Abstract
A field experiment was conducted for two years to find out best water management practice to mitigate methane emission from the rice-fields. Continuously flooded conditions yielded two major flushes of methane emission and on an average resulted in relatively higher rate of methane emission (2.20 and 1.30 mg m(-2) hr(-1), respectively in 2005 and 2006) during the kharif season. The methane flux was reduced to half (1.02 and 0.47 mg m(-2) hr(-1), respectively in 2005 and 2006) when rice fields were irrigated 2-3 days after infiltration of flood water into the soil. Irrigating the field at 0.15 bar matric potential reduced seasonal methane flux by 60% (0.99 and 0.41 mg m(-2) hr(-1), respectively in 2005 and 2006) as compared to completely flooded conditions, without any decline in grain yield (60 q ha(-1)).
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 4
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous flooding gave two methane flushes and relatively higher emission rates in 2005 and 2006.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0 - Treatment
- Continuously flooded conditionse0
- Outcome
- methane emissione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 2.20 and 1.30 mg m(-2) hr(-1)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Continuously flooded conditions yielded two major flushes of methane emission and on an average resulted in relatively higher rate of methane emission (2.20 and 1.30 mg m(-2) hr(-1), respectively in 2005 and 2006)”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation 2-3 days after infiltration halved methane flux relative to continuous flooding.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- irrigated 2-3 days after infiltration of flood water into the soile0
- Outcome
- methane fluxe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 1.02 and 0.47 mg m(-2) hr(-1)e0
- Comparator
- Continuously flooded conditionse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The methane flux was reduced to half (1.02 and 0.47 mg m(-2) hr(-1), respectively in 2005 and 2006) when rice fields were irrigated 2-3 days after infiltration of flood water into the soil.”
e1“Continuously flooded conditions”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigating at 0.15 bar matric potential reduced seasonal methane flux by 60% relative to complete flooding.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Irrigating the field at 0.15 bar matric potentiale0
- Outcome
- seasonal methane fluxe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 60%e0
- Comparator
- completely flooded conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Irrigating the field at 0.15 bar matric potential reduced seasonal methane flux by 60% (0.99 and 0.41 mg m(-2) hr(-1), respectively in 2005 and 2006) as compared to completely flooded conditions”
t0“rice”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 0.15 bar matric potential maintained grain yield at 60 q ha(-1) relative to complete flooding.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- Irrigating the field at 0.15 bar matric potentiale0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- without any declinee0
- Value
- 60 q ha(-1)e0
- Comparator
- completely flooded conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Irrigating the field at 0.15 bar matric potential reduced seasonal methane flux by 60% (0.99 and 0.41 mg m(-2) hr(-1), respectively in 2005 and 2006) as compared to completely flooded conditions, without any decline in grain yield (60 q ha(-1)).”
t0“rice”
The same questions in other papers
flooding · environment: emissions · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →irrigation · environment: emissions · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
108 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →irrigation · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 201 in the opposite direction · 64 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- positive
1,167 papers more in this group
See all 1,171 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.