Morphological Characteristics of High Yielding Rice Varieties
0819 The System of Rice Intensification (SRI): Understanding this Resource-Saving, High-Yielding...
-
Upload
sri-rice-international-programs-cals-cornell-university -
Category
Education
-
view
2.136 -
download
3
description
Transcript of 0819 The System of Rice Intensification (SRI): Understanding this Resource-Saving, High-Yielding...
The System of Rice Intensification (SRI):
Understanding this Resource-Saving, High-Yielding Rice Farming System and
Its Implications for Agricultural Science
Kyoto University, February 22, 2008
Norman Uphoff Cornell International Institute for
Food, Agriculture and Development (CIIFAD)in cooperation with Nippon Koei
Rice sector needs in 21st centuryacc. to IRRI/DG, Intl. Year of Rice, 2004
• Increased land productivity-- higher yield
• Higher water productivity -- crop per drop
• Technology accessible for the poor
• Environmental friendliness
• More pest- and disease-resistance
• More tolerance of abiotic stresses
• Better grain quality for consumers
• Greater profitability for farmers
SRI practice can meet all these needs:
• Higher yields by 50-100% (78% in NT)
• Water reductions of 25-50%
• Capital expenditure -- not necessary
• Neither are agrochemical inputs
• Pest and disease resistance
• Drought and lodging tolerance
• Better grain quality
• Lower costs of production by10-20%
Additional benefits of SRI practice:
• Time to maturity reduced by 1-2 weeks
• Milling outturn -- higher by about 15%
• Other crops’ performance also being improved by SRI concepts and practices, e.g., sugar cane, millet, wheat, mustard• Human resource development for farmers through participatory approach
• Diversification and modernization of smallholder agriculture
SRI Not a Technology – 6 Core Ideas
1. Use young seedlings to preserve growth potential – although DIRECT SEEDING is becoming an option
2. Avoid trauma to the roots -- transplant quickly, shallow, no inversion of root tips that will halt growth
3. Give plants wider spacing – one plant per hill and in square pattern to achieve ‘edge effect’
4. Keep paddy soil moist but unflooded – mostly aerobic, not continuously saturated, and
5. Actively aerate the soil -- as much as possible
6. Enhance soil organic matter as much as possible
Practices 1-3 stimulate plant growth; while practices 4-6 enhance the growth and health of roots and soil biota
Alternative Agricultural Paradigms: • GREEN REVOLUTION strategy was to:
(a) Change the genetic potential of plants, and
(b) Increase the provision of external inputs -- more water, more fertilizer and insecticides, etc.
• AGROECOLOGY (SRI) instead changes the management of plants, soil, water & nutrients to:
(a) Promote the growth of root systems, and
(b) Increase the abundance and diversity of soil organisms to better enlist their benefits
These produce bigger/better PHENOTYPES
Cambodia, Takeo Province:rice plant grownfrom single seed,with SRI methodsand trad. variety
Nepal,MorangDistrict:
Single riceplant grown
with SRI methods
India: Punjabi farmer showing difference in rice phenotypes
INDONESIA: Dried rice plants in Nippon Koei office, Jakarta
India, Maruteru Research Station, AP: roots of a single rice plant (MTU 1071)
Cuba: Two plants, same variety(VN 2084) and same age (52 DAP)
Microbial populations in rice rhizosphere as measured in TNAU analysis
Micro-organisms
Conventional rhizospheres
SRI practice rhizospheres
Total bacteria
88 x 106 105 x 106
Azospirillum 8 x 105 31 x 105
Azotobacter 39 x 103 66 x 103
Phospho-bacteria
33 x 103 59 x 103
AZOSPIRILLUM POPULATIONS, TILLERING AND RICE YIELDS ASSOCIATED WITH DIFFERENT CULTIVATION PRACTICES
