Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Rain as Irrigation sourceExperiments and ConceptsExperiments and Concepts by a Farmer & Researcher
PR Sheshagiri RaoP.R. Sheshagiri RaoProject Scientist, Earth Institute,
Columbia University, New York, USA&
Vice President (Agronomy), Natural Remedies Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore.
Based on
+Research Experience
Prof. Sulochana Gadgil, Farming in the Semi arid region+g ,
Prof. Madhav Gadgil
Prof Narahari Rao
+Dr. GNS Reddy, BIRD‐K (BAIF), Tiptur, India , ( also for several photos)
+Prof. Narahari Rao
&
f S d i
+Natural Remedies Pvt. Ltd, igreenpvt. Ltd. Bangalore, Prithvi energy pvt Ltd AssamProf. H.S. Jamadgni
Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore
pvt. Ltd. Assam.+
Several other Individuals & InstitutionsInstitutions
Rain as irrigation source?
1. Large part of India and world is rainfed (Map)
2. In India 68 percent of total net sown area
(136.8m.ha) is rainfed
3. ‘GAMBLE WITH THE MONSOONS’
4. Additional Irrigation is not an option ‐ 75% of
potential already in use
The Region of DISCUSSION (30,000 sq km)(A farmer here)
An example ‐ SEMIARID REGION‐ ANANTPUR
• Land use‐ Just peanuts
– 90% cultivated area‐ Rainfed Peanut crop (over the p (past 30 years)
R i f ll l & t i• Rainfall – low & uncertain
– June to Dec (Annual average) ‐ 49 cm, Std.dev.‐ 19. 4
– Crop water demand of Peanut – 35 cm
• Soils‐ poor in nutrients & water holding• Soils‐ poor in nutrients & water holding
– Sand loams, Alfisols, Hilly terrain
– Low water holding capacity < 12% V/V basis
Anantpur District average Peanut yield‐ (1975‐1995) ‐ Avg rain‐47.6 cmrain 47.6 cm
Ignore the green dots
Cost of Cultivation
Gamble with monsoon? ‐ Climate risk
Farm Scale – (100 year crop runs of APSIM, CROPGRO; only
Abi ti t )Abiotic stress)
60% of the years- Revenue < Cost of Cultivation
20% of the years- Profits (gross margins)
> 2 X Cost of Cultivation 2 X Cost of Cultivation
Contd…….
5. Uncertainty of Rain is a major challenge
Large variability between years and with in years (distribution)
Strategic options
5. Use Soil profile to integrate the variable supply
6. Deep + shallow roots (trees + crop mix) to utilize
7 Animals to transform biomass to7. Animals to transform biomass to
– nutrients for better growth
– valuable meat
Agro‐forestry (crops between rows of trees) Wh t i i thi ?‐What is new in this?
1. Very high tree density and short rotation period (5‐71. Very high tree density and short rotation period (5 7
years)
@ 600‐ 2500/ acre (depending on supply)
Multi tiered‐ Herb, shrub, trees (Like Tropical forest)
Very high diversity ( 20 40 species/acre) Very high diversity ( 20‐ 40 species/acre)
2. A new approach with Very high ‘Anticipatory Design’
Contd…3) Nurture soil‐ to support the growth demand) pp g
LOCK & SPILL BUND AS THE BASIC UNIT TO Harvest runoff (plot + h )catchment)
+Very large input of Biomass for nutrients & mineralization
+Microbes, Root activity
Virtuous cycle (Positive feed backs)
General overview of rainfall partitioning in farming systems in the semi‐arid tropics of sub‐ Saharan Africa, indicating the large portion of rainfall (R) which even in semi‐arid , g g p ( )farming systems is lost from the farm scale through drainage (D), surface run‐off (Roff) and non‐ productive evaporation (E). The remainder is transpiration (T) (Source: Rockström et al., 2007).
TYPICAL RAINFED FARM LAND (as benchmark)‐
TRENCH CUM BUND (lock & spill)– THE BASIC UNIT
Trenches Across The Slope To Harvest Runoff Biomass Filling
Collection Of Green Biomass Of Different Species For Trench Filling
IRI seminar on 1 October 2009 by PR Sheshagiri Rao, [email protected]
WHEN IT RAINS….
LARGER STRUCTURES FOR WATER HARVEST
SEEDLINGS ON TRENCH / BUND
IRI seminar on 1 October 2009 by PR Sheshagiri Rao, [email protected]
IRI seminar on 1 October 2009 by PR Sheshagiri Rao, [email protected]
3‐6 YEARS LATER ……….TRENCH / BUND DISSAPEARS IN THE…….
