Research Article

Growth, Yield and Economic Analysis of Dry-Seeded Basmati Rice

Shawaiz Iqbal1*, Nadeem Iqbal2, Usama Bin Khalid1, Muhammad Usman Saleem1, Adila Iram1, Muhammad Rizwan1, Muhammad Sabar1 and Tahir Hussain Awan1

1Rice Research Institute, Kala Shah Kaku, Punjab, Pakistan; 2Maiz and Millets Research Institute, Yousaf wala, Sahiwal, Punjab, Pakistan.

Received | June 02, 2020; Accepted | December 13, 2020; Published | February 22, 2021

*Correspondence | Shawaiz Iqbal, Rice Research Institute, Kala Shah Kaku, Punjab, Pakistan; Email: shawaiziqbal@gmail.com

Citation | Iqbal, S., N. Iqbal, U.B. Khalid, M.U. Saleem, A. Iram, M. Rizwan, M. Sabar and T.H. Awan. 2021. Growth, yield and economic analysis of dry-seeded basmati rice. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 37(1): 200-208.

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2021/37.1.200.208

Keywords | Basmati rice, Planting methods, Yield attributes, Grain yield, Economic analysis

Introduction

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is a staple food crop of more than half of the inhabitants across the globe (Khush, 2004). In Pakistan, after wheat, it occupies 2nd position. Its cropped area was 3034 M ha and production was 7.410 M tons (Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2019). Among the cereal crops, rice is an important export commodity (Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2019). It contributes 3.1% in value addition to agriculture and 0.6% in the GDP (Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2019). The average yield of rice in Pakistan is about 2.44 t ha-1 (Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2019) which is low as compared to other rice producing countries due to many constraints including proper crop establishing techniques (Aslam, 2016).

In Asia rice is growing by transplanting, rice seedlings manually in puddled soil which is a widely adopted method. It consumes abundant water (Bouman and Tuong, 2001). Whereas, water resources are declining day by day. Its judicious use is gaining a pivotal importance to fulfil future water and food demand for the growing population (Mahajan et al., 2012). Shrinking water resources availability is a threat for the future rice production in Asia (Mahajan et al., 2012) and will adversely affect the sustainability of rice production (Chauhan et al., 2014). This calls for exploring water saving approach in rice farming e.g. dry-seeded rice (DSR). Bouman and Tuong (2001) reported that DSR on flat soil or on raised beds saves water considerably. DSR is planted in well prepared seed bed by drill or broadcast method, and after that irrigation is applied immediately. Irrigation is repeated after 3-4 days interval till the full germination of rice and afterwards irrigation is applied about 6-7 days interval. This DSR method as compared to transplanted rice saves huge quantities of water (Cabangon et al., 2002). DSR sown on dry seed bed and first irrigation applied immediately after sowing, and plots re-irrigated daily for 2 week after germination to maintain saturation. Subsequent irrigations were applied at hairline cracks appearance at surface of soil. This DSR crop resulted in saving water upto 40% as compared to puddled transplanted rice (Bhushan et al., 2007).

Traditional method of transplanting rice seedlings in puddled soil not only consumes more water but also involves intensive labor (Saleem et al., 2020). About 25-50 man-days ha-1 are required for transplanting whereas in DSR only 5 man-days ha-1 are needed (Dawe, 2005). Labor scarcity and increasing wages are mounting a high production cost. This element is gradually replacing conventional transplanting with DSR. In Pakistan among other constraints, low plant population is an important factor of low production, which can be overcome by DSR. Moreover, DSR escapes time of nursery raising and transplanting which is strenuous and tedious in hot weather. Additionally, transplanting period is short and to adjust seedlings with environment DSR is a good alternative method for rice establishment (Laary et al., 2012), as it doesn’t face transplanting shock, favors early crop establishment, accelerate growth and hasten maturity (Tuong, 2008). Furthermore, DSR plays a key role to achieve optimum plant population with water saving and improvement in the yield (Ladha et al., 2009; Farooq et al., 2011). Planting through DSR is being practiced successfully in USA, Italy, France, Russia, Cuba, Japan, Korea, India and Philippines including Iran (Akhgari, 2004).

