Knowledge and adoption levels of drum seeder–based direct seeding among rice farmers in Mahabubabad district, Telangana, India

Introduction

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is the principal staple food for more than half of the global population and occupies a central role in ensuring food and nutritional security. In India, rice is cultivated across diverse agro-ecological regions and remains the dominant crop. To meet growing demand from the increasing population of our country, rice production needs to be enhanced by approximately 3 million tonnes annually (Dass et al., 2016) [2] . However, the sustainability and productivity of rice-based systems are increasingly constrained by inefficient use of critical inputs such as water, fertilizers, and labour; escalating costs of cultivation; declining availability of natural resources, particularly water and labour; and emerging challenges associated with climate variability, energy scarcity, and socio-economic transformations including urbanization and labour migration. Addressing these challenges necessitates the adoption of improved agronomic practices and innovative production technologies (Ladha et al., 2009) [6] . Rice cultivation is highly water-intensive, requiring substantial quantities of water during land preparation and crop growth, which often results in low water productivity and reduced economic returns (Kumar et al., 2012) [5] . Excessive and inefficient use of groundwater and surface water resources poses a serious threat to the long-term sustainability of rice production in India. It has been estimated that approximately 5,337 litres of water are required to produce one kilogram of rice (Nibber, 2016) [7] , highlighting the magnitude of water use and the associated concern of "virtual water" export through rice trade. Therefore, developing and promoting water-efficient rice production systems is critical for ensuring food security while maintaining environmental sustainability (Tuong and Bouman, 2003) [10] . In this context, direct seeded rice (DSR) has emerged as a promising alternative to conventional transplanting. DSR involves the sowing of pre-germinated or dry seeds directly into the field under puddled or non-puddled conditions. The technique offers several advantages, including reduced water requirement, lower labour and energy use, timely crop establishment, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and improved system productivity (Joshi et al., 2013) [3] . The availability of short-duration and early-maturing varieties, along with advances in nutrient and weed management, has further facilitated the adoption of DSR in different rice-growing regions. Consequently, DSR is gaining increasing attention as a resource-conserving and climateresilient production technology. Direct-seeded rice using drum seeders has been increasingly adopted in several parts of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. In Mahabubabad district, Telangana rice cultivation is predominantly practiced through conventional transplanting, with farmers largely dependent on tank and groundwater irrigation systems. However, increasing variability in monsoon onset and distribution frequently disrupts transplanting schedules. Farmers typically raise nurseries in of timely monsoon rains, but delays often result in over-aged seedlings, which are transplanted only after sufficient water becomes available. This leads to a sudden surge in labour demand and causes delays in transplanting operations, ultimately affecting crop establishment and productivity. Under such conditions, limited and erratic water availability further aggravates the problem, making conventional transplanting less reliable.

To address these challenges, the Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), Malyal, has been promoting DSR as a viable alternative to conventional methods. Drum seeder-based direct seeding technology has been disseminated through on-farm trials, frontline demonstrations, and capacity-building programmes in the district. In this backdrop, the present study was undertaken during 2023-24, to assess the knowledge and adoption levels of farmers regarding drum seeder-based direct seeded rice cultivation.

Research Method

An ex-post facto research design, combined with an exploratory approach, was adopted since the phenomena under study had already occurred and were beyond the control of the researcher. Familiarity with the local language enabled the investigators to establish quick rapport with the respondents and facilitated an in-depth investigation. The Mahabubabad district was purposively selected, as the investigators were working at Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), Malyal, Mahabubabad under Professor Jayashankar Telangana Agricultural University (PJTAU),Telangana, India during the study period. Accordingly, four villages were selected randomly based on potentiality of direct-seeded paddy. From each of the selected villages, 30 farmers were chosen, making a total sample of 120 farmers for the study. Primary data were collected using an open-ended interview schedule designed to capture farmers' knowledge and adoption of direct-seeded paddy practices. The responses were systematically categorized and analyzed using frequency and percentage distributions.

