1. Badawi A. Tantawi INTEGRATED WATER MANAGEMENT IN RICE FIELDS EGYPT
Rice Research Program, field Crops Research Institute,
Agricultural Research Center, Giza, 12619,
EGYPT

2. Table (1): Actual consumptive use (Eta) and water requrment of the rice and its component as will as potantial evapotranspiration in mm /day as calculated by different methods.
ETp
Eta
(E+T)
W.R mm
C.U P
mm/day T
E mm/day
Period
(day)
Pan
Blaney & Criddle
Penman
4.87
4.14
4.20
3.23
2.21
6.21
6.01
4.94
4.18
2.72
6.94
6.14
4.78
3.75
2.50
7.77
8.04
5.84
3.94
2.51
524.61
489.49
340.80
234.36
58.80
209.79
249.24
175.20
122.14
25.10
11.66
7.75
5.52
3.62
3.37
2.95
3.54
2.92
1.46
0.78
4.82
4.50
2.48
1.73
July (27 day)
Aug.(31day)
Sep.(30 day)
Oct. (31 day)
Nov. (10 day)
508.1
658.9
662.4
781.4
781.47
866.59
Total
(129 day)
The varity used Giza E = EvapoTranspiration (mm/day), T = Transpiration (mm/day),
P= Percolation (mm/day), C.U = Consumptive Use (mm), and W.R = Water Requirment (mm).
Total amount of evapotranspiration calculated by the different methods from transplanting to harvesting.

3. Table(2):Average monthely water consumptive use valued (cm), actual evapotranspiration ETa, potential evapotranspirtion ETp and rice coefficient valus Kc.
Irrigation every 8 days
Irrigation every 4 days
Month Kc
ETp (mm/day)
ETa (mm/day)
C.U
(cm)
0.56
1.23
1.15
1.26
7.6
7.4
7.3
4.5
4.28
8.98
8.30
5.75
8.55
28.45
25.00
6.88
0.64
1.40
1.30
1.43
4.85
10.43
9.43
6.50
9.73
32.35
28.35
7.80
June (20 days)
July (31days)
Aug. (31 days)
Sept. (12 days)
The varity used Giza C.U = Consumptive Use (mm), ETa =actual evaporationtranspiratio (mm/day), ETp=potential evaporationtranspiratio (mm/day), and Kc = rice coefficient
The values were measured after transplanting up to harvesting process.

4. Table(3) :Some water relations for some rice varieties as affected by irrigation treatments.
WUE
kg/m3
Water
saved %
Total
water use
(m3/ha)
Irrigation
treatments
Variety
( duration)
0.64
0.84
0.83 -
26.68
7.48
Continuous flooding
Continuous saturation
Irrigation every 6 days
Sakha 101
(135 days)
0.63
0.80
0.58
24.36
6.73
9935.6
Sakha 102
(120 days)
0.51
0.77
0.48
34.32
7.81
Giza 171
(155 days)
WUE = water use efficiency

5. Table (4): Effect of irrigation treatments on grain yield of some rice varieties.
mean
Giza 176
Giza 175
Giza 181
Giza 171
Treatments
11.0
6.3
7.4
6.8
6.7
5.0
9.0
8.6
7.3
6.1
6.6
5.8
9.3
8.7
8.0
4.7
9.4
12.0
7.0
7.7
9.7
9.2
10.1
5.3
6.4
6.2
3.7
7.9
7.2
10.2
Irrigation every 6 days (IE 6 D)
Irrigation every 12 days
IE 6 D shifting to 12 days for 36 days during tillering
IE 6 D shifting to 18 days for 36 days during tillering
IE 6 D shifting to 12 days for 36 days during PI
IE 6 D shifting to 18 days for 36 days during PI
IE 6 D shifting to 12 days for 36 days during flowering
IE 6 D shifting to 18 days for 36 days during flowering
Continuous flooding (chek)
1.1
0.8
L.S.D 5%
PI = panicle initiation

6. Table(5):Effect of irrigation withholding at different Productivity times of Sakha 102 rice variety
Yield t/ha
Treatments
6.92 e
6.91 e
7.85 bc
7.79 bcd
7.76 bcd
7.49 cd
7.77 bcd
8.21 ab
8.01 ab
8.38 a
7.33 de
8.00 ab
12 days withholding, 2 weeks AT
12 days withholding, 3 weeks AT
12 days withholding, 4 weeks AT
12 days withholding, 5 weeks AT
12 days withholding, 6 weeks AT
12 days withholding, 7 weeks AT
12 days withholding, 8 weeks AT
12 days withholding, 9 weeks AT
12 days withholding,10 weeks AT
continuous flooding
irrigation every 6 days
alternate 4 days on + 6 days off
AT = After transplanting

