Agronomy: Recent approaches for evaluating cropping systems

1. Jagadish.
ID NO: PALB-3164
Sr. M. Sc. (Agri.)
UASB

2. Sequence of presentation
 Introduction
 Efficient cropping systems of India
 Conventional indices of cropping systems
 Needs of recent approach
 Recent approaches of cropping systems
 Conclusion
 Future line of work

4. In INDIA
Net Cultivated Area : 143 m ha
Irrigated Area : 57 m ha (40%)
Rainfed Area : 86 m ha (60%)
TOTAL FOOD GRAIN
PRODUCTION
(263.2 m tonnes)
KHARIF
162 million tonnes
RABI
101.2 million tonnes

5. What is Cropping system..?
 System means a set of elements/components that are inter-related and
interacting themselves.
 Crop system is an arrangements of crop population that transform solar
energy , nutrients, water and other inputs into useful biomass.
 Cropping system is an order in which the crops are cultivated on piece of
land over a fixed period and their interaction with farm resources.
 Main object of cropping system is efficient utilization of all resources like
land, water, solar radiation and nutrients.
 Maintaining stability in production and obtaining higher net return.

6. Types of cropping systems
I. Mono cropping
II. Multiple cropping:
1. Inter cropping.
• Parallel cropping: Sorghum + Pigeonpea
• Companion cropping: Radish in Potato
• Multi-storeyed cropping: Coconut+Pepper+Banana+Cocoa
• Strip cropping: Maize + cowpea
• Row cropping: Groundnut + Pigeonpea
2. Mixed cropping: Mustard + Finger millet
3. Sequential cropping: Rice-Wheat
4. Relay cropping: Paddy-Lentil

7. Inter cropping
Wheat + Raya
Maize + Peas
Pearl millet+ Gram
Toria + Gobhi Sarson
Mustard + Gram
Sugarcane + Potato
Sugarcane +
Frenchbean
Maize + Groundnut
Sorghum + Redgram
Sunflower + Cotton
Crop sequence
Rice – wheat
Maize - wheat
Groundnut – Barley/wheat
Pearl millet- Mustard
Gram – Mustard
Cotton –wheat
Cotton – Groundnut
Sorghum – Gram
Sesame –Chickpea
Soybean - Safflower
Sugarcane - Pulses
Mono cropping
Rice
Wheat
Maize
Sorghum
Groundnut
Mustard
Redgram
Gram
Cowpea
Soybean
Sugarcane
Cotton

8. Major Cropping Systems in India
Rice – wheat (10.5 m ha)
Rice – rice (5.89 m ha)
Cotton – wheat (1.09 m ha)
Soybean – wheat (2.23 m ha)
Maize – wheat (1.86 m ha)
P. millet - wheat (2.26 m ha)
Anon., 2014

9. Intercropping
Sorghum + Redgram
Finger millet + Redgram
/French bean
Sorghum + Bengal gram
Cotton + Groundnut/sorghum
Maize + Cowpea
Groundnut + Castor
Groundnut + Redgram/Finger
millet
Sugarcane + French bean
Mono cropping
Rice
Maize
Sorghum
Groundnut
Redgram
Finger millet
Cotton
Gram
Chilli
Sugarcane
Cowpea
Soybean
Sequence cropping
Cowpea – Finger millet
Rice – Redgram
Groundnut – Sorghum
Cotton – Redgram
Groundnut – Redgram
Finger millet – Redgram
Finger millet – Horsegram
Maize – Cowpea
Maize - Chilli
Bajra – Horsegram
Greengarm- Sorghum
Redgram - Sorghum

10. Why the cropping systems evaluation is
required..?
• To asses the system productivity maximization
• To evaluate the resource use efficiency
• To asses the ability to use inputs and their impact
on environment

11. Conventional indices used in evaluation of
Cropping systems
1. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER)
2. Crop Equivalent Yield (CEY)
3. Area Time Equivalent Ratio (ATER)
4. Relative Crowding Coefficient (RCC)
5. Aggressivity (A)
6. Competition Ratio (CR)
7. Cropping Intensity (CII)
8. Cropping Index (CI)
9. Multiple Cropping Index (MCI)
10. Relative Cropping intensity Index (RCI)