Planting methods not only affect yield and quality of rice but also influence soil health. DSR produces more yield as compared to transplanting (Iqbal et al., 2019).

Site specific changes in method of land preparation and crop establishment should be applied in DSR to enhance yield (Farooq et al., 2008). This study was aimed to test economic impact of different planting techniques including DSR on yield and its components for Super Basmati rice which is planted on 80 % area in Pakistan.

 

Materials and Methods

Experiment was conducted at experimental farm of Rice Research Institute, Kala Shah Kaku, Pakistan (73°50’16E and 31°45’35N having altitude of 205 m) for two seasons (2014 and 2015). The soil under experimentation was clay loam and its physico-chemical properties of experimental field are given in Table 1. Soil analysis was carried out before sowing the experiment for pHs, ECe and SAR (U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954). Soil organic matter was determined using Walkely method as reported by Walkely (1947). Nitrogen percentage from soil was examined by Kjheldhal distillation apparatus method (Kjeldahl, 1883). Available phosphorous was determined by using Spectrophotometer according to the method described by Olsen et al. (1954) and available potassium using Flame photometer described by Chapman and Pratt (1961). And Soil texture was determined using hydrometer method.

A portion of saturated paste was transferred to a tarred china dish. It was weighed, dried to constant weight at 105oC and weighed again. Saturation percentage (SP) was calculated by using formula. (U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954).

Meteorological data of crop seasons are shown in Figure 1. Four planting methods viz. (i) broadcast 24 h soaked seed in well prepared seedbed (i.e. DSR-broadcast), (ii) drilling of dry seed in well prepared dry soil followed by irrigation (i.e. DSR-drill), (iii) ridges made after broadcast 24 h soaked seed in well prepared seed bed (i.e. DSR-ridge) and (iv) departmental recommended transplanting (TR-recommended) were compared with (v) farmers transplanting (TR-farmer practice). Drill sowing was done with happy seeder using its inclined plate seed box system. Whereas for DSR-ridge, seed was broadcasted in the well-prepared seedbed and afterwards ridges were made with the help of a ridger.

 

 

Table 1: Physico-chemical characteristics of experimental field.

Parameter	Soil depth
	0-6 inch	6-12 inch
EC (dS m-1)	1.42	0.89
Soil pH	8.31	8.14
Organic matter (%)	0.39	0.25
Nitrogen (%)	0.47	0.26
Available P (ppm)	5.5	5.2
Available K (ppm)	94	76
Saturation (%)	41	36
Texture	Clay loam	Clay loam
SAR (m mol L-1)1/2	7.23	7.14

 

Experiment was a randomized complete block design (RCBD), treatments replicated thrice. Sowing was done in a net plot of size 600 m2 (20m x 30m). Certified seed of Super Basmati (35 kg ha-1) was used for all DSR methods. Direct seeded rice was sown on June 12th and 14th in 2014 and 2015, respectively. Before sowing, seeds were treated with fungicide (Topsin M at the rate of 2.5 g kg-1). Drilling of dry seed with DSR-drill was done in a well-prepared dry seedbed following immediate irrigation and repeated water flooding whenever needed to enhance germination. In DSR-ridge, broadcast of soaked seed was done manually followed by formation of ridges using a potato ridger. Clover (Bispyribac sodium) 20% SC at the rate of 250 g ha-1 was sprayed at 20 and 39 days after seeding in saturated soil condition to control weeds. Manual transplanting of 35 days old rice seedlings was done on 14th July in TR-recommended and TR-farmer practice. In case of TR-recommended line to line and plant to plant distance was maintained 22.5 cm by using marked strings across the field. Rifit (Pretilachlor) at the rate of 2000 ml ha-1 used after 5 days of transplanting in standing water with shaker bottle to control weeds. Recommended fertilizer 133-85-62 kg N-P-K kg ha-1 was applied in all plots. All K and P with 1/3rd N was applied at seedbed preparation and remaining N was used in two equal splits at 40 and 60 days after transplantation (DAT). For transplanting methods continuous flooding was done for 30 DAT and thereafter irrigation was applied at weekly interval. Whereas, irrigation to DSR was applied at 5-7 days interval till maturity.

