Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
The System of Rice Intensification  (SRI) -- originally the Katayama System of Rice Production Seminar for the Ministry of...
WARNING! Some of the data and statistics you are about to hear or see may appear shocking Professional discretion is advised
What Is SRI? SRI is a methodology for getting more productive PHENOTYPES   from existing GENOTYPES of rice  by  changing t...
SRI field in Sri Lanka variety -- panicles have 400+ grains with yield >16 t/ha
 
Variety Los Palacios 9 -- 14 t/ha  (CFA Camilo Cienfuegos, Cuba)
SRI seems ‘too good to be true’  Changes paradigm of production <ul><li>GREEN REVOLUTION  paradigm: </li></ul><ul><li>(a) ...
Origins of SRI <ul><li>Developed by Fr. Henri de Laulanie, S.J. who studied agriculture at ENA (1937-39) before entering a...
 
SPREAD OF SRI <ul><li>Establishment of Association Tefy Saina in 1990  -- to disseminate SRI within Madagascar, slow progr...
 
OBSERVABLE  BENEFITS <ul><li>Average yields  about 8 t/ha  --   </li></ul><ul><li>twice present world average of 3.8 t/ha ...
LESS OR NO NEED FOR: <ul><li>Changing varieties ,  though best yields with  high-yielding varieties  and  hybrids   -- tra...
ADDITIONAL BENEFITS <ul><li>Seeding rate   is reduced up to 90%, as  5-10 kg/ha yields more than 50-100 kg </li></ul><ul><...
 
DISADVANTAGES / COSTS <ul><li>SICA is more   labor-intensive ,   at least initially -- but  can become  labor-saving </li>...
SRI Data from Sri Lanka <ul><li>  SRI   Usual </li></ul><ul><li>Yields (tons/ha)   8.0     4.2    +88% </li></ul><ul><li>M...
 
SRI  CAN  BE  ADAPTED  TO  UPLAND  PRODUCTION Results of Trials (N=20) by Philippine  NGO  [  Broader Initiatives for Negr...
‘ Starting Points’ for SRI <ul><li>Transplant   young seedlings ,   8-15 days  (2 leaves) --  quickly  and very   carefull...
These practices produce a different RICE  PHENOTYPE: <ul><li>Profuse TILLERING  - 30 to 50/plant,  80-100 possible, someti...
 
 
Plant Physical Structure and  Light Intensity Distribution  at Heading Stage   (CNRRI Research: Tao et al. 2002)
 
SRI sounds ILLOGICAL <ul><li>LESS CAN PRODUCE MORE   -- by utilizing </li></ul><ul><li>the  potentials and dynamics of bio...
Average Yields Impressive -- Big Increases Need to be Explained   <ul><li>Indonesia  --  West Timor (ADRA)  </li></ul><ul>...
(1) Importance of ROOTS <ul><li>Rather little scientific research on roots </li></ul><ul><li>Under continuous flooding,  3...
Dry Matter Distribution of Roots in SRI and Conventionally-Grown Plants at Heading Stage  (CNRRI research: Tao et al. 2002...
Root Activity in SRI and Conventional Rice Measured by  Oxygenation Ability Research at Nanjing Agricultural University, W...
 
 
(2) Importance of SOIL MICROBIAL PROCESSES <ul><li>Microbial activity is known to be crucial for soil fertility </li></ul>...
Bacteria, funguses, protozoa, amoeba, actinomycetes, etc. <ul><li>Decompose organic matter ,  making nutrients available <...
Biological Nitrogen Fixation <ul><li>Microorganisms, particularly bacteria,  both aerobic and anaerobic, living around, on...
 
Phosphorus Solubilization <ul><li>Aerobic bacteria can acquire phosphorus from unflooded soil for their own use </li></ul>...
Mycorrhizal Associations <ul><li>Mycorrhizal funguses ‘infect’ plant roots </li></ul><ul><li>They send out  hyphae  (filam...
Benefits from  Rhizobia   in rice now documented <ul><li>Studied in Egypt where rice and clover grown in rotation, for man...
ROOT  EXUDATION   IS CRITICAL  PROCESS <ul><li>Roots  are  ‘TWO-WAY  STREETS’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>40-60% of  photosyntha...
(3) Impact of Transplanting YOUNG SEEDLINGS <ul><li>Significant effect from transplanting  8-12 day-old seedlings  </li></...
 
 
 
What speeds up the biological clock?   (adapted from Nemoto et al. 1995) <ul><li>Shorter phyllochrons   Longer phyllochron...
Better growing conditions  shorten  the phyllochron <ul><li>More phyllochrons of growth are then completed before the plan...
Factorial Trials Evaluating 6 Factors <ul><li>Variety :  HYV (2798) vs. local ( riz rouge )  or   Soil quality :  better (...
 
Effect of Young Seedlings <ul><li>@ Anjomakely  Better Soil   Poorer Soil </li></ul><ul><li>SS/20/3/NPK   3.00   2.04 </li...
Effects of SRI vs. Conventional Practices Comparing Varietal and Soil Differences
(4) Importance of Enhancing SOIL ORGANIC MATTER <ul><li>Through combination of </li></ul><ul><li>Compost, mulching, etc. a...
This helps to solve puzzle <ul><li>Why were many Madagascar farmers putting their compost for SRI on their  contra-saison ...
 
Effects of Nutrient Amendments:  NPK vs. Compost (yield in t/ha)  HYV vs. Local Variety@ Morondava, 2000 Sandy soils ( sab...
SRI Supports the Concept of Organic Farming <ul><li>Rather than focus our efforts on  ‘ feeding the plants ’ -- we should ...
SRI  Raises More Questions than we have answers for   <ul><li>We think many answers will be found in the   growth and func...
Thank You for Opportunity to Share this With You <ul><li>More information can be obtained from SRI/SICA web site: </li></u...
 
 
 
 
 
.
 
