Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

Assessing congenial soil temperature and its impact on root growth,

grain yield of summer rice under varying water stress condition in Lower
Gangetic Plain of India
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty a,⇑, Saon Banerjee a, Rajib Nath b, Suman Samanta c
a
Department of Agricultural Meteorology & Physics, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, West Bengal, India
b
Department of Agronomy, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, West Bengal, India
c
Division of Agricultural Physics, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa, New Delhi, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Increasing winter temperature in lower Gangetic Plain of India has put a threat to the cultivation of sum-
Received 19 February 2021 mer rice along with decreasing fresh water availability. Increasing ambient temperature also increase the
Revised 12 May 2021 soil temperature in the root zone of the crop. Thus, the effect of soil temperature over an optimum value
Accepted 4 July 2021
may be detrimental for the root growth which turns into reduction of grain yield. Keeping in mind this
Available online xxxx
situation, an experiment was carried out during 2014 and 2015 on summer rice in University Research
Farm. Three transplanting dates and four irrigation regimes were chosen so that the crop experiences
Keywords:
extreme weather as well as water stress condition. It is found that the mean soil temperature has a grad-
Grain yield
Root growth
ual increasing trend with advancement of crop growth. A significant and exponential increase in root
Summer rice weight was recorded with the increase in soil temperature. It is found that root growth was reduced
Soil temperature when soil temperature increased beyond a critical value of 34 °C due to delayed transplanting and reduc-
Water stress tion of grain yield was noticed. So the summer-rice farmers are advised to complete transplanting within
first fortnight of February to avoid yield reduction due to delay.
Ó 2021 The Authors. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction
More than half of the worlds’ population consumes rice as their
principal food. Asia is the largest producing and consuming region
of the world (Khush, 2005). Among Indian states, West Bengal has
5.5 m ha under rice cultivation with a total production of 15.31
million tons and an average productivity of 2786 Kg ha 1 during
2013-’14 (Govt of India, 2014). West Bengal farmers grow rice dur-
ing July to November and January to April as winter and summer
crop depending up on the time of harvest. The transplanted rice
in West Bengal requires huge amount of irrigation water during
summer season which is lifted from the ground water reserve,
inviting arsenic pollution in the large tracks of Gangetic Plains
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Agricultural Meteorology & Physics,
Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, West Bengal, India
E-mail address: pramitikumar27@gmail.com (P.K. Chakraborty).
Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
(Sarkar et al., 2012; Mukherjee et al., 2017). Growth and yield of
rice, like those of other crops are determined by many environ-
mental factors including soil volumetric water content (De Datta,
1981; McCauley, 1990; Beyrouty et al., 1994), soil temperature dis-
tribution and soil heat transfer in a rice field throughout the grow-
ing season (Renaud et al., 2001). Large number of workers
investigated the effect of low temperature on rice crop and have
reported how low temperature reduce the growth, panicle forma-
tion and grain filling (Nishiyama, 1985; Wada, 1992). At present
the threat to productivity of rice is emanating from higher mini-
mum temperature during the winter season in the tropical belt
because of the global temperature change (IPCC, 2014). Das and
Lohar (2005) indicated an increase in temperature to the tune of
0.4 ± 0.2 °C over Gangetic West Bengal and adjoining areas in East-
ern India. Dash et al. (2007) also reported an increased winter tem-
perature by 1 °C. This increasing winter temperature has
accelerated evapotranspiration from rice field and has increased
water requirement of the crop. Increased temperature has also
shortened the vegetative stage of rice thus reducing yield. In sev-
eral field crops, horticultural crops and in natural vegetation supra
optimal root temperature caused negative effects on shoot and
root growth (Du and Tachibana, 1994; Xu and Huang, 2000;

