- 1. What is Being Learned about the System of Rice
Intensification (SRI)in China and Other Countries Norman Uphoff,
CIIFAD CAWG-MOIST Seminar, Sept. 15, 2004
2. 3. Message: For Centuries, Even Millennia, We Have Been
ABUSING and MISTREATING the Rice Plant
- We have FLOODED it drowning its roots
- We have CROWDED it inhibiting thegrowth potentialof its canopy
and roots
- Now we apply various FERTILIZERS and chemical BIOCIDES
affecting thesoil biotawhich providevaluable servicesto plants:N
fixation, P solubilization, protection against diseases and abiotic
stresses, etc.
4. The System of Rice Intensification
- Evolved in Madagascar over 20 years byFr. Henri de Laulani,
S.J. working with farmers, observing, doing experiments, also
having some luck in 1983-84 season
- SRI is now spreading in countries around the world: positive
results now seen in 21
- SRI is a set ofprinciples and insightsthat when translated into
certainpracticescanchange the growing environment of riceto get
healthier, more productive plants
5. Canopy of an individual rice plant grown under SRI
conditions; usually this variety (Swarna) is shy-tillering Andhra
Pradesh, India, rabi season, 2003-04 6. Roots of a single rice
plant (MTU 1071)grown at Agricultural Research Station Maruteru,
AP, India, kharif 2003 7. SRI field in Sri Lanka -- yield of 13
t/ha with panicles having 400+ grains 8. CFA Camilo Cienfuegos,
Cuba 14 t/ha -- Variety Los Palacios 9 9. SRI in Summary :
- A set of principles/methods that getmore productivePHENOTYPES
fromany existing GENOTYPEof rice.
- SRIchanges the managementofplants, soil, water, and
nutrientsto
- (a) induce greater ROOT growth and
- (b) nurturemore abundant and diversepopulations of SOIL
BIOTA
10. Plant Physical Structure andLight Intensity Distributionat
Heading Stage (CNRRI Research --Tao et al. 2002) 11. Dry Matter
Accumulation between SRI and Control (CK) Practices(kg/ha) at
Maturity (Zheng et al., SAAS, 2003) 12. Table 2. Different sizes of
the leaf blade (cm) with SRI practices (Zheng et al., SAAS, 2003)
11.98 15.95 7.96 18.49 19.11 14.97 9.79 14.59 % 0.20 8.86 0.16 9.00
0.30 9.29 0.14 8.18 +/- 1.67 55.56 2.01 48.67 1.57 62.03 1.43 56.07
CK 1.87 64.41 2.17 57.67 1.87 71.32 1.57 64.25 SRI Width Length
Width Length Width Length Width Length Average Flag leaf 2 ndleaf 3
rdleaf Prac-tice 13. Figure 1. Change of leaf area index (LAI)
during growth cycle (Zheng et al., 2003) 14. Different P aradigmsof
Production
- The GREEN REVOLUTIONparadigm:
- (a) Change thegenetic potentialof plants, and
- (b) Increase the use ofexternal inputs-- more water,
fertilizer, insecticides, etc.
- SRI changes variousmanagement practices for plants, soil, water
and nutrients, which:
- (A) Promotethe growth of root systems , and
- (B) Increase theabundance and diversityof
- (C ) Reducewater use and costs of production
15. Greatest Benefit Is notYIELD
- This can vary, often widely; for farmers,profitabilityis more
important outcome
- From societys perspective, what is most important isfactor
productivity kg of rice perland, labor, capital, and water!
