140 likes | 287 Views
New technologies to save water for irrigated rice in the Sahel Michiel de Vries, Vincent Bado and Abdoulaye Sow Africa Rice Center (WARDA) Sahel Station - Senegal Africa Rice Congress 31 July – 4 August 2006, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Back ground.
E N D
New technologies to save water for irrigated rice in the Sahel Michiel de Vries, Vincent Bado and Abdoulaye Sow Africa Rice Center (WARDA) Sahel Station - Senegal Africa Rice Congress 31 July – 4 August 2006, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Back ground • 80% of rice production in Senegal is irrigated. • In irrigation agriculture in the SRV, water accounts for 25% of production costs • Improving water use efficiency will reduce costs and improve production efficiency • Water-less or aerobic rice can save water (Bouman et al. 2005 a, b), and is grown under saturated soil conditions, • without standing water and without water stress. Introduction
Problem definition • Hypothesis: “Water-less rice can be beneficial for farmers is the Senegal River Valley” • Issues to be addressed: • Salinity and high temperatures may be a problem in the Sahel • Weeds may form an important constraint • Genetic material needs to be adapted to new conditions • Yield levels • To this end an on-station experiment was done Introduction
Treatments • Irrigation treatments: (main plot) • Completely aerobic; • Aerobic until PI, then flooded; • Flooded until PI, then aerobic and • Completely flooded • Weed control treatments: (sub-plot) • Herbicide applied at 21 DAS; • Herbicide applied at 35 DAS and • no herbicide Methods
Measurements • Measurements taken • Volume water irrigated • Water and salinity level in plots • Weed population • Plant growth data • Yield components Methods
Plot water level Results
Flood water salinity Threshold value 3.5 mS/cm Results
Volume water applied Results
Effects of water treatment Results Same letters are not different according to LSD, α=0.05
Effects of Herbicide treatment Results Same letters are not different according to LSD, α=0.05
Water x Herbicide interaction Results Same letters are not different according to LSD, α=0.05
Conclusion • Under complete aerobic: 25% yield loss compared to flooded, 40% water saving • Under flooded-aerobic system no sig. yield loss, 34% water saving • Strong herbicide x water treatment interaction • Opportunities to save on water! Conclusion
Next steps • On-station: • In-depth research N x Weed reactions on irrigation • Varietal screening of 42 advanced lines (20 NERICAs) • On-farm: • Collaboration with National partners • Sites along Senegal River • Socio-economic study Conclusion
Thank you, Merci, Dieuredieuf, Asante sana ! Special thanks for technical assistance to: Mandieye Top, Gougna Gaye & Malick Sarr