The document compares the yield and soil properties of System of Rice Intensification (SRI) and traditionally transplanted rice. SRI resulted in 49% higher grain yield compared to traditional farming across several studies. SRI also improved water productivity by saving 30-40% irrigation water. Soil properties like nitrogen use efficiency, microbial activity, and root growth were significantly better under SRI. In conclusion, SRI outperformed traditional rice farming in terms of yield, water productivity, nutrient use efficiency and soil health.

1. COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE OF SRI OVER
TRANSPLANTED RICE IN TERMS OF YIELD AND
SOME SOIL PROPERTIES
CHOWDHURY MONIRUL HAQUE
(neyonchowdhury16@gmail.com)
and
Prof. P. K. Mani
(pabitramani@gmail.com)
Department of Agril. Chemistry and Soil Science
Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya
Mohanpur-741252,Nadia, West Bengal, India

2. Mandal, 2012

3.  Indian Rice Scenario : Area : 1.48 million ha,
Production: 4.03 million tons
Av. Productivity: 2.71 ton/ha.
 Lots of efforts and new concepts are emerging to
increase the productivity of rice (Uprety, 2006).
 So, more rice production can play vital role to overcome
(by reducing) the problem of food grains.
 This additional rice will have to be produced on less land
with less water, less labor and fewer chemicals.
 Of the total rice area, more than 70% rice is grown under
rainfed condition, 9% under upland and 21% under
partially or fully irrigated conditions (NARC, 2007).

4. The traditional method of rice cultivation has no ability to
explore natural potential of the rice plant because it’s been
transplanted with old seedlings, closely spaced and continual
flooding which held back the plants natural potential.
(Tripathi et al., 2004).

5. SRI is neither a new variety nor a hybrid.
It is only the method of cultivating Paddy in
a particular pattern.
Any paddy variety can be cultivated
successfully by this method.
This method was first developed in 1983 in
Madagascar. (Laulanie´,1993).
What is SRI cultivation?

6. The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is a “set of
insights and practices that change the management of
plants, soil, water and nutrients used in growing
irrigated rice.” SRI methods, promote the growth of
more productive and robust plants.
More simply: SRI is a package of practices especially
developed to improve the productivity of rice.
SRI involves intermittent wetting and drying of paddies
as well as specific soil and crop management practices.
It is civil society innovation.

8. Water saving- AWD
Yield ?
CH4 drop
NUE
SRI / Aerobic riceSRI / Aerobic rice
(Mandal, 2012)

9. 9
Conventional
method
SRI method
Seed rate 60 kg/ ha 8 kg/ha
Nursery area 5 cents/acre 1 cent /acre
Age of seedlings 30 days(5-6 leaves) 8-12 days(2 leaves)
Spacing 15 cm x 10 cm 25 cm x 25 cm
Plants/hill 3-4 1
Hills/ sq.m 33 16
Weeding Manual /chemical Mechanical
Water management Continuous
inundation
Keep soil moist till
panicle initiation
stage

10. Advantage of SRI over Conventionally Transplanted Rice
are Studied on the following Parameters:
1.Yield and Yield Attributing Characters.
2.Water Productivity.
3.Soil Properties
•Nitrogen Use Efficiency
•Phosphorus and Potassium use efficiency
•Ammonia Loss
•Microbiological Propertis

11. CASE STUDY

12. • Overall, grain yield with SRI was 49% higher than with TFR, with yield
enhanced at every N application dose. N-uptake, use-efficiency, and
partial factor productivity from applied N were significantly higher in SRI
than TFR (Thakur et al.,2013)
• The findings revealed that growing rice under SRI with 100% NPK
recorded significantly higher mean grain yield of 76.56 q/ha than
traditional transplanting with a grain yield of 64.76 q/ha, resulting in an
yield increase of 15 percent. (Reddy et al.,2013)
• Grain and straw yield and net return were significantly higher in SRI
over CT and DT. (Suryavansi et al., 2012)

