Evaluation of NEB Mixed Urea in Rice Cultivation

Transcription

1 Available online at JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENTS VOLUME 2, ISSUE 10, OCTOBER 2017, PAGE: RESEARCH ARTICLE Evaluation of NEB Mixed Urea in Rice Cultivation M N Ahmed 1, M Iqbal 1, A Islam 1*, P K Saha 1, A L Shah 1, J C Biswas 1 1. Soil Science Division, Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI), Gazipur, Bangladesh. Corresponding author: A. Islam address: aminbrri@gmail.com Abstract Several field experiments were conducted at BRRI farm, Gazipur in T. Aman (wet season) 2012, Boro (dry season) and Boro with urea alone or mixed with NEB a blend of natural root exudates. Intent of those trials was to evaluate the efficiency of NEB in saving of urea fertilizer for rice cultivation. Experimental design was randomized complete block (RCB) with three replications. Two experiments in T. Aman 2012, one in Boro were conducted with ten treatments comprising different combinations of urea and NEB. Different doses of urea (0, 50, 75 and 100% of recommended dose) were applied with and without NEB in Boro All plots received phosphorus (P), potassium (K) and sulphur (S) as blanket dose. Results of all experiments revealed that urea control treatment gave significantly lower grain and straw yield than all urea treated plots. But among the urea treated plots there were no significant yield difference between with NEB and without NEB. Effect of NEB on grain weight, filled grain and unfilled grain of Boro rice were insignificant. It is concluded that NEB was failed to save urea fertilizer for rice cultivation. Keywords: NEB, T. Aman, Boro, efficiency of urea, grain yield, straw yield Citation to This Article: Ahmed MN, Iqbal M, Islam A, Saha PK, Shah AL, Biswas JC. Evaluation of NEB Mixed Urea in Rice Cultivation. Journal of Scientific Achievements, October 2017; 2 (10): INTRODUCTION Rice is the major cereal food crop in Bangladesh [1]. Population of Bangladesh will reach million in 2050, when 44.6 MT of clean rice will be required. In , the country acquired a rice surplus of about 2 MT. However, maintaining the current surplus of rice in the coming decades is a great challenge [2] and proper soil fertility management is one of the prime importances in an endeavor to increase crop productivity [3]. Fertilizer plays an important role in modern agriculture, especially for increased rice production by supplying single or multiple nutrients [4]. Use of nitrogen (N) efficiently is an important complementary strategy for improving rice yield and reducing cost of production [5]. It is also a prime nutrient for protein and carbohydrate synthesis, growth and development of plant body. The effect of nitrogen fertilization on rice growth and grain productivity are derived from several biochemical, physiological and morphological processes in the plant system. On the other hand, N is the most limiting nutrient in BRRI farm soil and the highest amount of rice yield reduction occurred due omission of this nutrient [6]. Being cheaper and prompt visible response of N than phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) fertilizers, farmers applies more N for rice production [7] and thus create nutrients imbalance in many cases. The imbalanced fertilizer use in Bangladesh agriculture is speeding up nutrients depletion [8-10], as well increase the cost of production which becomes a major problem in rice production. Required optimum N rate varies with soil type, yield potential of cultivar, levels of P and K in the soil, water management practices, and intensity of diseases, insects, and weeds. Use of appropriate N rate is important not only for obtaining maximum economic return, but also to reduce environmental pollution [11]. Nitrogen use-efficiency in lowland rice is about 32% and the rest of N is lost as leaching, volatilization, surface runoff, and