STATUS OF SRI CULTIVATION AND ITS FUTURE PROSPECTS IN

INDIA

Dr. M.C. Diwakar, DIRECTOR

DIRECTORATE OF RICE DEVELOPMENT, GOVT.OF INDIAMINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE

DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE & COOPERATION, PATNA

0

30.6833.14

35.62 37.60 39.33 40.30 41.00 42.68 44.55 42.56

05

101520253035404550

1st

2n

d

3rd

4th

5th

6th

7th

8th

9th

10

th

Plan-wise Area of Rice in India (area in million ha.)

Series1

Series2

25.0330.34

35.1541.8

47.3454.49

65.06

78.7487.27 85.40

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Ist Plan

2nd Plan

3rd Plan

4th Plan

5th Plan

6th Plan

7th Plan

8th Plan

9th Plan

10th Plan

Plan-wise Production of Rice in India (production in million tonnes)

Series1

816915 987

11121204

1352

1587

18451959 2007

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Ist Plan

2nd Plan

3rd Plan

4th Plan

5th Plan

6th Plan

7th Plan

8th Plan

9th Plan

10th Plan

Plan-wise Productivity of Rice in India (productivity in kg/ha)

Series1

Benefits of SRI * Seed requirement reduced by 65-70 per cent* Saving of water by about 35-45 per cent* More number of tillers/productive tillers* More number of spikelets per panicle* Uniform maturity* Head rice recovery is more* Earlier maturityby 5-20 days* Healthier plants resistant to major pests and diseases* Yield advantage over the conventional method by 1.5 to 2 times* Less competition between rice plant and weeds

Why a Paradigm Shift is NeededThe area of rice has been declining, and its productivity is

also stagnating. There is fear among the scientific community that the country may not be in a position to feed India’s citizens based on the present growth rate and current trends of productivity of rice.

The Green Revolution was successful for making our country self-sufficient in foodgrain production. However, the declining trend of food grain production during the past decades has become a great concern. The concept of Green Revolution was based on the following strategies:

(i) Develop semi-dwarf high-yielding varieties and exploit their genetic potential(ii) Make them more responsive to fertiliser application(iii) Increase optimum use of inputs such as water, fertiliser, seeds, pesticides and farm implements(iv) Utilise non-monetary inputs such as timely sowing, spacing, and the timely application of fertilisers and harvesting.

Strategies There is need to adopt other strategies in the present context as productivity is stagnating. Thus greater emphasis has to be given to bridging the gap between existing yields and potential yields demonstrated in the experimental fields.

Appropriate strategies may be as follows:(i) Adoption of improved crop production technology and its dissemination to the farming community(ii) Popularisation of hybrid rice(iii) Promotion of System of Rice Intensification

Hybrid Rice Demonstrations under SRI in Dindigul District, Tamil Nadu, 2004-05

Rice No. of demon-

strations

Area (acres)

Average yield

(kg / ha)

Performance

Hybrid 7 7 10,474 SRI gave 20-30 % more yield, vigorous crop growth, pest and disease resistance, and reduced weed problem

HYV 13 13 7,045 Produced more tillers than conventional methods, more productive tillers, less disease and pests, 15% more yield, plus labour and water saving. Lower seed rate and reduced water requirement

Table 8Comparison of SRI Technology and Normal Practice

in terms of Cost and Benefit Ratios

Sl. No. Component Cultivation cost / acre

Normal practice SRI

1 Nursery management

Ploughing, manuring & water management 500 100

2. Seed cost 200 30

3 Seed treatment 15 15

4 Main field preparation

Ploughing, organic manuring, bio-fertilizer application & bund formation

2000 2000

5 Inorganic manuring

Basal application 1200 1200

Top dressing 400 400

6 Transplanting 800 1000

7 Weeding/ weedicide application 600 100

8 Plant protection / spraying (4 times) 1,200 900

9 Irrigation 350 350

10 Harvest 800 600

Total cultivation cost (Rs.) 8,065 6,695

Yield (kg/ Acre) 2,400 2,818

Value of produce (Rs.) 14,400 16,908

Benefit / acre (Rs.) 6,335 10,213

Benefit : cost ratio 1.78 : 1 2.5 : 1

Sl. No.

Component Cultivation cost / acre

Normal practice SRI

Cost of cultivation (Rs. /ha) On-Farm Trial in Tamil Nadu

Sl. No. Details SRI Conventional Difference

1 Nursery 842 2,607 1,765

2 Field preparation 1,550 1,550 -

3 Pulling planting 1,700 3,500 1,800

4 Weeding 2,175 2,700 525

5 Nutrition 3,310 2,657 (-) 653

6 Plant protection 375 375 -

7 Irrigation 750 750 -

8 Harvesting 5 580 4,290 (-) 1,290

Total 16,282 18,429 2,147

Future Prospects of SRI

• Biologically eco-friendly• No pollution in environment, water and soil• Increasing farmers’ income as well as enhancing

their productivity• Higher benefit-cost ratio – 2.5 : 1• Technologies lead to organic farming• Less dependence on chemical fertilizers• Minimum use of pesticides• Early maturity of crop

Popularisation of SRI technologies• This technology is being popularised in countries like

Madagascar, Cambodia, Zambia, India, Myanmar, China, Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Nepal.

