IMPROVING WATER USE EFFICIENCY OF RICE TO
COPE WITH CLIMATE CHANGE AND WATER
SCARCITY IN NORTH SINAI
Gehan G. Abdel-Ghany
Water requirement unit, Desert Research Center El-Mataria, Cairo, Egypt
Key Words: Drought rice – drip irrigation – ETa - WUE – Investment ratio
ABSTRACT
A field experiment was conducted using modern irrigation system
such as trickle irrigation system for irrigation a new variety of drought
resistant rice (Oraby3) under Balouza (latitude 31o 3\ N and Longitude
32o 36\ E), condition in North Sinai through two seasons,(i.e,2017 and
2018). This study includes three irrigation water requirements which
represent three deficits, (i.e., ETC 20%, 40% and 50%) as a depletion of
free available water as a major treatment. Three distances between drip
lines, (i.e., 20, 30 and 40cm) were designed as sub-main treatment. Three
replicates were taken in split plot design as a statistical program (statistic
software version 9 (Analytical Software, 2008)). The objective of this
work is trying to implement some of water deficits in computing water
consumptive use of drought resistant rice (Oraby 3, Oryza sativa L and
maximizing water use efficiency to save more water quantities under
climate change circumstances in the experimental area of Balouza.
Results revealed that actual evapotranspiration could be reduced 3.75 %
when applying 20% of irrigation water deficit comparing with 50%. Also
yield increased 31.62%, 35.55% and 33.63% for grain, straw and
biological yield, respectively. The Same trend was noticed with the space
between the dripper lines, water consumption increase by increasing the
spaces between laterals by 4.73% for 40 cm compared with 20 cm. The
results indicated that, the highest seasonal ETa value was recorded at
D3C3, (i.e., 795.21mm), treatment while the lowest ETa was recorded
with D1C1, (i.e., 751.67mm) treatment. The results indicated an increase
in WUE with a decrease in both the depletion rate and the distance
between the emitter lines. The highest coefficients in terms of WUE was
the D1C1, (i.e., 0.906) treatment, the WUE values achieved by
D1C1reached to 1kg grains/1m3consumed water which is triple that of
traditional rice which 300 gm/1m3. From the results obtained, it is might
spread the cultivation of drought rice in the desert lands. About 59% of
the consumed water can be saved in relation to the traditional rice
varieties. The saved water can be used to cultivate drought rice for the
sake of an increase in production which estimated with 3715 kg/fed.
Accordingly, the area cultivated with rice and production can be doubled
.So the food gap resulting from the increase in population can be closed.
The highest investment ratio of 1.84,1.92 and 3.77for each of cereal,
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020 93-104
straw and biological crops respectively recorded withD1C3 .Therefor, it
is recommended to plant drought rice with treatment D1C3 under Balouza
conditions.
INTRODUCTION
Water scarcity, caused by the rapidly increasing world population
accompanying increases in water use for social and economic
development, threatens sustainable world crop production that consumes
most of the global water resources, the global water consumption for
irrigation has been steadily growing over the last 50 years and today it
makes 70% of all water consumption (Tian et al., 2017). The great
challenge of the agricultural sector is to produce more food from less
water, which can be achieved by increasing Crop Water Productivity
(CWP) (Zwart and Bastiaanssen 2004). Rice provides livelihood for
about two-thirds of the world population. Conventionally, rice is being
grown under continuous standing water in all phenological stages except
maturity. This method of cultivation of rice utilizes more than 30 to 45%
of the world’s fresh water resources (Humphreys et al., 2005). To meet
the rising food demand from an ever-increasing population, rice
production has to increase by 40% by the end of 2030 (FAO, 2009). The
conventional method of rice production is challenging in today’s scenario
due to water scarcity. The greatest consumer of irrigation water per unit
area is rice. Rice (paddy) is the second most important commodity
worldwide, and rice cropping fields significantly contribute to climate
change since they are a considerable source of methane (Parthasarathi
et. al., 2018). Statistics indicate that the water consumption of rice
accounts for approximately 54% of the total water consumption (He et
al., 2014). Rice crop is one of the strategic grain crop that Egyptians
depend on for their food. However, the traditional Egyptian varieties are
high water consuming and this does not suit the condition of water
scarcity in Egypt and need adding new cultivated areas of land to meet
increasing population growth. . Water shortage in Egypt and the need to
rationalize it so that we can add new agriculture areas , it is the largest
areas that consume large part of the water have become a need to face
growing and saving water for future generations to add new areas of
agriculture land. We should be develop new rice variety of low
consumption and more accordance with environmental factors. Soil
moisture plays an important role in the water, carbon and energy cycles.
