Report of an On-Farm Surveyof the

Greater Sylhet RegionWheat Growers' Practices, Perceptions, and their Implications

(Part of a WRC Monograph series of surveys beginning in 1990)

MONOGRAPH No. 16BANGLADESH AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE

WHEAT RESEARCH CENTRENASHIPUR, DINAJPUR

July 2001

Report of an On-Farm Survey of the

Sylhet RegionWheat Growers' Practices, Perceptions, and their Implications(Part of a WRC Monograph series of surveys beginning in 1990)

Data Collated and Report Written on behalf of all WRC Scientist Participants

by

Craig A. Meisner, CIMMYT NRG Wheat Specialist & Agronomist

The Survey was funded in part by the USAID Grant for Whole Family Training and Grower Demonstrations

MONOGRAPH No. 16BANGLADESH AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE

WHEAT RESEARCH CENTRENASHIPUR, DINAJPUR

July 2001

iii

PREFACE

Just as was the case in 1999, the wheat production based on the area of7.90 lac hectares reached historically high yields due to the favorableweather and the extensive wheat training that has occurred under USAIDfunding for this year 2000/02 and the past 4 years.

This year, the WRC went to an area where wheat is not grown extensively,though the Whole Family Training has been ongoing for 2 years inpartnership with the MACH project, again funded by USAID.

I wish to express my sincere appreciation to scientists of WRC and otherdisciplines of BARI for participating in the survey. Thanks also given to Dr.Craig A. Meisner, CIMMYT agronomist and his staff for providing assistancein conducting the survey and taking the responsibility in preparing this surveyreport.

Dr. A.B.S. HossainDirector, Wheat Research Centre

Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Surveys like the one we did in Sylhet could not be done without the supportof our donors–USAID funds for Whole Family Training were used and weremain very grateful to our donors. Scientists from the WRC of BARI not onlydevelop technologies through their research, but are willing to learn fromthe growers what technologies are needed in the future and how to betterdisseminate these. The WRC has a rich history of doing these surveys andCIMMYT is very fortunate to remain a committed partner to their cause. Dr.A.B.S. Hossain’s leadership during the survey was evident and because ofthat leadership, we really had fun learning from the growers their problemsand listening to their proposed solutions.

Dr. Craig A. MeisnerCIMMYT NRG Agronomist &

Cornell University Adjunct ProfessorCIMMYT Bangladesh

iv

SUMMARY

A survey of 66 wheat growers was conducted in the Sylhet region in January2001. However, of those, only ~36 had wheat in their fields this year. Theaverage farm size among the growers was 1.7 ha, and the average wheatarea within the farm was only 0..1 ha. The average wheat yield estimate forthis year was only 1.73, due to the lateness of sowing–past December 15th.There was far less use of the Chinese hand tractor (CHT) than in recent yearswith only 10% of the growers using this implement. In the recent past surveyof Faridpur/Barisal, over75% used the CHT. Ninety percent of the wheatarea was irrigated–the highest of any surveyed area in the past.

In this area and year, there was more FYM applied than in any other areaor year surveyed except Jessore/Kushtia, reflecting the dependence ondraft animals for tillage. An average of 6.5 t/ha of FYM was used by wheatgrowers. The average fertilizer rates for wheat of urea:TSP:MP were appliedat 203:98:64 kg/ha, respectively. The is in contrast with the recommendationsof 178:130:67 indicating that urea and MP are used more widely thanprevious surveys. Applications of zinc and sulfer were similar to previouslysurveyed years and areas.

Fifty-two percent of those growers surveyed indicated they felt wheat yieldswere increasing over the years, 35% were not changing with the remainderfeeling yields were decreasing. There was a lot of fallow land not beingsown to any crop, but those lands with irrigation showed a very diversecropping pattern.

The major problems with wheat cultivation defined by the growers werelack of irrigation, seed unavailability, excess moisture at sowing, while 33%stated there were no major constraints at all.

These surveys continue to provide a grower-defined database ofinformation for the researchers, extensionists and policy makers to use.

v

List of Abbreviations or Colloquial Words Used in This Document

Akbar: National variety released in 1987

Aman: Summer based cropping

Aus: Spring-based cropping

BADC: Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation

BARI: Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute

Boro: Winter-based cropping

CD: Cow Dung

CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center

CRI: Crown Root Initiation

FYM: Farm yard Manure

Gourab: Wheat Variety released in 1999

ha: Hectare

K: Potassium

K2O: Potassium oxide

Kanchan: National variety released in 1983

kg: Kilogram

MP: Murate of Potash

N: Nitrogen

P: Phosphorus

P2O5: Pentaoxide phosphate

Protiva: Variety released in 1997

S: Sulfur

Sourav: Variety released in 1999

Sonalika: Variety released in 1968

t: Ton (Metric)

T-aman: Transplanted summer rice

Thana: Administrative unit composed of 8-10 villages

TSP: Triple Super Phosphate

USAID: United States Agency for International Development

WRC: Wheat Research Centre

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

List of Abbreviations or Colloquial Words Used in This Document . . . . . . . . v

