Indian Sericulture- Past glory and future challenges

GK. Rajesh

Scientific Advisor, Council for Nature Conservation and Environmental Protection, CONCEPT India

This paper attempts to take a comprehensive look at the Indian silk industry and to identify the key issues of the sector. The impact of silk imports on domestic silk industry and sericulture are analyzed based on available data up to the year 2005. While the paper doesn’t offer any solutions for the problems, a few issues are thrown up which call for immediate research attention. The available (very few) studies on the economic issues of Indian silk industry are reviewed. The analysis has been restricted up to the year 2005 considering the fact that no much change has taken place in the industry since then.

Silk has a miniscule percentage of the global textile fibre market- less than 0.2%. But this figure can be a gross under-estimation, since the actual trading value of silk and silk products is much more. The unit price for raw silk is roughly twenty times that of raw cotton. The annual turnover of the China National Silk Import and Export Corporation alone is US$ 2–2.5 billion (ITC Silk review, 2001). 

 Sericulture has important socio-cultural implications. Studies have established large scale employment generation potential and high income generation potential of sericulture (Hanumappa, 1986). Jayaram et.al (1998) showed that every acre of sericulture practiced under irrigated conditions had a potential to employ 247 men and 193 women round the year. They have also shown that the small scale mulberry farms provided ample scope for employment of owned family labour and suggested its potential to solve the problem of seasonal unemployment. Lakshmanan et.al; (1999) found that female labour is quite dominant in all sericultural activities, to an extent of nearly 50%. Saraswathi and Sumangala (2001) observed that in the indoor activity of silkworm rearing women participation was as high as 94.67 % and that except for the peak period the entire sericultural activity is conducted using family labour. Most of the activities in silk production are in the informal sector and menial in nature. Thus about 90% of the employment goes either to the landless or to the marginal farming families that hire out these labour, or to the sericulture families (Sinha, 1989). While considering the price spread in the whole industry, it can be seen that 48% of it goes to farming sector, as illustrated below.

Sericulture and silk production are labour-intensive at the village level, employing both men and women at all stages of production (note-1). In China, it occupies some 20 million farmers, as well as 5 lakh people in the silk processing industry (ITC silk review 2001). In India, sericulture is a cottage industry in 59,000 villages, providing full and part-time employment to some six million people from the farm sector, and silk processing industry (ITC silk review 2001).

Sericulture in India – it’s past and present.

The silk trade flourished in India during the medieval period. Under the Moughals, silks from Kashmir and Bengal were exported mainly by the Moors, who during the 14^th and 15^th centuries transmitted it to Europe (Nanavaty, 1990). The British had identified the qualitative shortcoming with Indian silk and tried to improve it by bringing experts to modernize the rearing and reeling techniques. In 1771, the ‘China worm’ was introduced with the idea of improving cocoon quality. The government promoted the extension of land under sericulture. Rent was slashed by half for those lands, and that too was exempt for the first two years of cultivation. The government also promoted a higher wage structure for processing raw silk (Ray Indrajit, 2005). Technology was substantially improved in conformity with the European know-how and practices so that British weavers accepted raw silk of Bengal. In fact, the overseas market responded very favorably to the first consignment of the new technology in 1772 (Ray Indrajit, 2005). The government was also successful in diffusing Chinese worms in sericulture. Another breakthrough was achieved in the sphere of the production system. The government successfully organized sericulture as a cottage industry. The industry’s technology and organization were thus thoroughly reformed by the close of the eighteenth century in tandem with the requirements of the European market. Consequent to the abolition of British East India Company’s monopoly on private trade the company wound up its silk trade in 1833, leaving it to private entrepreneurs. During the last quarter of 19^th century Bengal silk began to decline due to lack of proper organization, husbanding authority and the absence of technical know how (Ray Indrajit, 2005).

Hanumappa and Erappa (1988) cites sericulture development in the princely state of Mysore as an example of the crucial role the state can play in augmenting the sources of rural income.  Sericulture flourished in Mysore during the 18^th century under Tipu Sultan. The technology was transferred from Bengal. Japanese and Italian silkworm strains were imported and experts hired from these countries (Nanavaty, 1990). Spread of diseases during 1866 and the world depression in 1929 along with competition from imported silk and rayon lead to downfall of Indian silk industry on the eve of World War II. A tariff protection commenced from 1934 to save the industry from cheap imports of silk (National Commission of Agriculture, 1976). Durng the World War II, the Indian silk industry again surged, mainly due to demand from the Allies for silk for manufacture of parachutes (note- 2).

The first authentic inquiry into the conditions of Indian silk industry was undertaken in 1914-15 by H. Maxwell Lefroy and E. C. Ansorge (Lefroy and Ansorge, 1915). In a report they observed that the industry was scattered and unorganized producers were subjected to exploitation. They suggested formation of a central organization to address the needs of the industry (Lefroy and Ansorge, 1915). Subsequent recommendations by a Silk Panel in 1946 lead to the formation of the Central Silk Board in 1949.

Central Silk Board (CSB) is a statutory body, under the administrative control of the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India. One of the earliest commodity boards to be constituted by the Government of India, the Board coordinates the development of sericulture and advises the Government on policies governing export and import. It has the responsibility for pre-shipment inspection of silk goods exported from the country. The Board is also responsible for organizing sericultural research, training, basic seed (egg) production and collection of statistics pertaining to sericulture and silk industry (National Commission of Agriculture, 1976 and Gopalachar, 1978).

