1) Rice is a staple food for nearly half the world's population. However, rice production faces challenges like water scarcity, weeds, labor shortages, and climate change. 2) Crop establishment refers to the process of seeding, germination, emergence and seedling development until the plant can grow to maturity. It involves transplanting, direct seeding, drum seeding, system of rice intensification, and other techniques. 3) Studies have compared the yield, economic benefits, and energy efficiency of different crop establishment methods like transplanting, direct seeding, zero tillage, and found transplanting and drum seeding generally perform better than direct seeding alone.

1. Crop
Establishment
Techniques
in
Rice
Pardeep Sagwal
Research Scholar
Dept. of Agronomy
CCS HAU Hisar

2. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one
of most important food crop
and nearly one-half of the
worlds population dependent
on it.
2
Rice
2011-12
Area
(m ha)
Production
(m tones)
Productivity
(kg/ha)
India 42.86 95.98 2239
Haryana 1.23 3.75 3044
Source: Dept. of Agri. and Cooperation, Govt. of India
Source: Food and agriculture organization
Production share (2012)

3. Challenges in rice production
• Water
• Weed
• Labour
• Energy
• Soil health
• Climate change
• Cost of cultivation
3
Source: Kumar and Ladha, 2011
Advances in Agronomy

4. It is estimated that one
hectare of productive land
is lost every 7.67 seconds.
4

5. Fig. 1. Trend of farm labour wages (US $ day -1) in selected Asian countries
5
Source: Kumar and Ladha, 2011
Advances in Agronomy

6. What is crop establishment ?
• It is a sequence of events that includes
seeding, seed germination, seedling
emergence and development to the stage
where the seedling could be expected to
grow to maturity
• It’s a complex interaction
6
Source: Jat et al., 2010
Technical Bulletin CIMMYT

7. Crop Establishment Techniques in Rice
7
Transplanting
Manual
Mechanical
System of rice intensification
Parachute rice
Direct seeded rice
Drum seeding
Zero tillage DSR
Aerobic rice
DSR in prepared soil

8. 8

10. Rice Ecosystems
I. Irrigated lowland(55%)
II. Rainfed lowland (30%)
III. Rainfed upland(12%)
IV. Deep water (3%)
10
Source: Pathak et al., 2011
Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences
Fig. 2. Distribution of rice area under various
water management practices in India

11. Fig. 3. Factors affecting the choice of rice establishment methods.
Source: Farooq et al.,2011
Soil & Tillage Research
TPR: transplanting
WS: wet seeding
DS: dry seeding.
11

12. Table 1. Yield attributes and yield of rice as affected by establishment
methods and varieties (Pooled data of 2 years)
Treatments
No. of
tillers/m2
Grains/
panicle
Plant dry
weight/m2
Grain yield
(q/ha)
Straw
Yield(q/ha)
Crop establishment methods
Direct seeding 243.91 67.46 673.25 32.48 42.66
Drum seeding 254.91 84.41 737.91 38.50 51.67
Transplanting 262.16 95.25 777.66 40.18 53.04
CD (P= 0.05) 9.36 3.71 16.10 0.88 4.35
Varieties
Taraori Basmati 227.66 73.66 700.54 25.67 38.24
Pusa Basmati 1 251.11 79.72 725.67 38.98 49.87
Pusa Sugandha 4 262.55 86.00 736.68 40.82 52.12
Pusa Sugandha 5 273.33 90.11 755.55 42.74 56.66
CD (P= 0.05) 6.87 2.46 10.50 0.90 5.30
12
Source: Yadav et al., 2013 at BijnorIndian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

