J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020; 18: 41–47

Journal ofInternational Cooperation for
Agricultural Development

Working Paper

Agronomic Traits and Grain Quality ofUpland Rice Cultivated in Southeast
Sulawesi, Indonesia
Mayumi Kikuta1), Daigo Makihara2), Yulius Barra Pasolon3), Fransiscus Suramas Rembon3),
Akira Miyazaki4) and Yoshinori Yamamoto4)
1) Applied Social System Institute of Asia (ASSIA), Nagoya University, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8601, Japan

2) International Center for Research and Education in Agriculture (ICREA), Nagoya University, Nagoya,

Aichi 464-8601, Japan

3) Faculty of Agriculture, Halu Oleo University, Kendari, Southeast Sulawesi 93232, Indonesia

4) Faculty of Agriculture and Marine Science, Kochi University, Nankoku, Kochi 783-8502, Japan

Received June 20, 2019 Accepted January 14, 2020
Abstract. Farms in Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia, historically grow upland rice crops that utilize the slash-and-burnfarming system. However, little is known about grain quality and the differences between upland rice varieties in this region.
In the present study, growth and grain yield were measured to elucidate the characteristics of traditional upland rice varieties
grown by local farmers. Additionally, amylose and protein content were measured to understand their characteristics. In thisregion, farmers predominantly grew traditional rice varieties, which were deemed as tropical japonica based on the measured
agronomic traits. These traditional varieties were highly varied in terms of grain appearance and yield-related factors. Grain
yield in the traditional varieties (3.0 t ha-1 on average) was inferior to that of Lampung (4.0 t ha-1 on average), an improved
variety newly introduced from outside the region. In particular, Lampung tended to have a higher spikelet number per m2
than that of the traditional varieties. The protein and amylose content varied depending on the different varieties. Amylose
content of eleven upland rice varieties was determined, with eight varieties characterized as sticky rice, two as non-glutinous
varieties, and one as an extremely low amylose variety. These results indicate that this region contains valuable upland rice
varieties, and this information is useful for future genetic resource studies.
Key words: Indonesia, Upland rice, Agronomic trait, Protein content, Amylose content

Introduction
Rice growing ecosystems are broadly classified into
three types based on soil-water conditions: irrigatedlowland, rainfed lowland, and upland; accounting for
approximately 75, 19, and 4% of global rice production,
respectively1). Therefore, the contribution of upland rice
to global rice production is not as great as that of lowland rice. However, in Asia, where more than 90% of theCorresponding author: M Kikuta, e-mail: mkikuta@agr.nagoyau.ac.jp

world’s rice is produced, upland rice remains an importantcrop for traditional smallholders1).
In Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia, upland
rice has been cultivated by the traditional slash-and-burnsystem during the rainy season for many years2, 3, 4, 5). In
this province, the upland rice cultivation area is relatively
higher than in other regions and has been estimated at
approximately 8,000 ha–10,000 ha (12% of the totalrice cultivation area), with annual production estimatedbetween 25,000 t and 32,000 t (8% of the total production)4, 5). Therefore, upland rice has played an importantrole as a staple food item for local people5). Farmers in

J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020 41

this region grow upland rice of traditional varieties mainlyfor personal consumption5). This is because farmers prefer
the eating quality of these traditional varieties. If upland
rice is sold in the market, its selling price is double that oflowland rice5). Recently, some upland rice farmers haveshifted from traditional varieties to improved varieties5, 6).
Therefore, there is a possibility that the improved varieties
might replace the traditional varieties in the future.
Traditional varieties have been selected by local people
in the past in line with local ecological characteristics;
therefore, some traditional varieties possess superior
characteristics and can grow under severely stressful environmental conditions, such as drought and aluminum
toxicity7). Traditional rice varieties in Southeast Asian
countries have been recognized as a valuable source oftolerance genes7). The traditional rice varieties in Indonesia have been used as breeding materials8). It is important
to obtain information about traditional upland varieties inthis area for studying genetic resources.
In the present study, growth and grain yield were
measured to understand the characteristics of traditional
rice varieties, with these characteristics compared with an
improved rice variety. Additionally, amylose and protein
content was measured to understand their abundances because there is currently no information about these factors
in this region.

