Fertilizer Response of some Sri Lankan Traditional Rice ... · Fertilizer Response of some Sri Lankan Traditional Rice ... differing from modern rice cultivars ... Since the number

International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications Volume 4 Issue 7 July 2014 1 ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Fertilizer Response of some Sri Lankan Traditional Rice

Cultivars during Vegetative Growth Phase

Amarasinghe UGS Ranawake AL Senanayake SGJN

Department of Agricultural Biology Faculty of Agriculture University of Ruhuna Sri Lanka

Abstract- Traditional rice cultivars in Sri Lanka conserve

different abiotic and biotic tolerant traits but the yield of

traditional rice cultivars is not as much of improved cultivars

Abiotic stress tolerance of some traditional rice cultivars were

evaluated in previous studies at Faculty of Agriculture

Mapalana Sri Lanka and this study attempted to understand the

possibility of enhancing the yield and yield components of

traditional rice cultivars by altering the fertilizer dose A field

experiment was carried out from October 2011 to April 2012 at

the Faculty of Agriculture Mapalana Traditional rice cultivars

are considered to be weaker in response to fertilizer Four

different fertilizer levels namely no fertilizer half of the

recommended dose recommended dose and twice of the

recommended dose were evaluated with forty Sri Lankan

traditional rice cultivars to understand the response of them on

different agronomic parameters Germinated seeds were planted

in rows with 15 cm X 20 cm spacing Twenty plants were

managed for each line and three lines were maintained for one

replicate of cultivar Experiment was conducted with four

replicates Effect of fertilizer on the plant height number of

tillersplant and number of leavesplant were measured at three

weeks after transplanting during the vegetative phase of

cultivars These parameters were significantly differed with the

fertilizer doses and with the individual cultivars Average plant

height was ranged from 378 cm to 1158 cm The highest plant

height was obtained by the cultivar Herath Banda (1158 cm) at

the half recommended dose while the lowest plant height was

recorded by the cultivar Palasithari 601 (378 cm) at no fertilizer

dose Highest number of tillers per plant (73) and the highest

number of leaves per plant (288) were obtained by the cultivar

Dena wee at the twice recommended dose and also the lowest

tiller number (155) and the lowest number of leavesplant (62)

was recorded by the cultivar Palasithari 601 at the twice

recommended dose Among tested traditional rice cultivars

cultivar Herath Banda recorded the highest plant height at all

four fertilizer levels (no fertilizer (1116 cm) half recommended

dose (1158 cm) recommended dose (1036 cm) and twice

recommended dose (1059 cm) Dena wee recorded the highest

number of tillers at no fertilizer (70) recommended dose (59)

and twice recommended dose (73) while Herath Banda recorded

the highest number of tillers (56) at half recommended dose

Highest number of leaves at no fertilizer dose was recorded by

the cultivar Kotathavalu 1 (223) Cultivar Herath Banda (222)

recorded the highest number of leaves at half of the

recommended dose while cultivar Dena wee recorded the highest

number of leavesplant at recommended dose (211) and twice

recommended dose of fertilizer (288) Correlation of these

parameters and other yield components with the final yield is yet

to be computed

Index Terms- Fertilizer Response Sri Lankan Traditional rice

I INTRODUCTION

ice is the staple food in the diet for much of the world and it

runs second to wheat in its importance as a food cereal in

the human diet (FAO 2011) About 672 Million Metric Tons of

rice is grown annually in the world (FAO 2011) Rice is the

single most important crop occupying 34 percent (077 million

ha) of the total cultivated area in Sri Lanka (Department of

Agriculture 2006) Presently paddy consumes the largest share

of chemical fertilizers and it accounts for approximately 50

percent of the overall use of chemical fertilizers in Sri Lanka

(Wijewardhena 1987) There are three major nutrients namely

Nitrogen (N) Potassium (K) and Phosphorus (P) essential for

paddy cultivation Three main fertilizers Urea Muriete of potash

(MOP) and Triple super phosphate (TSP) provide the nitrogen

potassium and phosphorus respectively (Ekanayake 2006) The

fertilizer added to the soil to ensure all necessary nutrient

elements are available to the crop to stimulate plant growth and

yield (Thenabadu 1980) Commercial fertilizers have to be

supplied to fulfill the compensate the nutrients depleted from the

soil by crop-uptake together with leaching and erosion losses

(Thenabadu 1980) Inorganic fertilizers release nutrients in

readily soluble mode to soil solution and these are instantly

available as plant nutrients (Siavoshi et al 2011) Fertilizer

consumption depends on rice variety soil condition and farmer

practices (Hach and Nam 2006) Imbalanced fertilizer

application especially in wet season creates severe diseases and

lodging resulting low efficiency of nitrogen fertilizer application

(Hach and Nam 2006) Although there are four techniques

available for determining fertilizer requirements namely Field

experimentation Soil tests Plant tests and biological tests Field

experiments are considered the most dependable for establishing

fertilizer recommendations (Priyangani et al 2008) The fertilizer

recommendations for rice have undergone many changes since

the first fertilizer recommendation of Joachim in the 1930s

(Thenabadu1980) It should be taken in to consideration the

application of fertilizer should be varied during the different

growth stages of a plant If a heavy dressing of inorganic

fertilizers is applied as a basal dressing the high concentration of

salts may sometimes damage or inhibit the seed germination

(Thenabadu1980) Along with improved cultural management

the use of balanced fertilizer is one of the most important aspects

for increased crop productivity

Sri Lanka possesses about two thousand indigenous rice

accessions (Priyangani et al 2008) which are having various

agronomic characters differing from one another and also

R

International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications Volume 4 Issue 7 July 2014 2

ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

differing from modern rice cultivars (Ranawake et al 2011b) At

the onset of green revolution farmers initiated to cultivate high

yielding varieties which are highly responsive to inorganic

fertilizers as a replacement for traditional rice varieties

(Weerahewa et al 2010) Traditional rice cultivars are generally

tall and have few tillers and produce low but stable yields even

under unfavorable environments and typically they are cultivated

without the application of fertilizer (Saito et al 2005) Various

field fertilizer experiments have been conducted with traditional

rice cultivars to understand the expansion of yield potential in

different countries by altering fertilizer application and the

results revealed that the most of rice cultivars show a remarkable

increase in grain yield when fertilizer application is increased

(Saito et al 2005 George et al 2005) Some Sri Lankan

traditional rice cultivars have been screened for abiotic stress

tolerances such as drought salinity and submergence (Ranawake

et al 2011b Ranawake et al 2010a Ranawake et al 2011a

Ranawake and Dahanayake 2012a Ranawake et al 2012b

Weragodawidana et al 2012) There is a potential to introduce

these cultivars directly to farmer field or use as future breeding

materials In such a process less yield of traditional rice cultivars

may pop-up as the major restriction (Saito et al 2005

Amarasinghe et al 2013) According to Khuong (2008) fertilizer

is the major factor affecting on grain yield and quality Some of

the Sri Lankan traditional rice cultivars have been evaluated for

fertilizer response (Amarasinghe et al 2013) However there is

no adequate information on response of traditional rice cultivars

of Sri Lanka for fertilizer applications Hence the present study

was carried out to understand the response of individual

traditional rice cultivar on different levels of inorganic fertilizers

at different growth stages The data presented in the paper is

focused on the vegetative growth phase of traditional rice

cultivars

II MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty traditional rice cultivars listed in the table 1 having Plant

