fertilizer sector improvement (fsi+) · compound fertilizer applied at a balanced rate is higher...

INTERNATIONAL FERTILIZER DEVELOPMENT CENTER

PO BOX 2040 | MUSCLE SHOALS, AL 35662 | USA

Fertilizer Sector Improvement (FSI+)

TRIALS WITH THE UREA DEEP PLACEMENT TECHNIQUE ON TRANSPLANTED RICE

WET SEASON 2018 Agreement Number BFS-IO-15-00001 May 2019

FSI+ Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018 i

Table of Contents

General Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1

1. UDP and Prilled Urea Deep Placement Trial ................................................................... 3

Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3

Objective ........................................................................................................................... 4

Materials and Methods ...................................................................................................... 4

Results and Discussion ..................................................................................................... 5

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 9

2. Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial ................................................. 10

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 10

Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 10

Materials and Methods .................................................................................................... 11

Results and Discussion ................................................................................................... 12

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 16

3. N Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR .................................................................................... 17

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 17

Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 17



Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 20

4. P Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR .................................................................................... 21

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 21

Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 21



Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 24

5. Omission Field Trial ....................................................................................................... 25

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 25

Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 26



Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 28

6. UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial ................................................. 28

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 28

Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 29



FSI+ Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018 ii

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 34

Summary .................................................................................................................................. 35

UDP and Prilled Urea Deep Placement Trial ................................................................. 35

Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial ................................................. 35

N Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR .................................................................................... 36

P Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR .................................................................................... 36

Omission Field Trial ....................................................................................................... 37

UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial ................................................. 37

Appendix 1. Data Sheets ......................................................................................................... 39

Data from UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial in Yin Daik Kwin, Taikkyi Township . 39

Data from UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial in Wet Sa Boe, Zigone Township ........ 40

Data from Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial in War Kauk Taw, Kunchangone Township ................................................................................................. 41

Data from Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial in East Waw, Waw Township......................................................................................................................... 42

Data from N Rate Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township ................................ 43

Data from P Rate Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township ................................. 44

Data from Omission Field Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township ................... 45

Data from UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial in Nyaung Chaung, Kangyidaunt .................................................................................................................... 46

Data from UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial in Kyee Chaung, Mawgyun ........................................................................................................................ 47

Photos ....................................................................................................................................... 48

Tables

Table 1. Locations and Coordinates of Field Trials, Wet Season 2018 ............................. 3

Table 2. Yield and Component Traits of the UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial ............ 7

Table 3. Simple Effect Comparisons of Treatment by Location ........................................ 8

Table 4. Yield and Component Traits of the Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial .................................................................................................... 15

Table 5. ANOVA of GLIMMIX Procedure of Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trials ................................................................................ 16

Table 6. Comparison of Mean Yields Across Test Locations at the P(0.05) Level (mean yields with the same letter are not significantly different) ...................... 16

Table 7. Yield and Component Traits of N Rates Trial at Paw Daw Mu, Kunchangone ...................................................................................................... 20

Table 8. Yield and Component Traits of the P Rate Trial at Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt ....................................................................................................... 24

FSI+ Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018 iii

Table 9. Yield and Component Traits of the Omission Field Trial at Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt ....................................................................................................... 28

Table 10. Yield and Component Traits of the UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trials ................................................................................................ 32

Table 11. Analysis of Variance Table of GLIMMIX Model and Fertilizer Means of UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trials ................................... 33

Figures

Figure 1. Treatment Comparison Within Locations ............................................................ 9

Figure 2. Response Curve of the Yield and Biomass Grain Weights of the P Rate Trial in Kangyidaunt .......................................................................................... 25

Figure 3. Variety Means Across Fertilizer Practices from UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trials ......................................................................... 34

Photos

Photo 1. UDP and PU Deep Placement Transplanting Trial in Wet Sa Boe Village, Zigone, Bago Region, on July 19, 2018 ............................................................. 48

Photo 2. Strengthening Bunds Just Before UDP and PU Application on Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilization Trial in Wet Sa Boe Village, Waw, Bago Region, on August 16, 2018 ........................................................... 48

Photo 3. UDP Application during UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Trial in Kyee Chaung Village, Mawgyun, Ayeyarwaddy Region, on August 28, 2018 .................................................................................................................... 49

Photo 4. Prilled Urea Application during Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial in War Kauk Taw Village, Kunchangone, Yangon Region, on August 8, 2018 .............................................................................................. 49

Photo 5. Early-Maturing 90-Day Variety of the UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial Matured Earlier Than Swarna sub1 in Nyaung Chaung Village, Kangyidaunt, Ayeyarwaddy Region, Just Before Harvest on October 18, 2018 .............................................................................. 50

Photo 6. Threshing Crop Cut from the UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial in Nyaung Chaung Village, Kangyidaunt Ayeyarwaddy Region, on October 18, 2018 ............................................................................. 50

Photo 7. N Rate Trial, P Rate Trial, and Nutrient Omission Trial (left to right) in Paw Daw Mu Village, Kangyidaunt, Ayeyarwaddy Region, on September 6, 2018 .............................................................................................. 51

FSI+ Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018 iv

Acronyms and Abbreviations

AE Agronomic Efficiency

ANOVA Analysis of Variance

BR Broadcast Rice

Ca Calcium

cm centimeter

CV Coefficient of Variation

ft foot

FP Farmer’s Practice

FSI Fertilizer Sector Improvement

g gram

ha hectare

HYV High-Yielding Variety

IFDC International Fertilizer Development Center

in inch

K Potassium

kg kilogram

lb pound

LSD Least Significant Difference

m meter

MOP Muriate of Potash

mt metric ton

N Nitrogen

P Phosphorus

PU Prilled Urea

RCB Randomized Complete Block

S Sulfur

SSNM Site Specific Nutrient Management

TSP Triple Superphosphate

TPR Transplanted Rice

UB Urea Broadcast

UDP Urea Deep Placement

USAID United States Agency for International Development

FSI+ Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018 v

Conversions

To Convert To Multiply by

acre hectare 0.4047

hectare acre 2.471

U.S. ton/acre t/ha 2.24

lb/acre kg/ha 1.12

kg/ha lb/acre 0.89

K2O K 0.83

K K2O 1.2047

P2O5 P 0.4364

P P2O5 2.2915

FSI+ Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018 vi

FSI+ Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018 1

Fertilizer Sector Improvement (FSI+) Project Trials With the Urea Deep Placement Technique

on Transplanted Rice | Wet Season 2018

General Introduction Urea deep placement (UDP) technology is a proven technology that can increase the yield of

transplanted lowland rice by 15-20% with less use of urea (up to 40%) compared to broadcast

application of urea. This has been proven in Bangladesh and in sub-Saharan African

countries.

Under the Fertilizer Sector Improvement (FSI) project, funded by the United States Agency

for International Development (USAID) and implemented by the International Fertilizer

Development Center (IFDC) based in Muscle Shoals, Alabama, USA, a number of UDP

adaptation trials on transplanted rice (TPR) during the 2014 wet season to the 2017 wet

season proved a yield increase of TPR in the project regions of Yangon, Bago, and

Ayeyarwaddy. Yield increase from UDP, with less or only slightly more nitrogen (N) than

that applied under farmer’s practice (FP), ranged from 4.3% to 41.7%. Yield increase from

UDP, with the same rate of N as surface broadcast prilled urea and the same basal P and K,

ranged from 3.4% to 46.9%. Results indicate that UDP is a robust technology that can

increase rice yield in Myanmar. Nutrient use efficiency of UDP was shown to be double that

of surface broadcast prilled urea.

UDP technology also was evaluated on broadcast rice (BR), which is a more common

practice of farmers in the project regions. Results show the effectiveness of UDP on BR.

UDP application on BR was found as effective as UDP on TPR. UDP can be applied just

before seed broadcasting or 20-25 days after sowing. It can be used for both early- and

medium-maturing rice varieties. It is not necessary to apply UDP at a spacing closer than that

on TPR (40 cm x 40 cm), although early growth shows green plants in lines along the UDP

rows with yellow plants in the interrow. This tends to blend as growth progresses. In TPR

trials in which balanced fertilization rates with straight fertilizers and UDP are compared with

FP of balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer and broadcast prilled urea, farmer’s

practice with compound fertilizer and PU did not provide sufficient nutrients; however, when

nutrients were balanced – either straight fertilizers with UDP or compound fertilizer with

broadcast prilled urea, yields were similar. Even though yields were not significantly


different, the yield with straight fertilizers and UDP was slightly higher than that of

compound fertilizer and broadcast prilled urea. The yield increase of balanced fertilization

with straight fertilizers over balanced with compound fertilizer was due to UDP. The cost of

compound fertilizer applied at a balanced rate is higher than that of straight fertilizers.

A long-term trial to determine the residual effect of N, phosphorus (P), and potassium (K)

was conducted on the rice-gram cropping system for five seasons (two-and-a-half crop

cycles). No residual effect of N, which was applied on rice as UDP, was observed on the

subsequent gram crop. There was no clear carryover effect of P and K on the subsequent

crop. The gram crop growing method, which relies on residual soil moisture and no

irrigation, could be a confounding factor. Full growth of the gram crop was seldom observed

in farmers’ fields. A few farmers applied P fertilizer at the booting/flowering stage of the rice

crop, which was then incorporated into the soil when preparing for the gram crop and may

have been available to the gram crop. Not all of the long-term trials could be continued for

various reasons, such as unwillingness of farmers and ownership change.

Eight omission pot trials were performed in the greenhouse to identify nutrient deficiency of

the soils, and rate trials were conducted in the fields where soil was sampled to initiate site-

specific nutrient management recommendations in the project areas. P was found to be

deficient in all test soils. N was also limited in all soils except for one site where the farmer

was a seed grower and may have applied a high rate of N fertilizer. K was found to be

deficient in three of eight soils, and S was deficient in two of eight soils.

In the 2018 wet season, UDP and prilled urea deep placement trials1 and trials of application

of compound fertilizer at a balanced rate were repeated for confirmation. Evaluation of UDP

on rice grown in flooded areas with submergence-tolerant rice varieties was carried out again

at new locations with new farmers. An omission field trial and nutrient rate trials were also

conducted on the soil, which was identified as N and P deficient in an earlier omission pot

trial. Altogether, nine trial sites were selected for six types of trials, with some trials

conducted in two different locations.

1 In this report, UDP refers to deep placement of a urea briquette.


Trial No. Trial Name Number of Trials

1. UDP and prilled urea deep placement trial 2 2. Balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer trial 2 3. N rate trial using UDP on TPR 1 4. P rate trial using UDP on TPR 1 5. Omission field trial 1 6. UDP evaluation under submergence conditions trial 2

TOTAL 9

The UDP and PU deep placement trial, balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer trial,

and UDP evaluation under submergence conditions trial were conducted in two locations

each. Trial sites (locations) and their coordinates are provided in Table 1.

Table 1. Locations and Coordinates of Field Trials, Wet Season 2018

Region Township Village Latitude Longitude Elevation Trial No.

Yangon Taikkyi Yin Daik Kwin 17° 20.514' N 95° 55.252' E 58 ft 1

Kunchangone War Kauk Taw 16° 26.256' N 95° 58.185' E 23 ft 2

Bago Waw East Waw 17° 29.977' N 96° 42.146' E 44 ft 2

Zigone Wet Sa Boe 18° 21.625' N 95° 26.398' E 113 ft 1

Ayeyarwady

Mawgyun Kyee Chaung 16° 20.086' N 95° 22.497' E 33 ft 6

Kangyidaunt Paw Daw Mu 16° 48.728' N 94° 51.708' E 11 ft 3



Kangyidaunt Nyaung Chaung 16° 27.934' N 95° 23.720' E 8 ft 6

1. UDP and Prilled Urea Deep Placement Trial

Introduction UDP is an approved technology to increase nutrient use efficiency and reduce losses through

various approaches. It can be applied on transplanted lowland rice as well as on broadcast

rice. The results of the UDP adaptation trials in the project regions in Myanmar indicate that

UDP can increase yield by 16-18% in the wet season and 24-28% in the dry season. To

enable a convenient means for deep placement, prilled or granular urea is compacted to

produce larger briquettes, which are easy to deep place manually in the soil at proper depth.2

2 Research has shown 7-10 cm to be the proper depth.


However, with the advent of specialized machinery, mechanized deep placement of

prilled/granular urea, instead of manual application of briquettes, becomes a possibility. This

trial was repeated to confirm the possibility of PU deep placement.

Objective • Study the response of deep placement of prilled urea, compared with urea briquette deep

placement and surface broadcast urea on transplanted rice.

Materials and Methods The trial was conducted in two locations using a randomized complete block (RCB) design

with five treatments and three replications.

Locations and Farmers 1. Yin Daik Kwin village, Taikkyi township, Yangon region, with U Zaw Min Htwe

2. Wet Sa Boe village, Zigone township, Bago (West) region, with U Thein Tun

Treatments 1. Control (0 N)

2. Urea briquette deep placement (51.8 kg N/ha)

3. Prilled urea point placement (51.8 kg N/ha)

4. Prilled urea band placement (51.8 kg N/ha)

5. Prilled urea surface broadcast application (51.8 kg N/ha) in three split doses

Variety Used 1. Thee Dat Yin in Taikkyi, Yangon, at Location 1

2. Sin Thu Kha in Zigone, Bago (West), at Location 2

Field Operation Procedure Five seedbeds of 3 m2 were prepared for each treatment. On each seedbed, 200 g of seed was

broadcasted uniformly, followed by farmer’s practice for nursery management. Field

preparation by farmers at each site was completed two to three days before transplanting.

Layout and bund formation around each plot was carried out by project staff and farmers.

Each experimental plot of 16 ft x 16 ft was separated by bunds at least 12 inches high and

8-12 inches wide. There were 15 plots for the 5 x 3 RCB design. Five treatments were in a

line in one block for each replication, and there were three blocks for three replications. After

bund formation, a blanket basal dose of P, K, and sulfur (S) was applied on all plots. P was

applied at 80 kg TSP ha-1 (36 kg P2O5/ha or 15.7 kg P/ha), K at 40 kg MOP ha-1 (24 kg


K2O/ha or 20 kg K/ha), and Ca and S were applied as gypsum at 25 kg ha-1 (4.5 kg S/ha and

5.75 kg Ca/ha). The fertilizer was then incorporated by rake, and the plot was leveled again.

