice hull ash as a source of silicon increases the paddy

yields.

120

Table 4.3.9: Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 5.99% CV= 6.36% LSD0.01 =0.4046 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3790 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3673(Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3967(Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =0.7346 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =0.7934 (Interaction)


2004 2005



P0 4.60 L

5.30 JKL

6.20 EFGHI

5.50 IJK

5.40 D

4.75 I

5.50 GHI

6.40 DEF

5.80 FGH

5.61 D

P1 5.00 KL

6.00 FGHIJ

7.20 CD

6.30 EFGH

6.12 C

5.20 HI

6.02 FG

7.00 CD

6.20 EFG

6.11 C

P2 6.70 DEF

7.50 BC

8.70 A

7.60 BC

7.62 A

6.90 DE

7.70 BC

8.90 A

7.80 B

7.82 A

P3 5.60 HIJK

6.60 DEF

8.00 AB

6.40 EFG

6.65 B

5.58 FGH

6.82 DE

8.00 B

6.20 EFG

6.69 B

P4 5.70 GHIJK

6.75 DE

7.60 BC

6.00 FGHIJ

6.51 B

5.90 FGH

6.90 DE

7.80 B

6.12 EFG

6.68 B

Means 5.52 C

6.43 B

7.54 A

6.36 B

5.70 C

5.59 B

7.62 A

6.42 B

121


Data in Table 4.3.10 shows that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly

from each other during both the years of study with respect to straw yield. It revealed

that the plant growth regulator level of G2 (90 ml ha-1) showed maximum straw yield

(11.81 and 11.46 t ha-1) during 2004 and 2005, respectively, followed by plant

growth regulator levels of G1 and G3 (60 and 120 ml ha-1) with the value of 9.96,

10.44 and 9.86, 10.18 t ha-1. It is obvious from the data that lowest straw yield (8.780

and 9.045 t ha-1) were recorded in plots without growth regulator application during

2004 and 2005. Goshi and Rama, (1997) given similar results.

The phosphorus levels also significantly affected the straw yield during both years of

study. Maximum straw yield was recorded in the treatment P2 (100 kg P2O5 ha-1)

with the value of 11.50 and 11.82 t ha-1, followed by P3 and P4 (150 and 200 kg P2O5

ha-1). However during both the years of studies the lowest straw yield (8.62 and

9.10 t ha-1) were observed in the plots without phosphatic fertilizer. Awan, et al.

(2003) also reported that maximum paddy and straw yield obtained from plots

treated with 120-100-75 NPK kg ha-1. Sudhakar, et al. (2004) and Prakash, et al.

(2007) stated that addition of P increased the straw yield.


significant during 2004 and 2005 with respect to straw yield. The treatment

combination of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg P2O5 ha-1) was on top with maximum

straw yield of 12.70 and 13.20 t ha-1 during 2004 and 2005, followed by the

treatment combination of G2P3 and G2P4 (90 ml ha-1 with 150 and 200 kg ha-1

phosphatic fertilizer). The lowest straw yield was noted in treatment G0P0 (without

plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer application) with the value of 7.50

and 7.80 t ha-1 during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

122

Table 4.3.10: Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 3.48% CV= 3.99% LSD0.01 =0.2961 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3619 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.3673 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01=0.3898 (Phosphorus Levels) LSD0.01 =0.7346 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =0.7797 (Interaction)


2004 2005



P0 7.50 K

8.70 HIJ

9.80 EFG

8.50 IJ

8.62 D 7.80 L 9.60 GHI

10.20 FGH

8.80 JK

9.10 D

P1 8.20 JK

9.40 FGH

10.70 CD

9.20 GHI

9.36 C 8.50 KL

10.50 EF

11.00 CDE

9.50 HIJ

9.88 C

P2 10.30 DE

11.40 BC

12.70 A

11.60 B

11.50 A

10.70 DEF

11.60 BC

13.20 A

11.80 B

11.82 A

P3 8.90 HIJ

10.00 DEF

11.40 BC

10.20 DE

10.13 B

9.20 IJK

10.60 EF

11.40 BCD

10.50 EF

10.43 B

P4 9.00 HI

10.30 DE

11.30 BC

9.80 EFG

10.10 B

9.02 IJK

10.40 EF

11.50 BC

10.30 EFG

10.31 B

Means 8.78 C

9.96 B

11.18 A

9.86 B

9.04 C

10.44 B

11.46 A

10.18 B

123


The data recorded on harvest index percentage are presented in Table. 4.3.11. The

data in Table depicted that doses of plant growth regulator differed significantly from

each other with regards to harvest index percentage during both the years. The data


harvest index (49.25 and 48.05 %) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. It was

followed by plant growth regulator dose of G1 (60 ml ha-1). It is obvious from the data

that lowest harvest index (41.42 and 41.30 %) was calculated in the plots without

growth regulator application during both the years of study.

The phosphorus levels also significantly affected the harvest index percentage

during both years of study. The maximum harvest index was recorded in the

treatment with P2 (100 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer application) having values of

48.89 and 48.92 %, followed by P3 and P4 (150 and 200 kg P2O5 ha-1). Sahrawat, et

al. (2002) stated that P improve the harvest index of the rice.

The interaction of plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer levels was highly

significant during 2004 and 2005, with regards to harvest index percentage. The

treatment having plant growth regulator level of G2P2 (90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg

phosphatic fertilizer) showed maximum harvest index of 53.38 and 53.04 % during

the year 2004 and 2005, respectively.

124

Table 4.3.11: Harvest index percentage as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.



2004 2005



P0 36.59 G

40.87 FG

43.08 DEF

39.90 FG

40.11 C

36.54 G

40.70 EFG

42.98 CDEF

43.11 CDEF

40.83 C

P1 40.85 FG

46.66 BCDE

48.66 ABCD

44.55 CDEF

45.18 B

39.13 FG

44.00 BCDEF

45.50 BCDE

42.77 CDEF

42.85 BC

P2 46.74 BCDE

47.34 BCDE

53.38 A

48.08 ABCD

48.89 A

46.60 BCDE

48.22 ABC

53.04 A

47.84 ABCD

48.92 A

P3 40.56 FG

44.90 CDEF

51.94 AB

43.22 DEF

45.16 B

42.04 DEFG

45.96 BCDE

49.39 AB

41.37 EFG

44.69 B

P4 42.35 EF

45.03 CDEF

49.21 ABC

42.26 EF

44.71 B

42.19 DEFG

44.59 BCDEF

49.36 AB

42.47 CDEFG

44.65 B

Means 41.42 C

44.96 B

49.25 A

43.70 BC

41.30 C

44.69 B

48.05 A

43.15 B

125


Economic analysis and BCR pertaining to effect of plant growth regulator and

phosphorus levels on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice

during both the years are presented in Table 4.3.12 Cost of production and other

economic details are given in Appendix 8. The data depicts that maximum net

income of Rs. 25136 and 26136 ha-1 was obtained from treatment G2P2 (90 ml plant

growth regulator with 100 kg P2O5 ha-1) with BCR of 1.33 and 1.39 during 2004 and

2005, respectively. The second highest net income was shown by the treatment

G2P3 (90 ml plant growth regulator with 150 kg P2O5 ha-1) that exhibited BCR of 1.01

during both the years. The lowest net income was calculated in control treatment,

where neither plant growth regulator was applied nor phosphatic fertilizer was

applied.

126

Table- 4.3.12: Economic analysis and BCR in transplanted coarse rice as affected by plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels during 2004 and 2005.

2004 2005 Plant growth regulator levels + Phosphorus levels

Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1

Gross IncomeRs. Ha-

1

Total Cost Rs. ha-1

Net IncomeRs. ha-

1 BCR

Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1

Gross income Rs. ha-1

Total Cost Rs. ha-1

Net IncomeRs. ha-

1 BCR

G0 (0ml) 5.52 0 28100 16319 11781 0.72 5.70 0 29000 16319 12681 0.78 G1 (60ml) 6.43 30 32650 16349 16301 0.99 6.59 30 33450 16349 17101 1.04 G2 (90ml) 7.54 45 38200 16364 21836 1.33 7.62 45 38600 16364 22236 1.36 G3 (120ml) 6.36 60 32300 16379 15921 0.97 6.42 60 32600 16379 16221 0.99 P0 (0 kg ha-1) 5.40 0 27500 16319 11181 0.68 5.61 0 28565 16319 12246 0.75 P1 (50 kg ha-1) 6.12 1250 31125 17569 13556 0.77 6.11 1250 31030 17569 13461 0.77 P2 (100 kg ha-1) 7.62 2500 38625 18819 19806 1.05 7.82 2500 39625 18819 20806 1.10 P3 (150 kg ha-1) 6.65 3750 33750 20069 13661 0.68 6.69 3750 33970 20069 13901 0.69 P4 (200 kg ha-1) 6.51 5000 33060 21319 11741 0.55 6.68 5000 33905 21319 12586 0.59 G0 X P0 (0ml X 0 kg ha-1) 4.60 0 23500 16319 7161 0.44 4.75 0 24250 16319 7931 0.48 G0 X P1 (0ml X 50kg ha-1) 5.00 1250 25500 17569 9731 0.55 5.20 1250 26500 17569 8931 0.51 G0 X P2 (0ml X 100kg ha-1) 6.70 2500 34000 18819 15161 0.80 6.90 2500 35000 18819 16181 0.86 G0 X P3 (0ml X 150kg ha-1) 5.60 3750 28500 20069 8431 0.42 5.58 3750 28375 20069 8306 0.41 G0 X P4 (0ml X 200kg ha-1) 5.70 5000 29000 21319 7661 0.36 5.90 5000 30000 21319 8681 0.40 G1 X P0 (60ml X 0kg ha-1) 5.30 30 27000 16349 10651 0.65 5.50 30 28000 16349 11651 0.71 G1 X P1 (60ml X 50kg ha-1) 6.00 1280 30500 17599 12901 0.73 6.02 1280 30625 17599 13086 0.74 G1 X P2 (60ml X 100kg ha-1) 7.50 2530 38000 18849 19151 1.01 7.70 2530 39000 18849 20151 1.07 G1 X P3 (60ml X 150kg ha-1) 6.60 3780 33500 20099 13401 0.67 6.82 3780 34625 20099 14526 0.72 G1 X P4 (60ml X 200kg ha-1) 6.75 5030 34250 21349 12901 0.60 6.90 5030 35000 21349 13651 0.63 G2 X P0 (90ml X 0kg ha-1) 6.20 45 31500 16364 15136 0.92 6.40 45 32500 16364 16136 0.99 G2 X P1 (90ml X 50kg ha-1) 7.20 1295 36500 17614 18866 1.07 7.00 1295 35500 17614 17886 1.01 G2 X P2 (90ml X 100kg ha-1) 8.70 2545 44000 18864 25136 1.33 8.90 2545 45000 18864 26136 1.39 G2 X P3 (90ml X 150kg ha-1) 8.00 3795 40500 20114 20386 1.01 8.00 3795 40500 20114 20386 1.01 G2 X P4 (90ml X 200kg ha-1) 7.60 5045 38500 21361 17136 0.80 7.80 5045 39500 21361 18139 0.85 G3 X P0 (120ml X 0kg ha-1) 5.50 60 28000 16379 11621 0.71 5.8 60 29500 16379 13121 0.80 G3 X P1 (120ml X 50kg ha-1) 6.30 1310 32000 17629 14371 0.81 6.20 1310 31500 17629 13871 0.78 G3 X P2 (120ml X 100kg ha-1) 7.60 2560 38500 18879 19621 1.04 7.80 2560 39500 18879 20621 1.09 G3 X P3 (120ml X 150kg ha-1) 6.40 3810 32500 20129 12371 0.61 6.20 3810 31500 20129 11371 0.56 G3 X P4 (120ml X 200kg ha-1) 6.00 5060 30500 21379 9121 0.43 6.12 5060 31125 21379 9746 0.45

