Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ken Sayre
Agronomist - Conservation Agriculture-Based Crop Management
SOME REVIEW
Conservation Agriculture is not a Separate Scientific Discipline or Department or Institute but it is based on a set of
Defined Principles that Should Be Applied by Crop Management Scientists to Better Insure the Development of Sustainable Crop Management Practices for Different Cropping Systems
There are Four Primary Principles that Provide the Basis for Conservation Agriculture
CA Principle One
Dramatic reductions in tillage
Goal Determine the appropriate, minimal level of tillage for a cropping system with zero till as a potential goal.
Chinese Strip Till Seeding Rainfed Maize After Wheat in Mexico with a Chinese 2-Wheel Tractor
CA Principle Two
Retention of adequate. rational levels of crop residues on the soil surface Ultimate Goal Retain sufficient residue on the soil surface to reduce soil erosion, improve soil parameters and enhance crop/water productivity to better insure long term, sustainable production
Extensive tillage combined with inadequate crop residue retention on the soil surface leads to soil degradation by erosion from wind and water Wind erosion Water erosion
Planting Zero Till Rainfed Wheat after Maize with Full Residue Retention in the Rainfed Highlands of Mexico
Maize Residue Management Zero Till Wheat Seeding in Maize Residue
Extensive tillage combined with inadequate crop residue retention on the soil surface can lead to extreme water loss by runoff and evaporation
Conventional Till Zero Till
Effect of inadequate versus adequate retention of crop residues on the soil surface for rainfed maize in the Central Highlands of Mexico
Zero Till without Residues Zero Till with Residues
CA Principle Three:
Use of proper and profitable crop rotations
Ultimate Goal Economically viable, diversified crop rotations that can offer farmers new options to reduce risk
These Three CA Principles when Properly Used Encourage Sustainable Soil Management
Chemical Soil Quality
Comparison of Soils Conventional Tilled Versus CA-Based Zero Tilled after 7 Years
Conv. Till Degraded Soil CA-based Zero till - Healthy Soil
But before farmers are willing to adopt new technologies based on these first three CA principles, they must be confident that they will gain immediate economic benefits
CA Principle Four:
Farmer must perceive the potential for imminent improved economic benefits and livelihoods from the new, CA-based technologies
Farmers Must Know that there is an Economic Benefit before they will adopt CA
Comparison of average rainfed wheat yields for the most common farmer practice versus the best improved practice (1996 to 2005)
Returns Above Variable Costs
Comparison economic returns for rainfed wheat from 1996 to 2005 for the most common farmer practice versus the best improved practice (Mexican Pesos) 3,500 Farmer Practice3,000 Continuous Wheat, 2,500 Conventional 2,000 Till, Residues Removed 1,500 1,000 500 (500) Improved Practice; Maize-Wheat; Zero Till; Residues Retained
6500
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
Farmer PracticeContinuous Wheat, Conventional Till, Residues Removed Improved Practice; Maize-Wheat; Zero Till; Residues Retained
The Four Basic principles of Conservation Agriculture Provide the Foundation to Manage Different Production Systems in a Sustainable Way
But
These underlying CA principles are not site specific and can be applied to essentially all crop production systems with the development of specific crop management practices for each specific system
The Four Principles of Conservation Agriculture Provide the Foundation to Develop and Apply the CA-based Crop Management Appropriate Crop Management Component Technologies Must be Specifically Developed for Each Crop Production System
Appropriate Crop Residue Management Appropriate Pest and Disease Management Appropriate Seeders/other Implements Other Relevant Crop Management Components
The Foundation for the Development of Suitable CA-based Crop Management Technologies
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
Costa Rica Guatemala Argentina LAC Bolivia Venezuela Paraguay Colombia Honduras
2.0
1.0
El Salvador
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
0.0
e.
Source: Valdes, 2008a, Agricultural Public Spending: Description and Assessment Relevant to Latin America, using FAO, 2005b, Base de Datos de estadsticas e indicadores del gasto publico agrcola y rural (GPAGRURAL), Oficina regional para American Latina y el Caribe, Santiago. Agricultural GDP growth rates are based on World Development Indicators Database, World Bank.
The Research and Development System that is Best suited for CA-based technologies is integrated and interlinks the needed partners
Innovation systems involving multiple agents (especially including farmers), each registering their expectations and contributing their own comparative advantage towards resolving the problem of developing functional CA systems.