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

SYNOPSIS OF THE AREA SURVEYED AND GENERAL COMMENTS . . . . . . . . . . 3

WHEAT PRODUCTION PRACTICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Wheat Variety Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Expected Wheat Yields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Seed Sources and Storage Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Seedbed Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Fertilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Farm Yard Manure (7); Nitrogen (8); Phosphorus (9);Potassium (9); Other nutrients (10)

Irrigation Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Yield Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

GROWERS' PERCEPTIONS AND PROBLEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Reasons for Growing Wheat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Growers' Problems with Wheat Cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Sustainability of Wheat in Sylhet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS SURVEYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

IMPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

APPENDIX I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Survey Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

APPENDIX II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Grower Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

1Saunders, D.A. 1990. Report of an on-farm survey: Dinajpur District. Monograph No. 6. Bangladesh Agricultural Research

Institute, What Research Centre, Nashipur Dinajpur. Available at the CIMMYT Bangladesh office, Uttara.

2Saunders, D.A. 1991. Report of an on-farm survey: Jessore and Kushtia (Districts). Monograph No. 8. Bangladesh

Agricultural Research Institute, What Research Centre, Nashipur Dinajpur. Available at the CIMMYT Bangladesh office, Uttara.

3Meisner C.A. 1992. Report of an on-farm survey of the Mymensingh Region and Tangail. Monograph No. 12. Bangladesh

Agricultural Research Institute, What Research Centre, Nashipur Dinajpur. Available at the CIMMYT Bangladesh office, Uttara.

4Meisner C.A. 1996. Report of an on-farm survey of the Comilla Region. Monograph No. 13. Bangladesh Agricultural

Research Institute, What Research Centre, Nashipur Dinajpur. Available at the CIMMYT Bangladesh office, Uttara.

5Meisner C.A. 1999. Report of an on-farm survey of the Faridpur Barisal Region. Monograph No. 14. Bangladesh Agricultural

Research Institute, What Research Centre, Nashipur Dinajpur. Available at the CIMMYT Bangladesh office, Uttara.

1

Figure 1. Area in orange color indicates thesurveyed area for 2001. Otherareas surveyed in other years aredesignated in other colors.

INTRODUCTION

This report is the sixth of a series of on-farm diagnostic surveys, thefirst conducted in 1990 in Dinajpur, the second in 1991 in Jessore/Kushtia,the third in 1992 in Mymensingh, the fourth in Comilla in 1996, and the fifthin Faridpur 1999 (Fig. 1). The purpose of these on-farm diagnostic surveysis to further acquaint the Bangladesh wheat researchers with wheatproducers, their practices, and the problems they face toward furtheringwheat production in Bangladesh. According to wheat yield andproduction trends in Bangladesh, the past two decades has shown littleincrease in either production or area, with the exception being the past

seven years with an increasing yield,area, and production trend (Fig. 2). Also, note that boro (winter) riceexpanded in area and productionduring the 2001 winter season,illustrating the general noncompetitiveness of wheat andboro rice for the same land (seeIFPRI Res. Report, Morris, et al., 1998).

These surveys help researchersunderstand the problems of wheatproduction in their future researchplans, addressing those issuesdefined by growers. The formatcontained in this survey follows thatof previous surveys compiled andwritten by David Saunders1 2 andCraig Meisner 3 4 5. Please refer tothe previous surveys, available at theWRC in Dinajpur or the CIMMYTBangladesh offices.

2

,

,

, ,

,

,

,,

,

,

,

,

, , , ,

,

,

, ,

,

,,

,

, ,

,

&

&

& &&

&

&

&

&

&&

&

& & & &

&

&

&

& &

& &

& &

&&

75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00'010

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3Wheat Area (million ha), Production (Mt), and Yield (t/ha)

Wheat Area Wheat Production Wheat Yields& ,

2001 yield and production data are DAE estimates

Figure 2 Wheat area, production, and yields over 26 years (DAEand BBS data)

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

Scientists from the Wheat Research Centre (WRC) and other divisionsof the Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) (see Appendix I fora list of participants) were divided into four teams of 5-6 researchers for theone-day duration of the survey. The survey was conducted January 28,2001 in the Greater Sylhet region including the following thanas :

Thana Percent of SurveySylhet Sadar 25.8%Bishwanath 7.6%Jointapur 4.5%Srimongal 60.6%Moulavibazar sadar 1.5%Total 100.0%

These 5 thanas represent 2 of the districts, namely, Sylhet andMoulivibazar that were surveyed in 2001 (Fig. 1). Many of these areas hadwheat cultivation due to inputs of an NGO, MACH, and the WRC’sinvolvement through Whole Family Training. Commonly areas were chosenfor each team to visit where there was known to be wheat growing in thefields. This was not easy in the Sylhet region compared to previous surveyswhere there were plenty of fields with wheat. Each team was assigned oneof those areas for that day and fields and/or growers were randomlyselected within that area. BADC contract seed growers were avoided.Growers were interviewed by members of the team using a formal surveysheet (updated from the experiences of the previous years’ surveys),

3

covering aspects of crop management and growers’ perceptions ofproblems (Appendix II delineates the survey instrument). The growers’ fieldswere inspected and data collected including crop condition, pest ratings,quantifiable yield parameters such as spikes meter-2, spikelets spike-1, etc.Since wheat during this period was mostly in the late tillering and earlyflowering stages, no crop cuts were obtained. However, both the growersand the enumerators gave a wheat yield estimate. The total sample sizewas 66 growers surveyed with their fields inspected. Of this total, all werefound suitable for data analysis. Spikes meter-2 were determined by placinga 0.25 m quadrate over an area representative of the field and spikescounted.