Genetic Resources Center (PGRC) Accession Numbers were

geminated and planted in nursery beds Ten day old seedlings

were transplanted in the experimental field at the Faculty of

Agriculture Mapalana Kamburupitiya Sri Lanka in rows with

15 cm X 20 cm spacing according to the randomized complete

block design The soil is low humic glay soil with low base

saturation

Table 1

Forty Sri Lankan Traditional rice cultivars used for the

experiment

PGRC PGRC

AccNo Local name AccNo Local name

3673 Kaluhandiran 3654 Pokuru Samba

3674 Kirikara 3655 Rata wee

3675 Kotathavalu 1 3660 Suduru

3676 Dena wee 3658 Ingrisi wee

3677 Herath Banda 3659 Kotathavalu 2

3678 Hondarawala 3653 Kalu Karayal

3679 Kottakaram 3668 Ranruwan

3681 Dandumara 3669 Rajes

3686 Karayal 1 3670 Madoluwa

3687 Dewaredderi 3671 Suduru Samba

3469 Sudu wee 3688 Handiran

3477 Sudu Goda wee 3691 Gunaratna

3479 Kiri Naran 3661 Polayal

3480 Karayal 2 3664 Tissa wee

3482 Akuramboda 3665 Sudu Karayal

3486 Puwakmalata

Samba 3666 Podisayam

3487 Palasithari 601 3423 Giress

3489 Murungakayan 3 3427 Naudu wee

3490 Murungakayan 101

3434 Kokuvellai

3496 Bala Ma wee 3463 Karayal 3

Four replicates were arranged for each fertilizer level and each

replicate was consisted of 3 lines Twenty plants were included

in to each line Four different fertilizer levels were applied no

fertilizer half of the recommended dose recommended dose and

twice of the recommended dose The recommended fertilizer

dosage for modern rice cultivars was used as the recommended

dose (Basal Dressing Urea 50 Kgha TSP 625 Kgha MOP 50

Kgha Top Dressing Urea 375 Kgha) Basal dressing was

applied before planting and top dressing was applied two times at

2 weeks after planting and at 8 weeks after planting Plant

heights (cm) number of tillersper plant number of leavesper

plant were recorded during the vegetative growth stage at 6

weeks after planting Data were statistically analyzed by

ANOVA and mean separation was done by DMRT using SAS

statistical software (SAS 2000) Yield and yield components of

the population at each fertilizer level are intended to be measured

after harvesting

Considering the contribution of the plant height number of

leavesplant and number of tillersplant for the final yield an

arbitrary rating scale was developed for the evaluated

parameters Since the number of tillers is the major contributor to

the yield the highest 5 points were allocated for the maximum

number of tillersplant Between number of leavesplant and

plant height number of leavesplant was given a higher rating 3

points while less 2 points were allocated to the plant height Rice

cultivars with plant height more than 110 cm were not considered

for scoring since they tend to be logged A fraction of maximum

score was given for the second highest and third highest values

of each parameter as given in table 2

Table 2 Arbitrary rating scale used for the evaluation of best

fertilizer level for individual rice cultivar

Plant height lt 110 cm Number of leaves Number of tillers

Highest score 2 3 5

Second highest 1 2 4

Third highest 05 1 3

Lowest 0 0 0

III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Plant height According to ANOVA plant height of individual

traditional rice cultivars significantly differed with the fertilizer

level where there was a significant difference among rice


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

cultivars as well Average plant height of the rice cultivars

ranged from 378 cm to 1158 cm The highest plant height was

recorded by the cultivar Herath Banda (1158 cm) at the half of

the recommended dose while the lowest plant height was


conditions Cultivar Suduru and cultivar Kalu karayal increased

their height linearly with the increased fertilizer applications

Among tested traditional rice cultivars cultivar Herath Banda

recorded the highest average plant height (1158 cm ndash 1036 cm)

at all four levels of fertilizer (Table 3) Cultivar Polayal reached

its maximum potential height at no fertilizer condition Further

Herath Banda Sudu wee Karayal 2 Puwakmalata samba

Murungakayan 101 Bala Ma wee Rajes Handiran Tissa wee

Sudu karayal Giress and Kokuwellai cultivars recorded their

highest plant height at half of the recommended dose Similarly

Kaluhandiran Kotathavalu 1 Hondarawala Dandumara

Kirinaran Akuramboda Murungakayan 3 Pokuru samba

Kotathavalu 2 Ranruwan Madoluwa Suduru Samba

Gunaratna Podisayam Naudu wee and Karayal 3 recorded their

highest plant height at the recommended fertilizer level

Plant height of cultivars Kirikara Dena wee Kottakaram and

Ingirisi Wee were unique for all the fertilizer levels Karayal 1

Dewaredderi and Sudu Goda Wee recorded their maximum

height at twice the recommended dose of fertilizer and there was

no linearity in plant heights with the fertilizer application

Cultivar Palasithari 601 and cultivar Rata wee gradually

decreased their plant height with the increased fertilizer

Number of tillersplant Number of tillersplant in traditional rice

cultivars significantly differed with the fertilizer applications

Average number of tillersplant in the tested traditional rice

cultivars ranged from 155 to 73 while Dena Wee recorded the

highest number of 7 tillers at no fertilizer and 6 at recommended

dose and at 73 at twice the recommended dose while Herath

Banda recorded the highest number of tillers of 56 at half the

recommended dose The lowest tiller number of 155 was

recorded by the cultivar Palasithari 601 at twice the

recommended dose Hondarawala Dandumara Akuramboda and

Rata wee cultivars increased the number of tillers alongwith the

increase of fertilizer Kirikara Sudu Goda wee Palasithari 601

and Karayal 3 decreased the tiller numbers with increasing of

fertilizer level Kaluhandiran reached its maximum tiller number

even at no fertilizer conditions Kotathavalu 1 Herath Banda

Kottakaram Karayal 1 Kiri naran Karayal 2 Murungakayan 3

Bala Ma wee Kotathavalu 2 Gunaratna Sudu Karayal

Podisayam Giress Naudu wee and Kokuwellai cultivars gained

their maximum number of tillers at half of the recommended

dose of fertilizer while Suduru Suduru samba and Tissa wee

recorded their maximum number of tillers at recommended dose

Further elevated amount of fertilizer couldnrsquot boost the tiller

number of these cultivars (Table 4) Kalu karayal couldnrsquot

response to the fertilizer when increasing its tiller number with

the added fertilizer doses at vegetative growth phase This is

contrary with Saleem et al (Saleem et al 2010) which indicated

that the number of tillershill increases with the level of nitrogen

fertilizer However Murtaza et al (2000) and Mahmood et al

(1993) recorded that the number of tillers significantly increases

with the use of nitrogen fertilizer Further Mannan et al (2011)

have also concluded that not only tiller number but also number

of panicles panicle length spikelet sterility and straw yield

increased with the increase of nitrogen levels

Table 3

Plant height of individual rice cultivar at different fertilizer

applications

Plant height (cm)