- No question any longer ofwhetherSRI methods give higher
yields/productivity but ratherhow to explainthese changes
- For some things, we haveevidence ; for others,strong
hypothesesfrom literature
16. What Are the Negatives?
- Surprisingly few, but main one islabor intensity at least
initially
- This is receding as a constraint, mostlya problem for first few
weeks or seasons
-
- Cambodian evaluation showed no increase (305 vs. 302 hrs/ha) --
and better timing
-
- IWMI showed labor productivity higher by 50-62%, with just
partial use of SRI method
-
- Farmer innovation is helping to reduce labor requirements; more
innovations will come
17. Roller-marker devised by Lakshmana Reddy, East Godavari, AP,
India, to save time in transplanting operations; his yield in
2003-04 rabi season was 16.2 t/ha paddy (dry weight) 18. 4-row
weeder designed by Gopal Swaminathan, Thanjavur, TN, India 19.
Seeder Developed in Cuba 20. What Are the Negatives?
- Less tractable iswater control although this can often be
solved by infrastructure or organization SRI makes changespay
-
- Important for best results but may not bea barrier (R. Bunch
report from Cambodia)
- Requirement offarmer learning and skill is a benefit as well as
a cost
- Disadoptionhas been reported as a problem only in
Madagascar(e.g. Cambodia)
- Nematodescan be a problem(e.g., Thailand)
21. Report from China, 2004
- Several SRI introductionsconcurrently:
- Dec. 1998 seminars atCAU and NAU ; first NAU field trials in
1999 (9.2-10.5 t/ha)
- Article on inILEIA journal(Dec. 1998) was read
byCNRRIscientist, tried 1999
- Director ofCNHRRDCattendedIRRI seminar, Feb. 1999; and/or got
SRI paper from June 2000 seminar at Cornell
- 3-S systemwas developed separately in1991-96, field tested by
1999 byNEAU
22. Chinese Adaptations
- Triangular systemof planting Liu Zhibin, Meishan, Sich. got16
t/ha and award from Prov. DOA
- 3-S system uses 45 d seedlings because of cold
temperatures;single seedlings planted with wide spacing (10,000
plants/mou), less water, more organic matter; but no active soil
aeration -- use herbicides
23. Normal 3-S 24. Seedlings are started at the end of winter in
plastic greenhouses 25. Seedling for transplanting -- and resulting
plant 26.
Transplanting 27. Wide Spacing of Plants
- Average spacing 15 cm (13-17 cm) by 40 cm (37-43 cm), 1-2 per
hill
28. Vegetative Growth Vigorous tillering 29. Vigorous roots 30.
3-S roots on right 31. . 131 3-S Field with Variety 131 32. 3-S has
good grain quality 33. Effects of Different Treatments within 3-S
System -- 9,691.5 26.0 90.0 92.0 450 Kongyu 131 +6.8% 10,351.5 25.6
78.0 108.0 480 Dongnong 9914 +24.0% 12,020.5 27.3 90.0 131.0 375
Xixuyan 1 +28.6% 12,471.0 29.0 85.0 136.0 371 Dongnong 423
VARIETIES + 28.5% 10,030.5 25.8 83.0 106.8 438.6 3-S METHOD --
7,808.5 24.8 83.1 70.1 540.5 Control (CK) Change Yield (t/ha)
1000-grain wt (g) Seed set (%) Grains/ paniclePanicles/m 2 34.