The data was entered into SPSS 9.0 for Windows and analyzed toobtain means, frequencies, correlations, regression, and other appropriatestatistical tests.

SYNOPSIS OF THE AREA SURVEYED AND GENERAL COMMENTS

Based on production data for 2000/2001, the wheat area in thissurveyed area represents only 0.25% of the total wheat production area ofBangladesh. Historically, this area had been a very minor wheat producingarea since the 1970s. Leaving the fields fallow during the rabi or winterseason was the norm. However with the increase in irrigation facilities, bororice became the major winter crop in this area. While wheat remains amarginalized crop in Sylhet, there are still many fallow areas where underirrigation or even rainfed conditions, wheat could be sown.

The average wheat area per grower in Sylhet surveyed area was lessthan 0.1ha but ranged from less than 0.01 to 0.6 hectares (Fig. 3). Theaverage total farm size of the surveyed growers in 2001 was only 1.7hectares. Like previous surveys, these growers we surveyed this year had thesome of the smallest land holdings. Just as in the past, it appeared thatwheat was grown mostly on small land holdings.

There was great variation in the different wheat yields within thedistricts surveyed (Table 1). Nationally, the greatest wheat yields wereobtained in the 2000/2001 season compared with previous years with thenational average being one of the highest at 2.56 t/ha. Survey sampling inthe Sylhet region shows a grower expectation at the sampling time of anoverall yield decrease of 20% over the previous year’s crop, though wasvariable, depending on the district involved. Also, the wheat crop wasmostly in the early booting stage and was difficult to assess at the time.However, the opposite occurred on a national level. WRC scientists accountfor the greater yields in 2000 over past years due to the increased amount

1Note that not all growers had wheat in 2001 or the growers were far away fromtheir fields so as not to warrent a field visit.

4

Do not know18.5%

Kanchan57.4%

Sonalika3.7%

Sourav12.9%

Gourab7.4%

Figure 3. Wheat variety usage by surveyed growers ofSylhet in 2001

of irrigated wheat (~90+% irrigated), and the high solar radiation during theseason.Table 1. Break down of production, crop areas, and crop yields by

districts as surveyed among the growers of the Sylhet thanas in2001.

SylhetSadar

Bishwanath Srimongal Moulovibazar Avg.

Avg. Farm Size (ha) 0.88 0.82 0.85 1.2 1.7

Avg. Wheat Area (ha) 0.04 0.01 0.13 0.03 0.10

Estimated Growersplots’ wheat Yield for 2001 t ha-1

2.90 2.00 1.49 1.59 1.57

Growers plots’ wheatYield for 2000 t ha-1

2.05 1.1 1.98 1.06 1.95

No. of Surveyed Growers’ Fields

2 4 29 1 36

No. of Surveyed Growers1 17 8 40 1 66

When growers were asked why they grew wheat, the majority (48%)claimed they grew it for food consumption in their own homes, 20% hadWhole Family Training by the WRC, 5% were following their neighbors’ lead,10% claimed yields were good, while others mentioned less waterrequirement, and their block supervisor recommended it.

WHEAT PRODUCTION PRACTICES

Wheat Variety Usage

Kanchan is themajor wheat variety nowsown in Bangladesh,largely replacing Sonalikathat has become moresusceptible to both leafblotch and rust. However,the Syhlet region had theleast percentage ofKanchan of any previoussurvey, i.e. 48% (Fig. 3).

5

Do not know36.4%

Kanchan47.7% Sonalika

4.5%

Sourav4.5%

Gourab6.8%

Figure 4. Wheat variety rated as best among the growersin Sylhet in 2001.

Only ~4% of the growersstill prefer Sonalika. Asmaller percent of theg r o w e r s p r e f e r r e dKanchan compared towho selected Kanchanwhile 5% still preferredSonalika (Fig 4). Gouravand Sourav, varietiesreleased within the past 2years, possesses goodyield potential though notrecognized nor preferredby many. However, thismay be due to the lack of experience in cultivating wheat in the Sylhetarea and knowledge of varieties.

Expected Wheat Yields

The average wheat yield estimated in the growers' fields by theresearchers for the Sylhet region was 1.57 t ha-1 with a minimum of 0.5 andmaximum of 3.0 t ha-1. The average wheat yield estimates determinedboth by the growers and by the enumerators were significantly correlated(r=0.62).