127

Experiment 4.4: Effect of plant growth regulator levels (NAA) at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice.

Abstract

The experiment was conducted to find out the optimal growth stage of transplanted

coarse rice under various plant growth regulator levels (NAA) for increase the

productivity of rice under the agro-climatic conditions of Dera Ismail Khan. The

experimental design was RCB with split plot arrangements. Main plots consisted of

three critical growth stages of paddy rice viz S1 (tillering stage) S2 (panicle initiation

stage) and S3 (grain formation stage). While sub plots contained four levels of plant

growth regulator (NAA) 0, 60, 90 and 120 ml ha-1 respectively. Data recorded on

plant height (cm) at maturity, productive tillers (m-2) number of panicle (m-2) number

of spikelets panicle-1, sterility percentage, 1000-grain weight (g) paddy yield (t ha-1),

straw yield (t ha-1) and biological yield (t ha-1). Various growth stages of rice crop,

plant growth regulator levels and interaction affected significantly paddy yield and

yield components. However the combination of S2 x G2 (Panicle initiation stage with

90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) prove to be the best combination.

Introduction

Rice is one of the most important cereal crop of the world in nature of food, area and

production. Pakistan is basically an agriculture country. The country heavily

dependent on agriculture for food and shelter. Soils, irrigation water and climatic

conditions are most suitable but agriculture in this country suffers form low

production in terms of per unit area and per farm worker. To meet the increased

demand for food grain of rapidly growing population. There are many yield boosting

agronomic techniques in which one of them is the foliar application of certain plant

growth regulators, may be define as substances synthised in particular cells and are

transferred to other cells where in extremely small quantities influence development

process.

Plant growth regulators for yield enhancement, quality improvement and the

facilitation of harvesting together with genetic engineering represent supplemental

technologies in agriculture for increasing crop production and optimizing the use of

128

limited resources. Although plant growth regulators have been used in agriculture for

as long as crop protection chemicals, their impact up to now has been relatively

small and their application is limited to some specific culture.

Plant growth regulators are synthesized indigenously by plants, however, several

studies demonstrated that plant can respond to exogenously applied these

chemicals. This response may be due to the lack of sufficient endogenous in plant

for optimal growth and development under sub optimal climatic and environment

conditions. An exogenous application of plant growth regulators may affect the

endogenous hormonal pattern of the plant, either by supplementation of sub optimal

levels or by interaction with the synthesis, translocation or inactivation of existing

hormone levels (Arshad and Frankenberger, 1993). The present study was

conducted to investigate the effect of exogenously applied Naphthalene Acetic Acid

(NAA) with different levels at three critical growth stages of coarse rice to enhance

the productivity of rice.

4.4.1: Plant Height (cm)

The data recorded on plant height (cm) at maturity are presented in Table 4.4.1. The

data indicated that the various growth stages differed significantly from each other in

relation to plant height during both the cropping seasons. The data revealed that the

growth stage S2 (panicle initiation stage) showed maximum plant height (130.4 and

130.0 cm), followed by S1 (tillering stage) with the value of 123.5 and 124.8 cm

during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

As far as the effect of plant growth regulator on plant height of rice is concerned, it

was observed that various plant growth regulator levels significantly affected the

plant height during both the years of experimentation. The tallest plants (132.7 and

135.4 cm) were recorded in the treatment plant growth regulator level of G2 (90ml

ha-1),

129

Table 4.4.1: Plant height at maturity (cm) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV=2.74% CV= 2.87% LSD0.01 =2.823 (Stages) LSD0.01 =3.581 (Stages) LSD0.01 =3.850 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =4.067 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =6.668 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =7.044 (Interaction) Means followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

2004 2005

Stages Stages Plant Growth

Regulator S1 S2 S3 Means S1 S2 S3 Means

G0 114.0 FG

117.0 FG 116.0 FG

115.7 D

117.0 F

116.0 F

115.0 F

116.0 D

G1 127.0 CD

135.0 AB 120.0 EF

127.3 B

127.0 CDE

134.0 BC 122.0 DEF

127.7 B

G2 133.0 BC

140.0 A

125.0 DE

132.7 A

135.0 AB 142.0 A

129.3 BC 135.4 A

G3 120.0 EF

129.0 BCD

112.0 G

120.5 C

120.0 EF

128.0 BCD

118.0 F

122.0 C

Means 123.5 B

130.4 A

118.3 C

124.8 B

130.0 A

121.1 C

130

followed by G1 (60ml ha-1). While during both years of study the smallest plants were

observed in control.

The interaction of growth stages and plant growth regulator levels on plant height

was highly significant during both years of study. The treatment combination of S2G2

(panicle initiation stage with plant growth regulator level of 90 ml ha-1) was on top

(140.0 and 142.0 cm) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The smallest plants were

noted with the treatment of without plant growth regulator at all growth stages and it

is also statistically at par with the highest dose G3 (120 ml ha-1) of plant growth

regulator at S3 (grain formation stage) during both the years of cropping season.

Awan, et al. (1989) reported that increased plant height was due to intact cells

elongation. Watanabe and Saigusa, (2004) resulted that plant height was

significantly increased by the application of 50 ppm ethephon 100 ppm GA3 alone or

in combination over that of control.


The data recorded on the number of productive tillers per unit area are presented in

Table 4.4.2. The data indicated that various growth stages differed significantly from

each other during both the cropping seasons regarding the number of productive

tillers. The data revealed that growth stages S2 (panicle initiation stage) showed

maximum number of productive tillers (365.0 and 370.8 m-2) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. It is obvious from the data that least number of productive tillers m-2

were recorded in plots with stage S3 (grain formation stage).

As far as the effect of plant growth regulator levels on number of productive tillers

m-2 of rice crop is concerned it was observed from the data that various growth

regulator levels significantly affected the number of productive tillers m-2 during both

the years of study however the maximum number of productive tillers (369.0 and

373.0 m-2) were recorded in treatment G2 (90 ml ha-1), followed by G1 (60 ml ha-1)

level of plant growth regulator. While during both the year of experimentation the

lesser number of productive tillers m-2 were observed in control.

131

Table 4.4.2: Number of productive tiller m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 1.11% CV= 0.99% LSD0.01 =6.392 (Stages) LSD0.01 =3.775 (Stages) LSD0.01 =4.472 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =4.084 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =7.746 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =7.074 (Interaction) Means followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

2004 2005



G0 347.0 GH 346.0 GH

348.0 FGH

347.0 D

357.0 DEF

355.0 EF

353.0 EF

355.0 D

G1 358.0 DE 368.0 B

352.0 EFG

359.3 B

364.0 CD 374.0 BC

358.0 DE

365.3 B

G2 367.0 BC 380.0 A

360.0 CD 369.0 A

372.0 BC 384.0 A

364.0 CD

373.3 A

G3 355.0 DEF

366.0 BC

342.0 H

354.3 C

360.0 DE 370.3 BC

350.0 F 360.1 C

Means 356.8 B

365.0 A

350.5 B

363.3 B

370.8 A

356.3 C

132

The interaction of plant growth stages and plant growth regulator levels was highly

significant during the both year of study and treatment combination of S2G2 (panicle

initiation stage with plant growth regulator levels of 90 ml ha-1) was on the top in

producing maximum number of productive tillers with (380.0 and 384.0 m-2) during

2004 and 2005, respectively. While the lowest number of productive tillers (342.0

and 350.0 m-2) were recorded in the treatment combination of S3G3 (grain formation

stage with 120ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator) during both the years of study.

The results are at par with the findings of Zahir, et al. (1998).

4.4.3: Number of Panicles m-2

The data given in Table 4.4.3 revealed that various growth stages differed

significantly from each other during both the cropping seasons regarding number of

panicles. It revealed that treatment S2 (panicle initiation stage) shows maximum

number of panicles (324.5 and 328.0 m-2) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. It is

obvious from the data that least number of panicles m-2 were recorded in S3 (grain

formation stage) with the value of 311.5 and 314.5, during both the years.

The plant growth regulator levels significantly affected the number of panicles during

both the year of study. The highest number of panicles (330.7 and 333.0 m-2) were

recorded in the treatment G2 (90 ml ha-1), followed by G1 (60 ml ha-1) producing

319.3 and 322.3 number of panicles m-2 during 2004 and 2005, respectively. While

during both the years of experimentation the lowest number of panicles m-2 were

recorded in the plots treated with G3 (120 ml ha-1) and in control plots during both the

years.

