K Sayre - CA-Based Hubs - Principles and Focus - CSISA CA Course - June-July 2011

8/3/2019 K Sayre - CA-Based Hubs - Principles and Focus - CSISA CA Course - June-July 2011

1/76

CIMMYT

International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center

Conservation Agriculture-Based

Hubs

PRINCIPLES AND FOCUS

Ken SayreAgronomist - Conservation Agriculture-Based Crop Management


2/76

SOME REVIEW


3/76

Why Conservation Agriculture (CA)

Stabilize/Reverse Widespread Soil Degradation to

Enhance Sustainability of Natural Resources Land,

Water and Air

Enhance Water Use Efficiency for both Rainfed and

Irrigated Crop Production Systems

Increase Crop Productivity through Increasing Time and

Input Use Efficiency

Reduce Production Costs for Farmers and Improve

Family Livelihoods


4/76

Conservation Agriculture

is not a Separate Scientific Discipline

or Department or Institute

but it is based on a set of

Defined Principles that Should Be Appliedby Crop Management Scientists to Better

Insure the Development of Sustainable

Crop Management Practices for Different

Cropping Systems


5/76

There are Four Primary Principlesthat Provide the Basis forConservation Agriculture


6/76

CA Principle One

Dramatic reductions in tillage

Goal

Determine the appropriate,minimal level of tillage for a cropping

system with zero till as a potential goal.


7/76

CA Emphasizes Dramatic Tillage Reductions

Conventional Till System CA-based, Zero Till System


8/76

INDIATurbo-Happy Zero Till Seeder


9/76

Chinese Strip Till Seeding Rainfed Maize After Wheat in

Mexico with a Chinese 2-Wheel Tractor


10/76

Conservation Agriculture MeansDramatic Tillage Reductions- Cotton-

Wheat Systems in UzbekistanConventional Till Raised Bed Systems CA-based Permanent Raised Bed Systems


11/76

CA Principle Two

Retention of adequate. rational levels of crop

residues on the soil surface

Ultimate GoalRetain sufficient residue on the

soil surface to reduce soil erosion, improve

soil parameters and enhance crop/water

productivity to better insure long term,

sustainable production


12/76

Extensive tillage combined with inadequate crop residue

retention on the soil surface leads to soil degradation by

erosion from wind and water

Wind erosion Water erosion


13/76

Planting Zero Till Rainfed Wheat afterMaize with Full Residue Retention in the Rainfed

Highlands of Mexico

Maize Residue Management Zero Till Wheat Seeding in Maize

Residue


14/76

Extensive tillage combined with inadequate crop residue

retention on the soil surface can lead to extreme water loss

by runoff and evaporation

Conventional Till Zero Till


15/76

Effect of inadequate versus adequate retention of crop

residues on the soil surface for rainfed maize in the

Central Highlands of Mexico

Zero Till without Residues Zero Till with Residues


16/76

CA Principle Three:

Use of proper and profitable crop

rotations

Ultimate GoalEconomically viable,

diversified crop rotations that can offer

farmers new options to reduce risk


17/76

CA Emphasizes Diversified and EconomicalCrop Rotation Options for Farmers

Zero Till Wheat Zero Till Chickpea

Zero Till Maize Zero Till Dry Beans


18/76

CA Emphasizes Diversified and EconomicalCrop Rotation Options for Farmers

Zero Till Soybean Irrigated Canola on Perm. Raised beds

Alfalfa on Perm. Raised beds Zero Till Cotton


19/76

These Three CA Principles whenProperly Used Encourage

Sustainable Soil Management

PhysicalSoil Quality

ChemicalSoil Quality

BiologicalSoil Quality

SoilOrganicMatter

C i f S i C i i


20/76

Comparison of SoilsConventional Tilled

Versus CA-Based Zero Tilled after 7 Years

Conv. Till Degraded Soil CA-based Zero till - Healthy Soil


21/76

But before farmers are willing toadopt new technologies based on

these first three CA principles,

they must be confident that they

will gain immediate economic

benefits


22/76

CA Principle Four:

