RPF-I

PROFORMA FOR SUBMISSION OF RESEARCH PROJECTS

PART -I: GENERAL INFORMATION

200 Project code:200 I Institute Code No:2002 ICAR Code No:

CPCP 2.1.14

201 Name oflnstitute and Division: Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute (IGFRl),Division of Crop Production

f ~ 2011 Name & Address of Institute: Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute(IGFRI), Jhansi - 284 003(UP)

2012 Name of Division/ Section: Division of Crop Production

2013 Location of Project: c. P. Farm, IGFRI, Jhansi

202 Project Title: Climate Resilient Forage Production Systems under Rainfed Situation

203 Priority Area: Research & Development

2031 Research Approach: Applied res Basic Res Process/TechnologyDevelopment

Transfer ofTechnology

01 02 03 042031 Research Approach: 01

204 Specific area: Conservation agriculture((

2051 Previous projects in this specific area: No205 Duration:2051 Date of Start2052 Likely date of completion206 Total cost of the project:2061 Foreign Exchange Component (if any)

Four yearskharif2012June 2016Institute project (Rs. 21, 07, 900)Nil

207 Project profile Summary:

Rainfed agriculture is pivotal to the Indian economy and food security. In India, rainfed agriculture ispracticed in 60% of the cultivated area and supports 60% of livestock population, is prone to climateuncertainties and risks. Rainfed areas will be hardest hit due to increasing water scarcity, frequent droughts,rising temperature, new pests and diseases, short growing seasons and degraded natural resources. Duringrecent past, perennial based rainfed forage production systems are also influenced by climatic variability.Moreover, the soils of Budelkhand region of India are medium to low in fertility with low organic mattercontent and poor water holding capacity that limits the fodder and food productivity. In recent years change

in climatic situations has greater impact on sustainability of fodder and food crops in the system. To mitigatethe effect of climate change, climate resilient forage production systems should be evaluated with efficientutilization of available natural resources and to improve the production and productivity of forage cropsunder rainfed situation. Therefore, innovative moisture conservation technologies in fodder-legume shrub-perennial grass based forage systems with seasonal food crops are tested to sustain the crop-livestockthrough sustainable forage production with improving input use efficiency under rainfed situation.

208 Key words: Climate resilience, Rainfed, Resource conservation, Perennial gtass & legumes,seasonal food & forage crops, cropping system

Part -II: Investigator Profile

210 Principal Investigators:2101 Name2102 Designation2103 Division/ Section2104 Location2105 Institute Address

211 Co- Investigator:2111 Name2112 Designation2113 Division/Section2114 Location2115 Institute Address

21221212122212321242125

Co-investigator:NameDesignationDivision/SectionLocationInstitute Address

r

220 Introduction and Objectives:

: Dr. Sunil Kumar: Principal Scientist (Agronomy) & Head: Division of Crop Production: Division of Crop Production: Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute (IGFRI), Jhansi

: Dr. Kiran Kumar T.: Scientist (Agronomy): Division of Crop Production: Division of Crop Production: Indian Grassland & Fodder Research Institute (IGFRI), Jhansi

: DrJ.B. Singh: Senior Scientist (Agro-meteorology): Division of Crop Production: Division of Crop Production: Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute (IGFRI), Jhansi

PART 1111:TECHNICAL DETAILS

2201 Origin ofthe project:Agriculture is a major contributor to climate change due to emission of greenhouse gas, nitrous oxideand methane. At the same time, the impacts of climate change on agriculture are becoming serious.Seasons and weather are becoming increasingly unpredictable and extreme. This can lead to major lossesas farmers no longer know what or when to plant. If climate change continues unabated, the increasingextremes could lead to the collapse of whole agricultural productivity in different regions. Climatechange also disrupts and alters pest and disease patterns, posing risks to agriculture everywhere.Agricultural productivity in rainfed areas continues to remain low and unstable due to weathervariations, degraded soils and continuing poverty of farmers. This is compounded by recurrent droughts,warming temperatures, and rising food and fuel prices. In order to feed the burgeoning Indian population

with changing food habits, development of climate resilient forage production systems are needed.Productive fodder crops integrating either legumes or perennial grasses have been tested andrecommended in past. But with advent of time, climatic variability has intensified and increasingvulnerability of rainfed forage based systems. Therefore, innovative moisture conservation technologiesintegrating fodder crop-legume shrubs-perennial grasses need to be tested for optimal & sustainablefodder availability and improving water- and input- use efficiency in rainfed ecology.