7. Table (6): Yield reduction and some water relations under different irrigation regimes
Total water used m3 /ha
Water saved %
Yield reduction %
Irrigation intervals
16200
13496
11756
10239 -
16.7
27.4
36.7
4.2
31.0
40.0
Irrigation every 3 days
Irrigation every 6 days
Irrigation every 9 days
Irrigation every 12 days

8. Water use efficiency (WUE)
Table(7):Water used, water saved and water use efficiency of some rice varieties as affected by water regime
Water Relations
Treatments
Water use efficiency (WUE)
Water saved %
Water used m3/ha*
0.68
0.51
0.72
0.66 -
Continuous Flooding:
Giza 182
Egyptian Jasmine
Sakha 103
Sakha 104
0.64
Mean
0.88
0.65
0.86
25.69
23.90
18.96
Continuous Saturation:
0.81
23.56
0.69
0.53
0.74
0.67
7.80
8.70
8.25
Irrigation every 6 days:
8.14
0.77
0.48
0.70
23.21
14.06
17.67
Irrigation every 9 days:
19.54
Including the amount of water used before applying treatments ( through nursesries and land preparation)
RRTC (2001).

9. Organic manure rates t/ha
Table(8):water use, water saved % and water use efficiency kg/m3 as affected by different irrigation intervals and organic manure of Sakha 101 rice variety.
Mean
Organic manure rates t/ha
Irrigation
Intervals
characters 12 8 4
13278
11888
9800
12900
11500
8900
13115
11620
9400
13350
12000
13750
12400
11100
Cont. flooding
6 days
9 days
Water
used m3
4.5
15.5
25.8
6.0
18.0
35.0
4.0
15.0
29.0
3.0
13.0
20.0 -
10.0
19.0
saved %
0.82
0.86
0.80
0.95
0.96
0.94
0.84
0.91
0.78
0.83
0.76
0.71
0.73
0.64
Water use efficiency
(WUE) kg/ m3

10. Table (9) Effect of cut of irrigation dates on
grain yield of some rice cultivars
Grain yield (T/ha)
Treatments
8.99
7.95
8.47
0.21
Rice cultivars ( V ) :
Sakha
Sakha
Sakha
L.S.D %
6.88
7.93
9.13
9.93
0.19
Cut of irrigation dates (C):
At complete heading (CH)
1 week after CH.
2 weeks after CH.
3 weeks after CH.
L.S.D %
Source : RRTC(2002 &2003)

11. At complete heading (CH)
Table(10) Effect of the interaction between cut of irrigation dates treatments and cultivars on grain yield.
Sakha
Sakha
Sakha
Treatments
7.12
7.93
9.13
9.93
6.35
7.63
8.32
9.50
7.18
8.40
9.97
10.40
At complete heading (CH)
1 week after CH
2 weeks after CH
3 weeks after CH
0.25
L.S.D %

12. Table(11)water use efficiency (WUE) kg /m3 of Giza 177 and Sakha 102 rice varieties as affected by land preparation and planting methods
Sakha 102
Giza 177
Treatments
0.505
0.519
0.485
0.544
0.512
0.493
0.455
0.520
Land preparation:
Disk + Leveling
Chisel + Disk + Leveling
Chisel + Leveling
Mold + Disk + Leveling
0.506
0.593
0.460
0.540
0.522
0.465
0.572
0.484
0.558
0.433
Planting methods:
Drilling
Dibbling
Broadcastinig
Manual Transplanting
Mech. Transplanting

13. Table(12):Total water requirement and water use efficiency as affected by land preparation and irrigation interval.
Water used efficiency
Total water
used
Treatment
Sakha
101
Giza
177
0.507
0.406
0.372
0.415
0.468
0.487
0.401
0.320
0.423
0.373
0.361
0.251
0.394
0.404
0.332
0.278
7182
7413
9079
6500
8556
7823
7180
6615
6394
6572
7975
6092
7987
6896
6333
5818
Land Preparation:
Chisel plough (2 passes) + wet leveling
Chisel plough (1 pass) + dry leveling
Moldboard plough + disk + dry leveling
Zero tillage
Irrigation interval:
Every 3 days
Every 6 days
Every 9 days
Every 12 days