Farmer must perceive the potential for

imminent improved economic benefits andlivelihoods from the new, CA-based

technologies

F M K h h i E i


23/76

Farmers Must Know that there is an Economic

Benefit before they will adopt CA

Compa rison of average rainfed wheat yields for themost common farmer practice versus the bestimproved practice (1996 to 2005)

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

6500

GranYied(kh

Farmer

Practice-

ContinuousWheat,

Conventional

Till, Residues

RemovedImproved

Practice;

Maize-Wheat;

Zero Till;

Residues

Retained

Comparison economic returns for rainfedwheat from 1996 to 2005 for the most

common farmer practice versus the bestimproved practice (Mexican Pesos)

(500)

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

ReturnsAbovVarableCoss

Farmer

Practice-ContinuousWheat,ConventionalTill, ResiduesRemoved

ImprovedPractice;Maize-Wheat;Zero Till;ResiduesRetained


24/76

The Four Basic principles of Conservation

Agriculture Provide the Foundation to Manage

Different Production Systems in a Sustainable Way

But

These underlying CA principles are notsite specific and can be applied toessentially all crop production systems

with the development of specific cropmanagement practices for each specificsystem

The Four Principles of Conservation Agriculture Provide the Foundation to


25/76

The Four Principles of Conservation Agriculture Provide the Foundation to

Develop and Apply the CA-based Crop Management

Appropriate Crop Management Component Technologies Must be Specifically

Developed for Each Crop Production System

AppropriateFertilizer

Management

Selection ofAppropriate

Cultivars

AppropriateIrrigation

Management

AppropriateWeed Control

Practices

AppropriateCrop

ResidueManagement

AppropriatePest andDisease

Management

AppropriateSeeders/otherImplements

The Foundation for the Development of Suitable CA-based Crop Management

Technologies

DramaticReductionsInTillage

Retention ofAdequateLevels ofResidues

on the Soil

EconomicallyViableDiversificationof Crop

Rotations

Perception ofEconomicBenefits byFarmers

Other RelevantCrop

ManagementComponents


26/76

HOW CAN CA-BASED

TECHNOLOGIES BE DELIVERED TO

FARMERS?


27/76

DELIVERY OF CA-BASED

TECHNOLOGIES TO FARMERS

WHY MUST FARMERS PARTICIPATE

IN THIS PROCESS?


28/76

Normal Research and Development

Systems are Linear

However, the linear flow of knowledge which hascommonly been used by researchers and extension

agents may work for delivery of new crop cultivars

etc but is not effective for the transfer and farmer

adoption of more comprehensive, integratedtechnologies like CA-based technologies.


29/76

Dominican Republic

Panama

Peru

Nicaragua

BrazilEcuador

Costa Rica

Chile

Guatemala

Argentina LACBolivia

ParaguayVenezuela

HondurasColombia

El Salvador

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Tasa

decrecimientodelPIBagrcola(1

997-2001)

(%)

Gasto Pblico en Agricultura como % del PIB, promedio 1997-2001e.

Source: Valdes, 2008a, Agricultural Public Spending: Descriptionand Assessment Relevant to Latin America, using FAO, 2005b, Basede Datos de estadsticas e indicadores del gasto publico agrcola yrural (GPAGRURAL), Oficina regional para American Latina y elCaribe, Santiago. Agricultural GDP growth rates are based on World

Development Indicators Database, World Bank.

Th R h d D l t S t th t i B t


30/76

The Research and Development System that is Best

suited for CA-based technologies is integrated and

interlinks the needed partners

Innovation systems

involving multiple agents

(especially including

farmers), each registering

their expectations and

contributing their own

comparative advantage

towards resolving the

problem of developing

functional CA systems.