Transplanting was done on the same day using two to three seedlings per hill at a spacing of

20 cm x 20 cm. The Taikkyi trial was transplanted 27 days after seedbed sowing, and the

Zigone trial was transplanted 29 days after seedbed sowing. Deep placement of urea for both

UDP and PU (Treatments 2, 3, and 4) was done one time only at seven days after

transplanting in Taikkyi and 11 days after transplanting in Zigone. For Treatments 2 and 3,

one 1.8-g briquette and an equal amount of PU was deep-placed by hand 3-4 inches deep at

the center of alternate four rice hills. For Treatment 4, a furrow of 3-4 inches deep was cut

between each alternate two rows, and an equal amount of prilled urea for each row was

immediately applied in the furrows with uniform distribution along the furrow line. Points of

placement and furrows were closed by hand. For Treatment 5, one-third of the PU was

broadcasted on the same day as UDP, one-third was applied at panicle initiation stage, and

one-third was applied at flowering stage. No urea was applied on Treatment 1 plots. Weed

control, pest and disease control, and water management were performed by farmers as

requested by IFDC. All activities were recorded. Data of all component characteristics,

including biomass weights, were taken. Crop cut harvests were done by taking a

representative sample size of 9 m2 from each plot. All parameters were analyzed with

ANOVA separately for the two locations. Yield data combined for both locations were

analyzed using the Generalized Linear Mixed Model (GLIMMIX), and treatment means were

compared using the Tukey Grouping procedure.

Results and Discussion Yin Daik Kwin, Taikkyi – The trial showed significant differences among treatments in the

number of panicles per hill, dry biomass straw weight at P(0.05), and yield at P(0.01) (refer to

Data from UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial in Yin Daik Kwin, Taikkyi Township). Other

characteristics were not significantly different. Number of panicles per hill was the highest

(12.6) with PU point placement, followed by UDP (11.7) and PU band deep placement

(11.6). The lowest number of panicles per hill (8.9) was found with the control plot.

However, only the difference between the control and urea application treatments was

significant. There was no statistical difference between the urea application treatments. The

dry biomass straw weights of plots with urea application were also not statistically different.

The weights of plots with urea application ranged from 460 g to 531 g. The highest weight

(531 g) was given with PU point deep placement. The lowest weight for the urea application

treatments (460 g) was produced by the PU band placement treatment. This was not


statistically different from the control treatment, which gave the lowest dry biomass straw

weight of 375 g (Table 2).

According to ANOVA, the highest yield (4.45 t/ha) was produced with UDP treatment. This

was significantly higher than all other treatments. The yields of plots with prilled urea

application were not significantly different and ranged from 4.00 t/ha to 4.08 t/ha. The

control plot produced the significantly lowest yield at 3.39 t/ha (Table 2). The results indicate

that N is limited in the test soil. Urea application can improve the rice yield. In this trial, UDP

seemed the most efficient application over prilled urea. But that does not mean PU deep

placement was not as efficient as UDP. Manual prilled urea deep placement is not as precise

as urea briquette deep placement. When deep-placed manually, not all of the PU reached the

correct depth within the anaerobic zone. Some of the prilled urea remained in the aerobic

zone. PU band placement is even more difficult than point placement. If prilled urea could be

deep-placed correctly at the required depth, the expected yield would be as high as that of

UDP.

Wet Sa Boe, Zigone – ANOVA showed significant differences in plant height, all biomass

straw and grain weights, and yield. The biomass grain weights were significant at P(0.05), and

the others were significant at P(0.01) (refer to Data from UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial in

Wet Sa Boe, Zigone Township). The plant height with UDP treatment was the highest at 108

cm. The second highest plant (106 cm) was found with PU point placement, followed by PU

band placement, which had a plant height of 101 cm. The shortest plant (92 cm) was found

with the control treatment; it was significantly the shortest among all treatments. The PU

broadcast treatment had the second shortest plant at 99 cm. There was no significant

difference between UDP and PU point placement or between PU point placement and PU

band placement or between PU band placement and broadcast PU (Table 2). Both wet and

dry biomass straw weights (1,696 g and 625 g, respectively) were the highest with the UDP

treatment and were significantly higher than all other treatments. Wet biomass straw weights

of prilled urea treatments were not significantly different. PU band placement had a slightly

higher wet straw weight (1,413 g) than PU point placement (1,406 g), and PU point

placement had a higher wet straw weight than PU band placement (1,334 g). However, none

of the differences were significant. The dry straw weights of PU point placement and PU

band placement, as well as PU band and broadcast PU, were not significantly different. PU

point placement produced 523 g, PU band placement produced 509 g, and broadcast PU

produced 454 g of dry straw weight. The control plot had the lowest dry straw weight at 306

g, which was significant. The biomass grain weights of UDP treatments were not statistically


different, ranging from 440 g to 489 g for wet grain weight and 426 g to 471 g for dry grain

weight. PU point placement produced the highest grain weights at 489 g for wet grain and

471 g for dry grain. The UDP treatment produced the second highest wet grain weight at 440

g, and the third dry grain weight at 426 g. The PU band placement produced the second

highest biomass grain weights at 440 g for wet grain and 434 g for dry grain. However, these

were not statistically different. The control plot had the significantly lowest biomass grain

weights. The control treatment and PU broadcast treatment were not different (Table 2).

The yield results of this trial were similar to those of the trial at Yin Daik Kwin. According to

ANOVA, the yield of the UDP treatment (4.70 t/ha) was the highest among all treatments. It

was not statistically different from the second highest yield produced by PU point placement

(4.45 t/ha). The PU point placement treatment was not significantly different from PU band

placement (4.05 t/ha). The yields of the PU band placement and PU broadcast treatment were

not significantly different. The PU surface broadcast treatment produced 3.85 t/ha. The

control treatment produced the significantly lowest yield (2.85 t/ha) (Table 2). The lower,

although not significantly different, yield of PU point placement compared with UDP

indicates the difficulty of the placement practice. It is more difficult to deep-place prilled urea

at the correct depth than a urea briquette. The lower yield of prilled urea compared with UDP

may be due to improper and imprecise deep placement of prilled urea. However, the yield

difference between PU point placement and UDP was not significant. The yield of PU deep

placement would be closer to that of UDP if it was properly deep-placed.

Table 2. Yield and Component Traits of the UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial

Location Treatment Pl

ant H

eigh

t (c

m)

No.

of P

anic

les

per H

ill

Pani

cle

Leng

th

(cm

)

No.

of G

rain

s pe

r Pan

icle

1,00

0-G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h St

raw

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Dry

Str

aw

Wei

ght (

g)

Dry

Gra

in

Wei

ght (

g)

Yiel

d (t/

ha)

Yin Daik Kwin, Taikkyi UDP 93 11.7 a 26.0 109 22.7 1,815 511 523 a 446 4.45 a

PU point 94 12.6 a 26.2 119 22.6 1,956 496 531 a 418 4.02 b PU band 94 11.6 a 26.2 105 23.7 1,672 496 460 ab 424 4.08 b

PU broadcast 92 10.9 a 25.6 113 23.6 1,708 517 515 a 451 4.00 b Control (0 N) 87 8.9 b 24.9 109 23.6 1,397 433 375 b 378 3.39 c

Wet Sa Boe, Zigone UDP 108 a 12.1 23.6 141 20.1 1,696 a 440 ab 625 a 426 ab 4.70 a

PU point 106 ab 11.6 22.6 150 19.3 1,406 b 489 a 523 b 471 a 4.45 ab PU band 101 bc 12.4 23.2 143 19.8 1,413 b 440 ab 509 bc 434 ab 4.05 bc

PU broadcast 99 c 11.1 21.8 123 19.5 1,334 b 366 bc 454 c 354 bc 3.85 c Control (0 N) 92 d 10.3 21.6 129 19.0 852 c 277 c 306 d 273 c 2.85 d


According to the pool analysis of location and fertilizer using the GLIMMIX procedure, a

significant difference was found in fertilizer practices and interaction of location by

treatment. By this procedure, the UDP treatment was not different from PU point placement

treatments in Zigone, but these were different in Taikkyi at P(0.05). The UDP yield was highly

significantly different from yields of PU broadcast and the control treatment at both sites.

UDP yield was highly significantly different from PU band placement in Zigone, and the

difference in these in Taikkyi was significant at P(0.05). With the GLIMMIX procedure, prilled

urea and UDP treatments were not different, which was the same result given by the separate

ANOVAs of each trial (Table 2; Table 3). In Zigone, UDP and PU point placement, PU band

placement, and PU broadcast treatments were not statistically different. The difference

between PU point and PU band placement was significant at P(0.05). However, these were not

significantly different in Taikkyi. The significant interaction effect of location by treatment is

clearly demonstrated in Figure 1. Differences among PU treatments were clearly observed in

Zigone but not in Taikkyi. The yields of PU treatments were similar in Taikkyi. These results

indicate that urea can be deep-placed with either the prilled or briquette form of urea. The

slightly lower yield with PU than UDP is due to the difficulty of manual deep placement,

resulting in a lower efficiency than UDP. A yield similar to UDP could be expected with

proper and precise deep-placement of prilled urea.

Table 3. Simple Effect Comparisons of Treatment by Location

Taikkyi Zigone Treatment Treatment t Value Pr > |t| t Value Pr > |t|

UDP PU point -2.81 0.0108 -1.64 0.1164 UDP PU band -2.43 0.0246 -4.20 0.0004 UDP PU broadcast -2.91 0.0087 -5.50 <.0001 UDP Control -6.87 <.0001 -12.04 <.0001 PU point PU band 0.38 0.7080 -2.56 0.0188 PU point PU broadcast -0.10 0.9245 -3.86 0.0010 PU point Control -4.06 0.0006 -10.40 <.0001 PU band PU broadcast 0.48 0.6393 1.30 0.2075 PU band Control -4.44 0.0002 -7.84 <.0001 PU broadcast Control -3.97 0.0008 -6.54 <.0001


Figure 1. Treatment Comparison Within Locations Red intervals are mean ± standard error. Treatments with overlap standard errors are not significantly different.

Conclusion Results of the trials indicate that N is limited in the test soil. The yield without N application

was the lowest at 3.39 t/ha in Taikkyi and 2.85 t/ha in Zigone. N application of 51.8 kg/ha

could improve rice yield by as much as 31% in Taikkyi and 65% in Zigone. The highest yield

was produced by UDP treatments in both locations, with 4.45 t/ha in Taikkyi and 4.70 t/ha in

Zigone. According to ANOVA, the UDP yield was significantly higher than those of prilled

urea application plots in Taikkyi (Table 2). With the GLIMMIX procedure, UDP yield was

significantly higher than the PU deep placement treatments at P(0.05) (Table 3). In Zigone, the

control plot produced the significantly lowest yield (2.85 t/ha) among all treatments. ANOVA

showed UDP and PU point placement, PU point and PU band placement, and PU band and

PU broadcast treatment were not significantly different in yield, which indicates the nutrient

efficiency of application practice. UDP is the most effective, easy, and convenient method to

apply at the precise depth. PU point placement is less efficient than UDP due to the difficulty

of placement. PU band placement is even more difficult than PU point placement. PU

broadcast, which gave the lowest yield among PU application treatments, is the least effective

method. Manual deep placement of PU is difficult and impractical, due to improper


distribution and imprecise placement depth, which was the main reason the yield of PU deep

placement was lower than UDP. Deep placement of urea briquettes (UDP) is more

convenient and easier to accomplish manually. If PU was deep-placed more precisely at the

correct depth and with an even distribution, it is assumed the yield would be similar to that of

UDP. Thus, urea deep placement practices (deep placement of briquette or prilled urea) were

found to be more effective than surface broadcasting of urea. Specialized tools for

mechanized application are needed. Mechanized application on transplanted rice with 20 cm

row spacing in puddled soils should be considered. Mechanized application after

transplanting is difficult, but to deep placement of urea with a machine just before

transplanting is possible.

2. Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial

Introduction Fertilizer application in Myanmar has rapidly changed from single element application

(mainly N as urea) to N:P:K application dominated by compound fertilizers with various

nutrient ratios. Those compound fertilizers are being applied on various crops, such as rice,

maize, sunflower, wheat, some vegetable crops, etc. The compound fertilizers are normally

applied as basal, followed by urea topdressing. The most commonly used compound fertilizer

has a nutrient ratio of 15:15:15 (N:P2O5:K2O) and is expensive. Some farmers use a 10:10:5

compound to reduce input costs. Most farmers apply compound at a rate of 25-50 kg/ac (62-

124 kg/ha). Urea is applied at 16-33 kg/ac on average. The nutrient value in those amounts is

insufficient for a rice crop.3 A few farmers may apply more than that amount. However, this

fertilizer management practice is not balanced. The yield is best improved by applying

enough nutrients at recommended rates either as a compound fertilizer, straight fertilizers, or

both. This trial was conducted to determine the yield response when fertilizer is applied as a

compound at the recommended rate.

Objectives • Compare farmer’s practice using compound fertilizer with balanced fertilization in which

N is applied as UDP.

3 Using the International Plant Nutrition Institute (IPNI) Nutrient Removal Calculator, a yield of 5 t/ha will remove 65 kg N/ha, 33.5 kg P2O5/ha, and 18 kg K2O/ha in grain.


• Study the benefits and advantages of using compound fertilizer at recommended rates on

rice cultivation.

Materials and Methods The trial was conducted in two locations, War Kauk Taw village, Kunchangone township,

Yangon region, and East Waw village, Waw township, Bago (East) region. The trial used an

RCB design with four treatments and three replications.

Treatments 1. Compound fertilizer + Gypsum + PU (not balanced)

(Compound 160 kg + Gypsum 25 kg and PU 60.3 kg per hectare)

(51.8 kg N + 24 kg P2O5 + 24 kg K2O + 4.5 kg S per hectare)

2. Balanced fertilization with straight fertilizers and N applied as UDP

(TSP 80 kg + MOP 40 kg + Gypsum 25 kg + UDP 168.8 kg per hectare)


3. Balanced fertilization with compound fertilizers (calculated to the required K rate) and

TSP, PU, and gypsum

(Compound 160 kg + TSP 26.7 kg + Gypsum 25 kg + PU 60.3 kg per hectare)


4. Compound fertilizer and Gypsum only

(Compound 247 kg + Gypsum 25 kg per hectare)

(37 kg N + 37 kg P2O5 + 37 kg K2O + 4.5 kg S per hectare)

Treatments 2 and 3 comprised the recommended balanced nutrients. They differed in the

manner in which N was applied. Treatment 2 applied nutrients as single element fertilizers

and N was applied as UDP. Treatment 3 applied nutrients as a 15:15:15 compound with K set

at the recommended rate and then broadcast prilled urea was applied to increase N to the

recommended rate and TSP applied to increase P to the recommended rate.

Treatment 1 represents the farmer’s practice, with adjustment of the N rate to increase it to

the N rate of the recommended balance in Treatments 2 and 3.

Treatment 4 applied compound fertilizer at double the rate of FP, which is 50 kg/ac (124

kg/ha).

All treatments applied gypsum at the same rate.


Variety Used Wet season varieties were used at both sites. The farmer’s variety was Paw San Yin in

Kunchangone and Pyi Taw Yin in Waw.