The amount of moisture in soil is an important variable to understand the
coupling of the surface and the atmosphere. The sustainability of
agricultural production depends on conservation and appropriate use and
management of scarce water resources especially in arid and semi-arid
94 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020
areas where irrigation is required for the production of food and cash
crops Douh and Boujelben, 2011. Water resource management and
water availability are among the most important political, social and
economic issues of 21st century in Egypt (Medany et al., 1997).Climate
change may affect food systems in several ways ranging from direct
effects on crop production (e.g. changes in rainfall leading to drought or
flooding, or warmer or cooler temperatures leading to changes in the
length of growing season Gregory et al., (2005). By the end of the 21st
century, the Arab region will face an increase of 2 to 5.5ºC in the surface
temperature. This increase will be coupled with a expected decrease in
precipitation up to 20%. These projected changes will lead to shorter
winters and dryer summers, hotter summers, more frequent heat wave
occurrence, and more variability and extreme weather events occurrence
(IPCC, 2007). Drip irrigation is an irrigation method that saves water
and fertilizer by allowing water to drip slowly to the roots of plants,
either onto the soil surface or directly onto the root zone, through a
network of valves, pipes, tubing, and emitters. It is done through narrow
tubes that deliver water directly to the base of the plant. El-Meseery
(2003) found that drip irrigation for maize in sandy soil saved about 20 to
25% of the water used by applying 80 and 75% of the Etc, respectively,
and no significant difference in crop yield was observed in comparison to
crop yield at application of 100% of Etc. Drip irrigation improved the
aerobic rice yield and water savings by 29 and 50%, respectively
Parthasarathi et al.(2018).Water use efficiency (WUE), measured as the
biomass produced per unit transpiration , describes the relationship
between water use and crop production .In water- limiting condition, it
would be important to produce a high amount of biomass , which
contributes to crop yield using a low or limited amount of water . WUE
can be achieved through integrated farm resources management. On-farm
irrigation water management techniques such as deficit irrigation if
coupled with better cropping patterns together with appropriate cultural
practices, crop water productivities suggest that agricultural production
can be maintained to its current level by using 20 to 40% less water if
new water management practices are adopted (Dehghanisanij et al.,
2006). The WUE or water productivity is the same term for expression
about the number of produced yield units for each irrigation water unit
(m3). The main pathways for enhancing WUE in irrigated agriculture onfarm
are to increase the output per unit of water via aspects of
engineering and agronomic management (Howell, 2006). From here, the
idea of research was the growing rice crop (Araby3) as anew drought –
generated class under sand soil conditions, drip irrigation system and
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020 95
deficit irrigation 20,40 and 50% of free water available, under three
distance of drip lines ,(i.e, 20,30 and40 cm ), in order to rationalize and
raise the efficiency of water use and maximize the production of land
and water units.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The main objective of the present work was to study integrated
system for maximizing the productivity of drought-resistance rice,
(Oraby3 variety) which impact on water unit productivity saving water
consumptive use. Field experiment was carried out in Balouza
experimental station which belongs to Desert research center where it
situated in north Sinai (latitude 31o 3\ N and Longitude 32o 36\ E). The
mechanical and chemical properties of the used soil are shown in Table
(1) according to (Page et al., 1984). The chemical analysis of the used
water is shown in Table (2).The chemical analysis of organic manure is
shown in Table (3).
Table (1). Some physical and chemical properties of the experimental
soil.
Particle size
distribution (%)
Texture
class
EC ds/m
pH
O
M
%
C
a
C
o
3
%
Soluble ions (mmol/l) Available
nutrients
(mg/kg)
Cations Anions
Sand Silt Clay Ca++ Mg++ Na+ K+ CO3
- - HCO3
- SO4
- - Cl- N P K
86.2 5.7 8.1 Sand 3.82 8.02 0.56 8.82 8.2 12.4 16.85 0.75 - 5.4 19.9 12.9 36.4 3.65 144
Table (2). Chemical analysis of irrigation water.
Samples pH
E.C.