Data recording

The data recording and harvesting of all treatments was done on 12th and 18th November during 2014 and 2015, respectively. Five plants were randomly selected from a treatment and height was measured from base to tip including panicle. At harvest, panicles bearing tillers were counted from a m2 area at three places in a treatment and averaged for number of tillers m-2. Five panicles were randomly selected, measured its length from ear marked area to tip, grains separated manually to determine filled and unfilled grains panicle-1. The paddy samples were sundried after harvesting and threshing, grain moisture content was determined by grain moisture meter (LKB-PRODUK TERAB-Stockholm-Sweden), and thousand grain weight was measured by using electrical balance. The paddy yield (t ha-1) was adjusted at 14% moisture.

Economic analysis

The economic analysis was carried out as under:

Grand income = [(paddy yield × market price of paddy t-1) + (straw yield × market price of straw t-1)]

Net profit= (grand income – total cost of production)

Benefit-cost ratio= net benefit / total cost of production

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed statistically by statistical package (Statistix 8.0). For testing treatments’ means significance, Fischer’s Analysis of Variance Technique was used and Least Significance Difference Test (P ≤ 0.05) was applied for comparing means (Steel et al., 1997).

 

Results and Discussion

Effect of planting methods was non-significant (P ≤ 0.05) on plant height during 2014 and 2015. However, various planting methods significantly (P ≤ 0.05) influenced productive tiller number m-2 in first and second year (Table 2). The maximum productive tiller number (416 and 409 m-2 during 2014 and 2015, respectively) were recorded in DSR-ridge. However, it remained statistically at par with DSR-drill and DSR-broadcast. All methods produced 26-61 % (2014) and 23-49 % (2015) higher productive tiller number m-2 when compared with TR-farm practice. Additionally, an increase of 18-24 % (2014) and 12-21% (2015) was recorded in tiller number per unit area in all DSR vs. TR-recommended practice. Two years averages data depicted that varying planting methods had a non-significant (P ≤ 0.05) effect on panicle length. All the rice establishing methods indicated an increase of 18-26 % (2014) and 1-9 % (2015) in panicle length (cm) against TR-farmer practice, except the TR-recommended practice during 2015 (Table 2).

Number of filled grains panicle-1 showed a significant response for planting methods (Table 2). The maximum number of filled grains panicle-1 was observed in DSR-ridge (90 and 72) followed by DSR-drill (79 and 58) and DSR-broadcast (77 and 50) in first and second year, respectively. DSR-ridge produced 38 and 55 %, DSR-drill resulted in 20 and 25 %, DSR-broadcast recorded 19 and 8 %, and TR-recommended practice caused 5 and 6 % more number of filled grains per panicle over TR-farmer practice during 2014 and 2015, respectively (Table 2). Different planting methods significantly (P ≤ 0.05) affected the unfilled grains number panicle-1 during both years. The lowest unfilled grains number panicle-1 (12) was observed in DSR-ridge (Table 2) that was followed by TR-recommended practice (13). All the treatments produced 12-31% and 8-23 % less unfilled grains per panicle than TR-farmer practice during 2014 and 2015, respectively (Table 2). Results indicated that different planting methods during 2014 and 2015 significantly (P≤0.05) altered grain sterility. The lowest sterility percentage (12 %) was recorded in DSR-ridge (Table 3) and it was followed by DSR-drill (16 %),

 

Table 2: Effect of planting methods on plant height (cm), number of productive tillers m-2, panicle length (cm) and number of filled and unfilled grains panicle during 2014 and 2015.