The Central Silk Board (CSB) established a number of sericulture research institutions in 1960s. With systematic efforts, it became possible in 1970s to develop a technology suitable for tropics. New mulberry varieties coupled with agronomical practices were made available to the farmers. Packages of practice were developed for silkworm rearing, besides realising new bivoltine races. Popularisation of the bivoltine hybrids was given priority. Since seed preparers started using bivoltine as a male parent for the preparation of cross breeds, the traditional poor yield crosses have been replaced to the extent of 85%. Consequent to this, mulberry sericulture was spread to non- traditional states like Kerala, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Gujarat in the 1980s. While other crops (grains) perish due to very little precipitation, mulberry survives such acute situation where ground water is also not available for raising the crops, thus providing subsistence to a large number of farmers (National Commission of Agriculture, 1976).

Currently in India mulberry silk is chiefly produced in 5 states viz. Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh , Tamilnadu , West Bengal and Jammu & Kashmir, contributing to about 99% of the total mulberry silk produced. Interestingly, the states of A.P and T.N with almost no silk production during 1960 (Vasumathi, 2000), currently occupy the second and fourth position respectively. West Bengal at present contributes about 11.8% of the total cocoon / silk production, while Karnataka contributes the lion's share (43.95%) with Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu contributing 38 % and 4 % respectively. Production statistics up to 2005 is furnished in table 1.

 Inability to exploit export potential

Table 2 gives India’s export, import and demand supply gap. The annual production of raw silk in India was 17305 tons, of which mulberry raw silk alone accounts for 15445 tons in 2005. The demand for raw silk was much higher than the production at 10180 tons. Hence, India imported 10538 tons of raw silk in 2005. The imports have steadily increased from 6015 tons in 2000 to 10538 tons in 2005 representing a compound annual growth rate of 9.8%, against a mere 0.25% compound growth rate in production. Over the five year period the demand supply gap has increased by 73%. The imports as a percentage of production have increased from 39% to 68%. This analysis indicate that India has neither been able to meet the increasing demand for silk in the domestic market by increasing domestic silk production, nor to exploit the huge export potential; instead resorted to rawsilk imports to fill the domestic demand supply gap.

 Table 3 gives India’s export earnings from silk (all commodities) over the period 2000 to 2005. It is seen that though the silk exports showed a compound growth rate of 7.95% over the years, its percentage share in total textile exports from the country has been stagnant over the years.

 Table 4 gives the value of silk and other textiles imported by India over the years. The percentage share of silk in the total textiles import has increased over the 6 years by 5.7%, whereas the net foreign exchange earning from export and imports has remained stagnant.

 From the above analysis it is clear that even after being the second largest producer of silk, India contributes only 16% of global silk production and it is the largest importer of rawsilk. India has been unable to meet the increasing demand for rawsilk by the domestic industry through increasing domestic supply. This is because of two reasons namely low productivity and low quality.

Impact of cheap imports on domestic industry

Apart from India’s inability to exploit the export potentials and dependency on imported raw material, another grave issue is pertaining to cheap imports of raw materials ruining the domestic sericulture industry. It is reported that Chinese raw silk and silk fabrics are reportedly being imported into the country at very low prices (Tikku, 1999).

The data furnished in table 4 reveal that the rawsilk imports to India increased from 7896 tons in 2001, to 10506 tons in 2002, which is a 33% increase in one year. During the subsequent year the domestic silk production fell by 5.6% (from 17351 tons of 2002 to 16369 tons of 2003).The domestic silk production further fell by 10% (from 16369 tons of 2003 to 14620 tons of 2004). 

 Table 5 compares the annual growth rate in rawsilk imports for five years from 2000 against the performance of Indian sericulture industry and reeling sector to generate an idea about the comparative dynamics (Note:3).

 It is seen that the growth rate of silk imports were very high from 1999 to 2003 except for 2000-01. The growth rate in the value of imported silk (in Indian Rupee terms) has been lower than that of quantity of imports. The prices of domestic rawsilk and cocoon are observed to be worst affected during the years 2001-02 and 2002-03, the periods in which imports grew very high and prices of imported silk kept falling. Thomas et. al (2005a) showed that the cocoon price get influenced by the yarn prices with a lag of six to ten days. From the table 5, it is clear that during 2001-02 and 2002-03 when domestic rawsilk prices fell by 4.9% and 24.1 % respectively, the cocoon price also fell by 4.8% and 10.8%. This has impacted on cocoon production, lowering it by 8.2% and 8.4% during 2002-03 and 2003-04 respectively. The data shows that the effect of imports influenced the mulberry plantation also. During 2002-03 in Karnataka alone 23% of the existing mulberry plantations were uprooted and in the subsequent year another 10% uprooting occurred. 6780 charka reeling units have closed down over the six years where as the number of cottage basin reeling units have increased by 846 only. The number of multi-end reeling units has also fallen by 59. This means considerable labour displacement from the charka sector during the six years which is not likely due to up gradation of the charka units into cottage basins.

