1039 Opportunities Created by the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) for Improvements in Soil, Water & Environmental Quality

Opportunities Created by the System of Rice

Intensification (SRI) for Improvements in Soil, Water

& Environmental Quality  

Norman Uphoff, Cornell University

Workshop - July 21 - on Carbon Markets: Expanding Opportunities & Valuing Co-Benefits, organized by the Soil & Water Conservation Society and the National

Wildlife Federation

The System of Rice Intensification (SRI)- developed in Madagascar in the 1980s –modifies standard rice-growing practices. By changing the management of plants, soil, water, and nutrients, SRI methods:(a) Support larger, better-functioning root systems, and (b) Promote the abundance, diversity and activity of beneficial soil biota.

Such agroecological management improves the growing environment (E) to yield a better phenotype (P) from any genotype (G)

Examples of phenotypical change: Rice plant

grown from single seed in

Takeo province CAMBODIA

CUBA: Farmer showing two rice plants of same

age (52 d) and same variety (VN 2084); both

are same genotype

INDONESIA:

Single SRI rice plant(variety: Cv. Ciherang)

with 223 fertile tillers

Sampoerna CSR Program,

Malang, E. Java, 2009

IRAQ: Comparison trials at Al-Mishkhab Rice Research Station, Najaf, same varieties, SRI management on left, standard

management on right

IRAN: SRI roots and normal

(flooded) roots: note difference in color as well as size

Comparison picture sent

by Haraz Technology Research Center, Amol,

Mazandaran

BHUTAN: Report on SRI in Deorali Geog, 2009

Sangay Dorji, Jr. Extension Agent, Deorali Geog, Dagana

Standard practice 3.6 t/ha SRI @ 25x25cm 9.5 t/ha

SRI random spacing 6.0 t/ha SRI @ 30x30cm 10.0 t/ha

2008: 6 farmers got SRI yields of 10.1 t/ha vs. 5.4 t/ha regular

2009: 42 farmers got SRI yields of 9.3 t/ha vs. 5.6 t/ha regular

2nd-year SRI farmers got 13.3 t/ha vs. 5.6 t/ha1st-year SRI farmers got 8.7 t/ha vs. 5.5 t/ha

AFGHANISTAN: 2009 Report from

Aga Khan Foundation: Baghlan Province

MALI: Farmer in the Timbuktu

region showing the difference

between regular and SRI rice

plants --

2007: SRI yield was 8.98 t/ha

--

Program managed by Africare and

supported by the Better U

Foundation

  SRI ControlFarmer Practice

Yield t/ha* 9.1 5.49 4.86Standard Error (SE) 0.24 0.27 0.18% Change compared to Control + 66 100 - 11% Change compared to Farmer Practice

+ 87 + 13 100

Number of Farmers

53 53 60

• * adjusted to 14% grain moisture content

MALI: 2008 results, rice grain yields for SRI plots, control plots, and

farmer-practice plots, Goundam, Timbuktu region

SRI shows the power of E in the equation:

P = ƒx [G x E] – How do we improve E ?1. Transplant young seedlings to preserve their growth

potential (altho direct seeding is becoming an option)

2. Avoid trauma to the roots -- transplant quickly and shallow, not inverting root tips, which halts growth

3. Give plants wide spacing -- one plant per hill and in square pattern to achieve “edge effect” everywhere

4. Keep paddy soil moist but unflooded -- soil should be mostly aerobic -- never continuously saturated

5. Actively aerate the soil -- as much as possible6. Enhance soil organic matter as much as possible

These practices stimulate root growth and the abundance and diversity of soil biota – raising productivity of land, labor, capital and water

Various Benefits from SRI Practices:

1. Increased yield – 50-100%, and often even more2. Saving of water – rice production is feasible with

less water; also rainfed versions are developing3. Resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses – less

damage from pests and diseases and from extremes (either way) in rainfall or temperature