Seed Sources and Storage Methods

Only 4 of the growers obtained at least some of their seed supplyfrom BADC (Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation) (Table 2).Only one of the growers stored their own seed. Seventeen growerspurchased from local markets while 4 purchased from neighbors. Thus,there is a dependency in this area on the local market as a seed supplier.BADC produced/supplied only 14% (18,000 t) of this year’s total nationalwheat seed supply as a supplement to the private or grower wheat seedsuppliers (~127,000 t national requirement). High wheat prices haveincreased the number of growers storing their own seed in other areas, butobviously this is not the case in Sylhet. Prices of wheat seed from BADCranged from 13-14 Tk./kg while local market prices in Sylhet ranged from 7to 25 but averaged 15 Tk/kg. BRAC had the highest price for wheat seedranging from 13-25 Tk/kg

6

1991

Din

ajpur

1992

Jes

sore

1993

Mym

ensi

ngh

1995

Com

illa

1999

Far

idpur/B

aris

al

2001

Syl

het0

20

40

60

80% Wheat Growers Using 2-wheel tractor for Tillage

Figure 5. Percent of wheat growers using theChinese 2-wheel tractor for wheatcultivation in Sylhet in 2000/2001.

Table 2. Price of seed from the various sources of seed supplied in2001 in Sylhet (Tk/kg)($1 = 57 Tk)

Source of seed Mean NPurchased from BADC 13.75 4Seed dealer 14.23 17Other farmers 17.50 4Purchased from market 14.67 3BRAC (NGO) 19.37 4Own 0 1Karitas (NGO) 0 1MACH (NGO) 0 3WRC (BARI) 15.00 1Total 15.25 33

Of the 4 growers that used their own seed, 1 stored those seed inplastic lined gunny sacks, 1 in earthen pots, and 1 within a drum. Previoussurveys of N Bangladesh showed that many more growers stored their ownseed using drums much more.

Seedbed Preparation

Just one decade ago,100% of the growers surveyed stillused an oxen and a woodencountry plow to till their wheatland. However, this year 10% ofthe growers used the ChineseHand Tiller (CHT) to till their soil. Inthe 1990 survey, there were 0%growers using this tiller, in 1991-11%, 1992- 17%, 1996-55%, 1999-74% (Fig. 5). The averageturnaround time had beenshown to be around 14 daysamong all the growers using acountry plow. Those using mechanization estimated an average of only 7-day turnaround. Researchers show the need of only 1-3 days turnaroundtime if the CHT is used. Those using the CHT tilled 2-4 times while those usingthe country plow tilled 7-14 times.

Planting dates for areas sown to wheat were very late, with over 39%of the growers planting past the optimum sowing(Fig. 6). The lateness ofthe sowing is the obvious yield constraint the researchers were able to

7

Nov 1

to 1

0

Nov 11

to 2

0

Nov 21

to 3

0

Dec 1

to 1

0

Dec 1

1 to

20

Dec 2

1 to

30

>Jan

1

Planting Date

0

10

20

30

40 Percent Growers

For every day 1.3% yield reduction after Dec 1,

Figure 6. Sowing dates for wheat in 10-day intervals from Nov 1 through Jan 1 from thesurvey of growers in the Sylhet region in 2001.

observe. For every day planted after December 1, there is a reduction of1.3% wheat yield.

Fertilization

Farm Yard Manure

Farm yard manure (FYM) is cow dung containing other farm yarddebris such as straw, household scraps, ash, etc. Hundred percent usedFYM for wheat averaging 6.5 t/ha (Table 3). Growers in the Sylhet regionapplied as much FYM if averaged among the entire sample. Plenty ofcattle availability allowed more use of FYM than other regions. Lack of 2-wheel tractors among wheat growers also meant more dependency oncattle.

8

0-2525-50

50-7575-100

100-125125-150

>150

N Fertilizer Application (kg/ha)

0

10

20

30

40

50Percent of Growers

Recommended rate is 80-100 kg

Figure 7. Use of nitrogen fertilizer by growers surveyedin Sylhet in 2001.

Table 3. The use of cow dung and farm yard manure among the thanasof Sylhet during the 2001 wheat season.

Farm Yard Manure

GrowerSample Size

% Growers applying FYM

Avg. FYM in t ha-1

among those whoapplied

Sylhet Sadar 8 100% 5.6

Bishwanath 4 100% 3.4

Srimongal 33 100% 7.1

Moulavibazar

1 100% 7.9

Total/avg 46 100% 6.5

FYM application rates were not related to the wheat yields.Additionally, the FYM application rates were not related to phosphorus andpotassium fertilizer application rates for the different crops. This is in contrastwith previous surveys that indicated those growers using greater inputs alsoused greater FYM.

Nitrogen

N i t r o g e n i s s t i l lprobably the most limitingnut r ient in crops inBangladesh (based on Nresponse demonstrationdata). This year's surveyshowed that nitrogenapplication rates wererelated to wheat yieldestimates (0.337;%=0.05). Theoverall nitrogen responsewas 42.2 kg wheat per kgnitrogen applied, somewhathigher than the findings of other surveys (Saunders, 1991; Meisner, 1992;Meisner, 1996) (see also Fig. 7). Hopefully the reasons are the increased useof Kanchan over Sonalika coupled with the increase in irrigation and moreapplication of FYM and other fertilizers, all raising the efficiency of nitrogenuse for wheat over time. The range in nitrogen application varied, with 85%of the growers applying far less than the recommended dose for irrigatedwheat (100 kg/ha)(Fig. 7).