12. Present cropping system indices
Available
Indices
Formula Application Drawback
Crop
equivalent
yield (CEY)
Yba x Pb
CEY= ------------ + Yab
Pa
Yield of one crop is
converted into
equivalent yield of other
crop
Net income is not
considered only grass
in come is considered
Land
Equivalent
Ratio (LER)
Yab Yba
LER = ---- + ------
Yaa Ybb
Relative land area
under sole crops
Its only yield
advantage
Area Time
Equivalent
Ratio (ATER)
LERa X Da + LERb X Db
ATER=--------------------
D
When the duration of
inter crop is large
Not applicable for short
duration difference in
intercrops
Relative
Crowding
Coefficient
(RCC)
Yab
RCC = -------------
Yaa - Yab
When intercrop has
produced more or less
than the expected yield
than pure stand
• Not suitable in
replacement series
• 50:50 ratio is
requiered

13. Aggressivity
(A)
A = LERa – LERb
Measure how much the relative
yield advantage increase in
component ‘a’ than component
‘b’.
It applicable only
when crop mixture at
50:50 ratio.
Competition
ratio (CR)
LER b
CR = ----------
LER a
It measures the
competition between the
intercrops
It applicable only
when crop mixture at
50:50 ratio.
Cropping
Intensity
(CI)
Total cropped
area
CI = ------------ x100
Net cropped area
To calculated the
cropping intensity
It suitable to
calculated for large
area
Cropping
Index (CI)
CI = no. of X 100
Crops
grown
To know the crops index
It suitable to
calculated for small
area
MULTIPLE
CROPPING
INDEX(MCI)
Σ
i=1
MCI = ----------- X 100
A
Percentage utilization of
land under multiple
cropping systems.
Relative
Cropping
Intensity
index(RCII)
Σ ak tk
RCII = ------------
Σ aiti
To determine the amount
of area and time allotted
to one crop.

14. Need of recent approaches.....?
 An intensive cropping system
 Aims at sustenance of soil fertility.
 Utilization of natural resources to enhance growth and yield.
 Cereal-legume systems are always efficient cropping systems
due to differential morpho-physiological characters
 To know productivity, profitability, yield and economic
advantage over existing conventional cropping systems
 Recent approaches of multiple cropping systems integrates
crops using space and labour more efficiently.

15. Recent approaches in evaluating cropping
systems
Recent approaches are applied to agriculture for efficient
utilization of all resources, maintaining stability in production and
obtaining higher net returns.

16. 1. System productivity
2. System profitability
3. Relative production efficiency (RPE)
4. Land use efficiency (LUE)
5. Energy efficiency (EE)
6. Specific energy (SE)
7. Energy productivity (EP)
8. Relative economic efficiency (REE)
9. Sustainability yield and value index (SYI)
10. Relative employment generation efficiency (REGE)
11. Radiation use efficiency (RUE)
12. Light interception

17. 1. System productivity
System productivity:
 Yields of different crops are converted into single crop equivalent
yield expressed as kg/ha/day
The equivalent yield should preferably be calculated
P = TP / R
Where,
P – Productivity (kg/ha/day)
TP – Total production (kg/ha)
R - Resource used (day)

18. Table 1: Paddy equivalent yield and system productivity of different
cropping systems (two year pooled data)
Treatments
Paddy equivalent yield
(q/ha)
System productivity
(kg/ha/day)
Rice-Wheat-Blackgram 14.09 40.26
Rice-Capsicum-Cucumber 16.06 49.72
Rice-Carrot-Cowpea 24.59 77.57
Rice-Musterd-Tomato 24.44 77.59
Rice-Potato-Onoin 28.47 94.27
Rice-Cabbage-Bitter gourd 21.00 72.66
Rice-Coriander-Ladys finger 26.79 76.32
Rice-Tomato-Bottle gourd 40.44 122.54
Rice-Pea-Green chilli 13.23 38.91
Rice-Lentil-Sponge gourd 19.37 61.49
S.Em+ 2.58 -
CD at 5% 7.66 -
PAU, Punjab Singh et al. (2011)

19.  Profit obtained by the crops & net returns is considered on
hectare basis refers Rs/ha/ day.
 The time here is agricultural year (365 days)
Inference
 Higher the profitability shows better the system
2. System profitability