Field Operation Procedure Nursery bed preparation and management were done by the trial farmer. When the seed bed

was ready, bunds were formed according to the layout plan. Each 16 ft x 16 ft plot for each

treatment was separated with bunds at least 12 inches high and 8-12 inches wide. Four plots

were in a block/row for four treatments, and there were three blocks, making three

replications. The treatments were randomly allocated within the block. Basal fertilizer (not

including N fertilizer) was applied according to treatment: straight fertilizers for Treatment 2

and compound fertilizer for the other treatments. Gypsum was applied on all treatments at

4.5 kg S/ha. The fertilizers were then incorporated by rake, and each plot was leveled again.

Transplanting was done on the same day using two to three seedlings per hill at a spacing of

20 cm x 20 cm. UDP was applied seven days after transplanting on Treatment 2 plots. PU

was applied as three splits of equal doses on Treatments 1 and 3. The first dose was applied

on the UDP day, the second dose at maximum tillering stage, and the last dose at panicle

initiation stage. No urea was applied on Treatment 4 plots. Weed control, pest and disease

control, and water management were performed by farmers as requested by IFDC. All

activities were recorded. Data of all component characteristics, including biomass weights,

were documented. Crop cut harvest was done by taking a 9 m2 representative sample from

each plot. The yield and all characteristics were analyzed for variance within a 4 x 3 RCB

design. Treatment means were compared using least significant difference (LSD) at P(0.05). A

GLIMMIX was run for pool analysis of both locations for yield. Treatment mean yields were

compared using the Tukey Grouping procedure.

Results and Discussion War Kauk Taw, Kunchangone – ANOVA showed four parameters, including yield, were

significantly different among treatments – the number of panicles per hill at P(0.01) and the

number of grains per panicle, the fresh biomass straw weight, and the yield at P(0.05). The

other parameters were not significantly different (refer to Data from Balanced Fertilization

With Compound Fertilizer Trial in War Kauk Taw, Kunchangone Township). The number of

panicles per hill was the highest at 11.1 with Treatment 3, balanced fertilization with

compound fertilizer. However, this was not significantly different from the 10.5 panicles per

hill produced using balanced fertilization with straight fertilizer and UDP. The compound


fertilizer and urea application treatment produced the significantly lowest number of panicles

per hill at 8.4. The highest number of grains per panicle (121) was given by balanced

fertilization with UDP. This was not different from the amounts given by the compound with

urea treatment (Treatment 1) and balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer (Treatment

3) at 116 and 112 grains per panicle, respectively. Compound fertilizer only (Treatment 4)

produced 105 grains per panicle, which was the lowest and significantly lower than the

highest number of grains per panicle with balanced fertilizer and UDP. The fresh biomass

straw weight was the highest with balanced fertilizer and UDP, which produced 2,229 g of

biomass straw. However, this was not statistically different from the 1,902 g straw weight

produced by balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer. The lowest straw weight

(1,641 g) was produced by the compound and PU treatment. Although not significant, other

characteristics had their highest values with balanced fertilization with straight fertilizers and

UDP. The panicle length was 24.9 cm, 1,000-grain weight was 27.3 g, biomass dry straw

weight was 926 g, fresh and dry biomass grain weights were 452 g and 429 g, respectively

(Table 4).

ANOVA showed significant differences in yield. The highest yield of 4.15 g/ha was given by

balanced fertilizer with UDP. The second highest yield of 3.87 t/ha was produced with

balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer. This yield was not statistically different from

the highest yield and those of the other treatments. The lowest yield was observed with

fertilization with compound fertilizer at double the farmer’s practice dose. Results indicate

that balanced fertilization could increase the rice yield if applied either as compound fertilizer

or straight fertilizers of major elements. The yield difference between the two balanced

fertilization treatments was because of the difference in UDP and PU. UDP showed its

effectiveness over PU. Application of a high rate of compound fertilizer alone (Treatment 4)

did not meet the N requirement; the N rate with this treatment was lower than the other

treatments and produced the lowest yield.

East Waw, Waw – According to statistical analysis, the biomass straw weights and yield

were significant at P(0.05). The other characteristics were not significantly different among

treatments (refer to Data from Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial in East

Waw, Waw Township). The fresh and dry biomass straw weights were the highest with

balanced fertilizer and UDP. With that treatment, fresh biomass straw weight was 2,185 g

and dry biomass straw weight was 755 g. These were significantly higher than those with all

other treatments. Fresh straw weights with other treatments ranged from 1,699 g with

compound fertilizer application only to 1,869 g with compound + PU application. These were


not statistically different. Dry straw weights with other treatments were also not statistically

different, ranging from 546 g to 580 g. The significant result showed UDP improved

vegetative yield over prilled urea application. The other insignificant characteristics, except

1,000-grain weight, had their highest values with balanced fertilization and UDP (Table 4).

The yield was the highest at 4.41 t/ha with Treatment 2 (balanced fertilization with UDP).

This was not statistically different from the second highest yield (4.25 t/ha) given by

Treatment 3 – balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer. These two treatments used the

same nutrient rates, although one applied straight fertilizer with N as UDP and one applied

compound fertilizer (calculated to the recommended K rate) with PU and TSP to obtain the

balanced rate. Therefore, the difference in yield was mainly due to the form of urea applied.

UDP could supply N more efficiently than PU, thus promoting significant biomass straw

weight and giving a higher yield. This supports the theory that UDP is more effective than

PU application. The yield of Treatment 3 (4.25 t/ha) was not statistically different from the

yield of Treatment 1 – compound fertilizer with PU treatment (3.75 t/ha). These two

treatments had the same N and K rates but a different P rate. Balanced fertilization with

compound (Treatment 3) had slightly more P than the compound with PU (Treatment 1).

Results indicate that there may be a small P response. Treatment 4, which applied only

compound fertilizer (at a high rate, resulting in lower N but higher P and K), produced the

significantly lowest yield among all treatments at 3.24 t/ha. Results confirm the importance

of N over P and K. This trial did not study the effect of S. S was applied in equal amounts on

all treatments at a rate that was assumed to be sufficient. The other characteristics, except

1,000-grain weight, had their highest values with balanced fertilization and UDP, although

values were not significantly different (Table 4).


Table 4. Yield and Component Traits of the Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial

Treatment Plan

t Hei

ght

(cm

)

No.

of P

anic

les

per H

ill

Pani

cle

Leng

th

(cm

)

No.

of G

rain

s pe

r Pan

icle

1,00

0-G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h St

raw

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Dry

Str

aw

Wei

ght (

g)

Dry

Gra

in

Wei

ght (

g)

Yiel

d (t/

ha)

War Kauk Taw, Kunchangone Compound + PU 142 8.4 c 24.2 116 a 26.8 1,641 b 386 693 373 3.65 b Balanced with UDP 143 10.5 ab 24.9 121 a 27.3 2,229 a 452 926 429 4.15 a Bal. with compound 142 11.1 a 24.7 112 ab 26.6 1,902 ab 432 768 413 3.87 ab Compound only 143 9.9 b 24.4 105 b 27.1 1,759 b 424 722 396 3.43 b East Waw, Waw Compound + PU 115 8.0 25.3 107 33.5 1,869 b 499 580 b 450 3.75 bc Balanced with UDP 115 9.4 26.2 119 33.4 2,185 a 657 755 a 611 4.41 a Bal. with compound 117 8.7 25.0 107 33.9 1,796 b 542 577 b 496 4.25 ab Compound only 114 7.8 24.7 111 33.0 1,699 b 464 546 b 429 3.24 c

Pool analysis of GLIMMIX procedure for both sites showed significant differences in

treatment only. Test location and interaction of location by treatment were not significantly

different (Table 5). On average across test locations, balanced fertilization with straight

fertilizer and UDP produced the highest yield at 4.28 t/ha. The second highest yield

(4.06 t/ha) was produced using balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer and PU.

According to the GLIMMIX procedure, both yields were not significantly different.

Compound fertilizer and PU, which was not balanced, produced a yield of 3.70 t/ha; this was

significantly lower than the balanced fertilization treatments but higher than compound

fertilizer application only, which produced the significantly lowest yield at 3.33 t/ha (Table

6). This was clearly due to N being a major limiting nutrient in the test soils. Compound

fertilizer only, although with double the dose of FP, had the lowest N content among all

treatments and gave the lowest yield, but the input cost was the highest among all treatments

because of the high price of compound fertilizer. The other treatments had the same N rate,

but compound fertilizer + PU had less P than the balanced practices. Therefore, the lower

yield with compound fertilizer + PU than with balanced practices may be due to P response.

The yield difference between balanced practices was due to the different forms of urea. UDP

provides more N than PU. Straight fertilizer is more economical than compound fertilizer.

Therefore, balanced fertilization with straight fertilizer and urea as UDP should be

recommended for high productivity with lower cost and higher profit.


Table 5. ANOVA of GLIMMIX Procedure of Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trials

Source of Variation Numerator DF Denominator DF F Value Pr > F Location 1 16 1.45 0.2465 Treatments 3 16 13.34 0.0001 Location by treatment 3 16 1.15 0.3588

Table 6. Comparison of Mean Yields Across Test Locations at the P(0.05) Level (mean yields with the same letter are not significantly different)

Source of Variation Mean Yield Mean Comparison Compound fertilizer + PU 3.70 b Balanced with straight fertilizer + UDP 4.28 a Balanced with compound fertilizer + PU 4.06 a Compound fertilizer only 3.33 c

Conclusion Significant results for yield were found, according to separate ANOVA for each trial and

GLIMMIX analysis of both locations. The highest yield was observed with balanced

fertilization + UDP, at 4.15 t/ha in Kunchungone and 4.41 in Waw (Table 4). However, this

was not significantly different from the second highest yield produced by balanced

fertilization with compound fertilizer + PU. The differences between balanced fertilizer +

UDP and unbalanced fertilization treatments were significant. Balanced fertilizer with the

compound + PU treatment was not different from the other unbalanced treatments in

Kunchangone and the compound fertilizer + PU treatment in Waw. The difference between

balanced fertilization treatments was due to difference in the forms of urea. UDP has a higher

nutrient use efficiency and produces a higher yield than PU. Results indicate that the form of

fertilizer, whether compound or straight, does not matter when it is applied at a balanced rate.

However, application of compound fertilizer at a balanced rate was more costly than straight

fertilizers due to its high price. Furthermore, phosphate fertilizer had to be added to get

balanced nutrients rates.

The trials showed N deficiency of test soils. A double dose of compound fertilizer treatment

(Treatment 4) produced the lowest yield due to a lower N rate than the other treatments. P

may also have been deficient but not as seriously as N. The GLIMMIX procedure analysis

confirmed the above results. The average yield of balanced fertilization with straight

fertilizer + UDP was the highest at 4.28 t/ha. This was not different from the second highest

yield (4.06 t/ha) by balanced with compound fertilizer + PU. Compound fertilizer at double


the rate has a lower N rate than other treatments and gave the lowest yield at 3.33 t/ha.

Compound fertilizer + PU, which was unbalanced and had a lower P rate, gave the second

lowest yield at 3.70 t/ha. One vegetative characteristic, biomass straw weight, supported the

yield result, having the significantly highest straw weight with balanced fertilization with

straight fertilizer + UDP (Table 6).

According to the separate analysis results (Table 4), the farmer’s practice of using compound

fertilizer and PU could produce an appropriate yield when applied to meet the N requirement

of 51.8 kg N/ha in this trial. It gave a yield similar to balanced fertilization with PU, even

though the P rate was slightly lower. To improve the rice yield even further, N must be

applied in more efficient way, such as with UDP. Application of straight fertilizer will be

more beneficial than application of a 15:15:15 (N:P2O5:K2O) compound fertilizer. Compound

fertilizer is expensive in the fertilizer market, but farmers often apply it. It is more cost-

effective to apply compound to match the K rate, then apply N as urea, preferably UDP, and

apply P, as TSP, to increase the rate to the recommended balance. Application of straight

fertilizers with UDP is the most economical and profitable treatment.

3. N Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR

Introduction Omission pot trials4 were used as a tool to identify site-specific nutrient deficiencies. These

were conducted in the greenhouse to identify nutrient deficiency of selected soils in the FSI

project areas. Altogether, eight pot trials were run during the project period. The soil at Paw

Daw Mu village, Kangyidaunt, showed P and N to be deficient. The dry biomass weights of P

and N omission treatments were as low as the control treatment. After identifying nutrient

deficiency of the soil, the amount of nutrient that should be applied on that soil had to be

determined. This is the follow-up study of the omission pot trial of the soil from Paw Daw

Mu village, Kangyidaunt township.

Objectives • Study the effect of application of various N rates on grain yield and biomass of rice.

• Determine the best application rate and provide a recommendation for N on the rice crop

in the test location.

4 IFDC. 2018. Fertilizer Sector Improvement Project Report of Omission Pot Trials.


Materials and Methods The trial was conducted on the same plot where the soil sample was taken for the omission

pot trial at Paw Daw Mu village, Kangyidaunt township. The trial used five treatments of five

N rates, including a control, with three replications within an RCB design. N was applied as

UDP on all N application treatments.

Treatments 1. Control (0 N)

2. 50 kg N/ha (one 1.8-g briquette per point)

3. 100 kg N/ha (two 1.8-g briquettes per point)

4. 150 kg N/ha (three 1.8-g briquettes per point)

5. 200 kg N/ha (four 1.8-g briquettes per point)

Basal Fertilizers Basal fertilizers included not only P, K, and S but also Mg, Ca, Zn, and B. The rates of basal

fertilizers were set high enough to account for any deficiency of these elements:

1. P 80 kg/ha or (163 kg P2O5/ha)

2. K 100 kg/ha of (120 kg K2O/ha)

3. S 40 kg/ha or (308 kg Epsom salt/ha)

4. Mg 30 kg/ha or (308 kg Epsom salt/ha)

5. Ca 35 kg/ha (97 kg CaCl2/ha)

6. Zn 5 kg/ha or (10.38 kg ZnCl2/ha)

7. B 1 kg/ha or (5.64 kg H3BO3/ha)

Note: Epsom salt at 308 kg was applied to provide both Mg 30 kg and S 40 kg/ha.

N was applied as UDP at seven days after transplanting. One 1.8-g briquette is applied with

Treatment 2, two 1.8-g briquettes are applied with Treatment 3, three 1.8-g briquettes are

applied with Treatment 4, and four 1.8-g briquettes per point of placement are applied with

Treatment 5. No urea was applied on the control plot (Treatment 1).

Variety Used A popular wet season variety, Sin Thu Kha, was used as the test variety. It is a high-yielding,

medium duration variety.


