View
2.211
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presenter: M.C. Diwakar, Director, Directorate of Rice Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperation, Patna Audience: 2nd National SRI Symposium, Agartala, India Subject Country: India
Citation preview
STATUS OF SRI CULTIVATION AND ITS FUTURE PROSPECTS IN
INDIA
Dr. M.C. Diwakar, DIRECTOR
DIRECTORATE OF RICE DEVELOPMENT, GOVT.OF INDIAMINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE & COOPERATION, PATNA
0
30.6833.14
35.62 37.60 39.33 40.30 41.00 42.68 44.55 42.56
05
101520253035404550
1st
2n
d
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
9th
10
th
Plan-wise Area of Rice in India (area in million ha.)
Series1
Series2
25.0330.34
35.1541.8
47.3454.49
65.06
78.7487.27 85.40
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Ist Plan
2nd Plan
3rd Plan
4th Plan
5th Plan
6th Plan
7th Plan
8th Plan
9th Plan
10th Plan
Plan-wise Production of Rice in India (production in million tonnes)
Series1
816915 987
11121204
1352
1587
18451959 2007
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Ist Plan
2nd Plan
3rd Plan
4th Plan
5th Plan
6th Plan
7th Plan
8th Plan
9th Plan
10th Plan
Plan-wise Productivity of Rice in India (productivity in kg/ha)
Series1
Benefits of SRI * Seed requirement reduced by 65-70 per cent* Saving of water by about 35-45 per cent* More number of tillers/productive tillers* More number of spikelets per panicle* Uniform maturity* Head rice recovery is more* Earlier maturityby 5-20 days* Healthier plants resistant to major pests and diseases* Yield advantage over the conventional method by 1.5 to 2 times* Less competition between rice plant and weeds
Why a Paradigm Shift is NeededThe area of rice has been declining, and its productivity is
also stagnating. There is fear among the scientific community that the country may not be in a position to feed India’s citizens based on the present growth rate and current trends of productivity of rice.
The Green Revolution was successful for making our country self-sufficient in foodgrain production. However, the declining trend of food grain production during the past decades has become a great concern. The concept of Green Revolution was based on the following strategies:
(i) Develop semi-dwarf high-yielding varieties and exploit their genetic potential(ii) Make them more responsive to fertiliser application(iii) Increase optimum use of inputs such as water, fertiliser, seeds, pesticides and farm implements(iv) Utilise non-monetary inputs such as timely sowing, spacing, and the timely application of fertilisers and harvesting.
Strategies There is need to adopt other strategies in the present context as productivity is stagnating. Thus greater emphasis has to be given to bridging the gap between existing yields and potential yields demonstrated in the experimental fields.
Appropriate strategies may be as follows:(i) Adoption of improved crop production technology and its dissemination to the farming community(ii) Popularisation of hybrid rice(iii) Promotion of System of Rice Intensification
Hybrid Rice Demonstrations under SRI in Dindigul District, Tamil Nadu, 2004-05
Rice No. of demon-
strations
Area (acres)
Average yield
(kg / ha)
Performance
Hybrid 7 7 10,474 SRI gave 20-30 % more yield, vigorous crop growth, pest and disease resistance, and reduced weed problem
HYV 13 13 7,045 Produced more tillers than conventional methods, more productive tillers, less disease and pests, 15% more yield, plus labour and water saving. Lower seed rate and reduced water requirement
Table 8Comparison of SRI Technology and Normal Practice
in terms of Cost and Benefit Ratios
Sl. No. Component Cultivation cost / acre
Normal practice SRI
1 Nursery management
Ploughing, manuring & water management 500 100
2. Seed cost 200 30
3 Seed treatment 15 15
4 Main field preparation
Ploughing, organic manuring, bio-fertilizer application & bund formation
2000 2000
5 Inorganic manuring
Basal application 1200 1200
Top dressing 400 400
6 Transplanting 800 1000
7 Weeding/ weedicide application 600 100
8 Plant protection / spraying (4 times) 1,200 900
9 Irrigation 350 350
10 Harvest 800 600
Total cultivation cost (Rs.) 8,065 6,695
Yield (kg/ Acre) 2,400 2,818
Value of produce (Rs.) 14,400 16,908
Benefit / acre (Rs.) 6,335 10,213
Benefit : cost ratio 1.78 : 1 2.5 : 1
Sl. No.
Component Cultivation cost / acre
Normal practice SRI
Cost of cultivation (Rs. /ha) On-Farm Trial in Tamil Nadu
Sl. No. Details SRI Conventional Difference
1 Nursery 842 2,607 1,765
2 Field preparation 1,550 1,550 -
3 Pulling planting 1,700 3,500 1,800
4 Weeding 2,175 2,700 525
5 Nutrition 3,310 2,657 (-) 653
6 Plant protection 375 375 -
7 Irrigation 750 750 -
8 Harvesting 5 580 4,290 (-) 1,290
Total 16,282 18,429 2,147
Future Prospects of SRI
• Biologically eco-friendly• No pollution in environment, water and soil• Increasing farmers’ income as well as enhancing
their productivity• Higher benefit-cost ratio – 2.5 : 1• Technologies lead to organic farming• Less dependence on chemical fertilizers• Minimum use of pesticides• Early maturity of crop
Popularisation of SRI technologies• This technology is being popularised in countries like
Madagascar, Cambodia, Zambia, India, Myanmar, China, Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Nepal.