The fall in: prices, quantity of cocoon production and mulberry area and labour displacement from the reeling sector cannot be completely attributed to the rawsilk import. Many other socio economic factors could be at play. However it is seen that subsequent to a protectionist intervention of the government during 2003, the quantity of imports fell by 2.3%, domestic rawsilk prices increased from Rs. 805.00 to Rs. 984.00 per kg (22.2% growth) and cocoon prices increased by 17.8% (note-4). During the subsequent year the quantity of cocoon production showed slight improvement (2.2% growth) and the mulberry uprooting rate came down from 10.26% to 2.23%. This indicates that the silk imports have had a deleterious effect on the domestic sericulture.

It is generally held that the imported rawsilk is consumed by the powerlooms since power looms require qualitatively superior and strong yarn for the warp and the relatively poor quality local yarn is fit for the weft only (Thomas e.al, 2005b and Vasumathi, 2000).

 Table 6 gives the growth rate of rawsilk imports over 6 years from 1999-00 against number of handlooms and power looms in the country. It is seen that the number of power looms have stagnated at 29340 over the years and the number of handlooms have increased by 30299 during 2001-02. The rawsilk imports have been in the increase. Thomas et.al. (2005b) found that only 50-53% of the yarn requirement of the power loom sector is met from Chinese imports. Thus it may be inferred that a considerable portion of the imported yarn is being absorbed by the handloom sector also, which is traditionally known as the sole consumer of charka silk (Vasumathi, 2000).

A study conducted by Thomas et.al. (2005b) revealed the pattern of rawsilk usage as given in table 7

 Thomas et.al. (2005b) also have shown that the imported Chinese silk is superior to the locally available silk with respect to denier, cleanness, cohesion, gumming losses and uniformity. Table .8 presents a comparison of imported silk with local silk based on these attributes.

Naik .G & Babu (1993) have estimated that the total high quality silk production in India could meet at the most 60 percent of the estimated demand and have cautioned about the negative implications of the Chinese raw silk on the development of Indian silk industry. They also noted that diversion of imported silk into domestic sector benefit only the consumer. By avoiding this diversion, the demand for domestically produced high quality silk would have increased the good health of the industry. Some of their recommendations for amelioration of the current situation include - improvement in research and extension facility, adequate supply of inputs and proper marketing facilities and modifications in the production system.

Summary and conclusion

In spite of its small volume in global textile production, silk has importance in developing economies primarily because of its favorable socio economic consequences. The development of sericulture had been the states priority in every country. The case of Indian sericulture is no exception to this. A number of regulations were made in favor of the farm sector. Many ambitious projects were launched and a large number of technologies made available. In spite of all this, poor productivity, poor quality, high cost of production and labour intensity continue to be the hall marks of Indian silk industry. In order to cater to the needs of sophisticated power-looms and in response to the relaxation in exim policies, large quantities of high quality silk has been imported at prices lower to local silk. This has disrupted the domestic silk reeling industry and sericulture farm sector, leading to considerable labour displacement. Protectionist government interventions have temporarily eased the problem. But how long tariff protections could help the domestic industry is a question. Data shows that imported silk is finding place even on the traditional handlooms, clearly demonstrating its comparative advantage. The recent data shows that the price of imported silk is in the increase while the government has announced a slash in customs duty of raw silk imports from 30% to 5%. While the farmers and reelers staged an agitation the weaving sector welcome the gesture. Thus the industry is divided in its opinion on cheap imports, indicating the necessity for the government to take appropriate policy decisions. Where does our comparative advantage lie? Is it in the sericulture farm sector or in the silk weaving industry? If the farm sector has to survive, is it sufficiently equipped to take up the challenge of ensuring high quality raw material supply? If this is ensured, is the silk reeling sector capable of absorbing the high quality cocoons? These are the questions that the Indian silk industry has to answer before proceeding any further.

Notes

1. While considering patterns of location of sericulture, Federico (1997) observed, “……. . the ideal environment for silkworm raising was densely populated area, with dispersed dwellings and few opportunities for non-agricultural work. It is not surprising that sericulture did not develop at all where the population was scarce and labour, expensive (as in the United States) or where people lived in large villages far from the fields (as in the interior of Sicily or Spain)……..Silkworm raising does not need strength but does require much care and caution in handling the worms, which are exteremely delicate animals, very sensitive to any form of ill-treatment and /or sudden change of temperature. Therefore sericulture was traditionally women’s work, while men cultivated the mulberry trees and sometimes helped to transport the leaves.”
2. The industry in Mysore doubled its pre-war size. Mulberry acrage rose from 26500 to 80000. Number of filature basins in Mysore and Madras rose from 300 (in 1939) to over 2000 (in 1945). Filature silk production rose from 2300 kg(1937) to 137000 kg (1945) (Nanavaty, 1990)
3. The majority of silk produced in India is through charka, the traditional reeling device and less sophisticated cottage basin reeling units. Semi and fully automatic reeling machines are used to produce high quality silk in Japan, Korea and China. Multi-end reeling machines have been developed and popularized in India to produce high quality silk which need good quality cocoons of uniform size and shape as raw material
4. Antidumping investigations were undertaken by Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and allied Duties (DGAD&AD) on a petition by the reelers affected by the falling domestic prices. The designated authority imposed antidumping duty on landed goods so as to raise import prices to US$ 27.97 per kg.on all imports of mulberry raw silk of 2A grade and below originating in or exported from Peoples Republic of China. The duty came into force wef. 3^rd July 2003. (Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, 2007)

REFERENCES

Gopalachar, A.R.S. (1978) 3 Decades of Sericultural Progress (Sericulture Industry in India Potential and Prospects) pub. Central silk Board, India.

