Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Traditional agrodiversity management: A case study of central himalayan village ecosystem

  • Published:
Journal of Mountain Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Environmental, biological, socio-cultural and economic status variation existing in the Central Himalaya have led to the evolution of diverse and unique traditional agroecosystems, crop species and livestock, which facilitate the traditional mountain farming societies to sustain themselves. Indigenous agroecosystems are highly site specific and differ from place to place, as they have evolved along divergent lines. For maintenance of traditional agrodiversity management the farmers of the Central Himalaya have evolved various types of crop rotations in consonance with the varied environmental conditions and agronomic requirements. In irrigated flat lands two crops are harvested in a year with negligible fallow period but in rainfed conditions if a cropping sequence is presumed to be starting after winter fallow phase then four major cropping seasons can be identified namely first kharif season (first crop season), first rabi season (second crop season), second kharif season (third crop season) and second rabi season (fourth crop season). Highest crop diversity is present in kharif season in comparison to rabi season. Traditionally the fields are left fallow after harvest of the second kharif season crop. Important characteristics of agrodiversity management are the use of bullocks for draught power, human energy as labour, crop residues as animal feed and animal waste mixed with forest litter as organic input to restore soil fertility levels. Women provide most of the human labour except for ploughing and threshing grain. The present study deals with assessment of traditional agrodiversity management such as (i) crop diversity, (ii) realized yield under the traditional practices and (iii) assess the differences of realized yields under sole and mixed cropping systems. It indicated that crop rotation is an important feature of the Central Himalayan village ecosystem which helps to continue the diversity of species grown, as are the distribution of crops in the growing period and the management of soil fertility. The cropping diversity existing and the sequences practiced by the traditional farmers seems to have achieved high degree of specialization and thus even when the yield/biomass variations are about 60%, the farmers continue to practice these sequences as they need to maintain diversity and synergistic relationships of crops in addition to manage the food and labour requirements for crop husbandry. Crop yields are generally higher in irrigated systems than rainfed systems and in sole cropping as compared with mixed cropping. However, gross biological and economic yields are higher in mixed cropping than sole cropping systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adjei-Nsiah S, Kuyper TW, Leeuwis C, Abekoe MK, Giller KE (2007) Evaluating sustainable and profitable cropping sequences with cassava and four legume crops: Effects on soil fertility and maize yields in the forest/savannah transitional agro-ecological zone of Ghana. Field Crops Research 103:89–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agegnehu G, Ghizaw A, Sinebo W (2006a) Crop productivity and land-use efficiency of a Teff/faba bean mixed cropping system in tropical highland environment. Exprimental Agriculture 42:495–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agegnehu G, Ghizaw A, Sinebo W (2006b) Yield performance and land-use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopia highlands. European Journal of Agronomy 25:202–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson RL (2005) Are some crops synergistic to following crops? Agronomy Journal 97:7–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anil AL, Park J, Philips RH, Miller FA (1998) Temperate inter cropping of cereals for forage: A review of the potential for growth and utilization with particular reference to the UK. Grass and Forage Science 53:301–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babatunde FE (2000) Effect of intercropping and cropping sequence on the marketable yield and productivity of Celosia and okra. Journal of Agriculture and Environment 1:55–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babatunde FE (2003) Intercrop productivity of roselle in Nigeria. Africa Crop Science Journal 11:43–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benites JR, McCollum RE, Nederman GC (1993) Production efficiency of intercrops relative to sequentially planted sole crop in humid tropical environment. Field Crops Research 31:1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black AL, Siddoway FW, Brown PL (1974) Summer fallow in the northern great plains (winter wheat) In: Summer Fallow in the Western United States. USDA Conservation Research Report, 17 USDA, Washington. pp 36–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrini-Feyerband G (1996) Collaborative Management of Protected Areas: Tailoring the Approach to the Context. IUCN-The World Conservation Union. Gland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulson HAJ, Snaydon RW, Stopes CF (1997). Effects of plant density on intercropped wheat and field beans in an organic farming system. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 128:59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr MP, Gardner CJ, Schatz GB, Zwinger SW, Guldan SJ (1995) Grain yield and weed biomass of a wheat-lentil intercrop. Agronomy Journal 87:574–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers R (1993) Challenging the Professions: Frontiers of Rural Development. Intermediate Technology Publication, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dapaah HK, Asafu-Agyei JN, Ennin SA, Yamoach C (2003) Yield stability of cassava, maize, soybean and cowpea intercrops. Journal of Agricultural Science 140:73–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dash SS, Mishra MK (2001) Studies on hill agro-ecosystems of three tribal villages on the Eastern Ghats of Orissa, India. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 86:287–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Ambrone CH, Minguez MI (2001) Cereal/legume rotations in a Mediterranean environment: biomass and yield production. Field Crops Research 70:139–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farahani HJ, Peterson GA, Wertfall DG (1998a) Dryland cropping intensification: A fundamental solution to efficient use of precipitation. Advance Agronomy 64:197–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farahani HJ, Peterson GA, Wertfall DG, Sherrod LA, Ahuja LR, (1998b) Soil water storage in dry land cropping system: The significance of cropping intensification. Soil Science Society of America Journal 62:984–991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (1999) Agricultural biodiversity FAO/Netherland conference on the multifunctional character of agriculture and land. p 42.

