View
136
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Studies on the yield performance of selected traditional rice
cultivars grown in mid country wet zone
J.H.M.M.JayaweeraDepartment of Crop
Science University of
Peradeniya.
Introduction
Oryza sativa
• Staple food• Employment
Production surplus
Can’t export-low quality
Low potential
High cost for NIV-
pest disease weeds
Lack of research
Traditional Verities with
diversityTraditional varieties
with low cost
Introduction
Oryza sativa • Staple food• Employment
Production surplus
Can’t export-low quality
Low potential
High cost for NIV-
pest disease weeds
Lack of research
Traditional Verities with
diversityTraditional varieties with low cost
Objectives
to evaluate traditional rice varieties suitable
for mid country wet zone
General objective
Objectives
1. To compare performance of traditional rice varieties (TRV) and new improved varieties (NIV) qualitatively and quantitatively
2. To compare performance of NIV under high in-put and low in-put conditions
Specific objectives
Methodology• 5 treatments in 3 blocks (RCBD)T1-Baranigla with organic fertilizerT2-Kiri Murunga organic fertilizerT3-Sudu Heenati organic fertilizerT4-Kalu heenati organic fertilizerT5-Bg 300 with organic fertilizerT6-Bg 300 with chemical fertilizer • Block size – 2m*5m• Seed paddy broad cast - 75 kg/ha
Observations• Yield• Yield components
No. panicles/m2
No. spikelets/panicleFilled grain %Potential size of grain
• Crude protein content• Paddy to rice ratio (fraction of rice)• Head rice yield (HRY)
Yield
No.of spikelets/panicle
Thousand grain weight
Crude protein content
Ratio between rice and paddy
Results and discussion
Treatment No.of spikelets/panicle1.Baranigala 99b
2.Kirimurunga 142b
3.Suduheenati 204a
4.Kaluheenati 105b
5.BG-300(organic fertilizer) 115b
6.BG-300(chemical fertilizer) 131b
For each harvest, means with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05)
Table 2: Number of spikelets per panicle of different treatments
Treatment Thousand grain wt.(g)
1.Baranigala 25.5e
2.Kirimurunga 30.3c
3.Suduheenati 38.3a
4.Kaluheenati 32.3b
5.BG-300(organic fertilizer) 27.1d
6.BG-300(chemical fertilizer) 27.0d
Treatment Yield (mt/ha)
1.Baranigala 3.64a
2.Kirimurunga 3.64a
3.Suduheenati 2.88c
4.Kaluheenati 1.90b
5.BG-300(organic fertilizer) 3.42a
6.BG-300(chemical fertilizer) 3.79a
Treatment Crude protein content (%)
1.Baranigala 3.06b
2.Kirimurunga 2.87c
3.Suduheenati 3.12b
4.Kaluheenati 3.40a
5.BG-300(organic fertilizer) 2.80cd
6.BG-300(chemical fertilizer) 2.70d
Treatment Fraction of rice
1.Baranigala 1.26cd
2.Kirimurunga 1.20d
3.Suduheenati 1.57a
4.Kaluheenati 1.43b
5.BG-300(organic fertilizer) 1.32bc
6.BG-300(chemical fertilizer) 1.20d
Treatment Head rice yield1.Baranigala 55.59b
2.Kirimurunga 55.00b
3.Suduheenati 59.02a
4.Kaluheenati 59.25a
5.BG-300(organic fertilizer) 52.40c
6.BG-300(chemical fertilizer) 60.09a
Conclusions
• Quality wise and quantity wise - BG-300<TRV in low potential lands
• No significant difference between compost treated and chemical fertilizer treated BG-300
• Beneficial to grow TRV in low potential paddy lands