Synergistic Effects of Silicon and Phosphorus Co-Application on Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Growth, Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency in Saline Soil

Despite the important role of silicon (Si) for the better utilization of plant nutrients, it is not well understood how the combinations of Si and P (phosphorus) will behave as a co-fertilizer for better yield performance and nutrient uptake in saline soil. Hence, the experiment was set-up to assess the effects of different combinations of Si×P fertilization on rice (Oryza sativa L.) productivity and nutrient use efficiency in saline soil. Combinedly, three levels of Si (Ca2SiO4: 0, 300 and 600 kg Si ha− 1) and four levels of P (TSP: 0, 13.2, 26.4 and 39.6 kg P ha− 1) were applied to a salt-tolerant rice (Binadhan-8) variety. Our findings indicate that the Si×P combination significantly improved rice growth and yield parameters, except plant height and unfilled grain number. We also found a strong positive correlation between the Si×P combination and other essential nutrients (N, P, K and S), implying that the interactive effects of Si×P fertilization increased nutrient uptake and NUE. The combination of Si300:P26.4 was identified as the optimum dose, which increased grain yield by 41.66%, straw yield by 55%, N uptake by 216%, P uptake by 193%, K uptake by 263% and S uptake by 130% over control. We conclude that the Si300:P26.4 combination could be an effective dose for improving rice performance and nutrient management in saline soil. The study’s limitation is that, despite using Ca-silicate as a source of Si fertilizer, the potential effect of Ca was not considered, which could have an impact on soil P unavailability.


Introduction
Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is a vital staple food for 2.4 billion people globally, with projections indicating an increase to 4.6 billion by 2050 [1].It is extensively cultivated in Asia, Latin America, and African countries [2], serving as the backbone of Bangladesh's economy and agriculture, accounting for about 25% of the country's GDP [3].However, the intensive agricultural practices and monoculture (rice) in recent decades have depleted the soil fertility status in Bangladesh and resulted in severe nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), and sulfur (S) deficiencies [4,5].As a consequence, it is necessary to adopt proper fertilizer management practices to enhance yields and minimize soil nutrient loss [6] while maintaining the high nutrient-demanding nature of rice production [7].In Bangladesh, a total of 30% of cultivable land is located in the coastal area, with 53% being affected by salinity [8], which has a severe impact on crop production.The salinity problem reduces the availability of plant available P [9,10] due to sorption processes and the low solubility of Ca-P minerals [11].Additionally, only a small amount of P (0.1% of total P) is available for plants because of it highly reactive nature and tendency to form metal ion complex with specific metal substances such as calcium (Ca), iron (Fe) and aluminum (Al) [12][13][14].However, phosphorus (P) is necessary for various critical functions in rice plants, including the synthesis of nucleic acids, carbohydrates, and lipids.It also plays a significant role in germination, root, shoot, flower, embryogenesis, photosynthesis, respiration, and nitrogen fixation in plants at both the cellular and whole plant levels [15].Moreover, P helps in cell division, enzyme activation or inactivation and carbohydrate metabolism in plant-soil system [16,17].Despite its great importance in rice plants, P has received little attention in comparison to N.
Silicon (Si) is the second-most abundant element in the terrestrial ecosystem after oxygen [18], and a major component of many plants, although it's not considered an essential element but it might be beneficial for plant development [19].Rice is a high-Si-demanding crop [20] and a Si-accumulator [21], with each unit area of rice production removing 150-300 kg Si ha − 1 from the soil in general [22,23].This eventually results in Si depletion in soil due to the removal of straw residue [24].But Si is not considered an essential co-fertilizer [25], although its beneficial effects on plant growth and development are well documented in the literature [26].Studies have shown that Si has a significant impact on P assimilation in Japonica and Indica rice plants [27].In addition, Si increases P uptake due to its synergistic effect on P availability [28].Also, the combination of Si×P application enhance P uptake by reducing salinity stress [29,30].To our knowledge, no investigation has been conducted to record the combined effect of Si×P on P uptake in saline soil to improve rice plant production.Therefore, it is necessary to develop low-cost and efficient combination of Si×P fertilizers and their proper application procedures for the integrated plant nutrients management strategies [31].
The availability of a nutrient can be influenced by the presence or absence of other nutrients due to their interactions in the soil-plant system [32].These interactions can be antagonistic, where the availability of one nutrient is reduced by the presence of another nutrient or synergistic, where the presence of one nutrient increases the availability of another.As a result, it might be crucial to take into account the right amount of different co-fertilizers application in order to maximize plant development, yield, and nutrient absorption.In this context, we hypothesized that the combined application of Si×P may help to increase P availability in plant, leading to enhanced yield production and greater uptake of other nutrients.Therefore, the aims of the study were to: (a) investigate the effect of different levels of Si×P combination on the growth potential and yield attributes; (b) quantify the trend of nutrient content (N, P, K, S, Fe and Na) and uptake; and (c) recommend the best treatment combination (Si×P) to maximize the growth, yield and nutrient uptake of salt-tolerant rice (Binadhan-8) variety in saline soil.