No F X frac12 RD RD X 2 RD

Kaluhandiran 769b 733

c 946

a 463

d

Kirikara 813 ab

716 c 866

a 793

b

Kotathavalu 1 931 c 1013

b 1025

a 688

d

Dena wee 807 c 1029

a 1026

a 817

b

Herath Banda 1116 b 1158

a 1036

d 1059

c

Hondarawala 596 b 567

c 732

a 503

d

Kottakaram 620 b 963

a 975

a 605

c

Dandumara 953 b 640

c 985

a 956

b

Karayal 1 915 b 866

c 713

d 952

a

Dewaredderi 927 c 943

b 915

d 975

a

Sudu wee 721 d 1046

a 921

c 984

b

Sudu Goda

wee 776

d 806

b 958

a 811

c

Kiri Naran 828 d 873

b 970

a 855

c

Karayal 2 935 d 1034

a 1014

b 992

c

Akuramboda 438 d 860

b 1005

a 504

c

Puwakmalata

Samba 603

b 716

a 535

c 595

b

Palasithari

601 1002

a 994

b 873

c 378

d

Murungakayan

3 495

d 755

b 825

a 735

c

Murungakayan

101 493

d 839

a 756

b 744

c

Bala Ma wee 942 b 973

a 777

c 905

b

Pokuru Samba 974 c 981

b 1015

a 968

d

Rata wee 805 a 750

b c 767

b 721

c

Suduru 735 b 853

a 856

a 855

a

Ingrisi wee 947 a 669

c 941

a 813

b


b 955

a 766

c

Kalu Karayal 841 c 874

b 963

a 969

a

Ranruwan 877b 851

c 913

a 837

d

Rajes 896 c 980

a 848

d 905

b

Madoluwa 603 c 513

d 896

a 738

b

Suduru Samba 608c 630

bc 745

a 646

b

Handiran 966b 1021

a 643

c 984

b

Gunaratna 916b 559

d 974

a 719

c

Polayal 899 a 815

b 610

d 696

c

Tissa wee 919 c 1010

a 917

c 969

b

Sudu Karayal 772 c 946

a 764

d 818

b

Podisayam 688b 529

d 906

a 621

c

Giress 730 c 939

a 705

d 876

b

Naudu wee 814b 715

d 861

a 783

c

Kokuvellai 879 c 980

a 827

d 951

b

Karayal 3 843b 772

c 954

a 834

b

Means with the same letters are not differ significantly

No F No fertilizer RD Recommended dose


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Table 4

Number tillersplant of individual rice cultivar at different

fertilizer applications

Number of tillersplant

No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD

Kaluhandiran 35 a 29

bc 30

b 29

bc

Kirikara 33 a 31

b 31

b 28

c

Kotathavalu 1 51 b

55 a 50

b 45

c

Dena wee 70 a 53

c 59

b 73

a

Herath Banda 44c 56

a 48

b 42

d

Hondarawala 30c 32

b 32

b 40

a

Kottakaram 26c 30

a 29

b 26

c

Dandumara 33 d

37 c 45

b 52

a

Karayal 1 28d 55

a 53

b 44

c

Dewaredderi 28d 36

b 30

c 51

a

Sudu wee 30c 52

a 39

b 51

a

Sudu Goda

wee 34

a 31

b 30

b 24

c

Kiri Naran 26 d

43 a 38

b 35

c

Karayal 2 32 b

35 a 31

b 32

b

Akuramboda 37c 45

b 45

b 47

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 18

c 34

a 29

ab 26

b

Palasithari

601 34

a 35

a 36

a 16

b

Murungakayan

3 21

d 50

a 35

c 46

b

Murungakayan

101 20

c 41

a 39

a 29

b

Bala Ma wee 32 d

49 a 38

b 33

c

Pokuru Samba 35c 40

ab 38

b 43

a

Rata wee 31c 32

b 32

b 34

a

Suduru 33c 49

a 39

b 41

b

Ingrisi wee 35 b

33c 35

b 41

a

Kotathavalu 2 36 d

47 a 43

b 39

c

Kalu Karayal 37 a 37

a 37

a 38

a

Ranruwan 35 b

34c 38

a 37

a

Rajes 29 d

34 b

31c 36

a

Madoluwa 18 d

21 b

19c 27

a

Suduru Samba 17c 16

c 24

a 21

b

Handiran 33c 48

a 32

d 38

b

Gunaratna 34c 43

a 34

c 38

b

Polayal 46 a 35

c 47

a 44

b

Tissa wee 38 b

35c 39

a 38

b

Sudu Karayal 27c 38

a 32

b 32

b

Podisayam 21 d

43 a 22

c 36

b

Giress 17 d

51 a 23

c 36

b

Naudu wee 32 d

46 a 33

c 39

b

Kokuvellai 30 d

39 a 34

c 36

b

Karayal 3 46 a 32

bc 33

b 30

c



Number of leaves Number of leaves significantly

differed with the fertilizer levels and the cultivars as

shown in the the ANOVA Table 5

Table 5

Number of leavesplant of individual rice cultivar at different


Number of leavesplant

No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD


c 120

b 99

d

Kirikara 134 a 120

b 123

b 107

c

Kotathavalu 1 223 a 218

b 210

c 142

d

Dena wee 213 b 210

c 211

c 288

a


a 178

c 175

c

Hondarawala 112 c 117

b 112

c 160

a

Kottakaram 88 d 120

a 115

b 105

c

Dandumara 130 d 133

c 173

b 208

a

Karayal 1 111 d 219

a 210

b 175

c


b 109

c 205

a

Sudu wee 145 d 206

a 172

c 203

b

Sudu Goda wee 126 a 127

a 120

b 106

c

Kiri Naran 108 173 a 155

b 135

c

Karayal 2 126 142 a 128

c 132

b

Akuramboda 156 c 181

b 183

b 188

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 71

d 134

a 118

b 102

c

Palasithari 601 133 c 140

b 145

a 62

d

Murungakayan 3 87 d 199

a 140

c 184

b

Murungakayan

101 84

d 162

a 152

b 113

c

Bala Ma wee 126 d 198

a 150

b 133

c

Pokuru Samba 137 d 158

b 150

c 169

a

Rata wee 123 c 128

b 128

b 138

a

Suduru 123 d 196

a 151

c 160

b

Ingrisi wee 140 b 130

c 140

b 164

a

Kotathavalu 2 145 d 188

a 173

b 157

c

Kalu Karayal 146 b 146

b 145

b 148

a

Ranruwan 140 b 135

c 150

a 146

ab

Rajes 117 d 138

b 125

c 145

a

Madoluwa 65 d 83

b 72

c 106

a

Suduru Samba 65 c 65

c 100

a 90

b

Handiran 132 c 193

a 100

d 153

b

Gunaratna 137 c 170

a 138

c 158

b

Polayal 183 b 148

c 188

a 181

b

Tissa wee 151 a 142

b 155

a 152

a


a 126

b 128

b

Podisayam 83 d 173

a 89

c 144

b

Giress 68 d 205

a 92

c 143

b

Naudu wee 129 d 183

a 130

c 155

b

Kokuvellai 121 d 155

a 135

c 145

b


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Karayal 3 185 a 129

c 131

b 120

d

DMRT groups are given in English letters


Average number of leaves ranged from 62 to 288 in the tested

traditional rice cultivars The development stage of the rice plant

can be determined by the number of leaves it bears The

population used for the study included different cultivars with

different days to maturity From germination to heading the

number of leaves developed from the main culm is generally less

in number for a short duration variety than a long duration

variety (Datta 1981) Highest average number of leaves (288)

was obtained for the cultivar Dena wee in 117 days at twice the

recommended dose and also the lowest average number of leaves

(62) was recorded by the cultivar Palasithari 601 (123 days to

maturity) at the twice the recommended dose (Table 3)