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2021.07.001
1658-077X/Ó 2021 The Authors. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article as: Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al., Assessing congenial soil temperature and its impact on root growth, grain yield of summer rice
under varying water stress condition in Lower Gangetic Plain of India, Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2021.07.001
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al.
Lyons et al., 2007). Soil temperature influences the morphological
characteristics and metabolism (McMichael and Burke, 1998).
The water and surface soil temperature in rice field are influenced
by net solar radiation which depends on the time of year, time of
day, latitude and cloudiness (Renaud et al., 2001) as air tempera-
ture increases, water and soil temperature in the rice field also
increase (Dutta et al., 2012). Effect of soil temperature on growth
processes is more than air temperature. However, no proper docu-
mentation is available in the Lower Gangetic Planis (LGP) of East-
ern India. In-house studies showed that yield and yield
components of rice were negatively influenced by high soil tem-
perature. In LGP and other parts of Eastern India rice cultivation
is exposed two-prong threats – increasing minimum temperature
during winter and increased arsenic pollution due to extraction
of ground water to irrigate the rice field. Selecting the proper trans-
planting window for conducive weather situation specifically the
soil temperature is a primary task for the rice researcher. Simulta-
neously application of minimum irrigation water through deficit
water management practices is also important to reduce the
arsenic load in the ecosystem as well as the conservation of ground
water. These two aspects may have profound effect on soil temper-
ature which influences the root growth and other growth parame-
ters and yield of the crops. In this study, therefore, three
transplanting windows and four levels of irrigation management
have been tried to delineate the effect of soil temperature on root
growth and its consequences on other growth processes and yield
of the crop under field condition.
2. Materials and method
2.1. Experimental set up
The site of the experiment is located at the University research
Farm, Kalyani, which falls in the Indo-Gangetic Plains of West Ben-
gal, India. The latitude, longitude and the altitude of the site are
22°58́N, 88°31́E and 9.75 m above mean sea level respectively.
The soil is Entisol, clay loam in character. The experimental soil
contains 0.78% organic C, 0.07% N, 24.06 kg ha 1 available P and
187.45 kg ha 1 of available K. The field experiment was carried
out in the winter season of 2014 and 2015. In every season 35 days
old rice seedling of the variety Shatabdi (IET-4786) was trans-
planted under three different planting windows (D1:24th January,
D2: 7th February and D3: 21st February) to expose the rice crop to
three different sets of thermal and radiation environments. Two
seedlings per hill were transplanted maintaining a row to row
spacing as 20 cm and plant to plant spacing 15 cm. Thus total num-
bers of seedlings used for transplanting were 1848 per plot (as
total plot area was 28 m2). Four irrigation regimes were adopted
[continuous ponding (I1); intermittent ponding (I2) during 20 to
65 days after transplanting i.e DAT (irrigation applied 3 days after
disappearance of standing water); irrigation depth is 0.05 m; inter-
mittent ponding (I3) during 20 to 65 DAT (irrigation applied 5 days
after disappearance of standing water); irrigation depth is 0.05 m
and shallow depth deficit irrigation (I4) during 20 to 65DAT; irriga-
tion depth is 0.03 m.].
Farmers of this region transplant summer rice in second quarter
of January and keep the field under continous ponding with 0.05 m
depth of water. Therefore D1-I1 combination was kept as control
group in the experimental set up. The dates of transplanting were
confined in horizontal strips (main plot) and the irrigation regimes
were kept in the vertical strip (sub-plot).
The source of irrigation water was shallow underground aquifer
at 25 m depth. The water quality was as followed: pH 7.7; EC
889.00 lS per cm; TH (total hardness as CaCO3) 325.00; Ca
112.00 mg per litre; Mg 4.86 mg per litre; Na 60.15 mg per litre;
2
Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
K 29.93 mg per litre; HCO3 365.00 mg per litre; Cl 365.00 mg per
litre; SO4 32.50 mg per litre; Fe 0.59 mg per litre; SiO2 6.40 mg
per litre (Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water
Resources, Govt. of India, 2017).
2.1.1. Measurement of soil temperature
In all the experimental plots soil temperature was measured on
30, 45, 60, 75 and 90 days after transplanting (DAT). Depth of mea-
surement was 0.05 m. Temperature data was recorded from 09 to
15 h of each date of observation at an interval of 1 h. So each day, 7
sets of data were recorded from each observation point. Metal-
jacketed glass thermometer with mercury as temperature measur-
ing liquid was used to record the desired data. Thermometers used
in this study followed specification laid by India Meteorological
Department. It is well known that, incoming solar radiation inten-
sity remains high in-between 09 and 15 hrs time span which
affects both the air and soil temperatures. The net radiation is
being utilized for (i) Atmospheric temperature,(ii) Latent heat of
vaporization and (iii) Soil temperature. Considering this theory,
the soil temperature at 5 cm depth in the present study has been
measured only during 09 to 15 hrs.
The dates of transplanting were confined in horizontal strips
(main plot) and the irrigation regimes were kept in the vertical
strip (sub-plot). The experiment was laid out in strip-plot design
with a plot size of 8 m  3.5 m having three replications. Around
each sub-plot treatment a 2 m wide channel was constructed to
restrict the water movement from one plot to another plot. The
plot bund was covered with polythene sheet to control the seepage
as well. The crop was raised adopting standard agronomic prac-
tices. The fertilizer doses were N 80 kg ha 1, P2O5 60 kg ha 1 and
K2O 60 kg ha 1. 50% of total dose of nitrogen was given before
transplanting, remaining 50% was splitted into two doses at max-
imum tillering (45DAT) and panicle initiation (65 DAT) stage.
P2O5 and K2O were applied before transplanting.
2.2. Weather data
Weather data during the experimental period was collected
from nearby agro-meteorological observatory and presented in
Figs. 1 and 2.
2.3. Statistical analysis
The design of the experiment is strip – plot. All the statistical
analysis is done through Statistical Tool for Agricultural Research
(STAR 2.0.1) software. Least Significant Test was done to find sig-
nificances in between the interaction effects of the treatments
along with years. Principal component regression (PCR) analysis
was carried out to find important relationships between environ-
mental and biological components. The PCR analysis was done to
overcome multicollinearity problem which arises when two or
more of the explanatory variables are close to being collinear. Bio-
logical and environmental relationship was measured as per
Gomez and Gomez (1984).
Soil temperature, root growth and yield were primary data col-
lected from the field experiment. Weather data during the experi-
mental period were collected from the adjacent
Agrometeorological Observatory.
3. Results
3.1. Mean soil temperature
In general it was observed that the soil temperature increased
gradually with progress of day up to 15:00 h. The soil temperature
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

