-

Выращивание картофеля в лунке (Tajikistan)

Description

Технология выращивание картошки в лунке

Это технология используется для получения продукции в зонах дефицита воды и экстремальных условиях. Технология очень проста: капают яму размером 50 х 50 х50 см. на дно ямы засыпают компост или обогащенную почву, и сажают одну или две семенные картошки. По мере роста ботва закапывается, полив осуществляется регулярно.

Цель технологии: улучшение производства картофеля, и тем самым, повышение дохода фермера в таких климатических условиях. Технология показывает хорошие адаптационные возможности в засушливых районах. Метод улучшает доступ к воде.

Основные действия и вложения: Технология очень простая и не требует больших затрат. Основным вкладом для фермеров является приготовление компоста и покупка высококачественных семян. Физическая работа требуется для приготовления ямы и для дальнейшего ухода за картофелем.

Природная\социальная обстановка: Данная технология может быть внедрена, как и в дехканских фермах, так и в приусадебных участках

Location

Location: Хатлонский район, Н.Хусравский район, Таджикистан, Tajikistan

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 68.0274, 37.2359

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. < 0.1 km2 (10 ha))

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation:

Type of introduction
Яма, где выращивается картофель (Каландаров Р. (г.Душанбе. ул.Герцина 3.))

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: root/tuber crops - potatoes
    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
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
  • physical soil deterioration - Pk: slaking and crusting, Pi: soil sealing
SLM group
  • irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility, A6: Residue management

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Схема показывает нижнею часть ямы заполняемую компостом и почвой по мера роста побегов Постепенно до поверхности лунка засыпается обогащенной почвой.

Место расположения: Юг Таджикистана. Н.Хусравский Район, Хатлонская область

Дата: 11.05.2011

Необходимые технические навыки для землепользователей: средний

Основные технические функции: улучшение поверхностной структуры (покрытие коркой, уплотнение)

Выращивание в грядках
Материал: семена картошки
Пояснение: лункование

Навоз / компост / остатки
Материал: компост
Author: Каландаров Р., г.Душанбе. ул.Герцина 3.

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: USD
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = n.a 450
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: n.a
Most important factors affecting the costs
основной фактор - копка лунки
Establishment activities
  1. Копание лунок (Timing/ frequency: None)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Копание лунок га 1.0 8.0 8.0 100.0
Equipment
Инструменты шт 1.0 5.0 5.0 100.0
Plant material
семена кг 200.0 0.45 90.0 1.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 103.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 103.0
Maintenance activities
  1. копка ям (Timing/ frequency: человек ден)
  2. заполнение лунок почвой (Timing/ frequency: человек/день)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
заполнение лунок почвой человек/день 0.1 5.0 0.5 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 0.5
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 0.5

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
Термический класс климата: субтропический
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
Water quality refers to:
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
health

poor
good
education

poor
good
technical assistance

poor
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
good
markets

poor
good
energy

poor
good
roads and transport

poor
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
good
financial services

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
increased

demand for irrigation water
increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
improved

None
None
None

Ecological impacts
surface runoff
increased
decreased

drought impacts
increased
decreased

Off-site impacts

Cost-benefit analysis

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

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

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
very well
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local rainstorm

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known
local windstorm

not well at all
very well
drought

not well at all
very well
general (river) flood

not well at all
very well
Other climate-related consequences
reduced growing period

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known

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%
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
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Технология новая

    Как можно сохранять устойчивость или усилить? по мере возможности
  • при выращивании в лунках урожайность повышается

    Как можно сохранять устойчивость или усилить? при соблюдении агротехники можно получить хороший урожай
  • водосберегательная технология

    Как можно сохранять устойчивость или усилить? полив воды производиться индивидуально
  • технологию можно использовать даже на небольших земельных участках (на приусадебных участках)

    Как можно сохранять устойчивость или усилить? при использовании этой технологии, можно обеспечить картофелем одну семью
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • все что указано выше
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • технология применима только на малых участках
  • None

References

Compiler
  • Rustam Kalandarov
Editors
Reviewer
  • Alexandra Gavilano
  • David Streiff
  • Joana Eichenberger
Date of documentation: Mei 4, 2011
Last update: Nov. 2, 2021
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International