Why Manipur Farmers Should Rethink Rice Seed and Urea Use

Agriculture in Manipur often suffers not because farmers lack hard work, but because old practices continue without adequate scientific correction. Paddy cultivation, which remains central to food security and rural livelihoods in the state, is one such area where a serious rethinking is urgently needed. Bigger harvests do not always come from more seed and more fertiliser. They often come from better knowledge.

The message delivered by Prof N Iboton Singh, former Dean of the College of Agriculture, Central Agricultural University, Imphal, during the launching ceremony of the Kharif Campaign 2026 of the Green Foundation, deserves wider public attention. His argument was simple, practical, and deeply relevant: rice farmers can save seed, reduce unnecessary urea use, and still obtain a higher yield if they adopt scientific methods with discipline.

At the centre of his observation is the role of the seed. A rice seed is not merely a grain placed in the soil. It carries within it the genetic capacity of the plant. Its ability to germinate with little moisture, produce effective tillers, attain a specific height, respond to pests and diseases, absorb nitrogen, produce panicles, mature within a defined period, and deliver yield is already embedded within it. In that sense, seed is not a passive input. It is a carrier of technology.

This understanding should change the way farmers look at seed rate. In many parts of Manipur, farmers continue to use around 60 kg of rice seed per hectare. This practice has become normal through repetition. It is rarely questioned at the field level. Prof Iboton Singh’s reminder that only about 10 kg of rice seed is actually required for one hectare under the one seed per hill method is therefore significant.

For the last decade, some farmers in Manipur have successfully grown rice by placing only one seed per hill. With spacing of about 7 inches from plant to plant and 10 inches from row to row, one hectare can accommodate around 3.5 lakh hills. Under such conditions, the reported yield has reached 18 tonnes per hectare. This figure should invite serious attention from agriculture departments, research institutions, extension workers, and farmers’ organisations.

The larger issue is not only yield. It is also a waste. If a farmer uses 60 kg of seed where 10 kg is sufficient, 50 kg of rice seed is wasted per hectare. Applied to Manipur’s estimated 1.8 lakh hectares of rice-cultivable land across the hills and the valley, the potential saving comes to around 9,000 tonnes of rice seed every year. This is not a small figure for a state that still faces periodic concerns over food supply, farm income, and input cost.

The implication becomes even larger when viewed beyond Manipur. India is one of the world’s major rice producing countries. If similar seed wastage occurs across rice-growing states, the national loss would be enormous. A saving of seed at this scale can contribute to food availability, reduce production cost, and strengthen the economics of small and marginal farmers.

The same argument applies to urea use. In Manipur, many farmers reportedly apply around four bags of urea per hectare. For 1.8 lakh hectares of paddy fields, this comes to nearly 7.2 lakh bags of urea during the kharif season. Under the usual recommendation, half of the dose is applied before sowing or transplantation. This means around 3.6 lakh bags may be applied before the crop is ready to be used meaningfully.

Prof Iboton Singh’s argument is based on a basic scientific fact. Rice seed can germinate and grow for about 15 days without external input if a little moisture is available. If this is so, applying a heavy dose of urea before sowing or transplantation needs careful reconsideration. It may not serve the seedling at the stage when the fertiliser is applied. Instead, it may increase loss, raise cultivation cost, and contribute to environmental damage through nitrogen emission.

This is where agricultural practice must be separated from agricultural habit. Farmers often apply fertiliser because it has always been done that way. The belief that more input automatically means more yield is deeply rooted. In reality, productivity depends not only on quantity but also on timing, method, soil condition, plant requirement, and water management.

A seed does not need excess crowding to perform. A young rice plant does not need unnecessary fertiliser before it can absorb and use it. What the crop needs is the right input at the right time in the right quantity. This is not merely a technical issue. It has policy importance.

Manipur’s agriculture remains constrained by small landholdings, rising input costs, uncertain rainfall, labour shortage, and limited market support. In such a situation, reducing avoidable waste is as important as increasing production. A farmer who saves seed and fertiliser without reducing yield has already improved farm income.

The one seed per hill method also has institutional significance. It points to the need for better agricultural extension. Research findings and field experiences should not remain confined to seminars, campaigns, or official reports. They must reach the paddy fields in simple, practical, demonstrable form.

Farmers will not change long-standing practices merely by hearing advice. They need field demonstrations, village-level trials, side-by-side comparisons, and evidence from farmers who have already succeeded. If one seed per hill can produce high yield in actual field conditions, the method should be documented, verified, refined, and promoted through a structured programme.

The role of agricultural universities and Krishi Vigyan Kendras becomes important here. They must work closely with farmers, not only to recommend seed rate and fertiliser dose but also to explain why certain practices work. Scientific agriculture cannot be built through instructions alone. It requires trust between researchers, extension workers, and cultivators.

The Green Foundation’s Kharif Campaign 2026 has therefore opened a timely discussion. Manipur needs more such platforms where scientific knowledge is translated into farmer-friendly practice. Paddy cultivation is too important to be left to inherited methods without review.

The environmental dimension must also be taken seriously. Urea is a valuable fertiliser when used properly. But when applied unnecessarily or at the wrong stage, it represents both economic loss and ecological burden. Nitrogen loss contributes to environmental stress. In a state where agriculture, wetlands, rivers, and forests are closely connected, fertiliser efficiency is also an environmental responsibility.

There is another important lesson. Food security cannot be achieved only by expanding acreage or increasing subsidy. It also depends on reducing waste within the existing system. Saving 9,000 tonnes of rice seed in Manipur is not merely an agricultural calculation. It is a public interest argument. It shows that better knowledge can release hidden resources already available within the farming system.

This does not mean that all farmers should be forced into one method without local adaptation. Soil type, water availability, variety, labour, and field condition vary from place to place. The one seed per hill method must be tested carefully across hill and valley conditions. But the principle behind it is sound: avoid excess, respect seed potential, and apply inputs according to crop need.

The way forward is clear. First, the Agriculture Department and research institutions should conduct systematic demonstrations on one seed per hill cultivation across different districts of Manipur. Second, data on yield, seed saving, labour requirement, pest incidence, and fertiliser response should be recorded transparently. Third, fertiliser recommendations should be reviewed in relation to actual crop stages and local field conditions. Fourth, farmers should be trained not only in what to do, but in why the method matters.

The launching ceremony, where experienced scientists like Prof. N Iboton Singh, Prof. RK Tombisana Devi, Dr M Thoithoi, Chairman of The Green Foundation, Kh Rajendra Singh and CEO U Himmat is a reminder that agriculture reform does not always require dramatic announcements. Sometimes, it begins with a single seed placed correctly in the soil. It also brings attention back to the fundamentals. The future of rice cultivation in Manipur will not be secured by wasteful input use. It will be secured by scientific discipline, farmer education, field evidence, and respect for the biological power already contained in the seed.

Manipur’s farmers have always worked with patience and resilience. What they need now is not more burden, but better guidance. If one seed per hill can reduce wastage, lower cost, and increase yield, it deserves serious adoption. If unnecessary early urea application can be avoided, it should be avoided.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of India Today NE or its affiliates.)