Vegetative growth was vigorous especially with nitrogen

application and number of leaves in main stem is frequently more

than 20 in modern rice cultivars according to Tanaka et al

[Tanaka 1976] Tanaka et al (1976) further reported that the rice

yield can be increased if the number of active leaves on plant can

be increased The cultivars Dandumara Akuramboda Rata wee

and Kalu karayal proved this phenomenon by gradually

increasing the number of leaves with the increase fertilizer but

Kirikara Kotathavalu 1 and Sudu Goda wee decreased their

number of leaves with the increased fertilizer (Table 5) Herath

Banda Kottakaram Karayal 1 Sudu wee Kirinaran Karayal 2

Puwakmalata Samba Murungakayan 3 Murungakayan 101

Bala Ma wee Suduru Kotathavalu 2 Handiran Gunaratna

Kokuvellai Podisayam Giress Naudu wee and Sudu Karayal

acquired maximum number of leaves at half of the

recommended dose and Palasithari 601 Suduru samba and

Polayal recorded the highest number of leaves at the

recommended fertilizer dose during the vegetative phase

Intermediate plant type records the plant height between 80 cm -

120 cm and they are well adapted to both poor and favorable

environments and provide medium to good grain yield

(wwwknowledgebankirriorgextension

farmersguideuplandrice) Further semi-dwarf cultivars normally

reached up to 110 cm height

(wwwknowledgebankirriorgextensionindexphpseslrm) Roberts

et al (Roberts et al 2013) have also concluded that the semi-

dwarf cultivars produced higher yields than that of tall cultivars

Hence in this study when use arbitrary rating scale to evaluate

the performances of cultivars cultivar increases its plant height

over 110 cm even at vegetative stage was considered as

unfavorable in plant architecture Plant height also a major

contributor to the yield (Yadav et al 2011) but greater plant

height susceptible to lodging reduces yield quality of production

and mechanical harvesting efficiency (Weber 1966 Kono

1995) It was estimated that lodging caused a loss of 26 kg handash1

in rice production in southern India (Duwayri et al 2000)

According to Ogbodo et al (2010) and Yadav et al (2011)

number of tillersplant directly contributes to the yield Thus the

fertilizer level which recorded the highest tiller number was

considered as the best fertilizer level for increasing tiller number

in arbitrary rating scale Further Tanaka et al (1976) stated that

the rice yield is increased with the higher number of leaves on

plant In the present study the cultivars with the highest number

of leavesplant were considered as more suitable cultivars for

higher yield

Yadav et al (2011) concluded that the harvest index numbers of

tillers per hill panicle length number of spikelets per panicle

plant height as the main contributors to yield Among those

parameters harvest index number of tillers per hill panicle

length and number of spikelet per panicle are the most important

characters that directly contribute to yield (Weber 1966) Hence

in the used arbitrary rating scale number of tillerplant was given

the highest score (Table 2)

Table 6 Cumulative values of scores at different fertilizer levels

No F

X

frac12

RD RD

X 2

RD

Best

level

Kaluhandiran 9 15 105 4 RD

Kirikara 9 6 15 05 RD

Kotathavalu 1 75 8 155 0 RD

Dena wee 12 3 15 9 RD

Herath Banda 6 8 12 2 RD

Hondarawala 2 65 85 8 RD

Kottakaram 4 10 14 4 RD

Dandumara 1 45 55 9 2RD

Karayal 1 1 13 14 6 RD

Dewaredderi 05 7 75 10 2RD

Sudu wee 3 10 13 8 RD

Sudu Goda wee 5 75 125 2 RD

Kiri Naran 0 9 9 45

R D

or

RD2

Karayal 2 4 10 14 65 RD

Akuramboda 0 7 7 85 2RD

Puwakmalata

Samba 1 10 11 55 RD

Palasithari 601 8 8 16 0 RD

Murungakayan 3 0 9 9 65

RD or

RD2

Murungakayan

101 0 10 10 55

R Dor

RD2

Bala Ma wee 1 10 11 45 RD

Pokuru Samba 05 8 85 8 RD

Rata wee 2 65 85 8 RD

Suduru 05 9 95 7 RD

Ingrisi wee 6 15 75 9 2RD


Kalu Karayal 55 8 135 10 RD

Ranruwan 7 05 75 7 RD

Rajes 02 8 82 9 2RD

Madoluwa 05 6 65 9 2RD


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Suduru Samba 1 5 6 7 2RD

Handiran 5 10 15 7 RD

Gunaratna 5 8 13 65 RD

Polayal 9 2 11 65 RD

Tissa wee 75 7 145 8 RD

Sudu Karayal 15 10 115 7 RD

Podisayam 05 8 85 65 RD

Giress 05 10 105 7 RD

Naudu wee 1 8 9 65 RD

Kokuvellai 05 10 105 7 RD


According to used scoring system among tested traditional rice

cultivars majority of the rice cultivars performed well at the

recommended fertilizer dose Rice cultivar Dandumara

Dewaredderi Akuramboda Ingirisi wee Rajes Modaluwa and

Suduru Samba performed well at twice the recommended

fertilizer dose while Kiri Naran and Murungakayan-3 performed

well at half of the recommended dose

CONCLUSIONS

Response of individual traditional rice cultivar for fertilizer on

vegetative growth phase parameters such as plant height number

of tillersplant and number of leavesplant are significantly

different at field conditions For rice cultivars Dandumara


Suduru Samba twice the recommended fertilizer dose is better

while half of the recommended dose is suitable for Kiri Naran

and Murungakayan-3 Recommended fertilizer dose is suitable

for all the other cultivars However the climatic agro-ecological

as well as soil factors have to be given due attention as the

availability of nutrients may be different in soils of different

regions of the country

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First author would like to acknowledge PGRC Gannoruwa

Peradeniya Sri Lanka for providing seeds of traditional rice

cultivars and TURIS research grant University of Ruhuna for

financial support

REFERENCES

[1] A Tanka ldquoComparison of rice growth in different environmentsrdquo Proceedings of the Symposium on Climate and Rice International Rice Research Institute 1976Pp 429-448

[2] AKM Saleem WM Elkhoby AB Abou- Khalifa and M Ceesay ldquoEffect of Nitrogen fertilizer and Seedling stage on inbred and hybrid ricerdquo Bangladesh J Agril Res 2010Vol35 No1 pp 157-165

[3] AL Ranawake and N Dahanayake ldquoUnderstanding abiotic stress tolerant levels and mechanisms in some traditional rice cultivars in Sri Lankardquo proceedings of the abstract of 9th Academic session University of Ruhuna 2012a p 23

[4] AL Ranawake N Dahanayake and DD Senadhipathi ldquoEvaluation of level of submergence tolerance in traditional rice cultivars at post-germination stagerdquo proceedings of the abstract of 8th Academic session University of Ruhuna 2010bp203

[5] AL Ranawake N Dahanayake and RDG Kumari ldquoAssessment of submergence tolerance of some traditional and modern rice cultivars in Sri Lankardquo In proceedings of the abstract of 8th Academic session University of Ruhuna 2010ap187

[6] AL Ranawake N Dahanayake and UTD Rodrigo ldquoSalinity tolerance in traditional rice cultivarsrdquo Proceedings of the abstract of International symposium on Agriculture and Environment (ISAE) 2011bpp136

[7] AL Ranawake SAP Madhurangi and N Dahanayake ldquoEvaluation of level of drought tolerance in traditional rice cultivars in Sri Lanka at the seedling stagerdquo Proceedings of the abstract of International Sympoisum on Agriculture and Environment (ISAE) 2012b pp 325 ndash 327

[8] AL Ranawake UGS Amarasingha and N Dahanayaka ldquoStudy on the submergence tolerance of some traditional rice cultivars in Sri Lanka under two different stress periods at seedling stagerdquo Proceedings of the abstract of International symposium on Agriculture and Environment (ISAE) 2011a p28

