0726 SRI in Tamil Nadu: Current Scenario

SRI in Tamil Nadu: Current Scenario

T.M. Thiyagarajan

• Policies

• Research

• Extension

• Adoption

Policies :

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University

• Has pursued a more scientific understanding of SRI

• Now large scale of adoption of SRI within Tamil Nadu state

• SRI is priority component in new 2007 World Bank-funded project on irrigated agriculture

Policies :

Agricultural Department

Govt. of Tamil Nadu

• Has undertaken popularization of SRI across TN state

• Promoting large scale of adoption

TNAU : SRI RESEARCH

• Carried out in the research stations at Coimbatore, Aduthurai, Thanjavur, Kumulur, Killikulam, and Tirur

• During the 2006-07: 7 research projects on agronomy of SRI, and 5 research projects in plant protection with SRI

Agronomy Research

• SRI with INM gave significantly higher yield than SRI with fertilizers only

• Hybrid rice yield was significantly higher than variety with SRI methods

(Rajendran, Aduthurai & Anbumani, Thanjavur)

Effect of organic nutrient sources on SRI

(Thiyagarajan & Gnanachitra, Tirur)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Control RF RF(LCC)

RF +MNM

GLM1 GLM +RF

GLM2 FYM1 FYM +RF

FYM2

Gra

in Y

ield

(k

g h

a-1)

Feb.- May. 2007

Nutrient management in SRI : Leaf folder damage

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

control RF HigherNK

RF +MNM

GM1 GM +RF

GM2 FYM1 FYM +RF

FYM2

% D

amag

e

Jul. – Oct. 2007

(Sumathi, Thiyagarajan & Gnanachitra, Tirur)

Nutrient management in SRI : Black bug populations

(Sumathi, Thiyagarajan & Gnanachitra, Tirur)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Control RF HigherNK

RF +MNM

GM1 GM +RF

GM2 FYM1 FYM +RF

FYM2

No

. per

hill

Jul. – Oct. 2007

Nematode populations with SRI

0

100

200

300

400

500

Planting Tillering Panicleinitiation

Flowering Harvest

Per

250

cc

soil SRI

Conventional

Root nematode / May-Aug. 2006 / Killikulam

0

100

200

300

400

500


Flowering Harvest

Per

250

cc

soil

SRI

Conventional

Root nematode / Aug.- Jan. 2007 / Killikulam

0

100

200

300

400

500


Flowering Harvest

Per

250

cc

soil

SRI

Conventional

Root knot nematode / May-Aug. 2006 / Killikulam

0

100

200

300

400

500


Flowering Harvest

Per

250

cc

soil

SRI

Conventional

Root knot nematode / Aug.- Jan. 2007 / Killikulam

(Seenivasan, Killikulam)

Plant protection research

Application of Pseudomonas fluorescence as seed + soil treatment recorded 37.5% and 59.5% reduction of rice root nematode population, and 61.3% and 62.8 % reduction of root knot nematode population in both soil and roots, respectively.

(Seenivasan, Killikulam)

Plant protection research• In the reproductive phase (80 to 100 DAT), SRI recorded significantly higher leaf folder incidence (2.95 to 23.95%) than conventional method (1.21 to 13.98%).

• At 100 DAT, stem borer incidence was less in SRI (2.24% WE) than with conventional method (5.6% WE)

• ADT43 showed less incidence of pests compared to hybrids

• SRI resulted in a significantly higher yield of 8,014 kg ha-1 compared to standard methods (6,393 kg ha-1).

(Ravi & Karthikeyan, Aduthurai)

Plant protection research

• No significant variation was found in the incidence of blast and brown spot between SRI and non-SRI

• False smut and sheath rot incidences were significantly lower in SRI (6.3 and 21.7 PDI, respectively) when compared to non-SRI (9.9 and 34.8 PDI, respectively)

(Dinakaran, Trichirapalli)

SRI Conventional

Stem borer damage

4.68% 6.09%

Leaf damage 2.76% 4.54%

Silver shoot 9.43% 13.68%

BPH 0.56 hill-1 0.68 hill-1

Spiders 1.24 hill-1 1.04 hill-1

Plant Protection Research

(Nalini, Madurai)

SRI Extension : TNAU

Major thrust in new World Bank-aided Major thrust in new World Bank-aided

project :project :

Irrigated Agricultural Modernization Irrigated Agricultural Modernization

and Water-bodies Restoration and and Water-bodies Restoration and

ManagementManagement (IAMWARM), 2006-2010 (IAMWARM), 2006-2010

IAMWARM project

Development objectives:Development objectives:

• Increase in area served by irrigation Increase in area served by irrigation

systems in 63 selected sub-basins that are systems in 63 selected sub-basins that are

to be rehabilitated and modernizedto be rehabilitated and modernized

• Increase in agricultural productivity -- net Increase in agricultural productivity -- net

benefits per unit of water delivered in Rs. mbenefits per unit of water delivered in Rs. m-3-3