Effects of Different Treatments within 3-S System +3.2% 10,323.4
25.7 79.8 141.0 357.0 6-03-04 +20.1% 11,967.5 25.9 81.5 145.0 391.0
5-21-04 -- 9,960.8 25.4 79.6 138.0 357.0 5-07-04 Panicles/m 2
TRANSPL. DATE +15.4% 11,080.9 24.03 89.5 120.2 21.7 1/hill +6.0%
10,174.2 22.77 88.0 132.5 19.6 2/hill -- 9,601.4 22.09 82.0 109.2
23.2 3/hill Panicles/ hill PLANTS/ HILL + 5.8% 11,544.7 25.2 77.0
133.7 445.1 43x14 cm -- 10,913.1 25.1 77.5 127.5 440.1 36x17 cm
Change Yield (t/ha) 1000-gr weight (g) Seed set (%) Grains/ panicle
Panicles/m 2 DENSITY: SPACING 35. Other Chinese Adaptations
- Plastic mulchwith an upland version of SRI in Sichuan: 8 t/ha,
less labor: gives weed control, conserves moisture, also better
soil temperature; useplastic trays
- Intercropping potatoes, rape, or mushrooms are good alternating
crops
- In general:using 20-25d plants and herbicide for weed control,
withsingle seedlings widely spaced ,reduced waterandmore organic
matter ; these methods givehigher yields , often withless
labor
36. Chinese Results, 2004
- HeilongjiongProvince: 10 t/ha in 2004 -- 44,000 ha under 3-S
system
- GuizhouProvince: set high-altitude record in 2003 with SRI 12.9
t/ha
- ZhejiangProvince, Tian Tai County: 10.8 t/ha in 2003; 11.5-12
t/ha in 2004 with 20 ha (300 mu), up to 13.5 t/ha
-
- Farmer experimentation is occurring
37. SRI demonstration fields in Tien Tai, Zhejiang, China 38.
Prof. Zhu Defeng, CNRRI, in field visit to SRI fields in Tian Tai,
Zhejiang 39. Nie Fuqiu, Bu Tou village, Tian Tai, Zhejiang,
describing his experiments within SRI system 40. Evaluation of SRI
by CAU Xinsheng Village, Dongxi Township, Jianyang County, August
2004
- 2003 7 farmers used SRI (SAAS)
- 2004 398 farmers used SRI (65%)
- 2003 SRI plot size average 0.07 mu
- 2004 SRI plot size average 0.99 mu
- 86.6% of SRI farmers (65/75) said they would expand their SRI
area next yearor keep their whole rice area under SRI
41. Xinsheng Village, Dongxi Township [N = 75] (20% sample of
all users) RICE YIELD (kg/mu) 2002 2003* 2004
Standard403.73297.88375.77 Methods SRI--439.87507.16
----------------------------------------------------------- SRI
Increase (%) +46.6%+34.8%*Drought year[Water saving/mu = 43.2%] 42.
Other Results Reported, 2004 Sichuan Province 60+ trials showed
10.5 t/ha average vs. 7.5 t/ha usual (double usual increase with
hybrid rice) SAU 11.75 t/ha;Leshan 12.1 t/ha (10 300 mu);Meishan
13.4 t/ha;SAASfield demonstration (observed) 11.64 t/ha Hunan
Province 13.5 t/ha in field demonstration of CNHRRD (SRI) Yunnan
Province 18 t/ha CNRRI trial20.4 t/ha certified by Dept of
S&T/SAU 43. Liu Zhibin, Meishan Inst. of Science &
Technology, in raised-bed,no-till SRI field with certified yield of
13.4 t/ha 44. Biomass applied to SRI plots in Meishan, China 45.
MEASURED DIFFERENCES IN GRAIN QUALITY CharacteristicSRI (3
spacings)ConventionalDiff. Paper by Prof. Ma Jun, Sichuan
Agricultural University, presented at 10th conference on Theory and
Practice for High-Quality, High-Yielding Rice in China, Haerbin,
8/2004 + 17.5 38.87 - 39.99 41.81 - 50.84 Head milled rice (%) +
16.1 41.54 - 51.46 53.58 - 54.41 Milled rice outturn (%) - 65.7
6.74 - 7.17 1.02 - 4.04 General chalkiness (%) - 30.7 39.89 - 41.07
23.62 - 32.47 Chalky kernels (%) 46. SRI Is not a Niche
Innovation
- (Dobermann,Agricultural Systems , 2004)
- Nor is itVoodoo Science[ Cold Fusion, UFOs]
- (Cassman & Sinclair,ACSSA , 2004)
- Sheehy et al. conclude inField Crops Research(2004):
- [SRI] has no major role in improving
- rice production generally
- This is not a valid conclusion, though presentedas being more
scientific than our conclusions
- SRI is not finished yet still evolving, still improving can
give seminar onexplanations , already supported or justifiably
hypothesized