Machinery Manufacturers
Input Suppliers
Innovative Farmers
Research ers
Equipmen t Developer s
But What Does This Really Mean? How Can This Approach Actually Provide Small and Medium-Scale Farmers, With Sustainable, Economical CA-based Crop Management Technologies
Real Situation - All the Players with the Farmer in the Middle with Almost No Say in What Goes On
NGOs
? ? ?
Socioeconomist s
Farmers with Different Crop Production Systems and Different Economic Capabilities
? ? ? ?
International Organizations CG Centers FAO IFAD etc
Precision Agricultur e
?
Politicians
?
Many Others
Strategies to Develop and Deliver Conservation Agriculture-Based Crop Management Technologies to Farmers
Conceptually Our View Regarding the CAbased Hub Strategy Is as Illustrated Below
Connection to Researchers (Gov and Non-Gov) Direct Participation of Interested Stakeholders and Partners in the CAbased Hub Activities
Farmer Module s
FARMERS FARMERS
Farmer Module s
FARMERS
FARMERS
Farmer Module s
FARMERS
FARMERS
Farmer Module s
Farmer Module s
Farmer Module s
In our CA-based Hubs in Mexico, Farmers are Involved in the Whole Process Starting from:
The Strategic Research Activities on Experiment Stations Through Component Technology Studies Though Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trials Through Determining the Best Bet CA-based Technologies to Test in Farmer Fields in the Farmer Modules Through Fine Tuning of these Technologies in Farmer Fields Through Delivery of Tested Technologies in the Farmer Modules to Surrounding Farmers
Once a Crop Production System in a Defined Area has Been Selected to Develop Appropriate CA-Based Technologies :
We Establish a CA-based Hub with an Adaptive Research and Delivery research platform While at The Same Time
We Immediately Identify Interested, Innovative Farmers to Begin to Test Best Bet CA-based Technologies in Modules in Their Fields
FARMERS
FARMERS
FARMERS
FARMERS
FARMERS
Socio-economic Input/Evaluations
Once a Crop Production System has Been Selected within a Defined Geographical Area to Develop Appropriate CA-Based Technologies and the Needed Partners (Farmers and Other Needed Stakeholders) have been Identified
We Initiate Activities in the CA-based Research and Delivery Hub Involving:
Establishment of Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial/s and identification of interested stakeholders and farmers to participate in the inter/multidisciplinary activities in these Platform Trials
These platform trial/s can be established in an experiment station, in a farmer field, in fields managed by groups or associations of farmers (perhaps the optimum situation) or any other viable field situation but should have at least an initial 5 year time perspective. Identification of a series of interested and innovative farmers to manage the Adaptive Research and Delivery Farmer Modules associated with each Platform Trial in fields of these farmers Identification of interested farmers surrounding each Adaptive Research and Delivery Module who will learn from the module farmers and adopt the useful CA-based practices that the observe This process must be a bottoms-up approach with the full, initial participation of the farmers and other stakeholders, not a top-down approach driven by officials (both national and international) at the top
Locations in Mexico where CIMMYT Currently has five CAbased Hubs in Operation
Mexico
El Bajio Irrigated 1500 m
Mexico City
CA-BASED RESEARCH AND DELIVERY HUB Organization and Function of CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trials in Mexico
Farmer Field Adaptive Research and Demonstration Modules
FARMERS
FARMERS
FARMERS
FARMERS FARMERS FARMERS FARMERS Farmer Field Adaptive Research and Demonstration Modules
Socio-economic Inputs/Evaluations
The Adaptive Research and Delivery Research and Delivery Platform Trial/s for each CA-based Hub provides Opportunities for Inter/Multidisciplinary Research and Development Activities for all the interested stakeholders to:
Develop and Test new, best bet CA-based crop management technology options sideby-side with the most common conventional farmer practices Better understand the long-term effects/benefits of these new CA-based technologies on sustainable production as compared to existing farmer practices Develop the needed specific crop management component technologies compatible with the new CA-based practices (weed control, residue management, machinery, fertilizer management, irrigation water management etc) Determine the potential economic benefits of the new CA technologies
