|
GO-MUTRA
AND DUNG BASED PRODUCTS AS VIABLE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUSTAINABLE
AGRICULTURE FOR OUR RURAL MARGINAL FARMERS
We can be proud of
the achievements of independent India in eradicating a
begging-bowl image and in creating self-confidence in
our agricultural capability. The tasks now relate to the
total eradication of hunger and the promotion of an evergreen
revolution rooted in the principles of ecology, social
and gender equity and employment generation
- M. S. Swaminathan
Introduction
Farming
is the oldest wealth-creating business known to man.
Current scientific strategies to maintain and improve
yields in support of high-input agriculture place great
emphasis on 'fail-safe' techniques for each component
of the production sequence with little consideration
of the integration of these components in a holistic,
systems approach. Research for sustainable agricultural
practices requires a far greater emphasis on such an
approach than now is fashionable, despite all the rhetoric
given politically to sustainability. The fact remains
that stable and lower human population is an integral
component of sustainable agriculture. With the world
population passing the 6 billion mark, the debate over
our ability to sustain a fast growing population is
heating up. The populations of the world’s poorest countries
have been growing rapidly, increasing the demand for
food. At the same time environmental degradation – both
natural and man made – has reduced the ability of farmers
to grow food in many areas. A lot has been written about
the significant contribution due to "Green Revolution"
and correctly so, especially considering our failure
to control unsustainable population growth. Thanks due
to the high yielding varieties we are still self-sufficient
in rice and wheat, but for how long? Hardly any one
argues that modern agriculture is sustainable. Besides,
high input agriculture is increasingly recognised as
an environment degrading and not profitable. We now
recognise that technical progress may have social and
environmental costs we cannot pay. Even, late Shri.
C. Subramaniam who remained committed to agriculture
and the welfare of farmers all through his life, realized
that the productivity improvements achieved as a result
of Green Revolution were plateauing and there was a
need for a holistic approach for agriculture while continuing
emphasis on marketing and income to farmers.
What
kind of agriculture is most appropriate for our rural
marginalised farmers?
An
increasingly commercialised agriculture has helped total
yields keep pace with needs, but has often cut small
farmers out of the equation. According to the International
Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)’s Rural
Poverty Report 2001 : The challenge of ending rural
poverty (p.15) three quarters of the world’s 1.2
billion poor (living on less than $1 a day) live in
rural areas, where agriculture remains the major source
of livelihood. Sometimes rural marginal farmers find
they no longer have access to enough food to feed their
families – in other words they are ‘food insecure’.
The dwindling per capita availability of land that decreased
from 0.5 ha in 1950 to 0.15 ha in 2000 because of population
escalation, is likely to reduce further to 0.08 ha in
2020. Therefore poverty - of smallholder farmers has
often increased forcing them to migrate to cities. According
to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) the
1996 World Food Summit target of merely halving the
numbers of the food insecure to 400 million people by
2015 will not now be met until 2030 or even 2061. The
experience about the agricultural sustainability world
over is same and that is as economic and environmental
resource capacities vary in time and space, the perceptions
of and priorities for development also vary along the
lines of ecological, economical, political and social
dimension. Therefore, if 60 per cent of the world’s
poor are still going to be rural in 2025, it is clear
that poor farmers will need to be protected and supported
so that they can continue to produce most of the food
they need to eat, as well as to produce a surplus to
sell on local markets to help feed the local community
as a whole, for decades yet to come. Approximately 80%
of the total farm holdings in India fall in the category
of small and marginal with an average holding of less
than 1 ha. Therefore, of what kind of agriculture is
most appropriate for our rural marginalised farmers?
Future of agriculture, so too they tend to assume a
particular technological approach for all – the agrochemical
based approach, which took off in the mid1960s and produced
the green revolution, and is soon to be supplemented
by increasing numbers of genetically modified (GM) crops.
No doubt, advances in agricultural technology - including
the introduction of new varieties of crops – have been
and will continue to be essential if the world’s growing
demands for food is to be met. However, decreasing yields
but increasing input costs – more fertiliser is needed
to maintain the same yields. Meanwhile the cost of fertiliser,
and of pesticides, is increasing. This is in large part
because it has been almost wholly a technological revolution.
It has failed to tackle crucial issues of poverty and
inequitable access to land and food, and has even in
some cases exacerbated them (through indebtedness and
land loss, for example, through loss of labour opportunities
due to mechanisation, or the inability to afford inputs).