AND NUTRIENT AMENDMENTS Results of replicated trials at Anjomakely, Madagascar, 2001 (Andriankaja, 2002)
Azospirillum
CLAY SOIL in Roots (103/mg)
Tillers/ plant
Yield (t/ha)
Traditional cultivation, no amendments
65 17 1.8
SRI cultivation, with no amendments
1,100 45 6.1
SRI cultivation, with NPK amendments
450 68 9.0
SRI cultivation, with compost
1,400 78 10.5
LOAM SOIL SRI cultivation, with no amendments
75 32 2.1
SRI cultivation, with compost
2,000 47 6.6
SRI
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
IH H FH MR WR YRStage
Org
an d
ry w
eigh
t(g/
hill)
CK
I H H FH MR WR YR
Yellowleaf andsheathPanicle
Leaf
Sheath
Stem
47.9% 34.7%
“Non-Flooding Rice Farming Technology in Irrigated Paddy Field”Dr. Tao Longxing, China National Rice Research Institute, 2004
CNRRI factorial trials, 2004 and 2005,using two super-rice hybrid varieties,
seeking to break the plateauing of S-R yields
Standard Rice Mgmt• 30-day seedlings• 20x20 cm spacing• Continuous flooding• Fertilization:
– 100% chemical
New Rice Mgmt (SRI)• 20-day seedlings• 30x30 cm spacing• Alternate wetting and
drying (AWD)• Fertilization:
– 50% chemical, – 50% organic
Average super-rice YIELDS (kg ha-1) with new rice management (SRI) vs. standard rice management
at different plant densities ha-1
0100020003000400050006000700080009000
10000
150,000 180,000 210,000
NRMSRM
Comparison of rice plant roots in North
Bharat Chandra Nagar, Rajnagar
Subdistrict,Tripura State
Conventionalrice plants (3)
on left; andSRI rice plant
(1) on left
1. INCREASED YIELD
Area under paddy (ha)
Paddy produc
tion (mt)
Ave. yield
(mt/ha)
Area under
SRI (ha)
SRI production (mt)
Ave. SRI
yield (mt/ha)
No. of
fami-lies
2005-06
15,613 49,976 3.009 24.5 170.08 6.942 122
2006-07
15,632 50,976 3.261 2,300 15,669.9 6.813 5,335
Data from Department of Agriculture, State of Tripura, Rajnagar Subdistrict Office
Indonesia,Lombok Province:
Rice plantssame variety,
same age
Results of 9 seasons of on-farm comparative evaluations of SRI in
Indonesia, by Nippon Koei, 2002-06
• No. of trials: 12,133
• Total area: 9,429.1 hectares
• Ave. increase in yield: 3.3 t/ha -- 78%
• Reduction in water requirements: 40%
• Reduction in fertilizer use: 50%
• Reduction in costs of production: 20%
Bali, DS 2006: 24 farmers on 42 hectares: SRI + Longping hybrids: 13.3 t/ha vs. 8.4
2. REDUCED WATER USE• Application of minimum of water to meet the plants’ needs – either by:
• Small daily applications to maintain soil moisture, according to soil type, with some periods of soil drying, or• Alternate wetting and drying – may give lower yield but saves on labor
• Getting higher yield with less water means greater water productivity and achieving goal of ‘more crop per drop’
Trend in Decreasing Water Table Level in Punjab
YearYear Affected areaAffected area Depth of water Depth of water level (in feet)level (in feet)
1973-741973-74 3%3% 3030
2005-062005-06 30%30% 70 70
20232023 Whole of Whole of Punjab?Punjab?
160160
Statistics of DOA PunjabStatistics of DOA Punjab
SRI Saving of Irrigation Water in Punjab
Method of Method of cultivationcultivation
No. of No. of irrigations irrigations per acreper acre
Time to irrigate Time to irrigate one acreone acre
(4” delivery pipe)(4” delivery pipe)
Saving of Saving of water under water under SRISRI
Conven-Conven-tional tional methodsmethods
2525 4 hours4 hours
50-55 %50-55 %SRISRI 1313 2 hours2 hours
If we apply SRI method of cultivation on 26 lakh If we apply SRI method of cultivation on 26 lakh hectares of rice area in Punjab, then it is estimated hectares of rice area in Punjab, then it is estimated that 50% of water can be saved.that 50% of water can be saved.