Delineate the best CA-based crop management technologies for the module farmers to select to test in there Adaptive Research and Delivery Modules in their fields side-by-side
with there existing technology
Depending upon the Nature, Abilities and Interests of the Different Stakeholders Participating in a CA-based Hub in Mexico, there may be an Opportunity to have several Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trials within the Hub Along with their Associated, Surrounding Adaptive Research and Delivery Farmer Modules in these Farmers Fields
In these situations, these Adaptive Research and Delivery Trials are Linked Together as a Network of Platform Trials within the Hub
Using the CA-Based Research Platform Long Term Trial to Compare of Zero Till Seeding with and without Residue Retention
Using the CA-Based Research Platform Long Term Trial to Compare Different Kinds of Seeders for Zero Till Seeding
Testing and Development of the Multi-Crop/Multi-Use Prototype CA Implement in the Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial in Cd. Obregon, Mexico
Planting Wheat and banding basal fertilizer Configured for Maize Planting
Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial to Compare Different Technology Components for Rainfed Production Conditions in El Batan, Mexico
Tillage/Residue Levels in Permanent Beds Without Residue With Residue
Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial to Compare Weed Control Strategies in El Batan, Mexico
Conventional Till Maize; No Residue Zero Till Maize; With Residues
Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial to Compare Different Technology Components for Rainfed Production Conditions in Toluca, Mexico
Narrow Permanent Raised Beds (0.75 m furrow to furrow) Wide Raised beds (1.5m furrow to furrow)
Comparison of the Efficiency of Rain Water Use for Conventional Farm Practices versus C A-based Practices in Year with Very Low Rainfall (CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial in El Batan, Mexico)
Conventional Tillage with Crop Residues Removed Zero Tillage with Crop Residues Retained
Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial for Long Term Trial Multidisciplinary Research (nearly 40 Ph D and M Sc Theses have been carried out in the Platform Trials in Mexico
Student Thesis Research With Green Seeker in Obregon On-going Project Research in El Batan
Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial in Cd. Obregon, Mexico to Compare Planting Method by Wheat Genotype Interactions (tilled raised beds versus permanent raised beds) for Furrow Irrigate Production Conditions
SOME EXAMPLES OF RESULTS FROM SOME OF THE ADAPTIVE RESEARCH AND DELIVERY PLATFORM TRIALS IN THE CA-BASED HUBS IN MEXICO
Effect of contrasting tillage, residue and rotation management practices of rainfed wheat yields over 11 years under optimum management at El Batan, Mexico from 1996 to 2006
8500
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Farmer Practice - Continuous Wheat: Conv. tillage: Residue Removed Best CA-based Practice - Wheat-Maize: Zero tillage: Residue Retained Worst Practice - Wheat-Maize: Zero tillage: Residue Removed
Effect of tillage and crop residue management on average bread wheat grain yield from 2001 to 2009 at CIANO, Cd. Obregon *
8000
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
Permanent Permanent Permanent Permanent Conventional Conventional beds - sub-soil beds + sub-soil beds - sub-soil beds + sub-soil till beds - sub- till beds - subblade; + blade; + blade; blade; soil blade; + soil blade; Residue Residue Residue Residue Residue Residue * Small scale sub-soil blade with side wings, used to about a 15-20 cm depth in the center of the bed to break possible compaction. Bed structure is maintained with no soil inversion.
Effect of Rotation, Tillage and Residue Management on Average Rainfed Wheat Grain Yields from 1997 to 2009 at El Batan in the Central Highlands of Mexico (Mean Annual Rainfall = 550mm)
6500
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
Wh-Wh - Conv Wh-Wh - Zero Wh-Wh - Zero Wh-Mz - Zero Wh-Mz - Zero Wh-Mz - Zero Till - All Till - All Till - All Till - All Till - 50% of Till - All Residues Residues Residues Residues Residues Residues Removed Removed Retained Retained Retained Removed (Farmer Practice)
Effect of Rotation, Tillage and Residue Management on the Average Returns Above Variable Costs for Rainfed Wheat from 1997 to 2009 at El Batan in the Central Highlands of Mexico
3,500
Returns Above Variable Costs