denitrification [12-13]. Nitrogen recovery efficiency varied 48-55% with urea deep placement and 30-35% with surface broadcast of prilled urea [14]. The USA based manufacturer Agmor Incorporated claimed that NEB is a blend of natural root exudates that can help to stop N loss from soil and also increase the population of beneficial microbes in soil. According to this manufacturer mixing of NEB with urea can save up to 50% of urea fertilizer in rice cultivation. So, we hypothesize that NEB mixed urea may save urea fertilizer in rice cultivation without sacrifice yield. Keeping these points in mind, several experiments were conducted at BRRI farm, Gazipur during T. Aman and Boro seasons to investigate the efficacy of NEB in saving urea fertilizer. ISSN: Page 20

2 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS Several experiments were conducted at BRRI farm, Gazipur to evaluate the efficacy of NEB for increasing the efficiency of urea which may save urea in rice cultivation. Experimental designs were RCB with three replications. Treatments used in different seasons and years are described below: 2.1 T. Aman 2012 In this season, two experiments were conducted with ten treatments in each and the treatment details are presented in Table 1. The seedlings used in these experiments were treated with NEB in the seed bed. Detail seed bed management presented in Table 2. However, in seed bed B, C, D and E seed was sown after mixing with NEB at 26 June, The second seed bed treatment was done only for seed bed C at 15 days after sowing as NEB spray. Transplanting was done at 25 July with 29 days old seedlings of BRRI dhan49. The urea fertilizer was applied in three equal splits; basal, at 21 and 40 days after transplanting. In field condition NEB was mixed with urea fertilizer during application of respective treatments as described in Table 1. Another experiment was also conducted with the same pattern consisting at two N levels (N 70 and N 100). Harvesting was done on 11 November, Table 1. Experimental treatment details in T. Aman 2012 Experiment 1(103A) Experiment 2 (103B) T 1 = N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed A) T 1 = N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed A) T 2 = N 50 + NEB 0 (seed bed A) T 2 = N 70 + NEB 0 (seed bed A) T 3 = N NEB 0 (seed bed A) T 3 = N NEB 0 (seed bed A) T 4 = N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed A) T 4 = N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed A) T 5 = N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed B) T 5 = N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed B) T 6 = N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed C) T 6 = N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed C) T 7= N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed D) T 7= N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed D) T 8= N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed E) T 8= N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed E) T 9= N NEB 750 (seed bed A) T 9= N NEB 750 (seed bed A) T 10= N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed C) T 10= N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed C) Table 2. Seed bed management with NEB in T. Aman 2012 Seed bed Seed bed NEB rate Seed bed application time Seed Bed A Seed Bed B 500 ml NEB During sowing Seed Bed C 500 ml NEB During sowing and 15 days after sowing Seed Bed D 100 ml of NEB-SB10 During sowing Seed Bed E 1000 ml of NEB-SB67 During sowing 2.2 Boro Ten treatments consist of five Urea-N levels (0, 40, 80, 120 and160 kg/ha) and five NEB treated urea-n levels (0, 20, 40, 60 and 80 kg/ha) were compared. Only one NEB treatment (250ml NEB- three times application) was used in the experiment. Forty-seven day olds seedlings of BRRI dhan29 was transplanted on 22 January, The urea was applied in three equal splits: 1/3 rd at basal, 1/3 