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

0327 The System of Rice Intensification (SRI)

747

Published on

Presented at: Seminar for the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF)
Tokyo, August 1, 2003

Presented by: Norman Uphoff

Published in: Technology, Travel
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • One Indian farmer from Bihar has produced 24 MT rice per ha and that is a world record. SRI is useful in other crops as well. Record production of potato with SRI is 108 ton per ha. Is not this incredible!!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
747
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
37
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Prepared with information available as of February 1, 2003. These slides can be used or adapted, even translated, however SRI colleagues would be useful for explaining this methodology to others.
  • Prepared with information available as of February 1, 2003. These slides can be used or adapted, even translated, however SRI colleagues would be useful for explaining this methodology to others.
  • Prepared with information available as of February 1, 2003. These slides can be used or adapted, even translated, however SRI colleagues would be useful for explaining this methodology to others.
  • Picture provided by Gamini Batuwitage, Sri Lanka, of field that yielded 17 t/ha in 2000.
  • The &amp;quot;economist&apos;s $100 bill&amp;quot; refers to the joke about an economist and his friend who were walking together down the street one day when the friend saw a $100 bill on the sidewalk. Thinking that his friend, being concerned with money, would surely pick the bill up, he did not reach down himself. But the economist walked right by. The friend asked, didn&apos;t you see that $100 bill on the sidewalk? Why didn&apos;t you pick it up? The economist replied,It wasn&apos;t a real $100 bill. If it had been genuine, since people are rational, someone would have picked it up by now, so I am sure that it was a counterfeit, and I didn&apos;t want to waste any effort on it. Agronomists have regarded SRI with similar skepticism, dismissing it by saying if it were indeed as good as reported, it should have been discovered previously, given the many millions of farmers and thousands of scientists who have worked with rice. So, therefore, SRI must not be genuine. SRI contradicts a number of key concepts held by agronomists and economists, giving them reasons to reject it, without giving it an empirical evaluation. However, the evidence in support of SRI is mounting year by year, month by month.
  • Average yields where farmers have learned SRI methods, understand them and use them, are about 8 t/ha. In some countries, the average is not yet at that level, but given experience in Madagascar and Sri Lanka, we feel confident that 8 t/ha is a reasonable average to expect with SRI. Maximum yields reported are very controversial. We report data as accurately and truthfully as we can. Farmers have had harvests -- some whole-field, some sampled -- calculated to be 15-20 t/ha, so we report what we think is correct. Over time this will be substantiated by other or not. Water requirement reductions of 40-60% are often reported. That productivity for all four factors of production can increase at the same time goes against the conventional idea of necessary tradeoffs in factor productivity. We have often seen across-the-board productivity improvements, which are more important than yield. Farmers and countries get richer by raising productivity, not by attaining highest yield (because one has to consider the cost of attaining this). Costs of production have been reported to be reduced by 10-50%, depending on how the cost of labor is figured. Because no purchase of external inputs is necessary, cash costs of production invariably go down with SRI. Whether or not labor costs are reduced depends on various factors.
  • Average yields where farmers have learned SRI methods, understand them and use them, are about 8 t/ha. In some countries, the average is not yet at that level, but given experience in Madagascar and Sri Lanka, we feel confident that 8 t/ha is a reasonable average to expect with SRI. Maximum yields reported are very controversial. We report data as accurately and truthfully as we can. Farmers have had harvests -- some whole-field, some sampled -- calculated to be 15-20 t/ha, so we report what we think is correct. Over time this will be substantiated by other or not. Water requirement reductions of 40-60% are often reported. That productivity for all four factors of production can increase at the same time goes against the conventional idea of necessary tradeoffs in factor productivity. We have often seen across-the-board productivity improvements, which are more important than yield. Farmers and countries get richer by raising productivity, not by attaining highest yield (because one has to consider the cost of attaining this). Costs of production have been reported to be reduced by 10-50%, depending on how the cost of labor is figured. Because no purchase of external inputs is necessary, cash costs of production invariably go down with SRI. Whether or not labor costs are reduced depends on various factors.
  • This picture from Sri Lanka shows two fields having the same soil, climate and irrigation access, during a drought period. On the left, the rice grown with conventional practices, with continuous flooding from the time of transplanting, has a shallower root system that cannot withstand water stress. On the right, SRI rice receiving less water during its growth has deeper rooting, and thus it can continue to thrive during the drought. Farmers in Sri Lanka are coming to accept SRI in part because it reduces their risk of crop failure during drought.
  • As noted for Slide 7, we are hearing from farmers in a number of countries, that SRI is not more labor-intensive for them. However, we think it best to acknowledge that SRI can require more labor, at least in the first year or two. Studies in Madagascar have put this increase between 25 and 50%, with first-year farmers sometimes even higher. With a doubling of yield, the returns to labor are higher even so. We do not want to minimize -- indeed, we should emphasize -- that SRI requires more skill and knowedge. Farmers are expected not to adopt SRI methods but to gain an understanding of them, particularly why we recommend wide spacing, young seedlings, no continuous flooding, etc. They should adapt the specific practices to their local conditions. SRI was intended by Fr. de Laulanie and Association Tefy Saina to encourage farmers to become more independent thinkings and active innovators. The most objective limitation on SRI is the need for good water control to get best results. Continuous flooding as seen below, leads to root deterioration. Farmers who are part of a cascade (field-to-field) irrigation system will have a hard time managing water for SRI unless there is cooperation among neighbors. Once the economic profitability of SRI has been well established, farmers, governments and even donor agencies should be willing to make investments in improving irrigation infrastructure to make SRI management possible.
  • Dr. Janaiah visited Sri Lanka the last week of October, 2002, and talked with 30 farmers in four villages who had been practicing SRI and who could give him detailed data. He had previously done such an evaluation for IRRI of the costs and benefits of adopting hybrid rice, having been on the IRRI staff in Los Banos from 1999 to 2002. He found SRI to be a much more profitable innovation for rice production than adoption of hybrids. We have found that SRI methods give the highest yields with hybrid varieties so there is not necessary contradiction or competition between the two. The SRI results reported from the Philippines, by the Agricultural Training Institute of the Department of Agriculture, from trials with three varieties at its Cotobato center in Mindanao (slide 20), calculated that the cost of production per hectare was 25,000 pesos, while the value of the rice yield with SRI was 96,000 pesos, a return of almost four times. Thus there are other evaluations of net profit from SRI that are even more favorable than Janaiah&apos;s calculation.
