IRRI DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES NO. 23 On-farm Management of Applied Inputs and Native Soil Fertility Daniel C. Olk and Piedad F. Mova, Editors INTERWATIONAL Rice RESEARCH INSTITUTE MCPO Box 3127, 1271 Makati City, Philippines“The International Rice Research Insitute (RI) was established in 1960 by the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations with the help and approval of the Government ofthe Philippines. Today IRRI is one ofthe 16 nonprofit ia- {emational research centers supported by the Consultative Group on Inter- national Agricultural Research (CGIAR). The CGIAR is sponsored bythe Food and Agriculture Organization ofthe United Nations, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Its membership comprises {donor countries, international and regional organizations and private foun- dations As listed in its most recent Corporate Report IRRI receives suppor through the CGIAR, from a number of donors including UNDP, World Bank, Europeat| Union, Asian Develepment Bank, Rockefeller Founda- tion, and the international ald agencies of the following governments Australia, Belpiam, Canada, People’s Republic of China, Denmark, France, ‘Germany, India, Indonesia, Jpan, Republi of Korea, The Netherlands, Norway, Philippines. Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, United Kingdom, and United Site "The responsibilty for this publication ests wi Research Institute the International Rice IRRI Discussion Paper Series Toe IRI Disesin Paper Series nase asa exile manor RRL ‘to share information with specialized institutions and individu as Each paper is pruced from camea-ead copy supplied bythe a- thor and is processed through IRRI's Communication and Publications ‘Services. The papers ae read (or typographical aceuracy only and are not ‘subjected tothe normal IRRI editing or peer review processes. ‘The series iy intended to be a Tast means of presenting preliminary results of researc sil in progress, but which could be of immediate use to others. The series also contains special project reports, consortia and net ‘work Fepors, short proceedings or reports of mestings and worksbops, recommendations from a particular workshop. and similar material. IRI invites feedback from readers, which will be useful tothe su ‘thors when they aze refining their materials fr formal publication ia jour nals or as monograph. Copyright Imernational Rice Research Insitute 1998 MCPO Box 3127, 1271 Makati City, Philippines Phone: (63-2) 845-0563, 812-7586 Fax: (63-2) 891-1292, 845-0605 Email: IRRI@CGIAR.ORG Home page: hup www ¢giax orga Ricewebs hrp:vwwriceweh ore iceworld: hp:/iwwwriceworldong Telex: (ITT) 40890 RICE PM (CWh 14519 IRILB PS (RCA) 22456 IRI PH. (CW 14861 TRIPS Suggested citation: ‘OIk DC, Moya PF, editors. 1998. On-farm management of applied inputs and native soil fentlity. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 23, Manila (Philippines): Imernational Rice Research institute, 212 p. ISBN 971.22.0118.x ISSN 01178180On-farm Management of Applied Inputs and Native Soil Fertility Daniel C. Olk and Piedad F. Moya, Editors 1998 INTERNATIONAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTE P. 0, Box 3127, 1274 Makati City, PhilippinesContents Preface v ‘Common Abbreviations and Acronyms vi Sectiont vi Introduction to the Mega Project on Reversing Trends of Declining Productivity in Intensive Irrigated Rice Systems Background projectinformation 1 Section? 7 Biophysical Reports from the National Sites ‘Significance ofthe indigenous soil nitrogen supply in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam Cao Van Phung 9 [Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to the indigenous soil N supply in intensive lowland rice systems of the Mekong Delta Pham Sy Tan a Indigenous soil nitrogen supply and nitrogen use efficiency of double-crop rice systems in Central Luzon, Philippines PLC. Sia. Cruz, $.R. Serrano, H.C. Gines, F.D. Garcia, J.B. Bajita, G.O. Redondo, GS. Simbahen, and JP. Deseaisota » Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to the indigenous soil nitrogen, supplying capacity under the Jatiluhur Irrigation Systems, S. Abdulrachmian, 1 juliardi, and A.M. Fagi a7 Yield response and indigenous soil N supply in intensive irrigated rice systems in the Cauvery Delta of Tamil Nadu R Nagarajan, P. Muthukrishnan, P. Stalin, and T.B. Ranganathan 66 Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to the indigenousnitrogen supply in intensive irrigated rice systems of the Cauvery Delta Zone, TamilNadu R. Nagarajan, P. Muthukrislnan, P. Stalin, and T.B. Ranganathan 89 Nitrogen management in irrigated rice-based systemsin West Africa: Examples from Burkina Faso and Mali ‘M.CS. Wopereis, C. Donovan, B. Nebié, D. Guindo, MK. N'Diaye, and S. Hifele 99 Section3 109 Sociaecenamic reports from the national sites Reversing trends of declining productivity in intensive irrigated rice systems: the socioeconomic component, Cuu Long Delta Rice Research institute, Vietnam ‘Nguyen Xuan Lai a1Reversing trends of declining productivity in intensiveirrigated rice systems: the socioeconomic component, Philippines S.R. Serrano, P.C, Sta. Cruz, H.C. Gines, GO. Redondo, F.D. Garcia, and J.B. Bajta Baseline profile of on-farm soil fertility managementtin the Jatiluhur Irrigation System, West Java, Indonesia LP. Wardana, A, Farid, and Z.M. Huelgas Reversing trends of declining productivity in intensive irrigated rice systems: the socioeconomic component, Suphan Buri, Thailand L. Niyomoit and S. Sataoathenanont Reversing trends of declining productivity in intensive irrigated rice systems: the socioeconomic component, Tamil Nadu, India S. Devarajan Sections 165 Cross-sitereporis from IRRI staff (On-farm use of N fertilizer: Evidence of suboptimal use and some preliminary explanations D.C. Olk and G.S. Simbakan Reversing the yield decline in intensively cultivated irrigated rice lands: report on farmers’ performance and socioeconomic monitoring P.F. Moya, D.L. Pabate, and P.L. Pingali Measuring factor productivity changes in farmers’ fields: Has there been a decline? Z.M, Huelgas 117 133, 147 157 167 7 190Preface The introduction of early maturing semidwarf rice varieties in the 1960s permitted the intensification, or multiple cropping each year, of lowland irrigated rice in the tropics and subtropics of Asia. Today, double- and triple-cropping in rice are practiced on about 14 million ha of irrigated lowlands in the developing countries of Asia. About 50% of the global rice supply is harvested from these intensified irrigated rice systems and rice-wheat systems in South Asia. Little is known about the long-term sustainability of these important yet youthful cropping systems. Results from double- and triple-cropped field trials on the IRRI farm and other research stations in the Philippines and India indicate trends of declining yields at constant fertilizer input and unchanged crop management over 25 yr. No comparable database of yield or productivity (ratio of yield to inputs) trends exist, however, for intensive rice cropping under on-farm conditions. In 1994, IRRI began the “Mega Project” with five collaborating institutions in national agricultural research systems (NARS) to establish on-farm productivity trends and to improve on- farm efficiency of inputs, especially fertilizers. Data collection began on selected farms in five domains of double-cropped irrigated rice centered on the Cuu Long Delta Rice Research Institute (Vietnam), Philippine Rice Research Institute (Philippines), Research Institute for Rice (Indonesia), Suphan Buri Rice Experiment Station (Thailand), and Tamil Nadu Rice Research Institute (India). IRRI agronomists, economists, and soil scientists shared research concepts and training with NARS scientists who collected data in their respective regions. In the first phase of this project, data were collected during three consecutive crop cycles (1995-96) on yields, rates, and costs of all inputs (fertilizer, labor, pesticides, seeds, water), native soil fertility, grain prices, and socioeconomic status of farming families. Efficiency indices for inputs were determined and related to socioeconomic and soil variables through collaboration among agronomists, economists, and soil scientists at the NARS institutes and IRRI Such information will guide the future development of ‘optimal crop management strategies that maximize the efficiency of all inputs, especially nutrient supplies from native soil reserves and applied fertilizers. These data also serve as the starting point for the establishment of productivity trends, which will require data collection during the next several years. Because native soil fertility may be considered an index of soil quality, its factors and long-term trends under intensive rice cropping will be of special interest. Results of the project's first phase were reported at a conference held at IRRL in October 1996. Parallel activities conducted by the West Africa Rice Development Association substation in Senegal were also reported. This publication is the proceedings of that conference. Expanded [project activities in the current second phase will be reported in future publications, We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation to this project. We especially thank the NARS administrators who have enthusiastically supported the full participation of their scientists in project activities, project founders Dr. K.G. Cassman and Dr. P-L. Pingeli, and our project colleagues at IRRI, Mr. Gil Gines, Ms. Zeny Huelgas, Mr. Don Pabale, and Mr. Greg Simbahan. D.C. Olk, Division of Agronomy, Plant Physiology, and Agroecology PLE, Moya, Division of Social SciencesAE ai CLRRI DAP DAS DAT Ds FFP cy INS LIFE NARS NUE OFE OFM PE PEP(N) PhilRice RE RIR RIDP SBRES SDC sNsC soc SOM TEP ‘TNRRI ‘TSN TP vi Common abbreviations and acronyms agronomic efficiency active ingredient Cuu Long Delta Rice Research Institute (Vietnam) diammonium phosphate days after sowing days after transplanting dry season direct seeding farmer's fertilizer practice grain yield high-yielding variety indigenous soil N supply integrated pest management International Rice Research Institute potassium long-term fertility experiment nitrogen national agricultural research system nitrogen use efficiency on-farm experiment on-farm monitoring phosphorus physiological efficiency partial factor productivity of N fertilizer Philippine Rice Research Institute (Philippines) recovery efficiency Research Institute for Rice (Indonesia) Reversing Trends of Declining Productivity Suphan Buri Rice Experiment Station (Thailand) ‘Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation soil nutrient supplying capacity soil organic carbon soil organic matter total factor productivity Tamil Nadu Rice Research Institute (India) total soil N transplanting wet direct seeding wet seasonSection 1 Introduction to the Mega Project on Reversing Trends of Declining Productivity in Intensive Irrigated Rice SystemsBackground project information ‘These proceedings summarize the research activities completed in the first phase of the Mega Project on Reversing Trends of Declining Productivity in Intensive Irrigated Rice Systems, a nutrient management study conducted for three to four cropping cycles in five different countries of tropical Asia, At each site, participating national scientists collected data following methodologies common to all sites. Sections If and III of these proceedings contain the primary reports of biophysical and socioeconomic data collected by the national scientists. Section IV contains cross-site reports by IRRI staff. Each country report contains an introduction to the respective region, materials and methods specific to that site, results, and discussion of results. Background project information common to all country reports is proviced in this section, which describes the rationale, structure, and basic activities of the project. Project rationale The general objective of the project is to ensure the capacity for increased rice production and efficient use of inputs in intensive irrigated rice-based cropping systems in tropical and subtropical Asia through crop and soil management practices that enhance soil quality and system profitability. Although high-input, double- and triple-cropped irrigated systems became possible only with the development of high-yielding semidwarf rice varieties in the 1960s, they have already become the foundation of Asia’s food supply. Intensive lowland rice and rice-wheat systems produce about half of the global rice supply (Cassman and Pingali 1995a). Recently, however, the sustainability of intensive irrigated rice cropping has come into question. Long-term declines in grain yield (GY) at constant fertilizer application rates had been noted in on-station trials of double- and triple-cropped irrigated rice in the Philippines and India (Cassman and Pingali 1995b). Based on initial field evidence, one hypothesized cause of the yield decline is a decrease in availability of native soil nitrogen (N), despite regular application of N fertilizer and maintained or increased levels of total soil N. Decreased efficiency of applied N fertilizer, lower capacity for N uptake by new crop varieties than by older varieties, deficiencies of other nutrients, or increased pest damage do not appear to be the primary cause of the yield decline. These factors. however, may have partially contributed to the yield decline. Studies began at IRRI to identify the causes of decreased soil N availability in long-term on-station trials. Simultaneous with this on-station initiative, it has become clear that a similar research program should be established under on-farm conditions that would determine long-term trends for GY or productivity (ratio of outputs to inputs) in intensively cropped farmers’ fields. This need represents the first major working objective of the project. A second, more immediate working objective of the project is to determine the on-farm. efficiency of applied fertilizers and other inputs. Improved efficiency of their application would help reduce the yield gap between mean on-farm yields and the higher yields typically obtained on-station, thus raising economic returns to farmers. A leading assumption in both project objectives is that nutrients taken up by the crop originated from either applied fertilizer or from native soil nutrient pools replenished through natural means, the soil nutrient supplying capacity (SNSC). The SNSC is considered independent of fertilizer inputs at least over the short term. Therefore the SNSC and fertilizer inputs should be managed in an independent yet coordinated manner. The SNSC for N will be called the indigenous soil N supply (INS); SNSC will be retained for P, K, and other nutrients.To meet these two main objectives, a long-term database will be established containing information on the INS and SNSC, crop productivity under optimal management, and efficiency terms described below for fertilizer N and all other inputs. Long-term trends in all parameters will be developed, interactions among them identified, and their relationships to cropping practices (residue incorporation, pest control, irrigation) elucidated. Project activities will also allow a unique examination of the role of the INS and SNSC in modern agriculture. The project database will allow calculation of the economic value of the INS— its effects on on-farm productivity and input use efficiency under the diverse conditions present at the project sites. Moreover, the INS can be postulated as an agronomic measure of soil quality—the general health and resilience of the soil. While many measures of soil quality are basic biological, chemical, and physical soil properties (Doran and Parkin 1994), the INS is a more holistic index that, emphasizes performance of the soil. Farmers may be more inclined to preserve soil quality if they know the resulting agronomic and economic benefits. Project structure Research activities in this first phase of the project were conducted at five sites representing five tropical Asian nations (Table 1). Each site was located in a domain of intensive lowland rice production where two irrigated rice crops are grown each year. Each site was centered on a national rice research institute or research station where a staff agronomist, soil scientist, and agricultural economist composed a team that implemented project activities. Research was conducted in 24-36 farmers’ fields of double-cropped irrigated rice, which were located near villages within 15-20 km of the research institute. Each field was managed by the farmer who made his/her own decisions, except for treatment plots within the fields that were established and managed by the project team (Fig. 1). Treatment plots were 6 x 6 m and were separated by raised bunds from the surrounding field managed by the farmer. In the unfertilized (F) treatment plot, neither manure nor N, P, or K fertilizer was applied. The INS and the SNSC for P and K were usually estimated by aboveground crop nutrient uptake in this plot. In the adjacent +PK treatment plot, P and K fertilizers were applied without any N fertilizer at rates that ensured adequate P and K supply. Greater crop N uptake or GY in the +PK plots than in the -F plots would dicate that GY and N uptake in the -F plots was limited by P o K deficiency. Plant N uptake and GY in the +PK treatment represented the INS for calculations involving crop response to applied N fertilizer. Adjoining these two plots, a 6 x 6-m area under the farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP plot) was demarcated with stakes. The farmer determined the fertilizer rates for the FFP plot and the remainder of the field outside the -F and +PK treatment plots without any advice from project scientists. Three sets of -F, +PK, and FFP plots, or replicates within fields, were established at different locations in each farmer's field. All plots were moved before each crop planting to new locations within the same field to preclude unrealistic depletion of soil nutrient pools. Each project team also managed a long-term fertility experiment (LTFE) at their research institute, starting at most sites in 1995. The purpose of the LTFE was to identify potential nutrient limitations to GY at each site as well as any nutrient interactions that occur at high yield levels. This information was needed to allow proper interpretation of on-farm results. At most sites, the main plot treatments were fertilizer treatments (minus NPK control, +PK, +N, +NK, +NP, +NPK) and subplot treatments were crop varieties. Atall sites the field design was a split-plot randomized complete block design. Nitrogen fertilizer rates were selected to achieve yields that approached themaximum yield potential at each site. Rates for P and K were calculated to replace the estimated nutrient removal from the LTFE represented by harvested grain and straw at the high yield levels. In all cases, these rates of N, P, and K were considerably higher than the rates normally recommended for the respective domains. At the end of the project’ first phase, it was decided for future crop cycles to eliminate the on- farm +PK treatment and to reduce the number of replicates of the -F and FFP treatments in each farmer's field from three to two. Statistical analysis showed that grain yield generally varied little between the -F and +PK treatments at the majority of sites and that the increase in error associated with the use of two replicates was within acceptable limits. These changes were prompted by the desire to reduce the work load to accommodate new activities planned for the project’s second phase. Plant and soil measurements Most plant and soil measurements (biophysical data) were taken in each plot during each crop cycle, defined as the complete array of activities involved in growing one rice crop from transplanting to harvesting, As described earlier, the INS was usually estimated either by GY or more strictly by the N content in grain and straw at physiological maturity in either the -F or +PK plots. Other plant measurements included filled and unfilled spikelets, harvest index, and N, P, and K concentrations of flag leaves at flowering and of grain and straw at maturity. Fertilizer applied by farmers to the FFP plots was calculated based on the amounts of fertilizer added to the surrounding field. Soil properties measured at least once per year included total soil C and N, ble P, extractable cations, texture, pH, and cation exchange capacity. Grain yield and 1,000-grain weight were estimated by two independent methods, allowing a preliminary evaluation of data quality. In one method, grains were collected at harvestable maturity from a central area in each -F, +PK, and FFP plot. For transplanted rice, this area consisted of 120 hills, and for direct-seeded rice this area was 5 m’. In the other method, plant samples were taken a few days earlier at physiological maturity from a few smaller areas just outside the periphery of the central harvest area to determine yield components, incitiding GY and 1,000-grain weight. For transplanted rice, this sampling consisted of 12 hills, taken from about four areas each located on one side of the central harvest area. For direct-seeded rice, this sampling was taken from two 0.25-m? quadrats or one 0.5-m’ quadrat. All plant samples or their subsamples were immediately oven-dried for grinding and further measurements. Additional details are included in some of the country reports, Relationships were evaluated among the various indices of the INS, between the INS and soil properties, between the INS and N fertilizer rates applied by farmers to their FFP treatment plots, and between the INS and the crop response to applied N fertilizer, defined as the GY difference between the FFP and +PK treatments. Magnitudes and factors of fertilizer N use efficiency achieved by farmers were also analyzed. Two measures of N use efficiency were calculated for each farmer: (1) the partial factor productivity for N fertilizer, defined for the FEP plots as the ratio of total output (GY) to fertilizer N input (Cassman and Pingali 1995b) and (2) the agronomic efficiency of fertilizer N, defined as the ratio of the GY difference between the FFP and +PK plots to the N rate applied by farmers to the FFP plot. A mixed model analysis of variance was used to determine the significance of fixed effects from fertilizer treatments on GY and N efficiency parameters, and the significance of random effects from farmers’ fields on GY and N efficiency parameters among farmers in the same village and between different villages, and their possible interactions within domains (Cessman et al 1996).Socioeconomic monitoring, To assess the economic performance of the farmer's rice production system and to identify trends in total factor productivity (ratio of total value of output, to the cost of inputs, TFP) at the farm level, data were collected on grain production and prices, types and quantities of all inputs, and farm management practices not only for the -F, +PK, and FFP plots but also for the larger field parcel (ie, managed unit) containing the field studied. Estimated fertilizer inputs to the FFP treatment for individual farmers reported in the socioeconomic papers may consequently differ from fertilizer rates listed in the corresponding biophysical papers, which report inputs only to the field studied. Socioeconomic monitoring was performed several times during each season to ensure accurate data collection. To standardize monitoring activities and data collection across all project sites, a questionnaire consisting of two forms was used for all farmer interviews. Form A contained detailed questions that pertained to the following: ‘+ Demographic characteristics of the farm households, such es age of farmer, educational attainment, family size, income, and credit ‘© Basic farm characteristics, such as total farm size, cropping patterns, and yield levels Form B contained the following sections: ‘= Types and frequencies of rice production practices, extending from land preparation to postharvest activities © Output /production levels and prices * Use of inputs, such as fertilizer and pesticides Labor use and wages Form A was administered at the start of the crop year, whereas Form B was administered every cropping season. A uniform data entry system was also developed to assure uniform data formatting across all sites and to facilitate a more efficient analysis for all sites. ‘Theoretical basis of the INS ‘The partial factor productivity for applied N [PFP(N)] was defined as PEP(N) = Y/N, where Y is grain yield and N, is the rate of N fertilizer applied in the FFP treatment. Because grain yield at a given N, represents the sum of yield without N input (Y,) plus the incremental increase that results from fertilizer N application (DY), PFP(N) can be expressed as: PFP(N) = (¥, + DY)/N, or PRP(N) = (¥,/N,) + (DY/N) (Cassman et al 1996). The incremental efficiency of applied N, DY/N, is the conventional definition of agronomic efficiency (AE), whereas the second term for PFP(N) reflects both the INS (Y)) and N fertilizer rate. Thus, the broadest measure of the N use efficiency of a production system is the PFP(N) because it represents the contributions of both indigenous and applied N sources,and optimal N use efficiency is achieved by maximizing the contributions from both N sources to plant uptake and yield formation. In this study, AE was defined as the ratio of [GY difference between either the FFP and +PK treatments (on-farm) or the +NPK and unfertilized control treatments (on-station)] to fertilizer N. application rate in either the FFP or +NPK treatment. Its units are kg grain kg” N fertilizer applied. AE itself is the product of recovery efficiency (RE) and physiological efficiency (PE). RE is defined as the proportion of applied fertilizer N that is taken up by the crop, with units of kg N uptake kg? N fertilizer applied. PE is the ratio of the increase in grain resulting from the uptake of fertilizer N to the crop uptake of fertilizer N, with units of kg grain kg” N uptake. References Cassman KG, Pingali PL. 1995a. Intensification of irrigated rice systems: learning from the past to meet future challenges. Geojournal 35:299-305. Cassman KG, Pingali PL. 1995b. Extrapolating trends from long-term experiments to farmers’ fields: the case of irrigated rice systems in Asia. In: Barnett V, Payne R, Steiner R, editors. Agricultural sustainability: economic, environmental, and statistical considerations. London (UX,): John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. p 63-84. Cassman KG, Gines HC, Dizon MA, Samson MI, Alcantara JM. 1996. Nitrogen-use efficiency in tropical lowland rice systems: contributions from indigenous and applied nitrogen. Field Crops Res. 47:1-12. Doran JW, Parkin TB. 1994. Defining and assessing soil quality. In: Doran JW, Coleman DC, Bezdicek DF, Stewart BA, editors. Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p 3-21. International Rice Research Institute. 1995. Mega Project: Reversing trends of declining productivity in intensive irrigated rice systems 1994-1996. Progress Report for Jan. 1994-Apr. 1995, Manila (Philippines): IRRI. 70 p. International Rice Research Institute. 1996. Mega Project: Reversing trends of declining productivity in intensive irrigated rice systems 1994-1996. Progress Report for May 1995-Jun. 1996, Manila (Philippines): IRRI. 80 p.‘Table 1. Collaborating institutions in the IRRI Mega Project on Reversing Trends of Declining Productivity in Intensive Irrigated Rice Systems. Tratitution/Location’ Tatitade Longitude Type (USDAT ‘CuuTong Delta Rice Research Institute (Omony’, Mekong Delta, Vietnam 1034'80"N1007'50"E —_Fluvaquantic Humaquept Philippine Rice Research Institute (Maligaya), Central Luzon, Philippines 1540°21°N 120°53'26"E_Entic Fellustert Research Institute for Rice (Sukamandi), Northwest Java, Indonesia 06°18'02"S-107°3746"E Aerie Tropaqualf ‘Suphan Buri Rice Experiment Station (Guphan Buri), Central Floodplains, Thailand 14°28'80”N_10005'23"E Aerie Tropaquept ‘Tamil Nadu Rice Research Institute (Aduthurai), Tamil Nadu, india 10°52"N 7920" Udorthentic Pellustert or Udorthentic Chromustert Naren PATEANGS Whe pray eal MMU *Latinide and longitude avadable only the minute, Fig. 1. Treatment plots in a single farmer's field: minus NPK (-F), adequate P and K fertilizer (+PK), and. farmer's fertilizer practice (FFF).Section 2 Biophysical reports from the national sitesSignificance of the indigenous soil nitrogen supply in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam Cao Van Phung Improved nitrogen use efficiency can only be achieved ifthe indigenous soil nitrogen supply capacity (INS) and other potential factors in rice grain yield are understood. The above objective was studied in flooded rice soil systems through a long-term fertilizer experiment and on-farm study at Omon district, Cantho province, Vietnam. The INS was lower in the wet seeson than in the dry season presumably due to low radiation and high temperature in the wet season. In addition, phosphorus deficiency on acid soils within the study domain appeared to be a major constraint to increased N uptake and hence rice yield. There was no relationship between INS and either soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, or the fertilizer N rates farmers applied to their fields. High variation in INS among, farmers in the same village and between different villages was also noted. The results indicated that fertilizer rates should be adjusted for different cropping seasons, and cultural practices should be improved to increase the fertilizer use efficiencies of farmers Introduction ‘The rice plant absorbs nitrogen from fertilizers, irrigation water, and the indigenous soil N, which is the sum of immediately available inorganic or organic N, N released through net mineralization of soil organic matter and crop residues, and soil N produced through biological nitrogen fixation Acquisition of applied N by the rice crop is typically less than 40% efficient in farmers’ fields (Cassman et al 1993). Most research to improve nitrogen efficiency has emphasized management of fertilizer N to reduce N losses and increase N uptake but less attention has been given to increasing the supply and capture of indigenous N from the soil and floodwater system (Bouldin 1986). ‘The purposes of this study were to (1) quantify the magnitude of variation in INS, (2) establish the relationship between INS and fertilizer N application, and (3) identify yield-limiting factors other than N. Materials and methods A long-term fertility experiment (LTFE) and a series of on-farm experiments were conducted at ‘Omon district of Cantho province. This region is located in the center of the Mekong Delta, where double and triple cropping of rice are common. Total annual rice production in the Delta gradually increased from 6.8 million t in 1985 to nearly 12 million t in 1995, Annual rainfall there is about 1800 mm; the monsoon begins in May and ends in November or December. The temperature ranges from 22 to 34°C. The Delta is a flat, flood-prone area, where floodwaters can reach a depth of 05-1.2 m in October. Farmers mainly use surface water for irrigation by exploiting daily changes in water depths in rivers and canals caused by ocean tides. General characteristics of soils in the ‘Omon district are slow inliltration, high water-holding capacity, and ease of puddling. Long-term fertility experiment ‘This experiment was started in the dry season (DS) of 1995 at the experimental farm of the Cun Long Rice Research Institute (CLRRI) (10.3°N, 100.7°E, 3 m above sea level). The soil has a claytexture, with 57% clay, 42.5% silt, and 0.5% sand. It is classified as a Fluvaquantic Humaquept. Irrigation water is drawn solely from the river and is abundant for most of the year. ‘The LTFE was laid out in a split-plot design with four replications and six treatments: no fertilizer (control), +PK, +N, +NP, +NK, and +NPK. Fertilizers were the main plot treatments. Subplot treatments were two varieties popular among farmers, namely IR64 and OM997. Nitrogen was applied! at the rates of 80 and 100 kg he’ for the wet season (WS) and DS, respectively. The P fertilizer rate was 25 kg ha" in both seasons, and the K fertilizer rate was 75 kg ha’! in both seasons. All aboveground crop residue was cut and removed after grain harvest. After WS harvest, the soil remained flooded for 3 mo without cultivation until puddling for the next DS crop. On-farm experiments Four farms in each of eight villages surrounding the CLRRI were selected as sites of the on-farm experiments. Three rice ¢rops were monitored from the 1995 DS through 1996 DS. Further details on the structure of the project supporting this study, methods for collecting plant, soil, and socioeconomic data, and the theoretical basis for N use efficiency terms are contained in Section I of this publication. Additional details specific to this site are that the P and K fertilizer rates in the on-farm +PK treatment plots were the same as in the LTFE. Bunds of 15-20 em height surrounded each +PK and unfertilized (-F) treatment plot to minimize fertilizer movement from the surrounding soil under the farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment. Each fertilizer treatment was replicated three times in each farmer's field for the second and third crop, but there was only one replicate in the first crop. Results Long-term fertility experiment ‘The effects of fertilizer treatments were clear (Table 1). The difference in grain yield (GY) between +NPK and +PK treatments represents the rice crop response to applied N. This response was higher in the DS (about 2 tha’) than in the WS (1.2 tha’). Grain yield was greater in the +PK treatment than in the control treatment in two of the three crop cycles, demonstrating that P or K deficiencies also limited GY. GY did not differ between the +N and +NK treatments, hence K was not limiting GY. GY was greater in the +NP treatment than in the +N treatment curing all three crop cycles. This difference ranged from 0.5 to 17 tha', demonstrating the critical role that adequate P supply plays in crop growth on these acid soils. Based on GY in the +NK and +NPK treatments, the agronomic efficiency of P fertilizer was 59 kg grain kg" P in the wet season and only 7 and 28 kg grain kg" P in the dry season crops. Although the necessary statistical analysis was not done, GY in treatments lacking P application appeared to decrease from the 1995 D5 to 1996 DS. Yield decreases from the 1995 DS to 1995 WS were especially large in the same treatments lacking P application. Soil pH is usually 0.5 unit lower in the WS than in the DS, which would accentuate a soil P deficiency. ‘The similar performance of the two varieties studied across all treatments suggests that variation in GY was mainly due to fertilizer treatments. However, GY in all treatments was far below the yield potential even in the DS when solar radiation is not limiting. This yield gap may thus be due to limitation of other nutrients. 10On-farm experiments Grain yield was highly correlated with N uptake in all three crop cycles (Fig. 1). This high correlation allows the use of GY as an estimate of plant N uptake and the INS. Plant N uptake and GY differed greatly among farms for each treatment (Table 2). Mean GY in the -F plots ranged from 2490 to 5703 kg ha" for the 1995 DS, 946 to 3630 kg ha’ for the 1995 WS, and 2268 to 5416 kg ha’ for the 1996 DS. Similarly, plant N uptake in the same -F plots varied from 277 to 82.4 kg ha’, 7.8 to 48.9 kg ha’, and 25.9 to 75.1 kg ha" in the 1995 DS and WS, and the 1996 DS, respectively. Grain yield and N uptake also varied widely in the +PK and FEP treatment plots during all three crop seasons. Wet season GY in the -F plot was 43% and 46% of GY in the two DS crops; the difference between the two seasons was highly significant. Grain yield difference was not significant between the two dry seasons. Graphical correlations between GY in the -F and in the +PK treatments indicated similar GY trends in both treatments during all three seasons (Fig. 2). However, GY values were not identical, since the slopes of their correlations were not close to 1.0 and the intercepts were different from 0. Mean GY across farms differed (P<0.001) between the +PK and -F treatments in each of the three seasons (data not shown). The GY difference between these two treatments varied among farmers within the same crop cycle and for each farmer between crop cycles (data not shown). As defined by GY in the -F plots, the INS was not correlated with either total soil N or soil organic carbon (Fig. 3). These two parameters therefore cannot be used to predict the INS. There was no correlation between GY in the -F treatment and the mean N fertilizer rate applied during the previous two seasons (Fig. 4). Thus, the INS is not greatly influenced by immediately prior inorganic N fertilization and may be considered more as a long-term soil property. Excessive fertilizer-N can be lost from irrigated lowland rice soils through surface runoff, leaching, volatilization, or denitrification. For individual villages, the mean yield increase above the -F treatment ranged from 33 to 924 kg grain ha" for the +PK treatment and from 856 to 2315 kg grain ha” for the FEP treatment (Table 3). Crop response to N, P, and K fertilizer was generally larger in those villages (eg., Dinhmon) located closer to the natural levees of the Mekong River, where soil conditions may be more conducive to plant growth due to easier leaching of toxic Fe"? and improved soil aeration. Data quality Grain yield estimates based on harvest area and on yield components did not produce identical results (Fig. 5): the yield components method provided for higher estimates. The discrepancies between these two methods may be due mainly to sampling and handling errors. The 1,000-grain weight was also estimated through harvest of the harvest area and yield components; these two methods generally produced similar estimates (Fig, 6). The poor correlation in the 1995 DS is probably due to measurement errors, Discussion Our results support those of previous nutrient management studies of irrigated lowland rice in the Mekong Delta. First, rice crop growth was far better in the DS than in the WS, as indicated by higher GY levels in all treatments in the LTFE. Pham et al (1995) found similar results in a previous LTFE at CLRRI conducted during 16 crop cycles. Vo et al (1995) suggested that inherently high soil "fertility allowed high GY in the dry season even at low rates of fertilizer application. Differences in INS between the DS and WS were mainly due to low solar radiation in the wet season, which reduced crop growth and N uptake. The INS is best represented through plant parameters only when factors other than N availability are not limiting plant growth. Second, the agronomic efficiency of P fertilizer was very high and especially so in the wet season, agreeing with earlier studies (Vo et al 1995, Pham et al 1995). While Jones et al (1980) considered tropical soil with available P (Bray and Kurtz 1945) levels less than 13 mg kg” as, deficient, the P levels in these soils were less than half of this threshold (data not shown). Our findings also agreed with studies done elsewhere on irrigated lowland rice. An excellent correlation between GY and plant N uptake for all crop seasons and varieties confirmed the findings of Cassman et al (1996b). Thus, GY will be a useful index of the INS for determination of ‘optimal fertilizer rates by farmers. Also, GY in the -F plots in our study was not correlated with soil organic C or total N, similar to the results of Cassman et al (1996a). Soil management, degree of soil drying, soil aeration, microbial activities, tillage, and residue management are considered key factors of INS (Cassman et al 1996b). This multitude of potential influences suggests why the INS differs among farmers within each season, In the Mekong Delta fertilizer application rates of farmers are mainly based on blanket fertilizer recommendations, experiences gained from their neighbors, and financial capabilities, among, other factors, Acknowledgment Iam very grateful to CLRRI for supplying manpower and facilities needed to carry out this study. The technical and financial support given by IRRI is also acknowledged. References Bouldin DR. 1986. The chemistry and biology of flooded soil in relation to the nitrogen economy of rice fields. Fertilizer Res. 9:1-14. Bray RH, Kurtz LT. 1945, Determination of total and available forms of phosphorus in soils. Soil Sci. 59:39-45, Cassman KG, Kropff MJ, Gaunt J, Peng S. 1993, Nitrogen use efficiency of rice reconsidered: what are the key constraints? Plant Soil 155 /156:359-362 Cassman KG, Dobermann A, Sta. Cruz PC, Gines GC, Samson MI Descalsota JP, Alcantara JM. Dizon MA, Olk DC. 1996a. Soil organic matter and the indigenous nitrogen supply of intensive irrigated rice systems in the tropics. Plant Soil 182:267-278. Cassman KG, Gines GC, Dizon MA, Samson MJ, Alcantara JM. 1996b. Nitrogen-use efficiency in tropical lowland rice systems: contributions from indigenous and applied nitrogen. Field Crops Res, 47:1-12. Jones US, Katyal JC, Mamaril CP, Park CS. 1980. Wetland rice—nutrient deficiencies other than nitrogen. In: Proceedings, Symposium on Rice Research Strategies for the Future, Los Baiios, Philippines. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. p 327-378, 12Pham Sy Tan, Thach Ngoc Anh, Nguyen Van Luat, Puckridge DW. 1995. Yield trends of a long- term NPK experiment for intensive rice monoculture in the Mekong Delta of Viet Nam. Field Crops Res. 42:101-109. Vo Thi Guong, Tran Thanh Lap, Nguyen My Hoa, Castillo EG, Padilla JL, Singh U. 1995. Nitrogen-use efficiency in direct-seeded rice in the Mekong River Delta: varietal and phosphorus response. In: Denning GL, Xuan V-T, editors. Vietnam and IRI: a partnership in Tice research, 4-7 May 1994, Hanoi, Vietnam. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute, and Hanoi (Vietnam): Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry. p 151- 159. Notes Author's address: Cuu Long Delta Rice Research Institute, Omon, Cantho, Vietnam. Citation: Olk DC, Moya PF, editors. 1998. On-farm management of applied inputs and native soil fertility. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 23. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 212 p. 13Table 1. Grain yield of fertilizer treatments and by crop variety in the long-term fertility experiment, CLRRI, Vietnam, Grain yied (eg ha) Treatment ae 1996 95 WS Fertilizer’ Control 3967 d 3798 1537 4PK 4469 4139 ¢ 2317 aN 5629 b 5340 b 1724 be +NP 6180 6230 3432 a +NK 6265 a S7i7b 2074 be 4NPK 6446 a 6413 a 3537 a Variety” TRe4 s512a 5274 2457 a OM997 5473 a 52724 2416 a ‘Foriaer treatment means WIN he same coTumin FATGWGT Dy The Sane leer are Hor SighanCanUy Gferenr (PCOS) Wang MRT. ‘Varietal means within the same column followed by the same letie are not significantly different (P<0.05) using LSD. Table 2. Ranges of grain yield and plant N uptake among individual farms for the -F, +PK, and farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment Grain yield (kg ha") ‘Nuptake (kg ha") ‘Treatment Mean’ Min, ax. Mean Min. Wax 1995 dry season F 47a 24890 5703 519 zr 824 4PK 4635 2995 5902 55.1 345 767 FEP 9353 3762 673 86.1 612 117 1996 dry season F 3015 a 2268 5416 459 259 75.1 40K 4486 3182 6633 530 304 863 FEP 5363 912 7468 808 259 1201 1995 wet season F 1805 b 946 3630 212 489 4PK 2292 1310 3937 282 53.3 FFP 3494 2568 4572 496 742 ‘Klean grain yield values for the Frontman followed by the save lotr are Ho) Sgpiicandy diorant [P=UOOT) wing AP Table 3. Difference in grain yield (kg ha") between the -F treatment and the +PK or farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment. Dry seaion Wet season Village FRP- CF) +PK- CP) FFP -() +PK- (CP) Thoi Dong 362 352 = = Thoi Lai 1295 580 = = Thot Long 1041 253 1739 312 Tai Tran 1675 765 2315 924 Thoi Thanh 1076 3 1661 209 Dinh Mon 1793 701 1921 692 Phuoe Thoi 856 a2 1159 352 ‘Thoi Thuan 1396 513 918 305 4Grain yield (t ha") (o) 9498 ory season 2. peor yw 40 roar Oven Vere (©) 25.06 bry seacon eaex ow co 100 Total N uptake (kg ha") Fig. Relationship between grain yield and total N uptake at maturity, on-farm monitoring, CLRRI, Vietnam. 15Grain yield in +PK treatment (t ha) (08498 oy seon «| Ree ‘ ey wa ean a) Pat tie . io ° TTT (2220.09 sen : J ee 2 oey Grain yield in F treatment (t ha) Fig.2._ Relationship between grain yields in the-F plotand +PK treatments, on-farm monitoring, CLRRI Vietnam,Grain yield (t ha) @ ° S 2 © 9495 05 r=0.25~ Doo — ossws 0 ¥ £596 08 r+030~ 1 15 2 25 3 3.5 Total soil nitrogen (g kg*) ) © 9495 vs +037 og 14 Ossws roar Y 0596 057-047" ° r r T 8 12 16 20 24 Soil organic carbon (g kg") 32 on-farm monitoring, CLRRI, Vietnam. Fig.3. Relationship between grain yield in -F plot ang (a) total soil nitrogen and (b) soil organic carbon, 7Grain yield in -F plot it ha) 7 r=020" e4 . . 64 oe and . 44 . ° . ‘ . oe 3 . 2 1 T T T T 120 150 180 210 240 N fertiizer applied (kg ha) 270 Fig.4. Grain yield (1996 DS) in - plot in relation to total N fertilizer applied during the previous two 18 seasons (1995 DS & WS), on-farm monitoring, CLRRI, Vietnam.Grain yield from harvest area (t ha) 0] (0) 2495 ony seoron ‘ £1 er20vaaeson A Z a 3 Z 2 o : v a 1 2 a « s 6 * of pam rages KE, i LEE ip Er * A Dg Z : 1 Ze « YO 8 2 2 Grain yield from components of yield (tha) Fig.5. Relationship between grain yield from yield components and grain yield from grain harvest area, CLRRY, Vietnam,1,000 grain weight from harvest area (g) a °] ewan yg oy s EK ao. x L =| 2s a) Loe Z ee 23 2 » : cpE 28 yo e i z : 20. neal 28 777) (95.06 br season J we] Sante tbe tp Fa al 2 a 20 7 - nnn Bm Oe 1,000¢rain weight from yield component (g) Fig. 6. Relationship between 1,000-grain weight from yield components and 1,000-grain weight from grain harvest area, CLRRI, Vietnam. 20Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to the indigenous soil N supply in intensive lowland rice systems of the Mekong Delta Pham Sy Tan Farm monitoring and a long-term fertility experiment (LTFE) for quantifying partial factor productivity (PFP) of N fertilizer were conducted for three crop seasons (1995 DS, 1995 WS, and 1996 DS) at CLRRI, Omon, Cantho, Vietnam. Fnormous variation was found in the indigenous N supply among farmers’ fields and N fertilizer rates applied by farmers to these fields also varied greatly, but there was no relationship between the applied N rate and the indigenous N supply estimated by crop N uptake. In the LTFE, season-to-season variation in the contributions of indigenous and applied N ‘was large. These results highlight the importance of adjusting the quantity of applied N in relation to the indigenous N supply Introduction Fertilizer N efficiency is relatively low in irrigated lowland rice systems. Most research to improve N efficiency has emphasized the management of fertilizer N inputs to reduce N losses and increase N uptake, such as improved timing, placement, and formulation of N fertilizer (De Datta et al 1998) and fertilizer amendment with nitrification or urease inhibitors (Buresh et al 1988, Chaiwanakupt et al 1995). Less attention has been given to increasing the supply and capture of indigenous N from the soil and floodwater system (Bouldin 1986). Nitrogen fertilizer recommendations for rice generally promote blanket N fertilizer applications across entire provinces or regions in most rice- growing countries in Asia, although the indigenous N supply (INS) can vary greatly within a rice- growing domain (Cassman et al 1996). Thus a leading issue is whether N fertilizer recommendations can also be developed for an individual farmer's field. The objectives of this study were to (a) evaluate the relationship between N fertilizer inputs and the INS, and (b) quantify the respective contributions of indigenous and applied N to plant N uptake in intensive irrigated rice production systems in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam. Materials and methods Long-term fertility experiment The structure and maintenance of the long-term fertility experiment are described by Cao Van Phung (p 9 of this publication). (On-farm experiments ‘On-farm experiments were conducted in 1995 dry season (DS) and wet season (WS), and 1996 DS in ‘Omon district, Cantho province (10°34'N, 100°7'E, 3 masl). The soils have a clay texture with very slow infiltration and a high water-holding capacity, and they are easy to puddle, A total of 32 farmers’ fields were selected from eight villages in three zones primarily within Omon district and also in Thot Not district, Cantho province. All fields were direct-sown with high-yielding rice in November or early December and harvested in February or March for the DS, whereas the WS extended from about May through August. 