Water quality of irrigated rice crop and yield as a function of drainage season
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X40621Keywords:
Oryza sativa L., Water fountains, Cultivar IRGA 424 RIAbstract
The State of Rio Grande do Sul (RS) has intense water use for irrigated rice production, generating concerns regarding the quality of this water, which will be returned to the water sources at the end of the harvest. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the quality of water from rice fields and yield as a function of drainage time. The treatments were: T1: drainage from full flowering (R4) according to Counce et al. (2000); T2: 7 days after R4; T3: 14 days after R4; T4: 21 days after R4; T5: 28 days after R4; T6 (control): 35 days after R4. At the moment of drainage the leaf height was quantified and the water samples were then collected, where the pH, electrical conductivity, nitrogen (ammonium and nitrate), phosphorus, potassium and sodium solution in solution were quantified of grain yield. All parameters related to water quality studied are in accordance with CONAMA Resolution 357/2005. The productivity results indicate that it is possible to drain irrigated rice from 14 days after full flowering.
Downloads
References
COUNCE, P.A. et al. A uniform, objective, and adaptative system for expressing rice development. Crop Science, Madison, v.40, n.2, p.436-443, 2000.
IRGA. Série histórica. http://www.irga.rs.gov.br/upload/20170724112804produco_rs_historica.pdf. Acesso em: 29 set 2017.
MACHADO et al. Consumo de água e perdas de nutrientes e de sedimentos na água de drenagem inicial do arroz irrigado. Ciência Rural, v. 36, n. 1, 2006.
MARCOLIN, E. et al. Produtividade de grãos de arroz irrigado em função da drenagem da água a partir do florescimento pleno. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 15 de março de 2019.
MUNDSTOCK. Água de irrigação e drenagem do perímetro de irrigação do Arroio Duro de 2005 a 2012. Cachoeirinha: IRGA/Divisão de Pesquisa, 2015. 96 p.
REUNIÃO TÉCNICA DA CULTURA DO ARROZ IRRIGADO. Arroz irrigado: recomendações técnicas da pesquisa para o Sul do Brasil. / Sociedade Sul-Brasileira de Aroz Irrigado. Farroupilha, RS. SOSBAI, 2018. 205 p.
SARTORI, G.M.S. et al. Rendimento de grãos e eficiência no uso de água de arroz irrigado em função da época de semeadura. Ciência Rural, v.43, n.3, p.397-403, 2013.
TEDESCO, M.J. Análises de solo, plantas e outros materiais. 2 ed. Porto Alegre : Departamento de Solos, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, 1995.
MARCHEZAN, E. et al. Qualidade de água dos rios Vacacaí e Vacacaí-Mirim no Estado do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Ciência Rural. 2009, v.39, n.7, p.2050-2056.
HAMER, A.J. et al. Amphibian decline and fertilizers used on agricultural land in south-eastern Australia. Agriculture, Ecosystems&Environment, v.102, n.3, p. 299-305. 2004.
SOSBAI. Recomendações Técnicas Da Pesquisa Para O Sul Do Brasil. Bento Gonçalves: Pallotti, v. 32, 2018, 189 p.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
