Content uploaded by Aseem Verma
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Aseem Verma on Jun 09, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
56
Rice (Oryza sativa L.)-wheat (Triticum aesitivum
L. emend. Fiori & Paol.) is the pre-dominant cropping
system in Northern India alone occupying 13.5 million
hectare in the Indo-Gangetic Plain (IGP) of South Asia
(Gupta and Seth, 2007). The productivity of rice-
wheat rotation of the Indo-Gangetic plain is critical to
India’s food security. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is a major
food of the world and more than half of the population
subsists on it (Biswas and Bhattacharya, 2013). It is
the main livelihood of rural population living in
subtropical and tropical Asia and hundreds of millions
people living in Africa and Latin America. Rice is
generally cultivated in northern India by transplanting
25-30 days old nursery seedlings in to the puddled
field which requires heavy amount of labour in raising,
uprooting of seedlings, puddling and transplanting in
the main field leading to a substantial rise in the
production cost. Transplanting of rice seedlings into
flooded fields gives the crop a major competitive
advantage over weeds as the majority of the weeds are
suppressed by the standing water. Rising costs of
labour, high water use and energy required for nursery
establishment, puddling of fields and transplanting,
coupled with labour scarcity during the peak period of
activity are the compelling factors to seek an
alternative to transplanting of rice. Before the start of
rice cultivation during 1960’s, the level of
underground water in various districts of Punjab was
shallow (varied from 5-20 feet in different parts). But
during the green revolution era, due to cultivation of
short duration high yielding fertilizer responsive
varieties of wheat and rice, negative effect on level of
underground water table was observed. Indiscriminate
cultivation of rice was main culprit for declining water
table. The scientists have reported a decline of 55 cm
per year in the underground water table from 1993 to
2007.
Direct seeding is an alternative rice cultivation
technology that can reduce the labour and energy
requirements for crop establishment and the demand
for irrigation water. It offers faster and easier planting,
reduces labour requirement, earlier crop maturity by
7– 10 days, more efficient water use and higher
tolerance of water deficit, less methane emission and
often higher profit in areas with an assured water
supply. In order to check the declining water table, a
new technique of direct-seeding is now fast replacing
traditional transplanted rice in areas with good
drainage and irrigation facilities (Balasubramanian
and Hill, 2000). The alternative to puddling and
transplanting could be different methods of direct
seeding because these do not require heavy amount of
labour and crop matures early (7-10 days) than
transplanted allowing timely planting of succeeding
wheat crop (Giri, 1998). The water productivity of
direct seeded rice was more than that of crop
transplanted on the day of direct sowing had an
On-farm assessment of direct-seeded rice production
system under central Punjab conditions
A. S. SIDHU, R. KOONER AND A. VERMA
Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Rupnagar and Ludhiana, Punjab,
Directorate of Extension Education,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141 004, Punjab
Received :18-12-2013, Revised:21-4-2014, Accepted:7-5-2014
ABSTRACT
The field experiments were conducted at farmer’s fields at nine different locations in district Ludhiana and Rupnagar of central
Punjab during kharif 2012. Puddled Transplanted Rice (PTR) and Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) production systems were compared
in respect of weed infestation, grain yield and economics. The results revealed that plant height, panicle length, number of grains
per panicle, number of empty grains per panicle and test weight of two systems was not significantly affected. Average Plant
2
population/m was significantly more in DSR (24.0) than PTR (19.2). Number of effective tillers which are the major determinants
2 2
of grain yield were significantly higher in puddled transplanted rice (272.9/m ) than direct seeded rice (263.3/ m ). Significantly
higher grain yield (55.56 q/ha) was observed with Puddled Transplanted Rice (PTR) than Direct Seeded Rice (53.72 q/ha) when
2
averaged over 9 locations. The population of weeds at 30 days after sowing was significantly more in DSR (24.3/m ) than PTR
2 3 3
(13.8/m ). The average net returns under PTR (47.71 X 10 Rs/ha) were higher than DSR (47.08 X 10 Rs/ha) but benefit cost ratio
was significantly more in DSR plots.
