On-farm Evaluation of On-farm Evaluation of SRI in Tamiraparani SRI in Tamiraparani Command Area, Tamil Command Area, Tamil Nadu, India Nadu, India T.M. Thiyagarajan T.M. Thiyagarajan Dean Dean Agricultural College & Research Institute Agricultural College & Research Institute Killikulam, Vallanadu 628 252 Killikulam, Vallanadu 628 252 Tamil Nadu, India Tamil Nadu, India
69
Embed
0407 On-Farm Evaluation of SRI in Tamiraparani Command Area, Tamil Nadu, India
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
On-farm Evaluation of SRI in On-farm Evaluation of SRI in Tamiraparani Command Area, Tamiraparani Command Area,
Tamil Nadu, IndiaTamil Nadu, India
T.M. ThiyagarajanT.M. Thiyagarajan
DeanDeanAgricultural College & Research InstituteAgricultural College & Research Institute
in 2001 by TNAU, preceding firstextension to farmers in 2002
Two field experiments on SRI
conducted in India in Tamil Nadu
Location : Wetland experimental areas at Tamil Nadu
Agricultural University, Coimbatore
Experiment I : Wet season (Sept. 2001- Jan. 2002)
hybrid rice CORH-2 (125 d)
Experiment II : Dry season (Feb. - June 2002)
hybrid rice ADTRH-1 (115 d)
Crop establishment factors
P1 Conventional planting: 24-day-old seedlings; single seedling per hill.
P2 Modified SRI planting: in the wet season, 14-day-old single seedling per hill; in dry season, direct wet seeding, 2-3 seeds manually sown, but later thinned to single seedling per hill.
Irrigation factors
I1 Conventional irrigation: irrigating to 5 cm depth one day after disappearance of surface water.
I2 Limited irrigation after crop establishment: irrigating to 2 cm depth after development of surface cracks; in the wet season, limited irrigation up to flowering stage, followed by conventional irrigation during grain filling;
in dry season, limited irrigation till maturity.
Weed management factors
W1 Conventional weeding: in the wet season, weeds were removed by manual weeding (three times); in the dry season, pre-emergence application of herbicide Butachlor, followed by manual weeding (two times).
W2 Weeds mechanically incorporated with a rotary weeder, used crisscross (five times) during the growing season.
Nutrient management factors
N1 Recommended amount of N (150 kg ha-1), P2O (60 kg ha-1), K2O (90 kg ha-1) and Zn in splits applied.
N2 The same as N1, plus green manure (fresh weight 6.25 t ha-1).
Water used for the rice hybrid CORH2 (wet season)
Conventional planting
Modified planting
Conventional
irrigation
Limited irrigation
Conventional
irrigation
Limited irrigation
Total water irrigated (m3 ha-1)
11853 5205 13347 6699
Total number of irrigations
14 9 16 11
Cumulative rainfall during the crop period (m3 ha-1)
3560 3560 3560 3560
Total water used (m3 ha-1)
15143 8765 16907 10259
Water used for the rice hybrid ADTRH1 (dry season)
Conventional planting
Modified SRI planting
Conventional
irrigation
Limited irrigation
Conventional
irrigation
Limited irrigation
Total water irrigated (m3 ha-1)
13406 6213 16634 8419
Total number of irrigations
21 15 25 18
Cumulative rainfall during the crop period (m3 ha-1)
560 560 560 560
Total water used (m3 ha-1)
13966 6773 17194 8979
Grain yield (kg ha-1) of rice hybrid CORH 2 under conventional and SRI
Factors
Conventional seedlings Younger seedlings
Mean Mean Conventional irrigation
Water saving
irrigation
Conventional irrigation
Water saving
irrigation
Weeds removed
N16151 6199 6841 6268 6365
6076N2 6000 6195 5893 5059 5787
Weeds incorporated
N16008 6908 6838 6707 6615
6737N2 6343 6349 7612 7126 6858
Mean 6126 6413 6796 6290
Mean 6269 6543
Factors
Conventional seedlings Direct Seeded
Mean Mean Conventional irrigation
Water saving
irrigation
Conventional irrigation
Water saving irrigation
Weeds removed
N1 6009 5694 6682 6366
6187