IRI seminar on 1 October 2009 by PR Sheshagiri Rao, [email protected]
IRI seminar on 1 October 2009 by PR Sheshagiri Rao, [email protected]
SHIFT TO FODDERFROMCROP
Development in PhasesBegin with 10 to 20 % area under Trench / Bund
4‐7 year period4 7 year periodCover the entire plot
MWater
Manure, storage
+ VE FEEDBACK
Tree Livestock
+ VE FEEDBACK cycles
biomassLivestock
In the beginning…..
……in between
3 years ago3 years ago
…and now
FARM BASED ENTERPRISES
Implementation experience‐Done by…… Location – climate How close Size in When did
to ideal? acres it start?
1) Sheep + farm (with large herds)
Tumkur, Anantpur, chitradurga,
10 to 30 % 1 to 20 Traditionalpractice(with large herds) chitradurga, practice
2) BAIF – NGO Arid, Semi arid, Humid, in 10 states of India
20 % to 60%
1 to 3 acre plots about 10 000
Initiated in 1985
of India 10,000 3) Own‐farm Pavagada, Semi arid‐
East Karnataka.50% 8 2005
4) Own farm ‐ 100 % 22 20104) Own farm Experiment ‐sensors
100 % 22 2010
5) Corporate 1 Silchar, Assam 80 % 155 & 80 2007
6) Corporate 2 Thali, near Bangalore 100 % 93 2009
7) Soft ware Magadi, near 100% 23 2009Professionals Bangalore8) Corporate 3 Ludhiana, Punjab 70% 25 2010
Systems model behind design (Not just planting seeds in Trench/Bund!)I iti l d i + On‐Farm Mgt
T/B how many? Design ?
SITE
Soil
CLIMATOLOGY + Forecast
Soil Productivity MgtOWNER’S
Initial design + On Farm Mgt.
Mar
Zone of Water supply
Design ?Soil texture, depth
Average & Maximum Seasonal total,
vity Mgt.
Mgt‐ Lopping, planting,
CHOICESProfit
maximize / Risk
ket
Water supply by T/BSlope,
catchment area
Wet spells, Dry spells.
Intense wet
harvest cycles/ Risk
minimize
Investmel l
pararea,
pebble content
l
Intense wet spells frequency and duration
Trees‐ Species, density & multi tier design
Enterprise mix‐ livestock, value addition
nt level, Timeline
for benefit
ametSoil
fertilityPH,
Sunshine hours Shrub , herb
layer‐ species, d i & d it
Extreme events‐Resilience, Utili ti
& cost flows
ters
design & density Utilization
QUANTIFY‐ VARIABLE SUPPLY FROM RAIN+ RUNOFFParmeter Details considered tools in use To develop
Rain fall Variable over different time periods– minimum assured , average maximum‐
100 years daily rainfall data ‐average, maximum data analysis
Catchment area ff
Depends on rain fall intensity + soil characters slope
APSIM Hydrology models?runoff per acre‐ + soil characters, slope models?
Total water available (variable in time) per
Water percolation rate in soil ‐ depth, clay and pebble
APSIM Hydrology models?(variable in time) per
acre (rain+runoff) content in profile
Capacity and design Root activity and vegetation None ExpertCapacity and design of water storage structures/ acre
Root activity and vegetation impact with time ‐‐‐
None Expert systems ‐Commonsense ‐2. IISc.
Total SUPPLY OF SOIL WATER AVAILABLE
Dynamics over a time scale of 5‐7 years
?? ??
ADAPT PEAK DEMAND FROM PERRINEALS ‐ TO SUPPLY
Parameter Decision based on ‐ Tools To developof demand used
p
Choice of 1. Market price, band of variability2 Mi f t i (li t k l
User i t ti
•Empirical lid ti fspecies 2. Mix of enterprises (livestock, value
addition) and owner preference, 3. How well does it fit with other
elements?
interactive data bases• timber,•fodder
validation of yield•Typology of growthelements? •fodder,
• live hedgegrowthcontexts
Density Consider peak water demand APSIM (3 Species specificyOf trees, herbs and shrubs species) expert systems
System level
1. How much risk to take?2. Use large rain events
None •Frequency of extremelevel
design‐2. Use large rain events 3. Survive extreme drought4. Low frequency but high impact
extreme events?•Risk mgt?