2Farmers in this area do not apply basal N fertilizer before or at sowing. Their first fertilizer application is at 7-10 d after sowing, which includes about one-third of the total N applied for the crop cycle and two-thirds of the total P applied. The remaining P and another third of the N are applied at 25-20 d after sowing, The remaining N is applied at the panicle initiation stage. Normally farmers do not apply K because grain yield (GY) response to K is very limited. Applications of K are restricted perhaps to small amounts of K in combined NPK fertilizer. Further details on the structure of the project supporting this study, methods for collecting plant, soil, and socioeconomic data, and the theoretical basis for N use efficiency terms are discussed by Cao Van Phung (p 9 of this publication) and also in Section 1 of this publication. Additional details specific to these sites are that in +PK treatment plots, P and K fertilizer were both applied at the rate of 50 kg ha’ as a basal dose just before sowing. Also, N was measured in the straw and grain from two 50 x 50-cm plant samples, which were cut at the soil surface at physiological maturity and oven-dried to constant weight at 70 °C. Grain yields were measured from a sample area of 10 m?in each plot. Total aboveground N was measured on material harvested in this 10-m? harvested area Results Long-term fertility experiment Grain yield increased with the application of N fertilizer in the 1995 DS and 1996 DS (Table 1). In the 1935 WS, however, a GY response to N fertilizer occurred only in those treatments also receiving P fertilizer. Phosphorus might be a more limiting input than N in the WS because GY was greater in the +PK treatment than in the +NK treatment, and GY in the +N treatment was closer to GY in the unfertilized control than GY in the +NP treatment. (On-farm experiments Several lines of evidence indicate inefficient on-farm use of N fertilizer. First, Cao Van Phung (p 9 of this publication) reports that the N fertilizer rates applied by individual farmers in their farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatments were not correlated with GY in their respective +PK treatments for any of the three crop cycles. Ifa farmer's N fertilizer rate were related to the INS from that field, a negative relationship should have been found. Second, GY increase due to fertilizer N application was also not correlated with N fertilizer rate (Fig. 1). Third, GY response to N fertilizer in the FFP plots decreased as grain yield in +PK plots increased (Fig, 2). Good N fertilizer use efficiency would result in such a negative relationship, but the correlation should be stronger. Fourth, farmers applied more N fertilizer in the WS than in the DS (Table 2), although the response of high-yielding rice to fertilizer N is greater in the DS. About 70% of the farmers applied more N fertilizer than the locally recommended rate in the 1995 WS, and 65% of the farmers applied less N fertilizer than the locally recommended rate in the 1995 DS. Nitrogen fertilizer use efficiency was slightly higher in the on-station LTFE than what was achieved by farmers since the recovery efficiency (RE), defined as Akg N uptake kg" fertilizer N, and the agronomic efficiency (AE), defined as Akg grain kg" fertilizer N, were both higher in the +NPK treatment of the LTFE than in the on-farm FFP treatment in all three crop cycles (Table 3). The greater AE levels achieved on-station were linked in the DS primarily with higher GY, whereas in the WS they principally reflected the lower, moderate rates of on-station N fertilizer application (Table 4). Significant differences in the partial factor productivity of N fertilizer [PFP(N)] followed those of AE in two of the three crop cycles. 22The magnitudes of PFP(N) and its component term Y,/N, were greater than for the other component term of PFP(N), AE (Tables 3 and 4), as were their variability among farmers’ fields (data not shown). The Y,/N, and AE terms were relatively independent, with no significant correlation between them in any of the three crop seasons (Fig. 3). Discussion Farmers achieved suboptimal fertilizer N use efficiency mostly because their N fertilizer rates were not based on crop need. For example, farmers did not adjust their rates of applied N in response to differences in the INS. Most farmers based their N fertilizer rates on preexisting ideas. Observations suggested that the worse appearance of the crop in the WS than in the DS encouraged farmers to apply more N fertilizer in the WS. Excessive application of N fertilizer in the WS, resulting in low N use efficiency, and inadequate N fertilizer in the DS, resulting in low grain yield, are both examples of poor fertilizer practices by farmers. These results indicated considerable scope to improve fertilizer N use efficiency in farmers’ fields. ‘The variation among farmers’ fields in the Y,/N, component of PFP was equal to or greater than the variation in AE. Because the Y, parameter represents the INS, this finding highlights the need for field-specific N management to optimize N use efficiency. Blanket prescriptions for the rate and timing of N fertilizer application in large recommendation domains, as presently issued by national research and extension authorities, cannot accommodate the wide range of the INS. References Bouldin DR. 1986. The chemistry and biology of flooded soils in relation to the nitrogen economy of rice fields. Fert. Res. 9:1-14, Buresh RJ, De Datta SK, Padilla JL, Chua TT. 1988. Potential of inhibitors for increasing response of lowland rice to urea fertilization. Agron. J. 80:947-952. Cassman KG, Gines GC, Dizon MA, Samson MI, Alcantara JM. 1996, Nitrogen-use efficiency in tropical lowland rice systems: contributions from indigenous and applied nitrogen. Field Crops Res. 47:1-12. Chaiwanakupt P, Freney JR, Keerthisinghe DG, Phongpan , Blakeley RL. 1996. Use of urease, algal inhibitors, and nitrification inhibitors to reduce nitrogen loss and increase the grain yield of flooded rice (Oryza sativa L.). Biol. Fertil. Soils 22:89-95, De Datta SK, Buresh RJ, Samson MI, Wang K-R. 1998. Nitrogen use efficiency and nitrogen-15 balances in broadcast-seeded flooded and transplanted rice. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52:849-855. Notes Author's address: Division of Agronomy, Cuu Long Delta Rice Research Institute, Omon, Cantho, Vietnam. Citation: Olk DC, Moya PF, editors. 1998, On-farm management of applied inputs and native soil fertility. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 23. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 212 p.Table 1. Grain yield by fertilizer treatment and crop variety in the long-term fertility experiment, CLRRI, Vietnam. Grain yield (kg ha") Treatment 1985 DS 1995 WS. 1996 DS Fertilizer Control 3967 1537 ¢ 3798. +N 5629 1724 be 5340 b +PK 4469 ¢ 2317 4139 +NK 6265a 2074 be s7i7b +NP 6180.0 3432 a 6230 a +NPK 6446.0 3537 a alsa Variety IR64 S812a' 2457 a 5274 a oMg97 5473.0 2416 a s272a ‘Fertlizer Weatment means WH The same Teter are nak sgnicany Ufferent at We BWTevel By DMIRT. ‘Narietal means with the same letter are not signifcanily ciferent at te Solevel by LSD. Table2. Nitrogen fertilizer rates for the farmers’ fertilizer practice treatment for individual farmers, CLRRI, Vietnam. N fertilizer rate (eg ha") Village Farmcode 1995 DS 1995 WS, 136 DS ThoiDong TOT 103 105 102 90 89 103 16 137 104 104 89 ThoiLai 201 70 83 202 300 79 203, 312 107 204 95 99 ‘Thoi Long 301 76 123 175 302 108 131 165 303 92 86 85 304 7 94 80 Thi Tran 401 95 159 121 402 86 126 96 403 107 m2 95 404 4 113 90 Thoi Hanh 501 75 174 182 502 87 122 89 503 87 126 121 504 or 7 78 Dinh Mon 601 78 137 105 602 86 155 7 603 86 449 127 604 102 89 106 Phuoc Tho 701 77 135 95 702 86 139 87 703 78 118 7 708 69 7 84 ‘Thoi Thuan 801 123 93 160 802 us 3 131 803 75 a 119 804 82 103 Mean 90 123 mi sD 7 28 29 24Table3, Recovery efficiency (RE), agronomic efficiency (AE), and partial factor productivity for N fertilizer [PFP(N)] with optimal fertilizer application in farmers’ fields (on-farm) and the long-term fertility experiment (LTFE), CLRRI, Vietnam. Crop season’ Experiment REF “AEF VINE PRP 1995 DS Ontarm Tx oF 335 TT LIFE 0.49 198 447 64.5, 1995 WS On-farm 0.18 99 20.0 23.8 LIFE 0.47 153 29.0 42 1996 DS On-farm 21 82 449 51.0 LIFE 0.56 22.7 414 64.1 Rig Nerop Nupiake kg” N reniizer applied "aaky grain kg'N fertilizer applied. d aed . s sete Ni fenzer ate ha") Fig. 1. Yield increase with applied N fertilizer (FFP less +PK) in relation to rate of N fertilizer applied, on- farm monitoring, CLRRI, Vietnam.‘Yield increase with N fertilizer (t ha*) {0} 9495 Oy season 7 . Teosae (©9596 Dy season Re Grain yield in +PK treatment (kg hat) Yield response to applied N fertilizer in relation to grain yield in the +PK treatment, CLRRI, Vietnam. arAgronomic efficiency of N fertilizer » 5 wena Otome, ears on ag % [a esetorieaee 5 @ ° e w4 oP Yow W j 83 0 oe wf. vy vate ® * Fae ee, v e Y ° oe 7s Y/N, Fig.3. Relationship between the ratio of grain yield in the +PK treatment to fertilizer N rate in the FFP treatment (Y,/N)) and the agronomic efficiency (AE) of N fertilizer, CLRRI, Vietnam, 28Indigenous soil nitrogen supply and nitrogen use efficiency of double-crop rice systems in Central Luzon, Philippines PLC. Sta. Cruz, S.R. Serrano, H.C. Gines, FD. Garcia, J-B. Bajita, G.O. Redondo, GS. Simbahan, and J.P. Descalsota Introduction Yield declines of 50 to 240 kg ha’ yr" have been documented for intensively cropped irrigated rice grown under experimental conditions (Cassman and Pingali 1995). Given the current double- and triple-cropping in irrigated rice systems, cbserved trends of decreasing productivity are likely to continue in the most favored lands as the resource base further degrades (Cassman et al 1995). Other than soil-related problems or increased disease and insect pressure that cause a yield or productivity decline at a site-specific scale, the indigenous soil nitrogen supply (INS) was identified to be a generic factor of declining yields in intensive irrigated rice systems. The INS may be considered as the inherent and distinct capacity of a soil to supply nutrients to the crop independently of fertilizers (Cassman et al 1996b). While the understanding of soil properties and processes governing the INS in irrigated rice systems is of primary importance in besic research, the need to establish a practical basis for estimating the INS is equally important for practical purposes. For example, a simple measurement for predicting the INS would simplify the development of appropriate nitrogen (N) management strategies to increase N use efficiency (NUE) in irrigated rice systems. One of the critical constraints to productivity in irrigated rice is low NUE, and its optimization involves matching the INS plus applied N fertilizer to crop N demand (Olk et al 1999), The Mega Project on Reversing Trends in Declining Productivity (RTDP) began in 1994 at the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) and involved an on-station long-term fertility experiment (LTFE) and 48 monitoring farms. The project aimed to provide a baseline information data set on soil quality and productivity levels achieved by rice farmers in intensive rice-growing areas of Central Luzon, Philippines. These data will be used to evaluate the relationship between productivity and soil quality over time. The LTFE at PhilRice was established in 1968 following a nutrient replacement strategy to ensure maintenance of soil nutrient levels over time. As an indicator of soil performance and soil fertility changes, the optimal fertilizer treatments of the LTFE could be the standard in the evaluation of on-farm experiments (OFEs) and farmers’ productivity. This paper presents the research progress of the RTDP project at the PhilRice site, with emphasis on INS and NUE meesurements in the OFEs and LTFE in the project domain. Materials and methods Project site ‘The RTDP project began in 1994 at PhilRice (15°43°N, 120°54’E), Nueva Ecija, Philippines. The project site represents the intensive rice-growing area of Central Luzon, considered the rice granary of the Philippines. The project area is located within a 30-km radius of PhilRice in a flat alluvial floodplain. Generally, rice double-cropping (rice-rice pattern) is being practiced in the area. During 29the dry season (DS) crop (December-April), the monitoring farms and the rest of the projected recommendation domain receive irrigation water through canals from the National Irrigation Authority. In a few instances, water from tube wells is used when canal water is unavailable. Because the area has a unimodal rainfall pattern (1656 mm from June to October), the wet season (WS) crop (June-October) is basically rainfed, but supplemented by irrigation from the canals or tube wells when precipitation is erratic. The soils of the PhilRice monitoring domain are Vertisols (USDA classification). Rice is grown. mostly on two lowland soils—the Quingua silt loam and the Maligaya silt loam or clay loam— which are classified as clayey Ustic Endoaquerts and Ustic Epiaquerts, respectively. Soils in both series are similar with very fine texture and poor drainage. On the other hand, the soil in the LTFE field is a fine, montmorillonitic, isohyperthermic Entic Pellustert. The monitored farms are typical of intensive irrigated systems in Central Luzon. Two rice crops per year are practiced with DS yields of 6-7 t hat and WS yields of 3-4 t ha". Direct seeding is a common practice during the DS, when it is used by about three-quarters of all farmers. About half of the farmers practice direct seeding in the WS. Except for one cluster (Bantug), which does not use insecticides, farmers generally apply insecticides two to three times per growing season (total 0.25 kg active ingredient [ai] ha*), and a single herbicide (0.39 kg ai ha’) in the DS. Farmers prefer early maturing varieties (IR64, PSBRc 10, PSBRc 14) with proven yields and farm prices. Average NPK rates (typically in two applications) are higher in the DS (132-13-22 kg N, P,O,, K,O ha*) than in the WS (84-13-17 kg N, P,O,, K,O ha’). Although organic and foliar fertilizers are gaining popularity in the area, the use of inorganic fertilizer remains dominant. On-farm experiment Forty-eight farms were selected for measurement of biophysical and factor productivity. The 48 farms were divided into four clusters: Bantug, Burgos, Casili, and Lagare. The Lagare farm cluster was included to allow comparison with past socioeconomic surveys and OFE from as early as the 1980s. The selected clusters represent the major soil series in the monitoring domain. All monitoring farms practice irrigated double-rice cropping. A reference soil sample for analysis of key properties was taken from the -F plots at 3-4 wk after transplanting or seeding in the 195 DS. Further details on the structure of the RTDP project, methods for collecting plant, soil, and socioeconomic data, and the theoretical basis for N use efficiency terms are contained in Section I of this publication. (On-station long-term fertility experiment (LTFE) ‘The LTFE at PhilRice wes established in the 1968 DS to monitor changes in productivity of double- crop irrigated rice over time in relation to fertilizer nutrient inputs. The same LTFE has also been conducted simultaneously at two other sites in the Philippines. Recently, investigations have addressed the quantification of changes in soil nutrient status in relation to nutrient input-output balances and the assessment of balanced nutrient inputs for the maintenance of soil quality and sustainability of rice yield. The fertilizer treatments consisted of an unfertilized control, +N, +NP, +NK, +PK, and +NPK. The varieties used represented the best available genotypes at a given time. 30Results Long-term fertility experiment, summary of accomplishments (1968-95) Yield trends during the 28-yr history of the irrigated double-cropped LTFE at PhilRice showed a long-term decline during the first 24 yr in both the +NPK and unfertilized treatments (data not shown), placing into question the sustainability of intensive irrigated lowland rice systems. Higher rates of N fertilizer were applied starting in the 1992 DS, which resulted in significantly higher yields. Subsequently, rates of P and K were also adjusted to provide a balanced supply based on higher yield targets. With the revised rates of fertilizer application, GY increased by more than 1 t ha' in the +NPK treatment. Until the 1991 crop, soil organic carbon (SOC) and total soil N (TSN) did not differ among fertilizer treatments (data not shown). Despite higher levels of P and K applied since 1992, the concentrations of these nutrients in the soil in the +NPK treatment remained below critical levels (data not shown). However, available soil P and K have been increasing in many treatments. These developments highlight issues on the relevance of SOC and TSN and balanced nutrition in LTFE plots. On-farm experiment Indigenous soil nitrogen supply The strong relationship (7 = 0.77***-0.90"*) between GY and total N uptake in all treatments at maturity for two DS and one WS crop cycles suggests that GY is an acceptable index of INS (Fig. 1). In addition, the relationship between GY in +PK plots (GY,_,) and GY in -F plots (GY,,) was highly significant for all crop cycles (r = 0.84"**-0.93"", Fig. 2). Therefore, GY,, is a reasonable index of the INS in the domain. Although domain-specific in nature, the observation conforms to findings at other project sites (Olk et al 1996b). ‘As simple measurements, SOC and TSN could be practical bases for predicting the INS. However, total crop N uptake in the -F treatment was associated with neither TSN nor SOC (Fig, 3). Similarly, GY,, was not associated with TSN or SOC (Fig. 4). These results agreed with earlier evidence on the lack of congruence between the INS and SOC in irrigated rice systems obtained in on-station LTFEs and OFEs (Cassman et al 1996a). Based on these correlations, SOC and TSN cannot be used to predict the INS in irrigated rice systems, Using GY, as a parameter to reflect the INS, a high degree of INS variability was noted among the monitoring farms. Across all farms, mean grain yield was 4378 kg ha" (1994-95 DS), 2670 kg, ha® (1995 WS), and 3624 kg ha" (1995-96 DS) and the standard deviation ranged from 772 to 1227 kg, ha" (Table 1), giving coefficients of variation (CV) of about 28%. The GY,, differed among farm clusters (village): cluster means differed by 900-1987 kg ha’ within crop cycles (Table 2). The lowest cluster variation was observed in the 1995-96 DS, when mean grain yields were low. The GY, was not correlated with the farmers’ fertilizer N rates applied to the FFP treatments in any of the three crop cycles (Fig. 5). This implied that farmers did not base their N fertilizer applications on their INS. Whether the reason is due to a lack of farmers’ awareness, a technology gap, or an intentional disregard of the INS remains to be clarified. This observation was further strengthened by the insignificant relationship between yield increase due to N application (GY difference between FFP and +PK treatments) and the N fertilizer rate of the FEP treatment (Fig, 6). 31Grain yield response to N fertilizer application was negatively correlated with the INS in all three crop cycles (Fig. 7), although in varying degrees. Large negative slopes in the two DS crops suggest that the GY response to N fertilizer application in a farmer's field will be small if GY is large. The less negative slope of the WS crop suggests a smaller GY response to N application in the WS than in the DS. These observations could be better understood by examining the agronomic efficiency (AB), the partial factor productivity of applied N [PFP(N)], and other agroenvironmental factors in the WS. The relationship between the INS (defined as GY ,) and N fertilizer rates of the previous two crop cycles was insignificant (Fig. 8). Apparently any residual N remaining from previous N fertilizer application did not influence the INS. Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to INS Farmers’ N application rates were highly variable. For all farmers, DS standard deviations were 38 (1994-95) and 40 kg ha" (1995-96) and mean application values were 136 and 130 kg ha’, respectively (Table 3), giving CV values of 28% and 31%. In the WS, the CV was 36% even with lower N fertilizer application rates. High variation was likewise observed across farms for the PFP(N). With overall means within crop cycles ranging from 45.5 to 48.6 kg grain kg” fertilizer N, standard deviations ranged from 14.1 to 32.5, resulting in CV values of 30-71%. The CV value for the wet season was double the mean DS value. Agronomic efficiency also varied considerably across all farms, with CV values of 57-111% for the three crop cycles. Variation among clusters or villages was likewise apparent for these N fertilizer parameters (Table 4). The Burgos farm cluster, for instance, had relatively high N application rates during the DS but lower AE, unlike the Bantug cluster, which had both high N fertilizer rates and high AE in both DS crops. Lagare had the highest mean AE in the 1994-95 DS and 1995 WS. This was attributed to a measurable crop response to applied N fertilizer at all Lagare farms: the lowest AE values in these crop cycles were 9.1 and 3.8 kg grain kg' fertilizer N, respectively. In contrast, some farms in the Bantug and Burgos clusters did not observe any crop response to N fertilizer application. ‘The correlation between AE and PFP(N) was positive and significant for only the 1995-96 DS (Fig. 9). The small slope of this correlation suggests that GY is affected less by applied N rates than by the INS, Relative to the LTFE, the OFEs had lower GY, N fertilizer rate, and AE but comparable PEP(N) during the two dry seasons (Table 5), On the other hand, only GY and PFP(N) in the WS were lower on-farm than in the LTFE. The DS comparison highlights the depressing impact of suboptimal AE on GY in the monitoring farms despite higher INS than or-station (data not shown). Greater AE and therefore GY of the LTFE were realized even at higher N fertilizer rates. Discussion Long-term fertility experiment While most of the on-station LTFEs at other Mega Project sites are newly established, the LTFE at PhilRice, Nueva Ecija, Philippines has been a continuing source of information for more than 30 yr. The voluminous amount of generated information highlights the crucial role of this LTFE and 32related on-station experiments as an indicator of system performance and soil fertility changes under intensive rice cropping. The LTFE has become a field laboratory for researchers in identifying causes of soil problems, and in developing remedial management options. Therefore, the LTFE is conceptually linked to the OFEs of the Mega Project, which share these potential uses. Aside from the observed trends of declining yields and factor productivity, information generated from the LTFE was also used to develop options for their reversal, to formulate initial hypotheses on the incongruence between the INS and soil organic matter (SOM) levels, and to simplify nutrient input-output balances for useful purposes. In the Mega Project, data generated from the LTFE served as a basis for evaluating the performance of the OFEs, and in a wider context the farmers’ productivity. Based on initial findings, the relatively lower GY in the OFEs during the DS reflects lower N fertilizer rates and AE than on-station. In the WS, conversely, a greater dependence of GY on the INS rather than on applied N fertilizer was apparent in both the OFEs and the LTFE. Varietal use and optimal crop management may have contributed to better use of the INS and higher GY in the LTFE. The contribution of improved management of inputs other than N fertilizer must likewise be examined. The seasonal variation of AE and PFP(N) in relation to crop management needs further investigation or cross-section analysis of available data from monitoring of OFEs and LTFEs Significance of indigenous soil nitrogen supply Grain yield can be used as an index of the INS. A reasonable index of the INS in the domain can be taken from GY, plots based on the tight positive correlation between GY, and GY», plots. However, the use of GY , plots as a measure of INS remains domain- or farm-specific, wherein GY, , can be used in case P and/or K responses are apparent. ‘The SOC and TSN cannot be used to predict INS in the project domain. The results confirmed earlier evidence presented by Cassman et al (1996a) on the observed incongruence between INS and SOM from on-station LTFEs and OFEs. The lack of association between total soil N and crop N uptake derived from indigenous resources of the floodwater system is currently the subject of intensive research at IRRI. Initial findings were reported by Olk et al (1996a). ‘There is a high degree of INS variability at the farm cluster and farm levels, Farmers’ } fertilizer rates did not match with the INS of their respective farms. The farmers’ failure to base their N fertilizer application on the INS offers several interpretations. For example, farmers may not be aware (even at a qualitative level) of variation in INS among their farms, or they may disregard the perceived variation and instead follow generic fertilizer N recommendations in their domains. Some farmers may modify a generic recommendation based on their perception (farmer- specific basis), Finally, the under- or over-application of N fertilizer may be due to other factors beyond the control of the farmers. Regardless of the farmer-specific reasons, the roles of agronomic or socioeconomic factors in affecting farmers’ decisions need more detailed analysis. Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to INS ‘The low and variable NUE terms calculated for the OFE reflect a compounded effect of highly variable INS, mismatch between the INS and N fertilizer rates, and differences in farm-specific crop management. Crop management differences can begin with crop establishment; for example, a small change in crop density changes dry matter partitioning, which in turn affects various plant indices. Farmers also use different rice varieties.The positive correlation between PFP(N) and AE in the DS and insignificant correlation in the WS point to certain interpretations. The small slopes in the DS suggest that the expected contribution from applied N fertilizer to GY is lower than that of the INS. The insignificant relationship between PFP(N) and AE during the WS implies a more complicated situation that needs further cross-section analysis using data sets on crop management, soil properties, climatic factors, and socioeconomic parameters from the project domain. In summary, there is a need to develop improved N fertilizer management (site- or season- specific) that accounts for crop demand and INS to achieve agronomic efficiencies of 24-33 kg grain kg"' Nat yield levels that approach maximum potential yields (Peng et al 1996). Summary and conclusions A biophysical and socioeconomic database has been established for the OFEs and LTFE within the project domain. This paper focused on the INS and NUE and reached the following conclusions: «The LTFE is a good indicator of system performance and soil fertility changes in intensive rice cropping. It serves as a field laboratory for identifying causes of soil problems and developing remedial management options. The conceptual linkage between the LTFE and OFEs was established by using the data gencrated from the LTFE as a basis for evaluating the performance of the OFEs. ‘+ GY can be used as an index of the INS. However, the use of GY,, as a measure of the INS remains domain- or farm-specitic, wherein GY, can be used in case P and /or K responses are apparent. Simple measurement of SOC and TSN cannot estimate the INS. + Theres a high degree of INS variability at farm cluster (village) and farm levels. Evidence also confirmed that farmers’ N fertilizer rates did not match the INS on their respective farms. Reasons for the farmers’ failure to base their N fertilizer application on the INS need further verification. ‘+ Farmers’ N fertilizer rates are highly variable. Similarly, PFP(N) and AE vary highly across farms and farm clusters. The situation is a compounded effect of the highly variable INS. ‘+ The incongruence between the INS and N fertilizer rate, and the high variation in INS, likely contributed to high variation in NUE parameters measured at the on-farm level in the DS. The insignificant relationship between PFP(N) and AE during the WS reveals a more complicated situation that needs study and integrated analysis of the database. ‘+ The OFEs have relatively lower GY, N fertilizer rate, and AE than the LTFE, but comparable PFP(N) during the DS. During the WS, the OFEs have relatively lower GY and PFP(N), while N fertilizer rates and AE are comparable to those of the LTFE. Coupling of the INS to appropriate nutrient and crop management to increase farmers’ profits remains a challenge. References ‘Cassman KG, De Datta SK, Olk DC, Alcantara J, Samson M, Descalsota J, Dizon M. 1995. Yield decline and nitrogen economy of long-term experiments on continuous, irrigated rice systems in the tropics. In: Lal R, Stewart BA, editors. Soil management: experimental basis for sustainability and environmental quality. Boca Raton (Florida): CRC/Lewis Publishers. p 181- 222.Cassman KG, Pingali PL. 1995. Extrapolating trends from long-term experiments to farmers’ fields: the case of irrigated rice systems in Asia. In: Barnett V, Payne R, Steiner R, editors. Agricultural sustainability: economic, environmental, and statistical considerations. London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. p 63-84. Cassman KG, Dobermann A, Sta. Cruz PC, Gines HC, Samson MI, Descalsota JP, Alcantara JM, Dizon MA, Olk DC. 1996a. Soil organic matter and the indigenous nitrogen supply of intensive irrigated rice systems in the tropics. Plant Soil 182:267-278. Cassman KG, Gines HC, Dizon MA, Samson MI, Alcantara JM. 1996b. Nitrogen use efficiency in tropical lowland rice systems: contributions from indigenous and applied nitrogen. Field Crops Res. 47:1-12. Olk DC, Cassman KG, Randall EW, Kinchesh P, Sanger LJ, Anderson JM. 1996a. Changes in ‘chemical properties of organic matter with intensified rice cropping in tropical lowland soil. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 47:293-303. (Olk DC, Cassman KG, Simbahan GC, Sta. Cruz PC, Abdulrachman S, Nagarajan R, Pham Sy Tan, ‘Satawathananont S. 1996b. Congruence of N fertilizer management by farmers and soil N ‘supply in tropical irrigated lowland rice systems. In: Maximizing sustainable rice yields through improved soil and environmental management. Proceedings, Symposium of the Paddy Soil Fertility Working Group, ISSS, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 11-17 Nov. 1996. p 29-38. Olk DC, Cassman KG, Simbahan GC, Sta. Cruz PC, Abdulrachman S, Nagarajan R, Pham Sy Tan, Satawathananont S. 1999. Interpreting fertilizer-use efficiency in relation to soil nutrient supplying capacity, factor productivity and agronomic efficiency. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys. (in press). Peng SB, Garcia FV, Laza RC, Sanico AL, Visperas RM, Cassman KG. 1996, Increased nitrogen use efficiency at high yield levels using chlorophyll meter. Field Crops Res. 47:243-252. Notes Authors’ addresses: P.C, Sta. Cruz, SR, Serrano, F.D. Garcia, J.B. Bajita, and G.O. Redondo, Philippine Rice Research Institute, Maligaya, Muiioz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines; H.C. Gines, GS. Simbahan, and J.P. Descalsota, International Rice Research Institute, P.O. Box 933, 1099 Manila, Philippines. Citation: Olk DC, Moya PF, editors. 1998. On-farm management of applied inputs and native soil fertility. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 23. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 212 p. 35‘Table 1__Mean grain yields in the on-farm treatment plots (-F, +PK, and FFP), PhilRice. Grain yield (kg ha") Treatment plots Mean SD. TOES diy season (n= 5 - 4378 1227 4PK 4519 1339 FFP, 6196 1254 1995 wet season (n = 45) + 2670 mm 4PK 2834 787 FEP 3287 7 1995-96 dry season (n = 34) - 3624 1016 42K 3700 984 FFP. 5619 770 = number of farmers” Hels sampled. Mean and standard deviation (SD) taken from farm means Table 2._Variability of grain yields within villages for ~F treatment, PhilRice. Grainyield (kgha") _ Cluster/ village _n Mean Minimum Maximum TS9ESS dry season Bantug 2 4576 2616 6729 Burgos 2 5446 319 617 Casili ul 3459 1835 5639 Lagare 10 3869 2952 5205 1995 wet season Bantug 2 2398 $31 3785 Burgos 2 2871 2071 387 Casili 10 2043 117 2856 Lagare u 3335 2395 4410 1995.96 dry season Bantug u 3180 1464 4568 Burgos 2 4080 2329 5346 Lagare u 3570 2670 5006 ‘Table 3. Ranges of N fertilizer rates, partial factor productivity for N [PEP(N)], and agronomic efficiency (AE) for the farmer's fettilizer treatment, PhilRice. Parameter an Mean 3D ‘Minimum Maximeam 1999-95 dry season N fertilizer rate (kg ha") 40 136.1 375, 695, 246.0 PFP(N) (kg grain kg” fert N) 40 18.6 qa 153 918 AE (Akg grain kg” fert N) 40 13.0 94 00 31.2 1995 wet season N fertilizer rate (kg ha") 31 845 306 28.9 155.3 PEP{N) (kg grain kg” fert N) 31 455 323 14a 173 AE (Akg grain kg" fert N) 31 65 72 00 314 1995.96 dry season N fertilizer rate (kg ha") 2 1305 402 732 260.1 PFP(N) (kg grain kg” fert N) 29 465 41 162 73 AE (Akg grain kg 'fert N) 29 15.6 88 49 34.8Table 4. Variability of N fertilizer rate and agronomic efficiency (AE) within clusters or village, PhilRice. Parameter /cluster Mean’ ‘Minimum “Maximum. N fertilizer rate (kg ha") T9B4-95 dry season Bantug 1978 469 246.0 Burgos 4 6 2129 Casili 1220 363 1722 Lagare 1072 869 1298 1995 wet season Bantug 27 562 1536 Burgos 75.2 538 975 Casi 75 576 1553 Lagare 473 289 2a 1995.96 dry season. Bantug 175 334 1663 Burgos uL0 556 260.1 Lagare 1055 479 1511 AE (Akg grain kg" fert N) 1994-95 dry season Rantug 140 00 279 Burgos 69 00 168 Casili BL 00 22 Lagare 23 on 32 1995 wet season Bantug 63 00 205 Burgos 46 00 169 Casili 59 00 160 Lagare 49 38 ala 1995-96 dry season. Bantug 199 00 MS Burgos 95 09 22 Lagore 13.9 00. 308 Table 5. Grain yield (GY), agronomic efficiency (AE), and partial factor productivity for N [PFP(N)] on-farm and in LTFE, PhilRice. Parameter “Grain yt Niertlizerrate RE FPR) (kg ha’) (kg ha!) (akg grainkg'N) (Akg grain kgN) 1995-95 dry season LIFE 9483 210 208 452 On-farm 6162 130 0 446 Difference 3021 sone 98" o6ns 1995 wet season LIFE 5220 80 7 65.2 Oncfarm 3188 84 33 455 Difference 2032 ans 13ns 19.7% 1995-96 dry season LIFE 7514 210 48 358 On-farm 5622 123 B3 413 Difference 1692 a 15 ns Ss 7Grain yield (¢ ha) (0) 9898 bry season (©) 95 wet sean , y W . “s ve Total N uptake (kg ha*) Fig. 1. Relationship between grain yield and total N uptake at maturity, on-farm monitoring, PhilRice, Philippines.Grain yield in +PK treatment (t ha") 2] (219898 Dy season (ease voor reas (98 sen of Tae 7} 195.96 oy seaton Grain yield in -F treatment (t ha) Fig. 2, Relationship between grain yields in the -F and +PK treatments, on-farm monitoring, PhilRice, Philippines. 39Total N uptake in -F treatment (kg ha) 100 (@) a7 v v a4 ° .Y . 4 20 = © e508 mone Veo moase ° r T " 08 os 12 15 18 24 24 Total soil nitrogen (g kg) Soil organic carbon (¢ kg") Fig.3. Relationship between total N uptake in the-F treatmentand (a) total soil nitrogen and (b) soil organic carbon, on-farm monitoring, PhilRice, Philippines.Grain yield in -F treatment (tha) 7 fa) ’ v v © 2908 moo ' Y 9008-031 oo Sta Total soil nitrogen (e ke") - ° : . . . ©) ‘ . . y . ow 5 wv 7 w ’ 4 sve. v 2 . A, 2 © 2509 naar i V 0605 03%" ° a aA a 1 2 4 6 8 © 2 % 1% 1 Scil organic carbon (g ke") Fig.4. Relationship between grain yield in the-F treatment and (a) total soil N and (b) soil organic carbon, ‘on-farm monitoring, PhilRice, Philippines.N feruiizer rate (kg ha) = + (0) 9695 on soto - . M3ase ss . . 0) 95 et sevson = maha 10 TP oa 1 330 Ov sesson 0. ° oe ° coe rc *. . ar 2 _ Grain yield in +PK treatment (hg ha?) Fig.5. Nitrogen fertilizer rate applied by farmers to the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment in relation to grain yield in the +PK plot, PhilRice, Philippines. a2Yield increase with N fertilizer (t ha*) © (a) 9895 Ory season x . foam ef | ' . . oe . . (2) 95 wr season xB (c) 95.96 ory season ‘ fox . om Om mee NN fertilizer rate (ke ha) Fig. 6. Yield increase from applied N (FFP less +PK) in relation to rate of N fertilizer applied, on-farm monitoring, PhilRice, Philippines.Yield increase with N fertilizer (t ha) . ore eas (0195 Wet season Yets23 p30 a tos ° se (c) 95:96 oy season Years O82 2 rear Grain yield in +PK treatment (t ha) Fig. 7. Yield response to applied N fertilizer in relation to grain yield in the +PK treatment, PhilRice, Philippines.Grain yield in F plot (t ha) 6 100 150 200 250 300 360 N fertilizer applied (kg ha) Fig.8. Grain yield (1996 DS) in -F plot in relation to total N fertilizer applied during the previous two seasons (1995 DS & WS), on-farm monitoring, PhilRice, Philippines.‘Agronomic efficioncy of applied N (kg grain kg? N applied) (2) 9295 oy season Poa 7 . (0) 98 we season reoio" » = . 10. (©) 95:8 Ory seasen ~ ° ~ 10 PFP(N) Fig.9. Relationship between agronomic efficiency and partial factor productivity of applied N fertilizer [PFPQN)] on-farm monitoring, PhilRice, Philippines.Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to the indigenous soil nitrogen supplying capacity under the Jatiluhur irrigation systems S. Abdulrachman, 1. Juliardi, and A.M. Fagi Field experiments were conducted in farmers’ ficldsin the villages of Karanghegar (latosol soil), Sukareja (gley humic soil), and Bojongjaya (alluvial soil) in the 1994-95 wet season, 1995 dry season, and 1995-96 wet season. The objectives of these experiments were to (a) evaluate the relationships between grain yield, the rate of N fertilizer input, and the indigenous N supply (INS), (b) quantify the ‘magnitude of variation in the INS, and (c) estimate the nitrogen use efficiency in relation to the INS in the area under the Jatiluhur irrigation systems. Ten farmers’ fields were selected in each village and in cach field three treatments were used: no fertilizer (F plots), +PK plots with 20 kg P ha’! and 40 kg K hha"! and the farmer's fertilizer practice plots (FFP plots). Results showed that the INS as estimated from total plant N uptake in -F plots was not affected by previous N application. Soil organic carbon and total N were not useful indices of the INS. Yield difforences between the FFP and +PK plots were significant at Karanghegar and Bojongjaya but not at Sukareja. Grain yields dropped sharply in the dry season at all locations. Agronomic efficiency of applied N was low in all locations in both the wet and dry seasons. The average agronomic efficioncy was 6,5, and 8 kg grain kg! N ha’ for the three crop cycles, respectively. Karanghegar had the highest agronomic efficiency, followed by Bojongiaya and Sukareja Introduction Self-sufficiency in rice has been a primary concem of the Indonesian agricultural development program for the past three decades. Fertilizer is one of the key inputs used in the rice intensification program. The sharp increase in fertilizer consumption from 1964 through 1995 indicates the importance of fertilizers in crop production. In most rice production centers, however, the growth rate of fertilizer consumption has been much faster than the growth rate of rice production. Unbalanced nutrient availability has been thought to be the one cause of stagnating growth in rice production. Therefore, balanced fertilizer application is included in the Supra Insus Rice Intensification Program, which was launched in 1985. Ammonium sulphate and triple superphosphate amended with Zn were recommended for Supra Insus rice for supplemental S and Zn, respectively. According to Ponnamperuma (1977), phosphorus accumulation in intensive rice cultivation may decrease Zn availability. Intensive fertilization for irrigated rice could stimulate ferric toxicity (smunadji and Sudjadi 1983). Supardi (1984) hypothesized that soil organic matter deterioration, disturbance of soil physical condition, and micronutrient deficiency may be the factors causing, stagnant rice production growth. Results from long-term fertility experiments conducted at the Sukamandi farm (hydromorphic soils) and at the Mojosari farm (regosol soil) indicated that N appeared to be one of the important nutrients for stable rice production (Tedjasarwana et al 1995, Suyamto et al 1990). The soils in these areas were unable to maintain an adequate supply of N to match rice demand. Understanding the indigenous nitrogen supply (INS) is therefore very important for sustaining rice grain yield (GY). ‘The purposes of this study were to (1) relate GY to the INS, (2) evaluate the relationship between N fertilizer rates and the INS, (3) quantify the magnitude of variation in the INS, and (4) estimate N use efficiency in relation to the INS. 47Materials and methods The on-farm experiments were conducted in the 1994-95 wet season (WS), 1995 dry season (DS), and 1995-96 WS at the villages of Karanghegar (latosol soil), Sukareja (gley humic soil), and Bojongjaya (alluvial soil), Further details on the structure of the project supporting this study, methods for collecting plant, soil, and socioeconomic data, and the theoretical basis for N use efficiency terms are contained in Section I of this publication. Details specific to this site are that in each village 10 farmers’ fields were selected for monitoring the unfertilized (-F), +PK, and farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatments. Fertilizer rates in the +PK treatment were 20 kg P ha and 40 kg K ha", The WS extends from about November to March and the WS from about April to August. Seasons are named after the precipitation conditions at the time of transplanting, although the weather is actually dry during most of the WS and wet during most of the DS. At the flowering stage, 40 flag leaves were collected for N, P, and K analysis. Twelve-hill samples were cut at the soil surface at physiological maturity and oven-dried to a constant weight at 70 °C. Nitrogen in rice straw, grain, and flag leaves was analyzed by the methods of Bremner and Mulvaney (1982). Phosphorus in flag leaf, straw, and grain samples was determined colorimetrically (Watanabe and Olsen 1965), as was K content. Grain yield was measured from a 120-hill sample area in the middle of each plot. Total N, P, and K in aboveground biomass were estimated from oven-dried GY. All aboveground crop residues were cut and removed after harvest. Results and discussion Relationship between grain yield and plant N uptake The correlation between GY and total plant N uptake at maturity was highly significant in all three crop cycles (Fig. 1). The following equations express the relationships: @y 0.85 for the 1994-95 WS (b) Y = 0.440 + 0.039X_— r= 0.97 for the 1995 DS (©) ¥ = 0.478 + 0.045X r= 0.96 for the 1995-96 WS 306 + 0.049X where Y = grain yield, X = total N uptake, and r = correlation coefficient. ‘The high correlation in all three crop cycles suggests that the INS as defined by total plant N uptake can be approximated from GY. ‘The slightly weaker correlation in the 1994-95 DS may have been related to a long dry season in 1994, At that time, Java suffered from the El Nifilo phenomenon: the DS lasted until the reproductive growth stage in January to February 1995. A looser correlation between GY and N uptake in the FFP treatment contributed to this slightly lower correlation coefficient. Spatial trends in the indigenous soil N supply Defined as GY in the -F treatment, the INS varied widely among farmers in all crop cycles and across ranges of comparable magnitude to mean GY values (Table 1). Mean GY in -F treatment plots of all villages was 4.9 tha’ in the 1994-95 WS, 2.9 tha" in the 1995 DS, and 3.6 t ha" in the1995-96 WS. Plant N uptake ranged ftom 40 to 120 kg ha" and 20 to 110 kg ha’ for the WS and DS, respectively (data not shown). These results agreed with those of Cassman et al (1996b), who also found that GY in -F plots varied greatly among soils within a rice-growing domain. Dolmat et al (1980) measured rice yields ranging from 2.3 to 5.7 tha’ in field plots without applied N at 31 locations in Louisiana. Mean GY in -F plots differed among villages. For example, mean GY values in the 1994-95 WS were 4.1 tha’ in Karanghegar, 5.6 t ha’ in Sukareja, and 5.0 t ha" in Bojongjaya. One reason for differences in the INS among villages may be the soil fertility status: total soil N and extractable K were lower in the Karanghegar soil (Table 2). Differences in planting date may also affect crop growth. Karanghegar, which belonged to the first irrigation group, had an earlier planting date, followed by Sukareja and Bojongjaya, which were located in the second and third irrigation ‘groups, respectively. Differences in planting dates by up to 15 d between the groups could consequently affect crop physiological processes, including nutrient uptake. Relationships between the INS and soil organic carbon or total soil nitrogen Soil quality is commonly evaluated through nutrient status and other soil properties. The monitoring of all possible soil parameters that affect the quality of soil in its role as a medium for plant growth, however, is far too cumbersome, expensive, and time-consuming, while the INS itself may be an integrative measure of these soil properties. In an attempt to simplify measurement of the INS, GY was correlated with soil organic carbon (Fig. 2) and total soil N (Fig. 3) in these experiments to determine whether these parameters would be acceptable indices of the INS. Both correlations were very poor, agreeing with results reported elsewhere for tropical and subtropical irrigated rice systems (IRRI 1993, 1994). Therefore, itis necessary to monitor other complex parameters that provide a more accurate measure of crop growth and GY. Soil organic matter provides a substrate for N and its rates of formation, decomposition, and mineralization consequently affect N availability. It has been difficult, however, to demonstrate that related properties such as soil organic carbon and total nitrogen represent the INS and soil quality: both analyses are generally insensitive predictors of actual soil nutrient supply and availability (Cassman et al 1996a). The quantity of N that is immediately available for crop uptake is usually far less than total N. Moreover, the INS includes other short-term sources of N besides mineralization of N from soil organic matter, such as mineralization of crop residues, biological N, fixation in floodwater and the rhizosphere, and N inputs from irrigation water and the atmosphere. During early rice-growing periods, communities of blue-green algae were observed in some fields in Sukareja, but not in Bojongjaya and Karanghegar. Changes in the indigenous N supply between crop cycles and seasons Grain yield in the -F treatment was generally higher in the WS than in the DS (Table 1); GY trends in the on-station long-term fertility experiment were similar (data not shown). Differences in GY between crop cycles and seasons were significant. The mean GY difference for the -F treatment was 1.27 t ha" within season and 1.33 t ha" between seasons. Weather characteristics such as rainfall, temperature, solar radiation, and humidity usually differed more between seasons than in the same season between years. By comparison, Toriyama and Sekiya (1991) reported year-to-year fluctuations in crop N uptake of 60% for tice receiving only P and K fertilizer in a long-term experiment in Japan. Although the main cause of different GY levels between the WS and the DS has not been clearly identified, one possibility could be changes in the chemical and electrochemical status of the soil, such as depletion of oxygen, decrease in redox potential, pH change, change in electrical 49conductivity, reduction of Mn, Fe, and SO,?, and changes in the availability of N, P, K, and Zn. ‘Therefore, research on reducing the yield gaps between seasons or between crop cycles is still necessary. One of the research goals for the project on reversing trends of declining rice productivity in intensive irrigated systems in the next phase should be the identification of the ‘causes of the seasonal and annual differences in GY at the Sukamandi, Karanghegar, Sukareja, and Bojongjaya sites. Effects on the INS of N fertilizer rates during previous crop cycles ‘The INS could be artificially increased by residual N from fertilizer applications in previous crop cycles. Despite a wide range in N rates applied by farmers at all sites during the 1994-95 WS and 1995 DS, however, these fertilizer N inputs were weakly negatively correlated with GY in the -F treatment plots during the 1995-96 WS (Fig, 4), suggesting that residual N fertilizer was not a dominant cause of increased plant growth in the -F treatment. These previous rates of fertilizer input varied among the Karanghegar, Sukareja, and Bojongjaya farmers, with generally lower rates applied in Sukareja. The N application rate during the 1994-95 WS was 79 to 172 kg ha" in Karanghegar, 65 to 95 kg ha” in Sukareja, and 95 to 175 kg ha’ in Bojongjaya. During the 1995 DS, the N fertilizer rates were 95 to 209 kg ha" in Karanghegar, $2 to 189 kg ha’ in Sukareja, and 64 to 180 kg ha’ in Bojongjaya. Nevertheless, mean GY in -F plots during the 1995-96 WS was highest in Sukareja at 4.8 t ha’!, and only 2.2 tha’ in Karanghegar, and 3.8 t ha” in Bojongjaya. These results suggested again that GY in the -F treatment plots was not influenced by recent N fertilizer rates. Relationship between grain yield in the +PK and -F treatments Mean grain yield by village was always higher in the +PK treatment plots than in the -F treatment plots (Table 3). Grain yield in the +PK treatment plots for all 30 farmers was greater than GY in the -F treatment plots by 7%, 13%, and 11% in the 1994-95 WS, 1995 DS, and 1995-96 WS, respectively. ‘These differences were significant when based on farm means of the three-plot replicates (Table 3) and were mostly significant when based on the plot replicates (Tables 4-6). Grain yield was less in the +PK treatment than in the corresponding -F treatment plots for only 7%, 10%, and 10% of all farmers in the 1994-95 WS, 1995 DS, and 1995-96 WS, respectively. Regression equations between the GY in +PK and -F plots had slopes ranging from 0.789 to 1.003, while the Y-axis intercepts ranged from 0.426 to 1.408 (Fig. 5) Plant N uptake in the +PK treatment plots was 79.9 kg ha’ in the 1994-95 WS, 71.4 kg ha in the 1995 DS, and 78.8 kg ha? in the 1995-96 WS (data not shown), representing the INS when P and K are not limiting. By comparison, plant N uptake in the -F treatment was 74.6 kg ha" in the 1994.95 WS, 64.1 kg ha’! in the 1995 DS, and 693 kg ha” in the 1995-96 WS. These results indicated that 2 positive crop response to P and K fertilizer application affects the definition of the INS. The INS might be best approximated by total plant N uptake in the +PK treatment, where only N is limiting. Grain yield response to applied fertilizers by village A GY response to application of P and K fertilizers occurred in the 1994-95 WS in Karanghegar and Sukareja (Table 4), in the 1995 DS in all three villages (Table 5), and in the 1995-95 WS in Sukareja and Bojongjaya (Table 6). Thus, a GY response to PK application occurred in every season only in Sukareja, The level of crop response to PK fertilizers in Sukareja, however, was lower than in Karanghegar and Bojongjaya. 