• It is being popularised in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Tripura in almost all districts. Also State govts. in Bihar, Karnataka , Chhattishgarh , Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, and West Bengal are implementing SRI in selected districts to increase yield. To create awareness among farmers, training and demonstrations are being organised at the farmers’ field level under Macro Management of Agriculture.

• SRI component has been added in the National Food SecurityMission.

Variety-wise yield HYV Ave. yield

with conv. method (mt/ha)

Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)

No. of demos in

farmer field (0.4 ha)

Joya 3.4 -3.8 5.5 -6.2 37

Krishna Hamsha

3.8 -4.5 6.4- 6.8 134

Satabdi 3.0-3.5 4.8 -5.4 46

Swati 3.75-4.25 5.8-6.25 30

HYV Ave. yield with conv.

method (mt/ha)

Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)

No. of demos in farmers

field (0.4 ha)

IR 64 4.5-5.0 7.2-7.6 192

MTU7029 4.5-5.5 7.2 -8.5 183

NDR 359 4.3-5.2 6.5 -7.2 73

NDR 97 2.5-3.0 4.6-5.0 64

POOJA 4.8-5.2 7.4 -8.2 124

HYBRIDHYBRID Ave. yield

with conv. method (mt/ha)

Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)

No. of demos in

farmer field (0.4 ha)

DRRH-1 6.0-6.5 7.6-8.1 19

KRH-2 6.5-7.0 8.2-8.7 35

PHB 71 6.5-7.0 8.1-8.5 28

SHEYADRI 6.2-6.8 7.2-7.8 15

Variety-wise yield

Local Ave. yield with conv.

method (mt/ha)

Ave. yield with SRI method (mt/ha)

No. of demos in farmer fields (0.4 ha)

Local varieties

2.0-3.0 3.8-4.3 37

Local scented varieties

1.5-2.0 3.1 -3.4 12

7917

7310 7433

6777

54795669 5536

5282

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Comparison between SRI and conventional methods in Andhra Pradesh

Av. Yield in SRIplot/ha (Kg)

Av. Yield inconventionalplot/ha(kg)

Yield performance of SRI on rice crop in trials organised by the Directorate of Agriculture, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

Year Season No. of trials

Ave. yield in SRI plot

(kg/ha)

Ave. yield in conventional plot (kg/ha)

Yield advantage

(kg/ha)

2003-04 Kharif/ rabi 476 7,917 5,479 2,438

2004-05 Kharif 599 7,310 5,561 1,749

Rabi 311 7,310 5,777 1,533

2005-06 Kharif 2,818 7,476 5,451 2,025

Rabi 11,792 7,390 5,620 1,770

2006-07 Kharif 7,653 6,724 5,005 1,718

Rabi 6,804 6,830 5,558 1,272

64.565.7 65.4

5253.1

51.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Comparison between SRI and conventional methods in Karnataka

SRI yield (Qtl/ha) Conventional yield (Qtl/ha)

Yield performance of SRI demonstration in Karnataka during 2004-05 to 2007-08

Year No. of demonstrations

SRI yield (mt/ha)

Conventional yield (mt/ha)

2004-05 2040 6.45 5.20

2005-06 4528 6.57 5.31

2006-07 1020 6.54 5.12

5348

6485

5800

7400

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Conven-tional cultivation (kg/ha) SRI cultivation (kg/ha)

Comparison between conventional cultivation and SRI cultivation in Tamil Nadu

2005-06 2006-07

Yield performance of SRI demonstration in

Tamil Nadu during 2005-06 and 2006-07

Year Average yield (kg/ha) Addl. Yield (kg/ha)

Conventional cultivation

SRI cultivation

2005-06 5,348 6,485 1,137

2006-07 5,800 7,400 1,600

Cost-benefit ratio:Cost of cultivation in Tamil Nadu (SRI vs. conventional methods)

Sl. No.

Inputs/ Particular SRI Conventional Savings %

1 Nursery area 100 Sq.m 800 Sq.m 88

2 Seed cost (Rs.) 103.00 1212.00 90

3 Irrigation water 24 m3 53 m3 55

4 Fertiliser cost (Rs.) 18 180 90

5 Labour cost, incl. ploughing (Rs.)

1,200 1800 34

6 Other costs (Rs.) 120 - -

Total costs (Rs.) 1,592 3,192 1,600

Net savings/ha = Rs. 1,600.00 contd..

Results of SRI experiments conducted in

Punjab State, 2006-07Method of cultivation (25 x 25 cm) SRI (without

puddling)Non-SRI (with

puddling)

Panicle length (cm) 29.8 27.07

Total no. of grains 190 130

No. of tillers per sq. metre 415 171

Yield per sq. metre (grams) 785 475

No. of chaffy grains 22 24

Yield per acre (quintals) 31.4 19.0

1000-grain weight 18.60 17.34

Plant height (cm) 137 144.5

No. of irrigations 14 26

Yield comparisons between conventional and SRI methods

54.7959.88

83.79

55

70

2

79.17

70.45

104.74

85 87

3.4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

A.P. T. N.

HYV Hybrid

Tripura

HYV Hybrid Scented

Yield (Q/ha)

conventional

Yield (Q/ha)

SRI