Innovative

Farmers

InputSuppliers

Equipmen

t

Developer

s

Extension(Change)

Agents

Machinery

Manu-

facturers

Research

ers


31/76

But What Does This Really Mean?

How Can This Approach Actually Provide

Small and Medium-Scale Farmers,With Sustainable, Economical CA-based

Crop Management Technologies

Real Situation All the Players with the Farmer in


32/76

Real Situation - All the Players with the Farmer in

the Middle with Almost No Say in What Goes On

International

Organizations

CG Centers

FAO

IFAD etc

NARS

Researc

h

Institute

s

Implement

Manufacturers and Dealers

Many

Others

Governmen

tPolicy

Makers

Socio-

economist

sNGOs

Private

Sector

Input

Dealers

Private

Sector

Input

Dealers

Politicians

Farmers with DifferentCrop Production

Systems and Different

Economic Capabilities

? ?

? ?

?

????

?

PrecisionAgricultur

e

?


33/76

In Mexico, CIMMYT has developed the

concept of the

CA-based Research and Delivery Hub

approach to effectively involveresearchers working in a multi/inter-

disciplinary manner with farmers,

agriculture leaders, private sector andother needed partners.


34/76

Strategies to Develop and Deliver

Conservation Agriculture-BasedCrop Management Technologies

to Farmers

CA-BASED HUBS TO DELIVER

TECHNOLOGIES TO FARMERSWITH FARMER PARTICIPATION


35/76

Conceptually Our View Regarding the CA-

based Hub Strategy Is as Illustrated Below

Connection to

Researchers

(Gov and

Non-Gov)

Direct

Participationof Interested

Stakeholders

and Partners

in the CA-

based HubActivities

Adaptive

Research and

Delivery

Platform Trial

Farmer

Module

s

Farmer

Module

s

Farmer

Module

s

Farmer

Module

sFarmer

Module

s

Farmer

Module

s

FARMERS

FARMERSFARMERS

FARMERS

FARMERS

FARMERSFARMERS

I CA b d H b i M i F


36/76

In our CA-based Hubs in Mexico, Farmers

are Involved in the Whole Process Starting

from: The Strategic Research Activities on Experiment Stations Through Component Technology Studies

Though Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trials

Through Determining the Best Bet CA-basedTechnologies to Test in Farmer Fields in the Farmer

Modules

Through Fine Tuning of these Technologies in FarmerFields

Through Delivery of Tested Technologies in the FarmerModules to Surrounding Farmers


37/76

Once a Crop Production System in a Defined

Area has Been Selected to Develop

Appropriate CA-Based Technologies : We Establish a CA-based Hub with an

Adaptive Research and Delivery research

platformWhile at The Same Time

We Immediately Identify Interested,

Innovative Farmers to Begin to Test BestBet CA-based Technologies in Modules inTheir Fields

CA-BASED RESEARCH AND DELIVERY HUB


38/76

Adaptive Research and DeliveryPlatform Trial/s

Long Term Multi-disciplinaryAdaptive Research, ImplementTesting and Demonstration and

Training

FARMERSFARMERS

FARMERS

FARMERS

Soils and

Agronomy

Component

Technology

Studies

FARMERS

Breeding and

Testing of

different

Cultivars

FARMERS

Weed ,disease and Pest

Management

Component

Technology Studies

FARMERS

FarmerPractices

BestBet 1

BestBet

2

BestBet

x

Farmer Field

Adaptive Research

and Demonstration

Modules

Farmer Field

Adaptive Research

and Demonstration

Modules

Farmer FieldAdaptive Research

and Demonstration

Modules

CA-based Agricultural

Machinery Development

FARMERS

Farmer Field

Adaptive Research

and Demonstration

Modules

Socio-economic

Input/Evaluations

FARMERS

NARS/Private

Sector/NGO

Involvement FARMERS

Once a Crop Production System has Been Selected within a Defined


39/76

Once a Crop Production System has Been Selected within a Defined

Geographical Area to Develop Appropriate CA-Based Technologies

and the Needed Partners (Farmers and Other Needed Stakeholders)

have been Identified

We Initiate Activities in the CA-based Research and Delivery Hub Involving:

Establishment of Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial/s and identification ofinterested stakeholders and farmers to participate in the inter/multidisciplinaryactivities in these Platform Trials

These platform trial/s can be established in an experiment station, in a farmer field, in

fields managed by groups or associations of farmers (perhaps the optimum situation)or any other viable field situation but should have at least an initial 5 year timeperspective.

