The Emerging Shape of a Post-Modern Agriculture: Indications from the Systemof Rice Intensification (SRI)

Prof. Norman UphoffCIIFAD/CIPA, Cornell University

February 12, 2010

Challenge for 21st Century:How to Produce MORE with

LESS?• This may sound impossible, but it will be needed to achieve sustainable development

• It will also be important for promoting equitable development

•We want to reduce poverty while we protect environmental integrity at the same time

• Can this be accomplished? Isn’t this like the mythical perpetual motion machine? No

Can be achieved within realm of BIOLOGY

21st Century AgricultureCannot Just Do ‘More of the Same’

• Arable land area per capita is reducing

• Population continues to grow, while

• Land area is being lost to urban spread and

• Land degradation increases year by year

• Water supply for agriculture is declining

• Competing demands for domestic use and industry

• Climate change is reducing amount and reliability

• Pests and diseases are likely to increase

21st Century AgricultureCannot Just Do ‘More of the Same’

• Energy prices will surely be higher in the 21st than in 20th century, affecting:

• Production costs: fuel, fertilizer, agrochemicals

• Transport cost: long-distance trade more costly

• Environmental impacts are larger concern

• Access to technology will be an issue

• Many of world’s poor are by-passed by GR

• Food quality is becoming more important

SRI indicates a path toward Post-Modern Agriculture• Comparative advantage is declining for large-scale, mechanized, monocropped production, with long-distance trade

• We need to reduce energy-intensity

• Consumer and environmental demands are growing for ‘healthier’ production

• We must reduce chemical-dependence

• ‘Post-modern agriculture’ must be the most modern agriculture = science-based

System of Rice Intensification

• Developed in Madagascar after 20 yrs of observation and experimentation by Henri de Laulanié, SJ -- synthesized in 1983-84 by changing the management of:

• Plants -- use of very young seedlings, careful transplanting, and wider spacing

• Soil -- active soil aeration during weeding

• Water -- no continuous flooding of fields

• Nutrients – relying on compost > fertilizer

Fr. de Laulaniémaking field visit

MADAGASCAR: Rice field grown with SRI methods

SRI is not yet finished !• SRI is not a technology; rather it is insights & ideas, concepts & methods• SRI derives from the work of Fr. Henri de Laulanié, SJ, who spent 34 yrs working with farmers in Madagascar• SRI methods were synthesized in 1984-85, but they continue to evolve• Developed for small, poor farmers, but are being adapted more widely

Status of SRI: As of 1999

Known and practiced only in Madagascar

Before 1999: Madagascar1999-2000: China, Indonesia2000-01: Bangladesh, Cuba, Laos, Cambodia, Gambia, India, Nepal, Myanmar, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Thailand 2002-03: Benin, Guinea, Peru, Moz 2004-05: Senegal, Mali, Vietnam, Pakistan

2006: Burkina Faso, Bhutan, Iran, Iraq, Zambia2007: Afghanistan, Brazil 2008: Rwanda, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, Ghana2009: Timor Leste, Malaysia2010: Kenya, Sabah? DPRK? Solomon Islands? Panama?

2010: SRI benefits have now been validated in

38 countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America

SRI practices contribute to achieving:

• Higher yields by 50-100% -- or more• Water reduction of 25-50% (also rainfed)• Reduced capital need (accessible to poor)• Little or no need for agrochemical inputs• Tolerance for climatic stresses (drought, storm damage, extreme temperatures)• Induced pest and disease resistance •Better grain quality -- less chalkiness • Lower costs of production by 10-20% -- leading to higher income for farmers

Two Paradigms for Agriculture:

• GREEN REVOLUTION strategy was to:(a) Change the genetic potential of plants, and

(b) Increase the use of external inputs -- more water, more fertilizer and insecticides

• SRI (AGROECOLOGY) instead changes the management of plants, soil, water & nutrients:

(a) Promotes the growth of root systems, and

(b) Increases the abundance and diversity of soil organisms to better enlist their benefits