9

<2020-40

40-6060-80

80-100100-120

Fertilizer Application (kg/ha)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60Percent of Growers

P2O5K2O

Recommended doses:P2O5 : 60 kg/haK2O : 40 kg/ha

Figure 8. Phosphorus and potassium used by growers surveyed inSylhet in 2001.

Though the wheat crop was largely irrigated, average total nitrogenapplication was 64 kg ha-1, less than the recommended dose of 100 kg (Fig.7). Only 15% growers used recommended N or more. There was norelationship with number of nitrogen applications and yield, with pastsurveys having similar findings. Fifty percent of the growers used an averageof 55 kg N ha-1 applied basally at sowing while most waited 20-30 days aftersowing to apply the first nitrogen application. Research data indicates thatfull or 66% basal application of the total nitrogen should be done. Forteenpercent of the growers applied a second dose of nitrogen averaging 21kg N ha-1 as a top dress. The practice of three splits of nitrogen is similar tothe recommended nitrogen applications for rice, reflecting still theinexperience of some growers in wheat production compared with rice. In fact, a second topdressing of nitrogen was weakly negatively related toyield. However, full basal application for wheat poses a problem in thatmany growers have little capital at wheat seeding to purchase and applythe full amount of nitrogen. They prefer to sell some of the aman rice tolater apply.

Phosphorus

Wheat yields nora n y c r o p y i e l destimates were relatedto phosphorus rates.T h e r a n g e o fp h o s p h o r u sapplication indicatesthat 78% of thegrowers applied lesst h a n t h er e c o m m e n d e ddosage (Fig. 8). Nextto nitrogen, decliningsoil phosphorus levelscan contribute todeclining wheat yields(data not shown).However, use of FYMcan supplement available P in the soils.

Potassium

Potassium application on wheat was however related to wheatyields in this survey (0.74;%=0.01). The range of potassium applicationindicates that 80% of the growers applied less than the recommendeddosage (Fig. 8). Although potassium deficiencies have not been identifiedmuch in growers’ wheat fields, this is the first survey to show use of K directlyrelating to wheat yields, thus indicating K deficiencies in wheat due to lowor lack of K application.

10

Table 4. Average fertilizer application rates for wheat among the usersof fertilizers (data from the 2001 Sylhet Survey).

NitrogenApplication

(N)

PhosphorusApplication (P2O5 )

PotassiumApplication (K2O)

Recommended Fertilizer (kg ha-1)

100-120 60 40

District % kg ha-1 % kg ha-1 % kg ha-1

Sylhet SadarGrowers Using Fert. 6 3 2

Avg. Rate 69 31 23

BishwanathGrowers Using Fert. 5 4 1

Avg. Rate 63 43 56

SrimongalGrowers Using Fert. 34 19 12

Avg. Rate 65 45 27

MoulavibazarGrowers Using Fert. 1 1 1

Avg. Rate 24 47 32

TotalGrowers Using Fert. 46 27 16

Avg. Rate 65 44 29

Other nutrients

Two other nutrients found limiting in some Bangladesh soils are sulfurand zinc. There are also indications that boron is becoming limited in thesoils, under environmental conditions that also limit sunlight and/ortranspiration (fog, waterlogging, etc.) expressing itself as sterility in wheatand other crops in the sandier soils. However, few sterility problems werenoted in this year's survey area nor anywhere in the country using nationallyapproved wheat varieties. Data collected in the survey showed that 14%and 4% of the growers used sulfur or zinc, respectively for wheat this year.

Irrigation Methodology

Sixty-eight percent of the growers in the region had access toirrigation facilities or used irrigation for at least once during the wheat crop.The average number of irrigations was 2, but there were close to 7% giving3 or more (Fig. 9). Three or even four irrigations would have beenrecommended and considering that during the 2000/2001 wheat growingseason there was zero recorded rainfall, those giving 3-4 probably got thebetter return for their investment. Growers having deep and shallowtubewells were 0 and 13% of the total growers using irrigation, respectively.

11

0 1 2 3 4

Number of Irrigations/Cropping Season

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50Percent of Growers

Figure 9. Number of irrigations for wheat during survey of Sylhetin 2001.

Low lift pumps or simply carrying water in jugs from a water source waspracticed by 33 and 29% of the growers, respectively.

Yield Parameters

There were good correlations between wheat yield estimates andyield parameters such as spikes meter-2 (0.62;%=0.01), flag leaf width(0.74;%=0.01), and spikelets spike-1 (0.80;%=0.01). The best indicator of wheatyields was the ground cover estimated by the enumerator (0.83;%=0.01),illustrating the importance of canopy coverage at this stage of grain filling.While correlations are useful statistical tools to assess any overall constraintto yields in the area, use of contrasts between the top and low producersgave the most interesting information (Table 5). While the yield estimatesdiffered greatly among the three groups, determining which factorscontributed to these differences may not be as distinct. Increase in N, P,FYM, and irrigations contributed to the higher ground cover scores whichcontributed to higher yields.

