SRI & TQPM Trial Demo Farms in the Visayas: Negros Occidental

Trials in the Magballo-Balicotoc-Canlamay Integrated Irrigation Systems under SPISP of NIA and ADB

2003-2004 Wet and Dry Season Trials, Supported by the Subproject Staff, Municipal Agriculture Office, and the

Agricultural Training Institute as well as the Consultants’ Consortium for SPISP

Accompanied by written report

The Color-coded Schemes

M

B

C

I

I

S

SPISP

NIA/ADB

System of Rice Intensification (SRI) at Magballo-Balicotoc-Canlamay IIS

Three spacings were evaluated, with organic fertilizer that is readily available from the market

SRI compared with the TQPM system that has a head start using inorganic fertilizer.

Rice Technology Demonstration Farm on SRIRice Technology Demonstration Farm on SRI

Preparing the Seedbed

Raising Seedlings Using Bamboos & Plastic Bags

Land Preparation: Mechanical and Man-Animal Finishing

Final Harrowing/Leveling: Transplanting

Split Bamboo Seedling Container First Option

Application of Organic Fertilizers

Health-Conscious Weeding

With a Simplified Rotary Weeder

Rice Technology Demonstration Farm with TQPM

Total Quality Productivity Management (TQPM): ATI-NIA/SPISP

This is similar to the System of Rice Intensification from Madagascar (and the Philippine version of the Margate Intermittent Irrigation & Drainage System, popularized in the Philippines in the 70s). A booster application of inorganic fertilizer is given after land preparation

Plants are greenerthan in previous

photograph of SRI

TQPM (Left) and SRI (Right)

Results of the Pilot Rice Techno-Demo Farms

FarmersFarmersPracticePractice

Practices Distance

Land Area

Ha./sq. m.

Production

(Sacks)

40 kg/sack

Gross

Income

PhP

Expenses

PhP

Net

Income

PhP

UndefinedUndefined 1 Ha.1 Ha. 66.3066.30 18,540.0018,540.00 10,948.0010,948.00 7,592.007,592.00

TQPMTQPMTechno-Techno-DemoDemo

10 cm x10 cm x30 cm30 cm

200 m200 m²²1 Ha.1 Ha.

1.831.8391.5091.50

549.00549.0027,450.0027,450.00

335.82335.8216,319.8016,319.80

213.18213.1811,130.2011,130.20

10 cm x10 cm x40 cm40 cm

200 m200 m²²1 Ha.1 Ha.

1.501.5075.0075.00

450.00450.0022,500.0022,500.00

309.01309.0115,435.5015,435.50

140.99140.997,064.507,064.50

SRISRITechno-Techno-DemoDemo

25 cm x25 cm x25 cm25 cm

35 cm x35 cm x35 cm35 cm

45 cm x45 cm x45 cm45 cm

133 m133 m²²1 Ha.1 Ha.

1.671.67125.00125.00

501.00501.0037,500.0037,500.00

393.58393.5829,865.2629,865.26

107.42107.427,634.747,634.74

133 m133 m²²1 Ha.1 Ha.

2.442.44183.33183.33

732.00732.0054,999.0054,999.00

407.99407.9930,945.2630,945.26

324.01324.0124,053.7424,053.74

133 m133 m²²1 Ha.1 Ha.

2.052.05154.18154.18

615.00615.0046,254.0046,254.00

389.55389.5530,735.7630,735.76

225.45225.4515,518.2415,518.24

Comparative Mean Values of ET, P, and Total Water Requirements

Irrigation

Technique

Evapotrans-

piration (mm)

Deep Perco-lation (mm)

Totals (mm)

Traditional shallow flooding

765.4

514.9

1280.3

Water-saving SRI

688.8 169.3 858.1

Difference 66.6 345.6

(67.1% less)

422.2

Derived Pumping Cost Savings with the SRI Option

Date Plot Pumping Water Volume Water Depth Pumping Traditional Pumping Pumping Pumpingof Area Time Pumped Maintained Cost Flooding Time Cost Cost

Irrigation ( m2) (hrs) (m3) (mm) (PhP ( m3) (hrs)* PhP Saved,%

24-Jun-03 399.99 1.16 28.94 20 9.126.67 1.07 8.38 -7.86%

03-Jul-03 399.99 0.83 20.71 20 6.5182.66 3.31 25.98 299.15%

03-Aug-03 399.99 0.67 16.72 20 5.25 34.67 1.39 10.88 107.33%

16-Aug-03 399.99 0.71 17.71 20 5.5737.33 1.50 11.74 110.80%

21-Sep-03 Ter Drn 56.00 1.50 11.74 110.80%Total Plot 399.99 3.37 84.08 20 26.43 237.33 8.76 68.74 160.07%

Extrapolated 1 ha. 84.25 2,102.05 20 660.77 5,933.33 219.11 1,718.48 160.07%

Extrapolated Irrigation Cost Savings for the SRI Trial-Demo Plots with 110 gpm Pump