SRI produces better PHENOTYPES naturally

CUBA: farmer with two plants of same variety

(VN 2084) and same age (52 DAP)

IRAN: SRI roots and normal

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

VIETNAM: Dông Trù village,Hanoi province,

after typhoon

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)

NEPAL: Crop duration (from seed to seed) of different rice varieties with SRI (6.3 t/ha) vs.

conventional methods (3.1 t/ha) - 125 vs. 141 days

Varieties Conventional duration

SRI duration Difference

Bansdhan/Kanchhi

145 127 (117-144)

18 (28-11)

Mansuli 155 136 (126-146)

19 (29- 9)

Swarna 155 139 (126-150)

16 (29- 5)

Sugandha 120 106 (98-112) 14 (22- 8)

Radha 12 155 138 (125-144)

17 (30-11)

Barse 3017 135 118 17

Hardinath 1 120 107 (98-112) 13 (22- 8)

Barse 2014 135 127 (116-125)

8 (19-10)

VIETNAM: Reduction in Diseases & Pests

National IPM Program conducted evaluation based on data from 8

provinces, 2005-06Spring season Summer season

SRIPlots

Farmer

Plots

Differ-ence

SRIPlots

Farmer

Plots

Differ-ence

Sheath blight

6.7%

18.1%

63.0% 5.2%

19.8%

73.7%

Leaf blight

-- -- -- 8.6%

36.3%

76.5%

Small leaf folder *

63.4 107.7 41.1% 61.8 122.3 49.5%

Brown plant hopper *

542 1,440 62.4% 545 3,214 83.0%

AVERAGE

55.5% 70.7%

* Insects/m2

SRI

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

IH H FH MR WR YRStage

Org

an d

ry w

eigh

t(g/

hill)

CK

I H H FH MR WR YR

Yellowleaf andsheathPanicle

Leaf

Sheath

Stem

47.9% 34.7%

Non-Flooding Rice Farming Technology in Irrigated Paddy FieldDr. Tao Longxing, China National Rice Research Institute, 2004

China National Rice Research Institute:

Factorial trials over two years, 2004/2005

using two super-hybrid varieties with the aim of breaking the ‘plateau’

limiting yieldsStandard Rice Mgmt• 30-day seedlings• 20x20 cm spacing• Continuous

flooding• Fertilization:

– 100% chemical

New Rice Mgmt (~SRI)• 20-day seedlings• 30x30 cm spacing• Alternate wetting

and drying (AWD)• Fertilization:

– 50% chemical, – 50% organic

Average super-rice yields with standard rice management (SRM) vs. new rice

management (NRM~SRI) at different plant densities ha-1

Plant density (plants per hectare)

Yie

ld (

kg

per

hecta

re)

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, E. AntonyExperimental Agriculture, 46(1), 77-98 (2010)

Water-use efficiency is reflected in theratio of photosynthesis to transpiration

For the loss of 1 millimol of water by transpiration,

In SRI plants, 3.6 millimols of CO2 are fixed

In RMP plants, 1.6 millimols of CO2 are fixed

We see many versions of SRI:

• In China, many different innovations:

• Triangular spacing, raised beds/no-till; now also plastic mulch on raised beds

• In Myanmar, Cambodia, Philippines, India: rainfed/upland SRI - not irrigated

• In India, Thailand, Sri Lanka: getting direct-seeded SRI - no transplanting

• In Pakistan, Costa Rica, India: have mechanized SRI - reducing labor-intensity

•In India, Mali, Ethiopia: other crops - wheat, sugar cane, millet, maize, etc.

Liu Zhibin, Meishan, Sichuan province, China, standing in raised-bed, zero-till SRI field; measured yield 13.4 t/ha;his SRI yield in 2001 (16 t/ha) set provincial yield record

Science and Technology Daily, Chengdu - 26 June 2009

“A New Technology Saves Millions in Paddy Fields in Drought Season in Sichuan Province” – Sheng Li

• Yield per mu in this drought-prone area is normally 300 kg (4.5 t/ha); with new methods it can exceed 500-600 kg/mu (7.7-9.0 t/ha), and can even reach 800 kg/mu (12 t/ha).