Dr. Amrik Singh, MANAGE, GurdaspurDr. Amrik Singh, MANAGE, Gurdaspur
3. ACCESSIBILITY TO POOR• SRI requires no purchases of external inputs, although these can be used
• All varieties respond to SRI practices – so no need to purchase new seeds, although highest yields with HYVs/hybrids• Decomposed biomass suffices for soil nutrition – so no need to buy fertilizers; fertilizer gives good but not best results• No/little need for agrochemical protection
• Credit is not necessary -- no need for households to borrow and go into debt
INDIA: South Tripura District, Rajnagar Subdivision: Dimatali -- all tribal village, 21/78 farmers using SRI
-- 6.5 t/ha SRI yield vs. 2.5 t/ha conventional --two years earlier not even doing row planting
Socially Marginal Villages Visited in Teliamura Agricultural Sub-Division,
West Tripura District, India
G.P. Area Population Culti-vators
SRI Culti-vators
PaddyArea (ha)
SRIArea (ha)
North Maharanipur
1800(90% STs)
632 143(79%)
180 100(56%)
Maiganga 3648(70% SCs)
822 200(24%)
248 100(40%)
EastHowaibari
1832(40% SCs,20% STs)
270 92(34%)
85 54(64%)
Data from Tripura State Dept. of Agriculture
Paddy Yield by Socially Marginal Villages, Teliamura Sub-Division, by season, 2006-07
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
SRIKhI
ConvKh1
SRIKh2
ConvKh2
SRIRabi
ConvRabi
N.Mah.Maig.E.How.
4. ENVIRONMENTALLY BENEFICIAL PRODUCTION
• Lower water requirement reduces pressure on natural ecosystems
• Reduced N fertilizer application preserves water quality (less NO3)
• Reduced use of agrochemicals benefits both soil and water quality
• Not flooding abates CH4 (GHG) -- although still need to assess N2O
5. PEST/DISEASE RESISTANCE
• SRI rice plants are more resistant to pests and diseases
• Little or no need for agrochemical protection
• Although IPM crop management is always recommended
• Some agrochemicals can be used on an ‘as-needed’ basis
Incidence of Diseases and PestsVietnam National IPM Program: average of
data from trials in 8 provinces, 2005-06:
Spring season Summer season
SRIPlots
FarmerPlots
Differ-ence
SRIPlots
FarmerPlots
Differ-ence
Sheath blight
6.7% 18.1% 63.0% 5.2% 19.8% 73.7%
Leaf blight
-- -- -- 8.6% 36.3% 76.5%
Small leaf folder
63.4* 107.7* 41.1% 61.8* 122.3* 49.5%
Brown plant hopper
542* 1,440* 62.4% 545* 3,214* 83.0%
AVERAGE*Insects/
m255.5% 70.7%
Insects
(damage or population size)
SRI cultivation
(mean ± SE)
Conventional cultivation
(mean ± SE)
t value
(difference)
(SRI reduction)
Cut worm(% damaged leaves
per seedling)
0.0 ± 0.0(0.0)
20.4 ± 4.8(19.1)
16.1**
( ∞ )
Thrips(per seedling)
0.5 ± 0.2(0.9)
6.1 ± 0.5(2.5)
19.3**
( 92% )
Green leaf hopper
(per seedling)
0.1 ± 0.0(0.8)
0.4 ± 0.1(0.9)
14.8**
( 75% )
BPH(per seedling)
0.0 ± 0.0(0.0)
0.2 ± 0.0(0.8)
11.5**
( ∞ )
Whorl maggot(% damaged leaves
per seedling)
0.8 ± 0.2(0.9)
9.3 ± 2.6(9.1)
12.5**
( 91% )
Pest abundance in nursery (TNAU)
Figures in parentheses are transformed values ** Significant difference (P<0.001)
Insects(damage or
Population size)
SRI cultivation
(mean ± SE)
Conventional cultivation
(mean ± SE)
t value
(difference)
(SRI reduction)
Whorl maggot
(% damaged leaves per hill)
17.9 ± 1.9(18.0)
23.2 ± 2.0(19.1)
6.6**
( 23% )
Thrips(per hill)
6.6 ± 0.1(2.2)
20.2 ± 2.0(4.1)
12.2**
( 67% )
Green leaf hopper(per hill)
0.6 ± 0.1(1.0)
1.1 ± 0.2(1.2)
10.7**
( 45% )
BPH(per hill)
1.1 ± 0.2(1.2)
2.7 ± 0.2(1.8)
14.4**
( 60% )
Whorl maggot
(% truncated leaves per hill)
5.6 ± 1.8(5.9)
8.8 ± 1.4(9.1)
4.5**
( 36% )
Pest abundance in main field (TNAU)
Figures in parentheses are transformed values ** significant difference (P<0.001)
6. RESISTANCE TO ABIOTIC STRESSES
• LODGING & STORM DAMAGE
• DROUGHT – WATER STRESS
• TEMPERATURE EXTREMES