(ds/m)
SAR
Soluble cations (mmol/l) Soluble anions (mmol/l)
Ca++ Mg++ Na+ K+ CO3
-- HCO3
- SO4
= Cl-
season st. 1 8.26 1.78 5.3 3.42 3.69 9.9 0.8 0.24 6.48 2.47 8.62
Season nd. 2 8.3 1.8 4.48 3.53 3.35 10.67 0.45 0.5 4.3 4.1 9.1
pH: Acidity, E.C.: Electrical conductivity, dSm-1: dec Siemen per meter, S.A.R: Sodium
adsorption ratio, me/l: mille equivalent per liter
Table (3). Chemical analysis of Farm yard manure.
Analysis of C% N% C/N ratio P% K%
farm yard
manure
23.5 1.5 15.66 0.45 0.48
The treatments comprised two treatments. The first treatment
included three irrigation water deficits from free available water, (i, e.,
20,40 and 50% as soil moisture depletion). The second treatment was
three distance among drip lines, (i.e, 20, 30 and40 cm).were designed.
Three replicates for each treatment were taken in split plot design as a
statistical program (statistic software version 9 (Analytical Software,
2008)).The excrement area well serviced, and then organic fertilizer was
added with the rate of 15 m3 / fed. below the planting lines. Seeds were
soaked in water for 24 hours before planting at 20cm distances by putting
96 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020
3to4 seeds in the hole at a rate of 60 kg/fed. Immediately after planting,
irrigation drip lines were extended over the distance of the experiment
and irrigation was given for the experiment, then another irrigation was
given for the experiment at Sunset. Irrigation continued for the first three
days of the experiment at a rate of twice a day to ensure the germination
of all seeds and neither damaged. Nitrogen fertilization was added at a
rate 200 kg nitrogen per fed. in four doses, the first when preparing the
land for cultivation , the second at 20 days of cultivation , the third at 40
days, and the fourth at 60 days of planting and before expelling the
spikes. After 10 days of planting, it was sprayed with calcium nitrate and
magnesium sulfate 2% at a rate of 2 liters per fed. At the age of 20 days,
sprayed with amino acid, potassium hamate, trace elements, calcium
nitrate and magnesium sulfate, while spraying with potassium sulfate
2%was carried out at 65 days of planting. After days from planting crop
production was measured as, weight of plant kg/fed. grain , straw and
biological yield. Water consumptive use was calculated using the
following equation of Israelson and Hansen (1962).
CU= ((M2-M1)×dp×D) ÷100
Where:
CU = Consumptive use (mm). Such CU is an estimate of actual
evapotranspiration of the crop i.e. actual ET crop.
D = Depth (in mm) of the irrigated soil under consideration.
dp = Bulk density (g/cm3) of the soil in the relevant soil depth.
M2 = Percentage of moisture in soil (w/w) following maximum irrigation
within the relevant soil depth.
M1 = Percentage of soil moisture (w/w) before next irrigation (within the
relevant depth).
Soil moisture content was gravimetrically determined for 3 depths;
0-20, 20-40 and 40-60 cm, immediately before and after 24 hours of
irrigation. The actual evapotranspiration (ETa) for each stage as well as
for the total season were determined. Irrigation water use efficiency
(WUE) was calculated as the ratio of grain, straw and biological yield
(kg. fed. -1) devided the total irrigation water volume applied per fed. (m3
fed. -1) seasonally. It was expressed as kg grain, straw or biological yield
per cubic meters of irrigation water (Howell, 2006).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Effect of depletion and lateral distance on rice actual
evapotranspiration.
To obtain the actual water consumptive use (ETa), the soil moisture
% was determined gravimetrically on dry basis just before and 24 hours
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020 97
after irrigation. By studying the effect of the treatments on water
consumption, the results in tables ( 4 and 5) showed that the treatments
had no effect in the germination stage , in order to unify the irrigation
parameters. But by applying the treatments , the water consumption
increased with the age of the plants, and the average life stage recorded
the highest water consumption. With an increase in the depletion rate, the
increased rates were 4.42-10.71, 1.2-3.05and 2.08-3.06 %for first season
and 4.4-6.83 , 1.3- 3.8and 2.07-3.39 %for the second season of
development stage , mid stage and late stage respectively compared with
depletion ratio 20%, these results agree with Naeem and Rai(2005) who
found that total water applied (mm)to wheat 214.8 and 251.42for 50 and
70% ASMD respectively .The same effect was observed for the distance
between the lateral , water consumption increased by increasing the
distance between laterals by ratio 1.2-3.34, 0.85-1.58and 0.54-1.28% for
the first season, while the increase was in the second season 1.55- 2.76,
0.75-1.84 and 0.82-1.48% for each of the stages development, mid and
late, respectively. Tables mentioned above show the interaction effect of
depletion rate and the distance between the laterals. It was found that the
consumed water increased by increasing both the distance between
laterals and the depletion Percentages, the increase was 10.67-9.63, 4.57-
4.74 and 4.36-4.55% for each of the stages development, mid and late
stage for both seasons respectively, the percentage of increase in total
water consumption was 5.8% for D3C3 and 5.62% for D2C2for both
seasons respectively compared with D1C1treatment751.67mm.
