Dr. Lin Xianqing

E-mail ： xqlin2003@163.com

China National Rice Research Institute

Workshop on SRI rice technology

Evaluation of Key Factors of SRI Method

Reporting Content ：

Ⅰ. SeedlingsⅡ. SpacingⅢ. Organic fertilizerⅣ. Water managementⅤ. Comparison between SRI and

traditional methodⅥ. Operation of SRI

1. Seedlings

1. TilleringTime Sowing

directly8 d oldseedling

13d oldseedling

18 d oldseedling

23 d oldseedling

28d oldseedling

Jun 7 2.80 1.33 0.80 1.35 -- --

Jun 16 6.73 3.33 2.67 3.87 2.53 2.73

Jun 27 16.53 7.67 7.60 9.60 8.47 7.00

Jul 2 19.93 14.00 13.00 13.53 11.67 10.80

Jul 8 27.93 20.87 26.20 25.40 21.27 21.93

Jul 16 30.20 29.73 30.20 27.93 25.47 25.67

Jul 24 27.20 25.07 29.40 26.67 24.40 24.87

Panicles 15.58 15.68 17.03 17.57 16.32 16.57

Effective tillering

58% 60% 58% 66% 66% 66%

2. Yield (Site:Xiage town)Yield

component Productive

panicles (/m2)

Total grain no/panicle

Seed setting rate

(%)

1000-grain weight(g)

Theoretical yield (t/ ha)

Sowing directly

172.4 209.3 80.4 26.0 7.6

8d old seedling

173.9 204.7 89.0 25.8 8.2

13d old seedling

188.9 234.0 88.2 25.5 10.0

18d old seedling

194.9 238.3 83.6 25.6 10.0

23d old seedling

181.4 212.6 84.8 25.8 8.4

28d old seedling

184.4 185.3 79.5 26.0 7.1

Yield (Site:Baite town)Yield

component Productive

panicles (/m2)

Total grain no/panicle

Seed setting

rate (%)

1000-grain

weight (g)

Theoretical yield (t/ ha)

Sowing directly

203.9 191.2 91.2 25.4 9.0

8d old seedling

205.4 200.3 87.7 26.2 9.4

13d old seedling

233.9 207.0 90.9 25.6 11.3

18d old seedling

208.4 230.6 91.2 25.4 10.5

23d old seedling

203.9 203.0 90.5 25.8 9.7

28d old seedling

203.6 196.1 91.3 26.3 9.6

Ⅱ. Spacing

1. Tillering Li angyoupei j i u两优培九

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112

Days af ter headi ng d出穗天数 （ ）

出穗

比例

Pro

po

rtio

n o

fh

ead

ing

%（

）

ECA

中优6 zhongyou 6号

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112

Days af ter headi ng d出穗天数 （ ）

出穗

比例

Prop

orti

on o

fhe

adin

g%

（）

EC

A

A: 195,000 hills/ha C: 135,000 hills/haE : 75,000 hills/ha

2.Yield (Xianju)Transplanti

ng densi

ty

Highest

tillering no.

Produc-tive panicle no.

Rate of

fertile panicle

s

Total

grain

no.

Seed setting

rate

1000-

grain weig

ht

Theoretic

al yield

Grain yield

/m2 /m2 /m2 % /Ear % g t/ hm2 t /hm2

15.0 404.8 208.4 51.5 184 93.9 26.6 9.61 8.95b

12.0 382.3 232.4 60.8 174 92.8 26.7 10.02 9.06b

9.0 359.3 248.9 69.2 173 90.9 25.7 10.08 9.79a

6.0 341.8 202.4 59.2 189 91.6 25.9 9.06 8.86b

2.Yield (CNRRI) – 2 seasons

Treatment

Transplanting density (hill/m2) Yield(kg/ha) Treatment

Transplanting density (hill/m2)

Yield (kg/h

a)

V1A 19.5 6,372.8b V3A 19.5 10,660b

V1B 16.5 6,692.4a V3B 16.5 11,299.9a

V1C 13.5 6,164.2b V3C 13.5 9,817.7c

V1D 10.5 5,106.4c V3D 10.5 8,111.3d

V1E 7.5 4,864.8d V3E 7.5 7,202.3e

V2A 19.5 7,360.0b V2A 19.5 8,180.3b

V2B 16.5 7,805.7a V2B 16.5 8,808.3a

V2C 13.5 7,316.2b V2C 13.5 8,048.1b

V2D 10.5 6,325.8c V2D 10.5 7,768.5c

V2E 7.5 6,432.2c V2E 7.5 7,682.9c

Ⅲ.Organic fertilizer

Treat-ment

Productive panicle/m2

Grain number per ear

Grain yield (t ha-1)