Keywords: Benefit cost ratio, direct seeded rice, effective tillers, grain yield and puddled transplanted rice
Email: amansidhu_80@rediffmail.com
Journal of Crop and Weed, 10(1):56-60(2014)
J. Crop and Weed, 10(1)
57
advantage of 25 days and it was less by 0.025 kg grains
-2
m (Gill, 2008). To harness higher yield of rice, plant
population plays an important role. The recommended
plant population density for transplanted rice is 33
-2 -2
hills m whereas under farmer’s fields 20-24 hills m
are kept (AICRP, 2006). Direct seeding of rice ensures
recommended plant population. However, for
cultivation of direct-seeded rice, weeds are major
hurdle for its success (Rao et al., 2007: Rao and
Nagamani, 2007) as nearly all kharif season weeds
depending upon seed bank in the field infest this crop.
Weeds pose major problem in rice production due to
the prevalence of congenial atmosphere during kharif
season and uncontrolled weeds compete with dry-
seeded rice and reduce yield upto 30.17 % (Singh et al:
2005). With direct seeded rice, water saving to the
extent of 20-30 per cent has been reported by Tabbal
et. al. (2002). Farmers commonly face several
constraints related to transplanted rice e.g.
1. lack of labour in time,
2. late planting of rice,
3. drudgery for farm workers,
4. low rice plant populations,
5. high production costs,
6. high water use for puddling,
7. restricted root system of wheat due to
puddling for rice and
8. adverse effects of puddling on soil physical
conditions,
India’s agriculture has the problems of limited
labour availability because of more off-farm jobs
being created due to economic growth, putting
pressure on supplies of agricultural labour. Alternate
methods of rice establishment requiring less labour
need to be developed to maintain the productivity of
the systems. Direct seeding offers certain advantages
although constraints are also associated with it.
The advantages of direct seeding are
1. savege of labour at transplanting,
2. faster and easier crop establishment,
3. less drudgery,
4. rice crop matures 7–10 days earlier than
transplanted crops,
5. less irrigation water requirement,
6. higher tolerance to water stress condition,
7. higher yield, a lower production cost, and
more profit,
8. better soil physical conditions for following
crops and lesser omission of methane.
Some constraints to direct seeding are
1. fields are occupied lesser time as compared
to transplanted crops,
2. higher weed pressure,
3. good crop establishment may be difficult,
4. precise water management and level fields
are necessary,
5. crop lodging may be greater,
6. higher pest and disease incidence is likely in
dense canopies because of less ventilation
around plants and more variability and risk.
To address some of the above considerations, an
agronomic evaluation of direct seeded rice production
system with puddled transplanted rice was conducted.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The field experiments were conducted at farmer’s
fields at nine different locations in the district of
Ludhiana and Rupnagar of central Punjab during
kharif, 2012. The climate of the experimental sites is
sub-tropical characterized by hot summer with mean
0
maximum temperature of 42±5 C during June and
0
cool winter with mean minimum temperature of 4±2 C
during December. The average annual rainfall (AAR)
in the study area varies from 650-1300 mm of which
75-80% is received during summer season extending
from July to September and rest during the winter
season. The relative humidity in the districts varies
from 36.3-93.7% demarcating a peak during July-
August, the days when ‘monsoon’ in the area is on full
swing. The soil of experiment locations was sandy
loam to loam in texture, normal in soil reaction (pH
7.65-8.06) and electrical conductivity (0.141-0.315
-1
dSm ), medium in organic carbon (0.358 -0.421%),
available phosphorus (11.5-24.1 kg/ha) and available
-1
potassium (118-163.7 kg/ha ). Seeds of short duration
rice cultivar PR 115 were drilled in rows 20 cm apart in
-1
first fortnight of June @ 30 kg/ha . The direct seeder
was operated using a 45 hp tractor. The tractor was
-1
operated with the forward speed of 1.7 kms hr and the
average depth of seed placement was 3.1 cm. After 40-
48 hrs of direct sowing, pre-emergence application of
-1
pendimethalin @ 750 gha was done and post-
-1
emergence application of bispyribac @ 25g ha was
J. Crop and Weed, 10(1)
Sidhu et al.