4. Shorter crop cycle – crop matures in 1-3 weeks less time; so less exposure to climate and pest hazards

5. Higher milling outturn – about 15% more rice per bushel of paddy, due to less chaff, less breakage

6. Reductions in labor requirements – incentive for adoption in China and India; mechanization starting

7. Lower costs of production – this increases farmer incomes by more than the yield increase; this adds to the incentive to adopt agroecological management

Environmental Benefits1. Reduced water requirements – less pressure on

ecosystems that are in competition with food and agriculture; higher crop water-use efficiency

2. Higher land productivity – reduce pressures for expansion of arable area to feed our population

3. Less use of inorganic fertilizer – reactive N is ‘the third major threat to our planet after biodiversity loss and climate change’ (John Lawton, former chief executive, UK National Envir. Research Council)

4. Less reliance on agrochemicals for crop protection - this should enhance both soil and water quality

5. Buffering the effects of climate change – drought, storms (no lodging), cold temperatures, etc.

6. Possible reduction in greenhouse gases (GHG) – reduced CH4 apparently without offsetting N2O

More productive SRI phenotypes give higher water-use efficiency as reflected in the ratio of photosynthesis to transpiration:

For each 1 millimol of water lost by transpiration:In SRI plants, 3.6 millimols of CO2 are fixed

In RMP plants, 1.6 millimols of CO2 are fixed

Climate change makes this increasingly

important‘An assessment of physiological effects of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) compared with recommended

rice cultivation practices in India,’ A.K. Thakur, N. Uphoff and E. Antony

Experimental Agriculture, 46(1), 77-98 (2010)

ParametersCultivation method

SRI RMP SRI % LSD.05

Total chlorophyll (mg g-1FW)

3.37 (0.17)

2.58 (0.21)

+30 0.11

Ratio of chlorophyll a/b 2.32 (0.28)

1.90 (0.37)

+22 0.29

Transpiration (m mol m-2 s-1)

6.41 (0.43)

7.59 (0.33)

-16 0.27

Net photosynthetic rate (μ mol m-2 s-1)

23.15 (3.17)

12.23 (2.02)

+89 1.64

Stomatal conductance (m mol m-2 s-1)

422.73 (34.35)

493.93 (35.93)

-15 30.12

Internal CO2 concentration (ppm)

292.6 (16.64)

347.0 (19.74)

-16 11.1

Comparison of chlorophyll content, transpiration rate, net photosynthetic rate,

stomatal conductance, and internal CO2 concentration in SRI and RMP

Standard deviations are given in parentheses [N = 15]

Other Benefits from Changes in Practices

1. Water saving – major concern in many places, also now have ‘rainfed’ version with similar results

2. Greater resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses – less damage from pests and diseases, drought, typhoons, flooding, cold spells [discuss tomorrow]

3. Shorter crop cycle – same varieties are harvested by 1-3 weeks sooner, save water, less crop risk

4. High milling output – by about 15%, due to fewer unfilled grains (less chaff) and fewer broken grains

5. Reductions in labor requirements – widely reported incentive for changing practices in India and China; also, mechanization is being introduced many places

6. Reductions in costs of production – greater farmer income and profitability, also health benefits

SRI LANKA: Rice fields 3 weeks after irrigation was stopped; conventionally-grown field on left, and SRI field on

right

VIETNAM: Dông Trù village,Hanoi province,

after typhoon

SRI field andrice plant on left;

Conventional field and plant on right

Period Period Mean Mean max. max.

temp. temp. 00CC

Mean Mean min. min.

temp. temp. 00C C

No. of No. of sunshine sunshine

hrshrs

1 – 151 – 15 NovNov 27.727.7 19.219.2 4.94.9

16–3016–30 Nov Nov 29.629.6 17.917.9 7.57.5

1 – 15 Dec1 – 15 Dec 29.129.1 14.614.6 8.68.6

16–31 Dec 16–31 Dec 28.128.1 12.212.2** 8.68.6

INDIA: Meteorological and yield data from ANGRAU IPM evaluation, Andhra Pradesh,

2006

SeasonSeason Normal (t/ha)Normal (t/ha) SRI (t/ha)SRI (t/ha)

