Abstract
We conducted SRI trial in two Upazilas of Noakhali district. The farmers practiced both SRI and conventional cultivation at a time to compare the results regarding production cost, yield and net return. Farmers applied less chemical fertilizers in SRI plots compared to conventional plots, which is expected. They did not use pesticides but adopted IPM cultural method for both practices indicating no attack of pests. Per hectare irrigation cost was more or less same for both practices though it was supposed to be less for SRI method. Water supplier might have counted frequency instead of water volume or there might have been system loss of water in SRI plots. SRI farmers drastically saved seed cost (67%) compared to conventional farmers. Famers weeded their conventional plot by hand while they used hand and also could use the rotary weeder for SRI plot due to wider spacing. It permitted soil aeration, better root development, more effective tiller and more panicle, which ultimately increase the yield in SRI method. During the last Boro season (2002-03) SRI farmers got 43% more yield than conventional one. Yield of straw was 39% higher in SRI compare to traditional method. Per hectare production cost in SRI was 9% less than conventional method. So higher yield and lower cost of production in SRI increased their net return to around 103% over that of traditional practice. Benefit - cost ratio was 2.87 and 1.84 for SRl and conventional method respectively.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 11
Claim · model-written summary
SRI rice plots used less chemical fertilizer than conventional plots.
- Taxon
- Rice
Oryza sativat0 - Treatment
- SRI plotse0
- Outcome
- chemical fertilizerse0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Comparator
- conventional plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“Farmers applied less chemical fertilizers in SRI plots compared to conventional plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Neither rice system used pesticides, with no pest attack reported.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- IPM cultural methode0
- Outcome
- no attack of pestse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“They did not use pesticides but adopted IPM cultural method for both practices indicating no attack of pests”
Claim · model-written summary
Per hectare irrigation cost was approximately the same under SRI and conventional rice cultivation.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRIe1
- Outcome
- Per hectare irrigation coste0
- Direction
- more or less samee0
- Comparator
- conventional cultivatione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“Per hectare irrigation cost was more or less same for both practices”
e1“both SRI and conventional cultivation”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI farmers saved 67% of seed cost compared with conventional farmers.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRIe0
- Outcome
- seed coste0
- Direction
- savede0
- Value
- 67%e0
- Comparator
- conventional farmerse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“SRI farmers drastically saved seed cost (67%) compared to conventional farmers”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI permitted better root development.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRI plote0
- Outcome
- root developmente0
- Direction
- bettere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“they used hand and also could use the rotary weeder for SRI plot due to wider spacing. It permitted soil aeration, better root development, more effective tiller and more panicle”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI permitted more effective tillers and more panicles.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRIe1
- Outcome
- effective tiller and more paniclee0
- Direction
- moree0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“It permitted soil aeration, better root development, more effective tiller and more panicle”
e1“for SRI plot due to wider spacing”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI rice had 43% more grain yield than conventional cultivation in the last Boro season.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRIe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 43%e0
- Qualifier
- Boro season (2002-03)e0
- Comparator
- conventional onee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“During the last Boro season (2002-03) SRI farmers got 43% more yield than conventional one”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI rice had 39% higher straw yield than traditional cultivation.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRIe0
- Outcome
- Yield of strawe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 39%e0
- Comparator
- traditional methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“Yield of straw was 39% higher in SRI compare to traditional method”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI production cost per hectare was 9% lower than conventional cultivation.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRIe0
- Outcome
- Per hectare production coste0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 9%e0
- Comparator
- conventional methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“Per hectare production cost in SRI was 9% less than conventional method”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI net return was approximately 103% higher than traditional practice.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRIe0
- Outcome
- net returne0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 103%e0
- Comparator
- traditional practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“higher yield and lower cost of production in SRI increased their net return to around 103% over that of traditional practice”
Claim · model-written summary
SRI benefit cost ratio was 2.87 versus 1.84 for conventional rice cultivation.
- Taxon
- RiceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- SRle0
- Outcome
- Benefit - cost ratioe0
- Value
- 2.87e0
- Qualifier
- 1.84e0
- Comparator
- conventional methode0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Rice”
e0“Benefit - cost ratio was 2.87 and 1.84 for SRl and conventional method respectively”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · growth · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
221 papers in the same direction as this paper · 62 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
287 papers more in this group
See all 291 papers →irrigation · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 201 in the opposite direction · 64 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
1,167 papers more in this group
See all 1,171 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.