Identification of a series of interested and innovative farmers to manage the AdaptiveResearch and Delivery Farmer Modules associated with each Platform Trial in fieldsof these farmers

Identification of interested farmers surrounding each Adaptive Research and DeliveryModule who will learn from the module farmers and adopt the useful CA-basedpractices that the observe

This process must be a bottoms-up approach with the full, initial participation of thefarmers and other stakeholders, not a top-down approach driven by officials (bothnational and international) at the top

L ti i M i h


40/76

Cd. ObregnIrrigated

39 m

CIMMYT HeadquartersEl Batn

Dry LandLow Rainfall

2249 m

MexicoCity

TolucaDry Land

High Rainfall2640 m

Locations in Mexico where

CIMMYT Currently has five CA-

based Hubs in Operation

Two more are planned by end of

2011

Mexico

El BajioIrrigated1500 m

SinaloaIrrigated50 m

CA-BASED RESEARCH AND DELIVERY HUB


41/76

Adaptive Research and DeliveryPlatform Trial/s

Long Term Multi-disciplinary AdaptiveResearch, Implement Testing and

Demonstration and Training,

,

FARMERSFARMERS

FARMERS

FARMERS

Soils and

Agronomy

Component

Technology

Studies

FARMERS

Breeding and

Testing of different

Cultivars

FARMERS

Organization and Function of CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform

Trials in Mexico

Weed ,disease and Pest

Management

Component

Technology Studies

FARMERS

Farmer

Practices

Best

Bet 1

Best

Bet

2

Best

Bet

x

Farmer Field

Adaptive Research

and Demonstration

Modules

Farmer Field

Adaptive Research

and Demonstration

Modules

Farmer Field

Adaptive Research

and Demonstration

Modules

CA-based Agricultural

Machinery Development

FARMERS

Farmer Field

Adaptive

Research and

Demonstration

ModulesSocio-economic

Inputs/Evaluations

FARMERS

NARS/Private

Sector/NGO

Involvement

FARMERS

The Adaptive Research and Delivery Research and Delivery Platform


42/76

The Adaptive Research and Delivery Research and Delivery Platform

Trial/s for each CA-based Hub provides Opportunities for

Inter/Multidisciplinary Research and Development Activities for all the

interested stakeholders to:

Develop and Test new, best bet CA-based crop management technology options side-

by-side with the most common conventional farmer practices

Better understand the long-term effects/benefits of these new CA-based technologies on

sustainable production as compared to existing farmer practices

Develop the needed specific crop management component technologies compatible with

the new CA-based practices (weed control, residue management, machinery, fertilizer

management, irrigation water management etc)

Determine the potential economic benefits of the new CA technologies

Delineate the best CA-based crop management technologies for the module farmers to

select to test in there Adaptive Research and Delivery Modules in their fields side-by-side

with there existing technology

D di th N t Abiliti d I t t f th


43/76

Depending upon the Nature, Abilities and Interests of the

Different Stakeholders Participating in a CA-based Hub in

Mexico, there may be an Opportunity to have several

Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trials withinthe Hub Along with their Associated, Surrounding

Adaptive Research and Delivery Farmer Modules in these

Farmers Fields

In these situations, these Adaptive Research and

Delivery Trials are Linked Together as a Network ofPlatform Trials within the Hub

