Sustainable describes farming systems that are "capable of maintaining their productivity and usefulness to society indefinitely. Resource-conserving Socially supportive Commercially competitive Environmentally sound

2. SUSTAINABILITY
IN
CROPPING SYSTEM
Koushalya T N
PALB 6193

3. "sustain" from the Latin
sustinere
sus- from below
tenere-to hold
Avoidance of the depletion of naturalresources in order to
maintainan ecological balance.
The Ability To Be Maintained At A
Certain Rate Or Level

4. CROPPINGSYSTEM
Sustainable describes farming systems that are
"capable of maintaining their productivity and
usefulness to society indefinitely.
Resource-conserving
Socially supportive
Commercially competitive
 Environmentally sound

5. Why…..we,,,,,, Need,,,,,,
– The quick rise in population.
• More people to feed.
– The greater need for production.
• Farms required to produce more.
– The increase in urbanism.
• Less farms to do more work.
– Wide-spread ecological impacts.
• Faith in technological, political
and economic fixes.

6. Fragmented holdings and lack of capital investment
Seasonal income and employment
Risk of crop failures
Single commodity farming
Horizontal expansion – limited scope
Deterioration of resource base

7. Problem
Low productivity Scarce biomass Land degradation
Poor marketsClimate variability Limited resouces

8. Negative Impacts
Our current mass production style of farming has resulted in
numerous
• Environmental damages
– Reduced biodiversity
– Habitat destruction
– Deforestation
– Water, air and soil pollution
– Salinization, desertification
– Decline in water resources
and land subsidence
• Human impacts
– Farm land destruction
– Damage to soil fertility
– Reduced nutritional value of food
– Decreased economic, social and cultural values
potential solution to correct and prevent these problems.

9. definition
Aimed at meeting the needs of the present
generation without endangering the resource
base of the future generations.
In order to feed the population more food has
to be produced and this has to be done without
degradation of the resource base.

10. objectives
• Satisfy human food and fiber needs
• Enhance environmental quality and the natural resource
• Efficient use of non-renewable resources and on-farm
resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural
biological cycles and controls
• Sustain the economic viability of farm operations
• Enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a
whole.

12. Major sustainable Cropping
Systems in India
Rice – wheat (10.5 m ha)
Rice – rice (5.89 m ha)
Cotton – wheat (1.09 m ha)
Soybean – wheat (2.23 m ha)
Maize – wheat (1.86 m ha)
P. millet - wheat (2.26 m ha)

13. Characterstics
Ecologically sound
Economically viable
Socially need
Environmental friendly
Farmers preference

14. Management practices for sustainable cropping
systems
Watershed management
Conservation of resources
 Integrated nutrient management
 Efficient water management
 Integrated weed management
Integrated pest management
Crop rotation
Mulching

17. “A sustainable cropping system does
not deplete soils "

18. System integration:
Diversification through Cereal (Maize)-Legume Integration
Legumes
• Increase soil fertility
• Improved nutrition
• Supply cashCereal (Maize)
• Increased productivity
– Ensured food security
– Income security
-Increase productivity
-Increase profitability
-Reduce down side risk
Forage
• Alternative of cattle
feeding (residue
management)
• Improved animal
nutrition

21. Diversification of rice (Oryza sativa L.) based cropping systems on economic and
straw/haulm/stover yields of component crops, rice equivalent yield (REY) and
sustainable yield index (SYI).
Cropping system Economic yield (t /ha)
System
productivity
(REY (t /ha)
SYI
Rice–wheat–fallow 4.80 2.38 – 7.85 0.27
Rice–wheat–greengram 4.89 2.38 1.11 12.45 0.45
Rice–sorghum–greengram 4.74 23.58* 1.15 9.43 0.34
Rice–castor 4.73 2.11 – 9.72 0.35
Rice–mustard–greengram 4.75 0.84 1.09 12.79 0.47
Rice–sorghum–groundnut 4.74 21.77* 2.15 10.21 0.37
Rice–chickpea –cowpea 4.97 0.67 2.78** 11.18 0.40
Rice–fenugreek–okra 4.88 8.04* 6.91 25.73 0.97
Rice–onion –cowpea 5.12 25.52 1.651** 24.15 0.91
Rice–chickpea–sesamum 4.99 0.63 0.72 10.28 0.37
SEM+ 0.45 0.02
CD at (0.05) 1.29 0.06
Ram et al.., 2012AICRP on cropping system research farm, Navsari, India