Effect of rotation, tillage and residue management for rainfed production systems on the distribution of soil wet aggregate distribution (0-20cm) at El Batan in the Central Highlands of Mexico
2.5
LSD (0.05) = 0.6 mm
MWD of Soil Wet Aggregates ( mm)
2 1.5 1 0.5 0
Wh-Wh - Conv. Till - Residue Removed (Farmer Practice) Wh-Wh - Zero Till - Residue Removed Wh-Wh - Zero Wh-Mz - Zero Till Wh-Mz - Zero Till Till - Residue - Residue - Residue Retained Removed Retained
18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
Effect of rotation, tillage and residue management for rainfed production systems on the "time to pond" during the 2005 crop cycle at El Batan in the Central Highlands of Mexico
LSD (0.05) = 2.5 seconds
Wh-Wh - Conv. Wh-Wh - Zero Wh-Wh - Zero Wh-Mz - Zero Till - Residue Till - Residue Till - Residue Till - Residue Removed Removed Retained Removed (Farmer Practice) Rotation - Tillage - Residue Management
Effect of tillage and residue management over seventeen years on average wheat grain yields with with optimum N management in theCA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial at Cd.Obregon, Mexico 8500 8000
Grain Yield (kg/ha)
7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 Year of Harvest Conventional till beds - residues incorporated Permanent beds - residues burned Permanent beds - 70% residues removed Permanent beds - residues retained
Performance of Wheat Lines Developed by Parallel Selected by Zero and Conventional Tillage for irrigated conditions in Cd. Obregon, Mexico Effects of Cross, Tillage and Selection Systems on Grain Yield Averaged over 2005, 2006, 2005
6500
6000
PB, S-ZT
PB, S-CT
5500
CB, S-ZT
CB, S-CT
5000
4500
Using the CA-Based Adaptive Research and Delivery Platform Trial to Train Technicians, Scientists and Farmers in El Batan, Mexico
Farmer Training Visiting Scientist Training
FARMER
FARMERS
Platform Trial/s for Long Term Multidisciplinary Adaptive Research, Implement Testing and Demonstration and Training, Farmer Practices
FARMER
FARMER
FARMERS
FARMERS
Best Bet 1
Best Bet 2
Best Bet x
FARMER
FARMERS Farmer Field Adaptive Research and Demonstration Modules FARMERS FARMERS
FARMER
THE ADAPTIVE RESEARCH AND DELIVERY MODULES PROVIDE THE VENUE TO:
FINE-TUNE THE NEW CA-BASED TECHNOLOGIES PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ORGANIZE VISITS IN THE MODULE FARMERS FIELDS FOR SURROUNDING FARMERS TO ASSIST:
THE FARMER WHO OWNS THE MODULE FIELD TO DEMONSTRATE AND DISCUSS THE NEW TECHNOLOGIES WITH THE NEIGHBORING FARMERS
Comparisons of Farmer Practices and the Best Bet CAbased Technologies for Training Technicians, Scientists and Farmers in the Farmer Modules
Meeting with Farmers from Areas Surrounding the Farmer Modules to Identify Farmers Interested in Cooperating
Using the Farmer Modules to Train Farmers/Service Providers in the Operation of CAbased Seeders
Using the Comparisons of Farmer Practices and the Best Bet CAbased Technologies in a CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Module to Demonstrate to and Train Farmers from the Surrounding Seeding Practices
CA-based Technology Farmer Practice
Comparing Farmer Practices with the Best Bet CA-based Technologies for Grain Sorghum in Participating Farmer Fields in a Farmer Module in Cd. Obregon, Mexico
Irrigated Sorghum on Tilled Raised Beds (Farmer Practice) Best Bet CA- Irrigated Sorghum on Permanent Raised Beds
Comparing Farmer Practices with the Best Bet CA-based Technologies for Irrigated Wheat in Participating Farmer Fields in Cd. Obregon, Mexico
Farmer Practice with Tilled Beds CA-based Permanent Beds
Farmer Field Day for Harvest of Irrigated Wheat Demonstration Plots in a CA-based Adaptive Research and Delivery Farmer Module in Cd. Obregon, Mexico
Comparison of average wheat grain yields, variable production costs and returns over variable costs for wheat produced with conventional tilled beds versus permanent raised beds in farmer modules in Cd. Obregon, Mexico
Grain Yield (kg/ha at 12% H O) 2
8,000 7,500 7,000 6,500 6,000 5,500 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000
4,011 4,985 6,245 6,926 6,356
8,000
7,500 7,000 6,500 6,000 5,500 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000
Mexican pesos
Comparison of CA-based Practices versus Farmer Practices in Farmer Modules Farmer Fields in the Central Highlands of Mexico
Cropping System Number of Modules in Farmer Fields CA-based Practices Average Maize Yield (kg/ha) Farmer Practice Average Maize Yield kg/ha CA-based Practices Returns Above Variable Costs (Mexican Pesos) Farmer Practice Returns Above Variable Costs (Mexican Pesos)
Irrigated Maize
19 29
8830 4830
6950 3000
17,154 5566
11,926 1853
Rainfed Maize
Thanks