Experiment Site and Soil Description
From January to May 2020, a pot experiment was carried out in a net house, where all the prevailing biotic and abiotic environmental factors were present like a real field experiment.Throughout this experiment, the mean minimum and maximum temperatures of the experiment site were 22ºC and 27ºC, respectively.
Soil sample was collected from a saline zone (Batiaghata Upazila, Khulna) under the coastal area of Bangladesh, where salinity is an issue for crop production.The collection of soil sampling was done before plowing of the field for next crop cultivation.The associated agro-ecological zone (AEZ) of the experimental soil was the Ganges tidal river floodplain [33] and the soil belongs to the Chromi-Calcaric Gleysols (FAO reference group).After collection, the soil was air-dried, grinded, and sieved through a 2 mm sieve.Initial soil physical and chemical properties were determined by the standard methods prior to the experiment (see Table 1) before rice transplantation.

Experimental Setup and Cultural Operations
A salinity tolerance rice variety, Binadhan-8 (130 to 135-days duration) was chosen for the experiment.This variety can withstand salinity level up to 12-14 dSm − 1 at the seedling stage and 8-10 dSm − 1 during the vegetative growth stages till maturity.The experiment was conducted in a completely randomized design (CRD) with three replications.The experiment was comprised of three levels of Si (0, 300 and 600 kg ha − 1 ) from calcium silicate (CS) and four levels of P (0, 13.2, 26.4 and 39.6 kg ha − 1 ) from triple superphosphate (TSP).The nutrient content of CS and TSP was 24.18% Si and 20.24% P, respectively.All the treatment combinations were applied with 125, 35, 6, and 1.3 kg ha − 1 of N, K, S and Zn, respectively.Also, 5 t ha − 1 of cattle farmyard manure (FYM) was used in each plot with treatment.The nutrient content of FYM was 6 kg N t − 1 , 1.41 kg P t − 1 , 6.64 kg K t − 1 , and 1.91 kg S t − 1 , respectively.Everything was applied on a gm pot − 1 basis from kg ha − 1 after calculation by using Eq. 1.The sources of N, K, S and Zn were urea, KCl, gypsum and ZnS, respectively.Urea was applied in 3 split doses (33% before transplant, 33% at 35 days after transplant and 33% at 62 days after the panicle initiation stage).KCl was applied in 2 split doses (50% before transplantation and 50% after transplantation).The other recommended fertilizers (gypsum and ZnS) were applied as basal doses in all the pots at the time of soil preparation.A detailed description of experimental treatments is presented in Table 2.All the pots were filled with 5 kg of soil and then three 20-day-old seedlings were transplanted into each pot with puddling under irrigation condition.For cultural operations, proper crop management procedures including irrigation and weeding were followed throughout the growing period and kept similar across all experimental plots.Throughout the growing phase, each pot was kept at a constant level of 3 to 5 cm of water until 2 days before the harvest.Harvesting was done when the grain reached at 85% of its maturity stage, and afterwards, the cut crops were threshed, winnowed, cleaned, and packed separately for laboratory analyses.
Here, TD = Treatment dose and RD = Recommended dose.

Growth, Yield
In this experiment, plant height (PH), number of tillers hill − 1 (TN), number of filled grains panicle − 1 (FG), number of unfilled grains panicle − 1 (UFG), number of total grains hill − 1 (TG), and 1000 grain weight (1000-G wt.) data of rice were recorded.The grain yield (GY), straw yield (SY), and biological yield (BY) were estimated in gm pot − 1 basis and expressed as t ha − 1 unit by using Eq. ( 2).Besides that, the grain harvest index GHI was also calculated according to Eq. 3; Here, GY = Grain Yield and SY = Straw Yield.