• Cost of mulching with new methods is 40 ¥/mu; but costs of weeding, land preparation, fertilizer and irrigation are decreased by 230 ¥/mu

• Net income can increase with higher yield by 460 ¥/mu ($1,015/hectare) – while using less water

Rainfed/upland SRIUtilizing monsoon or other

rainfall:1. Change WATER management

- no hoarding of rain water

2. Change NURSERY management – plant several nurseries, expect to sacrifice all but one of them

3. Increase soil organic matter for soil structure & water retention

INDIA: Cultivation costs & net profitsSubject SRI (Rs) Conv (Rs)

Land preparation 2,800 2,800

Seed 45 450

Labour (8) 400 750

DAP-75kg 750 750

Urea -50Kg 310 310

Weeding 600 1,000

Harvesting 420 420

Tractor hiring charges 450 450

Threshing 1,200 1,200

TOTAL COST 6,975 8,130

Irrigation - alternate (hrs) 3 7

Yield (bags) 39 32

Tons/ha 2.73 2.24

GROSS PROFIT 25,389 20,832

NET PROFIT 18,414 12,702

IWMI/India study: -67% more income per ha -- one field

yielded 15 t/ha

Direct-seeding for SRI

• Sow pre-germinated seed in square pattern – Cuba, India, Thailand

• Broadcast of pregerminated seed and thin out plants by weeding – Sri Lanka

• Parachute method – Iran, elsewhere? (spacing is not regular)

Seeder Developed in Cuba

INDIA: Southern Andhra PradeshDirect-seeder at KVK

THAILAND: Farmers making direct-seeder for SRI

Mechanization of SRI

• Need to reduce labor requirements in many places

• Interesting developments in Costa Rica, Pakistan and other countries• Mechanical transplanting• Mechanical land preparation• Mechanical weeding

Mechanical transplanter in Costa Rica

8 t/ha yield vs. 4.2 t/ha before

Costa Rica – mechanized SRI crop

8 t/ha yield without fertilizer

IRAQ: Comparison trials at Al-Mishkhab Rice Research Station, Najaf

Mechanical transplanting with SRI spacing in Iraq

Pakistan, Punjab Province:

Raised beds (dry) formed on laser-leveled fields

Multi-function transplanting machine: laborers drop 10-day seedlings into holes; machine sprays water into

holes and bands compost and fertilizer

Transplanting machine straddling raised beds as laborers drop seedlings

in holes

Weeder/soil aerator:removes weeds and

breaks soil crust for 9 inch (22.5cm) spacing

Growing crop – reached 90 tillers at 72 days

SRI Methods in DifferentAgroecosystems

• Tropical environment – Indonesia/Aceh

• Extreme mountain environment – Afghanistan

• Benign mountain environment – Bhutan

• Desert environment - Mali

‘Rice Aplenty in Aceh

(Indonesia)’

CARITAS NEWSSpring 2009

SRI methods were introduced in Aceh in 2005 by CARITAS Australia after tsunami had devastated the area – new methods raised local rice yields from 2 t/ha to 8.5

t/ha: “Using less rice seed, less water and organic compost, farmers in Aceh have

quadrupled their crop production.”