20. Table 2: System profitability different cropping system in mid hill
condition (Pooled data of 2 years)
Cropping system
Net returns
(Rs/ha)
System profitability
(Rs/ha/day)
Rice-Wheat 58520 160.33
Soybean - Wheat 70090 192.03
Blackgram - Wheat 83510 228.79
Maize - wheat 70180 192.27
Ginger - wheat 53660 147.01
West Bengal Mukherjee (2010)

21. Table 3: Effect of various rice-based crop sequence on system
productivity and system profitability.
Cropping system
Net return
(x 103 Rs/ha/year)
System profitability
(x 103 Rs/ha/day)
Rice-Wheat 33.4 0.09
Rice-Potato-Greengram 56.3 0.15
Rice - berseem 33.1 0.09
Rice – oat (multicut) 23.9 0.07
Rice - onion 36.4 0.10
Faizabad, UP
Kumar et al. (2008)

22. 3. Relative production efficiency RPE)
• Capacity of the system for production in relation to existing system
and expressed in percentage.
Where,
EYD- Equivalent yield under improved/diversified system
EYE- Existing system yield.
Inference
 +ve figures shows the superiority of the new system over the
existing and desirable
 -ve figures shows inferiority over the existing system and not
desirable
 Any positive figures of more than 20% are considered worth
recommending for extension use.

23. Cropping system
Rice equivalent
yield (t/ha)
Relative production
efficiency (%)
Rice-Wheat 9.36 -
Rice-Wheat+ Indian Mustard 9.40 0.43
Rice-Potato-Cowpea 20.98 124
Rice-Potato-Greengram 22.02 135
Rice-Pea-French bean 19.23 105
S.Em+ 0.27 --
CD 0.82 --
Table 4: Rice equivalent yield and Relative production under
different cropping system. (Pooled data of 2 years)
Nainital, Uttarkand Dinesh et al. (2014

24. 4. Land use efficiency (LUE)
• It is the land use during the agricultural year
Where ,
TND (i)-Total number of days field remained occupied under different crops
(i=1. ... n)
Inference
• Higher LUE denotes more use of the land in a year.
• Increased cropping intensity, the land use efficiency also improves.
• As higher the land use may not necessarily result in higher output from the
system.

25. Table 5: Yield, production efficiency and land utilization efficiency of rice
based cropping system.
Cropping system
Mean Rice
equivalent
yield (q/ha)
Production
efficiency
(Kg/ha/day)
Net
returns
(Rs/ha)
Land use
efficiency
(%)
Rice-Wheat-Japanese mint 142.0 41.16 30605 94.5
Rice-Mustard-Japanese mint 167.4 48.38 47665 94.8
Rice-Lentil-Japanese mint 161.0 47.49 46685 92.9
Rice-Potato-Greengram 193.0 59.38 46135 89.0
Rice-Potato-Japanese mint 266.40 79.76 74135 91.5
Rice-Potato-Onion 288.80 87.25 75835 90.7
Rice-Frenchbean-Japanese
mint
173.5 50.88 46055 93.4
S.Em+ 3.38 -- --
CD (P=0.05) 10.25 -- --
Singh et al. (2010)IISR, Lucknow

26. Cropping systems
Soybean Equivalent
yield
(kg/ha)
Production
efficiency
(Rs/ha/day)
Land use
efficiency (%)
Soybean-Wheat-
Fallow
18.95
285.50
70.55
Soybean-Wheat-
Mungbean
16.95 282.50 88.35
Soybean-Potato-
Chickpea
27.55 305.50 88.50
Soybean-fodder
sorgham-Mungbean 21.45 228.00 75.90
S.Em+ 1.96 -- ---
CD (P=0.05) 5.39 -- ---
IARI, New Delhi Prajapat et al. (2014)
Table 6 : Equivalent yield and Land use efficiency of
soybean based cropping system.