COMPARITIVE ECONOMICS ‐ CONVENTIONAL v/s NEW APPORACH (Baifdata)
I ( ) i 5 h fl i d @ 15% di tIncome (as NPV in Rs) in 5 year cash flow period @ 15% discount
Crop, tree, livestock
Type of tree
Number/acre Best case of data set
Worst case of data setlivestock
mixof data set of data set
1)----Crop ( t
None 0 30,000 - 15,000(current practice)2)----Crop Timber 600 207,263 102,945
+ Trees
(With 800 trees/ac and only 400 as
Fodder 200
Manure 200 timber )Manure 200
3)--- 2+ Maximum sheep/ac 243,132 151,912
4) 3+ Vermi compost 263 193 166 3624)----3+ Vermi-compost 263,193 166,362
Comparative Benefit & cost flow‐ current practice v/s New approach (BAIF data)
Particulars
Base yr
Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4
Yr5 Yr6 Yr 7 (harvest)
Cost –current system(c)
C SAME AS BASE YEAR
Benefit-current system
0.25 to 3 C
Cost- New approach
4 to 8 C
C to 4 C
5 C
Benefit-New approach
C to 2C C to 2C 15 to 50 C
SAME AS YEAR 2
IN SUCH CONTEXTS‐WHAT WORKS? A d i i i lAs design principles
1) Soil moisture is the engine of growth (weakest link of chain).
Harvest and store in the soil profile, integrate over years
Utilized by different species with different rooting depths
2) Shift from focus on risks to Utilize climate opportunities
3) Diversity as response to risk --We need emulate the rationale 3) e s ty as espo se to s e eed e u ate t e at o a e
of traditional cropping pattern of the region
Maturity periods- 90 days to 7 yearsa u y pe ods 90 days o yea s
Rooting depth- 0.30 m to 5m,
Light harvest- Canopy 0 3m to 10mLight harvest- Canopy 0.3m to 10m
10 % chance of 7 day Wet spell October in 24th Nov 5th(swathi Nakshatra)‐ impact on crop‐tree‐livestock (scale(swathi Nakshatra) impact on crop tree livestock (scale
of 1 to 5 with 5 as highest)
Ground Pigeon Sheep Mango Winter nut pea/castor (rainfed)
tamarindRice
I t 1Impact 1 ‐2 +5 ‐2 +3 +4Reason Pod rot Better soil
moisture at Higher incidence blue tooth,
Bettergrowth
Water for Puddling
flowering,
endo‐parasitesg g
Impact 2 ‐4 ‐2 +3 ‐1 +24 2 3 1 2Reason Post‐
HarvestProblems
Wilt due to water logging
Weeds. Fodder growth
Risk poormango flowerin
Irrigation Tanks have moreProblems logging flowerin
gmore water
Recent shift in cropping patterns (Pan‐Indian??) >>> Lack of experience, access to relevant information. So, in an increasingly dynamic farming and market setting…………
4.5
5
Cow pea / Horsegram / Greengram / Castor / Pigeonpea
Current Cropping System
3.5
4
l (cm
)
Peanut
Horsegram
p g g g p
2.5
3
rage
Rai
nfal
Sesamum / Horsegram / Cotton / Chillies / Cowpea / PearlMilletTraditionalCropping System Sorghum / Safflower / Niger / Castor / Pigeonpea / Peanut / Field bean
Left out quite a few!
1.5
2
Wee
kly
aver
Minor Millets ( I II)
Minor Millets (III, IV, V) upto January
Horsegram upto January
0.5
1
Sorghum
Pigeonpea upto February
Castor upto March
Minor Millets ( I, II)
0
Sorghum
APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
IN SUCH CONTEXTS‐WHAT WORKS? A d i i i lAs design principles
4) Annuals - Instead of reproductive growth (highly vulnerable)
f ( )Value from Vegetative growth (opportunistic) >>>>
converted as animal Proteins + source of active bio-molecules
) I f i h l l f li h d5) Income from components -with low overlap of water, light and
nutrient demands, BETTER if they are SYNRGISTIC
C li k M l ddi iCrops + trees + livestock + Manure + value addition
6) Need for ‘High level of Anticipatory design’
7) Learn from Best practices - Several are practicing very
interesting ideas….. But , do they realize the significance??