47. The SRI Effect Is Not Magic
- It should and can be explainable in terms of relationships that
are consistent with what is known about rice scientifically and
about rices interactions with its environment (G x E
interaction)
- A number of possible explanations have surfaced in recent
years; not all need to be correct, since there are so many
- We think some combination of the following can account for SRI
performance
48. 1 stExplanation? Above-Ground Environment
- Create the edge effect for the whole field
- Avoid edge effect only for measurement;promote it agronomically
(triangle spacing)
- Too-close spacing affectsphotosynthesiswithin canopy:
measurements at AARD (Sukamandi, Indonesia) found that with normal
spacing,lower leaveswere being subsidized by the upper leaves;
wider spacing enableswhole plantto contribute
49. 2nd Explanation? Nitrogen Provision
- Rice yields increased 40-60% whensame amountof Nprovided
equallyin both NO 3 andNH 4forms vs. whenallN is provided as NH 4
(Kronzucker et al., 1998)
- BNF increases greatly withalternated aerobic/anaerobic
conditions (Magdoffand Bouldin,Plant and Soil , 1970)
- Contributions ofprotozoato N supply
- Also contributions fromendophytes
50. 51. 3rd Explanation?Phosphorus Solubilization
- This nutrient is often limiting factor, but
- Large amounts of P in soil (90-95%) are present in unavailable
form
- Alternating wetting and drying of soilincreased P in soil
solution by 85-1900%compared with soils just wet or just dry(Turner
and Haygarth,Nature , May 2001)
- Aerobic bacteria acquire P from unavailable sources during dry
phase; during wet phase theylyse and release P into the soil
solution
52. 4 thExplanation?Mycorrhizal Fungi
- 90+% of terrestrial plants derive benefits from and even depend
on mycorrhizal associations(infections)
- Mycorrhizal hyphae extend into soil and expand volume
accessible to the plant by10-100x ,acquiringwater, P and other
nutrients ; they also provide protective/other services to
plants
- Flooded riceforgoes these benefits
53. 5 thExplanation? Phytohormones
- Aerobic bacteria and fungi produceauxins, cytokinins,
gibberellins , etc. in the rhizosphere
- Huge literature has documented effects of microbially-produced
phytohormones (e.g., Frankenberger and Arshad, 1995)
- Root growth in SRI plants probably isnot due just to
physiological processeswithin the plants --stimulated by aerobic
microorganisms?Roots are key to SRI
54. Single Cambodian rice plant transplanted at 10 days 55. Cuba
-- Variety VN 2084 (Bolito) -- 52DAP 56. Dry Matter Distribution of
Roots in SRI and Conventionally-Grown Plants at Heading Stage(CNRRI
research: Tao et al. 2002) Root dry weight (g) 57. Root Oxygenation
Ability with SRIvs. Conventionally-Grown Rice Research done at
Nanjing Agricultural University, Wuxianggeng 9 variety (Wang et al.
2002) 58. Table 13: Root Length Density (cm. cm -3 ) under SRI,
Modern (SRA) and Conventional Practice (from Barison, 2002) Results
from replicated on-station trials 0.06 0.13 0.36 1.19 1.28 4.11
Conventional practice 0.07 0.15 0.31 0.55 0.85 3.24 SRAwithout
fertilization 0.09 0.18 0.34 0.65 0.99 3.73 SRAwith NPK and urea
0.20 0.25 0.32 0.57 0.71 3.33 SRI-- without compost 0.23 0.30 0.33
0.61 0.75 3.65 SRI--with compost 40-50 30-40 20-30 10-20 5-10 0-5
Soil layers (cm) Treatments 59. Figure 8: Linear regression
relationship between N uptakeand grain yield for SRI
andconventional methods,using QUEFTS modeling (from Barison,
2002)Results are from on-farm comparisons (N = 108) 60. Figure 9:
Estimation of balanced N uptake for given a grain yield for rice
plants withthe SRI and conventional systems,using QUEFTS modeling
(same for P and K) (Barison, 2002) Results are from on-farm
comparisons (N = 108) 61. What Are Problems for SRI?