Planting methods	Plant height (cm)		Number of productive tillers m-2		Panicle length (cm)		Number of filled grains panicle-1		Number of unfilled grains panicle-1
	2014	2015	2014	2015	2014	2015	2014	2015	2014	2015
DSR-broadcast	117.21	117.92	384 ab	379 ab	26.54	25.77	77.41 abc	49.92 b	15.70 ab	21.31 a
DSR-ridge	120.01	120.06	416 a	409 a	28.30	26.34	89.73 a	71.81 a	12.31 c	18.13 b
DSR-drill	118.92	119.04	403 ab	388 ab	27.16	24.45	78.10 ab	57.71 b	14.91 b	21.50 a
TR-farmer practice	114.50	110.47	259 c	275 c	22.52	24.14	65.12 c	46.23 b	17.92 a	23.53 a
TR-recommended practice	117.53	108.05	326 bc	337 bc	27.35	23.66	68.71 bc	49.10 b	13.30 bc	20.81 ab
LSD	ns	ns	77.4	69.1	ns	ns	12.525	12.190	2.559	3.017

 

Table 3: Effect of planting methods on grain sterility %, 1000-grain weight, grain yield (t ha-1), straw yield (t ha-1) and harvest index (%) of rice crop during 2014 and 2015.

Planting methods	Grain sterility (%)		1000-grain weight (g)		Paddy yield (t ha-1)		Straw yield (t ha-1)		Harvest index (%)
	2014	2015	2014	2015	2014	2015	2014	2015	2014	2015
DSR-broadcast	16.89 b	29.95 b	20.11 b	26.85	4.30 abc	3.81 bc	11.35 a	9.17 ab	27.48 c	29.35 b
DSR-ridge	12.01 d	20.13 d	23.89 a	28.10	5.11 a	4.95 a	11.11 a	10.07 a	31.50 a	32.96 a
DSR-drill	16.02 c	27.19 c	20.86 b	27.56	4.70 ab	4.30 ab	11.67 a	10.60 a	28.71 bc	28.86 c
TR-farmer practice	21.55 a	33.80 a	20.52 b	25.40	3.52 c	3.11 c	8.73 b	8.37 b	28.73 bc	27.09 d
TR-recommended practice	16.18 c	29.83 b	21.05 b	27.10	3.90 bc	3.50 c	9.18 b	9.03 b	29.82 b	27.93 c
LSD	0.447	2.046	2.443	ns	0.908	0.703	1.156	2.423	2.300	0.630

 

TR-recommended practice (16 %), and DSR-broadcast (17 %), whereas, the highest sterility (21%) was recorded in TR-farmer practice during first year with a similar trend in the second year (Table 3). Results demonstrated that during 2014, 1000-grain weight was significantly affected with planting methods whereas in 2015 it showed a non-significant (P ≤ 0.05) behavior. All the planting methods resulted in 2-16 % and 6-11 % more grain weight over TR-farmer practice in first and second year, respectively (Table 3). However, the highest 1000-grain weight was achieved with DSR-ridge (23.89 g) while, the lowest was recorded in TR-farmer practices (20.52 g).