Materials and Methods
Study site

The study sites were located in the southeastern partof Sulawesi Island (Fig. 1). The survey was conducted infarmers’ fields on a hillside in Palangga District, South
Konawe Regency, Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia,
in 2010 and 2012. During the rainy season (late November to late July), the area receives more than 150 mm ofrainfall each month. The annual rainfall in this region isapproximately 2,000 mm and the average temperature is
24–29 °C 9).
Upland rice was cultivated in the traditional slash-andburn farming system by Tolakinese farmers during therainy season. The upland fields were prepared by cutting
down the trees in late September, and burning the fields
in the end of the dry season (late November) 9). In the beginning of the rainy season rice seeds were sown directly
into the prepared soil in upland field. The upland rice washarvested around May. The plants were grown without theuse of fertilizers or pesticides.
Growth and yield surveys

The surveys were conducted twice, in 2010 and 2012,prior to rice harvest. The first survey was performed from

Fig. 1. Map of the study site in Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia.

42 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020

late April to early May in 2010 in Kiaea and Wawonggura
villages. Farmers in Kiaea grew three rice varieties: Dai
Hoani, Moku, and Undolia, and farmers in Wawonggura
grew one rice variety, Dai Wolio. The second survey was
undertaken at three fields in Palangga village from late
April to early May in 2012. One farmer grew Uso and two
farmers grew Lampung. According to the farmers, Lampung is an improved variety that originated from outside
the region in the 2000s, and the other five varieties are
considered as traditional varieties. In the 2010 survey, 20
hills per variety were randomly selected to measure plant
length, culm length, panicle length, and flag leaf length in
the field. In the 2012 survey, these traits were measured forhills sampled from an area of 1 m2 (approximately 10 hills)
with three replications.
During both surveys, to determine the shoot fresh
weight and yield components, plant samples were takenfrom three square plots (1 m × 1 m) per variety. For eachsquare plot, the number of hills per plot and the number ofpanicles per hill were counted, after which all the hills in
the plot were cut at ground level. Panicle morphology wasphotographed, and we recorded whether grain awns were
present based on our observations. To determine the number of spikelets per panicle, percentage of filled grains, and1000-grain weight, 20 panicles were randomly selectedfrom each plot during the first survey and one representative hill with an average number of panicles per hill wasmeasured during the second survey. After hand-threshing,filled and unfilled grains were separated using fresh water
and were counted from each plot. The 1000-grain weightof rice was adjusted to a 14% moisture content. Grain yield
was calculated from all yield components.
Amylose and protein content

The brown rice samples were collected from the same
growing regions with yield survey areas. Ten upland rice
varieties (Biu, Dai Hoani, Dai Wolio, Lampung, Lang
Gandobu, Moku, Nggalaru, Undolia, Wolasi, and Wulumata) were collected from the fields around the Palangga
District, and one upland variety was collected at a market
in Kendari in Southeast Sulawesi Province. However, thevariety collected from the market was unknown and thecode name “red upland rice” was conferred based on thegrain color. For brown rice in these 11 varieties, amylose(Auto-analyzer II, Bran+Luebbe, Germany) and protein
content (Infra Alyzer500, Bran+Luebbe , Germany) were
measured.

Results
Growth and yield survey

Growth and yield measurements were collected from six

rice varieties in our two surveys, have awn (Fig. 2). Grain
color was white in six varieties, brown in four varieties,
and blackish in one variety (Fig. 3). Plant and culm lengthsof the six varieties ranged from 166 to 196 cm and 125 to154 cm, respectively (Table 1). Plant length of Dai Hoani
and Dai Wolio was longer than the other varieties. Panicle
length, and flag leaf length ranged from 25.6 to 36.8 cm
and from 36.8 to 50.6 cm, respectively.
Hill number per square meter ranged from 9.0 to 12.0
(Table 2). Panicle number per hill and per square meter
ranged from 9.6 to 13.1 and from 86 to 136, respectively.
Dai Hoani and Moku had lower panicle numbers per hilland per square meter than those of the other varieties.
Spikelet number per panicle ranged from 101 to 183, with
Dai Wolio and Uso having fewer numbers of spikelets thanthat of the other varieties. Spikelet number per square meterin the traditional varieties ranged from 13,000 to 17,000,
whereas the number in the improved variety (Lampung)
was approximately 21,000. The percentage of filled grains
ranged from 60.4% to 89.3%. The 1000-grain weight wasless than 25.0 g (21.7–23.2 g) in Moku, Uso, and Lampung, whereas it was greater than 25.0 g (27.3–33.2 g) in
Dai Hoani, Undolia and Dai Wolio. Brown rice yields fromall rice varieties ranged from 203 to 429 g m-2. Lampung
showed the highest yield out of the six varieties.
Protein and amylose content in brown rice