Table (4). Effect of depletion and lateral distance on rice actual
evapotranspiration(First season)
Late Total ETa
Stage,
mm
Mid
stage,
mm
Develop.
Stage,
mm
Initial
Stage,
mm
lines
distance,
cm
depletion
ratio% m3mm /fed.
C1 65.7 206.1 293.61 186.30 751.67 3157.0
D1* C2 65.7 208.9 295.12 187.32 757.08 3179.7
C3 65.7 211.7 297.84 189.98 765.26 3214.1
Mean 65.7 208.9 295.52 189.09 758.0 3183.6
C1 65.7 215.2 296.13 190.58 767.64 3224.1
D2 C2 65.7 218.4 298.88 192.02 775.00 3255.0
C3 65.7 220.8 302.19 192.70 781.37 3281.7
Mean 65.7 218.1 299.07 191.77 774.67 3253.6
C1 65.7 219.1 301.62 192.92 779.37 3273.4
D3 C2 65.7 223.9 304.95 193.53 788.09 3310.0
C3 65.7 228.04 307.03 194.43 795.21 3339.9
Mean 65.7 223.68 304.53 193.63 787.56 3307.77
G. Mean 65.7 216.89 299.71 191.5 773.41 3248.32
L.S.D(0.05) for D 3.98 2.52 5.04 0.43 0.43 1.81
L.S.D(0.05) for C 6.25 1.98 3.95 0.35 0.35 1.47
L.S.D(0.05) for D and C 9.66 3.74 7.47 0.65 0.65 2.74
*D1=depletion 20%,D2=depletion 40%,D3=depletion 50%,C1=20cm, C2=30cm and C3=40cm
98 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020
Table (5). Effect of depletion and lateral distance on rice actual
evapotranspiration(second season)
Late Total ETa
Stage,
mm
Mid
stage,
mm
Develop.
Stage,
mm
Initial
Stage,
mm
lines
distance,
cm
depletion
ratio% m3mm /fed.
D1* C1 65.7 205.61 292.40 185.47 749.19 3146.6
C2 65.7 207.87 294.10 186.45 754.13 3167.4
C3 65.7 210.92 297.27 188.62 762.53 3202.6
Main 65.7 208.13 294.59 186.85 755.28 3172.2
D2 C1 65.7 214.28 295.87 188.44 764.29 3210.0
C2 65.7 217.91 297.63 191.46 772.72 3245.4
C3 65.7 219.98 301.80 192.24 779.73 3274.9
Main 65.7 217.39 298.43 190.71 772.25 3243.43
D3 C1 65.7 218.8 300.73 192.50 777.75 3266.5
C2 65.7 222.84 303.93 193.15 785.62 3299.6
C3 65.7 225.41 306.27 193.90 791.29 3323.4
Main 65.7 222.35 303.64 193.18 784.89 3296.5
G. Main 65.7 215.96 298.89 190.25 770.81 3237.38
L.S.D(0.05) for D 0.13 0.64 0.57 0.59 0.88 3.7
L.S.D(0.05) for C 6.25 0.6 0.56 0.31 1.06 4.6
L.S.D(0.05) for D and C 0.02 1.05 0.97 0.73 1.73 7.27
*D1=depletion 20%,D2=depletion 40%,D3=depletion 50%,C1=20cm, C2=30cm and C3=40cm
Effect of depletion and lateral distance on rice yield
According Table (6) data show that the depletion rate had
significant effect on the yield of cereal , straw and biological crops, as
with the decrease in the depletion rate . Significant increase occurred for
the (grain, straw and biological yield). The percentage of increase that
occurred were 37.3-35.55, 21.1-20.27 and 33.63- 20.64% for grain ,
straw and biological crops at 20% and 40 % depletion rate compared to
50% of available free water this results agree with Venkatesan et al.