27. ENERGY USE AND ENERGY PRODUCTION
 For judging the system efficiency
 Every input and outputs are converted into the form of energy
 A system more efficient in producing higher output energy and
requires less input energy is considered desirable
 The energetic of the cropping system is expressed in MJ/ha
 Values can be utilized for simple conversion of crop produce into
the energy terms

28. Energy conversion factors for inputs
Particulars Unit Energy equivalent(MJ)
Human labour (Adult) Man-hour
Diesel Litre
Chemical fertilizers
Nitrogen (N) kg 60.6
Phosphorus (P) kg 11.1
Potash (K) kg 6.7
Plant protection (superior)
Granular chemical kg 120
Liquid chemical ml 0.102
Binning et al. (1983)

29. Cont….
Particulars Unit Energy equivalent(MJ)
Crop Produce (grain)
Rice
kg 14.7
Wheat kg 15.7
Greengram kg 14.03
Maize kg 15.1
Mustard kg 22.72
Soybean kg 18.14
Vegetable Pea
kg
3.91
Pegionpea
kg
14.07
Binning et al. (1983)

30. 5. Energy efficiency (EE)
 Cultural energy utilized through inputs energy produced as
products are calculated and expressed in Mega Joules (MJ)
Inference: Higher the ratio betters the system

31. Treatments
Energy input
(103 MJ/ha)
Energy output
(103 MJ/ha)
Energy use
efficiency
(MJ)
Rice-Potato-Onion 61.1 187.1 3.06
Rice-Pea-Onion 45.6 123.8 2.66
Rice-Potato-Cowpea 54.8 177.8 3.17
Rice-Pea-Cowpea 39.4 110.4 2.77
Rice-Rajmash-Onion 50.4 136.8 2.69
Rice-Rajmash- Cowpea 44.2 124.8 2.80
Rice-Maize-Cowpea 47.9 165.0 3.46
Table 7: Effect of different cropping sequence on energy use efficiency
BHU, UP Yadav et al. (2013)

32. Cropping system
Total input
(x103 MJ/ha)
Total output
(x103 MJ/ha)
Energy Use
Efficiency (MJ)
Rice-Wheat (Traditional) 24.9 226.7 9.10
Rice-Wheat+ Indian
Mustard
24.8 226.4 9.12
Rice-Potato-Cowpea 64.8 185.0 2.86
Rice-Potato-Greengram 65.4 201.5 3.08
Rice-Pea-Frenchbean 33.2 155.8 4.69
Table 8: Energy use efficiency in different rice based cropping systems.
Nainital, Uttarkand Dinesh and Purushottam (2014)

33. 6. Specific energy (SE)
 Specific energy of a treatment/system can be calculated in terms of
energy required to produce a kg of main product and expressed in
Mega Joules (MJ kg-1).
Inference
• Lower the ratio better the treatment /system

34. Table 9: Grain/total grain yield, Energy input and specific energy relationship of
different crops and cropping systems.
Crops and cropping
system
Grain/total grain
yield (kg/ha)
Energy input
(MJ/ha)
Specific energy
(MJ/kg)
Soybean 1054 9668 9.17
Wheat 2212 14036 6.64
Mustard 861 7673 8.91
Chickpea 835 6004 7.19
Soybean-Wheat 3266 23704 7.28
Soybean-Mustard 1915 17342 9.05
Soybean-Chickpea 1889 15672 8.29
S.Em+ 226 -- --
CD (P=0.05) 687 -- --
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
Mandal et al. (2002)

35. 7. Energy productivity (EP)
 The quantity of physical output obtained per every unit of
input and expressed as kg per Mega Joules (kg MJ-1)
Inference
 Higher the ratio better the system/ treatment

36. Table 10: Bioenergy and economic analysis of soybean based crop
production systems in central India
Cropping system
Grain
yield
(kg/ha)
By-products
yield
(kg/ha)
Total
biomass
(kg/ha)
Energy input
(MJ/ha)
Energy
productivity
(kg/MJ)
Soybean 1054 2069 3123 9668 0.323
Wheat 2212 3682 5894 14036 0.420
Mustard 861 2192 3053 7673 0.398
Chickpea 835 1532 2367 6004 0.394
Soybean - Wheat 3266 5751 9017 23704 0.380
Soybean - Mustard 1915 4261 6176 17304 0.357
Soybean - Chickpea 1889 3605 5494 15672 0.351
Bhopal, MP Mandal et al. (2002)

37. 8. Relative economic efficiency (REE)
 This is a comparative measure of economic gains over the existing
system.
Where,
DNR- Net return obtained under improved/diversified system
ENR- Net return in the existing system.
Inference
 Higher the economic efficiency better the system.

