Adaptive Agricultural Practices: Building Resilience in a Changing Climate [1st ed.] 978-3-030-15518-6;978-3-030-15519-3

Table of contents :
Front Matter ....Pages i-xviii
Agriculture in a Changing Climate (Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Gopal Shankar Singh, Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash)....Pages 1-10
Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production (Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Gopal Shankar Singh, Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash)....Pages 11-43
Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment (Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Gopal Shankar Singh, Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash)....Pages 45-61
Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability (Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Gopal Shankar Singh, Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash)....Pages 63-92
Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India (Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Gopal Shankar Singh, Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash)....Pages 93-122
Policy Implications, Future Prospects and Conclusion (Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Gopal Shankar Singh, Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash)....Pages 123-128
Back Matter ....Pages 129-132

Citation preview

SPRINGER BRIEFS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

Pradeep Kumar Dubey Gopal Shankar Singh Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash

Adaptive Agricultural Practices Building Resilience in a Changing Climate 123

SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science

SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science present concise summaries of cutting-­ edge research and practical applications across a wide spectrum of environmental fields, with fast turnaround time to publication. Featuring compact volumes of 50 to 125 pages, the series covers a range of content from professional to academic. Monographs of new material are considered for the SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science series. Typical topics might include: a timely report of state-of-the-art analytical techniques, a bridge between new research results, as published in journal articles and a contextual literature review, a snapshot of a hot or emerging topic, an in-depth case study or technical example, a presentation of core concepts that students must understand in order to make independent contributions, best practices or protocols to be followed, a series of short case studies/debates highlighting a specific angle. SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science allow authors to present their ideas and readers to absorb them with minimal time investment. Both solicited and unsolicited manuscripts are considered for publication. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8868

Pradeep Kumar Dubey • Gopal Shankar Singh Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash

Adaptive Agricultural Practices Building Resilience in a Changing Climate

Pradeep Kumar Dubey Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development Banaras Hindu University Varanasi, UP, India

Gopal Shankar Singh Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development Banaras Hindu University Varanasi, UP, India

Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development Banaras Hindu University Varanasi, UP, India

ISSN 2191-5547     ISSN 2191-5555 (electronic) SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science ISBN 978-3-030-15518-6    ISBN 978-3-030-15519-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3 © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Foreword

Maximizing food production for the rapidly growing human population is one of the major sustainability challenges of this twenty-first century. Unfortunately, global agricultural production is under threat because soil productivity is decreasing, mainly because of the rapid loss of essential micro- and macronutrients. The indiscriminate use of agrochemicals to enhance crop production during the past few decades has resulted in rampant environmental pollution. Changing climatic conditions also cause various biotic and abiotic stress in plants and thereby negatively affect the yield and nutritional quality of agricultural produce. Therefore, the integration of suitable climate-resilient and adaptive agronomic practices along with proper agro-biotechnological interventions are of paramount importance to feed the rapidly growing population. In this context, the present book, Adaptive Agricultural Practices: Building Resilience in a Changing Climate, is a topical and timely contribution that provides sustainable solutions for carrying out agriculture under changing climatic conditions. Apart from building resilience under a changing climate, adaptive agricultural practices are believed to have a major role in reducing trace gas emissions from the soil and also in sequestering more carbon in the soil. One of the striking features of this book is that the authors have provided various adaptive agricultural practices at three levels, ranging from species to farm to landscape level, across different global locations. Moreover, the authors showcased different adaptive strategies and practicing those results in better crop productivity, profitability, and net gains while reducing environmental externalities. For example, practices such as agroforestry, mulching, intercropping, organic farming, and the push–pull system of biological pest control are described in detail. Adaptive practices addressing different biotic and abiotic stresses in crop plants that can certainly facilitate decision making are also illustrated with suitable examples. Brief highlights on crop and climate modelling approaches and sustainable agricultural intensification and extensification, along with farmers’ perceptions about adaptive agricultural practices, further enhance the reader’s understanding. Overall, the book is highly informative, timely, and demands wide readership to learn about these promising adaptive practices and their success stories. I sincerely congratulate the authors for putting different v

vi

Foreword

p­ erspectives together and bringing such adaptive and resilient practices for transforming agriculture as a sustainable enterprise to our attention. The National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS) New Delhi, India

Panjab Singh

Preface

Sustainable agriculture is imperative for feeding the rapidly growing human population. However, agricultural production under changing climatic conditions is a challenging task because climate change negatively affects the availability of critical natural resources as well as the growth, yield, and nutritional quality of agricultural produce. In this context, adaptive and climate-resilient practices come to the fore, and proper validation and field implementation of such practices at different scales and agro-climatic regions are necessary for ensuring the food security of current and future generations. In this backdrop, the present book, Adaptive Agricultural Practices: Building Resilience in a Changing Climate, is aimed to showcase such promising adaptive and climate-resilient agricultural practices from all over the world for transforming agriculture as a sustainable enterprise, especially under changing climatic conditions. This book also pays considerable attention to enhancing the livelihood of small, medium, and subsistence-level farmers in developing countries and also provides insights on how crop, field, and landscape level resilience practices can be built up against untoward incidences such as drought, salinity, floods, and diseases. Moreover, the policy implications and future prospects of various adaptation strategies are well addressed. We shall be grateful if this work can serve as a primer for students, researchers, agricultural scientists, environmental and plant scientists, policy makers, regulatory agencies, and agronomists interested in adaptive and climate-resilient agricultural practices. Varanasi, UP, India  

Pradeep Kumar Dubey Gopal Shankar Singh Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash

vii

Acknowledgments

We sincerely wish to thank the local farmers of eastern Uttar Pradesh for providing necessary information related to the various adaptive agricultural practices employed by them for enhancing agricultural productivity and profitability. We specially acknowledge Mr. Ram Charitra Singh, Mr. Paras Nath Singh, and Mr. Ajeet Singh for their active support and heartfelt cooperation for conducting field surveys in the Mirzapur district of eastern Uttar Pradesh. We wish to give our sincere gratitude to Prof. H.B. Singh, Prof. R.K. Mall, Dr. Ch. Srinivasa Rao, Dr. J.P. Verma, Mr. Rama Kant Dubey, Mr. Vishal Tripathi, Mr. Sheikh Adil Edrisi, Ms. Mansi Bakshi, and Mr. Rajan Chaurasiya for their support and encouragement during the entire course of the preparation of this book. Pradeep Kumar Dubey is thankful to the University Grant Commission, New Delhi for the Senior Research Fellowship (UGC-SRF). P.C. Abhilash is grateful to ICAR for the Lal Bhadur Shastri Outstanding Young Scientist Award in Natural Resource Management. Special thanks go to Prof. Panjab Singh, The President, National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS), for his continuous motivation and encouragement. We also thank DST-Mahamana Centre for Excellence in Climate Change Research (MCCECR) for logistic support. Thanks are also due to Dr. Sherestha Saini and Mr. P. Silembarasan from Springer for their editorial support, guidance, and cooperation.

ix

Introduction

Meeting the food and nutritional demand for the rapidly growing human population is one of the major sustainability challenges of this twenty-first century. Changing environmental conditions combined with the changing climatic conditions drastically affect the agriculture production across the world and thereby pose serious challenges to the good quality of life and well-being of the billions of subsistence-­ level to medium-scale farmers in the developing world. It has been predicted that if no immediate climate-resilient measures have taken place during the first half of this century, the second half-century will face many serious environmental challenges. Therefore, systemic and transformational practices based on adaptive and resilient capacity are needed to maintain global agricultural production under adverse climatic conditions. Specifically, the validation and large-scale implementation of such adaptive, climate–resilient, and resource-conserving agronomic practices at different levels ranging from species to farm/field to landscape level, and the customization for different agro-climatic regions of the world, are imperative for enhancing sustainable agricultural production. Such adaptive practices are not only meant for attaining the first three UN-Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDG)— (1) no poverty, (2) zero hunger, and (3) good health and well-being—but are also imperative for achieving almost all other SDGs. This SpringerBriefs provides such adaptive agronomic innovations practiced at different scales and regions of the globe. The remaining knowledge gaps of such practices are also highlighted, so that suitable policy recommendations can be implemented in accordance with future climatic conditions. Keywords  Adaptive agricultural practices, Climate change, Farm-level practices, Food security, Knowledge sharing, Landscape-level practices, Population explosion, Species-level practices, Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)

xi

Contents

1 Agriculture in a Changing Climate����������������������������������������������������������    1 1.1 Introduction����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������    1 1.2 Changing Environmental Constraints Facing Agricultural Systems��������������������������������������������������������������������������    2 1.3 Adaptive Agricultural Practices and Their Intervention at Three Different Levels: Crop/Species, Farm/Field, and Landscape Level��������������������������������������������������������������������������    6 References����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������    8 2 Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production ����������   11 2.1 Brief Overview of Adaptive Practices������������������������������������������������   11 2.2 Crop Diversification����������������������������������������������������������������������������   12 2.2.1 Intercropping��������������������������������������������������������������������������   12 2.2.2 Crop Rotation and Double/Companion Cropping������������������   19 2.2.3 Perenniation����������������������������������������������������������������������������   21 2.3 Agroforestry: A Farm/Field- and Landscape-Level Practice��������������   22 2.4 Mulching ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   26 2.5 Organic Farming ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������   30 2.5.1 Integration of Livestock into Farm Lands������������������������������   30 2.5.2 Replacement of Chemical Fertilizers by Organic Inputs��������������������������������������������������������������������   32 References����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   35 3 Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment ����������������������������������������������������������������������������   45 3.1 Use of Resilient Crop Varieties: A Species-Level Practice����������������   45 3.2 Coping Under Abiotic Stress Environment����������������������������������������   46 3.2.1 Conferring Drought Tolerance������������������������������������������������   46 3.2.2 Conferring Salinity Tolerance������������������������������������������������   48 3.2.3 Conferring Flood Tolerance����������������������������������������������������   49

xiii

xiv

Contents

3.3 Coping Under Biotic Stress Environment������������������������������������������   50 3.3.1 Crop Weed Resistance������������������������������������������������������������   50 3.3.2 Crop Pests and Disease Resistance ����������������������������������������   50 3.4 Future Crops for Elevated Temperature and CO2 ������������������������������   53 3.5 Use of Climate/Crop Models for Building Adaptive Capacity in Agriculture for a Future Environment ����������������������������   55 References����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   56 4 Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability������������������������������������������������������������������   63 4.1 Increasing Nutrient and Water Use Efficiency������������������������������������   63 4.2 Conservation Agriculture (CA)����������������������������������������������������������   66 4.3 Farm Innovations for Enhanced Production of Major Cereals Crops����������������������������������������������������������������������   73 4.4 Sustainable Agriculture Intensification and Extensification������������������������������������������������������������������������������   77 4.5 Sustainability Issues in Agriculture from the Farmers’ Perspective��������������������������������������������������������������������������   81 References����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   87 5 Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India����������������������������������������������������������������������������������   93 5.1 Introduction����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   94 5.1.1 What Are Adaptive Agricultural Practices?����������������������������   94 5.1.2 Objectives of the Present Study����������������������������������������������   95 5.2 Methodology Employed����������������������������������������������������������������������   95 5.2.1 Study Area: Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India ������������������������������   95 5.2.2 Field Survey����������������������������������������������������������������������������   96 5.2.3 Geographic and Meteorological Conditions of the Study Region����������������������������������������������������������������   99 5.3 Results and Discussion ����������������������������������������������������������������������  100 5.3.1 Challenges and Threats Faced by Farmers ����������������������������  100 5.3.2 Adaptive Agronomic Practices Employed by Local Farmers��������������������������������������������������������������������  106 5.4 Conclusions and Future Policy Implications��������������������������������������  117 5.4.1 Conclusions����������������������������������������������������������������������������  117 5.4.2 Future Policy Implications������������������������������������������������������  118 References����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  120 6 Policy Implications, Future Prospects and Conclusion��������������������������  123 6.1 Policy Implications and Future Prospects������������������������������������������  123 6.2 Conclusions����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  125 References����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  128 Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  129

About the Authors

Pradeep Kumar Dubey  is a senior research fellow in the Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development at Banaras Hindu University (BHU) in Varanasi, India. He received his bachelor’s degree in Botany, Chemistry, and Zoology from Kamla Nehru Institute of Physical and Social Sciences and his master’s in Environmental Sciences from Banaras Hindu University; he is currently pursuing his PhD in Environmental Science and Technology at Banaras Hindu University. His main research interests include climate-resilient agriculture, sustainable agriculture, resource conservation techniques, food security, and adaptive agricultural practices. He is a member of the Agro-ecosystem Specialist Group of Commission on Ecosystem Management, IUCN, Managing Editor of Climate Change & Environmental Sustainability, and a regular reviewer for many international journals. Gopal Shankar Singh  is a professor in the Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development at Banaras Hindu University (BHU) in Varanasi, India, and leads the Department and Faculty of Environment & Sustainable Development in the capacity of Head and Dean. He completed his master’s from BHU and PhD from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. His research interests include natural resource management, biodiversity conservation, traditional ecological knowledge, ethnobotany, climate change, watershed management, sustainable development, and bridging the gaps of natural sciences with social sciences components during the past 25 years. He is an expert member of several national and international scientific committees including UN-IPBES. Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash  is a senior assistant professor of sustainability science in the Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development at Banaras Hindu University in Varanasi, India, and Chair of the Agroecosystem Specialist Group of IUCN-Commission on Ecosystem Management. He is a Fellow of the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS), and his latest research interests include land degradation and restoration, adaptive land management, nature-based solutions, climate-resilient agriculture, indigenous and local

xv

xvi

About the Authors

knowledge (ILK), and ecosystem-based approaches for managing agrobiodiversity for food and nutritional security. He is an expert member of four IUCN commissions (CEM, CEC, SSC, & CEESP), IUCN Task Force on Oil Palm & Biodiversity, UN-FAO, UN-IPBES, UNDP-BES Network, UNFCCD, and International Resource Panel of UNEP. He is also serving on the editorial board of the journals Agronomy, Biodegradation, Biomass & Bioenergy, Energy, Ecology & Environment, Environmental Management, Land Degradation & Development, Land, Restoration Ecology, Sustainable Earth, and Tropical Ecology.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

ABA Abscisic acid ACC 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate APSIM Agricultural production systems sIMulator AFOLU Agriculture, Forestry or Other Land Use AMF Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi APX Ascorbate peroxidase BPH Brown plant hopper CA Conservation agriculture CAFOs Concentrated animal feeding operations CAM Crassulacean acid metabolism CERES Crop environment resource synthesis DAP Diammonium phosphate DSSAT Decision Support System for Agro-Technology Transfer EBL 24-Epibrassinolide EPS Exopolysaccharides EUE Energy use efficiency FACE Free air CO2 enrichment FYM Farm yard manure GHGs Greenhouse gases GIS Geographic Information System GSH Glutathione reductase GWP Global warming potential ICM Integrated crop management IDM Integrated disease management IGP Indo-Gangetic Plain INM Integrated nutrient management IPM Integrated pest management IRM Integrated rice management IWM Integrated weed management LUE Land use efficiency NPK Nitrogen/phosphorus/potassium xvii

xviii

NUE OTC PGPM PGPR PSB PSM REDD+ RM system ROS RR system RW system RWCS SCI SOC SOD SOM SRF SRI SWAT UN-FAO UPAF VOCs VPD WUE

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Nutrient use efficiency Open top chamber Plant growth-promoting microorganism Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria Phosphate-solubilizing bacteria Phosphate-solubilizing microorganism Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation Rice–maize system Reactive oxygen species Rice–rice system Rice–wheat system Rice–wheat cropping system System of crop intensification Soil organic carbon Superoxide dismutase Soil organic matter Short rotation forestry System of rice intensification Soil and Water Assessment Tool Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry Volatile organic carbon Vapour pressure density Water use efficiency

Chapter 1

Agriculture in a Changing Climate

Abstract  Maximizing agricultural production for ensuring the food and nutritional requirements of a rapidly growing human population is a major sustainability challenge of this twenty-first century. This introductory chapter briefly address the various environmental challenges faced by agricultural system such as overgrowing human population, climate change, biotic and abiotic stress in crop plants etc., and the need of transition towards a resilient farming practices for feeding a growing population. In this backdrop, the sustainable execution of adaptive agricultural practices at different levels i.e. crop/species, farm/field, and landscape levels are imperative to meet the food and nutritional security of the growing human population. Keywords  Adaptive agriculture · Climate change · Food security · Resilience

1.1  Introduction Global food security is at the crossroads as our ever-growing population (Godfray et  al. 2010; UNDES 2013) and changing climatic conditions (IPCC 2014) exert tremendous pressure on agriculture systems worldwide. For one example, an increasing population leads to decreased land holdings per person (Abegaz and Keulen 2009; Abhilash et al. 2016) and thereby has resulted in continuous exploitation of croplands without any fallow periods. Consequently, the soil does not have enough time to recuperate its fertility, thus showing nutrient loss. These stresses ultimately enhance the process of land degradation and may lead to reduction in average cultivated land per person to less than 0.17 ha (FAO 2011; Abhilash 2015). Apart from that, the changing climatic conditions also pose serious threats to agriculture and food security (Dubey et al. 2016a, b; Dubey and Singh 2017). The threat to ‘food security’ is also threatening ‘good quality of life’ at various levels and scales (i.e., local, regional, global) with the ultimate results of poverty and unequal sharing of food resources among the rich and poor peoples in the world. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 P. K. Dubey et al., Adaptive Agricultural Practices, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3_1

1

2

1  Agriculture in a Changing Climate

Even today, nearly one billion people are not so fortunate to have two full meals per day (Sheeran 2011). Developing countries are most vulnerable to food security and poverty (IPCC 2014), and millions of poor and smallholder farmers are prone to malnutrition and hunger. Without immediate interventions, the problem will persist for the coming decades (Godfray et al. 2010; Abhilash et al. 2015) and will seriously undermine the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framed by the UN as their 2030 agenda for development. In particular, 1.5 billion people in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa are under the grind of food poverty, a number expected to reach 3.9  billion by middle of this century (Wheeler and von Braun 2013). The global population is projected to increase to 9 (Godfray et al. 2010) or 9.6 billion (UNDES 2013) by mid-century, and therefore feeding this overgrowing population in the near future using the existing land area and also by current agricultural practices seems unimaginable. Moreover, the lack of information, knowledge sharing, and extension services provided to farmers also have a major effect in narrowing the agricultural yield in developing countries. Climate scientists have already predicted that if immediate adaptation (particularly crop-level adaptation) strategies are not properly implemented (Challinor et al. 2014; Abhilash et al. 2016), the agriculture sector is going to witness severe repercussions in coming decades. To feed this rapidly growing population, at least 60% additional agricultural extensification must happen by 2050 (Alexandratos and Bruinsma 2012). However, land is a limited resource, and apart from agricultural activities, the growing population also needs land for habitation and other developmental activities. Therefore, adopting systemic and transformational practices based on the adaptive capacity of farms and fields are imperative for ensuring food availability in coming decades (Morton 2007; Challinor et al. 2014; Dubey et al. 2016a) (Fig. 1.1).

1.2  C  hanging Environmental Constraints Facing Agricultural Systems As we mentioned earlier, the agriculture sector is badly impacted by changing environmental conditions, facing various biotic and abiotic stresses daily. Major biotic stress includes herbivore or pathogen attack and crop pests and diseases (Figs. 1.2 and 1.3). Abiotic stress includes drought, flood, salinity, heat shock, chilling stress, and UV radiations (Fig. 1.4) (Wani et al. 2016; Schwalm et al. 2017). Although crop plants bear a self-defence mechanism against these stresses and tend to show tolerance or sensitivity during different stages of growth and development (Chinnusamy et al. 2004; Abhilash et al. 2012), they are vulnerable to multiple stresses. The plants either release phytohormones such as abscisic acid (ABA) and ethylene or express multiple traits (e.g., volatile-based emissions to repel pests/pathogens, etc.) to ­combat various abiotic and biotic stresses (Barrett and Heil 2012; Wani et al. 2016).

1.2  Changing Environmental Constraints Facing Agricultural Systems

3

Need of adaptive agricultural practices •Overpopulation •Climate change •Erratic weather changes or climate variability’s. •Biotic and abiotic stress in different agro-climatic regions of the world. •Rising food demand and change in dietary preferences. •Use of land and water resources for non-agricultural purposes and everyday increasing rivalry for it. •Constrain in agricultural land capacity to produce substantial amount of food to feed overgrowing population. •Soil degradation due to pollution by anthropogenic activities. •Need of higher input cost in agricultural sector. •Need of mitigating GHGs emissions from agricultural lands

Advantages of Adaptive Agricultural practices •Conserve soil and improve its fertility. •Ensure carbon sequestration •Improve water availability. •Increased nutrient use efficiency of crops •Cope with events such as drought, flood/submergence, pest diseases or salinity stress etc. in crop plants. •Increased crop yield •Enhancement of nutritional quality in crops or crop improvements. •Preservation of landscapes, rivers, streams, marshes and mangroves. •Conservation of natural resources, natural habitats and associated biodiversity. •Reduce greenhouse gas emissions into atmosphere.

Fig. 1.1  Why do we need adaptive agricultural practices? Indeed, adaptive practices are the need of the hour. Pictorial representation of the need as well as the benefits of various adaptive agricultural practices

For  example, several crops such as cereals (wheat and maize; Kong et  al. 2010; Chen et al. 2014), oilseeds (soybean; Komatsu et al. 2015), vegetables (tomato and cucumber; Ahsan et al. 2007; He et al. 2012), condiments (cacao; Bertolde et al. 2014), and spices (red/white clover; Stoychev et al. 2013) have been seen to show adaptation under flood conditions by expressing diverse traits. However, because of continuous, long-time domestication, most of the species have lost their natural traits (Stenberg et al. 2015). In addition, intermittently occurring multiple stresses pose additional challenges. For instance, events such as salinity and drought (IPCC 2008), heavy rainfall, floods, and drought (Iijima et al. 2016) are affecting the resilience of agricultural systems.

4

1  Agriculture in a Changing Climate

Fig. 1.2  Crop pests are the major biotic stress in the agriculture sector. Common pests of rice crops: (a) young caterpillar of cutworm, (b) damselfly, (c) slender rice bug (d–f), grasshoppers, (g) gundhi bug, (h) whorl maggots, (i) stink bug. (Photo credit: Mr. Ajeet Singh, IESD, BHU)

Modelling studies have predicted that a climate-smart crop production system alone cannot solve the burden of food security under changing climatic conditions (Van Wijk et  al. 2014). Looking at the shortage of plant-derived foods, various national and international initiatives such as concentrated animal-feeding operations (CAFOs) (CLYEC 2007) and intensive livestock farm management (IAESD and NIES 2009) have already been started in recent years to promote the consumption of animal-derived foods for human well-being. Consequently, the majority of the global population has been more inclined towards consumption of animal food

1.2  Changing Environmental Constraints Facing Agricultural Systems

5

Fig. 1.3  Damage caused in rice by (a) gundhi bug, (b) cutworms, (c) green horned caterpillar, (d) stink bug, and (e–f) false smut disease caused by Ustilaginoidea virens. (Photo credit: Mr. Ajeet Singh, IESD, BHU)

in the past two decades (Pan 2011). Initiatives such as CAFOs are expanding in developing as well as developed nations including the US (USEPA 2009). However, insofar as environmental and human health is concerned, over-dependence on animal food cannot be considered as a better alternative to crop-derived food. Overall, the changing environmental conditions will negatively affect the crop growth, yield, soil quality, and even the vegetation of a particular region (Abhilash et al. 2013; Thornton et al. 2014; Rakshit et al. 2016a, b). Therefore, better adaptive practices or strategies at different levels must be incorporated for sustainable agricultural production.

6

1  Agriculture in a Changing Climate

Fig. 1.4  Abiotic stresses in crops such as (a) drought, (b) flood, (c) cold, and (d) salinity are the major stresses affecting agricultural production across the globe. (Photo credits (d) Mr. Sheikh Adil Edrisi, IESD, BHU)

1.3  A  daptive Agricultural Practices and Their Intervention at Three Different Levels: Crop/Species, Farm/Field, and Landscape Level The foregoing assertions clearly indicate that adaptive practices are imperative for sustainable agriculture as these adaptive practices should bring stability in the cropping system by retaining crop yield potential in terms of both quality (nutritional value) as well as quantity. It also allows recuperation of the functional integrity of agricultural systems even under stressed environmental conditions (Di Falco and Chavas 2008; Lin 2011). Thus, it is anticipated that adaptive agricultural practices can ensure both food security and environmental sustainability and thereby improve the livelihood of one and all. The implementation of such adaptive agronomic practices at various levels (i.e., ranging from crop/species to farm/field to landscape level) will also provide benefits at three different scales: local, regional, and global (Fig. 1.5). For example, a better adaptation to ‘salinity stress’ or ‘region having lack of freshwater resources’ could be either to use saline water as a new resource for

1.3  Adaptive Agricultural Practices and Their Intervention at Three Different Levels…

7

Fig. 1.5  Levels at which adaptive agricultural practices can be employed: (1) crop/species level, (2) farm/field, and (3) landscape level

i­rrigation or other agricultural purposes in an innovative way (Pang et al. 2010), or to develop salt-tolerant crop varieties by suitable crop and nutrient management strategies (Singh et al. 2016). The former one is an example of farm/field/landscape adaptation whereas the latter is crop/species level adaptive practices. Another example of a species-level adaptive practice is to select the suitable crop/intercrops for providing defence against pest attacks. For instance, use of such intercrops that can mimic the pathogen/herbivore which induces emissions of volatile organic compound (VOC) in crops and plants to provide resistance against pests is a successful practice used by farmers for a long time (Khan et al. 1997). However, recent studies suggest such practices of providing an indirect plant defence system against pests was beneficial only in cases of monoculture (Rodriguez et  al. 2015). Therefore, there is always a need to explore more new insights of adaptive agricultural practices that could resolve both current and future problems under a changing environment. For instance, Stenberg et al. (2015) suggested that nectar-based food rewards for ­biocontrol agents can be given combined with volatile-based tri-trophic interactions to resolve problems of pest attacks on crop plants. In the present book, we articulate such promising adaptive agronomic practices from different agro-climatic zones of the world as model practices for enhancing the sustainability of global food production and also for building resilience under changing climatic conditions. Moreover, the book also exemplifies the knowledge gaps and future prospects for transforming agriculture as a sustainable enterprise in a changing environment.

8

1  Agriculture in a Changing Climate

References Abegaz A, Keulen HV (2009) Modelling soil nutrient dynamics under alternative farm management practices in the Northern Highlands of Ethiopia. Soil Tillage Res 103:203–215 Abhilash PC (2015) Managing soil resources from pollution and degradation: the need of the hour. J Clean Prod 102:550–551 Abhilash PC, Powell JR, Singh HB, Singh BK (2012) Plant–microbe interactions: novel applications for exploitation in multipurpose remediation technologies. Trends Biotechnol 30:416–420 Abhilash PC, Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Srivastava P, Verma JP, Singh HB (2013) Remediation and management of POPs-contaminated soils in a warming climate: challenges and perspectives. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:5879–5885 Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Dubey RK, Edrisi SA (2015) Coping with changes: adaptation of trees in a changing environment. Trends Plant Sci 20:137–138 Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Dubey RK, Bakshi M, Dube PK, Ebbs SD (2016) Sustainability of crop production from polluted lands. Energ Ecol Environ 1:54–56 Ahsan N, Lee DG, Lee SH, Kang KY, Bahk JD, Choi MS, Lee IJ, Renaut J, Lee BH (2007) A comparative proteomic analysis of tomato leaves in response to waterlogging stress. Physiol Plant 131:555–570 Alexandratos N, Bruinsma J (2012) World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 Revision ESA Working paper No. 12–03. FAO, Rome Barrett LG, Heil M (2012) Unifying concepts and mechanisms in the speciality of plant-enemy interactions. Trends Plant Sci 17:282–292 Bertolde FZ, Almeida AAF, Pirovani CP (2014) Analysis of gene expression and proteomic profiles of clonal genotypes from Theobroma cacao subjected to soil flooding. PLoS One 9(10):e108705 Challinor AJ, Watson J, Lobell DB, Howden SM, Smith DR, Chhetri N (2014) A meta-analysis of crop yield under climate change and adaptation. Nat Clim Chang 4(4):287–291. https://doi. org/10.1038/NCLIMATE2153 Chen Y, Chen X, Wang H, Bao Y, Zhang W (2014) Examination of the leaf proteome during flooding stress and the induction of programmed cell death in maize. Proteome Sci 12(1):33 China Livestock Yearbook Editing Committee (CLYEC) (2007) China livestock yearbook. China Agriculture Press, Beijing Chinnusamy V, Schumaker H, Zhu JK (2004) Molecular genetic perspectives on cross-talk and specificity in abiotic stress signalling in plants. J Exp Bot 55:225–236 Dubey PK, Singh A (2017) Adaptive agricultural practices for rice-wheat cropping system in Indo-­ Gangetic plains of India. IUCN-CEM Agroecosyst Newslett 1(1):13–17. Available at https:// www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/content/documents/agroecosystems_sg_iucn_cem_newsletter_1. pdf Dubey PK, Singh GS, Abhilash PC (2016a) Agriculture in a changing climate. J  Clean Prod 113:1046–1047 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Dubey PK, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2016b) Exploring rhizospheric interactions for agricultural sustainability: the need of integrative research on multi-trophic interactions. J Clean Prod 115:362–365 di Falco S, Chavas JP (2008) Rainfall shocks, resilience, and the effects of crop biodiversity on agroecosystem productivity. Land Econ 84:83–96 FAO (2011) The state of the world’s land and water resources for Food and Agriculture Organization. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF, Pretty J, Robinson S, Thomas SM, Toulmin C (2010) Food security. The challenges of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327:812–818 He L, Lu X, Tian J, Yang Y, Li B, Li J, Guo S (2012) Proteomic analysis of the effects of exogenous calcium on hypoxic-responsive proteins in cucumber roots. Proteome Sci 10(1):42

References

9

IAESD, NIES (2009) The first national survey of pollution sources – livestock and poultry production excrete coefficients manual handbook. The First National Survey of Pollution Sources Leading Group Office, Beijing Iijima M, Awala SK, Watanabe Y, Kawato Y, Fujioka Y, Yamanea K, Wadaa KC (2016) Mixed cropping has the potential to enhance flood tolerance of drought-adapted grain crops. J Plant Physiol 192:21–25 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2008) Climate change and water. In: Bates BC, Kundzewicz ZW, Palutikof J, Wu S (eds) IPCC technical paper VI. IPCC, Secretariat, Geneva. (210 pp) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; New York, NY. (p: 1150) Khan ZR, Nyarko KA, Chiliswa P, Hassanali A, Kimani S, Lwande W, Overholt WA, Picketta JA, Smart LE, Woodcock CM (1997) Intercropping increases parasitism of pests. Nature 388:631–632 Komatsu S, Tougou M, Nanjo Y (2015) Proteomic techniques and management of flooding tolerance in Soybean. J Proteome Res 14:3768–3778 Kong FJ, Oyanagi A, Komatsu S (2010) Cell wall proteome of wheat roots under flooding stress using gel-based and LC MS/MSbased proteomics approaches. Biochim Biophys Acta Proteins Proteomics 1804:124–136 Lin B (2011) Resilience in agriculture through crop diversification: adaptive management for environmental change. Bioscience 61:183–193 Morton JF (2007) The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:19680–19685 Pan YG (2011) Panorama and trend of meat consumption in China. J Northwest Agric Univ 11:1–6 Pang HC, Li YY, Yang JS, Liang YS (2010) Effect of brackish water irrigation and straw mulching on soil salinity and crop yields under monsoonal climatic conditions. Agric Water Manag 97:1971–1977 Rakshit A, Mishra R, Singh RN, Abhilash PC (2016a) Celebrating the international year of soils: catalyzing initiatives and provide a modern perspective of soil science. Int J  Bioresour Sci 3:69–77 Rakshit A, Parihar M, Yadav RS, Abhilash PC (2016b) Soils are back at the centre stage: development and trends. SATSA Mukhaptra 20:77–80 Rodriguez EQ, Morales‐Vargas AT, Molina‐Torres J, Ádame‐Alvarez RM, Acosta‐Gallegos JA, Heil M (2015) Plant volatiles cause direct, induced and associational resistance in common bean to the fungal pathogen Colletotrichum lindemuthianum. J Ecol 103:250–260 Schwalm CR, Anderegg WRL, Michalak AM, Fisher JB, Biondi F, Koch G, Litvak M, Ogle K, Shaw JD, Wolf A, Huntzinger DN, Schaefer K, Cook R, Wei Y, Fang Y, Hayes D, Huang M, Jain A, Tian H (2017) Global patterns of drought recovery. Nature 548:202–205 Sheeran J (2011) Preventing hunger: sustainability not aid. Nature 479:469–470 Singh YP, Mishra VK, Singh S, Sharma DK, Singh D, Singh US, Singh RK, Haefele SM, Ismail AM (2016) Productivity of sodic soils can be enhanced through the use of salt tolerant rice varieties and proper agronomic practices. Field Crop Res 190:82–90 Stenberg JA, Heil A, Ahman A, Björkman C (2015) Optimizing crops for biocontrol of pests and disease. Trends Plant Sci 20:698–712 Stoychev V, Simova-Stoilova L, Vaseva I, Kostadinova A, Nenkova R, Feller U, Demirevska K (2013) Protein changes and proteolytic degradation in red and white clover plants subjected to waterlogging. Acta Physiol Plant 35:1925–1932 Thornton PK, Ericksen PJ, Herrero M, Challinor A (2014) Climate variability and vulnerability to climate change: a review. Glob Chang Biol 20:3313–3328 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDES), Population Division (2013) World population prospects: the 2012 revision, Volume I: Comprehensive tables ST/ESA/ SER.A/336. Available at http://esa.un.org/wpp/Documentation/pdf/WPP2012_Volume-I_ Comprehensive-Tables.pdf.

10

1  Agriculture in a Changing Climate

USEPA (2009) Regulatory definitions of large CAFOs, medium CAFOs, and small CAFOs. USEPA, Washington, DC.  Available at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/. sector_table.pdf. Accessed 26 Feb 2014 Van Wijk MT, Rufino MC, Enahoro D, Parsons D, Silvestri S, Valdivia RO, Herrero M (2014) Farm household models to analyse food security in a changing climate: a review. Global Food Sec 3:77–84 Wani SH, Kumar V, Shriram V, Sah SK (2016) Phytohormones and their metabolic engineering for abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Crop J 4:162–176 Wheeler T, von Braun J  (2013) Climate change impacts on global food security. Science 341:508–513

Chapter 2

Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

Abstract  Agronomic practices play a major role in enhancing the productivity of agricultural crops. However, such agronomic practices under changing climatic condition is not adequate to enhance crop production as the changing climatic conditions are reported to negatively affect crop growth, yield, soil quality and thereby the nutritional quality of agricultural produce. Furthermore, maintaining critical resources including water is a challenging task under changing climatic conditions. Therefore, the wise adoption of various adaptive, specifically resource-conserving agricultural practices such as intercropping, crop rotation, agroforestry, mixed croplivestock farming, mulching, and the push–pull system of crop pest and disease management etc. are imperative to cope-up with such adverse situations. The present chapter describes such agronomic practices and their benefits in detail. Keywords  Adaptive agricultural practices · Crop diversification · Mulching · Organic farming · Resource conserving practices

2.1  Brief Overview of Adaptive Practices Management of agricultural systems, technical and equipment support, policy/economic makeover, and infrastructural upkeep are of prime importance to improve the agriculture sector of any nation. However, to cope with agricultural production under the present and future warming climate, adaptive and climate-resilient agricultural practices should be implemented immediately (Dubey et al. 2016a; Dubey and Singh 2017). Many international conventions and agreements, viz. RIO + 20 (2012), the Paris Agreement (UNFCC, 2015), and the United Nation Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDGs) have commonalities in their targets. They all are

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 P. K. Dubey et al., Adaptive Agricultural Practices, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3_2

11

12

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

framed to meet global food and nutritional security to eradicate hunger, poverty, and malnutrition, thereby attaining sustainable development by the year 2030. Because agriculture is a dominant economic sector in many developing nations, it has a major role in deciding the livelihood and income status of farmers (Collier and Dercon 2014). Therefore, farmers are also equally concerned for employing climate-resilient agricultural practices at the local level (Galdies et al. 2016). They continue to employ various indigenous and adaptive practices at either the crop/ species, farm/field, or landscape level. Adaptive practices at the first two levels are adopted by all groups of farmers, whether farming at a small, medium, or large scale, whereas the landscape-level adaptive practices (for example, agroforestry) are being done mostly by large-scale farmers or sometimes by small farmers provided they are being paid for this work by industrial interference or through government support (Hartoyo et  al. 2016). Overall, the adoption of climate-resilient, adaptive, and resource-conserving agronomic practices can ensure high productivity, profitability, crop biodiversity, minimal emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), and reduced environmental risks associated with the agriculture sector (Abhilash 2015; Abhilash et al. 2013). Detailed description of promising practices with examples from different locations around the world and their benefits are discussed in this chapter and shown in Table 2.1.

2.2  Crop Diversification Crop diversification means switching from single or mono-cropping towards double/companion/multiple cropping practices, intercropping practices, crop rotation, or perenniation, etc. (Glover et al. 2012; Boudreau 2013): it is a more efficient way of utilizing natural resources such as soil, water, and light energy for agricultural production. Crop diversification strategies simultaneously increase net crop production and also improve soil health by imparting interspecific interactions among different crop species both above and below ground, respectively (Abhilash and Dubey 2014; Rakshit et al. 2017, 2018). Aboveground diversification increases canopy heat and light capture whereas belowground diversification assists in better utilization of water and soil macro- and micronutrients such as phosphorus (P), iron (Fe), and zinc (Zn) by increasing soil microbial load and activity (Singh et al. 2016c; Li et al. 2016; King and Hofmockel 2017).

2.2.1  Intercropping Intercropping is a traditional (but often neglected) agricultural practice in which two or more than two crops are grown at the same place simultaneously (Dwivedi et al. 2015). Intercropping alters the microclimate of the soil by changing soil temperature and moisture: it changes the pattern of dispersal through wind, rain, or a vector

2.2  Crop Diversification

13

Table 2.1  Promising adaptive agricultural practices employed at species, farm, and landscape level from across the world for sustainable food production under changing climate Sample no. Adaptive agronomic practices (a) Landscape level 1. Integrated soil crop management system (Meng et al. 2016) 2.

Crop residue management strategies (Ventrella et al. 2016)

3.