Using the CA-Based Research Platform Long


44/76

Using the CA Based Research Platform Long

Term Trial to Compare of Zero Till Seeding with

and without Residue Retention

Using the CA Based Research Platform Long Term


45/76

Using the CA-Based Research Platform Long Term

Trial to Compare Different Kinds of Seeders for

Zero Till Seeding

Testing and Development of the Multi-Crop/Multi-Use Prototype


46/76

CA Implement in the Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform

Trial in Cd. Obregon, MexicoPlanting Wheat and banding basal

fertilizer

Configured for Maize Planting

Side-dress banded N application for

Wheat

Side-dress banded N application for

Maize

Greenseeker NDVI-based Variable Rate


47/76

Greenseeker NDVI based Variable Rate

Foliar N Fertilizer Application System

Using the CA Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial


48/76

Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial

to Compare Different Technology Components

for Rainfed Production Conditions in El Batan, Mexico

Tillage/Residue Levels in Permanent BedsWithout Residue With Residue



49/76


to Compare Weed Control Strategies in

El Batan, Mexico

Conventional Till Maize; No Residue Zero Till Maize; With Residues

Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery


50/76

Platform Trial to Compare Different Technology Components

for Rainfed Production Conditions in Toluca, Mexico

Narrow Permanent Raised Beds Wide Raised beds

(0.75 mfurrow to furrow) (1.5mfurrow to furrow)

Comparison of the Efficiency of Rain Water Use for Conventional Farm Practices


51/76

Comparison of the Efficiency of Rain Water Use for Conventional Farm Practices

versus C A-based Practices in Year with Very Low Rainfall

(CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial in El Batan, Mexico)

Conventional Tillage with Crop Residues

Removed

Zero Tillage with Crop

Residues Retained

Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trialf L T T i l M ltidi i li R h ( l 40 Ph D d M S


52/76

for Long Term Trial Multidisciplinary Research (nearly 40 Ph D and M Sc

Theses have been carried out in the Platform Trials in Mexico

Student Thesis Research On-going Project Research in El Batan

With Green Seeker in Obregon

Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery


53/76

Platform Trial in Cd. Obregon, Mexico to Compare Planting Method by Wheat

Genotype Interactions (tilled raised beds versus permanent raised beds) for

Furrow Irrigate Production Conditions


54/76

SOME EXAMPLES OF RESULTS

FROM SOME OF THE ADAPTIVERESEARCH AND DELIVERY

PLATFORM TRIALS IN THE

CA-BASED HUBS IN MEXICO

Effect of contrasting tillage, residue and rotation management


55/76

g g , g

practices of rainfed wheat yields over 11 years under optimum

management at El Batan, Mexico from 1996 to 2006

1500

2500

35004500

5500

6500

7500

8500

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

GrainY

ield

(kg/ha)

Farmer Practice - Continuous Wheat: Conv. tillage: Residue Removed

Best CA-based Practice - Wheat-Maize: Zero tillage: Residue Retained

Worst Practice - Wheat-Maize: Zero tillage: Residue Removed

LSD (0.05) = 475 kg/ha

Effect of tillage and crop residue management on average bread


56/76

Effect of tillage and crop residue management on average bread

wheat grain yield from 2001 to 2009 at CIANO, Cd. Obregon*

5000

5500

6000

6500

7000

7500

8000

Permanent

beds - sub-soil

blade; +

Residue

Permanent

beds + sub-soil

blade; +

Residue

Permanent

beds - sub-soil

blade; -

Residue

Permanent

beds + sub-soil

blade; -

Residue

Conventional

till beds - sub-

soil blade; +

Residue

Conventional

till beds - sub-

soil blade; -

Residue

Grain

Yield

(kg/ha)

*Small scale sub-soil blade with side wings, used to about a 15-20 cm depth in the center of the bed to

break possible compaction. Bed structure is maintained with no soil inversion.