The interaction of rice growth stages and plant growth regulator levels was highly

significant during both the years of study. The treatment S2G2 (panicle initiation

stage with 90ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator) produced maximum number of

panicles (340.0 and 342.0 m-2) during both years of experimentation. While the

lowest number of panicles (305.0 and 308.0 m-2) were recorded in treatment S3G3

(grain formation stage with 120 ml ha-1 level of plant growth regulator) applied during

133

Table 4.4.3: Number of panicles m-2 as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



G0 309.0 F

310.0 F

307.0 F

308.7 C

312.0 E

314.0 DE

310.0 E

312.0 C

G1 319.0 CDE

327.0 BC

312.0 EF

319.3 B 321.0 CD

331.0 B

315.0 DE

322.3 B

G2 330.0 B

340.0 A

322.0 BC

330.7 A 332.0 B

342.0 A

325.0 BC

333.0 A

G3 313.0 DEF

321.0 CD

305.0 F

313.0 C

315.0 DE

325.0 BC

308.0 E

316.0 C

Means 317.8 B

324.5 A

311.5 C

320.0 B

328.0 A

314.5 C

134

both years of study. The results are in line with Khan and Zia, (2000) who

reported that green manuring with EM has a significant effect on panicle baring

tillers.


Data in Table 4.4.4 revealed that rice growth stages affected the number of

spikelets panicle-1. The data on number of spikelets panicle-1 indicated that

various growth stages of rice differed significantly from each other during both

the cropping seasons. It revealed that the S2 (panicle initiation stage) produced

maximum number of spikelets panicle-1 (164.3 and 168.5), followed by treatment

S3 (grain formation stage) with 151.3 and 156.3 during 2004 and 2005,

respectively.

The effect of plant growth regulator levels on number of spikelets per panicle was

significant during both the years of experimentation. The maximum number of

spikelets panicle-1 (171.3 and 176.0) were recorded in the treatment G2 (90 ml

ha-1 plant growth regulator level), followed by G1 (60 ml ha-1 level of plant growth

regulator) during both the year of study.


significant during both the years of experimentation. The stage S2G2 (panicle

initiation stage with 90ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) gave maximum

number of apikelets panicle-1 (182.0 and 187.0) during both years of study. While

the lowest number of spikelets panicle-1 were recorded in plots with high dose

(120 ml ha-1) of plant growth regulator and in control plants. Misra and Sahu,

(1957) reported that number of spikelets and grains favorably influenced by NAA

@ 500 ppm ha-1.

135

Table 4.4.4: Number of spikelets panicle-1 as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



G0 145.0 EF

147.0 EF

146.0 EF

146.0 D

151.0 D

150.0 D

153.0 D

151.3 D

G1 161.0 CD

168.0 BC

153.0 DE

160.0 B

165.0 C

171.0 BC

156.0 D

164.0 B

G2 170.0 B

182.0 A

162.0 BC

171.3 A

174.0 B

187.0 A

167.0 BC

176.0 A

G3 150.0 EF

160.0 CD

144.0 F

151.0 C

156.0 D

166.0 C

150.0 D

157.3 C

Means 156.5 B

164.3 A

151.3 C

161.5 B

168.5 A

156.3 C

136

4.4.5: Sterility Percentage

Data pertaining sterility percentage are given the Table 4.4.5 which revealed that

during both the cropping seasons different growth stages differed significantly

from each other with respect to sterility percentage. The results presented in

Table 4.4.5 showed higher sterility percentage (24.65 and 23.35 %) in S3 (grain

formation stage), while minimum sterility percentage was recorded (21.23 and

19.00 %) in treatment S2 (panicle initiation stage) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively.

The plant growth regulator levels significantly affected the sterility percentage

during both the years of study. The highest sterility percentage was recorded in

treatment G0 (without plant growth regulator) during both the years with 26.80%

and 25.07% respectively. While the lowest sterility percentage was observed in

treatment G2 (90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) showing (19.67 and 18.17

%) sterility during 2004 and 2005, respectively.


significantly during both years of the study regarding sterility percentage. The

treatment S3G3 (grain formation stage with 120 ml ha-1 level of plant growth

regulator) showed the highest sterility percentage (28.00 and 26.00 %) during

both the experimental years. The treatment S2G2 (panicle initiation stage with 90

ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) proved to be the lowest sterility percentage

during both the years. This is due to by improving seed setting applying the GA3

60 g ha-1 Yadav, et al. (2005).

137

Table 4.4.5: Sterility percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



G0 27.00 B

26.80 B

26.60 B

26.80 A

24.80 A

25.00 A

25.40 A

25.07 A

G1 22.00 D

19.60 G

23.00 C

21.53 C

20.10 C

17.00 EF

22.00 B

19.70 C

G2 20.00 FG

18.00 E

21.00 E

19.67 D

18.50 D

16.00 F

20.00 C

18.17 D

G3 23.00 C

20.50 EF

28.00 A

23.83 B

21.00 BE

18.00 DE

26.00 A 21.67 B

Means 23.00 B

21.23 C

24.65 A

21.10 B

19.00 C

23.35 A

138

4.4.6: Normal Kernels Percentage

The data presented in Table 4.4.6 indicated that rice growth stages significantly

affected the normal kernel percentage during both the years of study. The crop

growth stage S2 (panicle initiation stage) produced maximum normal kernels

percentage (78.50 and 80.50 %) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. While lowest

normal kernels percentage (67.25 and 65.75 %) was recorded in S3 (grain formation

stage).

The plant growth regulator levels significantly affected the normal kernels

percentage during both the planting seasons. The highest normal kernels

percentage (81.25 and 80.33 %) was recoded in treatment G2 (90 ml ha-1 plant

growth regulator level) during both the years. While the lowest normal kernels

percentage (70.0 and 70.33 %) was noted in the treatment G3 (120 ml ha-1 plant

growth regulator level) during 2004 and 2005, respectively.


significant during both the years of study with regarding normal kernel percentage.

The treatment S2G2 (panicle initiation stage with 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator

level) showed more normal kernels percentage (88.00 and 90.00 %) during 2004

and 2005, respectively. While the lesser normal kernels percentage was recorded in

plots S1 (tillering stage) and G0 (control) during both the years of study.

The reason for obtaining more normal kernels in case of treated plots may be due to

the fact that leaves in treated plots remain functional for a larger period of time on

account of delayed senescence in these plots. The second reason for might be the

longer functionality of the vascular bundles in different parts of the panicle which

might have resulted in an efficient translocation of photosynthesis Awan, et al.

(1999).

139

Table 4.4.6: Normal kernel percentage as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



G0 63.00 FG 62.00 EFG

65.00 EFG

64.67 D

66.00 EFG

65.00 FG

67.00 DEFG

66.00 C

G1 77.00 BCD

82.00 AB 70.00 DEF

76.33 B

74.00 CD

85.00 AB

60.00 GH

73.00 B

G2 81.75 AB 88.00 A

74.00 CD

81.25 A

80.00 BC 90.00 A

71.00 DEF

80.33 A

G3 72.00 CDE

78.00 BC

60.00 G

70.00 C

73.00 CDE

82.00 B

56.00 H

70.33 B

Means 73.44 B

78.50 A

67.25 C

73.25 B

80.50 A

65.75 C

140


Data in Table 4.4.7 indicated that 1000-grain weight was highly significant at

different growth stages during both the years of experimentation. Highest 1000-

grain weight (20.76 g) and (21.02 g) was recorded in S2 (panicle initiation stage),

followed by S1 (tillering stage) during 2004 and 2005, respectively.

Plant growth regulator levels affected the 1000-grain weight highly significantly

during both the years of study, the highest 1000-grain weight was recorded in the

treatment G2 (90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) producing (21.12 and 21.40 g)

respectively, during 2004 and 2005. While the lowest 1000-grain weight was noted

in the plots of control. Gurmani, et al. (2006) given the similar results.


significant during both the years of study. The treatment S2G2 (panicle initiation

stage with 90 ml ha-1) produced maximum 1000-grain weight during both the years

of study. While the lowest 1000-grain weight was noted in S1G0 (control) and S3G3

(grain formation stage with 120ml ha-1) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. Kaur

and Singh, (1987) noted that similar results.

141

Table 4.4.7: 1000-grain weight (g) as affected by plant growth levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



G0 18.20 G

18.00 G

18.15 G

18.12 D

18.3G H 18.40 G 18.23 GH 18.31 D

G1 19.70 E

21.80 B

18.81 F

20.10 B

20.00 E

22.00 B 19.00 F

20.33 B

G2 20.60 C

23.00 A

19.76 E

21.12 A

21.00 C

23.20 A 20.00 E

21.40 A

G3 18.67 F

20.25 D

18.00 G

18.97 C

19.00 F

20.50 D 18.00 H

19.17 C

Means 19.26 B

20.76 A

18.68 C

19.58 B

21.02 A

18.81 C

142

4.4.8: Biological yield (t ha-1) The data in Table 4.4.8 depicted that various growth stages of rice crop differed

significantly with regard to biological yield during 2004 and 2005. The growth stage

of S2 (panicle initiation stage) produced significantly higher biological yield (18.30

and 18.58 t ha-1), followed by S1 (tillering stage) (17.41 and 17.63 t ha-1) during 2004

and 2005, respectively.


significantly differed among plant growth regulator levels. However plots treated with

G2 (90ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) resulted in higher biological yield (19.07

and 19.37 t ha-1), followed by G1 (60ml ha-1 growth regulator level) with the value of

17.57 and 17.90 t ha-1 during both the years of study, respectively.

The interaction between growth stages of rice crop and plant growth regulator levels

was significantly affected during both the years of study with regard to biological

yield. However the maximum biological yield of (20.40 and 20.60 tha-1) was recorded

in treatment of S2G2 (panicle initiation stage with plant growth regulator level of 90ml

ha-1) during 2004 and 2005, respectively. While the lowest biological yield was

recorded in treatment S3G3 (grain formation stage with plant growth regulator level of

120 ml ha-1) during 1st and 2nd year of study, respectively. Anwar, (1999) stated that

IAA and GA concentration range 1-2 ug/ml increased plant biomass of rice.