Field Operation Procedure Seedlings were raised in seedbeds in the nursery. Irrigation, fertilization, and pesticide were

applied by the farmer as necessary. Land preparation was finished three days before

transplanting. Layout and bunds were made one day before transplanting. Each experimental

plot was separated by bunds at least 8 inches high and 8-12 inches wide. After separating the

experimental plots, all basal fertilizers were applied. The fertilizer was then incorporated by

rake, and the plot was leveled again. Hand transplanting was done the next day. Three to four

seedlings were transplanted to each hill with a spacing of 20 cm x 20 cm. UDP was applied

seven days after transplanting. No N was applied on the control plot (Treatment 1). One to

four briquettes were applied by hand on Treatments 2 through 5 accordingly. The required

number of briquettes was placed at the center of alternate four hills at 7-10 cm below the

surface. Standing water in the plots was kept to a level of not more than 1 inch. All cultural

practices were well managed. Dates of activities, pest and insect infestation, control

measures, weeding, etc., were noted. Plant characteristics and yield were recorded. Crop cut

for yield was harvested from a 9 m2 area, excluding outer border rows. ANOVA was run for

the yield and data recorded for an RCB design with five treatments and three replications.

Mean comparison was made using LSD at P(0.05).

Results and Discussion According to ANOVA, significant results were observed for biomass straw weights and

1,000-grain weight only. Both fresh and dry biomass straw weights and 1,000-grain weight

were significant at P(0.01). The other parameters were not significantly different among

treatments (refer to Data from N Rate Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township).

Biomass straw weights increased as the N rate increased. Both wet and dry biomass straw

weights were the highest with the highest N rate (200 kg N/ha). However, wet straw weights

between adjacent N rate treatments were not significantly different. For dry straw weight, the

control treatment and the lowest N rate of 50 kg/ha were not significantly different. The dry

straw weights of 100 kg N/ha, 150 kg N/ha, and 200 kg N/ha rates also were not significantly

different, although the weights did increase as the N rate increased. Results clearly indicate

that N promotes vegetative growth of the rice plant, since more straw is produced with a

higher N rate (Table 7). The highest 1,000-grain weight (21.2 g) was observed with the

control plot, which was significantly higher than other treatments. Variability in 1,000-grain

weight was observed among other treatments. Treatments that applied 50 kg N/ha, 100 kg

N/ha, and 200 kg N/ha did not have significantly different 1,000-grain weights. The 1,000-

grain weights with 100 kg N/ha and 150 kg N/ha rates were not significantly different. The


difference in 1,000-grain weights of those treatments did not seem to be related to the N rate

applied. The differences could have been due to the variation in grain moisture at harvest

time. The still-green characteristic of N application plots was observed at harvest, and grain

moisture content was different among N application treatments. Recorded grain weights were

adjusted to 14% moisture content. Generally, significantly different results in 1,000-grain

weight were not observed (Table 7).

Although the yield was not significantly different among treatments, the control plot

produced the lowest yield at 3.24 t/ha. The treatment that applied the lowest N rate (50 kg/ha)

produced the highest yield at 4.38 t/ha, and the yield decreased as the N rate increased. The

treatment of 100 kg N/ha produced 4.05 t/ha, 150 kg N/ha produced 3.72 t/ha, and 200 kg

N/ha produced 3.42 t/ha (Table 7). The lowest yield with the control plot indicates that the

soil was deficient in N. Application of N fertilizer could improve the rice yield. The amount

of N that should be applied on the test soil likely is around 50 kg N/ha. The amount of other

nutrients, such P, K, S, Ca, Mg, Zn, and B, also must be sufficient so that rice yield is not

limited by a deficiency.

Table 7. Yield and Component Traits of N Rates Trial at Paw Daw Mu, Kunchangone

Treatment Plan

t Hei

ght

(cm

)

No.

of P

anic

les

per H

ill

Pani

cle

Leng

th

(cm

)

No.

of G

rain

s pe

r Pan

icle

1,00

0-G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h St

raw

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Dry

Stra

w

Wei

ght (

g)

Dry

Gra

in

Wei

ght (

g)

Yiel

d (t/

ha)

Control (0 N) 110 8.7 25.1 157 21.2 a 1,663 c 493 442 b 422 3.24 50 kg N/ha 110 11.6 25.2 172 20.0 b 1,536 c 766 649 b 691 4.38 100 kg N/ha 106 9.3 24.6 152 19.9 bc 2,015 bc 1,018 874 a 950 4.05 150 kg N/ha 110 10.8 24.5 157 19.0 c 2,254 ab 1,049 930 a 762 3.72 200 kg N/ha 111 9.1 24.5 142 20.2 b 2,593 a 922 988 a 799 3.42

Conclusion Due to the lowest yield with the control treatment in this trial, the test soil is clearly N

deficient and needs N to improve rice yield. Results also confirm the omission pot trial,

which showed N deficiency. This trial was conducted to determine how much N fertilizer

should be applied to produce the maximum yield of transplanted rice. The highest yield with

50 kg N/ha application shows that the soil needs around 50 kg N/ha to obtain maximum

yield. A decreasing yield with an increasing N rate indicates that application of N fertilizer at

a rate higher than 50 kg/ha could not improve or could even decrease the rice yield. However,


N fertilizer improves vegetative growth. To obtain the highest yield with this N rate, other

elements, such as P, K, Mg, S, Zn, and B, must be adequate in the soil. This trial applied the

maximum rate of those nutrients so that there was no effect on yield due to a nutrient

deficiency. In this trial N was applied using the UDP technique, which is twice as efficient as

applying prilled urea. The N requirement would likely be higher if prilled urea were used.

This supports the findings reported in the 2017 wet season research report (IFDC.org):

application of N fertilizer at 50-75 kg urea per acre, which is equal to 58-87 kg N/ha, may be

enough N, but other nutrients must be applied at a balanced rate.

4. P Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR

Introduction Omission pot trials were used as a tool to identify site-specific nutrient deficiencies. These

were conducted in the greenhouse to identify nutrient deficiency of some selected soils in the

FSI+ project areas. According to the results of eight pot trials, P was found deficient in all

test soils. After identifying nutrient deficiency of the soil, the amount of the nutrient that

should be applied on that soil had to be determined. This is the follow-up study of the

omission pot trial for the soil from Paw Daw Mu village, Kangyidaunt township.

Objectives • Study the effect of application of various P rates on grain yield and biomass of rice.

• Determine the best P application rate and provide a recommendation for the rice crop in

the test location.

Materials and Methods The trial was conducted on the same plot from where the soil sample was taken for the

omission pot trial at Paw Daw Mu village, Kangyidaunt township. The trial used five

treatments of five P rates, including a control, with three replications within an RCB design.

Treatments 1. Control (0 P)

2. 50 kg P2O5/ha (111 TSP kg/ha)

3. 100 kg P2O5/ha (222 TSP kg/ha)

4. 150 kg P2O5/ha (333 TSP kg/ha)

5. 200 kg P2O5/ha (444 TSP kg/ha)

https://ifdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/FSI-Research-Report-2017-WS-Final-Draft-9-24.pdf


Basal Fertilizers Basal fertilizers included not only N, K, and S but also Mg, Ca, Zn, and B. The rates of

fertilizers were set high enough to account for any deficiency from these elements:

1. N 200 kg/ha

2. K 100 kg/ha of (120 kg K2O/ha)

3. S 40 kg/ha

4. Mg 30 kg/ha or (308 kg Epsom salt/ha)

5. Ca 35 kg/ha (97 kg CaCl2/ha)

6. Zn 5 kg/ha or (10.38 kg ZnCl2/ha)

7. B 1 kg/ha or (5.64 kg H3BO3/ha)

Note: Epsom salt at 308 kg was applied to provide both Mg 30 kg and S 40 kg/ha.

N was applied as UDP at seven days after transplanting. Four 1.8-g briquettes, which is close

to an N rate of 200 kg/ha, were deep-placed at a depth of 7-10 cm at the center of four

alternate hills.

Variety Used A popular wet season variety, Sin Thu Kha, was used as the test variety. It is a widely grown

high-yielding, medium duration variety.

Field Operation Procedure Seedlings were raised in seedbeds in the nursery. Irrigation and pesticide application were

done by the farmer as necessary. Field preparation was finished three days before



experimental plots, all basal fertilizers, except P, were applied. TSP was applied as the P

nutrient at different rates according to treatment. Treatment 1 applied no P, Treatment 2

applied 111 kg TSP/ha (50 kg P2O5/ha), Treatment 3 applied 222 kg TSP/ha (100 kg

P2O5/ha), Treatment 4 applied 333 kg TSP/ha (150 kg P2O5/ha), and Treatment 5 applied

444 kg TSP/ha (200 kg P2O5/ha). The fertilizers were then incorporated by rake, and the plot

was leveled again. Hand transplanting was done the next day. Three to four seedlings were

transplanted at each hill with a spacing of 20 cm x 20 cm. N was applied as UDP at 200 kg

N/ha seven days after transplanting. Four 1.8-g briquettes, which is approximately equal to

200 kg N/ha, were applied by hand. Briquettes were placed at the center of alternate four hills

at 7-10 cm below the surface. Standing water in the plots was kept to a level of not more than

1 inch. All cultural practices were well managed. Dates of activities, pest and insect


infestation, control measures, weeding, etc., were noted. Plant characteristics and yield were

recorded. Crop cut for yield was harvested from a 9 m2 area, excluding outer border rows.

ANOVA was run for the yield and data recorded for an RCB design with five treatments and

three replications. Mean comparison was made using LSD at P(0.05).

Results and Discussion According to the ANOVA, three of the recorded parameters were significant. The yield and

dry biomass grain weight were significant at P(0.05), and fresh biomass grain weights were

significant at P(0.01). The other characteristics were not significantly different (refer to Data

from P Rate Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township). The insignificant characteristics

showed variations in response to the P rate. Plant height ranged from 111 cm to 113 cm,

which is a very narrow range. The tallest plant (113 cm) was observed with a P rate of 150 kg

P2O5/ha. The number of panicles per hill ranged from 10.5 to 11.9, and the highest number

(11.9) was produced by the highest P rate of 200 kg P2O5/ha. The panicle length and number

of spikelets and grains per panicle had their highest values with the lowest P rate (50 kg

P2O5/ha). The 1,000-grain weight was highest (19.2 g) with a P rate of 150 kg P2O5/ha.

However, all of those parameters were not statistically different between treatments. All

biomass weights and the yield were the highest with the highest P rate (200 kg P2O5/ha). The

biomass grain weight and yield had significant differences, but the biomass straw weight did

not. The results show that the biomass grain weight increased as the P rate increased.

According to mean comparison at P(0.05), the two highest fresh grain weights and the three

highest dry grain weights were not statistically different (Table 8). The results of the 1,000-

grain weight and biomass grain weight indicate that grain filling was better with higher P

rates.

The yield was the highest with the highest P rate (200 kg P2O5/ha); this was significantly

higher than all other treatments. The yields of the other treatments, including the control plot,

ranged from 3.87 t/ha to 4.34 t/ha; according to the mean comparison at P(0.05), these were not

statistically different. The lowest yield of 3.87 t/ha was produced with a P rate of 100 kg

P2O5/ha (Table 8). The results indicate that P is seriously deficient in the test soil. Application

of P at up to 150 kg P2O5/ha could not improve the rice yield (Table 8). In the omission pot

trial, the -P treatment and the control treatment were not different. Total dry matter of the -P

treatment was even lower than that of the control treatment (refer to Report on Omission Pot

Trials). The results indicate that P needs to be applied at a high rate, which could be around

200 kg P2O5/ha, to obtain high rice yields. The rice yield with a P rate at 150 kg P2O5/ha was

4.34 t/ha; this was the second highest yield in this trial. However, it was not statistically


different from the control plot and was significantly lower than the highest yield produced

with the highest P rate. Application of P at 150 kg P2O5/ha was not sufficient to improve the

rice yield.

Table 8. Yield and Component Traits of the P Rate Trial at Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt

Treatment Plan

t Hei

ght

(cm

)

No.

of P

anic

les

per H

ill

Pani

cle

Leng

th

(cm

)

No.

of G

rain

s pe

r Pan

icle

1,00

0-G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h St

raw

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Dry

Stra

w

Wei

ght (

g)

Dry

Gra

in

Wei

ght (

g)

Yiel

d (t/

ha)

Control 111 11.5 24.6 174 18.5 2,179 1,044 c 913 859 bc 3.95 b 50 kg P2O5/ha 111 11.6 24.9 191 18.6 2,168 1,063 c 911 731 c 3.95 b 100 kg P2O5/ha 112 10.5 24.0 159 19.1 2,025 1,175 bc 1,055 998 abc 3.87 b 150 kg P2O5/ha 113 11.6 24.6 179 19.2 2,452 1,293 ab 1,022 1147 ab 4.34 b 200 kg P2O5/ha 112 11.9 24.4 166 18.5 2,839 1,482 a 1,096 1350 a 4.96 a

Conclusion ANOVA showed significant results in yield and biomass grain weights. The yield and dry

biomass grain weight were significant at P(0.05), and fresh biomass grain weight was

significant at P(0.01). There was some variation in those traits in response to different P rates.

The lowest fresh biomass grain weight (1,044 g) was found with the control plot, and the

weight increased as the P rate increased. The highest fresh grain weight (1,482 g) was

produced by the highest P rate. The lowest dry grain weight (731 g) was produced at a P rate

of 50 kg P2O5/ha. The three lowest weights of both fresh and dry grain weights were not

statistically different, and the two highest fresh grain weights and the three highest dry grain

weights were not different. The results suggest an application of 150-200 kg P2O5/ha to

improve grain weight (Table 8; Figure 2).

The yields of the control treatment and the lowest P rate (50 kg P2O5/ha) were the same at

3.95 t/ha. Treatment with 100 kg P2O5/ha produced the lowest yield at 3.87 t/ha. The yield

then increased as the P rate increased from 100 kg to 200 kg. The yield with 150 kg P2O5/ha

was 4.34 t/ha. However, the yields of the control plot and plots with a P rate up to 150 kg

P2O5/ha were not significantly different. The highest yield (4.96 t/ha) was produced with the

highest P rate of 200 kg P2O5/ha; this was significantly higher than the other treatments

(Table 8; Figure 2). The results clearly indicate that the test soil is seriously deficient in P,

which is in agreement with the omission pot trial showing P to be the most limiting element

among all nutrients. According to the results of this trial, application of P at 150 kg P2O5/ha


seems insufficient to improve the rice yield. Figure 2 shows that, even with 200 kg P2O5/ha,

the yield continues to rise. The IPNI Nutrient Removal Calculator estimates 33.5 kg P2O5/ha

is removed by a 5 t/ha rice crop. Phosphorus fixation in this soil is suspected, since 200 kg

P2O5/ha was needed to get this yield.

Rice farmers in the Delta area are applying urea only due to its visible color response. They

now use compound fertilizer at a low rate as a basal application. The most commonly used

compound fertilizers are 15:15:15 and 10:10:5 (N:P2O5:K2O) at rates that do not supply the

required level of P. Therefore, P becomes increasingly limited in the soil. To get a better

response curve, the trial would need to add higher rates of P.

