Table 2.
Mosquito larvae density/350 ml according to different technologies during rice development
| Tillage | Flooding | Leveling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deep | Minimal | Continuous | Intermittent | Normal | Abnormal | |
| Transplanting | 2,056a | 0,592b | 1,922a | 0,792b | 1,367a | 1,539a |
| P value | 0,000000 | 0,000000 | 0,088302 | |||
| Tillering | 2,833a | 1,017b | 2,694a | 1,225b | 1,925a | 2,228a |
| P value | 0,000000 | 0,000000 | 0,151127 | |||
| Maturation | 0,667a | 0,350b | 0,689a | 0,317b | 0,492a | 0,572a |
| P value | 0,001351 | 0,000065 | 0,818796 | |||
NB, The numbers sharing the same letter are not significantly different. Comparison was made between deep tillage and minimal tillage, continuous flooding and intermittent flooding, normal levelling and abnormal levelling effect on reduction of anopheles larval density