13. Table 1:Effect of different methods of crop establishment
(Khadka, 2015)

14.
Growth Parameters
Plant height Effective tillers Panicle length Grain weight
Kharif
(2008)
Treatment (cm) (m-2
) (cm) (g)
SRI-org 65 221 21.2 20.6
SRI-org + inorg 74 373 22.8 21.8
BMP 73 256 21.4 21.3
LSD (0.05%) 1 53 1.17 2.6
Kharif
(2009)
SRI-org 57 312 17.7 18.2
SRI-org+ inorg 58 528 20.2 18.7
BMP 57 480 19.5 17.5
LSD (0.05%) 5.3 50 1.9 1.8
Rabi
(2008-09)
SRI-org 74 307 21.1 14.3
SRI-org+ inorg 76 444 21.6 14.9
BMP 72 370 20.6 14.0
LSD (0.05%) 6 57 1.4 0.7
(Balasubhramanium et al.,2014)
Table 2: Comparative Study of Yield attributing Characters in SRI over TPR

15. Table 3: Comparative Study of Yield attributing Characters in SRI over TPR
(Thakur et al.,2013)

16. CASE STUDY
Fig .1: Comparative Study of Grain and Straw Yield in SRI over TFR
(Source: Thakur et al,2013)
N Fertilizer Rate (kg ha-1
)

17. • There was significant advantage in term of water productivity
under SRI over conventional transplanted (CT) rice and less
quantity of water was utilized in SRI for production of each
unit of grain. A water saving of 34.5-36.0% in SRI and 28.9-
32.1% in aerobic rice was recorded as compared to CT rice.
(Singh et al.,2013)
• An average of 31 and 37% of irrigation water were saved
during Kharif and Rabi seasons, respectively, with both SRI
methods of rice cultivation compared to BMP of TPR.
(Subhramanium et al.,2014)

18. Table 4 : Effect of Crop Establishment Method (SRI & DSR) on Total
Water Use and Water Productivity
(Source: Thakur et al,2014)

19. Table 5: Effect of Crop Establishment Method on Total Water Use and Water
Productivity
( Raj et al., 2017)

20. Fig 2: Comparative Study of Total Water Productivity in SRI over PTR & DSR
( Raj et al., 2017)

21. Table 6: Comparative Study of Root Growth in SRI over TPR( Control)
( Rupela et al.,2006)

22. Fig 3: Comparative Study of Root Growth in SRI over
Transplanted Rice (Control)
(Rupela et al.,2006)

23. • Between two methods, SRI improved N, P and K uptake, milling
percentage and protein content. (Dass et al., 2012)
• The results revealed that soils amended with organic manures
consistently registered significantly improved organic C, mineral,
total N and grain yield compared to the unamended soil. (Babau et
al., 2009)
• Conventional and system of rice intensification (SRI) methods of
planting showed statistically at par uptake of N, Fe, Zn, Mn and Cu in
grain and straw. (Singh et al.,2013).
• SRI practices have enhanced the uptake of nitrogen, thereby
minimizing losses to the environment and providing economic
benefits to farmers. (Thakur et al.,2013)

24. Treatments pH EC
(dS/m)
SOC
(%)
Available N
(kg/ha)
Available
P2O5
(kg/ha)
Available
K2O
(kg/ha)
Eco-SRI 8.51 0.50 1.10 247 204 674
SRI 8.43 0.51 1.25 272 258 638
Convention
al
8.44 0.51 1.18 251 256 609
Mean 8.44 0.51 1.18 257 239 641
CD (0.05) NS NS NS NS 26 34
Table 7: Comparative Study of Soil Properties in SRI over TPR
(Source: Surekha et al,2015)

25. N (kg ha-1
) NUE PFP
TF SRI Difference TF SRI Difference
80 (N1) 10.6a
15.7a
5.1 ** 61.3a
86.0a
24.7**
160 (N2) 12.6a
7.0b
-5.6 ** 37.9b
42.1b
4.2**
240 (N3) 7.1b
2.1c
-5.0 ** 23.9b
25.5c
1.6 ns
Analysis of
variance
NUE PFP
Cultivation * **
N level ** **
Cultivation × N
rate
** **
Table 8 : Comparative Study of Nitrogen Use Efficiency in SRI
over Transplanted Rice
( Zhao et al., 2010)