Why? Because of larger, stronger root systems -- and possibly more uptake of silicon when paddy soils are not kept saturated
Climate-proofing to deal w/ climate change
India, Tamil Nadu: rice plot in foreground is normal rice; no lodging on SRI plot in center
Vietnam: FFS farmer in Dông Trù village, Hanoi Province – after typhoon
Sri Lanka: rice fields of same variety, same irrigation system, and same drought -- left, conventional methods; right, SRI
7. GRAIN QUALITY• More milled rice per bushel of SRI paddy
• Fewer unfilled grains – less chaff
• Fewer broken grains – less shattering
• Less chalkiness – maybe other quality improvements? Should be studied
• More nutritional value? More protein? Possible due to increased N uptake
• More micronutrients? Likely with larger, deeper root system and denser grains
Measured Differences in Grain Quality Conventional SRI Methods
Characteristic Methods (3 spacings) Difference
Chalky kernels (%)
39.89 – 41.07 23.62 – 32.47 ↓30.7%
General chalkiness (%)
6.74 – 7.17 1.02 – 4.04 ↓65.7%
Milled rice outturn (%)
41.54 – 51.46 53.58 – 54.41 ↑16.1%
Head milled rice (%)
38.87 – 39.99 41.81 – 50.84 ↑17.5%
Paper by Prof. Ma Jun, Sichuan Agricultural University,presented at 10th conference on Theory and Practice for
High-Quality, High-Yielding Rice in China, Haerbin, 8/2004
8. HIGHER PROFITABILITY
INCREASED PRODUCTION +
LOWER COSTS OF PRODUCTION =
MORE NET INCOME FOR FARMERS
Average cost reduction/ha across
10 evaluations in 8 countries = 25%On-farm comparisons: N = 4,214
1. Bangladesh – IRRI-funded evaluation (N=1,073)
2. Cambodia – GTZ evaluation (N=500); CEDAC evaluation of 3-year SRI users (N=120)
3. China – China Agricultural University (N=82)
4. India – TNAU (N=100), IWMI-India (N=108)
5. Indonesia – Nippon Koei evaluation (N=1,849)
6. Nepal – DADO Morang record-keeping (N=412)
7. Sri Lanka – IWMI evaluation (N=120)
8. Vietnam – farmer field school reporting (N=60)
Country Evaluation by/for:
YieldIncrease
Water-Saving
Cost Reduction
Increase in Net Income
Comments
BANGLADESHOn-farm Evaluations(N=1,073)
BRAC/SAFEBRRI/Syng-enta BD Ltd(Husain et al., 2004)
24% n.d.
7% 59%
(32-82%)
On-farm evaluations funded by IRRI under its PETRRA project with DFID
CAM-BODIANational Survey(N=500)
GTZ (Anthofer et al., 2004) 41%
Flooding at TP
reduced 96.3%→
2.5%
56% 74%
Survey of SRI and non-SRI users randomly sampled in 5 provinces; SRI use has grown to >70,000 farmers in 5 years
Long-term Users
(N=120)
CEDAC (Tech, 2004) 105% 50% 44% 89%
Small farmers who had used SRI methods consecutively for 3 years
CHINAVillage Study (N=82)
China Agric. University(Li et al., 2005)
29% 44%7.4%
[ext. service promoting fertilizer & new seeds]
64%
SRI use in village had gone from 7 in 2003, to 398 in 2004; farmers considered labor-saving main
benefit (N=82)
Country Evaluation by/for:
YieldIncrease
Water-Saving
Cost Reduction
Increase in Net Income
Comments
INDIATamil Nadu (N=100)
Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. (Thiyaga-rajan et al., 2004)
28% 40-50%
11% 112%
On-farm comparisons in Tamiraparani Basin, supervised by TNAU and extension service
Andhra Pradesh (N=1,535)
Andhra Pradesh Agric. Univ. (Satyanara-yana, 2005)
38% 40% NA NA
On-farm trials supervised by ANGRAU and State extension service centers
West Bengal (N=108)
IWMI-India(Sinha and Talati, 2005) 32%
Rainfed version of SRI 35% 67%
SRI use in villages had gone from 4 farmers to 150 in 3 seasons; now > 6,500
INDO-NESIA(N=1,849)
Nippon Koei (Sato, 2006)
84% 40% 24% 412%
3 years of evaluation in Eastern. Indonesia; trials conducted on 1,363 ha
Country Evaluation by/for:
YieldIncrease
Water-Saving
Cost Reduction
Increase in Net Income