38. Treatments
Net returns
(Rs/ha/Year)
Relative economic
efficiency
(%)
Rice (DP) - Wheat 38819 --
Rice (DP) – Potato- Wheat 64246 65.50
Rice (DP) – Veg. peas - Wheat 67570 74.06
Rice (HC) - Wheat 37499 -3.46
Rice (HC) – Potato- Wheat 65566 68.90
Rice (HC) – Veg. peas - Wheat 67510 73.91
CD (P = 0.05) 4593 --
Table 11: Economics of diversified cropping systems
Punjab Singh et al. (2009)

39. 9. Sustainability Yield Index (SYI)
 The trend of yield over the year in systems reflects the sustainability yield
of a cropping system.
 The sustainability yield index ranges from 0 to 1
Where ,
SYI- Sustainability Yield Index,
Y- Average yield over years (n= 0, 1, 2, 3, 4....)
sd- Standard deviation
Ymax -Maximum yield obtained in any of the year.
Inference
• The value nearing unity shows higher stability reflecting that the
system is higher sustainable.

40. Table 12: Sustainability yield index of different cropping system
Treatment
Inbred rice
equivalent yield
(t/ha/year)
Sustainability
yield index
Inbred rice-Wheat-fallow 10.5 0.93
Inbred rice-Wheat-GM 11.3 0.95
Hybrid rice-Wheat-GM 13.0 0.94
Hybrid rice-Wheat-Greengram 22.1 0.84
Hybrid rice-Wheat-Blackgram 14.7 0.87
Basamati rice – Wheat - GM 12.4 0.92
Basamati rice – Berseem (GF +Seed) 11.2 0.81
Faizabad, UP Alok kumar et al. (2012)

41. 10. SUSTAINABLE VALUE INDEX (SVI))
 In cropping system in which more than one crop is involved & the economic
assessment is considered ideal than biological assessment.
 Minimum four year net profit data are required to calculate the Sustainable
Value Index.
Where
SVl - Sustainable Value index,
Y- Average net profit over years n,
sd -standard deviation
Ymax -maximum net profit obtained in any of the year
Inference
• The value nearing unity shows that the system is highly sustainable.

42. Table 13: Economics of rice based crop sequences
(Mean of five years)
Crop sequences Net returns (Rs/ha) Sustainable value index
Rice-Rice 33699 0.81
Rice-Sesamum 29436 0.81
Rice-Wheat 26567 0.64
Rice-Sunflower 25398 0.67
Rice-Maize 22936 0.56
Rice-Mustard 22952 0.49
Rice-Bengalgram 19563 0.39
Dharwad Olekar et al., (2000)

43. Table 14: Sustainability indices of the selected cropping
system (Pooled data 3 years)
Cropping systems
Productivity
(kg/ha/day)
Sustainable
yield index
Sustainable
value index
Rice-Maize-Cowpea 58.58 0.81 0.79
Rice-Maize-Greengram 58.92 0.87 0.83
Rice-Ground nut-
Greengram
55.51 0.82 0.70
Rice-Groundnut-Sesamum 51.77 0.81 0.68
Bhubaneswar, Orissa Gulati et al. (2008)

44. Employment generation
 Man-days generated by cropping system
 Certain crops specially vegetables requires more man days and
considered helpful for employment generation
 Intensification of the system adds to the employment
generation
 Therefore employment generation needs to be considered in
relation to economic benefit and availability of required labour
and machinery

45. 11. Relative employment generation efficiency (REGE)
Where
MDD: Total man days require in diversified system
MDE: Total man days require in existing system
Inference
Higher the percentage more employment generation through treatment/
system

