 |
| Border effect in rice |
Effect of Border on Yield Component
and Yield of Rice
M.A.K. Mian, Principal Scientific
Officer,
Agronomy Division, Bangladesh
Agricultural Research Institute, Gazipur 1701
Introduction
Border is the outer margin or side of a plot or crop field. Outer margin
of crop field is exposed more as compared to inner side of the plot. Plants in
the outermost row next to the unplanted alley showed a general increase in
yield and growth as compared with the center row. This phenomenon has been
referred to as 'border effect'. Main causes of border effect are considered to
be advantageous environmental factors above the ground, such as higher solar
energy, air circulation etc. Consequently, crop plants of border get more light
and more opportunity for gaseous exchange like carbon di oxide intake and
release of oxygen. Transpiration of crop plant is also influenced by border.
Crop plants of border get more aeration as compared to inner side of the plot.
More light enhanced photosynthesis of crop plants of border. More photosynthesis
results in more dry matter production in the plant system ultimately
contributes to higher yield of crop. Thus physiological process of yield
formation of crop plant is influenced by border effect. There are scientific
evidences of border effect on crop yield. But research on border effect of crop
as well rice in Bangladesh is scanty. Therefore the study was undertaken to quantify
the border effect on rice.
Materials and Method
The experiment was conducted at Agronomy Research Field of Bangladesh
Agricultural Institute, Gazipur during 2019 to quantify the border effect on
rice. The experiment was set in a randomized complete design with twenty four
replication. The treatment was non border (T1) and border (T2).
Unit plot size was 5 m×5 m. Plant spacing was maintained as 25 cm ×15
cm (row to row 25 cm and hill to hill 15 cm).
The land was prepared well by power tiller. Twenty eight day old
seedling of BRRI dhan71 was transplanted on 28 July 2019 and the crop was
harvested on 25 October (border) and 28 October (non border). The crop was
fertilizer as per recommendation of BRRI (2014). Other intercultural operations
were done as and when necessary. Date of anthesis and maturity (with
photograph) was recorded. Data was
recorded of border (2 lines around the plot) and non border (excluding 2 lines
around the border) treatment. Sixty hill per treatment was cut randomly at the
base of rice plant for yield component. Hundred panicle was selected for number
of grains/panicle and length of panicle measurement. Grain growth was
calculated on the basis of 1000-grain weight and duration of maturity required
after anthesis. Yield was recorded on the basis border (2 lines around the
plot) and non border (excluding 2 lines around the border) area of each plot
(total 24). Grain yield of rice was adjusted at 12% moisture level. Collected
data was subjected to statistical analysis and significant level indicated the
variation between two treatments.
Results and Discussion
Plant height, tillers/plant, length of panicle, total grains/panicle,
filled grains/panicle, unfilled grains/panicle, weight of 1000-grain, duration
of maturity after anthesis, grain growth, grain weight/panicle, grain yield,
straw yield and harvest index of rice were significantly varied between non
border and border treatment (Table 1 and Table 2). Tillers/hill, Length of
panicle, total grains/panicle, Filled grains/panicle were observed higher in
border treatment but plant height and unfilled grain/panicle were higher in non
border treatment (Table 1). The weight of 1000-grain, grain growth, grain
weight/panicle, grain yield, straw yield and harvest index was recorded higher
in border treatment whereas duration of maturity after anthethis was lower as
compared to non border treatment (Table 2). Grain yield increased 8% due to
border effect as compared to non border.
Conclusion
Border effect was estimated at 8% in border area. Two lines of rice
hill should be excluded for harvesting of plot yield. Otherwise 8% yield will
be deducted in the border area (2 lines of hill around the plot) for actual
yield calculation.
Table 1.
Plant height, tillers/plant, length of panicle, total grains/panicle, filled
grains/panicle and
unfilled grains/panicle of rice
under non border and border treatment (2019)
Treatment
|
Plant height (cm)
|
Tillers/hill (no.)
|
Length of panicle
(cm)
|
Total grains/panicle (no.)
|
Filled grains/panicle
(no.)
|
Unfilled grains/panicle
(no.)
|
Non Border
|
122
|
12.0
|
26.57
|
164
|
121
|
42
|
Border
|
117
|
14.20
|
27.92
|
193
|
179
|
12
|
LS
|
**
|
**
|
**
|
**
|
**
|
*
|
CV (%)
|
1.57
|
9.52
|
3.58
|
2.53
|
4.27
|
17.05
|
LS=Level of significance,
**Significant at 1% level of probability and * Significant at 5% level of
probability
Table 2. Weight
of 1000 grain, duration of maturity after anthesis, grain growth, grain weight/panicle,
grain yield, straw yield and
harvest index of rice under non border and border treatment
(2019)
(2019)
Treatment
|
Weight of 1000 grain
(g)
|
Duration of maturity after anthesis (days)
|
Grain growth (mg/grain/day)
|
Grain weight/
Panicle (g)
|
Grain yield
(t/ha)
|
Straw yield
(t/ha)
|
HI (%)
|
Non Border
|
25.78
|
30 (120)
|
0.86
|
3.09
|
6.12
|
8.67
|
41.36
|
Border
|
26.03
|
27 (127)
|
0.96
|
4.47
|
6.61
|
8.96
|
42.45
|
LS
|
**
|
**
|
*
|
*
|
**
|
*
|
**
|
CV(%)
|
1.62
|
5.11
|
9.22
|
6.13
|
8.56
|
10.25
|
2.64
|
Values in parenthesis indicates the
total life period,
LS=Level of significance, **Significant at 1%
level of probability and * Significant at 5% level of probability