58
-1
done 24-27 days after sowing. Nitrogen @ 150 kg ha
was applied in four splits after 2, 4, 7 and 10 weeks of
-1
crop sowing. Whole phosphorus (30 kg ha ) and
-1
potassium (30 kg ha ) was applied at sowing. Iron
deficiency was noticed in DSR plots which was
counteracted by two sprays of ferrous sulphate @ 2.5
kg in 250 litres of water per ha at 10 days interval. The
direct seeded rice plots were kept moist throughout
and 5 cm irrigation was applied at around 10 days
interval and irrigation was withheld 10 days before
crop harvest. In transplanting (control) treatment the
same variety was used for which sowing in the nursery
th
was done within 8-13 May, 2012 and thereafter it was
th
transplanted in the field on 7-12 June, 2012 at the age
of 30-35 days. The weed control was done by applying
recommended herbicide, butachlor 50 EC @ 3.0 litres
per hectare by mixing in 150 kg sand after 3 days of
transplantation. All other practices during crop growth
period were as per the package of practices for kharif
crops recom mended by Punjab Agricultural
University, Ludhiana (Punjab). The crop was
harvested and threshed manually and yield was
computed at 8% moisture content. The total rainfall
received during the growing season was 0.5 mm,
146.5 mm, 79.5 mm, 11.5 mm and 1.5 mm during the
month of June, July, August, September and October
respectively. The irrigation intervals were extended
according to the intensity and frequency of rainfall.
The mean maximum temperature during the growth
season was 44.0ºC, 44.3ºC, 38.1ºC, 33.8ºC, 33.8ºC
and 32.2ºC whereas the mean minimum temperature
was 16.2ºC, 22.8ºC, 21.6ºC, 24.1ºC, 20.2ºC, 11.6ºC
during the month of May, June, July, August,
September and October respectively. Data on crop-
plant height, effective tillers, panicle length, number
of grains per panicle and grain yield were recorded at
the time of crop harvest to draw valid conclusions.
Data on weed density was recorded at 30 days after
seeding from (1 m × 1 m) quadrate. Students’t test was
employed to test the significant of the differences in
different parameters.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The data given in Table 1, revealed that plant
height, panicle length, number of grains per panicle
and test weight were not significantly affected by
establishment methods according to Students’t-test.
Average plant populationm was significantly higher in
direct seeded rice plots than puddled transplanted rice
plots according to Students’ t test, which was due to
sowing of more number of seeds per unit area as
compared to transplanted plots where labour
invariably transplants less number of seedlings per
unit area. Number of effective tillersm which are
determining factors for grain yield were significantly
more in puddled PTR than DSR on the basis of
students’t test. There was no significant effect on
number of empty grains per panicle due to different
establishment methods but number of empty grains
was slightly more in direct seeded rice plots. Grain
yield is the main criterion for judging the comparative
efficacy of different treatments. Significantly higher
-1
grain yield (5.55 t ha ) was observed with puddled
-1
transplanted rice than direct seeded rice (5.37 t ha )
when averaged over 9 locations. The lower grain yield
in DSR plots were attributed to uneven depth of
sowing, lower number of effective tillers and more
infestation of weeds. Mangat et al. (2006) also
-1
reported significantly higher grain yield (70.8 q ha ) of
rice with manual transplanting as compared to dry
seeding with seed drill and zero till drill. Walia et al.
(2009) also recorded significant differences in grain
yields of direct seeded rice and puddled transplanted
rice at Ludhiana.
The perusal of data in Table2, indicated much more
weed infestation in DSR plots than PTR plots. The
weed flora included Trianthema portulacastrum L.,
Eragrostis tenella (L.)P. Beauv. Eragrostis pilosa (L.)
P. Beauv., Dactyloctenium aegyptium (L.) Willd.,
Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn., Digera arvensis (L.),
Commelina benghalensis L., Echinochloa colona (L.)
Link, Echinochloa crusgalli (L.) P. Beauv., Cyperus
rotundus L., Cyperus iria L., Cyperus diformis L.,
Fimbristylis sp., Caesulia axillaris Roxb., Leptochloa
apnicea and Sphenoclea sp. The population of weeds
at 30 days after sowing was significantly higher in
DSR (24.3m) than PTR (13.8m). This was due to more
congenial conditions for weed growth under DSR
production system. In PTR plots normal paddy weeds
were present but in DSR plots many non-paddy weeds
were observed. Leptochloa apnicea was only present
in DSR plots and was not controlled with applied
herbicides. Singh et al. (2005) also reported that
establishment methods have marked effect on weed
density in rice at pantnagar. This observation is in
agreement with the findings of Jana and Mallick
(2013). The highest weed density was recorded in
direct seeded rice plots and least in transplanted plots
at 30 days stages of growth.