45 12
2014 SS(Hr) TMAX TMIN
11
40
10
35
9
30 8
7
25
6
20
5
15 4
3
10
2
5
1
0 0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

45 12
2015
40 11
10

Bright sun shine hour (hr)

35 9
Temperature (°C)

30 8
25 7
6
20 5
15 4
3
10
2
5 1
0 0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Standard Meteorological Week

Fig. 1. Temperature (TMAX and TMIN) and bright sun shine hour data (BSS) during the experimental period where SMW is Standard Meteorological Week.

variation with the progress of growth is presented in Table 1. The
soil temperature increased gradually with the advancement of
growth and delay in transplanting. Under D1 the mean soil temper-
ature ranged from 23.4 to 31.2 °C throughout the period of growth.
Under D2 the same ranged from 29.1 to 31.8 °C and under D3 it was
in the range of 28.7 to 32.4 °C. Among the irrigation regimes I1
recorded minimum and I3 recorded maximum soil temperature
irrespective of DOTs and experimental year.
3.2. Impact of soil temperature on root growth
The root dry matter accumulation was found to be an exponen-
tial function of soil temperature under different DOTs (Fig. 3) and
irrigation regimes (Fig. 4). A significant and exponential increase
in root weight was recorded with the increase in soil temperature.
Approximately 69.8, 17.9 and 43.2% variation in root biomass
might be explained through the variation in soil temperature
under D1, D2 and D3 respectively. Similarly, 51.8, 39.4, 36.6 and
55.4% variation in root biomass might be assigned to the variation
in soil temperature for I1, I2, I3 and I4 irrigation regimes respec-
tively. So, irrespective of dates of transplanting and irrigation
regime, the root weight generally increased with enhancement of
soil temperature exponentially. But the specific impact of soil tem-
perature on root growth on each date of observation cannot be
obtained from this. So principal component regression (PCR) was
carried out to get the impact of soil temperature over root dry mat-
ter accumulation on specific date of observation. Soil temperature
on different dates of observation had significant impact on root
biomass under different DOTs and irrigation regimes as evident
from principal component regression analysis shown in Table 2.
The root biomass was positively and significantly affected by the
soil temperature on 30, 45 and 75 DAT under D1 transplanting.
Under D2 the soil temperature significantly and positively influ-
enced the root biomass throughout the growth phases except soil
temperature of 75 DAT. Under D3 the root biomass was positively
and significantly affected by soil temperature on 60 DAT but had a
negative impact by the soil temperature of 45 and 75 DAT. This
suggested that the increase in soil temperature increased the root
biomass when the crop was transplanted during the cool season.
As the transplanting was delayed root biomass decreased during
the later phase with increasing soil temperature. The observed data
revealed that root growth was gradually restricted when soil tem-

3
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

60 30
55 2014
50 25
45
40 20
35
30 15 RAINFALL
25 EVAPORATION
20 10
15
10 5
5
0 0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

60 30
55 2015

Evapotranspiraon (mm)
50 25
45
Rainfall (mm)

40 20
35
30 15
25
20 10
15
10 5
5
0 0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Standard Meteorological Week (SMW)

Fig. 2. Rainfall (mm) and evaporation (mm) scenario during the experimental period.

Table 1
Mean soil temperature (°C) under different DOTs and irrigation regimes with the progress of growth.

DOT Treatment DAT

30 45 60 75 90
2014 2015 Mean 2014 2015 Mean 2014 2015 Mean 2014 2015 Mean 2014 2015 Mean
D1 I1 24.64 21.47 23.06 25.59 29.29 27.44 27.97 30.33 29.15 29.13 29.69 29.41 30.04 31.29 30.66
I2 24.93 22.14 23.54 26.00 30.54 28.27 28.06 30.40 29.23 31.16 31.34 31.25 30.51 31.99 31.25
I3 25.17 22.47 23.82 25.99 30.77 28.38 28.46 31.00 29.73 32.34 31.50 31.92 31.61 32.11 31.86
I4 24.86 21.79 23.32 25.61 29.71 27.66 28.31 30.60 29.46 29.43 30.37 29.90 30.63 31.61 31.12
Mean 24.90 21.97 25.80 30.08 28.20 30.58 30.51 30.73 30.70 31.75
D2 I1 27.03 28.01 27.52 24.66 30.19 27.42 27.03 29.70 28.36 27.50 31.41 29.46 28.29 31.77 30.03
I2 28.59 30.97 29.78 25.83 32.16 28.99 27.54 31.81 29.68 27.56 33.27 30.41 30.60 32.89 31.74
I3 28.79 31.30 30.04 26.06 32.43 29.24 28.59 32.17 30.38 28.77 33.71 31.24 32.24 33.70 32.97
I4 27.17 30.66 28.91 25.50 32.37 28.94 27.20 31.31 29.26 27.87 32.71 30.29 31.99 32.57 32.28
Mean 27.89 30.24 25.51 31.79 27.59 31.25 27.93 32.78 30.78 32.73
D3 I1 27.40 28.54 27.97 30.11 30.94 30.53 30.34 29.87 30.11 29.80 30.57 30.19 30.53 32.20 31.36
I2 27.96 29.14 28.55 30.51 32.07 31.29 30.94 31.94 31.44 30.34 32.06 31.20 31.49 33.43 32.46
I3 29.87 30.50 30.19 30.76 32.39 31.57 32.23 32.07 32.15 32.26 32.57 32.41 32.66 34.16 33.41
I4 29.79 28.64 29.21 30.39 31.89 31.14 30.84 31.01 30.93 30.21 31.91 31.06 30.77 33.76 32.26
Mean 28.75 29.21 30.44 31.82 31.09 31.23 30.65 31.78 31.36 33.39