Rabi 2005-06Rabi 2005-06 2.25 2.25 3.473.47

Kharif 2006Kharif 2006 0.21*0.21* 4.164.16

* Low yield was due to cold injury for plants (see above)

*Sudden drop in min. temp. during 16–21 Dec. (9.2-9.8oC for 5 days)

METHANE EMISSIONS

Initial results reported by IPB Soil Biotechnology Laboratory

from GHG studies with SRI management in Indonesia

N2O EMISSIONS

Yan, X., H. Akiyama, K. Yagi and H. Akomoto. ‘Global estimations of the inventory and

mitigation potential of methane emissions from rice cultivation conducted using the 2006

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines.’ Global Biochemical Cycles, (2009)

“We estimated that if all of the continuously flooded rice fields were drained at least once during the growing season, the CH4

emissions would be reduced by 4.1 Tg a-1 . Furthermore, we estimated that applying rice straw off-season wherever and

whenever possible would result in a further reduction in emissions of 4.1 Tg a-1 globally. … if both of these mitigation

options were adopted, the global CH4 emission from rice paddies could be reduced by 7.6 Tg a-1.

Although draining continuously flooded rice fields may lead to an increase in nitrous oxide (N2O) emission, the global warming potential resulting from this increase is

negligible when compared to the reduction in global warming potential that would result from the CH4

reduction associated with draining the fields.”

Soil and Atmospheric Benefits?

1. Few evaluations of impact on soil organic carbon – study at ICRISAT (Rupela et al. 2006) found microbial biomass carbon (MBC) 1242 vs. 1187 (NS)

2. Should have some increase in carbon sequestration – from ongoing amendments of compost, FYM, etc. + exudation from larger, more active root systems

3. Improvements in soil structure – improved soil porosity from increased biological activity; venting of H2S, CO2 and other gases

4. Increased water retention – related to soil porosity and SOM, also from increased biological activity

5. Should have reduced carbon footprint – with smaller-scale, less mechanized production; and less chemical fertilizer produced and transported

Total bacteria Total diazotrophs

Microbial populations in rhizosphere soil in rice crop under different management at active tillering, panicle initiation

and flowering (SRI = yellow; conventional = red) – IPB research

[units are √ transformed values of population/gram of dry soil]

Phosphobacteria \ Azotobacter

Dehydrogenase activity (μg TPF) Urease activity (μg NH4-N))

Microbial activities in rhizosphere soil in rice crop with different management (SRI = yellow; conventional = red) at active tillering, panicle initiation and flowering stages

[units are √ transformed values of population/gram of dry soil per 24 h]

Acid phosphate activity (μg p-Nitrophenol) \

Nitrogenase activity (nano mol C2H4)

Microorganisms in Leaves and Seeds:New Paradigm for Agriculture?

1. Beneficial interactions between plants and microorganisms within the root zone (rhizosphere) are well established

2. We are now finding that positive interactions extend also to the rest of the plant: – Leaves: soil bacteria (Rhizobia) migrate

into the leaf zone (phyllosphere), promoting better phenotypes, and

– Seeds: when inoculated with fungus (Fusarium culmorum), more root growth

Ascending Migration of Endophytic Rhizobia, from Roots and Leaves, inside Rice Plants and Assessment of Benefits to

Rice Growth Physiology Feng Chi et al.,J. Applied & Envir. Microbiology 71 (2005),

7271-7278Rhizo-bium test strain

Total plant root

volume/pot (cm3)

Shoot dry weight/ pot (g)

Net photo-synthetic

rate (μmol-2 s-1)

Water utilization efficiency

Area (cm2) of flag leaf

Grain yield/ pot (g)