Hanumappa, H.G. and Erappa, S. (1988) Sericulture in Princely Mysore (1914-1945)  a Survey. Paper presented at Seminar on South Indian Economy,C. 1914-C. 1945.  CDS, Trivandrum, April, 25-28, 1988.

Hanumappa,H.G., and Erappa, S. (1986) Economic issues in sericulture: Study of Karnataka. ”Economic and Political Weekly” 20(31)1322-1324.

ITC Silk Review (2001)  http://www.intracen.org/

Jayaram, H., Mallikarjuna, V., Lakshmanan, S., Ganapathi, Rao, R. and Geetha, Devi, R. G. (1998) Labour Employment Under Different Mulberry Farm Holdings-a Comparative Study. Indian Journal of Sericulture, 37(01), p52-56.

Lakshman, S; B. Mallikarjuna., R. Ganapathi Rao; H. Jayaram and R.G. Geetha Devi (1999) An empirical investigation on labour productivity in mulberry sericulture. “Indian journal of Sericulture” 38(1) 48-52

Lefroy, MaxWell, H. and E.C. Ansorge (1915) Report on an Inquiry into the Silk Industry in India (1915), Vol. I, Calcutta,

Mattigatti, R; Srinivasa, G; Iyengar, M.N.S; Datta, R.K. and Geetha Devi, R.G (2000) Price spread in silk industry- an economic analysis. “Indian Journal of Sericulture” 39(2) 163-64

Naik Gopal and Babu KH, (1993), Demand and Supply Prospects for High Quality Silk,Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi.

Nanavathy, M. (1990) Silk, Production, Procesing and Marketting, Pub: Wilely Eastern Ltd.

National Commission of Agriculture (1976) Report of the National Commission on Agriculture, sericulture and apiculture; Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, New Delhi. P.447-480

Ray, Indrajit (2005) The Silk Industry In Bengal During Colonial Rule: The De-Industrialisation. Thesis Revisited. Indian Economic Social History Review; 42; 339

Saraswathi, J.M.  and Sumangala, P.R. (2001) Participation of Farm Women In Sericulture Enterprise. “Indian Journal of Sericulture” 40(1) 86-91

Sinha, Sanjay (1989) Development Impact Of Silk Production, A Wealth Of Opportunities. “Economic and Political Weekly,” January 21, 157-163.

Thomas Jacob, Arun Kumar, K.S, Reddy and Lalith. A (2005a) Quantification of Relationship Between Silk Cocoon and Silk Yarn Prices- an Application of ARIMA Model. In Reading in Sericulture Economics Marketing and Management. Eds. K.S. Arun Kumar, R.K. Datta and G. srinivas. Pub: Santhosh Creations, Bangalore.

Thomas, Jacob., Arun Kumar, K.S, Lalith. A and Reddy.S (2005b) Requirement of Quality Silk Yarn of The Power Loom Sector-A Quantitative Analysis. In       Reading In Sericulture Economics Marketing And Management. Eds. K.S. Arun Kumar, R.K. Datta and G. Srinivas. Pub: Santhosh Creations, Bangalore.

Tikku, M.K. (1999) Tangled Threads Silk Growers and Imports. Economic and Political Weekly, March 6-13, p. 578

United Nations (1994) “Silks In Asia,” Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. 

Vasumathi ( 2000) An Analytical Study Of The Silk Reeling Operations In Karnataka. 

INTERCROPPING IN MULBERRY WITH CEREALS, PULSES AND OIL SEEDS UNDER RAINFED CONDITIONS OF CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT

P.K.Das, R.Gururaj, S.B.Magadum, C. Doreswamy , Shivashankar Murthy

The first & third authors have retired as Scientist-D in November & September 2010 respectively from Regional Sericultural Research Station, Chamarajanagar (Karnataka) of Central Silk Board, Ministry of Textiles, Govt. Of India. 

The third and fourth authors are with Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Hardanahalli, Chamarajanagar
Please read a previous article by Dr. PK Das

What is intercropping?

Intercropping can be defined as agricultural practice of cultivating or growing of two or more crops simultaneously on the same area of land for increasing the returns from unit area of land. The crops are not necessarily sown at exactly the same time and their harvest times may be quite different, but they are usually “simultaneous” for a significant part of their growing periods. It is a practice often associated with sustainable agriculture and organic farming. Intercropping is one form of polyculture, using companion planting principles. Intercropping may benefit crop yield or the control of some kind of pest, or may have other agronomic benefits. In intercropping, there is often one main crop and one or more added crops, with the main crop being the one of primary importance because of economic or food production reasons. The two or more crops used in an intercrop may be from different species and different plant families, or they may simply be different varieties or cultivars of the same crop species. Intercropping offers farmers the opportunity to engage nature's principle of diversity on their farms. Spatial arrangements of plants planting rates and maturity dates must be considered when planning intercrops. Intercrops can be more productive than growing pure stands.