perature was above 34 °C. The impact of soil temperature on root 75 DAT had a negative impact on root biomass under I1, I2 and I3
biomass under different irrigation regimes was different from irrigation regimes. Under I2 regime soil temperature of 30 DAT also
dates of transplanting (Table 2). The soil temperature on 45 and had a negative impact on root biomass with high R2 value (0.985).

4
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

5.0

Root Weight (g/hill)

y = 0.001e0.235x
4.0 D1 R² = 0.698**
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0

Soil Temperature (°C)

5.0
Root Weight (g/hill)

D2 y = 0.072e0.109x
4.0
R² = 0.179*
3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Soil Temperature (°C)

5.0
Root Weight (g/hill)

D3 y = 0.001e0.243x
4.0 R² = 0.432**
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Soil Temperature (°C)

Fig. 3. Effect of soil temperature on root dry weight under different dates of transplanting (averaged over irrigation regimes and experimental years; *significant at 5% level,
**significant at 1% level).

Under I4 regime soil temperature during early phase had positive
impact on root biomass.
The root weight is an exponential function of accumulated soil
temperature under different irrigation regimes (Fig. 5a). The root
weight increased exponentially and significantly with increased
accumulated soil temperature as found in case of discrete soil tem-
perature value on a particular date of observation. When irrigation
regimes and dates of transplanting are averaged similar results
were observed (Fig. 5b).
3.3. Relationship between soil temperature and environmental factors
The environmental factors influence soil temperature signifi-
cantly. Among the environmental parameters, air temperature is
one of the most important climatic factors which influence soil
temperature. Shifting of transplanting dates (i.e D1, D2 and D3)
denoted the change in air temperature in the present study
(Fig. 1). A significant linear increase in soil temperature was
observed with the increase in mean air temperature irrespective
of dates of transplanting (Fig. 6). Under D1 transplanting, when
mean air temperature was 30 °C, soil temperature was 29.9 °C;
but for the similar value the soil temperature were 30.2 °C and
30.5 °C respectively for D2 and D3 transplanting dates. The R2 value
5
showed strength of relationship were more under D1 and D3 com-
pared to D2.
3.4. Grain yield
Grain yield of rice, affected by DOT and irrigation regimes have
been presented in Table 3. The mean grain yield was maximum
under D2 in the first year and D1 in the second year, however, no
significant difference was observed in between these two treat-
ments. The D3 transplanted crop had minimum grain yield in both
the years. The reduction in grain yield for 15 days early and 15 days
late transplanting with respect to D2 were 1.33 and 56 Kg ha 1
day 1 in the first year. However, in the second year delay in trans-
planting from D1 reduced the grain yield of 10.6 and 93.33 Kg ha 1
day 1 respectively for D2 and D3. This indicates that if transplant-
ing is done beyond first fortnight of February, more than 18.12%
yield will be reduced.
Among the four irrigation regimes, I2 recorded maximum grain
yield (irrespective of DOTs) and this was at par with I1 regime. But
I3 and I4 regimes had significant differences in the first and second
year. Percent reductions in grain yield in I1, I3 and I4 were 1.85,
14.64 and 11.45% in the first year and 1.31, 15.41 and 11.64% in
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

5.0

Root Weight (g/hill)

I1 y = 0.001e0.229x
4.0
R² = 0.518**
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Soil Temperature (°C)

5.0
Root Weight (g/hill)

y = 0.020e0.152x
4.0
I2 R² = 0.394**
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Soil Temperature (°C)
5.0
Root Weight (g/hill)

4.0 I3 y = 0.013e0.166x
3.0
R² = 0.366**
2.0
1.0
0.0
20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Soil Temperature (°C)

5.0
I4 y = 0.003e0.201x
Root Weight

4.0
R² = 0.554**
(g/hill)

3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Soil Temperature (°C)

Fig. 4. Effect of soil temperature on root growth under different irrigation regimes (averaged over DOTs and experimental years; **significant at 1% level).