2202 Definition of Problem

There is vulnerability of existing fodder based cropping systems in central India, especially underrainfed conditions due to changes in climatic scenario. To tackle the effect of climatic variability on theexisting cropping systems there is a need to increase water and resource use efficiency to sustain theperennial fodder based cropping systems.

2203 Immediate objectives:

• To enhance the productivity and sustainability of perennial forage based systems in changingvulnerabilities through integration of different resource conservation techniques.

• To improve input use efficiencies (water, energy, nutrients) in rainfed forage based systems.

2204 Long-term objectives:• To sustain forage production systems in changing climate through enhancing resource use

efficiency

2205 Review of Status of Research in the Subject:

a. International Status: Attached in separate sheet Annexure I

b. National Status : Attached in separate sheet Annexure I

221 Project Technical profile:

2211 Organization of work elements (for objective and participating investigator giving man-months involved):

Activities Year I Year 2 Year 3 Year 4Selection offield & Preparatory tillage operations -VCollection and analysis of initial soil sample -VPreparation of bed and wide furrow -VEstablishment of perennial grass and legume on bunds -VRecording ofbiometric observations -V -V -V -VSoil moisture studies -V -V -V -VSoil health studies -V -V -V -VEnergy parameters -V -V -V -VWeather parameters -V -V -V -V

2212 Methodology:

(

Technical ProgrammeA. Cropping systemsCS 1: TSH + Leucaena + (Sorghum + Pigeonpea)CS2: TSH + Leucaena + (Sorghum + Cowpea - Chickpea)CS3: TSH + Leucaena + (Sorghum + Cowpea - Barley)CS4: TSH +Desmanthus + (Sorghum + Pigeonpea)CS5: TSH + Desmanthus + (Sorghum + Cowpea - Chickpea)CS6: TSH + Desmanthus + (Sorghum + Cowpea - Barley)CS7: TSH + Sesbania + (Sorghum + Pigeonpea)CS8: TSH + Sesbania + (Sorghum + Cowpea - Chickpea)CS9: TSH + Sesbania + (Sorghum + Cowpea - Barley)B. Resource conservation practicesRCl: Rainfed (control)RC2: Life saving irrigation*RC3: In-situ moisture conservation (CA based practices)**

Note:*One pre-sowing irrigation (Rabi) + other irrigation as per theoretical calculation i.e. 30% of (totalrainfall-ET losses)** Integration of Residue retention (stubble height 15 ern) +Mulching (green weed biomass + litterfall) + Perennials in bed & seasonal crops in wide furrows

Fodder: TSH: Tri Specific Hybrid (Pennisetum purpureum x P. squamulatum x P. glaucum),Leucaena, Sesbania, Desmenthus, Sorghum, Cowpea; Grain: Chickpea, Pigeonpea; Dual (Fodder +Grain): Barley.

Design: Strip-plot DesignDuration: Four years

Replications: FourYear of start: Kharif, 2012

t {OBSERVATIONS1. Agronomic parameters

.:. Green and dry fodder yield

.:. Fresh and dry matter yield

.:. Yield of individual crop and cropping systems

.:. System productivity different systems

.:. Crude protein yield

.:. Economics2. Soil moisture studies

.:. Periodic soil moisture estimation

.:. Leaf canopy temperature

.:. Soil temperature3. Energy parameters

.:. Input and output energy

.:. Energy use efficiency4. Soil health & weather parameters

.:. Soil physical properties: Bulk density

.:. Soil chemical: Organic carbon, NPK and Carbon sequestration

.:. Microbial: Microbial biomass carbon, Dehydrogenage activity

•• III!I!!!!!III!!!!!J'"-------- ---- _~--

.:. Collection of weekly meteorological parameters

2213 Plan of Action: - As per activities mentioned in Col. 2211.

2214 Time schedule of Activities (Milestones):

As per activities mentioned in Col. 2211.