[9] CR Weber and WR Fehr ldquoSeed yield losses from lodging and combine harvesting in soybeansrdquo Agron J 1966287ndash289

[10] CV Hach and NTH Nam ldquoResponse of some promising high yielding rice varieties to nitrogen fertilizerrdquo Omonrice Vol14 2006pp78-91

[11] Department of Agriculture Crop recommendations ndash Rice 2006 Retrieved 28th November 2011 from httpwwwagrideptgovlk

[12] EGD Priyangani NS Kottearachci DPSTG Attanayaka and BD Pathinayake ldquoCharacterization of Suwandal and Heenati rice varieties for the fragrance gene using Polymerase Chain Reaction based molecular markersrdquo Faculty of Agriculture and plantation management Wayamba University of Sri Lanka 2008

[13] EN Ogbodo II Ekpe EB Utobo and EO Ogah ldquoEffect of plant spacing and N rates on the growth and yields of rice at Abakaliki Ebinyi state South Nigeriardquo Research Journal of agric and biological sci 20106(5)653-658

[14] FAO STAT 2011 Retrieved 28th November 2011 httpfaostatfaoorg

[15] G Murtaza N Hussain and A Ghafoor Growth Response of Rice (Oryza sativa L) to Fertilizer Nitrogen in Salt-Affected Soils Int J Agri Biol 2000pp 204-206

[16] HKJ Ekanayake ldquoThe Impact of Fertilizer Subsidy on Paddy Cultivation in Sri Lanka Staff studiesrdquo Central bank of Sri lanka 2006 pp 73

[17] IA Mahmood RH Qureshi M Aslam S Nawaz and B Akhtar ldquoResponse of rice to various sources of nitrogen in salt-affected soilrdquo Pakistan J Agric Sci 1993 pp 64ndash68

[18] IRRI The rice environments or ecosystems 2007 httpwwwknowledgebankirriorgericeproduction03_Rice_environmentshtm

[19] JDH Wijewardena ldquoImprovement of plant nutrient management for better farmer livelihoodrdquo Food security and environment in Sri Lankardquo 1987 Retrieved November 15 from httpwwwfaoorg

[20] JWeerahewa SS Kodithuwakku and A Ariyawardana Case Study 7-11 The Fertilizer Subsidy Program in Sri Lanka In (Ed Per Pinstrup-


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Andersen and Fuzhi Cheng) Food Policy for Developing Countries Case Studies 2010 12 pp

[21] KSaito B Linquist GN Atlin K Phanthaboon T Shiraiwa and T Horie ldquoResponse of traditional and improved upland rice cultivars to N and P fertilizer in northern Laosrdquo Field crop research vol30 2005pp 8-15

[22] MA Mannan MSU Bhuiya HMA Hossain and MIM Akhand ldquoOptimization of nitrogen rate for aromatic basmati rice (Oriza Sativa L) varietiesrdquo American-Eurasian J Agricamp Environ Sci 2011PP640-646

[23] M Duwayri DV Tran VN Nguyen ldquoReflections on yield gaps in rice production how to narrow the gapsrdquo Binding the Rice Yield Gap in the Asia-Pacific Region 2000 Retrieved on 14th March 2014 httpwwwfaoorgDOCREP003X6905Ex6905e05htmREFLECTIONS20ON20YIELD20GAPS20IN20RICE20PRODUCTION20HOW20TO20NARROW20THEGAPS20Mahmud20Duwayril20Dat20Van20Tran220and20Van20Nguu20Nguyen3

[24] M Kono ldquoPhysiological aspects of lodgingrdquo In T Matsuo K Kumazawa R Ishii K Ishihara H Hirata eds Science of the Rice Plant Vol 2 Physiology Food and Agriculture Policy Research Center Tokyo 1995 pp 971ndash982

[25] M Siavoshi A Nasiri and SL Laware Effect of organic fertilizer on growth and yield components in rice (Oryza sativa L) Journal of Agricultural science 2011 pp 217-224

[26] MW Thenabandu ldquoUse of fertilizers and manures in Sri Lankardquo In Science education series No 5 National Science council of Sri Lanka Colombo 1980

[27] PSB Weragodavidana AL Ranawake UGS Amarasingha and NDahanayake ldquoEvaluation of level of drought tolerance in traditional rice cultivars in Sri Lanka at the seedling stagerdquo Proceedings of the abstract of International Sympoisum on Agriculture and Environment (ISAE) 2012pp 328-330

[28] SK Yadav P Pandey B Kumar and BG Suresh Genetic architecture inter-relationship and selection criteria for yield improvement in rice Pak J Biol Sci2011 pp540-545

[29] SR Roberts JE Hill DM Brandon BC Miller SC Scardaci CM Wick and JF Williams ldquoBiological yield and harvest index in rice

nitrogen response of tall and semidwarf cultivarsrdquo Journal of production Agriculture 2013 pp585-588

[30] SAS Institute Inc SAS OnlineDocо Version 8 Cary NC SAS Institute Inc 2000

[31] S K De Datta ldquoPrinciples and Practices of Rice Productionrdquo Willey-Interscience Publication Canada 1981Pp 146-164

[32] TGeorge R Magbanua W Roder KVan Keer G Trebuil and V Reoma ldquoUpland rice response to phosphorus fertilization in Asiardquo Agron J 2001 pp 1362ndash1370

[33] TQ Khuong TTN Huan and CV Hach ldquoStudy on the fertilizer rates for getting maximum grain yield and profit ability of rice productionrdquo Omonrice 2008 pp 93-99

[34] UGS Amarasingha AL Ranawake and SGJN Senanayake ldquoEffect of fertilizer on Agronomic characters and yield in forty traditional rice cultivars in Sri Lankardquo Proceedings of the abstract of 9th Ruhuna Science symposium 2013 p30

[35] UGS Amarasinghe AL Ranawake and SGJN Senanayake Fertilizer response of some Sri Lankan traditional rice cultivars Proceedings of the Abstracts of Jaffna University International Research Conference (JUICE- 2012) 2012 p 5

AUTHORS

First Author ndash Amarasinghe UGS BSc Agriculture Faculty

of Agriculture University of Ruhuna

Second Author ndash Ranawake AL PhD Faculty of Agriculture

University of Ruhuna lankaranawakeagbioruhaclk

Third Author ndash Senanayake SGJN PhD Faculty of

Agriculture University of Ruhuna

Correspondence Author ndash Corresponding author

lankaranawakeagbioruhaclk

TEL +94-41-2292200-EXT 315

FAX+94412292384


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

differing from modern rice cultivars (Ranawake et al 2011b) At

the onset of green revolution farmers initiated to cultivate high

yielding varieties which are highly responsive to inorganic

fertilizers as a replacement for traditional rice varieties

(Weerahewa et al 2010) Traditional rice cultivars are generally

tall and have few tillers and produce low but stable yields even

under unfavorable environments and typically they are cultivated

without the application of fertilizer (Saito et al 2005) Various

field fertilizer experiments have been conducted with traditional

rice cultivars to understand the expansion of yield potential in

different countries by altering fertilizer application and the

results revealed that the most of rice cultivars show a remarkable

increase in grain yield when fertilizer application is increased

(Saito et al 2005 George et al 2005) Some Sri Lankan

traditional rice cultivars have been screened for abiotic stress

tolerances such as drought salinity and submergence (Ranawake

et al 2011b Ranawake et al 2010a Ranawake et al 2011a

Ranawake and Dahanayake 2012a Ranawake et al 2012b

Weragodawidana et al 2012) There is a potential to introduce

these cultivars directly to farmer field or use as future breeding

materials In such a process less yield of traditional rice cultivars

may pop-up as the major restriction (Saito et al 2005

Amarasinghe et al 2013) According to Khuong (2008) fertilizer

is the major factor affecting on grain yield and quality Some of

the Sri Lankan traditional rice cultivars have been evaluated for

fertilizer response (Amarasinghe et al 2013) However there is

no adequate information on response of traditional rice cultivars

of Sri Lanka for fertilizer applications Hence the present study

was carried out to understand the response of individual

traditional rice cultivar on different levels of inorganic fertilizers

at different growth stages The data presented in the paper is

focused on the vegetative growth phase of traditional rice

cultivars

II MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty traditional rice cultivars listed in the table 1 having Plant