No manure 15000 kg ha-1

manure

No manure

15000 kg ha-1

manure

No manure

15000 kg ha-1

manure

　 Liangyoupeijiu

CK 199.2b* 201.6b 154.1b 157.1b 7.03b 7.21b

D1 206.7ab 220.1a 158.9ab 173.4a 7.43ab 7.99a

D2 223.4a 225.6a 171.2a 176.6a 8.01a 8.27a

D3 217.6a 221.3a 167.3a 170.9a 7.71a 7.93a

Zhongyou 6

CK 228.3b 233.8b 149.1b 154.6b 8.06b 8.37b

D1 248.9a 262.3a 168.7a 169.1a 8.81a 8.97a

D2 251.4a 266.7a 169.8a 172.4a 8.97a 9.32a

D3 249.8a 259.8a 166.7a 169.3a 8.82a 9.01a

Effect of organic fertilizer on grain yield

D1: 7.5 hills/m2; D2: 13.5 hills/m2; D3 :19.5 hills/m2; CK: 19.5 hills/m2

Ⅳ. Water management

Quantitative measurement of water management

SWD: Shallow water depth with wetting and drying

Comparison of water input and output under different irrigation methods.

TreatmentIrriga-

tion

water

Puddling

water

Effective

rainfall

Total water

consumption

WUE Productivity

of irrigation

water supply

（ m3/

ha）

（ m3/ha） （ m3/

ha）

（ m3/ha） （ kg.m-

3）

（ kg.m-3）

Traditional

(CK)

5,806.5 1,800 5,110.5 12,717 0.6 1.12

SWD 3,529.5 1,197 5,110.5 9,837 0.74 1.8

±% -39.2 -33.5 0.0 -22.6 23.3 60.7

- 350- 300- 250- 200- 150- 100- 50

050

100150200

TP TL FL MT

Anal ysi s t i me

Eh

mV

（）

ACK

Changes in redox potential of SWD at different growth stages ( A----SWD)

The number of actinomycetes under different fertilizer and water management regimes

TreatmentNumber

(106) TreatmentNumber

(106)

I1F1 66.3 c I2F1 52.3 b

I1F2 119.7 b I2F2 84.4 a

I1F3 259.6 a I2F3 93.3 a

I1 =SWD; I2 = CKF1 = Chemical fertilizerF2 = 50% organic, 50% chemical fertilizer F3 = All organic fertilizer

Physiological characteristics of rice leaves at flowering stage as influenced by manure and density

Net photo-synthetic rate (µmol CO2 m

-2 s-1)

Stomatal conductance (mol H2O

m-2 s-1 )

Specific leaf weight(g m-2)

Leaf area index (LAI)

Leaf dry weight (DW)

(g plant-1)

Manure

No manure

22.19±1.54 1.37±0.11 40.97±4.75 6.34±0.78 1.01±0.11

15 t ha-1 manure

25.67±1.35 1.47±0.25 46.49±3.79 7.01±0.76 1.13±0.06

Density

D1 23.29±2.28 1.45±0.21 42.26±4.77 5.73±0.49 1.04±0.10

D2 25.46±2.08 1.46±0.19 45.90±5.06 6.99±0.32 1.12±0.11

D3 23.04±2.21 1.35±0.20 43.02±5.80 7.30±0.48 1.06±0.11

D1: 7.5 hills/m2; D2: 13.5hills/m2; D3 : 19.5hills/m2

Nitrogen accumulated before flowering stage and during the grain-filling period (GFP); N remobilized from vegetative tissue; leaf and grain N content; total N accumulated at

maturity; and N harvest index (NHI) of 2 irrigation methods in 2 rice cultivars (Liangyoupeijiu and Eryou 7954)

Effect of SWD on tiller composition and productive panicles

Variety TreatmentProportion of tillers （ % ）

Panicle

rate （ % ）at early

tillering stage

at late

tillering stage

Zhongyou6 SWD 86.7 13.3 69.7

CK 52.9 47.1 53.6

Liangyoupeijiu SWD 88.9 11.1 64.1

　 CK 62.4 37.6 51.3

Effect of SWD on flag leaf traits（ IIyou7954）

Treatment Flag leaf angle

(degrees o)

Flag leaf length (cm)

Flag leaf width (cm)