Transition from conventional agriculture practice to agroforestry practices (Schwab et al. 2015) Agroforestry practice in larger landscape (Torralba et al. 2016)

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Benefits of adaptive practices Higher crop yield and N use efficiency; low environmental risk Maintains SOC over a long period of time; higher crop productivity Improved soil quality, soil fertility, and productivity

Location (country) China

Southern Italy

Typical mid-hill region of Nepal

Increases soil fertility, decreases All Europe soil erosion, conserves biodiversity, and improves ecosystem services China Nitrogen supply capacity and Replacement of nitrogenous production sustainability are fertilizer by green manure (Xie improved; minimised et al. 2016) environmental risk New Delhi, India Enhanced soil quality; Selective irrigation practices; optimized water and fertilizer zero tillage; use of FYM and domestic sewage sludge (Bhaduri use for rice and wheat and Purakayastha 2014) Conversion of tropical forest site Reduced NO2 fluxes from farm French Guiana, into agricultural cropland or land France pasture by using fire-free chop and mulch method (Petitjean et al. 2015) Western Kenya, Enhanced pest and weed Climate-adapted push-pull Eastern Uganda, system in a companion cropping control; better growth; higher soil fertility and soil microbial Northern system as a pest and weed diversity; higher grain yield by Tanzania management strategy (Midega companion cropping et al. 2015) Higher grain yield with reduced North and South Use of biofertilizer (Rhodopseudomonas palustris) in CH4 emission Thailand organic and saline flooded paddy field (Kantachote et al. 2016) Bengolea, Monte Enhanced faunal diversity; Integrated agronomic practices, Buey, Pergamino increment in litter and soil i.e., mixed crop rotation; use of Province, quality cover crops; rational use of Argentina agrochemicals; integrated pest, weed, and disease management; no-tillage (Bedano et al. 2016) (continued)

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

14 Table 2.1 (continued)

Sample no. Adaptive agronomic practices 11. Split nitrogen fertilizer application under plastic film mulching in semi-arid farmland with maize cultivation (Wang et al. 2016) 12. Reduced tillage and strip tillage under fresh and permanent beds in rice–maize system (Gathala et al. 2015) 13.

Summer legume crops grown as green manure in rotation with winter wheat (Dabin et al. 2016)

(b) Farm/field level 1. Integrated pest management (IPM) practices (Muriithi et al. 2016) 2. Legume-based double cropping system under conservation tillage practice (Hassan et al. 2016; Shah et al. 2012) 3. Wheat/maize/soybean relay intercropping system with rational phosphorus application (Chen et al. 2015) 4. Minimum tillage and intercropping (sunflower + 60% soybean) (Hamzei and Seyyedi 2016) 5. Use of laser levelling techniques under water-saving technology in agriculture (Larson et al. 2016) 6.

7.

Benefits of adaptive practices Increase in maize grain yield

Higher yield; higher profitability from reduced production cost and labour input under permanent beds crop establishment Higher soil biomass, maintains N pool with lower C:N ratio, reduces risk of N loss through leaching, better crop growth Controls fruit fly infestation and reduces yield loss; thereby increases net income Increases residual and fixed nitrogen and thus increases net benefit and cost–benefit ratio

Location (country) Loess Plateau, China

Northwest Bangladesh

Shaanxi Province, south Loess Plateau, China Meru County, Kenya Rawalpindi, Pakistan

Increases total grain yield, shoot Southwest China phosphorus uptake and phosphorus recovery efficiency Increases energy use efficiency, land use efficiency (LUE), and total yield

Six- to sevenfold gain in net revenue in comparison to cost input thereby enhancing gross benefit Increases crop yield, lowered Integrated nutrient management (long-term balanced fertilization) yield-scaled global warming potential and reduced N2O (Dhadli et al. 2016) emission to some extent Controls weeds at different Integrated glyphosate-resistant (GR) volunteer corn management growth stage of soybean in a corn–soybean cropping system (Chahal and Jhala 2016; Alms et al. 2016; Chahal et al. 2015; Marquardt and Johnson 2013)

Hamedan, Iran

Punjab, India

Ludhiana, Punjab, India

Clay Centre, Clay County, Nebraska, Lincoln, Lancaster County, USA (continued)

2.2  Crop Diversification

15

Table 2.1 (continued) Sample no. Adaptive agronomic practices 8. Tillage and trash management practice in field having sugarcane variety ‘Co 86-032’ as first-year crop and ratoon as next-year crop (Surendran et al. 2016)

Location (country) Tamil Nadu, India

9.

Meghalaya, India

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

Benefits of adaptive practices Germination and yield of ratoon crop increased; nitrogen and phosphorus availability in soil, soil organic carbon (SOC), microbial biomass carbon (MBC), and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) population is increased. Soil fertility is also sustained Conservation tillage and residue Soil organic carbon increased. mulching (Das et al. 2014a) Soil physicochemical, hydrophysical, and biological qualities improved and crop yield increased Nitrate nitrogen and total Treatment with low N fertilization rate, high fertilization nitrogen leaching in wheat frequency, and dense planting in season is reduced significantly and rice grain yield increased RW cropping system (Cao et al. significantly 2014) Increased soil carbon Plastic film mulching under sequestration and total carbon reduced water application in a stock cotton field (Li et al. 2015) Soil temperature and soil Plastic film mulching in moisture are enhanced. Grain temperate upland soil (Cuello productivity is increased et al. 2015) Dry seeded rice with increased Crop competitiveness increases seeding rates (Ahmed et al. 2014) suppressing weed growth and sustaining grain yield Nitrogen use efficiency Optimised nitrogen fertilization increased in cropping system (Ju et al. 2009; Cui et al. 2008; Zhao et al. 2006) Significant reduction in CH4 No-tillage applied in a double rice cropping system (Zhang emission for both rice seasons; et al. 2013a) thus it can be a promising option for carbon-smart agriculture by mitigating GHG emission from paddy field Mechanical hill direct seeding of Higher grain yield is obtained; hybrid rice in a single season rice productive tiller per hill is production system with increased increased seeding space (Wang et al. 2014) Lesser production costs with Alteration in tillage and crop more crop productivity; soil establishment techniques with organic carbon (SOC) content is partial residue retention (Singh improved; physical properties et al. 2016a) of soil are improved

Jiangsu Province, China

Xinjiang, China

Jinju, South Korea Bangladesh

Taihu (East China), North China Plain Hunan Province, South China

Zhejiang Province, China

Uttar Pradesh, India

(continued)

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

16 Table 2.1 (continued)

Sample no. Adaptive agronomic practices 18. Inoculation of plant growth-­ promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) in a field having history of wheat, rice, and black gram cropping system during past 10 years (Mäder et al. 2011) 19. Straw mulching treatment in winter wheat crop (Peng et al. 2015) 20. Phosphorus application and inoculation of biofertilizers [phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB) and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhiza (VAM)] in soybean– wheat cropping system (Mahanta et al. 2014) 21. Permanent narrow and broad-bed planting, residue management, and zero tillage as conservation agricultural (CA) practices (Das et al. 2014a) 22. Plow, rotary, and no tillage practice under rainfed condition having 20 years of rotary tillage history (Guan et al. 2015)

23.

24.

Intercropping cereal (maize) and legumes (Dwivedi et al. 2015)

Intercropping cereal (wheat) and legumes in a low nitrogen input agriculture system viz. organic farming system (Bedoussac et al. 2014) (c) Crop/species level 1. Integrated disease management (IDM) and deficit irrigation under water shortage in tomato crop (Cantore et al. 2016)

Benefits of adaptive practices Grain yield increased, phosphorus use efficiency increased

Increased yield, water use efficiency, and soil water storage Many root properties like cation-exchange capacity (CEC) and root length density improved; grain yield is also increased

Location (country) Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, India

Shaanxi Province, Northwest China New Delhi, India

Higher mean water productivity. New Delhi, India Rise in net income gain. May be highly beneficial for region with intensive tillage practice Plow tillage was most beneficial in winter wheat. Increases groundwater recharge, grain yield, spike numbers, 1000-­ grain weight, water use efficiency, and plant population Improved soil fertility and increased crop yield. Provided insurance against crop failure incidence via crop pests and disease attacks Increased yield and protein concentrations in wheat grains and reduced weeds in comparison to sole legume crops. Managed crop disease. Compensated negative effects of water stress on plants by increasing yield and water use efficiency (WUE). Fruit quality is also improved

Hebei Province, China

Meerut, India

France and Denmark

Southern Italy

(continued)

2.2  Crop Diversification

17

Table 2.1 (continued) Sample no. Adaptive agronomic practices 2. Practical and economic weed management option for scented rice variety (Basmati rice) by using herbicide (Singh et al. 2016b) 3. Alteration in planting configuration (Bed/Ridge) and drip irrigation scheduling in Cyperus esculentus (tiger nut) (Seva et al. 2016) 4. Straw treatment and biochar amendment with and without N fertilization in a super high-­ yielding rice variety (Oryza sativa L. subsp. japonica cv. ‘Shennong 265’) in field having history of rice cultivation for more than past 30 years (Sui et al. 2016) 5. Inoculation of Italian rye grass and red clover with three different arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungus (Kohl et al. 2015) 6.

7.

8.

Benefits of adaptive practices Weed biomass decreased after 45 days of sowing. Highest yield and maximum 1000-grain weight is obtained

Location (country) Haryana, India

Irrigation water use efficiency and yield is increased

Spain

Reduced GHGs emission and increased carbon storage in soil

Northeast China

Minimises fertilizer requirements and also minimises risk to environment from nitrogen leaching. Increases phosphorous uptake. Brown plant hopper insect Development of brown plant feeding, growth rate, longevity hopper (BPH)-resistant rice variety by cloning technique (Du reduced, thus providing rice defence against insect et al. 2009) Free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) Increases grain yield, panicle number, number of spikelet per given for Yangdao 6 hao (an panicle, filled spikelet indica rice) (Zhu et al. 2015) percentage, and individual grain weight. Shoot, tiller biomass and plant height is significantly increased Upgrade rainfall resource Early-ripening late japonica utilization efficiency through (Oryza sativa L.) rice variety better water management ‘Yangjing 4227’ subjected to waterlogging/submergence at rice strategies via increased control space in paddy field and thereby tillering stage at three different conserving irrigation water and depths for three different reducing labour input durations (Zhang et al. 2015)

Zurich, Switzerland

China

Jiangsu Province, China

Yangzhou, China

(continued)

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

18 Table 2.1 (continued)

Sample no. Adaptive agronomic practices 9. Development of transgenic crop lines by overexpression of the Arabidopsis thaliana receptor-­ like kinase ERECTA (ER) in Arabidopsis, rice, and tomato (Shen et al. 2015) 10. Marker-assisted backcrossing to transfer diverse stem rust (Puccinia graminis tritici)resistant gene into popular Indian wheat cv. HUW234 (Yadav et al. 2015)

11.

12.

Benefits of adaptive practices Improved thermotolerance in transgenic tomato and rice lines in the greenhouse and field experiments along with their increased biomass with zero growth penalty Resistance to stem pest was increased significantly with undisturbed agronomic performance. Under disease free condition, yield parameters such as grain yield, wieght of thousand grains, spike length, etc. is improved Reduced evapotranspiration. Black plastic film mulching in Soil moisture, water use combination with controlled-­ released fertilizer in spring-sown efficiency, and yield increases. Could be a better field maize field (Liu et al. 2016a) management option for high-yield maize variety “Pioneer 335” under the limitations of water, soil, fertilizer, and labour Indian spinach has potential to Explored and characterized grow in diverse agro-climatic highly nutritious underutilized conditions ranging from acidic perennial leafy vegetables of Basellaceae viz. Basella alba and to alkaline soil type. Edible Basella rubra (commonly known parts of this species are rich in vitamins A and C, protein, as Malabar spinach or Indian amino acids, and flavones and spinach) (Singh et al. 2018) minerals (Ca, Fe, Mg, P, K, Na, Zn, Cu, Mn, and Se). Such underutilized crop species can play promising role in meeting food and nutritional security under current and future warming climate

Location (country) China

Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka, India

Loess Plateau, Shaanxi Province, China

Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, India

that inclusively benefits the intercropped plants in one way or another. It increases nitrogen and carbon content in the rhizospheric soil, and therefore those resource pools can be further used by successive crops (Zang et al. 2015). Xiong et al. (2013) reported increased iron (Fe) content in the rhizosphere of a peanut–maize intercropping system. The Fe enrichment enhanced the carbon and nitrogen metabolism and photosynthetic efficiency of the peanut crop as well as the resistance of both peanut and maize against various environmental stresses. The push–pull system of crop pests and disease control is also a new innovation seen as a result of intercropping practices. Intercropping alters the morphology and

2.2  Crop Diversification

19

physiology of host plants, thereby saving them from pest attacks, and leads to direct inhibition of pathogens (discussed further in  Chap. 3, Sect. 3.3.2). Midega et  al. (2015) reported that the use of Desmodium as an intercrop with maize (Zea mays) in a degraded environment in a different dry agro-ecosystem of tropical eastern Africa resulted in a positive yield as Desmodium fixed the nitrogen at the rate of 300 kg N ha−1 year−1, thereby significantly increasing the soil fertility, soil organic matter, soil moisture, soil microbial diversity, mean plant height, and also grain yield significantly (2.5-fold). Further, intercropping practices when done with suitable amount of phosphorus inputs in the soil significantly increased the crop yield along with soil health and fertility (Chen et al. 2015; Rakshit et al. 2017). Although intercropping practices are highly crop- and cultivars specific, such practices are beneficial when there is a significant overlap between the sowing and harvesting of intercrops. For example, Shah et al. (2016) reported that intercropping of BT cotton with wheat resulted better economic yields. This idea can be better explained by the example of maize–soybean intercropping practices. Previously, it was found that maize–soybean intercropping showed good results in terms of crop yield and soil fertility as compared to their respective mono-cropping results (Woomer et al. 2004). Therefore, it was considered as a sustainable agronomic practice for subsistence farmers and small-scale farmers practicing mixed crop–livestock farming across the world and was also promoted at landscape level in particular in the East Africa region (Yusuf et al. 2009). However, in several recent studies, it was found that in maize–soybean intercropping the maize yield is increased but the soybean yield declines because of inter-competition among cereals and legumes for light, water, nutrients, and root development during their growth stages in which legumes are lacking. Better adaptation to overcome such problems could be to select crops with different maturity periods or crop day length or changing their harvesting time interval. For instance, in Central Kenya, Herrmann et al. (2014) intercropped maize variety (H513) with a promiscuous soybean cultivar having a maturity period of 125 days and 100 days, respectively, at the farm/field level and found increased yields of both intercrops. Further examples of intercropping practices employed by local farmers at field level in North India can be seen in Fig. 2.1.

2.2.2  Crop Rotation and Double/Companion Cropping Crop rotation or double cropping practices help in restoring soil fertility and provide diverse crop types with more net annual income to the farmers (Gaudin et al. 2015; Rakshit et al. 2016a, b). Practices such as crop–crop rotations such as corn–soybean rotation and also prawn–rice or fish–rice rotation are among the emerging agronomic practices under changing environmental conditions (Loc et  al. 2017). Particularly, the crop–crop rotation is more advantageous when integrated with reduced tillage practices. Corn–soybean rotation with reduced tillage practices enhanced the corn and soybean yield by 7% and 22%, respectively (Gaudin et al.

20

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

Fig. 2.1  Some common intercroppings in North India: (a) Indian mustard (Brassica campestris) intercropped with lentil (Lens culinaris); (b) rice (Oryza sativa) with ladyfinger (Abelmoschus esculentus); and (c) pulses (pigeon pea, Cajanas cajan) with groundnut (Arachis hypogea). (Photo credit for (b): Mr. Ramakant Dubey, IESD, BHU)

2015), even under erratic environmental conditions such as varying temperature, soil moisture, and hot and dry years. Similarly, prawn–rice rotational cropping are better adaptive practices for areas having high saline water intrusion. For instance, Loc et al. (2017) experimented with prawn–rice practice in Kien Giang Province of Vietnam that utilises saline water received during summers as a resource for cultivation. Similarly, fish–rice farming practices are employed by the indigenous rural people of Bangladesh at landscape level for alleviating poverty and generating more farm income (Islam et al. 2015). Similar to crop rotation, double/companion cropping is also a sustainable agronomic practice as it increases the overall productivity of an agricultural landscape. For instance, Andrade and Satorre (2015) found that in the Argentine pampas where mass cultivation of soybean is done at a larger landscape level, integrating wheat as a double crop would increase soybean yield and also provide wheat as an additional crop for that region. Further examples of double cropping practices employed by local farmers at field level in eastern Uttar Pradesh of North India can be seen in Fig. 2.2. Apart from the benefits of double cropping, it may have certain disadvantages too. For instance, in the East Asia region, a 0.4 °C rise in temperature from

2.2  Crop Diversification

21

Fig. 2.2  Common double cropping in eastern Uttar Pradesh of North India: (a) mustard (Brassica campestris) + pea (Pisum sativum); (b) mustard (Brassica campestris) + chickpea (Cicer arietenum), (c) wheat (Triticum aestivum) + brinjal (eggplant) (Solanum melongena), and (d) pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)  +  pigeon pea (Cajanas cajan). Such crop diversification strategy is highly sustainable as it improves soil health and nutrients and allows more farm productivity from a limited agricultural land resource. It also provides diverse types of food from the same field in a particular season

single cropping in the surrounding environment has increased to 1.02 °C from double cropping (Jeong et al. 2014). This finding supports the fact that adaptive practices are highly location specific, and therefore their adoption must be done with proper attention. Moreover, the simultaneous practice of ‘double cropping + intercropping’ is also found to be beneficial. For instance, wheat–maize double cropping intercropped with watermelon (cash crop) in the North China Plain is a beneficial practice (in terms of income and employment from the agriculture sectors), as explored by Huang et al. (2015).

2.2.3  Perenniation Perenniation is another promising way to integrate trees with perennial plants (plants living for 2 or more years) together in the same crop fields. For example, when Cajanus cajan (perennial pea) and Arachis hypogea (groundnuts, peanuts) are grown together, soil nitrogen content increases, thereby decreasing dependency on nitrogenous fertilizers (Snapp et al. 2010). In Africa, perenniation is considered to

22

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

be a good landscape-level adaptive practice showing multiple benefits (Glover et al. 2012), as discussed next. • Growing ‘Faidherbia albida (firewood tree) + Zea mays (cereal crop)’ increases the soil nutrient (particularly carbon) and water content and also increases maize yield. It also brings profits in terms of feed and firewood, providing evergreen agriculture. • Growing ‘Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea) + Glycine max (as a first-year crop) and Zea mays (as a second-year crop)’ increases fertilizer use efficiency, grain yield, and protein content. It also reduces labour input and improves the family nutritional diets (especially protein) by doubling the legume system. • Perenniation is also known to be a unique practice providing the push–pull system of controlling crop insects and pests. (For more detail, see Sect. 4(iv).)

2.3  Agroforestry: A Farm/Field- and Landscape-Level Practice Agroforestry is a modern agronomic practice being used in different agro-climatic zones of the world at both farm/field and landscape levels. In most African countries, agroforestry practices complement the agriculture sector and are mainly employed as a landscape-level agronomic practice (Mbow et  al. 2014a, b). Agroforestry operates under the umbrella of either ‘agriculture, forestry, or other land use’ (AFOLU) pathways (Luedeling et al. 2011; Mbow et al. 2014c) or ‘urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry’ (UPAF) (Lwasa et al. 2014) or sometimes by ‘short rotation forestry’ (SRF) plantation, etc. In general, agroforestry practices increase crop production, farm income, and ecosystem benefits (in ecosystem services by crop and tree diversification), and improves the livelihood of resource-poor farmers (Abhilash et al. 2015). Therefore, it is treated as a promising sustainable agricultural practice and can double the farmer’s income as well as safeguarding global food security (Mbow et al. 2014a, b). In context to Africa, agroforestry can also contribute in meeting two major goals under the REDD+ schemes: (1) replacing and protecting land area otherwise used for forests and (2) reducing the overexploitation of forests for obtaining specific tree products (Minang et  al. 2014). Therefore, Africa is a major hotspot in the world for agroforestry practices. For instance, UPAF is mainly followed in East and West Africa and sub-Saharan Africa only (Lwasa et al. 2014). Modern agroforestry has its origins in the classical practices of local peoples a long time ago for social, cultural, economic, and ecological reasons to maintain their agro-ecosystem. For example, in East Kalimantan, Indonesia, there are various small places or cultivation area (e.g., Simpung munaan, Lembo, Kampung merabu, and kampung birang) where crops, fruits, or livestock were integrated with woody plants such as bamboo, shrubs, or even trees to fulfill their requirements (Hartoyo et al. 2016). Modern agroforestry is just an extension of these classical or traditional practices in which commercial/perennial trees such as cocoa or rubber are included

2.3  Agroforestry: A Farm/Field- and Landscape-Level Practice

23

with crop plants. However, in some places the traditional practices still continue as an adaptive strategy for soil carbon sink management. For instance, Nath et  al. (2015) reported the traditional bamboo-based agroforestry practices of the indigenous people of Barak valley of North East India could sequester significant amounts of organic carbon to a 30-cm soil depth. Nearly 30.5 Mg C ha−1 and a carbon sequestration rate of 0.44 Mg C ha−1 year−1 was reported from such fields. Similarly, the organic tea plantation in pine forests in the eastern Himalayas of North India is another landscape-level adaptive practice (Fig.  2.3). Because of such large-scale

Fig. 2.3  Agroforestry practices in North India: (a) tea (Camellia sinensis) plantation in pine (Pinus) forests in Eastern Himalayas, (b) Indian gooseberry (Phyllanthus emblica), and wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivation in eastern Uttar Pradesh. (Photo credit for (b): Mr. Rama Kant Dubey, IESD, BHU)

24

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

sustainable land utilization for organic tea production, Sikkim was declared an organic state of India during the year 2015. In the present scenario, agroforestry promotion is much needed as the younger agroforestry system has been found to provide benefits as it increases the organic carbon stock significantly. Monroe et al. (2016) reported such soil organic carbon buildup in newly established (4 years before) cacao and rubber agroforestry systems in Southern Bahia, Brazil. Similarly, Kim et al. (2016) observed soil carbon sequestration and biomass increment up to 30% and 70%, respectively, in a 15-year-old agroforestry establishment, with carbon sequestration rate ranging from 4.4 to 10 ton C ha−1 year−1. Moreover, it also mitigates greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, particularly CH4 and N2O, by a rate of 13–41 ton CO2 equivalent ha−1 year−1. Also, practicing agroforestry on pasture land or land where conventional agriculture practices (monoculture cropping) have been employed is more adaptive because this increases tree biodiversity, improving soil quality, land use of an area, and also the livelihood of the local/indigenous people. Valencia et al. (2014) found that the species of Inga trees that constitute just 34% of all tree species present in a Mexican forest has been increased (45%) by introducing coffee-based agroforestry practice in Chiapas, Mexico. Apart from the biodiversity enrichment, the chance of splash soil erosion was also reduced, particularly by rubber agroforestry (Liu et al. 2016b), as it offers lower canopy height, broader area coverage, and also keeps the topmost soil layer intact by containing litter which is meant to increase soil fertility. Coffee-­ based agroforestry is also much better than just doing casual coffee plantation in terms of soil management strategy as it increases the labile soil carbon and microbial biomass carbon. Thomazini et al. (2015) compared coffee agroforestry with a full-sun coffee system in an Atlantic rainforest in Brazil and found that such an agroforestry system resulted in a 36% increase in labile soil carbon to the 40-cm depth, nearly 20 g kg−1 of carbon in the top soil layer (0–5 cm) through the addition of increased litterfall and also decreased the CO2-C emission by more than 1.9 Mg CO2-C ha−1 year−1. Similarly, Liu et al. (2016b) noted that in rubber-based agroforestry the splash soil erosion was reduced by 49% and 72% as compared to agroforestry excluding rubber and rubber monoculture, respectively. Cultivation of timber-yielding tree species at borders of farm fields are common agroforestry practices employed by small- and medium-scale local farmers in eastern Uttar Pradesh of North India, which is a typical example for enhancing farm security as well as economic returns (Fig. 2.4). Similar to coffee- and rubber-based agroforestry practices, the cocoa–coconut agroforestry system practiced in Indonesian landscapes is also sustainable as it increases the soil organic carbon, soil organic matter, and beneficial soil microbes such as Pseudomonas and Trichoderma species, thereby increasing the yield of both cocoa and coconut (Utomo et al. 2016). Moreover, cocoa–coconut agroforestry also benefits the environment significantly because 1  ton of cocoa pod production required only 2.25 E−05 kg PO4-eq, 4.31 E−02 kg SO2-eq, and 3.67 E+01 kg CO2-eq, which are known causes for eutrophication, acidification, and global warming, respectively. Apart from these, integration of livestock in agroforestry practices also shows better results. For instance, the poultry + olive orchard system can minimise

2.3  Agroforestry: A Farm/Field- and Landscape-Level Practice

25

Fig. 2.4  Emerging agroforestry practices in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. Timber-yielding tree (teak) (Tetona grandis) plantation at border of different crop fields are an emerging agronomic practices employed in eastern Uttar Pradesh. (a, c, d) Integrated teak + rice–wheat cropping practices; (b, e, f) integrated teak + chickpea (Cicer arietenum), cauliflower (Brassica oleracea cv.), and radish (Raphanus sativus) cultivation practice, respectively. Such practices are adopted by small- to medium-scale farmers for maximum land utilization and more net economic gain in the long term (selling timber-yielding trees on maturity can give good income to the farmers). Overall soil quality is also enhanced by leaf litter that falls from tree species, thereby resulting in increased crop yields

26

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

as much as 18% and 12% of harmful land use impact caused by chickens and by olive production, respectively, apart from the added benefits of weed control and fertilization in olive orchards (Paolotti et al. 2016). Apart from the positive effects of agroforestry mentioned in the foregoing section, sustainable agroforestry practices can minimise the negative effects of deforestation to a certain extent. However, in addition to the soil organic carbon dynamics, more insights on evapotranspiration and water cycling are needed to validate the actual benefits derived from agroforestry practices (Mbow et al. 2014b). Although the practice of agriculture, agroforestry, and animal husbandry (cattle breeding) in one common landscape provides multiple benefits, such practices sometimes also cause certain negative impacts. Hipolito et al. (2016) reported that such integrated agroforestry practices in the Mediterranean landscape has negatively affected the population of the European badger (Meles meles). Until now, implementation of agroforestry practices have mainly considered the importance of various ecosystem services such as provisioning, regulating, and supporting services offered by such a system without any due consideration of the social and cultural values offered by such intriguing practices (Fagerholm et al. 2016). As a result, the World Bank considers agroforestry as a livelihood for poor people for alleviating poverty as they can be employed on major projects launched to establish agroforestry in a region (World Bank Independent Evaluation Group 2007; Mbow et al. 2014a, c; Jerneck and Olsson 2013).

2.4  Mulching Mulching is an innovative strategy for reducing water loss from agricultural fields under warming climatic conditions because in an agriculture field more than 65% of water loss occurs mainly from evaporation (in 2:3 ratio, during growth and fallow season, respectively) and therefore is not available for crop plants (Qin et al. 2013). The crop plants can utilise only the remaining water, less than 35% of water for growth and development (Qin et al. 2013). Therefore, there is an ongoing need to conserve soil moisture and water content. Mulching can conserve soil moisture content, improve soil microclimate, reduce weeds, add soil nutrients, and protect against abiotic stress such heat or chilling. Most importantly, mulching maintains the soil temperature suitable for growth and survival of crops. It also increases the yield, water use efficiency, and nitrogen use efficiency of crop plants. For instance, mulching in cereal crops such as maize and wheat has been found to increase the water use efficiency, nitrogen use efficiency, and yield more than 1.5-fold (Qin et al. 2015). Various types of mulching such as film mulching, straw mulching, flat mulching, ridge-furrow mulching, mulching with use of some specific materials such as polyethylene, or mulching with two materials combined have been used in agricultural fields. Broadly, two types of mulch materials are used in agriculture: (1) organic, such as straw, wood, shells, hay, leaves, needles, etc., and (2) synthetic, such as polyethylene, plastic sheets, and geotextiles (Salman et  al. 2016). Use of these

2.4 Mulching

27

Fig. 2.5  Common mulching practices employed by small-scale farmers in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. Most farmers use (a) sugarcane bagasse, (b) turmeric crop straw in ridge–furrow, (c) textiles/cloths (Saree), (d) rice straw + jute, (e) rice straw, and (f) pearl millet straw as mulch for different crop fields including vegetables such as chilli, tomato, onion, and coriander during summer and rainy season. Rice straw is a common mulch material used in the pointed gourd (Trichosanthes dioica) field during its early to mid-growth phase, that is, before its branches are spread. Such practices are mainly to conserve soil moisture and minimize weed emergence

mulches are totally location specific and are used for different purposes at different places. Mulching practices done in districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh by using sugarcane bagasse, jute, textiles, and crop residue/straw returns in different crop fields are shown in Fig.  2.5. Particularly, the organic mulch materials are beneficial to maintain optimal soil conditions for thriving beneficial soil microbes and insects and to discourage harmful insects and slugs (Salman et al. 2016). Film mulching is quite beneficial for saving water in arid and semi-arid regions (Wang et al. 2011; Zhou et al. 2012); however, it is not recommended for regions with high precipitation (Araya and Stroosnijder 2010). Plastic film mulching in its

28

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

common forms is mostly practiced in many developed nations and has multiple advantages. It increases soil moisture content by reducing water evaporation rate, maintains soil temperature, and increases soil microbial load and activity (Singh et al. 2016d); it also governs nutrient flow from soil to crop. Mulching decreases leaching of plant nutrients and increases mineralisation of soil organic matter (Cornejo et al. 2014). Overall, it increases the readily available nutrients for crop plants, thereby promoting crop growth and its productivity. At farm/field level, plastic film mulching or its particular type, black plastic film mulching, when applied in combination with other agronomic practices such as drip irrigation technology or slow and controlled fertilizer release or with organic manure shows multiple advantages such as follows: • For rice cultivation under conventional flooding and under non-flooded conditions, the ‘plastic film mulching’ alone and ‘plastic film mulching + furrow irrigation’ increased water use efficiency by 52–112% and 35–89%, respectively. Similarly, ‘plastic film mulching + drip irrigation’ is also proven to be a water-­ saving technology (He et al. 2013). • ‘Plastic film mulching + drip irrigation + fertilizer application’ in an aridisol having a long history of cotton cultivation (since past 15 years) showed significant increase in soil organic and inorganic carbon stock at 0–30 cm and 30–70 cm depths, respectively. Overall, 0.48 kg carbon m−2 year−1 is built up in 0–70 cm depth, thereby resulting in increased soil carbon sequestration (Li et al. 2015). • ‘Plastic film mulching + organic manure’ in maize cultivation during the seedling stage resulted in 13.5% carbon enrichment in soil, of which more than 60% and less than 27% is integrated into microbial biomass carbon during the beginning stage and also after the completion of 15 days, respectively (An et al. 2015). • ‘Black plastic film mulching + slow/controlled releasing fertilizers’ in the spring-­ sown maize field reduces evapotranspiration rate and maintained the soil moisture to a depth of 120 cm. Such combinatorial approaches enhanced the water use efficiency (WUE) and grain yield from 20.99 kg ha−1 mm−1 and 12.37 ton−1 ha to 28.3 kg ha−1 mm−1 and 16.64 ton−1 ha, respectively (Liu et al. 2016a). Despite having multiple advantages, plastic mulching is not often considered an environmentally friendly practice because plastics added to the soil environment ultimately turn into microplastics and plastic residues that can affect soil quality and lead to environmental pollution (Steinmetz et al. 2016). Therefore, to overcome this disadvantage, the use of biodegradable film materials for mulching is being preferred over plastic mulch under varying environmental and ecological conditions (Yang et al. 2015; Brodhagen et al. 2015). Straw mulching is another alternative to plastic mulching, but the advantages of straw mulching can be better seen during the whole period as compared to the crop growth period. This mulch significantly improves soil water storage, yield, and WUE during normal years compared to years having an extended rainy season. Wang and Shangguan (2015) in Northwest China employed straw mulching in winter wheat at three different rates: high (9000 kg−1 ha), medium (6000 kg−1 ha), and low (3000 kg−1 ha) and found that the soil water content at 0–200 cm depth was found to increase by 0.7% to 22.5%. WUE

2.4 Mulching

29

under high, medium, and low straw mulch treatment increased by 30.6%, 32.7%, 24.2%, and 15.2%, 17.2%, and 18.0% during the whole period and the growth period, respectively. Moreover, the crop yield during the growth period increased from 13.3% to 23.0%. Straw mulching can be done on flat surfaces as well as on ridges and furrows. Straw mulching on ridges and furrows (also called ridge and straw mulching) (Fig. 2.5) is relatively more beneficial and can potentially enhance the crop yield by 20% to 180% (Gan et al. 2013). Similarly, another promising approach is plastic mulching on ridges with straw mulching in furrows. This practice can significantly improve precipitation use efficiency because in the winter season the plastic mulch will increases the top soil layer temperature whereas in summer the straw mulch will decrease the same temperature (Gan et al. 2013). This cyclic phenomenon can potentially improve soil water infiltration, thereby maintaining soil microclimate, soil temperature, and available water for crop plants (Gan et al. 2013). Polyethylene mulching is also a distinct type of adaptive practice providing benefits to the farmers. Usually, black polyethylene sheet mulching is integrated with drip irrigation technology, thereby reducing half the total water requirements for crop plants, for maximum benefit. Such mulching practices are quite beneficial for vegetable crops such as tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Biswas et al. (2015) found that ‘polyethylene mulching + drip irrigation’ practice in tomato field resulted in better yield, that is, more than 81 ton ha−1 crop yield, more than 590 kg ha−1 mm−1 WUE, with a benefit:cost ratio greater than 7 along with improved nutrient quality in agricultural produce. Mulching  +  no or reduced tillage  +  manure addition is another combinatorial approach for farm/field-level application. The benefits of this practice have been validated by Das et al. (2014b) in the maize–rapeseed cropping system of the northeast region of India. The study found that such mulching practices improved the soil organic carbon content, stable water aggregation, mean weight diameter of soil, and soil microbial biomass carbon by 8.4%, 9.3%, 42.6%, and 66.8%, respectively. The mulch materials they used were maize stover, ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), along with farm yard manure (FYM) and poultry manure in different proportions under no tillage. This practice enhanced the SOC content in the soil by more than 30%. Mulching practices have success stories at different levels: • In French Guinea, a mulching application in combination with the fire-free chop method ‘in which small trees are chopped and larger ones are floored’ is used to convert a tropical forest site into cropland or pastureland with very low impact on soil NO2 fluxes (Petitjean et al. 2015). • Plastic film mulching in larger maize fields of temperate upland soils of South Korea showed increased soil temperature (2 °C), soil moisture (0.04 m3 m−3) and grain productivity (8–33%) (Cuello et al. 2015). • Application of ridge–furrow mulching in dryland wheat production increases yield and WUE by 18% and more than 20%, respectively (Wang and Shangguan 2015).

30

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

• Mulching practice is also beneficial for crop-level adaptation. Liu et al. (2016a) reported enhanced species-level adaptation by the mulching practice especially for high-yield maize variety “Pioneer 335” under conditions of scarce water and nutrients. Apart from the benefits of mulching in agriculture, such practices also have certain drawbacks. For example, despite the potential of mulching practices to increase short-duration productivity, it also tends to disturb the coordination between biotic and abiotic factors in the agro-ecosystem (Li et al. 2007). Cuello et al. (2015) found that although plastic mulching resulted in an 8–33% rise in grain productivity, such practices also raised the global warming potential (GWP) by 12% to 82% as the result of the enhanced CH4, CO2, and N2O emissions. Polyethylene mulching also has similar risks (Biswas et  al. 2015). On the other hand, polyethylene-mulched ridges in radish and soybean crops grown in a poor sandy soil having low soil moisture under temperate monsoon climatic conditions reduced the N2O emission by 32% (Berger et al. 2013). Therefore, such practices needs more scientific validation before field-level applications.

2.5  Organic Farming Farming practices aimed to replace the use of synthetic agrochemicals such as synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, preservatives, additives, or genetically modified seeds/ breeds by different kinds of organic input are often termed organic farming. This approach increases soil fertility and water retention capacity and prevents crop pests and diseases (Scialabba and Lindenlauf 2010; Pimentel et al. 2005). Such adaptation increases the agro-biodiversity of farm fields and also improves the nutritional quality of the agricultural produce. Most importantly, such practices have positive implications for ensuring the nutritional security and well-being of resource-poor farmers in developing nations (FAO 2011; Singh and Abhilash 2018; Singh et al. 2018).

2.5.1  Integration of Livestock into Farm Lands Mixed crop–livestock farming is one of the chief and sustainable agronomic practices that come under organic agriculture. Organic farming practices were usually employed with investments (approximately ten times more than as of today) from both public and private sectors from a long time back in most nations of the world (Fan and Hazell 2001; World Bank 2007). Therefore, today it contributes nearly 50% of the share in total global food production and organic farming as practiced at farm/field and landscape level across many developing nations of the world (Herrero et al. 2010, 2012) (Fig. 2.6). Earlier, the manure generated from livestock was not properly transported or spread in the farm fields in a well-mechanised way, thereby

2.5  Organic Farming

31 Latin America 6.79 mha (15%) North America 3.08 mha (7%)

Oceania 17.34 mha (40%) Organic farming Practices

Asia 3.57 mha (8%) Africa 1.26 mha (3%)

Europe 11.62 mha (27%)

Fig. 2.6  Organic farming is one of the best adaptive practices for restoring soil quality and fertility: region-wise share of organic agriculture (Helga and Lernoud 2016)

wasting the otherwise useful nutrients for soil and crops in the fields (Sun et  al. 2012). Instead, that manure was discharged into watercourses, degrading water quality. For instance, in China and Vietnam nearly 20% and 7–15% of total manure generated, respectively, was discharged as such (Wang et al. 2007; Vu et al. 2012). However, in mixed crop–livestock practices, the crop residue generated can be used for cattle feeding and in return the cattle dung can be used as an input for organic agriculture. This manure in turn can be used as input under different crop management and nutrient planning strategies at both farm/field and landscape level. Such additions can replace the excessive use of chemicals (Zhang et al. 2013b). Organic manure is also being used for various soil amendments that are beneficial for crops; however, the long-term impacts of such soil amendments are still under experimental validation by different groups of researchers (Tittonell et  al. 2015). Moreover, mixed crop–livestock farming practices at landscape level can significantly reduce carbon footprint by limiting the use of agrochemicals and also by reducing the GHG emission from the field (Abhilash 2015; Abhilash and Singh 2009; Herrero et al. 2010). For instance, a 9% decline in GHG emissions at landscape level has been reported by establishment of the European livestock sector (EEA 2009). The organic manure addition (from domestic cattle) into the soil has the potential to stabilise the C:N ratio of the soil (Rigolot et al. 2017). Recent study suggests that integration of small ruminants into this practice would be a smarter approach for stabilising the C:N ratio (Douxchamps et al. 2016). Integration of livestock into farm lands is a better adaptive strategy for those locations where most farmers own cattle, have an appreciable size farm land, and have access to resources. Such farmers can wisely use the crop residues and straw

32

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

generated from their farm lands for cattle feeding (provided that the quantity of straw generated does not meet the threshold requirement if it is to be used as cover crops). By doing so, good quantity of manure could be derived in the form of FYM and that can be used in agricultural fields for improving soil health and crop productivity (Rakshit et  al. 2018). For example, in three African locations, namely, Murehwa, Ruaca, and Gorongosa, the crop residue generation from small and large farmlands ranges from 0.8 to 2.2 ton ha−1, 0.5–1.3 ton ha−1, and 0.2–0.4 ton ha−1, respectively, which does not meet the minimum quantity of straw required (i.e., 30%) to be used as a cover crop. Therefore, utilizing crop residues that are generated for cattle feeding has been suggested as the best option (Rusinamhodzi et al. 2016) as these can sustain the livestock population while enriching soil fertility through the addition of dung and urine of livestock. Therefore, suitable crop selection is also important while practicing the mixed crop–livestock farming practices.