(2005) who found that yield reduction was less in 40% stress treatment
compared to 60% stress treatment in various stages and the same trend
was observed for the distance between pipe lines, regularly as by
decreasing the distance between the lines which led to increase the crop
production . The increase rates were 13.81- 13.03 , 7.57 - 7.73 and
13.41- 5.15% each of gain, straw and biological yield when applying
distances 20 and 30 cm respectively compared to distance 40 cm these
results agree with Parthasarathi et al.(2013) who found that increase in
lateral distance from 0.6 to 1.0 m , caused reduction in water availability
to root zone, therefore root biomass is reduced, consequently the lack of
yield. The interfering effect of transaction on productivity (grain, straw
and biological yield) show that the highest productivity were2861.2,
2910.9 and 5772.1kg. with treatment D1C1 and the lowest
productivity1786.5, 1870.9 and3657.4kg. with treatment D3C3. So the
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020 99
increase rates were 60.61, 55.61 and 57.82% for the first season. While
they were 2965.2, 3056.2 and 6021.4 with treatment D1C1 ,while it were
1767.8, 1820.5 and 3588.4 with treatment D3C3 for the second season.
On the other hand when applying 20% depletion rate, grain, straw and
biological yield increased in proportions 38.8, 37.5 -23.1, 23.73, 38.14
and 23.4% at rates of depletion 20 and 40% of available water,
respectively. Reducing the distance between drip hoses led to increase
the yield of grain , straw and biological with 15.82- 16.38, 8.05 -8.31
and16.11- 8.18% at spaces 20 and 30 cm, respectively .While the study
of the interfering between the irrigation lines resulted in an increase in
production at rates of 67.73 , 67.88 and 67.8% for cereal , straw and
biological yields respectively when treatment D1C1achieved the highest
productivity compared to treatment D3C3 which achieved the lowest
productivity .
Table (6) Effect of depletion and lateral distance on rice yield
lines first season second season
distance
depletion
ratio% Biological
yield
kg/fed
straw
kg/fed
grain
kg/fed
Biological
yield
kg/fed.
straw
kg/fed
grain
kg/fed
D1* C1 2861.2 2910.9 5772.1 2965.2 3056.2 6021.4
C2 2342.6 2781.5 5124.2 2712.9 2803.5 5516.3
C3 2528.9 2601.3 5130.2 2594.8 2712.6 5307.5
Main 2577.6 2764.5 5342.2 2757.6 2857.4 5615.1
D2 C1 2490.5 2561.2 5051.7 2568.7 2703.5 5272.1
C2 2388.1 2482.4 4870.5 2471.4 2605.2 5076.6
C3 2236.2 2315.1 4551.2 2297.5 2401.4 4698.9
Main 2371.6 2452.9 4824.5 2445.9 2570.0 5015.9
D3 C1 2104.4 2199.9 4304.1 2180.3 2310.7 4491.1
C2 1983.9 2047.6 4031.6 2012.4 2102.3 4114.6
C3 1786.5 1870.9 3657.4 1767.8 1820.5 3588.4
Main 1958.3 2039.5 3997.8 1986.8 2077.8 4064.7
G. Main 2302.5 2419.0 4721.5 2396.7 2501.7 4898.6
L.S.D(0.05) for D 252.21 1.15 251.82 0.46 0.07 0.46
L.S.D(0.05) for C 197.51 0.62 157.39 0.24 0.10 0.29
L.S.D(0.05) for D and C 373.72 1.44 373.34 0.57 0.16 0.61
*D1=depletion 20%, D2=depletion 40%, D3=depletion 50%, C1=20cm, C2=30cm and C3=40cm
Effect of depletion and lateral distance on rice water use efficiency
In the same direction , the results in table (7) indicated an increase
in the efficiency of water consumption ,due to a decrease of depletion by
rate 36.73,40.79and 38.82 % for grain straw and biological yields in the
first season , when the rate were 44.2,42.85 and 43,51 in the second
season ,this results agree with El-Sayed and Abd El-Monem (2017)
who reached to crop water use efficiency and field water use efficiency
were higher under 30% soil moisture depletion (SMD). Increasing
100 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020
distance between dripper liens decreased WUE 13.72, 13.14
and13.41%for grain, straw and biological yields at the first season
respectively, and 15.2, 15.58 and 15.39% for second season. The best
water use – efficiency was achieved with the treatment D1C1,incease
rate achieved (69.43,64.58and 66.66.95%)for grain, straw and biological
yields with first seasons and 77.18,77.31 and 77.23% for the three crops
with the second season respectively, compared with D3C3.
