1.
ACIAR-04: Crop diversity – Healthy Food – Cash Income
Project Title
SURVEY OF SRI AND OTHER RICE
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ACID SOILS
IN PREY VENG PROVINCES
Speaker: Mr. Pin Vannaro
Maharishi Vedic University

2.
Project Objective
To make an assessment of the differences
between CP, BMP and SRI practices in terms of
biophysical, economic and social aspects.
To provide MVU students and staff with practical
experience in field survey techniques.
To conduct a cross-check to discuss with involved
farmer, researchers and extension workers.

3.
Project Duration
 Commencement date : November, 2005
 Completion date : November, 2006

4.
Staff and resources
 Mr. Pin Vannaro
 Mr. Veth Ravy
 Mr. Seing Sokha
 Mr. Chhem Vutha
 Nine Student Numerators
 SRI Research Advisory Group

5.
Collaborating Organisations
 AusAID
 GTZ/RDP
 SRI Secretariat ( DAALI/MAFF )

6.
Study Areas

7.
Farming Systems Survey
 System of Rice Intensification ( SRI )
 Those farmers who have attended SRI training and intend
to use SRI practice in coming crops.
 Best Management Practice ( BMP )
 Those farmers who have attended other rice production
training.
 Conventional Practice ( CP )
 Those farmers who have not received any rice production
training.

8.
Sample Numbers
Farming
Practice
KamChai
Mear
Prey Veng
Kampong
Leave
Ba Phnom
Kampong
Trobek
Phreas
Sdach
Total
SRI 00 00 00 02 15 00 17
BMP 06 03 02 00 05 05 21
CP 08 04 00 10 04 00 26
Total 14 07 02 12 25 05 64

9.
Data collection
1.Baseline Data
2.Agronomy Observat
3.Socio-economic
4.Other related Data

10.
Average land area (ha) for farmers
using different practice
0.14
0.77
0.38
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
SRI BMP CP
SRI BMP CP

11.
Rice management on three
farming practice
Description SRI BMP CP
Seeding rate (kg/ha) 22 52 74
Seeding age at transplanting (days) 14 26 29
Planting depth (cm) 1 2 3
Planting distance (cm) 26 17 16

12.
Rice biophysical characteristics
Rice biophysical SRI BMP CP Sig.
Plant height (cm) 77.39a 61.35b 67.24b 0.0010
Tiller number per m2
390b 418b 510a 0.0001
Non-tiller number per m2
36c 94b 133a 0.0001
Panicle number per hill 350b 323ab 376a 0.6900
Panicle length (cm) 23a 21b 21b 0.0001
Seed number per panicle 125a 109b 90c 0.0001
Filled grains per panicle 101a 81b 70c 0.0001
Unfilled grains per panicle 24a 28a 21a 0.1040
1000-grain weight (g) 24.41a 24.57a 24.80a 0.4380
Grain yield (kg/ha) 3,798a 2990b 2553c 0.0001

13.
Grain yields of rice management systems
3,798
2,990
2,553
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
SRI BMP CP
Grain
Yield
(kg/ha)

14.
Relationship between grain yield and filled grain
SRI : y = 32.501x + 527.94
R
2
= 0.3782
BMP : y = 18.978x + 1448
R
2
= 0.2429
CP : y = 18.848x + 1240.2
R2
= 0.1931
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Filled grain per panical
Grain
yield
(kg/ha)

15.
Relationship between grain yield and field techniques
Field techniques Grain Yield (kg/ha)
Organic fertilizer application 0.03 ns
Inorganic fertilizer application -0.44 **
Seed rate -0.28 *
Seedling age -0.54 **
Plant number per hill -0.55 **
Planting depth -0.55 **
Hill spacing 0.53 **
Water depth at transplanting -0.26 *

16.
Socioeconomic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
Level of appropriateness of rice management practices
4.2
4.0
3.7
4.0
1.0
5.0
2.5
0.0
4.2
1.3
0.0
2.0
0
1
2
3
4
5
Seedling age Transplanting Land Preparation Weeding Spacing Water level
Appropriatness
score
BMP
CP
SRI
Note: score 1 to 5 represent the worst to best

17.
Socioeconomic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
Labor inputs of rice management systems (person-hours/ha)
Labor inputs SRI BMP CP Sig.
Compost preparation 868a 67b 1b 0.0001
Land Preparation 89a 77a 75a 0.8480
Uproot seedling 390a 348a 261a 0.4610
Transplanting 550a 449a 405a 0.6470
Water management 156a 116a 109a 0.6540