It has also sometimes exacerbated hunger because the
components of traditional balanced diets – a variety
of crop types, wild plants, traditionally preferred
foods – have been displaced, along with local knowledge
of both foods and farming. GM technology is being envisaged
as a second or doubly green revolution. However, as
is clear from the first (Green revolution), technology
alone will not solve the problems of small farmers and
of hunger and poverty. They too are likely to be too
expensive and even less within the control of small
farmers. It is clear that the combination of agrochemical
or GM agriculture with increasing liberalisation of
agricultural trade is not about to be the answer for
millions of poor farmers throughout the developing world.
Many have tried agrochemical agriculture, and they have
failed. Therefore, many are now turning to sustainable
agriculture techniques as a practical and positive alternative.
Organic farming has been the main agricultural practice
throughout our history and it is correct to assume that
although the average life span was shorter the earlier
generations were free of many diseases that are today
caused by the intake of toxic substances. People are
now seriously concerned with the protection of the environment
and even more about safeguarding their health. As now
people realize that by consuming the standard agriculture
based food products they are constantly taking in small
quantities of poison of various kinds and much of this
comes from the chemical pesticides that are used to
produce food crops. Modern farming requires large inputs
of chemical fertilizer and stimulants to increase yields
from hybrids. However for poor rural marginal farmers
the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides have
made agriculture very expensive and to maintain yields
in deteriorating soils increasing doses of modern chemical
inputs have had to be used. Unlike the farmers in the
developed countries, who often have more than one source
of income, those in the developing countries are very
poor and agriculture is their sole livelihood and a
single crop failure could bring forth nothing but social
disaster. In these countries poverty is a self-reinforcing
phenomenon which has also brought with it chronic indebtedness.
Even if farmers are able to obtain good harvest marketing
has become a problem in most developing countries. Today
the farmer is at the mercy of the private trader and
the middleman who is bent on maximizing profits by exploiting
the producer. The time has now come to consider alternative
means of sustaining our agriculture and to protect the
farmer from low prices, high indebtedness and to ensure
that production incentives remain. For small marginal
farmers, organic farming is most suitable as considerable
vertical integration is possible and appreciable cost
savings could be achieved through the recycling of waste
and other materials that are available within the system.
A
considerable amount of literature is available on the
practice of organic farming. Our purpose is not to elaborate
on the practical aspects and the basic ingredients of
organic farming, but to indicate its social and economic
advantages. Where organic farming is practiced, the
farmer will use natural processes to enhance productivity,
maintain the nutritive status of the soil to be less
dependent on external resources and to keep his costs
down. This will strengthen his social and financial
position in the society. Organic farming uses natural
materials which are the by products of the farm and
these include the production of the key element in organic
farming, which is the making of compost. Compost does
not destroy, it is environmentally safe, it enhances
the nutritive qualities of the soil and it natures the
organisms in the soils, which are generally destroyed
by the use of chemical manures and pesticides, and significantly
reduces cost. Besides the social and economic benefits
of organic farming to the small farmer are self-evident.
The making of compost means that the farmer has to raise
a large number of cattle and he has to grow grass to
feed them. Cattle will not only supply the dung and
the urine for the making of compost but will also produce
milk, which is the raw material for the production of
a wide range of dairy products. Organic farming automatically
leads to the diversification of farm activity.
Today
there is a subsidy on chemical fertilizer while the
farmer is dependent on market forces for the price at
which he obtains supplies of fertilizer. Furthermore,
he has to obtain credit to have ready cash to buy supplies.
On the other side the government has to have the funds
to meet the subsidy and this imposes a strain on the
budget. External agencies like the IMF and the World
Bank stipulate that even production subsidies should
be discontinued with. One of the major advantages of
organic farming therefore is that both the farmer and
the government is able to minimize expenditure, and
in particular, the farmer is able to make environmental
friendly compost without heavy outlays. Even if some
farmers would have to buy organic manure the price indeed
will be very low as this produced out of what are called
today waste materials. Specialists state that organic
manure will prevent weed growth, as against chemical
manures, which stimulate weeds. In the present circumstances
many farmers use poisonous chemicals to keep weeds in
check. Going back to the natural methods of farming
has benefits, which are self-reinforcing. It creates
a safer environment for both the farmer and the consumer.
Organic farming produces healthy plants and safeguards
the health of animals because the grass that the cattle
feed on is not fertilized by chemical nutrients. One
of the important considerations is that organic farming
can be deployed anywhere and in any kind of agriculture
in the country, irrespective of where the land is situated
and it is applicable to all crops without exception.