- Labor Requirements initially more labor-intensive --
25-50%
- As farmers gain skill & experience, this is reduced, and
SRI can even becomelabor-saving
- GTZ evaluation of SRI in Cambodia: no difference in labor
requirements (305 vs. 302 hrs/ha) better timing
- CEDAC evaluation of 120 farmers who have done SRI for 3 years:
55% said easier; only 18% said more difficult
62. Adjustable-width weeder designed by Hari R., Moramanga,
Madagascar (from IRRI design) 63. Labor-Saving Methods ofCrop
Establishment
- Tray methods being developedin China, also in Cuba
- Sowing/Thinning methods started in India and Sri Lanka
broadcasting pregerminated seed (25 kg/ha) or young seedlings --
thenweed as usual , creating wide spacing with a square
pattern(sacrifice seed for labor)
64. What Are Problems for SRI?
- 2.Water Control needed to get the best results with SRI
methods
- This constraint but can be reduced by investment in physical
facilities or in organization and management
- Most rice-growing countries will need toreduce the allocations
of water for rice sectorin coming yrs
- SRI can helpreduce water demand
65. Emerging Benefits of SRI?
- 1. Resistance toAbiotic Stressesclimate becoming more extreme
and more unpredictable
- Observed resistance todrought (Sri Lanka, several years)
,hurricane (Sichuan Sept. 2002) ,typhoon (AP, India Dec. 2003)
,cold spell (AP, India February 2004)
- Resistance tolodgingdue to roots?
66. Two rice fields in Sri Lanka -- same variety, same
irrigation system, andsame drought: conventional methods (left),
SRI (right) 67. Emerging Benefits of SRI?
- 2. Resistance toPests and Diseases widely reported by farmers
probably reflecting theprotective servicesof soil
microorganisms
- 3. HigherMilling Outturn ~ 15%:SRI paddy raises outturn in
Indiafrom 66 to 75%; in Cuba, from 60 to 68-71%; adds to paddy
yield
- Fewerunfilled grains(less chaff)
- Fewerbroken grains(less shattering)
68. Emerging Benefits of SRI?
- 4. HigherNutritional Valueof Rice?
- SRI can be organic rice that is free from agrochemical
residues
- Possibly SRI has higher nutritional quality in terms
ofmicronutrients needs to be evaluated scientifically
- Larger root system gives higher grain weight and greater grain
densityalso great nutrient density?
69. Emerging Benefits of SRI?
- 5. Conservation of RiceBiodiversity ?
- Highest SRI yields come with HYVs and hybrids (all SRI yields
>15 t/ha)
- Buttraditional/local varietiesrespond very well to SRI
practice, can produce yields of 6-10 t/ha, and even more
- Traditional rices receivehigher price
- Higher SRI yields make them popular
- Get anorganic premiumfor export?
70. 71. LESSCAN PRODUCEMORE
- byutilizingbiological potentials & processes
- Smaller, younger seedlings becomelarger, more productive mature
plants
- Fewer plants per hill and per m 2will givehigher yieldif used
with other SRI practices
- Half as much water producesmore rice because aerobic soil
conditions are better
- Greater outputis possiblewith use of
- fewer or evenno external/chemical inputs
- Changes in management practices givedifferent phenotypes
fromrice genomes
72. SRI STILL RAISESMORE QUESTIONSTHAN WE HAVE ANSWERS FOR
- This shouldplease scientistslot of interesting new work
ahead
- We are linking with researchers and practioners around the
world
- Two-pronged strategy: researchand practice proceeding in
tandem-- walking on both legs as Mao advised
73. SRI Experience CouldHelp to Us to Improve21 stCentury
Agriculture
- Nurturing of roots and soil biota is relevant for much of
agriculture
- We need an agriculture that is
-
- Less thirsty-- better roots will help
-
- Less dependent on fossil-fuel energysources -- fertilizer,
mechanization
-
- Less dependent on agrochemicals--for sake of soil & water
quality, for health
74. To raise world rice productionby 60% by 2030, we will need
totriple N fertilizer applications(Cassman et al., 1998)
- Who believes this isfeasible ?