Nutrient use Efficiency (NUE)
Due to the total amount of Si + P (ka ha − 1 ) application, the partial factor productivity (PFP Si+P ) and agronomic efficiency (AE Si+P ) were estimated by Eqs. 6, 7 respectively [33].
Here, Y k represents yield kg ha − 1 and (Si + P) a represents the amount of Si and P applied (kg ha − 1 ).
Here, AE Si+P = Agronomic efficiency; GY t = Grain yield in the treated pot; GY 0 = Grain yield in the control pot.

Statistical Analysis
A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the least significant difference (LSD) test were used [45] to compare the differences between the treatment means at a 5% probability level in Minitab version 19 (Triola Statistics Company, 1972).Data distribution was assessed for normality before doing an ANOVA.The Pearson correlation and a general linear regression graph were created by Microsoft Excel to illustrate the correlation among the different parameters and (6) Partial factor productivity (PFP Si+P ) = Y k (Si + P) a (7) Agronomic efficiency (AE Si+P ) = GY t− GY 0 Amount of Si + P applied kg ha −1   to establish the relationship with different treatments.Principal component analysis (PCA) and its illustrations were developed using R 3.6.1 for Windows [46].

Results
3.1 Plant Height (PH), 1000-Grain wt., Grain Harvest Index (GHI), and Number of Tillers hill -1 (TN) In this experiment, Si and P did not have any significant effects on PH, 1000 grain weight, or GHI (p > 0.05) (Tables 3 and 4).It is interesting to note that the interaction effect of Si×P significantly enhanced the TN (p < 0.05) (Table 3) of rice.With the exception of P0, P13.2 rate with Si0, and P0 with Si600, other treatment combinations exhibited statistically identical and highest TN.Besides that, the TN had a positive correlation (r = 0.646; p < 0.001) with P application (Fig. 1).

Number of Filled Grain (FG), Unfilled Grain (UFG), and Total Grains (TG) panicle -1
The interaction effect of Si×P resulted in an increase in FG and TG and a decrease in UFG (p < 0.05).Without P0, P13.2 rate in conjunction with S0, other treatment combinations exhibited statistically less UFG.The P0 rate showed minimum FG and TG in combinations with Si300 and Si600, respectively, while other treatment combination resulted significantly higher FG and TG (Table 3).Phosphorus doses showed a significant and positive correlation (r = 0.54; p ≤ 0.01) with FG (Fig. 1).However, there was a negative correlation between the Si treatments and UFG (r = -0.477;p < 0.05) (Fig. 1).

Grain Yield (GY), Straw Yield (SY)
The interaction of Si×P led to a significant increase in GY and SY (Table 4).The S0, S300, and S600 rates in combination with the P0 did not significantly differ in GY.However, P26.4 and P39.6 in combination with S600  treatment resulted in more than 6 t ha − 1 GY production, which was 70-75% higher than the control.Besides that, Si300:P26.4treatment combination showed 41.66% higher yield than control.The GY showed a positive correlation with P treatment (r = 0.6; p ≤ 0.01) (Fig. 1).On the other hand, P13.2, P26.4 and P39.6 treatment in combination with both Si300 and Si600 resulted statistically higher and also similar SY.A significant correlation (r = 0.42; p ≤ 0.01) was found between SY and Si doses (Fig. 1).Treatment Si300:P26.4combination increased 55% of SY production compared to control.

Nutrient use Efficiency (NUE)
The combination of Si×P application significantly influenced the PFP Si+P while increasing the dose reduced the PFP Si+P in this study (Table 4).The highest PFP Si+P (109.06) was observed in the Si0:P13.2treatment followed by the Si0:P26.4 treatment while the lowest PFP Si+P (5.7) was recorded from the Si600:P0 treatment.In contrast, increasing Si×P dose reduced the AE Si+P while the best combination was Si0:P26.4 (15.61) and Si0:P39.6 (12.18) treatments for better AE Si+P in this experiment (Table 4).However, better PFP Si+P and AE Si+P were recorded from Si0:P26.4 and Si0:P39.6 treatments combination, which may be due to the better grain yield and sufficient nutrient uptake.