2009 Report from Aga Khan

Foundation: Baghlan Province,

Afghanistan

2008: 6 farmers got SRI yields of 10.1 t/ha vs. 5.4 t/ha regular2009: 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: SRI field in Baghlan Province, supported by Aga Khan Foundation Natural Resource Management

program

AKF technician making field visit in Baghlan Province

SRI field at 30 days

SRI plant with 133 tillers @

72 days after transplanting 11.56 t/ha

BHUTAN: Report on SRI in Deorali Geog, 2009

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

SRI @ 25x25cm 9.5 t/ha SRI random spacing 6.0 t/ha

SRI @ 30x30cm 10.0 t/ha Standard practice 3.6 t/ha

MALI: SRI nursery in Timbuktu region – 8-day seedlings ready for transplanting

SRI transplanting in Timbuktu, Mali

MALI: Farmer in Timbuktu region

showing difference between regular

and SRI rice plants --

2007: SRI yield was 8.98 t/ha

  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

Rice grain yield for SRI plots, control plots and farmer-practice plots,

Goundam circle, Timbuktu region, Mali, 2008

Importance of Soil Aeration

• Stimulate aerobic soil organisms as they are critical for soil fertility• Nitrogen fixation• Phosphorus solubilization• Mycorrhyzal fungi• Nutrient cycling – protozoa, nematodes• Induced systemic resistance (ISR)

Soil-aerating hand weeder in Sri Lanka costing <$10

MechanicalWeedings

Farmers (N)

Area (ha)

Harvest(kg)

Yield (t/ha)

None 2 0.11 657 5.973One 8 0.62 3,741 7.723Two 27 3.54 26,102 7.373

Three 24 5.21 47,516 9.120Four 15 5.92 69,693 11.772

Madagascar: Impact of SRI Weeding on Yield, Ambatovaky, 1997-98

Why Is ‘Weeding’ So Important?

Not just to control weeds; also benefit from green-manure effect of weeds

Promotion of beneficial soil organisms, both bacteria and fungi (mycorrhizae)

These organisms are functioning not only in the soil -- but also in the plant

• As symbiotic endophytes in ROOTS• Also as endophytes in the LEAVES• Even as endophytes in the seed coat!

Microbial populations in rice rhizosphere

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University research

Microorganisms

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

T. M. Thiyagarajan, WRRC presentation, Tsukuba, Japan, 2004

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)

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

Phosphobacteria \ Azotobacter

Total microbes and numbers of beneficial microbes (CFU g-1) under conventional and

SRI cultivation methods, Tanjung Sari, Bogor, Indonesia, Feb-Aug 2009 (Iswandi

et al., 2009)Cultivation

method and fertilization

Total microbes

(x105)

Azoto-bacter(x103)

Azospi-rillum(x103)

P-solubilizing bacteria

(x104)

Conventional crop mgmt with NPK

2.3a 1.9a 0.9a 3.3a

Inorganic SRI (NPK fertilizer)

2.7a 2.2a 1.7ab 4.0a

Organic SRI (compost)

3.8b 3.7b 2.8bc 5.9b

Inorganic SRI + biofertilizer

4.8c 4.4b 3.3c 6.4b

ENDOPHYTIC AZOSPIRILLUM, TI LLERING, AND RICE YIELDS WITH CULTIVATION PRACTICES AND NUTRIENT AMENDMENTS Replicated trials at Anjomakely, Madagascar, 2001 (Andriankaja, 2002)

Azospirillum No. of CLAY SOIL in roots

(103/mg) tillers/

plant Yield (t/ha)

Traditional cultivation, no amendments

65 17 1.8

SRI cultivation, with no amendments

1,100 45 6.1

SRI cultivation, with NPK amendments

450 68 9.0

SRI cultivation, with compost

1,400 78 10.5

LOAM SOIL SRI cultivation with no amendments

75 32 2.1

SRI cultivation, with compost

2,000 47 6.6

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

Rice Growth Physiology Feng Chi et al.,Applied and 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

Data are based on the average linear root and shoot growth of three symbiotic (dashed line) and three nonsymbiotic (solid line) plants.

Arrows indicate the times when root hair development started.

Ratio of root and shoot growth in symbiotic and nonsymbiotic rice plants -- symbiotic plant seeds were inoculated with Fusarium culmorum

Russell J. Rodriguez et al., ‘Symbiotic regulation of plant growth, development and reproduction,’

Communicative and Integrative Biology, 2:3 (2009).