Genetic Resources Center (PGRC) Accession Numbers were

geminated and planted in nursery beds Ten day old seedlings

were transplanted in the experimental field at the Faculty of

Agriculture Mapalana Kamburupitiya Sri Lanka in rows with

15 cm X 20 cm spacing according to the randomized complete

block design The soil is low humic glay soil with low base

saturation

Table 1

Forty Sri Lankan Traditional rice cultivars used for the

experiment

PGRC PGRC

AccNo Local name AccNo Local name

3673 Kaluhandiran 3654 Pokuru Samba

3674 Kirikara 3655 Rata wee

3675 Kotathavalu 1 3660 Suduru

3676 Dena wee 3658 Ingrisi wee

3677 Herath Banda 3659 Kotathavalu 2

3678 Hondarawala 3653 Kalu Karayal

3679 Kottakaram 3668 Ranruwan

3681 Dandumara 3669 Rajes

3686 Karayal 1 3670 Madoluwa

3687 Dewaredderi 3671 Suduru Samba

3469 Sudu wee 3688 Handiran

3477 Sudu Goda wee 3691 Gunaratna

3479 Kiri Naran 3661 Polayal

3480 Karayal 2 3664 Tissa wee

3482 Akuramboda 3665 Sudu Karayal

3486 Puwakmalata

Samba 3666 Podisayam

3487 Palasithari 601 3423 Giress

3489 Murungakayan 3 3427 Naudu wee

3490 Murungakayan 101

3434 Kokuvellai

3496 Bala Ma wee 3463 Karayal 3

Four replicates were arranged for each fertilizer level and each

replicate was consisted of 3 lines Twenty plants were included

in to each line Four different fertilizer levels were applied no

fertilizer half of the recommended dose recommended dose and

twice of the recommended dose The recommended fertilizer

dosage for modern rice cultivars was used as the recommended

dose (Basal Dressing Urea 50 Kgha TSP 625 Kgha MOP 50

Kgha Top Dressing Urea 375 Kgha) Basal dressing was

applied before planting and top dressing was applied two times at

2 weeks after planting and at 8 weeks after planting Plant

heights (cm) number of tillersper plant number of leavesper

plant were recorded during the vegetative growth stage at 6

weeks after planting Data were statistically analyzed by

ANOVA and mean separation was done by DMRT using SAS

statistical software (SAS 2000) Yield and yield components of

the population at each fertilizer level are intended to be measured

after harvesting

Considering the contribution of the plant height number of

leavesplant and number of tillersplant for the final yield an

arbitrary rating scale was developed for the evaluated

parameters Since the number of tillers is the major contributor to

the yield the highest 5 points were allocated for the maximum

number of tillersplant Between number of leavesplant and

plant height number of leavesplant was given a higher rating 3

points while less 2 points were allocated to the plant height Rice

cultivars with plant height more than 110 cm were not considered

for scoring since they tend to be logged A fraction of maximum

score was given for the second highest and third highest values

of each parameter as given in table 2

Table 2 Arbitrary rating scale used for the evaluation of best

fertilizer level for individual rice cultivar

Plant height lt 110 cm Number of leaves Number of tillers

Highest score 2 3 5

Second highest 1 2 4

Third highest 05 1 3

Lowest 0 0 0

III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Plant height According to ANOVA plant height of individual

traditional rice cultivars significantly differed with the fertilizer

level where there was a significant difference among rice


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg





























































Table 3


applications

Plant height (cm)