50Mean GY in the FFP treatment across all farms was 5.9, 4.0, and 5.1 t ha’ in the 1994-95 WS, 1995 DS, and 1995-96 WS, respectively (Tables 4-6), repeating the trend in the -F treatment of higher GY in the WS. Among villages, higher GY levels in the FFP treatment were maintained at Bojongjaya and Sukarcja than at Karanghegar. A comparison of GY between the FFP and +PK treatments indicated that GY increased with fertilizer N application at Karanghegar by 24%, 60%, and 76%, respectively, at Sukareja by 4% for all three seasons, and at Bojongjaya by 12%, 14%, and 20%, respectively. The crop response was significant in each crop cycle at Karanghegar and Bojongjaya, but in none of the crop cycles at Sukareja. Therefore, rice responded better to fertilizer application when planted in less fertile soil than in more fertile soil. However, the decrease in GY from the WS to the DS was most pronounced in the less fertile soil at Karanghegar. A nonsignificant crop response to N application in Sukareja could have been caused by large N inputs from biological N, fixation associated with significant algae growth observed there. Relationship between the INS and rate of N fertilizer application If fertilizer N rates were based on the INS, they would be negatively correlated with GY in the +PK treatment and positively correlated with the resulting GY increase. In our study, however, GY for the +PK treatment was not correlated with fertilizer N rate in the 1995 DS and only weakly negatively correlated in the 1994-95 and 1995-96 WS (Fig. 6). Similarly, GY increase resulting from {ectilizer N application was not correlated with rate of fertilizer N application in any crop cycle (Fig. 7). Although other elements besides N may contribute to the GY increase, all of these results suggested that farmers do not consider the INS when deciding their fertilizer N application rates. A comparison of fertilizer N application rates between the WS and DS also suggests inefficient fertilizer applications. Fertilizer rates should be less in the DS, given the generally lower crop response. Mean fertilizer rates, however, were comparable across both seasons for both Karanghegar and Bojongjaya, whereas fertilizer rates were actually higher in the DS than in the WS at Sukareja (Table 7), The yield increase associated with the application of fertilizer N was negatively correlated with GY in the +PK treatment in all three crop cycles (Fig. 8), although the correlation was somewhat weak in the first two crop cycles. Efficient fertilizer applications would result in a strong negative correlation. The higher the GY increase due to applied N, the less was the dependence of the rice crop on soil N. Agronomic efficiency ‘The agronomic efficiency (AE) of applied fertilizer N was low in all locations and in all crop cycles (Table 8). The highest AE values were generally in Karanghegar (less fertile) followed by Bojongjaya (moderately fertile) and Sukareja (fertile). Village mean values for the 1994-95 WS, 1995 DS, and 1995-96 WS were 10.1, 9.2, and 13.2 kg grain kg N for Karanghegar, 5.7, 5.5, and 7.1 kg grain kg" N for Bojongjaya, and 3.1, 1.3, and 3.4 kg grain kg" N for Sukareja. Normally, AE for IR64 at Sukamandi is about 25 and 22 kg grain kg" N for the WS and DS, respectively (Juliardi and Suprihatno 1993). Yoshida (1981) reported that AE for modem rice varieties grown under favorable conditions and good management in the tropics can be as high as 50 kg grain kg? N. The recovery efficiency (RE) was low, particularly at Sukareja and Bojongjaya (Table 8). It ranged from 0 to 0.21 kg N uptake kg” N applied. Typical RE values are 0.5 or more in irrigated rice systems with good management and favorable growth conditions (Cassman et al 1993). Therefore, low RE might be a major constraint to achieving higher GY. On the other hand, physiological efficiency (PE) varied tremendously in all villages from nearly zero to well beyond high values (50) that well-managed irrigated rice. Such variability indicates either that crop management stshould be improved in many farmers’ fields; widespread damage occurred from infestation of rats, weeds, or birds; or errors were made in determining GY or plant N uptake. Similar to AE, partial factor productivity for N fertilizer varied greatly among farmers. The PFP(N) was not significantly correlated with AE in any crop cycle (data not shown). Peng et al (1996) also found a lack of agreement between PFP(N) and either AE or RE, and concluded that PEP(N) was a more relevant measure of N use efficiency. Partial factor productivity is useful, particularly at the farmers’ field level, for diagnostic identification of some constraints to improving N use efficiency because it allows the distinction between indigenous soil N and applied N. Grain yield differed significantly by 1 to 2 tha" between the optimal +NPK fertilizer treatment of the on-station long-term fertility experiment (LTFE) and the optimal on-farm FFP fertilizer treatment in all three crop cycles (Table 9). Greater fertilizer N input was a significant contributor to yield increase only for the on-farm GY in the 1994-95 WS, which was also the only crop cycle when AE was greater on-farm. Despite significant GY differences between the +NPK and FFP treatments in all three crop cycles, the PFP(N) differed only in the 1995 DS. The generally low AE achieved on-farm was caused by inefficient application of high rates of N fertilizer to soils with high INS. Farmers at the experimental sites applied fertilizer N rates higher than the national recommendation, which suggests that N management could be improved to, reduce N losses and increase N uptake. Low agronomic efficiency in irrigated lowland rice systems is commonly caused by rapid N losses from the soil-floodwater system through volatilization and denitrification (De Datta and Buresh 1989). Possible ways of increasing AE are improved timing and placement of fertilizer application, and formulation of applied N (Cassman et al 1995). Most farmers at Karanghegar and Bojongjaya apply high rates of fertilizer N to achieve high yields. They do not worry about the expense of buying pesticides or fertilizers, especially urea. ‘They expect higher grain yields than in the previous seasons. The performance of standing rice crops, such as number of tillers and incidence of rat or insect damage, is used as a criterion of crop management. They do not realize that continually high N fertilizer applications may create imbalances in soil nutrient availability. Consequently, soil quality may decline and tice production will decrease accordingly. Both AE and PFP(N) varied greatly between farmers, sites, and soil types. A lack of synchrony between crop N demand and N supply from both the INS and applied fertilizer contributed to low AE. Grain yield appeared to vary among seasons as a function of crop management. Although the farmers used solely urea tablets to increase N use efficiency and reduce N fertilizer application, they did not fully succeed in doing so. Acknowledgment The authors are grateful for IRRI’s supporting budget and to the farmers in Karanghegar, Sukareja, and Bojongjaya who participated in this project. We also acknowledge the help and guidance of Dr. Daniel Olk and Mr. Greg Simbahan in data analysis. Finally, special thanks go to Dr. KG. Cassman for his idea to initiate this project. 52References Bray RH, Kurtz CT. 1945. Determination of total, organic, and available forms of P in the soils. Soil Sci. 59:39-45. Bremner JM, Mulvaney CS. 1982. Nitrogen-total. In: Page AL, Miller RH, Keeney DR, editors. Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. 2nd ed. Madison (Wisconsin): Am. Soc. Agron. p 595-624. Cassman KG, Kropff MJ, Gaunt J, Peng S. 1993. Nitrogen use efficiency of rice reconsidered: what are the key constraints? Plant Soil 155 /156:359-362. Cassman KG, De Datta SK, Olk DC, Alcantara J, Samson M, Descalsota J, Dizon M. 1995. Yield decline and the nitrogen economy of long-term experiments on continuous, irrigated rice systems in the tropics. In: Lal R, Stewart BA, editors. Soil management: experimental basis for sustainability and environmental quality. Boca Raton (Florida): CRC/Lewis Publishers. p 181- 22. Cassman KG, Dobermann A, Sta. Cruz PC, Gines HC, Samson MI, Descalsota JP, Alcantara JM, Dizon MA, Olk DC. 1996a. Soil organic matter and the indigenous nitrogen supply of intensive irrigated rice systems in the tropics. Plant Soil 182:267-278. Cassman KG, Gines HC, Dizon MA, Samson MI, Alcantara JM. 19960. Nitrogen-use efficiency in tropical lowland rice systems: Contributions from indigenous and applied nitrogen. Field Crops Res. 47:1-12. De Datta SK, Buresh RJ. 1989. Integrated nitrogen management in irrigated rice. Adv. Agron. 10:143-169. Dolmat MT, Patrick WH, Peterson F]. 1980. Relation of available soil nitrogen to rice yield. Soil Sci. 129:229-237 [IRRI] International Rice Research Institute. 1993. Program report for 1992. Manila (Philippines): IRRI. 316 p. [IRRI] International Rice Research Institute. 1994, Program report for 1993. Manila (Philippines): IRRI. 317 p. Ismunadji, Sudjadi, 1983, Soil problem and rice production. In: Problems and research results on rice. CRIFC, Bogor. (In Indonesian.) Juliardi 1, Suprihatno. 1993. Fffect of briquette and liquid urea application on yield of IR64 on Ultisol Sukamandi. Reflektor 6: 31-38. (In Indonesian.) Peng S, Garcia FV, Gines HC, Laza RC, Samson MI, Sunico AL, Visperas RM, Cassman KG. 1996. Nitrogen use efficiency of irrigated tropical rice established by broadcast wet-seeding and transplanting, Fert. Res. 45:123-134. Ponnamperuma FN, 1977. The behavior of minor elements in paddy soil. IRRI Research Paper 9. Manila (Philippines): IRRL ‘Supardi G. 1984. The relationship between organic matter and liming on soil properties and soybean or corn growth. Technical agricultural meeting. Yogyakarta. (In Indonesian.) Suyamto H, Basir A, Suwono. 1990. The long-term fertilizer experiment on lowland rice. In: Research on fertilizer and variety of lowiand rice for supporting rice self-sufficiency. MARIF, Malang, (In Indonesian.) 53Tedjasarwana R, Rochmat, Guswara A. 1995. The long-term NPK fertilization on lowland rice. Paper presented at the RIR weekly seminar, Sukamandi. (In Indonesian.) ‘Toriyama K, Sekiya SI. 1991. A method of forecasting the nitrogen release pattern of paddy soils for the fertilizer management of rice plants. In: Soil management for sustainable rice production in the tropics. International Board for Soil Research and Management. [BSRAM Monograph no. 2, Bangkok, Thailand, p 287-302, Watanabe FS, Olsen SR. 1965. Test of an ascorbic acid method for determining phosphorus in water and NaHCO, extracts from soil. Soil Sci, Soc. Am. Proc. 29:677-678. Yoshida S. 1981. Fundamentals of rice erop science. Manila (Philippines): IRRI. 269 p. Notes Authors’ addresses: S. Abdulrachman and |. Juliardi, Research Institute for Rice, Sukamandi, Subang, West Java, Indonesia; A.M. Fagi, Director, Central Research Institute for Food Crops, Jalan Merdeka 147, Bogor 16111, Indonesia. Citation: Olk DC, Moya PF, editors. 1998, On-farm management of applied inputs and native soil fertility. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 23. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 212 p.Table 1. Comparison of grain yields in - treatment plots between seasons, RIR, Indonesia. Grain yield in - plot kg hay Difference Village TOES WS 1995 DS 1995-96 WS 1995 WS vs. 96 WS_WS va DS Karanghegar Mean Wee Tb —_77e 17 1392 sD 664 248 498 Sukareja Mean Sea -3887a 87a meee ggg ee sD 327 765 374 Bojongjaya Mean 4964 36860 BBL 123 716 sD 476 520 824 All farms Mean 4887 2919 3615 wre asset sD Bil 1051 1203 762 764 Minimum 3125 L131 1523 Maximum. 200 4025 5466, Within a season, village means FOTSWEC By the same Teter are nor Significantly diferent atthe 5% evel by TSD. ‘a significant al 5% "significant at 1%, ‘Table 2. Mean soil characteristics and standard deviations for the on-farm monitoring plots. Samples were taken before transplanting, RIR, Indonesia, 1994-85 wet season. Sor ‘Karanghegar Sukareya Bojongjaya characteristics Units Latosol Podsolie Alluvial Total nitrogen BRE sol 104 2 0.05 2A7 = 006 25 = 0.08 Olsen's P* mg kg! soil 15.1205 140206 123207 Bray P* mg kg* soil 4.40 = 0.26 3.072017 3.200.283 Extractable K cemol kg! soil 0.23 = 0.01 0.60 = 0.02 0.67 2 002 Measured by the manOUs oF Watanabe and Olsen (TIS) Measured by the methods of Bray and Kurts (1845). ‘Table 3._ Comparison of mean grain yields in -F and +PK plots, RIR, Indonesia. Grain yields (kha) “SPR pIe plat Ditters Village Season Karanghegar 199495 WS BS 074 a0 1995 DS 2077 1734 ua 1995-96 WS 2612 277 435° ‘Sukareja 1994-95 WS 037 5623 aa" 1995 DS 3572 3337 236* 1995-96 WS 5189) 4827 362" Bojongjaya 1994.95 WS 5213 4964 249 1995 DS 4417 3686 731 1995-96 WS 4353 3841 512" All farms 1991.95 WS 5265 4887 37a 1995 DS 3356 zis a7 1995-96 WS 4051 3615 43604 = signifi at, = Significant at 1%, = agRUCaNT ae OT 55Table 4. Mean grain yields by village for the -F, +PK, and FFP treatments and the yield response to applied fertilizers at three villages, RIR, Indonesia, 1994-95 wet season. Fertilizer Grain yield (kg ha") ‘Yield response Village treatment _n* Meant Min. Max “Mean Min. Wax Raranghegar—-F 0 074 «3125 aE = = 4PK 10 45156 3518, 5713 470 16 1030 FP 10 56554 4904 7072 1581 601 2942 Root MSE! = 455, CV = 10 Sukareja - 10 5623 5199 6260 . : : 4PK 10 07a 5699 6650 44 319 1075 FFP 10 23a 5618 7066 639 138 1466 Root MSE = 407, CV =7 Bojongjaya =F 10 4964 3735, 5421 - : - 4K 10 52136 4135, 5765 249 “61 513 FFP 10 5860a 5368 6475 896 294 1633 Root MSE = 423, CV = 8 Allvillages -F 30 48873125 6260 : e 2 +K 30 52653518 6650 378 319 1073 FE 30 5926 4904 7072 1039 138 2042 *No- oF ariners Telds with three replicate plow in each We Within a village, mean grain yields followed by the same leter are not significantly different using LSD at §% lovel, LSD not possible because of significant village x teatment term “Root MSE, coefficient of variation from mixed model aralysis of variance foreach village Table5. Mean grain yields by village for the -F, +PK, and FFP treatments and the yield response to applied fertilizers at three villages, RIR, Indonesia, 1995 dry season. Fertilizer Grain yield (kg ha") ‘Yield response lage treatment _nt Mean’ Min. Max. Mean Min. Max Karanghegar_-F 0 Tae 1131 3 = = = +PK 10 277b = «15273225, 38 76 e72 FR 10 3333a 3121 3558 1599 137 2099 Root MSE* = 187, CV =8 Sukareja F 10 3337b 119 4267 E z +PK 10 3572a 2281 4760 236 258 m4 Fr 10 s7a 2378 4673 370 “9 1135 Root MSE = 162, CV = 5 Bojongiaya = -F 10 3686¢ 2579 4625 - : : 4PK 10 47b 3314 5626 731 73 2081 FP 10 50a 3986 6100 1336 a2 2314 Root MSE = 256,CV = 6 Allvillages FP 30 2919 131 4625 E Z : +PK 30 3356 1527 5626 437 -258 2081 FEP 30 4021 2376 6100 1102 69 2514 Noo farmers’ Fels with three replicate plots in each Feld "Within a village, mean grain yields followed by the same letter are not significantly diferent using LSD at 5% level LSD not possible because of sigrufican village x treatment term, ‘Root MSE, cooificient of variation from mixed model analysis o! variance foreach village.Table 6. Mean grain yields by village for the -F, +PK, and FFP treatments and the yield response to applied fertilizers at three villages, RIR, Indonesia, 1995.96 wet season, Fertilizer “Grain yield (kg ha") “Yield response Village __treatment__nt “Mean? Min, ‘Wax. (ean fin. Karanghegar— -F 0 78 1523 0 - = PK 10 2612b 16404057 495 13 1415 FFP 10 46050 40195155 282715003632 Root MSE!'=277, CV =9 Sukareja - 10 4827b 4922 3466 = = + PK 10 5189a 44175913, 362 “161058 FP 10 539047586403 363 2 1226 Root MSE = 344, CV =7 Bojongiaya -F 10 B8ile 30364826 E 7 : 4+PK 10 4353 b ‘3157 5736 512 4 1291 FFP 10 52102 489959591360 5541928 Root MSE = 242, CV =5 Allvillages 20 36S 123565 2 s “PK 30 4051 16405913, 436 46 is FEP___30 5069 40496031453 623632 "Naot Tormners Telds wath thice replicate plow in each HONE 'Within a village, mean grain yields followed by the same letter are not significantly diferent using LSD at 5% level LSD not possible because of significant village x treatment frm. *Root MSE, coeffcket of variation from mixed mode analysis of vaclance for each village. ‘Table 7. Nitrogen fertilizer rates applied by farmers in the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment, RIR, Indonesia. Nitrogen fertilizer rate (kg ha) Village 1984-95 WS 1995 DS___ 1995-96 WS Karanghegar Tea 154 155.4 Sukareja PA 123.1 749 Bojongjaya 124 1208 1427, ‘Table 8. Agronomic efficiency (AE), recovery efficiency (RE), physiological efficiency PE), and partial factor productivity for N fertilizer [PFP(N)], RIR, Indonesia a A SV Ta Raragghegar 198858 WS 101 17 sad 1995 DS 92 0.196 464 2d 1995.96 WS 13.2 0.242 634 29.6 Sukareja 1994-95 WS 34 0.128 361 81.0 1995 DS 13 0.033 340 30.9 1995.96 WS 34 0.102 122 73.8 Bojongjaya 1994-95 WS 57 0.124 72 50.5 1995 DS 33 0.167 325 45.1 1995-96 WS 7 0.202 33.1 38.9 ‘akg grain FN erilizer applied. ‘akg crop Nuptake kg! N fertilizer applied. “akg grain Akg” crop N uptake. "The ratio of total gran yield to fortilizor N rate applied to the FFP treatment. 37Table 9, Comparison of grain yield, N fertilizer rate, agronomic efficiency (AE), and partial factor productivity {PFP(N)] of N fertilizer between the on-station +NPK treatment and the on-farm farmer's fertilizer practice treatment for three crop cycles. Onfarn New LTFE Parameters Units (rrr) GNPK) Ditference 1954-95 wet season Grain yield kgha* 7467 5925 1542 N fertilizer rate kghat 140 108 2s AE kg grain kg" fert N 163 63 100 * PEP(N) kg grain kg" fert N 533 02 68 ns 1995 dry season Grain yield kg ha" 3014 4020 1006s N fertilizer rate kgha" 140 120 10 ns AE kg grain kg" fert N 52 53 01 ns PEP(N) kg grain kg" fert N us 334 9“ 1995.95 wet season Grain yield kg ha" 7084 5068 2016 N fertilizer rate kghat 140 130 10 ne AE kg grain kg" fert N 92 79 13 1s PFP(N) rain kg’ fert N 506 474 32 5S sgnificantal 1%, *°= Significant al 01%, ns = NOP sgRTACANEGrain yes (tha) 1 9425 at eon * > wate x ‘ose °, ’ : . 2 ee om : vi 7) eee oso . y ot s “ oe v vm ' vr ] Vetere oou” a] aoe y s v ‘ o-* O wm ' vor | — > 8 6 6 © mw Total W uptake (kg ha) Fig. 1. Relationship between grain yield and total N uptake at maturity, on-farm monitoring, RIR, Indonesia.Grain yield in -F ueatment (t ha*) 6 5 . a <8 . a4 . oe a4 oe . © . . .e 14 ° T T 10 13 16 19 2 25, Soil organic carbon (g kg) Fig. 2. Relationship between grain yield in the -F treatment and soil organic carbon, on-farm monitoring, RIR, Indonesia, 1995-96 wet season. Grain yield in -F treatment (t ha) 6 5 . . . . ove J 34 ee Py. a ° + 1 + 1 1 12 14 16 18 2 ‘Total soil nitrogen (g kg") Fig.3. Relationship between grain yield in the -F treatment and total soil nitrogen, on-farm monitoring, RIR. Indonesia, 1995-96 wet season.Grain yield in -F treatment (¢ ha") 7 20160200240 280 3860200, N\ fertilizer applied (kg ne*) in yield (1995-96 WS) in the -F treatment in relation to total N fertilizer applied in farmer's treatment during the previous two seasons (1994-95 WS & 1995 DS), RIR, Indonesia,Grain yield in +PK treatment (t ha) ° é (a) 9495 Wer season - of Fetes So 780% (0) 9596 wet season ef Y208e Tore Grain yleld in -F treatment (¢ ha%) Fig.5. Relationship between grain yields in the -Fand +PK treatments, on-farm monitoring, RIR, Indonesia,N fertilizer rate (ke ha 4) (sags wersonon Yeig x soa" 290 (9500 season es = aa - , fee ‘0 oe . ‘0. > Se Grain yield in +PK treatment (t ha") Fig. 6. Nitrogen fertilizer rate applied by farmers to the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment in relation to grain yield in the +PK plot, RIR, Indonesia 63Yield increase with N fertilizer (t ha*) (0) 2695 wet seson . s « . ° (0) 95 Dy season froze ° ee ‘ . ° as (c) 95:96 wor season . roa 3 x eo. eo 08 te. . <3 . . . of 2 ° sO OOO NN fertiizer rate (kg ha) Fig. 7. Yield response to applied N fertilizer in relation to rate of N fertilizer applied to the farmer’s fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment, RIR, Indonesia,Yield increase with N fertilizer (t na”) 94.98 Wet season reas : (2295 09 aveson Yeteae- 020% : sates Grain yield in +PK treatment (kg ha) Fig.8, Yield response to applied N fertilizer in relation to grain yield in the +PK treatment, RIR, Indonesia.Yield response and indigenous soil N supply in intensive irrigated rice systems in the Cauvery Delta of Tamil Nadu R. Nagarajan, P. Muthukrishnan, P. Stalin, and T.B. Ranganathan An underlying assumption in field studies of N use efficiency is that N taken up by the rice plant can be partitioned as coming from either applied fertilizer N or the inherent capacity of the soil to supply N. ‘The indigenous soil N supply (INS) must therefore be quantified so that the amountand rate of total N supply, including that from applied fertilizer, matches crop N demand. A simple measure of INS is the amount of plant N uptake in unfertilized plots under otherwise favorable growth conditions. In our study, unfertilized (F) plots were established in 24-30 farmers’ fields. Their grain yield (GY) was highly correlated with total N uptake (r= 0.82, P0,001), allowing the use of GY in unfertilized plots asa reasonable index of INS. rain yield in the -F plots varied greatly among farmers. Nitrogen uptake and GY were not significantly correlated with total oil N or soil organic C, although these parameters are often considered as indices of soil N availability. Because of the variability in the INS, afield-specific approach is required to optimize the efficiency and profitability of applied N; blanket regional recommendations thatare presently provided cannotaccommodate this variability. Introduction The demand for more and better food to meet the needs of constantly increasing populations puts considerable pressure on agricultural lands. A major problem in modern agriculture is the decline in yield which occurs when the same crop is grown continuously on the same piece of land. Sustainability of irrigated rice systems has been the subject of numerous debates, particularly centering around the question of whether there is a yield or total factor productivity decline (Flinn and De Datta 1984, Cassman and Harwood 1995, Cassman and Pingali 1995, Byerlee 1992, Sankaram 1996). Using results from long-term experiments during the past 30 yr, trends in soil quality and yields have been described for the major intensive rice-based cropping systems in India (Nambiar 1994, Nambiar and Abrol 1989, Nagarajan et al 1996). The causes of declining yields or productivity are complex and still not fully understood. At the IRRI Research Farm, Cassman et al (1995) concluded that the causes of a yield decline in several long-term experiments were associated with a decrease in the effective N supply from soil although the total soil N remained constant or increased. Little attention has been given to factors other than N supplying capacity and soil N balance. These factors may also contribute to sustaining yields in a continuous irrigated rice system. In consideration of these knowledge gaps, especially under on-farm conditions, the IRRI- sponsored Mega Project was established at the Tamil Nadu Rice Research Institute. This project seeks to establish long-term productivity trends both on-farm and on-station through measurement of grain yield and all crop production inputs. The results presented here summarize project activities.Materials and methods General site information ‘The Tamil Nadu Rice Research Institute is located in Aduthurai, Tamil Nadu, India (79°08, ALON, 19.4 masl). The project site is typical of the Cauvery Delta Zone (CDZ), which is one of seven agroclimatic zones of Tamil Nadu. The important cropping systems are rice-rice-fallow, rice-rice-pulses, rice-rice-cotton, and rice-rice-gingelly (sesame). The climate of the CDZ is tropical monsoon (Table 1). There are two main rice-growing seasons: kuruvai (Jun-Sep) and thaladi (Oct-Feb). In solar radiation and total precipitation, the kuruvai resembles a dry season and the thaladi a wet season, but because the pattern of precipitation is not always predictable ‘we shall retain here the terms kuruvai and thaladi seasons. The temperature regime is favorable during the kuruvai season and cool during the thaladi season. The rainfall is of less than 4-mo duration. The kuruvai season crop enjoys long daylength, but during the thaladi season daylength is reduced The soils of the CDZ are classified into the Kalathur, Adanur, Padugai, and Alangudi series. Project activities were conducted on the Kalathur, Adanur, and Padugai series. Their subgroup F Location Z 313 T Be ca Farm (location) 25 1980.9 36 552 4.33 0.0001 Rep*farm (location) 56 1639 4 29 1.46 0.0462 ‘Treatment 2 14205 7 7102 2073 Location x treatment 4 154 0 38 eT Farm'treatment (location) 50 591.6 6 us 5.90 0.0001 Residual 112 2247 6 20 Total 251 3848.1 No of farmers Teds with Ue replicate plows in each IG Within a taluk and acrossailtaluks (all sites), mean grain yields followed by the same leter are not significantly different at 5% by LSD. “Root mean square error (MSE), coefficient of variation (CV) from mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA) for each taluk. 