13. Table 2. Agronomic parameters of rice as affected by different
establishment techniques
Source: Baloch et al., 2007 at Dera Islam Khan
Rice Science
Treatments and
parameters
Direct
seeding
on flat
Transplanting
on flat
Direct
seeding
on ridges
Transplanting
on ridges
Parachute
planting
Plant population
(seedlings/m2)
30.5 a 21.0 b 22.5 b 12.0 d 17.0 c
No. of panicles
per m2
424.5 b 710.5 a 307.5 c 463.0 b 677.5 a
No. of spikelets
per panicle
152.5 b 192.5 a 150.5 b 193.0 a 196.2 a
Spikelet sterility 15.7 a 11.4 bc 12.0 b 9.2 c 9.2 c
1000-grain weight 30.3 32.0 30.7 31.2 31.8
Grain yield (t /ha) 4.0 b 6.5 a 5.1 ab 6.5 a 6.5 a
13

14. Table 3. Economic evaluation for stand establishment techniques
in rice
14
Treatments
Grain
yield
(t/ha)
Variable
cost
(Rs/ha)
Gross
income
(Rs/ha)
Total
cost
(Rs/ha)
Net
income
(Rs/ha)
B:C
Direct seeding on flat 4.08 560 20900 16340 4470 1.27
Transplanting on flat 6.58 1800 33400 17670 15730 1.89
Direct seeding on ridges 5.10 560 26000 16430 9570 1.58
Transplanting on ridges 6.50 1800 33000 17670 15330 1.86
Parachute planting 6.55 2580 33250 18450 14800 1.80
Source: Baloch et al., 2007 at Dera Islam Khan
Rice Science

15. Table 4. Effect of establishment methods on yield components,
grain yield, straw yield and economics in rice
Establishment
methods
Panicle
m-2
Grains/
panicle
Grain
yield
(t ha-1)
Growth
duration
(days)
Gross
return
($ ha-1)
Gross
margin
($ ha-1)
B:C
Aman 2006
CT-DrumR 323 a 87 b 6.0 a 135 c 1042 625 2.5
CT-TPR 1 244 b 118 a 6.1 a 151 a 1035 595 2.4
CT-TPR 2 248 b 114 a 6.1 a 143 b 993 590 2.5
Boro 2006-07
CT-DrumR 392 a 77.8 c 6.4 a 141 c 1126 680 2.5
CT-TPR 1 327 b 87.4 b 6.0 b 162 a 1057 552 2.1
CT-TPR 2 328 b 96.2 a 6.5 a 152 b 1125 654 2.4
15
Source: Rashid et al., 2009 at Gazipur
Field Crop Research
CT: Conventional tillage
TPR: Transplanted rice

16. Table 5. Yields and protein content in grain and straw as influenced
by crop establishment methods in rice
Methods of
crop
establishment
Yield (q ha-1)
2003
Yield (q ha-1)
2004
Protein content
in grain (%)
Protein in
straw (%)
Grain Straw Grain Straw 2003 2004 2003 2004
Dry seeding 37.26 47.15 38.41 42.53 7.36 7.07 3.25 3.33
Drum seeding 54.53 65.61 50.62 58.57 7.36 7.05 3.27 3.33
Zero tillage 44.53 53.23 42.27 48.27 7.45 7.03 3.38 3.40
Transplanting 54.72 66.02 55.29 63.94 7.43 7.13 3.30 3.38
C.D. at 5 % 1.31 1.56 4.12 4.43 NS NS NS NS
16
Source: Yadav et al., 2010 at Faizabad
Pakistan Journal of Weed Science Research

17. Table 6. Effect of different stand establishment techniques on
rice yield and its attributes.
Treatments
Plant
height
Productive
tillers/m2
Number
of grains/
Panicle
1000
grain
wt.(g)
Yield
(t/ha)
ZT transplanting 136.1 a 219.0 ab 96.50 a 23.17 a 4.80 a
Direct seeding 126.6 c 231.7 a 72.67 b 22.17 b 3.36 c
Brown manuring 128.2 bc 186.3 c 93.83 a 22.83 ab 4.23 b
Transplanting on bed 129.2 bc 206.7 abc 95.73 a 23.17 a 4.43 b
Conventional
transplanting
130.2 b 200.2 bc 98.57 a 23.50 a 4.72 a
LSD (0.05) 2.782 26.65 8.851 0.9676 0.2844
17
Source: Aslam et al., 2008 at Sheikhupura
Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences
ZT: Zero tillage