The 1000-grain weight ranged from 20.7 to 33.5 g between the 11 rice varieties (Table 3). The protein content
in the 11 varieties ranged from 7.8% to 10.7%. Amylose
content was 0% in Biu and Dai Wolio, and 5.9% in Wulumata. Amylose content in the other eight varieties ranged
from 14.8% to 19.7%.

Discussion
Characteristics of cultivated varieties

In previous studies, more than 20 varieties of traditional upland rice varieties have been examined3), with
one improved rice variety also observed in this region5, 6).
Similarly, in our survey, farmers grow both traditional andimproved rice varieties (Table 1); however, the traditional
rice varieties still predominate in the region. The traditional
rice varieties were widely different in terms of grain shape,size, and color compared to the improved rice variety(Figs. 2 and 3, Table 3), suggesting that these traditional
rice varieties have retained their diversity. This might bebecause farmers grow several different rice varieties toensure risk distribution, resulting in the diversity of thevarieties being maintained.
Most of the upland rice varieties are classified as
tropical japonica, as shown in studies on upland rice in
J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020 43

Fig. 2. Panicles of rice varieties that are used to determine the growth and yield components.

Undolia, Moku, Dai Hoani, and Dai Wolio collected in 2010 (upper left), Uso collected in 2012 (upper
right), Lampung-1 collected in 2012 (lower left), and Lampung-2 collected in 2012 (lower right).

Fig. 3. Grain color and shape variation in rice varieties that are used to determine protein and amylose content
in brown rice.
44 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020

Table 1. Growth characteristics of upland rice varieties in Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia.
Researched village

Awn

Plant length(cm)

Culm length
(cm)

2010

Dai Hoani
Moku
Undolia
Dai Wolio

Kiaea
Kiaea
Kiaea
Wawouggura

long
long
long
long

196 ± 7175 ± 6174 ± 9184 ± 11154 ± 8144 ± 7137 ± 11143 ± 636.8 ± 1.2
28.1 ± 0.6
33.9 ± 1.1
35.4 ± 1.1

48.1 ± 2.4
37.0 ± 2.0
41.8 ± 2.2
48.1 ± 3.3

2012

Uso
Lampung-1
Lampung-2

Palangga
Palangga (Farmer 1)
Palangga (Farmer 2)

long
long
long

169 ± 6172 ± 2166 ± 11133 ± 5125 ± 4130 ± 827.6 ± 1.1
27.8 ± 0.2
25.6 ± 0.9

36.8 ± 1.7
50.6 ± 2.5
42.1 ± 2.4

Year

Variety

Panicle length Flag leaf length
(cm)
(cm)

Data are mean values with S.D.

Table 2. Yield and yield components of upland rice varieties in Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia.
Year

VarietyNo. of hills

Panicle number

Spikelet number

Percentage of 1000-grain
filled grain
weight(%)(g)

Brown riceyield
(g m-2)(m-2)(per hill)(m-2)(per panicle)

(m-2)

2010

Dai Hoani
Moku
Undolia
Dai Wolio

9.0 ± 1.0
9.0 ± 0.0
9.3 ± 1.5
12.0 ± 2.6

9.7 ± 2.0
9.6 ± 0.6
12.4 ± 1.2
10.5 ± 2.8

87 ± 1086 ± 6115 ± 12126 ± 15174 ± 27183 ± 12150 ± 1101 ± 2215172 ± 1718
15797 ± 1752
17241 ± 1786
12786 ± 3952