143

Table 4.4.8: Biological yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



G0 16.20 G

16.00 G

15.80 G

15.94 D

16.00 H

16.30 GH

16.20 GH

16.17 D

G1 17.40 E

18.60 BC

16.70 F

17.57 B

17.80 DEF

18.90 BC

17.00 FG

17.90 D

G2 19.00 B

20.40 A

17.80 DE

19.07 A

19.30 B

20.60 A

18.20 CDE

19.37 A

G3 17.20 EF

18.20 CD

14.50 H

16.63 C

17.40 EF

18.50 BCD

15.60 H

17.17 C

Means 17.41 B

18.30 A

16.20 C

17.63 B

18.58 A

16.75 C

144


The data presented in Table 4.4.9 indicated that different growth stages significantly

affected the paddy yield during both the planting years. The crop growth stage S2

(panicle initiation stage) showed maximum paddy yield (7.65 and 7.92 tha-1) during

2004 and 2005. While the lowest paddy yield (6.33 and 6.55 t ha-1) was recorded in

treatment S1 (tillering stage) during both the cropping seasons, respectively.

The plant growth regulator levels significantly affected the paddy yield during both

the cropping seasons. The highest paddy yield was recorded in the treatment G2 (90

ml t ha-1 plant growth regulator level) during both the years (8.12 and 8.40 t ha-1)

respectively. While the lesser paddy yield was recorded in the treatment G3 (120 ml

ha-1).

The interaction of crop growth stages and plants growth regulator levels was highly

significant during both the years of experimentation with regards paddy yield. The

treatment S2G2 (panicle initiation stage with 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level)

produced maximum paddy yield (9.00 and 9.20 t ha-1) during both the years of study.

While the lowest paddy yield was recorded in S3G3 (grain formation stage with 120

ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) and in control plots. Gurmani, et al. (2006)

resulted that plant growth regulators increased grain yield. The finding are also

similar with Pandey et al (2001), who reported that IAA @ 50 ppm followed by Alar

@ 3000 ppm produced significantly maximum grain yield per plant, 1000-grain

weight and yield kg ha-1. These were significantly superior to all other treatments.

The enhance yield under IAA may be due to increase in panicle length, number of

panicle. The other possible reasons for the best yield recorded in IAA treatment

would be the capability of this treatment in efficiency channelising the assimilated to

the grains.

145

Table 4.4.9: Paddy yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.

CV= 4.45% CV= 5.39% LSD0.01 =0.3523 (Stages) LSD0.01 =0.3866 (Stages) LSD0.01 =0.3523 (G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.4410(G. Levels) LSD0.01 =0.6102 (Interaction) LSD0.01 =0.7638 (Interaction) Means followed by different letter(s) are significantly different at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

2004 2005



G0 6.20 EF

6.30 E

6.00 EF

6.17 C

6.40 EF

6.50 DEF

6.20 EF

6.37 C

G1 7.00 CD

8.00 B

6.50 DE

7.17 B

7.20 CD

8.40 B

6.40 EF

7.33 B

G2 8.15 B

9.00 A

7.20 C

8.12 A

8.40 B

9.20 A

7.60 C

8.40 A

G3 6.50 DE

7.30 C

5.62 F

6.48 C

6.80 DE

7.60 C

6.00 F

6.80 C

Means 6.93 AB

7.65 A

6.33 B

7.20 B

7.92 A

6.55 C

146


The data presented in the Table 4.4.10 indicate that straw yield was significantly

affected by different growth stages of rice crop during 2004 and 2005. The stage S2

(panicle initiation stage) produced significantly higher straw yield (10.55 and 10.98 t

ha-1), followed by S1 (tillering stage) with (9.80 and 10.08 t ha-1) during 2004 and

2005, respectively.


significantly affected by various plant growth regulator levels. However, the

treatment G2 (90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) resulted higher straw yield

(11.70 and 11.97 t ha-1), followed by G1 (60ml ha-1) with (9.73 and 10.00 t ha-1)

during both the experimentation years.

The interaction between growth stages of rice crop and plant growth regulator levels

was significant during both the years of experimentation with regards to straw yield.

The highest straw yield (13.00 and 13.30 t ha-1) was recorded in the treatments

S2G2 (panicle initiation stage with 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) during both

the years of study 2004 and 2005, respectively. However the lowest straw yield (t ha-

1) was recorded in treatments that were treated with G3 (120 ml ha-1 of plant growth

regulator level) and in control during both the years of study. Khan and Zia, (2000)

also stated that green manuring and EM increased the straw yield.

147

Table 4.4.10: Straw yield (t ha-1) as affected by plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004 and 2005.


2004 2005



G0 8.60 GH

8.50 GH

8.20 H

8.43 D

9.00 EF

9.20 EF

8.80 FG

9.00 C

G1 9.50 EF

10.70 C

9.00 FG

9.73 B

9.70 DE

11.00 C

9.30 EF

10.00 B

G2 11.80 B

13.00 A

10.30 CD

11.70 A

12.00 B

13.30 A

10.6 C

11.97 A

G3 9.30 F

10.00 DE

8.00 H

9.10 C

9.60 E

10.40 CD

8.20 G

9.40 C

Means 9.80 B

10.55 A

8.88 C

10.08 B

10.98 A

9.22 C

148


Economic analysis and BCR pertaining to the effect of plant growth stages and plant

growth regulator levels on the yield and yield components at transplanted coarse

rice during both the years are presented in Table 4.4.12. Cost of production and

other economic details are given in Appendix 9. The data indicated that maximum

net income of Rs. 27531 and 28531 ha-1 was obtained in the treatment S2G2 (panicle

initiation stage with 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) with BCR of 1.53 and

1.59 during 2004 and 2005, respectively. The second highest net income was

calculated (Rs. 23281 and 24531) with BCR of 1.29 and 1.36 in the treatment S1G2

(tillering stage with 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level) during 2004 and 2005,

respectively. The lowest net income was recorded in treatment S3G3 (grain formation

stage with plant growth regulator level of 120 ml ha-1).

149

Table: 4.4.11: Economic analysis and BCR in transplanted coarse rice as affected by plant growth regulator

levels at different growth stages during 2004 and 2005.

2004 2005 Plant growth stages + Plant

growth regulator levels Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1


Total Cost Rs. ha-1

Net Income Rs. ha-1

BCR Paddy yield t

ha-1

Total variable

cost Rs. ha-1


Total Cost Rs. ha-1

Net IncomeRs. ha-

1 BCR

S1 (Tillering stage) 6.93 0 35150 17924 17226 0.96 7.20 0 36500 17924 18576 1.04 S2 (Panicle initiation stage) 7.65 0 38750 17924 20826 1.61 7.92 0 40125 17924 22201 1.24 S3 (Grain formation stage) 6.33 0 32155 17924 14231 0.79 6.55 0 33250 17924 15326 0.86 G0 (0ml ha-1) 6.17 0 31335 17924 13411 0.75 6.37 0 32335 17924 14411 0.80 G 1 (60ml ha-1) 7.17 30 36335 17954 18381 1.02 7.33 30 37165 17954 19211 1.07 G 2 (90ml ha-1) 8.11 45 41085 17969 23116 1.28 8.40 45 42500 17969 24531 1.36 G 3 (120ml ha-1) 6.48 60 32875 17984 14891 0.83 6.80 60 34500 17984 16516 0.92 S1X G 0 (S1 X 0ml ha-1) 6.20 0 31500 17924 13576 0.76 6.40 0 32500 17924 14576 0.82 S1X G 1 (S1 X 60ml ha-1) 7.00 30 35500 17954 17546 0.98 7.20 30 36500 17954 18546 1.03 S1X G 2 (S1 X 90ml ha-1) 8.15 45 41250 17969 23281 1.29 8.40 45 42500 17969 24531 1.36 S1X G 3 (S1 X 120ml ha-1) 6.50 60 33000 17984 15016 0.83 6.80 60 34500 17984 16516 0.92 S2X G 0 (S2 X 0ml ha-1) 6.30 0 32000 17924 14076 0.78 6.50 0 33000 17924 15076 0.84 S2X G 1 (S2 X 60ml ha-1) 8.00 30 40500 17954 22546 1.26 8.40 30 42500 17954 24546 1.38 S2X G 2 (S2 X 90ml ha-1) 9.00 45 45500 17969 27531 1.53 9.20 45 46500 17969 28531 1.59 S2X G 3 (S2 X 120ml ha-1) 7.30 60 37000 17984 19016 1.06 7.60 60 38500 17984 20516 1.14 S3X G 0 (S3 X 0ml ha-1) 6.00 0 30500 17924 12576 0.70 6.20 0 31500 17924 13576 0.76 S3X G 1 (S3 X 60ml ha-1) 6.50 30 33000 17954 15046 0.84 6.40 30 32500 17954 13546 0.75 S3X G 2 (S3 X 90ml ha-1) 7.20 45 36500 17969 18531 1.03 7.60 45 38500 17969 20531 1.14 S3X G 3 (S3 X 120ml ha-1) 5.62 60 28625 17984 10641 0.59 6.00 60 30500 17984 12516 0.69

150

Chapter-5

Summary

During the course of experimentation for evaluation of appropriate rice

cultivation technology four field experiments were conducted. Coarse rice

variety IR-6, well-adapted to the climatic conditions of the area was used in all

experiments. Thirty five days old rice nursery was transplanted in plots. Data

were recorded on various growth and yield parameters like plant height (cm),

productive tillers m-2, panicles m-2, spikelets panicle-1, sterility and normal

kernels percentage, 1000-grain weight (g), paddy yield (t ha-1), straw yield (t

ha-1) and harvest index percentage.

In 1st experiment which was related with the study of phosphorus levels and

irrigation regimes in which five P2O5 levels were maintained in main plot while

the four irrigation regimes were kept as sub plot. The results predicted that the

combination of (150 kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations containing 750 mm water

amount) proved to the best combination.

The 2nd trial pertaining to the study of effect of plant growth regulator’s (NAA)

levels and irrigation regimes, it was noted that 90 ml ha-1 level of plant growth

regulator and 10 irrigations are the best combination for getting maximum

yield of coarse rice under agro-ecological conditions of Dera Ismail Khan.

Third experiment related to the study of effects of phosphorus and plant

growth regulator (NAA) levels, it was observed that the treatment having plant

growth regulator level of 90 ml ha-1 with 100 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer was

on top in with maximum paddy yield.

In 4th experiment which focused the effect of plant growth regulator at different

growth stages of transplanted coarse rice the combination of panicle initiation

stage with 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level prove to be the best

combination.