Results and Discussion

Knowledge level of rice farmers on Drum seeder technology

Analysis of knowledge levels on drum seeder technology indicated that farmers possess generally high level of knowledge among farmers (Table 1), though variation exists across specific components. Among all practices, the highest level of knowledge was observed for draining of standing water before sowing pre-germinated seeds (88.33%, Rank 1), indicating strong awareness of critical field preparation requirements. This was closely followed by knowledge on the benefit of drudgery reduction and ease of operation (87.50%, Rank 2) and knowledge on weed management through weedicide application (86.66%, Rank 3), knowledge on water-saving benefits (85.00%, Rank 4) and seed soaking and incubation (82.50%, Rank 5). Knowledge on the requirement of well puddled and levelled fields was also high (81.66%). Comparatively low level of knowledge was recorded for aspects like seed filling in the drum (68.33%), maintenance of thin layer of irrigation water in the field till seeds germinate (67.50%) and intermittent irrigation scheduling (71.66%), presowing settling of puddled field (74.16%). Such high level of knowledge was also exhibited by Khammam district farmers in the study conducted by Shaker, et al., 2020 [9] . High knowledge levels of the farmers on the technology revealed that On-farm trials, FLDs, training programmes, field days and exposure visits organized by the Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Malyal, Mahabubabad in the district has created positive impact among farmers on the technology. Though, farmers are well informed about the major benefits and key operational practices, there are notable gaps in precise technical and water management practices, which may affect the optimal performance of the technology.

Adoption level of recommended practices of Drum seeded technology

The adoption pattern of recommended drum seeder-based rice cultivation practices revealed varying levels of acceptance among farmers across different components (Table 2).

Field preparation practices showed moderate to high adoption

A majority of the farmers fully adopted field preparation practices like levelling of the field with a plank before sowing (60.00%), maintaining well puddled and levelled fields (56.66%), draining excess water before sowing (50.00%) of respondents. However, only 45.83% of respondents fully adopted the practice of leaving the field for 1-2 days for soil settling. About 29.16 to 41.67% of the respondents adopted these practices partially. 8.34 to 16.66% of the respondents did not adopt the field preparation practices of drum seeder technology.

Seed sowing practices showed comparatively higher adoption

Recommended seed rate (30-37.5 kg/ha) was completely adopted by 75% of the respondents, followed by sowing of pregerminated seeds using a drum seeder (67.50%), filling the drum up to two-thirds capacity (59.16%) and soaking and incubation of seeds (55.00%) while 20.83% partially adopted this. However, technical aspects like maintaining optimal germination length (1-2 mm) and seed treatment had relatively lower full adoption levels of 40.83% and 41.66%, respectively, with a significant proportion of farmers partially adopting these practices.

Weed management practices exhibited mixed adoption levels. Herbicide application 3-5 days after sowing had relatively higher full adoption (57.50%), followed by post-emergence herbicide application (55.00%). Pre-emergence herbicide use was fully adopted by 44.16% of farmers. In contrast, mechanical weeding using cono or power weeders showed the lowest full adoption (19.16%) and the highest non-adoption rate (48.33%), indicating constraints in its use Under nutrient management, only 38.33% of farmers fully adopted the recommended basal nitrogen application at 15 days after sowing, while 35.00% partially adopted and 26.67% did not adopt it, indicating moderate acceptance.

Water management practices recorded relatively low full adoption levels. Only 33.34% of farmers maintained a thin layer of water during germination, and 34.16% practiced intermittent irrigation at 2-3 day intervals up to panicle initiation stage. A larger proportion of farmers were in the partial adoption category for these practices.

In pest management, 50.00% of farmers fully adopted recommended pest and disease management practices, while 38.33% partially adopted them, indicating moderate awareness and implementation.

The results indicated that seed sowing practices had the highest level of adoption, followed by field preparation practices, whereas weed management (especially mechanical weeding), nutrient management, and water management practices showed comparatively lower adoption levels, highlighting areas that require focused extension efforts. Similar results were reported by Chinnam Naidu, et al., 2018 [1] , who found that farmers from Srikakulam district of Andhra Pradesh felt difficulty in weed management practices with drum seeder technology while more than 50% of the farmers adopted leveling of the fields, pre and post emergence herbicide and 80% farmers adopted seed sowing practices like seed rate, seed soaking, sowing sprouted seeds. Weed Management, difficulty in operating cono weeder, were the major constrains faced by farmers of Nalgonda district, Telangana in adoption of drum seeding technology in rice (Pallavi et al, 2025) [8] .

Perception of Farmers on the Benefits of Drum Seeder Technology in Rice Cultivation

Farmers perceived multiple advantages of drum seeder technology (Table 3) over conventional transplanting. The most prominent benefit is reduction in drudgery along with earlier crop maturity (7-10 days), reported by 84.16% of respondents, indicating that labour comfort and timeliness are the primary drivers of adoption. This is followed closely by higher yield (82.50%) and savings in irrigation water, seed, labour, and overall production costs (80.83%), suggesting that farmers recognize both productivity and resource-use efficiency gains.