• It is being popularised in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Tripura in almost all districts. Also State govts. in Bihar, Karnataka , Chhattishgarh , Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, and West Bengal are implementing SRI in selected districts to increase yield. To create awareness among farmers, training and demonstrations are being organised at the farmers’ field level under Macro Management of Agriculture.
• SRI component has been added in the National Food SecurityMission.
Variety-wise yield HYV Ave. yield
with conv. method (mt/ha)
Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)
No. of demos in
farmer field (0.4 ha)
Joya 3.4 -3.8 5.5 -6.2 37
Krishna Hamsha
3.8 -4.5 6.4- 6.8 134
Satabdi 3.0-3.5 4.8 -5.4 46
Swati 3.75-4.25 5.8-6.25 30
HYV Ave. yield with conv.
method (mt/ha)
Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)
No. of demos in farmers
field (0.4 ha)
IR 64 4.5-5.0 7.2-7.6 192
MTU7029 4.5-5.5 7.2 -8.5 183
NDR 359 4.3-5.2 6.5 -7.2 73
NDR 97 2.5-3.0 4.6-5.0 64
POOJA 4.8-5.2 7.4 -8.2 124
HYBRIDHYBRID Ave. yield
with conv. method (mt/ha)
Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)
No. of demos in
farmer field (0.4 ha)
DRRH-1 6.0-6.5 7.6-8.1 19
KRH-2 6.5-7.0 8.2-8.7 35
PHB 71 6.5-7.0 8.1-8.5 28
SHEYADRI 6.2-6.8 7.2-7.8 15
Variety-wise yield
Local Ave. yield with conv.
method (mt/ha)
Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)
No. of demos in farmer fields (0.4 ha)
Local varieties
2.0-3.0 3.8-4.3 37
Local scented varieties
1.5-2.0 3.1 -3.4 12
7917
7310 7433
6777
54795669 5536
5282
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Comparison between SRI and conventional methods in Andhra Pradesh
Av. Yield in SRIplot/ha (Kg)
Av. Yield inconventionalplot/ha(kg)
Yield performance of SRI on rice crop in trials organised by the Directorate of Agriculture, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh
Year Season No. of trials
Ave. yield in SRI plot
(kg/ha)
Ave. yield in conventional plot (kg/ha)
Yield advantage
(kg/ha)
2003-04 Kharif/ rabi 476 7,917 5,479 2,438
2004-05 Kharif 599 7,310 5,561 1,749
Rabi 311 7,310 5,777 1,533
2005-06 Kharif 2,818 7,476 5,451 2,025
Rabi 11,792 7,390 5,620 1,770
2006-07 Kharif 7,653 6,724 5,005 1,718
Rabi 6,804 6,830 5,558 1,272
64.565.7 65.4
5253.1
51.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Comparison between SRI and conventional methods in Karnataka
SRI yield (Qtl/ha) Conventional yield (Qtl/ha)
Yield performance of SRI demonstration in Karnataka during 2004-05 to 2007-08
Year No. of demonstrations
SRI yield (mt/ha)
Conventional yield (mt/ha)
2004-05 2040 6.45 5.20
2005-06 4528 6.57 5.31
2006-07 1020 6.54 5.12
5348
6485
5800
7400
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Conven-tional cultivation (kg/ha) SRI cultivation (kg/ha)
Comparison between conventional cultivation and SRI cultivation in Tamil Nadu
2005-06 2006-07
Yield performance of SRI demonstration in
Tamil Nadu during 2005-06 and 2006-07
Year Average yield (kg/ha) Addl. Yield (kg/ha)
Conventional cultivation
SRI cultivation
2005-06 5,348 6,485 1,137
2006-07 5,800 7,400 1,600
Cost-benefit ratio:Cost of cultivation in Tamil Nadu (SRI vs. conventional methods)
Sl. No.
Inputs/ Particular SRI Conventional Savings %
1 Nursery area 100 Sq.m 800 Sq.m 88
2 Seed cost (Rs.) 103.00 1212.00 90
3 Irrigation water 24 m3 53 m3 55
4 Fertiliser cost (Rs.) 18 180 90
5 Labour cost, incl. ploughing (Rs.)
1,200 1800 34
6 Other costs (Rs.) 120 - -
Total costs (Rs.) 1,592 3,192 1,600
Net savings/ha = Rs. 1,600.00 contd..
Results of SRI experiments conducted in
Punjab State, 2006-07Method of cultivation (25 x 25 cm) SRI (without
puddling)Non-SRI (with
puddling)
Panicle length (cm) 29.8 27.07
Total no. of grains 190 130
No. of tillers per sq. metre 415 171
Yield per sq. metre (grams) 785 475
No. of chaffy grains 22 24
Yield per acre (quintals) 31.4 19.0
1000-grain weight 18.60 17.34
Plant height (cm) 137 144.5
No. of irrigations 14 26
Yield comparisons between conventional and SRI methods
54.7959.88
83.79
55
70
2
79.17
70.45
104.74
85 87
3.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
A.P. T. N.
HYV Hybrid
Tripura
HYV Hybrid Scented
Yield (Q/ha)
conventional
Yield (Q/ha)
SRI