On the basis of research findings, it can be concluded that for getting

maximum yield of paddy under agro-climatic conditions of Dera Ismail Khan

the farmer should apply 10 irrigations (750 mm water), 90 ml ha-1 plant growth

regulator (NAA) on panicle initiation stage. As far as the phosphatic fertilizer

151

dose is concerned it is worth mentioning that when the crop is applied with the

plant growth regulator levels (90ml ha-1), the P2O5 dose could be reduced up

to 100 kg ha-1, however if the plant growth regulator is not used then the dose

of phosphatic fertilizer should be increased up to 150 kg ha-1. It is further

added that with the use of plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer the

ample amount of irrigation water can be saved.

152

Chapter-6

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In research project “Enhancing the yield potential of rice through different

agronomic techniques” four field experiments were conducted using coarse

variety IR-6. The results of the experiments revealed that the combination of 150

kg P2O5 ha-1 with 10 irrigations containing 750 mm water amount proved to the

best combination.

In the 2nd experiment related to the study of effect of plant growth regulator’s

(NAA) levels and irrigation regimes, it was observed that plant growth regulator

level of 90 ml ha-1 and 10 irrigations are the best combination for obtaining

maximum paddy yield.

While the third experiment conducted for looking into the effects of plant growth

regulator (NAA) and phosphorus levels on the yield and yield components of rice,

it was observed that the treatment having plant growth regulator level of 90 ml ha-

1 with 100 kg ha-1 phosphatic fertilizer was on top with maximum paddy yield.

In 4th experiment for exploring the appropriate growth stage of rice for application

of plant growth regulator along with its suitable dose; it was observed that panicle

initiation stage with 90 ml ha-1 plant growth regulator level seems to be the most

excellent combination for getting best results with regards to paddy yield.

On the basis of research observations and data recorded it can be concluded that

for getting maximum yield of paddy under agro-climatic conditions of Dera Ismail

Khan, the crop should be supplied with 10 irrigations (750 mm water), 90 ml ha-1

plant growth regulator (NAA) on panicle initiation stage. In case of trial on

phosphatic fertilizer dose it is obvious that when the crop is applied with the plant

growth regulator the P2O5 dose could be decreased up to 100 kg ha-1, however if

the plant growth regulator is not used then the dose of phosphatic fertilizer should

be increased up to 150 kg ha-1. More over it is also concluded that the use of

plant growth regulator and phosphatic fertilizer may be helpful in decreasing the

irrigation water required for rice crop.

153

Chapter -7

LITERATURE CITED

Abro, G. H; Syed, T. S; Umer, M. I. and Zhang, J. (2004). Effect of application of a growth regulator and micronutrients on insect pest infestation and yield components of cotton. J. Entom. 1(1): 12-16.

Ahmad, S; Yaseen. M. and Saboor, A. (2000). Genetic variation for phosphorus use in rice at two level of soil applied phosphorus. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 3(8): 1274-1276.

Akram, M. and Majid, A. (2004). http://[email protected]. Org.pk/latest/M-akram-kahlown

Anbumozhi, V. E; Yamaji, T. and Tabuchi,T. (1998). Rice crop growth and yield influenced by changing in ponding water depth, water regimes and fertigation levels. Agric. Water Manage. 37(3): 241-253.

Anonymous, (2002) Crop Statistics of Division. Agriculture Statistics (Ext. Dept), Dera Ismail Khan, NWFP. Pakistan.

Anonymous, (2006) Statistical year book. Federal Bureau of statistics. Pakistan.

Anwar, G. (1999). Production of growth hormones and nitrogenase use by diazotrophic bacteria and their effect on plant growth. University of Punjab, Lahore / Institute of Biochemistry and Biotechnology. Ph.D. Thesis.

Arshad, M. and Frankenberger, Jr. (1993). Microbial production of plant growth regulators. : 307-347. In: Soil Microbial Echology, F. B. Metting Jr. (Ed),Marcel Dekker Inc.,NY.

Asif, M; Choudhary, F.M. and Saeed, M. (1999). Effect of different levels of assessment of individual and combined impact of NPK on BAS-385 , Pak. J. Soil Sci. 12(3-4): 81-85

Asif, M; Choudhary, F. M. and Saeed, M. (1997). Influence of NPK levels and spilt N application on grain filling and yield of fine rice. IRRN. 24. (2) : 30-31.

Awan, I. U; Alizai, H. K and Chaudhry, F. M. (1989). Effect of plant growth regulations on ripening, grain development, and grain quality of rice. IRRN. 14. (3): 30-32.

Awan, I. U; Baloch, M. S; Saddozai, M. Z. and Sulemani, M. (1999). Stimulatory effects of GA3 and IAA on ripening process, kernel development and quality of rice. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2(2): 410-412.

154

Awan, K. H; Ranjha, A. M; Mehdi, S. M; Serfraz, M. and Hussain, G. (2003). Response of rice line PN-95 to different NPK levels. J. Biol. Sci. 3(2): 157-166.

Balasubramanian, A. and Krishnaranjan, J. (2000). Influence of irrigation regimes on growth, water use and water use efficiency of direct seeded rice. Res. crops 1(1): 1-4.

Balasubramanian, R. and Krishnaranjan, J. (2003). Water management in direct seeded low land rice. IRRN. 28. (1): 70-71.

Bali, A. S. and Uppal, H. S. (1999). Irrigation schedule in producing quality basmati rice. Agric. Sci. 69(5): 325-328

Baloch, M. S; Awan. I. U; Jatoi, S. A; Hussain I. and Khan B. U. (2000). Evaluation of seeding densities in broadcast wet seeded rice. J. Pure and Applied Sci. 19 (1): 63-65.

Baloch, M. S., Awan. I. U; Hassan. G; Khan. M. A; Ahmad. K. and Sulemani. M.Z. (2004). Quantitative assessment of social and some input variables relating to rice production in Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan. Pak J. Agron. 3 (1): 52-58.

Barber, S. A. (1976). Efficient fertilizer use In. Patteron, F.L. ed. :13-29. Agronomic research for Food, ASA, Special Pub. 26, Madison.

Begum, M. K; Kader, M. K; Hussain, S. M. A. and Hassan, K. N. (2002). Effect of seedling raising method and fertilizer combination on the yield of late Boro rice. Pak. J. Agron. 1(2-3): 89-91.

Belder, P; Bouman, B. A. M; Cabangon, R; Guoan, Lu; Quilang, E. J. P; Yuanhua, Li; Spiertz, J. H. J. and Tuong, T. P. (2004). Effect of water saving irrigation on rice yield and water use in typical low land conditions in Asia. Agric. Water Manage. 65(3): 193-210.

Borrell, A; Garside A. and Fukai, S. (1997). Improving efficiency of water use for irrigated rice in a semi-arid tropical environment. Field Crop Res. 53(3): 231-248.

Bouman, B. A. M. (2001). Water efficient management strategies in rice production. IRRN. 26(2): 17-22.

Chaudhry, M. R. (2001). A text book of irrigation and drainage practices for agriculture. Published by study Aid Project University of Agriculture Faisalabad. pp. 68-70.

Chenniappan, V; Ravichandran. V. and Thyagarajan, K. (2004). Maximization of seed set in hybrid rice through chemical manipulation. World Rice Research Conference 2004 : 210.

155

Cheong, B. H. (2003). Recent status of water resources and its prospects and efficient use of agricultural water resources in Korea. Int. Symp. On enhancement of water use efficiency in low land rice cultivation. Iksan, Korea: 19-38

Davies, P. J. (1987). Plant Hormone and their role in plant growth and development. In The plant hormones: Their Nature, Occurrence and Functions (ed. P. J. Davies) pp. 1-11. Martinus Nijhoff publishers Dordrecht,Netherlands.

Dengon, S. Y; Wag, S. M. and Savin, N. R. (1996). Study on performance of plant growth regulator in rainfed transplanted rice on farmers' fields. J. Agric. Sci. 128 (3): 201-203.

Dutta, D. P; Jana, K. and Bandyopadhyay, P. (2001). Growht analysis of rice under rice-com-prawn culture system. Res. crops. 2(1): 73-80.

Dwivedi, B. S; Singh, V. K. and Dwivedi, V. (2004). Application of phosphate rock, with or without Aspergillw awamori inocultiver to meet phosphorus demands of rice-wheat systems in the Indo-genetic plains of India. Australian J. Exp. Agric. 4(10): 1041 - 1050.

Ezekiel; Akinkunmi. and Akinrinde. (2006). Growth regulators and nitrogen fertilization effects on performance and nitrogen use efficiency to tall and dwarf varieties of rice. Biotechnology, 5(3): 268-276.

Fageria, N. K. and Santos, A. B. (2002). Low land rice genotypes evaluation for phosphorus use efficiency. J. Plant Nutr. Monticello, NY: Marcel Dekker Inc. 25(12): 2793-2802.

George, T; Magbanua, R; Garrity, D. P; Tubana, B. S. and Quiton, J. (2002). Rapid yield loss of rice crop successively in aerobic soil. Agron. J. 94(5): 981-989.

George, T; Magbanua, R; Roder, W; Keer, K; Trebuil, G. and Reoma, V. (2001). Upland rice response to phosphorus fertilzation in Asia. Agron. J. 93(6): 1362-1370.

Ghoshi, B. and Rama, R. (1997). Effect of various growth hormones on paddy yield and its contributing components on rice. Ind. J. Plant Sci. 21 (2): 37 -39.

Gowda, J. and Rudraradhya,C. (1998). Effect of irrigation regimes and neutrient management in paddy field. Ind. J. Agric. Res. 27 (3): 24-30

Guerra, L. C; Bhulyan, T. P; Tuong, T. P. and Barker, R. (1998). Producing more rice with less water from irrigated systems. S.W.I.M. Paper5. Colombo (Sri Lanka); International Irrigation Management Institute.

Gurmani, A. R; Banno, A. and Saleem, M. (2006). Effect of growth regulators on growth, yield and ion accumulation of rice. Pak. J. Bot. 38 (5): 1415-1424.

156

Harda, J; Yans. M; Nho, S.P; Song, Y. and Tanka, T. (1985). Promotion of seedling growth of kosean Japoica-Indica Hybrid rice cv. by gibberellic application. Bulletin of the Hukuriku National Agriculture Exp. Station. (Plant Growth Regulators Abst., 12(10): 1689; 1986).