71.2 ± 9.1
72.5 ± 6.7
77.9 ± 7.2
77.2 ± 7.0

33.0 ± 0.7
23.2 ± 0.7
27.3 ± 0.7
33.2 ± 0.6

353 ± 71267 ± 33363 ± 47316 ± 712012

Uso
Lampung-1
Lampung-2

10.0 ± 0.8
11.3 ± 1.7
11.0 ± 2.0

13.0 ± 1.2
10.7 ± 1.1
13.1 ± 4.3

131 ± 22121 ± 21136 ± 21118 ± 18
175 ± 18161 ± 42

15903 ± 5005
21019 ± 2967
20914 ± 2233

60.4 ± 6.7
76.5 ± 10.3
89.3 ± 2.7

21.7 ± 0.8
23.2 ± 1.3
22.9 ± 1.4

203 ± 48366 ± 24429 ± 58

Data are mean values with S.D.

Vietnam and Laos10, 11). The morphological traits of tropical japonica varieties include greater than average plant
length (120–180 cm), longer leaves, larger but fewer
panicles (2–4 panicles per hill), and more (150–300) grains
per panicle12, 13, 14). The morphological traits of the five traditional upland varieties sampled in our study were similar
to those of typical traditional upland rice, except that they
had more panicles than typical upland rice (Tables 1 and
2). The higher panicle number may be a unique trait of theupland rice varieties in this region.
Yield levels among collected varieties

In our surveys, the yield of the traditional varieties was
3.0 t ha-1 on average, whereas that of the improved variety,Lampung, was 4.0 t ha-1, that is, the traditional varieties
had no yield advantage over the improved upland variety(Table 2). Lampung tended to have a higher spikelet
number per square meter than that of the traditional varieties. This result supported our previous study, whichshowed that yield potential might be different between
the traditional and improved varieties5). The highest yield
difference among the traditional varieties was 1.6 t ha-1,
with the highest yield in Undolia variety (3.6 t ha-1) andthe lowest yield in Uso (2.0 t ha-1); and characteristicsof the yield component were different depending on the

Table 3. The 1000-grain weight and amylose and protein
content of upland rice varieties in southeast
Sulawesi Province, Indonesia.
Variety

1000-grain weight(g)Protein(%)

Amylose(%)

Biu
Dai Hoani
Dai Wolio
Lampung
Lang Gandobu
Moku
Nggalaru
Undolia
Wolasi
Wulumata
Red Upland Rice

25.2
33.3
33.5
23.9
20.8
23.4
21.7
27.6
22.2
20.7
20.7

9.8
10.2
9.6
9.3
9.6
7.8
7.8
8.3
10.2
10.7
8.7

0.0
14.8
0.00
19.7
18.2
19.5
19.3
19.2
18.7
5.9
18.4

variety (Table 2). It appears that the selection of rice
variety by farmers is more complex than just the yieldor morphological traits. These results imply that farmers
select rice varieties through comprehensive analysis of theinterrelationship among crop traits, environmental factors,social factors, etc. Further studies are needed to understandfarmers’ strategies for variety management.