Figure 2. Response Curve of the Yield and Biomass Grain Weights of the P

Rate Trial in Kangyidaunt

5. Omission Field Trial

Introduction The omission pot trial on the soil from Paw Daw Mu village, Kangyidaunt township, found P

was the most deficient element, followed by N. No symptoms of deficiency were found for

other elements, especially major ones, such as K, Mg, and S. This omission field trial was

designed to confirm the status of those elements, including N, in the test soil on the same

land.


Objectives • Evaluate the status of K and S, which were not found deficient in the omission pot trial.

Materials and Methods The trial was conducted on the same plot from where the soil sample was taken for the

omission pot trial at Paw Daw Mu village, Kangyidaunt township. The trial used five

treatments, including a treatment in which no nutrient was applied, one in which all nutrients

were applied, and three others in which the test elements (N, K, and S) were omitted. An

RCB design was used with three replications.

Treatments 1. Control (no nutrient applied)

2. All nutrients applied

3. -N (N was omitted)

4. -K (K was omitted)

5. -S (P was omitted)

The following nutrient rates were used in this trial:

• N 200 kg/ha Four 1.8-g urea briquettes applied as UDP

• P 80 kg/ha 163 kg P2O5/ha or 360 kg TSP/ha

• K 100 kg/ha 120 kg K2O/ha or 200 kg MOP/ha

• S 40 kg/ha 308 kg Epsom salt/ha

• Mg 30 kg/ha 308 kg Epsom salt/ha

• Ca 35 kg/ha 97 kg CaCl2/ha

• Zn 5 kg/ha 10.38 kg ZnCl2/ha

• B 1 kg/ha 5.64 kg H3BO3/ha

Variety Used A popular wet season variety, Sin Thu Kha, was used as the test variety. It is a widely grown

high-yielding, medium duration variety.

Field Operation Procedure Seedlings were raised in seedbeds in the nursery. Irrigation and pesticide application were

done by the farmer as necessary. Field preparation was finished three days before




experimental plots, all basal fertilizers were applied on Treatment 2 (“All” plot) and

Treatment 3 (-N treatment). No fertilizer was applied on Treatment 1 (control plot). All basal

fertilizer except K was applied on Treatment 4 (-K plot), and all basal fertilizer except S was

applied on Treatment 5 (-S plot). The fertilizer was then incorporated by rake, and the plot

was leveled again. Transplanting was done the next day. Three to four seedlings were

transplanted at each hill with a spacing of 20 cm x 20 cm. The UDP was applied seven days

after transplanting using four 1.8-g briquettes at one point. This was applied on Treatments 2,

4, and 5. No urea was applied on the control or -N treatments. Standing water in the plots was

kept to no more than 1 inch. All cultural practices were well managed. Dates of activities,

pest and insect infestation, control measures, weeding, etc., were noted. ANOVA was run for

the yield and data recorded using an RCB design with five treatments and three replications.

Mean comparison was made by LSD at P(0.05).

Results and Discussion According to ANOVA, the number of panicles per hill and 1,000-grain weight were

significant at P(0.05). Other parameters were not significantly different among treatments (refer

to Data from Omission Field Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township). The number of

panicles per hill was the highest (11.8) with the -K treatment, which was not significantly

different from that of the -S and “All” treatments. The -N treatment had the lowest number of

panicles per hill at 8.3, but this was not significantly different than the control and “All”

treatments. The 1,000-grain weight ranged from 18.8 g to 21.3 g. The maximum 1,000-grain

weight (21.3 g) was given by the control treatment, which was not significantly different

from the “All” and -N treatments. The lowest 1,000-grain weight (18.8 g) was given by

the -K treatment, which also was not significantly different from the “All” and -S treatments.

The differences of the other characteristics due to treatment were small. Plant height ranged

from 110 cm to 111 cm, and panicle length ranged from 24.5 cm to 25.6 cm. Though not

significant, biomass straw and grain weights were the highest with the treatment which

applied all nutrients (Table 9).

ANOVA showed the yield was not significantly different among treatments. The -N

treatment produced 3.68 t/ha, which was the highest yield; this was very close to the yield

(3.66 t/ha) produced by the “All” treatment. The lowest yield (3.43 t/ha) was produced by the

-S treatment (Table 9). Insignificant results suggest that N, K, and S were not deficient in the

test soil. Results confirm the omission pot trial for K and S but not for N. The omission pot

trial showed N was deficient. The N rate trial reported above also confirmed no significant

yield difference between N rates.


Table 9. Yield and Component Traits of the Omission Field Trial at Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt

Treatment Plan

t Hei

ght

(cm

)

No.

of P

anic

les

per H

ill

Pani

cle

Leng

th

(cm

)

No.

of G

rain

s pe

r Pan

icle

1,00

0-G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h St

raw

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Dry

Stra

w

Wei

ght (

g)

Dry

Gra

in

Wei

ght (

g)

Yiel

d (t/

ha)

Control 111 8.9 b 24.9 151 21.3 a 2,359 656 642 561 3.49 All nutrient 111 9.9 ab 24.5 171 20.0 ab 2,580 903 983 803 3.66 -N 110 8.3 b 24.5 137 21.0 a 2,311 572 616 499 3.68 -K 111 11.8 a 25.6 184 18.8 b 2,096 763 794 670 3.50 -S 111 11.7 a 25.0 185 18.9 b 1,902 471 628 427 3.43

Conclusion The omission pot trial in the greenhouse showed deficiency symptoms of N and P.

Deficiency symptoms of K and S were not observed. Results of the omission field trial to

confirm pot trial results were slightly different from the pot trial, especially for N. While N

was found to be deficient in the pot trial, the -N treatment did not reduce the rice yield.

Therefore, N may not be critical in the test soil. The result of the N rate trial (Table 7)

supports this result, since the lowest amount of N fertilizer (50 kg N/ha) produced the highest

yield; the yield was not significantly different from the control or other treatments. Both

omission pot and field trials showed no deficiency in K or S. The -K and -S treatments did

not reduce the rice yield. Their yields were not significantly different from treatments which

applied all nutrients or the control plot. Therefore, the test soil may be slightly deficient in N,

needing only a low amount of N fertilizer. It was not deficient in K or S.

6. UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial

Introduction Some of the Delta areas in Myanmar often are flooded in the wet season. Some are flooded

for a long period of time, and some are flooded for a short time. IFDC’s global program “Soil

Fertility Technology (SFT) Adoption, Policy Reform and Knowledge Management Project”

includes Myanmar as a test country to study UDP technology on rice under submerged

conditions. In the Delta regions of Myanmar, farmers grow normal high-yielding rice

varieties, such as Sin Thu Kha, Ayar Padathar, or a 90-day variety. These are not tolerant to

flooding that lasts for more than two weeks, and farmers often face total crop loss at that

point. The Department of Agricultural Research (DAR) has developed a high-yielding


submergence-tolerant variety to solve that problem. This improved variety, Swarna sub1,

needs an adequate supply of nutrients to achieve a high yield. Balanced fertilization with

UDP has been shown to be a climate-resilient practice in rice-growing areas in Myanmar.

However, its applicability in vulnerable areas, such as saline/alkaline soil or in fully

submerged conditions, needs to be tested. This trial was conducted to test its applicability in

submergence conditions.

Objectives • Compare balanced fertilization + UDP with farmer’s practice fertilization under

submergence conditions.

• Study the adaptability of a submergence-tolerant variety compared with a farmer’s

variety.

Materials and Methods The trial was conducted in two locations, Kangyidaunt and Mawgyun, where flooding often

takes place. Two fertilizer practices, balanced with UDP and farmer’s practice, were applied

on two varieties, farmer’s variety and a submergence-tolerant variety, Swarna sub1. The trial,

therefore, included four treatments (two fertilizer practices by two varieties). It was tested

with a 2 x 2 factorial within an RCB design with three replications.

Treatments There were two factors in this trial – fertilizer practice and variety.

Fertilizer Practices 1. Farmer’s practice – conventional broadcast PU.

2. Balanced fertilization with UDP.

Basal fertilizer rates for balanced fertilization include 80 kg TSP/ha (36 kg P2O5/ha), 40 kg

MOP/ha (24 kg K2O/ha), and 25 kg gypsum/ha (4.5 kg S/ha). One 1.8-g briquette was used

for balanced practice. The N rate was 51.8 kg/ha. Farmer’s practice applied no K and no

gypsum. Only triple superphosphate at 25 kg/ac (28 kg P2O5/ha) was applied on the FP

treatment. Both farmers applied 25 kg urea/ac (28 kg N/ha) with three split applications.

Varieties 1. Farmer’s variety (90-day variety in Kangyidaunt and Ayar Padathar in Mawgyun)

2. Submergence-tolerant variety (Swarna sub1)


Field Operation Procedure The trial was conducted on transplanted rice in a flood-prone area. Seedbed preparation and

management were done by the trial farmer. The farmers used their preferred variety, which

varied among farmers. The Mawgyun farmer used a local medium growth duration variety

(Ayar Padathar), and the Kangyidaunt farmer used a short duration variety (90-day variety).

Field preparation was completed two to three days before transplanting. After field

preparation, layout and bunds were made one day before transplanting. Each experimental

plot was separated by bunds at least 8 inches high and 8-12 inches wide. Basal P, K, and S

fertilizers then were applied on the UDP treatment, and TSP only was applied on the FP

treatment. The fertilizers were then incorporated by rake, and the plot was leveled again.

Transplanting was done the next day using two to three seedlings per hill at a spacing of

20 cm x 20 cm. UDP was applied to the balanced fertilizer treatment. One 1.8-g urea

briquette was applied seven days after transplanting by deep-placing 7-10 cm deep at the

center of four alternate rice hills. Prilled urea was broadcasted in three equal split doses on

the FP treatment. The first dose was applied at the same time as UDP, the second dose was

applied 35 days after transplanting, and the third dose was applied at flowering time. All

cultural practices were well managed. Dates of activities, pest and insect infestation, control

measures, weeding, etc., were noted. All plant characteristics, component characteristics, and

yield were recorded at harvest time. ANOVA was calculated separately for each trial using an

RCB design. Combined analysis was done for both trials using the GLIMMIX procedure, and

treatment means were compared using the Tukey grouping procedure.

Results and Discussion Nyaung Chaung village, Kangyidaunt – According to ANOVA using an RCB design, all

parameters, except panicle length, were significant. The biomass grain weights were

significant at P(0.05), and the others characteristics were significant at P(0.01) level (refer to

Data from UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial in Kyee Chaung,

Mawgyun). The plant height of the Swarna sub1 variety was found to be higher than that of

the 90-day variety. Plant height of the 90-day variety was not significantly different among

fertilizer practices. It was 85 cm and 86 cm with FP and UDP, respectively. However, plant

height of Swarna sub1 was significantly higher with UDP than with FP at 108 cm and 99 cm,

respectively. Swarna sub1 produced more productive tillers than the 90-day variety; it

produced 14.1 panicles per hill with UDP and 11.1 panicles per hill with FP. The 90-day

variety produced fewer panicles with UDP than with FP at 9.5 and 10.7 panicles per hill,

respectively. The number of grains per panicle of the 90-day variety was similar with FP and


UDP. Swarna sub1 had fewer grains per panicle with UDP (149) than with FP (166). All of

these parameters are varietal characteristics. Swarna sub1 had short and small grains, with

more grains per panicle and lower 1,000-grain weight. The 90-day variety had a heavier grain

weight and fewer grains per panicle, which were long and cylindrical. Both varieties had

higher biomass grain weights with UDP than FP. The results indicate that Swarna sub1 was

more responsive to UDP than the 90-day variety (Table 10). This could be related to its

longer growth duration to absorb the applied N, producing more productive tillers. Growth

duration of Swarna sub1 is one month longer than that of the 90-day variety.

ANOVA showed the Swarna sub1 variety with UDP produced the significantly highest yield

(5.96 t/ha); the second highest yield (4.67 t/ha) was produced by the same variety with FP

fertilizer. These yields were significantly different. The variety bears significantly more

panicles per hill with UDP than with FP. Yields of the 90-day variety were similar at 3.85

t/ha with UDP and 3.75 t/ha with FP (Table 10). The other component characteristics of the

90-day variety were also similar with UDP and FP. Both varieties are high-yielding varieties.

The lower yield of the 90-day variety may be due to its shorter growing period. There is a

30-day difference in growing period between the two varieties. Therefore, Swarna sub1 has

more time to take up nutrients, especially N, than the 90-day variety. This trial was not totally

under submergence conditions during the season. Standing water during the peak rain period

in the field was around 30 cm. Although not totally submerged, the Swarna sub1 variety

seems more tolerant to standing deep water in the field than the 90-day variety. Fewer

panicles per hill of the 90-day variety indicates a lower tolerance to a water depth of up to 30

cm.

Kyee Chaung village, Mawgyun – ANOVA showed significant differences in only two

parameters. Plant height and panicle length were highly significantly different, and the

remaining characteristics were not significantly different (refer to Data from UDP Evaluation

Under Submergence Conditions Trial in Kyee Chaung, Mawgyun). Ayar Padathar was

significantly taller than Swarna sub1, since it is a late-maturing tall variety. Plant heights of

both varieties were not significantly different with UDP and FP although slightly higher with

UDP. The heights of Ayar Padathar were 146 cm with UDP and 145 cm with FP, and those

of Swarna sub1 were 101 cm with UDP and 97 cm with FP. Panicle length of Ayar Padathar

with UDP and FP were not significantly different; however, Swarna sub1 bore significantly

longer panicles with UDP than with FP (Table 10). Although not significantly different, both

varieties performed better with UDP than with FP. Both varieties produced higher biomass

straw and grain weights with UDP than with FP. Both varieties produced more productive


tillers with UDP than with FP. This was clearly observed with Swarna sub1. The variety had

14 panicles per hill with UDP and 10.3 panicles per hill with FP. Both varieties showed

heavier grain weights with UDP than with FP. The 1,000-grain weight of Ayar Padathar was

20.7 g with UDP and 20.0 g with FP, and that of Swarna sub1 was 19.6 g with UDP and

19.4 g with FP. However, the trend of the number of grains per panicle was reversed. Fewer

grains per panicle were observed with UDP than FP for both varieties. The difference was

minimal, with only about 10 of a total of 200 grains (Table 10). The other varietal

characteristics showed little difference due to fertilizer treatment.

Both varieties produced higher yields with UDP than with FP, although the differences were

not significant. The farmer’s variety, Ayar Padathar, produced 5.70 t/ha with UDP and

5.41 t/ha with FP. Swarna sub1 produced 4.56 t/ha with UDP and 4.13 t/ha with FP (Table

10). The trial was submerged for three hours just after UDP application. Swarna sub1 was

totally submerged, but Ayar Padathar was not completely under water due to its seedling

height. Ayar Padathar is a local tall variety, and Swarna sub1 is a semi-dwarf variety. Two

more submergence events occurred before panicle initiation but lasted for less than 24 hours;

neither variety was affected. The local variety seems to perform better than Swarna sub1 and

produced a higher yield. This could be due to its longer growth duration and heavier grains.