  • Greab BW (1983) Water conservation: Central great plants. In: Drengne, H.E., Willis, W.O., (Eds). Agroecology and Small Farm Development, CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 137–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauggaard-Nielsen H, Jensen ES (2001) Evaluating pea and barley cultivation for complementarity in inter cropping at different levels of soil N availability. Field Crops Research 72:185–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlan JR (1975) Our vanishing genetic resources. Science 188:618–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haymes R, Lee HC (1999) Competition between autumn and spring planted grain intercrops of wheat (Triticum aestivum) and field bean (Vicia faba). Field Crops Research 62:167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JB, Erhabur PO (1999) Cultivar effects on oat-berseem clover intercrops. Agronomy Journal 91:321–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen ES (1996) Grain yield, symbiotic N2 fixation and interspecific competition for inorganic N in a pea-barley intercrops. Plant and Soil 182:25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallu BA, Erhabor PO (1990) Barley, lentil and flex yield under different intercropping systems. Agronomy Journal 82:1066–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchmann F, Thorvaldsson G (2000) Challenging targets for future agriculture. European Journal of Agronomy 12:145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumber AM, Buriro VA, Kumber MB, Oad FC, Jamro GH, Chachar QI (2007) Yield of wheat, cotton, berseen and soybean under different crop sequences and fertility regimes. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 6:143–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kundu S, Bhattacharya R, Prakash V, Gupta HS, Pathak H, Ladha JK (2007) Longterm yield trend and sustainability of rainfed soybean-wheat system through farmyard manure application in a sandy loam soil of the Indian Himalayas. Biology and Fertility of Soils 43:271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langat MC, Okiror MA, Ouma JP, Gesimber RM, (2006) The efffect of intercropping groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) with sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) on yield and cash income. Agriculture Tropical Et Subtropica 39:87–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenssen AW, Johnson GD, Carlson GK (2007) Cropping sequence and tillage system influences annual crop production and water use in semiarid Montana, USA. Field Crops Research 70:139–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maikhuri RK, Ramakrishnan PS (1990) Ecological analysis of a cluster of villages emphasizing land use of different tribes in Meghalaya in north-east India. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 31:17–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maikhuri RK, Rao KS, Saxena KG (1996) Traditional crop diversity for sustainable development of Central Himalayan agroecosystems. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 3:8–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maikhuri RK, Rao KS, Saxena KG, Semwal RL (1999) Traditional Crop Diversity Based Nutrition and the Prospects for Sustainable Rural Development in the Central Himalaya. Himalayan Paryavaran 6:36–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maikhuri RK, Rao KS, Semwal RL (2001) Changing scenario of Himalayan agroecosystems: loss of agrobiodiversity, an indicator of environmental change in Central Himalayas. The Environmentalist 21:23–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maikhuri RK, Semwal RL, Rao KS, Nautiyal S, Saxena KG (1997) Eroding traditional crop diversity imperils the sustainability of agricultural systems in Central Himalaya. Current Science 73:777–782.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra MK, Dash SS (2000) Biomass and energetic of nontimber forest resources in a cluster of tribal villages on the Eastern Ghats of Orissa, India. Biomass and Bioenergy 18:229–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell R (1979) The Analysis of Indian Agro-ecosystems. Inter print, New Delhi, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moench M (1989) Forest degradation and the structure of biomass utilization in a Himalayan foothills village. Environmental Conservation 6:37–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nautiyal S, Maikhuri RK, Rao KS, Semwal RL, Saxena KG (2002) Agroecosystem function around a Himalayan Biosphere Reserve. Journal of Environmental Systems 29:71–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nayak SP, Nisanka SK, Mishra MK (1993) Biomass and energy dynamics in tribal village ecosystem of Orissa, India. Biomass and Bioenergy 4:23–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pal UR, Oseni TO, Nurman JC (1993) Effect of component densities on the productivity of soyabean/maize and soyabean/sorghum intercrop. Journal of Agronomy 170:66–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersson GA, Schlegel AJ, Tanaka DL, Jones OR (1996) Precipitation use efficiency as affected by cropping and tillage systems. Journal of Production Agriculture 9:180–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter PM, Lauer JG, Lueschen WE, Ford JH, Horerstad TR, Oplinger ES, Crookston RK (1997) Environment affects the corn and soybean rotation effect. Agronomy Journal 89:442–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao MR, Willey RW (1980) Evaluation of yield stability in intercropping: studies on sorghum/pigeonpea. Experimental Agriculture 16:105–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravelle R (1976) Energy use in rural India. Science 192:969–975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh GS, Rao KS, Saxena KG (1997) Energy and economic efficiency of the mountain farming system: a case study in the north-western Himalaya. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 9: 25–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh JS, Singh SP (1992a) Forests of Himalaya: Structure, functioning and impact of man. Gyanodaya Prakashan, Nainital.

