南亚以集约化水稻(Oryzasativa)为基础的种植系统提供了中低收入农村和城市人口的大量卡路里和蛋白质需求。集约化耕作需要更多的资源,破坏土壤质量,降低作物产量和利润率。作物多样化以及基于保护性农业(CA)的管理实践可能会减少外部投入的使用,提高资源利用效率,并提高集约化种植系统的生产率和盈利能力。在孟加拉国北部亚热带气候的肥沃土壤上进行了田间研究,以评估三种耕作方式和六种水稻种植顺序对谷物的影响,卡路里,以及不同作物和种植顺序的蛋白质产量和毛利率(GM)。三种耕作方式是:(1)保护性农业(CA),所有农作物均按顺序免耕,(2)交替耕作(AT),季风季节水稻作物耕种,冬季作物不耕种,(3)常规耕作(CT),所有农作物均按顺序耕作。六个种植顺序是:水稻-水稻(R-R),水稻绿豆(Vignaradiata)(R-MB),稻麦(小麦)(R-W),水稻-玉米(玉米)(R-M),稻麦绿豆(R-W-MB),和水稻-玉米-绿豆(R-M-MB)。经过三年的实验,CA的季风水稻平均产量比CT低8%,但CA的平均冬季作物产量比CT高13%。系统水稻当量产量(SREY)和系统卡路里和蛋白质产量约为5%,3%和6%,分别,CA下比CT下高;此外,AT为这些好处增加了约1%。与CT相比,CA和AT下的系统生产率提高使GM提高了16%,同时降低了CA下的劳动力和总生产成本。R-M旋转有更高的SREY,卡路里,蛋白质产量,和通用汽车24%,26%,66%,和148%,分别,而不是主要实践的R-R旋转。R-W-MB轮换具有最高的SREY(30%)和第二高的GM(118%)。考虑到耕作和耕作制度的综合作用,具有R-M旋转的CA在SREY方面表现出卓越的性能,蛋白质产量,和GM。ThedistributionoflaboruseandGMacrossrotationsweregroupedintofourcategories:R-Winlow-low(low-lowloweruseandlowGM),低-高R-M(低劳动力使用和高GM),R-W-MB和R-M-MB在高-高(高劳动力使用和高GM)和R-R-MB在高-低(高劳动力使用和低GM)。总之,在不同的冬季作物和种植系统中,CA的表现优于CT,但在季风水稻中却没有。我们的结果表明,采用基于CA的部分和全部耕作方法与适当的作物多样化相结合,可以实现可持续的粮食安全,同时摄入更多的卡路里和蛋白质,同时最大程度地提高集约化水稻轮作系统的农场盈利能力。
Intensive rice (Oryza sativa)-based cropping systems in south Asia provide much of the calorie and protein requirements of low to middle-income rural and urban populations. Intensive tillage practices demand more resources, damage soil quality, and reduce crop yields and profit margins. Crop diversification along with conservation agriculture (CA)-based management practices may reduce external input use, improve resource-use efficiency, and increase the productivity and profitability of intensive cropping systems. A field study was conducted on loamy soil in a sub-tropical climate in northern Bangladesh to evaluate the effects of three tillage options and six rice-based cropping sequences on grain, calorie, and protein yields and gross margins (GM) for different crops and cropping sequences. The three tillage options were: (1) conservation agriculture (CA) with all crops in sequences untilled, (2) alternating tillage (AT) with the monsoon season rice crop tilled but winter season crops untilled, and (3) conventional tillage (CT) with all crops in sequences tilled. The six cropping sequences were: rice-rice (R-R), rice-mung bean (Vigna radiata) (R-MB), rice-wheat (Triticum aestivum) (R-W), rice-maize (Zea mays) (R-M), rice-wheat-mung bean (R-W-MB), and rice-maize-mung bean (R-M-MB). Over three years of experimentation, the average monsoon rice yield was 8% lower for CA than CT, but the average winter crops yield was 13% higher for CA than CT. Systems rice equivalent yield (SREY) and systems calorie and protein yields were about 5%, 3% and 6%, respectively, higher under CA than CT; additionally, AT added approximately 1% more to these benefits. The systems productivity gain under CA and AT resulted in higher GM by 16% while reducing the labor and total production cost under CA than CT. The R-M rotation had higher SREY, calorie, protein yields, and GM by 24%, 26%, 66%, and 148%, respectively, than the predominantly practiced R-R rotation. The R-W-MB rotation had the highest SREY (30%) and second highest (118%) GM. Considering the combined effect of tillage and cropping system, CA with R-M rotation showed superior performance in terms of SREY, protein yield, and GM. The distribution of labor use and GM across rotations was grouped into four categories: R-W in low-low (low labor use and low GM), R-M in low-high (low labor use and high GM), R-W-MB and R-M-MB in high-high (high labor use and high GM) and R-R and R-MB in high-low (high labor use and low GM). In conclusion, CA performed better than CT in different winter crops and cropping systems but not in monsoon rice. Our results demonstrate the multiple benefits of partial and full CA-based tillage practices employed with appropriate crop diversification to achieve sustainable food security with greater calorie and protein intake while maximizing farm profitability of intensive rice-based rotational systems.