23. Cropping system
Dry matter (kg ha-1)
production at Harvest
Grain yield
(kg ha-1) Straw yield
(kg ha-1)
T1: Fallow-rice 7754 4125 5899
T2: Sunnhemp-rice 14455 6501 8505
T3: Greengram-rice 12199 5789 7592
T4: Blackgram-rice 11838 5605 7522
T5: Sesame-rice 10486 5310 7257
T6: Clusterbean-rice 9692 4825 6627
T7: Bhendi-rice 11645 5512 7485
S.Em + 642.39 177.24 217.81
CD (P=0.05) 1909 527 647
dry matter production and yield of kharif rice as influenced by pre kharif crops in
rice based cropping system
Sai sravan and ramana murthy, 2014Acharya NG. Ranga Agricultural University, AP

24. Inter/relay cropping systems
Grain//forage yield of inter/relay crops
(t ha-1)
Rice equivalent yield of inter/relay
crops (t ha-1)
Rice Intercrops Relay crops intercrops Relay crops
Wheat oriented set
Rice alone- wheat 4.02 a - 2.99 c - 2.46
Rice + Maize- wheat 3.81 b 40.70 a 3.22 bc 2.87 2.65
Rice + Sesbania- wheat 2.98 c 27.49 b 3.54 a 1.94 2.92
Rice +Mungbean- wheat 3.36 b 20.60 d 3.46 ab 1.45 2.85
Rice + Ricebean- wheat 3.47 b 19.50 d 3.49 ab 1.38 2.67
Rice + Cowpea- wheat 3.41 b 23.69 c 3.43 ab 1.67 2.82
Rice + Pigeonpea- wheat 3.35 b 20.76 d 3.32 ab 1.46 2.73
Lentil oriented set
Rice alone- lentil 4.02 a - 0.99 c - 3.26
Rice + Maize- lentil 3.81 b 40.70 a 1.03 c 2.87 3.39
Rice + Sesbania- lentil 2.98 c 27.49 b 1.38 a 1.94 4.55
Rice +Mungbean- lentil 3.36 b 20.60 d 1.20 b 1.45 3.96
Rice + Ricebean- lentil 3.47 b 19.50 d 1.20 b 1.38 3.95
Rice + Cowpea-lentil 3.41 b 23.69 c 1.19 b 1.67 3.92
Rice + Pigeonpea -lentil 3.35 b 20.76 d 1.19 b 1.47 3.92
Egyptian clover oriented set
Rice alone-Egyptian clover 4.02 a - 66.70 b - 4.28
Rice + Maize-Egyptian clover 3.81 b 40.70 a 66.52 b 2.87 4.27
Rice + Sesbania-Egyptian clover 2.98 c 27.49 b 76.05 a 1.94 5.37
Rice+Mungbean-Egyptian clover 3.36 b 20.60 d 73.34 a 1.45 5.18
Rice+ Ricebean- Egyptian clover 3.47 b 19.50 d 73.70 a 1.38 5.20
Rice + Cowpea-Egyptian clover 3.41 b 23.69 c 72.15 ab 1.67 8.09
Rice+Pigeonpea-Egyptian clover 3.35 b 20.76 d 73.28 a 1.46 5.03
Market prices of green fodder
:Wheat = Rs. 350/40 kg, Pigeonpea fodder = Rs. 30/40 kg, Lentil = Rs. 1400 /40 kg, Maize fodder = Rs. 30/40 kg, Egyptian clover fodder = Rs. 30/40 kg,
Mungbean fodder = Rs.30/40 kg, Sesbania fodder = Rs. 30/40 kg, Cowpea fodder = Rs. 30/40 kg, Ricebean fodder = Rs. 30/40 kg
ABDUL, 2011
Total rice grain equivalent yield as affected by different direct seeded rice-
based inter/relay cropping system (two-year average data)