Ac-ORS571 210 ± 36A 63 ± 2A 16.42 ± 1.39A 3.62 ± 0.17BC 17.64 ± 4.94ABC 86 ± 5A

SM-1021 180 ± 26A 67 ± 5A 14.99 ± 1.64B 4.02 ± 0.19AB 20.03 ± 3.92A 86 ± 4A

SM-1002 168 ± 8AB 52 ± 4BC 13.70 ± 0.73B 4.15 ± 0.32A 19.58 ± 4.47AB 61 ± 4B

R1-2370 175 ± 23A 61 ± 8AB 13.85 ± 0.38B 3.36 ± 0.41C 18.98 ± 4.49AB 64 ± 9B

Mh-93 193 ± 16A 67 ± 4A 13.86 ± 0.76B 3.18 ± 0.25CD 16.79 ± 3.43BC 77 ± 5A

Control 130 ± 10B 47 ± 6C 10.23 ± 1.03C 2.77 ± 0.69D 15.24 ± 4.0C 51 ± 4C

Growth of nonsymbiotic (on left) and symbiotic (on right) rice seedlings. On growth of endophyte (F. culmorum) and plant

inoculation procedures, see Rodriguez et al., Communicative and Integrative Biology, 2:3 (2009).

SRI Concepts and Methods Are Now Being Extended Beyond

RiceAgroecological management is

generic -- SRI is not a technologyApplications now with other crops:• Wheat (India, Ethiopia, Mali)• Sugar cane (India)• Finger millet (India, Ethiopia)• Legumes and vegetables (India)• Teff (Ethiopia)

New farming method boosts food output in Bihar for India's rural poor

In Ghantadih village in Gaya district, more than half of the 42 farming households have switched to SWI from traditional practices.

Manna Devi, mother of three, was the first woman to use the technique in Bihar state. She says she decided to take a gamble despite jibes from neighbouring farmers who mocked her cultivation methods.

"We were living a hand-to-mouth existence before and we just couldn't manage to eat, let alone put our children through school," she says. "We were only producing about 30 kg of wheat, which lasted us four months, and we had to take loans, and my husband had also taken a second job as a rickshaw puller in order to make ends meet."

Devi says she now produces about 80 kg of wheat - enough to feed her family for a year – and hopes to start selling extra crop.

Alert Net: Thomson-Reuters Foundation, March 30, 2010

ICRISAT-WWF Sugarcane Initiative: at least 20% more

cane yield, with: •30% reduction in water, and •25% reduction in chemical inputs

“The inspiration for putting this package together is from the successful approach of SRI – System of Rice Intensification.”

INDIA: I mproved variety of finger millet(ragi) with new methods (lef t); regular

management of improved variety (middle) and a traditional variety (right)

HIGH-TILLERING TRAIT IN TEFF WHEN TRANSPLANTED WITH WIDER SPACING

Dr. Tareke Berhe, SAA, ‘Recent Developments in Teff, Ethiopia’s Most Important Cereal and Gift to the World,’ Cornell seminar, 7/23/09 –

Berhe was CIMMYT post-doctoral fellow with Norman Borlaug in 1970

Where Is All This Leading?1. Still a lot of research to be done, but we should

begin moving beyond our genocentric paradigm a. ‘Seeds and fertilizer’ is not only path to progress

2. Many powerful trends are making ‘modern agriculture’ less profitable and less sustainable

3. Now beginning to work toward what might be called ‘post-modern’ agriculture – focusing on: a. Ecological dynamics at field level and aboveb. Crop/animal interactions with microbes at micro levelc. Gene expression > DNA, e.g., epigenetics

4. Convergence of IPM, Conservation Agriculture, organic agriculture, SRI, agroforestry, et al.a. Low-input intensification (European Parliament study)b. Sustainable intensification (UK Royal Society report)

Thank youWebsite:

http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/Soon to be:

http://sri.ciifad.cornell.eduEmail:

[email protected]