Com-ments
NEPAL(N=412)
Morang District Agr. Dev. Office (Uprety, 2005)
82% 43%2.2%
[rotary hoes not widely available]
163%
Morang district users from 1 in 2003 to >1,400 in 2005, and > 2,000 in 2006
SRI LANKADistrict Surveys (N=120)
Intl. Water Managemt Institute (IWMI) (Namara et al., 2004)
44% 24% 11.9-13.3%
90-117%
Survey of SRI users and non-users who were randomly sampled in 2 districts , 60 farmers in each, half SRI, half non-SRI
VIET-NAMFFS(N=60)
National IPM Program (Dông Trù village)
21% 60% 24% 65%
Record-keeping by Farmer Field School alumni on SRI results
AVER-AGE
52% 44% 25% 128%
9. Reduced Time to Maturity 51 SRI farmers in Morang district, Nepal,
monsoon season, 2005, who planted popular Bansdhan (145-day) variety
Age of N of Days to Reductionseedling farmers harvest (in days)> 14 d 9 138.5 6.510 - 14 d 37 130.6 14.4 8 - 9 d 5 123.6 21.4With doubling of yield from 3.1 to 6.3 t/ha --
and reduced water use
Impact of Soil-Aerating ‘Weeding’412 farmers in Morang district, Nepal,
using SRI in monsoon season, 2005Ave. SRI yield = 6.3 t/ha, vs. control = 3.1 t/ha• Data show that weedings can raise yield
No. of No. of Average Rangeweedings farmers yield of yields 1 32 5.16 (3.6-7.6) 2 366 5.87 (3.5-11.0) 3 14 7.87 (5.85-10.4)
10. Extrapolation to Other Crops Farmers in India are taking SRI concepts
and practices and are applying them to other crops:
• Sugar cane (Andhra Pradesh)• Finger millet (Elusine coracana)
(Jharkand, Karnataka)• Wheat (Himachal Pradesh)• Mustard (Orissa)
SRI IS NOT A TECHNOLOGY – rather it is a set of insights and concepts
System of Finger Millet Intensification on left; regular management of improvedvariety and of traditional variety on right,picture courtesy of PRADAN, Jharkand
Winter wheat in Poland before going into winter dormancy
Liu Zhibin, seed multiplication farm, Meishan, Sichuanplanting on raised beds with zero-tillage – 13.4 t/ha yield
SRI crop of G. Moghanraj Yadhav, Nagipattanam district, Tamil Nadu
SRI is still ‘a work in progress’• Contributing to ‘post-modern
agriculture’ – which is the most modern agriculture
• Building on advances in biology and ecology
• Especially in microbiology and soil ecology
• New perspectives on plant-soil-microbial ‘systems’
Ascending Migration of Endophytic Rhizobia, from Roots and Leave, inside Rice Plants and
Assessment of Benefits to Rice Growth Physiology
Rhizobium test strain
Total plant root
vol/pot (cm3)
Shoot dry wt/pot
(g)
Net photo-synthetic
rate (μmol-2 s-1)
Water utilization efficiency
Area (cm2) of flag leaf
Grain yield/pot
(g)
Ac-ORS571 210 ± 36A 63 ± 2A 16.42 ± 1.39A 3.62 ± 0.17BC 17.64 ± 4.94ABC 86 ± 5A
SM-1021 180 ± 26A 67 ± 5A 14.99 ± 1.64B 4.02± 0.19AB 20.03 ± 3.92A 86 ± 4A
SM-1002 168 ± 8AB 52 ± 4BC 13.70 ± 0.73B 4.15 ± 0.32A 19.58 ± 4.47AB 61 ± 4B
R1-2370 175 ± 23A 61 ± 8AB 13.85 ± 0.38B 3.36 ± 0.41C 18.98 ± 4.49AB 64 ± 9B
Mh-93 193 ± 16A 67 ± 4A 13.86 ± 0.76B 3.18 ± 0.25CD 16.79 ± 3.43BC 77 ± 5A
Control 130 ± 10B 47 ± 6C 10.23 ± 1.03C 2.77 ± 0.69D 15.24 ± 4.0C 51 ± 4C
Feng Chi et al., Applied and Envir. Microbiology, 71 (2005), 7271-7278
“Productivity is increased [with SRI], and at the same time the environment is saved. . . . I want to urge everybody, starting with
the Minister of Agriculture and everyone else -- let us support this SRI method with our maximum capacity.”-- Pres. S. B. Yudhoyono speaking at SRIHarvest Festival, Cianjur, July 30, 2007
THANK YOU
• Web page: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/
• Email: [email protected] or [email protected] or
Factorial Trial Results, MadagascarMorandava, 2000:
sea level, tropical climate, poor soils
HYV vs. tradl. varieties• 8 vs. 16 days• aerated (AS) vs.