LSD (0.05) = 101 kg/ha

Effect of Rotation, Tillage and Residue Management on Average


57/76

g g g

Rainfed Wheat Grain Yields from 1997 to 2009 at El Batan in the

Central Highlands of Mexico (Mean Annual Rainfall = 550mm)

3000

3500

40004500

5000

5500

6000

6500

Wh-Wh - ConvTill - All

Residues

Removed

(Farmer

Practice)

Wh-Wh - ZeroTill - All

Residues

Removed

Wh-Wh - ZeroTill - All

Residues

Retained

Wh-Mz - ZeroTill - All

Residues

Retained

Wh-Mz - ZeroTill - 50% of

Residues

Retained

Wh-Mz - ZeroTill - All

Residues

Removed

Rotation - Tillage - Residue Management

GrainY

ield(kg/ha) LSD (0.05) = 235 kg/ha

Effect of Rotation, Tillage and Residue Management on the


58/76

Average Returns Above Variable Costs for Rainfed Wheat from

1997 to 2009 at El Batan in the Central Highlands of Mexico

(500)

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500


R

eturnsAbove

VariableCosts

Wh-Wh: C. T: Res Removed (Farmer Practice) Wh-Wh; Z T; Res Removed

Wh-Wh, Z T, Res Retained Wh-Mz; Z T; Res Retained

Wh-Mz; Z T; 50% Res Removed Wh-Mz; Z T; Res Removed

Effect of rotation, tillage and residue management for rainfed production systems on


59/76

the distribution of soil wet aggregate distribution (0-20cm) at El Batan in the Central

Highlands of Mexico

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Wh-Wh - Conv.

Till - Residue

Removed

(Farmer

Practice)

Wh-Wh - Zero

Till - Residue

Removed

Wh-Wh - Zero

Till - Residue

Retained

Wh-Mz - Zero Till

- Residue

Removed

Wh-Mz - Zero Till

- Residue

Retained


MWDo

fSoilWet

Aggregates(mm) LSD (0.05) = 0.6 mm

Effect of rotation, tillage and residue management for rainfed production


60/76

systems on the "time to pond" during the 2005 crop cycle at El Batan in the

Central Highlands of Mexico

0

2

4

68

10

12

1416

18

Wh-Wh - Conv.

Till - Residue

Removed

(Farmer

Practice)

Wh-Wh - Zero

Till - Residue

Removed

Wh-Wh - Zero

Till - Residue

Retained

Wh-Mz - Zero

Till - Residue

Removed

Wh-Mz - Zero

Till - Residue

Retained


TimetoPo

nd(Seconds)

LSD (0.05) = 2.5 seconds

Effect of tillage and residue management over seventeen years on average


61/76

wheat grain yields with with optimum N management in theCA-based

Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial at Cd.Obregon, Mexico

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

6500

7000

75008000

8500

1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

Year of Harvest

GrainYield(kg/ha)

Conventional till beds - residues incorporatedPermanent beds - residues burnedPermanent beds - 70% residues removed

Permanent beds - residues retained

Performance of Wheat Lines Developed by Parallel Selected by Zero andConventional Tillage for irrigated conditions in Cd Obregon Mexico


62/76

Conventional Tillage for irrigated conditions in Cd. Obregon, Mexico

Effects of Cross, Tillage and Selection Systems on Grain Yield

Averaged over 2005, 2006, 2005

4500

5000

5500

6000

6500

Grainyield(kg/ha)

PB, S-ZT

PB, S-CT

CB, S-ZT

CB, S-CT

Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and


63/76

Using the CA Based Adaptive Research and

Delivery Platform Trial to Train Technicians,

Scientists and Farmers in El Batan, Mexico

Farmer Training Visiting Scientist Training


64/76

THE ADAPTIVE RESEARCH AND DELIVERY


65/76

MODULES PROVIDE THE VENUE:

To compare tested and farmer approved CA- based

technologies side-by-side farmer practice

To further fine-tune the CA-based technologies asneeded in farmer fields in cooperation with the farmer