Table (7) Effect of depletion and lateral distance on rice water use
efficiency
lines first season second season
distance
depletion
ratio% Biological
WUE
straw
WUE
grain
WUE
Biological
WUE
straw
WUE
grain
WUE
D1 C1 0.906 0.923 1.828 0.942 0.971 1.914
C2 0.738 0.875 1.612 0.857 0.885 1742
C3 0.787 0.809 1.596 0.810 0.847 1.657
Main 0.810 0869 1.679 0.870 0.901 1.771
D2 C1 0.773 0.794 1.567 0.800 0.842 1.642
C2 0.734 0.763 1.496 0.762 0.803 1.564
C3 0.681 0.705 1.387 0.702 0.733 1.435
Main 0.729 0.754 1.483 0.755 0.793 1.552
D3 C1 0.643 0.672 1.314 0.668 0.707 1.375
C2 0.600 0.619 1.218 0.609 0.637 1.207
C3 0.535 0.560 1.095 0.532 0.548 1.080
Main 0.593 0.617 1.209 0.603 0.631 1.221
G. Main 0.711 0.747 1.457 0.743 0.775 1.515
L.S.D(0.05) for D 0.79 5.70 0.79 1.09 1.09 2.17
L.S.D(0.05) for C 0.06 2.93 0.06 9.89 9.93 1.98
L.S.D(0.05) for D and C 0.12 6.99 0.12 1.76 1.76 3.52
*D1=depletion 20%, D2=depletion 40%, D3=depletion 50%, C1=20cm, C2=30cm and C3=40cm
The economic return of rice production Investment Ratio, (IR)).
Table (8) show the effect of both moisture depletion rates, the
distance between drip liens, and their effect on the economic return of
rice production. All the components of the costs of rice cultivation and
production were calculated and on the other hand the economic return
was calculated to study the investment ratio (IR)
IR =Economic return/costs
Through the results, the best treatment was D1C3, as it achieved the
highest investment ratio of 1.84,1.92 and 3.77for each of cereal, straw
and biological crops respectively .Therefor, it is recommended to plant
drought rice with treatment D1C3 under Balouza conditions to achieve
the highest investment ratio, where a good moisture distribution was
achieved with this treatment, a accompanied by good crop growth ,as it
happened ,saving the cost of establishing a network of hoses.
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020 101
Table (8): The economic return of rice production Investment Ratio, (IR).
Soil
depletion
Liens
spaces
First season Second season
IR for
grain
IR for
straw
IR for
biological
yield
IR for
grain
IR for
straw
IR for
biological
yield
D1 C1 1.75 1.76 3.49 1.79 1.85 3.46
C2 1.58 1.87 3.45 1.83 1.89 3.72
C3 1.80 1.85 3.64 1.84 1.92 3.77
D2 C1 1.50 1.55 3.05 1.55 1.63 3.18
C2 1.60 1.67 3.28 1.66 1.76 3.42
C3 1.59 1.65 3.23 1.63 1.7 3.34
D3 C1 1.27 1.33 2.60 1.32 1.4 2.71
C2 1.33 1.38 2.71 1.35 1.41 2.77
C3 1.27 1.33 2.6 1.26 1.29 2.51
RECOMMENDATION
From the results obtained, it is might spread the cultivation of
drought rice in the desert lands. About 59% of the consumed water can
be saved in relation to the traditional rice varieties. The WUE values
achieved by D1C1reached to about 1kg grains/1m3consumed water which
is triple that of traditional rice which 300 gm. /1m3. The saved water can
be used to cultivate drought rice for the sake of an increase in production
which estimated with 3715 kg/fed. Accordingly, the area cultivated with
rice and production can be doubled .So the food gap resulting from the
increase in population can be closed. The best treatment under Balouza
condition was D1C3becouse it have the highest investment ratio,
(1.84,1.92 and3.77 for grain, straw and biological crops respectively.