J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020 45

Characteristics of protein and amylose content

Protein content in brown rice is closely related to eating
quality15, 16). In our study, the protein content varied from
7.8% to 10.7% depending on the rice variety, with an average of 8.7% (Table 3). These values fell within the range(4.3%–18.2%) of the IRRI’s World Collection (17,587 cultivars)16). Taira and Taira17) reported that protein content inbrown rice was greater in rice grown in uplands comparedwith rice grown in lowlands. It has also been reported thathigh N fertilization at heading stage increased protein
content in brown rice17). In our study, the protein content
in brown rice, despite being grown in the upland field,
tended to be lower than the average of the IRRI’s World
Collection (9.5%)16). This may be because in this region
rice was cultivated without fertilization.
Damardjati and Oka18) have reported that a major factor
in determining eating quality is the amylose content, but
consumer preferences differed widely in the Indonesian
region. According to Gomez (1979) 16), amylose content inrice was classified as waxy (0%–2% in brown rice, 0%–2%
in milled rice), very low (0%–9% in brown rice, 2%–9%in milled rice), low (10%–19% in brown rice, 9%–20%
in milled rice), intermediate (20%–24% in brown rice,
20%–25% in milled rice), and high (> 25% in brown rice,> 25% in milled rice). In our studies, amylose content of
non-glutinous rice was 14.8%–19.7% in brown rice, which
was estimated at 15.8%–22.5% in milled rice, based ona previous study that compared the amylose content ofbrown and milled rice19). Damardjati and Oka18) collected
rice samples from three large regions (Jakarta, South Sulawesi, and North Sumatra) in Indonesia and reported thatthe amylose content of 469 samples of milled rice ranged
from 17.2% to 27.3% (low to high). They reported thatmost people in Sumatera and Sulawesi preferred the lesssticky rice, whereas people in Java preferred sticky rice. A
similar low to intermediate amylose content (10%–25%)
was found in our study, which was conducted in Southeast
Sulawesi. Additionally, it has been reported that mosttraditional upland varieties were placed in the intermediate
category for amylose content20). Therefore, farmers in thisregion may prefer normal amylose content rice varieties
rather than high amylose content rice varieties.
Besides non-glutinous rice, two glutinous rice were
found with amylose content of 0% (Table 3). However,
the ratio of glutinous rice varieties was less than 20% of
the collected samples. Similarly, Pasolon and Borromeu3)
reported that glutinous rice occupied 15% of the collected
upland rice in the same region. Thus, non-glutinous rice
predominates in this region. Glutinous rice is generally
cooked by steaming and is mainly eaten during festivals orgatherings9). Farmers might have consciously cultivated the
sticky rice varieties in certain ratios. Wulumata had less than
46 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020

10% amylose content (Table 3). This rice is categorized ashaving a very low amylose content. Similar to our results,
very low amylose content rice was found from landraces
in mountainous areas in Southeast Asia21, 22). In Japan,
rice with low amylose content is becoming increasingly
popular because it is being developed as one of the new
types of rice by breeding to expand rice demand23). Thus,
this type of unique characteristic might be important fromthe point of view of genetic resources.

Conclusion
Upland rice grown by farmers in the Southeast Sulawesi
Province was highly diverse in terms of grain appearance
and yield-related factors. Almost all studied rice varieties
were traditional varieties categorized as tropical japonica
rice. Although, amylose and protein content differed depending on the rice variety, there were no high values ofprotein and amylose content in non-glutinous rice from oursurveys. However, we observed a rice variety (Wulumata)with extremely low amylose content, which is a uniquecharacteristic. Our results show that this region has valuable upland rice varieties, and these characteristics are important when considering these varieties for their genetic
resources. Eating quality was only partially researchedin the present study; therefore, future research should beundertaken to study a wider range of eating qualities.
Acknowledgements
We thank the members of the Soil Science Laboratory,
Faculty of Agriculture, Halu Oleo University, Indonesia,
for their support during our survey. We also thank the
farmers for their cooperation. We are grateful to Dr. Takata
Sei (Kochi Prefecture Agriculture Center) for his valuableadvice and support.
References
1. Maclean J, Hardy B, Hettel G. (2013) Rice Almanac:
Source Book for One of the Most Important Economic
Activities on Earth (4th ed.). Los Baños, Phillipines:
IRRI: 283.
2. Nishimura Y. (1995) Agriculture in the villages ofSoutheast Sulawesi, Indonesia: Part 1: The inter-village variations in food production and consumption.
Sago Palm 3: 55-61. (In Japanese with English abstract)
3. Pasolon YB, Borromeu MD. (2016) Diversity andagronomic features of indigenous of upland rice inSoutheast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Adv Environ Bio 10:
49-53.
4. Pasolon YB, Gago C, Boer D, Rembon FS, Muhidin,
Kikuta M, Yamamoto Y. (2017) Growth of upland ricein variable soil water-holding capacity. Res J Pharm,