The average net returns under transplanted plots
3 -1
(47.71 X 10 Rs ha ) were higher than direct seeded
J. Crop and Weed, 10(1)
On farm assessment of direct seeded rice production
59
Table-1 : Effect of methods of establishment on yield attributes and grain yield of rice
Plant Plant Tillers Panicle Grains Empty Test Grain
-2 -1
Location height population (m ) length panicle grains. weight yield
-2 -1 -1
(cm) (m ) (cm) panicle (g) (t.ha )
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
L80.50 81.00 18 25 285 269 23.20 22.70 181 187 8 8 22.00 21.80 5.50 5.35
1
L79.00 78.80 20 24 268 257 20.90 20.10 196 190 8 7 20.50 21.00 5.75 5.65
2
L82.50 82.00 19 22 274 265 24.00 23.80 184 186 9 9 21.80 19.00 5.35 5.05
3
L81.00 81.00 17 23 286 272 22.80 22.90 199 191 6 6 22.20 21.50 5.80 5.60
4
L80.00 81.00 21 25 280 268 23.20 22.80 195 189 7 6 21.80 20.90 5.25 5.10
5
L83.50 82.00 20 25 278 275 22.10 21.50 202 189 5 8 20.00 21.00 5.30 5.25
6
L79.50 80.00 18 25 261 250 22.60 22.50 206 204 5 5 19.80 20.00 5.50 5.30
7
L80.50 81.50 19 24 264 262 23.10 24.90 198 196 6 9 20.30 20.00 5.70 5.45
8
L80.00 79.00 21 23 260 252 22.80 22.10 176 186 9 7 21.10 22.00 5.85 5.60
9
Mean 80.7 80.6 19.2 24.0 272.9 263.3 22.7 22.6 193 190.8 7 7.2 21.0 20.8 5.55 5.37
t-value 0.081 8.86 6.52 0.63 0.94 0.41 0.70 7.38
Note: 1:PTR, 2: DSR
Table 2: Density of weeds in rice as influenced by methods of establishment
-2
Location Weed density (number m )30 DAS
PTR DSR
L25 10
1
L31 15
2
L28 13
3
L18 20
4
L26 08
5
L23 13
6
L29 15
7
L21 18
8
L18 12
9
Mean 24.3 13.8
t-value 4.92
3 -1
rice plots (47.08 X 10 symbol of Rs.ha ) but
differences were non significant. Average benefit cost
ratio (2.17) was significantly more in direct seeded
rice plots as compared to transplanted plots. This was
due to less cost involved in land preparation and crop
establishment in direct seeded rice than transplanted
rice. Gangawar et al. (2008) also recorded higher
benefit: cost ratio with direct seeded rice as compared
to transplanted rice.
The grain yields of both the systems were
comparable but due to less input cost involved benefit
cost ratio was more in DSR system. If weeds can be
controlled effectively through integrated approach,
then direct seeded rice can be a success under Punjab
conditions. There is also a need to study the shift in
weed flora due to change from transplanted to direct
seeded rice production system.
J. Crop and Weed, 10(1)
Sidhu et al.
60
REFERENCES
AICRP. 2006. Annual Progress Report. All India
Coordinated Research Project on Cropping
System, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
Pp. 34.
Balasubramanian, V. and Hill, J. 2000. Direct wet
seeding of rice in Asia: Emerging issues and
st
strategic research needs for the 21 century. Annual
Workshop of the Directorate of Rice Res.,
Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh.
Biswas, R. and Bhattacharya, B.2013. ARIMA
modeling to forecast area and production of rice in
West Bengal. J Crop Weed, 9:26-31.
Ganawar, K.S., Tomar. O.K. and Pandey D.K. 2008.
Productivity and economics of transplanted and
direct-seeded rice (Oryza sativa)-based cropping
systems in Indo-Gangetic plains. Indian J. Agric.
Sci. 78: 655-58.
Gill, M.S. 2008. Productivity of direct-seeded rice
(Oryza sativa) under varying seed rates, weed
control and irrigation levels. Ind. J. Agri. Sci. 78:
32-36.