REFERENCE
Dehghanisanij, H. ; T. Oweis and A.S. Qureshi (2006). Agricultural
Water Use and Management in Arid and Semiarid areas: Current
Situation and Measures for Improvement. Annals of Arid Zone.,
45(2): 1-24.
Douh, B. and A. Boujelben (2011) . Improving water use efficiency for a
sustainable productivity of agricultural systems with using
subsurface drip irrigation for maize Zea mays L.), Journal of
Agricultural Science and Technology B1 (JAST), pp 881-888.
El-Meseery, A.A. (2003). Effects of different drip irrigation systems on
maize yield in sandy soil. 11th Annual Conf. Society Misr of
Agriculture Engineering Role in Redu- cing Losses and
Maximizing Production. 15-16 Oct., 2003: 576 – 594
El-Sayed, M.M. and A.M.A. Abd El-Monem (2017). Irrigation
performance and water consumptive use for rice crop grown under
moisture stress at different seed rates, Assiut, Egypt. Middle East
Journal of Agriculture Research ., 6:1273-1284
FAO, (2009). FAO rice price update. [ONLINE] Available at. FAO, 2009.
FAO rice price update. [ONLINE] Available at.
http://www.fao.org/economic/est/publications/rice-
102 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020
publications/the-fao-rice-price-update/en/, Accessed date:
24October 2016.
Gregory, P. J. ; J. S. Ingram and M. Brklacich (2005). Climate change
and food security. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Socity.,
360 (1463): 2139-2148.
He, H.B. ; R. Yang ; B. Jia and L. Chen (2014): Rice photosynthetic
productivity and psii photochemistry under no flooded irrigation.
The Scientific World Journal., 58: 83–96.
Howell, T.A. (2006). Challenges in increasing water use efficiency in
irrigated agriculture international Symposium on Water and Land
Management for Sustainable Irrigated Agriculture, April 4-8, 2006,
Adana, Turkey. p. 11.
Humphreys, E. ; C. Meisner ; R. Gupta ; J. Timsina ; H.G. Beecher;
Tang Yong Lu ; Yadvinder-Singh ; M.A. Gill ; I. Masih ;
Zheng Jia Guo and J.A. Thomposon (2005). Water savings in
rice-wheat systems. Plant Prod. Sci., 8:242-258.
IPCC (2007).Climate Change 2007: The Scientific Basis, Summary for
Policymakers Contribution of Working Group I to the IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report 2007.
Israelson, O.W. and V.E. Hansen (1962). Irrigation principles and
practices, 3rd Ed., John Willey and Sons Inc., New York, USA
Medany, M.A. ; M.M. Wadid and A.F. Abou-Hadid (1997). New
extension system for modern irrigation management in Egypt. Acta
Hort., 562: 407-411.
Naeem Mahmood and Rai Niaz Ahmad (2005), Determination 0f water
requirements and response of wheat to irrigation of different soil
moisture depletion levels .International journal of Agriculture ,
Biology, 7(5): 812-815.
Page, A.L.; R.H. Miller and D.R. Keeney (1984). Methods of Soil
Analysis. part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Second
edition. Agronomy J. 9: 2, Am. Soc. Agron. Inc., Soil Sci. Soc.
Am. Inc. Pub. Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Parthasarathi, T. ; K. Vanitha ; S. Mohandass and E. Vered (2018):
Evaluation of Drip Irrigation System for Water Productivity and
Yield of Rice. Agronomy Journal., 110(6):2378-2389.
Parthasarathi, T. ; S. Mohandass ; S. Senthilvel and E. Vered (2013). Effects
Of Impulse Drip Irrigation On Root Response Of Aerobic Rice
American-Eurasian Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 7(4): 235-240.
Tian, F. ; PengjuYang ; Hongchang Hu and Hui Liu (2017): Energy
balance and canopy conductance for a cotton field underfilm
mulched drip irrigation in an arid region of northwestern China.
Agric. Water Manage., 179(1): 110-121.
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020 103
Venkatesan, G. ; M.T. Selvam ; G. Swaminathan and S.
Krishnamoorthi (2005). Effect of Water Stress on Yield of Rice
Crop. International Journal of Ecology & Development Fall 2005,
Vol. 3, No. F05; Int. J. Ecol. Dev.
Zwart, S. J. and W. G. M. Bastiaanssen (2004): Review of measured crop
water productivity values for irrigated wheat, rice, cotton and
maize. – Agricultural Water Management., 69:115–133.