rd at 21 days after transplanting (DAT) and rest of the urea at 50 DAT. In field condition NEB was mixed with urea fertilizer during application of respective treatments. Harvesting was done on 13 May, Boro Different doses of urea (0, 50, 75 and 100% of recommended dose) were applied with and without NEB in this season. Urea was applied in three equal splits like as Boro Blanket doses of P, K and S were applied in all experiments as basal. All plots were surrounded by 30 cm earthen levee to avoid contamination among the treatments. Intercultural operations were performed as and when necessary. 2.4 Initial soil sample collection and analysis Soil sample was collect from experimental field at 0-15cm depth and analysis was done for soil texture, soil ph, Nitrogen %, available phosphorus, exchangeable potassium and available sulphur (Table 3). 2.5 Data collection and analysis Crop cut was done from 5 m 2 area at the centre of each plot for grain yield and straw yield. On the other hand, 16 hills from four corners (4 from each corner) excluding border line were harvested for counting number of tiller and panicle per square meter. Ten panicles were collected randomly from each plot to estimate the percent of filled and unfilled grains. ISSN: Page 21

3 2.6 Statistical analysis All collected data were analyzed for ANOVA and mean comparisons using statistics10 software. Table 3. Soil properties of experimental of experimental field Parameters Tested value Soil texture Clay-loam Sand (%) 25 ± 1 Silt (%) 31 ± 1 Clay (%) 44 ± 2 Soil ph 6.84 ± 0.07 Organic matter (%) 1.96 ± 0.13 Total nitrogen (%) 0.10 ± 0.01 Available phosphorus (ppm) 26 ± 4 Available potassium (cmol/kg) 0.22 ± 0.04 Available sulphur (ppm) 32 ± 4 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 T. Aman 2012 Application of 50 and 100 kg N/ha with and without NEB treatment did not influence on tiller/m 2 and panicle/m 2 production (Table 4). Similarly, seed bed NEB treated seedling also produced tiller/m 2 and panicle/m 2 statistically at par without NEB treated seedling in fertilizer control condition. Straw yield also followed similar trend as tiller and panicle production. Seedlings without NEB treated at 50 kg N/ha produced grain yield similar as NEB treated treatment at this particular rate and even at 100 kg NEB treated treatment except treatment T 3, T 5 and T 6. When we consider N 50 and N 100 the panicle/m 2 statistically similar but the grain yield obtained comparatively low with N 100 than N 50. Table 4. Performance of NEB on yield and yield components of rice, T. Aman 2012, 103A Treatment Tiller/m 2 Panicle/m 2 Grain yield (t/ha) Straw yield (t/ha) T 1 = N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed A). 241 c 233 c 3.42 de 3.97b T 2 = N 50 + NEB 0 (seed bed A) 279 ab 274 ab 4.58 abc 6.07a T 3 = N NEB 0 (seed bed A) 282 ab 274 ab 3.85 cde 6.60a T 4 = N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed A) 271 abc 267 abc 3.99 bcd 5.48a T 5 = N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed B) 274 abc 269 abc 3.24 e 5.59a T 6 = N 50 + NEB 750 (seed bed C) 263 abc 254 abc 3.20 e 5.83a T 7= N 50 + NEB 750(seed bed D) 268 abc 262 abc 4.65 ab 5.74a T 8= N 50 + NEB 750(seed bed E) 279 ab 274 ab 4.85 a 6.20a T 9= N NEB 750 (seed bed A) 295 a 286 a 4.50 abc 6.50a T 10= N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed C) 253 bc 242 bc 3.27 de 4.34b CV (%) Different letter shows significant difference at 0.05 level of significance Results of experiment 103B revealed that at N control condition, NEB treated and untreated seedlings produced similar tiller, panicle and rice grain (Table 5). 