18. Table 7. Effect of different stand establishment techniques on
economic returns in rice
18
Establishment
methods
Paddy
yield
(t/ha)
Cost
(Rs/ha)
Income
(Rs/ha)
Profit
(Rs/ha)
Benefit
cost ratio
ZT transplanting 4.80 59660 114000 35643 1.91
Direct seeding 3.36 55057 79800 5793 1.14
Brown manuring 4.23 60402 100462 21310 1.66
Transplanting on beds 4.43 60452 105212 26010 1.74
Conventional planting 4.72 61045 104975 25180 1.72
Source: Aslam et al., 2008 at Sheikhupura
Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences
ZT: Zero tillage

19. Table 8. Yield of direct seeded rice and wheat under various
tillage sequences
19
Tillage
sequence
Rice yield (Mg ha -1) Wheat yield (Mg ha-1)
2006 2007 2008 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
ZT-ZT 1.06 b 1.84 b 2.94 a 2.725 a 3.72 a 4.45 a
ZT-CT 1.06 b 2.16 ab 2.59 ab 1.850 b 3.92 a 3.62 b
CT-ZT 1.31 a 2.10 ab 2.47 ab 2.373 a 3.98 a 3.31 b
CT-CT 1.31 a 2.26 a 2.35 b 1.910 b 3.80 a 3.86 ab
Source : Mishra and Singh, 2012 at Jabalpur
Soil & Tillage Research
CT: Conventional tillage
ZT: Zero tillage

20. Table 9. Effect of tillage sequence on economic returns and
energy efficiency in direct seeded rice-wheat system
20
Tillage
sequence
Economic returns Energy parameters
Total
variable
cost
($ ha-1)
Net
returns
($ ha-1)
B:C
Input
energy
(Mj ha-1)
Output
energy
(Mj ha-1)
Output-
input
Energy ratio
ZT-ZT 537.3 b 1086.7 a 2.97 a 33906 c 106872 a 3.18 a
ZT-CT 577.5 a 780.5 b 2.33 b 35979 b 91287 b 2.53 b
CT-ZT 545.9 b 709.9 c 2.27 b 35979 b 84961 c 2.35 b
CT-CT 283.9 a 786.1 b 2.33 b 38187 a 91272 b 2.38 b
Source : Mishra and Singh, 2012 at Jabalpur
Soil & Tillage Research

21. Table 10. Rice grain yield under different establishment systems
over different years
Establishment System
Grain yield (kg ha-1)
2004 2005 2006 2007 Mean
WS conventional 10,652 8170 8874 7859 8954 a
WS stale 9437 7342 8265 8047 8273 b
WS no-till stale 10,420 8175 8352 9029 8994 a
DS conventional 10,802 8410 9117 8398 9130 a
DS no-till stale 10,294 8292 10,042 9454 9520 a
ANOVA results NS NS NS NS
21
Source: Pittelkow et al., 2012 at Devis
Field Crop Research
WS: Water seeded
DS: Drill seeded

22. Table 11. Vegetative growth and yield parameters of paddy as
influenced by mechanical and manual transplanting
Source: Manjunatha et al., 2009 at Gangavati
Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Science
Parameters
2003-04 2004-05 Mean data
Machine Manual Machine Manual Machine Manual
Plant Height(cm) 47.8 46.0 46.0 45.0 46.9 45.5
No. of tillers/hill 17.26 17.40 18.64 17.86 17.94 17.64
No. of panicles/m2 476.5 483.6 460.0 473.2 468.2 478.4
No. of grains/5 panicles 374 385 382 379 378 382
Grain yield (q/ha) 59.45 59.85 48.58 47.70 54.01 53.77
Straw Yield (t/ha) 6.92 6.11 7.48 6.76 7.20 6.43
Harvest Index 0.46 0.49 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.45
Gross returns (Rs/ha) 37,400 37435 31018 30310 34209 33872
22

