research on system of rice intensification – initial...

Research on System of Rice Intensification – Initial Experiences

.B. C. Viraktamath

Project Director

Directorate of Rice Research, Hyderabad

______________________________E- mail: bcvmath@drricar.org

Rice in India

◙ It is the staple food for > 70% Indians, and it holds the key for food security.

◙ Grown in 42.5 m.ha with a production of 88 m.t.

◙ Occupies 25% of cropped area and contributes about 24% to AGDP.

◙ Earns about 7000 crores of foreign exchange.

◙ It is a source of livelihood for millions of farm families.

361.1439.2

548.2646.3

1012.4

1200

1400

65.46 85.00 111.53 146.55 201.6253 305

90 1301000

400

800

1200

1600

1951-60 1961-70 1971-80 1981-90 1999-00 2009-10 2024-25

In M

illio

ns

Population (million)

Food grain (mt)

Rice (mt)

Population, production of food grains, and rice trends and projections

211.3 (2002)

93.3 (2002) Rice

Food grains

Challenges for enhancing rice production

Declining resource base

Land

WaterLabour

Deteriorating soil healthIncreasing environmental concerns Increasing cost of cultivation

Among these water is becoming a critical factor

4.6 5.3

10.6

2.3

14.9

51.8

19.6

2.4 2.5 4 2.11.8 1.5 1.8 2

8.7

20.7

9.9 10.6

4.27.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

China India Pakistan UK USA Bangladesh Nepal

195519902025

Per capita water availability in selected countries (000 m3)

Rice and Water80% of fresh water is used for agriculture.More than 50% of this is consumed by the rice crop.Rice consumes about 4000-5000 liters of water to produce 1 kg of grain.Irrigated rice cannot be ignored as it contributes significantly to food security.Little scope to save water from other irrigated dry crops.Hence, pressure would be on rice cultivation to cut down the water requirement.

What is SRI ?It is a set of modified practices for growing ricewhich was developed in Madagascar in 1983 byFather Henri Laulanie

FeaturesPlanting young seedlings 8 – 12 days oldPlanting single seedling/hill Along with soilWider Spacing 25 cm x 25 cmOrganic manuring Compost , Gm , StrawNo standing water till PI stage Alternate wetting and dryingAerated Soil Weeding by Cono-weeder

Claims of SRI method

High yields (up to 10 – 20 %)Water saving (up to 50%) Improved soil healthImproved input use efficiencyLower seed requirement

Keeping in view of the above, need to validate these claims, research work was initiated by DRR in 2003

DRR trial - A prelude to multi-location trials

Season - Rabi 2003

Treatments - Normal transplanting, SRI with 12d old seedlings, SRI with 25d old seedlings, normal planting with wider spacing (25 x 25 cm).

Results:Yields in SRI were higher in SRI by 16.6%Planting young seedlings is beneficial

Hybrids performed better than varietiesHybrids – Yield increase 46 - 48%Varieties – Yield increase 5 – 17%

Pusa Basmati did not perform well under SRI.

Multi-location trials on SRI under AICRIP were conducted during kharif 2004 , 2005 and 2006 seasons (21 locations)

State (2005) LocationAndhra Pradesh Rajendranagar (Hyderabad)

Assam Karimgunj, Titabar

Bihar Patna, Sabour

Chhattisgarh Jagdalpur

Gujarat Nawagam

Himachal Pradesh Malan

Jharkhand Ranchi

Karnataka Mandya, Siriguppa

Contd….

State (2006) LocationOrissa Chiplima

Punjab Kapurthala

Pondicherry Karaikal

Tamil Nadu Aduthurai, Coimbatore

Tripura Arundhatinagar

Uttar pradesh Varanasi

Uttaranchal Pantnagar, Almora

Meghalaya Umiam

Results of Multi-location TrialsKharif 2004 -- Locations :21

● Performance of SRI varied from location to location

● SRI gave higher yield (7-42 %) than control at 11 locations with mean of 12 %

● Varieties responded differently● SRI and ICM were on par at 4 locations● At Kapurthala and Malan, normal method

was better than SRI● KRH-2 performed better● Increased yield was due to increased no. of

panicles.

Contd….