2215 Annual target of each activity:

(

15t year: Selection of site, field preparation, establishment of perennial component and recording ofobservations (Soil, Plant and input)

2nd year: Recording ofbiometric observations, soil moisture, soil health, energy and weather parameters

3rd year: Recording ofbiometric observations, soil moisture, 'soil health, energy and weather parameters

4th year: Recording of biometric observations, soil moisture, soil health, energy and weather parameters

2216 Estimated Man monthsa. Scientific 34b. Technical 10c. Supporting

222 Proposed Research Details

2221 Importance of the proposed project (Gaps in Knowledge / products/ process technology)to the Institute mandate:

To assure continuous fodder production with change in climatic situations through efficient utilization ofnatural resources (Conservation Agriculture based practices) under rainfed situation.

r (

2222 Questions Attempted to be answered:1. Suitable fodder production system for continuous supply of fodder in rainfed situation.2. In changing climate, option for food-forage based system under rainfed situation having perennial

component adopting resource conservation practices.3. Efficient utilization of resources (water & nutrient) for profitable production system for situations of

mixed farming situations.4. Evaluation of climate resilient forage & food crops for sustainable production system in semi arid

situation.5. Exploring possibility ofrabi crops ( food/forage) under conserved moisture in rainfed situation

2223 Anticipated process/products/ Technology/Knowledge Expected to be evolved by pursuing theproject:

.:. Evaluation of climate resilient forage production systems .

•:. Improvement in soil health through innovative resource conservation practices .

•:. Conservation agriculture based in-situ moisture conservation practices for sustainable forageproduction .

•:. Sustainable forage production with improving soil environment and conserved biodiversity.

2224 Practical utility of Anticipated Results of the projects:

a. Immediate benefits.

Improvement in productivity offorage production systems with enhanced input use efficiency.

b. Medium term benefits.

Improvement in soil health and increase in resource use efficiency with reduced effect of climaticvariability on forage based cropping systems.

c. Long term benefits.

Sustainability of forage based cropping systems under rainfed ecology with change in climatic scenario.

2225 Expertise available with Investigator Group / Institute: -Expertise available at the Institute.

2226 Expertise (if any) to be Investigatory Group from Out side the Institute.a. Within Countryb. Outside Country

PART -IV: BUDGETARY ESTIMATES (SUMMARY)

230 Budgetary Summary (Recurring)Year Year Year Year Total

1 2 3 42301 Salaries:

i)Scientific 3,82,900 4,21,100 4,63,300 5,09,600 1776900ii)Technical 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 150000

/ I , iii) Supporting(

iv) Wages 40,000 45,000 47,000 49,000 181000-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sub Total 452900 501100 550300 603600 2107900

2302 Consumables:i) Chemicalsii) Glasswaresiii) Others

700020003000

1000030003200

1200040003800

1500050004000

440001400014000

Sub Total 12000 16200 19800 24000 24000

2303 Travel 20,000 25,000 30,000 33,000 108000

2304 Miscellaneous(Other costs):

3,000 3,600 4,000 4,200 14800

2305 Sub Total:(Recurring) 23,000 28,600 34,000 37,200 122800

231 Non -Recurring(Equipments)1.2.3.

232 Total(230 and 231)

23,000 28,600 34,000 37,200 122800

233Salaries/Wages: Year(l)Designation with payScale:1.Dr.Sunil Kumar,2.Dr.Kiran Kumar, T3.DrJ.B. Singh

Year (2) Year(3) Total

P.SScientistS.S

Rs.37,400-67,000Rs.15600-39100Rs.37,400-67,000

2331 Justification (for technical! Wages/labour in terms of work content):laboratory work

To assists field and

234 Consumables:Budget

Item Year (1) Year (2) Year(3) Year(4) Totali) Chemicals 7000 10000 12000 15000 44000ii) Glasswares 2000 3000 4000 5000 14000iii) Others 3000 3200 3800 4000 14000

Sub Total 20000 25000 30000 33000 24000

2341 Justification: These inputs will be utilized for estimation of plant nutrients and soil health studies.

235 Travel: Year (1)20000

Year (2) Year (3) Year (4)25000 30,000 35000

Total108000

2351 JustificationTo attend training! symposium/conferences

236 Other costslMiscellaneous:2361 Field preparation /planting!

Harvesting (Man days/costs)

2362 Inter cultivation & dressing -(Man days/costs)

2363 Animal maintenance2364 Any other items2365 Justification for above for conducting experiments

For the growing offorage crops and plant /soil sample collection and intercultureEtc.

237 Equipment:

2371 Equipments Already Available to be used in Project:1. Specto photometer, Flame photometer2. N-Analyser,3. PH meter etc

2372 Equipments to be Purchased with Costs:- NIL-

2373 Justification for each additional equipment:

2374 Equipment to be imported2375 Justification for import

-NIL- NIL

238 Additional Infrastructure Facilities (if Needed)2381 Works - NIL2382 Land (Sq meter) - NIL2383 Animal - NIL

239 Financing organizationsIf financed by an organization other than the Institute, then give the following information:(a) Name of financing organization: N.A

(b) Title of the Project:(Ifthe project forms a part of a larger project)

PART- V: DECLARATION

This is to certify that

I. The research work proposed in the scheme / project does not in any way duplicate the work alreadydone or being carried out in the Institute on the subject.

ii. The same project has not been submitted to any other agency (ies) for financial support.

iii. The investigator / co- investigators have been fully consulted in the development of project and havefully undertaken the responsibility to carry out the programme as per the technical programme.

unil~yt..--

Signature of the Project Investigator

Co - Investigators: rt:

\C~1. (Kiran Kumar, T.)