Paddy yield varied significantly (P≤0.05) among different planting methods during first and second year (Table 3). The maximum paddy yield during 2014 was achieved with the DSR-ridge (5.11 t ha-1) followed by DSR-drill (4.70 t ha-1), DSR-broadcast (4.30 t ha-1) and TR-recommended practice (3.90 t ha-1) as compared to TR-farmer practice (3.52 t ha-1). Similar trend was observed in 2015. All the methods resulted in 10-45 % and 13-59 % more paddy yield over TR-farmer practice during first and second year, respectively. Moreover, all the DSR-planting methods produced 10-31 % and 8-41 % more paddy yield over TR-recommended practice during 2014 and 2015, respectively (Table 3). As far as TR-recommended practice and TR-farmer practice is concerned, TR-recommended practice produced 10 and 11 % more paddy yield than TR-farmer practice in first and second year, respectively (Table 3). Significant (P≤0.05) effect of planting methods was observed on straw yield of rice crop during 2014 and 2015 (Table 3). The highest straw yield (11.67 t ha-1) during first year was achieved with DSR-drill that was followed DSR-broadcast and DSR-ridge, whereas, lowest straw yield (8.73 t ha-1) was recorded in TR-farmer practice. During 2015, the maximum straw yield (10.67 t ha-1) was found in DSR-drill that was followed by DSR-broadcast, DSR-ridge and TR-recommended practice, respectively. The TR-farmer practice again occupied the bottom rank by producing straw yield of 8.37 t ha-1. Planting methods influenced harvest index significantly (P≤0.05) during both the years (Table 3). DSR-ridge and TR-recommended practice produced 10 and 22 %, 4 and 3 % more harvest index (%) over TR-farmer practice during 2014 and 2015, respectively. The maximum harvest index (31.50 %) was observed with DSR-ridge that was followed TR-recommended practice whereas, the lowest harvest index of 27.48 % was noted in DSR-broadcast having a similar trend during the second year (Table 3).

The lowest production cost was observed in DSR-broadcast, ridge and drill sowing and highest was in TR-recommended practice followed by TR-farmer practice (Table 4). Economic analysis revealed that during first year the highest net benefit ($ 800.46 ha-1) was obtained in DSR-ridge sowing followed by DSR-drill sowing ($ 692.51 ha-1) while, minimum net benefit ($ 333.56 ha-1) was observed in farmer transplanted rice. Benefit-cost ratio was also highest in DSR-ridge (1.54) and -drill (1.31) whereas, lowest (0.58) in TR-farmer practice. Similar trend was noted in the second year of study (Table 5).

Planting techniques have paramount role on growth and grain yield contributing parameters e.g. like plant height, population density, filled or unfilled grains per panicle, panicle length and 1000-grain weight and grain yield. Our research findings revealed a non-significant behavior among planting methods on plant height (Das et al., 2015; Iqbal et al., 2019). However, this study indicated more height in all DSR methods with maximum in DSR-ridge, which might be attributed to better growth of the plants on ridges (Jamil et al., 2017). Similarly, all the DSR methods resulted in maximum productive tillers m-2 than transplanting method either TR-famer or -recommended practice. This is owed mainly because of optimum seed rate directly applying in the field that leads to recruitment of ideally required plant population, as it evades nursery raising, and then it’s transplanting which is a strenuous job due to scorching and inhospitable weather condition in which laborers transplant hurriedly without fulfilling the optimum planting density. Some of earlier studies carried in past also reported more number of tillers m-2 achieved in DSR methods as compared to transplanting in puddled fields (Rashid et al., 2009; Sudhir et al., 2007). However, among these varying methods, maximum tiller number was observed in DSR-ridge and it might be ascribed to enhanced surface area availability with more porous and loose soil, eventually enabling the rice crop to absorb and uptake mineral nutrients in sufficient quantity along with water more effectively and efficiently (Zhang et al., 2003).

Panicle length showed a non-significant behavior under different planting methods. Some of previously

 

Table 4: Production cost (US $ ha-1) of different planting methods.

 

Table 5: Economics of different planting methods and their impact on grand income, net profit and benefit cost ratio for 2014 and 2015.