2.5.2  Replacement of Chemical Fertilizers by Organic Inputs The excessive use of agrochemicals over preceding decades has caused significant harm to soil health and fertility (Abhilash and Singh 2009) (Fig. 2.7). Now is the right time to make sustainable use of organic inputs into agricultural fields. Various

Fig. 2.7  Indiscriminate use of agrochemicals deteriorates soil quality and health, such as (1) urea, (2) di-ammonium phosphate (DAP, a phosphorus-based fertilizer), (3) Ad-Tan (butachlor 50% EC and metsulfuran methyl 20% WP), (4) Biltop (Fipronil), (5) Nomini Gold, (6) Mancozeb, and (7) Weedgaurd in eastern Uttar Pradesh (UP). (Photo credit: Mr. Ajeet Singh, IESD, BHU)

2.5  Organic Farming

33

organic inputs such as farm yard manure (FYM), green manure, bio-fertilizers, domestic sewage sludge, compost, and vermicomposts have been used for organic farming practices. FYM, green manure, sheep manure, and domestic sewage sludge are among the significant materials being used under organic farming practices (Fig.  2.8), minimising the use of inorganic nitrogenous fertilizers and providing several other benefits. For instance, Bhaduri and Purakayastha (2014) observed that the addition of FYM and domestic sewage sludge has resulted in the replacement of 25% of nitrogen fertilizers in the rice–wheat system and improved the soil quality, minimising water requirements in rice and use of chemical fertilizers in rice and wheat both. Similarly, Shun et al. (2015) found that in a maize field, 30% of nitrogen/chemical fertilizers could be replaced by the addition of green manure, thereby increasing plant N uptake, yield, and while reducing N losses into the soil. Green

Fig. 2.8  Various organic agricultural inputs used in eastern UP, India: native breeds of (a) buffalo and (b) cows for mixed crop–livestock farming; (c–h) cattle dung for field application; (i, j) sheep are allowed to stay on agricultural fields during the fallow period for improving soil fertility (particularly soil NPK content) as the urine is rich in N, feces are rich in P, and hairs are rich in K, that falls onto the ground when sheep stand for a few overnights; (k–m) vermicomposts prepared from earthworms by local farmers are also used for enhancing soil fertility; (n) the seaweed extract based organic manure known as Dhanzyme is also used as organic inputs; (o–q) crop residues/ straw are used as feedstock for cattle, and in return excess cattle dung in rural areas is used as dung cake for household cooking

34

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

manure having added advantages over cattle manure addition because it reduces the risks of N loss either into the soil through nitrate leaching or into the atmosphere in gaseous form such as NH3, N2, and N2O (Ti et al. 2012). Crop rotation of summer legumes with winter cereals shows multiple advantages. For instance, Dabin et al. (2016) found that incorporation of green manure such as Huai bean, soybean, and mung bean as a summer legume crop and grown in rotation with the winter wheat crop in China shows multiple benefits. It enhanced soil biomass while maintaining the N pool with lower C:N ratio and also reduced the risk of N loss through leaching. Increase in N decomposition and its release rate subsequently improved the crop growth. Nearly 50% of the accumulated N by green manure legume in a year is released after decomposition for nearly 1 year, of which 25% to 84% is consequently utilised by the winter wheat crop; it replaces N fertilizers by average rate of 31%. Overall, green manure legume incorporation is a promising adaptive agronomic practice. Zou et al. (2015) noticed long-term benefits of the incorporation of dicotyledonous crops as a break crop in a crop rotation system predominated by cereal-based monoculture in a boreal climate. Successive cereal crops grown were found to benefit by the addition of green manures in terms of enhanced yield, nitrogen use efficiency, grain protein content, and decreased nutrient (nitrogen) loss from leaching. Faba bean and turnip is grown with barley in the first year, and their residue was put back into the soil after the harvest. In the second year, along with barley, buckwheat, caraway, faba bean, hemp, and white lupin were sown either at the flowering stage or after the harvest. Finally, in the third year, the barley was grown alone. Increase in yield and grain protein content of barley was observed until second year when white lupin, faba bean, and hemp were grown, but no such benefit was seen after growing caraway or buckwheat. Manure addition also has risk of phosphorus (P) loss into the soil or watercourses similar to N loss, as we mentioned previously (Ribaudo et al. 2003). Because P is a key nutrient responsible for eutrophication, its dissipation into the environment must be controlled. Using bio-fertilizer as an organic input is a beneficial alternative as it not only replaces the P application to greater extent, but also enhances the phosphorus use efficiency (PUE) of crop plants. The most common bio-fertilizers used are phosphate solubilizing micro-organisms (PSM) and vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal (VAM). Mahanta et al. (2014) replaced nearly 50% of the P application by inoculating these two bio-fertilizers in a soybean–wheat cropping system in an inceptisol soil of the semi-arid region of the Indo Gangetic Plain (IGP). They observed positive changes in crop root morphology: root cation exchange capacity, root length density, and phosphorus inflow rate and subsequent improvement in the grain yield of both soybean and wheat by 4.1% and 4.9%, respectively. Besides this, mutualistic root microorganisms such as plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) are beneficial in raising PUE in crop plants and grain yield maximally in those locations where crop yield is low (Abhilash and Dubey 2015; Abhilash et al. 2016; Dubey et al. 2017). For instance, Mäder et al. (2011) inoculated PGPR of two fluorescent Pseudomonas strains, P. jessenii and P. synxantha, and AMF alone and in consortium of different strains in wheat, rice, and black gram cropping system at field level. They noticed 95%

References

35

increases in PUE and wheat grain yield increased by 29%, 31%, and 41% by the inoculation of AMF, PGPR, and both respectively. These applications increase the activity of soil enzymes such as alkaline and acid phosphatase, urease, and dehydrogenase which in turn improved the soil quality, enhanced the nutrient uptake, and augmented the plant fitness without causing any negative impact on P stock. Moreover, bio-fertilizer application at landscape level can significantly reduce methane emission from a paddy field (Kantachote et al. 2016). Another adaptive practice that could increases nutrient use efficiency (NUE) and crop yield is adding compost with N and P fertilizer application: this could elevate the available N and P for plants and also mobilise the soil nutrients such as B, Ca, K, Mg, P, S, and Zn. For instance, the long-term compost addition together with nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers application in humic andosol soils in the south central highlands of Ethiopia having maize and faba bean showed increase in NUE and crop yields (Bedada et al. 2016). Similarly, Drenovsky et al. (2010) found that agriculture management via compost addition in different land uses of California improves soil function such as soil moisture, soil water-holding capacity, and soil fertility by bringing fruitful changes in the rhizospheric soil microbial community. It can also bring resistance and resilience among the soil microbial community toward both low and high soil moisture during drying and rewetting cycles, respectively (Dubey et  al. 2015; Singh et  al. 2016d). These microbial communities are very sensitive during drying but fortunately high moisture in soil provides enhanced resources to them (Dijkstra et al. 2012; Placella et al. 2012). In turn, these rhizospheric microbial community shows significant role in plant–microbe interactions, improving plant biomass and its productivity (Abhilash et al. 2012; Abhilash and Dubey 2014; Tripathi et  al. 2015; Dubey et  al. 2016b). Therefore, such adaptive practices should be promoted further. To know the different types of existing microbial communities, their composition and physiology by determining physiochemical properties of the soil of the region and the history of an area must be explored (Griffiths and Philippot 2013). Ng et al. (2015) also indicated that ‘rainwater + compost’ addition aids in shaping the soil microbial community residing below the ground especially in grasslands ecosystem. While replacing the inorganic chemical fertilizers by different organic materials viz. manure, compost or digestate (expelled from some anaerobic bio-digesters/biogas systems) for attaining desired environmental benefits, it is also imperative to check whether proper utilization of nutrients released from organic agro-inputs are achieved (Chadwick et al. 2015).

References Abhilash PC (2015) Towards the designing of low carbon societies for sustainable landscapes. J Clean Prod 87:992–993 Abhilash PC, Dubey RK (2014) Integrating aboveground–belowground responses to climate change. Curr Sci 106:1637–1638 Abhilash PC, Dubey RK (2015) Root system engineering: prospects and promises. Trends Plant Sci 20:408–409

36

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

Abhilash PC, Singh N (2009) Pesticide use and application: an Indian scenario. J Hazard Mater 165:1–12 Abhilash PC, Powell JR, Singh HB, Singh BK (2012) Plant–microbe interactions: novel applications for exploitation in multipurpose remediation technologies. Trends Biotechnol 30:416–420 Abhilash PC, Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Srivastava P, Verma JP, Singh HB (2013) Remediation and management of POPs-contaminated soils in a warming climate: challenges and perspectives. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:5879–5885 Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Dubey RK, Edrisi SA (2015) Coping with changes: adaptation of trees in a changing environment. Trends Plant Sci 20:137–138 Abhilash PC, Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Gupta VK, Singh HB (2016) Plant growth-promoting microorganisms for environmental sustainability. Trends Biotechnol 34:847–850 Ahmed S, Salim M, Chauhan BS (2014) Effect of weed management and seed rate on crop growth under direct dry seeded rice systems in Bangladesh. PLoS One 9(7):e101919. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101919 Alms J, Moechnig M, Vos D, Clay SA (2016) Yield loss and management of volunteer corn in soybean. Weed Technol 30:254–262 An T, Schaeffer S, Li S, Fu S, Pei J, Li H, Zhuang J, Radosevich M, Wang J (2015) Carbon fluxes from plants to soil and dynamics of microbial immobilization under plastic film mulching and fertilizer application using 13C pulse-labeling. Soil Biol Biochem 80:53–61 Andrade JF, Satorre EH (2015) Single and double crop systems in the Argentine Pampas: environmental determinants of annual grain yield. Field Crop Res 177:137–147 Araya A, Stroosnijder L (2010) Effects of tied ridges and mulch on barley (Hordeum vulgare) rainwater use efficiency and production in Northern Ethiopia. Agric Water Manag 97:841–847 Bedada W, Lemenih M, Karltun E (2016) Soil nutrient build-up, input interaction effects and plot level N and P balances under long-term addition of compost and NP fertilizer. Agric Ecosyst Environ 218:220–231 Bedano JC, Domínguez A, Arolfo R, Wall LG (2016) Effect of good agricultural practices under no-till on litter and soil invertebrates in areas with different soil types. Soil Tillage Res 158:100–109 Bedoussac L, Journet EP, Nielsen HH, Naudin C, Hellou GC, Prieur L, Jensen ES, Justes E (2014) Eco-functional intensification by cereal-grain legume intercropping in organic farming systems for increased yields, reduced weeds and improved grain protein concentration. In: Organic farming, prototype for sustainable agricultures. Springer, Dordrecht, pp  47–63. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-94-007-7927-3_3 Berger S, Kim Y, Kettering J, Gebauer G (2013) Plastic mulching in agriculture—friend or foe of N2O emissions? Agric Ecosyst Environ 167:43–51 Bhaduri D, Purakayastha TJ (2014) Long-term tillage, water and nutrient management in rice– wheat cropping system: assessment and response of soil quality. Soil Tillage Res 144:83–95 Biswas SK, Akanda AR, Rahman MS, Hossain MA (2015) Effect of drip irrigation and mulching on yield, water-use efficiency and economics of tomato. Plant Soil Environ 6:97–102 Boudreau MA (2013) Diseases in intercropping systems. Annu Rev Phytopathol 51:499–519 Brodhagen M, Peyron M, Miles C, Inglis DA (2015) Biodegradable plastic agricultural mulches and key features of microbial degradation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 99:1039–1056 Cantore V, Lechkar O, Karabulut E, Sellami MH, Albrizio R, Boari F, Stellacci AM, Todorovic M (2016) Combined effect of deficit irrigation and strobilurin application on yield, fruit quality and water use efficiency of “cherry” tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Agric Water Manag 167:53–61 Cao Y, Tian Y, Yin B, Zhu Z (2014) Improving agronomic practices to reduce nitrate leaching from the rice–wheat rotation system. Agric Ecosyst Environ 195:61–67 Chadwick D, Wei J, Yan’an T, Guanghui Y, Qirong S, Qing C (2015) Improving manure nutrient management towards sustainable agricultural intensification in China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 209:34–46

References

37

Chahal PS, Jhala AJ (2016) Impact of glyphosate-resistant volunteer corn (Zea mays L.) density, control timing, and late-season emergence on yield of glyphosateresistant soybean (Glycine max L.). Crop Prot 81:38–42 Chahal PS, Jha P, Jackson-Ziems T, Wright R, Jhala AJ (2015) Glyphosateresistant volunteer maize (Zea mays L.): impact and management. In: Trevlos I (ed) Weed and pest control: molecular biology, pesticides, and environmental impact. Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY Chen Y, Zhou T, Zhang C, Wang K, Liu J, Lu J, Lu J, Xu K (2015) Rational phosphorus application facilitates the sustainability of the wheat/maize/soybean relay strip intercropping system. PLoS One 10(11):e0141725. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141725 Collier P, Dercon S (2014) African agriculture in 50 years: smallholders in a rapidly changing world? World Dev 63:92–101 Cornejo JM, Zornoza R, Faz A (2014) Carbon and nitrogen mineralization during decomposition of crop residues in a calcareous soil. Geoderma 230:58–63 Cuello JP, Hwang HY, Gutierrez J, Kim SY, Kim PJ (2015) Impact of plastic film mulching on increasing greenhouse gas emissions in temperate upland soil during maize cultivation. Appl Soil Ecol 91:48–57 Cui Z, Chen X, Miao Y, Zhang F, Sun Q, Schroder J, Zhang H, Li J, Shi L, Xu J, Ye Y (2008) On-farm evaluation of the improved soil N–based nitrogen management for summer maize in North China Plain. Agron J 100:517–525 Dabin Z, Pengwei Y, Na Z, Changwei Y, Weidong C, Yajun G (2016) Contribution of green manure legumes to nitrogen dynamics in traditional winter wheat cropping system in the loess plateau of china. Eur J Agron 72:47–55 Das TK, Bhattacharyya R, Sudhishri S, Sharma AR, Saharawat YS, Bandyopadhyay KK, Sepat S, Bana RS, Aggarwal P, Sharma RK, Bhatia A, Singh G, Datta SP, Kar A, Singh B, Singh P, Pathak H, Vyas AK, Jat ML (2014a) Conservation agriculture in an irrigated cotton–wheat system of the western Indo-Gangetic plains: crop and water productivity and economic profitability. Field Crop Res 158:24–33 Das A, Ghosh PK, Lal R, Saha R, Ngachan S (2014b) Soil quality effect of conservation practices in maize–rapeseed cropping system in eastern Himalaya. Land Degrad Dev 28(6):1862. https:// doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2325 Dhadli HS, Brar BS, Black TA (2016) N2O emissions in a long-term soil fertility experiment under maize-wheat cropping system in Northern India. Geoderma Reg 7:102–109 Dijkstra FA, Augustine DJ, Brewer P, von Fischer JC (2012) Nitrogen cycling and water pulses in semiarid grasslands: are microbial and plant processes temporally asynchronous? Oecologia 170:799–808 Douxchamps S, Wijk MTV, Silvestri S, Moussa AS, Quiros C, Ndèye Badiane Y, Buah S, Somé L, Herrero M, Kristjanson P, Ouedraogo M (2016) Linking agricultural adaptation strategies, food security and vulnerability: evidence from West Africa. Reg Environ Change 16:1305–1317 Drenovsky RE, Steenwerth KL, Jackson LE, Scow KM (2010) Land use and climatic factors structure regional patterns in soil microbial communities. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:27–39 Du B, Zhang W, Liu B, Hu J, Wei Z, Shi Z, He R, Zhu L, Chen R, Han B, He G (2009) Identification and characterization of Bph14, a gene conferring resistance to brown plant hopper in rice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:22163–22168 Dubey PK, Singh A (2017) Adaptive agricultural practices for rice-wheat cropping system in Indo-­ Gangetic plains of India. IUCN-CEM Agroecosyst Newslett 1(1):13–17. https://www.iucn.org/ sites/dev/files/content/documents/agroecosystems_sg_iucn_cem_newsletter_1.pdf Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Abhilash PC (2015) Book review: principles of plant-microbe interactions: microbes for sustainable agriculture. Front Plant Sci 96:14073–14078. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpls.2015.00986 Dubey PK, Singh GS, Abhilash PC (2016a) Agriculture in a changing climate. J  Clean Prod 113:1046–1047 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Dubey PK, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2016b) Exploring rhizospheric interactions for agricultural sustainability: the need of integrative research on multi-trophic interactions. J Clean Prod 115:362–365

38

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Bakshi M, Dubey PK, Singh A, Verma JP, Singh A, Sarma BK, Raskhit A, Singh DP, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2017) Role of plant growth promoting microorganisms in sustainable agriculture and environmental remediation. In: Singh HB, Sharma B, Kesawani C (eds) Advances in PGPR research. CABI Press, Boston, MA. https:// doi.org/10.1079/9781786390325.0000 Dwivedi A, Dev I, Kumar V, Yadav RS, Yadav M, Gupta D, Singh A, Tomar SS (2015) Potential role of maize-legume intercropping systems to improve soil fertility status under smallholder farming systems for sustainable agriculture in India. Int J  Life Sci Biotechnol Pharma Res 4(3):145–157 European Environmental Agency (EEA) (2009) Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990– 2007 and inventory report. Submission to the UNFCCC secretariat. EEA, Brussels Fagerholm N, Torralba M, Burgess PJ, Plieninger T (2016) A systematic map of ecosystem services assessments around European agroforestry. Ecol Indic 62:47–65 Fan S, Hazell P (2001) Returns to public investments in the less-favored areas of India and China. Am J Agric Econ 83(5):1217–1222 FAO (2011) Organic agriculture and climate change mitigation—a report of the round table on organic agriculture and climate change. Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nation, Rome Galdies C, Said A, Camilleri L, Caruana M (2016) Climate change trends in Malta and related beliefs, concerns and attitudes toward adaptation among Gozitan farmers. Eur J Agron 74:18–28 Gan YT, Siddique KHM, Turner NC, Li XG, Niu JY, Yang C, Liu LP, Chai Q (2013) Ridge-furrow mulching systems-an innovative technique for boosting crop productivity in semiarid rain-fed environments. Adv Agron 118:429–476 Gathala MK, Timsina J, Islam MS, Rahman MM, Hossain MI, Rashid MHR, Ghosh AK, Krupnik TJ, Tiwari TP (2015) Conservation agriculture based tillage and crop establishment options can maintain farmers’ yields and increase profits in South Asia’s rice–maize systems: evidence from Bangladesh. Field Crop Res 172:85–98 Gaudin ACM, Tolhurst TN, Ker AP, Janovicek K, Tortora C, Martin RC, Deen W (2015) Increasing crop diversity mitigates weather variations and improves yield stability. PLoS One 10(2):e0113261. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0113261 Glover D, Reganold JP, Cox CM (2012) Agriculture: plant perennials to save Africa’s soils. Nature 489:359–361 Griffiths BS, Philippot L (2013) Insights into the resistance and resilience of the soil microbial community. FEMS Microbiol Rev 37:112–129 Guan D, Zhang Y, Kaisi MMA, Wang Q, Zhang M, Li Z (2015) Tillage practices effect on root distribution and water use efficiency of winter wheat under rain-fed condition in the north china plain. Soil Tillage Res 146:286–295 Hamzei J, Seyyedi M (2016) Energy use and input–output costs for sunflower production in sole and intercropping with soybean under different tillage systems. Soil Tillage Res 157:73–82 Hartoyo APP, Siregar IZ, Supriyantoa, Prasetyo LB, Thelaide I (2016) Biodiversity, carbon stocks and community monitoring in traditional agroforestry practices: preliminary results from two investigated villages in Berau, East Kalimantan. Proc Environ Sci 33:376–385 Hassan A, Ijaz SS, Lal R, Barker D, Ansar M, Ali S, Jiang S (2016) Tillage effect on partial budget analysis of cropping intensification under dryland farming in Punjab, Pakistan. Arch Agron Soil Sci 62:151–162 He H, Ma F, Yang R, Chen L, Jia B, Cui J, Fan H, Wang X, Li L (2013) Rice performance and water use efficiency under plastic mulching with drip irrigation. PLoS One 8(12):e83103 Helga W, Lernoud J  (eds) (2016) The world of organic agriculture. Statistics and emerging trends 2016. Research institute of organic agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM – Organic International, Bonn. http://WWW.organic-world.net/yearbook/yearbook-2016.html Herrero M, Thornton PK, Notenbaert AM, Wood S, Msangi S, Freeman HA, Bossio D, Dixon J, Peters M, van de Steeg J, Lynam J, Rao PP, Macmillan S, Gerard B, McDermott J, Seré C,

References

39

Rosegrant M (2010) Smart investments in sustainable food production: revisiting mixed crop-­ livestock systems. Science 327:822–825 Herrero M, Thornton PK, Notenbaert AMO, Msangi S, Wood S, Kruska RL, Dixon JA, Bossio DA, van de Steeg JA, Freeman HA, Li X (2012) Drivers of change in crop–livestock systems and their potential impacts on agro-ecosystems services and human wellbeing to 2030: a study commissioned by the CGIAR Systemwide Livestock Programme. ILRI, Nairobi Herrmann L, Chotte JL, Thuita M, Lesueur D (2014) Effects of cropping systems, maize residues application and N fertilization on promiscuous soybean yields and diversity of native rhizobia in Central Kenya. Pedobiology 57:75–85 Hipolito D, Reis MS, Rosalino LM (2016) Effects of agro-forestry activities, cattle-raising practices and food-related factors in badger sett location and use in Portugal. Mamm Biol 81:194–200 Huang C, Liu Q, Heerink N, Stomph T, Li B, Liu R, Zhang H, Wang C, Li X, Zhang C, Werf WV (2015) Economic performance and sustainability of a novel intercropping system on the North China plain. PLoS One 10(8):e0135518 Islam AHMS, Barman BK, Jahan KM (2015) Adoption and impact of integrated rice–fish farming system in Bangladesh. Aquaculture 447:76–85 Jeong SJ, Ho CH, Piao S, Kim J, Ciais P, Lee YB, Jhun JG, Park SK (2014) Effects of double cropping on summer climate of the North China Plain and neighbouring regions. Nat Clim Chang 4:615–619 Jerneck A, Olsson L (2013) More than trees! Understanding the agroforestry adoption gap in subsistence agriculture: insights from narrative walks in Kenya. J Rural Stud 32:114–125 Ju XT, Xing GX, Chen XP, Zhang SL, Zhang LJ, Liu XJ, Cui ZL, Yin B, Christie P, Zhub ZL, Zhang FS (2009) Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:3041–3046 Kantachote D, Nunkaew T, Kantha T, Chaiprapat S (2016) Biofertilizers from Rhodopseudomonas palustris strains to enhance rice yields and reduce methane emissions. Appl Soil Ecol 100:154–161 Kim DG, Kirschbaumb MUF, Beedy TL (2016) Carbon sequestration and net emissions of CH4 and N2O under agroforestry: synthesizing available data and suggestions for future studies. Agric Ecosyst Environ 226:65–78 King AE, Hofmockel KS (2017) Diversified cropping systems support greater microbial cycling and retention of carbon and nitrogen. Agric Ecosyst Environ 240:66–76 Kohl L, Marcel GA, Heijden VD (2016) Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal species differ in their effect on nutrient Q7 leaching. Soil Biol Biochem 94:191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. soilbio.2015.11.019 Larson N, Sekhri S, Sidhu R (2016) Adoption of water-saving technology in agriculture: the case of laser levellers. Water Resour Econ 14:44–64 Li YS, Wu LH, Zhao LM, Lu XH, Fan QL, Zhang FS (2007) Influence of continuous plastic film mulching on yield, water use efficiency and soil properties of rice fields under non-flooding condition. Soil Tillage Res 93:370–378 Li ZG, Tian CY, Zhang RH, Mohamed I, Liua Y, Zhang GS, Pan JF, Chena F (2015) Plastic mulching with drip irrigation increases soil carbon stocks of natrargid soils in arid areas of northwestern China. Catena 133:179–185 Li L, Zhang L, Zhang F (2016) Crop mixtures and the mechanisms of overyielding. Reference module in life science. In: Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 382–395 Liu Q, Chen Y, Liu Y, Wen X, Liao Y (2016a) Coupling effects of plastic film mulching and urea types on water use efficiency and grain yield of maize in the Loess Plateau, China. Soil Tillage Res 157:1–10 Liu W, Zhu C, Wu J, Chen C (2016b) Are rubber-based agroforestry systems effective in controlling rain splash erosion? Catena 147:16–24 Loc HH, Diep NTH, Can NT, Irvine KN, Shimizu Y (2017) Integrated evaluation of ecosystem services in prawn-rice rotational crops, Vietnam. Ecosyst Serv 26:377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecoser.2016.04.007

40

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

Luedeling E, Sileshi G, Beedy T, Dietz J (2011) Carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems in Africa. In: Kumar BM & Nair PK. Carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems: opportunities and challenges. Adv Agroforest 8:61–83 Lwasa S, Mugagg F, Wahab B, Simon D, Connors J, Griffith C (2014) Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry: transcending poverty alleviation to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Urban Clim 7:92–106 Mäder P, Kaiser F, Adholey A, Singh R, Uppal HS, Sharma AK, Srivastava R, Sahai V, Aragno M, Wiemken A, Johri BN, Fried PM (2011) Inoculation of root microorganisms for sustainable wheat-rice and wheat-black gram rotations in India. Soil Biol Biochem 43:609–619 Mahanta D, Rai RK, Mishra SD, Raja AK, Purakayastha TJ, Varghese E (2014) Influence of phosphorus and biofertilizers on soybean and wheat root growth and properties. Field Crop Res 166:1–9 Marquardt PT, Johnson WG (2013) Influence of clethodim application timing on control of volunteer corn in soybean. Weed Technol 27:645–648 Mbow C, Noordwijk MV, Luedeling E, Neufeldt H, Minang PA, Kowero G (2014a) Agroforestry solutions to address food security and climate change challenges in Africa. Curr Opin Environ Sust 6:61–67 Mbow C, Noordwijk MV, Prabhu R, Simons T (2014b) Knowledge gaps and research needs concerning agroforestry’s contribution to Sustainable Development Goals in Africa. Curr Opin Environ Sust 6:162–170 Mbow C, Smith P, Skole D, Duguma L, Bustamante M (2014c) Achieving mitigation and adaptation to climate change through sustainable agroforestry practices in Africa. Curr Opin Environ Sust 6:8–14 Meng QF, Yue SC, Hou P, Cui ZL, Chen XP (2016) Improving yield and nitrogen use efficiency simultaneously for maize and wheat in China: a review. Pedosphere 26(2):137–147 Midega CAO, Toby JA, Bruce Pickett JA, Pittchara JO, Muragea A, Khan ZR (2015) Climate-­ adapted companion cropping increases agricultural productivity in East Africa. Field Crop Res 180:118–125 Minang PA, Duguma LA, Bernard F, Mertz O, Noordwijk MV (2014) Prospects for agroforestry in REDD+ landscapes in Africa. Curr Opin Environ Sust 6:78–82 Monroe PHM, Rodrigues EFG, Rodrigues ACG, Marques JRB (2016) Soil carbon stocks and origin under different cacao agroforestry systems in Southern Bahia, Brazil. Agric Ecosyst Environ 221:99–108 Muriithi BW, Affognon HD, Diiro GM, Kingori SW, Tanga CM, Nderitu PW, Mohamed SA, Ekesi S (2016) Impact assessment of integrated pest management (IPM) strategy for suppression of mango-infesting fruit flies in Kenya. Crop Prot 81:20–29 Nath AJ, Lal R, Das AK (2015) Ethnopedology and soil properties in bamboo (Bambusa sp.) based agroforestry system in North East India. Catena 135:92–99 Ng EL, Patti AF, Rose MT, Schefe CR, Smernik RK, Cavagnaro TR (2015) Do organic inputs alter resistance and resilience of soil microbial community to drying? Soil Biol Biochem 81:58–66 Paolotti L, Boggia A, Castellini C, Rocchi L, Rosati A (2016) Combining livestock and tree crops to improve sustainability in agriculture: a case study using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach. J Clean Prod 131:351–363 Peng Z, Ting W, Haixia W, Min W, Xiangping M, Siwei M, Rui Z, Zhikuan J, Qingfang H (2015) Effects of straw mulch on soil water and winter wheat production in dryland farming. Sci Rep 5:10725. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep10725 Petitjean C, Hénault C, Perrin AS, Pontet C, Metaye A, Bernoux M, Jehanno T, Viard A, Roggy JC (2015) Soil N2O emissions in French Guiana after the conversion of tropical forest to agriculture with the chop-and-mulch method. Agric Ecosyst Environ 208:64–74 Pimentel D, Hepperly P, Hanson J, Douds D, Seidel R (2005) Environmental, energetic, and economic comparisons of organic and conventional farming systems. Bioscience 55:573–582 Placella SA, Brodie EL, Firestone MK (2012) Rainfall-induced carbon dioxide pulses result from sequential resuscitation of phylogenetically clustered microbial groups. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:10931–10936

References

41

Qin W, Chi B, Oenema O (2013) Long-term monitoring of rainfed wheat yield and soil water at the loess plateau reveals low water use efficiency. PLoS One 8(11):e78828 Qin W, Hu C, Oenema O (2015) Soil mulching significantly enhances yields and water and nitrogen use efficiencies of maize and wheat: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep 5:16210 Rakshit A, Mishra R, Singh RN, Abhilash PC (2016a) Celebrating the international year of soils: catalyzing initiatives and provide a modern perspective of soil science. Int J  Bioresour Sci 3:69–77 Rakshit A, Parihar M, Yadav RS, Abhilash PC (2016b) Soils are back at the centre stage: development and trends. SATSA Mukhaptra 20:77–80 Rakshit A, Abhilash PC, Singh HB, Ghosh S (2017) Adaptive soil management: from theory to practices. Springer Nature Singapore Pvt Ltd., Singapore. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-10-3638 Rakshit A, Sarkar B, Abhilash PC (2018) Soil amendments for sustainability: challenges and perspectives. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL Ribaudo MO, Gollehon NR, Agapoff J  (2003) Land application of manure by animal feeding operations: is more land needed? J Soil Water Conserv 58:30–38 Rigolot C, de Voil P, Douxchamps S, Prestwidge D, Wijk MV, Thornton PK, Rodriguez D, Henderson B, Medina D, Herrero M (2017) Interactions between intervention packages, climatic risk, climate change and food security in mixed crop–livestock systems in Burkina Faso. Agr Syst 151:217–224 RIO+20 (2012). The Earth negotiations bulletin. Summary of the United Nations conference on sustainable development: IISD reporting services. http://www.iisd.ca/vol27/enb2751e.html Rusinamhodzi L, Corbeels M, Giller KE (2016) Diversity in crop residue management across an intensification gradient in southern Africa: system dynamics and crop productivity. Field Crop Res 185:79–88 Salman M, Bunclark L, AbuKhalaf M, Borgia C, Guarnieri L, Hoffmann O, Sambalino F, Steenbergen FV, Lebdi F (2016) Strengthening agricultural water efficiency and productivity on the African and global level Status, performance and scope assessment of water harvesting in Uganda, Burkina Faso and Morocco Food and Agriculture. Organization of the United Nations, Rome Schwab N, Schickhoff U, Fischer E (2015) Transition to agroforestry significantly improves soil quality: a case study in the central mid-hills of Nepal. Agric Ecosyst Environ 205:57–69 Scialabba NEH, Lindenlauf MM (2010) Organic agriculture and climate change. Renew Agric Food Syst 25:158–169 Seva NP, Bautista AS, Galarza SL, Maroto JV, Pascual B (2016) Response of drip-irrigated chufa (Cyperus esculentus L. var. sativus Boeck.) to different planting configurations: yield and irrigation water-use efficiency. Agric Water Manag 170:140–147 Shah H, Khan MA, Azeem T, Majid A, Mehmood A (2012) The impact of gypsum application on groundnut yield in rainfed Pothwar: an economic perspective. Lahore J Ecol 17:83–100 Shah MA, Farooq M, Hussain M (2016) Productivity and profitability of cotton–wheat system as influenced by relay intercropping of insect resistant transgenic cotton in bed planted wheat. Eur J Agron 75:33–41 Shen H, Zhong X, Zhao F, Wang Y, Yan B, Li Q, Chen G, Mao B, Wang J, Li Y, Xiao G, He Y, Xiao H, Li J, He Z (2015) Overexpression of receptor-like kinase ERECTA improves thermotolerance in rice and tomato. Nat Biotechnol 33:996–1003 Shun BJ, Dong CW, Jing X, Hua ZN, Juan GS, Katsuyoshi S (2015) Integrated application of February Orchid (Orychophragmus violaceus) as green manure with chemical fertilizer for improving grain yield and reducing nitrogen losses in spring maize system in northern China. J Integr Agric 14:2490–2499 Singh A, Abhilash PC (2018) Agricultural biodiversity for sustainable food production. J Clean Prod 172:1368–1369 Singh VK, Singh Y, Dwivedi BS, Singh SK, Majumdard K, Jate ML, Mishra RP, Rania M (2016a) Soil physical properties, yield trends and economics after five years of conservation agriculture based rice-maize system in north-western India. Soil Tillage Res 155:133–148

42

2  Adaptive Agronomic Practices for Sustaining Food Production

Singh V, Jat ML, Ganie ZA, Chauhan BS, Gupta RK (2016b) Herbicide options for effective weed management in dry direct seeded rice under scented rice-wheat rotation of western Indo-­ Gangetic plains. Crop Prot 81:168–176 Singh YP, Mishra VK, Singh S, Sharma DK, Singh D, Singh US, Singh RK, Haefele SM, Ismail AM (2016c) Productivity of sodic soils can be enhanced through the use of salt tolerant rice varieties and proper agronomic practices. Field Crop Res 190:82–90 Singh JS, Abhilash PC, Gupta VK (2016d) Agriculturally important microbes in sustainable food production. Trends Biotechnol 34:773–775 Singh A, Dubey PK, Chaurasiya R, Mathur N, Kumar G, Bharati S, Abhilash PC (2018) Indian spinach: an underutilized perennial leafy vegetable for nutritional security in developing world. Energ Ecol Environ 3:195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-018-0091-1 Snapp SS, Blackie MJ, Gilbert RA, Bezner-Kerr R, Kanyama-Phiri GY (2010) Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:20840–20845 Steinmetz Z, Wollmann C, Schaefer M, Buchmann C, David J, Tröger J, Muñoz K, Frör O, Schaumann GE (2016) Plastic mulching in agriculture. Trading short-term agronomic benefits for long-term soil degradation? Sci Total Environ 550:690–705 Sui Y, Gao J, Liu C, Zhang W, Lan Y, Li S, Meng J, Xu Z, Tang L (2016) Interactive effects of straw-derived biochar and N fertilization on soil C storage and rice productivity in rice paddies of Northeast China. Sci Total Environ 544:203–210 Sun B, Zhang L, Yang L, Zhang F, Norse D, Zhu Z (2012) Agricultural non-point source pollution in China: causes and mitigation measures. Ambio 41:370–379 Surendran U, Ramesh V, Jayakumar M, Marimuthu S, Sridevi G (2016) Improved sugarcane productivity with tillage and trash management practices in semi-arid tropical agro ecosystem in India. Soil Tillage Res 158:10–21 Thomazini A, Mendonça ES, Cardoso IM, Garbina ML (2015) SOC dynamics and soil quality index of agroforestry systems in the Atlantic rainforest of Brazil. Geoderma Reg 5:15–24 Ti C, Pan J, Xia Y, Yan X (2012) A nitrogen budget of mainland China with spatial and temporal variation. Biogeochemistry 108:381–394 Tittonell P, Gérard B, Erenstein O (2015) Tradeoffs around crop residue biomass in smallholder crop–livestock systems—what’s next? Agr Syst 134:119–128 Torralba M, Fagerholm N, Burgess PJ, Moreno G, Plieninger T (2016) Do European agroforestry systems enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services? A meta-analysis. Agric Ecosyst Environ 230:150–161 Tripathi V, Fraceto LF, Abhilash PC (2015) Sustainable clean-up technologies for soils contaminated with multiple pollutants: plant-microbe-pollutant and climate nexus. Ecol Eng 82:330–335 UNFCC (2015) Adoption of Paris agreement. United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCC) https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf Utomo B, Prawoto AA, Bonnet S, Bangviwat A, Gheewala SH (2016) Environmental performance of cocoa production from monoculture and agroforestry systems in Indonesia. J Clean Prod 134:583–591 Valencia V, Barrios LG, West P, Sterling EJ, Naeem S (2014) The role of coffee agroforestry in the conservation of tree diversity and community composition of native forests in a Biosphere Reserve. Agric Ecosyst Environ 189:154–163 Ventrella D, Stellacci AM, Castrignano A, Charfeddine M, Castellini M (2016) Effects of crop residue management on winter durum wheat productivity in a long term experiment in Southern Italy. Eur J Agron 77:188–198 Vu QD, Tran TM, Nguyen PD, Vu CC, Vu VTK, Jensen LS (2012) Effect of biogas technology on nutrient flows for small- and medium-scale pig farms in Vietnam. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 94:1–13 Wang LF, Shangguan ZP (2015) Water-use efficiency of dryland wheat in response to mulching and tillage practices on the Loess Plateau. Sci Rep 5:12225. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep12225 Wang F, Zhang F, Ma W (2007) The present situation and the countermeasures of agricultural non-­ point source pollution in China (Report to the Department of Agriculture).