Hassan, G. Gill, K. H; Chaudhry, E. H; Sial, R. A. and Ehsan, B. A. (1996). Assessment of individual and combines impact of NPK on Bas-385 rice. Pak. J. Soil Sci. 12(3-4): 81-85.

He, Y; Shen, Q; Kong,H; Xiong, Y. and Wang, X. (2004). Effect of soil moisture content and phosphorus application on phosphorus nutrition of rice cultivated in different water regimes systems. “J. plant nutr.” 17(12): 2259-2272.

Henry, J. L; Slinkard, A. E; and Hogg T. J. (1995). Effect of phosphorus on establishment, yield and quality of pea, lentil and fababean. Canadian Journals of Plant Sciences. 75: 395-398.

Iqbal, M. T. (2004). Yield and biomass in rice interactions of nitrogen, phosphorus and water application. Pak. J. Biol. Sci.7 (2): 2115-2120.

IRRI, (International Rice Research Institute) (2001). Annual report 2000-2001. Rice research: the way forward. Los Banos, Philippines: 71.

Islam, M. S; Ahmad, G. J. H.and Zulfiquar. (2005). Effect of flag leaf clipping and GA3 application on hybrid rice seed yield. IRRN. 30(1): 46-47.

Jenson, M. E. (1980). The role of irrigation in food and fiber. The American Society of Agricultural Engineers: 181-202.

Joseph, K. (2003). Participatory research on the aspect of on-farm water management practices. IRRN. 28 (2): 44-45.

Kalita, R; Borthakur,M. P. and Sahrma, B. N.(2000). Agronomic manipulation for higher yield in late transplanted kharif rice. J. Agric. Sci. Soc. North East, India 13(1): 117-118.

Karim, A; Rehman, A; Egashira, K. and Haider, J. (1996). Yield and water requirements of Boro rice grown on the clay terrace soil. Tropical Agriculture. 73 (1): 14-18.

Kato, N; Saka, H; Morita, S. and Yamagishi, J. (2004). Gibberellin regulate panicle formation in rice. World Rice Research Conference 2004:107.

Kaur, J. and Singh, G. (1987). Hormonal regulations of grain fillings in relation to peduncle anatomy in rice cultivar. Ind. J. Exp. Bio. 25: 63-65.

Khan, M. I. and Zia, M. H. (2000). Use of integrated approaches to manage inferior soil and water resources for rice production. Pak. J. Bio. Sci. 3(6): 1062-1065.

157

Khaswneh, F. E. (1980). The roll of phosphorus in Agriculture. Madison, wis: Amer. Soc. Agron.

Khunthasuvon, S; Rajastasereekul, S; Hanviriyapant, P; Romyen, P; Fukai, S; Basnayake, J, and skulkhu, E. (1998). Effect of fertilizer applications and irrigation. Field Crop Res. 59 (2): 99-108.

Kumar, K. A. and Reddy, M. D. (2003). Effect of nursery seedling date and phosphorus fertilization on rice seedling growth. IRRN. 28 (2): 50-52.

Lalu, J. and Yadav, R. D. S. (1999). Effect of irrigation regimes and NP level in genetic plans of India on indica rice. Ind. J. Agric. Res. 5(7): 31-39.

Leopold, A. C. and Kriedemann, P.E. (1975). Plant growth and development. McGraw Hill New York.

Li, J; Eneji, A. E; Duan, L; Inanaga, S. and Li, Z. (2005). Saving irrigation water for winter wheat with phosphorus application in the North China Plan. J. Plant Nutr. 28(11): 2001-2010.

Lu, J. Tookawa. and Hirasawa, T. (2000). Effect of irrigation regimes on water use, dry matter production and physiological response of paddy rice. Plant and Soil. 223 (1-2): 207-216.

Maqsood, M; Akhtar, N; Wajid, A. and Ahmad, S. (2001). Growth and yield of rice (basmati-385) as influence by different NP levels. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 1(4) 291-292.

Mian, S. M; Akram, M; Gull, K. H. and Ahmad, Z. (2001). Phosphorus and zinc fertilization of wheat and rice. Pak. J. Soil Sci. 20: 86-91.

Misra,G. and Sahu,G.(1957). Effect of plant growth substances on an early variety. Buliton of the Torrey Botanical Club. 84(6) : 142-149.

Mohammad, S. (1999). Long term effects of fertilizers and integrated nutrient supply systems in intensive cropping on soil fertility, nutrient uptake and yield of rice. J. Agric. Sci. Cambridge. 133(4): 365-370.

Nadeem, M. and Ibrahim, M. (2002). Phosphorus management in wheat-rice cropping system. Pak. J. Soil Sci. 21(4): 21-23.

Nakamura, R. (2004). Development of sustainable agriculture based on rice, water and the living environment. World Rice Research Conference 2004.

Nathan, A; Slaton; Charles, E; Wilson, Jr; Richard, J; Norman, S. N. and Donna, L. F. (2002). Rice response to phosphorus fertilizer rate and timing on alkaline soils in Arkansas. Agron. J. 94 (6): 1393-1399.

158

Nwadukwe, P. O. and Chude, V. O.(1998). Manipulation of the irrigation schedule of rice as maximizing water use efficiency and irrigation efficiency in sami-arid tropics. J. Arid. Environ. 40 (3): 331-339/

Pandey, A. K; Tripathi R. S. and Yadav, R. S. (2001). Effect of certain growth regulators on the growth, yield and quality of rice Ind. J. Agric. Res.35 (2): 118-120.

Pandey. P. K; Pandey, M. D. and Singh, R. (2000). Response of medium land rice to swing methods, moisture regimes and nitrogen levels. Res. Crops. 1 (2): 249-252.

Phulare, R. D. and Upadhyay,U.C. (1978). Study on water management in seasonal (annual) crop of sugarcane (Saccharum Officinarum L) Indian Sugar. 27(12) 817-821.

Prakash, N. B; Nagaraj, H; Gurusheamy, K. T; Vishwanatha, B. N; Vishwanatha, C; Naraganaswamy, N. A; Gowda, J; Vasuki, N. and Siddayamappa, R. (2007). Rice hull as a source of silicon and phosphatic fertilizers effects on growth and yield of rice. IRRN. 32 (1) 34-36.

Qadar, A. and Ansari, Z. M. A. (2006). Phosphorus requirements of rice grown in soils with different sodicity. J. plant Nutr.9 (12): 2105-2117.

Rafiq, K; Maqsood, M; Akbar, N. and Chaudhry, F. M. (1998). Biological response of BAS-385 to different NPK levels. Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 35 (1-4): 62-64.

Razi, S. S. and Sen, S.P. (1996). Diazotrophic bacterium Klebsiella sp. Bio. Fertil. soils. 23(4): 454-458.

Sahrawat, K. L; Jhones, M. P; Diatta, S. and Adam, A. A. (2002). Response of upland rice to phosphorus and its residual value in an Ultisol. Commun- Soil. Sci plant analysis. 32(15-16): 2459-2468.

Sahrawat, K. L. and Sika, M. (2002). Direct and residual phosphorus effects on soil tests values and their relationship with grain yield and phosphorus uptake of upland rice on an Ultisol. Common soil. Sci. Plant-anal. 33 (3/4): 321-332.

Saleque, M. A; Abedin, M. J; Ahmed, Z. U; Hussain, M. and Panaullaha, G. M. (2001). Influence of phosphorus deficiency on the uptake of nitrogen, Potassium, Calcium, Magnisium, Sulpher and Zinc in low land rice varieties. J. Plant Nutr. 24 (10): 1621-1632.

Sarwer, M. J. and Khanif, Y. M. (2005). Effect of different water levels on rice yield and Cu and Zn concentration. J. Biol. Sci. 4 (2): 116-121.

Shaikh, M. A. and Kanasro, (2003). Production, consumption and export of rice press release, the Daily DAWN, http://www.DAWN.com, March 10.

159

Sherma, D. K.and Sherma, D. R. (1999). Sustainable use of poor quality water with proper scheduling of irrigation and nitrogen levels for rice crop. Water Sci. Tech. 40 (2): 111-114.

Shimono, H; Hasegawa T. and Iwama, K. (2002). Response of growth and grain yield in paddy rice to cool water at different growth stages. Field Crop Res. 73 (2-3): 67-79.

Shi, Q; Zeng, X; Li, M; Tan, X; and Xu, F. (2002). Effects of different water management practices on rice growth. Proceedings of a thematic workshop on water-wise production, at IRRI in Los Banos, Phillipines.

Singh, B; Nitranjan, R. K. and Pathak, R. K. (2001). Effect of organic matter resources and inorganic fertilizers on yield and nutrient uptake in the rice-wheat system. IRRN. 26 (2): 57-58.

Singh, F; Singh, S. and Gurun, S. B. (1984). Effect of growth regulators in rice productivity. Tropical Agric. 61 (2): 106-108.

Singh, S. and Singh, G. (1982). Effect of growth regulators on some biochemical parameters in developing grains of rice plant. Plant Physi. Bioch. 9 (2): 68-73.

Slaton, N. A; Wilson, C. E; Norman, R. J; Ntamatungero, S. and Frizzell, D. L. (2002). Rice response to phosphorus fertilizer application rate and time on alkaline soils in Arkansas. Agron. J. 94 (6): 1393-1399.

Sovuthy; Phear; Bell, R. W; White, P. F. and Kirk, G. J. D. (2003). Fate of applied fertilizer phosphorus in a highly weathered sandy soil under low land rice cropping and its residual effect. Field Crop Res. 81 (1): 1-16.

Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. (1980). Principles and procedures of Statistics. McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc., New York.

Stevens, G; Moylan, C; Sheckell, A; Dunn, D; Wellson, H. and Irmingham, K. (2001). Effect of phosphorus and white lime on rice. Missouri rice research. AgBB.

Sudhakar, P. C; Singh, J. P. and Singh, K. (2004). Effect of silicon sources and fertility level on transplanted rice. IRRN. 29 (2): 55-57.

Thomas, U. C; Varughese, K. and Thomas, A. (2003). Influence of irrigation, nutrient management and seed priming on yield and attributes of upland rice. IRRN. 28 (2) :39-40.