 

conducted studies also concluded that DSR-ridge planting, DSR flat planting either line or broadcast and puddled transplanting showed non-significant behavior on panicle length, with DSR-ridge having highest panicle length (Iqbal et al., 2019). Almost similar findings were reported by Naresh et al. (2013) while comparing three DSR methods with transplanted rice that supports our results. Highest number of filled grains per panicle was achieved with DSR-ridge and this enhanced number of filled grains might be attributed to better vegetative growth on ridges that promoted higher assimilates translocation during the grain filling stage (Song et al., 2009). Maximum sterility (%) was recorded in TR-farmer practice, and one of the previous research also reported higher sterility percentage in transplanted rice as compared to DSR planting methods (Javaid et al., 2012). 1000-grain weight was maximum in DSR-ridge and it might be owing to better root growth and development on ridges which produced healthier panicles with thick grains. Comparatively heavier grains recorded in this method might be due to more water retention in ridges for nutrient transportation during physiological maturity (Yuan-zhi, 2015). Zhang et al. (2003) also concluded higher grain weight in ridge sowing over conventional rice transplanting.

Paddy yield and HI (%) are the most vital parameters greatly affected by various crop establishment methods and are directly linked to other allometric components like plant population, filled grains panicle-1, 1000 grain weight and sterility. In current study all these traits were higher in DSR-ridge and this might be due to higher chlorophyll content of flag leaf, slowing of leaf senescence, higher photosynthetic efficiency (Ting et al., 2013), more root biomass development and more root vitality (Dan-Ying et al., 2008), increased tillering, enhanced leaf area index and eventually resulting in higher paddy yield and HI (Feng et al., 2010). Lower paddy yield in TR methods might be affected by subsurface hard pan hindering and impeding root growth and development, and ultimately affect the crop growth and grain yield. Yuan-zhi (2015) and Iqbal et al. (2019) also concluded higher paddy yield in ridge sowing over transplanted rice, drill and broadcast sowing techniques. All types of DSR methods were more profitable, due to low input cost and higher yield, as compared to puddled TR-planting methods. Some of the earlier studies also reported more profits extracted from DSR as compared to transplanting methods in Pakistan and other countries (Iqbal et al., 2019; Singh et al., 2004).

 

Conclusions and Recommendations

On the basis of current study it may be concluded that among all the treatments, DSR-ridge and DSR-drill proved to be the best to obtain the maximum paddy yield and net profit. Thus, to harvest maximum economical paddy yield a farmer may opt any of these two dry seeding planting methods depending upon the type of available farm machinery, equipment and soil.

 

Novelty Statement

Dry-seeded rice (DSR) is contemporary rice produc-tion technology which escapes the strenuous job of rice seedling transplanting in puddled soil. Refine-ment of DSR production technology especially plant-ing techniques is an important aspect addressed in current study, and it was concluded that DSR–ridge and –drill sowing are best alternative options that can be adopted by rice growers across the globe to har-vest maximum benefits.

 

Author’s Contribution

SI and UBK conducted the experiments in field, recorded data and drafted the manuscript. NI drafted introduction. Whereas, MUS compiled the data and AI wrote material and methods. MR did statistical analysis. MS supervised the trials, and THA revised and improved the language of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

 

References

Akhgari, H., 2004. Rice agronomy, fertilization, and nutrition. Islamic Azad University Press, Rasht, Iran, pp. 376 (In Persian).

Ali, R.I., N. Iqbal, M.U. Saleem and M. Akhtar. 2012. Effect of different planting methods on economic yield and grain quality of rice. Int. J. Agric. App. Sci., 4(1): 28-34.

Aslam, M., 2016. Agricultural productivity current scenario, constraints and future prospects in Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric. 32(4): 289-303. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2016.32.4.289.303

Aslam, M., S. Hussain, M. Ramzan and M. Akhter. 2008. Effect of different stand establishment techniques on rice yields and its attributes. J. Anim. Plant Sci., 18(2-3): 80-82.