  • Singh S, Singh G (1992b) Energy input crop yield relationship for four major crops of northern India. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America 23:57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundriyal RC, Rai SC, Sharma E, Rai YK (1994) Hill Agroforestry systems in south Sikkim, India. Agroforestry Systems 26:215–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka DL, Andensson RLB, Rao CR (2005) Crop sequencing to improve use of precipitation and synergize crop growth. Agronomy Journal 97:385–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viglizzo EF, Roberto ZE, Brockington NR (1991) Agroecosystem performance in semi-arid pampas of Argentina and their interaction with the environment. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 36:23–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willey RW, Heath SB (1979) The quantitative relationship between plant population and crop yield. Advances in Agronomy 21:282–321.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Biology, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110 007, India

    Abhishek Chandra & P. Pardha Saradhi

  2. Garhwal Unit, G.B.Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development, Srinagar, Uttarakhand, 246 174, India

    R. K. Maikhuri

  3. School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 110 067, India

    K. G. Saxena

  4. Department of Botany, University of Delhi, Delhi, 110 007, India

    K. S. Rao

Authors
  1. Abhishek Chandra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Pardha Saradhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. K. Maikhuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. G. Saxena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. K. S. Rao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abhishek Chandra.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chandra, A., Saradhi, P.P., Maikhuri, R.K. et al. Traditional agrodiversity management: A case study of central himalayan village ecosystem. J. Mt. Sci. 8, 62–74 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-011-1081-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-011-1081-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation