Organic Agriculture

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 21–30 | Cite as

Production strategies of organic basmati rice in Tarai region of Uttarakhand, India

  • D. K. SinghEmail author
  • Z. Akhtar
  • S. Gupta
  • A. Srivastava
  • M. Chakraborty


Field experiments were conducted at G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India, during rainy season 2012 to 2014 to explore possible outcomes of sustainable production of organic basmati rice in terms of productivity, water use efficiency and methane emission reduction in North Western Himalayas of India. Six sets of nutrient management and production technology treatments were taken in randomized block design (RBD) with three replications. Traditional basmati rice variety type 3 popularly known as Dehraduni Basmati was taken for study. Dry matter production, crop growth rate and effective tillers were found higher in green manuring (GM) + vermicompost (VC) during all the 3 years. Overall highest grain yield of basmati rice (average over 3 years) was found in GM + VC with Sesbania aculeate (3209 kg ha−1) followed by System of Rice Intensification (SRI) (3174 kg ha−1), while lowest grain yield of basmati rice was recorded in organic control (2871 kg ha−1). However, only four treatments were considered to quantify methane (CH4) flux. Maximum CH4 flux was observed at panicle initiation stage (55 days after transplanting (DAT)). Across the crop growth period, GM + VC, farmyard manure (FYM) + VC, SRI and chemical control produced an average CH4 flux of 20.19, 13.00, 9.83 and 5.53 mg m−2 h−1, respectively. This shows that among the nutrient sources, CH4 emission was higher in organically fertilized plots as compared to chemically fertilized with urea at initial stages; however, at later stages, not much variation was observed in CH4 emission for different nutrient sources. Even with in organic system, less CH4 was emitted from SRI field where water was maintained through alternate wetting and drying system.


Basmati rice Crop growth rate Farmyard manure Methane flux Sesbania aculeate Vermicompost Water use efficiency Yield 


  1. Anitha S, Mathew J (2010) In situ green manuring with dhaincha (Sesbania aculeata Pers.): a cost effective management alternative for wet seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Trop Agric 48(1–2):34–39Google Scholar
  2. Aulakh MS, Bodenbender J, Wassmann R, Rennenberg H (2000) Methane transport capacity of rice plants influence of methane concentration and growth stage analyzed with an automated measuring system. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 58:357–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bana OPS, Pant K (2000) Green manuring for ecologically sound crop production. Indian Farmers Digest 33(2):19–20Google Scholar
  4. Bisht PS, Puniya R, Pandey PC, Singh DK (2007) Grain yield and yield components of rice as influenced by different crop establishment methods. Int Rice Res Notes 32(2):33–34Google Scholar
  5. Bouman BAM, Peng S, Castan AR, Visperas RM (2009) Yield and water use of irrigated tropical aerobic rice systems. Agric Water Manag 74:87–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruderie K, Shambu P, Roy S (2009) Vulnerability reduction and adaption experiences from Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh: the System of Rice Intensification. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, Vulnerability and Assessment Programme, India, pp. 1–35Google Scholar
  7. Chowdhury MR, Kumar V, Sattar A, Brahmachari K (2014) Studies on the water use efficiency and nutrient uptake by rice under system of intensification. The Bioscan 9(1):85–88Google Scholar
  8. Greenland DJ, (1997) “Rice farming today. In: The sustainability of rice farming”. CAB International, Oxon, UK and New York, USA. IRRI, Manilla, Philippines, 273Google Scholar
  9. Dejene M, Lemlem M (2012) Integrated agronomic crop managements to improve Tef productivity under terminal drought. In: Md. Rahman M, Hasegawa H (eds) Water Stress, InTech Open Science, pp: 235–254Google Scholar
  10. Delaune RD, Smith CJ, Patrick WH (1986) Methane production in Mississippi River deltaic plain peat. Org Geochem 9:193–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jain MC, Kumar S, Wassmann R, Mitra S, Singh SD, Singh JP, Gupta S (2000) Methane emissions from irrigated rice fields in northern India, New Delhi. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 58(1–3):75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kar B, Karmakar S, Saha G, and Bhattacharya R (2014) Estimation of methane flux on rice field as influenced by plant climate under varied management practices. In; International symposium on New Dimension in Agrometeorology for Sustainable Agriculture 16–18 Oct 34pGoogle Scholar
  13. Khan NI, Malik AU, Umer F, Bodla MI (2010) Effect of tillage and farm yard manure on physical properties of soil. Int Res J Plant Sci 1(4):75–82Google Scholar
  14. Kumar S, Rawat CR, Dhar S, Rai Suchit K (2005) Dry matter accumulation, nutrient uptake and changes in soil fertility status as influenced by different organic and inorganic sources of nutrients to forage sorghum (Sorghum bicolour). Indian J Agri Sci 75(6):340–342Google Scholar
  15. Lukham E, Krishanranjan J, Premshekhar M (2004) Irrigation and nitrogen application schedule for hybrid ‘ADTRH 1’ rice (Oryza sativa) in Tamil Nadu. Indian J Agron 49(1):37–39Google Scholar
  16. Mahajan A, Bhagat RM, Gupta RD (2008) Integrated nutrient management in sustainable rice-wheat cropping system for food security in India. SAARC J Agri 6(2):29–32Google Scholar
  17. Mitra S, Jain MC, Kumar S, Bandyopadhyay SK, Kalra N (1999) Effect of rice cultivars on methane emission. Agri Ecosyst Environ 73(3):177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Prasad R (2011) Aerobic rice system. Adv Agron 111:207–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ramakrishna Y, Singh S, Parihar S (2007) Influence of irrigation regime and nitrogen management on productivity, nitrogen uptake and water use by rice (Oryza sativa). Indian J Agron 52(2):102–106Google Scholar
  20. Singh AB, Ganguly TK (2005) Quality comparison of conventional compost, vermicompost and chemically rich compost. J Ind Soc Soil Science 53(3):352–355Google Scholar
  21. Singh DK, Singh G, Gupta S, Arora M, Verma S (2012) Yield sustainability and quality of basmati rice as influenced by conventional, organic and integrated modes of cultivation. Oryza 49(2):102–107Google Scholar
  22. Sharma RP, Bali SV, Gupta DK (2001) Soil fertility and productivity of rice-wheat cropping system in an Inceptisoil as influenced by integrated nutrient management. Indian J Agric Sci 71:82–86Google Scholar
  23. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1967) Statistical methods, Sixth edn. Publishing Corp. Calcutta, Oxford and IBHGoogle Scholar
  24. Tripathi HP, Jaishwal LM (2006) Effect of nitrogen on yield and yield attributes of rice hybrids under irrigated condition. Oryza 43(3):249–250Google Scholar
  25. Wang MX, Shangguan XJ (1995) Methane emission from various rice fields in China. In: Climate change and rice. Springer Publishers, IRRI, pp. 67–79Google Scholar
  26. WWF-ICRISAT Project (2010) More rice for people, more water for the planet. Africare, Oxfam America, WWF-ICRISAT Project, Hyderabad, India pp 1-35Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. K. Singh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Z. Akhtar
    • 2
  • S. Gupta
    • 1
  • A. Srivastava
    • 3
  • M. Chakraborty
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of AgronomyG.B. Pant University of Agriculture & TechnologyPantnagarIndia
  2. 2.Department of AgrometeorologyG.B. Pant University of Agriculture & TechnologyPantnagarIndia
  3. 3.Intercooperation Social Development IndiaAndhra PradeshIndia

Personalised recommendations