In this trial, FP fertilizer applied less N (28 kg/ha) than UDP (51.8 kg/ha). The higher yield

with UDP may be due to not only its efficiency but also its higher N rate. Therefore, it is

difficult to state that UDP could be applied more efficiently under submergence conditions.

Table 10. Yield and Component Traits of the UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trials

Treatment Plan

t Hei

ght

(cm

)

No.

of P

anic

les

per H

ill

Pani

cle

Leng

th

(cm

)

No.

of G

rain

s pe

r Pan

icle

1,00

0-G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h St

raw

W

eigh

t (g)

Fres

h G

rain

W

eigh

t (g)

Dry

Stra

w

Wei

ght (

g)

Dry

Gra

in

Wei

ght (

g)

Yiel

d (t/

ha)

Nyaung Chaung, Kangyidaunt 90-days + FP 85 10.7 24.5 83 32.8 1,420 572 419 485 3.75 c 90-days + UDP 86 9.5 24.4 86 33.0 1,606 595 427 510 3.85 c Swarna sub1 + FP 99 11.1 23.5 166 20.2 1,439 599 449 561 4.67 b Swarna sub1 + UDP 108 14.1 23.2 149 20.7 1,846 724 549 656 5.96 a Kyee Chaung, Mawgyun Ayar Padathar + FP 145 a 9.9 28.7 a 209 20.0 2,189 571 776 512 5.41 Ayar Padathar + UDP 146 a 10.7 28.1 ab 199 20.7 3,077 606 955 525 5.70 Swarna sub1 + FP 97 b 10.3 25.7 c 211 19.4 1,684 668 583 613 4.13 Swarna sub1 + UDP 101 b 14.0 27.4 b 202 19.6 2,253 837 653 736 4.56


The analysis of location*fertilizer*variety by the GLIMMIX procedure showed only fertilizer

and interaction of location by variety were significant. Fertilizer was significant at P(0.05), and

interaction of location by variety was significant at P(0.01) (Table 11). Location, variety,

location*fertilizer, location*variety, and triple interaction were not significantly different.

The UDP practice produced a significantly higher yield (5.02 t/ha) than FP fertilizer

(4.49 t/ha) across locations and varieties (Table 11). This result may be due not only to the

higher efficiency of UDP but also an N rate higher than FP. UDP applied N at a rate of

51.8 kg/ha, and FP applied N at a rate of 28 kg/ha (see Fertilizer Practices). The higher yield

with UDP was probably due to both the higher N rate and the efficiency of UDP. There was a

significant interaction effect of location by variety. Swarna sub1 was better than the local

variety in Kangyidaunt. Swarna sub1 produced 5.31 t/ha, while the local variety produced

3.80 t/ha on average across fertilizer practices. However, in Mawgyun, the local variety was

better than Swarna sub1, with yields of 5.55 t/ha and 4.34 t/ha, respectively (Figure 3). This

different response definitely was due to the genetic differences in the varieties. The local

variety was not the same at both locations. In Kangyidaunt, a 90-day variety, which is an

early-maturing variety, was used, while in Mawgyun, Ayar Padathar was used, which is a

late-maturing variety.

Table 11. Analysis of Variance Table of GLIMMIX Model and Fertilizer Means of UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trials

Type III Test of Fixed Effect Fertilizer Means Effect Num DF Den DF F - value Pr > F UDP FP Location 1 16 2.64 0.1235 ns Fertilizer 1 16 4.84 0.0429 * 5.02 a 4.49 b Location*Fertilizer 1 16 0.48 0.4967 ns Variety 1 16 0.41 0.5325 ns Location*Variety 1 16 32.24 <.0001 ** Fertilizer*Variety 1 16 1.99 0.1776 ns Location*Fertility*Variety 1 16 1.22 0.2859 ns


Figure 3. Variety Means Across Fertilizer Practices from UDP Evaluation

Under Submergence Conditions Trials

Conclusion Separate analysis of variance for each location showed the yield in the Kangyidaunt trial was

significant, but in the Mawgyun trial, it was not significant. The significantly highest yield

(5.96 t/ha) in Kangyidaunt was produced by Swarna sub1 with UDP. The local 90-day variety

produced a significantly lower yield than Swarna sub1 (Table 10). This trial did not

encounter submergence conditions, but the water depth in the field was as deep as 30 cm

during the vegetative period. The short duration local variety did not have a long enough

growing period to absorb the nutrients applied to produce productive tillers for a better yield.

The average yield of the 90-day variety was 3.80 t/ha, while Swarna sub1 produced 5.31 t/ha.

Although not significant, the local variety produced a higher yield than Swarna sub1 in

Mawgyun. The average yield over fertilizer practices of the local variety was 5.55 t/ha and

that of Swarna sub1 was 4.34 t/ha (Figure 3). The trials showed UDP practices consistently

gave higher yields over FP fertilizer rates. This was confirmed by GLIMMIX analysis. UDP

gave a significantly higher yield at 5.02 t/ha on average across locations and varieties. The

yield of FP was 4.49 t/ha (Table 11). However, the higher yield reflected not only the nutrient

use efficiency of UDP, but also its higher N rate than FP. It is difficult to differentiate

between these effects. GLIMMIX analysis showed a significant interaction of location by

variety. The local variety, which is an early-maturing 90-day variety, produced a lower yield

than Swarna sub1 in Kangyidaunt. The medium/late-maturing local variety, Ayar Padathar,

3.80

5.31 5.55

4.34


produced a higher yield than Swarna sub1 in Mawgyun. This is due to the genetic difference

between the two varieties. Results indicate that a medium-maturing tall variety is better suited

under prolonged deep water.

Summary

UDP and Prilled Urea Deep Placement Trial Both test locations showed significant differences between treatments. UDP gave the

significantly highest yield (4.45 t/ha) in Taikkyi. UDP also gave the highest yield (4.70 t/ha)

in Zigone, although this was not significantly different from the second highest yield

(4.45 t/ha) produced with PU point placement. Again, PU point and PU band placement, as

well as PU band and PU broadcast treatments, were not statistically different. The control

treatment yield of 2.85 t/ha was the significantly lowest. Results indicate that PU broadcast is

the least efficient N application method among all. Results suggest urea can be deep-placed

either in briquette form or prilled form. The yield difference between deep placement

methods is due to the precision of the placement. The degree of difficulty of each deep

placement method is different. Manual deep placement of a briquette is the easiest and most

convenient method to place at a precise depth. PU band placement is the most difficult to

place at a precise depth with even distribution. To overcome this difficulty, mechanized

application with a precision tool is the best option to apply urea at the proper depth. It can be

done with a machine just before seed broadcasting or transplanting. A smooth and dry or

moist seedbed may be the best conditions to get the precision required.

Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial The trials conducted in Kunchangone and Waw townships examined the benefit of using

compound fertilizer, which is increasingly applied by farmers. The most commonly used

compound fertilizer is 15:15:15. Both separate ANOVAs and combined analysis by

GLIMMIX showed significant results at both locations. Balanced fertilization with UDP

produced the significantly highest yield of 4.15 t/ha in Kunchangone and 4.41 t/ha in Waw

(Table 4). On average across both locations, the yield of balanced fertilization with straight

fertilizer +UDP was 4.28 t/ha and that of balanced fertilization with compound fertilizer + PU

was 4.06 t/ha (Table 6). However, these were not statistically different. The difference

between these two fertilizer practices is one uses straight fertilizers with UDP and the other

uses compound fertilizer with PU. Nutrient rates are the same for both. Therefore, the yield

difference between the two practices is due to difference in the form of urea. With balanced


fertilizer, UDP yield is higher than PU although not significant. There was no significant

yield difference between straight fertilizers and compound fertilizer applied at a balanced

rate. However, the cost is different due to the high price of compound fertilizer. Since straight

fertilizer + UDP is cheaper and gives a slightly higher yield, it is more economical than

compound plus PU. The test clarified the efficient use of nutrients with UDP technology. The

lowest yield was given with compound fertilizer only; even at a high dose, the compound

fertilizer provided less N than the other treatments. This indicates that N was the most

important of the major nutrients. The difference between compound fertilizer + PU and

gypsum (Treatment 1, which is not balanced in nutrients) and the completely balanced

treatments suggests a small P response on yield. Application of compound fertilizer only,

even at a high rate, does not supply the required amount of N. Further research may be

needed for K and S, since rates in this trial should have been sufficient.

N Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR The trial was conducted on the soil identified as N deficient in an omission pot trial in the

greenhouse to define a recommendation on how much N should be applied to obtain the

highest yield. The trial confirmed N deficiency of the soil. The control plot with 0 N

produced the lowest yield at 3.24 t/ha. N application at 50 kg N/ha increased the yield

significantly to 4.38 t/ha. The rice yield then tended to decrease as the N rate increased up to

200 kg N/ha. The highest N rate of 200 kg/ha gave the lowest yield (3.42 t/ha) among the N

application treatments (Table 7). Thus, the rice yield was the highest at 50 kg N/ha. Other

characteristics supported these results. The number of panicles per hill and number of grains

per panicle were the highest with N rate of 50 kg/ha. Results suggest an N application rate of

50 kg/ha along with other nutrients. In this study, UDP was applied as the N fertilizer. If

prilled urea is surface broadcast, the rate may need to be higher than 50 kg N/ha due to its

lower efficiency than UDP.

P Rate Trial Using UDP on TPR The trial was conducted on the soil identified as P deficient in an omission pot trial. The

ANOVA showed significant differences at P(0.05) in yield and dry biomass grain weight. The

fresh biomass grain weight was significant at P(0.01). The other characteristics were not

significant. The control treatment gave the lowest biomass grain weights; the weight

increased as the P rate increased. The highest biomass grain weights were given by the

highest P rate (200 kg P2O5/ha). However, the two highest fresh grain weights and three

highest dry grain weights were not statistically different. The highest yield (4.96 t/ha) was


also given by the highest P rate, and this was significantly higher than all other treatments.

The yields of other treatments were not statistically different, ranging from 3.87 t/ha to

4.34 t/ha (Table 8). Results confirm P deficiency of the soil at Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt. P

was the only element which showed a deficiency out of all omission pot trials conducted in

the greenhouse. P application has been neglected by farmers for many years due to its

invisible response. Now farmers apply P with compound fertilizers. However, the amount of

P in the compound fertilizer may still not meet the crop requirement. The highest yield with

the highest P rate indicates a serious P deficiency in Kangyidaunt. However, the IPNI

Nutrient Removal Calculator estimates 33.5 kg P2O5/ha is removed by a 5 t/ha rice crop,

which is considerably less than the 200 kg P2O5/ha indicated as needed in this trial. P fixation

in this soil is suspected, and further research is necessary.

Omission Field Trial The trial was conducted to confirm sufficient K and S, which showed no deficiencies in the

omission pot trial. The trial also included an N omission treatment, since an N deficiency was

identified in the pot trial. Significant differences were observed in the number of panicles per

hill and 1,000-grain weight only. The other characteristics were not significantly different.

The highest number of panicles per hill was produced by the K omission plot (11.8), followed

by the S omission plot (11.7). These were not statistically different from the treatment that

applied all nutrients (9.9). The -N treatment produced the lowest number of panicles per hill

at 8.3, but it was not significantly different from that of the “All” treatment. The yield was

not significantly different, ranging from 3.43 t/ha to 3.68 t/ha. The highest yield was given by

the -N treatment, followed by the “All” treatment at 3.66 t/ha (Table 9). The results indicate

that K and S are not deficient, as observed in the omission pot trial. N was not found to be

deficient in this omission field trial but was in the pot trial. Therefore, N may be not critical

in this test soil. The N rate trial in this season showed the N requirement in the test soil was

as low as 50 kg N/ha.

UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial This trial was conducted in two locations – Kangyidaunt and Mawgyun.

The Kangyidaunt trial showed significant differences in all traits except panicle length.

Swarna sub1 with UDP produced the significantly highest yield (5.96 t/ha); it also produced

4.67 t/ha with FP fertilizer, which was significantly higher than the farmer’s variety (90-day

variety) with both fertilizer practices. The UDP practice showed its superiority over FP with


the Swarna sub1 variety. There was no difference between UDP and FP with the 90-day

variety. UDP had only a slightly higher yield than FP (Table 10), probably due to the growth

duration of the varieties. The early-maturing 90-day variety did not seem to have enough time

to utilize all applied nutrients, especially N from UDP. The 90-day variety produced a

significantly lower yield than Swarna sub1.

The Mawgyun trial showed significant differences in plant height and panicle length only.

The other characteristics, including yield, were not significant. The farmer’s variety, Ayar

Padathar, which is a local tall variety, had a significantly taller plant height than Swarna sub1.

Although not significantly different, both varieties produced higher yields with UDP than

with FP (Table 10). Analysis using the GLIMMIX procedure showed significant results in

fertilizer practices and interaction of location by variety only. As an overall average, the UDP

yield of 5.02 t/ha was significantly higher than the FP yield of 4.49 t/ha (Table 11). This

result not only reflected the efficiency of UDP, but the yield also is assumed to be influenced

by the higher nutrient rate of UDP. The N rate of UDP in this trial was nearly double the N

rate of FP. The efficiency of UDP under submergence conditions has been studied in

previous wet seasons. The results had shown a possibility for UDP application under

submergence conditions in the Delta regions.

The farmer’s variety in Kangyidaunt produced a lower yield than Swarna sub1. However, the

farmer’s variety in Mawgyun produced a higher yield than Swarna sub1. This was mainly

due to the difference in growth duration between the two varieties. In Kangyidaunt, the 90-

day variety had a shorter growth duration than Swarna sub1 and produced a lower yield due

to its shorter nutrient uptake period. But in Mawgyun, Ayar Padathar produced a higher yield

than Swarna sub1 due to its longer nutrient uptake period.