70 and 100 kg/ha with and without NEB produced statistically identical rice grain and panicle/m 2 with and without NEB treated seedling. It means 70 kg N/ha might be enough for desired yield in T. Aman season. The overall influence of NEB management in seed bed and main field together did not show its superiority over urea treatment in T. Aman season. It needs farther study for conclusive results. Table 5. Performance of NEB on yield and yield components of rice, T. Aman 2012, 103B Treatment Tiller/m 2 Panicle/m 2 Grain yield (t/ha) Straw yield (t/ha) T 1 = N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed A). 234 d 230 c 2.93 b 3.88b T 2 = N 70 + NEB 0 (seed bed A) 267 bcd 262 abc 4.56 a 5.83a T 3 = N NEB 0 (seed bed A) 301 ab 286 a 4.64 a 5.91a T 4 = N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed A) 276 abc 267abc 4.74 a 6.13a T 5 = N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed B) 285 ab 279 a 4.66 a 6.04a T 6 = N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed C) 263 bcd 254 abc 4.77 a 5.79a T 7= N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed D) 285 ab 276 a 4.48 a 5.52a T 8= N 70 + NEB 750 (seed bed E) 309 a 292 a 4.85 a 5.95a T 9= N NEB 750 (seed bed A) 276 abc 270 ab 4.67 a 5.98a T 10= N 0 + NEB 0 (seed bed C) 241 cd 233 bc 2.99 b 3.76b CV (%) Different letter shows significant difference at 0.05 level of significance 3.2 Boro There was no significant grain yield difference between urea and NEB treated urea application at their equivalent N levels (Table 6 Fig. 1). However, N rates significantly influenced grain yield of Boro rice. Rice yield progressively increased with the increase of N ISSN: Page 22

4 rates up to 120 kg/ha and then slightly decreased. However, increment of grain yield after 80 kg N/ha was not significant. NEB treated or untreated 80 kg N/ha had statistically identical grain yield. Results of Boro season indicated that NEB had no effects on the efficacy of urea in rice production. But Boro rice yield was increased due to N fertilizer rates only rather than NEB. Table 6. Performance of NEB on tiller/m 2, panicle/m 2 and grain yield of rice, Boro Treatment Tiller/m 2 Panicle/m 2 Grain yield (t/ha) N d 153 cd 2.34 c Urea-N 40 kg 198 bc 189 b 3.83 b Urea-N 80 kg 224 b 216 b 4.64 a Urea-N 120 kg 280 a 272 a 4.95 a Urea-N 160 kg 302 a 292 a 4.83 a N 0 +NEB 147 d 143 d 2.49 c NEB-N cd 179 c 3.19 bc NEB-N bc 201 bc 3.70 b NEB-N b 210 b 3.89 b NEB-N b 209 b 4.75 a CV (%) Different letter shows significant difference at 0.05 level of significance 3.3 Boro Fig. 1. Response of urea and NEB treated urea on yield of rice, Boro Number of tiller and panicle per meter square were significantly lower in urea control plot (Table 7). It was also found that there were no effects of NEB on tiller and panicle production of Boro rice. Similar result was observed in plant height. The highest number of tiller/m 2, panicle/m 2 and the tallest plant was observed with 100% urea application. However tiller and panicle production with 100% and 75% urea application was identical. Urea fertilization significantly increased grain and straw yield of Boro rice compared to urea control plots (Table 8). But NEB mixing with different rates of N could not bring any significant yield advantage with respective dose of N without NEB. Moreover, NEB treated plots gave slightly lower grain yield compared to respective N doses without NEB. Reduction of N dose to 75% (105 kg N/ha) produced similar grain yield with 100% N. There were no significant difference among the treatments for 1000 grain weight, filled grain per panicle and percent unfilled grain (Table 9). Table 7. Performance of NEB on tiller/m 2, panicle/m 2 and plant height of rice, Boro Treatments Tiller/m 2 Panicle/m 2 Plant height cm T1= Urea control 198 c 188 c 87 d T2=100% urea* 296 ab 283 ab 117 a T3=100%urea+NEB@ 675ml/ha 325 a 308 a 110 b T4=75% urea 271 b 266 ab 105 b T5=75% urea+neb@ 675ml/ha 284 ab 267 ab 105 b T6=50% urea 259 b 245 b 99 c T7=50% urea+neb@ 675ml/ha 254 b 243 b 105 b % CV *100% Urea = 140 kg N/ha. Different letter shows significant difference at 0.05 level of significance ISSN: Page 23

