Acceso usuarios
S.K. Jalota, K.B. Singh, G.B.S. Chahal, R. K. Gupta, Somsubhra Chakraborty, Anil Soob, S.S. Ray, S. Panigrahy
Individual effect of different field scale management interventions for water saving in rice viz. changing date of transplanting, cultivar and irrigation schedule on yield, water saving and water productivity is well documented in the literature. However, little is known about their integrated effect. To study that, field experimentation and modeling approach was used. Field experiments were conducted for 2 years (2006 and 2007) at Punjab Agricultural University Farm, Ludhiana on a deep alluvial loamy sand Typic Ustipsamment soils developed under hyper-thermic regime. Treatments included three dates of transplanting (25 May, 10 June and 25 June), two cultivars (PR 118 inbred and RH 257 hybrid) and two irrigation schedules (2-days drainage period and at soil water suction of 16 kPa). The model used was CropSyst, which has already been calibrated for growth (periodic biomass and LAI) of rice and soil water content in two independent experiments. The main findings of the field and simulation studies conducted are compared to any individual, integrated management of transplanting date, cultivar and irrigation, sustained yield (6.3�7.5 t ha-1) and saved substantial amount of water in rice. For example, with two management interventions, i.e. shifting of transplanting date to lower evaporative demand (from 5 May to 25 June) concomitant with growing of short duration hybrid variety (90 days from transplanting to harvest), the total real water saving (wet saving) through reduction in evapotranspiration (ET) was 140 mm, which was almost double than managing the single, i.e. 66 mm by shifting transplanting or 71 mm by growing short duration hybrid variety. Shifting the transplanting date saved water through reduction in soil water evaporation component while growing of short duration variety through reduction in both evaporation and transpiration components of water balance. Managing irrigation water schedule based on soil water suction of 16 kPa at 15�20 cm soil depth, compared to 2-day drainage, did not save water in real (wet saving), however, it resulted into apparent water saving (dry saving). The real crop water productivity (marketable yield/ET) was more by 17% in 25th June transplanted rice than 25th May, 23% in short duration variety than long and 2% in irrigation treatment of 16 kPa soil water suction than 2-days drainage. The corresponding values for the apparent crop water productivity (marketable yield/irrigation water applied) were 16, 20 and 50%, respectively. Pooled experimental data of 2 years showed that with managing irrigation scheduling based on soil water suction of 16 kPa at 15�20 cm soil depth, though 700 mm irrigation water was saved but the associated yield was reduced by 277 kg ha-1.
