Biomass yield of rice (Oryza sativa) cultivars as affected by applied silicate in an Inceptisol

Arkaprava Roy; Siba Prasad Datta; Mandira Barman; Somnath Bhattacharyya; Mahesh Chand Meena; Debasis Golui; Vivek Kumar Trivedi; Ranabir Chakraborty

doi:10.56093/ijas.v90i9.106630

Authors

Arkaprava Roy ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
Siba Prasad Datta Professor and Principal Scientist, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
Mandira Barman Scientist, Division of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry ,ICAR-IARI, New Delhi
Somnath Bhattacharyya Professor, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, West Bengal
Mahesh Chand Meena Senior Scientist, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
Debasis Golui ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
Vivek Kumar Trivedi Research associate, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
Ranabir Chakraborty Ph D scholar, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v90i9.106630

Keywords:

Cultivars, Grain yield, Rice, Silicate, Straw yield

Abstract

West Bengal is the largest rice (Oryza sativa L) producing state of India. In spite of leading the world in rice production, India lags behind in terms of rice productivity. In view of limited information, a pot experiment was conducted at ICAR-IARI, New Delhi during kharif, 2018-19 to evaluate the response of important rice cultivars to applied silicate. The experiment was conducted with four rice cultivars (one indigenous aromatic and rest three HYVs) and three doses of sodium metasilicate (0, 250 and 500 mg/kg) using an alluvial Inceptisol collected from West Bengal. Results indicated that the grain and straw yield was increased up to 40.7 and 18.1%, respectively, due to application of silicate. Rice cultivars, on the basis of grain yield, can be arranged in the order: Khitish (20.8 g/ pot)> Satabdi (17.6 g/pot) > IR-36 (15.4 g/pot) >Badshabhog (3.72 g/pot). The highest and the lowest straw yield was recorded with Badshabhog (70.1 g/pot) and IR-36 (14.6 g/pot), respectively. Rice cultivars showed differential responses in terms of yield to applied silicate. It can be concluded that application of sodium metasilicate can be one of the effective options for enhancing rice yield in the alluvial Inceptisol of West Bengal.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Agostinho F, Tubana B, Martins M, and Datnoff L. 2017. Effect of different silicon sources on yield and silicon uptake of rice grown under varying phosphorus rates. Plants 6(3):35–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/plants6030035

Bhat J A, Shivaraj S M, Singh P, Navadagi D B, Tripathi D K, Dash P K, Solanke A U, Sonah H and Deshmukh R. 2019. Role of silicon in mitigation of heavy metal stresses in crop plants. Plants 8(3): 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/plants8030071

Cornelis J T, Delvaux B. 2016. Soil processes drive the biological silicon feedback loop. Functional Ecology 30(8): 1298–310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12704

Datta A, Ullah H, Ferdous Z. 2017. Water management in rice. Rice Production Worldwide, pp 255–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47516-5_11

Chauhan B S, Jabran K and Mahajan G (Eds). Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Datta S P, Rao A S and Ganeshamurthy A N. 1997. Effect of electrolytes coupled with variable stirring on soil pH. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science 45(1): 185–7.

Fleck A T, Mattusch J and Schenk M K. 2013. Silicon decreases the arsenic level in rice grain by limiting arsenite transport. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 176: 785–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.201200440

Haynes R J. 2019. What effect does liming have on silicon availability in agricultural soils?. Geoderma 337: 375–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.09.026

India Today. 2018. Top 10 rice producing states in India: Rice production and area under cultivation. https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/top-10-riceproducing-states-in-india-rice-production-and-area-undercultivation-1343024-2018-09-18(accessed 31 December, 2019).

Jackson M L. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, India.

Meena V D, Dotaniya M L, Coumar V, Rajendiran S, Kundu S and Rao A S. 2014. A case for silicon fertilization to improve crop yields in tropical soils. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B: Biological Sciences 84(3): 505–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40011-013-0270-y

Murali A A, Ramasamy S, Mohamed A. 2007. Impact of post panicle initiation nutrient management on the yield of rice (var. ADT-36). Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences 3(6):638–41.

Rao G B, PI P Y and Syriac E K. 2017. Silicon nutrition in rice- A review. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 6(6): 390–2.

Rao G B, PI P Y and Syriac E K. 2018. Effect of silicon fertilization on yield attributing factors, yield and economics of rice cultivation. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 7(2): 1381–3.

Savant N K, Snyder G H and Datnoff L E. 1996. Silicon management and sustainable rice production. Advances in Agronomy 58: 151–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60255-2

Singh K, Singh K R, Singh J P, Singh Y and Singh K K. 2006. Effect of level and time of silicon application on growth, yield and its uptake by rice (Oryza sativa). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 76(7): 410–3.

Sommer M, Kaczorek D, Kuzyakov Y and Breuer J. 2006. Silicon pools and fluxes in soils and landscapes—a review. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 169(3): 310–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200521981

Statista. 2019. Principal rice exporting countries worldwide in 2018/2019. https://www.statista.com/statistics/255947/top-rice-exporting-countries-worldwide-2011/ (accessed 29 December, 2019).

U S Department of Agriculture. 2019. World Agricultural Production. Washington DC. https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/

(accessed 29 December, 2019) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1144/geosci-29-11