A substantial proportion (70.83%) also reported higher net economic returns, confirming that the technology is perceived as financially beneficial. However, comparatively fewer farmers (59.16%) identified low input demand as a benefit, implying that while cost savings are evident, the perception of reduced input requirement is less pronounced. The results are in uniformity with the results of Chinnam Naidu, et al. (2018) [1] . [4] reported that 54.17% of respondents had medium knowledge on rice drum seeder technology in Khammam district, Telangana and in the present study majority of the respondents had high level of knowledge.

Conclusion

The study clearly indicates that drum seeder technology in rice cultivation has achieved substantial awareness and acceptance among farmers. A majority of respondents exhibited high levels of knowledge (64.16%), reflecting the positive impact of extension activities such as trainings, demonstrations, and field visits. However, specific gaps persist in technical aspects, particularly in water management and precision practices, which may limit the full potential of the technology. Adoption patterns revealed that while more than half of the farmers (51.66%) fall under the high adoption category, a considerable proportion still practice partial adoption. Core operations like seed sowing and field preparation are widely adopted, whereas practices related to water, nutrient, and mechanical weed management lag behind, indicating operational and resource-related constraints. Farmers strongly perceived the benefits of drum seeder technology, especially in terms of reduced drudgery, earlier crop maturity, higher yields, and cost savings. These perceived advantages are key drivers of adoption and demonstrate the technology's potential to improve productivity and profitability in rice cultivation.

Thus the findings suggest that although drum seeder technology is well recognized and increasingly adopted, bridging the gap between knowledge and full adoption is essential. Strengthening targeted extension interventions, promoting hands-on training, and addressing practical constraints-particularly in water and weed management-will be crucial for enhancing the effective and widespread use of this technology.

References

1. Chinnam Naidu D, Lakshmana K, Kiranmai K. Adoption of recommended practices of drum seeder technology in paddy in North Coastal Andhra Pradesh. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences. 2018;10(24):7628-7630.
2. Dass A, Chandra S, Choudhary AK, Singh G, Sudhishri S. Influence of field response pattern and plant spacing on rice root-shoot characteristics, yield and water productivity of two modern cultivars under SRI management in Indian Mollisols. Paddy and Water Environment. 2016;14(1):4559.
3. Joshi E, Kumar D, Lal B, Nepalia V, Gautam P, Vyas AK. Management of direct seeded rice for enhanced resourceuse efficiency. Plant Knowledge Journal. 2013;2(3):119134.
4. Kumar BN, Sreenivasulu M, Preethi M, Vidyasagar GECH. Knowledge level of farmers on rice drum seeder technology in Khammam district of Telangana state. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2018;7(2):2304-2306.
5. Kumar S, Singh OP, Naresh RK, Singh S. Crop establishment, tillage and water management technologies on crop and water productivity of rice cultivars in western Uttar Pradesh. Indian Journal of Plant Sciences. 2012;1(1):61-68.
6. Ladha JK, Kumar V, Alam MM, Sharma S, Gathala MK, Chandna P, et al. Integrating crop and resource management technologies for enhanced productivity, profitability and sustainability of the rice-wheat system in South Asia. In: Ladha JK, Yadvinder Singh, Erenstein O, Hardy B, editors. Integrated Crop and Resource Management in the RiceWheat System of South Asia. Los Baños: International Rice Research Institute; 2009. p. 69-108.
7. Nibber GS. Punjab 'emptying' reservoirs to grow waterguzzling rice. Hindustan Times. 2016 Jan 8.
8. Pallavi S, Shankar M, Bharath T, Himabindu T, Shankaraiah M. Status of drum seeder technology among farmers of Nalgonda district, Telangana state. International Journal of Agriculture Extension and Social Development. 2025;8(1):88-93.
9. Shaker BRM, Hemantha Kumar J, Jagan Mohan Rao P, Sri Ranjitha P, Chaitanya V, Ravi Kumar K. Knowledge and adoption levels of farmers on direct seeding among rice farmers of Khammam district of Telangana state, India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2020;9(6):1877-1887.
10. Tuong TP, Bouman BAM. Rice production in water-scarce environments. In: Kijne JW, Barker R, Molden D, editors. Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement. Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2003. p. 53-67.