Objective of intercropping:

The most common objective of intercropping is to produce a greater yield on a given piece of land by making use of resources that would otherwise not be utilized by a single crop and thereby to augment the income. Careful planning is required, taking into account the soil, climate, crops, and varieties. It is particularly important not to have crops competing with each other for physical space, nutrients, water, or sunlight. Intercropping of compatible plants also encourages biodiversity, by providing a habitat for a variety of insects and soil organisms that would not be present in a single crop environment. This biodiversity can in turn help to limit outbreaks of crop pests by increasing the diversity or abundance of natural enemies, such as spiders or parasitic wasps. Increasing the complexity of the crop environment through intercropping also limits the places where pests can find optimal foraging or reproductive conditions.

Watch the story as a movie

Informations available on intercropping in mulberry

Intercropping has been tried in paired row system of mulberry under irrigated condition in Kharif with French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and Radish (Raphanus sativus) and with Sabssige (Anethum graveolens) , Methe (Trigonella foenum graecum) and Palak (Spinacea oleracea) in Rabi at CSRTI, Mysore. Intercropping was also done with Bengal gram, Gladiolus, Marigold, Amaranthus and Cluster bean to improve the net returns (Ravindran et.al , 2003, CSR&TI, Mysore). Intercropping in rainfed mulberry with different cereals, pulses, millets, oil seeds and vegetables was studied in ICAR adhoc research project  on “Development of appropriate inter cropping system for rainfed mulberry garden” (Shankar and Devaiah,  2002 , UAS , Bangalore). The report revealed that there was no adverse effect in mulberry or on silkworm  growth and production. Besides, it also increased the net income per unit area of mulberry garden.

Different types of intercropping:

1. Row intercropping: This involves growing two or more crops simultaneously where one or more crops are planted in rows.

2. Mixed intercropping: Here two or more crops are simultaneously grown intermingled in the same plot with no distinct row arrangement.

3. Strip intercropping: It involves growing two or more crops simultaneously in different strips wide enough to permit independent cultivation but narrow enough for the crop to interact agronomically.

4. Parallel multiple cropping: In contrast to multiple cropping in series, one could visualize the situation of parallel multiple cropping where two crops of dissimilar growth habit are made to grow simultaneously in such a way that they do not affect the performance of each other adversely.

5. Relay intercropping: Growing component crops in relay so that growth cycles overlap.

6. Multi tier intercropping: It is a system of growing together crops of different heights at the same time in the same piece of land and thus using land, water and space most efficiently and economically.

7. Alley cropping: Alley cropping is essentially an agro forestry system in which food crops are grown in alleys formed by hedge rows of trees or shrubs.

Feasibilities of intercropping in mulberry under rainfed condition at Chamarajanagara

Chamarajanagara district is a traditional sericultural belt in Karnataka. Presently, mulberry is cultivated in a area of approximately 8,313 hectares. Out of this, 6,957 hectares (83.7%) are existing under rainfed and 1,356 hectares (16.3%) under irrigated conditions. To improve the economic production per unit area of mulberry garden specially under rainfed condition, it is important to grow other short duration agricultural crops adopted to grow under local agronomical conditions along with mulberry within available space. Under rainfed condition of Chamrajanagar it is recommended to grow S-13 / S-34 mulberry varieties in red / black soil respectively in a spacing of 90 cm x 90 cm as bush plantation in plain lands. While growing of the same varieties in a spacing of 180 cm x 180 cm ( i.e 6’ x 6’) is also recommended as tree plantation in undulating as well as sloppy lands or hilly areas. Thus the available space between mulberry rows under bush or tree plantations provides a good opportunity  for intercropping. It has been observed that in Chamarajanagara district ragi, ground nut and cowpea are generally grown by the agricultural farmers during Kharif (June- September) with the available soil moisture due to rain as subsidiary crops and as major source of income while horse gram is grown during Rabi season (October – January). However, their use in rainfed mulberry garden is hardly seen due to limitation of knowledge of intercropping among the sericultural farmers. This is further constrained by the non availability of proper technology package of intercropping in rainfed condition. Though It has been observed that during last seven years (2000-2007) Chamarajanagar received an average rainfall of 729.8 mm / year ( Table-1), in true sense most of the year received below average rainfall accept the years 2000-2001 &  2005-2006 and most of which were restricted from the month of June to October. Thus it is highly important to grow short duration intercrops which can be grown in mulberry taking advantage of this scanty rainfall to augment the income of farmers and make sericulture more remunerative. However, it is very important to develop meticulous plan to grow intercrops with this low rainfall. With these in mind intercropping in mulberry was studied at Regional Sericultural Research Station, Chamarajanagar from June 2007 for three years to see the feasibility of intercropping in mulberry for augmenting income of the sericultural farmers of this area. The project was undertaken in collaboration with KVK, Chamarajanagar. Intercropping was taken up only during rainy season by growing four intercrops (ragi, cowpea, groundnut and Horse gram) under 90 cm x 90 cm spacing with S-13, paired row plantation (90cm + 180 cm) x 60 cm with V-1 and mulberry tree under 180 cm x 180 cm and 240 cm x 240 cm spacing with S-13. Four experiments were conducted   simultaneously in four different gardens considering 4 treatments (4 intercrops) with 3 replications each