46. Table 15: Effect of cropping sequence on relative production efficiency and
employment generation.
Cropping sequence
Relative production
efficiency
(kg/ha/day)
Employment
generation
(man/days/ha/year)
REGE
(%)
Rice-Maize 61.1 359 --
Rice-Potato-Onion 97.45 469 30.64
Rice-Pea-Onion 67.5 439 22.28
Rice-Potato-Cowpea 88.15 401 11.69
Rice-Pea-Cowpea 53.1 372 3.62
Rice-Rajmash-Onion 81.65 445 23.95
Rice-Rajmash- Cowpea 68.55 377 5.01
S.Em + 1.3 -
CD (P=0.05) 4.1 -
Varanasi, UP. Yadav et al. (2013)

47. 12. Radiation use efficiency
• Crops use PAR in the spectral waveband 400 to 700 nm for photosynthesis
• The distribution of PAR from the top to the bottom of a crop canopy affects
transpiration and other crop growth and development processes
• PAR interception and utilization by the crop canopy is important for improving
production and functioning of agro-ecosystems
• To quantify crop efficiency for radiation use in both sole crop and intercrops
• Biomass of crops is positively correlated with radiation interception
• Unlike sole cropping, intercrop RUE depends not only on crop canopy
geometry but also on the intercropping arrangement

48. Radiation use efficiency
• Radiation use efficiency was calculated by dividing
accumulated biomass (g) to cumulative Photosynthetic
adsorption ratio (PAR) (MJ m-2) during a defined period of
time.
where; Radiation use efficiency- g MJ-1
Accumulated biomass (g)
Radiation use
efficiency
=
Accumulated biomass
PAR

49. China Yang et al. (2010)

50. Table 16: Above ground biomass, grain yield, harvest index(HI), land
equivalent ratio(LER), radiation use efficiency(RUE) for maize
and soybean cropping systems (Three growing seasons).
Treatment
Above ground
Biomass (t/ha)
Grain
yield
(t/ha)
Harvest
index
RUE
(kg/MJ)
Soybean + Maize (1:3) 18.1 8.11 0.45 3.14
Soybean + Maize (2:3) 21.4 9.33 0.44 3.12
Soybean + Maize (3:1) 5.58 1.93 0.35 1.65
Soybean + Maize (3:2) 5.02 1.79 0.36 1.63
Sole Maize 23.3 9.80 0.42 3.18
Sole Soybean 5.88 2.36 0.40 1.55
China Yang et al. (2010)

51. 13. Light interception
 The greater yield loss of the minor crop is mainly due to reduced PAR
reaching the lower parts of the intercrop canopy, occupied by the minor
legume.
 Light levels during the late flowering to mid pod formation stages of
growth have been found to be more critical than during vegetative and late
reproductive periods.
 Therefore, any interventions that lead to increased amount of PAR
interception by the minor crop have potential to increase the yield of the
minor crop and increase productivity of the intercropping system.

52. Table : Effect of intercropping pattern on PAR and LAI
of maize and soybean
Treatment Crop 35 DAP 49DAP 63DAP
PAR% LAI PAR% LAI PAR% LAI
Sole Maize Maize 57.2 1.03 66.5 1.28 83.4 3.61
Sole Soybean Soybean 58.2 1.09 55.0 1.00 73.1 2.87
Maize+Soybean
(1M:1S)
Maize 32.4 0.47 56.6 0.99 74.2 2.74
Soybean 41.7 0.66 56.7 0.99 78.1 3.06
Maize+Soybean
(2M:2S)
Maize 45.9 0.74 61.0 1.24 74.1 3.21
Soybean 53.7 0.95 66.9 1.45 84.2 4.26
Maize+Soybean
(2M:4S)
Maize 42.7 0.70 55.6 0.95 69.1 2.34
Soybean 55.9 1.00 48.7 0.87 68.2 2.40
Maize+Soybean
(2M:6S)
Maize 46.3 0.75 51.4 0.87 67.0 2.23
Soybean 53.8 0.95 59.1 1.10 77.7 3.35
Kenya Jossias et al. (2014)

53.  Conventional indicators has shortfall in consideration of
cropping systems
 Recent cropping indices are systematically evaluated to asses
the productivity of the cropping systems
 These indices will serve as new tool for better understanding
and identification of efficient production systems.
CONCLUSION

54.  Extension use of these indices has to be promoted for
application in various cropping systems.
FUTURE LINE OF WORK

55. “If you are late in doing one thing in agriculture, You are
late in all things’’.
- S.C.PANDA