14. Irrigation treatments
Table (13):some of water relations for Giza 178 and Sakha 102 rice varities as affected by irrigation regimes and different planting methods.
WUE kg /m3
Water saved %
Total water use m3/ha
Irrigation treatments
Planting
method
mean
Sakha 102
Giza 178
0.69
0.70
0.68
0.63
0.71
0.62
0.67
0.64 -
7.06
11.19
17.37
6.99
11.08
16.04
7.12
11.30
18.70 I1 I2 I3 I4
Maual transplanting
0.60
0.56
0.61
0.58
0.53
0.59
6.12
9.01
14.74
7.55
12.10
16.66
Broadcasting
0.66
0.65
6.76
12.44
16.43
6.87
11.27
15.37
6.64
13.60
17.52
Mech. Drilling
0.55
6.79
11.95
15.68
6.55
11.41
14.85
7.03
12.46
16.50
Dibbling
I1= 4days on + 6 days off, I2= 4days on + 8 days off, I3= 4days on + 10 days off, I4= 4days on + 12 days off

15. Irrigation regimes ( I ) : Cont. flooding I1 Cont. saturation I2
Table (14): Grain yield (t/ha) as influenced by irrigation treatments and different planting methods.
Grain yield (t / ha)
Treatments
9.85
9.54
9.18
8.17
0.21
Irrigation regimes ( I ) :
Cont. flooding I1
Cont. saturation I2
6- day off I3
8- day off I4
L.S.D %
9.28
8.61
9.16
9.70
Planting methods (P):
Broadcasting P1
Drilling P2
Mech. Transplanting P3
Transplanting P4
L.S.D %

16. Water used before treatments m3/ha
Table (15A): Some of water relations of Sakha 104 rice cultivar as affected by irrigation treatments and methods of planting .
Water saved %
Total water used 1000 m3/ha
Planting methods
Mean P4 P3 P2 P1 -
24.29
9.72
18.88
24.16
8.40
17.37
23.92
12.23
20.70
23.67
9.60
18.10
25.41
8.66
19.34
14959
11322
13509
12125
15016
11388
13755
12407
14599
11107
12812
11577
14389
10984
13009
11786
15833
11809
14460
12771
Cont.flooding
Cont.saturation
6- day off
8- day off
4353
3420
3603
5967
Water used before treatments m3/ha
P1=Broadcasting, P2= Drilling, P3= Mech. Transplanting, P4 = Transplanting.

17. Table (15 B): Grain yield (t/ha) as influenced by irrigation treatments and different planting methods.
WUE Kg /m3
Yield reduction %
Planting
Mean P4 P3 P2 P1
methods
0.66
0.85
0.68
0.70
0.89
0.72
0.67
0.86
0.71
0.82
0.65
0.63
0.81 -
3.11
6.91
17.06
3.15
5.35
21.10
1.44
5.89
13.65
3.53
8.24
19.59
4.33
8.15
13.88
Cont. flooding
Cont. saturation
6- day
8- day
0.75
0.74
0.69
P1=Broadcasting, P2= Drilling, P3= Mech. Transplanting, P4 = Transplanting.

18. Table (16): Weed dry weight as influenced by regime, row spacing, and number of seedling in manually transplanted rice.
Weed dry weight (g/m2)*
Water regime
4-days on +
12- days off
6- days off
Continuous
flooding
Seedling
no/hill
Spacing
(cm)
288 c
167 d
14 b 3
10x20
241 de
129 ef
0.0 b 6
224 e
100 f 9
220 dc
227 c
17 b
20x20
295 c
183 d
12 b
261 d
156 de
7 b
389 e
328 a
56 a
331 b
263 b
28 ab
218 c
15 b
* Means followed by a common are not significantly at the 5% level by DMRI

19. (Hreebicides kg a.i/ha)
Table 17 Dry weight of weeds and grain yield of transplanted rice (Sakha 101 cv) as influenced by conventional weed control treatments
MBCR
Yield
(t/ha)
Weeds
(g/m2)
Treatments
(Hreebicides kg a.i/ha)
A. Improved weed control (10x20 cm)
1- Continuous flooding for 15 days: 28
9.13 38
- Butachlor (1.1)
6.34
169
- Weedy check
2- Continuous flooding for 15 days: 32
9.97
0.0
6.83
142
B. Conventional weed control (20x20 cm)
1- flooding every 6 days: 25
8.23 75
- Hand weeding twice 19
8.97 64
- Thiobencarb (2.4) 22
8.87 59
- Butachlor (2.4)
4.51
373

20. CONCLUSION
In order to increase the efficiency of the irrigation water in rice fields the following alternatives should be used
Substituting long duration varieties with short duration varieties in all rice growing areas.
Convince farmers to use the laser technique and dry leveling in land preparation.
Use the optimum plant density with the specific rice varieties.
Use the drought tolerance varieties such as Giza 178 at the end of canals.
Withholding irrigation water for short time at medium tillering stage and during late grain filling stage.
Improving the irrigation and drainage system to minimize water losses.
Extensive public awareness campaign on the importance of the water and the possible methods for saving.
Other water resources have to be developed such as ground water particularly for the reclaimed areas.

21. Thank you