26. Rice equivalent yield, water use efficiency and water use
productivity of rice based cropping system as influenced by
residual crop and land fallow
Cropping sequence
Rice equivalent
yield (kg)
WUE
(kg/ha-cm)
Water productivity
(kg/m-3 irrigation
water)
Rice-Pea
2143
19.69
0.64
Rice-Lentil
1284
12.34
0.34
Rice-Fallow
(Farmer practice)
652 5.99 0.18
Meghalaya Anup et al. (2014)
26

28. Treatment
Dry matter of Phalaris
minor (q/ha)
No. of seed/m2 in soil
Before sowing
After harvest
Rice-Wheat (Herbicide) 2.09 7.8 1.8
Rice-Wheat (Control) 45.5 8.0 10.3
Rice-Potato-Wheat 0.0 0.5 0.0
Rice-Potato-Sunflower 0.0 0.3 0.0
Rice-Berseem 0.0 0.3 0.0
Rice-Gobhi-sarson 0.13 0.8 0.5
CD at 5% 0.40 - -
Verma, 2015
Uttrakhand

29. Effect of crop sequences on Phalaris minor population in wheat
Crop sequence Population of Phalaris minor (No/m2)
Rice-wheat-rice-wheat -rice-wheat 253
Rice-potato-rice-wheat-rice-potato 54
Rice-potato-rice-berseem-rice-winter maize 16
Rice-sugarcane:-sugarcane-ratoon-ratoon-wheat 4
Maize-wheat-rice-wheat -maize-wheat 18
Soybean-wheat -maize-wheat-soybean-wheat 22
Verma, 2015Uttrakhand

33. System profitability of rice based cropping system as
influenced by crop diversification
Cropping system
Net return
(Rs/ha/year)
System profitability
(Rs/ha/day)
Rice-Wheat 33400 91.50
Rice - berseem 33100 90.68
Rice – oat (multicut) 23900 65.47
Rice-Potato-Greengram 43200 118.35
Rice - onion 36400 99.72
Faizabad, U.P. Alok Kumar et al. (2008) 33

34. Economics and employment generation of dairy as
component in farming system
Particulars
Expenses
Rs/ha
Net income
Rs /ha
Total
Employmen
t
Generation
(man Days)
1. Cropping
(Cotton+blackgram,
Sorghum+cowpea)
14138 8422 393
2. Dairy+Cropping
(3 Jersey milch cows)
32583 19900 702
Chandrasekaran et al., 1994

35. Gross and net income from different CS & FS models
IFS model Income
from crop
(Rs/ha)
Income
from
animals
(Rs)
Gross
income
(Rs/ha)
Expendi
ture (Rs)
Net
income
(Rs/ha)
B:C ratio Employment
(mandays/ha/
year)
Crop alone
28196 -- 28196 22025 6171 1.28 185
Crop+goat+
poultry 27138 24633 51771 26950 24821 1.92 297
Crop+goat+
poultry+dairy 27478 74605 102083 59458 42625 1.72 343
Crop+goat+
poultry+sheep 28213 39563 67776 45980 21796 1.47 343
Crop+goat+
poultry+dairy+s
heep
29281 93640 122921 70127 52794 1.75 389
Mean 28061 58110 74549 44908 29641 1.63 311
SD 825 31618 38116 20585 18305 0.25 78
CV(%) 2.9 54.4 51.1 45.8 61.8 15.5 25
Solaiappan et al., 2007

39. CONCLUSION