MULTILOCATION EXPERIMENTS –PROOF OF CRITICAL PROCESSES‐WATER, NUTRIENT, ROOTS, MICROBES
Sample
Control Treatments & Replications inExperimentle Experiment
Location 1
One plot for each Treatment
6 Treatmentsand 10 replications /Treatment
Location 2
One plot for each Treatment
6 Treatmentsand 10 replications /Treatmenton 2
Locati One plot for each T t t
6 Treatmentsd 10 li ti /T t ton 3 Treatment and 10 replications /Treatment
1 AVERAGE USED in all the upcoming slides1. AVERAGEs USED in all the upcoming slides 2. samples from soil close to manure pit
SOIL MOISTURE % DEVIATION FROM UNTREATED FARM at different depths (all 3 locations pooled)different depths (all 3 locations pooled)
100
150
50
100
ED F
AR
M
-50
0Jan. 04 Feb. 04 March. 04 April. 04
FR
OM
UN
TREA
TE
-150
-100
% D
EVIA
TIO
N
-250
-200
PERIOD
0-15 Cm (Soil depth) 15-30 Cm 30-45 Cm 45-60 Cm
Nutrient Budget– Supply from initial biomass application – No fertilizers at all @ 4 harvests /yrapplication – No fertilizers at all @ 4 harvests /yr
Year sample
LOCATION 1 (all in kg/acre) LOCATION 2 (all in kg/acre)
Nitrogen Phosphor potassium Nitrogen Phosphor potassiumsampled
ous ous
2002 288 10.8 45.0 320 13.8 58.32002 (base yr)
88 0 8 5 0 3 0 3 8 58 3
2004 224 17.1 87.9 282 17.4 105.32004
Change from base
-64 6.3 42.9 -37 3.6 47.0from base
2006 613 19.0 96.3 746 16.6 64.1
Change from base
325 8.2 51.3 426 2.7 5.8
2-3 yearold Treesfrom
Root growth parameter
Location 1 Location 2 Location 3 Average
PITSIDE(with
Number primary roots 5 3 3 3.66
Longest root (cm) 117+ 106+ 120+ 114.33
Thi k t t ( ) 7 6 5 5 6 6 36manureandwater)
Thickest root (cm) 7.6 5.5 6 6.36
Root Depth (cm ) 100+ 85+ 95+
AWAYFROMTHE
Number primary roots 2 2 3 2.33
Longest primary root 64 68 66 66
PIT(without)
Thickest root 4 5.2 5.3 4.85
Root Depth 45 49 42TREES Number primary roots 3 5 2 3.33TREES_IRRIGATION
Number primary roots 3 5 2 3.33
Longest primary root 77 62 82 73.66
Thickest root 6.25 6 4.25 5.5
Root Depth 51 39 32
SOIL MICROBE GROUPS ---UNTREATED V/S TREATMENTS IN 3 LOCATIONS
60
70
80
FAR
M
40
50
60
RA
INFE
D F
20
30
40
ON
FR
OM
R
0
10
20
gi a s er m e rs gi a s er m e rs gi a s er m e rsT D
EVIA
TIO
-20
-10 Fung
Bac
teria
Act
inim
ycet
e
Azo
toba
cte
Azo
spiri
llium
Pho
spha
teso
lubi
lizer
Fung
Bac
teria
Act
inim
ycet
e
Azo
toba
cte
Azo
spiri
llium
Pho
spha
teso
lubi
lizer
Fung
Bac
teria
Act
inim
ycet
e
Azo
toba
cte
Azo
spiri
llium
Pho
spha
teso
lubi
lizer
PER
CEN
T
-30BALUVANERALU THAMMADIHALLY BAGADAGERE
VILLAGE AND SOIL MICROBES
WORK AHEADTh h t ‘ t h ’ ith tiTheory has to ‘catch up’ with practice
• Ad‐hoc wireless network + electronic sensor measurements‐COMMONSENSE PROJECT (2nd phase)COMMONSENSE PROJECT (2 phase)
• Expert system modelingImprove design
How to compute economics, risk component ??Climate information
• Non crop based issues‐ livestock, trees• For integrative systems
– ‐ Rain, runoff & 60 to 500 cm soil moisture dyanamics,– annual total, extreme events –BBB v/s BGGBB, 5‐7 year distribution.
Need FOR FIELD BASED‐ SYSTEMS SCIENCE
Deployment Concept
In the fieldIn the field‐Web based control of &control of & sensor data
access
Sensor node Wifi connection node
I id th Wifi dInstalling sensor node Inside the Wifi node
Typical measurement – Min. time unit – micro seconds!
Benefits‐ Beyond the farmBeyond thefarm
What is achieved? Remarks
O i L ti id f tili L COrganic farming
•Low pesticide, fertilizer use•Biomass based nutrients
Low ‐ Currentproductivity
d Mi i f 20 i /Bio – diversity & Conservation
•Minimum of 20 species/acre •Perennials support large diversity
Low ‐ Currentdiversity
d E h d l i ffGround water recharge
•Enhanced percolation•1000 to 5,000 cubic meters /acre/ year
•Effect on surface waterflows (CPR)? ( )•Ownership?
Soil carbon •Biomass in pits‐ 50 to 200 tons (Air dry wt)/ acre/year
Carbon creditl i iwt)/ acre/year
•Humus has 150‐ 2000 years permanence value
claims in Australia
If you want to discuss further on this….
Thank you all ..........