Timsina, J; Singh, U; Baddarudin, M; Meisner, C; Baddarudin, C. and Amin, M.R. (2001). Cultivar, nitrogen and water effects on productivity and nitrogen use efficiency and balance for rice-wheat sequences of Bangladesh. Field Crop. Res. 72(2): 143-161.

160

Tran, K; Tinh, H; Thi, T. and Hong, N. S. I. (2001). Rice-soil interaction in Vietnamese acid sulfate soils; impacts of submergence depth on soil solution chemistry and yield. Soil use management oxon, UIK: (ABI international. 17(2): 67-76)

Watanabe, H. and Siagusa, M. (2004). Effects of combine application of ethephon and gibberllin on growth and nutrient uptake of rice seedling growing under direct seedling conditions. Proceeding of the 4th international crop science. Brisbane, Australia. Also available on website of http://www.cropscience.com/

Xiaoping, Z; Qiangshen, G. and Bin, S. (2004). Water saving technology for paddy rice irrigation and its popularization in China. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, 18(4): 347-356.

Yadav, R. D. S; Singh, G. R. and Srivastava, J. P (2005). Enhancing out crossing potential in hybrid rice. IRRN 30 (1): 20-21.

Yaduvanshi, N. P. S. (2003). Substitution of inorganic fertilizer by organic manure and the effect of soil fertility in a rice wheat rotation on reclaimed sodic soil in India. J. Agric. Sci. Cambridge. 140(2): 161-168.

Yadvinder, S; Doberman, A; Bigay, S; Bronson, K.F. and Khind, C.S. (2000). Optimal phosphorus management strategies of wheat-rice cropping on a loam sand. Soil Sci. J. 64 (4): 1413-1422.

Yang, J; C; Zhang, J. H; Ye, Y. X; Wang, Z. Q; Zhu, Q. S; and Liu, L. J. (2004). Involvement of absisic acid and ethylene in the response of rice grains to water stress during fillings. Plant, Cell and Environment. 27(8): 105.

Yang, J; Zhang, J; Wang, Z; Zhu, Q. L. and Liu, L. (2002). Abscises acid and cytokinins in the root exudates and leaves and their relationship of carbon reserves in rice subjected to water stress during grain filling, Planta. Berlin; New York. 215(4): 645-652.

Yang, J; Zhang, J; Wang, Z; Liu, L. and Zhu, Q. (2003). Postanthesis water deficits enhance grain filling in two-line hybrid rice. Crop Sci. 43: 2099-2108.

Zahir, Z. A; Rahman, A; Asghar, N. and Arshad, M. (1998). Effect of an Auxin Precursor L-trytophan on growth and yield of rice. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 1(4): 354-356.

Zahir, Z. A; Malik, M. R and Arshad, M. (2000). Improving crop yields by the application of an auxin precusor L-tryptophan. Pak. J of Biol. Sci. 3(1): 133-135.

Zia, M. S; Gill. M. A; Aslam, M; and Hassan, M. F. (1991). Fertilizer use efficiency in Pakistan. Progressive farming, 11: 35-38.

161

Chapter- 8 APPENDICES

Appendix-1: Meteorological data for 2004 and 2005 recorded at the

Agricultural Research Institute, Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan.

2004 2005

Temperature (°C)

Relative Humidity

Rainfall(mm)

Temperature (°C)

Relative Humidity

Rain fall(mm)

Month

Max Min % Max Min % May

41.00 23.00 72.00 0.00 36.00 20.00 65.00 19.00 June

39.00 26.00 78.00 39.50 42.00 25.00 60.00 0.00 July

38.00 27.00 79.00 46.00 37.00 26.00 81.00 142.50 Aug.

36.00 25.00 83.00 42.50 37.00 27.00 81.00 96.00 Sept.

36.00 24.00 82.00 50.00 36.00 24.00 82.00 62.00 Oct.

30.00 19.00 81.00 0.00 33.00 17.00 80.00 0.00

Source: Arid Zone Research Institute, Dera Ismail Khan, and NWFP, PAKISTAN.

162

Appendix-2: Treatments used in effect of phosphorus and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

Treatments Symbol Treatments Detail Main Plot Phosphatic Fertilizer P0 0 kg ha-1

P1 50 kg ha-1 P2 100 kg ha-1 P3 150 kg ha-1 P4 200 kg ha-1

Sub Plot Irrigation I1 600 mm (8 irrigations) I2 750 mm (10 irrigations) I3 900 mm (12 irrigations) I4 1050mm(14 irrigations)

Appendix-3: Treatments used in effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) levels and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

Treatments Symbol Treatments Detail Main Plot Plant Growth Regulator G0 0 ml ha-1 G1 60 ml ha-1

G2 90 ml ha-1 G3 120 ml ha-1

Sub Plot Irrigation I1 600 mm (8 irrigations) I2 750 mm (10 irrigations) I3 900 mm (12 irrigations) I4 1050mm(14 irrigations)

163

Appendix-4: Treatments used in effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) and phosphorus levels on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice.

Treatments Symbol Treatments Detail Main Plot Plant Growth Regulator G0 0 ml ha-1

G1 60 ml ha-1 G2 90 ml ha-1 G3 120 ml ha-1

Sub Plot Phosphatic fertilizer P0 0 kg ha-1 P1 50 kg ha-1

P2 100 kg ha-1 P3 150 kg ha-1

P4 200 kg ha-1

Appendix-5: Treatments used in effect of plant growth regulator (NAA) levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice.

Treatments Symbol Treatments Detail Main Plot Plant Growth Stages S1 Tillering stage

S2 Panicle initiation stage S3 Grain formation stage

Sub Plot Plant Growth Regulator G0 0 ml ha-1 G1 60 ml ha-1 G2 90 ml ha-1 G3 120 ml ha-1

164

Appendix-6: Cost of production ha-1 (Rupees) of phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice, during 2004 and 2005.

S. No. Operations/ Inputs Quantity Rate (Rs.)/unit Total expenditure

1. Preparatory Tillage

(i) Ploughing 3 hours 180.00 540.00

(ii) Harrowing 2 hours 180.00 360.00

(iii) Tillering 2 hours 180.00 360.00

2. Fertilizers

(i) Urea 5 bags 430.0 2150.0

(ii) K2SO4 2 bags 790.0 1580.0

(iii) Transportation charges 57 bags 5.000 285.00

(iv) Application charges 2 men day-1 80.00 160.00

3. Plant Protection

(i) Furadon granules 3 bags 335.0 1005.0

(ii) Application charges 2 men day 80.00 160.00

4. Transplanting charges --------- ------- 2000.0

5. Weed control

(i) Ronstar 1250 ml 1.00/ml 1250.0

(ii) Application charges 1 man day-1 80.00 80.000

6. Harvesting & threshing --- 800 acre-1 2000.0

7. Land rent 6 months 5000 year-1 2500.0

8. Land revenues --- 250.00 250.00

9. Interest on investment

for 6 months @12 % year-1

(item 1-9 excluding canal

irrigation) --- 806.00

Total cost Rs. ha-1 --- --- 15486/-

For the economic of other treatments, only the price of S.S.P. and irrigation regimes and the interest on investment will change, while all other operations/inputs will remain the same.

165

Appendix-7: Cost of production ha-1 (Rupees) of plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice, during 2004 and 2005.






2. Fertilizers

(i) Urea 5 bags 430.0 2150.0

(ii) SSP 10 bags 250.0 2500.0

(iii) K2SO4 2 bags 790.0 1580.0

(iv) Transportation charges 17 bags 5.000 85.000

(vi) Application charges 2 men day-1 80.00 160.00

3. Plant Protection



4. Transplanting charges 2000.0

5. Weed control

(i) Ronstar 1250ml 1.00/ml 1250.0


6. Harvesting & threshing ------- 800 acre-1 2000.0


8. Land revenues --- 250.00 250.00





Total cost Rs. ha-1 --- --- 17924/-

For the economic of other treatments, only the price of plant growth regulator and irrigation regimes and the interest on investment will change, while all other operations/inputs will remain the same.

166

Appendix–8: Cost of production ha-1 (Rupees) of plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels effect on yield and yield components of coarse rice, during 2004 and 2005.






2. Fertilizers

(i) Urea 5 bags 430.0 2150.0

(ii) K2SO4 2 bags 790.0 1580.0

(iii) Transportation charges 57 bags 5.000 285.00

(iv) Application charges 1 man day-1 80.00 80.000

3. Plant Protection



4. Irrigation charges 10 No.s 80.00 800.00

5. Transplanting Charges -------- -------- 2000.0

6. Weed control

(i) Ronstar 1250 ml 1/ml 1250.0


7. Harvesting & threshing --- 800 acre-1 2000.0


9. Land revenues --- 250.00 250.00





Total cost Rs. ha-1 = --- --- 16319/-

For the economic of other treatments, only the price of plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels and the interest on investment will change, while all other operations/inputs will remain the same.

167

Appendix–9: Cost of production ha-1 (Rupees) of plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages on yield and yield components of transplanted coarse rice, during 2004 and 2005.






2. Fertilizers

(i) Urea 5 bags 430.0 2150.0

(ii) SSP 10 bags 250.0 2500.0

(iii) K2SO4 2 bags 790.0 1580.0

(iv) Transportation charges 17 bags 5.000 85.000

(vi) Application charges 2 men day-1 80.00 160.00

3. Transplanting ------ ------ 2000.0

4. Plant Protection



5. Weed control

(i) Ronstar 1250 ml 1.00/ml 1250.0


6. Harvesting & threshing ------ 800 Acre-1 2000.0


8. Land revenues ----- 250.00 250.00




irrigation) ---- 944.00

Total cost Rs. ha-1 ---- --- 17924/-

For the economic of other treatments, only the price of plant growth regulator and the interest on investment will change, while all other operations/inputs will remain the same.

168

Appendix-10 (a): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004.