Organic
farming versus industrial agriculture
It
is not our purpose to advocate for or against organic
farming versus industrial agriculture approach, instead,
we are looking for solutions that are based on ecological
and biological principles and have significantly fewer
environmental costs. There is such an alternative that
has been pioneered by organic farmers. Organic agriculture
is described by the United Nations Food & Agriculture
Organization (FAO) as "a holistic production management
system which promotes and enhances agro-ecosystem health,
including biodiversity, biological cycles, and soil
biological activity." Our current world food production
is more than sufficient to provide an adequate diet
to all humans, yet more than 840 million people are
suffering from hunger. Hunger is a problem of poverty,
distribution, and access to food. The question then,
is not "how to feed the world", but rather,
how can we develop sustainable farming methods that
have the potential to help the world feed and sustain
itself. Organic management practices promote soil health,
water conservation and can reverse environmental degradation.
The emphasis on small-scale family farms has the potential
to revitalize rural areas and their economies. Counter
to the widely held belief that industrial agriculture
is more efficient and productive, small farms produce
far more per acre than large farms. Industrial agriculture
relies heavily on monocultures, the planting of a single
crop throughout the farm, because they simplify management
and allow the use of heavy machinery. Larger farms in
the third world also tend to grow export luxury crops
instead of providing staple foods to their growing population.
Small farmers, especially in the Third World have integrated
farming systems where they plant a variety of crops
maximizing the use of their land. They are also more
likely to have livestock on their farm, which provides
a variety of animal products to the local economy and
manure for improving soil fertility. In such farms,
though the yield per acre of a single crop might be
lower than a large farm, total production per acre of
all the crops and various animal products is much higher
than large conventional farms. Thus organic methods
can help small family farms survive, increase farm productivity,
repair decades of environmental damage and knit communities
into smaller, more sustainable distribution networks
— all leading to improved food security around the world.
Therefore at this juncture further work on the development
of agriculture biotechnology products based on cow urine
and dung offers immense potential as viable alternative
for sustainable agriculture for our rural marginal farmers.
Cattle
based products for rural marginal farmers
Agriculture
dates back about 10,000-12,000 years to the Neolithic
Age; it began in the Tigris-Euphrates, the Indus, and
the Nile river valleys. The development of agriculture
took two major roads. One has survived until today and
is based on the river valleys (fluvisols) and to terrace
soils (andosols). This system was based on very fertile
soils that periodically were enriched by wind or water-borne
materials. The other road was the one of shifting cultivation,
which today is of minor importance as only a small fraction
(200 million people) still relies on this very versatile
system. The late 1600th and early 1700th
centuries witnessed the agricultural breakthrough that
generally doubled crop yields – to 2 tons cereals per
hectare. Fodder production was boasted by the use of
clovers, which gradually spread from Spain, pH in soils
was raised, drainage took place and, very importantly,
the urine and manure from livestock were carefully saved
and applied to the cropland. In addition, refuse and
night soil were collected from towns and utilised in
vegetable and crop production. Therefore, mankind has
used animal manure as a nutrient source strategically
for a very long time in order to optimize crop production.
Animal is found in a large variety of forms and each
form contain in addition varying amounts of nutrients.
Such variation causes huge differences in the degradability
of the organic matter. The problems associated with
the use of animal manure are mainly the result of the
development in animal husbandry in the last 30-35 years.
The animals have been concentrated on still fewer and
larger farms and an analogous development has taken
place in plant production. Ecological agriculture aims
to have animals on the farms as well as to include legumes
in the crop rotation. Fertiliser and fodder requirements
seem to balance when one cow is present per hectare.
This will result in an average amount of 10-15 tons
manure per hectare. Even with this amount of manure,
it is necessary to steward the available nutrients in
ecological agriculture. The nutrient content in the
manure varies greatly; not only between manure from
different animals but also between manure from different
housing systems with different storage systems (causing
differences in NH3 losses) and between farms.
It is thus difficult to generalise, but, nevertheless,
this is exactly what is done today. The quality of the
fodder strongly influences the nutrient amount in the
manure as 70-90% of the ingested nitrogen and Phosphorus
are excreted again in the manure. However, the amount
of roughage in the fodder ratio will also influence
the amounts of nutrients in the manure. Nutrient quality
of manure produced from cow is superior to other bovine
sources. After the manure has left the animal several
changes can occur. Wash-water and rainwater typically
cause a dilution of the slurry or urine. Liquid can
be lost from farmyard manure. Ammonia (NH3)
losses occur from the stable and the storage. However,
they also occur when the animal is grazing or when the
manure is spread on the fields. Denitrification is another
process that occurs in the stable and during the storage.