Grain yield under different methods of crop establishment

– Kharif 2004

Location

0

2

4

6

8

10

R'n

agar

Patn

a

Alm

ora

Siru

gupp

a

Man

dya

Adhu

thur

ai

Jagd

alpu

r

Karja

t

Ran

chi

Tita

bar

A'na

gar

Coi

mba

tore

Naw

agam

Vara

nasi

Chi

plim

a

Sabo

ur

Kapu

rthal

a

Mal

an

Gra

in y

ield

(t/h

a)NT SRI ICM

SRI<NTSRI=NTSRI>NTSRI>ICM>NT

SRI=ICM

Multi-location Evaluation of SRIResults of Kharif 2005

◘ SRI was significantly better than normal transplanting at 10 locations (Yield increase -5.0-69 .9 % with a mean of 25%

◘ SRI and ICM were on par at 7 locations.

◘ SRI performed better in southern and central India

◘ SRI recorded lower yields than normal planting at 4 locations (Karaikal, Kapurthala, Pusa, Malan)

◘ Yield increase of SRI was higher in acidic soils as compared to alkaline soils Contd….

Crop establishment method for increasing yield in TP rice (SRI, ICM & TP), Kharif 2006

Locations - 27 Significant at 21 locationsSRI method promising at 13 out of 21 locations

ICM comparable with SRI – 3 (KNP, UMM, MLN)Standard transplanting at 5 locations

(MND, KRK, MRT, CHP, PDY)Mean increase in grain yield across locations (21)

With SRI - 11% With ICM - 8%

SRI performance is better when nursery sowing date is same as compared to transplanting date.

Across location (21)

01234567

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6

Treatments

Gra

in y

ield

(t/h

a)

0246810121416

(%) i

ncre

ase

Overall GYincrease (%)

Nursery dates are same

Transplanting dates are same

Performance of different methods of crop establishment in different regions

Vigorous root system (right ) under SRI

SRIConventional

60 d old plants under SRI and normal TP

Collaborative research by DRR and ICRISAT

Treatments were SRI, ECO-SRI (fully organic methods) and normal transplantingWater supplied to each plot was measured with water meters Nutrients added to all treatments were calculated on N basisNo pesticides were applied, as there was no serious pest attack

0

100

200

300

400

ECO SRI Control

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

ECO SRI Control

Root dry mass (g m-3)

Root length density (cm m-3)

Mean Root Mass and Root Length Density, Rabi 2006, DRR Fields

Differences: **

Differences: *

Other Salient Observations• Managing soil moisture in SRI plots and

keeping them weed-free was the biggest challenges

• SRI plots remained unimpressive even up to flowering

• Pest damage was lower in SRI plots than in normal plots

• Plants in SRI plots were greener than those in normal plots

• Grain yield increase by 10% in SRI

• Water use decreased by 29% (SRI 79 Cum)

Way Forward/Take-Home Message

• Root mass, root length density of plants in SRI plots was higher than that of controls and need more studies (over depth).

• Bigger, better (non-black) and deeper roots together with the generally high microbial

activity may explain higher yield in SRI and needs to be studied

• More studies needed, particularly through long-term experiments, including addressing the issues of soil nutrient depletion in SRI plots and adoption of SRI by farmers to help policy makers towards

its scaling up

0102030405060708090

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

SRI Normal

kg/c

u M

Gra

in y

ield

(q/h

a)an

d C

u.m

Methods

Water productivity in SRI Yield

Water use (Cu.M

W pro

Increase

Water productivity in SRI vs. flooded rice

•Grain yield increase by 10% in SRI•Water use decreased by 29% (SRI 79 Cum)•Water productivity up by 20%

Stem borer damage at flowering stage

Root and soil nematodes

01020304050607080

SRI SRI- Eco Conventional

Crop establishment methods

Pop

ulat

ion

RNSN

Nematode population as influenced by crop establishment methods

ConclusionsSRI practice is significantly superior to the conventional method in more than 50% locations indicating that it does not do well at all locations.The performance of SRI was variety-specific, and hybrids performed better than varieties irrespective of date of sowing. The mean yield advantage observed under SRI over the conventional method varied from 10 to 16 per cent. SRI performance was not satisfactory at Malan and Kapurthala.Acidic soils responded better to SRI method.

Future Thrust Areas for Research on SRI

■ Varietal response to SRI and designing suitable plant type

■ Identification of areas/zones most suited for SRI method

■ Precise quantification of savings in water■ Effective weed management and

refinement of machinery■ Detailed studies on soil health and

microbial activity■ SRI vis-à-vis pest and disease incidence

and their management.■ Detailed economics of SRI and cost :

benefit analaysis.