尼泊尔卡斯基不同作物种植方法和肥料管理方法下水稻的资源利用效率

K. Pariyar, L. Amgain, T. Karki, Sambaat Ranabhat
{"title":"尼泊尔卡斯基不同作物种植方法和肥料管理方法下水稻的资源利用效率","authors":"K. Pariyar, L. Amgain, T. Karki, Sambaat Ranabhat","doi":"10.5455/faa.137963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conventional transplanting of rice production system and farmers ignorance about proper fertilizer application has been a major problem in rice production and resource conservation in Nepal. To address the problem of resource conservation, an experiment was conducted in Kaski, Nepal during the rainy season of 2019. The experimental set up was in strip plot design consisting of three crop establishment methods(i) zero-till dry direct-seeded rice (ZT-DSR), (ii) reduced-till dry direct-seeded rice (RT-DSR) and (iii) transplanted rice (TPR) and four site-specific nutrient management (SSNM) options(i) nutrient expert (NE Model), (ii) leaf color chart (LCC), (iii) chlorophyll content meter-200 (CCM-200) and (iv) farmers fertilizer practice (FFP) with three replications in the fields. Among the establishment methods, TPR performed better in terms of grain yield and nutrient uses, whereas ZT-DSR was superior in terms of profitability and energy use. Among the nutrient management, CCM-200 showed promising performance with significantly higher grain nitrogen uptake (60.5 kg ha−1), straw nitrogen uptake (24.11 kg ha−1) and total nitrogen uptake (84.6 kg ha−1) than other nutrient management practices. The energy input in ZT-DSR and RT-DSR were 41.8% and 32.9% lower than the TPR. The energy use efficiency (EUE) was higher in ZT-DSR (15.79) and FFP (15.07) as compared to other crop establishment methods and fertilizer management approaches. The ZT-DSR with FFP had the highest EUE (20.94) followed by ZT-DSR with LCC (15.0). Whereas, the highest grain yield and B:C ratio was recorded on TPR with CCM-200 and ZT-DSR with CCM-200 respectively. Thus, considering the great importance of yield and profitability at the farmers’ level, combination of ZT-DSR and CCM-200 may be recommended to farmers.","PeriodicalId":53074,"journal":{"name":"Fundamental and Applied Agriculture","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resource use efficiencies of rice grown under different crop establishment methods and fertilizer management approaches in Kaski, Nepal\",\"authors\":\"K. Pariyar, L. Amgain, T. Karki, Sambaat Ranabhat\",\"doi\":\"10.5455/faa.137963\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The conventional transplanting of rice production system and farmers ignorance about proper fertilizer application has been a major problem in rice production and resource conservation in Nepal. To address the problem of resource conservation, an experiment was conducted in Kaski, Nepal during the rainy season of 2019. The experimental set up was in strip plot design consisting of three crop establishment methods(i) zero-till dry direct-seeded rice (ZT-DSR), (ii) reduced-till dry direct-seeded rice (RT-DSR) and (iii) transplanted rice (TPR) and four site-specific nutrient management (SSNM) options(i) nutrient expert (NE Model), (ii) leaf color chart (LCC), (iii) chlorophyll content meter-200 (CCM-200) and (iv) farmers fertilizer practice (FFP) with three replications in the fields. Among the establishment methods, TPR performed better in terms of grain yield and nutrient uses, whereas ZT-DSR was superior in terms of profitability and energy use. Among the nutrient management, CCM-200 showed promising performance with significantly higher grain nitrogen uptake (60.5 kg ha−1), straw nitrogen uptake (24.11 kg ha−1) and total nitrogen uptake (84.6 kg ha−1) than other nutrient management