  • We emphasize that these are &amp;quot;starting point&amp;quot; because farmers are expected and encouraged to do some experimentation and adaptation with these practices, based on their understanding of the core concepts. The reasons for transplanting young seedlings are given in Slides 34-39. Quick and careful transplanting is necessary so there is little or no trauma to the young roots, which would set back their subsequent growth. We recommend that the roots be laid gently into the soil, only 1-2 cm deep, with the root straight downward or at least horizontal (L-shaped) rather than being plunged vertically down into the soil which causes the tip of the root to invert back upwards (J-shaped). When there is such inversion, it takes days, even weeks, for the root to reposition itself for resumed downward growth. Single plants spaced widely have room for both the roots and canopy to grow vigorously, as they will with young seedlings and aerated soil. We recommend starting with 25x25 spacing, but with good soil (and the soil usually improves year-to-year with SRI culivation), higher yields will be achieved with 30x30 or 40x40 spacing. The highest yield we know was with 50x50 cm spacing once soil had been improved by plant, soil, water and nutrient management. So farmers should experiment with wider spacing each year to see whether it leads to better crop performance than 25x25. They can experiment with narrower spacing if they like. No continuous flooding at least up to panicle initiation is key. This can be done, however, either by adding small amounts of water each day to keep the soil moist but not saturated, and not watering the field for 3-6 days several times during the growing season to dry out the field, up to the point of surface cracking; or by flooding the field for 3-6 days, and then draining it and leaving it dry for 3-6 days, until there is enough cracking to make reflooding necessary. We are still learning how to manage water for best effect with SRI. The best practices for any particular farmer will surely depend on soil, climatic, topographic and other variables. We recommend that farmers keep 1-2 cm of water on the field after panicle initiation, up to 10 days before harvest when the field should be drained (as done with all irrigated rice cultivation systems). Possibly the soil should be kept more aerated than this after panicle initiation, but no systematic research has been done. Weeding is important, for soil aeration as well as removal of weeds. See Slide 44.
  • The data summarize our observations and measurements. Regarding panicle size, we have had single panicles with as many as 900 grains, but this is so fantastic, few will believe it. The maximum of number of fertile tillers observed so far is 140, with 50x50 spacing. The most important phenotypic difference is the last one, discussed in Slides 21-22.
  • This was one of the first data sets that began laying a scientific foundation for SRI. Data were gathered from 76 farmers around Ambatovaky, a town on the western side of the peripheral zone around Ranomafana National Park in Madagascar, during the 1996-97 season. We had confidence in the field worker who collected the data, Simon Pierre, who had worked with Fr. de Laulanie before his death. The correlation between number of tillers per plant and number of grains per panicle was +.65, rather than the negative one expected from the literature. We have seen this positive relationship many times since this first analysis was done.
  • This figure is from research from the China National Rice Research Institute reported at the Sanya conference in April 2002 and published in the Proceedings. Two different rice varieties were used with SRI and conventional (CK) methods. The second responded more positively to the methods in terms of leaf area and dry matter as measured at different elevations, but there was a very obvious difference in the phenotypes produced from the first variety&apos;s genome by changing cultivation methods from conventional to SRI.
  • This picture was contributed from Cambodia by Koma Yang Saing (CEDAC). Viewers should try to imagine the very small single young seedling from which this massive plant grew.
  • This helps to explain our problem of &amp;quot;the agronomists&apos; $100 bill.&amp;quot; SRI is quite &amp;quot;counterintuitive.&amp;quot; Indeed, it even sounds crazy. But we have experience and evidence that this &amp;quot;less is more&amp;quot; dynamic operates, and subsequent slides provide a number of scientific explanations for why fewer or smaller inpouts produce more in the case of irrigated rice
  • Bruce Ewart, ADRA representative in Indonesia, got 7 farmers in West Timor to try SRI methods in 2002, with the encouragement of Roland Bunch. These are better farmers than their peers, as seen from their yield that season with current methods (4.4 t/ha), more than double the usual yield in the area. Their SRI plots averaged 11.7. Farmers working with ADRA in Lampung, Sumatra, got 8.5 t/ha with SRI methods compared to their usual production of 3 t/ha. Pablo Best reported that when farmers in Pucallpa, a lowland jungle area, tried SRI, they got a yield of 8 t/ha, four times their previous average, and not needing to do 8-10 hours/day of bird scaring at the end of the season because with SRI, the heavy panicles hung downward (but not lodging) so that birds could not get to them. Instead of letting cattle graze on the regrowth after harvest, the rice was allowed to produce a second (ratoon) crop, which was 5.5 t/ha, 70% of the first. Controlled trials in Benin, having read the account of SRI in ECHO Development Notes, found about a 5-fold difference in yield between SRI and conventional practice. The Agricultural Training Institute in the Philippines tried SRI methods with three varieties in Cotabato, Mindanao, and got an average yield of 12 t/ha, three times the usual yield in that area. The economic return averaged 290% as the value of rice produced was almost four times the cost of production.
  • This is a figure also from research reported by the China National Rice Research Institute to the Sanya conference and published in its proceedings. It shows how the roots of the same variety (two varieties shown) grow deeper into the soil with SRI methods compared to conventional ones (CK).
  • This figure from report by Nanjing Agricultural University researchers to the Sanya conference, and reproduced from those proceedings, shows that the oxygenation ability of rice roots growing under SRI conditions are about double the ability, throughout the growth cycle, compared to the same variety grown under conventional conditions.
  • This picture was provided by Koma Yang Saing (CEDAC) of a pleased Cambodian farmer, showing the size of a massive root ball with a SRI rice plant.
  • These are just the most obvious contributions. Our understanding of this netherworld is limited, though fortunately there are a growing number of microbiologists using very advanced modern techniques, such as DNA analysis, to map and track what is going on in the soil. The discussion that follows is can be viewed as introductory or superficial, or both.
  • Most people know that leguminous plants &amp;quot;fix&amp;quot; N in their roots through nodules on the roots inhabited by certain bacteria, rhizobia. And by implication, most thinks that non-leguminous plants &amp;quot;do not fix nitrogen.&amp;quot; This is correct in terms of locus, but it misleads. All of the gramineae species (rice, wheat, sugar cane, etc.) have free-living bacteria in their root zones (referred to as &apos;associated&apos; microbes) that fix N. Even in fertilized crops, a majority of the N taken up by the roots is from organic sources. And there is evidence that adding inorganic N to the root zone inhibits or suppresses the roots&apos; and microbes&apos; production of nitrogenase, the enzyme needed to fix N. So there is a tradeoff, in that adding inorganic N fertilizer reduces the N that is produced by natural biological processes. Or most relevance to SRI is research published more than 30 years ago reporting that when aerobic and anaerobic horizons of soil are mixed, BNF increases greatly compared to that originating from either aerobic or anaerobic soil. This suggests that the water management and weeding practices of SRI could be actively promoting N production in the soil. We have no research results to support this inference (though see data in Slide 49), but the yield increases with SRI practices require large amounts of N. BNF is the most plausible explanation.