Table 2
Regression analysis showing effect of soil temperature on root growth under different dates of transplanting and irrigation regimes in summer rice.

DOT Equation R2 SE of Estimate

D1 RW90 = 12.105 + 0.178ST30 + 0.795ST45 1.468ST60 + 0. 248ST75 0.915** 0.247
D2 RW90 = 7.498 + 0.318ST30 + 0.281ST45 + 0.199ST60-0.913ST75 0.942** 0.262
D3 RW90 = 4.686 + 0.077ST30-0.204ST45 + 0.315ST60-0.216ST75 0.946** 0.098
OVERALLDOT RW90 = 3.352 + 0.069ST30-0.173ST45 + 0.254ST60-0.149ST75 0.278 (Adj R2 = 0.216) 0.548
IRRIGATION REGIME
I1 RW90 = -8.569 + 0.323ST30-0.464ST45 + 1.018ST60-0.452ST75 0.826** 0.658
I2 RW90 = -6.504–0.141ST30-1.130ST45 + 1.952ST60-0.378ST75 0.985** 0.155
I3 RW90 = -0.036–0.029ST30-0.263ST45 + 0.458ST60-0.057ST75 0.666* 0.345
I4 RW90 = 65.433 + 0.011ST30 + 1.523ST45-2.274ST60-1.273ST75 0.843** 0.542
OVERALLIRRI RW90 = 0.138 + 0.049ST30-0.262ST45 + 0.398ST60-0.083ST75 0.241 (Adj R2 = 0.081) 0.562

RW90 = Root Weight at 90DAT, STn = Soil Temperature of "n"th DAT. (* significant at 5% level; ** significant at 1% level)

the second year with respect to I2. Faghani et al., (2011) also The effect of root growth on grain yield is presented in Table 4.
reported similar effects of late transplanting in rice. The regression analysis showed mostly negative impact of 45 DAT

6
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

60 y = 0.005e0.019x

Root weight (g/hill)

55
50 I1 R² = 0.765**
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
350 400 450 500 550 600

Accumulated soil temperature (day°C)

60
55 I y = 0.023e0.016x
Root weight (g/hill)

50 2 R² = 0.762**
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
350 400 450 500 550 600
Accumulated soil temperature (day°C)
60
Root weight (g/hill)

55 I3
50 y = 0.082e0.013x
45
40 R² = 0.746**
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
350 400 450 500 550 600

Accumulated soil temperature (day°C)

60 y = 0.012e0.017x
Root weight (g/hill)

55
50 I4 R² = 0.741**
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
350 400 450 500 550 600
Accumulated soil temperature (day°C)
Fig. 5a. Relationship of accumulated soil temperature and root weight under different irrigation regimes (Averaged over DOTs and year of experiment; **significant at 1%
level).

root weight (maximum tillering stage) over the grain yield in all I1 was due to standing water which absorbed much of the atmo-
transplanting dates. When the irrigation regimes were considered spheric heat. Primary roots were able to grow over a broad
it was found positive impact of root weight on grain yield at flow- range of temperature. The rice crop has fibrous root systems
ering and milk stage (after 60 DAT) in I3 and I4 regimes. On the which are developed within shallow soil depth. Several workers
other hand, root weight of 30 DAT had a negative impact on grain also confirmed that the root growth tends to increase with
yield in I1 and I2 irrigation regimes. increase in temperature till an optimum is reached (Brar et al.,
1970; Cooper, 1973; Glinski and Lipiec, 1990). Under continu-
4. Discussion ously irrigated condition growth of root is less compared to
the intermittent irrigation regimes. Under D1 a soil temperature
Dutta et al. (2012) had reported similar pattern of diurnal vari- range of 22–32 °C seemed to be congenial for root growth
ation in soil temperature in rice field. Increased soil temperature whereas under D2 and D3, the ranges of 24.5–34 °C and 27–
was observed for the delayed transplanted crops which may be 34 °C were found to be optimum for better growth of roots.
due to increased air temperature. Soil temperature is lower than Nishiyama (1976) reported that rooting of rice seedlings occurs
the air temperature but alteration are also observed (McMichael favourably over a range of 19–33 °C; above 35 °C root growth
and Burke, 1998). The minimum soil temperature observed under is severely inhibited.

7
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

60
55 y = 0.025e0.015x
R² = 0.746**
50

Root weight (g/hill)

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
350 400 450 500 550

Accumulated soil temperature (day°C)

Fig. 5b. Relationship of accumulated soil temperature and root weight (Averaged over DOTs, irrigation regimes and experimental years; **significant at 1% level).