Appendix 1. Data Sheets

Data from UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial in Yin Daik Kwin, Taikkyi Township

UDP & Prilled Urea Trial at TaikkyiExp. Design 5 x 3 RCBLocation Yin Daik Kwin, Taik KyiYear/season 2018 Wet SeasonFarmer U Zaw Min HtweVariety Thee Htet YinPlot size 256 sq ft.Sowing Date 13-Jul UDP date 16-Aug Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 9-Aug Harvest date 2-Nov Harvested hills 225

Treat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 YieldRep. ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MC

No Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha1 1 Control 1-Oct 110 82 10 24.4 138 104 75.1 1316 389 461 348 23.7 3550 2807 32.0 3.121 2 UDP 1-Oct 110 92 13.4 24.6 133 82 61.2 1852 548 506 475 22.3 5200 4100 32.2 4.561 3 PU point 1-Oct 110 93 14.6 24.8 142 109 76.9 1614 461 528 402 24.3 4645 3630 32.8 4.031 4 PU band 1-Oct 110 95 11.2 26.0 162 115 70.8 1609 456 542 415 24.4 4580 3648 31.5 4.051 5 PU B'cast 1-Oct 110 96 12.0 25.2 161 113 70.3 1461 479 519 442 24.3 4550 3529 33.3 3.922 1 Control 1-Oct 110 90 8.8 25.2 132 103 77.8 1620 460 348 409 23.3 3950 3109 32.3 3.452 2 UDP 1-Oct 110 94 10.8 26.5 199 122 61.3 1964 491 610 419 21.8 4870 3839 32.2 4.272 3 PU point 1-Oct 110 96 12.0 26.3 160 117 73.1 2217 598 583 504 23.2 4625 3641 32.3 4.052 4 PU band 1-Oct 110 94 13.6 26.7 147 105 71.3 1646 539 448 456 23.5 4795 3752 32.7 4.172 5 PU B'cast 1-Oct 110 89 10.0 26.5 186 129 69.5 2206 559 594 474 23.5 4730 3713 32.5 4.133 1 Control 1-Oct 110 89 8 25.2 160 119 74.5 1255 450 317 378 23.8 4070 3247 31.4 3.613 2 UDP 1-Oct 110 92 11.0 26.8 178 123 69.4 1630 495 454 444 24.0 5290 4072 33.8 4.523 3 PU point 1-Oct 110 94 11.2 27.3 173 132 76.1 2036 429 482 350 20.2 4660 3576 34.0 3.973 4 PU band 1-Oct 110 93 10.0 25.8 168 95 56.8 1763 492 389 401 23.3 4605 3604 32.7 4.003 5 PU B'cast 1-Oct 110 91 10.8 25.1 154 98 63.2 1457 513 432 437 23.0 4625 3566 33.7 3.96

Average values1 Control 110 87 8.9 24.9 144 109 75.7 1397 433 375 378 23.6 3054 3.392 UDP 110 93 11.7 26.0 170 109 64.1 1815 511 523 446 22.7 4004 4.453 PU point 110 94 12.6 26.2 159 119 75.3 1956 496 531 418 22.6 3616 4.024 PU band 110 94 11.6 26.2 159 105 66.0 1672 496 460 424 23.7 3668 4.085 PU B'cast 110 92 10.9 25.6 167 113 67.8 1708 517 515 451 23.6 3602 4.00

F test * ns ns ns ns ns * ns ns **CV (%) 10.4 10.7 3.9LSD(0.05) 2.2 97.3 0.3

Fresh Biomass Dry Biomass Yield/225 hills


Data from UDP and PU Deep Placement Trial in Wet Sa Boe, Zigone Township

UDP & Prilled Urea Trial at ZigonExp. Design 5 x 3 RCBLocation Wet Sa Boe, ZigoneYear/season 2018 Wet SeasonFarmer U Thein TunVariety SinthukhaPlot size 256 sq ft.Sowing Date 20-Jun 138 UDP date 30-Jul Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 19-Jul Harvest date 5-Nov Harvested hills 225

Treat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 YieldRep. ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MC

No Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha1 1 Control 3-Oct 135 90 11.2 20.6 156 114 73.3 806 284 299 280 18.7 2685 2666 14.6 2.961 2 UDP 3-Oct 135 107 12.8 24.0 178 143 80.7 1788 537 644 522 20.8 5070 4492 23.8 4.991 3 PU point 3-Oct 135 104 12.2 23.0 187 145 77.7 1521 444 510 420 19.6 4325 4104 18.4 4.561 4 PU band 3-Oct 135 94 10.6 21.9 167 135 80.5 1356 459 501 452 19.6 3780 3613 17.8 4.011 5 PU B'cast 3-Oct 135 92 10.6 21.5 141 117 82.8 1310 410 453 390 19.6 3515 3307 19.1 3.672 1 Control 3-Oct 135 93 10.6 21.3 138 117 85.2 847 273 306 267 19.6 2655 2467 20.1 2.742 2 UDP 3-Oct 135 107 8.6 23.6 188 141 75.2 1779 341 668 338 20.0 4155 3957 18.1 4.402 3 PU point 3-Oct 135 108 10.6 23.3 209 174 83.3 1242 548 493 537 18.2 3805 3712 16.1 4.122 4 PU band 3-Oct 135 106 13.8 22.8 176 121 68.8 1539 396 532 390 20.0 4005 3833 17.7 4.262 5 PU B'cast 3-Oct 135 104 11.2 21.6 151 129 85.2 1233 377 458 366 19.3 3775 3613 17.7 4.013 1 Control 3-Oct 135 93 9.2 22.8 173 156 89.9 902 273 315 271 18.8 2750 2561 19.9 2.853 2 UDP 3-Oct 135 110 14.8 23.1 196 138 70.7 1522 443 565 418 19.7 4495 4234 19.0 4.703 3 PU point 3-Oct 135 106 12.0 21.5 157 130 83.2 1454 476 565 456 20.2 4490 4187 19.8 4.653 4 PU band 3-Oct 135 105 12.8 24.8 208 174 83.8 1345 465 494 460 19.8 3620 3498 16.9 3.893 5 PU B'cast 3-Oct 135 100 11.6 22.2 155 125 80.4 1460 310 451 307 19.8 4050 3485 26.0 3.87

Average values1 Control 135 92 10.3 21.6 155 129 83.0 852 277 306 273 19.0 2565 2.852 UDP 135 108 12.1 23.6 187 141 75.3 1696 440 625 426 20.1 4228 4.703 PU point 135 106 11.6 22.6 184 150 81.4 1406 489 523 471 19.3 4001 4.454 PU band 135 101 12.4 23.2 184 143 78.0 1413 440 509 434 19.8 3648 4.055 PU B'cast 135 99 11.1 21.8 149 123 82.8 1334 366 454 354 19.5 3468 3.85



Data from Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial in War Kauk Taw, Kunchangone Township

Compound Fertilizer Trial at KunchangoneExp. Design 4 x 3 RCBLocation War Kauk Taw, KunchangoneYear/season 2018 Wet Season F1 = Compd + Gyp + PUFarmer U Aung Khaing F2 = Balanced with TSP, MOP, Gyp + UDPVariety Paw San Yin F3 = Balanced with Compound used PUPlot size 256 sq ft. F4 = Compd + Gypsum onlySowing Date 29-Jun 150 UDP date 8-Aug Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 1-Aug Harvest date 26-Nov Harvested hills 225

Treat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 YieldRep ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MC

No Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha1 1 F1 21-Oct 144 142 8.6 23.5 119 104 87.5 1636 399 692 403 28.1 3420 3245 18.4 3.611 2 F2 21-Oct 144 145 10.8 24.6 128 107 83.0 1971 447 825 434 25.5 4520 3884 26.1 4.321 3 F3 21-Oct 144 143 10.6 24.7 135 95 69.9 1994 431 771 414 27.7 4325 3706 26.3 4.121 4 F4 21-Oct 144 144 10.0 23.9 107 88 82.5 1951 400 846 358 26.9 3335 2870 26.0 3.192 1 F1 21-Oct 144 141 9.0 24.6 134 111 82.7 1919 436 814 412 27.5 3540 3244 21.2 3.602 2 F2 21-Oct 144 141 11.4 26.3 164 121 73.9 2510 535 1037 509 27.7 4325 3782 24.8 4.202 3 F3 21-Oct 144 140 12.8 23.8 137 116 84.9 2017 393 891 369 25.6 4080 3473 26.8 3.862 4 F4 21-Oct 144 143 10.6 23.9 126 98 78.0 1720 410 683 387 27.1 3730 3396 21.7 3.773 1 F1 21-Oct 144 142 7.6 24.6 155 133 86.0 1367 323 572 304 27.9 3735 3370 22.4 3.743 2 F2 21-Oct 144 144 9.2 23.8 156 136 87.0 2207 373 917 344 28.5 3965 3532 23.4 3.923 3 F3 21-Oct 144 143 10.0 25.5 152 125 82.2 1693 472 643 456 26.5 3740 3279 24.6 3.643 4 F4 21-Oct 144 143 9 25.6 164 128 78.5 1608 462 639 445 27.3 3320 2988 22.6 3.32

Average values1 F1 144 142 8.4 24.2 136 116 85.4 1641 386 693 373 27.8 3286 3.652 F2 144 143 10.5 24.9 150 121 81.1 2229 452 926 429 27.3 3733 4.153 F3 144 142 11.1 24.7 141 112 79.1 1902 432 768 413 26.6 3486 3.874 F4 144 143 9.9 24.4 132 105 79.4 1759 424 722 396 27.1 3085 3.43

F test ns ** ns ns * * ns ns ns ns *CV (%) 4.6 4.6 10.1 6.0LSD(0.05) 0.92 10.3 378.9 0.5



Data from Balanced Fertilization With Compound Fertilizer Trial in East Waw, Waw Township

Compound Fertilizer Trial at WawExp. Design 4 x 3 RCBLocation East Waw, WawYear/season 2018 Wet Season F1 = Compd + Gyp + PUFarmer U Naung Moe F2 = Balanced with TSP, MOP, Gyp + UDPVariety Pyi Taw Yin F3 = Balanced with Compound used PUPlot size 256 sq ft. F4 = Compd + Gypsum onlySowing Date 3-Jun 129 UDP date 10-Jul Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 3-Jul Harvest date 10-Oct Harvested hills 225

Treat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 YieldRep ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MC

No Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha1 1 F1 7-Sep 126 114 8.6 24.6 108 99 91.5 1681 459 535 413 33.9 3845 3308 26.0 3.681 2 F2 7-Sep 126 115 9.2 25.6 134 124 92.1 2114 601 697 532 30.9 4350 3930 22.3 4.371 3 F3 7-Sep 126 118 8.4 25.6 111 104 93.7 1922 518 616 474 34.2 4115 3794 20.7 4.221 4 F4 7-Sep 126 112 7.2 25.6 121 116 95.7 1707 548 580 524 34.4 3090 2609 27.4 2.902 1 F1 7-Sep 126 118 7.2 25.9 120 111 92.0 1873 517 591 474 32.9 3930 3359 26.5 3.732 2 F2 7-Sep 126 115 10.0 26.0 123 114 93.0 2125 630 735 583 33.0 4590 3998 25.1 4.442 3 F3 7-Sep 126 116 9.4 25.3 125 120 95.7 1765 550 608 498 34.2 4325 3832 23.8 4.262 4 F4 7-Sep 126 115 8.8 24.0 136 118 86.8 1776 484 553 420 33.7 4340 3583 29.0 3.983 1 F1 7-Sep 126 113 8.2 25.3 122 112 91.5 2054 521 613 464 33.7 4020 3454 26.1 3.843 2 F2 7-Sep 126 116 9.0 27.1 141 118 83.6 2314 741 833 720 32.7 4760 3974 28.2 4.423 3 F3 7-Sep 126 116 8.2 24.2 109 98 89.5 1701 559 508 516 33.2 4315 3843 23.4 4.273 4 F4 7-Sep 126 115 7.4 24.6 106 100 94.3 1614 361 506 343 34.2 2895 2558 24.0 2.84

Average values1 F1 126 115 8.0 25.3 117 107 91.7 1869 499 580 450 33.5 3374 3.752 F2 126 115 9.4 26.2 133 119 89.4 2185 657 755 611 32.2 3967 4.413 F3 126 117 8.7 25.0 115 107 93.1 1796 542 577 496 33.9 3823 4.254 F4 126 114 7.8 24.7 121 111 92.0 1699 464 546 429 34.1 2917 3.24

F test ns ns ns ns ns * ns * ns ns *CV (%) 7.7 10.0 8.2LSD(0.05) 288.9 123.2 0.6



Data from N Rate Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township

N rate trial with UDP at KangyidauntExp. Design 5 x 3 RCBLocation Paw Taw Mu, KangyidauntYear/season 2018 Wet SeasonFarmer U Phyo Kyaw HeinVariety SinthukhaPlot size 256 sq ft.Sowing Date 16-Jun UDP date 25-Jul Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 12-Jul Harvest date 17-Oct Harvested hills 225

30-OctTreat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 Yieldment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MCNo Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha

1 0 N (control) 17-Sep 123 112 9.8 25.4 191 162 84.5 2065 505 505 424 21.8 3530 2750 33.0 3.062 50 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 111 11 26.1 235 184 78.1 1462 574 595 522 19.9 3570 3225 22.3 3.583 100 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 107 9.4 24.6 203 142 70.0 1903 952 661 858 19.2 3410 3121 21.3 3.474 150 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 113 10.6 22.8 166 123 73.9 2197 1193 1015 1050 19.1 2265 2102 20.2 2.345 200 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 112 7.6 24.3 195 113 57.8 2512 1138 958 984 20.4 3660 3047 28.4 3.391 0 N (control) 17-Sep 123 111 8.0 25.1 214 172 80.6 1410 470 409 416 20.9 3870 3168 29.6 3.522 50 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 108 11.8 24.9 184 143 77.9 1751 1134 708 989 20.3 4620 4249 20.9 4.723 100 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 108 7.6 24.9 232 173 74.4 2378 947 1019 854 20.2 4270 3734 24.8 4.154 150 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 105 11.0 25.6 212 169 79.5 2282 998 794 596 19.0 4510 4028 23.2 4.485 200 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 111 11.2 24.3 214 151 70.9 3059 1051 1071 863 20.7 1950 1782 21.4 1.981 0 N (control) 17-Sep 123 108 8.4 25.0 185 137 74.3 1515 505 413 427 21.0 3510 2820 30.9 3.132 50 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 112 12.0 24.6 223 188 84.0 1394 591 643 563 19.7 4740 4354 21.0 4.843 100 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 104 10.8 24.3 167 142 84.9 1764 1156 943 1138 20.3 4570 4081 23.2 4.534 150 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 111 10.8 25.0 239 179 74.6 2284 956 983 640 19.0 4700 3924 28.2 4.365 200 kg N/ha 26-Sep 132 109 8.6 25.0 221 163 73.8 2209 576 937 549 19.5 4885 4397 22.6 4.89

Average values1 0 N (control) 123 110 8.7 25.1 197 157 79.9 1663 493 442 422 21.2 2913 3.242 50 kg N/ha 132 110 11.6 25.2 214 172 80.1 1536 766 649 691 20.0 3943 4.383 100 kg N/ha 132 106 9.3 24.6 201 152 75.9 2015 1018 874 950 19.9 3645 4.054 150 kg N/ha 132 110 10.8 24.5 206 157 76.1 2254 1049 930 762 19.0 3351 3.725 200 kg N/ha 132 111 9.1 24.5 210 142 67.9 2593 922 988 799 20.2 3075 3.42

F test ns ns ns ns ns ** ns ** ns ** nsCV (%) 13.7 15.4 2.5LSD(0.05) 518.7 226.0 0.9