8r>J12. (1. B. Smgh)

Signature & Comments of the Headof the Division/Section

~ct~ ~~k

Signature & Comments of theJoint Director (Research)

Signature & Comments of theDirector

Annexure I

International

Increasing GHG resulted in global warming by 0.74°C over pastl00 years. Future predictions areincrease in temperature by 1.8 to 4.0°C, and C02 level from 380 pmm to 770 ppm by the end of thiscentury. These changes will have direct and indirect affects on fodder crops, livestock, soil moistureavailability, frequency and intensity of inter- and intra- seasonal droughts. and floods, evapo-transpiration (IPCC, 2007).

National

Gill et al. (1983) reported that intercropping of perennial cereals [Pennisetum americanum X P.purpureum] intercropped with legumes including Leucaenctleucocephala and Sesbania sesban increasedthe GFY and provided GF availability for a longer period.

The legume intercropping with millet increased GFY by 11-29%, DMY by 5-23% as well as increasedCP yield over pearl millet grown alone. The highest green and dry forage yields and CP yields camefrom pearl millet + cowpea in a 2:2 row ratio. Intercropping also altered the ambient air and canopytemperature of the crops (Gill et al. 1984, Singh et a1.1984, Hazra et al. 1993).

Green panic (Panicum maximum) intercropped with 5 forage legumes (S sesban, S grandiflora, Shamata, leucaena sp. and D. virgatus) showed that green panic/leucaena system (120.2 t/ha green fodderand 28 t/ha dry matter; these yields were 8.7 and 4.3% higher respectively than green panic alone andother intercrops. (Raut et al. 1987).

Kumar et al. (2003) reported that under dryland conditions of Jhansi, pigeon pea spaced at 100 em withone to three lines of sorghum produced higher fodder equivalent yield, net income and LER (1.28) thanthe sole stands of the component crops.

Singh et al. (2003) revealed that Maize + cowpea intercropped in the ratio of 1:3 was proved to be thebest stable for green fodder and dry matter yield, while both intercropped in the row ratio of3:3 and alsoas mixture in 1:1 showed promise for consistency for green fodder yield in UP, MP, AP and Orissa.

Ram, (2009) reported that at Jhansi intercropping of Guinea grass with S. hamata in paired rowsproduced significantly higher dry forage (4.24, 5.75, 5.27,4.76 and 5.01 t/ha) and crude protein yields(381. 7, 507.1, 467.0 and 399.2 kg/ha) as compared to sole stands of both grass and legume andintercropping in alternate rows.

Thakur et al. (2011) recorded 16.7% to 28.6% increase in rainfed Sorghum yield under ridge andfurrow system and additional income to the tune of 11,225/ha as well as green weed biomass furtherincreased the sorghum yield by 24.1%. Ridge and furrow system of sowing and application of greenweed biomass mulch improved the soil moisture conservation considerably.

References

Singh, K., Shukla, G.P., Melkania, N.P., Kumar, Sunil and Rawat, C.R. 2003. Stability of inter croppingsystems of maize and Cowpea for forage productivity. Range Management and Agroforestry24(2): 148-151.

Hazra, e.R. and Pradeep Behari. 1993. Legume intercropping in maize for forage yield and quality

under dryland condition. Range Management and Agroforestry 14(1): 57-60.

Singh, K.A., Patil, B.D. and Rai, P. 1984. Integration of forage-food production through intercropping insemi-arid region. Indian Journal of Agronomy 29(4): 510-515.

Gill, A.S., Patil, B.D. and Yadav, C.L. 1983. Intercropping studies in hybrid napier varieties associatingLeucaena and other leguminous fodder shrubs. Leucaena research reports 4: 21

Ram, S.N. 2009. Effect of row ratio and fertility levels on performance of guinea grass + S. hamataintercropping system under rainfed condition. Range Management and Agroforestry 30(2): 130-135.

IPCe. 2007. Fourth Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Secretariat.Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.ipcc.chl