Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byIsaac Wilson Modified over 9 years ago
1
New technologies to save water for irrigated rice in the Sahel Michiel de Vries, Vincent Bado and Abdoulaye Sow Africa Rice Center (WARDA) Sahel Station - Senegal Africa Rice Congress 31 July – 4 August 2006, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
2
80% of rice production in Senegal is irrigated. In irrigation agriculture in the SRV, water accounts for 25% of production costs Improving water use efficiency will reduce costs and improve production efficiency Water-less or aerobic rice can save water (Bouman et al. 2005 a, b), and is grown under saturated soil conditions, without standing water and without water stress. Introduction Back ground
3
Problem definition Hypothesis: “Water-less rice can be beneficial for farmers is the Senegal River Valley” Issues to be addressed: Salinity and high temperatures may be a problem in the Sahel Weeds may form an important constraint Genetic material needs to be adapted to new conditions Yield levels To this end an on-station experiment was done Introduction
4
Irrigation treatments: (main plot) –Completely aerobic; –Aerobic until PI, then flooded; –Flooded until PI, then aerobic and –Completely flooded Weed control treatments: (sub-plot) –Herbicide applied at 21 DAS; –Herbicide applied at 35 DAS and –no herbicide Methods Treatments
5
Measurements taken –Volume water irrigated –Water and salinity level in plots –Weed population –Plant growth data –Yield components Methods Measurements
6
Results Plot water level
7
Flood water salinity Results Threshold value 3.5 mS/cm
8
Treatment Irrigation (mm) Rel. water use Aerobic139060% Aerobic- Flooded207090% Flooded- Aerobic152066% Flooded2300100% Results Volume water applied
9
TreatmentYield (kg/ha) Water Prod. (kg rice/mm irrigation) Aerobic4960 b 3.56 Aerobic-Flooded5490 b 2.65 Flooded-Aerobic6470 a 4.25 Flooded6670 a 2.90 Results Effects of water treatment Same letters are not different according to LSD, α=0.05
10
Effects of Herbicide treatment TreatmentYield (kg/ha)Tiller/m2 maturity Herb. 21 DAS6990 a 2290 a Herb. 35 DAS6760 a 2310 a No herb.3940 b 1760 b Results Same letters are not different according to LSD, α=0.05
11
Rice yield (kg/ha) TreatmentHerb. 21 DASNo herbic. Aerobic6200 b 2700 d Aerobic-Flooded6960 ab 2890 d Flooded-Aerobic7160 ab 5080 c Flooded7640 a 5100 c Results Water x Herbicide interaction Same letters are not different according to LSD, α=0.05
12
Conclusion Under complete aerobic: 25% yield loss compared to flooded, 40% water saving Under flooded-aerobic system no sig. yield loss, 34% water saving Strong herbicide x water treatment interaction Opportunities to save on water! Conclusion
13
On-station: –In-depth research N x Weed reactions on irrigation –Varietal screening of 42 advanced lines (20 NERICAs) On-farm: –Collaboration with National partners –Sites along Senegal River Socio-economic study Conclusion Next steps
14
Thank you, Merci, Dieuredieuf, Asante sana ! Special thanks for technical assistance to: Mandieye Top, Gougna Gaye & Malick Sarr
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.