The rice leaf folder, Cnaphalocrocis medinalis Guenée (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) is a predominant foliage feeder in all the rice ecosystems. The object

Rice leaffolder, Cnaphalocrocis medinalis is one of the key foliage feeding insects of great concern throughout Asia as it results in significant yield losses. High visibility of damage is triggering farmers to apply toxic pesticides for its management. Therefore, it is vital to identify new stable sources of resistance for leaffolder. Phenotyping of 160 recombinant inbred lines (RILs) of a cross between a resistant parent, W1263 and a susceptible parent, TN1 using a rapid field screening method for three seasons resulted in identification of nine RILs as stable sources of resistance to rice leaffolder. Phenotypic frequency distributions were found continuous indicating that the resistance is a quantitative trait governed by polygenes. Phenotypic data for three seasons were analyzed using Genotype and Genotype × Environment Interaction (GGE) analysis for identification of stable resistant lines. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) analysis showed that 86.41% of the total sum of square of damaged leaf area was attributed to genotype (GEN) effect; 0.48% to environment (ENV) effects and 5.68% to genotype by environment (G × E) interaction effects. Damage area, damage score and leaf length showed very high broad-sense heritability across three environments. However, leaf width had low heritability indicating higher environment influence. Phylogenetic analysis grouped these 160 RILs and parents into five clusters based on resistant reaction. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis revealed that stable genotypes G8 (MP114) and G3 (MP108) with lower damage area and damage score can be utilized in developing cultivars with leaffolder resistance.

The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) developed in Madagascar has spread to many parts of the world, including India. This study assessing insect pest prevalence on rice grown with SRI vs. conventional methods at multiple locations in India was prompted by reports that SRI-managed rice plants are healthier and more resistant to pest and disease damage. Field experiments were conducted under the All-India Coordinated Rice Improvement Project over a 5-year period. The split-plot design assessed both cultivation methods and different cultivars, hybrids and improved varieties. Across the eight locations, SRI methods of cultivation showed a lower incidence of stem borer, planthoppers, and gall midge compared to conventional methods. Whorl maggots and thrips, on the other hand, were observed to be higher. Grain yield was significantly higher with SRI management across all locations. Higher ash, cellulose, hemicellulose, as well as silica content in rice plants under SRI management could explain at least in part the SRI plants’ resistance to pest damage. Analysis of guild composition revealed that in SRI plots, there were more natural enemies (insect predators and parasitoids) present and fewer crop pests (phytophages). A meta-analysis that considered other published research on this subject revealed a lower incidence of dead hearts, white ear-heads, and leaf folders, along with higher grain yield, in SRI plots.

Initial evaluations of the System of Rice Intensification in India and elsewhere focused mainly on its impacts on yield and income, and usually covered just one or two seasons. Researchers at the ICAR-Indian Institute of Rice Research have conducted a more comprehensive evaluation of SRI methods over six years (six wet and six dry seasons), comparing them with three alternatives: modified, partially mechanized SRI (MSRI) to reduce labor requirements; direct-seeded rice (DSR) as an alternative method for growing rice; and conventional transplanting of rice with flooding of fields (CTF). Grain yield with SRI methods was found to be about 50% higher than with CTF (6.35 t ha⁻¹ vs. 4.27 t ha⁻¹), while the MSRI yield was essentially the same (6.34 t ha⁻¹), 16% more than with DSR (5.45 t ha⁻¹). Water productivity with SRI methods was 5.32–6.85 kg ha-mm⁻¹, followed by 4.14–5.72 kg ha-mm⁻¹ for MSRI, 5.06–5.11 kg ha-mm⁻¹ for DSR, and 3.52–4.56 kg ha-mm⁻¹ for CTF. In comparison with CTF, SRI methods significantly enhanced soil microbial populations over time: bacteria by 12%, fungi by 8%, and actinomycetes by 20%. Biological activity in the rhizosphere was also higher as indicated by 8.5% greater dehydrogenase and 16% more FDA enzymes in soil under SRI management. Similarly, an indicator of soil organic matter, glucosidase activity, was 78% higher compared to CTF. SRI enhanced the relative abundance of beneficial microbial-feeding nematodes by 7.5% compared to CTF, while that of plant-pathogenic nematodes was 7.5% lower under SRI. Relative to conventional methods, SRI management reduced GHG emissions by 21%, while DSR reduced them by 23%, and MSRI by 13%, compared to standard rice-growing practice. Economic analysis showed both gross and net economic returns to be higher with SRI than with the other management systems evaluated. While the six-year study documented many advantages of SRI crop management, it also showed that MSRI is a promising adaptation that provides similar benefits but with lower labor requirements.