c 946

a 463

d

Kirikara 813 ab

716 c 866

a 793

b


b 1025

a 688

d

Dena wee 807 c 1029

a 1026

a 817

b


a 1036

d 1059

c


c 732

a 503

d


a 975

a 605

c

Dandumara 953 b 640

c 985

a 956

b

Karayal 1 915 b 866

c 713

d 952

a


b 915

d 975

a

Sudu wee 721 d 1046

a 921

c 984

b

Sudu Goda

wee 776

d 806

b 958

a 811

c


b 970

a 855

c


a 1014

b 992

c


b 1005

a 504

c

Puwakmalata

Samba 603

b 716

a 535

c 595

b

Palasithari

601 1002

a 994

b 873

c 378

d

Murungakayan

3 495

d 755

b 825

a 735

c

Murungakayan

101 493

d 839

a 756

b 744

c


a 777

c 905

b


b 1015

a 968

d

Rata wee 805 a 750

b c 767

b 721

c

Suduru 735 b 853

a 856

a 855

a


c 941

a 813

b


b 955

a 766

c


b 963

a 969

a

Ranruwan 877b 851

c 913

a 837

d

Rajes 896 c 980

a 848

d 905

b

Madoluwa 603 c 513

d 896

a 738

b


bc 745

a 646

b

Handiran 966b 1021

a 643

c 984

b

Gunaratna 916b 559

d 974

a 719

c

Polayal 899 a 815

b 610

d 696

c


a 917

c 969

b


a 764

d 818

b

Podisayam 688b 529

d 906

a 621

c

Giress 730 c 939

a 705

d 876

b

Naudu wee 814b 715

d 861

a 783

c


a 827

d 951

b

Karayal 3 843b 772

c 954

a 834

b




ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Table 4




No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD


bc 30

b 29

bc

Kirikara 33 a 31

b 31

b 28

c

Kotathavalu 1 51 b

55 a 50

b 45

c

Dena wee 70 a 53

c 59

b 73

a

Herath Banda 44c 56

a 48

b 42

d

Hondarawala 30c 32

b 32

b 40

a

Kottakaram 26c 30

a 29

b 26

c

Dandumara 33 d

37 c 45

b 52

a

Karayal 1 28d 55

a 53

b 44

c

Dewaredderi 28d 36

b 30

c 51

a

Sudu wee 30c 52

a 39

b 51

a

Sudu Goda

wee 34

a 31

b 30

b 24

c

Kiri Naran 26 d

43 a 38

b 35

c

Karayal 2 32 b

35 a 31

b 32

b

Akuramboda 37c 45

b 45

b 47

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 18

c 34

a 29

ab 26

b

Palasithari

601 34

a 35

a 36

a 16

b

Murungakayan

3 21

d 50

a 35

c 46

b

Murungakayan

101 20

c 41

a 39

a 29

b

Bala Ma wee 32 d

49 a 38

b 33

c

Pokuru Samba 35c 40

ab 38

b 43

a

Rata wee 31c 32

b 32

b 34

a

Suduru 33c 49

a 39

b 41

b

Ingrisi wee 35 b

33c 35

b 41

a

Kotathavalu 2 36 d

47 a 43

b 39

c


a 37

a 38

a

Ranruwan 35 b

34c 38

a 37

a

Rajes 29 d

34 b

31c 36

a

Madoluwa 18 d

21 b

19c 27

a

Suduru Samba 17c 16

c 24

a 21

b

Handiran 33c 48

a 32

d 38

b

Gunaratna 34c 43

a 34

c 38

b

Polayal 46 a 35

c 47

a 44

b

Tissa wee 38 b

35c 39

a 38

b

Sudu Karayal 27c 38

a 32

b 32

b

Podisayam 21 d

43 a 22

c 36

b

Giress 17 d

51 a 23

c 36

b

Naudu wee 32 d

46 a 33

c 39

b

Kokuvellai 30 d

39 a 34

c 36

b

Karayal 3 46 a 32

bc 33

b 30

c






Table 5




No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD


c 120

b 99

d

Kirikara 134 a 120

b 123

b 107

c


b 210

c 142

d

Dena wee 213 b 210

c 211

c 288

a


a 178

c 175

c


b 112

c 160

a

Kottakaram 88 d 120

a 115

b 105

c

Dandumara 130 d 133

c 173

b 208

a

Karayal 1 111 d 219

a 210

b 175

c


b 109

c 205

a

Sudu wee 145 d 206

a 172

c 203

b


a 120

b 106

c


b 135

c

Karayal 2 126 142 a 128

c 132

b


b 183

b 188

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 71

d 134

a 118

b 102

c


b 145

a 62

d


a 140

c 184

b

Murungakayan

101 84

d 162

a 152

b 113

c


a 150

b 133

c


b 150

c 169

a

Rata wee 123 c 128

b 128

b 138

a

Suduru 123 d 196

a 151

c 160

b


c 140

b 164

a


a 173

b 157

c


b 145

b 148

a

Ranruwan 140 b 135

c 150

a 146

ab

Rajes 117 d 138

b 125

c 145

a

Madoluwa 65 d 83

b 72

c 106

a


c 100

a 90

b

Handiran 132 c 193

a 100

d 153

b

Gunaratna 137 c 170

a 138

c 158

b

Polayal 183 b 148

c 188

a 181

b

Tissa wee 151 a 142

b 155

a 152

a


a 126

b 128

b

Podisayam 83 d 173

a 89

c 144

b

Giress 68 d 205

a 92

c 143

b

Naudu wee 129 d 183

a 130

c 155

b


a 135

c 145

b


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Karayal 3 185 a 129

c 131

b 120

d



























































higher yield










No F

X

frac12

RD RD

X 2

RD

Best

level













Kiri Naran 0 9 9 45

R D

or

RD2

Karayal 2 4 10 14 65 RD


Puwakmalata

Samba 1 10 11 55 RD



RD or

RD2

Murungakayan

101 0 10 10 55

R Dor

RD2




Suduru 05 9 95 7 RD





Rajes 02 8 82 9 2RD



ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg








Giress 05 10 105 7 RD











CONCLUSIONS













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




financial support

REFERENCES






















ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg


















AUTHORS









TEL +94-41-2292200-EXT 315

FAX+94412292384


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg





























































Table 3


applications

Plant height (cm)