Data from P Rate Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township

P rate trial with UDP at KangyiduantExp. Design 5 x 3 RCBLocation Paw Daw Mu, KangyidauntYear/season 2018 Wet SeasonFarmer U Phyo Kyaw HeinVariety Sin Thu KhaPlot size 256 sq ft.Sowing Date 16-Jun UDP date 25-Jul Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 12-Jul Harvest date 30-Oct Harvested hills 225Treat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 Yield

Rep. ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MCNo Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha

1 1 0 P2O5 26-Sep 132 108 10.4 23.8 203 152 75.1 1804 946 744 692 18.2 4095 3581 24.8 3.98

1 2 50 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 108 13.0 25.6 236 212 90.0 2059 1141 1024 829 19.2 4100 3633 23.8 4.04

1 3 100 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 110 10.6 23.8 195 169 86.9 2303 1072 1080 829 18.3 4450 4114 20.5 4.57

1 4 150 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 117 12.4 24.4 218 169 77.3 2972 1193 915 962 19.7 4550 4206 20.5 4.67

1 5 200 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 110 12.8 23.8 179 136 75.8 3035 1455 1067 1402 17.8 5565 5021 22.4 5.58

2 1 0 P2O5 26-Sep 132 112 11.4 25.1 222 198 89.2 2263 1132 911 1012 18.4 4150 3658 24.2 4.06

2 2 50 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 112 11.8 23.4 180 156 86.9 2287 1013 764 704 17.6 4185 3475 28.6 3.86

2 3 100 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 118 9.4 25.0 177 157 88.9 1955 1280 867 1199 19.9 4010 3395 27.2 3.77

2 4 150 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 110 11.4 24.6 182 154 84.9 2619 1221 923 991 19.8 4605 4171 22.1 4.63

2 5 200 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 116 11.8 25.6 217 196 90.2 2718 1587 1065 1390 18.8 5115 4556 23.4 5.06

3 1 0 P2O5 26-Sep 132 113 12.8 25.0 204 173 84.6 2471 1054 1085 872 18.9 4030 3430 26.8 3.81

3 2 50 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 112 10.0 25.6 230 206 89.5 2159 1036 944 660 18.8 4185 3557 26.9 3.95

3 3 100 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 109 11.4 23.3 173 150 86.7 1815 1175 1217 966 19.1 3660 2937 31.0 3.26

3 4 150 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 113 11.0 24.9 235 213 90.6 1765 1465 1226 1487 18.2 3585 3331 20.1 3.70

3 5 200 kg P2O5/ha 26-Sep 132 109 11.0 23.8 187 165 88.5 2765 1405 1156 1256 18.9 4465 3826 26.3 4.25Average values

1 0 P2O5 132 111 11.5 24.6 210 174 83.1 2179 1044 913 859 18.5 3556 3.95

2 50 P2O5 132 111 11.6 24.9 215 191 89.0 2168 1063 911 731 18.6 3555 3.95

3 100 P2O5 132 112 10.5 24.0 181 159 87.5 2025 1175 1055 998 19.1 3482 3.87

4 150 P2O5 132 113 11.6 24.6 212 179 84.4 2452 1293 1022 1147 19.2 3903 4.34

5 200 P2O5 132 112 11.9 24.4 194 166 85.2 2839 1482 1096 1350 18.5 4468 4.96F test ns ns ns ns ns ns ** ns * ns *CV (%) 8.8 18.5 8.0LSD(0.05) 200.8 353.7 0.6



Data from Omission Field Trial in Paw Daw Mu, Kangyidaunt Township

Omission Field Trial at KangyidauntExp. Design 5 x 3 RCBLocation Paw Daw Mu, KangyidauntYear/season 2018 Wet SeasonFarmer U Phyo Kyaw HeinVariety Sin Thu KhaPlot size 256 sq ft.Sowing Date 16-Jun UDP date 25-Jul Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 12-Jul Harvest date 17-Oct Harvested hills 225

30-OctTreat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 Yield

Rep. ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MCNo Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha

1 1 Control 17-Sep 123 112 9.0 25.3 199 151 76.0 2156 634 558 520 21.6 3250 2566 32.1 2.851 2 All nutrients 26-Sep 132 105 9.8 25.7 235 207 88.3 2557 1012 1055 972 19.0 4370 3720 26.8 4.131 3 minus N 17-Sep 123 110 7.6 24.7 181 146 80.4 2177 528 528 450 21.3 3840 3112 30.3 3.461 4 minus K 26-Sep 132 112 13.4 26.4 234 206 88.2 2669 871 953 735 19.1 4055 3532 25.1 3.921 5 minus S 26-Sep 132 112 11.0 25.5 228 201 88.1 1504 206 489 187 19.1 3555 3241 21.6 3.602 1 Control 17-Sep 123 110 8.2 25.2 188 162 86.0 2218 607 607 533 21.2 3865 3173 29.4 3.532 2 All nutrients 26-Sep 132 112 10.6 23.9 214 183 85.4 2409 781 923 615 19.1 3320 2791 27.7 3.102 3 minus N 17-Sep 123 112 9.0 24.4 191 146 76.3 2657 658 763 587 20.7 4700 3782 30.8 4.202 4 minus K 26-Sep 132 112 11.8 24.8 207 169 81.9 1810 785 779 730 18.4 3845 3367 24.7 3.742 5 minus S 26-Sep 132 110 14.4 24.1 188 158 84.3 1950 520 577 436 19.3 3720 3123 27.8 3.473 1 Control 17-Sep 123 112 9.6 24.2 185 142 76.5 2702 728 762 631 21.2 4550 3672 30.6 4.083 2 All nutrients 26-Sep 132 106 9.2 24.0 164 122 74.1 2772 918 972 823 22.0 3995 3373 27.4 3.753 3 minus N 17-Sep 123 107 8.2 24.5 158 119 75.7 2099 531 558 461 21.1 3775 3046 30.6 3.383 4 minus K 26-Sep 132 107 10.2 25.5 224 176 78.8 1808 632 649 545 18.8 3110 2542 29.7 2.823 5 minus S 26-Sep 132 110 9.6 25.5 244 194 79.7 2252 688 817 657 18.2 3380 2897 26.3 3.22

Average values1 Control 123 111 8.9 24.9 191 151 79.4 2359 656 642 561 21.3 3137 3.492 All nutrients 132 107 9.9 24.5 204 171 83.5 2580 903 983 803 20.0 3294 3.663 minus N 123 110 8.3 24.5 177 137 77.5 2311 572 616 499 21.0 3313 3.684 minus K 132 111 11.8 25.6 221 184 83.1 2096 763 794 670 18.8 3147 3.505 minus S 132 111 11.7 25.0 220 185 83.9 1902 471 628 427 18.9 3087 3.43

F test ns * ns ns ns ns ns ns ns * nsCV (%) 13.6 4.5LSD(0.05) 2.6 1.7



Data from UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial in Nyaung Chaung, Kangyidaunt

UDP under Submerged Condition Trial at KangyidauntExp. Design 4 x 3 RCBLocation Nyaung Chaung, KangyidauntYear/season 2018 Wet Season Variety FertilizerFarmer U Myint Aung V1 Local (90 Day) F1 FP Urea 3 splitsVariety 90 Day and Swarna V2 Swarna sub1 F2 UDPPlot size 256 sq ft.Sowing Date 8-Jul UDP date 23-Aug Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 3-Aug Harvest date 18-Oct Harvested hills 225

19-NovTreat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 Yield

Rep ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MCNo Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha

1 1 V1 F1 16-Sep 100 87 10.2 24.4 92 80 86.5 1297 583 376 498 32.7 4110 3431 28.2 3.691 2 V1 F2 16-Sep 100 87 8.4 24.8 103 95 91.9 1499 551 375 472 32.7 4320 3451 31.3 3.711 3 V2 F1 16-Oct 130 100 12.0 23.6 188 169 89.8 1398 558 420 529 20.5 4779 4095 26.3 4.411 4 V2 F2 18-Oct 132 108 13.6 23.8 184 163 88.7 1700 790 511 717 20.2 7000 5877 27.8 6.332 1 V1 F1 16-Sep 100 84 11.4 25.3 100 90 90.4 1402 593 431 494 33.1 4285 3577 28.2 3.852 2 V1 F2 16-Sep 100 86 10.2 23.7 87 79 91.5 1723 642 467 534 33.2 4375 3561 30.0 3.832 3 V2 F1 16-Oct 130 99 10.8 24.4 184 173 93.7 1394 647 429 608 19.9 5062 4379 25.6 4.712 4 V2 F2 18-Oct 132 108 14.0 23.0 178 160 89.7 1738 664 539 600 21.1 6253 5206 28.4 5.603 1 V1 F1 16-Sep 100 84 10.6 23.7 92 78 85.2 1560 540 450 462 32.6 4165 3453 28.7 3.723 2 V1 F2 16-Sep 100 85 9.8 24.7 93 83 88.4 1597 593 438 524 32.9 4685 3704 32.0 3.993 3 V2 F1 16-Oct 130 99 10.4 22.5 167 155 93.2 1526 592 498 546 20.1 5321 4529 26.8 4.883 4 V2 F2 18-Oct 132 108 14.6 22.8 141 123 87.8 2102 717 596 652 20.7 6560 5538 27.4 5.96

Average values1 V1 F1 100 85 10.7 24.5 94 83 87.4 1420 572 419 485 32.8 3487 3.752 V1 F2 100 86 9.5 24.4 94 86 90.6 1606 595 427 510 33.0 3572 3.853 V2 F1 130 99 11.1 23.5 180 166 92.2 1439 599 449 561 20.2 4335 4.674 V2 F2 132 108 14.1 23.2 168 149 88.8 1846 724 549 656 20.7 5540 5.96

F test ** ** ns ** ** ** * ** * ** **CV (%) 0.7 7.0 8.5 8.6 6.8 8.4 5.1 8.4 1.2 5.6LSD(0.05) 1.4 1.6 22.8 20.8 215.0 104.3 47.0 93.2 0.6 0.5



Data from UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Conditions Trial in Kyee Chaung, Mawgyun

UDP under Submerged Condition Trial at MawgyunExp. Design 4 x 3 RCBLocation Kyee Chaung, MawgyunYear/season 2018 Wet Season Variety FertilizerFarmer U Hla Han V1 Local (Ayar Padathar) F1 FP Urea 3 splitsVariety V2 Swarna sub1 F2 UDPPlot size 256 sq ft.Sowing Date 20-Jul UDP date 28-Aug Harvested area 100 sq. ft.Transplant Date 21-Aug Harvest date 5-Dec Harvested hills 225

12-DecTreat Date Days Plant No of Panicle No of No of Spikelet 1000 Yield

Rep ment Treatment of to height panicles Length spikelets grains per Fertility Straw Grain Straw Grain grain Wet Calculat MCNo Flowering Maturity (cm) per hill (cm) /panicle panicle % wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) wt. (g) (g) (g) (%) t/ha

1 1 V1 F1 12-Nov 145 147 9 28.9 246 214 87.0 3060 780 1050 694 20.3 6497 5968 21.0 6.421 2 V1 F2 12-Nov 145 144 7.2 28.4 217 187 86.4 3569 551 1045 469 21.0 6350 5553 24.8 5.981 3 V2 F1 5-Nov 138 94 9.0 25.9 243 221 91.0 1595 625 625 587 20.3 4530 3703 29.7 3.991 4 V2 F2 5-Nov 138 101 12.6 27.7 227 213 93.7 2367 768 645 656 19.5 4580 3717 30.2 4.002 1 V1 F1 12-Nov 145 144 11.6 29.0 245 220 90.0 1416 404 526 367 18.9 6355 5631 23.8 6.062 2 V1 F2 12-Nov 145 147 8.0 27.6 221 190 86.2 3158 632 997 538 20.5 6604 5291 31.1 5.692 3 V2 F1 5-Nov 138 98 11.0 26.0 239 221 92.2 1672 658 507 591 18.4 4875 4104 27.6 4.422 4 V2 F2 5-Nov 138 101 13.6 28.1 209 189 90.3 2047 813 617 736 19.5 5290 4287 30.3 4.613 1 V1 F1 12-Nov 145 145 9 28.3 221 192 86.7 2090 530 753 476 20.8 3810 3473 21.6 3.743 2 V1 F2 12-Nov 145 148 17.0 28.5 242 218 90.3 2505 635 822 568 20.7 5950 5030 27.3 5.413 3 V2 F1 5-Nov 138 98 11.0 25.1 229 191 83.4 1784 721 618 660 19.6 4560 3690 30.4 3.973 4 V2 F2 5-Nov 138 102 15.8 26.5 222 205 92.2 2346 929 697 818 19.8 5665 4703 28.6 5.06

Average values1 V1 F1 145 145 9.9 28.7 237 209 87.9 2189 571 776 512 20.0 5024 5.412 V1 F2 145 146 10.7 28.1 227 199 87.7 3077 606 955 525 20.7 5291 5.703 V2 F1 138 97 10.3 25.7 237 211 89.0 1684 668 583 613 19.4 3833 4.134 V2 F2 138 101 14.0 27.4 220 202 92.1 2253 837 653 736 19.6 4236 4.56

F test ** ns ** ns ns ns ns ns ns ns nsCV (%) 1.4 1.9LSD(0.05) 3.3 1.1



Photos

Photo 1. UDP and PU Deep Placement Transplanting Trial in Wet Sa Boe

Village, Zigone, Bago Region, on July 19, 2018

Photo 2. Strengthening Bunds Just Before UDP and PU Application on Balanced

Fertilization With Compound Fertilization Trial in Wet Sa Boe Village, Waw, Bago Region, on August 16, 2018


Photo 3. UDP Application during UDP Evaluation Under Submergence Trial in

Kyee Chaung Village, Mawgyun, Ayeyarwaddy Region, on August 28, 2018

Photo 4. Prilled Urea Application during Balanced Fertilization With Compound

Fertilizer Trial in War Kauk Taw Village, Kunchangone, Yangon Region, on August 8, 2018


Photo 5. Early-Maturing 90-Day Variety of the UDP Evaluation Under

Submergence Conditions Trial Matured Earlier Than Swarna sub1 in Nyaung Chaung Village, Kangyidaunt, Ayeyarwaddy Region, Just Before Harvest on October 18, 2018

Photo 6. Threshing Crop Cut from the UDP Evaluation Under Submergence

Conditions Trial in Nyaung Chaung Village, Kangyidaunt Ayeyarwaddy Region, on October 18, 2018


Photo 7. N Rate Trial, P Rate Trial, and Nutrient Omission Trial (left to right) in

Paw Daw Mu Village, Kangyidaunt, Ayeyarwaddy Region, on September 6, 2018

fertilizer sector improvement (fsi+) · compound fertilizer applied at a balanced rate is higher...

Documents