References

43

Wang YJ, Xie ZK, Sukhev SM, Cecil LV, Zhang YB, Guo ZH (2011) Effects of gravel-sand mulch, plastic mulch and ridge and furrow rainfall harvesting system combinations on water use efficiency, soil temperature and watermelon yield in a semi-arid Loess Plateau of northwestern China. Agric Water Manag 10:88–92 Wang D, Chen S, Wang Z, Ji C, Xu C, Zhang X, Chauhan BS (2014) Optimizing hill seeding density for high-yielding hybrid rice in a single rice cropping system in south china. PLoS One 9(10):e109417 Wang S, Luo S, Li X, Yue S, Shen Y, Li S (2016) Effect of split application of nitrogen on nitrous oxide emissions from plastic mulching maize in the semiarid Loess Plateau. Agric Ecosyst Environ 220:21–27 Woomer PL, Langat M, Tungani JO (2004) Innovative maize-legume intercropping results in above- and below-ground competitive advantages for understorey legumes. West Afr J Appl Ecol 6:85–94 World Bank (2007) World development report 2008: agriculture for development. World Bank, Washington, DC World Bank, Independent Evaluation Group (2007) World Bank assistance to agriculture in Sub-­ Saharan Africa: an IEG review. World Bank Publications, Washington, DC Xie Z, Tu S, Shah F, Xu C, Chen J, Han D, Liu G, Li H, Muhammad I, Cao W (2016) Substitution of fertilizer-N by green manure improves the sustainability of yield in double-rice cropping system in south China. Field Crop Res 188:142–149 Xiong H, Shen H, Zhang L, Zhang Y, Guo X, Wang P, Duan P, Ji C, Zhong L, Zhang F, Zuo Y (2013) Comparative proteomic analysis for assessment of the ecological significance of maize and peanut intercropping. J Proteomics 78:447–460 Yadav PS, Mishra VK, Arun B, Chand R, Vishwakarma MK, Vasistha NK, Mishra AN, Kalappanavard IK, Joshi AK (2015) Enhanced resistance in wheat against stem rust achieved by marker assisted backcrossing involving three independent sr genes. Curr Plant Biol 2:25–33 Yang N, Sun ZX, Feng LS, Zheng MZ, Chi DC, Meng WZ, Hou ZY, Bai W, Li KY (2015) Plastic film mulching for water-efficient agricultural applications and degradable films materials development research. Materia Manufact Proce 30:143–154 Yusuf AA, Abaidoo RC, Iwuafor ENO, Olufajo OO, Sanginga N (2009) Rotation effects of grain legumes and fallow on maize yield, microbial biomass and chemical properties of an Alfisol in the Nigerian savanna. Agric Ecosyst Environ 129:325–331 Zang H, Yang X, Feng X, Qian X, Hu Y, Ren C, Zeng Z (2015) Rhizodeposition of nitrogen and carbon by mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) and its contribution to intercropped oats (Avena nuda L.). PLoS One 10(3):e0121132 Zhang HL, Bai XL, Xue JF, Chen ZD, Tang HM, Chen F (2013a) Emissions of CH4 and N2O under different tillage systems from double-cropped paddy fields in Southern China. PLoS One 8:e65277 Zhang WF, Zhengxi D, He P, Ju XT, Powlson D, Chadwick D, Norse D, Lu YL, Zhang Y, Wu L, Chen XP, Cassman KG, Zhang FS (2013b) New technologies reduce greenhouse gas emissions from nitrogenous fertilizer in China. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:8375–8380 Zhang Y, Wang Z, Li L, Zhou Q, Xiao Y, Wei X, Zhou M (2015) Short-term complete submergence of rice at the tillering stage increases yield. PLoS One 10(5):e0127982 Zhao RF, Chen XP, Zhang FS, Zhang H, Schroder J, Römheld V (2006) Fertilization and nitrogen balance in a wheat–maize rotation system in North China. Agron J 98(4):938–945 Zhou LM, Jin SL, Liu CA, Xiong YC, Si JT, Li XG, Gan YT, Li FM (2012) Ridge-furrow and plastic-mulching tillage enhances maize-soil interactions: opportunities and challenges in a semiarid agroecosystem. Field Crop Res 126:181–188 Zhu C, Xu X, Wang D, Zhu J, Liu G (2015) An indica rice genotype showed a similar yield enhancement to that of hybrid rice under free air carbon dioxide enrichment. Sci Rep 5:15312. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep12719 Zou L, Yli-Halla M, Stoddard FL, Mäkelä PSA (2015) Effects of break crops on yield and grain protein concentration of Barley in a boreal climate. PLoS One 10(6):e0130765

Chapter 3

Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

Abstract  Increasing the resilience of agricultural crops towards various biotic and abiotic stresses is a promising method for maximizing the crop production under adverse conditions. In this chapter, we briefly discussed various integrated strategies for conferring drought, flood, salinity, pests, and diseases resistance in agricultural crops including the resistance to elevated CO2 under changing climatic conditions. Keywords  Crop modelling · Drought tolerance · Flood tolerance · Futuristic crops · Resilient varieties · Salinity tolerance

3.1  Use of Resilient Crop Varieties: A Species-Level Practice Agro-biotechnologists and plant breeders have a major role in developing next-­ generation climate smart crops for future climatic conditions. Changes in crop productivity and resistance against changing environmental conditions can be conferred to individual crop plants by developing transgenic crop lines or by doing marker-­ assisted backcross breeding. For instance, Shen et al. (2015) developed transgenic crop lines by overexpression of the Arabidopsis thaliana receptor-like kinase ERECTA (ER) in Arabidopsis, Oryza sativa (rice), and Lycopersican esculentum (tomato). In the greenhouse as well as in field experiments, improved thermotolerance in transgenic tomato and rice lines was found, along with their increased biomass with zero growth penalties. Dong et  al. (2016) reported the ‘Solanum lycopersicum nam-like protein 1’ (SlNAM1) from tomato, which is a typical N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) transcription factor. The introduction of SINAI into tobacco plants shows better germination potential (rates), photosynthetic rate, and reduced wilting in response to chilling stress. Different abiotic stresses including chilling induces its overexpression, which lightens the oxidative damage of the cell membranes by scavenging excess reactive oxygen species (ROS) through enhanced superoxide dismutase (SOD) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activities. Similarly, marker-assisted backcross breeding is gaining popularity over conventional breeding techniques. For instance, Vishwakarma et al. (2014) integrated the gene Gpc-B1 in wheat cultivar HUW 468 within 2.5  years of time by using the © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 P. K. Dubey et al., Adaptive Agricultural Practices, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3_3

45

46

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

Glu269 genotype as a donor parent. They witnessed improved grain protein content and found improved lines showing 88.4–92.3% recurrence in the parent genome. Similarly, Yadav et al. (2015) transferred three diverse stem rust (Puccinia graminis tritici) resistance genes, namely, Sr25, SrWeb, and Sr50 from the CIMMYT breeding line PMBWIR4 via marker-assisted backcross breeding technique into popular Indian wheat cv. HUW234. They witnessed significant resistance to stem pests with equivalently better agronomic performance in the modified wheat cultivar. Furthermore, developing stress-tolerant crop varieties is also the need of the hour for conferring adaptive capacity at the species level. For instance, flood stress badly hampers growth, productivity, and seed quality in soybean crops (Nguyen et  al. 2012). Because the soybean has high-quality oil and protein that is good for human consumption as well as animal food, there is an urgent need to develop some flood-­ resistant soybean crops by using marker-assisted backcross breeding techniques. However, no such transgenic crop has been developed so far. Via proteomic techniques, Komatsu et al. (2015) analysed the important proteins currently involved in flood tolerance in soybean and summarised how it could be further used in soybean marker-assisted breeding to develop a much more flood-tolerant transgenic soybean crop. More examples of abiotic stress tolerance, viz. drought, salinity, and flood, in crop plants are cited in the next sections of this chapter.

3.2  Coping Under Abiotic Stress Environment 3.2.1  Conferring Drought Tolerance Areas under drought are very prone to soil erosion, which in turns leads to reduced soil fertility, soil nutrients, and soil productivity, which are important factors driving crop growth and productivity (Delgado et al. 2013). To fight against drought stress, farmers take both engineering and non-engineering measures. The most common engineering measures are increasing the irrigation water supply efficiently in drought-affected areas, although most farmers are inclined towards non-engineering measures such as enhancing irrigation intensity, changing crop varieties, changing agricultural inputs, changing the crop calendar by changing the sowing or harvesting dates, or growing drought-resistant crop varieties. For instance, 86% of the farmers in China adopt non-engineering measures whereas only 10% farmers adopt engineering measures (Chen et al. 2014). These adaptive practices are used at both crop/species and farm/field level. At the crop/species level, using drought-tolerant crops or using transgenic and plant breeding techniques to develop drought-tolerant crop varieties are among the most commonly used practices. For example, sorghum is used as a drought-tolerant crop in marginal areas of Africa where it has a vital role in livelihoods of millions of people (Westengen et al. 2014). Use of transgenic plants to overcome drought is another promising approach (Abhilash et al. 2009; Cicero et al. 2015). Use of plant

3.2 Coping Under Abiotic Stress Environment

47

growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) is found to be a better approach in the case of dryland agriculture as it introduces beneficial physical and chemical changes in the soil–plant system (Abhilash et al. 2016a; Dubey et al. 2017). Vurukonda et al. (2016) examined PGPR microbes colonising the plant rhizosphere and producing exopolysaccharides (EPS), phytohormones, 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase, and volatile compounds. PGPR stimulate the accumulation of ‘osmolytes,’ which elicit the ‘antioxidants’ and osmotic response. Overall, it upregulates or downregulates the stress-responsive genes and brings required changes in root morphology to overcome drought stress. Farmers are also adopting various innovative practices at the field level to overcome drought stress in plants. Talaat et al. (2015) for the first time investigated the role of foliar application of 0.1 mg L−1 24-epibrassinolide (EBL) and 25 mg L−1 spermine (Spm) in combination on two maize hybrids (Giza 10 and Giza 129) that grow under drought stress conditions. They observed the inhibition of monodehydroascorbate reductase and dehydroascorbate reductase activities that became increased during drought conditions. The redox state of ascorbate and glutathione was also improved by inhibition of ascorbate (AsA)/dehydroascorbate (DHA) and glutathione reductase (GSH)/reduced glutathione (GSSG) ratios. This practice increases the reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenging antioxidant defence mechanism in plants that limits ROS accumulation, thereby increasing the drought tolerance in hybrid maize cultivars. Further, use of film-forming anti-transpirants could also be a better practice at species level to improve wheat grain yield under drought conditions. For example, Abdullah et al. (2015) found that negative effects of late-­ season drought on growth and yield of wheat in semi-arid regions could be mitigated by adoption of such practices. They concluded that anti-transpirants increased plant water use, rate of transpiration, stomatal conductance, leaf turgor, and photosynthesis, which collectively reduces water deficit or drought stress condition. However, to explore the possibility for crop plants to resist drought events at the landscape level, understanding the spatiotemporal response of the plant communities of grasslands against severe drought events is advocated (Godfree et al. 2011) because grassland communities are likely adapted and resilient to such changes by expanding certain local drought-tolerant species that maintain ecosystem functions with changing climate (Craine et  al. 2013). Moreover, another landscape-level adaptive practice could be to extract the projected drought periods both in dry and wet regions by determining the spatial changes in hydrological cycles (Delgado et al. 2013). These changes can assist in formulation of better adaptation pathways via adaptive soil and water management techniques and policies. Although adaptive practices are imperative for conferring better adaptation to drought events, government policies and social investments also are effective in helping the farmers to cope with such events. Many times, however, government efforts do not reach the farmers in need on time. For example, in China only 5% of villages are benefitted by government support (Chen et al. 2014). This challenge to the agriculture sector must be considered carefully for wise solutions.

48

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

3.2.2  Conferring Salinity Tolerance Using salt-tolerant genotypes or salt-tolerant crop plants is the best strategy for regions facing salinity stress. For example, by osmotic effect, a significant rise in abscisic acid (ABA) concentration in the xylem sap is seen in the salt-tolerant genotype in comparison to the salt-sensitive genotype as seen in tomato (Ghanem et al. 2008; Amjad et al. 2014) and maize (de Costa et al. 2007) crops. On the other hand, García et  al. (2014) found that henna crops naturally adapt well under moderate salinity stress (i.e., 75  mM NaCl). This plant has intrinsic water use efficiency (WUE) that limits the reach of toxic ions and carbon to its leaves and roots, thereby maintaining its turgidity by acting as an osmotic. Transgenic varieties are also developed at the species level to induce salinity tolerance in crop plants. For example, Eltayeb et al. (2007) and Lu et al. (2007) found that transgenic tobacco and transgenic Arabidopsis, which overexpress monodehydroascorbate reductase and cytosolic ascorbate peroxidise, respectively, showed more salinity tolerance as compared to the wild variety. Similarly, transgenic Arabidopsis overexpressed with Capsicum annuum drought stress responsive 6 (CaDSR6) cDNA confer both drought and salinity stress tolerance (Kim et al. 2014). Similarly, in the transgenic apple variety ‘calli’ the V-ATPase subunit B1 gene MdVHA-B1 significantly increases both drought and salinity stress tolerance as compared to its wild variety (Hu et al. 2015). Particularly, MdVHA-B1 was found to interact with Arabidopsis SOS2-like protein kinase (MdSOS2L1), conferring salt tolerance in apple via the salt overly sensitive (SOS) signaling pathway, maintaining ion homeostasis. Increase in K+/Na+ ratio also enhances salinity stress tolerance within the crops (Shabala et al. 2010, 2013), which can be achieved if Na+ uptake is reduced and K+ level is increased in the xylem sap. This change is possible by external potassium input for the crops, as it decreases the Na+ influx from antagonistic/competitive behaviour between K+ and Na+ for binding sites on the plasma membrane and increases the xylem K+ content (Davenport et al. 2007). The increased xylem K+ content under salinity stress condition increases the stomatal conductance, decreases the level of plant stress hormones, mainly ABA and ethylene, and reduces chlorophyllase activity leading to increased chlorophyll content and thus photosynthesis. This increase maintains turgor and enzyme activation and reduces the extra uptake of Na+ and Fe3+ ions (Cakmak 2005). Potassium (K+) application under increased saline (Na+ Cl−) concentration was, for instance, found to reduce the negative impact of salt stress in oilseeds (Fanaei et al. 2009), sweet potato (Zhu et al. 2012), and tomato (Amjad et al. 2014). K+ uptake can also be increased via the grafting technique as in the case of sweet pepper (Capsicum spp.), which is a frequent crop in arid and semi-arid regions (Penella et al. 2015). Commercial cultivar seedlings can be grafted and grown in its rootstocks under stress condition at landscape level. Grafting restricts Cl− transport to the leaves and reduces the Na+ level in leaves and roots, thereby leading to increase in K+ uptake, which benefits the plants under both salinity and drought stress conditions and also increases crop yield.

3.2 Coping Under Abiotic Stress Environment

49

In citrus plants, salinity stress tolerance can be induced by treating with NH4+ nutrition as it acts as a minor stress for initiating salt stress tolerance in citrus, as demonstrated by Crespo et  al. (2012). Use of plant growth-promoting microorganisms (PGPM) can also be quite beneficial under the salt stress condition. Fasciglione et al. (2015) found that lettuce growing under salt stress can demonstrate enhanced yield, storage life, and overall product and visual quality after inoculating the seed with Azospirillum (A. brasilense Sp 245). Apart from this, seed priming is also a widely used crop-level practice to enhance salinity stress tolerance in crop plants. Recently, Ibrahim (2016) reviewed in detail how seed priming increases the antioxidant system, and repairs the membrane system, thereby promoting seed vigour during seed germination and at the growth stage at which salinity most affects the crop.

3.2.3  Conferring Flood Tolerance Flood stress can be overcome either by developing flood-tolerant crop varieties or by incorporating adaptive preferences that are in demand. To meet the food demand in Asia, about four million or more farmers are growing rice varieties into which a gene (sub1) from a rice crop that can withstand submergence (flood) is incorporated via marker-assisted backcrossing (Ismail et al. 2013). This sub1 gene-induced rice can sustain effectively at almost all growth stages starting from early seedlings to before flowering. On average, 2 ton ha−1 increase in yield on complete and natural submergence was also found. Cabello et  al. (2016) induced flood tolerance in Arabidopsis plants via using sunflower HaHB11 (Helianthus annuus homeobox 11) as an agro-biotechnological tool. They found that the transgenic Arabidopsis showed better tolerance towards both submergence and waterlogging without compromising the seed yield, rosette, and stem biomass. Mutava et al. (2015) found that the flood-tolerant variety of soybean (PI 408105A) can be used against flood stress. This variety responds well under flood stress because of the specific fibrillin proteins (FBN1a, 1b, 7a) present in it. This protein is equally beneficial in drought conditions also. Besides this, flash flood events occur in many regions of the world: flood events even occur in dryland regions periodically along with drought (also discussed in Chap. 1, Sect. 1.2). New research suggests that crop plants that can grow well under submergence or flood conditions can overcome this issue (Iijima et al. 2016). Awala et al. (2016) suggested that if the rice crop is integrated with dryland cereals such as pearl millet and soybean, the increased oxygen demand caused by the anoxic condition from flooding can be compromised to a greater extent because the rice crop can adapt well under flood conditions by releasing oxygen in the rhizosphere (Awala et al. 2016). The oxygen released from the roots of rice into the rhizosphere can be utilised by dryland cereal crops for their better survival. Gautam et al. (2015) found

50

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

that the application of both post-flood nitrogen and basal phosphorus in rice variety IR-20 (non-sub 1 rice cultivar), IR-64 sub 1 and Swarna sub 1 (sub 1 rice cultivar) resulted in grain yield increased by nearly 26%, 18%, and 17%, respectively, in comparison to the post-flood nitrogen application. Moreover, they noticed that foliar application of nitrogenous fertilizers (urea) reduced flowering time, thereby leading to increased grain yield and productivity.

3.3  Coping Under Biotic Stress Environment 3.3.1  Crop Weed Resistance Weed growth is another problem in crop fields that must be controlled as it strongly affects the crop yield in many regions. For reasons of lack of labour and water most of the farmers in Asian regions are now practicing dry-seeded rice transplantation (Mahajan et al. 2012). As this practice causes an aerobic condition in the soil that is favourable for weed germination and growth, weed infestation is inevitable. To overcome this, weed control treatments are being practiced in various parts of the globe, although conventional weed treatment methods result in reduction of yield. Chauhan and Opena (2013), during their field-level study during wet and dry seasons of 2011 and 2012, found that weed density, weed biomass, rice panicle number, and rice yield were minimally affected by the two different cultivars under different weed management, such as herbicides and hand weeding. However, in both cultivars, yield is reduced by approximately 18% and 40% on average using herbicides and hand weeding, respectively, which reflects the need for better and effective agronomic practices. Timing for herbicide application must be adjusted for better weed management and weed control practice must be adopted in accordance with the region, soil type, climatic conditions, crop plants, stages of crops, time of sowing or harvesting, etc. For instance, the glyphosate-resistant volunteer corn (Zea maize L.) weed seen most commonly in the soybean field under corn–soybean cropping system (Green 2014) could be controlled by improved cultural agronomic practices (Chahal and Jhala 2016).

3.3.2  Crop Pests and Disease Resistance Crop pests and diseases are normally controlled either by the use of pest-resistant crop varieties developed through breeding techniques, by using chemical pesticides/ insecticides, or by deploying good framing practices under the integrated pest management (IPM) scheme. In China, stem borers, plant hoppers, and leaf borers occurring normally in rice crop fields are managed by use of chemical ­pesticides/

3.3 Coping Under Biotic Stress Environment

51

insecticides (Lou et al. 2014). However, these chemicals are environmentally harmful, so the adoption of biological or natural ways to tackle pests must be promoted (Dubey et al. 2016a, b). For instance, use of pheromones can control pests by either attract-and-kill, mass trapping, or the push–pull system (Tewari et al. 2014). Use of the push–pull system of crop pest and disease control has gained considerable importance in the past few years. It is based on adaptive cultivation, attained by intercropping of desirable crops, for example, whereby a maize crop intercropped with any crop that repels (pushes) pests outwards whereas the field is surrounded by another crop that traps (pulls) those pests towards itself (Khan et al. 2014). Midega et al. (2015) intercropped maize with two drought-tolerant crops, that is, Brachiaria cv. mulato and greenleaf Desmodium as a border crop. They noticed that damage by the weed Striga and the stem borer pest was significantly reduced, by 18 times and 6 times, respectively, as compared to a maize mono-cropping practice. Cockburn et  al. (2014) also suggested the push–pull system as a better strategy to control Eldana saccharina Walker (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), a stem borer pest that has a wide distribution in sugarcane fields in South Africa. Their results concluded that the push–pull system can be practiced at landscape level in South Africa, giving significant benefit to farmers of the region in terms of yield and net economic gain. Similarly, ‘attracting and rewarding’ is another promising approach that can be introduced at species level through genetic engineering and crop breeding techniques. It enhances the capacity of crops for tri-trophic interactions and also provides the push–pull system of biocontrolling pest/disease. However, because of the involvement of genetic engineering this approach is still not accepted in countries in which organic farming is the major farming system (Andersen et al. 2015). Besides the push–pull system, the aphid population (Rhopalosiphum padi) that damages wheat crops can be controlled naturally by a group of invertebrates that prey on aphids (Woodcock et al. 2016). However, spillover (i.e., range) of the predators that can reach in the field and floristic diversity at the margins of the crop field decide the level of aphid control. Suggestions are that half of the pests would be controlled naturally at a typical arable field size (12 ha) with rich floristic diversity kept at the margins. Lou et al. (2014) suggested further improvements in biological pest control method such as the natural species (enemies) feeding on crop insects and pests must be identified more carefully so that the most appropriate methods can be deployed for control. Comparatively, in tropical countries, intercropping has been used as a better adaptive practice at the farm/field scale, more often by smallholder farmers rather than in the large and well-mechanized farms of temperate countries. Surveys done in these regions emphasise securing crop pests and disease incidence in these small agricultural farms as they contribute nearly 20% of the global food production directly (Boudreau 2013). Based on local farmer practices and our own research, a few examples of benefits of intercropping practices in terms of controlling pest/ pathogen attacks and disease suppression in different crop plants including cereals, legumes, and vegetables are highlighted in Table 3.1.

52

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

Table 3.1  Examples of intercropping practices and their benefits in terms of reduction in crop pests and diseases, from different locations of the world, in particular mainly from tropical and developing countries (Source: Boudreau 2013) Sample no. Intercropped plants 1. Wheat Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) 2.

Rice

3.

Maize

4.

5.

Maize (in greater quantity) Maize

6.

Maize

7.

Maize

8.

Maize

9.

Maize

10. 11.

Benefits in terms of disease reduction Reductions of 26–49% for wheat powdery mildew Watermelon (Citrullus lanatus Wilting in watermelon L.) caused by soil-borne fungus (Fusarium sp.) is inhibited Reduced Pratylenchus zeae Legumes jack bean populations by 32% and (Canavalia ensiformis) and reduced damage from the velvet bean (Mucuna nematodes by 26% pruriens) grown as cover crops Chili peppers (in lesser Less Phytophthora blight in quantity than maize) peppers

Transplanting pepper seedlings into sparse maize stands Bean

Pepper veinal mottle virus incidence is lowered

Rayado fino virus, corn stunt spiroplasma, and maize bushy stunt mycoplasma have been reduced (although results not consistent) Disease incidence rate is Sorghum (not actually intercropping but grown either minimised significantly Random broadcasting in in alternate rows, broadcast rows reduces disease rate randomly in the row, or by 40% interspersed within rows) Desmodium + bean Striga population can be suppressed significantly

Sesame (Sesamum indicum)

Location or climatic conditions China Warm climate Kenya

China

Nigeria

Central America

Ethiopia

Warm climate (East Africa) Nigeria

Reduced Alternaria leaf blight and Cercospora leaf spot of sesame significantly Beans and Soybean (Glycine max L.) and Drastic decline in disease Tropics peanuts maize (Zea mays L.) severity in case of legume Warm Damping off (caused Lentils Onion (Allium cepa L.), climate generally by Rhizoctonia cumin (Cuminum cyminum), anise (Pimpinella anisum L.), and Fusarium species) is reduced garlic (Allium sativum L.) (continued)

3.4 Future Crops for Elevated Temperature and CO2

53

Table 3.1 (continued) Sample no. Intercropped plants 12. Cassava Maize (Zea mays L.), beans, sorghum, sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.), and coffee (Coffea sp.)

13.

Peanut

14.

Tomato

15.

Tomato

16.

Tomato

17.

Banana

Benefits in terms of disease reduction Benefit was maximum in cassava (cash crop of Africa) as 10% reduction in cassava mosaic disease and significant decline in whitefly population witnessed Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor To certain extent able to L.) reduce tremendous infestation of witch weed (Striga sp.) Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata Reduced AUDPC of L.) bacterial wilt (caused by Ralstonia solani) but only when two crops were alternated within the same rows Tomato yellow leaf curl Cucumber (Cucumis sativus incidence was reduced by L.) planted between rows of 80% at 60 days after tomato (Lycopersicum planting esculentum L.) Marigolds (Tagetes spp.) used Reduced nematode infestations, especially as either intercrop or cover those caused by the crop root-knot nematode Meloidogyne incognita in tomatoes Alfalfa and white clover Reduces downy mildew in (Trifolium repens L.) grapes provided the intercropping is done in dry season only

Location or climatic conditions Warm climate

Nigeria

Taiwan

Jordan

Taiwan

China

3.4  Future Crops for Elevated Temperature and CO2 The current atmospheric temperature is constantly increasing by 0.84 °C annually and the atmosphere holds a CO2 concentration greater than 400 ppm (IPCC 2014). Temperature is further expected to rise by 3.7–4.8  °C by the end of this century (IPCC 2014). This elevated temperature will limit food grain production by causing heat injury and some physiological disorders in crop plants (Johkan et al. 2011). Especially, tropical and subtropical countries such as India will face a 30% decrease in food grain production with every 1–2 °C rise in temperature (IPCC 2014). This alarming situation is creating a need to develop adaptive crop management strategies or to develop future crops that could sustain with time and grow in a future environment with high CO2 level, temperature, and heat stress (Dubey et al. 2016a, b; Abhilash et al. 2016b; Singh and Abhilash 2018; Singh et al. 2018).

54

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

In general, elevated CO2 is a problem for crop plants but for C3 crops it has been found beneficial. For example, in wheat crops, elevated CO2 concentration promotes plant growth by enhancing photosynthesis and through a fertilization effect (Ghannoum et al. 2000). In rice, free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) treatment to different cultivars including japonica rice cultivars increased the yield to 9–15% (Chen et  al. 2005; Yang et  al. 2006). However, in a hybrid rice cultivar, 30% and 13% increase in rice yield has been noticed as compared to conventional and japonica rice cultivars, respectively (Liu et al. 2008; Yang et al. 2009). This increase of yield in hybrid rice is possible because under FACE treatment, photosynthetic efficiency is maintained at the grain filling stage and root activity is enhanced, resulting in more cytokinin production in the plant root which eventually is distributed in the shoot through transpiration, leading to enhanced crop growth. Zhu et  al. (2015) observed similar results in the inbred indica rice genotype (Yangdao 6 hao) for the first time in terms of yield enhancement as it was for the hybrid rice cultivar under elevated CO2 condition. Shoot, tiller biomass, and plant height significantly increased by 29.0%, 14.3%, and 4.5%, respectively, and 30%, 12.4%, 8.2%, 5.9%, and 3.0% increase in grain yield, panicle counts, spikelet count per panicle, spikelet percentage, and individual grain weight, respectively, was seen, possible because the indica rice cultivar has strong nitrogen uptake capacity and sink generation capacity to maintaining the C:N ratio, thereby avoiding any chances of photosynthetic acclimation. Similarly, Ziska et al. (2012) also found that for rice, crop breeding techniques and active selection of crop under high CO2 concentration is an important species-level adaptive practice. Rao et al. (2016) recently reported that a C3 crop growing in less fertile soil and in water stress or drought conditions can actually be benefitted by elevated CO2. Borland et al. (2015) suggested that incorporating bioengineered crassulacean acid metabolism (CAM) metabolism into a C3 crop can also improve its WUE. The CAM metabolism works to conserve water by shifting the stomatal openings and also maintains CO2 uptake during drought conditions by conducting its nocturnal fixation when leaf:air vapour pressure density (VPD) is less and thus WUE is increased. In contrast to this, many other studies have reported that elevated CO2 may have a negative impact on C3 crops as well, as it impacts soil microbes, soil health, and crop yield negatively. Hao et al. (2016) found that the NPK concentration in soybean (C3 crop) plant tissue is subject to CO2 concentration in the atmosphere depending on the different stages of growth. On the other hand, various studies such as those by Ghannoum et al. (2000), Mendelsohn and Dinar (2009), Fang et al. (2010), Pathak et al. (2012), and Abebe et al. (2016) suggest that elevated temperature and CO2 are not good for C4 crops. Battipaglia et al. (2013) suggested that Populus species grown under elevated CO2 conditions showed decline in stomatal conductance and improved WUE. To overcome heat stress, various similar practices are recommended for drought stress conditions (see Sect. 3.2.1). Fahad et al. (2016) reported that the combined application of ‘rice husk-based biochar’ (containing nearly 29% of carbon) + phosphate fertilizer can overcome the heat stress and also increase grain yield in rice cultivar IR-64 by nearly 7%.

3.5 Use of Climate/Crop Models for Building Adaptive Capacity in Agriculture…

55

3.5  U  se of Climate/Crop Models for Building Adaptive Capacity in Agriculture for a Future Environment To meet the global food demand, adaptive agricultural strategies are required to cope with changing climatic conditions. Therefore, implementing smarter approaches for predicting future climate and taking adaptive actions accordingly by using various climate and crop models are also necessary. Bird et al. (2016) made predictions about significant decrease in crop production from 2040 to 2070  in China under future climatic scenarios by using ‘Aqua crop,’ an FAO model (FAO 2015b), as water has been a limiting resource for the region and the model fits best for such conditions. Under the CLIMB project (Climate Induced Changes on the Hydrology of Mediterranean Basins Reducing Uncertainty and Quantifying Risk through an Integrated Monitoring and Modelling System), two different sites of the Mediterranean region, Sardinia and Tunisia, were taken for predictions of wheat and tomato production, respectively, under different soil types and different climatic conditions by using this model. Previously, EEA (2012) also had predicted that these regions would have less precipitation, with more frequent occurrences of flood and drought events. Iglesias et al. (2007) also found summer heat stress to be primary cause for the decline in crop yields as a result of reduced water resource availability for these regions. Adaptive practices based on such modelling can select suitable crop varieties for different edaphic and climatic conditions (Dettori et al. 2011a, b). Similar models and software, such as EToCalc, have also been used for predictions of changes in crop productivity in a future climate (FAO 2015a). For better decision making, a crop yield model such as APSIM is also advisable. Iglesias et al. (2012) also offered a climate crop model that can be used to understand how crop productivity and water requirements are affected by the use of fertilizers, water, and land resources based on various adaptation and mitigation policies, thereby providing an idea for building resilience in the agricultural system of a particular region. Decision Support System for Agro Technology Transfer (DSSAT) CERES-rice and CERES-maize models have been already employed as promising tools to discover likely options for better nitrogen management and water-saving techniques, thereby bringing nitrogen- and water-efficient best management practices for the aerobic rice–maize cropping system in semi-arid tropics (Kadiyala et al. 2015). However, certain typical uncertainties always remain with input and model parameters in modelling many crop simulations. Therefore, crop models must be calibrated accordingly (Challinor et al. 2009), and such modelling results must be integrated into adaptive planning for building agricultural resilience under changing climatic conditions (Soussana et al. 2010; Webber et al. 2014). Importantly, the Asian and sub-Saharan African continents urgently need such approaches for attaining some of the UN-SDGs targets set for 2030 by reducing hunger and poverty and improving the livelihood status of poor farmers. Apart from using crop models, crop biophysical suitability analysis under a changing climate can also include some focus group discussions to identify the most suitable crops for current and future climatic conditions of a particular region.

56

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

For example, the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief and International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (OXFAM-CIAT 2011) conducted one such study entitled “Impact of climate change on Jamaican hotel industry supply chains and on farmer’s livelihoods” in year 2011. Their crop prediction was done spatially, using a mechanistic model that was based on the Ecocrop database. The results depend on the suitability index assigned to a crop, which in turn is based on analysis by models using temperatures (ranging from minimum, maximum, and mean monthly values) and rainfall (total monthly values) data. Besides this, the process-based ecosystem model ‘Daycent’ can assess the soil respiration rate under future climatic conditions. For instance, Black et al. (2017) used this model for a maize–soybean cropping system and assessed that after one century more than 11% of soil organic C will be lost under elevated CO2 and temperature. This analysis would assist in better preparedness of the agricultural system for future environmental conditions. GIS-based productivity models can be used (as a crop/species-level adaptive practice) to analyse different crop species that can perform better under future environmental conditions. For example, Owen et al. (2015) analysed two crop species, Agave tequilana and Opuntia ficus-indica, that are highly water-efficient CAM crop plants. They found them very resilient to changing climate, outperforming conventional C3- and C4-based bioenergy crops, thus suggesting them as a potential source to fulfil future global bioenergy demand. Similarly, the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) model can be used to select the best adaptive practice for different agro-climatic zones of the world. Maharjan et al. (2016) used the SWAT model and recommended that the ‘split fertilizer application + winter cover crop cultivation’ practice for dryland crops such as cabbage, potato, and radish grown in the Haean (mountainous) catchment area of South Korea can increase crop yields, significantly limiting the agricultural nutrients (specifically nitrate) pollution and level of sediments.

