Presenter: M.C. Diwakar, Director, Directorate of Rice Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperation, Patna Audience: 2nd National SRI Symposium, Agartala, India Subject Country: India

1. STATUS OF SRI CULTIVATION AND ITS FUTURE PROSPECTS IN INDIA Dr. M.C. Diwakar , DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF RICE DEVELOPMENT, GOVT.OF INDIA MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE & COOPERATION, PATNA

5. 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

6. Why a Paradigm Shift is Needed The 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:

7. (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.

8. 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

9. 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

10. Table 8 Comparison 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

11. 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

12. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. HYBRID HYBRID 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

18. 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

27. Yield comparisons between conventional and SRI methods 54.79 59.88 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

28. THANK YOU