Bhushan, L., K. Jagdish, J.K. Ladha, R.K. Gupta, S. Singh, A. Tirol- Padre, Y.S. Saharawat, M. Gathala and H. Pathak. 2007. Saving of water and labor in a rice wheat system with no-tillage and direct seeding technologies. Agron. J., 99: 1288-1296. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2006.0227

Bouman, B.A.M. and T.P. Tuong. 2001. Field water management to save water and increase its productivity in irrigated lowland rice. Agric. Water Manage., 49: 11-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(00)00128-1

Bouyouces, G.J., 1962. Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analysis of soils. Argon. J., 53: 464-465. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1962.00021962005400050028x

Cabangon, R.J., T.P. Tuong and N.B. Abdullah. 2002. Comparing water input and water productivity of transplanted and direct seeded rice production systems. Agric. Water Manage., 57: 11-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(02)00048-3

Chapman, H.D. and P.F. Pratt. 1961. Methods of analysis for soils, plants and waters. University of California, Los Angeles, 60-61: 150-179.

Chauhan, B.S., A.S.K. Abeysekara, M.S. Wickramarathe, S.D. Kalatunga and U.B. Wickrame. 2014. Effect of rice establishment methods on weedy rice (Oryza sativa L.) infestation and grain yield of cultivated rice (Oryza sativa L.) in Sri Lanka. Crop Prot., 55: 42-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2013.09.008

Dan-Ying, W., H. Bo, Z. Xiu-Fu, S. Guo-Sheng, X. Chun-Mei and F. Guan-Fu. 2008. Influence of rhizosphere oxygen concentration on rice root growth. Acta Agron. Sin., 34: 803-808. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00803

Das, G.C., S.C. Samanta, P. Biswas, N.K. Saha and J. Bhattacharya. 2015. Effects of sowing methods on yield attributes and yield of aus rice under the tidal ecosystem. J. Biosci. Agric. Res., 4(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.18801/jbar.040115.37

Dawe, D., 2005. Increasing water productivity in rice-based systems in Asia–past trends, current problems, and future prospects. Plant Prod. Sci., 8: 221-230. https://doi.org/10.1626/pps.8.221

Economic survey of Pakistan. 2019. Govt. Pakistan finance division economic advisory wing Islamabad, pp. 21. http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_20/02_Agriculture.pdf (accessed 10th Oct. 2020).

Farooq, M., K.H.M. Siddique, H. Rehman, T. Aziz, D.J. Lee and A. Wahid. 2011. Rice direct seeding: Experiences, challenges and opportunities. Soil Till. Res., 116: 260-267.

Farooq, M., S.M.A. Basra and S.A. Asad. 2008. Comparison of conventional puddling and dry tillage in rice wheat system. Paddy Water Environ., 6: 397-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-008-0138-6

Feng, Z., W. Dan-Ying, X. Chun-Mei, Z. Wei-Jian, L. Feng-Bo, M. Hai-Jun and Z. Xiu-Fu. 2010. Response of morphological, physiological and yield characteristics of rice (Oryza sativa L.) to different oxygen-increasing patterns in rhizosphere. Acta Agron. Sin., 36: 303-312. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.00303

Iqbal, S., U.B. Khalid, M.U. Saleem, A. Iram, N. Ahmad, N. Iqbal, M. Sabar and T.H. Awan. 2019. Agronomic efficiency and economics of crop establishing techniques and nitrogen application in fine aromatic rice (Oryza sativa). Int. J. Agric. Biol., 22: 1347-1355.

Jamil, M., S.S. Hussain, M.A. Qureshi, S.M. Mehdi, M.Q. Nawaz and Q. Javed. 2017. Rice yield improvement through various direct seeding techniques on moderately salt affected soil. J. Anim. Plant Sci., 27: 848-854.

Javaid, T., I.U. Awan, M.S. Baloch, I.H. Shah, M.A. Nadim, E.A. Khan, A.A. Khakwani and M.R. Abuzar. 2012. Effect of planting methods on the growth and yield of coarse rice J. Anim. Plant Sci., 22: 358-362.

Kjeldahl, J., 1883. A new method for the determination of nitrogen in organic matter. Z. Anal. Chem., 22: 366-382.