References Abdullah AS, Aziz MM, Siddique KHM, Flower KC (2015) Film antitranspirants increase yield in drought stressed wheat plants by maintaining high grain number. Agric Water Manag 159:11–18 Abebe A, Pathak H, Singh SD, Bhatia A, Harit RC, Kumar V (2016) Growth, yield and quality of maize with elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature in north–west India. Agric Ecosyst Environ 218:66–72 Abhilash PC, Jamil S, Singh N (2009) Transgenic plants for enhanced biodegradation and phytoremediation of organic xenobiotics. Biotechnol Adv 27(4):474–488 Abhilash PC, Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Gupta VK, Singh HB (2016a) Plant growth-promoting microorganisms for environmental sustainability. Trends Biotechnol 34:847–850 Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Dubey RK, Bakshi M, Dube PK, Ebbs SD (2016b) Sustainability of crop production from polluted lands. Energ Ecol Environ 1:54–56 Amjad M, Akhtar J, Anwar-ul-Haq M, Yang A, Akhtar SS, Jacobsen SE (2014) Integrating role of ethylene and ABA in tomato plants adaptation to salt stress. Sci Hortic 172:109–116

References

57

Andersen MM, Landes X, Xiang W, Anyshchenko A, Falhof J, Østerberg JT, Olsen LI, Edenbrandt AK, Vedel SE, Thorsen BJ, Sandøe P (2015) Feasibility of new breeding techniques for organic farming. Trends Plant Sci 20:426–434 Awala SK, Yamane K, Izumi Y, Fujioka Y, Watanabe Y, Wada KC, Kawato Y, Mwandemele OD, Iijima M (2016) Field evaluation of mixed-seedlings with rice to alleviate flood stress for semi-­ arid cereals. Eur J Agron 80:105–112 Battipaglia G, Saurer M, Cherubini P, Calfapietra C, McCarthy H, Norby R, Cotrufo M (2013) Elevated CO2 increases tree-level intrinsic water use efficiency: insights from carbon and oxygen isotope analyses in tree rings across three forest FACE sites. New Phytol 197:544–554 Bird DN, Benabdallah S, Gouda N, Hummel F, Koeberl J, La Jeunesse I, Meyer S, Prettenthaler F, Soddu A, Gallasch SW (2016) Modelling climate change impacts on and adaptation strategies for agriculture in Sardinia and Tunisia using AquaCrop and value-at-risk. Sci Total Environ 543:1019–1027 Black CK, Davis SC, Hudiburg TW, Bernacchi CJ, Delucia EH (2017) Elevated CO2 and temperature increase soil C losses from a soybean–maize ecosystem. Glob Chang Biol 23:435–445 Borland AM, Wullschleger SD, Weston DJ, Hartwell J, Tuskan GA, Yang X, Cushman JC (2015) Climate-resilient agroforestry: physiological responses to climate change and engineering of crassulacean acid metabolism (CAM) as a mitigation strategy. Plant Cell Environ 38:1833–1849 Boudreau MA (2013) Diseases in intercropping systems. Annu Rev Phytopathol 51:499–519 Cabello JV, Giacomelli JI, Piattoni CV, Iglesias AA, Chan RL (2016) The sunflower transcription factor HaHB11 improves yield, biomass and tolerance to flooding in transgenic Arabidopsis plants. J Biotechnol 222:73–83 Cakmak I (2005) The role of potassium in alleviating detrimental effects of abiotic stresses in plants. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 168:521–530 Chahal PS, Jhala AJ (2016) Impact of glyphosate-resistant volunteer corn (Zea mays L.) density, control timing, and late-season emergence on yield of glyphosateresistant soybean (Glycine max L.). Crop Prot 81:38–42 Challinor AJ, Ewert F, Arnold S, Simelton E, Fraser E (2009) Crops and climate change: progress, trends, and challenges in simulating impacts and informing adaptation. J Exp Bot 60:2775–2789 Chauhan BS, Opena J (2013) Weed management and grain yield of rice sown at low seeding rates in mechanized dry-seeded systems. Field Crop Res 141:9–15 Chen GY, Yong ZH, Liao Y, Zhang DY, Chen Y, Zhang HB, Chen J, Zhu JG, Xu DQ (2005) Photosynthetic acclimation in rice leaves to free-air CO2 enrichment related to both ribulose-­ 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylation limitation and ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate regeneration limitation. Plant Cell Physiol 46:1036–1045 Chen H, Wang J, Huang J (2014) Policy support, social capital, and farmers’ adaptation to drought in China. Glob Environ Chang 24:193–202 Cicero LL, Madesis P, Tsaftaris A, Piero ARL (2015) Tobacco plants over-expressing the sweet orange tau glutathione transferases (CsGSTUs) acquire tolerance to the diphenyl ether herbicide fluorodifen and to salt and drought stresses. Phytochemistry 116:69–77 Cockburn J, Coetzee H, Berg JVD, Conlong D (2014) Large-scale sugarcane farmers’ knowledge and perceptions of Eldana saccharina Walker (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), push pull and integrated pest management. Crop Prot 56:1–9 de Costa W, Zorb C, Hartung W, Schubert S (2007) Salt resistance is determined by osmotic adjustment and abscisic acid in newly developed maize hybrids in the first phase of salt stress. Physiol Plant 131:311–321 Craine JM, Ocheltree TW, Nippert JB, Towne EG, Skibbe AM, Kembe SW, Fargione JE (2013) Global diversity of drought tolerance and grassland climate-change resilience. Nat Clim Chang 3:63–67 Crespo EF, Camañes G, Agustín PG (2012) Ammonium enhances resistance to salinity stress in citrus plants. J Plant Physiol 169:1183–1191 Davenport RJ, Munoz-Mayor A, Jha D, Essah PA, Rus A, Tester M (2007) The Na+ transporter AtHKT1; 1 controls retrieval of Na+ from the xylem in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Environ 30:497–507

58

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

Delgado JA, Nearing MA, Rice CW (2013) Chapter Two  – Conservation practices for climate change adaptation. Adv Agron 121:47–115 Dettori M, Cesaraccio C, Motroni A, Spano D, Duce P (2011a) Using CERES-wheat to simulate durum wheat production and phenology in Southern Sardinia, Italy. Field Crop Res 120:179–188 Dettori M, Crossa J, Ammar K, Peña RJ, Varela M (2011b) Three-mode principal component analysis of genotype-by-environment-by-trait data in durum wheat. J Crop Improv 25:619–649 Dong LX, Yang ZK, Ming LZ, Yue YD, Na MN, Wei MQ (2016) Overexpression of a novel NAC-­ type tomato transcription factor, SlNAM1, enhances the chilling stress tolerance of transgenic tobacco. J Plant Physiol 204:54–65 Dubey PK, Singh GS, Abhilash PC (2016a) Agriculture in a changing climate. J  Clean Prod 113:1046–1047 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Dubey PK, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2016b) Exploring rhizospheric interactions for agricultural sustainability: the need of integrative research on multi-trophic interactions. J Clean Prod 115:362–365 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Bakshi M, Dubey PK, Singh A, Verma JP, Singh A, Sarma BK, Raskhit A, Singh DP, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2017) Role of plant growth promoting microorganisms in sustainable agriculture and environmental remediation. In: Singh HB, Sharma B, Kesawani C (eds) Advances in PGPR research. CABI Press, Washington, DC. https://doi. org/10.1079/9781786390325.0000 Eltayeb AE, Kawano N, Badawi GH, Kaminaka H, Sanekata T, Shibahara T, Inanaga S, Tanaka K (2007) Overexpression of monodehydroascorbate reductase in transgenic tobacco confers enhance tolerance to ozone, salt and polyethylene glycol stresses. Planta 225:1255–1264 European Environment Agency (EEA) (2012) Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe. An indicator-based report. EEA Report No. 12/2012. Copenhagen, Denmark Fahad S, Hussain S, Saud S, Hassan S, Tanveer M, Ihsan MZ, Shah AN, Ullah A, Nasrullah, Khan F, Ullah S, Alharby H, Nasim W, Wu C, Huang J (2016) A combined application of biochar and phosphorus alleviates heat-induced adversities on physiological, agronomical and quality attributes of rice. Plant Physiol Biochem 103:191–198 Fanaei HR, Galavi M, Kafi M, Bonjar AG (2009) Amelioration of water stress by potassium fertilizer in two oilseed species. Int J Plant Prod 3:41–54 Fang SB, Shen B, Tan K, Gao XN (2010) Effect of elevated CO2 concentration and increased temperature on physiology and production of crops. Chin J Eco-Agric 18:1116–1124 FAO, (2015a) ETo calculator. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/eto.html FAO, (2015b) About AquaCrop. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquacrop_about.html Fasciglione G, Casanovas EM, Quillehauquy V, Yommi AK, Goni MG, Roura SI, Barassi CA (2015) Azospirillum inoculation effects on growth, product quality and storage life of lettuce plants grown under salt stress. Sci Hortic 195:154–162 García NF, Olmos E, Bardisi E, De la Garma JG, López-Berenguer C, Rubio-Asensio JS (2014) Intrinsic water use efficiency controls the adaptation to high salinity in a semi-arid adapted plant, henna (Lawsonia inermis L.). J Plant Physiol 171:64–75 Gautam P, Lal B, Raja R, Tripathi R, Shahid M, Baig MJ, Puree C, Mohanty S, Nayak AK (2015) Effect of simulated flash flooding on rice and its recovery after flooding with nutrient management strategies. Ecol Eng 77:250–256 Ghanem M, Albacete A, Martínez-Andujar C, Acosta M, Romero-Aranda R, Dodd IC, Lutts S, Pérez-Alfocea F (2008) Hormonal changes during salinity-induced leaf senescente in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.), J. Exp Bot 59:3039–3050 Ghannoum O, Von Caemmerer S, Ziska LH, Conroy JP (2000) The response of C4 plants to elevated CO2 partial pressure: a reassessment. Plant Cell Environ 23:931–942 Godfree R, Lepschi B, Reside A, Bolger T, Robertson B, Marshall D, Carnegie M (2011) Multiscale topoedaphic heterogeneity increases resilience and resistance of a dominant grassland species to extreme drought and climate change. Glob Chang Biol 17:943–958 Green JM (2014) Current state of herbicide-resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci 70:1351–1357

References

59

Hao X, Li P, Han X, Norton RM, Lam SK, Zong Y, Sun M, Lin E, Gao Z (2016) Effects of free-­ air CO2 enrichment (FACE) on N, P and K uptake of soybean in northern China. Agric Forest Meteorol 218:261–266 Hu DG, Sun MH, Sun CH, Liu X, Zhang QY, Zhao J  (2015) Yu-Jin Hao∗Conserved vacuolar H+-ATPase subunit B1 improves salt stress tolerance in apple calli and tomato plants. Sci Hortic 197:107–116 Ibrahim EA (2016) Seed priming to alleviate salinity stress in germinating seeds. J. Plant Physiol 192:38–46 Iglesias A, Avis K, Benzie M, Fisher P, Harley M, Hodgson N, Horrocks L, Moneo M, Webb J  (2007) Adaptation to climate change in the agricultural sector. Report to European Commission Directorate–General for Agriculture and Rural Development, AEA Energy & Environment and Universidad de Politécnica de Madrid. In: AGRI-2006-G4-05, ED05334. http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/external-studies/2007/adaptation-climate-change/full text_ en.pdf. Accessed 25 Jun 2015 Iglesias A, Garrote L, Quiroga S, Moneo M (2012) From climate change impacts to the development of adaptation strategies: challenges for agriculture in Europe. Clim Change 112:143–168 Iijima M, Awala SK, Watanabe Y, Kawato Y, Fujioka Y, Yamanea K, Wadaa KC (2016) Mixed cropping has the potential to enhance flood tolerance of drought-adapted grain crops. J Plant Physiol 192:21–25 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Field CB et al (eds) climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Ismail AM, Singh US, Singh S, Dar MH, Mackill DJ (2013) The contribution of submergence-­ tolerant (Sub1) rice varieties to food security in flood prone rainfed lowland areas in Asia. Field Crop Res 152:83–93 Johkan M, Oda M, Maruo T, Shinohara Y (2011) Crop production and global warming impacts. Case studies on the economy, human health, and on urban and natural environments. INTECH Open Access Publisher, Rijeka. http://www.intechopen.com Kadiyala MDM, Jones JW, Mylavarapu RS, Li YC, Reddy MD (2015) Identifying irrigation and nitrogen best management practices for aerobic rice–maize cropping system for semi-arid tropics using CERES-rice and maize models. Agric Water Manag 149:23–32 Khan ZR, Midega CAO, Pittchar JO, Murage AW, Birkett MA, Bruce TJA, Pickett JA (2014) Achieving food security for one million sub-Saharan African poor through push-pull innovation by 2020. Phil Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 369:20120284 Kim EY, Seo YS, Park KY, Kim SJ, Kim WT (2014) Overexpression of CaDSR6 increases tolerance to drought and salt stresses in transgenic Arabidopsis plants. Gene 552:146–154 Komatsu S, Tougou M, Nanjo Y (2015) Proteomic techniques and management of flooding tolerance in Soybean. J Proteome Res 14:3768–3778 Liu HJ et al (2008) Yield formation of CO2-enriched hybrid rice cultivar Shanyou 63 under fully open-air field conditions. Field Crop Res 108:93–100 Lou YG, Zhang GR, Zhang WQ, Hu Y, Zhang J (2014) Reprint of: biological control of rice insect pests in China. Biol Contr 68:103–116 Lu Z, Liu D, Liu S (2007) Two rice cytosolic ascorbate peroxidases differentially improve salt tolerance. Plant Cell Rep 26:1909–1917 Mahajan G, Chauhan BS, Timsina J, Singh PP (2012) Kuldeep-Singh crop performance and waterand nitrogen-use efficiencies in dry-seeded rice in response to irrigation and fertilizer amounts in northwest India. Field Crop Res 134:59–70 Maharjan GR, Ruidisch M, Shope CL, Choi K, Huwe B, Kim SJ, Tenhunen J, Arnhold S (2016) Assessing the effectiveness of split fertilization and cover crop cultivation in order to conserve soil and water resources and improve crop productivity. Agric Water Manag 163:305–318 Mendelsohn R, Dinar A (2009) Climate change and agriculture: an economic analysis of global impacts, adaptation and distributional effects. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 256

60

3  Increasing Resilience in Crops for Future Changing Environment

Midega CAO, Toby JA, Bruce Pickett JA, Pittchara JO, Muragea A, Khan ZR (2015) Climate-­ adapted companion cropping increases agricultural productivity in East Africa. Field Crop Res 180:118–125 Mutava RN, Prince SJK, Syed NH, Song L, Valliyodan B, Chen W, Nguyen HT (2015) Understanding abiotic stress tolerance mechanisms in soybean: a comparative evaluation of soybean response to drought and flooding stress. Plant Physiol Biochem 86:109–120 Nguyen VT, Vuong TD, VanToai T, Lee JD, Wu X, Mian MA, Dorrance AE, Shannon JG, Nguyen HT (2012) Mapping of quantitative trait loci associated with resistance to Phytophthora sojae and flooding tolerance in soybean. Crop Sci 52:2481–2493 Owen NA, Fahy KF, Griffiths H (2015) Crassulacean acid metabolism (CAM) offers sustainable bioenergy production and resilience to climate change. GCB Bioenerg 8:737. https://doi. org/10.1111/gcbb.12272 OXFAM - CIAT (2011) Impact of climate change on Jamaican hotel industry supply chains and on farmer’s livelihoods. Case study: Jamaica. International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Cali Pathak H, Aggarwal PK, Singh SD (2012) Climate change impacts, adaptations and mitigation in agriculture: methodology for assessment and application. Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, pp xix–302 Penella C, Nebauer SG, Bautista AS, Galarza SL, Calatayud A (2015) Strategies to avoid salinity and hydric stress of pepper grafted Plants. Agriculture and climate change - adapting crops to increased uncertainty (AGRI 2015). Proc Environ Sci 29:211–212 Rao CS, Kundu S, Shanker AK, Naik RP, Vanaja M, Venkanna K, Sankar GRM, Rao VUM (2016) Continuous cropping under elevated CO2: differential effects on C4 and C3 crops, soil properties and carbon dynamics in semi-arid alfisols. Agric Ecosyst Environ 218:73–86 Shabala S, Shabala L, Cuin TA, Pang J, Percey W, Chen Z, Conn S, Eing C, Wegner LH (2010) Xylem ionic relations and salinity tolerance in barley. Plant J 61:839–853 Shabala S, Hariadi Y, Jacobsen SE (2013) Genotypic difference in salinity tolerance in quinoa is determined by differential control of xylem Na+ loading and stomatal density. J Plant Physiol 170:906–914 Shen H, Zhong X, Zhao F, Wang Y, Yan B, Li Q, Chen G, Mao B, Wang J, Li Y, Xiao G, He Y, Xiao H, Li J, He Z (2015) Overexpression of receptor-like kinase ERECTA improves thermotolerance in rice and tomato. Nat Biotechnol 33(9):996–1003 Singh A, Abhilash PC (2018) Agricultural biodiversity for sustainable food production. J Clean Prod 172:1368–1369 Singh A, Dubey PK, Chaurasiya R, Mathur N, Kumar G, Bharati S, Abhilash PC (2018) Indian spinach: an underutilized perennial leafy vegetable for nutritional security in developing world. Energ Ecol Environ 3:195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-018-0091-1 Soussana JF, Graux AI, Tubiello FN (2010) Improving the use of modeling for projections of climate change impacts on crops and pastures. J Exp Bot 61:2217–2228 Talaat NB, Shawky BT, Ibrahim AS (2015) Alleviation of drought-induced oxidative stress in maize (Zea mays L.) plants by dual application of 24-epibrassinolide and spermine. Environ Exp Bot 113:47–58 Tewari S, Lesky TC, Nielsen AL, Pinero JC, Saona CRR (2014) Chapter 9 - Uses of pheromones in insect pest management, with special attention to Weevil pheromones. In: Integrated pest management: current concepts and ecological perspective. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 141–168 Vishwakarma MK, Mishra VK, Gupta PK, Yadav PS, Kumar H, Joshi AK (2014) Introgression of the high grain protein gene Gpc-B1 in an elite wheat variety of Indo-Gangetic plains through marker assisted backcross breeding. Curr Plant Biol 1:60–67 Vurukonda SSKP, Vardharajula S, Shrivastava M, SkZ A (2016) Enhancement of drought stress tolerance in crops by plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Microbiol Res 184:13–24 Webber H, Gaiser T, Ewert F (2014) What role can crop models play in supporting climate change adaptation decisions to enhance food security in Sub-Saharan Africa? Agric Syst 127:161–177

References

61

Westengen OT, Okongo MA, Onek L, Berg T, Upadhyaya H, Birkeland S, Khalsa SDK, Ringa KH, Stenseth NC, Brysting AK (2014) Ethnolinguistic structuring of sorghum genetic diversity in Africa and the role of local seed systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111:14100–14105 Woodcock BA, Bullock JM, McCracken M, Chapman RE, Ball SL, Edwards ME, Nowakowski M, Pywell RF (2016) Spill-over of pest control and pollination services into arable crops. Agric Ecosyst Environ 231:15–23 Yadav PS, Mishra VK, Arun B, Chand R, Vishwakarma MK, Vasistha NK, Mishra AN, Kalappanavard IK, Joshi AK (2015) Enhanced resistance in wheat against stem rust achieved by marker assisted backcrossing involving three independent sr genes. Curr Plant Biol 2:25–33 Yang L, Huang J, Yang H, Zhu J, Liu H, Dong G, Liu G, Han Y, Wang Y (2006) The impact of free-­ air CO2 enrichment (FACE) and N supply on yield formation of rice crops with large panicle. Field Crop Res 98:141–150 Yang L, Liu H, Wang Y, Zhu J, Huang J, Liu G, Dong G, Wang Y (2009) Yield formation of CO2-­ enriched inter-subspecific hybrid rice cultivar Liangyoupeijiu under fully open-air field condition in a warm sub-tropical climate. Agric Ecosyst Environ 129:193–200 Zhu LD, Shao XH, Zhang YC, Zhang H, Hou MM (2012) Effects of potassium fertilizer application on photosynthesis and seedling growth of sweet potato under drought stress. J Food Agric Environ 10:487–491 Zhu C, Xu X, Wang D, Zhu J, Liu G (2015) An indica rice genotype showed a similar yield enhancement to that of hybrid rice under free air carbon dioxide enrichment. Sci Rep 5:12719. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep12719 Ziska LH, Bunce JA, Shimono H, Gealy DR, Baker JT, Newton PC, Reynolds MP, Jagadish KS, Zhu C, Howden M, Wilson LT (2012) Food security and climate change: on the potential to adapt global crop production by active selection to rising atmospheric carbon dioxide. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 279:4097–4105

Chapter 4

Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Abstract  Adaptive agriculture practices are stemmed from various eco-friendly and ecological agricultural practices such as conservation agriculture (CA), climateresilient agriculture (CRA), climate smart agriculture (CSA), sustainable agriculture (SA), sustainable agriculture intensification (SAI), and sustainable agriculture extensification (SAE) etc. and all of these practices are intended to enhance the food production under changing climatic conditions while reducing the ecological footprint considerably. The ensuing sections underline the ecological manifestations of such resource-­conserving and innovative practices for agricultural sustainability. Keywords  Agriculture intensification · Agriculture extensification · Conservation agriculture · Farm innovation · Farmer’s perspectives · Nutrient and water use efficiency

4.1  Increasing Nutrient and Water Use Efficiency Adaptive agricultural practices for better soil and crop management are essential to improve net economic gain by increasing total yield per unit land area and to enhance nutrient use efficiency (NUE). Dates of sowing can be changed, planting densities may be altered, quantities of irrigation water may be changed, and fertilization rate and the amount of straw returned to the field may be monitored, among other measures. Many such adaptive practices at crop/species, farm/field, and landscape levels are presented in Fig. 4.1. The adoption of site-specific, adaptive soil and crop management practices are beneficial at both farm/field and landscape levels. For example, in the South Asia region, the non-rice cropping system is proved to be more beneficial; however, up-scaling such practices at the landscape level requires better farm innovations in that area. Another example of site-specific nitrogen (N) management strategy comes from northwest India where dry direct seeded rice using a Greenseeker optical sensor increases nitrogen use efficiency and decreases its loss into the environment via leaching or emission (Ali et al. 2015).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 P. K. Dubey et al., Adaptive Agricultural Practices, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3_4

63

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Farm/ Field Level

Crop/ Species Level

Adaptive agricultural practices under changing climate

Landscape Level

64

Integrated soil management and crop residue management Green manure/ cover crop input Farm yard manure (FYM) and domestic sewage sludge input No tillage, zero tillage or reduced tillage Conversion of forest site into agricultural croplands Push-pull system of pest and weed management Bio-fertilizer input Integrated agricultural approach under no tillage Split nitrogen fertilizer application under plastic film mulching Geospatial techniques Crop modelling for future predictions Watershed management. Agroforestry and crop diversification. Water harvesting/ irrigation facilities/ check dams. Reforestation, revegetation/ soil erosion measure. Soil fertility improvement. Integrated pest management (IPM) Double cropping under conservation tillage Relay intercropping with rational phosphorous application Intercropping/ crop rotation Laser levelling technique as water saving technology Integrated nutrient management (INM) Integrated weed management (IWM) Tillage and trash management Conservation tillage and residue mulching Compost addition in soil and Mulching Increasing seeding rate (in dry seeded rice) and seeding space Alteration in tillage and crop establishment techniques Inoculating PGPR and Arbuscular Mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) Use of bio fertilizer (PSB and VAM) Conservation agriculture practice Drip and micro drip irrigation Inclusion of perennial crops Change in planting dates and crop calendar improvement. System of rice intensification (SRI) System of crop intensification (SCI) System of teff intensification (STI) Integrated disease management (IDM) Alteration in planting configuration Replacing nitrogen fertilization by straw and biochar treatment Improved variety by cloning technique Marker assisted backcross breeding Developing transgenic crop lines Slow releasing fertilizer with mulching Conventional breeding and Participatory seed breeding Use of resistant species (drought, salinity, pest, flood) High yielding variety with high nutritional quality Incorporating bioengineered CAM metabolism in C3 crops

Fig. 4.1  Adaptive agricultural practices that can be implemented at different levels (i.e., crop/species level, farm/field level, landscape level)

4.1 Increasing Nutrient and Water Use Efficiency

65

Similarly, the cropping system followed with rotary tillage practices in southeast China for coastal saline bioenergy production increases greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (mainly methane) into the atmosphere, which is an alarming situation for southeast China and also for the world. Adoption of the zero-tillage practice in the region can reduce net annual greenhouse gas balance and greenhouse gas intensity by 11–21% and 4–8%, respectively (Liu et al. 2015). This practice increases crop biomass and also improves soil salinity over the entire landscape. Not only this, combined with other practices such as irrigation under permanent narrow- or broad-­ bed planting and doing ‘residue retention  +  no/zero tillage’ could be even more beneficial for other locations or cropping systems. For instance, in the cotton–wheat cropping system in the western Indo-Gangetic plain, India, crop productivity and mean system water productivity were enhanced by 3.1  mg  wheat equivalent yield ha−1 year−1 and 48%, respectively (Das et al. 2014). Although the residue input cost is a little extra in this method, the practice is found beneficial in terms of benefit:cost ratio as the residue addition provides N mineral nutrients to the soil, thereby decreasing the need for nitrogenous fertilizers. Many more examples of sustainable agricultural practices for improved water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient use efficiency (NUE) from the China region can be cited here. For example, particularly with the rotated rice cropping system done in China, 15.7% ± 5.9% of synthetic N could be replaced per year without affecting rice productivity. Also, optimum nitrogen application and proper field management including shallow flooding can reduce major GHG (CH4, CO2, and N2O) emissions while minimising N loss into the soil by 34.3% and 2.8%, respectively, and thereby increase the rice yield by 1.7% (Chen et al. 2016). Optimised nitrogen fertilization application during the past decade in the different cropping systems in the North China plain shows how nitrogen use efficiency is increased significantly while enhancing net economic gain with reduced environmental risk. For example, Cui et al. (2008) observed 44 kg N ha−1 and 65 kg N ha−1 reduction in residual nitrate N content and N losses, respectively, in summer maize production with 16%, 6 kg kg−1, and 36 kg kg−1 increase in N efficiency, agronomic N efficiency, and N partial factor productivity, respectively, in comparison with the farmer’s N practice. Similarly, Ju et al. (2009) found no changes in crop yield on reducing N fertilizer application in the field from 550 to 600 kg ha−1 to 230–400 kg ha−1. Similar results were also seen in a winter wheat–summer maize cropping system by Zhao et al. (2006). Guo et al. (2015a) found that nitrogen application at 200–250 kg ha−1 in rice fields shows reasonable nitrogen use efficiency from increased plant nitrogen uptake along with an appreciable amount of rice grain yield in regions of China where the average rice grain yield is 7.67 ton ha−1. Moreover, a wheat–rice cropping system with low nitrogen fertilization rate, high fertilization frequency, and intense planting density resulted in reduced leaching of nitrate nitrogen (14%) and total nitrogen leaching (21%), with increase in rice grain yield by 6.7% in per hectare of land area (Cao et al. 2014). Application of mineral fertilizers is another adaptive practice as it increases microbial biomass and microbial functional diversity, which in turn is beneficial in terms of crop yield for both short- and long-term crop types. The microbial

66

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

c­ ommunity has a major role in decomposition and nutrient cycling at local and landscape levels (Bradford et  al. 2014). Application of mineral fertilizers with legume rotation practice is relatively more beneficial for the small tropical agroecosystem than a temperate region. In temperate regions, this practice may decrease functional gene abundance, for example, the N2 fixing gene can be reduced to a greater extent (Fierer et al. 2012). However, in a tropical system, both functional capacity and yield are increased by such practice (Wood et al. 2015a). It also reduces the requirements of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers, and the net nitrogen balance remains positive, which ultimately benefits the farmers. Despite these beneficial effects, there are some potential trade-offs associated with these processes, such as soil nutrients and organic matter becoming extensively converted into greenhouse gases (Wood et  al. 2015b), but agricultural sustainability can be maintained by adopting innovative agronomic practices. Enhancing phosphorus use efficiency (PUE) in crop plants is another important aspect in attaining environmental sustainability. For example, Chen et  al. (2015) studied the effect of rational phosphorus application at the rate of 72 kg P ha−1 or maintaining appropriate soil Olsen-P level at 19.1  mg  kg−1 in wheat–maize–soybean relay strip intercropping, which increased shoot phosphorus uptake at a threshold rate of 70 kg P ha−1, and phosphorus recovery efficiency by 28.8%, as compared to normal agronomic practices. Such optimised use of P fertilizers decreases its leaching into the soil, maintains the phosphorus balance in the system for the next 3–4 years at least, and also gives a good grain yield (Wang et al. 2014).

4.2  Conservation Agriculture (CA) Conservation agriculture is being adopted globally in view of its potential to increase crop productivity along with soil conservation (Andersson and Giller 2012; Powlson et  al. 2016). Moreover, at the landscape level, it can improve the condition of degraded soil, which could promote the long-term productivity of the region (Abhilash et al. 2016; Tripathi et al. 2017). For instance, in regions of East Africa, CA practices are being investigated for the same purpose (Corbeels et  al. 2015). This management concept helps in reducing soil erosion and surface water runoff, while maintaining soil moisture, soil organic carbon (SOC), and soil organic matter (SOM) (Brouder and Gomez-Macpherson 2014). These aspects are the core philosophy of any soil conservation practices that are mainly promoted because of three key components of conservation agriculture practices (FAO 2008): • By offering minimum soil disturbances via practices such as zero or reduced tillage • By maintaining maximum soil cover via practices such as use of cover crops, crop residue retention, or permanent organic soil cover in crop fields • By crop diversification and crop rotation Sustainable adoption of these practices inclusively provides better soil conditions for increased crop productivity. Retention of crop residue in the field is one of the

4.2 Conservation Agriculture (CA)

67

best options to maintain productivity of the crop field. However, the increasing demand of crop/cereal residue for livestock feeding is a major challenge for soil mulching. Baudron et al. (2014) suggested closing the maize yield gap in Saharan Africa as a solution for reducing such conflicts. For example, they reported that closing the yield gap in Kenya and Ethiopian rift valleys increased crop residue retention by 61% and 80%, respectively. Mafongoya et al. (2016) recently did a meta-analysis of different conservation agriculture (CA) options in Zimbabwe to analyse the total maize yield as compared to conventional agriculture practices. For instance, yield was found to be 241 kg ha−1, 258 kg ha−1, and 445 kg ha−1 under CA practices such as seeding into planting basins, rip-line seeding, and direct seeding, respectively. For dry areas, rip-line seeding was found to be more beneficial than direct seeding. The yield increases mainly because of enhanced soil surface cover, enhanced nutrient cycling, increase in WUE, micro- and macrofauna (particularly termites), and retention of SOC (Brouder and Gomez-Macpherson 2014). Particularly, SOC retention enhanced productivity in temperate and subtemperate regions (West and Post 2002; Bhattacharyya et al. 2012, 2013) as well as in tropical agro-ecosystems (Bhattacharyya et  al. 2015). Planting time, application of fertilizers and herbicides, weeding, and sufficient training in equipment use contribute to these benefits. For the IGP region, CA was found to minimize nearly one fourth of the production cost, improve irrigation water productivity by at least 65% or more, while reducing the canopy temperature by 2.5  °C to withstand a warming climate and reduce GHG emissions into the environment (Sapkota et al. 2015). Similarly, CA is becoming popular in countries such as Africa (Bolliger et al. 2006; Kassam et al. 2009), Brazil, and Paraguay (Evers and Agostini 2001). The UN-FAO has already reported an increase in average yield trend over a period of 8 years for three major crops, wheat, soybean, and maize, for all of Brazil by adopting CA over conventional tillage practices (http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/5.html) (Fig.  4.2). A few more examples of adoption and benefits derived from CA over conventional agriculture in different locations across the globe are listed in Table  4.1. Sustainable fertilizer input can be considered as a better adaptive practice to overcome the deficiency of Conventional Tillage

Conservation Agriculture

6 Crop Yield (tonn/ha)

Fig. 4.2  Effect of crop yield obtained by conservation agriculture over conventional tillage. The 8-year average yields of wheat, soybean, and maize crops under conservation agriculture were higher than those attained with conventional tillage practices in Brazil. (Adapted from FAO: http:// www.fao.org/ag/ca/5.html)

5 4 3 2 1 0

Wheat

Soya

Maize

2.

Adoption of conservation agriculture (CA) practices Zero tillage + raised bed crop establishment + wheat and maize crop residue retention

Cropping system followed Maize–wheat–green gram cropping system

Benefits of conservation agriculture over conventional agriculture Overall energy use efficiency increased about 9% by CA practices. More energy was used in land preparation, sowing, and irrigation than in conventional practice but crop residue retention significantly increased energy output by 17% CA practice mainly drives SOC Sorghum (Sorghum vulgare Pers. Four-year crop Field left fallow in between dynamics and its concentration in rotation of wheat main crops + ploughing done to var. sudanense) used as cover top 5-cm soil layer; this improves crop + vetch (Vicia sativa L.) and (Triticum aestivum 35-cm depth + crop residues soil aggregation and reduces soil retention in the field + seedbed barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) crop L.), oilseed rape Preparation by tilling to depth cultivated during spring–summer (Brassica napus L.), erosion, thereby limiting GHG maize (Zea mays L.), emissions. and autumn–winter in between 15 cm and soybean (Glycine SOC and total nitrogen content at main crops, respectively + no 0–5 cm soil depth increased by max L.) tillage + cover crop suppression 0.2 g 100 g−1 and 0.02 g 100 g−1, respectively

Sample Conventional agriculture no. practice 1. No tillage + flat-bed crop establishment + no residue input

Northeastern Italy Piccoli et al. (2016)

Location NW-IGP, India Saad et al. (2016)

Table 4.1  Adoption of conservation agriculture (CA) practices and its benefits compared to conventional agriculture practices in different locations of the globe

68 4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Sample Conventional agriculture no. practice 3. Conventional tillage practice

Adoption of conservation agriculture (CA) practices Permanent bed preparation + zero-­ tillage practice

Cropping system followed Four intensively irrigated maize systems: maize– wheat–mung bean; maize chickpea– Sesbania green manure; maize– mustard–mung bean; and maize–maize– Sesbania

Benefits of conservation agriculture over conventional agriculture System productivity in terms of maize equivalent yield and glucose equivalent yield under conventional tillage, permanent bed, and zero tillage in 6-year time increased approximately by 2.5 Mg ha−1, 3.8 Mg ha−1, and 4.4 Mg ha−1 and 1.2 Mg ha−1, 1.7 Mg ha−1, and 2.2 Mg ha−1, respectively. Permanent bed and zero tillage leads to 60–98 ha-mm and 40–65 ha-mm less water requirement for irrigation in comparison to conventional tillage, thereby both resulting in nearly 20% rise in system water productivity. Production cost under zero tillage was minimized by >70 $ ha−1 and net profit was >30% as compared to conventional tillage (continued)

Location New Delhi, India Parihar et al. (2016)

4.2 Conservation Agriculture (CA) 69

Simulations of rice–wheat cropping system by CERES-­ rice and CERES-­ wheat, DSSAT cropping system models

Dry seeded rice + alternate wet and dry irrigation + crop residue retention

5.

Water-seeded rice without residue retention + flooded irrigation

Cropping system followed Rice–wheat cropping systems

Adoption of conservation agriculture (CA) practices Bed and flat field establishment method + crop residue retention + dry seeded rice followed by surface-seeded wheat

Sample Conventional agriculture no. practice 4. Conventional dry tillage + water-seeded rice followed by surface-seeded wheat

Table 4.1 (continued) Benefits of conservation agriculture over conventional agriculture More than 65% irrigation water can be saved by CA practice. Particularly in bed field preparation, 15% more water is saved as compared to flat field establishment method. Conventional practices in this case reduce soil salinity at deep groundwater table depth that endangers both rice and wheat crops. However, CA practices overcome that by increasing soil salinity to minimum required threshold level. Water required for irrigation in rice fields reduced by ~60%. Yield increased by 0.5 ton ha−1 by deep placement of urea in dry seeded rice. Simulations shows continuous increment in rice yield since 13 years after CA practice was introduced. However, wheat yield increased since beginning

Semi-arid dryland of Central Asia Devkota et al. (2015b)

Location NW Uzbekistan Devkota et al. (2015a)

70 4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

7.

Conventional tillage in wheat + transplanted rice

Sample Conventional agriculture no. practice 6. Irrigated and rainfed farming of Boro and Aman rice, respectively + intensive wet tillage + manual harvesting of rice + 5–10 cm standing stubble (biomass) left in rice field during harvest

Adoption of conservation agriculture (CA) practices Best management practices [as recommended by BRRI (2007) for rice and by BARI (2004)] for potato, maize, and mung bean + crop diversification (i.e., potato-relay maize/mung bean– rice crop rotation) + reduced (in potato) or zero (maize and mung bean) tillage + 30 cm standing stubble (biomass) of rice left in field and full crop residue retention of non-rice crops during harvest Mung bean residue retention + dry seeded rice + zero tillage in wheat + 40% rice residue retention in field + zero tillage in mung bean field

Benefits of conservation agriculture over conventional agriculture Boro rice replaced with potato and maize or mung bean grown during fallow season raises yield and increases economic returns by nearly two- to threefold. Water use efficiency (WUE) and energy use efficiency (EUE) also increased

Nearly 2.9 Mg ha−1 year−1 rise in aboveground biomass productivity. Wheat grain yield and sum of grain yield of all crops raised on average by 15% and 10%, respectively. Retention of rice residue alone raised SOC by 150 kg C ha−1 year−1 in soil top layer (5–15 cm). Labile carbon pool increased from 3.1 to 3.875 g kg−1, i.e., by nearly 25%. Overall >125% C input was estimated in period of 3 years. Consequently, in 5–15 cm soil top layer, soil bulk density was reduced, thereby raising potential to retain more carbon in surface soil and increasing overall productivity of rice–wheat–green gram cropping system

Cropping system followed Rice–fallow–rice cropping system distributed across three seasons: boro (rabi, November– March), aus (premonsoon Kharif, April–June), and aman (monsoon Kharif, July–October)

Tropical rice–wheat cropping system as well as rice–wheat-­ green gram cropping system

(continued)

New Delhi, India Bhattacharyya et al. (2015)

Location Eastern Gangetic plains of Bangladesh Alam et al. (2015)

4.2 Conservation Agriculture (CA) 71

Zero tillage in wheat + aerobic rice culture

9.

Deep or conventional tillage + alternate wetting and drying or flooded system of irrigation

Adoption of conservation agriculture (CA) practices No tillage + different site-specific split nitrogen fertilizer application based on nutrient expert such as (1) 80% and 20% N fertilizer application at planting and second irrigation, respectively; (2) 33% fertilizer N application each at basal, crown root initiation, and second irrigation stage; (3) 80% N basal fertilizer application or 20% as per recommendation based on optical sensor (Green Seeker TM)

Sample Conventional agriculture no. practice 8. Conventional tillage + farmer fertilizer treatment as well as state recommendations for nutrient management

Table 4.1 (continued) Benefits of conservation agriculture over conventional agriculture Increase in yield and nitrogen use efficiency. Over state recommendations grain and biomass yield increased by 5% and 3%, respectively. Over farmers’ practice, increase in both was nearly threefold more. With farmers’ practice net profitability was significantly higher. Decrease in GWP of wheat production system observed. Third form of split nitrogen fertilizer application reduces N2O and total GHG emissions Rice–wheat cropping Significant increase in resource use efficiency and gain in net income. system (for wheat Significant decline in weed density. crop only) For example, the emergence of toothed dock (Rumex dentatus L.) and little-seed canary-grass (Phalaris minor Retz.) significantly reduced. However, narrow-leaf weeds such as little seed canary grass dominate under zero tillage

Cropping system followed Rice–wheat cropping system (treatment for wheat crop only)

Faisalabad, Pakistan Farooq and Nawaz (2014)

Location Haryana (IGP), NW India Sapkota et al. (2014)

72 4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

4.3 Farm Innovations for Enhanced Production of Major Cereals Crops

73

organic matter in nutrient-poor soil (Abhilash et  al. 2013; Dubey et  al. 2016). Vanlauwe et al. (2014) suggested the adoption of sustainable agricultural intensification for sub-Saharan African regions as a better adaptation option. Similarly, in Morocco, the adoption of CA practices constituting ‘crop rotation + crop residue retention’ is suggested as a better adaptive practice over conventional tillage practices (Salman et al. 2016): it can increase crop yield by 10% to more than 150% based on the weather conditions at the sites.

4.3  F  arm Innovations for Enhanced Production of Major Cereals Crops Rice is discussed in this section in particular as it is the staple food crop for 50–60% of the global population (Mohanty 2013). Because the yield and nutritional value of rice have been declining under the changing climate, new avenues are essential to sustain rice production. Initially, techniques of integrated rice management (IRM), also called integrated crop management (ICM), were used for rice yield enhancement (Kebbeh and Miezan 2003). Later, other innovative practices such as weed management, nutrient management via organic fertilizer input, and a water-saving technique via the bunding method have been adopted and found significant. In East and Southern Africa, these management/techniques showed nearly 92%, 90%, and 87% enhancement in relative yield gains, respectively (Nhamo et al. 2014). Further, the system of rice intensification (SRI) technique has come into practice widely throughout the world (Reddy and Venkatanarayana 2013). In particular, its promotion in developing countries such as China, India, Indonesia, Cambodia, and Vietnam, which produce two thirds of the world’s rice, was quite high in the past decade (Thakur et  al. 2016). It has several benefits and is also very good for the environment. In Andhra Pradesh, India, SRI practices resulted in more than 60% increase in rice yield with significant reduction in GHG emissions, as reported by Hardy et al. (2016). However, there are many concerns regarding the yield and economic returns of SRI practices (Berkhout et  al. 2015) and also about the performance of the SRI system under a future warming climate (Thakur et al. 2016). Consequently, the system of rice intensification (SRI) techniques has been extrapolated and modified into a system of crop intensification (SCI) in many Asian and African countries (Fig. 4.3), so this could be implemented to a wide range of other crops such as wheat, millet, sugarcane, oilseeds (mustard), legumes (soya, kidney beans), and vegetables (WOTR 2013). It has been found beneficial for other crops also, particularly for wheat. Moreover, the SCI techniques are much more beneficial for regions having maximum threats to food security such as Ethiopia, Bihar (India), the hills of Nepal, and Timbuktu (Mali) (WOTR 2013; FDRE 2013). SCI increases crop productivity as well as improving the livelihood of poor people.