practices. The energy input in ZT-DSR and RT-DSR were 41.8% and 32.9% lower than the TPR. The energy use efficiency (EUE) was higher in ZT-DSR (15.79) and FFP (15.07) as compared to other crop establishment methods and fertilizer management approaches. The ZT-DSR with FFP had the highest EUE (20.94) followed by ZT-DSR with LCC (15.0). Whereas, the highest grain yield and B:C ratio was recorded on TPR with CCM-200 and ZT-DSR with CCM-200 respectively. Thus, considering the great importance of yield and profitability at the farmers’ level, combination of ZT-DSR and CCM-200 may be recommended to farmers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fundamental and Applied Agriculture\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fundamental and Applied Agriculture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5455/faa.137963\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fundamental and Applied Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5455/faa.137963","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

传统的水稻生产系统移栽和农民对适当施肥的无知一直是尼泊尔水稻生产和资源保护的主要问题。为了解决资源保护问题,2019年雨季在尼泊尔卡斯基进行了一项实验。试验设置为条畦设计,包括3种作物建立方法(i)零耕干直播稻(ZT-DSR)、(ii)少耕干直播稻(RT-DSR)和(iii)移栽稻(TPR),以及4种特定场地养分管理(SSNM)方案(i)营养专家(NE模型)、(ii)叶色图(LCC)、(iii)叶绿素含量仪-200 (CCM-200)和(iv)农户施肥实践(FFP),田间3个重复。TPR在粮食产量和养分利用方面表现较好,ZT-DSR在盈利能力和能量利用方面表现较好。在养分管理中,CCM-200的籽粒氮吸收(60.5 kg ha−1)、秸秆氮吸收(24.11 kg ha−1)和总氮吸收(84.6 kg ha−1)均显著高于其他养分管理。ZT-DSR和RT-DSR的能量输入分别比TPR低41.8%和32.9%。ZT-DSR和FFP的能量利用效率(EUE)分别为15.79和15.07,高于其他作物种植方式和肥料管理方式。添加FFP的ZT-DSR的EUE最高(20.94),其次是添加LCC的ZT-DSR(15.0)。而TPR和ZT-DSR分别以CCM-200和CCM-200处理的籽粒产量和B:C比最高。因此,考虑到农民对产量和盈利能力的重要性,建议农民将ZT-DSR与CCM-200组合使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resource use efficiencies of rice grown under different crop establishment methods and fertilizer management approaches in Kaski, Nepal
The conventional transplanting of rice production system and farmers ignorance about proper fertilizer application has been a major problem in rice production and resource conservation in Nepal. To address the problem of resource conservation, an experiment was conducted in Kaski, Nepal during the rainy season of 2019. The experimental set up was in strip plot design consisting of three crop establishment methods(i) zero-till dry direct-seeded rice (ZT-DSR), (ii) reduced-till dry direct-seeded rice (RT-DSR) and (iii) transplanted rice (TPR) and four site-specific nutrient management (SSNM) options(i) nutrient expert (NE Model), (ii) leaf color chart (LCC), (iii) chlorophyll content meter-200 (CCM-200) and (iv) farmers fertilizer practice (FFP) with three replications in the fields. Among the establishment methods, TPR performed better in terms of grain yield and nutrient uses, whereas ZT-DSR was superior in terms of profitability and energy use. Among the nutrient management, CCM-200 showed promising performance with significantly higher grain nitrogen uptake (60.5 kg ha−1), straw nitrogen uptake (24.11 kg ha−1) and total nitrogen uptake (84.6 kg ha−1) than other nutrient management practices. The energy input in ZT-DSR and RT-DSR were 41.8% and 32.9% lower than the TPR. The energy use efficiency (EUE) was higher in ZT-DSR (15.79) and FFP (15.07) as compared to other crop establishment methods and fertilizer management approaches. The ZT-DSR with FFP had the highest EUE (20.94) followed by ZT-DSR with LCC (15.0). Whereas, the highest grain yield and B:C ratio was recorded on TPR with CCM-200 and ZT-DSR with CCM-200 respectively. Thus, considering the great importance of yield and profitability at the farmers’ level, combination of ZT-DSR and CCM-200 may be recommended to farmers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信