  • These data from a study done by Fide Raobelison under the supervision of Prof. Robert Randriamiharisoa at Beforona station in Madagascar, and reported in Prof. Robert&apos;s paper in the Sanya conference proceedings, give the first direct evidence to support our thinking about the contribution of soil microbes to the super-yields achieved with SRI methods. The bacterium Azospirillum was studied as an &amp;quot;indicator species&amp;quot; presumably reflecting overall levels of microbial populations and activity in and around the plant roots. Somewhat surprisingly, there was no significant difference in Azospirillum populations in the rhizosphere. But there were huge differences in the counts of Azospirillum in the roots themselves according to soil types (clay vs. loam) and cultivation practices (traditional vs. SRI) and nutrient amendments (none vs. NPK vs. compost). NPK amendments with SRI produce very good results, a yield on clay soil five times higher than traditional methods with no amendments. But compost used with SRI gives a six times higher yield. The NPK increases Azospirillum (and other) populations, but most/much of the N that produced a 9 t/ha yield is coming from inorganic sources compared to the higher 10.5 t/ha yield with compost that depends entirely on organic N. On poorer soil, SRI methods do not have much effect, but when enriched with compost, even this poor soil can give a huge increase in production, attributable to the largest of the increases in microbial activity in the roots. At least, this is how we interpret these findings. Similar research should be repeated many times, with different soils, varieties and climates. We consider these findings significant because they mirror results we have seen in other carefully measured SRI results such as the Anjomakely factorial trials (Slide 24) and the previous season&apos;s trials with SRI at Beforona (10.2 t/ha).
  • The increase in yields around Ranomafana National Park during 1994/95-1998/99 from 2 t/ha to 8 t/ha ith SRI were quite inexplicable given that soil analyses by North Carolina State found on average that available P was only 3-4 ppm, which is less than half the minimum usually considered necessary for an acceptable yield. SRI farmers got twice as much as an acceptable yield without adding any P to the soil. Where did the P come from? The research reported by Turner and Haygarth in NATURE (May 17, 2001) could explain this since SRI methods involved alternate wetting and drying of the soil which the authors showed greatly increased levels of P in the soil solution, almost all from organic sources. They suggested that this effect probably applies for other nutrients too, but they were measuring only P.
  • Mycorrhizal associations have been largely ignored in rice because most is grown under continuously flooded conditions, which are inhospitable to growth of funguses. Yet we now know that 80-90% of plants depend in small to large part on the nutrient acquisition of funguses that &amp;quot;infect&amp;quot; their roots and provide access to a much larger volume of soil through the network of hyphae (filaments) that spread out in all directions. These hyphae acquire water and nutrients that ar shared with the plant, particularly P but also many others. Mycorrhizal hyphae are thinner even than hair roots so can access places in the soil that the root system cannot. One study found that &amp;quot;infected&amp;quot; plants could grow as well with 1/60th as much P in the soil as could &amp;quot;uninfected&amp;quot; plants, reported in the review on mycorrhizae by M. Habte and N.W. Osorio, Mycorrhizas: Producing and applying arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculum (2002). This is available on the web in The Overstory, #102 &lt;http://agroforester.com/overstory/ovbook.html&gt;
  • Research conducted in Egypt where farmers have for centuries alternated growing rice and berseem (clover) has shown that free-associated rhizobia in the root zone of rice (not living in nodules as they do on a legume) are abundant in this soil and have many measurable beneficial effects on rice growth. Surprisingly, the rhizobia do not contribute BNF for rice. Instead they stimulate nutrient uptake and plant growth in other ways. More research should be done on this particular microbe to understand what it could contribute to plant growth more generally. See Y. G. Yanni, et al., The beneficial plant growth-promoting association of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii with rice roots, AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, 28 (2001), pp. 845-870.
  • Research conducted in Egypt where farmers have for centuries alternated growing rice and berseem (clover) has shown that free-associated rhizobia in the root zone of rice (not living in nodules as they do on a legume) are abundant in this soil and have many measurable beneficial effects on rice growth. Surprisingly, the rhizobia do not contribute BNF for rice. Instead they stimulate nutrient uptake and plant growth in other ways. More research should be done on this particular microbe to understand what it could contribute to plant growth more generally. See Y. G. Yanni, et al., The beneficial plant growth-promoting association of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii with rice roots, AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, 28 (2001), pp. 845-870.
  • To get a systematic understanding of how the different factors brought together in SRI contribute to greater yield, two top students in the faculty of agriculture at the University of Antananarivo did baccalaureate thesis research involving large-scale factorial trials in 2000 and 2001. Jean de Dieu Rajaonarison did his study near Morondava on the west coast of Madagascar at the Centre de Baobab. He did not vary soil quality (the soil there was poor sandy soil, sable roux) but evaluated SRI effects with different varieties (half of the 288 plots were planted with a high-yielding variety and half with a local variety). Andry Andriankaja did his study in the village of Anjomakely 18 south of the capital Antananarivo, on the high plateau and on farmers&apos; fields. He used the same variety (riz rouge) on two different kinds of soil (better clay and poorer loam). These were contrasting locations agroecologically as the Morondava site was near sea level, with tropical climate and poor soil, while the Anjomakely site was about 1200 m elevation, with temperate climate, and better soils. Both varied water management (aeration according to SRI principles vs. continuously saturated soil), seedling age (8 days vs. 16 days at Morondava and 20 days at Anjomakely, these latter ages being equivalent given differences in ambient temperature), plants per hill (1 vs. 3), and fertilization (compost vs. NPK vs. none as a control with the Morondava soils). Spacing was 25x25 or 30x30, but both were within the SRI range and gave no significant difference (absolutely no difference in Morondava and only 80 kg/ha at Anjomakely, other factors being equal). This was in a way a &amp;quot;mistake&amp;quot; in research design, as we should have compared a SRI and non-SRI spacing. But because there was no significant difference according to the spacing factor, we could combine those trials, having thus SIX replications for all of the averages calculated for the 48 combinations at Morondava and 40 combinations at Anjomakely.
  • Note that conventional practices -- 20-day seedlings, 3/hill, in saturated soil, with NPK amendments -- give 2-3 t/ha, while all-SRI practices -- 8-day seedlings, 1/hill, aerated soil, with compost -- give more than 3 times greater yield. (Note also that weeding and spacing were not varied in these factorial trials, which would have doubled the number of plots needed to 480, assuming just 3 rather than 6 replications.) The individual practice adding most to yield was young seedlings, then aerated soil, then single seedling, then compost. Pooling results from better and poorer soil (last column), we see that going from 75% to 100% SRI adds more to yield (almost 2 t/ha) than going from 0 to 25%, 25 to 50%, or 50 to 75%, an indication of synergistic effects among practices. The pattern of increase was similar for the trials at Morondava on poorer soil, with SRI practices increasing the HYV yield from 2.84 to 6.83 t/ha for the HYV and from 2.11 to 5.96 for the traditional variety, by 2.4 and 2.8 times respectively.
  • Here we look just at the effect of young seedlings, on better and poorer soil, at Anjomakely. The synergistic effect of compost with aerated soil is seen in the bottom three lines. Compost with saturated soil does less well (7.7 t/ha) than NPK with aerated soil (8.77 t/ha), but compost with aerated soil does by far the best (10.35 t/ha) on better soil. The same relationship is seen on poorer soil (right-hand column).