Nutrient (N, P, K, S, Fe and Na) Uptake
The interaction of Si×P had a significant effect on N, P, K and S uptake of rice (Table 5).Treatment P39.6 in combination with Si300 and Si600 resulted in maximum N uptake (125.3 kg ha − 1 and 133.43 kg ha − 1 , respectively), which was 317.38% and 344.47% higher than the control, respectively.Besides that, a significant correlation (r = 0.81; p ≤ 0.001) was also obtained between N concentration and P application (Fig. 2a).Phosphorus (P) uptake was significantly boosted by the interaction effect of Si×P (Table 5).The highest P uptake was recorded from the P13.2, P26.4 and P39.6 in combination with Si300 and Si600 treatment, while the minimum was obtained from the control treatment including with P13.2 and P26.4 in combination with Si0.Also, P concentration in plant tissue was significantly correlated (r = 0.54; p ≤ 0.001) with P application (Fig. 2b).
The interaction effect of Si×P significantly increased on K uptake (Table 5).On the other hand, K concentration had a linear correlation with Si (r = 0.52; p ≤ 0.001) (Fig. 3a) and P (r = 0.11; p ≤ 0.05) (Fig. 2c) application.The highest K uptake (130.11kg ha − 1 ) was recorded from the Si600:P39.6treatment, which was 221% more compared to the control.
Sulfur uptake was significantly influenced by the interaction effect of Si×P (Table 5).The lowest (10.54 kg ha − 1 ) and highest (31.77kg ha − 1 ) S uptake were found in the control and Si600:P39.6treatment, respectively.The S Table 5 Mean interaction effect of Si and P on nutrient uptake parameter of Binadhan-8 in saline soil In each column, the means ± standard deviation values denoted by the same letter are not significantly different at the p < 0.05 level, *; significantly different at the p < 0.05 level, **; significantly different at the p < 0.01 level, ***; and significantly different at the p < 0.001 level, ns; not significantly different.On the other hand, LSD value (p = 0.05) represents the critical number that defines significant deference among the treatment combination kg ha −    3 General Linear regression between Si application and concentration of K, Fe and Na in salt-tolerant Binadhan-8 rice concentration showed a significantly positive correlation (r = 0.47; p ≤ 0.001) with P doses (Fig. 2e).
The interaction effect of Si×P was insignificant on Fe and Na uptake (Table 5), but Fe uptake had a significant effect under Si application (Fig. 4).The Si300 and Si600 doses resulted in maximum Fe uptake by rice, while Si300 in combination with P39.6 gave the minimum Na uptake.Si doses had a negative correlation with Na concentration (r = 0.48; p ≤ 0.001) (Figs.3c).Similarly, P doses also showed a negative correlation with Fe (r = 0.51; p ≤ 0.001) and Na (r = 0.39; p ≤ 0.001) concentration (Fig. 2d and f).

K + /Na + Ratio
K + /Na + ratio in this experiment was significantly increased by the interaction effect of Si×P in plant tissue (Fig. 5).Control treatment resulted the minimum K + /Na + ratio (0.63) while P26.4 and P39.6 in combination with Si600 treatment showed the maximum K + /Na + (1.81and 2.31, respectively), which was 187% and 267% higher than the control, respectively.

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Correlation
The PCA (variable and biplot PCA) was performed on the uptake parameters (N, P, K, S, Fe and Na) and yield parameters (TN, FG, TG, GY, SY, and BY) as influenced by Si and P co-fertilization with different doses (Fig. 6).The first two principal components (PC's) accounted for 71.2% of the variance in the dataset, with the PC1 and the PC2 accounting for 56.0% and 15.2%, respectively of the overall variance.Also, the single and interactive effect of Si and P doses were highly correlated to the nutrient uptake and yield parameters of Binadhan-8 (Fig. 6).