40 y = 0.779x + 6.576
Mean soil temperature

38 R² = 0.615**
36 D1
34
32
(°C)

30
28
26
24
22
20
20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Mean air temperature (°C)

40 y = 0.311x + 20.91
Mean soil temperature

38
D2 R² = 0.343*
36
34
32
30
(°C)

28
26
24
22
20
20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40

Mean air temperature (°C)

40 y = 0.402x + 18.48
Mean soil temperature (°C)

38 R² = 0.574**
36 D3
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Mean air temperature (°C)

Fig. 6. Effect of mean air temperature on mean soil temperature (Pooled over irrigation regimes and experimental years; *significant at 5% level; **significant at 1% level).

8
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 3
1
Grain yield (tha ) of summer rice under different DOTs and irrigation regimes (P = 0.05, Means with the same letter are not significantly different).

Irrigation Level Year

2014 2015
DOT
D1 D2 D3 D1 D2 D3
I1 6.63a 5.66b 5.20a 6.81a 5.96c 5.26a
I2 6.22b 6.45a 5.13ab 6.70a 6.57a 5.01b
I3 4.95d 6.28a 4.96b 5.46c 6.33b 4.57c
I4 5.36c 5.84b 4.58c 5.75b 6.13bc 4.29d
DF F value Pr (>F) CV (a)% CV (b)% CV (c)%
Y 1 18.60 0.012
D 2 1230.95 0.000
I 3 148.34 0.000
YD 2 54.57 0.000
YI 3 0.98 0.434
DI 6 121.01 0.000
YDI 6 5.54 0.001
Pooled Error a 8 1.71
Pooled Error b 12 2.12
Pooled Error c 24 1.71

Y = Year, D = Dates of transplanting, I = Irrigation levels.

Table 4
Regression analysis showing effect of root growth on grain yield under different dates of transplanting and irrigation regimes in summer rice.

DOT Regression Equation R2 SE of Estimate

D1 YD1 = 5.663–1.701RT30-5.857RT45 + 1.831RT75 + 0.483RT90 0.647* 0.637
D2 YD2 = 0.603 + 3.503RT30-7.794RT45 + 6.016RT60 + 1.35RT75 + 0.211RT90 0.897** 0.275
D3 YD3 = 8.275 + 4.087RT30-1.306RT45-2.495RT60 + 2.046RT75-1.621RT90 0.550 0.443
IRRIGATION REGIME
I1 YI1 = 6.854–1.661RT30 0.718** 0.517
I2 YI2 = 7.199–1.682RT30 0.549 0.702
I3 YI3 = 1.466–2.722RT30 0.093RT45 2.201RT60 + 3.620RT75 + 0.203RT90 0.546 0.549
I4 YI4 = 5.339–2.146RT30 + 0.959RT45 0.936** 0.223

Yn = Yield of ‘n’th treatment, RTx = Root weight of ‘x’th DAT. (* significant at 5% level; ** significant at 1% level)

Soil temperature on different dates of observation had signifi-
cant impact on root biomass under different DOTs and irrigation
regimes. In case of D1, atmospheric temperature during early phase
(30 and 45 DAT) remained low causing low water and soil temper-
ature during the period. But on 60 DAT both the atmospheric and
soil temperature increased. Increased soil temperature beyond a
certain level may cause the reduced root growth during 60 DAT.
Although the root growth increased exponentially with soil tem-
perature (as depicted in earlier figure) the PCR equations showed
negative coefficients at some specific stages of crop growth. It
may be due to the fact that during maximum tillering, active
absorptions of nutrients by root occur; higher temperature reduces
the rate of absorption by root leading to adverse effect on root bio-
mass accumulation (Nagai and Matsushita, 1963).
The accumulated root weight and accumulated soil tempera-
ture showed a significant exponential relationship. This happened
because the root weight was a resultant effect of accumulated soil
temperature. Soil temperature controls the root growth (Kaspar
and Bland, 1992) through its impact on root respiration (Burton
et al., 1998), and by affecting the infiltration (Singh, 1992), hydrau-
lic conductivity (Ren et al., 2014), soluble movements in soil profile
(Grundmann et al., 1995; Vigil and Kissel, 1995), solute concentra-
tion (Merdun, 2012), dissolved organic carbon export (Haei et al.,
2010) and rates of mineralization (Rustad et al., 2001; Haei et al.,
2013).
The PCR analysis showed that soil temperature at the later
phase of growth negatively affected the root growth because of
the mutual translocation of metabolites between aerial and under-
ground organs which affect the root growth in a relatively short
time. The observation also supported by Yoshida (1973). Arai-
Sanoh et al. (2010) studied the effects of soil temperature in the
stage from late tillering to panicle initiation and during the grain
filling stage on grain setting, dry matter production, photosynthe-
sis, non-structural carbohydrate, xylem exudation and abscisic acid
level in rice. Rice plants were exposed to four soil temperatures
during these two stages. The author suggested that the yield, yield
components, grain filling and quality was negatively influenced by
high soil temperature (37 °C), when temperature treatments were
imposed during late tillering to panicle initiation. The same reason
might be applicable in case of root weight and grain yield
relationship.
Soil temperature is a function of mean air temperature. In the
present study the soil temperature significantly and linearly
depends on mean air temperature. Islam et al. (2015) observed a
strong positive correlation between air and soil temperature up
to 20 cm depth in Bangladesh. They also found a linear relationship
between these two parameters. Barman et al. (2017) recorded that
the soil temperatures at 5, 15 and 30 cm levels had a significant
exponential increase with the increase of mean air temperature
in the Lower Indo – Gangetic Plains of Eastern India. The authors
also observed that the soil temperature up to 30 cm soil depth
increased during morning hours but declined in the afternoon. In
the present study soil temperature at the root zone depth of rice
was measured up to 15:00 hr. During night time soil temperature
was not measured also remembering its reverse trend. Moreover
the rice field soil was submerged with water and the upward flow
of heat would reach the water layer which would be cooled due to
surface evaporation during the evening and night time. Therefore,