26. Cultivation N rates Basal
fertilizer
Tillering
fertilizer
Booting
fertilizer
Total NH3
loss
TF
N0 1.02a
0.80a
0.32a
2.14a
N1 3.77b
1.58b
1.08b
6.44 b
(5.37)
N2 4.91c
3.03c
1.84c
9.78 c
(4.77)
N3 6.33d
4.19d
2.61d
13.13d
(4.58)
SRI
N0 1.38a
1.03a
0.72a
3.14a
N1 4.22b
1.98b
1.67b
7.88b (5.93)
N2 6.06c
3.65c
2.48c
12.19c
(5.66)
N3 7.78d
5.04d
3.41d
16.23d
(5.45)
Table 9: Comparative Study of Ammonia Loss in SRI over
Transplanted Rice
( Zhao et al.,2010 )

27. Fig 4: Comparative Study of Ammonia Loss in SRI over
Transplanted Rice (TPR)
Days After Fertilization
(Zhao et al.,2010 )

28. CASE STUDY
Fig 5: Comparative Study of Nutrient Use Efficiency in SRI
over Transplanted Rice
(Surekha et al.,2015)

29. Year Treatment
Total
Bacteria
Total
Actinomycetes
Total
Fungi
Kharif
(2008)
SRI- org 5.79 4.60 5.59
SRI- org + inorg 5.79 4.66 5.71
BMPCTR 5.77 4.41 5.42
LSD (5%) 0.01 0.11 0.10
Kharif
(2009)
SRI- org 5.97 5.00 3.81
SRI- org + inorg 6.08 4.90 3.81
BMPCTR 5.80 4.73 3.78
LSD (5%) 0.08 0.200 0.02
Rabi
(2008–09)
SRI- org * * *
SRI- org + inorg 6.94 5.56 5.72
BMPCTR 6.81 5.52 5.59
LSD (5%) 0.16 0.10 0.13
Rabi
(2009–10)
SRI-org 6.88 6.04 4.88
SRI-org + inorg 6.76 5.84 4.99
BMPCTR 6.76 5.69 4.68
LSD (5%) 0.01 0.13 0.04
Table 10 : Comparative Study of Microorganism’s population in SRI over TPR
(Balasubhramanium et al.2014)Microbial populations were expressed in Log10 values; * = not analyzed

30. CASE STUDY
Fig : Comparative Study MBC & MBN in SRI over
Transplanted Rice
(Zhao et al,2010)

31. Table 11 : Comparative Study of Microbiological Growth in SRI
over Transplanted Rice
(Lin et al.,2011)
SRI Transplanted
Fertilization Actinomycetes (106
) Fertilization Actinomycetes
(106
)
F25 66.3 F25 52.3
F50 119.7 F50 84.4
F100 259.6 F100 93.3
Significance: Lower case significance at 5% level; capital letters significance at 1 % level
F25 : 25 % organic; F50: 50 % organic; F100 : 100 % organic

32. Season Treatment Dehydrogenase MBC
(µg g-1
soil 24 h-1
) (µg g-1
soil 24 h-1
)
Kharif
(2008)
SRI-org 188.0 672.0
SRI-org + inorg 186.0 643.0
BMPCTR 170.0 500.0
LSD (5%) 13.6 120.7
Kharif
(2009)
SRI-org 97.0 623.0
SRI-org + inorg 110.0 605.0
BMPCTR 82.0 450.0
LSD (5%) 14.8 151.0
Rabi
(2008–09)
SRI-org * *
SRI-org + inorg 326.0 1218.0
BMPCTR 267.0 1153.0
LSD (5%) 26.2 19.5
Rabi
(2009–10)
SRI-org * *
SRI-org + inorg 274.0 781.0
BMPCTR 183.0 706.0
LSD (5%) 89.5 4.3
Table 12 : Comparative Study MBC & MBN in SRI over TPR
(Balasubhramanium et al.,2014)

33. CONCLUSION:
In terms of yield SRI gave higher yield in majority of the cases
over conventionally transplanted rice.
 On the ground of water productivity SRI out performed TPR in
almost all the researches that means SRI is the method that will
make the ever increasing problem of water scarcity.
The root growth was higher in case of SRI that will invite more
no of beneficial microorganisms
Nutrient use efficiency was also higher in SRI.
The microbiological activity , i.e., population and enzymatic
activity was greater in case of SRI which will help the crop to use
the nutrients more efficiently leading to sustaining the soil health.

34. ABC of SRIABC of SRI
A. 2 Leaf stage seedlings
ready for transplant
B. Transplanting of
single seedlings
C . Rice Crop stand
in SRI Method.
Thanks
for your patient
hearing