0417 Why and How 21st Century's Agriculture Should be Different from 20th Century Agriculture
•Download as PPT, PDF•
1 like•1,029 views
Presented by: Norman Uphoff Presented at: Rice Experimental Station, INCA, Los Palacios
![20th Century ‘Modern’ Agriculture Has Been the Most Successful in History ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (19)
Similar to 0417 Why and How 21st Century's Agriculture Should be Different from 20th Century Agriculture
Similar to 0417 Why and How 21st Century's Agriculture Should be Different from 20th Century Agriculture (20)
More from SRI-Rice, Dept. of Global Development, CALS, Cornell University
More from SRI-Rice, Dept. of Global Development, CALS, Cornell University (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
0417 Why and How 21st Century's Agriculture Should be Different from 20th Century Agriculture
- 1. Why and How 21st Century Agriculture Should Be Different from 20th Century Agriculture Rice Experimental Station, INCA, Los Palacios, Cuba July 9, 2004 Norman Uphoff Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and Development (CIIFAD)
- 22. Plant Physical Structure and Light Intensity Distribution at Heading Stage (CNRRI Research --Tao et al. 2002)
- 23. Single Cambodian rice plant transplanted at 10 days
- 25. SRI field in Sri Lanka -- yield of 13 t/ha with panicles having 400+ grains
- 27. Rice field at CPA Camilo Cienfuegos in Cuba -- 14 t/ha
- 28. Two rice plants in Cuba -- Same variety: 2084 (Bollito) Same age: 52 DAP
- 29. Single SRI Rice Plant Grown at Rice Research Station, Maruteru, AP, India
- 30. Rice Roots - Andhra Pradesh, India - SRI on right
- 31. Two rice fields in Sri Lanka -- same variety, same irrigation system, and same drought : conventional methods (left), SRI (right)
- 35. Root Activity in SRI and Conventionally-Grown Rice Nanjing Agricultural University (Wang et al. 2002) Wuxianggeng-9 variety
Editor's Notes
- 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'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.
- Picture provided by Gamini Batuwitage, Sri Lanka, of field that yielded 17 t/ha in 2000.
- 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.
- 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'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 "indicator species" 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's trials with SRI at Beforona (10.2 t/ha).