6226
N2 6261 5809 6600 6391
6265
Weeds incorporated
N1 6240 6014 6890 6400
6386
6436
N2 6311 6080 6941 6612
6486
Mean 6205 5899 6778 6442
Mean 6052 6610
Grain yield (kg ha-1) of rice hybrid ADTRH 1 under conventional and SRI
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Conventional Planting +Coventional Irrigation
Conventional Planting +Limited Irrigation
Modif ied Planting +Conventional Irrigation
Modif ied Planting +Limited Irrigation
Wat
er P
rod
uct
ivit
y (k
g m
-3)
Wet Season
Dry Season
Labour Productivity (US$)
Management options
Wet season
Dry season
Conventional 3.29 3.46
Conventional planting
Limited irrigation
Conventional weeding
3.55 3.39
Modified planting
Conventional irrigation
Mechanical weeding
4.71 3.85
SRI 4.64 3.91
SRI resulted in higher LAI during grain filling period
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Days after transplanting
Leaf
are
a in
dex
Conventionalirrigation
Modified SRIirrigation
SRI method of planting resulted in higher root volume at panicle initiation, flowering and grain filling stages
0
20
40
60
80
AT PI FF GF
Crop growth stages
Roo
t vol
ume
( cc
pla
nt-1
)
Conventional planting
Modif ied SRI planting
Mechanical weedingConventional weeding
Root growth
Microbial population in rice rhizosphere
Microorganism Conventional SRI
Total bacteria 88 x 106 105 x 106
Azospirillum 8 x 105 31 x 105
Azotobacter 39 x 103 66 x 103
Phosphobacteria 33 x 103 59 x 103
Effect of SRI on crop physiology Wet season (CORH2) Dry season (ADTRH1)
Conventional SRI Conventional SRI
Total Chlorophyll (mg g-1)
2.76 3.20 2.60 3.13
Soluble protein (mg g-1)
8.35 12.62 10.25 11.95
Nitrate reductase (mg NO2g-1 h-1)
12.42 18.11 11.74 16.70
Root CEC (mg 100g-1)
- - 8.40 11.23Cytokinin (pmol g-1)
- - 56.77 72.47
Insects and their damage / population
SRI cultivation
(Mean ± SE)
Conventional cultivation
(Mean ± SE)
t value
Cut worm(% damaged leaves
per seedling)
0.0 ± 0.0
(0.0)
20.4 ± 4.8
(19.1)
16.1**
Thrips(per seedling)
0.5 ± 0.2
(0.9)
6.1 ± 0.5
(2.5)
19.3**
Green leaf hopper
(per seedling)
0.1 ± 0.0
(0.8)
0.4 ± 0.1
(0.9)
14.8**
BPH(per seedling)
0.0 ± 0.0
(0.0)
0.2 ± 0.0
(0.8)
11.5**
Whorl maggot(% damaged leaves
per seedling)
0.8 ± 0.2
(0.9)
9.3 ± 2.6
(9.1)
12.5**
Pest abundance in nursery
Figures in parentheses are transformed values ** significant difference (P<0.001)
Insects and their damage / population
SRI cultivation(Mean ± SE)
Conventional cultivation(Mean ± SE)
t value
Whorl maggot(% damaged leaves
per hill)
17.9 ± 1.9
(18.0)
23.2 ± 2.0
(19.1)
6.6**
Thrips(per hill)
6.6 ± 0.1
(2.2)
20.2 ± 2.0
(4.1)
12.2**
Green leaf hopper(per hill)
0.6 ± 0.1
(1.0)
1.1 ± 0.2
(1.2)
10.7**
BPH(per hill)
1.1 ± 0.2
(1.2)
2.7 ± 0.2
(1.8)
14.4**
Whorl maggot(% truncated leaves
per hill)
5.6 ± 1.8
(5.9)
8.8 ± 1.4
(9.1)
4.5**
Pest abundance in main field
Figures in parentheses are transformed values ** significant difference (P<0.001)
Insects and their damage / population
SRI cultivation(Mean ± SE)
Conventional cultivation(Mean ± SE)
t value
Gall midge(% silver shoot
per hill)
5.0 ± 1.2
(6.8)
11.0 ± 1.5
(19.1)
9.3**
Stem borers(deadheart/white
ear per hill)
11.7 ± 1.3
(15.5)
7.3 ± 1.0
(10.0)
10.1**
Leaf folder(scraped leaves
per hill)
20.3 ± 1.6
(21.7)
6.5 ± 1.0
(11.8)
15.4**
Earhead bug(No. per hill)
0.9 ± 0.1
(1.1)
0.9 ± 0.1
(1.1)
0.4NS
Pest abundance in main field
Figures in parentheses are transformed values
** significant difference (P<0.001)
NS : not significant
Prospects
SRI offers scope for considerable reduction in water use, seed requirements, labour for weeding, with concurrent increase in yield
Evaluation in Farmers’ Fields
The Government of Tamil Nadu approved US$ 30,000 to conduct Adaptive Research Trials (ART) in 100 farmers’ fields in Tamiraparani River Command area in 2003-2004