Laary, J.K., W. Dogbe, P.O. Boamah and J. Agawini. 2012. Evaluation of planting methods for growth and yield of “digang” rice (Oryza sativa L.) under upland condition of Bawku, upper east region, Ghana. ARPN J. Agric. Biol. Sci., 7: 814-819.

Ladha, J.K., V. Kumar, M.M. Alam, S. Sharma, M. Gathala, P. Chandna, Y.S. Saharawat and V. Balasubramanian. 2009. Integrating crop and resource management technologies for enhanced productivity, profitability, and sustainability of the rice-wheat system in South Asia. Integrated crop and resource management in the rice wheat system of South Asia. Int. Rice Res. Inst., pp. 69-108.

Mahajan, G., B.S. Chauhan, J. Timsina, P.P. Singh and K. Singh. 2012. Crop performance and water and nitrogen-use efficiencies in dry-seeded rice in response to irrigation and fertilizer amounts in northwest India. Field Crops Res., 134: 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2012.04.011

Naresh, R.K., A.K. Misra and S.P. Singh. 2013. Assessment of direct seeded and transplanting methods of rice cultivars in the western part of Uttar Pradesh. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. Bus. Manage., 1: 1-8.

Olsen, S.R., C.V. Cole, F.S. Watanabe and L.A. Dean. 1954. Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. USDA Circ., 939: 19.

Rashid, M.H., M. Alam, M. Khan and J.K. Ladha. 2009. Productivity and resource use of direct seeded and transplanted rice in puddled soils in rice-rice and rice-wheat ecosystems. Filed Crops Res., 113: 274-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2009.06.004

Saleem, M.U., N. Iqbal, S. Iqbal, U.B. Khalid, A. Iram, M. Akhter, T. Latif and T.H. Awan. 2020. Reduced water use and labor cost and increased productivity of direct seeded basmati rice in Punjab, Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric., 36(2): 603-611. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2020/36.2.603.611

Singh, S., R.P. Tripathi, P. Shrama and R. Kumar. 2004. Effect of tillage on root growth, crop establishment and economics of rice. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 74: 300-304.

Song, C., C. Shenguan and C. Xin, 2009. Genotypic differences in growth and physiological responses to transplanting and direct seeding cultivation in rice. Rice Sci., 16: 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1672-6308(08)60071-2

Steel, R.G.D., J.H. Torrie and D.A. Dickey. 1997. Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw Hill Book Co., Inc. New York, USA.

Sudhir, Y., M.S. Gill and S.S. Kukal. 2007. Performance of direct seeded basmati rice in loamy sand in semi arid subtropical India. Soil Till. Res., 97: 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2007.09.019

Ting, H., L. Zhun, Y. Lin, H. Hui, L. Jian-xia, Z. Hua-bin, C. Yang and H. Huang. 2013. Effects of ridge-bed cultivation on physiological characteristics of flag leaf and grain yield during grain filling. J. Hunan Agric. Univ. Nat. Sci., 1: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1238.2013.00001

Tuong, L., 2008. Studies on direct-seeding adaptability of Cambodian rice cultivars and development of cultivars with good eating quality. PhD thesis, Science of Plant and Animal Production, United Graduate School of Agricultural Science, Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Japan.

U.S. Salinity Lab. Staff, 1954. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. USDA Hand book No. 60, Washington, DC, USA.

Walkley, A., 1947. A critical examination of a rapid method for determining organic carbon in soils effect of variations in digestion conditions and of inorganic soils constituents. Soil Sci., 63: 251-264. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-194704000-00001

Yuan-zhi, Y., 2015. Effects of ridge tillage on photosynthesis and root characters of rice. Chilean J. Agric. Res., 75(1): 35-41. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-58392015000100005

Zhang, X.F., D.Y. Wang and S. Guo-sheng. 2003. Effects of rice ridge cultivation on grain yield and quality and its physiological and ecological mechanisms. Chinese J. Rice Sci., 17: 343-348.