74

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Early establishment of healthy seedlings

Potential of root and shoot system growth is carefully conserved and looked after

Individual plants are transplanted and sown with wider spacing between them

Soil enriched with sufficient amount of organic matter and is well aerated

It give more space above and below ground for their growth

It support better growth of root and beneficial microbes in the soil

Water applications is done in a way that favours growth of both plant roots and beneficial aerobic soil biota

It avoid hypoxic conditions in the soil

Fig. 4.3  Adaptive practices in system of rice intensification (SRI) techniques to develop more sustainable system of crop intensification (SCI) techniques

In Ethiopia, where ‘tef’ is a main staple crop, the Ethiopia Agricultural Transformation Agency has upscaled this practice at landscape level with a new name called “system of tef intensification” (STI) (FDRE 2013). Similarly, in India the SCI method has also been scaled up significantly by many major institutions such as the World Bank (Behera et  al. 2013) (WBI-SRI, 2008). These practices substantially increase the productivity and profitability of more ‘intensively’ managed crops. For instance, the World Bank reported one project in year 2012 in which 348,759 food-insecure farmers in Bihar, India, used the SCI technique on about 50,000 ha of land and were benefitted in terms of yields and profitability by 250%, 86%, 67%, 93%, and 47% for rice, wheat, pulses, oilseeds, and vegetables, respectively (Behera et al. 2013). Besides these, it has come to light that in South Asian countries such as Bangladesh, the rice–maize (RM) system is expanding to more areas in comparison to the existing rice–rice (RR) or rice–wheat (RW) cropping system (Gathala et al. 2015; Singh et al. 2016), because (1) maize shows better suitability in terms of yields over rice or wheat, (2) maize requires less water than rice, and (3) maize is very much in demand in the poultry and fish feed industries. Currently, in the RM cropping system, puddled transplanted rice and maize are still grown with conventional methods deploying repeated tillage (Gathala et  al. 2015; Singh et al. 2016), but this has certain disadvantages. For example, it degrades soil structure, delays maize planting, reduces yield potential, and increases energy, labour, and cost input. To overcome these shortcomings, conservation agriculture (CA) has now gained importance (Bhattacharyya et al. 2015). In CA practices, crop establishment options in the RM-CS system such as strip or reduced tillage, zero-till

4.3 Farm Innovations for Enhanced Production of Major Cereals Crops

75

direct-seeded rice followed by zero-till maize, residue reduction from both rice and maize, and raised beds could help in increasing potential to gain higher yield, reduce production cost, and ultimately double the farmer’s income. The Indo-Gangetic plain (IGP) includes in total 43.75% (10.5 M ha) of cultivated land in the rice–wheat cropping system in the Asian subtropics (Bhattacharyya et  al. 2015). After rice (Oryza sativa), wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is another staple crop. Because the IGP is highly vulnerable to climate change, the major challenge for researchers is to develop adaptive practices that are energy-, water-, capital-, and labour efficient. Improved soil, water, and nutrient management strategies are also essential for sustaining soil health and environmental quality (Rao et  al. 2016a). Use of cover crops and crop residue retention in rice crops after wheat harvest are considered suitable practices for the IGP region (Rao et  al. 2016b). For better soil health and system productivity, farmers in this region can rely on tilled and direct-seeded rice and zero or reduced tillage wheat along with residue retention, saving on water consumption as well as reducing weed intensity. Besides these practices, cultivation of green manure crops such as Sesbania or green gram (mung bean) is also very effective for the region, particularly in terms of nitrogen enrichment of soils. Table 4.2 briefly highlights some of the adaptive agricultural practices employed for sustainable wheat production in rice–wheat cropping in the IGP region as well  as  its benefits over conventional agronomic practices.

Table 4.2  Adaptive agricultural practices employed for wheat production in Indo-Gangetic plains (IGP) at farm/field/landscape level and their benefits over conventional agronomic practices

Sample Conventional no. practices 1. Transplanted rice and conventionally tilled wheat

2.

Adaptive agricultural practices for sustainable wheat production Mung bean residue retention + direct seeded rice–zero tilled wheat + rice residue retention-­ zero-­tilled relay summer mung bean

Zero tillage with bed Conventional tillage with bed and flat planting planting

Specification of the study conducted at farm/ field level Rice–wheat–green gram (mung bean) crop rotation at New Delhi, India (Bhattacharyya et al. 2015)

Cotton and wheat crop rotation at New Delhi, India (Das et al. 2013)

Benefits of adaptive practices over conventional practices 15% increase in wheat grain yield, 2.89 Mg ha−1 year−1 increase in harvestable aboveground biomass, 127% more carbon input, and ~24% more labile carbon pool attained in topsoil SOC enhanced in 0–5 cm soil top layer by 28% and 26% in zero-tilled bed and flat planting, respectively; this contributes to improved soil health (continued)

76

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Table 4.2 (continued)

Sample Conventional no. practices 3. Local farmer fertilizer practices

Adaptive agricultural practices for sustainable wheat production Improved nutrient management strategy adopted (by accounting indigenous nutrient supply, yield target, and crop nutrient demand as function of interaction between NPK) Zero-tilled wheat cropping

Specification of the study conducted at farm/ field level Ten different locations of IGP selected for these practices (Singh et al. 2014)

Survey from 328 rice–wheat farmers in NW Bangladesh (part that falls under IGP region) (Aravindakshan et al. 2015)

4.

Conventional tillage

5.

Traditional tillage

Conservation tillage including power tiller operated seeding, mechanical bed planting, and strip tillage

6.

Conventional tillage

7.

Conventional tillage

Most widely adopted resource conserving agronomic practice in IGP region of India (Erenstein and Laxmi 2008) Reduced tillage + rice Rice–wheat cropping system in residue retention in sandy loam soil wheat crop field (Gangwar et al. (rather than burning 2006) or removal) Zero tillage and timely sowing of wheat after rice

Typic Ustochrept alluvial sandy loam soil was dominant in the region (Kumar et al. 2014)

Benefits of adaptive practices over conventional practices 1.55 ton ha−1 and US$ 585 ha−1 increase in wheat grain yield and net economic return, respectively

Increase of 81%, 17%, 13%, and 33% in operational field capacity, specific energy, energy use efficiency, and net income, respectively Energy use efficiency score increased by 0.24, 0.23 and 0.23 in power tiller-operated seeding, mechanical bed planting, and strip tillage, respectively, as compared to traditional tillage practice Increase of 5–7% in yield and US$ 52 ha−1 cost savings by this practice, which also controls weeds (Phalaris minor) and conserves water Yield increased from 4.60 to 6.1 Mg ha−1. Rice residue retention 5 Mg ha−1 with nitrogen input 150 kg ha−1 in the field during wheat crop season is recommended as good adaptive agronomic practice for this site

4.4 Sustainable Agriculture Intensification and Extensification

77

4.4  Sustainable Agriculture Intensification and Extensification With the burgeoning population, the demand of different ecosystem services offered by agro-ecosystems is also rising. It has been predicted that to feed the growing population, food production has to be doubled in the coming decades (Schiefer et al. 2016). However, the loss of agro-biodiversity and ecosystem services is a major threat to food security (Singh and Abhilash 2018). Although the Green Revolution triggered agricultural intensification across the world (World Bank 2008), it has also resulted in considerable depletion of natural resources. Similarly, losses in European agro-ecosystem functioning because of declining biodiversity in the previous five decades have also been devastating (Emmerson et al. 2016). As a result, most of the states such as Cyprus, Greece, Germany, France, Sweden, Slovenia, Spain, Poland, and Portugal have less soil resilience. Low soil resilience is reducing the physical, chemical, and biochemical processes in the soil system and thereby negatively affecting soil ecology and health (Schiefer et al. 2016; Rakshit et al. 2017). Therefore, it is imperative to practice sustainable agriculture intensification (SAI) for feeding the rapidly growing human population under changing climatic conditions. International organizations such as UN-FAO and Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research also promote SAI as necessary steps for building agricultural resilience under the changing climate and resolving the global problem of food insecurity (Beddington et al. 2012). A promising way to achieve SAI tends toward adoption of adaptive land and soil management practices that can increase agricultural production, reduce environmental risks, and improve the overall resilience of the system (Abhilash et al. 2013). Therefore, various direct and indirect drivers affecting system resilience must be thoroughly understood and suitable strategies must be undertaken to improve the major physical, chemical, and biological processes occurring in the agricultural system (Fig. 4.4). Importantly, suitable indicators must be designed for identifying promising landscapes for future intensification. Schiefer et  al. (2015) determined that nearly 40% of the arable land in Germany can still be used for agricultural intensification based on such resilience indicators. Besides adaptive land management, sustainable water resources management, particularly in areas having or predicted to have water scarcity in the near future, also needs equal priority. For instance, Dile et al. (2013) have determined that making transformational changes via adaptive water harvesting techniques at the farm/ field scale could better assist in employing sustainable agricultural intensification. For example, in tropical regions where water scarcity, repeated drought, and dry spells are common, sustainable water harvesting techniques are of high significance. Therefore, integrated land and water management is a promising option to improve ecosystem services and functions and thereby build resilience in the agroecosystem to sustain agricultural productivity under diverse environmental conditions. Successful water harvesting techniques at a small scale can be scaled up to

78

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Maintenance of soil aggregation and formation of clay-humus complexes for reducing leaching, Total soil surface area get increased thereby raising water availability for plants.

Texture

Regulates erosion and soil loss

Soil pH Maintain soil biodiversity

Regulate depth of rooting, buffer, filter and transformation capacities of soil and storage of pollutant and nutrient in soil.

Soil Organic Carbon

Depth

Slope Cation Exchange Capacity

Regulate mobility, availability and leaching capacity of nutrients in soil.

Regulation of most of the soil physico-chemical and biological processes; Provide energy to soil organisms and nutrients to plants; increases soil bulk density, water holding capacity, buffer capacity; and improves soil structure and aggregation filter transformation.

Fig. 4.4  Key properties/indicators of the soil system (blue circles) for sustainability also act as drivers for regulating major physical, chemical, and biological processes of the agricultural system. (Adopted from Schiefer et al. 2016)

farm/landscape level through different adaptive in situ and ex situ ways of water harvesting and conservation (Fig. 4.5). For instance, water buffering in the mountainous region is an adaptive practice adopted by the local people of sub-Saharan Africa (Salman et al. 2016). This stored water can be later used for multiple purposes including irrigation and groundwater recharge during water-scarce conditions (Knoop et al. 2012). In general, water is stored in the form of either surface water, groundwater, or as soil moisture that can be used in agriculture directly or indirectly. Table 4.3 briefly highlights different water harvesting and storage techniques in sub-Saharan Africa and its implications for agricultural productivity and profitability. In Asia, both in situ and ex situ ways of adaptive water harvesting methods for irrigation purposes are common. In Asian countries stone lines/bunds are common modes of water conservation, whereas in African countries grass strips are designed to perform a similar function. Different grass species, such as Vetiveria nigritana, Andropogon gayanus, and Cymbopogon schoenanthus, are usually sown before rainy seasons on contour lines having gentle slopes of 2% to improve soil infiltration, to reduce soil

4.4 Sustainable Agriculture Intensification and Extensification

79

Adaptive Water Harvesting Practices Employed in North, India

Storage of water and improved water productivity; supplements irrigation; increases yield and biomass; reduces runoff velocity and soil erosion

Helps in diversion of storm floods and nutrients for soil profile storage; increases soil moisture and crop yield; recharge ground water Store water and supplement irrigation; deep percolation of water into soil occurs; groundwater recharges

Open canals

Contour/Terraces

Reducing runoff velocity; Increasing soil moisture and improve biodiversity and agricultural production Runoff velocity reduces biological activity in the soil, rehabilitate land and enhance crop yield.

Open ponds/ Cistern

Bunds/ Stone lines Improve the infiltration rate and organic matter content; improves water use efficiency; increase carbon sequestration

Run-off collection

Conservation agriculture Facilitate rainwater harvestings and groundwater recharging; infiltration and increases yield

Check dams

Small ponds

Fig. 4.5  Various adaptive water-harvesting practices employed by farmers for overcoming water scarcity in North India

erosion, flooding, and excess runoff, and to gather fertile soil sediments, which ultimately benefits the agricultural land of the entire region (Knoop et al. 2012). Although there is consensus on the adoption of sustainable agricultural intensification, consensus is limited about choosing the appropriate technology (Horrocks et al. 2014). Moraes et al. (2017) recently revealed that in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil there was nearly 40% increase in sugarcane production and significant increase in citrus production from years 1971–2008, at the cost of a 4.3% decrease in forested areas as a result of deforestation and fragmented forest land. Such practices must be checked and abandoned (Martini et al. 2015): extensification at the cost of ecosystem

80

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Table 4.3  Adaptive water harvesting and storage techniques employed in different countries of sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and their implications for agricultural productivity and profitability. (Adopted and modified from FAO report by Salman et al. 2016) Adaptive ways Sample of water harvesting no. 1. Water harvesting from roads

2.

3.

Small water harvesting ponds Subsurface dams

Mechanisms or implications of agricultural system Greatest scope of providing supplementary water for irrigation during dry seasons or during dry spells of wet seasons if stored in reservoirs Can be built artificially in regions having less permeable/clay-rich soils

Adaptive way of water storage Surface water

Countries of SSA where practiced Uganda, Burkina Faso and Morocco

Surface water

Uganda, Burkina Faso Uganda, Burkina Faso Uganda, Burkina Faso Uganda, Burkina Faso Uganda, Burkina Faso Uganda, Burkina Faso

–

Groundwater

4.

Tube recharge

–

Groundwater

5.

Sand dams

–

Groundwater

6.

Demi-lunes

Soil moisture

7.

Grass strips

8.

Mulching

9.

Terraces

Small bunds with half-moon shape heading tip on contour lines and act as micro-catchments Different grass species, viz., Vetiveria nigritana, Andropogon gayanus, and Cymbopogon schoenateus in bands nearly 1-m width normally sown before rainy seasons on contour lines with gentle slopes of 2% Can accumulate sediment particles beneath the mulch and improves soil ecology –

Soil moisture

10.

Agroforestry

–

Soil moisture

11. 12. 13.

Check dams Valley dams Valley tanks

Soil moisture Surface water Surface water

14.

Conservation agriculture (CA) practice

– – Can supplement irrigation and is good for cash crop or vegetable production in rainfed regimes Crop rotations, crop residue retention, use of cover crops, use of organic manures, etc.

Uganda, Burkina Faso Uganda, Morocco Burkina Faso Morocco Uganda Uganda

Soil moisture

Morocco

Soil moisture

Soil moisture

4.5 Sustainability Issues in Agriculture from the Farmers’ Perspective

81

Fig. 4.6  Agricultural extensification into red soil as a local adaptive strategy. Authors have set an experimental plot in the Vindhyan region of Northern India having red lateritic soil and mixed with inorganic fertilizers (NPK) and organic fertilizers (such as FYM, Pressmud, Biochar, Vermicompost) as agricultural inputs for rice–wheat cropping

services cannot be encouraged (Dobrovolski et al. 2011). Instead, agricultural extensification should be considered as an opportunity towards reutilising already degraded systems and marginal lands (Horrocks et al. 2014; Abhilash et al. 2016; Tripathi et al. 2017). For an example, the authors recently started experimentation in the unused lateritic soil of the Vindhyan zone of India (Fig. 4.6). The scientific literature contains limited success stories for agricultural extensification worldwide (Nakalembe et al. 2017). Nevertheless, it was anticipated that successful extensification will provide multiple ecosystem services (Fig. 4.7).

4.5  S  ustainability Issues in Agriculture from the Farmers’ Perspective In a survey conducted among African farmers, more than 80%, 65%, and 35% of farmers in Kenya, Ethiopia, and South Africa, respectively, were aware of decisions for adopting adaptive agronomic practices under changing weather patterns (Bryan et al. 2013). In West Africa, most adaptive practices employed by local farmers were also subject to weather-related phenomena (Wood et al. 2014). Similarly, in Asian

82

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

GHGs Emissions

GHGs Emissions

AGRICULTURAL EXTENSIFICATION IN GRASSLAND

AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION Limited dose Rich Biodiversity

Less Doses

Inorganic Fertilizers Input

Over dose

N

Food Production

N

N/ P/ K

K

P P

P

P

P C

Nutrients Cycling

N

P

C

Nutrients Cycling

P

Soil Biota

K

C

N

P N C

Food Production

N

N

C

C

K

N/ P/ K

N2 Fixation

Leaching and Erosion

Soil Biota P

P

K

N C

P Leaching and Erosion

Aquatic System

Fig. 4.7  Shift from unsustainable agricultural intensification towards sustainable agricultural extensification on different land use types such as grasslands or arable land is an adaptive agronomic practice under the changing climate. Excessive use of inorganic fertilizers/pesticides (left side) will further degrade agricultural land, limiting many ecosystem services and agro-­biodiversity. In contrast, many of the ecosystem services can be regenerated if agro-biodiversity (species diversity) is increased in grasslands by agricultural extensification with limited use of inorganic fertilizers (right side). This shift can increase nitrogen fixation and provide at least some food with minimal leaching and erosion of inorganic nutrients into the aquatic system (fewer red narrow arrows) and less greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions into the atmosphere

4.5 Sustainability Issues in Agriculture from the Farmers’ Perspective

83

countries such as India, Bangladesh, and Nepal, it was reported that 50–90% of the adoption of innovative agronomic practices (such as changing crop cultivars, planting dates and methods, amount of agro-inputs such as fertilizer, chemicals, pesticides, and water for irrigation, and livestock management options) was used by farmers during the past 10 years to cope with erratic weather events and climate-­ related hazards (Bhatta et al. 2016) (Fig. 4.8). This discussion shows that local and indigenous farmers are highly adaptive in nature and therefore are employing adaptive practices themselves for attaining better farm productivity and profitability and to minimise losses from weather-related risks (Wood et al. 2014). It is well known that weather-related events are real drivers for the adoption of such resilient practices. However, a landscape-level extensive survey of 2660 farmers in South Asia reveals that there are other important issues besides erratic weather that force indigenous farmers to undertake adaptive practices at the crop/farm/field/landscape level under a changing environment (Bhatta et al. 2016). Some of the noted factors or issues are listed here: • Market-related issues are based on market opportunities and competition among farmers for better yield/production/income (Bhatta et  al. 2016). Indigenous farmers of the Asian region (as in North India) are now willing to cultivate ‘horticultural (fruit) trees and cash crops’ in integration with vegetable or cereal crops for fetching a good market price (Fig. 4.9). However, African farmers of southern Burkina Faso and Côte d’Ivoire showed landscape-level adaptation and

% change in agronomic practice

100

Eastern India

Coastal Bangladesh

Nepal

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Change in crop Change in Change in Integration of cultivars Planting dates & amount of livestock methods agroinputs used management Adaptive Agronomic Practices

Fig. 4.8  Adaptive agronomic practices employed by local and indigenous farmers of Asian countries. Graph shows rate at which different adaptive agronomic practices were employed by local and indigenous farmers during 10-year time frame (i.e., from 2001 to 2011) at three selected locations in South Asia: Indo-Gangetic plain (Bihar, India), coastal region (Bangladesh), and Terai region (Nepal). Adaptive practices were employed at rates ranging from 50% to 90% under various weather conditions (Bhatta et al. 2016)

84

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Fig. 4.9  Integration of fruit (horticultural) trees with cereals and vegetables in drylands of eastern Uttar Pradesh of North India for more farm-generated income: (a) banana cultivated along field bunds; (b) banana + mustard; (c) papaya grown in a homegarden; (d) guava + wheat mixed farming; (e) guava + chickpea double cropping; (f) mango–wheat cropping; (g) sweet lemon (Citrus limetta) + vegetables + wheat cropping system

shifted entirely from cereals/staple crop cultivation to fruit (mango; Van Melle and Buschmann 2013) or cash crop (cashew nut; Koné 2010) cultivation. • Migration-related issues are based on the search for off-farm sources of income by rural farmers. The growing population, which is reducing land holdings per person and subsequently decreasing farm-generated income, compels poor and rural farmers to migrate towards urban areas (FAO 2011). As a result, the urban population is increasing at a rapid rate and is expected to increase even faster. For example, in

4.5 Sustainability Issues in Agriculture from the Farmers’ Perspective

85

Mali (Africa), the World Bank predicts a 200% rise in urban population from year 2004–2024 (Cartier 2013). Urban agriculture seems to be a better adaptive practice under such scenarios for feeding an enhanced urban population. • Dietary preference-related issues, as in the changing dietary patterns, compels the farmers to cultivate diverse food crops, resulting in crop diversification and integrated farming systems compared to the mono-cropping system, mainly because of urbanization and the inclination towards animal-based foods (Pan 2011). • Resource-related issues of the deficiency of critical natural resources such as land, water, and fertile soil (Abhilash 2015; Bhatta et al. 2016) force farmers to validate resource conservation and climate-smart practices (Ollenburger et al. 2016). • Awareness-related issues are based on integration of knowledge in agriculture by knowledge sharing among the scientific and farming community (Coolsaet 2016). For example, large groups of farmers in Kenya at the landscape level rely solely on chemical methods of pest control in grain-/legume-based cropping, mainly because farmers have been unaware of the extended benefits of biological methods of pest control such as use of biopesticides, biofertilizers, and early crop varieties (Abtew et al. 2016; Campos et al. 2018). Knowledge-sharing platforms need to be expanded in developing countries (Coolsaet 2016): 1 . Organization of farmer’s welfare meets (also called kisan mela in India). 2. Establishment of the krishi vigyan kendra knowledge network, as established in India by the Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR) from the year 1974 (https://kvk.icar.gov.in/Homepage.aspx). 3. Taking initiatives such as farmers’ field school, as initiated by UN-FAO in Asia during the past three to four decades and now being practiced in nearly 100 developing nations, including India and China (Guo et al. 2015b). These platforms are meant for knowledge sharing among various stakeholders such as agricultural/climate scientists, agronomists, farmers, and policy makers for sharing improved understanding of implementing farm innovations and adaptive practices at different levels and scales (Nyong et al. 2007; Lalani et al. 2016) (Figs. 4.10 and 4.11). • Cognitive justice-related issues are based on recognition of what the farming communities (specifically in developed nations) deserve. For instance, during collective agro-biodiversity initiatives taken in France at the landscape level, it was realized that most of the European peasant community are deprived of cognitive justice and the recognition they deserve (Coolsaet 2016). • Experience-related issues are based on farmers’ intentions, attitude, behaviour, financial condition, and the local weather of an area (Lalani et al. 2016). For an illustration, adoption of conservation agriculture practices by small farmers and continuing these for longer periods depends on the expectations and experience of the farmer while employing that adaptive practice in a short time period. As in the case of Cabo Delgado, Mozambique, some of the sub-Saharan Africa farmers’ intention to continue CA practices varied by 80% depending on the results they witnessed in terms of yield, soil quality, weed emergence, and labour requirements, etc. (Lalani et al. 2016).

86

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability Knowledge sharing of Adaptive agricultural practices

Local/ Indigenous Farmers

Known knowns

Known unknowns

Researchers/ Agricultural Scientists

Unknowns known

Unknowns unknown

INCREASE IN KNOWLEDGE Fig. 4.10  Conceptual framework for knowledge sharing among farmers and researchers at different levels (farm, field, landscape) and boundaries (local, regional, national, international)

Responsive agricultural land and soil system Less responsive agricultural land and soil system

Agronomic Efficiency

Interventions levels of Adaptive Agricultural practices

Landscape Farm/Field Species

Current Agriculture practice

Location specific Adaptive agricultural practices

Integrated Agriculture (Soil, Nutrient, Water, Pests etc.) Management

Agronomic Practices

Fig. 4.11  Conceptual depiction of adaptive agricultural practice embedded with increase in knowledge via local innovation system, knowledge sharing among farmers, researchers, and agronomists, and their scientific validation aiming at increased agronomic use efficiencies of land, water, nutrients, and energy, and attaining integrated agriculture management via intervention of such adaptive practices at three different levels: species, farm/field, landscape level

References

87

• Wealth-related issues are based on the financial (socioeconomic) status of a farming family. Shifts in farming practices depending on the wealth of a farmer are also highly location specific. For example, a wealthier farmer in West Africa will always prefer doing on-farm changes whereas wealthier Indian farmers prefer off-farm changes (Wood et al. 2014). • Research-related issues are based on extension of policy formulation, modifications, and research project recommendations to the farmers. • Vulnerability (for crop pest and disease)-related issues vary spatiotemporally. For example, in Iran infestation of wheat rust disease at the landscape level makes farmers more vulnerable, that is, sensitive and exposed, thereby affecting their current agronomic practices (Nazari et al. 2015). The issues just discussed are ultimately driven by changing climate and the ever-­ growing human population (Wood et  al. 2014). Therefore, investing time and resources to document adaptive agricultural practice from different locations and the agro-climatic zones of the world and their scientific validation for further upscaling at landscape level is one of the most effective means for climate change adaptation in agriculture (Dubey et  al. 2016). Because farmers are the most significant stakeholders in agriculture, integrating their traditional and indigenous knowledge can be remarkably helpful for agro-biodiversity and agro-ecosystems management and for building resilience in agriculture under the changing climate (UNFCCC 2013; Petersen and Snapp 2015; Dubey et  al. 2016; Singh and Abhilash 2018). Some major problems faced by farmers in developing nations are these: 1. Lack of need-based weather information/forecasting services or early warning system 2. Lack of contingency grant and adequate crop insurance policies for meeting the sudden changes 3. Gender inequality 4. Lack of access to market 5. Lack of infrastructure, mechanization, and modernization 6. Lack of policy measures for agricultural intensification and extensification 7. Lack of investment in agricultural sector

References Abhilash PC (2015) Managing soil resources from pollution and degradation: the need of the hour. J Clean Prod 102:550–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.046 Abhilash PC, Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Srivastava P, Verma JP, Singh HB (2013) Adaptive soil management. Curr Sci 104:1275–1276 Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Dubey RK, Bakshi M, Dube PK, Ebbs SD (2016) Sustainability of crop production from polluted lands. Energ Ecol Environ 1:54–56 Abtew A, Niassy S, Affognon H, Subramanian S, Kreiter S, Garzia GT, Martin T (2016) Farmers’ knowledge and perception of grain legume pests and their management in the Eastern province of Kenya. Crop Prot 87:90–97

88

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Alam MM, Ladha JK, Faisal MW, Sharma S, Saha A, Noor S, Rahman MA (2015) Improvement of cereal-based cropping systems following the principles of conservation agriculture under changing agricultural scenarios in Bangladesh. Field Crop Res 175:1–15 Ali AM, Thind HS, Singh V, Singh B (2015) A framework for refining nitrogen management in dry direct-seeded rice using GreenSeeker™ optical sensor. Comput Electro Agric 110:114–120 Andersson JA, Giller KE (2012) “On heretics and God’s blanket salesmen” contested claims for conservation agriculture and the politics of its promotion in African smallholder farming. In: Sumberg J, Thompson J (eds) Contested agronomy: agricultural research in a changing world. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 22–46 Aravindakshan S, Rossi FJ, Krupnik TJ (2015) What does benchmarking of wheat farmers practicing conservation tillage in the eastern Indo-gangetic plain tell us about energy use efficiency? An application of slack based data envelopment analysis. Energy 90:483–493 BARI (2004). Krishi Projukti Hatbai (A Bengali Publication). Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Gazipur, Bangladesh Baudron F, Jaleta M, Okitoi O, Tegegn A (2014) Conservation agriculture in African mixed crop-­ livestock systems: expanding the niche. Agric Ecosyst Environ 187:171–182 Beddington JR, Asaduzzaman M, Clark M, Fernandez A, Guilou M, Jahn M, Erda L, Mamo T, Van Bo N, Nobre CA, Scholes R, Sharma R, Wakhungu J (2012) Achieving food security in the face of climate change: final report from the commission on sustainable agriculture and climate change. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change. Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Copenhagen Behera D, Chaudhury AK, Vutukutu VK, Gupta A, Machiraju S, Shah P (2013) Enhancing agricultural livelihoods through community institutions in Bihar, India, South Asia livelihoods learning series. World Bank; JEEVIKA, New Delhi; Patna. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2013/01/17517688/ enhancing-agricultural-livelihoods-through-community-institutions-Bihar-India Berkhout E, Glover D, Kuyvenhoven A (2015) On-farm impact of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI): evidence and knowledge gaps. Agr Syst 132:157–166 Bhatta GD, Aggarwal PK, Kristjanson P, Shrivastava AK (2016) Climatic and non-climatic factors influencing changing agricultural practices across different rainfall regimes in South Asia. Curr Sci 110(7):1272 Bhattacharyya R, Tuti MD, Kundu S, Bisht JK, Bhatt JC (2012) Conservation tillage impacts on soil aggregation and carbon pools in a sandy clay loam soil of the Indian Himalayas. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76:617–627 Bhattacharyya R, Das TK, Pramanik P, Ganeshan V, Saad AA, Sharma AR (2013) Impacts of conservation agriculture on soil aggregation and aggregate-associated N under an irrigated agroecosystem of the Indo-Gangetic plains. Nutr Cycl Agro Ecosyst 96:185–202 Bhattacharyya R, Das TK, Sudhishri S, Dudwal B, Sharma AR, Bhatia A, Singh G (2015) Conservation agriculture effects on soil organic carbon accumulation and crop productivity under a rice–wheat cropping system in the western Indo-Gangetic plains. Eur J Agron 70:11–21 Bolliger A, Magid J, Amado TJC, Neto FS, Ribeiro MDD, Calegari A, Ralisch R, de Neergaard A (2006) Taking stock of the Brazilian zero-till revolution: a review of landmark research and farmers’ practice. Adv Agron 91:47–110 Bradford MA, Warren RJ, Baldrian P, Crowther TW, Maynard DS, Oldfield EE, Wieder WR, Wood SA, King JR (2014) Climate fails to predict wood decomposition at regional scales. Nat Clim Chang 4:625–630 BRRI (2007) Adhunik Daner Chas (A Bengali Publication). Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BARI), Gazipur, Bangladesh Brouder SM, Gomez-Macpherson H (2014) The impact of conservation agriculture on smallholder agricultural yields: a scoping review of the evidence. Agric Ecosyst Environ 187:11–32 Bryan E, Ringler C, Okoba B, Roncoli C, Silvestri S, Herrero M (2013) Adapting agriculture to climate change in Kenya: household strategies and determinants. J Environ Manage 114:26–35

References

89

Campos EVR, Proença PLF, Oliveira JL, Bakshi M, Abhilash PC, Fraceto LF (2018) Use of botanical insecticides for sustainable agriculture: future perspectives. Ecol Indic. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.04.038 Cao Y, Tian Y, Yin B, Zhu Z (2014) Improving agronomic practices to reduce nitrate leaching from the rice–wheat rotation system. Agric Ecosyst Environ 195:61–67 Cartier D (2013) Mali crisis: a migration perspective. IOM, Geneva Chen Y, Zhou T, Zhang C, Wang K, Liu J, Lu J, Lu J, Xu K (2015) Rational phosphorus application facilitates the sustainability of the wheat/maize/soybean relay strip intercropping system. PLoS One 10(11):e0141725 Chen H, Yu C, Li C, Xin Q, Huang X, Zhang J, Yue Y, Huang G, Li X, Wang W (2016) Modeling the impacts of water and fertilizer management on the ecosystem service of rice rotated cropping systems in China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 219:49–57 Coolsaet B (2016) Towards an agroecology of knowledges: recognition, cognitive justice and farmers’ autonomy in France. J Rural Stud 47:165–171 Corbeels M, Thierfelder C, Rusinamhodzi L (2015) Conservation agriculture in sub-­Saharan Africa. In: Farooq M, KHM S (eds) Conservation agriculture. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 443–476 Cui Z, Chen X, Miao Y, Zhang F, Sun Q, Schroder J, Zhang H, Li J, Shi L, Xu J, Ye Y (2008) On-farm evaluation of the improved soil N–based nitrogen management for summer maize in North China Plain. Agron J 100:517–525 Das TK, Bhattacharya R, Sharma AR, Das S, Saad AA, Pathak H (2013) Impacts of Conservation agriculture on total soil organic carbon retention potential under an irrigated agro-ecosystem of the western Indo-gangetic plain. Eur J Agron 51:34–42 Das TK, Bhattacharyya R, Sudhishri S, Sharma AR, Saharawat YS, Bandyopadhyay KK, Sepat S, Bana RS, Aggarwal P, Sharma RK, Bhatia A, Singh G, Datta SP, Kar A, Singh B, Singh P, Pathak H, Vyas AK, Jat ML (2014) Conservation agriculture in an irrigated cotton–wheat system of the western Indo-Gangetic plains: crop and water productivity and economic profitability. Field Crop Res 158:24–33 Devkota KP, Lamers JPA, Manschadi AM, Devkota M, Donald AJM, Vlek PLG (2015a) Comparative advantages of conservation agriculture basedrice–wheat rotation systems under water and salt dynamics typicalf or the irrigated arid drylands in Central Asia. Eur J Agron 62:98–109 Devkota KP, Hoogenboom G, Boote KJ, Singh U, Lamers JPA, Devkota M, Vlek PLG (2015b) Simulating the impact of water saving irrigation and conservation agriculture practices for rice–wheat systems in the irrigated semi-arid dry lands of Central Asia. Agric For Meteorol 214:266–280 Dile YT, Karlberg L, Temesgen M, Rockström J (2013) The role of water harvesting to achieve sustainable agricultural intensification and resilience against water related shocks in sub-­ Saharan Africa. Agric Ecosyst Environ 181:69–79 Dobrovolski R, Diniz-Filho JAF, Loyola RD, Junior PDM (2011) Agricultural expansion and the fate of global conservation priorities. Biodivers Conserv 20:2445–2459 Dubey PK, Singh GS, Abhilash PC (2016) Agriculture in a changing climate. J  Clean Prod 113:1046–1047 Emmerson M, Morales MB, Onate JJ, Batary P, Berendse F, Liira J, Aavik T, Guerrero I, Bommarco R, Eggers S, Pärt T (2016) How agriculture intensification affects biodiversity and ecosystem services. Adv Ecol Res 55:43–97 Erenstein O, Laxmi V (2008) Zero tillage impacts in India’s rice-wheat systems: a review. Soil Tillage Res 100:1–14 Evers G, Agostini A (2001) No-tillage farming for sustainable land management: lessons from the 2000 Brazil study tour. FAO Investment Centre Occasional Paper Series No. 12. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome FAO (2008) Investing in sustainable agricultural intensification: the role of conservation agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome FAO (2011) The state of the world’s land and water resources for Food and Agriculture Organization. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

90

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Farooq M, Nawaz A (2014) Weed dynamics and productivity of wheat in conventional and conservation rice-based cropping systems. Soil Tillage Res 141:1–9 Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) (2013) Agricultural transformation agency: results of 2012 new TEF technology demonstration trials. ATA and Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa Fierer N, Lauber CL, Ramirez KS, Zaneveld J, Bradford MA, Knight R (2012) Comparative metagenomic, phylogenetic and physiological analyses of soil microbial communities across nitrogen gradients. ISME J 6:1007–1017 Gangwar KS, Singh KK, Sharma SK, Tomar OK (2006) Alternative tillage and crop residue management in wheat after rice in sandy loam soils of Indo-Gangetic plains. Soil Tillage Res 88:242–252 Gathala MK, Timsina J, Islam MS, Rahman MM, Hossain MI, Rashid MHR, Ghosh AK, Krupnik TJ, Tiwari TP (2015) Andrew McDonald. Conservation agriculture based tillage and crop establishment options can maintain farmers’ yields and increase profits in South Asia’srice– maize systems: evidence from Bangladesh. Field Crop Res 172:85–98 Guo CS, Qiang ZB, Ting LY, Liang Y, Wei L, Zhi-an L, Wen HS, Bing S (2015a) Review grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency in rice production regions in China. J Integr Agric 14:2456–2466 Guo M, Jia X, Huang J, Kumar KB, Burger NE (2015b) Farmer field school and farmer knowledge acquisition in rice production: experimental evaluation in China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 209:100–107 Hardy AG, Reddy DN, Venkatanarayana M, White BH (2016) System of Rice Intensification provides environmental and economic gains but at the expense of social sustainability — a multidisciplinary analysis in India. Agr Syst 143:159–168 Horrocks CA, Dungait JAJ, Cardenas LM, Heal KV (2014) Does extensification lead to enhanced provision of ecosystems services from soils in UK agriculture? Land Use Policy 38:123–128 Ju XT, Xing GX, Chen XP, Zhang SL, Zhang LJ, Liu XJ, Cui ZL, Yin B, Christie P, Zhub ZL, Zhang FS (2009) Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:3041–3046 Kassam A, Friedrich T, Shaxson F, Pretty J (2009) The spread of Conservation Agriculture: justification, sustainability and uptake. Int J Agric Sust 7:292–320 Kebbeh M, Miezan KM (2003) Ex-ante evaluation of integrated crop management options for irrigated rice production in the Senegal River Valley. Field Crop Res 81:87–94 Knoop L, Sambalino F, van Steenbergen F (2012) Securing water and land in the Tana Basin. A resource book for water managers and practitioners. UNEP/3R Water Secretariat, Wageningen, pp 1–177 Koné M (2010) Analysis of the cashew sector value chain in Côte d’ Ivoire. Deutsche Gesellschaft für, Eschborn Kumar V, Saharawat YS, Gathala MK, Jat AS, Singh SK, Chaudhary N, Jat ML (2014) Effect of different tillage and seeding methods on energy use efficiency and productivity of wheat in the Indo Gangetic Plain. Field Crop Res 142:1–8 Lalani B, Dorward P, Holloway G, Wauters E (2016) Smallholder farmers’ motivations for using Conservation Agriculture and the roles of yield, labour and soil fertility in decision making. Agr Syst 146:80–90 Liu S, Zhao C, Zhang Y, Hu Z, Wang C, Zong Y, Zhang L, Zou J (2015) Annual net greenhouse gas balance in a halophyte (Helianthus tuberosus) bioenergy cropping system under various soil practices in Southeast China. GCB Bioenerg 7:690–703 Mafongoya P, Rusinamhodzi L, Siziba S, Thierfelder C, Mvumi BM, Nhau B, Hove L, Chivenge P (2016) Maize productivity and profitability in conservation agriculture systems across agro-­ ecological regions in Zimbabwe: a review of knowledge and practice. Agric Ecosyst Environ 220:211–225 Martini DZ, Moreira MA, Cruz de Aragão LEO, Formaggio AR, Nora ELD (2015) Potential land availability for agricultural expansion in the Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy 49:35–42 Mohanty S (2013) Trends in global rice consumption. Rice Today 12(1):44–45