Achievement

The data clearly revealed that among all the intercrops, groundnut has influenced maximum on the leaf yield of both the S-13 and V-1 mulberry varieties.  Among all the planting geometry, tree plantation under 180 cm x 180 cm spacing showed the promising result. A maximum percentage of improvement in the leaf yield (45.7 %) was observed in the first year from S-13 mulberry variety as tree plantation under 180 cm x 180 cm spacing with groundnut intercropping (Table-2). The second year data also clearly revealed that among all the intercrops, groundnut has influenced maximum (35.8%) on the leaf yield of S13 mulberry variety as tree plantation under 180 cm x 180 cm spacing (Table-3). A silkworm rearing was conducted in 2^nd year which did not show any significant variation in the larval growth, survivability and cocoon yield due to intercropping as compared to control (sole mulberry) suggesting no adverse effect of intercropping on mulberry leaf quality ( Table-4). A substantial yield of intercrops specially groundnut and cowpea was also recorded under both the S-13 and V-1 mulberry varieties indicating a positive role of intercropping in augmenting income (Table -5).  However, the intercropping in 3^rd year failed due to poor rainfall. The cost benefit ratio was worked out for intercropping under mulberry. The intercropping with cowpea and groundnut was found to be quite profitable while horse gram and ragi intercropping was found not profitable under rainfed mulberry.

Recommendation:

v  Hence, intercropping once in a year in S-13 mulberry during rainy season with cow pea and specially with groundnut under 3 ‘ x 3’ row system of plantation, V-1 mulberry with paired row system as well as S-13 mulberry under tree plantation with 6’ x 6’ or 8’x 8’ is recommended.

v  This will augment the farm income besides proper utilization of farm land.

v  While intercropping with cowpea the seed rate should be @ 20 kg / ha and groundnut @ 100 kg / ha following line / row sowing method keeping a distance of 1 feet from line to line / row to row.

v  Chemical fertilizers should be applied for the intercrops at the rate of 30:50:30 NPK kg / ha / year besides application of the recommended dose of fertilizers for mulberry during rainy season. FYM can be applied as per the recommendation of mulberry cultivation under rainfed condition.

Future Plan of Action:

The intercropping in rainfed mulberry is under popularization among the sericulturists of Chamarajanagar. For which the DOS has been also involved for assisting in the farmers field. An Action plan has also been submitted to DOS.

Microsporidia - A Taxonomic Nomad

Dr. K. Chandrasekharan

Dr. K. Chandrasekharan is a Senior scientist with Central Silk Board, India. He obtained his BSc and MSc degrees in Zoology from the University of Calicut, Kerala. His Ph.D was from the University of Mysore on white muscardine disease of silkworm caused by Beauveria bassina. Before joining CSB he had worked on the biological control aspects of pests of coconut, with special reference to the parasitoid hyperparasitoid interaction of the coconut pest Opisina arenosella in the field, as a UGC/CSIR fellow. In CSB his initial work was in Tasar sericulture sector. After moving to the Regional Sericulture Research Station , Kodathi, Bangalore he worked for a short spell on transfer of technoloies to the field. There after till now his work is at the Silkworm Pathology Laboratory at the Central Sericultural Research and Training Institute at Mysore. Presently he is engaged in developing suitable strategies for the management of silkworm diseases. The team he is working with has developed and commercialised a number of products for managing silkworm diseases, which are commercialised in the trade names 'Asthra, Ankush, Amruth, and Vijetha supplement'. He has published nearly 120 papers and supervised 6 students for their MSc dissertations. 
Dr. K. Chandrasekharan can be contacted at E-mail: kchandrasekharan@rediffmail.com 

Microsporidia are a group of obligate eukaryotic intracellular parasites first recognized more than 150 years ago with the description of Nosema bombycis the parasite causing pebrine disease in silkworms. Microsporidia infect almost all animal phyla and among the more than 144 described genera, several have been demonstrated in human disease. Pebrine caused by the microsporidian, N. bombycis is one of the most dangerous and devastating disease in silkworm. This disease devastated sericulture industry in several countries and even it wiped out the industry from some of the European countries. This disease was first reported during 1845 in France and later spread to several other European countries. In 1870, Louis Pasteur developed a practical method to control the disease which saved the industry during that time and this method of mother moth examination is still followed to prepare and supply pebrine free layings.

Spores of N. bombycis

Several microsporidia other than N. bombycis (Vairimorpha sp., Pleistophora sp., Thelohania sp. etc.) are also reported as causative agents of this disease. They mainly transmit by ingestion of spores (horizontal transmission) and in addition, many species of microsporidia are transmitted vertically or trans-ovarially (generation to generation) from an infected adult female to her offspring, either through the egg surface or within the egg.Microsporidia are primitive eukaryotes with well defined nuclei and plasma membrane but lack some typical organelles found in the typical eukaryotes like mitochondria, stacked Golgi and peroxisomes. Microsporidian spores have a characteristic coiled polar tube, tubule or filament, layered polaroplast, a posterior vacuole and protective exospores made up of proteins and chitin which is responsible for the spores’ high environmental resistance.  Microsporidia infiltrate into the host cells through the polar tube or polar filament found in the spore. They are widely distributed in nature with over 1200 characterized species. Recently microsporidia have also been documented as parasitic to human beings. Although the largest number of microsporidian species infect arthropods (especially insects), most animal phyla contain at least a few species that are infected by microsporidia. 

Taken from: http://www.palaeos.com/Eukarya/Units/Microsporidia/Microsporidia.000.html

The microsporidia have occupied the attention of taxonomists for a long time and have been subject to several reclassifications at all levels of organisation, from the species level up to that of their phylum’s affinity with other eukaryotes. The classification of Microsporidia has evolved through time with growing scientific research and the specifics are still thoroughly debated. Recent studies indicate phylum Microspora under the Fungal kingdom or at least as a sister kingdom to Fungi. The class, order and family within the Microspora phylum are also frequently revised and debated. Since from its inception, microsporidia was changed to distinct and varied taxonomic groups and hence microsporidian group can be considered as a taxonomic nomad.The name "Protozoa" was coined by Goldfuss (1817) and Siebold (1845) defined it and made phylum Protozoa. Order Microsporidia was erected by Balbiani in 1882 and initially this order was placed under the phylum Protozoa (kingdom Protista), and class Sporozoa along with the well known pathogens like Plasmodium and Leishmania. Later Doflein (1901) created a subclass Cnidosporidia, and order Microsporidia came under this sub class until a separate class Microsporidea under the sub phylum Cnidospora was erected by Honigberg et al. (1964) 

Classification of microsporidia as a class in the phylum Protozoa (Honigberg et al. ,1)964)

Microsporidia was later elevated into a separate phylum called Microspora under sub kingdom Protozoa which was erected in 1969 to accommodate this unique group of organisms (Sprague (1969, 1977), Levine et al. (1980)).

Classification of Microspora as a separate phylum of the animal subkingdom Protozoa  (Levine et al. 1980, Sprague 1969, 1977)

Sprague et al. (1992) introduce a different classification system, based on whether the species is diplokaryotic at some point in the life cycle (Dihaplophasea) or uninucleate throughout its life cycle (Haplophasea). The Dihaplophasea are further separated into those in which the diplokaryon is formed through meiosis (Meiodihaplophasida) and those in which the diplokaryon is formed through nuclear dissociation (Dissociodihaplophasida). 

Taxonomic position of Nosema sp.  in the Phylum Microsporidia (Sprague et al.1992)

Many mycologists and invertebrate pathologists now consider that the Microsporidia have been proven beyond any reasonable doubt to be comparatively recent and highly derived endobiotic fungi. They are neither extremely ancient eukaryote nor affiliated with protozoans as most textbooks indicate. None of this realignment to the fungi is being disputed by either microsporidiologists or phylogenetic mycologists. The rationale for this realignment is well presented by James et al. (2006). These fascinating organisms connect to the fungal tree of life at the base of the nonflagellate fungi (among or near the fungi traditionally treated as the Zygomycota) but their exact affinities and nearest remain uncertain. Recent scientific studies using genetic tools have proved that microsporidians are more fungal than protozoal in nature. Now pebrine can be better classified as a mycosis rather than microsporidiosis.

James et al (2006) developed the phylogenetic hypotheses for Fungi using data from six gene regions and nearly 200 species. The results indicate that there may have been at least four independent losses of the flagellum in the kingdom Fungi. These losses of swimming spores coincided with the evolution of new mechanisms of spore dispersal, such as aerial dispersal in mycelial groups and polar tube eversion in the microsporidia (unicellular forms that lack mitochondria). The enigmatic microsporidia seem to be derived from an endoparasitic chytrid ancestor similar to Rozella allomycis, on the earliest diverging branch of the fungal phylogenetic tree. The recent results using RPB1, a- and b-tubulin, and other genes, have suggested a fungal origin of the microsporidia (Hirt et al.,1999; Katinka et al., 2001 and Keeling 2003), a placement consistent with their having the shared traits of closed mitosis and spores that contain chitin and trehalose  (Cavalier-Smith, 2001). Only one study has placed the microsporidia with a specific fungal lineage, in which a relationship was demonstrated between members of the Zygomycota and microsporidia by using tubulin proteins (Keeling, 2003). However, tubulin proteins seem to have evolved at different rates in flagellated and non-flagellated fungi (Keeling, 2003; Corradi et al., 2004).

Presently work has focused on the determination of the nucleotide sequences for ribosomal RNA (rRNA) genes, which have been used as diagnostic tools for species identification as well as for the development of a molecular phylogeny of these organisms. Microsporidia have historically been considered to be “primitive” protozoa, however, molecular phylogenetic analysis has led to the recognition that these organisms are not “primitive” but degenerate and that they are related to the fungi and not to other protozoa. Molecular phylogeny has also led to the recognition that the traditional phylogeny of these organisms based on structural observations may not reflect the “true” relationships among the various microsporidia species and genera.

Studies using DNA techniques indicate phylum Microspora should be classified under the Fungal kingdom or at least as a sister kingdom to Fungi. The class, order and family within the Microspora phylum are also frequently revised and debated. Traditionally, species were identified by observing the physical characteristics of the spore, life cycle and relationship with the host cell. However, studies using genetic tools (namely ribosomal RNA sequencing) have challenged this approach and suggest genetic markers a more correct method for scientific classification. More research is still needed to better understand the origins of microspora and of individual species.