  • Summary results from two sets of factorial trials in two different agroecological settings in 2000 and 2001 by honors students in the Faculty of Agriculture at the University of Antananarivo. The first setting was on the west coast of Madagascar, at an agricultural experiment center near Morondava, with a tropical climate, near sea level, and poor sandy soil. (This location was chosen because there are few pest or disease problems during that season which could affect plant performance.) The second was on the high plateau near the village of Anjomakely, 18 km south of Antananarivo, with a temperate climate, about 1200 m elevation, and better soils, comparing results on better clay soil and poorer loam soil. In 2000, Jean de Dieu Rajonarison did trials on 288 plots (2.5x2.5 m) at the Centre de Baobab, with sandy soil [ sable roux], evaluating the effects of five factors: variety – HYV [2798] vs. traditional [riz rouge]; age of seedling [16-day vs. 8-day], seedlings per hill [3 vs. 1], water management [continuous flooding vs. water control, with deliberate aeration of the soil during the vegetative growth period], and nutrient amendments [none vs. NPK vs. compost]. The study was designed with spacing as a sixth factor [25x25 vs. 30x30cm], sok that there were 96 combinations (2x2x2x3x2x2), with three replications. But both spacings were within the SRI range, and the average yield distinguished by spacing [each N = 144] was identical, 3.18 t/ha. So the analysis deals with only five factors, having six replications for each average reported. Plots were randomly distributed according to a modified Fisher bloc design, except for water management, for which the plot with these two different treatments had to be separate to avoid effects of lateral seepage. In 2000, Andry Andriankaja did trials on 240 plots (2.5x2.5m) on a farmer’s fields near Anjomakely, using a traditional rice variety [ riz rouge], evaluating the effects of five factors: soil [clay vs. loam], age of seedling [20-day vs. 8-day – with colder temperatures, the onset of the 4 th phyllochron of growth is later than at Morondava], seedlings per hill [3 vs. 1], water management [continuous flooding vs. water control, with deliberate aeration of the soil during the vegetative growth period], and nutrient amendments [none vs. NPK vs. compost]. The reason why there are only 240 trials rather than 288 is that trials with no amendments were done only on the clay soil plots, not on the poorer loam soil plots, which were known to have low inherent fertility. This made for 40 combinations, with six replications. [The spacing factor as in the Morondava trials was not significant, with a difference of only 80 kg/ha for the two sets, each N = 120.] Again, all yields reported are averages for 6 replicated plots randomly distributed.
  • These data are taken from the article by Ladha et al. (1998) but they did not draw any implication from their finding that optimum N fertilizer application was LOWER for late-maturing varieties than for early-maturing varieties -- and that the late-maturing varieties had higher yield with less fertilizer application than did early-maturing varieties. If volatilization and leaching of nutrients, particularl N, is as big a problem as stated in the article, these numbers should have been reversed. If, on the other hand, the N applied can &amp;quot;prime&amp;quot; soil microbiological processes that contribute to plant nutrition, a smaller amount over time could give higher yield. This is speculation, but it is consistent with relationships observed with SRI. It seems worth exploring.
  • This review of what is known, and what we think we know, about SRI is not a conclusive or final discussion of the subject. We expect that in 3-5 years&apos; time, much more will be known as scientists become engaged on these topics and as farmers and NGOs continue producing new data that begs for explanations. The two main areas for research that have emerged from our SRI experence is (a) the growth and performance of roots, and (b) the dynamics and contributions of soil microbes. Both of these areas of research should be useful for improving the production of other crops. The explanations for greater root growth with SRI are quite straightforward: young seedlings, wide spacing, aerated soil. What results from this remains to be better documented and explained.
  • This is a SRI rice nursery in Sri Lanka, showing one way (but only one of many ways) to grow young seedlings. The soil in this raised bed was a mixture of one-third soil, one-third compost, and one-third chicken manure. (The flooding around it is because the surrounding field is being readied for transplanting; normally there would not be so much water standing around the nursery.)
  • Here the seedlings are being removed. We would recommend that they be lifted with a trowel, to have minimum disturbance of the roots, but these seedlings are so vigorous that this manual method is successful. This farmer has found that his seedlings, when transplanted with two leaves at time of transplanting, already put out a third leave the next day after transplanting, indicating that there was no transplant &apos;shock.&apos;
  • Here the field is being &apos;marked&apos; for transplanting with a simple wooden &apos;rake.&apos; If the soil is too wet, these lines will not remain long enough for transplanting. There are drains within the field to carry excess water away from the root zone.
  • Here are seedlings being removed from a clump for transplanting. Note that the yellow color comes from the sunlight reflecting off the plant. The plant&apos;s color is a rich green, indicating no N deficiency.
  • Here the seedlings are being set into the soil, very shallow (only 1-2 cm deep). The transplanted seedlings are barely visible at the intersections of the lines. This operation proceeds very quickly once the transplanters have gained some skill and confidence in the method. As noted already, these seedling set out with two leaves can already have a third leaf by the next day.
  • The SRI field looks rather sparse and unproductive at first. Up to the 5th or 6th week, SRI fields look rather miserable, and farmers can wonder why they ever tried this method and &apos;wasted&apos; their precious land with such a crazy scheme. But the SRI plot here will yield twice as much rice as the surrounding ones once the rapid tillering (and root growth) begins between 35 and 45 days.
  • This is one of many happy Sri Lankan farmers with his SRI field nearing harvest time. Some young farmers have taken up growing &amp;quot;eco-rice,&amp;quot; i.e., traditional varieties grown organically to be sold for a much higher price than conventional HYV rice, because of better texture, taste, smell and aroma and more assurance of healthy food. SRI in this way is starting to contribute to the preservation of rice biodiversity. As noted above, SRI methods work well with hybrid varieties and HYVs. These give the highest yields with SRI methods. But as SRI methods can double or triple traditional-variety yields, these old varieties become economically more advantageous with SRI. Much more remains to be learned about and from SRI. But we have now enough accumulated evidence, based on experience in farmers&apos; fields, not just on experiment stations, and consistent with what is known in the literature (though often not previously connected up to promote increased rice productivity), to have confidence that this methodology will contribute to greater food security and a better environment. SRI, developed by Fr. de Laulanie and promoted by his friends in Association Tefy Saina, and by a growing number of colleagues in many countries around the world, could help to improve other crop production. The world does not need a doubling of rice production, but it does need increased productivity in the rice sector, as this is the largest single agricultural sector in the world in terms of the resources devoted to it. By raising the productivity of land, labor, water and capital in the rice sector, we should be able to meet our staple food needs with less of these resources, which have significant opportunity costs. We hope that SRI methods will enable farmers to redeploy some of their land, labor, water and capital to producing other, higher-value and more nutritious crops, thereby enhancing the well-being of rural households and urban populations. The urban poor should benefit from lower prices for rice that will follow from higher productivity. SRI is not a labor-intensive method that will &apos;keep rice production backward,&apos; as was alleged by its critics in Madagascar for many years, but a strategy for achieving diversification and modernization in the agricultural sector.
  • Transcript of "0327 The System of Rice Intensification (SRI)"