Growth and Yield Parameters
In general, improved rice growth and development were observed in this study as the TN, FG, TG, GY, SY, PFP and AE of rice were significantly affected by the interaction effect of Si×P, while the effect was insignificant on PH, 1000-G wt. and GHI.Similar response of rice PH under Si application was reported by Cuong et al. [24] and Zia et al. [47].However, Pati et al. [27] recorded a positive influenced of Si on PH, which might be attributed to the presence of a salinity tolerance gene that differentiated rice plant physiology in some ways; leading minimized PH difference in this experiment.Additionally, the variation in PH may be influenced by some other factors, including the varietal differences, availability of other soil nutrients or the timing and method of application.In a greenhouse study, Place et al. [48] found an insignificant impact of P on PH, which is also identical to this current experiment regarding the effect of P on PH.On the other hand, significant effect of Si [49,50] and P [51][52][53] on 1000-G wt. were reported by some previous literature, which is contradicted to our findings.This might be due to the parameter 1000-G wt., is more or less genetically controlled, has a generally stable varietal character and have little management impact on it [54].However, in a study, Pati et al. [27] recorded that Si did not influence the 1000-grain weight, which is aligned to our experiment.GHI is a complex characteristic comprised of several yield-related traits and physiological properties [55], which could be the reason for the insignificant result on GHI in this study.Moreover, there are some additional factors that can contribute to this phenomenon such as nutrient availability, water availability, temperature and grain quality.This may have a greater impact on GY, which is considered a crucial factor determining GHI.
In our present study, the interaction effect of Si×P significantly influenced TN production.Increasing TN with Si application might be because of Si improved the plant's dry matter yield, nutrient uptake, cell wall strength and the resistance to abiotic stresses [56][57][58].Apart from that, Si intensifies antioxidant activity or increase in cytokinins, salicylic acid, gibberellins or other plant growth hormones [59], that might augmented the TN production.Silicon is known to be accumulated in the epidermal cells of the rice hull [60], helping the synthesis of phytolith [61], that contribute to the mechanical strength [62], prevent pathogens and give protection from environmental stresses [63], resulted higher mature grains [31]; which eventually increased the FG production.Likewise, some past investigations [21,51,63], in our study, the interaction effect of Si×P was also significant on FG and UFG production.Increasing FG with S i300 Si600 Fe uptake (kg/ha) Fig. 4 Effect of Si on Fe uptake.Data included as mean ± SE (standard error).Small common letters denote no significant difference in mean values at 0.05% level of significance increasing Si, discrepancy might be due to Binadhan-8's distinct physiological responses when exposed to soil salinity stress.Besides that, P plays a critical role in grain filling [64], photosynthetic process, enhance the accumulation of starch [65,66] and nutrients, thus yielded more FG.
In this study, the significant interaction effects of Si×P on rice GY may be due to the production of more and larger FG.Alam et al. [51] and Meena et al. [67] reported that, P has a significant impact on GY and SY of rice, which is similar to our findings.This might be explained by the fact that there was no serious alkalinity problem or weed infestation in this research.However, a contradictory result regarding the impact of P on GY [52,68] and SY [52,69] were reported by some past literatures.The differences could be attributed to the additional effect of N over P or multiple heterogeneity effect at the field level experiment, or may be for the different variety chosen for the studies.Following the Si fertilization, GY and SY were also enhanced in our experiment, which might be due to improved photosynthetic activity that allow the plant to accumulate enough photosynthates and produce more dry matter [27].

Nutrient Concentration and Uptake
In this experiment, the combination of Si×P significantly affected NPKS uptake, while Fe uptake was significant only for individual Si effect.Regarding the N uptake, Pati et al. [27] and Sudhakar et al. [31] reported a positive effect of Si on N uptake on their investigations which is in consistent with our current findings.Silicon might boost the capacity of enzyme activity involved in N metabolism (nitrate reductase and glutamine synthetase) [70], which may stimulate more N assimilation in plants.Alternatively, Si can also uplift the photosynthetic activity [27], potentially resulting a greater carbon supply form the atmosphere for increased N uptake.Research shown that plants having higher P in soil tend to have a larger root surface area compared with lower levels of P [71,72], may be one of the factors contributing to enhanced N uptake due to enhanced P application in this study.
A significant increment in P uptake with Si application was reported by some past studies [31,73] and Pati et al. [27] reported that Si elevated the P uptake by 24-34%.Silicon stimulating rice P uptake could be explained by lower P availability in soil due to its fixation, where Si improved P solubility by stimulating the activity of phosphatase enzymes in soil [74].However, we recorded a comparatively weak correlation between the Si application and P uptake (r = 0.2; p > 0.05) (Fig. 1).Surprisingly, this study showed that P application has a stronger correlation with N (r = 0.81; p ≤ 0.001) uptake than the P uptake (r = 0.61; p > 0.05) itself, implying other amendments may be necessary to improve P availability.Therefore, Si is useful but not necessarily greater than other management strategies in ameliorating P availability in saline soil since P is transported through the soil mainly by diffusion [75].Simultaneously, Si stimulates the K uptake of rice, which may be due to plant's better turgidity, stomatal conductance and transpiration rate [76].We also have found an enhanced K uptake in rice with Si fertilization which is supported by some earlier experiments [21,27,77].We speculate that the increased K uptake might be the probable reasons for improved K + /Na + ratio in this experiment.Silicon can amplify S uptake through the up-regulation of genes involved in S assimilation and the refine in the activity of enzymes involved in its metabolism which might be reflected in this experiment.Another possibility is that Si and S may have synergistic relationships.Despite the positive effects of Si application and S uptake on rice, there is currently limited research available on the topic, highlighting the necessity for further investigation that could lead to new insights.Likewise, a significant effect of P on S uptake was found by Assefa et al. [78], which is similar to this experiment.Additionally, in a previous research, Flam-Shepherd et al. [79] recorded that Si decreased the Fe concentration, which is parallel to our current finding.In this experiment, Si had shown a positive correlation with BY and Fe uptake, which could be one of the explanations for improved Fe uptake (Fig. 1).Increasing application of Si has been found to enhance the Fe uptake, despite a reduction in the concentration of Fe in the plant tissue, this phenomenon may be attributed to the increase in BY as influenced by the Si and P co-fertilization.