Liu et al., (2006) concluded in their studies that Microsporidia are the sister group of the rest of the Fungi and should not be classified as true Fungi, but that topology does not conflict with the delimitation of the monophyletic Fungi as proposed here. The analysis of James et al. (2006) suggested that Rozella, which was not sampled by Liu et al. (2006), is the sister group of the Microsporidia. Based on the genetic analyses of Keeling et al. (2000), Gill & Fast (2006), James et al. (2006) and Liu et al. (2006) phylum microspora has been included under the fungal kingdom in the recent phylogenetic classification of fungi by Hibbett et al. (2007). No subdivision of the Microsporidia is proposed, in the classification by Hibbet et al (2007) owing to a lack of well-sampled multilocus analyses of this group. 

Phylogeny and classification of Fungi (Hibbet et al., 2007)

The study of microsporidia has reached the breaking point where the classical cytology, which has been the base of microsporidian studies since the very beginning, has lost its importance and it has actually been replaced by the molecular biology. Vossbrinck and Vossbrinck (2005) have adopted the new view, and the result is a new phylogeny and a new classification for a selection of microsporidian species. Five major clades with three taxonomic (class) designations in the phylum Microsporidia were identified in the phylograms. In the Class Aquasporidia, primarily parasites of freshwater organisms are included. The majority of the marine Microsporidia are designated as the Class Marinosporidia, which represents the parasites of marine hosts. Microsporidia isolated from terrestrial hosts are designated into the Class Terresporidia, and are mainly parasites of insects with economic importance.

Taxonomic position of Nosema sp. in the Division Microsporidia of Fungal kingdom (Vossbrinck & Debrunner-Vossbrinck , 2005)

The new classification necessitates a paradigm shift in our understanding about the pebrine disease in silkworm. More over the new understanding may revolutionise our strategies to mange pebrine disease of silkworm.

Refernces

Balbiani G. (1882) Sur les microsporidies ou psorospermies des articules. C. R. Acad. Sci. 95: 1168–1171.

Cavalier-Smith, T. (2001) In: The Mycota (Eds McLaughlin, D. J., McLaughlin, E. G. & Lemke, P. A.) 3–-37 (Springer, New York)

Corradi, N. et al.  (2004) Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (Glomeromycota) harbour ancient fungal tubulin genes that resemble those of the chytrids (Chytridiomycota). Fungal Genet. Biol. 41, 1037–-1045.

Doflein F. (1901) Die Protozoen als Parasiten und Krankheitserreger nach biologischen Gesichtspunkten dargestellt. Jena.    

Gill E. E. and Fast N. M. (2006) Assessing the microsporidia–fungi relationship: combined phylogenetic analysis of eight genes. Gene. 375: 103–109.

Goldfuss G.A. (1817) Zber die Entwicklungsstufen des Thieres. L. Schrag, Nurenberg.

Hibbett et al. (2007) A higher-level phylogenetic classification of the Fungi. Mycological Research. 111: 509-547.

Hirt, R. P. et al. (1999) Microsporidia are related to fungi: evidence from the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II and other proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 580–-585

Honigberg et al. (1964) A revised classification of the phylum Protozoa. J. Protozool. 11: 7-20.

James et al (2006) Reconstructing the early evolution of the fungi using a six gene phylogeny. Nature. 443:818-822.

Katinka, M. D. et al. (2001) Genome sequence and gene compaction of the eukaryote parasite Encephalitozoon cuniculi. Nature. 414, 450-453

Keeling P. J. (2003) Congruent evidence for alpha-tubulin and betatubulin gene phylogenies for a zygomycete origin of Microsporidia. Fungal Genetics and Biology.38: 298–309.

Keeling P.J. et al. (2000) Evidence from beta-tubulin phylogeny that Microsporidia evolved from within the fungi. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 17: 23–31.

Levine et al. (1980) A Newly Revised Classification of the Protozoa. J. Protozool. 27(1): 37–58.

Liu Y. J. et al. (2006) Loss of the flagellum happened only once in the fungal lineage: phylogenetic structure of kingdom Fungi inferred from RNA polymerase II subunit genes. BMC Evolutionary Biology 6: 74.

Siebold C. T. E. (1845) Lehrbuch der Vergleichenden Anatomie der Wirbellossen Thiere. In: Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Anatomie 1 (Eds. von Siebold C.T.E. and Stannius H.). Berlin.

Sprague, V. (1969) Need for drastic revision of the classification of subphylum Amoebagena. Progress in Protozoology, 3rd Internationla Cong. Protozool. Lenningrad. 372.

Sprague, V. (1977) Classification and phylogeny of the microsporidia. In: Bulla, L. A., and T. C. Cheng, (Eds.) Comparative pathobiology, Vol. 2. Systematics of the microsporidia. Plenum Press, New York.

Sprague, V. et al. (1992) Taxonomy of phylum Microspora. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 18: 285–395.

Vossbrinck C. R. and Debrunner-Vossbrinck B. A. (2005) Molecular phylogeny of the Microsporidia: ecological, ultrastructural and taxonomic considerations. Folia Parasitologica. 52: 131–142.