References

91

Moraes MCPD, Mello KD, Toppa RH (2017) Protected areas and agricultural expansion: biodiversity conservation versus economic growth in the Southeast of Brazil. J  Environ Manage 188:73–84 Nakalembe C, Dempewolf J, Justice C (2017) Agricultural land use change in Karamoja Region, Uganda. Land Use Policy 62:2–12 Nazari S, Rad GP, Sedighi H, Azadi H (2015) Vulnerability of wheat farmers: toward a conceptual framework. Ecol Indic 52:517–532 Nhamo N, Rodenburg J, Zenna N, Makombe G, Kihupi AL (2014) Narrowing the rice yield gap in East and Southern Africa: using and adapting existing technologies. Agr Syst 131:45–55 Nyong A, Adesina F, Elasha BO (2007) The value of indigenous knowledge in climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies in the African Sahel. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Chang 12:787–797 Ollenburger MH, Descheemaeker K, Crane TA, Sanogo OM, Giller KE (2016) Waking the sleeping giant: agricultural intensification, extensification or stagnation in Mali’s Guinea Savannah. Agr Syst 148:58–70 Pan YG (2011) Panorama and trend of meat consumption in China. J Northwest Agric For Univ 11:1–6 Parihar CM, Jat SL, Singh AK, Kumar B, Singh Y, Pradhan S, Pooniya V, Dhauja A, Chaudhary V, Jat ML, Jat RK, Yadav OP (2016) Conservation agriculture in irrigated intensive maize-based systems of north-western India: effects on crop yields, water productivity and economic profitability. Field Crop Res 193:104–116 Petersen B, Snapp S (2015) What is sustainable intensification? Views from experts. Land Use Policy 46:1–10 Piccoli I, Chiarini F, Carletti P, Furlan F, Lazzaro B, Nardi S, Berti A, Sartori L, Dalconi MC, Morari F (2016) Disentangling the effects of conservation agriculture practices on the vertical distribution of soil organic carbon. Evidence of poor carbon sequestration in North-Eastern Italy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 230:68–78 Powlson DS, Stirling CM, Thierfelder C, White RP, Jat ML (2016) Does conservation agriculture deliver climate change mitigation through soil carbon sequestration in tropical agro-­ ecosystems? Agric Ecosyst Environ 220:164–174 Rakshit A, Abhilash PC, Singh HB, Ghosh S (2017) Adaptive soil management: from theory to practices. Springer Nature Singapore Pvt Ltd., Singapore. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-10-3638 Rao CS, Kundu S, Shanker AK, Naik RP, Vanaja M, Venkanna K, Sankar GRM, Rao VUM (2016a) Continuous cropping under elevated CO2: differential effects on C4 and C3 crops, soil properties and carbon dynamics in semi-arid alfisols. Agric Ecosyst Environ 218:73–86 Rao CS et al (2016b) Chapter four - climate resilient villages for sustainable food security in tropical India: concept, process, technologies, institutions, and impacts. Adv Agron 140:101–214 Reddy DN, Venkatanarayana M (2013) SRI cultivation in Andhra Pradesh: achievements, problems and implications for GHGs and work. Work in Progress Paper 13: Project on measuring materiality in informal production–distribution systems. Oxford University, Delhi, pp 160–192 Saad AA, Das TK, Rana DS, Sharma AR, Bhattacharyya R, Lal K (2016) Energy auditing of a maizeewheategreengram cropping system under conventional and conservation agriculture in irrigated north-western Indo-Gangetic plains. Energy 116:293–305 Salman M, Bunclark L, AbuKhalaf M, Borgia C, Guarnieri L, Hoffmann O, Sambalino F, Steenbergen FV, Lebdi F (2016) Strengthening agricultural water efficiency and productivity on the African and global level Status, performance and scope assessment of water harvesting in Uganda, Burkina Faso and Morocco Food and Agriculture. Organization of the united nations, Rome Sapkota TB, Majumdar K, Jat ML, Kumar A, Bishnoi DK, Donald AJM, Pampolino M (2014) Precision nutrient management in conservation agriculture based wheat production of Northwest India: profitability, nutrient use efficiency and environmental footprint. Field Crop Res 155:233–244

92

4  Resource Conserving and Innovative Practices for Agricultural Sustainability

Sapkota TB, Jat ML, Aryal JP, Jat RK, Chhetri AK (2015) Climate change adaptation, greenhouse gas mitigation and economic profitability of conservation agriculture: some examples from cereal systems of Indo-Gangetic plains. J Integr Agric 14:1524–1533 Schiefer J, Lair GJ, Blum WEH (2015) Indicators for the definition of land quality as a basis for the sustainable intensification of agricultural production. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 3:42–49 Schiefer J, Lair GJ, Blum WEH (2016) Potential and limits of land and soil for sustainable intensification of European agriculture. Agric Ecosyst Environ 230:283–293 Singh A, Abhilash PC (2018) Agricultural biodiversity for sustainable food production. J Clean Prod 172:1368–1369 Singh VK, Dwivedi BS, Tiwari KN, Majumdar K, Rani M, Singh SK, Timsina J (2014) Optimizing nutrient management strategies for rice-wheat system in the Indo-gangetic plains of India and adjacent region for higher productivity, nutrient use efficiency and profits. Field Crop Res 164:30–44 Singh VK, Singh Y, Dwivedi BS, Singh SK, Majumdard K, Jate ML, Mishra RP, Rania M (2016) Soil physical properties, yield trends and economics after five years of conservation agriculture based rice-maize system in north-western India. Soil Tillage Res 155:133–148 Thakur AK, Uphoff NT, Stoop WA (2016) Scientific underpinnings of system of rice intensification (SRI): what is known so far? Adv Agron 135:147–179 Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Chen B, Gupta VK, Vilu R, Gathergood N (2017) Biotechnological advances for restoring degraded land for sustainable development. Trends Biotechnol 35(9):847–859 UNFCCC (2013) Best practices and available tools for the use of indigenous and traditional knowledge and practices for adaptation, and the application of gender-sensitive approaches and tools for understanding and assessing impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. FCCC/TP/11:62. http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SC/pdf/ UNFCCC-TP-2013-11.pdf Van Melle C, Buschmann S (2013) Comparative analysis of mango value chain models in Benin, Burkina Faso and Ghana. In: Elbehri A (ed) Rebuilding West Africa’s Food potential: policies and market incentives for smallholder-inclusive food value chains. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome, pp 317–345 Vanlauwe B, Wendt J, Giller KE, Corbeels M, Gerard B, Nolte C (2014) A fourth principle is required to define Conservation Agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: the appropriate use of fertilizer to enhance crop productivity. Field Crop Res 155:10–13 Wang ZG, Jin X, Bao XG, Li XF, Zhao JH, Sun JH, Christie P, Li L (2014) Intercropping Enhances Productivity and Maintains the Most Soil Fertility Properties Relative to Sole Cropping. PLoS One 9(12):e113984 Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR) (2013) SCI: system of crop intensification - a step towards climate-resistant agriculture. WOTR, Pune West TO, Post WM (2002) Soil organic carbon sequestration rates by tillage and crop rotation: a global data analysis. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:1930–1946 Wood SA, Jina AS, Jain M, Kristjanson P, DeFries RS (2014) Smallholder farmer cropping decisions related to climate variability across multiple regions. Glob Environ Chang 25:163–172 Wood SA, Bradford MA, Gilbert JA, McGuire KL, Palm CA, Tully KL, Zhou J, Naeem S (2015a) Agricultural intensification and the functional capacity of soil microbes on smallholder African farms. J Appl Ecol 52:744–752 Wood SA, Almaraz M, Bradford MA, McGuire KL, Naeem S, Neill C, Palm CA, Tully KL, Zhou J (2015b) Farm management, not soil microbial diversity, controls nutrient loss from smallholder tropical agriculture. Front Microbiol 6:90 World Bank (2008) Agriculture for development. Agriculture. World Bank, Washington, DC World Bank Institute (WBI) (2008) System of rice intensification (SRI): Achieving more with less, a new way of cultivating rice. World Bank, Washington, DC. http://info.worldbank.org/etools/ docs/library/245848/ Zhao RF, Chen XP, Zhang FS, Zhang H, Schroder J, Römheld V (2006) Fertilization and nitrogen balance in a wheat–maize rotation system in North China. Agron J 98:938–945

Chapter 5

Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Ajeet Singh, Rajan Chaurasia, Gopal S. Singh, and Purushothaman Chirakkuzhyil Abhilash

Abstract  The present study was undertaken to evaluate various adaptive ­agronomic practices employed by indigenous farmers of eastern Uttar Pradesh in North India. For this, extensive field survey was conducted in selected districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh and various practices done by farmers were noted for further studies. The promising practices were classified at three distinct level such as (1) crop or species level, (2) farm or field level, and (3) landscape level. Major emphasis was given to documenting crop diversification strategy, varietal selection and preferences over the period (especially in rice) and critical natural resource conservation methods that is employed by the local farmers themselves to sustain food production under changing climatic conditions. The present study could able to identify so many promising practices for further validation and the subsequent scaling-up of promising practices. It is concluded that integrating traditional and indigenous farming technologies offer huge promise in climate change adaptation in agriculture and is a sustainable and adaptive way for maximizing food production under changing climatic conditions. Keywords  Adaptive agricultural practices · Crop diversification · Dryland agriculture · Eastern UP · Environmental challenges · Integrated farming practices · Resource conservation · Varietal selection

P. K. Dubey · G. S. Singh · P. C. Abhilash (*) ·A. Singh · R. Chaurasia Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 P. K. Dubey et al., Adaptive Agricultural Practices, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3_5

93

94

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

5.1  Introduction It is well known that climate change negatively affects many aspects of our lives. Among the various sectors, agriculture is the foremost and the most vulnerable to changing climatic conditions (Porter et al. 2014; Abhilash et al. 2016; Dubey et al. 2017; Dubey and Singh 2017). Similarly, among various affected regions, the tropical regions are the most vulnerable to climate change. Therefore, agricultural production under changing climatic conditions is a serious challenge for a tropical nation like India as the majority of the farmers (~70%) are doing subsistence farming (Rao et al. 2016a, b), are resource poor, and have only small land holdings (less than 2 ha of agricultural land). Apart from the resource crunch, the changing conditions exert additional pressure on farmers because such reduce soil fertility and water resource availability, as well as enhance incidences of pests that may again negatively affect crop physiology and thereby reduce its yield (Porter et al. 2014). However, the magnitude of such impacts depends on geographic location and the socioeconomic conditions of the region (Tripathi 2017; Singh and Abhilash 2018; Singh et al. 2018a, b). Because agriculture contributes a significant part of the socioeconomic well-being and livelihood of the Indian population, it is imperative to maintain agricultural production for the current population and maximize food production for its rapidly growing population in a sustainable manner (Abhilash 2015a, b; World Bank 2008; Abhilash and Singh 2009; UNFCCC 2009; Abhilash et al. 2015; Dubey et al. 2016a, b; Tripathi & Mishra 2017).

5.1.1  What Are Adaptive Agricultural Practices? What sort of practices can be categorized as adaptive agricultural practices? Although we have conducted an extensive Scopus-based literature survey (www.scopus.org) for a meaningful interpretation of adaptive agricultural practices, we could not find such a definition. Therefore, for the sake of a wide range of stakeholders, here we have tried to define this concept in a simple and interesting manner. Adaptive agricultural practices can be defined as a ‘set of agricultural practices developed by local farmers to adapt or adjust to the changing socioeconomic, ecological, and climatic conditions of a particular region without compromising the yield and quality of agricultural produce’. Such adaptations are meant to (1) save energy, time, labor, and money, (2) conserve critical natural resources such as water, biodiversity, and soil nutrients, and, most importantly, to (3) adapt or adjust to adversities such as drought, heat, flood, pests, and disease. These adaptive practices can be done at different levels such as, first, those practices at the crop or species level (e.g., varietal selection for early maturing, late maturing, use of resilient crops such as traditional and wild crops for conferring crop- or species-level adaptation); second, practices at the farm or field level (e.g., field modifications such as tillage, no-tillage, crop diversification, mulching, manuring, or drip irrigation to gain field-­level adaptation); and third, practices employed at the landscape level, such as water-harvesting systems ­

5.2 Methodology Employed

95

(e.g., check-dams, canals, integrated farming practices such as agriculture + pisciculture, agroforestry with animal husbandry, orchards) to attain landscape-level adaptation. However, the extent and efficacy of such adaptation measures to various challenges including changing climatic conditions depend on many crucial factors such as (1) the farmers’ awareness of the necessity of such adaptive measures, (2) the indigenous and local ecological and agricultural knowledge of the farmers, (3) the availability and affordability of improvisation technologies for farming, and (4) the farmers’ willingness to undertake transformational adaptation against those challenges and vulnerabilities in a timely and sustainable manner.

5.1.2  Objectives of the Present Study The present study was undertaken mainly to evaluate various adaptive practices employed by farmers in eastern Uttar Pradesh (UP) for sustainable agriculture and also to bridge the knowledge gap between farming and the scientific community in relationship to the adoption of such adaptive and sustainable practices in agriculture to maximize food production in a changing environment. Such region-specific studies are essential to provide an opportunity for the updating and expansion of knowledge regarding current challenges and issues related to the agricultural sector in that particular region (Raeisi et al. 2018) and also the available adaptation mechanisms to cope with such challenges. Furthermore, the documentation of such adaptive practices and their further validation can facilitate the large-scale exploitation of such practices for local peoples and also for formulating location-specific agricultural and rural development policies and mobilizing institutional support for fostering farmers’ adaptation at various levels. Importantly, landscape-level utilization of various adaptive practices in a sustainable manner will help meet most of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDG) targets for the year 2030.

5.2  Methodology Employed 5.2.1  Study Area: Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India Uttar Pradesh (UP) is the largest and most populous state of India (http://indiapopulation2018.in/). According to the latest estimates of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI 2013), 29.43% of the population of UP is below the poverty line (BPL), key evidence that UP is a weaker state in terms of its socioeconomic conditions and livelihood status. Climate challenges and variabilities are also at par in the state, affecting its agricultural systems and regional food and nutritional security. In the present study, the eastern UP has been particularly selected owing to its slow pace of economic development coupled with low per capita income and higher population density. Furthermore, this region belongs to a relatively large number of resource-poor and small-scale farmers (Tripathi 2017).

96

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

The rising trends of population growth in different districts of eastern UP over a period of two decades, that is, 1991–2011, are shown in Figs. 5.1 and 5.2. The percent increase in human population in these districts ranges from nearly 40–70% in just two decades, which is quite alarming as it has resulted in limited per capita land availability and in land degradation caused by agricultural intensification. This situation is severely affecting the livelihood and well-being of resource-poor farmers in eastern UP. It has been reported that changing climatic conditions will further increase the occurrence of erratic weather events such as drought, flood, and heat waves. As the majority of the population in eastern UP solely rely on the agriculture sector for their subsistence, it is important to develop suitable strategies to maximize agricultural production even under adverse conditions. Therefore, documentation, validation, and large-scale exploitation of adaptive, site-specific, and resource-conserving farming practices are needed for sustainable agricultural production in this region.

5.2.2  Field Survey Extensive, multi-tier field surveys [random initial surveys followed by detailed questionnaires (prepared in the mother tongue of the farmers)-based surveys, face-­to-­face interactions as well as field visits] were conducted for a 2-year period, 2016–2017, and promising practices including commonly cultivated crops and the trend of cultivation during the past few decades were recorded for further validation. Based on the population statistics, agroclimatic conditions, resource availability, and the nature of agricultural vulnerabilities in the overall region, 10 blocks coming under four representative districts (of the 26 districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh) were further selected for detailed studies (Fig.  5.3). Additional visits were conducted to the fields of 16000000

1991

2001

2011

Human Population

14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0

Districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh

Fig. 5.1  Trend of population explosion in eastern Uttar Pradesh from the year 1991–2011. This growing population exerts tremendous pressure on sustainable resource use. (Source: Census data 1991, 2001, and 2011). (Note: Amethi* was later declared a separate district)

5.2 Methodology Employed

97

Districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh

Varanasi Sultanpur + Amethi* St. Ravidasnagar… St. Kabirnagar Sravasti Sonbhadra Sidharthnagar Pratapgarh Mirzapur Mau Maharajganj Kushinagar Jaunpur Gorakhpur Gonda Ghazipur Deoria Chandauli Basti Balrampur Ballia Bahraich Azamgarh Ambedkarnagar Allahabad 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Percent increase in population from year 1991 to 2011

Fig. 5.2  Rate of population increase in each district of eastern Uttar Pradesh from 1991 to 2011. Increase in population ranges from 40% to 70%. Green bars represent districts selected for current study as they represent low, moderate, and high rates of increase in human population

Tarawa Badagaon Marihan

Eastern Uttar Pradesh

Lalganj Arajiline Kashi Vidyapeeth

Rajgarh Robertsganj

Narayanpur Chatra

Uttar Pradesh C

B India A Fig. 5.3  Location of various blocks surveyed in four districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh, namely, Azamgarh, Varanasi, Mirzapur, and Sonbhadra. Triangles and pentagons represent the blocks in middle Gangetic plains and Vindhyan zones of India, respectively

98

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Fig. 5.4  Extensive field visits and direct interactions with farmers document adaptive agricultural practices and resource-conserving techniques employed by local farmers in eastern Uttar Pradesh (UP)

selected farmers to study the ecological, economic, and social benefits of such adaptive practices (Fig. 5.4). In addition to the field visits, information related to the ongoing agricultural practices was also collected from secondary sources such as the agricultural contingency plans of the concerned districts as well as from the Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs). Special efforts were made to gather information from farmers on two major aspects: (1) major challenges faced by farmers in the studied region and (2) various innovative strategies and practices developed by farmers to tackle such issues and challenges. The farmers were classified into four groups based on their landholdings: very small (300 ft deep) each year in the rocky hills. The small-scale and poor farmers mainly rely on rainwater for irrigation or sometimes from others’ bore wells. The profound scarcity of water in the studied region has resulted in the sharp decline of the productivity of rice, which is an important monsoon crop of eastern Uttar Pradesh. Because of the changing climatic conditions, the farmers who solely depend on rainfed agriculture in dryland areas (semi-arid environments) are more affected by such changes. Some devastating repercussions are presented in pictorial form in Figs. 5.5 and 5.6 and in Tables 5.3 and 5.4. The major factors leading to the decline in crop production during the past few decades (Fig. 5.7) are mainly due to the following reasons: • Erratic weather events such as changing rainfall patterns and intensities, heat waves, and drought conditions during the summer season. In the past 15 years, the cultivation and productivity of different crops have been affected significantly as the rainfall intensity and pattern have changed drastically. For example, during 2013 and 2015, there was a drastic decline in overall rainfall during the rice-growing season. However, in 2013, heavy rainfall and storms for a continuous 10 days during the fruiting stage of rice resulted in more than 70% loss of yield. The year 2015 was also not promising for both wheat and rice as there was a heat shock during rice sowing and excessive rainfall during the wheat sowing stage that resulted in significant yield losses (25%) and crop damage. F ­ urthermore, vegetable production has also been negatively affected by such climate variations. For instance, the majority of the farmers agreed that during the past few

Fig. 5.5  Water scarcity is a major impediment for sustainable agricultural production in the drylands of Mirzapur district

102

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Local water storage system fails Large and small ponds remains dry during summer

Groundwater table goes very down Borewells and wells (200 & 50 feet deep respectively) fails to supply water for irrigation

Extreme water scarcity & fallow field. No canal water supply and field remain fallow during peak cropping season

Fig. 5.6  The Vindhyan zone in Mirzapur and Sonbhadra districts of eastern UP suffers great water scarcity. No water availability during major crop seasons (such as rice and wheat) and peak water requirement for irrigation, which negatively affects crop yield and productivity. The majority of resource-poor farmers cannot afford irrigation water by private bore wells, ponds, or tube-wells, which is devastating

years, cultivation of crops such as Lagenaria siceraria (bottle gourd), Colocasia, Allium sativum (garlic), Abelmoschus esculentus (lady’s fingers), Solanum tuberosum, Pisum sativum, Zingiber officinale (ginger), and Allium cepa was not profitable because of the low yield. • Increasing incidence of pests and diseases is another challenge in the studied region. For example, the false smut disease caused by Ustilaginoidea virens and the blast disease of rice caused by Magnaporthe oryzae are common in this region.

5.3 Results and Discussion

103

Table 5.3  Various challenges and vulnerabilities in the studied region (Source: Agriculture Contingency Plan for District of Uttar Pradesh; http://www.nicra-icar.in/nicrarevised/index.php/ state-wise-plan) Sample no. 1

Districts surveyed Azamgarh

2

Mirzapur

3

Sonbhadra

4

Varanasi

Climate challenges and vulnerabilities in agriculture sector Frequent Occasional Pests and disease outbreak Drought, flood, heat wave, cold wave, frost Drought, pests and disease Flood, hailstorm, heat wave, cold outbreak, fog wave, frost Drought, pests, and disease Flood, hailstorm, heat wave, cold outbreak, fog wave, frost Drought, pests and disease Flood, hailstorm, heat wave, cold outbreak wave, frost

Table 5.4  Major environmental challenges in eastern Uttar Pradesh (adapted from Krishi Vigyan Kendra, ICAR; https://kvk.icar.gov.in/) Lists of districts of eastern UP (agroclimatic zone, NARP) Ambedkarnagar (eastern plain zone)

Bahraich (northeastern Plain zone)

Gonda (northeastern Plain zone) Gorakhpur, Deoria, Basti (northeastern Plain zone)

Mirzapur and Sonbhadra (Vindhyan zone)

Major agricultural challenges faced by these districts Waterlogged conditions and poor soil fertility in some parts of the district. Crop yield is generally low in most parts because of use of conventional farming methods and low-yielding cultivars. Overapplication of fertilizers has deteriorated soil quality, and problems of pests and diseases are also prevalent in most parts of the district. Most farmers are unaware of innovative agronomic practices employed in other districts Soil is deficient in micronutrients such as Zn, B, and macronutrients (S). Soil pH is generally high and lacks organic matter content. Low productivity of major cereals (rice, wheat, maize) and vegetables is result of conventional farming practices and less-yielding cultivars. Insects and pests also damage crops and vegetables at larger extent Some parts of district are flood prone. Two types of soils: sandy and sandy loam (soil organic matter is low in sandy soil) Crop yield is declining. In four major talukas of Gorakhpur district, yield is declining mainly because of pests and diseases. In Deoria, low yield is result of use of conventional agronomic practices and crop varieties. In Basti district, yields of oilseeds, pulses, and cereals are low as large numbers of resource-poor farmers cannot afford irrigation during peak requirements Dryland agriculture and semi-arid environment. Problems as mentioned in previous section (continued)

104

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Table 5.4 (continued) Lists of districts of eastern UP (agroclimatic zone, NARP) Varanasi, Sultanpur, and Amethi*, Ghazipur, Mau, Jaunpur, Chandauli, Ballia, Azamgarh (eastern plain zone)

Balrampur; Kushinagar, Maharajganj, Sidharthnagar, Sravasti, St. Kabirnagar (northeastern Plain zone); St. Ravidasnagar/Bhadohi (Vindhyan zone) Allahabad and Pratapgarh (central zone)

Major agricultural challenges faced by these districts Alkaline and saline soil is a major issue. In Sultanpur, Amethi, and Ballia districts, most of the soil is absolutely infertile. Potassium deficiency is prevalent in Chandauli district. Organic carbon and nitrogen content are low in sandy and sandy loam soil. In Varanasi, waterlogged condition also exists in some parts. This region has substantial number of farmers who are farming on lease land (landless farmers cultivating another farmer’s field). Marginal and resource-poor farmers have no farm machinery such as tractors and credit support. Azamgarh district has sandy loam, sandy clay, clay loam, and sodic soil types. Only clay loam is fertile; the other soil types not as fertile. In Ghazipur district, most of the land area (87,347 ha agricultural land) is affected by micronutrient deficiency. Almost 9842 ha and 9663 ha agricultural land faces soil erosion and waterlogging, respectively. About 1257 ha land area remains as wasteland or barren land Low productivity mainly caused by micronutrient deficiencies. Large tracts of salt affect soil

Low soil fertility. In Allahabad district, 15% agricultural land has sandy loam to sodic soil. Similar soil type also exists in Pratapgarh district

• Increased incidence of storm winds resulted in lodging of rice and wheat and crop damage. • Subsistence farmers are struggling to meet the food requirements of their own growing families. • Overuse of chemical fertilizers and pesticides: excessive use of chemical inputs such as nitrogenous (urea) and phosphatic (diammonium phosphate) fertilizers, muriate of potash, zinc, and sulfur combined with the excessive use of pesticides has resulted in pollution and reduced soil fertility in the studied region. Some of the farmers are also using banned weedicides such as 2,4-D. • Human–wild animal conflicts. Crop damage by the Asian antelope (Boselaphus tragocamelus) (nilgai) is a major issue throughout the region.

5.3 Results and Discussion

105

Fig. 5.7  Pictorial representation of usual challenges faced by agriculture system in eastern Uttar Pradesh (UP). (a) Water is so scarce that it is hardly even available for drinking purposes during the summer season. (b, c) Drying of wells and ponds during summer. (d–f) Agricultural land is becoming less fertile or is turning into sodic land from increased salinity or alkalinity, particularly in middle Gangetic plains of eastern UP. (g, h) Small and resource-poor farmers are impacted most by the harsh climatic conditions (their farm fields remain fallow), but rich farmers still cultivate crops unsustainably, relying on inorganic chemicals and pesticides and private bore wells to attain productivity both in the middle Gangetic plains and in the Vindhyan zone of eastern UP. (i) Burning of crop residues in a farm field is responsible for agricultural emissions. (j) Unscientific land use practices. (k) Storm winds caused damage to lodgings and crops. (l) Crop damage done by wild animals (antelope). (m, n) Weeds in rice and wheat. (o) Pest infestation is another major issue

106

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

5.3.2  A  daptive Agronomic Practices Employed by Local Farmers Crop Diversification Strategies Crop diversification as seen in eastern UP has been found to augment farm-­generated income by providing a variety of crops and also offers dietary diversification for the farming community. Furthermore, such strategies are typical examples for the sustainable utilization of agricultural land and the associated resources such as soil and water under harsh climatic conditions. The type of crop diversification followed by farmers depends on various factors such as availability of water, demands of farm produce in local markets, and also the availability of seeds, fertilizer, local transport, and road connections, etc. (Kundu and Chattopadhyay 2018). These factors are important because the farming community of the entire eastern UP consists of mainly resource-poor farmers with small land holdings who are now bound to shift towards the adoption of high-value crops for more farm-generated income. It may be noted that such adaptive practice at a larger scale is the need of the hour as the per capita land availability is declining year after year whereas the food demand and population rate are increasing in eastern UP at an alarming rate. Moreover, the majority of the farmers in eastern UP are not aware of suitable crop insurance schemes and various strategies to adapt under adverse economic conditions. Farmers of Azamgarh, Varanasi, and Mirzapur districts are also additionally benefitted by crop diversification strategies, mainly because of the availability of water for irrigation and improvised irrigation facilities in these regions. As a result, border crops, intercrops, and adjacent crops are common field-level adaptive practices by a large number of farmers in these regions (Fig. 5.8). However, in the case of the dry land region of Vindhyan, farmers are interested in the diversification of farm fields by integrating timber-yielding trees such as teak and other profitable horticultural crops such as banana, guava, phalsa (Grewia asiatica), etc., and livestock such as cow, buffalo, goat, sheep, and poultry (Fig. 5.9). This kind of diversification strategy is used mainly because of the lack of groundwater for irrigation. Examples of ­various such practices employed by local farmers in dry land regions are listed in Tables 5.5 and 5.6. Critical Natural Resources Conservation Methods Groundwater is the only source of water for most of the farmers in the Vindhyan region. Before 2000, wells were the major source of irrigation water and the farmers could afford it. However, the drying up of wells during the past two decades because of changing climatic conditions has forced them to dig bore wells for irrigation. Although medium-income and rich farmers can afford to dig deep bore wells, resource-poor farmers cannot afford these, which creates a gap in utilization of groundwater resources for agriculture by poor, medium, and rich farmers. Because the groundwater level is lowering at an alarming rate, even medium-scale farmers are also

Fig. 5.8  Mustard grown (a) as a border crop, (b) as an interdispersed crop in wheat field, (c) as intercropping with pea (Pisum sativum), and (d) as adjacent crop to potato (Solanum tuberosum) are examples of farm-level adaptive practices. Such practices provide diverse food to the farmers in a single season as well as a sustainable way of land utilization for agri-production

Fig. 5.9  Integration of multiple crops (a) radish, spinach, Allium sativum, Allium cepa, coriander, etc., (b) wheat and lentils at field borders of chickpea, (c) integration of teak (timber-yielding) tree at border of wheat field, (d) livestock (cow, buffalo, goat, sheep, etc.), and (e) flower (Tagetes erectus) with sugarcane cropping at farm/field level can assist in enhancing agrobiodiversity and offers more farm-generated income for small- to medium-scale farmers because the market value of such integration is significantly high

108

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Table 5.5  Adaptive practices or farm innovation by local farmers in selected blocks of Vindhyan region of eastern UP Adaptive agricultural practices employed by farmers • Integrated crop–cattle mixed farming (goats/cow) • Vegetable (brinjal/chili/Lablab purpureus)-legume (pigeon pea)-based crop cultivation • Rice–fodder–wheat intensive cropping system • Mustard grown as border crop in wheat crop field • Double cropping (wheat + brinjal) • Integrated crop–livestock mixed farming • Fish pond-based farming and groundwater recharge system • Solar-powered irrigation system • Citrus-based farming • Large-scale vegetable cultivation (cucurbits/cauliflower/coriander/fennel, etc.) • Fresh fruit cultivation (coconut/guava/mango, etc.) in large area • Fruits (mango, Litchi sinensis, guava, amla/Indian gooseberry), and timber-yielding tree (teak, Moringa oleifera)-based farming • Drought-tolerant crops (chickpea, mustard) and vegetables (bottle gourd) cultivation • Integrated floricultural (marigold) and horticultural (papaya, jackfruit) crop cultivation • Marigold (Tagetus species) cultivated as cover crop for protection against plant-parasitic nematodes • Integrated crop–livestock mixed farming • Establishment of community ponds and private bore wells for water harvesting and irrigation use in agriculture • Digging of deep bore wells + drip irrigation technologies • Orchard-based crop cultivation (banana/mango/papaya + rice/wheat/tomato/ mustard/maize/gram cultivation) • Rice straw used for mulching during vegetable cultivation • Intercropping orchard (guava) with legume (chickpea) in large fields • Larger farm fields bordered with hardy, drought-tolerant plant Carisa carandus and mango whose spines and larger canopy offer defense against herbivory, respectively • Integrated fish farm ponds + drip irrigation system • Integrated crop–livestock mixed production system • Orchards groundcover management system (plantation of mango, banana, lemon, papaya, java plum, etc. in farm fields) • Cultivation of spices and flavoring crops such as fenugreek (methi, Trigonella foenum-graecum), black cumin (Nigella sativa), and fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), etc., in crop fields • Cultivation of highly nutritious, underutilized, and wild neglected crops, i.e., Basella alba/Indian spinach in homestead gardens • Sustainable organic mixed farming [use of farmyard manure (FYM)/ vermicompost/sheep manure at suitable gap periods] • Crop choices (rice/wheat/cash crops) made depending on availability of groundwater from deep bore wells

Village surveyed Shehunha, Chatra block, Sonbhadra Darwan, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur

Robertsganj, Sonbhadra Darwan, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur Koori, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur

Ramgarh, Chatra block, Sonbhadra Dadara, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur

Bhagauda, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur

Bhawa, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur

Pachoukhara, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur Atari, Marihan block, Mirzapur

(continued)

5.3 Results and Discussion

109

Table 5.5 (continued) Adaptive agricultural practices employed by farmers • Incorporating grain legumes, viz. Urad (Vigna mungo), moong (Vigna radiata), and green manure (Sesbania) in cereal-based cropping system to improve profitability • Agroforestry (teak plantation at field borders) • Mulching (rice straw used as mulch material) • Crop rotation and intercropping (pointed gourd, groundnut) • Minor crop choices, viz., spices, condiments, and cash crops intermixed with major crops choices, viz., rice and wheat during different seasons on a poorly maintained, less-sloping terraced land • Crop rotation with seasonal crops (wheat, mustard, barley, chickpea, lentil, pea, onion, fodder, pointed gourds, etc.) • Digging of deep bore wells (~300 ft) in water-scarce region for farm irrigation • Cultivation of short-day/less water requiring wheat variety (viz. PBW 154, Malviya 343) for sustainable utilization of groundwater • Combined recommended fertilizer dose and organic agro-inputs (derived from FYM and wheat straw) in farmlands • Integrated fodder crop–livestock production system • Replacement of inorganic fertilizers by FYM input at alternate years in rice–wheat cropping system. • Community farm pond rehabilitation + water-saving sprinkler irrigation system (minimize 50% farm water requirement) • Preference of vegetable cultivation over low-yielding rice–wheat cultivation in area

Village surveyed Bhawanipur, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur

Semri, Rajgarh block, Mirzapur Hardi Khurd, Marihan block, Mirzapur

Belahara, Marihan block, Mirzapur

Table 5.6  List of resilient crops for drylands environment in eastern UP Sample no. 1 2 3 4 5

6 7

8

Name of crop Pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) Brinjal (Solanum melongena) Gram/chickpea (Cicer arietinum) Pea (Pisum sativum)

Crop type Pulse Fruit or vegetable Vegetable Pulse Pulse

Indian spinach (Basella alba, B. rubra) Falsa/phalsa (Grewia asiatica)

Leafy vegetable Fruit

Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)

Cash crop

Nutritional importance Protein, fiber, minerals (Mg, P, K, Cu, Mn), vitamins B1, folate Minerals (Mo, Cu, K, Mn, P), vitamins (C, K, A, B6, E, H, B4, folate), fiber Carbohydrates, vitamins (K, B1, B6, folate), minerals (Mn, K), fiber Protein, carbohydrates, vitamins (B6, C), minerals (Fe, Ca, Mg, K), fiber Protein, vitamins (K, B1, B2, B4, B6), fiber, minerals (Mn, Cu, Mo, Zn, Mg, Fe, P, K), choline Vitamins (A, C, B6), minerals (Fe, Mn, Ca, K) Minerals (Ca, P, Fe, K), vitamins (C, B1, B2, B3), carbohydrates, moisture, good energy supplement for summers Natural sugar with fat content, minerals (Na, K, Ca, Mg, Fe), medicinal importance (prevents lung diseases) (continued)

110

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Table 5.6 (continued) Sample no. 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Name of crop Lemon (Citrus limon)

Crop type Fruit

Pearl millet (Pennisetum Cereal glaucum) Banana (Musa Fruit paradisiaca) Guava (Psidium guajava) Fruit Plumb (Ziziphus Fruit mauritiana) Chili (Capsicum annuum) Spice Black gram (Vigna mungo) Mung bean (Vigna radiata) Mustard (Brassica campestris) Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) Peanut/groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) Pointed guard (Trichosanthes dioica)

Pulse Pulse Oilseeds Oilseed/cash crop Oils/cash crop Vegetable

Nutritional importance Vitamins (C, B6, K), fiber, minerals (Fe, Mg, Ca), medicinal importance (prevents bone and teeth diseases) Protein, fiber, vitamins (B, Mn), carbohydrates, fat Vitamin B6, carbohydrates, protein, naturally free from fat Vitamins (A, B1, B2, B4, B6, C), carbohydrates Vitamins (A, C, K), fiber Fiber, vitamins (A, B1, B2, B4, B6, C, K), minerals (K, Cu, Mn, Fe, Mg, P) Protein, minerals (K, Ca, Fe), vitamins (B1, B2, B4) Carbohydrates, fiber, protein, minerals (K, Mg, Fe, Ca), vitamins (B6, C, A) Omega-3 fatty acid, minerals (Se, Mn, P, Mg, Cu), vitamin B1 Vitamins (E, B1, B4, B6), minerals (Cu, Mn, Se, P, Mg) Protein, minerals (Ca, P, Fe, Zn, B), vitamins (E, B-complex) Carbohydrates, fiber, protein, vitamin C, minerals (K, Ca, Mg, Fe)

facing difficulty in digging new and deeper bore wells each year. Therefore, adaptive agricultural practices, mainly for reducing negative environmental, ecological, and social consequences (Raeisi et al. 2018), are of utmost importance for such waterscarce regions. Some of the adaptive strategies employed by local farmers in the studied region for water conservation are shown in Fig. 5.10. For making agriculture truly a sustainable entity, it is necessary to make more profitable, efficient, and cleaner use of energy and resources at various levels, that is, farm/field/landscape levels. Doing so would support the nation in different ways, including providing national energy security. Renewable sources of energy such as solar energy make irrigation relatively easier as it can generate power in form of electricity for the extraction of groundwater by bore wells. However, sustainable water management should also be done simultaneously to overcome challenges arising from water scarcity in the region. For instance, sprinkler and drip irrigation technologies are used by some of the farmers in eastern UP. In the Vindhyan region, farmers are also getting a subsidy for installing solar pumps and thereby are able to achieve energy use efficiency in agriculture. However, most of the small-scale farmers still do not prefer to have such installations (of solar panels) as they need government incentives for digging bore wells instead of the solar pumps.