12

0 1-25 26-50 51-75 76-99 100

% of Wheat Yield Consumed as Food

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70% of Growers

Figure 10. Percent of growers consumingamounts of wheat produce from asurvey of Sylhet in 2001.

Table 5. Contrast between the wheat yields in the top and bottom thirdof the growers among the quantitative variables somewhatcorrelated with yields in the 2001 Sylhet survey.

Variable

(Number of producers) :

33% LowProducers

(10)

33% MedianProducers

(17)

33% TopProducers

(12)

Avg. Yield Estimates t ha-1 0.98 1.64 2.14

Avg. Nitrogen Application kg ha-1 65 84 63

Avg. Phosphorus Application kg ha-1 23 54 48

Avg. Potassium Application kg ha-1 16 23 48

Spikes meter-2 162 201 361

FYM Application t ha-1 (% producers applying FYM)

4.5 7.4 7.6

Urea used at basal kg ha-1 96 87 190

Flag Leaf Width (cm) 1.1 1.3 1.6

Seed sown kg ha-1 121 147 155

Irrigations used 1.6 1.8 1.9

Ground Cover Score 40 64 82

There was no correlation of seeding rates with wheat yields, with theaverage seeding rate being 142 kg ha-1. This is similar to other surveyswhere the rate of one bag (20kg) per 1/3 acre is used by all growersthough the recommended rate of 120 kg ha-1.

GROWERS' PERCEPTIONS AND PROBLEMS

Reasons for Growing Wheat

When growers were askedfor their reasons for sowingwheat this year, their answerswere directly recorded (notrated with prerecordedanswers). Forty-eight percent ofthe growers sowed wheat to usefor their cereal security alone.Thirty-one percent of the wheatproduced by the wheat growersin 2001 was consumed by the

13

growers giving credence to the importance of wheat production forhousehold cereal security (Fig 10). Ten percent felt the yields weresatisfactory for the inputs. Eighteen percent had received training onwheat production due to Whole Family Training.

Growers' Problems with Wheat Cultivation

Thirty-three percent of the growers said there were no majorproblems in wheat cultivation. Forty-three percent of the growers in thisarea stated the lack of irrigation for wheat. Seed unavailability was listedby 30% of the growers as a constraint to wheat cultivation. Birds at seedingwere delineated as problems by 11% of the growers. Previous surveys haveillustrated these birds and rats as problems. Excess moisture at sowing waslisted by 5% of the growers. Enumerators found lack of weed control nota problem among the growers, thus weeds appear not to be a majorconstraint for wheat producers in this area. Ninety-one percent did noweeding, and enumerators confirmed no weeds. The usual practice is handweeding at the crown root initiation (CRI) stage before an irrigation andtopdressing with urea and was practiced by 9% of the growers only onetime during the season. No one listed insects as a constraint or problem forwheat production.

Sustainability of Wheat in Sylhet

The rice-wheat rotation has existed in Bangladesh for over half acentury, but only within the past 20 years has the production of wheatincreased such that it is now part of a major rotation practiced. The usualrotation with wheat in Bangladesh consists of spring-planted aus rice or jute,transplanted summer aman rice, and then wheat. However, in Sylhet,wheat has never been cultivated due to the emphasis on boro rice. Yeta significant amount of land is left fallow during the rabi season that has noaccess to irrigation for boro rice, but could be irrigated for wheat.

Previous surveys for Dinajpur (1990) and Kushtia/Jessore (1991),Mymensingh (1992), and Comilla (1996) addressed the contention thatwheat yields were believed to be declining in the rice-wheat rotation. Theresults of the Sylhet survey show for wheat 52% felt that the wheat yieldswere increasing, 35% stated declining yields and the remainder with nochange. Thus, for wheat, it is difficult to state there is a real change inyields over time. Future plans of the growers indicated that 64% weregoing to increase the area of wheat in 2000 and 7% decrease it.

14

COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS SURVEYS

The level of irrigation was amazingly high for an area not thought ofas being as well developed compared with previous years' and location’ssurveys (Table 6). Most likely in Sylhet, if irrigation facilities can be securedfor their fields, the growers would sow more boro rice. Syhlet is currently nota major wheat producing area, unlike the Dinajpur and Jessore surveys ofmajor wheat producing areas. Thus, the wheat yields were lower, with theamounts of phosphorus and potassium also being lower than othersurveyed areas. The use of the FYM was decidedly higher in this areacompared to all the other areas surveyed so far.

There is less dependence on seed sources other than their ownstored and more purchased from NGOs or the local markets (Table 6). With30% stating availability of seed being a problem, obtaining and/or storingtheir own seed is clearly the answer. Observing the high range in wheatseed prices this year (12 to 25 Tk.) clearly indicates the demand.