9
Pramiti Kumar Chakraborty, S. Banerjee, R. Nath et al.
there might be minimum change in soil temperature during night
time. Although the cooling process may be modified when rice
canopy attains full vegetative growth during maximum tillering.
5. Conclusion
From the above experiment it can be concluded that increased
soil temperature during early phase of growth increased root
growth under D1 and D2 transplanting. Under D3 increased soil
temperature on 30 and 60 DAT increased the root growth. In gen-
eral it may be stated that increased soil temperature on 75 DAT
negatively affected the root growth. In the present context where
three DOTs and four irrigation regimes were taken, it is found that
root growth was reduced when soil temperature increased beyond
a critical value of 34 °C (that is often occurs in delayed transplant-
ing). So the summer-rice farmers of this agro-ecological zone may
be advised to complete transplanting within first fortnight of
February to avoid yield reduction due to delay.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
Authors are grateful to all the faculties and staffs of All India
Coordinated Research Project on Agrometeorology, Mohunpur
Centre, West Bengal, India. The mighty help in revision process
of the manuscript by Dr. S. Sarkar, Professor, Department of Agri-
cultural Meteorology and Phyisics, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavi-
dyalaya, Mohanpur, West Bengal, India, is gratefully
acknowledged.
References
Arai-Sanoh, Y., Ishimaru, T., Ohsumi, A., Kondo, M., 2010. Effects of soil temperature
on growth and root function in rice. Plant. Prod. Sci. 13 (3), 235–242.
Barman, D., Kundu, D.K., Pal, S., Pal, S., Chakraborty, A.K., Jha, A.K., Mazumdar, S.P.,
Saha, R., Bhattacharyya, P., 2017. Soil temperature prediction from air
temperature for alluvial soils in lower Indo – Gangetic plain. Int. Agrophys.
31, 9–22.
Beyrouty, C.A., Grigg, B.C., Norman, R.J., Wells, B.R., 1994. Nutrient uptake by rice in
response to water management. J. Plant Nutr. 17 (1), 39–55.
Brar, G.S., Gomez, J.F., McMichael, B.L., Matches, A.G., Taylor, H.M., 1991.
Germination of twenty forage legumes as influenced by temperature. Agron J
83 (1), 173–175.
Burton, A.J., Pregitzer, K.S., Zogg, G.P., Zak, D.R., 1998. Drought reduces root
respiration in sugar maple forests. Ecol. Appl. 8 (3), 771–778.
Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India, 2017.
Ground Water Year Book of West Bengal and Andaman and Nicobar Islands
(2016 – 2017), Technical Report: Series ‘‘D”. 281.
Cooper, A.J., 1973. Root temperature and plant growth. Commonwealth Agricultural
Bureau, Slough, U.K..
Das, L., Lohar, D., 2005. Construction of climate change scenario for a tropical
monsoon region. Clim. Res. 30, 39–52.
Dash, S.K., Jenamani, R.K., Kalsi, S.R., Panda, S.K., 2007. Some evidence of climate
change in twentieth century India. Clim. Change. 85 (3-4), 299–321.
De Datta, S.K., 1981. Principles and Practices of Rice Production. IRRI, Los Ban~ os.
Philippines. p618.
10
Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (xxxx) xxx
Du, Y.C., Tachibana, S., 1994. Photosynthesis, Photosynthetic Translocation and
Metabolism in Cucumber Roots Held at Supraoptimal Temperature. J. Japan.
Soc. Hort. Sci. 63 (2), 401–408.
Dutta, S.K., Fangzauva, D., Jena, S., Chakraborty, P.K., 2012. Effect of diurnal and
seasonal variation in soil and water temperature affecting tillering behavior of
rice under different dates of transplanting. J. Agrometeorol. 14, 243–251.
Faghani, R., Mobaser, H.R., Dehpor, A.A., Kochaksarai, S.T., 2011. The effect of
planting date and seeding age on yield and yield components of rice (Oryza
sativa L.) varieties in North of Iran. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 6 (11), 2571–2575.
Glinski, J., Lipiec, J., 1990. Soil conditions and plant roots: Boca Raton. CRC Press.
Gomez, K.A., Gomez, A.A., 1984. Statistical procedures for agricultural research.
Wily, New York.
Govt. of India, 2014. Agricultural Statistics at a glance 2014. Department of
Agriculture and Cooperation, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, p. 74.
Grundmann, G.L., Renault, P., Rosso, L., Bardin, R., 1995. Differential effects of soil
