Abstract

The authors regret to report some mistakes (AE for treatment N) in the published Table 3 (resulting from a spreadsheet error) and associated changes necessary to results and discussion section of the paper. The corrected Table 3 and associated text are below (words to be removed in sections ‘3.3 and 4.4’ are shown with bold, words to be added are italicised). There are no changes to paper conclusions or abstract. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused. Table 3 Interaction of establishment method and N rate on agronomic efficiency of N (AE) and partial factor productivity of N (PFP) of rice at Rajshahi in 2016 and 2017, and at Dinajpur in 2017 and 2018. Values are means of three replicates. [Table presented] PTR = Puddled transplanted rice; ZT UPTR = Zero-till unpuddled transplanted rice; ZT RUPTR = Zero-till rainfed unpuddled transplanted rice; N = 45 kg N ha; N = 90 kg N ha; LSD = Least significance difference; NS = Not significant. 3.3. N use efficiency There was no significant effect of rice establishment method and N rate on AE in any season and location, except for N rate at Dinajpur Rajshahi in the second season (Table 3). In general, AE decreased increased with increasing N rate at Rajshahi, however, the trend was opposite at Dinajpur. 4.4. Effect of establishment method and N fertilization on N use efficiency There was a decreasing trend in both AE and PFP with increasing N rate, irrespective of the establishment method, suggesting that the recommended N management for both the PTR and ZT UPTR rice was similar in both the sites. The AE was generally greater where 45 kg N ha was applied than in the 90 kg N ha treatment. Comparatively lower AEwith increasing N rate at Dinajpur may be due to the higher N losses at the higher N rate resulting from N leaching during deep drainage in the light-textured soil.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call