SRI in IAMWARM project

• 750 - 1000 ha of SRI in each basin

• Rs. 10,000 subsidy for 1 ha

• Women labourers also to be trained

Rupees

Seed + seed treatment 200

Nursery 1000

Marker 1000

Weeder (5 nos.) 2500

Fertilizers 4040

Pesticides 1640

Transplanting 4000

IAMWARM project : Unit cost for 1 ha of SRI

Rice area 89,092 ha

Area of implementation 750 ha

Period 3 years

OutcomeArea spread 5,000 ha

Increased productivity 1,200 kg ha-1

Additional revenue Rs. 30 million

IAMWARM Project : SRI in Cooum Basin

SRI Extension : TN State Agricultural Department

• Implementation of Integrated Cereal Development Programme – Paddy (ICDPP)

• Implementation of National Food Security Mission – Rice (NFSM-R)

• Covering 25 % of 1st season (June – Oct. 07) rice area -- 1.88 lakh ha

• Covering 40 % of 2nd season (Aug.07 – Jan.08) rice area -- 5.45 lakh ha

National Food Security Mission - Rice

• Increase rice production by 10 million tons by the

end of 11th Plan (2007-08 to 2011-12)

• SRI to be implemented in 133 districts across the

country (5 districts in Tamil Nadu)

• Target area for SRI: 5 million ha

• Rs. 3,000 per SRI demonstration allocated

• 50,000 demonstrations; 1 demo of 0.4 ha for

every 100 ha of rice area

Integrated Cereal Development Programme : Paddy

• Cluster approach

• 1,132 villages in Tamil Nadu

• 1 cluster = 10 ha

• Demo in each cluster : Rs.20,000 (10 ha)

• Training in each cluster : Rs.5,000

• Budget : Rs.283 lakhs

Survey on farmers’ opinion on SRI techniques in comparison with conventional cultivation

• 50 farms in Thamirabarani Basin

• 25 farms in Cauvery Delta Basin

Note different opinions among farmers between the two basins

Thamirabarani Basin(farmers’ opinions %)

SRI technique Hard Normal Easy Not adopted

Land preparation 6 92 2 0

Modified nursery preparation

56 12 30 2

Square planting 68 10 20 2

Mechanical weeding 12 4 78 6

Cauvery Basin(farmers’ opinions %)

SRI technique Hard Normal Easy Not adopted

Land preparation 36 64 0 0

Modified nursery preparation

32 28 20 20

Square planting 28 48 24 0

Mechanical weeding 40 4 56 0


Factor/constraint Good Normal Bad Not applicable

Availability of mechanical weeder

82 10 2 6

Timely reach of inputs

72 10 18 -

Plant population maintenance

90 8 2 -

Cauvery Delta Basin(farmers’ opinions %)

Factor/constraint Good Normal Bad Not applicable

Availability of mechanical weeder

92 8 0 -

Timely reach of inputs

28 20 52 -

Plant population maintenance

80 20 0 -


Higher Normal Less

Pest and disease problems 2 24 74

Weed problems 10 50 40

Farmers here have not found weed control to be difficult, by using cono-weedersAs seen above, farmers have not experienced any difficulty in accessing weeders

Cauvery Basin(Farmers’ opinion %)

Higher Normal Less

Pest and disease problems 4 46 50

Weed problems 4 28 68*

Farmers here take a very positive view of the cono-weeder to control weedsFarmers here have not experienced any real difficulty in accessing weeders

Problems in adoption(farmers’ opinions %)

Thamirabarani Basin

Cauvery Basin

SRI requires more labour for transplanting

68 24

Women labourers reluctant to do square transplanting

36 12

Farmers that in the two basins have very different assessments of SRI labor requirements

Survey on social suitability of SRI


• Farmers who tried SRI for the first time were generally surprised and positive about the method and its results: higher yield with reduced water usage.


• Despite the positive reactions and awareness of the advantages, relatively few farmers practice SRI or are motivated to switch over fully to SRI.

• Many remain skeptical and perceive SRI practices as relatively difficult compared to conventional rice cultivation practices.

• Most farmers say that they are not familiar enough with SRI techniques to practice the system independently.

• They feel insecure about the practices and fear that poor implementation of the practice could lead to crop failure.

• SRI is not popular in areas of labour shortage

• Drum seeding + partial SRI adoption may be successful

• Nursery and transplanting are to be avoided

Drum Seeder

Grain yield comparisons (t ha-1)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Conventional SRI (20 X 20 cm)

SRI (25 X 25 cm)

Drum seeding +SRI

0726 SRI in Tamil Nadu: Current Scenario

Technology

Transcript of 0726 SRI in Tamil Nadu: Current Scenario