1. Shantappa Duttarganvi
M.Sc. (Agri) Dept of
Agronomy, 2009

2. ON

3. 
Introduction

Components of cropping system

Components of livestock

Livestock integration

Problems and prospects in crop-livestock based farming
system

Advantages

Integrated livestock systems

Conclusion

5. NEED….
Fragmented holdings and lack of capital investment
Seasonal income and employment
Risk of crop failures
Single commodity farming
Horizontal expansion – limited scope
Deterioration of resource base

6. STRATEGY
ENHANCING
WEALTH
ENHANCING
HEALTH
Livestock heritage serving a nation….,!!!!!!

7. Relationship between integrated crop-livestock
system and related terms

8. Integrated Farming System (IFS)
It integrates natural resources into farming
activities to achieve maximum replacement of offfarm inputs.
Components:
Crop-livestock system
Agri-silviculture
Agri-horticulture
Silvi-horticulture

9. “ It is the farming system which combines
crop production with livestock rearing”.

10. Maintains sustainable production system without
damaging
resource base
Provides full family employment through out the year
Enables recycling of wastes within the farming system
Provides balanced food diet
Standard of living will be improved
Efficient utilization of all land available within the farm

11. COMPONENTS OF CROPPING
SYSTEM
Three-strata forage system
Integrated tree cropping systems
Agro-forestry systems
Food-feed intercropping system
Relay cropping
Alley cropping
Grazing and stall feeding systems

12. Live stock

13. Components of livestock
Dairy
farming

14. Poultry farming

15. Sheep and goat

16. Piggery

17. Animal husbandry contributes about 30 per cent
of country’s agricultural out put
57 per cent of the world’s buffalo production
15 per cent cattle production
Livestock sector contributes 8 per cent to India’s
GDP
Contribution of livestock to the national economy
is Rs.45,000 crores

18. Contribution of livestock to
global production
CAST,1999.

19. An outline of different resource flows in mixed
crop-livestock systems

20. Role of livestock in farming system
Livestock is a source of food
Livestock is a renewable natural resource
Source of draught power and dung manure
Acts as a cushion against income shocks
Transport

21. Livestock Integration
Supplementary integration
Complementary integration

22. Why to go for integration of enterprises?
Population in Indian sub-continent is increasing by
leaps and bounds which require production of more food
from the limited available lands
There is no scope for horizontal expansion of land for
food and feed
Only vertical expansion is possible by integrating
appropriate farming components requiring less space and
time, which provide periodic income to the farmers

23. FUNCTIONAL INTERACTION IN LIVESTOCK FARM
Food security
Avoidance of temporary food
shortages
Adequate food quality
Avoidance of nutritional deficiencies
Environmental protection
Contribution to economy
Market supply
Short and long term risk cover
Economic viability
Farming integration function
Soil fertility
Nutrient transfer and supply of manure
Biodiversity
Supply of draught
External effects
Peters, 1999

24. Crops
Irrigation
family
Livestock
pond
Effluent
manure
biodigester
Integration pathway in Ecological farming system

25. Pathways of nutrient flow in mixed crop-livestock farming systems
Stangel ., 2001

26. Labour intensity
Multistoreyed cropping
Agrihorticulture
Alley cropping
Intercropping with NFT’s
Crop-livestock FS
Land use intensity
Farming systems in relation to labour and land use intensity
Singh, 2000

27. Methods of crop-livestock integration
Spatially separated crop and livestock farms
Spatial and temporal integration on the same land base
Russelle et al., 2007

28. Aims of livestock development strategies
Conserve the natural resource base
Raise productivity
Expand production
Optimizes the allocation of development resources

29. Integration of
Crop-Dairy

30. milk
residues
Slurry waste

31. Cattle grazing under coconut trees

32. Adding cattle to a legume-grain crop rotation
doubled the rate of soil carbon accumulation
because of manure addition.
Drinkwatr et al.,
1998
Recycling of crop carbon through manure and
decomposing residues improves soil carbon
sequestration
Singh et al.,
1998

33. Economics and employment generation of dairy as
component in farming system
Particulars
Expenses
Rs/ha
Total
Employm
ent
Net income Generatio
n
Rs /ha
(man
Days)
1. Cropping
(Cotton+blackgram,
Sorghum+cowpea)
14138
8422
393
2. Dairy+Cropping
(3 Jersey milch cows)
32583
19900
702
Chandrasekaran et al., 1994