5.3 Results and Discussion

111

Fig. 5.10  Farm- and landscape-level adaptive water-conserving measures employed in eastern UP. (a–d) Wells, lakes, and constructed small and large ponds are important sources for water storage and groundwater recharge. (e–g) Tube wells and canals constructed in the middle Gangetic plains help farmers irrigate their farm fields. (h, i) Use of irrigation pipes for bringing water over long distances is another innovative method for easy transport and also for preventing water losses. (j) Construction of tunnels for water diversion and irrigation. (k) Construction of ridges and furrows for optimum water use and rainwater harvesting. (l) Ridge furrow mulching. (m) Mulching. (n) Terrace farming. (o) Sprinkler irrigation. (p) Drip irrigation technologies for water conservation; this is extremely important for the semi-arid environment of Vindhyan areas as it conserves more than 50% of water used for irrigation and guarantees maximum utilization of each drop of water by crops

Besides this, farmers in eastern UP are also aware of the declining soil fertility caused by overuse of inorganic chemical fertilizers (particularly urea and diammonium phosphate) in the past few decades. Therefore, several adaptive practices are used to overcome excessive application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides by various forms of organic inputs. Farm yard manure (FYM), vermicompost, crop residues/straws (particularly rice/wheat/mustard straw) retention, incorporation of

112

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

green manure (e.g., Sesbania), etc. are some of the commonly used organic inputs. Most farmers apply FYM at the rate of 13–20 ton ha−1 during every alternate year. Moreover, they keep sheep, goats, or even ducks in agricultural fields for about a week because it is believed that the urine of sheep has high nitrogen content and their fecal pellets are rich in phosphorus (P) and potassium (K). Another adaptive practice is residue retention as this improves the soil nutrient content (Fig. 5.11). In the Narayanpur block of Mirzapur district, there is an organic agricultural farm maintained by Surabhi Research Institute of Jalans Group, which is known for its 100% organic agricultural production practices. Organic manures are prepared via different methods including composts (made of FYM + plant leaves), vermicomposts, biodung methods, and green manure. Apart from raw organic inputs, packaged organic manures with different local names having suitable preparation are also largely used by farmers in the Mirzapur district of eastern UP. For example, one such product with the local name Dhanzyme-G/Dhanzyme Liquid is a seaweed extract. Among all organic inputs used locally in eastern UP, use of vermicomposts have been reported in terms of both improving soil quality and increasing crop production in both the middle Gangetic plains and the Vindhyan region of eastern UP. Because it is cost effective, farmers can prepare the vermicompost themselves at home. For example, a farmer named Harishankar Singh from village Vishunpura of Narayanpur block of Mirzapur district has replaced nearly 80% or more of his chemical fertilizer input by homemade vermicompost + wheat straw in rice fields and found a significant increase in the number of tillers, grains per panicle, and overall rice yield (Fig. 5.12). Varietal Shifts in Rice for Maximum Profits There is a need to address the multitude of challenges in the agriculture sector with adaptive agronomic practices. During the current survey, we could observe that local farmers are making the following transitions or shifts, especially for s­ ustainable rice farming (Table 5.7): • Long-day crop varieties to short-day varieties in semi-arid/drought-prone areas, such as the Vindhyan region in eastern UP. • Pest- and disease-prone varieties to their resistant varieties. • Conventional varieties to high-yielding hybrid varieties • Water-intensive to less water requiring varieties • Less adaptable to more adaptable crop varieties • Tall varieties to short/dwarf varieties.

Fig. 5.11  Some of the other innovative farming practices employed by farmers in Vidhyan region: (a, b) solar pump for irrigation, (c) sheep manure, (d) poultry manure, (e) farmyard manure, and (f, g) goat manure. Using such organic input, farmers have witnessed enhanced beneficial faunal biodiversity in their farm fields. For example, (h) earthworm and (j) millipedes are seen in good numbers in agricultural fields, which are important soil fertility indicators. For maintenance of soil nutrient status, the standing stubble from the base (of nearly 15–20 cm height) is left in the field while harvesting major cereals such as rice and wheat

114

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Fig. 5.12  Use of homemade vermicompost + wheat straw retention in rice crop field is an adaptive practice employed by a local farmer (Harishankar Singh) in the middle Gangetic plain region of Mirzapur district. Performance of the rice cultivar (Sampurna Kaveri) is compared under a limited dose of chemical fertilizer (left-hand side) such as urea, 150 kg ha−1, DAP, 100 kg ha−1, and MOP, muriate of potash, 40 kg ha−1 with that of homemade vermicompost (right-hand side)

Table 5.7  Evolution of rice cultivation in the studied region during the past few decades Rice variety 6444 Diamond

Adamchini

Aman

Badi mansoori Bauni mansoori/MTU 7029/Nati Mansuri/ Swarna Mansuri BNR-2355 Chana

Important traits Remarks High yielding and water Cultivated in middle Gangetic plain as is intensive high-yielding variety but requires more water (normally five irrigations) Scented, long-duration Not cultivated commonly mainly because crops, water intensive of its long duration and high water requirements. Cultivated in a small scale for culinary preparations and sweet dishes Short duration, less Moderately prone to pests and diseases; water intensive cultivated by farmers because it is adaptable in water-scarce conditions and short duration Water intensive Water requirement is high; thus is not preferred in Vindhyan zones Although the variety is moderately prone Dwarf, short duration, to pests and disease, it is yet a preferred water intensive, moderately prone to pest variety for cultivation in eastern UP as has high yield and diseases Prone to pests and Cultivation reduced because of its diseases susceptibility to pests and diseases Short duration and Conventional rice variety of 120 crop-day disease resistant length having low-quality grain but very good disease resistance and was gradually replaced by other high yield varieties (continued)

5.3 Results and Discussion

115

Table 5.7 (continued) Rice variety Damini

Dhanya DPT

Ganesh

Ganga kaveri

GR-32 HUR-3022

Jalohar, Madrasi, Ratna Jaya Jeetmaud Kabuli

Kaveri soha Mahendra

Moti Gold-NP 360

Narendra NDR PA-6444

Important traits Long duration, high yielding, disease resistant Low-yielding variety, less water intensive Long duration, water intensive, disease resistant Very short duration, less water intensive

Medium duration, moderate water intensive and diseases resistant Scented, long-duration, low-yielding variety Moderate water requirement, short duration, high yielding Low yielding, less water intensive Short duration and low-yielding variety Low yielding Higher yielding, moderately water intensive Tall variety prone to lodging High yielding, high water intensive

Remarks Although long-duration crop, it is preferred by most farmers as it is high yielding and resistant to diseases and pests Was replaced by other high-yielding variety Still cultivated by farmers because of its resistance to disease and pests and high-quality grains A short-day (100 days) variety with much less water requirement and good yield according to the current climatic conditions in the Vindhyan zone Was replaced by higher-yielding short-duration varieties

Not cultivated commonly; cultivated as a culinary delicacy Still preferred in regions where there is water available for irrigation Replaced by higher-yielding varieties Replaced by higher-yielding varieties Yield was very low; therefore replaced by new high-yielding varieties. Requires four to five times irrigation but yield is good, therefore still cultivated

Replaced by dwarf, higher-yielding varieties Although high yielding, water requirement is very high (requires at least six irrigations), therefore replaced by other less water requiring varieties Medium duration, needs Although its cultivation is cost effective minimal care but prone for both small- and medium-scale farmers, susceptible to pest and diseases, but still to pest and diseases cultivated by resource-poor farmers Short duration, low Replaced by other high-yielding varieties yield Long duration and less Replaced by short-duration varieties water intensive Short duration with Replaced by other dwarf varieties with moderate yield higher yield (continued)

116

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Table 5.7 (continued) Rice variety Pan mansoori

Pant-4

Panth-10

Important traits Short duration, high yielding but prone to pest and dieses Traditional short-­ duration variety, low quality and low yield Moderately yielding, disease resistant

Poonam

Water intensive 

Prasanna

Mild scented, drought resistant, medium duration High yielding, disease prone, optimum water requirement Long duration, high quality, water intensive High yield, moderate water requirement, disease resistant, medium duration Medium duration, drought resistant but disease prone High water requiring, high yielding Moderate crop duration, moderate water requirement Short duration, low yield Moderate yield, moderate water requirement but prone to pest and diseases Good yielding water-intensive crop Low yielding, low water intensive Tall, traditional varieties with low yield

Roopa mansoori

Sambha mansuri Sampurna kaveri-108

Sarju-52

Shyam jira Sindoor

Sitadhan Sonam

Spriha Suruchi Taichun

Remarks Preferred resistant varieties

Replaced by hardy and resistant varieties

Yield was slightly higher than Pant-4; however, replaced by other high-yielding varieties In middle Gangetic plain, this variety is still cultivated but because of its high water requirement (at least four to six times), its cultivation in the Vindhyan region has ceased Cultivated for commercial purpose

Still preferred because of its higher yield and modest water requirement Few farmers still cultivate it because of its higher grain quality A preferred variety because of its adaptive traits

Still preferred in water-stressed region

Only preferred in those areas having water for irrigation Cultivated in water-scarce areas

Replaced by other higher-yielding varieties Replaced by other high-yielding varieties

Not preferred in water-scarce regions Replaced by other good varieties Prone to lodging and replaced by other short and high-yielding varieties (continued)

5.4 Conclusions and Future Policy Implications

117

Table 5.7 (continued) Rice variety Tandav Thakur Bhog Vaishnavi Vashundhara Warangal-14 Yashoda

Important traits Low yielding, moderate water intensive Tall, scented, water intensive Moderate duration, average yield High water intensive and low yielding High yielding, resilient, water intensive High yielding, moderately water intensive, resilient variety

Remarks Still cultivated in water-scarce regions Cultivated in those areas having water availability and good irrigational facilities Cultivated in water-scarce regions Replaced by other varieties having better traits. Cultivated in those areas having water for irrigation Preferred by most farmers because of higher yield

5.4  Conclusions and Future Policy Implications 5.4.1  Conclusions The aim of this present study was to highlight the major challenges for sustainable agriculture in eastern Uttar Pradesh and also to propose the best crop/species- and farm/fields-level adaptive agronomic practices for maximizing agricultural yield in the studied region. The field studies indicate that site-specific adaptive practices can significantly sustain lives and livelihoods while doubling the farmers’ incomes during drought and erratic rainfall conditions. Our results found that most of these practices are not only suitable for farming communities but also economically feasible, environmentally sound, and socially viable. The striking feature of such adaptive practices was that they are based on indigenous and local knowledge (ILK), natural resource availability, and the agroclimatic conditions of the region. The different adaptive practices explored in eastern UP can be categorized under the following major groups: • Adjusting the crop calendar by shifting sowing and harvesting dates. • Production-centric varietal shifts in major cereals such as rice and wheat. • Cultivating short-duration crops in drought-prone or water-scarce areas, viz., the Vindhyan region. • Adopting suitable crop diversification strategies such as intercropping, double cropping, crop rotation, and multiple cropping. • Using biodegradable mulch materials for conservation of soil moisture and to minimize weed emergence. • Change in crops, cropping system, or pattern as per environmental suitability. • Drip irrigation and sprinkler systems, etc., of irrigation for conserving water.

118

• • • • • •

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Agroforestry practices or growing trees (fruit trees/timber) at field borders. Integrated crop–livestock farming. Use of renewable and cleaner sources of energy in agriculture (e.g., solar pumps). Integrated use of organic and inorganic agricultural inputs in a suitable ratio. Integration of floriculture and horticulture mixed farming. Construction of small and large ponds/fish ponds for water recharge and storage system.

The present study clearly indicates that the various adaptive practices employed by farmers in the studied region have a key role in soil quality and crop yield. Moreover, the agro-biodiversity and incidence of crop pests and diseases were also influenced by adaptive practices in a positive manner. Among the different agronomic practices, crop diversification was found to potentially support most of the small- and medium-scale farmers as it was a way for dietary diversification with diverse crops such as cereals, vegetables, legumes, pulses, fruits, spices, etc. and also an opportunity for increasing the farmer’s wealth. Second, the conservation of critical natural resources such as soil and water for agriculture also enhanced agricultural production. Third, transitions or shifts in crops/varieties or the crop calendar by local farmers are also promising adaptive practices. These practices hold potential to satisfy the current and future food needs as well as nutritional security and thereby overcome the hidden hunger under the changing climate. Therefore, we conclude that site-specific and landscape-level utilization of such adaptive practices can substantially avert vulnerability in drought-prone areas (Vindhyan zones) and areas facing soil quality degradation (middle Gangetic plains) in eastern Uttar Pradesh. However, the scaling-up of most suitable practices is imperative for their large-scale adoption, especially based on the following criteria: • Agroclimatic and agro-meteorological conditions • Social and market needs • Willingness of farming communities Our current assessment of promising adaptive agriculture practices is primarily based on information gathered by direct interaction with the local farmers of eastern Uttar Pradesh. This baseline information on such adaptive agricultural practices can be utilized effectively for any future research in climate-resilient agriculture.

5.4.2  Future Policy Implications Because most of the rural population in the studied region is totally dependent on agriculture for their sustenance, it becomes imperative to maintain agriculture production even under changing climatic conditions. Although a few progressive farmers can adapt to such changing conditions and have even developed various adaptive cultivation practices to maintain agricultural productivity, the majority of them are

5.4 Conclusions and Future Policy Implications

119

Table 5.8  Various state and central government schemes for meeting the agricultural challenges in eastern Uttar Pradesh and the rest of the country Sample no. 1 2

3 4

5

Schemes Solar photo-voltaic irrigation pump Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK) Grant on certified seed Promotion of hybrid seeds

National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture

Purpose To rely more on renewable and alternate sources of energy and minimize traditional energy sources KVKs or Centers of Agricultural Science are established to deliver the latest scientific knowledge and innovation to the farmers Seeds are provided to farmers by UP Government at subsidized rate Hybrid seeds are distributed at subsidized rate to increase production of food grains, thereby maximizing farm-­ generated income, especially for resource-poor and marginal farmers Main components are (a) Rain-fed Area Development; (b) Soil Health Management; (c) Paramparagat Krishi Vikash Yojna (projects for promoting traditional agricultural practices)

not aware of the changing climatic conditions or any adaptive practices. Our findings clearly suggest that eastern Uttar Pradesh needs more such adaptation by the farmers. However, most of these farmers are not aware of the need of such adaptation, or of available extension services, resources, and incentives provided by the government to cope with changing climatic conditions. In eastern UP, many schemes already exist (Table 5.8). Farmers in the study region have been practicing agricultural intensification for a long time. Their practices also need to be monitored, with specific solutions and policy generated to be implemented at various scales. Overall, some of the farmers have knowledge of adaptive practices, especially resource-conserving practices for maintaining agricultural production even under the various challenges (Fig. 5.13). Therefore, sharing of those success stories with fellow farmers, encouraging them to validate their own farm-level adaptive measures, and creating awareness about various ongoing government initiatives are imperative for building resilience in the agricultural sector under changing climatic conditions.

120

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Fig. 5.13  Modern agricultural practices are needed in eastern UP in view of the future prospects of the agricultural system and food requirements in the region: (a) rooftop farming; (b–d) backyard, kitchen, and home gardens; (e) local markets with locally produced vegetables; (f, g) additional sources such as (f) local poultry and (g) fisheries for dietary diversification

Acknowledgments  P.K.D. is thankful to University Grant  Commission for Senior Research Fellowship, A.S. is thankful to Jawaharlal Nehru Trust for Jawaharlal Nehru Fellwoship, R.S. is grateful to Council of Scientific & Industrial Research for Junior Research Fellowship, and P.C.A. is grateful to Indian Council of Agricultural Research for Lal Bhadur Shastri Outstanding Young Scientist award.

References Abhilash PC (2015a) Towards the designing of low carbon societies for sustainable landscapes. J Clean Prod 87:992–993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.057 Abhilash PC (2015b) Managing soil resources from pollution and degradation: the need of the hour. J Clean Prod 102:550–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.046 Abhilash PC, Singh N (2009) Pesticide use and application: an Indian scenario. J Hazard Mater 165(1-3):1–12 Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Dubey RK, Edrisi SA (2015) Coping with changes: adaptation of trees in a changing environment. Trends Plant Sci 20:137–138

References

121

Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Dubey RK, Bakshi M, Dubey PK, Ebbs SD (2016) Sustainability of crop production from polluted lands. Energ Ecol Environ 1:54–56 Census data of India (1991). http://censusindia.gov.in/DigitalLibrary/data/Census_1991/ Publication/India/45969_1991_CHN.pdf Census data of India (2001). http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-common/census_data_2001. html Census data of India (2011). http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-common/aboutus.html Dubey PK, Singh A (2017) Adaptive agricultural practices for rice-wheat cropping system in Indo-­ Gangetic plains of India. IUCN-CEM Agroecosyst Newslett 1(1):13–17. https://www.iucn.org/ sites/dev/files/content/documents/agroecosystems_sg_iucn_cem_newsletter_1.pdf Dubey PK, Singh GS, Abhilash PC (2016a) Agriculture in a changing climate. J  Clean Prod 113:1046–1047 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Dubey PK, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2016b) Exploring rhizospheric interactions for agricultural sustainability: the need of integrative research on multi-trophic interactions. J Clean Prod 115:362–365 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Bakshi M, Dubey PK, Singh A, Verma JP, Singh A, Sarma BK, Raskhit A, Singh DP, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2017) Role of plant growth promoting microorganisms in sustainable agriculture and environmental remediation. In: Singh HB, Sharma B, Kesawani C (eds) Advances in PGPR research. CABI Press, Washington, DC. https://doi. org/10.1079/9781786390325.0000 Kundu RK, Chattopadhyay AK (2018) Spatio-temporal variations of crop diversification a block-­ level study in West Bengal. Econ Pol Week LIII(21) Porter JR, Xie L, Challinor AJ, Cochrane K, Howden SM, Iqbal MM, Lobell DB, Travasso MI (2014) Food security and food production systems. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; New York, NY, pp 485–533 Raeisi A, Bijani M, Chizari M (2018) The mediating role of environmental emotions in transition from knowledge to sustainable use of groundwater resources in Iran’s agriculture. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 6:143–152 Rao CS, Gopinath KA, Prasad JVNS, Singh AK (2016a) Climate resilient villages for sustainable food security in tropical India: concept, process, technologies, institutions, and impacts. Adv Agron 140:101–214 Rao CS, Kundu S, Shanker AK, Naik RP, Vanaja M, Venkanna K, Sankar GRM, Rao VUM (2016b) Continuous cropping under elevated CO2: differential effects on C4 and C3 crops, soil properties and carbon dynamics in semi-arid alfisols. Agric Ecosyst Environ 218:73–86 RBI (Reserve Bank of India) (2013) Annual report. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ List_of_Indian_states_and_union_territories_by_poverty_rate Sammie EPM, Manzungu E, Siziba S (2018) Key attributes of agricultural innovations in semi-­ arid smallholder farming systems in south-west Zimbabwe. Phys Chem Earth Part A/B/C 105:125–135 Singh A, Abhilash PC (2018) Agricultural biodiversity for sustainable food production. J Clean Prod 172:1368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.279 Singh A, Dubey PK, Abhilash PC (2018a) Food for thought: putting wild edibles back on the table for combating hidden hunger in developing countries. Curr Sci 115(4):611–613 Singh A, Dubey PK, Chaurasiya R, Mathur N, Kumar G, Bharati S, Abhilash PC (2018b) Indian spinach: an underutilized perennial leafy vegetable for nutritional security in developing world. Energ Ecol Environ 3:195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-018-0091-1 Stringer LC, Dyer JC, Reeds MS (2009) Adaptations to climate change, drought and desertification; local insights to enhance policy in southern Africa. Environ Sci Policy 12(7):748–765

122

5  Adaptive Agricultural Practices Employed in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, India

Tripathi A (2017) Socioeconomic backwardness and vulnerability to climate change: evidence from Uttar Pradesh state in India. J Environ Plan Manag 60(2):328–350 Tripathi A, Mishra AK (2017) Knowledge and passive adaptation to climate change: an example from Indian farmers. Clim Risk Manag 16:195–207 UNFCCC (2009) Report of the Conference of the Parties on its fifteenth session, held in Copenhagen from 7 to 19 December 2009; Part Two: Decisions Adopted by the Conference of the Parties. UNFCCC, Bonn World Bank (2008) Agriculture for development. World development report. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The World Bank, Washington DC

Chapter 6

Policy Implications, Future Prospects and Conclusion

Abstract  Adaptive agricultural practices are essential for maintaining the agricultural production under changing climatic conditions. While most of the farmers have already developed many field-level innovations, its validation and scaling-ups are essential for large-scale exploitation. Current chapter describes various policy measures for the wide-scale adoption of adaptive agricultural practices. Keywords  Climate resilient agriculture · Global food secuirty · Human wellbeing · Policy implications · Sustainabel Development Goals

6.1  Policy Implications and Future Prospects Adaptive and climate-resilient agronomic practices are the need of the hour for enhancing agricultural productivity under changing climatic conditions (Dubey et al. 2016a, b). For instance, practices such as mulching, crop diversification, innovative water storage measures, and adjusting crop cultivation, etc., done by local farmers in Jamaica (Gamble et  al. 2010; ODPEM 2011), adaptive practices validated for the drought-prone regions in southern St. Elizabeth (Campbell et al. 2011), and growing suitable crops for the hurricane season (FAO 2010) are examples of such practices from different parts of the world. However, several other issues preclude the large-scale exploitation of such practices. As we mentioned earlier, gender-­based inequalities still persist in the agricultural sector at many locations (particularly in Asia and Africa). Males are often benefitted more than females as they have more access to knowledge, information, markets, and extension services (Kristjanson et al. 2014). Second, agricultural intensification is being practiced by a wider group of farmers worldwide for maximum food production in an unsustainable manner (Abhilash et al. 2016; Dubey et al. 2017). This approach has negative implications for soil, environment, and agro-biodiversity because of the intensive use of fertilizers and pesticides on crop fields (Garnett and Godfray 2012; Godfray and Garnett 2014; Abhilash 2015a, b; Dubey et al. 2016a). Third, although legumebased agroforestry is an adaptive practice for a region having low soil nitrogen

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 P. K. Dubey et al., Adaptive Agricultural Practices, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3_6

123

124

6  Policy Implications, Future Prospects and Conclusion

content, the same practices in a normal soil that has sufficient N content may cause nitrogenous emissions in the form of N2O and NO3− into the atmosphere, thereby having negative environmental and health consequences (Rosenstock et al. 2014). Therefore, special emphasis should be given to site-specific adaptive practices (Dubey et al. 2016a). For example, a terrace or contour (Fig. 6.1) constructed in hilly regions can minimise water erosion even under rainstorm conditions. Therefore, crops having even negligible resistance against water erosion, such as wheat, potato,

Fig. 6.1  Sustainable agriculture extensification as a landscape-level adaptive agronomic practice. Rice and wheat cultivation in hilly regions of Eastern Himalayas is an example of a typical landscape-­level adaptive practice for enhancing crop production while reducing soil erosion and surface runoff

6.2 Conclusions

125

and flax, can be grown in terraced land in hilly areas for better crop production (Wei et al. 2014). Another example is from Finland as it is predicted that there will be an increase in the length of the thermal growing season in response to the changing climate. Thus, soil moisture and frosts will occur during the early spring season whereas the end of the autumn season will have favourable conditions for crop growth. Such conditions normally limit crop production because sowing during early spring would result in yield decline from unfavourable conditions. According to Sainio et  al. (2014), winter cereals and perennials can be cultivated in rotation in such regions as these crops have more yield potential by utilizing well the favourable growing conditions for crops, viz., ‘soil moisture’ during winters and ‘nutrient remained’ in fields of previous crop residues. Furthermore, it is always beneficial if a solution is obtained at or near the site to the problem itself. For instance, Ridout and Newcombe (2016) recently reported that in the Pacific Northwest (USA) disease caused by Fusarium in winter wheat can be suppressed by microbes found in the litter and rhizospheric soil of the nearby forest area. Although there are many issues that are difficult to comprehend, such as the impact of rainfall and temperature on agroforestry systems (Lott et  al. 2009; Luedeling et  al. 2014), enhanced carbon dioxide concentration on plant physiology (Pinheiro and Chaves 2011), etc., it is the moral and social reasonability of humanity to look for even better solutions for eradicating hunger, poverty, and malnutrition to provide a good quality of life to the coming generations. Following are some policy recommendations for those future prospects: • Understanding the interconnected linkages between traditional ecological knowledge, cultural practices, and agro-ecosystem management • Upscaling and customization of holistic and integrated adaptation strategies to the landscape and ecosystem level • Use of information technology for knowledge sharing and adaptive agriculture • Creating a community gene bank for climate-resilient crop varieties • Respecting gender equality and traditional and resource-conserving agricultural practices • Encouraging technology transfer and private sector investment in agriculture • Ensuring stakeholder involvement in decision making • Ensuring food availability, accessibility, and affordability (Fig. 6.2)

6.2  Conclusions Sustainable agricultural practices are imperative for feeding the rapidly growing human population and also for meeting the Sustainable Development Goals framed by the United Nations (UN-SDGs) as the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. However, in times of global warming and associated climatic changes, food and nutritional security are under threat as the changing climatic conditions are

126

6  Policy Implications, Future Prospects and Conclusion

•Small holding farmers •Medium scale farmers •Large scale farmers •Governance •Farmers Welfare

•Farmers •Agriculture Scientists •Researchers •Agronomists •Policymakers

•Governance •Income •Equity •Political •Institutional

Adaptability

Availability

Affordability

Accessibility •Social •Political •Market based •Stakeholder •Supplier and regulator

Fig. 6.2  Various factors responsible for attaining global food security while building food system resilience, such as (1) adaptability of agricultural system against varying climate and erratic weather events, (2) availability of sufficient and nutritive food for each section of society, ranging from poor to rich, (3) accessibility to required resources to fulfil their dietary preferences and nutritional demands, and (4) affordability of food by one and all

negatively affecting the sustainability of agricultural systems all over the world. Moreover, the likelihood of climate change impacts will further increase if adaptation strategies are not put into place accordingly. With this background, the validation of adaptive and climate-resilient agricultural practices are the one and only solution for feeding a burgeoning population under changing climatic conditions. Although traditional knowledge, the strategies adopted and practiced by farmers since time immemorial, are extremely important even in today’s context, such practices need further refinement, customization, and scaling-up for maximizing their ecological, environmental, and social benefits. Even this adaption strategy can be done at different levels (i.e., species, field, and landscape) and at different scales. This book embodies a critical compilation of such practices and farming methods including intercropping, crop rotations, and management of crop residues and viable use of cover crops, mulching, agroforestry, no-till agricultural practice, and livestock grazing intensity management, etc.; better resources, viz., land, soil, and water

6.2 Conclusions

127

(irrigation volume) management; better management of crop weeds, pests, and disease; conservation agriculture and precision agriculture; organic farming; selective cropping; changing the crop calendar (sowing/planting/harvesting dates), and improved use of modern technologies. Utilising farmers’ knowledge combined with scientific validation along with proper policy guidelines will help in the large-scale exploitation of adaptive practices for feeding a growing global population sustainably, and equitably, and thereby attaining the UN-Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to ensure the well-being of one and all (Fig. 6.3).

Changing Climate and overgrowing human population

Global Food Security

Fig. 6.3  Adaptive agriculture practices can potentially help in attaining important UN sustainable development goals (SDGs). The hypothetical balance sheet shown here highlights the importance of adaptive agricultural practices in building resilience against changing climate, thereby attaining global food security. Securing world food demand can help in meeting UN SDGs goals numbers 1 (No Poverty), 2 (Zero Hunger), 3 (Good health and Well-being), 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), 13 (Climate Action), 14 (Life Below Water), and 15 (Life on Land) and their targets by 2030. Red boxes and arrow indicates negative effects of changing climate and overgrowing population; green colour indicates positive changes under changing climate by building resilience into the agricultural system

128

6  Policy Implications, Future Prospects and Conclusion

References Abhilash PC (2015a) Towards the designing of low carbon societies for sustainable landscapes. J Clean Prod 87:992–993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.057 Abhilash PC (2015b) Managing soil resources from pollution and degradation: the need of the hour. J Clean Prod 102:550–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.046 Abhilash PC, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Dubey RK, Bakshi M, Dube PK, Ebbs SD (2016) Sustainability of crop production from polluted lands. Energ Ecol Environ 1:54–56 Campbell D, Barker D, McGregor D (2011) Dealing with drought: small farmers and environmental hazards in southern St Elizabeth, Jamaica. Applied Geography 31:146–158 Dubey PK, Singh GS, Abhilash PC (2016a) Agriculture in a changing climate. J  Clean Prod 113:1046–1047 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Dubey PK, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2016b) Exploring rhizospheric interactions for agricultural sustainability: the need of integrative research on multi-trophic interactions. J Clean Prod 115:362–365 Dubey RK, Tripathi V, Edrisi SA, Bakshi M, Dubey PK, Singh A, Verma JP, Singh A, Sarma BK, Raskhit A, Singh DP, Singh HB, Abhilash PC (2017) Role of plant growth promoting microorganisms in sustainable agriculture and environmental remediation. In: Singh HB, Sharma B, Kesawani C (eds) Advances in PGPR research. CABI Press, Washington, DC. https://doi. org/10.1079/9781786390325.0000 FAO (2010) Training report on the livelihood assessment tool-kit: analyzing and responding to the impact of disasters on the livelihoods of people. In: Technical Cooperation Project (TCP) TCP/ JAM3202 (D) National disaster preparedness and emergency response plan for the agricultural sector. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome Gamble DW, Campbell D, Allen TL, Barker D, Curtis S, McGregor D, Popke J (2010) Climate change, drought, and Jamaican agriculture: local knowledge and the climate record. Ann Assoc Am Geograph 100(4):880–893 Garnett T, Godfray C (2012) Sustainable intensification in agriculture. Navigating a course through competing food system priorities. Food Climate Research Network and the Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food, vol 51. University of Oxford, Oxford Godfray HCJ, Garnett T (2014) Food security and sustainable intensification. Philos Trans R Soc B 369:20120273. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0273 Kristjanson P, Waters-Bayer A, Johnson N, Tipilda A, Njuki J, Baltenweck GD, MacMillan D (2014) Livestock and women’s livelihoods: a review of the recent evidence. In: Quisumbing A, Meinzen-Dick R, Raney T, Croppenstedt A, Behrman JA, Peterman A (eds) Gender in agriculture and food security: closing the knowledge gap. Springer, New York, NY. (Chapter 9) Lott JE, Ong CK, Black CR (2009) Understorey microclimate and crop performance in a Grevillea robusta-based agroforestry system in semi-arid Kenya. Agric For Meteor 149:1140–1151 Luedeling E, Kindt R, Huth NI, Koenig K (2014) Agroforestry systems in a changing climate — challenges in projecting future performance. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 6:1–7 Office of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management (ODPEM) (2011) Building disaster resilient communities project. Project Concept document. ODPEM, Kingston Pinheiro C, Chaves MM (2011) Photosynthesis and drought: can we make metabolic connections from available data? J Exp Bot 62:869–882 Ridout M, Newcombe G (2016) Disease suppression in winter wheat from novel symbiosis with forest Fungi. Fung Ecol 20:40–48 Rosenstock TS, Tully KL, Navarro CA, Neufeldt H, Bahl KB, Verchot LV (2014) Agroforestry with N2-fixing trees: sustainable development’s friend or foe? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 6:15–21 Sainio PP, Rajala A, Känkänen H, Hakala K (2014) Improving farming systems in northern Europe. In: Crop physiology: applications for genetic improvement and agronomy. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 65–91 Wei W, Chen L, Zhang H, Yang L, Yu Y, Chen J (2014) Effects of crop rotation and rainfall on water erosion on a gentle slope in the hilly loess area China. Catena 123:205–214

Index

A Abiotic stress, 2, 6 Abscisic acid (ABA), 2 Adaptive agricultural practices, 7, 86, 123, 127 agricultural production, 11 agroforestry (see Agroforestry) benefits and location, 13–18 crop diversification (see Crop diversification) farmers, 12 levels, implementation, 63, 64 mulching (see Mulching) NUE, 63 rice–wheat cropping, 75–76 SRI techniques, 74 Adaptive agricultural practices, UP agricultural system, 120 agricultural threats, 100–102, 104, 105 challenges and vulnerabilities, 103 crop/species level, 94, 117 definition, 94 drylands environment, 109–110 environmental challenges, 103–104 farm/field level, 94, 117 field survey, 96–99 geographic and meteorological conditions, 99 geography and agricultural account, 100 integration, multiple crops, 107 landscape level, 94, 118 local farmers crop diversification, 106 natural resources conservation methods, 106, 111, 112, 114 Vindhyan region, 108–109, 113

population rate, 97 trend, 96 rice cultivation, 114–117 state and central government schemes, 119 study area, 95, 96 Adaptive agronomic practices, 6, 7 Adaptive practices, 46, 47, 51, 55 Agricultural drought, 101 Agricultural intensification, 96, 123 Agricultural threats chemical fertilizers and pesticides, 104 drought, types, 101 dryland agriculture, 101, 102 erratic weather events, 101 pests and diseases, 102 Agriculture, 12 mulching, 26, 30 organic farming practices, 30 practices, 24, 26 Agriculture extensification, 79, 81, 82 Agriculture intensification, 73, 77, 79 Agriculture, forestry/other land use (AFOLU) pathways, 22 Agro-biodiversity, 118 Agroforestry, 126 AFOLU pathways, 22 cocoa–coconut, 24 coffee-based, 24 description, 22 in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India, 25 implementation, 26 modern, 22 in North India, 23 promotion, 24

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 P. K. Dubey et al., Adaptive Agricultural Practices, SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15519-3

129

130

Index

Agroforestry (cont.) REDD+ schemes, 22 rubber-based, 24 sustainable agroforestry practices, 26 UPAF pathway, 22 Aqua crop, 55 Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), 34

productivity and water requirements, 55 SWAT, 56 Crop pests, 50, 51 Crop rotation, 19, 20 Crop/species level, 94, 117 Crop weed resistance, 50 Crop yield, 101–103, 118

B Bio-fertilizers, 33–35 Biotic stress, 2, 4

D Domestic sewage sludge, 13, 33 Double/companion cropping, 20, 21 Drought tolerance, 46, 47 Dryland agriculture, 101, 103

C C3 crops, 54 C4 crops, 54, 56 CERES-maize models, 55 CERES-rice models, 55 Climate change, 4 Cocoa–coconut agroforestry, 24 Coffee-based agroforestry, 24 Compost, 33, 35 Concentrated animal-feeding operations (CAFOs), 4 Conservation agriculture (CA) adoption and benefits, 67 adoption of CA vs. conventional agriculture practices, 67–72 components, 66 description, 66 effect, crop yield, 67 landscape level, 66 production cost, 67 retention, crop residue, 66 RM-CS system, 74 SAI, 73 sustainable adoption, 66 yield gap, 67 Cotton–wheat cropping system, 65 Crop diversification, 106, 118, 123 crop rotation/double cropping practices, 19–21 description, 12 intercropping, 12, 18, 19 perenniation, 21, 22 strategies, 12 Crop modelling adaptive practices, 55 biophysical suitability analysis, 55 CLIMB project, 55 Ecocrop database, 56 EToCalc, 55 GIS-based productivity models, 56

E Elevated CO2, 54 Elevated temperature, 53, 54 Environmental challenges, 103–104 Environmental constraints, agricultural systems, 2, 5 F Farm innovations bunding method, 73 IGP, 75 IRM and ICM, 73 nutrient management, 73 RM cropping system, 74 SCI techniques, 73, 74 SRI technique, 73, 74 STI, 74 weed management, 73 Farm/field level, 94, 117 Farmer’s perspective, agricultural sustainability adaptive practices, 81 African farmers, 81 Asian countries, 81–83 awareness-related, 85 cognitive justice-related, 85 dietary preference-related, 85 experience-related, 85 in developing nations, 87 knowledge-sharing platforms, 85 local and indigenous farmers, 83 market-related, 83 migration-related, 84 research-related, 87 resource-related, 85 vulnerability, 87 wealth-related, 87

Index Farm yard manure (FYM), 13, 29, 32, 33, 108, 109, 111 Film mulching, 27, 28 Flood tolerance, 49, 50 Food security, 1, 4, 6 Free air CO2 enrichment (FACE) treatment, 54 Futuristic crops, 53–54 G GIS-based productivity models, 56 Green manure, 33, 34 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 12, 24, 31, 65, 67, 73 H Helianthus annuus homeobox 11(HaHB11), 49 Hurricane season, 123 Hydrological drought, 101 I Indo-Gangetic plain (IGP), 67, 75–76 Integrated crop management (ICM), 73 Integrated farming practices, 95 Integrated rice management (IRM), 73 Intercropping, 12, 18, 19 Intercropping practices, 51–53 K Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs), 98, 119 L Landscape level, 94 Legume-based agroforestry, 123 M Meteorological drought, 101 Microbial community, 65–66 Micronutrient deficiencies, 98, 103, 104 Mineral fertilizers, 65, 66 Mixed crop–livestock farming, 30, 31 Modern agroforestry, 22 Mulching, 126 in cereal crops, 26 crop-level adaptation, 30 description, 26 film mulching, 27, 28 in French Guinea, 29

131 plastic mulching, 28, 29 polyethylene mulching, 29, 30 practices, 27 soil temperature, 26 in South Korea, 29 straw mulching, 29 types, 26 N Natural resources conservation methods Dhanzyme-G/Dhanzyme Liquid, 112 farm/field/landscape levels, 110, 111 FYM, 112 soil fertility, 111 varietal shifts, rice, 112 vermicomposts, 112 Nutrient use efficiency (NUE), 63, 65 O Organic farming, 31, 127 crop rotation, 34 definition, 30 green manure, 33–34 livestock into farm lands, integration, 31 mixed crop–livestock farming, 30, 31 NUE and crop yield, 35 organic inputs, 33 organic manure, 31 phosphorus (P) application, 34 P Perenniation, 12, 21, 22 Phosphorus use efficiency (PUE), 66 Plant growth-promoting microorganisms (PGPM), 49 Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), 34, 46–47 Plastic mulching, 28, 29 Policy implications adaptive and climate-resilient agronomic practices, 123 agricultural intensification, 123 agro-ecosystem management, 125 carbon dioxide concentration, 125 recommendations, 125 Polyethylene mulching, 29, 30 Potassium deficiency, 104 Proteomic techniques, 46 Push–pull system, 18, 51

132 R Reactive oxygen species (ROS), 45, 47 Resilient crop varieties, 45–46 Resource conserving practices, 12 See also Adaptive agricultural practices Rubber-based agroforestry, 24 S Salinity stress, 6 Salinity tolerance, 48, 49 Short rotation forestry (SRF) plantation, 22 Socioeconomic conditions, 94, 95 Soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) model, 56 Soil fertility, 94, 103, 104, 111, 113 Soil microbial community, 35 Soil moisture and frosts, 125 Solanum lycopersicum nam-like protein 1 (SlNAM1), 45 Species-level adaptive practice, 7 Storm winds, 104 Straw mulching, 28, 29 Sustainable agriculture, 6 Sustainable agriculture extensification (SAE), 79, 81, 82 Sustainable development, 125 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 2, 127 System of crop intensification (SCI), 73, 74 System of rice intensification (SRI) technique, 73, 74 System of tef intensification (STI), 74

Index T Transgenic varieties, 48 U United Nation Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDGs), 11, 95 Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry (UPAF), 22 V Varietal selection, 94 Vermicomposts, 33, 112 Vindhyan region, 98 Volatile organic compound (VOC), 7 W Water harvesting techniques, 77–80 Water-saving technique, 73 Water scarcity, 99, 101, 102, 110 Water storage techniques, 78, 80 Water use efficiency (WUE), 48, 54, 65, 67, 71 Weed growth, 50 Weed management, 50, 73 Z Zero-tillage practice, 65