Research on System of Rice Research on System of Rice Intensification – Initial ExperiencesIntensification – Initial Experiences

..B. C. ViraktamathB. C. Viraktamath

Project DirectorProject Director

Directorate of Rice Research, Directorate of Rice Research, HyderabadHyderabad

____________________________________________________________E- mail: bcvmath@drricar.orgE- mail: bcvmath@drricar.org

Rice in IndiaRice in India

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

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

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

◙ Earns about 7000 crores of foreign exchange.Earns about 7000 crores of foreign exchange.

◙ It is a source of livelihood for millions of farm It is a source of livelihood for millions of farm families.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 Population, production of food grains, grains,

and rice trends and projectionsand rice trends and projections

211.3 (2002)

93.3 (2002) Rice

Food grains

Challenges for enhancing rice Challenges for enhancing rice productionproduction

Declining resource baseDeclining resource base

LandLand WaterWater LabourLabour

Deteriorating soil healthDeteriorating soil health Increasing environmental concerns Increasing environmental concerns Increasing cost of cultivationIncreasing 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 42.11.8 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 WaterRice and Water 80% of fresh water is used for agriculture.80% of fresh water is used for agriculture. More than 50% of this is consumed by the More than 50% of this is consumed by the

rice crop.rice crop. Rice consumes about 4000-5000 liters of Rice consumes about 4000-5000 liters of

water to produce 1 kg of grain.water to produce 1 kg of grain. Irrigated rice cannot be ignored as it Irrigated rice cannot be ignored as it

contributes significantly to food security.contributes significantly to food security. Little scope to save water from other Little scope to save water from other

irrigated dry crops.irrigated dry crops. Hence, pressure would be on rice cultivation Hence, pressure would be on rice cultivation

to cut down the water requirement.to cut down the water requirement.

What is SRI ?What is SRI ? It is a set of modified practices for growing rice It is a set of modified practices for growing rice

which was developed in Madagascar in 1983 by which was developed in Madagascar in 1983 by Father Henri LaulanieFather Henri Laulanie

FeaturesFeatures

Planting young seedlings Planting young seedlings 8 – 12 days old8 – 12 days old

Planting single seedling/hillPlanting single seedling/hill Along with soilAlong with soil

Wider SpacingWider Spacing 25 cm x 25 cm25 cm x 25 cm

Organic manuringOrganic manuring Compost , Gm , StrawCompost , Gm , Straw

No standing water till PI stageNo standing water till PI stage Alternate wetting and dryingAlternate wetting and drying

Aerated SoilAerated Soil Weeding by Cono-weederWeeding by Cono-weeder

Claims of SRI methodClaims of SRI method

High yields (up to 10 – 20 %)High yields (up to 10 – 20 %) Water saving (up to 50%) Water saving (up to 50%) Improved soil healthImproved soil health Improved input use efficiencyImproved input use efficiency Lower seed requirementLower 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 trialsDRR trial - A prelude to multi-location trials

SeasonSeason -- Rabi 2003Rabi 2003

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

Results:

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

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

Pusa Basmati did not perform well under SRI.Pusa Basmati did not perform well under SRI.

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

State (2005)State (2005) LocationLocation

Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh Rajendranagar (Hyderabad)Rajendranagar (Hyderabad)

AssamAssam Karimgunj, TitabarKarimgunj, Titabar

BiharBihar Patna, SabourPatna, Sabour

ChhattisgarhChhattisgarh JagdalpurJagdalpur

GujaratGujarat NawagamNawagam

Himachal PradeshHimachal Pradesh MalanMalan

JharkhandJharkhand RanchiRanchi

KarnatakaKarnataka Mandya, SiriguppaMandya, Siriguppa

Contd….

State (2006)State (2006) LocationLocation

OrissaOrissa ChiplimaChiplima

PunjabPunjab KapurthalaKapurthala

PondicherryPondicherry KaraikalKaraikal

Tamil NaduTamil Nadu Aduthurai, CoimbatoreAduthurai, Coimbatore

TripuraTripura ArundhatinagarArundhatinagar

Uttar pradeshUttar pradesh VaranasiVaranasi

UttaranchalUttaranchal Pantnagar, AlmoraPantnagar, Almora

MeghalayaMeghalaya UmiamUmiam

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

● Performance of SRI varied from location to locationPerformance of SRI varied from location to location● SRI gave higher yield (7-42 %) than control at 11 SRI gave higher yield (7-42 %) than control at 11

locations with mean of 12 %locations with mean of 12 %● Varieties responded differentlyVarieties responded differently● SRI and ICM were on par at 4 locationsSRI and ICM were on par at 4 locations● At Kapurthala and Malan, normal method was At Kapurthala and Malan, normal method was