18.
Socioeconomic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
Labor inputs of rice management systems (person-hours/ha) (cont.
Labor inputs SRI BMP CP Sig.
Weed control 205a 90ab 23b 0.0280
Pesticide spray 0b 18a 13a 0.0160
Harvesting 363a 183b 266ab 0.0570
Threshing 394a 70b 146b 0.0100
Drying/storing 327a 91b 93b 0.0001
Total labor inputs 3311a 1622b 1426b 0.0020

19.
Socioeconomic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
Input costs of rice management practices (thousand riels/ha)
Material cost SRI BMP CP Sig.
Seed cost 29.2b 80.5a 69.1a 0.0001
Organic fertilizer cost 706.1a 39.3b 145.8b 0.0001
Inorganic fertilizer cost 0.0b 426.6a 459.2a 0.0001
Pesticide cost 0.0b 34.6a 29.4 0.0390
Fuel cost 269.6 339.6a 187.4a 0.2960
Total material cost 1,004.9a 920.6a `890.9a 0.8700

20.
Socioeconomic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
Income from each rice management practice (thousand riels/ha)
- SRI = 2,089.10 riels/ha
- BMP = 1,644.70 riels/ha
- CP = 1,404.30 riels/ha
- There were highly significantly different between
the income of these rice management systems

21.
Socioeconomic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
Gross margin of rice management practice (thousand riels/ha)
-2,285
-1,059
-1,166
1,084
724
513
-2,500
-2,000
-1,500
-1,000
-500
0
500
1,000
1,500
SRI BMP CP
GMs
(thousand
riels/ha)
Gross Margin with labors
Gross Margin without labors

22.
Socioeconomic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
Farmers perception on the importance of rice field management techniques
6 5
27
0 0
12 11
19 12
28 33
38
33
95
81
44
76
58
67 62
35
67
5 8
44
5
31
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
SRI BMP CP SRI BMP CP SRI BMP CP
Fertilizer Land Preparation Seed
Field techniques
%
of
farmers
response
High
Medium
Low

23.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Performance of Rice Management Systems
- SRI provided the highest grain yield and other positive rice
characteristics compared to BMP and CP. Grain yield increased
approximately 48% and 27%
- The main factors contributing to improving and enhancing rice
production were short seedling age, good water management,
weed control, organic fertilizer, and good planting methods.
- SRI played the significantly role to improve soil fertility, enhance
good performance, and contribute to good quality of rice grain.
However, limited availability of organic fertilizer is an important
issue to be concerned by many stakeholders

24.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Farmers practices
- SRI farmers usually follow the practices of seedling preparation,
transplanting, hill spacing, organic fertilizer application, weeding,
and water rather than those of BMP and CP farmers. In contrast,
CP farmers relied mainly on natural condition.
-Some techniques could not be implemented by farmers in
specific conditions. For instance, farmers could not manage water
to enhance rice growing.
-Requiring high quality of field management, SRI field sizes were
relatively small and located close to farmers houses compared to
CP and BMP.

25.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Economic Aspects of Rice Management Systems
- SRI required both higher labors and materials than those of CP and BMP.
Most labors of SRI method were accumulated highly on compost preparation
and weed control. With the high yield of SRI practices, more labors were
needed for harvesting, threshing, and drying/storing.
-Being account for labor cost, all rice management systems provided the GMs
below 0 riel, and the highest loss were in SRI, followed by CP and BMP. In
contrast, excluding total labor costs from this calculation the SRI farmers got
the highest benefits, and net income (GMs) was increased about 110% and
50% when they turned their practices from CP and BMP to SRI, respectively
-Even if losses of net income were occurred for all system when including
invested labors, the opportunity of employments were highly available for the
family member through their own rice productions, meaning that losses money
was compensated with family labor investment on their farms

26.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Farmers vision on rice management practices
-Most of the SRI farmers thought that fertilizer application and
land preparation were the main factors contributing to achieve
maximum grain yield. However, combining of many rice
management techniques on rice production was critical to achieve
maximum grain yield
-Level of farmers adoption on SRI methods varied from the
farmers to others. Relying on natural condition was the main
factor influencing the level of farmers' adoption. Therefore, partly
adopting the principles or techniques of SRI methods may be
more appropriate to help farmers improve and enhance their rice
production to be compatible with erratic natural condition