Straight angle

SWD 20.8 42.9 2.2 100.0

CK 88.0 47.6 2.3 77.4

Zhongyou 6

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 30 60 90 120

Pl ant hi ght cm（ ）

Light

transmittance(%）

A

T

Li angyoupei j i u

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 30 60 90 120

l ant hi ght cm（ ）Light

transmittance(%）

A

T

Effect of SWD on canopy light transmittance rate at flowering stage (A = SWD; T = CK)

Irrigation method

Incidence in hills( % ）

Incidence in tillers（ % ）

Index of sheath blight

（ % ）

SWD 60 9.6 2.1

CK 100 50.7 14.9

Effect of SWD on the incidence of sheath blight

0. 00

0. 02

0. 04

0. 06

0. 08

0. 10

0. 12

0. 14

0. 16

0. 18

孕穗期 开花期 孕穗期 开花期

Bleeding sap per tiller

g/h

（）

A

T

Zhongyou 6 Li angyoupei j iu

Effect of SWD on bleeding sap of rice root ( A = SWD; T = CK)

V. Comparison between SRI and traditional method

Physiological characteristics of rice leaves as influenced by SRI

Physiological characteristics

Flowering stage 20d after flowering

SRI CK SRI CK

Net photosynthetic rate (µmol CO2 m

-2 s-1)25.46a* 22.18b 15.53a 11.66b

Stomatal conductance (mol H2O m-2 s-1 )

1.46a 1.29b 0.58 0.52

Specific leaf weight (g m-2)

45.90a 39.22b 59.44a 53.15b

Leaf Area Index 6.99 6.83 3.29a 2.09b

Leaf dry weight (g plant-1)

1.12a 0.96b 1.27a 1.11b

* Means followed by different letters are significantly different at the P = 0.05 level according to Duncan’s Multiple Range Test.

Effect of transplanting density on leaf nitrogen content under SRI

0. 00

5. 00

10. 00

15. 00

20. 00

25. 00

30. 00

35. 00

CK D1 D2 D3

Treatment

Leaf

co

nte

nt

(gkg

-1)

CK = 25 hills/m2; D1 = 7.5 hills/m2 D2 = 13.5 hills/m2 D3 = 19.5 hills/m2

c bba

Tiller emergence

SRI CK

Tiller number per plant

% of total

Tiller number per plant

% of total

1st branch 7.8 19 7.1 31

2nd branch 20.4 50 12.3 53

3rd branch 12.6 31 3.8 16

Total 40.8 100 23.1 100

Various tiller components with SRI

Root growth of SRI at stem elongation

CK SRI

Demonstration yields of SRI（ 2003-2005）

Year Variety Site Average yield Highest yield

Area (ha) Yield (t/ha) (t/ha)

2003Liangyoupeijiu

Tiantai 3.4 11.0 11.3

2003 Cunjiangnu 2 Yuhuan 38.7 10.8 11.4

2003 Xieyou 9308 Xinchang 82.5 11.5 12.0

2004 Goudao 6 Tiantai 6.8 12.1 12.4

2004Liangyoupeijiu

Tiantai 10.0 11.7 12.0

2004Zhongzheyou 1

Shengzhou

7.5 12.3 12.5

2004Zhongzheyou 1

Linan 7.6 10.7 11.2

2004 IIyou7954 Fuhu 7.0 10.6 11.7

2005 Goudao 6 Fuyang 7.0 11.0 12.6

2005 Goudao 6 Linan 6.8 12.0 12.2

2005Zhongzheyou 1

Linan 7.5 11.2 11.9

2005Zhongzheyou 1

Kaihua 8.0 11.5 12.2

2005 Goudao 1 Kaihua 6.9 11.7 12.5

2005 II you 7954 Kaihua 6.8 12.0 13.2

Ⅵ. Operations of SRI

A. Precision seeding with seedlings by tray

B. Density control

Transplanting density: 13.5-19.5 x 104 hill/ha

C. Standard of field water control is SWD

Three Shallows – transplanting,

when spraying with insecticide, and

during booting-flowering stage

Three Wets - tillering, panicle initiation,

and during milk grain-mature grain stage

One Dry - tiller control

“SWD” =

Shallow-water puddling

Wet tillage

Shallow-water transplanting

Dry for tiller control

Wet tillering

Wet for mature grain

Shallow-water for booting to flowering

Wet for milk grain

D. Maintaining N and increasing K

Need to increase organic fertilizer

E . Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

Demonstration of SRI in Bu Tou Village

Technical Guidance

Application area of SRI in Zhejiang 2005-09

688,000 ha

Calculated increase in production from SRI use

862,000 tons(+1.253 t/ha)

Thank you