15

Table 6. Comparison of some survey statistics in Dinajpur (1990) Jessore/Kushtia (1991), Mymensingh (1992),Comilla/Chandpur Areas (1995), Faridpur/Barisal (1999) and lastly this past year, Sylhet (2001).

Variable Area Surveyed:

(Year of Survey):

Dinajpur

(1990)

Jessore/Kushtia (1991)

Mymensingh

(1992)

Comilla/Chandpur

(1995)

Faridpur/Barisal(1999)

Sylhet

(2001)

Mean Wheat Yield (t/ ha-1) 2.45 3.04 2.28 2.31 2.23 1.73Mean Farm Size (ha) 2.00 1.98 1.28 0.70 1.2 1.7Mean Wheat Area Farm(ha)

0.37 0.36 0.42 0.16 0.36 0.1

Irrigation Usage (% Growers) 67 90 32 31 80 90Mean Aus Rice Yield (t ha-1) 2.39 2.27 1.52 3.1 - no dataMean Aman Yield (t ha-1) 3.20 4.31 2.77 2.7 - no dataMean Boro Yield (t ha-1) - - 3.37 5.6 - no dataVariety Usage (% Growers): Kanchan 46 63 75.7 73 72 56

Sonalika 50 7 16 23 14 4Akbar 2 26 5 0 0 0Others/Mixtures 2 4 3.3 4 14 18Sourav - - - - - 13Gourab - - - - - 7

Seed Sources: BADC 28 48 65 25 13 10Own Stored Seed 45 34 38 15 36 2Local Market 28 18 - 52 42 6Neighbors 9 - - 15 8 8BRAC/MACH/NGOs - - - - - 16WRC - - - - - 20

Mean Inputs for Wheat: Urea (kg /ha-1) 139 222 173 195 155 203TSP (kg /ha-1) 118 133 90 171 97 98MP (kg /ha-1) 42 44 30 88 45 64Cow dung (t/ ha-1) 5.3 10.5 3.5 - - -FYM (t /ha-1) - - 1.8 4.6 2.3 6.5

16

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH

Unlike other areas of the country, the less use of the 2-wheel Chinesetractor for tillage was very evident in this year’s survey. Thus, the continuedsale of the 2-wheel Chinese tractor and the local manufacture of theaccessories also produced in China which assist in sowing wheat seed withminimum tillage as well as the rice/wheat harvester can be implemented. Innovative ways to demonstrate the use of these accessories, evaluatepossible impact, and to market these should be a priority for the future intechnology transfer in the rice-wheat cropping systems. Seed rates wouldcome down, bird damage would be negligible, and the sowing datesmore timely by the use of these machineries and accessories.

Additionally, this survey supports the emphasis on current research bythe WRC on wheat sowing and plant establishment. Average seed ratesof 147 kg ha-1 should be able to produce a plant canopy that wouldsupport higher spikes m-2 as well as early coverage. This is not occurring inthe growers' fields and requires further investigation. There was littlemention by the growers of problems with threshing in this year's survey ashad been in previous surveys.

Lack of irrigation and seed and to a less extent, bird control continueto be the growers' greatest concerns and need to be formally addressedboth in research and technology transfer to the growers.

IMPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSION

With the lack of grower-stored seed, more emphasis on training andvarietal demonstrations may be required in the future and more emphasison crop management demonstrations, reducing the turnaround time usingminimum tillage. Also, the fact that the area cultivated to wheat grew atall during last year was partially due to the Wheat Research Centre’semphasis on “Whole Family Training” in the spring of each year on seedselection, storage, and marketing on a household level. Closing the yieldgap will require consistent use of nutrients, both organic and inorganic,better use of irrigation, and in general, the adoption of the whole packageof practices that the WRC recommends to growers. Continued use of thevideos produced by the WRC should be done by the DAE as well as thebooklets and training materials.

17

CONCLUSIONS

Sylhet is a non-traditional wheat cultivation zone. The reasons areobvious from the growers’ survey: late sowing was the greatest yieldconstraint, coupled with lack of seed, excess moisture at sowing, and thegrowers’ lack of experience in wheat cultivation.

18

APPENDIX ISurvey Participants

Participants ListSylhet Survey 2001

Sl. No. Name Designation Institution1 Dr. A.B.S. Hossain Director WRC, Dinajpur2 Dr. Abu Sufian PSO (T&D) WRC, Dinajpur3 Mr. Anwar Shaheed PSO (Pathology) WRC, Dinajpur4 Mr M M Rahman SSO (Breeding) WRC, Dinajpur5 Mr N C D Barma SSO (Breeding) WRC, Dinajpur6 Mr Israil Hossain SSO (Agril. Eng.) WRC, Dinajpur7 Dr D B Pandit SSO (Breeding) WRC, Dinajpur8 Mr. Elahi Baksh SSO (Economic) WRC, Dinajpur9 Md. Bodruzzaman SO (Soil Science) WRC, Dinajpur