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).

PERFORMANCE OF SCI PERFORMANCE OF SCI CROPS DURING DROUGHT CROPS DURING DROUGHT

SEASON 2009SEASON 2009 Experiences from Himachal Pradesh & Experiences from Himachal Pradesh & UttarakhandUttarakhand

PEOPLE’S SCIENCE INSTITUTE, DEHRADUNPEOPLE’S SCIENCE INSTITUTE, DEHRADUN

Up-scaling of SRI in Himachal Up-scaling of SRI in Himachal Pradesh & Uttarakhand, 2006-08Pradesh & Uttarakhand, 2006-08

Particulars 2006 2007 2008

Conv. SRI Conv. SRI Conv. SRINo. of farmers (villages)

40 (25) 591 (133) 12,214 (496)

Area (ha) - 0.95 - 15.00 252.98Average grain yield (Q/ha)

31.5 52.5 28.5 54.0 39.5 60.5

% increase in grain yield

- 67 - 89 - 53

Average straw yield (Q/ha)

58 72.5 55 73.5 110.5 145

% increase in straw yield

- 25 - 34 - 31

Average SRI increase in grain yield has been about 70 per cent --Average SRI increase in grain yield has been about 70 per cent --SRI concepts and methods now being applied to OTHER CROPSSRI concepts and methods now being applied to OTHER CROPS

SRI Comparative Crop-Cut Results, SRI Comparative Crop-Cut Results, 20092009Normal (2006-2008) Drought (2009)

Conv. SRI Conv. SRI

No. of effective tillers/ plant 7 21 5 18Average plant height (cm) 99 122 88 102Average panicle length (cm) 18 24 19 25Average no. of grains/panicle 93 177 90 174

Grain yield (t/ha) 3.6 5.5 2.5 4.8Straw yield (t/ha) 11.1 14.5 5.1 8.5

** In this drought year, grain yields of conventional crop decreased by 31%, as compared to a reduction of only 13% in the SRI crop** Conventional yields stood close to 2.5 tons per ha while SRI yields were 4.8 tons per ha -- 92% higher

Experiments on System of Crop Experiments on System of Crop Intensification (SCI), 2009Intensification (SCI), 2009

Crops Total Farmers

Area(in Ha)

Maize 183 10.34

Kidney bean (Rajma) 679 14.01Sesame (Til) 22 0.41Finger millet (Mandwa) 340 8.04Black gram (Urad) 314 2.00Soyabean 77 2.47Tomato 45 4.36French bean 44 0.35

1,704 41.98

Finger Millet Maize

Conv. SCI Conv. SCIAve. ears/plant (cobs/plant) 3 5 2 3Average plant height (cm) 69.5 88.5 149.4 173.7Ave. no. of grains /ear (kernels/cob)

290 428 225 248

Grain yield (T/ha) 1.2 1.8 17.1 22.9% increase in grain yield - 50% - 34%

Results of SCI with Finger Millet & Maize, Results of SCI with Finger Millet & Maize, Kharif 2009Kharif 2009

System of Finger Millet I ntensificationon lef t; regular management of improved

variety and of traditional variety on right

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.’

Comparison of SRI and usual rice plants –

Miyatty Jannah, Crawuk village,

Ngawi, E. Java

Single-seed SRI rice plantVariety: CiherangFertile tillers: 223Sampoerna CSR Program, Malang, E. Java, 2009

SRI is pointing the way toward a paradigm shift toward ‘post-modern agriculture’?• Less genocentric and more fundamentally biocentric• More interest in epigenetics• Re-focus biotechnology and bioengineering to capitalize on benefits of biodiversity and ecological dynamics• Less chemical-dependent and more energy-efficient• More oriented to health of humans and the environment•Intensification of production• Focus on greater factor productivity and sustainability

THANK YOU

• Check out SRI website: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/

• Email: ciifad@cornell.edu

• or ntu1@cornell.edu