    1. 1. The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) -- originally the Katayama System of Rice Production Seminar for the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) Tokyo, August 1, 2003 Norman Uphoff Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and Development
    2. 2. WARNING! Some of the data and statistics you are about to hear or see may appear shocking Professional discretion is advised
    3. 3. What Is SRI? SRI is a methodology for getting more productive PHENOTYPES from existing GENOTYPES of rice by changing the management of Plants, Soil, Water, and Nutrients to (a) induce greater ROOT growth and (b) nurture more abundant and diverse SOIL MICROBIAL communities
    4. 4. SRI field in Sri Lanka variety -- panicles have 400+ grains with yield >16 t/ha
    5. 6. Variety Los Palacios 9 -- 14 t/ha (CFA Camilo Cienfuegos, Cuba)
    6. 7. SRI seems ‘too good to be true’ Changes paradigm of production <ul><li>GREEN REVOLUTION paradigm: </li></ul><ul><li>(a) Changes plants’ genetic potential , and </li></ul><ul><li>(b) Provides plants with chemical-intensive external inputs -- fertilizer, biocides, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>SRI changes certain management practices : </li></ul><ul><li>(a) To promote root growth , and </li></ul><ul><li>(b) To increase the abundance and diversity </li></ul><ul><li>of soil microbial populations </li></ul>
    7. 8. Origins of SRI <ul><li>Developed by Fr. Henri de Laulanie, S.J. who studied agriculture at ENA (1937-39) before entering a Jesuit seminar in 1941 </li></ul><ul><li>Went to Madagascar in 1961, spent next (last) 34 years of his life working with farmers to improve their rice production </li></ul><ul><li>Synthesized SRI practices in 1983-84 </li></ul><ul><li>This is an example where TECHNOLOGY leads SCIENCE, as in case of AVIATION </li></ul>
    8. 10. SPREAD OF SRI <ul><li>Establishment of Association Tefy Saina in 1990 -- to disseminate SRI within Madagascar, slow progress </li></ul><ul><li>First evaluations outside Madagascar in 1999-2000 -- China (Nanjing Agric. University) and Indonesia (AARD) </li></ul><ul><li>Spread through NGOs, researchers, individuals -- “civil society” innovation </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific understanding SRI growing -- through work of many researchers </li></ul>
    9. 12. OBSERVABLE BENEFITS <ul><li>Average yields about 8 t/ha -- </li></ul><ul><li>twice present world average of 3.8 t/ha </li></ul><ul><li>Maximum yields can be twice this -- 15 t/ha or more, occasionally >20 t/ha </li></ul><ul><li>Water requirement is reduced by 50% </li></ul><ul><li>Factor productivity is increased for land, labor, capital and water together </li></ul><ul><li>Costs of production are lowered -- most important to farmers, raise profits </li></ul>
    10. 13. LESS OR NO NEED FOR: <ul><li>Changing varieties , though best yields with high-yielding varieties and hybrids -- traditional varieties produce 6-12 t/ha </li></ul><ul><li>Chemical fertilizers -- give a positive yield response with SRI, but the best results are obtained with compost </li></ul><ul><li>Agrochemicals – with SRI methods, plants more resistant to pests and diseases, chemical use not needed </li></ul>
    11. 14. ADDITIONAL BENEFITS <ul><li>Seeding rate is reduced up to 90%, as 5-10 kg/ha yields more than 50-100 kg </li></ul><ul><li>No lodging because of stronger roots </li></ul><ul><li>Environmentally friendly production due to water saving, no/fewer chemicals </li></ul><ul><li>More accessible to poor households because few capital requirements </li></ul><ul><li>Can be more drought-resistant </li></ul>
    12. 16. DISADVANTAGES / COSTS <ul><li>SICA is more labor-intensive , at least initially -- but can become labor-saving </li></ul><ul><li>SICA requires greater knowledge/skill from farmers to become better decision-makers and managers -- this contributes however to human resource development </li></ul><ul><li>SICA requires good water control to get best results , making regular applications of smaller amounts of water -- can gain control with investments & organization? </li></ul>
    13. 17. SRI Data from Sri Lanka <ul><li> SRI Usual </li></ul><ul><li>Yields (tons/ha) 8.0 4.2 +88% </li></ul><ul><li>Market price (Rs/ton) 1,500 1,300 +15% </li></ul><ul><li>Total cash cost (Rs/ha) 18,000 22,000 -18% </li></ul><ul><li>Gross returns (Rs/ha) 120,000 58,500 +105% </li></ul><ul><li>Net profit (Rs/ha) 102,000 36,500 +180% </li></ul><ul><li>Family labor earnings Increased with SRI </li></ul><ul><li>Water savings ~ 40-50% </li></ul><ul><li>Data from Dr. Janaiah Aldas, an economist formerly with IRRI; now at Indira Gandhi Development Research Institute, Mumbai; based on interviews with 30 SRI farmers in Sri Lanka, October, 2002 </li></ul>
    14. 19. SRI CAN BE ADAPTED TO UPLAND PRODUCTION Results of Trials (N=20) by Philippine NGO [ Broader Initiatives for Negros Development ] with Azucena Variety