S.V. D.F. Plant

Height (cm)

No. of Productive

Tillers m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2

No. of SpikeletsPanicle-1

Sterility(%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000-Grain Wt (g)

PaddyYield

(t ha-1)

Biological Yield

(t ha-1)

Water productivity

(kg-1 kg-1)

Fertilizer use

Efficiency

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

Harvest Index

%

Replication 3 2.146 0.767 2.150 0.433 0.022 4.333 0.049 0.043 0.029 0.046 13.591 0.023 1.303

Factor A 4 1629.237 2270.800 1673.450 2383.300 334.937 1276.300 24.696 19.487 25.027 29.372 153.296 98.075 317.067

Error 12 2.604 4.725 6.733 5.933 0.199 10.083 0.028 0.012 0.173 0.020 2.852 0.112 3.263

Factor B 3 1424.979 1634.333 2964.983 1706.933 205.415 937.333 12.034 28.675 79.479 56.844 453.134 96.423 226.806

AB 12 9.771 21.333 7.317 28.767 9.124 2.833 0.353 0.318 0.758 0.373 66.565 1.845 12.439

Error 45 4.779 3.089 3.061 3.767 0.282 5.111 0.032 0.017 0.119 0.028 7.592 0.129 2.633

Total 79 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 2.13 0.51 0.59 1.33 1.79 3.14 0.86 2.41 2.33 2.50 17.50 3.30 4.51

NS = Non-significant * = Significant at 1% level of probability using LSD test.

169

Appendix-10 (b): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on phosphorus levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2005.


S.V. D.F. Plant

Height (cm)

No. of Productive

Tillers m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2


Sterility(%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000-Grain

Wt (g)

PaddyYield

(t ha-1)

Biological Yield

(t ha-1)

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

Water productivity

(kg-1 kg-1)

Fertilizer Use

Efficiency

Harvest Index

%

Replication 3 1.953 19.350 20.833 35.617 0.543 12.600 0.082 0.026 0.198 0.090 0.019 12.699 0.142

Factor A 4 1625.11 2482.450 3530.00 2793.200 283.550 1466.30 23.18 18.331 34.593 87.408 28.233 228.131 203.353

Error 12 7.460 7.975 25.958 15.283 0.138 2.892 0.081 0.046 0.078 0.136 0.054 6.963 2.642

Factor B 3 1465.29 1973.383 2883.40 1501.783 190.800 838.60 11.07 28.770 86.754 96.095 62.840 756.794 192.362

AB 12 18.182 23.717 5.733 54.200 9.217 1.767 0.312 0.460 0.822 1.400 0.694 93.802 10.578

Error 45 2.214 3.583 12.267 7.083 0.683 4.567 0.101 0.062 0.146 0.098 0.061 7.130 2.924

Total 79 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 1.41 0.54 1.16 1.77 2.86 2.94 1.52 4.52 2.50 2.82 3.60 16.25 4.82

170

Appendix-11 (a): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2004.

S.V. D.F. Pl. Ht (cm)

No. of Productive

Tillers m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2


Sterility(%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000- Grain Wt (g)

PaddyYield

(t ha-1)

Biological Yield

(t ha-1)

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

Water Productivity

(kg-1 kg-1)

Harvest Index

%

Replication 3 4.104 4.297 13.639 3.958 0.113 12.458 0.012 0.047 0.272 0.004 0.035 1.340

Factor A 3 2010.917 1170.766 1716.754 1467.167 103.955 685.396 15.776 18.165 91.398 27.877 27.503 58.416

Error 9 2.299 3.130 12.181 2.569 0.256 7.931 0.010 0.089 0.022 0.038 0.115 2.994

Factor B 3 1082.917 1175.099 2015.421 1422.500 117.062 474.729 22.767 22.547 159.181 98.902 46.940 17.644

AB 9 38.694 14.016 19.490 14.778 16.488 19.174 0.903 0.272 1.317 2.166 0.213 7.391

Error 36 2.472 2.589 16.379 3.972 0.206 3.313 0.031 0.063 0.051 0.033 0.093 2.781

Total 63 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 1.50 0.45 1.19 1.34 1.48 2.43 0.86 4.28 1.33 1.55 4.20 4.86


171

Appendix-11 (b): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on plant growth regulator levels and irrigation regimes in transplanted coarse rice during 2005.

S.V. D.F. Plant.

Height (cm)

No. of Producive

Tillers m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2


Sterility(%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000-Grain Wt (g)

PaddyYield

(t ha-1)

Biological Yield

(t ha-1)

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

Water productivity

(kg-1 kg-1)

Harvest Index

%

Replication 3 3.726 8.667 4.938 6.563 1.218 0.208 0.254 0.123 0.022 0.085 0.731 1.938

Factor A 3 1761.940 1556.667 1651.229 1493.729 56.403 639.417 14.816 16.599 89.936 82.202 29.246 34.961

Error 9 3.704 7.667 14.926 3.007 1.779 4.208 0.143 0.153 0.043 0.345 0.731 0.708

Factor B 3 1362.073 1439.333 2223.563 1567.396 96.962 581.458 23.400 25.389 161.217 186.527 53.135 28.478

AB 9 21.084 10.222 23.785 13.729 10.251 28.736 1.483 0.419 1.297 2.715 0.508 5.355

Error 36 6.993 6.583 3.521 5.340 1.850 5.778 0.157 0.178 0.080 0.261 0.610 3.649

Total 63 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 2.48 0.72 0.55 1.54 4.48 3.16 1.9 7.05 1.63 2.92 10.64 5.55


172

Appendix-12 (a): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2004.

S.V. D.F. Plant

Height (cm)

No. of Productive

Tillers m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2


Sterility(%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000-GrainWt (g)

PaddyYield

(t ha-1)

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

BiologicalYield

(t ha-1)

Harvest Index

%

Replication 3 1.300 13.133 4.433 13.167 0.462 21.412 0.012 0.166 0.242 0.241 15.143

Factor A 3 816.733 1912.200 2415.733 2405.000 91.690 1354.013 5.605 13.739 19.266 11.289 218.109

Error 9 8.278 9.844 15.544 8.900 0.06 8.746 0.007 0.155 0.083 0.062 5.207

Factor B 4 480.300 1096.000 188.700 1213.300 25.407 686.363 3.034 10.527 18.167 10.136 155.894

AB 12 17.2333 15.867 118.567 59.167 4.909 25.262 0.171 0.214 0.071 0.302 7.438

Error 48 7.700 17.167 15.725 14.967 0.073 7.246 0.005 0.150 0.210 0.118 8.921

Total 79 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 2.29 1.18 1.19 2.74 1.33 3.91 0.35 5.99 3.48 2.39 6.67


173

Appendix-12 (b): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on plant growth regulator and phosphorus levels in transplanted coarse rice during 2005.

S.V. D.F. Plant

Height (cm)

No. of Prod. Tillers

m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2


Sterility(%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000- Grain Wt (g)

Paddy Yield

(t ha-1)

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

Biological Yield

(t ha-1)

Harvest index %

Replication 3 2.500 49.083 26.017 36.950 0.447 38.713 0.001 0.051 0.009 0.422 4.925

Factor A 3 773.000 2146.317 2322.983 2577.917 64.785 1315.246 11.945 12.534 19.950 14.266 158.948

Error 9 5.167 8.550 11.083 5.972 0.045 4.490 0.216 0.136 0.124 0.122 4.467

Factor B 4 1584.200 1130.200 1949.300 1084.700 15.164 641.113 10.785 10.935 15.847 10.226 142.932

AB 12 25.000 26.067 110.900 65.500 1.973 23.579 1.663 0.251 0.245 0.537 10.003

Error 48 8.042 10.933 12.233 14.383 0.305 11.379 0.729 0.175 0.169 0.136 9.981

Total 79 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 2.30 0.94 1.05 2.67 2.97 4.78 0.61 6.36 3.99 2.49 7.12


174

Appendix-13 (a): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2004.

S.V. D.F. Plant

Height (cm)

No. of Productive

Tillers m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2

No. of Spikelets Panicle-1

Sterility (%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000-Grain Wt (g)

Paddy Yield

(t ha-1)

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

Biological Yield (t ha-1)

Replication 3 6.139 23.778 7.389 29.000 0.011 5.521 0.005 0.247 0.254 0.318

Factor A 2 591.583 846.333 676.333 684.333 46.943 507.938 18.346 6.961 11.263 14.470

Error 6 4.639 23.778 21.472 6.833 0.257 8.021 0.036 0.295 0.221 0.073

Factor B 3 671.639 1023.444 1097.222 148.222 113.559 630.410 20.612 8.974 23.834 22.839

AB 6 58.472 136.111 46.556 70.556 11.0332 59.826 2.600 0.506 1.134 1.572

Error 27 11.583 15.630 17.519 20.889 0.188 12.891 0.081 0.097 0.127 0.087

Total 47 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 2.74 1.11 1.32 2.90 1.89 4.91 0.69 4.45 3.66 1.70


175

Appendix-13 (b): Mean squares of ANOVA’s of agronomic parameters recorded on plant growth regulator levels at different growth stages of transplanted coarse rice during 2005.

S.V. D.F. Plant

Height (cm)

No. of Productive

Tillers m-2

No. of Panicles

m-2


Sterility (%)

Normal Kernels

(%)

1000-Grain Wt (g)

Paddy Yield (t ha-1)

Straw Yield

(t ha-1)

Biological Yield

(t ha-1)

Replication 3 2.299 30.521 6.944 19.056 1.593 18.944 0.020 0.024 0.029 0.035

Factor A 2 322.771 848.688 737.333 581.333 75.720 529.333 20.310 7.638 12.613 13.330

Error 6 7.465 14.854 2.611 10.306 1.237 26.444 0.021 0.091 0.156 0.234

Factor B 3 821.299 735.854 1006.667 1341.778 106.440 882.111 21.882 9.183 20.626 21.773

AB 6 33.882 81.354 41.333 109.778 10.600 59.111 2.036 0.570 1.080 1.583

Error 27 12.928 13.039 17.833 13.889 0.427 7.574 0.033 0.152 0.136 0.189

Total 47 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

CV % -- 2.87 0.99 1.32 2.30 3.09 3.64 0.92 5.39 3.65 2.46


ENHANCING THE YIELD POTENTIAL OF RICE …prr.hec.gov.pk/jspui/bitstream/123456789/540/1/410S.pdfcv =...

Documents

Transcript of ENHANCING THE YIELD POTENTIAL OF RICE …prr.hec.gov.pk/jspui/bitstream/123456789/540/1/410S.pdfcv =...