تحسین کفاءة الأستخدام المائى لل رز المقاوم لمجفاف لیتلاءم مع التغیر
المناخى وندرة المیاه بشمال سیناء
جهان جمال عبد الغنى
مرکز بحوث الصح ا رء
وحدة الأحتیاجات المائیة – قسم کیمیاء وطبیعة الأرضى
تم أج ا رء تجربة حقمیة بمحطة بحوث بالوظة التابعة لمرکز بحوث الصح ا رء بشمال سیناء خلال
عامى 7102 و 7103 لزا رعة صنف جدید من الارز المقاوم لمجفاف )ع ا ربى 3( تحت نظام الرى بالتنقیط
بادارة مائیة اشتممت عمى ثلاث نسب استنفاذ رطوبى, 71 و 01 و 01 % من الماء المیسر المتاح کعامل
رئیسى . وکان العامل التحت رئیسى ثلاث مسافات بین خطوط التنقیط 71 و 31 و 01 سم ,وأخذ ثلاث
مکرا رت تحت کل عامل وکان التصمیم الاحصائى القطع المنشقة مرة واحدة.لاختبار تاثیر العوامل
السابقة عمى الاستیلاک المائى للارز المقاوم لمجفاف تحت ظروف منطقة بالوظة وکذلک کل من
الانتاجیة وکفاءة الاستیلاک المائى لممحصول فى محاولة لتوفیر المیاه وتعظیم کفاءة وحدة المیاة
المستخدمة , لمواجیة ظروف التغی ا رت المائیة ومحاولة حل مشکمة نقص الماء بمصر وتوفیر کمیات میاه
تفى بالتوسع الافقى لمواجیة النمو السکانى وماترتب عمیو من فجوة غذائیة . وقد اشارت النتائج الى نقص
البخر نتح الفعمى بمعدل 3.20 % عند نسبة استنفاذ 71 % مقارنة بنسبة استنفاذ 01 % . کذلک حدثت
ذیادة فى الانتاجیة 30.17 و 30.00 و 33.13 % بالنسبة لمحصول الحبوب والقش والمحصول
البیولوجى عمى التوالى. کما لوحظ نفس الاتجاه فى النتائج بالنسبة لممسافة بین خطوط التنقیط فقد ذاد
الاستیلاک المائى بزیادة المسافة بین خطوط التنقیط بنسبة 0.2 % عند مسافة 01 سم مقارنة بالمسافة
D3C 71 سم بین الخطوط. کما اشارت النتائج الى ارتفاع الاستیلاک المائى الموسمى مع المعاممة 3
200.12 مم ( .کذلک اوضحت النتائج حدوث زیادة فى کفاء (D1C 240.70 مم( مقارنة بالمعادلة 1 (
D1C الاستیلاک المائى بنقص کل من نسبة الاستنفاذ والمسافة بین خطوط التنقیط فحققت المعاممة 1
اعمى نسبة کفاءة استیلاک مائى ) 1.411 ( حیث ان المتر الکعب من المیاة استخدم فى انتاج حوالى 0
کجم من الحبوب وذلک یمثل ثلاثة اضعاف انتاج اصناف الارز التقمیدیة الذى یبمغ 311 جم لکل متر
مکعب من المیاه مما یضع الارز الجفافى فى مصاف الحبوب العادیة کالقمح والذرة من ناحیة کفاءة
الاستیلاک المائى . من النتائج نخمص الى انو یمکن التوسع فى زا رعة الار ا زلجفافى بالمناطق الصح ا رویة
تحت نظام الرى بالتنقیط .حیث تم توفیر حوالى 04 % من المیاه المستیمکة بواسطة اصناف الارز
التقمیدیة التى تستیمک کمیات کبیرة من المیاه من خلال الماء المتوفر یمکن اضافة 3200 کجم/ف.
وبالتالى یمکن مضاعفة کل من المساحة المزروعة ارز وایضا الانتاجیة مما یسیم فى سد الفجوة
أعلاىم حیث حققت نسب D1C الغذائیة,وبحساب نسبة الاستثمار لممعاملات کانت المعاممة 3
0.30 و 0.47 و 3.22 مع کل من الحبوب والقش والمحصول البیولوجى عمى التوالى لذلک ینصح بزا رعة
.D1C أرز ع ا ربى 3 تحت ظروف بالوظة مع المعاممة 3
104 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (9) 2020