Giri, G.S. 1998. Effect of rice and wheat establishment
technique on wheat grain yield. In. Proc. Rice-
Wheat Res. Project Workshop, pp. 65-68.
Gupta, R.K. and Seth, A. 2007. A review of resource
co nserving t ec hn ol og ies for s ustainable
management of the rice–wheat cropping systems
of the Indo-Gangetic plains (IGP). Crop Protec.
26: 436-47.
Jana, K. and Mallick, G.K. 2013. Predominance of
weedy rice in different rice ecosystem under
western zone of West Bengal. J. Crop Weed, 9:154-
58.
Mangat, R., Hari, O., Dhiman, S.D. and Nandal D.P.
2009. Productivity and economics of rice-wheat
cropping system as affected by establishment
methods and tillage practices. Indian J. Agron. 51 :
77-80.
Rao, A.N. and Nagamani, A. 2007. Available
technologies and future research challenges for
managing weeds in dry-seeded rice in India. In:
st th
Proc. 21 Asian Pacific Weed Sci. Soc. Conf. 2 to 6
October 2007, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Rao, A.N., Mortimer, A.M., Joh nson, D.E.,
Sivaprasad, B. and Ladha, J.K. 2007. Weed
management in direct-seeded rice. Adv. Agron. 93:
155-257.
Singh, R.P., Singh, C.M. and Singh, A.K. 2003. Effect
of crop establishments, weed management and
splitting of nitrogen on rice (Oryza sativa L.) and
associated weeds. Indian J. Weed Sci. 35: 33-37.
Singh, S., Singh, G., Singh, V.P. and Singh, A.P.2005.
Effect of establishment methods and weed
management practices on weeds and rice in rice-
wheat cropping system. Indian J. Weed Sci.37:51-57.
Singh, V.P., Singh, G., Singh, R.K., Singh, S.P.,
Kumar, A., Dhyani, V.C., Kumar, M. and Sharma,
G. 2005. Effect of Herbicides alone and in
combination on direct seeded rice Indian J. Weed
Sci. 37: 197-01
Tabbal, D.F., Bourman, B.A.M., Bhuiyan, S.I.,
Sibayan, E.B. and Sattar, M.A. 2002. On-farm
strategies for reducing water input in irrigated rice:
Case Studies in the Phillipines. Agril. Water
Management, 56: 93-112.
Walia, U.S., Bhullar, M.S., Walia, S.S., Sidhu, A.S.
and Nayyar, Shelly. 2009. Scope of direct seeded
rice in Punjab. In. Proc. Nat. Workshop on Scope
and Problems Direct Seeded Rice. PAU, Ludhiana.
pp. 6-23.
Table 3: Comparison of economics of direct seeded rice (DSR) and puddled transplanted rice (PTR)
Production unit Gross return Input cost Net return B:C
-1 3 -1 3 -1 3 -1
Location (t ha ) (10 Rs ha ) (10 Rs ha ) (10 Rs ha )
DSR PTR DSR PTR DSR PTR DSR PTR DSR PTR
L5.35 5.5 68.48 70.40 21.25 23.25 47.23 47.15 2.22 2.03
1
L5.65 5.75 72.32 73.60 22.00 23.55 50.32 50.05 2.29 2.13
2
L5.05 5.35 64.64 68.48 21.75 22.68 42.89 45.80 1.97 2.02
3
L5.6 5.8 71.68 74.24 21.54 23.10 50.14 51.14 2.33 2.21
4
L5.1 5.25 65.28 67.20 20.72 22.34 44.56 44.86 2.15 2.01
5
L5.25 5.3 67.20 67.84 21.66 23.78 45.54 44.06 2.10 1.85
6
L5.3 5.5 67.84 70.40 22.20 23.95 45.64 46.45 2.06 1.94
7
L5.45 5.7 69.76 72.96 21.85 23.74 47.91 49.22 2.19 2.07
8
L5.6 5.85 71.68 74.88 22.15 24.05 49.53 50.63 2.24 2.11
9
Mean 5.37 5.55 68.76 71.11 21.68 23.38 47.08 47.71 2.17 2.04
p value 7.38 7.38 15.4 1.62 5.19
Note: Minimum support price of paddy – Rs. 1280 per quintal
J. Crop and Weed, 10(1)
On farm assessment of direct seeded rice production