5 Table 8. Performance of NEB on grain and straw yield of rice, Boro Treatments Grain yield (t/ha) Straw yield (t/ha) T1= Urea control 2.78 c 3.35 c T2=100% urea* 5.83 a 6.90 ab T3=100%urea+NEB@ 675ml/ha 5.48 ab 7.22 a T4=75% urea 5.84 a 6.18 ab T5=75% urea+neb@ 675ml/ha 5.49 ab 6.70 ab T6=50% urea 5.43 b 5.66 b T7=50% urea+neb@ 675ml/ha 5.12 b 5.34 b % CV *100% Urea = 140 kg N/ha, Different letter show significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. Table 9. Performance of NEB on 1000 grain weight, filled grain per panicle and % unfilled grain of rice, Boro Treatments 1000 grain wt (g) Filled grain/pan %unfilled grain T1= Urea control T2=100% urea* T3=100%urea+NEB@ 675ml/ha T4=75% urea T5=75% urea+neb@ 675ml/ha T6=50% urea T7=50% urea+neb@ 675ml/ha % CV LSD NS NS NS *100% Urea = 140 kg N/ha. Different letter shows significant difference at 0.05 level of significance. 4. CONCLUSION NEB had no added benefit for rice cultivation in T. Aman and Boro season. Special attention should be given in formulating NEB for effective performance under wetland rice condition. Nitrogen doses for rice cultivation varied from kg/ha depending on season and year. Acknowledgement We deeply acknowledge ACI Bangladesh Ltd. for providing financial support for this study. REFERENCES 1. A Islam and MA Muttaleb Effect of Potassium Fertilization on Yield and Potassium Nutrition of Boro Rice in a Wetland Ecosystem of Bangladesh. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 62 (11), MS Kabir, MU Salam, A Chowdhury, NMF Rahman, KM Iftekharuddaula, MS Rahman, MH Rashid, SS Dipti, A Islam, MA Latif, AKMS Islam, MM Hossain, B Nessa, TH Ansari, MA Ali, and JK Biswas Rice Vision for Bangladesh: 2050 and Beyond. Bangladesh Rice J. 19 (2), Islam MN, Sarkar MIU, Ali MH, Islam A, Saha PK IPNS Based Fertilizer Management for Rice in Coastal Zone of Bangladesh. Bangladesh J. Agril. Res. 41 (4): M Iqbal, M Akter, JC Biswas and A Islam Performance of Nitrogen Phosphorus compound fertilizer in Boro rice. International Journal of Medical Investigation 6(1): MN Islam, A Islam and JC Biswas Genotypic Variations in Modern Rice and Nitrogen Use Efficiency. International Journal of Agricultural Papers 1 (2), M. Kamrunnahar, Shahrear Ahmad, Mosud Iqbal, Mahmuda Akter, Aminul Islam Effects of Some Major Plant Nutrients on Growth and Yield of Wet Season Rice. Journal of Scientific Achievements 2(4): Islam A, Chandrabiswas J, Karim AJMS, Salmapervin M, Saleque MA Effects of potassium fertilization on growth and yield of wetland rice in grey terrace soils of Bangladesh. Res. Crop Ecophysiol. J. 10 (2): [3] 8. Ali MM, Mian MS, Islam A Interaction effects of sulphur and phosphorus on wetland rice. Asian J. Plant Sci. 3 (5): Panaullah GM, Timsina J, Saleque MA, Ishaque M, Pathan ABMBU, Connor DJ, Saha PK, Quayyum MA, Humphreys E, Meisner CA Nutrient uptake and apparent balances for rice-wheat sequences: III. Potassium. J. Plant Nutr. 29 (1): ISSN: Page 24

6 10. Rijpma J, Islam MF Nutrient mining and its effect on crop production and environment in Bangladesh. ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl (Access on ). 11. Fageria NK. and Baligar VC, Methodology for evaluation of lowland rice genotypes for nitrogen use efficiency. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 26: Fageria, N.K., Baligar, V.C. (2001) Lowland rice response to nitrogen fertilization. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 32, Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418: S. M. Mofijul Islam, Yam Kanta Gaihre, A. L. Shah, Upendra Singh, Md Imran Ullah Sarkar, M. Abdus Satter, Joaquin Sanabria, Jatish Chandra Biswas Rice yields and nitrogen use efficiency with different fertilizers and water management under intensive lowland rice cropping systems in Bangladesh. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 106: ISSN: Page 25