- Who believes this isdesirable ?
- Who believes this iseconomically possible ?
- Who believes this isenvironmentally sustainable ?SRI shows
alternative way
75. 76. 77. SRI Data from Sri Lanka
- Yields(tons/ha) 8.0 4.2+88%
- Market price(Rs/ton) 1,500 1,300 +15%
- Total cash cost(Rs/ha)18,000 22,000-18%
- Gross returns(Rs/ha) 120,000 58,500+105%
- Net profit(Rs/ha) 102,000 36,500+180%
- Family labor earnings Increased with SRI
- Data from Dr. Aldas Janaiah, IRRI agric. economist, 1999-2002;
now at Indira Gandhi Development Research Institute in Mumbai;
based on interviews conducted with 30 SRI farmers in Sri Lanka,
October, 2002
78. IWMI Data from Sri Lanka
- IWMI Evaluation (Namara, Weligamage, Barker 2003)
- 60 SRI and 60 non-SRI farmers randomly selected:
- YIELD-- increased by 50% on average(not doing full SRI)
- WATER PRODUCTIVITY-- increased by 90%
- COST OF PRODUCTION(Rs./kg) -- lower by 111-209% with family
labor, 17-27%at standard wage rate
- LABOR PRODUCTIVITY(kg/hr) -- up 50% in yala (dry) season, up
62% in maha (wet) season
- PROFITABILITY-- increased by 83-206%, depending on the wage
assumed (family labor vs. paid labor)
- RISK REDUCTION-- conventional farmers had net losses in 28% of
seasons, SRI farmers in only 4%
79. 80. SRI CONCEPTS CAN BE EXTENDED TOUPLAND PRODUCTION Results
of trials (N=20) by Philippine NGO, Broader Initiatives for Negros
Development,withAzucenalocal variety (4,000 m 2area) --usingmulchas
main innovation, not young plants 81. ROOT SYSTEM PROMOTION
- SRI is becoming referred to in India (AP) as the root
revolution -- key factor
- Roots benefit from wider plant spacing, aerated soil, more soil
organic matter --from bothcompostandroot exudation
- Roots are supported by more abundant and diversified
populations ofsoil biota -- bacteria and viruses produce PGRs
- Plants aretwo-way streets , coevolvedw/ microorganisms,
dependent on them
82. Root Research Reported byDr. Ana Primavesi (1980)
- Shoot and root growth of maize (in g)grown in hydroponic
solutions (14 days), with varying nutrient concentrations
- 2% concentration when4356changed every other day
83. Contribution of SOIL MICROBIAL PROCESSES
- Microbial activity is known to be crucial factor in soil
fertility
- The microbial flora causes a large number of biochemical
changes in the soil thatlargely determine the fertility of the
soil. (DeDatta,1981, p. 60, emphasis added)
84. Bacteria, funguses, protozoa, amoeba, actinomycetes,
etc.
- Decompose organic matter , making nutrients available
- Acquire nutrients otherwise unavailable to plant roots
- Improve soil structure and health -- water retention, soil
aggregation, aeration, pathogen control, etc.
85. 86. 87. Effect of Young Seedlings
- @ AnjomakelyClay Soil Loam Soil
- AS / 8 /3/ Comp 6.86 3.61
- SS/ 8/ 1 / Comp 7.70 4.07
- AS / 8 / 1 /NPK 8.77 5.00
- AS / 8 / 1 / Comp 10.35 6.39
- Note: All of these averages are for 6 replicated trials
88. Effects of SRI vs. Conventional Practices Comparing Varietal
and Soil Differences