saturated soil (SS)• 1 vs. 3 plants per hill• compost vs. NPK• 25 vs. 30 cm spacing
(no difference)
• all same weeding
Anjomakely, 2001:
1200m, temperate climate, good soils
better vs. poorer soils• 8 vs. 20 days• aerated (AS) vs.
saturated soil (SS)• 1 vs. 3 plants per hill• compost vs. NPK• 25 vs. 30 cm spacing
(only 80 kg/ha difference)
• all same weeding
FACTORIAL RESULTS (t/ha), ANJOMAKELY, 2001 [N=240]CONVENTIONAL Clay Loam Average Addition
SS/20/3/NPK 3.00 (6) 2.04 (6) 2.52 (12)1 SRI PracticeSS/ 20 / 3 / C 3.71 (6) 2.03 (6)SS/20/1/NPK 5.04 (6) 2.78 (6)SS/ 8 /3/NPK 7.16 (6) 3.89 (6)AS/20/3/NPK 5.08 (6) 2.60 (6)
5.25 (24) 2.83 (24) 4.04 (48) +1.522 SRI PracticesSS/20/ 1 / C 4.50 (6) 2.44 (6)SS / 8 / 3 / C 6.86 (6) 3.61 (6)AS/20/1/NPK 6.07 (6) 3.15 (6)AS/20/ 3 / C 6.72 (6) 3.41 (6)SS/ 8 /1/NPK 8.13 (6) 4.36 (6)AS/ 8 /3/NPK 8.15 (6) 4.44 (6)
6.74 (36) 3.57 (36) 5.16 (72) +1.123 SRI PracticesSS/ 8 / 1 / C 7.70 (6) 4.07 (6)AS/20/ 1 / C 7.45 (6) 4.10 (6)AS/ 8 / 3 / C 9.32 (6) 5.17 (6)AS/ 8 /1/NPK 8.77 (6) 5.00 (6)
8.31 (24) 4.59 (24) 6.45 (48) +1.29ALL SRI PRAC TICES
AS / 8 / 1 / C 10.35 (6) 6.39 (6) 8.37 (12) +1.92
FACTORIAL RESULTS (t/ha), MORONDAVA, 2000 [N=288]
CONVENTIONAL HYV Traditional Average Addition
SS/16/3/NPK 2.84 (6) 2.11 (6) 2.48 (12)1 SRI PracticeSS/ 16 / 3 / C 2.69 (6) 2.67 (6)SS/16/1/NPK 2.74 (6) 2.28 (6)SS/ 8 /3/NPK 4.08 (6) 3.09 (6)AS/16/3/NPK 4.04 (6) 2.64 (6)
3.34 (24)(.021) 2.67 (24)(.007) 3.01 (48) + 0.532 SRI PracticesSS/16/ 1 / C 2.73 (6) 2.47 (6)SS / 8 / 3 / C 3.35 (6) 4.33 (6)AS/16/1/NPK 4.10 (6) 2.89 (6)AS/16/ 3 / C 4.18 (6) 3.10 (6)SS/ 8 /1/NPK 5.00 (6) 3.65 (6)AS/ 8 /3/NPK 5.75 (6) 3.34 (6)
4.28 (36)(.000) 3.24 (36)(.000) 3.78 (72) + 0.773 SRI PracticesSS/ 8 / 1 / C 3.85 (6) 5.18 (6)AS/16/ 1 / C 3.82 (6) 2.87 (6)AS/ 8 / 3 / C 4.49 (6) 4.78 (6)AS/ 8 /1/NPK 6.62 (6) 4.29 (6)
4.69 (24)(.000) 4.28 (24)(.000) 4.48 (48) + 0.70ALL SRI PRACTICES
AS / 8 / 1 / C 6.83 (6)(.000) 5.96 (6)(.000) 6.40 (12) +1.92