water content and temperature on nitrification and aeration. Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J.
59, 1342–1349.
Haei, M., O’’quist, M.G., Buffam, I., Aogreen, A., Blomkvist, P., Bishop, K., LÖfvenius,
M.O., Laudon, H., 2010. Cold winter soils enhance dissolved organic carbon
concentrations in soil and stream water. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37.
Haei, M., O’’quist, M.G., Kreyling, J., Ilstedt, U., Laudon H., 2013. Winter climate
controls soil carbon dynamicaduring summer in boreal forests. Environ. Res.
Lett. 8, 024017.
Islam, Khandaker Iftekharul, Khan, Anisuzzaman, Islam, Tanaz, 2015. Correlation
between atmospheric temperature and soil temperature: A case study for
Dhaka. Bangladesh. ACS. 05 (03), 200–208.
Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change, 2014. ‘‘Climate Change 2014 Impacts,
Adaptation, and Vulnerability Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects.” IPCC.
Kaspar, T.C., Bland, W.L., 1992. Soil temperature and root growth, (USA). Soil Sci.
154 (4), 290–297.
Khush, Gurdev S., 2005. What it will take to Feed 5.0 Billion Rice consumers in 2030.
Plant Mol. Biol. 59 (1), 1–6.
Lyons, E.M., Pote, J., Da Costa, M., Huang, B., 2007. Whole-plant carbon relations and
root respiration associated with root tolerance to high soil temperature for
Agrostis grass. Environ. Exp. Bot. 59, 307–313.
McMichael, B.L., Burke, J.J., 1998. Soil temperature and root growth. Hortic. Sci. 33
(6), 947–951.
McCauley, G.N., 1990. Sprinkler vs flood irrigation in traditional rice production
regions of south east Texas. Agron J. 82, 677–683.
Merdun, H., 2012. Effects of different factors on water flow and solute transport
investigated by time domain reflectometry in sandy clay loam field soil. Water
Air Soil Pollut. 223, 4905–4923.
Mukherjee, Arkabanee, Kundu, M., Basu, B., Sinha, B., Chatterjee, M., Bairagya, M.
Das, Singh, U.K., Sarkar, S., 2017. Arsenic load in rice ecosystem and its
mitigation through deficit irrigation. J. Environ. Manage. 197, 89–95.
Nagai, T., Matsushita, E., 1963. Physio-ecological characteristics in roots of rice
plants grown under different soil temperature conditions (in Japanese).
Proceedings Crop Science Society of Japan 31, 385–388.
Nishiyama, I., 1976. Effects of temperature on the vegetative growth of rice plants.
In: Climate and Rice. International Rice Research Institute, Los Ba~nos,
Philippines, pp. 159–186.
Nishiyama, K., 1985. Physiology of cool-weather damage in rice plant (in Japanese).
Hokkaido University Press, Japan, Hokkaido, 1–313.
Ren, J., Shen, Z., Yang, J., Zhao, J., Yin, J., 2014. Effects of temperature and density on
hydraulic conductivity of silty clay under infiltration of low-temperature water.
Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 39, 461–469.
Renaud, F., Scott, H.D., Brewer, D.W., 2001. Soil temperature dynamics and heat
transfer in a soil cropped to rice. Soil Sci. 166 (12), 910–920.
Rustad, L., Campbell, J., Marion, G., Norby, R., Mitchell, M., Hartley, A., Cornelissen, J.,
Gurevitch, J., 2001. A meta-analysis of the response of soil respiration, net
nitrogen mineralization and above ground plant growth to experimental
ecosystem warming. Oecologia. 126 (4), 543–562.
Sarkar, S., Basu, B., Kundu, C.K., Patra, P.K., 2012. Deficit irrigation: An option to
mitigate arsenic load of rice grain in West Bengal. India. Agric. Ecos. Environ.
146 (1), 147–152.
Singh, V.P., 1992. Elementary hydrology. Prentice – Hall, Englewood Cliffs, Nj, USA.
STAR, version 2.0.1, 2014. Biometrics and Breeding Informatics, PBGB Division,
International Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Laguna.
Vigil, M.F., Kissel, D.E., 1995. Rate of nitrogen mineralized from incorporated crop
residues as influenced by temperature. Soil. Sci. Soc. Am. J. 59, 1636–1644.
Wada, S., 1992. Cool-weather damage in rice plant (in Japanese). Youkendo, Japan,
Tokyo, pp. 1–261.
Xu, Q., Huang, B., 2000. Effects of Differential Air and Soil Temperature on
Carbohydrate Metabolism in Creeping Bentgrass. Crop. Sc. 40 (5), 1368–1374.
Yoshida, Shouichi, 1973. Effects of temperature on growth of the rice plant (Oryza
sativa L.) in a controlled environment. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 19 (4), 299–310.