Bio Chem Sciences 8: 1608-1614.
5. Kikuta M, Yamamoto Y, Pasolon YB, Rembon FS,
Miyazaki A, Makihara D. (2016) How growth andyield of upland rice vary with topographic conditions.
Trop Agr Develop 60: 162-171.
6. Kikuta M, Yamamoto Y, Pasolon YB, Rembon FS,
Miyazaki A, Makihara D. (2018) Effects of sloperelated soil properties on upland rice growth andyield under slash-and-burn system in South Konawe
Regency, Southeast Sulawesi Province, Indonesia.
Trop Agr Develop 62: 60-67.
7. Chang TT, Loresto GC. (1985) Germplasm resources
and breeding for drought resistance. In: Progress inUpland Rice Research. Manila, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute: 199-212.
8. Yoshida T, Anas, Rosniawaty S, Setiamihardja R.
(2009) Genetic background of Indonesia rice germplasm and its relationship to agronomic characteristics
and eating quality. Jpn J Crop Sci 78: 335-343. (InJapanese with English abstract)
9. Nishimura Y (1995) Agriculture in the villages ofSoutheast Sulawesi, Indonesia: Part 2: The role of sago
exploitation in household and village economy, Sago
Palm 3: 62-71. (In Japanese with English abstract)
10. Arraudeau M., Xuan VT. (1995) Opportunities for upland rice research in Vietnam. In: Vietnam and IRRI:
a partnership in rice research. Manila, Philippines:
International Rice Research Institute and Hanoi(Vietnam): Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry.
p. 191-198.
11. Roder W, Keoboulapha B, Vannalath K, Phouaravanh
B. (1996) Glutinous rice and its importance for hill
farmers in Laos. Econ. Bot. 50:401-408.
12. Atlin GN, Lafitte HR, Tao D, Laza M, Amante M,
Courtois B. (2006) Developing rice cultivars for highfertility upland systems in the Asian tropics. Field
Crops Res 97: 43-52.
13. Saito Y. (1992) The routes of introduction of Rice inJapan. J Brew Soc Jpn 87: 732-738. (In Japanese withEnglish title)
14. Arraudeau MA., Vergara BS. (1988) A Farmer’s
primer on growing upland rice. Manila, Philippines:
International Rice Research Institute: pp284.

15. Inatsu O. (1988) Studies on improving the eating quality of Hokkaido rice. Hokkaido Central Agricultural
Experiment Station: 89. (In Japanese with English
abstract)
16. Gomez KA. (1979) Effect of environment on protein
and amylose content of rice. In: Proceedings of theWorkshop on Chemical Aspects of Rice Grain Quality. International Rice Research Institute Los Baños,
Laguna, Philippines: 59-68.
17. Taira H, Taira H. (1971). Effect of irrigation on protein
content of upland, lowland and their hybrid brownrice. Jpn J Crop Sci 40: 294-298.
18. Damardjati DS, Oka M. (1992) Evaluation of urban
consumer preferences for rice quality characteristics
in Indonesia. Unnevehr L, Duff B, Juliano BO. (eds.),
Consumer demand for rice grain quality: Terminal
report of IDRC projects, National grain quality (Asia),
and International grain quality economics (Asia).
Manila, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute: 59-73.
19. Oosato K, Hamachi Y, Kawamura Y, Imabayashi S.
(1998) Selection for high palatability lines by amylose
content adjusted by heading date for rice breeding.
Jpn J Crop Sci 67: 36-40. (In Japanese with English
abstract)
20. Sall S, Norman D, Featherstone AM. (2000) Quantitative assessment of improved rice variety adoption: thefarmer’s perspective. Agric Sys 66: 129-144.
21. Nakagahara M, Nagamine T, Okuno K. (1986)
Spontaneous occurrence of low amylose genes andgeographical distribution of amylose content in rice.
Rice Genet Newsl 3: 46-48.
22. Irie K, Aye K, Myint Y, Kha LN, Tun YT, Nagamine
T, Fujimaki H, Kikuchi F. (2003) Varietal variationsof heading time among rice landraces in Myanmar.
Jpn J Trop Agr 47: 198-205. (In Japanese with English
abstract)
23. Yoshi Y, Arisaka M, Jou T, Hayakawa T. (1997) Physicochemical properties of low-amylose rice, Nippon
Shokuhin Kagaku Kogaku Kaishi 44: 353-360. (InJapanese with English abstract)

J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2020 47