23. Table 12. Yield components in rice under various tillage and
seeding treatments.
Treatments
Panicle
number(m-2)
Number of grains
(Panicle-1)
1000-grain
weight
2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006
Puddled TPR 253 b 242 b 117.6 a 121.0 a 26.8 27.2
Unpuddled TPR 249 b 236 b 117.3 a 121.2 a 26.8 27.1
No-till TPR 244 b 238 b 116.8 a 119.2 ab 26.7 26.8
Puddled drum seeded rice 274 a 266 a 108.0 b 116.2 b 26.2 26.9
No-till drum seeded rice 269 a 260 a 105.3 b 111.8 b 26.1 26.5
23
Source: Saharawat et al., 2010 at Kaul
Field Crop Research
TPR: Transplanted rice

24. Table 13. Yield of rice and wheat with various tillage and seeding
treatments
Treatments
Grain Yield(Mg ha-1) Average
net
returns
of system
(US $ ha-1)
Rice Wheat System
2005 2006 2005-06 2006-07 2005-06 2006-07
Puddled TPR 7.28 a 7.06 a 4.93 b 4.74 12.21 ab 11.80 a 686 c
Unpuddled TPR 7.23 a 6.92 ab 5.14 ab 4.81 12.37 a 11.73 a 712 b
No-till TPR 7.16 a 6.86 ab 5.32 a 4.92 12.48 a 11.78 a 721 a
Puddled drum
seeded rice
6.73 b 6.61 b 5.32 a 4.86 12.05 b 11.47 ab 704 b
No-till drum
seeded rice
6.67 b 6.52 b 5.33 a 4.92 12.00 b 11.44 b 720 a
24
Source: Saharawat et al., 2010 at Kaul
Field Crop ResearchTPR: Transplanted rice

25. 25
Fig. 4. Effect of tillage systems on total weed biomass at
crop harvest
WS12: Wet season 2012 (a)
DS13: Dry season 2013 (b)
CONT: Conventional tillage
ZT: Zero tillage
Source: Chauhan, 2013 at Los Banos
Crop Protection

26. 26
Source: Chauhan, 2013 at Los Banos
Crop Protection
WS12: Wet season 2012 (a)
DS13: Dry season 2013 (b)
CONT: Conventional tillage
ZT: Zero tillage
Fig. 5. Effect of tillage systems on rice panicle numbers

27. 27
Fig. 6. Effect of tillage systems on rice grain yield
WS12: Wet season 2012 (a)
DS13: Dry season 2013 (b)
CONT: Conventional tillage
ZT: Zero tillage
Source: Chauhan, 2013 at Los Banos
Crop Protection

28. Table 14. Effect of planting methods on different traits of rice
Yield parameters
Planting methods
D1 TPR D2 DSR D3 DSR D4 DSR
Plant height (cm) 140.86 a 128.11 b 132.82 b 122.7 b
Effective tillers/m2 272.89 b 372.24 a 336.76 ab 328.9 ab
Panicle length 27.67 a 26.11 b 27.12 a 27.06 b
No. of grains/panicle 121.74 a 96.71 b 101.82 b 101.79 b
Sterility % 7.91 b 11.87 a 12.62 a 12.06 a
1000-grain weight 25.91 a 26.80 a 26.62 a 26.26 a
Grain yield 496.16 a 412.29 bc 461.99 ab 67.12 c
28
Akhgari and Kavaini, 2011 at Rashat(Iran)
African Journal of Agricultural Research
D1: Transplanted Rice
D2: Broadcasted DSR
D3: Linear DSR
D4: Hill DSR

29. Table 15. Comparative performance of direct seeded rice(DSR)
and conventional puddled transplanted rice(PTR)
Parameters PTR DSR
Human Labour (Man days) 55-60 35-40
Tractor(Hours) 10-12 5-6
Crop Duration (days) 140-150 130-140
Benefit (Rs/ha) 14000-17000 17000-20000
No. of irrigation 20-25 14-17
Global Warming potential(Mg Co2 eq.) 2.0-4.5 1.3-3.0
29
Pathak et al., 2011 at Jalandhar
Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences

30. Fig. 7. Global warming potential of transplanted and
direct seeded rice
30
Pathak et al., 2011
Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences

31. Table 16. Methane emission as influenced by establishment
techniques
Establishment
techniques
Methane emission (mg plant-1 day -1)
30 DAS 40 DAS 50DAS 60DAS 70 DAS 80 DAS 90 DAS Total
Transplanting 0.104 2.17 2.60 4.42 5.38 5.80 4.10 24.57
SRI 0.161 2.31 2.71 3.29 4.29 5.30 3.96 22.01
Aerobic rice 0.116 1.54 1.66 2.27 2.69 3.10 1.81 13.18
C.D. at 1% 0.007 0.26 0.26 0.66 0.67 1.43 1.22 1.23
31
Source: Jayadeva et al., 2009 at Kathalagere
Agricultural Science Digest

32. 32
Source: Kumar and Ladha, 2011 at Modipuram
Advances in Agronomy
Fig. 8. Nitrous oxide emission from rice under alternate tillage and crop
establishment methods during 2007 and 2008

33. Table 17. Yield, water productivity and profitability of rice
under different crop establishment techniques
Crop establishment
methods
Yield
(t ha-1)
Water use
(m3 ha-1)
Water productivity
(kg grain m-3)
Net profit
(Rs ha-1)
Western Uttar Pradesh
Conventional puddle TPR 7.56 18,720 0.40 19,440
ZT DSR 7.19 17,550 0.41 21,915
RT DSR 7.50 17,550 0.43 22,185
Haryana
Conventional puddle TPR 4.36 16,013 0.29 19,200
RT DSR 4.20 12,532 0.37 22,339
33
Source: Pathak et al., 2011
Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences
ZT: Zero tillage
RT: Reduced tillage
DSR: Direct seeded rice
TPR: Transplanted rice

34. Fig. 9. Cracking intensity at 18–20cm soil depth in PTR (Puddled transplanted rice)
and DSR(Direct seeded rice).
34
Source: Sudhir-Yadav et al., 2011 at Ludhiana
Field Crop Research

35. Fig. 10. Field situation after rice harvest under different establishment systems
35
Source : CIMMYT-CCAFS Participatory strategic research platform, Taraori (Karnal)
Puddled transplanted Zero Tillage DSR

36. Table 18. Depth of irrigation and grain yield as affected by irrigation
intervals in basmati rice under different establishment methods
Establishment
methods
Irrigation
interval (days)
Grain yield
(kg/ha)
Depth of
irrigation (cm)
2010 2011 2010 2011
PTR conventional 3212 2620 a 125.5 145.7
DSR 7X + 5Y 3262 2670 a 99.9 136.5
DSR 7 + 7 3135 2540 a 73 119.2
DSR 7 + 10 3085 2196 b 68.1 99.6
DSR 15 + 5 3205 2607 a 102.4 131.1
DSR 15 + 7 3023 2490 a 69 113.9
DSR 15 + 10 2981 2004 b 63.2 94.4
LSD (P=0.05) NS 249
36
X= First post sowing irrigation; Y= Subsequent post sowing irrigation
DSR: Direct seeded rice
PTR: Puddled transplanted rice
Godara, 2013 at RRS, Karnal
Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of
Agronomy, CCS HAU, Hisar

37. 37
Fig. 11: Grain yield (t ha−1) of rice as affected by establishment method and
irrigation schedule in 2008 (a) and 2009 (b).
Source: Sudhir-Yadav et al., 2011 at Ludhiana
Field Crop Research

38. Fig. 12. Irrigation water productivity (WPi) as affected by establishment method and
irrigation schedule in 2008 (a) and 2009 (b).
38
Source: Sudhir-Yadav et al., 2011 at Ludhiana
Field Crop Research

39. 39
Conclusion
• Transplanting is better option under sufficient
water and labour availability.
• Direct seeded rice is an alternate production
system with increased resource use efficiency
and profitability with efficient water and
weed management.

40. 40
Thank U