    15. 20. ‘ Starting Points’ for SRI <ul><li>Transplant young seedlings , 8-15 days (2 leaves) -- quickly and very carefully </li></ul><ul><li>Single plants per hill with wide spacing in a square pattern -- 25x25 cm or wider </li></ul><ul><li>No continuous flooding of field during the vegetative growth phase (AWD ok) </li></ul><ul><li>Weed with rotating hoe early (10 DAT) and often -- 2 to 4 times </li></ul><ul><li>Use of compost is recommended/optional </li></ul><ul><li>Adapt practices to local conditions </li></ul>
    16. 21. These practices produce a different RICE PHENOTYPE: <ul><li>Profuse TILLERING - 30 to 50/plant, 80-100 possible, sometimes 100+ </li></ul><ul><li>More ROOT GROWTH -- 5-6x more resistance (kg/plant) for uprooting </li></ul><ul><li>Larger PANICLES -- 150-250+ grains </li></ul><ul><li>Often higher GRAIN WEIGHT -- 5-10% </li></ul><ul><li>A POSITIVE CORRELATION between tillers/plant and grains/panicle </li></ul>
    17. 24. Plant Physical Structure and Light Intensity Distribution at Heading Stage (CNRRI Research: Tao et al. 2002)
    18. 26. SRI sounds ILLOGICAL <ul><li>LESS CAN PRODUCE MORE -- by utilizing </li></ul><ul><li>the potentials and dynamics of biology </li></ul><ul><li>Smaller, younger seedlings give larger, more productive mature plants </li></ul><ul><li>Fewer plants per hill and per m 2 give higher yield if used with other SRI practices </li></ul><ul><li>Half as much water produces more rice </li></ul><ul><li>Greater output possible from using </li></ul><ul><li>fewer or even no external inputs </li></ul><ul><li>Get new plant types from existing genomes </li></ul>
    19. 27. Average Yields Impressive -- Big Increases Need to be Explained <ul><li>Indonesia -- West Timor (ADRA) </li></ul><ul><li>Yield with current methods -- 4.4 t/ha </li></ul><ul><li>Yield with SRI methods -- 11.7 t/ha </li></ul><ul><li>Peru -- Pucallpa, jungle area </li></ul><ul><li>Previous yields -- 2 t/ha, with more labor </li></ul><ul><li>SRI yield -- 8 t/ha, with less labor </li></ul><ul><li>+ ratoon crop 5.5 t/ha = 70% of first crop </li></ul><ul><li>Benin -- controlled trial: 1.6 vs. 7.5 t/ha </li></ul><ul><li>HOW ARE THESE RESULTS ACHIEVED? </li></ul>
    20. 28. (1) Importance of ROOTS <ul><li>Rather little scientific research on roots </li></ul><ul><li>Under continuous flooding, 3/4 of rice roots remain in top 6 cm of soil </li></ul><ul><li>Under continuous flooding, roots form air pockets (aerenchyma); these enable rice plants to survive, but cannot thrive </li></ul><ul><li>Under continuous flooding, 3/4 of roots degenerate by time of flowering at start of reproductive phase (Kar et al., 1974) </li></ul>
    21. 29. Dry Matter Distribution of Roots in SRI and Conventionally-Grown Plants at Heading Stage (CNRRI research: Tao et al. 2002) Root dry weight (g)
    22. 30. Root Activity in SRI and Conventional Rice Measured by Oxygenation Ability Research at Nanjing Agricultural University, Wuxianggeng 9 variety (Wang et al. 2002)
    23. 33. (2) Importance of SOIL MICROBIAL PROCESSES <ul><li>Microbial activity is known to be crucial for soil fertility </li></ul><ul><li>“ The microbial flora causes a large number of biochemical changes in the soil that largely determine the fertility of the soil.” (DeDatta, 1981, p. 60, emphasis added) </li></ul>
    24. 34. Bacteria, funguses, protozoa, amoeba, actinomycetes, etc. <ul><li>Decompose organic matter , making nutrients available </li></ul><ul><li>Acquire nutrients that are unavailable to plant roots </li></ul><ul><li>Improve soil structure and health (water retention, pathogen control) </li></ul>
    25. 35. Biological Nitrogen Fixation <ul><li>Microorganisms, particularly bacteria, both aerobic and anaerobic, living around, on and in plant roots can fix nitrogen (N) from air into forms available to plant roots </li></ul><ul><li>Research has shown that when aerobic soil and anaerobic soil are mixed , rather than having only aerobic soil or only anaerobic soil, BNF is greatly increased (Magdoff and Bouldin, 1970) </li></ul>
    26. 37. Phosphorus Solubilization <ul><li>Aerobic bacteria can acquire phosphorus from unflooded soil for their own use </li></ul><ul><li>When the soil is flooded, these bacteria die (lyse) due to osmotic pressure and release their contents into the soil solution </li></ul><ul><li>When the soil dries again, surviving bacteria begin their growth again </li></ul><ul><li>This cycle of wetting and drying increases the supply of P, and maybe other nutrients, that become available to plants </li></ul><ul><li>MICROBIOLOGICAL WEATHERING PROCESS </li></ul>
    27. 38. Mycorrhizal Associations <ul><li>Mycorrhizal funguses ‘infect’ plant roots </li></ul><ul><li>They send out hyphae (filaments/threads) in all directions and expand the volume of soil from which the plant can extract nutrients by 10-100 times </li></ul><ul><li>Mycorrhizae are very good at harvesting P -- increase efficiency by as much as 60 x </li></ul><ul><li>Mycorrhizae cannot grow in anaerobic soil conditions, so cannot benefit irrigated rice </li></ul>
    28. 39. Benefits from Rhizobia in rice now documented <ul><li>Studied in Egypt where rice and clover grown in rotation, for many centuries </li></ul><ul><li>These endophytic bacteria induce more efficient acquisition of N, P, K, Mg, Ca and Zn in rice (Yanni et al. 2001) </li></ul><ul><li>Rhizobia increase yield and total protein quantity/ha , by producing auxins and other plant-growth promoting hormones (however, no BNF demonstrated) </li></ul>
