Paddy field ready for planting with corn using Conservation Tillage Technology (Romeo V. Labios)

Conservation Tillage Practices for Corn Production (Philippines)

"Tipid Saka"

Description

Conservation Tillage Technology (Zero Tillage) or "Tipid Saka" - A crop production system which focuses on soil conservation and reducing excessive tillage operations, reduces labor and farm inputs while increasing productivity and profitability

Brief Description about Conservation Tillage Technology

Conservation tillage is the practice of planting seeds through the stubble of last season’s crop, rather than plowing and disking the field. The stubble protects topsoil against loss to wind and rain and reduces chemical run-off to streams. By not plowing, farmers also conserve soil moisture, which can reduce irrigation demands. Farmers can save fuel by reducing the number of farm machinery passes across their fields. In simple terms, Conservation Tillage can be said to lie along a continuum of two other techniques:

Minimum Tillage - mouldboard plowing is replaced by light tillage with tined implements, with or without a low toxicity non-residual herbicide to eliminate both perennial and annual weeds. 30% or more of the soil surface is kept covered by soil residues until final seedbed preparation. Conventional planting equipment can normally be used. Zero Tillage - planting is normally conducted without any preparatory tillage, or seedbed preparation. Normally, this technique requires specialized machinery for planting which can displace residues from the previous crop. A low toxicity non-residual herbicide application is recommended where growing weeds are present. There are numerous potential advantages of conservation tillage:

Farming Benefits
For farmers the primary benefits of CT, achieved with any loss of yields, include:
- More sustainable farming due to dramatic reductions in soil erosion caused by water or wind
- More efficient conservation and utilization of water under dryland conditions
- Improved energy efficiency as a result of reduced fuel requirements associated with fewer field operations
- Greater crop and farm profitability through reduced direct and indirect costs for chemicals, fuel and labor.

Environmental Benefits
At the same time, CT offers a number of significant benefits to the environment, these include:
- Greater biodiversity than with standard cultivation practices where the surface has no crop residues
- Reduces the build-up of soil sediments in reservoirs, drainage, ditches, etc. caused by soil erosion
- Less pollution of drinking water sources caused by run-off of soil, fertilizers and pesticides
- Reduced CO2 emissions due to increased soil organic matter level

Furthermore, crops grown without tillage use water more efficiently, the water-holding capacity of the soil increases, and water losses from runoff and evaporation are reduced. For crops grown without irrigation in drought-prone soils, this more efficient water use can translate into higher yields. In addition, soil organic matter and populations of beneficial insects are maintained, soil and nutrients are less likely to be lost from the field and less time and labor is required to prepare the field for planting. In general, the greatest advantages of reduced tillage are realized on soils prone to erosion and drought. Also achieved are greater water-stability of surface soil aggregates, higher microbial activity and earthworm populations and higher total carbon. Soil loss is less from sprinkler irrigation than in the plow treatment.

Location

Location: San Jose, Abra de Ilog, Sta. Cruz, Sablayan, Laguna, Philippines

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 120.65, 13.33

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (100.0 km²)

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction
Corn grown using Conservation Tillage Technology at 10 days after planting (DAP) (Romeo V. Labios)

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping: cereals - maize, tobacco, vegetables - other, rice
    • Tree and shrub cropping: fruits, other
    Number of growing seasons per year: 2

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by water - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
  • water degradation - Ha: aridification
SLM group
  • minimal soil disturbance
  • irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)
  • cost reduction
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A3: Soil surface treatment (A 3.1: No tillage)

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology area
  • Currency used for cost calculation: USD
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = n.a
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 5.00
Most important factors affecting the costs
Land cultivation- zero tillage offset the costs incurred during land preparation. Labor costs for hand tractor and carabao-drawn plows are substituted by costs of spraying POWER herbicide which is significantly less expensive
Establishment activities
n.a.
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Labour vouluntarily and paid ha 1.0 147.6 147.6 100.0
post harvest ha 1.0 200.0 200.0
Plant material
seed ha 1.0 30.0 30.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
fertilizer ha 1.0 60.0 60.0 100.0
biocides ha 1.0 1.6 1.6 100.0
BIO-N ha 1.0 2.0 2.0 100.0
Other
man person days ha 1.0 70.0 70.0 100.0
marketing: transportation ha 1.0 20.0 20.0 100.0
marketing: packaging ha 1.0 10.0 10.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 541.2
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 541.2
Maintenance activities
  1. 1st side dressing, Release of trichogramma (Timing/ frequency: early vegetative stage / each cropping season)
  2. 2nd side dressing, Off-barring and hilling-up (Timing/ frequency: vegetative stage / each cropping season)
  3. Detasseling (Timing/ frequency: late vegetative stage / each cropping season)
  4. Spray POWER herbicide, Planting (Timing/ frequency: onset of rainy season / each cropping season)
  5. Retouch application of POWER herbicide, Replanting (Timing/ frequency: onset of rainy season / each cropping season)

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Average annual rainfall in mm: 450.0
Thermal climate class: tropics
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
increased

farm income
decreased
increased

workload
increased
decreased

input constraints
increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts
SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
improved

conflict mitigation
worsened
improved

Ecological impacts
excess water drainage
reduced
improved

soil moisture
decreased
increased

soil loss
increased
decreased

Quantity before SLM: 10
Quantity after SLM: 2

soil compaction
increased
reduced

flood impacts
increased
decreased

wind velocity
increased
decreased

soil fertility
decreased
increased

Off-site impacts

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Climate change

-

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Number of households and/ or area covered
300 households
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Easy to establish and maintain
  • Improved production efficiency
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Easy to establish and maintain
  • Improved production efficiency
  • Increase soil water storage
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Soil compaction and flooding
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Soil compaction and flooding

References

Compiler
  • Philippine Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies
Editors
Reviewer
  • David Streiff
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Maart 16, 2011
Last update: Junie 13, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Labios, R.V. Et al. 200-2002," Conservation Tillage Practices in Corn Production After Rice: A Case in San Jose, Mindoro Occidenta"l. Pamhplet published by UPLB, DA-BAR, and National Corn RDE Network. P33:
  • Labios, R.V., Robles, A.Y., Javier, P.A., Garcia, M.U., Gonzales, P.G., Luis, E.M., Labios, J.D., Medina, C.M., Valencia, G.Z., Tamisin, L.L., Ocampo, E.P. Jr., Miciano, D.M. 1999. Annual Report. Enhancing Adaptation and Utilization of Location Sp:
  • Manalo, J.O. 2000. Tipid Saka Technology. Monsanto Philippines, Inc. 7th Floor Ayala Life FGU Center, Madrigal Business Park, Alabang, Muntinlupa City.:
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International