From uncovered manure or compost heaps extensive leaching
can occur as well as loss of carbon under aerobic conditions.
Systematic
collection and use of urine for fertilization purposes
only dates back approximately one century. There is
almost no P in urine, thus only N and K are considered
in the following. More than 90% of the total N content
in urine is NH4+-N. Also the K
is predominantly present in inorganic form. This means
that urine is comparable to commercial inorganic N and
K fertiliser. The average K content in cattle urine
is 0.7%, and when urine is applied to old grass sods
strong effects are often seen – effects that have often
been confused with an N effect - although it is primarily
a K response.
Composting
is a well-established process in ecological agriculture
followed in India since ancient time. It has become
a process of almost religious importance to some ecologists.
However, it must be considered carefully what material
is used for composting. In many cases, the degradation
processes may as well take place on or in the soil in
the fields. A well-composted farmyard manure is due
to its structure easy to spread on the fields. In addition
smaller amounts must be handled after composting because
a lot of carbon is lost during composting. It is mostly
free of toxic substances that otherwise would depress
plant growth. When well composted (temperature >55°C
- up to 70-80°C, with pH values of 8.7-8.9) most pathogens
and weed seeds will be killed. Nitrogen will be present
mostly in organic forms so the direct impact on plant
growth will be small. Compost is very well suited for
improving soil fertility. Application of compost may
have a reducing effect on attacks of soil pathogens.
Disadvantages of composting: At pH values of 8.3, 10%
of NH4+ will be converted to NH3.
Thus a lot of nitrogen may be lost, typically 10-30%.
Therefore, it is difficult to estimate the fertiliser
effect, and to a large extent compost cannot be regarded
as a fertiliser but as a soil amendment due to its slow
release of nutrients. Composting is well suited for
our small marginal farmers. The quality of the compost
depends on the time and temperature and only very little
on the microorganisms involved. Bacteria and fungi are
important during the early stages. In the presence of
a soluble, highly available nutrient source, temperatures
resulting from the biodegradation process range from
50 to 65°C in early managed composting systems. Few
fungi grow above 50°C and fungi lack the high growth
rates of bacteria, so these temperatures will kill the
fungi and promote the growth of thermopiles bacteria.
Because biological reactions such as degradation double
with each 10°C rise in temperature, this will eventually
speed up the composting processes and will further enhance
the destruction of pathogens and weed seeds. Fungi are
the major organisms in the latter part of the composting
process when cellulose, lignin, and bacterial dead bodies
make up the available substrate. Fungi are responsible
for 30-40% of the weight loss and are related to the
biochemical events that occur during humification in
the latter stages. The final characteristics vary with
the original substrate, the degree of maturity, and
the composting process itself.
Slurry
is a mixture of faeces and urine. In addition, varying
amounts of water and straw are present. Slurry from
cattle contains approximately 60% faeces and 40% urine,
while the average dry matter content is 8%. The main
component in urine is urea. Also some salts are present
together with vitamins, hormones, and enzymes. There
is practically no P in urine, but K can be found in
mineral form, making it easily available for plants.
Faeces are composed of undigested or non-absorbed plant
components: fiber, lignin, cellulose, minerals, water,
and minerals. In addition, it contains excreted products
from the ingestion channel, and finally, a lot of bacteria
and their constituents. The nitrogen present in the
faeces can be separated into two parts, that is (i)
a slowly degradable fraction that has resisted degradation
in the animal, and (ii) and easily degradable fraction
that mainly consists of microbial protein. This latter
part constitutes 50-67 % of the total N in the faeces.
In a slurry storage tank, an anaerobic digestion takes
place because oxygen diffuses very slowly in liquid.
Slurry systems are very common, and slurry has often
been applied using the N content as a determinant for
dosing. This can result in over-fertilization with P
and K. Phosphorus in slurry is normally mainly present
in an inorganic form, and generally the effect of P
in slurry can be compared with mineral fertiliser-P.
Inorganic P is mainly present as calcium phosphates,
of which some may have a rather low solubility. Generally,
more P is present in organic form in fresh slurry but
it is gradually converted into inorganic forms during
storage. The conversion happens via the microbial biomass,
which can have a turnover time of 10-20 weeks at 20-25°C.
Consequently, most organic P will be microbial when
slurry is applied to the field. It is recommended that
slurry be stored at least two months (especially under
cold conditions) in order to reduce the parasite load.
In composting material three days with 50°C is sufficient
to kill all parasites, including their eggs.
Future
directions
Major
lacuna at this point is to ensure a product, which will
have an uniform acceptability in terms of quality product.
At this stage no detailed scientific study has been
conducted to ensure to maintain uniform quality of the
product. Our endeavor is to conduct thorough scientific
studies on cow based products. To achieve the objective
we have recently developed a technology, which consists
of use of novel bacteria isolated from Sahiwal cow’s
milk. To our knowledge, it is the first report demonstrating
the isolation of plant growth promoting bacteria from
cow’s milk. India has the largest area under sugarcane
among cane growing countries of the world. Its sugar
industry ranks as the second major agro-industry in
the country. Press mud is a "waste" product
obtained during sugar manufacture. Many of these sugar
mills uses yeast to ferment molasses for producing ethyl
alcohol. Spent wash, a distillery effluent of the fermentation
process along with press mud are considered as pollutants
and therefore can not be disposed off into the environment.
We have invented a process of manufacturing plant growth
enhancer, which utilises press mud and/or spent wash
as a raw material. Fermentation of press mud and/or
spent wash, using our novel bacteria results into a
value addition product, useful for enhancing growth
of plants. Our plant growth promoting microbes propagates
well in the fermented press mud. Press mud like any
other organic manure affects the physical, chemical
and biological properties of the soils. It also helps
to increase water stable aggregates in soils. Our product
significantly enhances plant growth of wide range of
plants representing economically important horticulture,
floriculture, and agronomic crops in the range of 10-60%.
The product also enhances growth of wide range of agronomic,
horticulture, and floriculture, plants. We have developed
the technology using novel microbial synergistic mixture
of bacteria and cost effective manufacturing procedures.
United States and Global patent applications (NF404/2001)
have been filed by Council of Scientific & Industrial
Research for our invention. Agricultural and environmental
industry would therefore clearly benefit from our simple,
less expensive method of microbial inoculants for plants,
seeds and soil as it may help in economising crop production
and maintenance of soil structure, fertility and healthy
ecosystem. Collectively these activities will determine
the ability of the soil to sustain plant production.
Besides the technology is very user friendly and cost
effective for its wide scale use by our marginal farmers.
We
are working in close collaboration with Go-Vigyan Anusandhan
Kendra, Nagpur since May, 2000 to develop agriculture
biotechnology products based on cow urine and dung having
immense potential as viable alternative for sustainable
agriculture for our rural marginal farmers. Go-mutra
is being used for a very long time world over in combination
with various plants and/or dung to manufacture plant
growth promoting products. However, as described earlier
there is almost no P in urine and therefore we are currently
working to solve this problem so that Go-mutra
based products can be fortified with P, thereby making
it a more desirable as plant growth promoter. We have
also discovered that cow urine and dung are two important
bio matters which can be used methodically to get better
result in controlling several plant pathogenic fungi
viz. Colletotrichum capsici, Sclerotium rolfsii,
Alternaria alternata, Penicillium sp., Rhizoctonia
solani, Phytophthora palmivora, Fusarium moniliforme,
Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, Helminthosporium spp.
and Cladosporium spp and promote growth
of Maize (Zea mays), Lady finger (Abelmoschus
esculentus), rice (Oryza sativa), lauki
(Luffa cylindrica), tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum),
khira (Cucumis sativus), wheat (Triticum aestivum),
pea (Pisum sativum), and balsam (Impatiens
balsamina) up to 10-30% under green house conditions.
The traditional information about the use of cow urine
and dung the two important bio matters which can be
used methodically to get better result in controlling
plant pathogenic fungi and promoting plant growth should
not be ignored. This will encourage the marginal farmers
to redirect sufficient resources to preserving and enhancing
agricultural environments in a much more meaningful
way. Since sustainability lacks the high visibility
and short-term payoffs, reconciling investments in long-term
sustainable agriculture with farmers' short-term needs
will require creative plans and policies at every step.
C. S. Nautiyal*, S. Mehta, H. B. Singh, and P. Pushpangadan
National Botanical Research Institute, Rana Pratap Marg,
Lucknow 226 001
. E-mail:
nautiyalnbri@yahoo.com]
|
