{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030270527946609463, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03634846859730664, 'mean_word_length': 4.747945205479452, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 1, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Comparative Study on Production Realized in Traditional and SRI Methods of Paddy Cultivation in District Katni (M.P.), India

Rice is grown on an estimated 155 million hectares in 114 countries, in an area lying between the latitudes 53°North and 35°South. Asia accounts for nine of the top ten riceproducing countries. Globally, 55 per cent of the area under rice cultivation, that is irrigated, contributes 75 per cent of the total rice production. Rice area in India has fluctuated fairly stably around 43 million hectares during the last two decades, with a maximum rice area of 46.67 million hectares in 2012-2012. Total rice production was also the maximum during this year (104.4 million tonnes). It is noted that rough (unhusked) rice productivity, which was at 10.02 q/ha in 1950-1951, reached a maximum of 33.03 q/ha in 20122013. The average rice yield in the year of 2012-13 found to be 22.28 q/ha. System of Rice Intensification (SRI) emerged in the 1980‟s as a synthesis of locally advantageous rice production practices encountered in Madagascar by Fr Henri de Laulanie, a Jesuit Priest who had been working there since 1961 (Chourasia and Singh, 1972; Fale et al., 1985; Gupta et al., 1985). But, it is Dr. Norman Uphoff from Cornell International Institute for Food and Agriculture, Ithaca, USA, who had brought this method to the notice of outside world in the late 1990s (Anthofer, 2004). Today SRI is being adopted in many states in India and the response from farmers has been overwhelming seeing the benefits of the International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 7 Number 01 (2018) Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com


Introduction
Rice is grown on an estimated 155 million hectares in 114 countries, in an area lying between the latitudes 53°North and 35°South. Asia accounts for nine of the top ten riceproducing countries. Globally, 55 per cent of the area under rice cultivation, that is irrigated, contributes 75 per cent of the total rice production. Rice area in India has fluctuated fairly stably around 43 million hectares during the last two decades, with a maximum rice area of 46.67 million hectares in 2012-2012. Total rice production was also the maximum during this year (104.4 million tonnes). It is noted that rough (unhusked) rice productivity, which was at 10.02 q/ha in 1950-1951, reached a maximum of 33.03 q/ha in 2012-2013. The average rice yield in the year of 2012-13 found to be 22.28 q/ha. System of Rice Intensification (SRI) emerged in the 1980"s as a synthesis of locally advantageous rice production practices encountered in Madagascar by Fr Henri de Laulanie, a Jesuit Priest who had been working there since 1961 (Chourasia and Singh, 1972;Fale et al., 1985;Gupta et al., 1985). But, it is Dr. Norman Uphoff from Cornell International Institute for Food and Agriculture, Ithaca, USA, who had brought this method to the notice of outside world in the late 1990s (Anthofer, 2004). Today SRI is being adopted in many states in India and the response from farmers has been overwhelming seeing the benefits of the  (Haldar et al., 2012;Sarath and Thilak, 2004) In this study comparison has been made Returns realized in traditional and SRI methods of Paddy Cultivation.

Materials and Methods
The study was conducted in Katni district of Madhya Pradesh. This district has been selected purposively because large number of paddy cultivators adopted SRI method of paddy cultivation. From the selected district 24 villages were selected for the present study and then selected 6 SRI and 6 non SRI farmers from each village with the help of random sampling method. Thus 288 farmers (144 SRI and 144 non SRI) were selected for the present study. Data collected through observation and interview with the farmers. Collected data have been classified, tabulated and interpreted.

Production realized in traditional and SRI method
Besides the cost incurred in paddy cultivation with traditional and SRI methods per hectare basis, the yield realized analysis for both the methods is the relevant tool where the prime motive of the activity is profit-measure in the production process. Economist for obvious reason has not developed suitable measures to evaluate cost, returns and profit in terms other than money, because mostly yield goes on fluctuating with the several biotic and abiotic factors (Jaiswal et al., 1996;Mohandas and Thomas, 1997;Jayapal Reddy et al., 2013). In the present study, the yield parameter for comparison of profitability is also considered because general farmers looking towards higher yield from their farms.
It has been found in various studies that the yield of paddy is directly influencing with the level of technologies used in the production, method of practices adopted and certain other reasons. It can be said that the technological status and methods (practices) in agriculture, the paddy production and productivity is being recognized to change. The problem is that due to ignorance about improved practices in paddy cultivation and suitable methods of cultivation, general farmers were found to have not used judicious application of improved technology and suitable methods of cultivation (Yuan, 2002;Sivanagaraju, 2006).
It is considerable point that, the actual farm yields realized by the paddy growers with traditional and SRI methods of cultivation, needs to be compared under different situations to be of more use for decision making. The most widely used term "potential" yield is defined as the yield of the crop which is obtainable on farmers fields under farmers environments with the modern production inputs and techniques giving maximum yield. The table 1 revealed the quantification of yield gap between traditional and SRI method of paddy cultivation.
The quantification of yield gap between traditional method and SRI method of paddy cultivation revealed that the SRI method of paddy growers realized, on an average, higher yield in terms of grain product i.e. 32.94 quintals per hectare, while, the traditional method of paddy growers realized, on an average, 24.52 quintals per hectare. On the other hand, the traditional method of paddy growers realized, on an average, higher byproduct i.e. 18.22 quintals per hectare, while the SRI method of paddy growers realized, on an average, 16.93 quintals per hectare of byproduct.
It is concluded that the SRI farmers have been realized more up to 8.42 quintals of paddy grain per hectare over the traditional method of paddy cultivation. On the other hand, the SRI farmers have been realized the lower i.e.1.29 quintals of paddy by-product per hectare over the traditional method of paddy cultivation On the basis of above facts, findings and discussion the hypotheses "III" i.e. "There is no difference between yield realized with "SRI method" and "traditional method" of paddy cultivation" is rejected. It is found that "there are differences in the yield realization among traditional and SRI methods of paddy cultivation".
It is indicated by the above facts and findings that there exists a reservoir of untapped yield potential of paddy cultivation with new the concept of SRI method in the areas of traditional method of paddy cultivation (Sahu et al., 1993;Nagabhushanam and Herle, 1997;Ying et al., 1998). The contributing factors as derived in the study show that nearly 34.33 per cent yield of the paddy growers can be increased merely by adopting SRI method rather than traditional method of cultivation.
The quantification of yield gap between traditional method and SRI method of paddy cultivation revealed that the SRI method of paddy growers realized on an average higher yield in terms of grain product i.e. 32.94 quintal per hectare, while, the traditional method of paddy growers realized on an average 24.52 quintal per hectare. On the other hand, the traditional method of paddy growers realized on an average higher byproduct i.e. 18.22 quintals per hectare, while the SRI method of paddy growers realized on an average 16.93 quintals per hectare of by-product. It is concluded that the SRI farmers have been realized more of 8.42 quintals of paddy grain per hectare over the traditional method of paddy cultivation. On the other hand, the SRI farmers have been realized lower of 1.29 quintals of paddy by-product per hectare over traditional method of paddy cultivation.