To organize field day visits by surrounding farmers tosee the farmer modules and to directly interact with themodule farmers

To utilize the field day visits to the module farmers to

indentify surrounding farmers who are interested intesting the new CA-based technologies in their ownfarms

THE ADAPTIVE RESEARCH AND DELIVERY


66/76

MODULES PROVIDE THE VENUE TO:

FINE-TUNE THE NEW CA-BASED TECHNOLOGIES

PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ORGANIZE VISITS IN

THE MODULE FARMERS FIELDS FOR SURROUNDING

FARMERS TO ASSIST:

THE FARMER WHO OWNS THE MODULE FIELD TO

DEMONSTRATE AND DISCUSS THE NEW TECHNOLOGIES WITH

THE NEIGHBORING FARMERS

THE EXTENSION OF THESE NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO THESE

NEIGHBOR FARMERS

Comparisons of Farmer Practices and the Best Bet CA-


67/76

p

based Technologies for Training Technicians, Scientists

and Farmers in the Farmer Modules

Meeting with Farmers from Areas Surrounding


68/76

the Farmer Modules to Identify Farmers Interested

in Cooperating

Using the Farmer Modules to Train


69/76

Farmers/Service Providers in the Operation of CA-

based Seeders

Using the Comparisons of Farmer Practices and the Best Bet CA-


70/76

based Technologies in a CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery

Module to Demonstrate to and Train Farmers from the Surrounding

Seeding Practices

CA-based Technology Farmer Practice

Comparing Farmer Practices with the Best Bet CA-based


71/76

Technologies for Grain Sorghum in Participating Farmer Fields in a

Farmer Module in Cd. Obregon, Mexico

Irrigated Sorghum on Tilled RaisedBeds (Farmer Practice)

Best Bet CA- Irrigated Sorghum

on Permanent Raised Beds

Comparing Farmer Practices with the Best Bet CA-basedTechnologies for Irrigated Wheat in Participating Farmer


72/76

Technologies for Irrigated Wheat in Participating Farmer

Fields in Cd. Obregon, MexicoFarmer Practice with Tilled Beds CA-based Permanent Beds

Farmer Field Day for Harvest of Irrigated Wheat DemonstrationPlots in a CA based Adaptive Research and Delivery Farmer Module


73/76

Plots in a CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Farmer Module

in Cd. Obregon, Mexico

Comparison of average wheat grain yields, variable production costs and returns over


74/76

p g g y , p

variable costs for wheat produced with conventional tilled beds versus permanent raised

beds in farmer modules in Cd. Obregon, Mexico

6,245 6,356

4,011

6,926

4,985

6,550

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,0005,500

6,000

6,500

7,000

7,500

8,000

Grain yield (kg/ha) Production costs

(Mexican pesos)

Returns over

variable costs

(Mexican pesos)

G

rainYield(kg/

haat12%H

2O)

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

6,000

6,500

7,000

7,500

8,000

Mexi

canpesos

Conventional tilled bedsPermanent beds

Comparison of CA-based Practices versus Farmer


75/76

Practices in Farmer Modules Farmer Fields in the

Central Highlands of MexicoCropping

System Number ofModules inFarmer

Fields

CA-based

Practices

Average

Maize

Yield

(kg/ha)

Farmer

Practice

Average

Maize

Yield

kg/ha

CA-based

Practices

Returns

Above

Variable

Costs(Mexican

Pesos)

Farmer

Practice

Returns

Above

Variable

Costs(Mexican

Pesos)

Irrigated Maize 19 8830 6950 17,154 11,926

Rainfed Maize 29 4830 3000 5566 1853

1US Dollar = 11.5 Mexican Pesos

WHEAT ON PERMANENT RAISED


76/76

BEDS IN KAZAKHSTAN

Thanks

K Sayre - CA-Based Hubs - Principles and Focus - CSISA CA Course - June-July 2011

Documents