34. Integration of
Crop-Sheep/Goat

35. Sheep grazing under tall-stemmed fruit trees

36. Economics of IFS and CCS (1 ha)
Years
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
IFS
CCS
IFS
CCS
IFS
CCS
IFS
CCS
IFS
CCS
Crop
components
3384
2800
5455
3695
5872
4095
6420
4200
7229
4905
Animal
components
2970
-
4805
-
3895
-
11900
-
12375
-
Total
6254
2800
10260
3695
14757
4095
18320
4200
19604
4905
-
3625
-
5150
-
8400
-
9250
-
Receipts (Rs.)
Expenditure (Rs.)
Maintenance of
goat
Cost of
cultivation
1772
1547
2217
1840
2852
2115
33300
2150
2795
2450
Total
1512
1547
5842
1840
8002
2115
11700
2150
12045
2450
Net income
(Rs.)
2970
1253
4418
1855
6765
1980
6620
2050
7539
2455
Additional
income (Rs.)
1717
-
2563
-
4785
-
4620
-
5084
-
Shivasankaran et al., 1995

37. Reasons for non adoption of certain practices related
to sheep and goat rearing in different agro climatic
zones
Maintenance of crossbreeds
Grazing
Provision of house or night shelter
Provision of concentrate mixtures
Isolation of breeding rams during grazing
Knowledge of non-contagious diseases
(Bloat, tetanus)
Problem of marketting

38. Integration of
Crop-Dairy-Goat

39. Cows and sheep grazing together in a
pasture to optimize biomass utilization

40. System Productivity (Rice grain equivalent)
of Integrated Farming System
Farming
systems
System
% over
productivity CCS
Crop Poultry Pigeon Fish Goat
(kg/ha)
Component productivity (kg)*
Crop
12995
-
-
-
-
12995
-
Crop + Fish +
Poultry
26352
1205
-
2052
-
29609
128
Crop + Fish +
Pigeon
24854
-
2545
1774
-
29173
124
Crop + Fish +
Goat
25725
-
-
1975
9979
37679
190
* Mean over three years
Jayanthi, 2002

41. PROFIT FROM IFS
Economic profit
Social benefits to the farm family and the
community
Environmental conservation

42. Economic analysis of maize (f) + cowpea(f) – chickpea + coriander system
Cost of
cultivation
(Rs./ha)
Net returns
(Rs./ha)
B:C
ratio
S0 No manure
14,669
10,642
1.73
S1 Rec.ferilizers
17,711
22,643
2.28
S2.100%composted buffalo manure
17,679
23,763
2.35
S3 75% composted buffalo manure
17,039
22,927
2.35
S4 100% composted goat manure
15,589
19,216
2.23
S5 75%composted goat manure
15,489
18,056
2.17
Treatment
Esther Skekinah , 2004
1 ha farming system: (0.8 ha cropping, 0.1 ha agroforestry, goat +buffaloes
42
on 0.06 ha, farm pond 0.04ha)

43. NUTRIENT ADDITION PER YEAR IN VARIOUS
LIVESTOCK BASED SYSTEMS
• 3 Adult cows + 2 Calves
As FYM (12 tonnes),
113 – 67 – 86
N – P2O5 – K2O kg/year
As biogas + slurry
( 730 m3) ( slurry 11 tonnes),
157 – 133 – 114
N – P2O5 – K2O kg/year
• 20 female + 1 male of small ruminates under deep litter system
Nutrients,
132 – 70 – 60
N – P2O5 – K2O kg/year

44. Integration of
Crop – Dairy – Sheep -Poultry

45. Income and employment generation from different
enterprises (1 ha) during the study period (2006-07)
Bench mark year
2005-06
Second year 2006-07
4521
5966
Dairy unit
11952
16434
Sheep unit
12100
22860
Poultry unit
-
5496
5
Fodder crops
-
1652
6
Gross income
28573
54358
7
Cost of cultivation
18182
24451
8
Net income
10391
29907
9
Per cent increase over bench mark
year
-
110.27
10
Employment generation (man-days)
604
697
11
Cropping intensity(%)
87.50
115.62
12
B:C ratios
1.57
2.22
Sl. No
1
Particulars
Field crops
Subsidiary enterprises
4
Anon., 2007