10 Mr. H Haque Khan SO (Quality) WRC, Dinajpur11 Mr H Morshed Talukder SO (Agronomy) WRC, Dinajpur12 Mr Abdul Hakim SO(Breeding) WRC, Dinajpur13 Mr Ali Babar SO(Breeding) WRC, Dinajpur14 Mr Mostafa Ali Reza SO(Pathology) WRC, Dinajpur15 Mr Al-Amin Siddique SO(CU) WRC, Dinajpur16 Mr Rezaul Amin Razu SO(RW) WRC, Dinajpur17 Mr Mostaque Ahmed SO(RW) WRC, Dinajpur18 Mr Mohshin Al Sadat SO(CU) WRC, Dinajpur19 Mr Abed Hossain SSO(Breeding) WRC, Rajbari, Dinajpur20 Mrs Salina Begum SO (Agronomy) WRC, Dinajpur21 Mr. Z I Sarker SSO (Breeding) ARS, Rajshahi22 Mr Illias Hossain SO(Agronomy) ARS, Rajshahi23 Dr. A B Siddique PSO (Breeding) RARS, Jessore24 Mr Haider Hossain SO (Pathology) RARS, Jessore25 Dr M A Samad PSO (Breeding) RARS, Jamalpur26 Mr. Feroj Ahmed SSO (Pathology) RARS, Jamalpur27 Mr Monjur Kader SO (Breeding) RARS, Jamalpur28 Mr Zahangir Alam SO(Breeding) RARS, Ishurdi29 Mr Saleh Uddin SO (Breeding) RARS, Rahmatpur30 Mr N K Shaha PSO (Breeding) BARI, Gazipur31 Mr. Babu Lal Nag SSO (Agronomy) RARS, Barisal32 Mr Saifuzzaman SSO (Physiology) BARI, Gazipur33 Dr R A Sarker CSO (Breedomg) BARI, Gazipur34 Mr M Anwar Hossain PSO (Breeding) RARS, Jamalpur35 Dr. Craig A. Meisner Agronomist CIMMYT

19

APPENDIX IIGrower Survey 2001

Wheat Research CentreNashipur, Dinajpur

Growers Survey On Wheat Production Technology in Sylhet2001

1. Farmer’s name:

Village: Upzilla : District:

2. Farm size (in decimal):Own land Rented in Rented out

3. Area under wheat and other rabi crops:Name of crop Area in decimal

During 2000-2001 During last year 1999-2000

WheatBoro ricePotatoMaizePulseOil seeds

WHEAT PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY (For one plot)4 Size of the plot (decimal) __________________________5 Variety 6 No. of ploughing: by country plough __________ by Power tiller

___________7 Wheat seeding (a) Broad casting (b) Line sowing 8 Seeding time ____________________________9 Seed rate (Kg) _______________________ Price of seed (Tk /kg)

___________10 Source of seed: Own/ Purchased from BADC/ Seed dealer/ Other

farmers

20

Fertilizer Management 11 Cow dung /Compost used (mond)12 How often used 13 Fertilizer use (kg): Basal urea ___________________________14 1st top dress DAS15 2nd top dress DAS 16 TSP 17 SSP 18 MP19 Gypsum 20 Zinc sulphate

Irrigation Management21 Irrigation use: Yes / No22 If yes, No. of irrigation used :23 Time of irrigation (DAS) 1st 2nd 3rd _______ 4th ____24 Irrigation source: STW / DTW / HTW / Paddle pump / Others 25 Yellowing of wheat leaves after 1st irrigation : Yes No_____

Weed Management 26 Weed control (a) Nil (b) by hand ________ (c) by

chemical 27 Time of weed control (DAS) 1st 2nd 3rd ______

YIELD28 Wheat yield of last year (1999-2000) (Kg/acre): 29 Price of wheat (Tk/ kg):30 Percent of wheat consumed (1999-2000): 31 Percent of wheat sold (1999-2000):32 Farmers expected wheat yield for 2000-2001 (kg/acre):

________________________________________33 Any change in wheat yield over the years? Increased / Decreased

/ Same34 Reseason for growing wheat this year:

35 Farmers opinion of best wheat variety : 36 Will the farmer grow wheat in the next year : Yes / No

21

37 Will the farmer Increase , Decrease , Same

wheat area___________38 Problem with wheat cultivation :

STORAGE AND PROCUREMENT OF WHEAT SEED: 39 Did the farmer stored wheat seed last year: Yes / No40 If yes, Quantity of seed stored (kg): 41 Method of storing:

CROP OBSERVATIONS:42 Verification of variety (name of variety):43 Purity of variety in the field: Mixed , Pure44 Ground cover (%): 45 Spikes /m2

46 Spikelets/ spike: 47 No. of grains/ spike 48 Visual sterility score (%):49 Weed infestation score: Numerous , Medium ,

Few

DESEASE AND OTHER PESTS RATING:50 Percent leaf senescence (%):51 Leaf rust score (Cobb’s scale):52 BPLB score (0-9):53 Rat problem: Yes / No54 If yes, % damage:55 Control measures used:56 Bird problem: Yes / No57 Control measures used: 58 Color rating of plants: Normal green , Light green

,Yellow59 Flag leaf: length (cm), Width

(cm)60 Enumerator’s yield estimate: (t/ha)

22

Enumerators name:Designation:Date: