Integrated Farming System of Lautenbach: A Practical Contribution Toward Sustainable Agriculture in Europe

2020 ◽  
pp. 265-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. El Titi ◽  
H. Landes
2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-123
Author(s):  
Siti Romelah ◽  
Ainin Niswati ◽  
Tugiyono Tugiyono ◽  
Dermiyati Dermiyati

The objectives of the research were to compare the quality of physical and chemical characteristics of the soils in the oil palm plantations applied with integrated farming system of cattle and oil palm plantation (IFSCO) and without IFSCO (non-IFSCO), as well as to evaluate the economic benefits of IFSCO application. The research was conducted in two oil palm plantations, i.e. an oil palm plantation applied with IFSCO (5 ha) and an oil palm plantation without IFSCO application (non-IFSCO) (5 ha), located in the Karya Makmur Village, Penawar Aji Subdistrict, Tulang Bawang District, Lampung, Indonesia, in June until August 2016. The research was conducted using a survey and systematic sampling methods to collect soil samples, and data from 30 farmers who applied IFSCO and other 30 farmers who applied non-IFSCO. The results showed that the application of organic fertilizer in the IFSCO field resulted in higher level of exchangeable-K, -Ca, -Mg, and -Na, cation exchange capacity (CEC), and organic-C content of the soil;and better improvement on the physical soil quality, i.e. bulk density, porosity and soil moisture content; in comparison to that in the field without organic fertilizer application (non-IFSCO field). However, the application of IFSCO did not affect the pH, available-P, base saturation and total-N content of the soil.  There was a difference in the texture class of the soils in the IFSCO field and non-IFSCO field.  The result of texture analysis showed that the texture of the soil in the IFSCO field is “clay”, while the texture of the soil in the non-IFSCO field is “sandy clay loam”.  Application of IFSCO can save the fertilizer cost by 66%, the feed cost by 50%, and can increase oil palm production and farmers’ income by about 25%, so it is economically profitable. Thus, IFSCO can improve soil quality and provide economic benefits for the farmers, so the IFSCO obviously supports the implementation of sustainable agriculture.


Green Farming ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 696
Author(s):  
MEERA A.V. ◽  
JOHN J. ◽  
SUDHA B. ◽  
SAJEENA A. ◽  
JACOB D. ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
SANJEEV KUMAR ◽  
SHIVANI . ◽  
S. K. SAMAL ◽  
S. K. DWIVEDI ◽  
MANIBHUSHAN .

Integration of different components viz. livestock, fishery, horticulture, mushroom etc. along with field crops not only enhanced productivity but by-products (waste) of one component act as input for another component through resource recycling within the system. Six integrated farming systems models with suitable combinations of Crop, vegetables, fruit trees, fish, livestock, mushroom etc. were made and evaluated at the experimental farm of ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna during 2012-16 for harness maximum income, nutrient recycling and employment. Among six combinations, crop + fish + duck + goat resulted as most profitable combination in terms of productivity (RGEY- 22.2t), net income (Rs. 2,15,900/ha), additional employment (170 days/year) with income sustainability index (ISI) by 90.2. Upon nutrient recycling prepared from different wastes from the system Crop + fish + duck + goat combination added N (56.5 kg), P (39.6 kg) and K (42.7 kg) into the soil and reduced the cost of cultivation by 24 percent and was followed by crop + fish + goat combination. Crops grown under IFS mode with different types of manures produced 31 percent higher yield over conventional rice- wheat system. The contribution of crops towards the system productivity ranged from 36.4 to 56.2 %, while fish ranged from 22.0-33.5 %; for goat 25.4-32.9 %; for poultry 38.7 %; for duck 22.0-29.0 %; for cattle 32.2% and for mushroom 10.3 %.


Author(s):  
Dibyendu Chatterjee ◽  
Rukuosietuo Kuotsu ◽  
Sanjay Kumar Ray ◽  
M. K. Patra ◽  
A. Thirugnanavel ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 2605-2623 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. K. Behera ◽  
P. Panigrahi ◽  
A. Sarangi

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-103
Author(s):  
Munandar Munandar ◽  
F Gustiar ◽  
Yakup Yakup ◽  
R Hayati ◽  
A I Munawar

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document