    29. 40. ROOT EXUDATION IS CRITICAL PROCESS <ul><li>Roots are ‘TWO-WAY STREETS’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>40-60% of photosynthate from plants’ canopy is sent down into the plant roots </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Much of this is for root metabolism, but rhizodeposition contributes C to soil </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>20-40% of photosynthate sent to roots gets exuded into soil for microbial support </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Increased bacteria on roots are ‘grazed’ by protozoa -- these ‘excrete’ excess N on root because their C:N ratio is lower </li></ul><ul><li>Other processes augment plant nutrition </li></ul>
    30. 41. (3) Impact of Transplanting YOUNG SEEDLINGS <ul><li>Significant effect from transplanting 8-12 day-old seedlings </li></ul><ul><li>Want to avoid any trauma to rice plant, esp. to its roots -- to maintain maximum growth trajectory </li></ul><ul><li>DIRECT SEEDING is an option -- this should be evaluated </li></ul>
    31. 45. What speeds up the biological clock? (adapted from Nemoto et al. 1995) <ul><li>Shorter phyllochrons Longer phyllochrons </li></ul><ul><li>Higher temperatures > cold temperatures </li></ul><ul><li>Wider spacing > crowding of roots/canopy </li></ul><ul><li>More illumination > shading of plants </li></ul><ul><li>Ample nutrients in soil > nutrient deficits </li></ul><ul><li>Soil penetrability > compaction of soil </li></ul><ul><li>Sufficient moisture > drought conditions </li></ul><ul><li>Sufficient oxygen > hypoxic soil conditions </li></ul>
    32. 46. Better growing conditions shorten the phyllochron <ul><li>More phyllochrons of growth are then completed before the plant switches from (a) vegetative growth phase to (b) reproductive phase </li></ul><ul><li>More tillering means there is also more root development </li></ul>
    33. 47. Factorial Trials Evaluating 6 Factors <ul><li>Variety : HYV (2798) vs. local ( riz rouge ) or Soil quality : better (clay) vs. poorer (loam) </li></ul><ul><li>Water mgmt : aerated vs. saturated soil </li></ul><ul><li>Seedling age : 8 days vs. 16 or 20 days </li></ul><ul><li>Plants per hill : 1/hill vs. 3/hill </li></ul><ul><li>Fertilization : compost vs. NPK vs. none </li></ul><ul><li>Spacing : 25x25cm vs. 30x30cm (NS diff.) </li></ul><ul><li>6 replications : 2.5x2.5m plots (N=288, 240) </li></ul>
    34. 49. Effect of Young Seedlings <ul><li>@ Anjomakely Better Soil Poorer Soil </li></ul><ul><li>SS/20/3/NPK 3.00 2.04 </li></ul><ul><li>SS/ 8 /3/NPK 7.16 3.89 </li></ul><ul><li>SS/ 8 / 1 /NPK 8.13 4.36 </li></ul><ul><li>AS / 8 /3/NPK 8.15 4.44 </li></ul><ul><li>AS / 8 /3/ Comp 6.86 3.61 </li></ul><ul><li>SS/ 8 / 1 / Comp 7.70 4.07 </li></ul><ul><li>AS / 8 / 1 /NPK 8.77 5.00 </li></ul><ul><li>AS / 8 / 1 / Comp 10.35 6.39 </li></ul>
    35. 50. Effects of SRI vs. Conventional Practices Comparing Varietal and Soil Differences
    36. 51. (4) Importance of Enhancing SOIL ORGANIC MATTER <ul><li>Through combination of </li></ul><ul><li>Compost, mulching, etc. and </li></ul><ul><li>Increased root exudation </li></ul><ul><li>Monocropping reduces diversity </li></ul><ul><li>Value of CROP ROTATION seen from SRI yields -- highest are from rice grown in rotation w/ potatoes </li></ul>
    37. 52. This helps to solve puzzle <ul><li>Why were many Madagascar farmers putting their compost for SRI on their contra-saison crop -- not on rice crop? </li></ul><ul><li>Both crops reportedly gave better yield </li></ul><ul><li>This makes no sense if LEACHING and VOLATILIZATION are big problems, or if nutrients are ‘used up’ by plants </li></ul><ul><li>It makes sense, however, for BNF </li></ul>
    38. 54. Effects of Nutrient Amendments: NPK vs. Compost (yield in t/ha) HYV vs. Local Variety@ Morondava, 2000 Sandy soils ( sable roux )
    39. 55. SRI Supports the Concept of Organic Farming <ul><li>Rather than focus our efforts on ‘ feeding the plants ’ -- we should </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Feed the soil ’ -- and let the soil feed the plants </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on symbiosis between plants and soil microorganisms </li></ul><ul><li>Different strategy for agriculture </li></ul>
    40. 56. SRI Raises More Questions than we have answers for <ul><li>We think many answers will be found in the growth and functioning of Roots, which grow better from </li></ul><ul><li>YOUNG SEEDLINGS, with </li></ul><ul><li>WIDE SPACING, and in </li></ul><ul><li>AERATED SOIL </li></ul><ul><li>Answers also in Soil Microbiology </li></ul>
    41. 57. Thank You for Opportunity to Share this With You <ul><li>More information can be obtained from SRI/SICA web site: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Or from Association Tefy Saina: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Or from me: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul></ul>
    42. 63. .
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×