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

Pat

na

Alm

ora

Siru

gupp

a

Man

dya

Adh

uthu

rai

Jagd

alpu

r

Kar

jat

Ran

chi

Tita

bar

A'n

agar

Coi

mba

tore

Naw

agam

Var

anas

i

Chi

plim

a

Sab

our

Kap

urth

ala

Mal

an

Gra

in y

ield

(t/

ha)

NT SRI ICMSRI<NTSRI=NTSRI>NTSRI>ICM>NT

SRI=ICM

Multi-location Evaluation of SRIMulti-location Evaluation of SRI Results of Kharif 2005Results of Kharif 2005

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

◘ SRI and ICM were on par at 7 locations.SRI and ICM were on par at 7 locations.

◘ SRI performed better in southern and central IndiaSRI performed better in southern and central India◘ SRI recorded lower yields than normal planting at SRI recorded lower yields than normal planting at

4 locations (Karaikal, 4 locations (Karaikal, KapurthalaKapurthala, Pusa, , Pusa, MalanMalan))◘ Yield increase of SRI was higher in acidic soils as Yield increase of SRI was higher in acidic soils as

compared to alkaline soilscompared to alkaline soilsContd….

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

Locations - 27 Significant at 21 locations

SRI method promising at 13 out of 21 SRI method promising at 13 out of 21 locationslocationsICM comparable with SRI – 3 (KNP, UMM, MLN)ICM comparable with SRI – 3 (KNP, UMM, MLN)

Standard transplanting at 5 locationsStandard transplanting at 5 locations(MND, KRK, MRT, CHP, PDY)(MND, KRK, MRT, CHP, PDY)

Mean increase in grain yield across locations (21)Mean increase in grain yield across locations (21)

With SRI - 11%With SRI - 11% With ICM - With ICM - 8%8%

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

Across location (21)

0

1

2

34

5

6

7

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6

Treatments

Gra

in y

ield

(t/h

a)

0246810121416

(%) i

ncre

ase

Overall GY

increase (%)

Nursery dates are same

Transplanting dates are same

Performance of different methods of crop Performance of different methods of crop establishment in different regionsestablishment in different regions

Vigorous root system (right ) under SRI

SRIConventional

60 d old plants under SRI and normal TP

Collaborative research by DRR and Collaborative research by DRR and ICRISATICRISAT

Treatments were SRI, ECO-SRI (fully organic Treatments were SRI, ECO-SRI (fully organic methods) and normal transplantingmethods) and normal transplanting

Water supplied to each plot was measured Water supplied to each plot was measured with water meters with water meters

Nutrients added to all treatments were Nutrients added to all treatments were calculated on N basiscalculated on N basis

No pesticides were applied, as there was no No pesticides were applied, as there was no serious pest attackserious 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

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

SRI Normal

kg/c

u M

Gra

in y

ield

(q

/ha)

and

Cu

.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 stageStem borer damage at flowering stage

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

BPT 5204 DRRH2 Swarna

Per

cen

t w

hite

head

s

Eco-SRI

SRI

Conv

Root and soil nematodes

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

SRI SRI- Eco Conventional

Crop establishment methods

Popu

latio

nRN

SN

Nematode population as influenced by crop establishment methods

ConclusionsConclusions SRI practice is significantly superior to the SRI practice is significantly superior to the

conventional method in more than 50% conventional method in more than 50% locations indicating that it does not do well at locations indicating that it does not do well at all locations.all locations.

The performance of SRI was variety-specific, The performance of SRI was variety-specific, and hybrids performed better than varieties and hybrids performed better than varieties irrespective of date of sowing. irrespective of date of sowing.

The mean yield advantage observed under SRI The mean yield advantage observed under SRI over the conventional method varied from 10 over the conventional method varied from 10 to 16 per cent. to 16 per cent.

SRI performance was not satisfactory at Malan SRI performance was not satisfactory at Malan and Kapurthala.and Kapurthala.

Acidic soils responded better to SRI method. Acidic soils responded better to SRI method.

Future Thrust Areas for Research on SRIFuture Thrust Areas for Research on SRI

■ Varietal response to SRI and designing Varietal response to SRI and designing suitable plant typesuitable plant type

■ Identification of areas/zones most suited for Identification of areas/zones most suited for SRI methodSRI method

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

of machineryof machinery■ Detailed studies on soil health and microbial Detailed studies on soil health and microbial

activityactivity■ SRI vis-à-vis pest and disease incidence and SRI vis-à-vis pest and disease incidence and

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

analaysis.analaysis.