Limitations
The main limitation of this study is that, despite using Casilicate (CS) as a source of Si fertilizer, the potential effect of calcium (Ca) was not considered in the experimental design.Plant response to Ca was not expected in this study because soil Ca status was higher (12.52 cmol(+)/kg) than the critical limit (CL) and lower than the toxicity threshold (Ca critical limit 2.0 cmol(+)/kg).However, there may have had some influence of Ca as an interfering compound in this experiment because Ca can form a metal ion complex with soil P and makes it unavailable [12][13][14], which was not the interest of the experiment.This constraint will allow a follow-up study in the field to distinguish to what extent Ca-silicate will interfere with P and whether there is any risk to using Ca-silicate as a source of Si fertilizer in Ca-rich highly saline soil.

Conclusion
Our result shows that the Si and P co-application significantly improves the growth and yield parameters (TN, FG, TG, GY, SY, PFP and AE), except PH, 1000 grains wt., UFG in saline soil.Additionally, the findings emphasize the significance of the interaction effects of Si×P application for amplifying N uptake.This study found a strong positive correlation between the Si×P combinations and other essential nutrients (N, P, K and S), implying that the interactive effects improve nutrient uptake and increase NUE.The optimum combination of 300 kg Si ha − 1 and 26.4 kg P ha − 1 has been identified to maximize the rice yield and nutrients use efficiencies under salinity condition.However, the weak correlation between Si fertilization and P uptake suggests that Si might be a good but not necessary the best amendment for ameliorating P deficiency in highly saline soil but the combination of Si×P co-fertilization could be a good strategy to ameliorating P deficiency in highly saline soil.

Fig. 1
Fig. 1 Pearson correlation matrix among treatments, rice growth, yield and nutrient uptake.The blue color corresponds to a positive (+) correlation and the red color corresponds to a negative (-) correlation.The white color corresponds to neutral correlation.Significance level: * p ≤ 0.05; ** p ≤ 0.01; *** p ≤ 0.001

Fig. 2
Fig.2General Linear regression between P application and concentration of N, P, K, S, Fe and Na in salt-tolerant Binadhan-8 rice

Fig. 5 K
Fig.5K + /Na + ratio of rice with the combination of Si and P treatments.Data included as mean ± SE (standard error).Small common letters denote no significant difference in mean values at 0.05% level of significance

Fig. 6
Fig. 6 The influence of Si and P on yield and nutrient uptake is depicted in this diagram of Principal Component Analysis (variables PCA and individuals PCA, separately).The bigger the loadings and the

Table 1
Physical and chemical properties of the soil before rice transplantation

Table 2
A detailed description of the combination of Si and P treat-

Table 3
Mean interaction effect of Si and P on plant height (PH), tiller number hill − 1 (TN), number of filled grains (FG), number of unfilled grains (UFG), number of total grains (TG), and 1000-grains weight parameter of Binadhan-8 in saline soilIn each column, the means ± standard deviation values denoted by the same letter are not significantly different at the p < 0.05 level, *; significantly different at the p < 0.05 level, **; significantly different at the p < 0.01 level, ***; and significantly different at the p < 0.001 level, ns; not significantly different.On the other hand, LSD value (p = 0.05) represents the critical number that defines significant deference among the treatment combination

Table 4
Mean interaction effect of Si and P on grain yield (GY), straw yield (SY), grain harvest index (GHI), partial factor productivity (PFP), and agronomic nutrient use efficiency (AE) parameter of Binadhan-8 in saline soilIn each column, the means ± standard deviation values denoted by the same letter are not significantly different at the p < 0.05 level, *; significantly different at the p < 0.05 level, **; significantly different at the p < 0.01 level, ***; and significantly different at the p < 0.001 level, ns; not significantly different.On the other hand, LSD value (p = 0.05) represents the critical number that defines significant deference among the treatment combination