78Table 6. Ranges by taluk in grain yield and yield response to N fertilizer applications for the-F, +PK, and farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment, TNRRI, India, 1995 kuruvai (DS). Grain yield (kg ha") Yield response Taluk Treatment ot Mean’ Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Kumbakonam F 53848 «3409 4363 - = = +PK 5401036625372. 73 W178 FFP 5 6988.a_ 315.7540 805119223627 CV" 568, root MSE = 285 Mayiladuthural = -F 5 | 4BBb 322 SAD : : : wK «5 418K 30675280. 54 A715 FFP 5 S351a 3769 632K MB 148 CV =827, root MSE = 380 Thiruvidaimaruthur -F 12 | 8756b 258) 5040 . 2 F 4K 12 3965b 21805671 209 © 430946 FFP 12 617%a_—-4023,—= 7147, 24209633987 CV = 817, root MSE =379 All sites + 2" 38862580 S22 ? : 2 WK 22 4161215071 275-471 1728 FFP 2261343769 7540-2028 4B_ (3087 Mixed model ANOVA for grain yield =a Sum oF squares ————— sv. at “S510 Wor ta _ MS (x10) Fevalue _Pr>F Location z S25 T 23 ad Farm (location) 1 10834 30 57.0 659 0.0001 Rep*farm (location) 4 AS 2 17 130 0.1473, Troatment 2 18584 51 929.2 19.04 0128 Location x treatment 4 1497 4 374 457 0.0082 Farm*treatment (location) 37 3029 8 82 628 0.0001 Residual 86 1122 3 13 Total 1436338 {Nis of farmers Welds with three replicate plow in each Feld ‘within a taluk, mean grain yields followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% by LSD. Comparison of mean {grin yields across all talks was not done because of signifcant Location by Treatment interaction. ‘Root mean square error (MSE), coefficient of variation (CY) from mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA) for each taluk 76Table7. Rangesby taluk in grain yield and yield response toN fertilizer applications for the -F, +PK, and. farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment, TNRRI, India, 1995-96 thaladi (WS). Grain yield (kg ha) Yield response: Min, M Mean Min. Max. Taluk Treatment a” Mean’ a. Kumbakonam F @ dle 2965 6060 4K 6 4870b 30589 724 3321870 FP 6 6768a 5183. 88S 2622132238 CVF = 7.16, root MSE =377 Mayiladuthurat = -F 7 3824e 4076180 4PK 74122 20006577 298 1 599 FP 7 S71 3386 7997198875753 48, root MSE = 342 ‘Thirwvidaimacuthur -F 4081c 23805833, +PK 4499 26875818 418-201-889 FEP 95a 5617510168 02, oot MSE = 353 All sites 4031c 14076180 28 = 4484b © 20006577, 453 -392—1870 28 870a 3386 800S MOTT Mixed model ANOVA for grain yield _ Sumi of squares sv ai SS(€10}) Hoftoral MS(x10) Fvalue _Pr>F Tocation z 1510 3 755 i Farm (location) % 29154. 917 Bal 6.0001 Rep*farm (location) 56 135, 2 20 161 0.0174 ‘Treatment 2 2586.1 4 1208.1 196.14 0.0085 Location x treatment 4 292 1 73 al Farm*treatment (location) 50 4820 8 96 764 6.0001 Residual 12 uit 2 13 Total 251___—57948 Ris of farmers Teles with Three replicate plots in each TRE ‘Within a taluk and across all taluk (all sites), mean grain yields followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% by LSD, Root mean square error (MSE), coeificient of variation (CV) from mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA) for each taluk.Table 8._Comparison of grain yields in-F treatment between seasons, TNRRI, India. “Grain yield in-F plot (kg ha") ‘Diiference between Farm WET Slant SSAA eS ihalad’ 19Skuruvei 1995-WGthaladi —199ESthaladi —‘Thaladivs vs 1095.96thaladi —_kuruvai I sa SF Ti 2 3 4958 4 4393 3390 3004 5 4a 6 4317 6000 “1683 7 5358 3409 4495, 923 “1488 8 4179 3491 2965 14 81 5266 4328 4584 683 397 5775 2690 3146 5102 4836 4737 365 84 2488 4497 3156 968 1525 3877 3212 407 2469 570 4285 6180 “1895 3422 3990 568 5859 5222 4365, 1194 260 5433 3895 9B 505 “1285 5635 3041 3940 1695 a7 2718 2812 94 5487 7 3137 4533 356 -1218 5085 2847 4158 927 “1774 4217 4498 “21 3341 4929 -1588 4133 4725 5833 “1700 258, 4164 3559 3812, 353 429 5020 3884 4604 4917 -1003 204 5697 4826 4519 1178 281 5446 5040 4207 1239 214 4719 2580 2884 1835 “1222 4588 2380 2208 3345 4100 2924 a2 966 4637 3886 4031 455 285 825 806 118 1997 901 28 2 28 4 2 2488.0 2980.0 1407.3 71895 “774 5753 5222.0 61800 3146 1525 1.59 =1.48 244 0.1262 78Table 9. Fertilizer application rates in the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment, TNRRI, India, 1994.95 thaladi (WS). —___Fertilizerapplication rates Farm Ee S$ — (kg ha) (kg ha") (kg ha") 8 T 2 125.2 o4 S48. 3 M410 253 38 4 1292 188 65 5 975, 182 39 6 04 263 233 7 1488 37.9 00 8 101.2 20 408 9 55 253 00 10 $3.2 139 553 n 669 288 308 2 1131 202 957 B 3 25.0 50.0 or 1354 187 910 5 708 41 387 16 1665 253 615 7 1950 25.3 93.0 18 856 176 148 rt 995, 138 440 2 108.0 220 246 21 2226 25.3 es 2 1071 249 60.6 B 903 94 37a 28 80.0 25.3 222 35 1375 253 185, 26 1375 253 39.4 7 1022 35.2 33.3 28 1488 379 00 29 1190 253. SH 30 952 326 00‘Table 10. Fertilizer application rates in the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment, TNRRI India, 1995 kuruvai (DS). ‘application rates i ae Farm (kg ha?) (kg ha?) (kg ha?) a 2 113.9 294 146 3 106.3 303 28 4 273 324 BB. 5 1248 37.2 00 6 1184 200 19.8 7 140.5 26.0 00 8 116.7 00 0.0 9 66.3, 16.0 107 10 105.7 244 aut n 655 45 472 R 69.3, 103 353 1B 85.6 219 25.7 u 1585 18.4 35.0 6 168.9 10.0 525 16 197 144 655 v7 1347 25.0 474 18 142.5 18.9 25 vp 113.2 3 644 20 142.3 262 925, 2 123.9 24.6 733 22 804 34.8 345 2B 93.9 142 176 24 77 82 116 25 123.6 218 93.1 26 1236 285 00 27 107.5 143 46.0 23. 158.9 us 87.6‘Table 11. Fertilizer application rates in the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment, "TNRRI. India, 1995-96 thaladi (WS). = ye aS Farm (kg ha) (kg ha") (kg ha’) 7 i546 23 302 2 105.1 368 00 3 59.1 137 55.5 4 83.4 379 42 5 137.5 23 0.0 6 151.3 241 73.2 7 85.2 253 00 8 724 Ba 404 9 97.4 126 46.1 10 52.2 98 18.2 n 82.4 10 80.1 2 815 190 36.8 B 90.4 187 85.3 u 179.6 44 “7 15 134.3 101 519 16 169.5 16 60.0 v 178.9 198 54.9 18 101.1 25.0 46.0 19 79.4 233 18.7 2 195.0 253 923 2 703 35 30.9 2 138.3 278 74.2 B 108.5 23 30.7 24 89.6 182 822 rs 121 176 308 26 1240 18.7 or) 7 1758.7 127 00 28 119.3 121Grain yield (1 ha) 8 © somata © sku a ¥ sssomaia T T T T T 40 60 80 400 120 Total N uptake (kg hat) Fig. 1. Relationship between grain yield and total N uptake at maturity in the -F treatment, on-farm. monitoring, TNRRI India.Grain yield (t ha) vm s vee +f) 26 Kee 9 | WiEet ecto Total N uptake (kg ha?) Fig. 2. Relationship between grain yield and total N uptake at maturity in the -F, +PK, and farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP), on-farm treatments, INRRI, India. 83Grain yield in +P treatment (t ha) (9495 Tato! 5) 64 Vite Verve Worse ) 95 Kura (0S) edaae 108174 (619596 raisa (ws) o | Yeates Foasix <2 Grain yield in -F treatment (t ha) Fig. 3. Relationship between grain yields in the -F and +P treatments, on-farm monitoring, TNRRI, India.Grain yield (t ha?) 7 & . s & . . $8 “oO eOe . ¥ woe a 7 2 , sos r-000 1 © sat +9067 ¥ socsserte 000 o T T 8 a 0 2 Soil organic carbon (g kg") 1” TNRRI, India. Fig. 4a, Relationship between grain yield in the -F treatment and soil organic carbon, on-farm monitoring, Grain yield (t ha) 7 6 . er = "se so 5 : ° 2 8 Rhy ? g 4 * ae ot yo "8g 0 8 3 3 "yB Fo 2 © s00t 96 raat 12023" . 4] 0 1995 at 1-038 ¥ iseszertena (008 o T T 07 os 08 10 14 Total soll nitrogen (g ke*) 12 Fig. 4b, Relationship between grain yield in the-F treatment and total soil nitrogen, on-farm monitoring, TNRRI, India.Groin yield in -F trostment (t ha) 7 sy . . , . . . é . 44 7 . 34 . . a 24 . 1 + 7 1 7 i 120 160 200-240 280 320 860400 N ferilizer epplied (hg ha) Grain yield in the-F treatment during the 1995-96 Thaladi (WS) crop in relation to total N fertilizer applied during the previous two (1995 Kuruvai é& 1994-95 Thaladi) seasons, on-farm monitoring, ‘TTNRRI, India.Grain yield from harvest area (t ha) (0) 9495 tata (5) sof Videos 10) I Oster 4 ‘ ° ‘ 2 — 228 338 zt ta 6 8 © @ 2 (09596 Nova ws) / | 104 Sate Vowear Pa 6 4 . 2 8 BO UB UR Groin yield from components of yield (t ha) Fig. 6. Relationship between grain yield from the components of yield and grain yield from the grain harvest area, TNRRI, India41,000-grain weight from harvest area (2) 2s (0) 9495 aot Ws) Vebare Dare 234 forsee a 28 (b) 95 Kura (05) nd Than caoe Nobaee ” 0 ” 16. 3 7 US 2 VeSaerornn 2s a . . 4 2 1 " ae — se e — a8 18. is 7 au Ba a 1,000 -grain weight from yield components (g) Fig.7. Relationship between 1,000-grain weight from the components of yield and 000-grain weight from the grain harvest area, TNRRI, Indie.Nitrogen use efficiency in relation to the indigenous nitrogen supply in intensive irrigated rice systems of the Cauvery Delta Zone, Tamil Nadu R. Nagarajan, P. Muthukrishnan, P. Stalin, and T.B, Ranganathan Partial factor productivity of N fertilizer [PFP(N)] includes the contributions to N use efficiency (NUE) from both indigenous N and applied N. Both N pools iwere monitored in farmers’ fields near the Tamil Nadu Rice Research Institute. Enormous variation was found in the indigenous N supply (INS) among farmers’ fields as indicated by the wide variation in grain yield in plots lacking fertilizer N input. Fertilizer N rates applied by farmers in the surrounding farmer's fertilizer practice treatment also varied markedly, but there was no relationship between fertilizer rates and the INS. Likewise, in the on-station long-term fertility experiment, seasonal variations in the contributions of INS and fertilizer N to plant N uptake were also observed. Because of the significant variation in INS between farmers’ fields and the lack of farmers’ perception of the INS in formulating N fertilizer rates, physiological efficiency, recovery efficiency, and agronomic efficiency were generally low and PFP(N) varied greatly among farmers’ fields. These results suggested that the ability to adjust the quantity of applied N in relation to variation in the INS is of primary importance in increasing PFF(N) and other NUE terms. Field-specific N management is required to respond to variation in the INS, and PFP(N) isa useful parameter in identifying constraints to improved fertilizer NUE in farmers’ fields. Introduction ‘Among plant nutrients, N is the most important for rice production. It is projected that rice yields on irrigated land must average 8 t ha to meet the expected increase in demand from population growth by 2025. This will account for nearly 20 million t of inorganic fertilizers if fertilizer N use efficiency remains at 33% (Cassman and Pingali 1995). This represents a threefold increase in fertilizer N inputs. A major issue in achieving optimum N fertilization for irrigated lowland rice systems is the difficulty of predicting the amount of N made available through mineralization. Most soil N is in organic form and is not directly available to the plant. Mineralization of organic N in flooded soils supplies the major portion (50-80%) of total N taken up by a rice crop and is therefore the most important pathway for making N available for plant growth (Broadbent 1979, Koyama 1981). ‘Many attempts have been made in the recent past to improve fertilizer N use efficiency through appropriate management of N inputs to reduce N losses and increase plant N uptake. This was achieved by previous research on improved timing. placement, and formulation of N fertilizers (De Datta et al 1988, Shoji and Gandeza 1992) or fertilizer amendment with nitrification or urease inhibitors (Buresh et al 1988, Chaiwanakupt et al 1995). Apart from research on management of fertilizer N, however, litle attention was given to increasing the capture of indigenous N from the soil-floodwater system for supply to the crop. ‘Currently, research and extension systems provide blanket N fertilizer recommendations without taking into consideration any variation in the indigenous soil N supply (INS) among farmers’ fields in a perticular region in India. This could lead to mismatching of N supply and crop N demand if the INS varied significantly among farmers’ fields. Adjusting fertilizer N rates according to INS, applying N fertilizer in several splits, and better timing of split applications according to plant N demand all appear to be more promising as strategies for increasing NUE and reducing N leaching losses (Cassman et al 1996, Bhagat et al 1988).In this study, we determined the ranges for our study area in the partial factor productivity of N [PEP(N)] and other NUE terms for rice production as related to the INS, which is defined as plant N uptake in plots where fertilizer N is not applied and where shortages of other nutrients, diseases, pests, or water do not limit yields. The PFP(N) is a useful index for diagnosing constraints to improved NUE because it reflects both agronomic efficiency and the balance between the INS and applied N. Materials and methods Details of the field experimental sites, weather data during the kuruvai (dry) and thaladi (wet) seasons, and soil physicochemical properties for both the on-farm monitoring experiments and the on-station long-term fertility experiment (LTFE) are found in Nagarajan et al (p 72 of this publication). Nagarajan et al and Section I of this publication also describe the procedure for obtaining grain yield (GY) and N uptake data in the on-farm unfertilized (F), +PK, and farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment plots and the fertilizer treatment plots of the LTFE. Data were collected in the 1994- 95 thaladi, 1995 kuruvai, and 1995-96 thaladi crop cycles. These data were used to assess physiological efficiency (PE), recovery efficiency (RE), agronomic efficiency (AE), and PFP(N) as described by Cassman et al (1996). Results On-farm experiments ‘As described by Nagarajan et al (same publication), a close correlation between crop N uptake and GY allows the use of GY as an index of the INS. Furthermore, both plant N uptake and GY in unfertilized plots varied considerably in our study atea. If farmers considered the INS in determining their N fertilizer rates in the FFP treatment plots, the fertilizer rates should be negatively correlated to the INS and positively correlated to the yield response to applied N fertilizer. However, neither relationship was significant in our study when the INS was defined as GY in the +PK treatment plots and yield response was calculated as the difference in GY between the FFP and +PK treatments (Figs. 1, 2). Further, the yield response to applied N fertilizer was not correlated with GY in the +PK treatment in two of the three crop cycles, with only a weak correlation in the 1995-96 thaladi crop (Fig. 3). The absence of a strong negative correlation suggests again that farmers are not basing their N fertilizer rates on the INS to achieve high GY. All NUE indices varied greatly among farmers and crop cycles and were generally low. The RE ranged from 0.12 to 1.07, 0.13 to 0.67, and 0.27 to 1.08 kg N uptake kg N applied in the 1994-95 thaladi, 1995 kuruvai, and 1995.9 thaladi seasons, respectively (Table 1). Variation in PE was proportionately even greater, ranging from 2.5 to 58.6, 10.4 to 54.8, and 8.0 to 61.0 kg grain kg? N uptake in the three crop cycles, respectively. A PE of 50 kg ha* is typical of modem rice varieties grown under favorable conditions with good management (Yoshida 1981). The AE ranged from 05 to 59.5, 2.2 to 36.5, and 2.4 to 48.7 kg grain kg! N applied in the three crop seasons, respectively (Table 1). It is normally possible to achieve an AE of 24-33 kg grain kg N applied in tropical lowland rice (Peng et al 1996). However, the AE was suboptimal in most of the farmers’ fields in all seasons in this study. 90‘The most relevant measure of NUE is the PFP(N), since it is an integrative measure of efficiency that quantifies the total value of output supported by the combined N supply from both the INS and fertilizer inputs as related to fertilizer N rate. Therefore PFP(N) is a function of both the yield supported by INS and yield increase resulting from applied N (agronomic efficiency), which is in turn the product of the RE and PE. Because of the significant variation in INS between farmers’ fields at each site and the lack of farmers’ perception on the INS in formulating N fertilizer rates, the PFP(N) varied greatly between farmers’ fields in the present investigation. Ranges were 27.4 to 103.8, 19.9 to 82.6, and 30.2 to 123.9 kg grain kg! N applied for the three crop cycles, respectively (Table 1). AE is one component term of the PFP(N); the other component is the ratio of the INS (GY in the +PK treatment) to fertilizer N rate. This ratio ranged from 15.1 to 76.4, 106 to 643, and 15.3 to 103.5 kg grain kg" N applied in the three crop cycles, respectively (Table 1). Both the magnitude of the INS and its variation among farmers’ fields were greater than the magnitude and variation in AE. AE decreased with the increasing ratio of INS to fertilizer N rate (data not shown). AE and PEP(N) were positively correlated in all three crop cycles (Fig, 4). 1N use efficiency in the long-term fertility experiment Mean GY in the NPK treatment of the LTFE was 7584, 6999, and 6452 kg ha” in the 1994-95 thaladi, 1995 kuruvai, and 1995-96 thaladi crop seasons, respectively, compared with mean GY of 6285, 5829, and 6325 kg ha’ in the on-farm FFP plots for the same three crop cycles, respectively (Table 2). The GY difference was not significant between the NPK and FFP treatments during the last two crop cycles. The nearly 24% greater GY in the NPK treatment than in the FFP treatment during the 1994-95 thaladi season might be due to a higher rate of fertilizer N application and a greater number of fertilizer splits in the LIFE. AE was similar between the NPK and FFP treatments in all three crop cycles. PFP(N) differed between the two treatments only during the 1995-96 thaladi crop cycle, which might be due to a greater contribution of N from the INS in farmers’ fields. Discussion Currently, blanket N fertilizer recommendations are made by extension agents without considering, the magnitude of variation in the INS among farmers’ fields. This results in a mismatch in individual fields between crop N demand and total N supply coming from both the INS and applied N. There are some soil test-based fertilizer recommendations made at the village level. The Tamil Nadu Agricultural University has also developed soil test crop response (STCR}-based fertilizer recommendations for rice. To achieve optimal NUE, the INS must be quantified so that the amount and rate of total soil N supply matches crop N demand. The INS in +PK plots varied widely among farmers’ fields from season to season. Similarly, the quantity of N applied by farmers in FEP treatment plots also varied greatly. The N fertilizer rate in FFP plots was not correlated with GY or total N uptake in +PK treatment plots or with the increase in GY associated with N input. Evidently, this shows a lack of farmers’ perception of the INS in formulating N fertilizer rates. A similar conclusion was also drawn by Cassman et al (1996), Dobermann et al (1996), and Olk et al (1996). The high variability among farmers in PE, RE, and AE and their generally low values also suggested inefficient N fertilizer use. The clear gap between optimum PE and farmers’ actual values indicated that factors other than N supply affected N use, such as crop variety and cultural 1practices. In addition, excessive fertilizer N applied at planting or in the early vegetative phase can create excessive vegetative growth and reduce harvest index, thereby reducing PE. Low and variable values of RE may be due to different rates of N application, varied timing, and number of split applications of N. Several field studies have demonstrated that RE can be increased by reducing the amount of N applied in the crop establishment and early vegetative growth phases or by increasing the number of split applications (De Datta et al 1988, Cassman et al 1994, Peng et al 1996). Wide variation in AE might be due to great differences in both the fertilizer N rates and the INS, Continuous monitoring of GY over time in plots lacking N fertilizer will provide information about crop management effects on INS, which might help farmers to optimize the N contribution from indigenous sources and to increase PFP(N). High variability in PFP(N) among farmers reflects enormous variations in both component terms, AE and the ratio of GY in the +PK treatment (INS) to applied N in the FFP treatment. Although most research on improving N efficiency in lowland rice systems has focused on increasing AE by improving the timing, placement, and formulation of applied N, the absolute magnitude of variation among farmers’ fields in AE was less than the variation in the ratio of INS to fertilizer N rate. The findings of the present study highlight the need for field-specific N management to optimize NUE of the lowland rice system. Blanket prescriptions for the rate and timing of N fertilizer application as presently recommended cannot accommodate the wide range of INS found among fields within much smaller areas. Acknowledgment ‘The assistance rendered by Messrs. D. Kabilar, S. Natarajan, M. Selvakumar, and R. Jayaseelan, Junior Research Fellow's of TNRRI, Aduthurai, in carrying out the field experiments is gratefully acknowledged. References Bhagat RM, Kanwar BB, Verma TS, Minhas KS. 1988. Nitrogen economy in lowland rice culture. Oryza 25:255-260. Broadbent FE. 1979. Mineralization of organic nitrogen in paddy soils. In: Nitrogen and rice. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. p 105-118, Buresh RJ, De Datta SK, Padilla JL, Chua TT. 1988. Potential of inhibitors of increasing response of lowland rice to urea fertilization. Agron. J. 80:947-952. ‘Cassman KG, Pingali PL. 1995. Intensification of irrigated rice systems: learning from the past to meet future challenges. Geofournal 35:299-305. Cassman KG, Kropff MJ, Yan Z-D. 1994. A conceptual framework for nitrogen management of irrigated rice in high-yield environments. In: Virmani S, editor. Hybrid rice technology: new developments and future prospects. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. PB1-96, Cassman KG, Gines GC, Dizon, MA, Samson M, Alcantara JM. 1996. Nitrogen-use efficiency in tropical lowland rice systems: contributions from indigenous and applied nitrogen. Field Crops Res. 47:1-12.Chaiwanakupt P, Freney JR, Keerthisinghe G, Phongpan, S, Blakeley RL. 1995. Use of urease, algal and nitrification inhibitors to reduce nitrogen loss and increase grain yield of flooded rice (Oryza sativa L.). Biol. Fertil. Soils 22:89-95. De Datta SK, Buresh RJ, Samson MI, Wang K-R. 1988. Nitrogen-use efficiency and nitrogen-15, balances in broadcast-seeded flooded and transplanted rice. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52:849-855. Dobermann A, Cassman KG, Sta. Cruz PC, Adviento MAA, Pampolino MF. 19%. Fertilizer inputs, nutrient balance and soil nutrient-supplying power in intensive irrigated rice systems. IIL. Phosphorus. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys. 46:111-125. Koyama J. 1981. The transformations and balance of nitrogen in Japanese paddy fields. Fert. Res. 2: 261-278. Olk DC, Cassman KG, Simbahan G, Sta. Cruz PC, Abdulrachman S, Nagarajan R, Pham Sy Tan, Satawathananont S. 1996, Congruence of N fertilizer management by farmers and soil N supply in tropicel irrigated lowland rice systems. In: Attanandana T, Kheoruenromne I, Pongsakul P, Vearasilp T, editors. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Maximizing Sustainable Rice Yields Through Improved Soil and Environmental Management, 11-17 Nov. 1996, Khon Kaen (Thailand). Thailand Department of Agriculture, Soil and Fertilizer Society of Thailand, Thailand Department of Land Development, International Society of Soil Science. p 29-38. Peng S, Garcia FV, Laza RC, Sanico AL, Visperas, RM, Cassman KG. 1996, Increased N-use efficiency using a chlorophyll meter on high-yielding rice. Field Crops Res. 47:243-252. Shoji S, Gandeza AT. 1992. Controlled release fertilizers. Sendai (Japan): Konno Printing Co. Notes Authors’ address: Tamil Nadu Rice Research Institute, Aduthurai 612101, Tamil Nadu, India. Citation: Otk DC, Moya PF, editors. 1998. On-farm management of applied inputs and native soil fertility. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 23. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 212 p. 93Table 1. Ranges among farmers in recovery efficiency (RE), physiological efficiency (PE), agronomic efficiency (AE), and partial factor productivity for N fertilizer [PFP(N)], and the ratio of grain yield in the +PK treatment plot to N fertilizer rate in the farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatment plot (Y/N). RE PE AE FREON, YNZ 1994-05 Thaladi (wel) season Mean, oaz ma 153 603 45.0 sD 0.26 43 int 23 149 Minimum on 25 05 24 15.1 Maximum 1.07 58.6 595 103.8 764 1995 kuruvai (dry) season Mean. 039 358 “7 48.8 34.1 sD ous na 8 177, 140 Minimum 013 104 22 199 106 Maximum. 0.67 548 365 826 643 1995-96 thaladi (wet) season Mean 052 221 172, 610 439 sD oz 10.1 94 241 204 Minimum, 027 80 24 30.2 15.3 ‘Maximum 1.08 610 487 123.9 1035 "akg cop Nruptake Rg’ N Teli applied. “akg grain Akg crop N uptake. “Ale gen keg" N feraizer applied erie Fatt of total grain yl to kg ferlzer N applied to the FFP treatment. "Tho rato of the grain yield in +P plot to kg fertlizer N applied to the FFP treatment. ‘Table 2. Comparison between on-farm farmer's fertilizer practice treatment (FFP) and on-station +NPK ‘treatment in the long-term fertility experiment (LIFE) for grain yield, N fertilizer rate, agronomic efficiency (AF), and partial factor productivity [PFP(N)] for N fertilizer. TIFE ‘On-farm Parameters Units (+NPK) FFP) Difference 1994-95 thaladi (wel) season Grain yieldt kg ha? 7584 6285, 1299" N fertilizer kg ha? 132 118 17" AE kg grain kg” fert N 168 153 151s PEP) kg grain kg” fert N S74 604 -3.0ns 1995 kuruvai (dry) season Grain yielct kgha’ 6999 5829 1170 ns N fertilizer kg hat 150 136 Mans AE kg grain kg" fert N us 136 -20ns PFPCN) kg grain kg" fert N 467 462 O5ns 1995.96 thaladi (wet) season, Grain yielt kg ha? ois, 6325 17 ns N fertilizer kghat 132 16 16+ AE kg grain kg" fertN 9 172 270s PFP(N) kg grain kg" fert N 489 61.0 aa Syignifiennt at SU, Av = nol significant “LITE varieties used: ADT 38 for 1995 & 1996 thaladi, ADT 42 for 1995 kurwvaiN fertilizer rate ( kg ha*) . boa » To eeee Tene wm east . | . » . ° Grain yield in +PK treatment (kg hat) Fig. 1. Nitrogen fertilizer rate applied by farmers to the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment in relation to grain yield in the +PK plot, TNRRI, India.‘Yield increase with N fertilizer (t na) 4 95 Toles (v5) . "oar . . . ' . ¢ é a (0 28 Kanes ©) reas a oe . (205.96 Tote ws) me a 7 2 oe © He oa” . . 4% peek . N fertifizer rate (kg ha) Fig.2. Yield response to applied N fertilizer in relation to rate of N fertilizer applied to the farmer's fertilizer practice treatment, TNRRJ, India.Yield increase with N fertilizer (t ha) (99695 mateal(W5) Poa : 78 ‘ (0) 95 Karoat(05) . rose ee . . . . ‘ eo. (6) 9596 Tala (ws) oe Ye aue +03 roa Grain yield in +PK treatment (kg ha) Fig.3._ Yield response to applied N fertilizer in relation to grain yield in the +PK treatment, TNRRI, India. 97‘Agronomic efficiency of applied N (kg grain kg* N applied) 1498 alos Ws) 7) torre 7) Kurwal os) Yuod2s oe a ry (239596 Tia ws) yeaa: 102502 eed feos . 2 PFP(N) Fig.4. Relationship between agronomic efficiency and partial factor productivity of applied N fertilizer [PFPQN)], on-farm monitoring, TNRRI, India.Nitrogen management in irrigated rice-based systems in West Africa: Examples from Burkina Faso and Mali M.CS, Wopereis, C. Donovan, B. Nebié, D. Guindo, MK. N’Diaye, and S. Hiifele (Quantitative information on rice yield and N fertilizer management in irrigated systems in West Africa is scarce. Agronomic surveys were conducted to determine the variability among farmers feldsin rice yield, N use, and productivity in irrigated systems in Mali Office du Niger) and Burkina Faso (Kou Valley). Grain yields were highly variable with N fertilizer input (3.4-6 tha" in the Kou Valley and. 2.7- 8,7 tha in the Office du Niges) but were strongly related to crop N uptake at maturity. Recovery of fertilizer N was variable and generally low (30-40% of applied N). Farmers did not follow blanket research-based fertilizer recommendations. Timing of N fertilizer application was extremely variable and did not coineide with ertical growth stages of the rice plant. Farmers did not adjust quantities of applied fertilizer N to the indigenous soil N supply, proxied by plant N uptake in unfertilized plots. Nitrogen uptake in unfertilized plots ranged from 32 to 83 kg ha’. Field specific N management is needed to achieve abetter match between soil N supply. applied, and crop Ndemand. Better N management may result in substantial yield increases without increasing total N inputs. Introduction Irrigated rice is cultivated along a north-south gradient in West Africa, cutting across the Sahelian humid forest agroecological zone and Guinea savanna. The pressure on irrigated rice land, estimated at 520,000 ha in West Africa (Matlon et al 1996), is increasing as rice consumption in West Africa is growing by 3% per year, due especially to increased demand in turban centers (Randolph 1997). Actual production figures from irrigated rice land are often below expectations. One reason may be that irrigated rice is quite a novelty in West Africa, ie., unlike in Asia, African farmers cannot build on traditional cultivation practices and rice germplasm. Other reasons may also exist for low production. Quantitative information is scarce on factors of grain yield (GY), input use efficiency, and productivity in irrigated rice-based systems in West Africa. This paper reports rice yield and nitrogen management in two important irrigation systems in West Africa, one located in the Sahel agroecological zone, and one located in the Guinea savanna zone. Materials and methods Farmer surveys were implemented in irrigation schemes in the Kou Valley in Burkina Faso and in the Office du Niger in Mali during the 1995 wet season. The Kou Valley is situated in the Guinea savanna zone, 25 km northeast of Bobo Dioulasso (11°11'N, 4°18’W), the second largest city in Burkina Faso. Rainfall is about 1200 mm yr’. The scheme is irrigated through diversion of the river Kou and was established by Chinese engineers in the 1960s. The total surface area under irrigation is 1260 ha. Minimum air temperatures are 15-17 °C during December January, whereas maximum air temperatures of 35-38 °C are reached in March and April. Rice is transplanted, and grown in both wet (jul-Nov) and dry Jan-May) seasons. The current fertilizer recommendation for the wet season in the Kou Valley is 300 kg 14-23-14 NPK ha'' applied at transplanting, 100 kg urea ha” (35 kg ha" at the start of tillering and 65 kg ha" at panicle initiation) (Nebié 1995). 99The Office du Niger was developed by French engineers in the 1920s and is the largest irrigated system (50,000 ha) in Mali. It is located in the Sahelian agroecological zone, near Niono (14°18N, 5°59W). Irrigation is gravity-fed, starting at the Markala dam on the Niger River. Rice is mostly transplanted and can be grown in both wet (Jun-Nov) and dry seasons (Jan-May). Rainfall is about 200 mm yr!. Minimum air temperatures are about 13-15 °C in December- Jenuary and maximum air temperatures are 39-41 °C in May. The fertilizer recommendation for the wet season in the Office du Niger is 100 kg 18-46-0 NPK (diammonium phosphate, DAP) ha" and 240 kg N ha’ as urea (N'Diaye et al 1997). In Burkina Faso, 20 farmers were selected from each of two soil types: clay loam (CL) and sandy clay loam (SCL). These soil types represent 38% and 24%, respectively, of the total area under rice cropping in the Kou Valley. All 40 farmers transplanted and practiced double cropping (two rice crops per year on the same plot), which is the local norm. Most used rice variety ITA 123. In Mali, farmers practice both single cropping (SC) and double cropping (DC), so 18 SC farmers and 16 DC farmers were selected for this project to represent the mix of cropping, intensities. All fields were on a ‘Dango’ clay loam soil, which occupies 43% of the total area under rice cropping in the Office du Niger. Farmers practice transplanting, using mostly rice variety BG 90-2. At both sites, farmers decide on the management of their fields, including timing and rates of fertilizer applications. Each farmer established a 10 x 10-m plot (-F) at the side of the irrigation canal, separated from the main field by bunds, and which received no fertilizer application. To monitor the farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP), a 10 x 10-m sampling area bordering each -F plot was used. This FFP subplot was not physically delineated from the remainder of the main field. All cropping practices were noted, including inputs. Crop N uptake was measured by the standard Kjeldahl procedure, and grain and straw yields were measured at maturity for -F and FFP plots. The indigenous soil N supply (INS) was defined as plant N uptake in -F plots and recovery rates for applied N were based on the difference in crop N uptake between -F and FFP treatments. Physiological efficiency of N was calculated as the ratio of yield increase to increase in N uptake between -F and FFP plots. Partial factor productivity of N was determined as the ratio of yield in FEP plots to applied N. The RIDEV model (Dingkuhn 1997) was used to estimate crop growth duration and spikelet sterility due to cold stress at flowering in the Office du Niger in Mali. Inputs for the model are weather data, variety, sowing date, and crop establishment method. Outputs are estimated growth duration, timing of phenological events, and spikelet sterility due to cold or heat stress. RIDEV also gives recommendations for timing of fertilizer application (two splits: at the start of tillering and at panicle initiation). The model could not be used in the Kou Valley since it has only been validated for Sahelian climatic conditions and because the photothermal characteristics of the variety mostly used by the farmers (ITA 123) have not yet been characterized. We used 32 yr (1950-82) of data from Niono on minimum air temperature to estimate spikelet sterility and to derive the best timing for fertilizer applications. Results and discussion ‘Transplanting date and seedling age in the Kou Valley were highly variable (Table 1). Some farmers prepared their seedbeds in early July; others in August. Transplanting dates varied from 26 July to 19 September. As a result, age of rice plants at transplanting ranged from 12 to 65 days 100(mean 38 days). Late transplanters used old seedlings. Yield and seedling age at transplanting were, however, not correlated. Research-recommended seedling age at transplanting is 20 days in the wet season. Farmers clearly were not able to follow this recommendation, possibly due to lack of animal power to prepare fields on time. In Mali, seedling age at transplanting was highly variable as well, ranging from 19 to 63 days for SC farmers and from 21 to 52 days for DC farmers (Table 1). Some farmers transplanted as early as the second half of June, but variability was large, with one DC farmer transplanting on 25 September. Simulations with RIDEV showed that if farmers in the Office du Niger transplant after 15 August, spikelet sterility—and therefore substantial yield loss—can be expected due to cold temperatures around flowering. Two DC farmers each transplanted during the last week of August (estimated 10% mean yield loss) and in September (estimated 30% mean yield loss). Grain yield (GY) and total N uptake varied considerably among farmers for both the FFP and -F treatment plots (Fig. 1a, b). The correlation between yield and total N uptake was strong in both Burkina Faso and Mali, indicating the importance of N as a yield-limiting factor. Grain yield varied ‘most notably in the farmer-managed FFP treatment, from a minimum of 2.7 t ha* in a DC plot in Mali to a maximum of 8.7 t ha" in an SC plot in Mali, In Burkina Faso, GY did not differ between soil types within either the -F or FFP treatments, although there was somewhat greater variability in the FFP yields (Table 2, Fig. 2a). Mean crop N uptake for the -F plots was higher in clay loam soil than in sandy clay loam soil. In Mali, mean GY of the -F treatment was lower in DC plots than in SC plots (Table 2, Fig. 2b), although crop N uptake in the -F treatment was insignificantly lower in DC plots than in SC plots. Most probably the supply of nutrients other than N was limiting GY in DC plots, since no significant weed, insect, or disease damage was noted around the flowering stage at either site. As indicated earlier, some DC farmers may have experienced yield losses due to late transplanting and subsequent cold stress-induced spikelet sterility around flowering. Nitrogen fertilizer recovery rates varied widely within each site (Table 2, Fig. 3a, b). Some farmers achieved more than 50% recovery of applied N while other farmers recovered less than 5%. Mean recovery rate did not differ between the sandy clay loam soil and the clay loam soil in Burkina Faso nor between SC and DC plots in Mali. The N physiological efficiency (PE) ranged on average from 50 to 59 kg grain kg? N (Table 2), which is typical for modern rice varieties grown in the tropics (Yoshida 1981). In some cases, PE was very low, indicating that factors other than N were limiting GY. The unrealistically high PE values calculated for a few farmers (more than 80 kg grain kg" N) were most probably due to an underestimation of straw weight at maturity sampling. Partial factor productivity of applied N was high for farmers in Burkina Faso (about 75 kg grain kg” applied N) and lower for farmers in Mali (about 44 kg grain kg" applied IN). Burkinabe farmers obtained higher returns per unit N fertilizer than farmers in Mali, Timing of fertilizer application should ideally coincide with critical growth stages of high N demand by the rice plant, ie., start of tillering, panicle initiation, and heading. Monitored farmers in the Kou Valley applied mineral fertilizers (14-23-14 NPK and urea) in two splits at about 15 and 32 d after transplanting (DAT) (Table 3). The variability in timing was very high. Application at 15 DAT coincided with the start of tillering, Field observations indicated that panicle initiation for BG90-2 takes place at about 40-45 DAT (Nebié, unpublished data). The second application was 101therefore about 1-2 wk too early to coincide with panicle initiation. As a result, the crop completed the final 70 d of its crop cycle without application of fresh fertilizer. Burkinabé farmers applied either a combination of NPK and urea or only NPK in the first split, and either a combination of NPK and urea or only urea in the second split. Six farmers applied fertilizer only once. The average total amount of urea applied was 112 kg ha‘, which is close to the recommended rate. Variability was very high, however, since farmers applied between 50 and 250 kg urea ha and between 50 and 300 kg NPK ha’. Application of both NPK and urea fertilizers was exclusively by topdressing. In Mali, diammonium phosphate (DAP) was topdressed, mostly shortly after transplanting (Table 4). One farmer applied DAP as late as 20 DAT. The dosage ranged from 50 to 167 kg ha" Urea was topdressed in two splits, with the total amount ranging widely from 100 to 400 kg, ha On average, SC farmers exceeded the researcher-recommended dose (240 kg urea ha") by about 30 kg ha". Double-cropping farmers applied an average of about 200 kg urea ha". Timing of urea application was highly variable, with the first split application at about 25 DAT and the second at about 54 DAT. Using weather data from Niono, however, RIDEV simulations showed that the best timing for BG90-2 in the wet season is about 18 DAT (first split) and 50 DAT (second split), Therefore, on average, Malian farmers applied the first urea split too late and the second split roughly on time. As illustrated earlier, farmers’ fertilizer N strategies were very diverse, with Malian farmers applying on average nearly twice as much elemental N as farmers in Burkina Faso (125 kg ha?! compared with 76 kg ha"). If farmers applied fertilizer to complement the INS, fertilizer N rates and the INS would be negatively correlated. There was no such relationship, however, between applied N in the FFP treatment and plant N uptake in the -F treatment for either location (Fig. 4a, b). Total fertilizer N applied was not related to GY (data not shown), which is expected given the heterogeneity of the INS. Cassman et al (1993) reported similar results. Farmers either did not consider the INS in their fertilizer N strategies or they were unaware of the true INS in their fields The variety of N fertilizer strategies pursued indicated that farmers were not simply following blanket recommendations. Therefore, the insensitivity of a single blanket fertilizer recommendation to widely varying INS values among farmers cannot be used to explain the lack of synchrony between plant N demand and N fertilizer applications. Conclusions Although GY was closely related to total crop N at maturity, no relation was found between GY and total amount of N fertilizer input. The N fertilizer application strategies of farmers varied without any apparent relationship to the INS, Plant recovery of fertilizer N was highly variable, with some plots recovering less than 5% of the applied N. Thus, further research should determine the causes for these differences in recovery rates and consequently in efficiency of fertilizer use. (One major factor at our survey sites is that farmers’ timing of fertilizer application did not coincide with critical growth stages of N demand by the rice plant. Although GY was lower in the DC plots than in the SC plots in Mali, mean fertilizer application was lower for the DC plots than for the SC plots. Consequently, this yield gap between DC and SC will not be closed, posing potential implications for intensified agriculture in the region. 102‘The results indicated that current blanket recommendations for regions and entire countries do not respond to the variability within soil types and cultivation practices. Farmers could achieve substantial gains in efficiency of input use along with the maintenance of soil fertility if field-specific soil fertility management packages were developed. Such packages should focus on (a) adjusting the quantity of applied N to the INS and (b) optimizing the timing and quantity of applied N. Acknowledgment We thank the farmers of the Kou Valley in Burkina Faso and the Office du Niger in Mali. This study was supported by a grant from the Federal Ministry of Cooperation (BMZ) and the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ) in Germany. References Cassman KG, Kropff MJ, Gaunt J, Peng S. 1993. Nitrogen use efficiency of rice reconsidered: what are the key constraints? Plant Soil 155/156:359-362. Cassman KG, De Datta SK, Olk DC, Alcantara JM, Samson MI, Descalsota JP, Dizon M. 1995. Yield decline and the nitrogen economy of long-term experiments on continuous, irrigated rice systems in the tropics. In: Lal R, Stewart BA, editors, Soil management: experimental basis for sustainability and environmental quality. Boca Raton (Florida): Lewis /CRC Publishers. p 181- 222. Dingkuhn M. 1997. Characterizing irrigated rice environments using the rice phenology model RIDEV. In: Miézan KM, Wopereis MCS, Dingkuhn M, Deckers J, Randolph TF, editors. Irrigated rice in the Sahel: prospects for sustainable development. Bouaké (Céte dIvoire): West Africa Rice Development Association. p 343-360. Matlon P, Randolph TF, Guei R. 1996. Impact of rice research in West Africa. Paper prepared for the International Conference on the Impact of Rice Research, 3-5 June, Bangkok (Thailand). 28 p. Diaye MK, Guindo D, Dicko MK, 1997. Gestion de la fertilité des solsrizicoles de Office du Niger. In: Miézan KM, Wopereis MCS, Dingkuhn M, Deckers J, Randolph TF, editors. Irrigated rice in the Sahel: prospects for sustainable development. Bouaké (Cote dIvoire): West Africa Rice Development Association. p 201-211. Nebié B. 1995. Etude des facteurs agro-pédologiques déterminants la production du riz irrigué dans 1a vallée du Kou au Burkina Faso. Thése Docteur-Ingénieur 229/95, Université Nationale de Cote d'Ivoire. 209 p. Randolph TF. 1997. Rice demand in the Sahel. In: Miézan KM, Wopereis MCS, Dingkuhn M, Deckers J, Randolph TF, editors, Irrigated rice in the Sahel: prospects for sustainable development. Bouaké (Céte d'Ivoire): West Africa Rice Development Association. p 71-88. Yoshida S. 1981. Fundamentals of rice crop science. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 269 p. WARDA (West Africa Rice Development Association). 1996. Annual report 1995. WARDA, Bouaké, Cote dIvoire. 103Notes Authors’ addresses: M.C.S. Wopereis and C. Donovan (Rockefeller Foundation Visiting Research Fellow), West Africa Rice Development Association, BP 96, St. Louis, Senegal; B. Nebié, Institut d'Etudes et de Recherches Agricoles, Station de Farako-Ba, BP 910, Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso; D. Guindo and MK. Ndiaye, Institut d’Economie Rural, Programme Riz Irrigué, BP 07, Niono, Mali; S. Hafele, Institut fur Bodenkunde, Universitat Hamburg, Allende-Platz 2, 20146 Hamburg, Germany. Citation: Olk DC, Moya PF, editors. 1998. On-farm management of applied inputs and native soil fertility. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 23. Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. 212 p. 108Table 1. Sowing and transplanting dates for farmers with sandy clay loam or clay loam soils in the Kou Valley, Burkina Faso, and with single-cropping or double-cropping systems in the Office du Niger, Mali, 1995 wet season. Fractice No. Mean SD Min. Max. No. Mean SD___Min. Max farmers farmers Kou Valley, Burkina Faso Sandy clay loam soil Clay loam soil ‘Sowing date 20° W4jul =~ ful, 1SAug 20 17Jul «11. BOJun SAug Transplant date 20 23Aug 11 6Aug 19Sep 20 22Aug 13 26Jul 12Sep Seedling age ~) 2040 2 Bb 6 2036 4 6 Office du Niger, Malt Single-cropping Double-cropping Sowing date 18 26fun 17 4Jun 25Jul 16 10Jul_ «20 13Jun-27 Aug Tranoplantdate 18 27Jul 18 29Jun Aug 16 10Aug 23 10ful 25Sep Seedling age (@) 18 __3L 1019 63 1633 92 52 Table2. Grain yield and N uptake for the unfertilized (-F) and farmer's fertilizer practice (FFP) treatments, N fertilizer applied, N recovery efficiency, and partial productivity for N fertilizer [PFP(N)] in the Kou Valley, Burkina Faso, and Office du Niger, Mali, 1995 wet season. pe No. Grain Grain Gran WV Ww NRF farmers yield -_yield uptake —_yield fertilizer recovery physiol Ftmmt) FFP emg) CF umd (FFP trmt) applied efficiency efficiency? (thai) (that) (kg hat) _ (kg hat) hat) (%) (%)__ (ke kg") Burkino Faso cs Sandy clay 20 34 49 51 84 754 46 50 n loam (@73y (1.00) 425) 21) 59) 5) 2 Clayloam = 20 36 5:1 60 aa 774 59 78 059) 0.52) (120) (194) 33) 2) BS) Difference! ns ns “ ns Rs ns ns ns Mali Single- 8 35 58 38a 51 42 cropping 18 70) (127) (179) 253) 29) (47) BY.) Double- 16 26 50 541035110046 50 46 cropping 16 7) 2) 91) 20) IB) 8) a9) 1) Difference ~~ * ns as “ ns as as ‘Nrrecovery EGHCY We Wicreaseh pan Vasa porcenrageoT applied ForaTzerN Ni physiological efficiency is [yield (FFP) - yield (]/[N uptake (FFP) - N uptake CF) atta factor productivity oN fetilizeris kg yield (FFP) kg" N fertilizer applied “Two extreme cases were excluded for N fertilizer applied, N recovery efficiency, N physiological efficiency, and PFP(N) ‘Numbers in parentheses are standard deviations. ‘Results of two-tailed t-tests ofthe mears assuming equal variances ‘s+ significant at PeO 01, ** = significant at Pe0.C5, ns = no significant 105Table3. Timing, kind, and amount of fertilizers (kg ha) applied by fermers in sandy clay loam or clay loan soil in the Kou Valley, Burkina Faso. andy clay Toa soil Clay loam sor No Mean SD Min. Max No Mean SD Min Max farmers farmers Fist toparessing Date (DAT) 2 Bb 7 0 0 D 7 B 3 © Amount urea u 58 20 801001238 5D 100 Amount1423-14NPK 20.««108- 49,50, 2002044550250 Second topdressing Date (DAT) y» 8B 9 mM 2 5 BM 7 Ww M1 Amounturea 19 83-3250 15015 10038 50150 Amount142344NPK 16 6125-25 10013-32180 ‘Total applied fertilizer Urea 2 om sz 50 20 62 348520 14-23-14 NPK 20 155 «62 50250-20188. 51100300 N (elemental basis) 2 73 27 630 140 20H P (elementalbasis) 2 % MW 2 Ss 2 8 n BB @ K (elemental basis) 2 2 9 7 9% HF Table 4. Timing, kind, and amount of fertilizers (kg ha") applied by farmers with single-cropping or double- ‘cropping systems in the Office du Niger, Mali, 1995 wet season. Single-croppin Doublecropping. No. Mean SD Min. Max. = ~No Mean SD Min. Max. farmers farmers First topdrassing Date (DAT) vor 5 3 @ » 3 3 3 0 Amount urea Bw 2B 1 8 8 6 2 9 W % ‘Amount 14-23-14 NPK vy 13 28 50150 6 9 7 MD 687 Second topdressing Date(DAT) we 75050250 6 1 24) 150 Amount urea 19 4975250 3 98 20 5D 180 Amount 14-23-14 NPK 1B 58 78 6 8 8B 2% 97 Total applied fertilizer Urea 17271200400 16 204 42106300 14-23-14 NPK 17 103 «28 50150 1 97) 7 7 N (elemental basis) 1 3-33-0202 16 10 18) 138 (elemental basis) yo Bo RB 68 6 4 2B B 7 K(elemental basis) oo oo 0 oo 0 0 0 108Grain yield (kg ha") 8000 (a) (b) e YeNIB+73-0.1952 0 a y=728+42x, 720.79 6000 -} 0.82 , ah