46. Gross and net income from different IFS models
IFS model
Income
from crop
(Rs/ha)
Income
from
animal
s (Rs)
Gross
income
(Rs/ha)
Expen
diture
(Rs)
Net
income
(Rs/ha)
B:C
ratio
Employment
(mandays/ha
/ year)
28196
--
28196
22025
6171
1.28
185
Crop+goat+
poultry
27138
24633
51771
26950
24821
1.92
297
Crop+goat+
poultry+dairy
27478
74605
102083
59458
42625
1.72
343
Crop+goat+
poultry+sheep
28213
39563
67776
45980
21796
1.47
343
Crop+goat+
poultry+dairy+
sheep
29281
93640
122921
70127
52794
1.75
389
Mean
28061
58110
74549
44908
29641
1.63
311
SD
825
31618
38116
20585
18305
0.25
78
CV(%)
2.9
54.4
51.1
45.8
61.8
15.5
25
Crop alone
Solaiappan et al., 2007

47. Integration of
Crop-Fish-poultry

48. manure
manure
dropping
feed
feed
Food waste

49. Utilization of byproducts

50. Net returns, sustainable value index and profit per day as
influenced by rice-fish-poultry integrated farming
systems
Treatment
Net returns
Rs/ha/year
Sustainable
Value Index
(SVI)
Profit
Rs/ha/day
2004-05
2005-06
T1
37,062
61,545
0.48
182.6
T2
36,734
58,754
0.48
176.8
T3
49,348
76,606
0.64
233.2
T4
31,301
44,231
0.41
139.9
T5
37,590
52,858
0.46
167.5
T6
14,139
29,059
0.18
80.0
(conventional
rice field)
Channabasavanna et al., 2007

51. Rice grain-equivalent yield under different production
systems
Production
Productivity (kg/ha)
Monocropping
Cashew
Coconut
Rice
Total
4,489
2,624
4,943
12,056
Improved cropping system
Cashew
Coconut +forage
Rice- Brinjal+ Rice-Cowpea
Total
4,489
7,796
10,859
23,144
IFS
Cashew
Coconut +forage +dairy
Rice-Brinjal +Rice-Cowpea +poultry
Total
7,521
13,553
21,223
42,297
Kalyan Singh et al., 2007

52. Integrated farming system approach
Production
system
Gross
returns
(Rs/ha)
COC
(Rs/ha)
Net returns
(Rs/ha)
B:C ratio
Coconut +
94,870
forage +dairy
62,535
32,335
0.52
Rice-brinjal + 1,48,560
Rice-cowpea
+poultry
73,200
75,360
1.03
Total
1,52,050
1,44,025
0.95
2,96,075
Manjunath et al., 2002

53. Productivity of integrated farming system (mean over 2 years)
Crop
Poultry
Mushroom
Riceequivalent
yield (kg/ha)
4,311
-
-
4,311
Ricegroundnut +
mushroom + poultry
6,557
6,060
4,305
16,922
RiceCowpea + mushroom
+ poultry
7,662
6,060
4,305
18,027
RiceBrinjal + mushroom
+ poultry
11,122
6,060
4,305
21,487
Ricesunhemp +
mushroom + poultry
4,993
6,060
4,305
15,358
Component productivity
Farming system
Rice cropping alone
Manjunath, 2002

54. Economics analysis of Integrated Farming System
Net
Returns
B:C Ratio
Per day
Return
64975
37153
2.43
178
4833
146035
97731
3.02
400
Cropping +
Fish + Pigeon
47090
145868
98778
3.06
400
Cropping +
Fish + Goat
55549
186667
131118
3.36
511
Farming
Systems
Production
Cost (Rs/ha)
Gross
Returns (Rs)
Cropping
alone
27822
Cropping +
Fish + Poultry
Jayanthi , 2002

55. Information required for decision making in integrated
crop-livestock systems
Consideration
Information required
Short term profit
Crop yield and feeding value
Input cost
Output value
Multiyear factors
Rotation benefits
Symbiotic N2 fixation
Residual fertilizer
Weed populations
Whole-farm factors
Farm size and spatial distribution
Availability of different enterprises
Labour, cost, livestock
Ewing et al., 2004

56. Contd…
Risk factors
Yield variability
Price variability
Risk acceptance
responsiveness
Sustainability factors
Persistence of perennials
Weed population
Soil condition and sensitivity

57. Advantages of integrated livestock based
farming system
Increases productivity
Better recycling of
produces
Increases profitability
Improves soil fertility
Provides balance food
Employment generation
Money flow around the
year
Adoption of new
technology
Solve the energy crisis

58. Constraints in integrated
crop-livestock system
Fragmentation and division of holdings
Scarcity of family labour
Less reliable market
Scarcity of own funds
Lack of transport and marketing facilities
Fluctuation in output prices