Influence of nutrient levels, optical sensors and decision support tools on yield and harvest index of rice
The study results (Table 2) indicated that the treatment T
9 (N application at SI < 90%) had noted significantly higher mean grain yield of rice (5379 kg/ha) and remained statistically at par with T
4 (150-75-75), T
8 (N application at LCC ≤4) and T
6 (T
3+NU @ 2 ml/L at panicle initiation). Moreover, the former treatment reported a 16.85% significant increase in the mean grain yield of rice in comparison with T
3 (120-60-60) which represented the recommended dose of fertilizer. The increased nitrogen application in treatments T
9, T
4 and T
8, as opposed to T
3, likely contributed to an expanded sink capacity through adequate availability of nitrogen at sensitive stages and subsequently led to higher grain yields. Additionally, exceeding the recommended levels of phosphorus and potassium did not have a statistically significant impact on grain yield when the nitrogen level was held constant. However, when nano urea was applied during the panicle initiation stage in conjunction with the recommended fertilizer dose, it yielded results that were statistically comparable to higher nitrogen levels. The results were similar to the findings of
Cheng et al., (2022) in rice;
Samanta et al., (2022) in finger millet;
Samui et al., (2022) and
Sairam et al., (2023) in maize. Interestingly, the mean straw yield of rice was significantly higher with T
4 but registered statistically comparable results with T
9, T
8, T
6 and exhibited 10.79% significant superiority over T
3. The better performance of T
4 could be explained by the relatively higher levels of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium availability in comparison to the other treatments. The increased nutrient availability might have contributed to enhance the quality and rigidity of the rice straw. Nevertheless, the improvement in straw quality and rigidity due to these factors was statistically insignificant when compared to treatments with sufficient nitrogen supply. These results corroborate the findings of
Moharana et al., (2019) and
Mohanta et al., (2021). The highest mean biological yield was recorded by T
9 and this result did not significantly differ from T
4 and T
8. In comparison with T
3 the former treatment showed significant superiority and recorded a 13.13% increment in the biological yield of rice. This might be attributed to the maximum grain and straw yield of rice. Among all the treatments the lowest mean grain yield, mean straw yield and mean biological yield of rice was recorded by the T
1 (control) treatment. Although there are numerical differences among the treatments concerning harvest index (%), however, they did not differ statistically. Similar findings were observed by
Awan et al., (2011) in rice; and
Panda et al., (2021) in finger millet.
Influence of nutrient levels, optical sensors and decision support tools on nitrogen uptake in grain and straw of rice
The data about nitrogen uptake in grain and straw of rice were significantly influenced by different fertilizer levels, portable optical sensors and decision support tools (Table 3). The uptake of any nutrient is mainly determined by yield and nutrient content in its dry matter. In this study, the treatment T
9 outperformed all other treatments by showing significantly higher nitrogen uptake in grain during the crop-growing season in 2021 and 2022. Notably, the performance of T
9 in terms of nitrogen uptake by rice grain was statistically equivalent to those of T
4, T
8 and T
6 during both the respective years of investigation 2021 and 2022. This superior performance might be attributed to the former treatment, through its grain yield and enhanced nitrogen concentration in the grain dry matter due to precise and consistent nitrogen supply at adequate levels of phosphorus and potassium through real-time monitoring of chlorophyll index at regular intervals. These findings corroborate with the findings of
(Moharana et al., 2019;
Baral et al., 2021).
However, it’s worth mentioning that T
4 recorded the highest nitrogen uptake in rice straw in 2021 and 2022, respectively. Apart from T
9, T
8, T
6 and T
3, all other treatments under comparison exhibited a significant difference in nitrogen uptake by straw in 2021 with the former treatment while, T
9, T
8, T
6, T
11 and T
3 showed statistical similarity but the remaining treatments exhibited significant difference in nitrogen uptake by straw in 2022. The absorption of nitrogen by rice straw was primarily determined by the quantity of straw produced and the nitrogen content left within the straw after contributing to grain production. These factors, in turn, were predominantly affected by the provision of an ideal amount of nitrogen without any restrictions on the availability of phosphorus and potassium. This discussion was in agreement with the findings of
(Singh et al., 2015;
Nandan et al., 2020 and
Sreedevi et al., 2022).
Influence of nutrient levels, optical sensors and decision support tools on agronomic N efficiency and N recovery efficiency of rice
Among the treatments, the treatment T
8 was found to register the highest Agronomic efficiency and Recovery efficiency during both the years of investigation 2021 and 2022 (Table 4). Increase in grain yield in proportion to the nitrogen applied; likely be the probable reason for recording comparatively higher agronomic efficiency by the former treatment such that for each kilogram application of nitrogen the grain yield was found to be increased by 18.22 kg in 2021 and 19.29 kg in 2022 over no fertilizer control. Likewise, the greater increase in total nitrogen uptake in proportion to the nitrogen applied may be the contributing factor for the elevated recovery efficiency and in the former treatment, it was found that only 43.27% and 50.25% shall be recovered from the total N fertilizer applied during 2021 and 2022, respectively. Similarly,
Subedi et al., (2018),
Baral et al., (2021) in rice reported significantly higher agronomic nitrogen use efficiency and recovery efficiency.