You might also like

• International Rice Research Notes Vol.19 No.2

  

  Document42 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.19 No.2

  ccquintos

  100% (1)
• Crop-Animal Interaction

  

  Document584 pages

  Crop-Animal Interaction

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol12 No.2

  

  Document52 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol12 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• • Magazines
  • Podcasts
  • Sheet music
• Integrated Crop-Animal Systems in Southeast Asia: Current Status and Prospects

  

  Document196 pages

  Integrated Crop-Animal Systems in Southeast Asia: Current Status and Prospects

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol. 17 No.1

  

  Document35 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol. 17 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.15 No.1

  

  Document44 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.15 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.16 No.1

  

  Document28 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.16 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.8 No.3

  

  Document24 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.8 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol. 10 No.2

  

  Document32 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol. 10 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• IRRI Annual Report 1999-2000

  

  Document72 pages

  IRRI Annual Report 1999-2000

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.13 No.1

  

  Document36 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.13 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.4

  

  Document24 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.4

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.7 No.4

  

  Document20 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.7 No.4

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.5

  

  Document48 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.5

  ccquintos

  0% (1)
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.9 No.2

  

  Document32 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.9 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.8 No.5

  

  Document32 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.8 No.5

  ccquintos

  50% (2)
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.3

  

  Document24 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.18 No.1

  

  Document69 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.18 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.16 No.2

  

  Document28 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.16 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• Seed Health Improvement For Pest Management and Crop Production

  

  Document96 pages

  Seed Health Improvement For Pest Management and Crop Production

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.6 No.3

  

  Document28 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.6 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.5

  

  Document28 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.5

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• Field Problems of Tropical Rice

  

  Document178 pages

  Field Problems of Tropical Rice

  mote34

  100% (2)
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.6

  

  Document40 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.6

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• IRRI Annual Report 1997-1998

  

  Document64 pages

  IRRI Annual Report 1997-1998

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.9 No.6

  

  Document28 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.9 No.6

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.25 No.3

  

  Document47 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.25 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.9 No.5

  

  Document32 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.9 No.5

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.7 No.5

  

  Document24 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.7 No.5

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.17 No.2

  

  Document36 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.17 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol12 No.3

  

  Document56 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol12 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.15 No.6

  

  Document36 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.15 No.6

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• IRRN International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.8 No. 6

  

  Document32 pages

  IRRN International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.8 No. 6

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.2

  

  Document20 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.3 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.6 No.6

  

  Document24 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.6 No.6

  ccquintos

  100% (1)
• IRRI Annual Report 2005-2006

  

  Document197 pages

  IRRI Annual Report 2005-2006

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.31 No.1

  

  Document47 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.31 No.1

  ccquintos

  0% (1)
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.15 No.2

  

  Document40 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.15 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.5 No.5

  

  Document24 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.5 No.5

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.4

  

  Document45 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.4

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.16 No.3

  

  Document32 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.16 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.25 No.1

  

  Document45 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.25 No.1

  ccquintos

  0% (1)
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.13 No.4

  

  Document48 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.13 No.4

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.19 No.3

  

  Document64 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.19 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.14 No.5

  

  Document36 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.14 No.5

  ccquintos

  100% (1)
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.2

  

  Document32 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.11 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol12 No.4

  

  Document67 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol12 No.4

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.18 No.3

  

  Document52 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.18 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.24 No.1

  

  Document48 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.24 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.24 No.2

  

  Document48 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.24 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.22 No.3

  

  Document44 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.22 No.3

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.22 No.1

  

  Document56 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.22 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.26 No.2

  

  Document86 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.26 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.28 No.1

  

  Document80 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.28 No.1

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• IRRI Annual Report 1996-1997

  

  Document62 pages

  IRRI Annual Report 1996-1997

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.20 No.2

  

  Document35 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.20 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Notes Vol.29 No.2

  

  Document103 pages

  International Rice Research Notes Vol.29 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.14 No.2

  

  Document44 pages

  International Rice Research Newsletter Vol.14 No.2

  ccquintos

  No ratings yet
• Characteristics and Classifications of Wetland Rice Soils in India, Indonesia, and Thailand

  

  Document233 pages

  Characteristics and Classifications of Wetland Rice Soils in India, Indonesia, and Thailand

  CPS_IRRI

  No ratings yet
• Trex450SE-V2Manual Ebook

  

  Document36 pages

  Trex450SE-V2Manual Ebook

  doms

  No ratings yet