c 946

a 463

d

Kirikara 813 ab

716 c 866

a 793

b


b 1025

a 688

d

Dena wee 807 c 1029

a 1026

a 817

b


a 1036

d 1059

c


c 732

a 503

d


a 975

a 605

c

Dandumara 953 b 640

c 985

a 956

b

Karayal 1 915 b 866

c 713

d 952

a


b 915

d 975

a

Sudu wee 721 d 1046

a 921

c 984

b

Sudu Goda

wee 776

d 806

b 958

a 811

c


b 970

a 855

c


a 1014

b 992

c


b 1005

a 504

c

Puwakmalata

Samba 603

b 716

a 535

c 595

b

Palasithari

601 1002

a 994

b 873

c 378

d

Murungakayan

3 495

d 755

b 825

a 735

c

Murungakayan

101 493

d 839

a 756

b 744

c


a 777

c 905

b


b 1015

a 968

d

Rata wee 805 a 750

b c 767

b 721

c

Suduru 735 b 853

a 856

a 855

a


c 941

a 813

b


b 955

a 766

c


b 963

a 969

a

Ranruwan 877b 851

c 913

a 837

d

Rajes 896 c 980

a 848

d 905

b

Madoluwa 603 c 513

d 896

a 738

b


bc 745

a 646

b

Handiran 966b 1021

a 643

c 984

b

Gunaratna 916b 559

d 974

a 719

c

Polayal 899 a 815

b 610

d 696

c


a 917

c 969

b


a 764

d 818

b

Podisayam 688b 529

d 906

a 621

c

Giress 730 c 939

a 705

d 876

b

Naudu wee 814b 715

d 861

a 783

c


a 827

d 951

b

Karayal 3 843b 772

c 954

a 834

b




ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Table 4




No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD


bc 30

b 29

bc

Kirikara 33 a 31

b 31

b 28

c

Kotathavalu 1 51 b

55 a 50

b 45

c

Dena wee 70 a 53

c 59

b 73

a

Herath Banda 44c 56

a 48

b 42

d

Hondarawala 30c 32

b 32

b 40

a

Kottakaram 26c 30

a 29

b 26

c

Dandumara 33 d

37 c 45

b 52

a

Karayal 1 28d 55

a 53

b 44

c

Dewaredderi 28d 36

b 30

c 51

a

Sudu wee 30c 52

a 39

b 51

a

Sudu Goda

wee 34

a 31

b 30

b 24

c

Kiri Naran 26 d

43 a 38

b 35

c

Karayal 2 32 b

35 a 31

b 32

b

Akuramboda 37c 45

b 45

b 47

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 18

c 34

a 29

ab 26

b

Palasithari

601 34

a 35

a 36

a 16

b

Murungakayan

3 21

d 50

a 35

c 46

b

Murungakayan

101 20

c 41

a 39

a 29

b

Bala Ma wee 32 d

49 a 38

b 33

c

Pokuru Samba 35c 40

ab 38

b 43

a

Rata wee 31c 32

b 32

b 34

a

Suduru 33c 49

a 39

b 41

b

Ingrisi wee 35 b

33c 35

b 41

a

Kotathavalu 2 36 d

47 a 43

b 39

c


a 37

a 38

a

Ranruwan 35 b

34c 38

a 37

a

Rajes 29 d

34 b

31c 36

a

Madoluwa 18 d

21 b

19c 27

a

Suduru Samba 17c 16

c 24

a 21

b

Handiran 33c 48

a 32

d 38

b

Gunaratna 34c 43

a 34

c 38

b

Polayal 46 a 35

c 47

a 44

b

Tissa wee 38 b

35c 39

a 38

b

Sudu Karayal 27c 38

a 32

b 32

b

Podisayam 21 d

43 a 22

c 36

b

Giress 17 d

51 a 23

c 36

b

Naudu wee 32 d

46 a 33

c 39

b

Kokuvellai 30 d

39 a 34

c 36

b

Karayal 3 46 a 32

bc 33

b 30

c






Table 5




No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD


c 120

b 99

d

Kirikara 134 a 120

b 123

b 107

c


b 210

c 142

d

Dena wee 213 b 210

c 211

c 288

a


a 178

c 175

c


b 112

c 160

a

Kottakaram 88 d 120

a 115

b 105

c

Dandumara 130 d 133

c 173

b 208

a

Karayal 1 111 d 219

a 210

b 175

c


b 109

c 205

a

Sudu wee 145 d 206

a 172

c 203

b


a 120

b 106

c


b 135

c

Karayal 2 126 142 a 128

c 132

b


b 183

b 188

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 71

d 134

a 118

b 102

c


b 145

a 62

d


a 140

c 184

b

Murungakayan

101 84

d 162

a 152

b 113

c


a 150

b 133

c


b 150

c 169

a

Rata wee 123 c 128

b 128

b 138

a

Suduru 123 d 196

a 151

c 160

b


c 140

b 164

a


a 173

b 157

c


b 145

b 148

a

Ranruwan 140 b 135

c 150

a 146

ab

Rajes 117 d 138

b 125

c 145

a

Madoluwa 65 d 83

b 72

c 106

a


c 100

a 90

b

Handiran 132 c 193

a 100

d 153

b

Gunaratna 137 c 170

a 138

c 158

b

Polayal 183 b 148

c 188

a 181

b

Tissa wee 151 a 142

b 155

a 152

a


a 126

b 128

b

Podisayam 83 d 173

a 89

c 144

b

Giress 68 d 205

a 92

c 143

b

Naudu wee 129 d 183

a 130

c 155

b


a 135

c 145

b


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Karayal 3 185 a 129

c 131

b 120

d



























































higher yield










No F

X

frac12

RD RD

X 2

RD

Best

level













Kiri Naran 0 9 9 45

R D

or

RD2

Karayal 2 4 10 14 65 RD


Puwakmalata

Samba 1 10 11 55 RD



RD or

RD2

Murungakayan

101 0 10 10 55

R Dor

RD2




Suduru 05 9 95 7 RD





Rajes 02 8 82 9 2RD



ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg








Giress 05 10 105 7 RD











CONCLUSIONS













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




financial support

REFERENCES






















ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg


















AUTHORS









TEL +94-41-2292200-EXT 315

FAX+94412292384


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Table 4




No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD


bc 30

b 29

bc

Kirikara 33 a 31

b 31

b 28

c

Kotathavalu 1 51 b

55 a 50

b 45

c

Dena wee 70 a 53

c 59

b 73

a

Herath Banda 44c 56

a 48

b 42

d

Hondarawala 30c 32

b 32

b 40

a

Kottakaram 26c 30

a 29

b 26

c

Dandumara 33 d

37 c 45

b 52

a

Karayal 1 28d 55

a 53

b 44

c

Dewaredderi 28d 36

b 30

c 51

a

Sudu wee 30c 52

a 39

b 51

a

Sudu Goda

wee 34

a 31

b 30

b 24

c

Kiri Naran 26 d

43 a 38

b 35

c

Karayal 2 32 b

35 a 31

b 32

b

Akuramboda 37c 45

b 45

b 47

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 18

c 34

a 29

ab 26

b

Palasithari

601 34

a 35

a 36

a 16

b

Murungakayan

3 21

d 50

a 35

c 46

b

Murungakayan

101 20

c 41

a 39

a 29

b

Bala Ma wee 32 d

49 a 38

b 33

c

Pokuru Samba 35c 40

ab 38

b 43

a

Rata wee 31c 32

b 32

b 34

a

Suduru 33c 49

a 39

b 41

b

Ingrisi wee 35 b

33c 35

b 41

a

Kotathavalu 2 36 d

47 a 43

b 39

c


a 37

a 38

a

Ranruwan 35 b

34c 38

a 37

a

Rajes 29 d

34 b

31c 36

a

Madoluwa 18 d

21 b

19c 27

a

Suduru Samba 17c 16

c 24

a 21

b

Handiran 33c 48

a 32

d 38

b

Gunaratna 34c 43

a 34

c 38

b

Polayal 46 a 35

c 47

a 44

b

Tissa wee 38 b

35c 39

a 38

b

Sudu Karayal 27c 38

a 32

b 32

b

Podisayam 21 d

43 a 22

c 36

b

Giress 17 d

51 a 23

c 36

b

Naudu wee 32 d

46 a 33

c 39

b

Kokuvellai 30 d

39 a 34

c 36

b

Karayal 3 46 a 32

bc 33

b 30

c






Table 5




No F

X frac12

RD RD X 2 RD


c 120

b 99

d

Kirikara 134 a 120

b 123

b 107

c


b 210

c 142

d

Dena wee 213 b 210

c 211

c 288

a


a 178

c 175

c


b 112

c 160

a

Kottakaram 88 d 120

a 115

b 105

c

Dandumara 130 d 133

c 173

b 208

a

Karayal 1 111 d 219

a 210

b 175

c


b 109

c 205

a

Sudu wee 145 d 206

a 172

c 203

b


a 120

b 106

c


b 135

c

Karayal 2 126 142 a 128

c 132

b


b 183

b 188

a

Puwakmalata

Samba 71

d 134

a 118

b 102

c


b 145

a 62

d


a 140

c 184

b

Murungakayan

101 84

d 162

a 152

b 113

c


a 150

b 133

c


b 150

c 169

a

Rata wee 123 c 128

b 128

b 138

a

Suduru 123 d 196

a 151

c 160

b


c 140

b 164

a


a 173

b 157

c


b 145

b 148

a

Ranruwan 140 b 135

c 150

a 146

ab

Rajes 117 d 138

b 125

c 145

a

Madoluwa 65 d 83

b 72

c 106

a


c 100

a 90

b

Handiran 132 c 193

a 100

d 153

b

Gunaratna 137 c 170

a 138

c 158

b

Polayal 183 b 148

c 188

a 181

b

Tissa wee 151 a 142

b 155

a 152

a


a 126

b 128

b

Podisayam 83 d 173

a 89

c 144

b

Giress 68 d 205

a 92

c 143

b

Naudu wee 129 d 183

a 130

c 155

b


a 135

c 145

b


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Karayal 3 185 a 129

c 131

b 120

d



























































higher yield










No F

X

frac12

RD RD

X 2

RD

Best

level













Kiri Naran 0 9 9 45

R D

or

RD2

Karayal 2 4 10 14 65 RD


Puwakmalata

Samba 1 10 11 55 RD



RD or

RD2

Murungakayan

101 0 10 10 55

R Dor

RD2




Suduru 05 9 95 7 RD





Rajes 02 8 82 9 2RD



ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg








Giress 05 10 105 7 RD











CONCLUSIONS













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




financial support

REFERENCES






















ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg


















AUTHORS









TEL +94-41-2292200-EXT 315

FAX+94412292384


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg

Karayal 3 185 a 129

c 131

b 120

d



























































higher yield










No F

X

frac12

RD RD

X 2

RD

Best

level













Kiri Naran 0 9 9 45

R D

or

RD2

Karayal 2 4 10 14 65 RD


Puwakmalata

Samba 1 10 11 55 RD



RD or

RD2

Murungakayan

101 0 10 10 55

R Dor

RD2




Suduru 05 9 95 7 RD





Rajes 02 8 82 9 2RD



ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg








Giress 05 10 105 7 RD











CONCLUSIONS













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




financial support

REFERENCES






















ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg


















AUTHORS









TEL +94-41-2292200-EXT 315

FAX+94412292384


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg








Giress 05 10 105 7 RD











CONCLUSIONS













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




financial support

REFERENCES






















ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg


















AUTHORS









TEL +94-41-2292200-EXT 315

FAX+94412292384


ISSN 2250-3153

wwwijsrporg


















AUTHORS









TEL +94-41-2292200-EXT 315

FAX+94412292384

Documents

Fertilizer Response of some Sri Lankan Traditional Rice ... · Fertilizer Response of some Sri Lankan Traditional Rice ... differing from modern rice cultivars ... Since the number