Modern Indian agriculture faces a paradox. Calorie production has never been higher; soil health has never been lower. Soil organic carbon levels across our intensively farmed regions have fallen below 0.5% — against the 1.5–2% threshold that soil scientists consider minimally functional. Groundwater tables are collapsing. Seasonal rivers run dry months ahead of schedule. And farming households are trapped in a debt spiral driven by escalating input costs that yield diminishing returns. These are not separate crises. They are symptoms of one underlying failure: the systematic destruction of in-situ biomass.
For decades, agricultural modernization meant substitution — biology replaced by chemistry, diverse landscapes replaced by monocultures, soil ecology replaced by soil chemistry. The Green Revolution’s calorie triumph obscured what was simultaneously being destroyed: the functional architecture of living soil. Critically, soil health cannot be restored by importing organic matter from outside the farm. It must be generated where it is needed — by living plants, active roots, and functioning soil biology, season after season, without interruption. This article examines what several of the world’s most rigorous agroecological models do in practice to generate biomass in-situ: what they grow, when they grow it, how they manage it, and what it does to the soil.
Why In-Situ Biomass Is Different from Applied Organic Matter
The distinction matters. Bringing compost or organic matter from outside the farm improves soil chemistry but does relatively little for soil biology, because the living connections — the root exudates, the mycorrhizal networks, the rhizosphere communities — are created only by living plants growing in the soil. Dr. Christine Jones’ research identifies the ‘liquid carbon pathway’: approximately 30% of photosynthate is exuded directly from living roots to mycorrhizal fungi and soil bacteria, which convert it into stable soil aggregates at a carbon efficiency of 46% — nearly six times higher than decomposition of applied residues. The pathway is active only when living roots are present. Every month of bare fallow is a month during which the soil’s most efficient self-repair mechanism is switched off.
Walter Jehne’s ‘soil carbon sponge’ framework extends this further: biologically structured soil absorbs and holds water, cooling the microclimate through transpiration. Bare, degraded soil sheds water and bakes. The practical implication is the same across every model examined below: the goal is maximum living root presence in the soil for the maximum number of days in the year. In-situ biomass generation is the mechanism; continuous biological soil activity is the outcome.
Pre-Monsoon Dry Sowing (PMDS): Biomass Before the Rains
The most innovative in-situ biomass practice in Indian dryland agriculture is Pre-Monsoon Dry Sowing, pioneered under the APCNF programme in Andhra Pradesh. In conventional rainfed farming, soil lies bare for seven to eight months between the post-Kharif harvest and the following monsoon — the period during which the liquid carbon pathway is entirely inactive. PMDS disrupts this by establishing a third season of living biomass beginning in April, three full months before the rains arrive.
The in-situ biomass generation mechanics of PMDS work as follows. A seed consortium of fifteen to twenty species is selected specifically for biomass function, not just crop yield:
• Fast-establishing cereals and millets (jowar, bajra, ragi) for structural above-ground biomass and deep fibrous root mass
• Short-duration pulses (cowpea, horse gram, moth bean) for rapid ground cover, nitrogen fixation, and fine root exudates that feed soil biology
• Oilseeds (sesame, sunflower) for deep taproots that penetrate compacted subsoil layers, creating biopores
• Cucurbits and leafy vegetables for horizontal ground cover that suppresses bare soil exposure
• Dhaincha (Sesbania) and other green manure species specifically for high-biomass production that will be incorporated later
Seeds are pelleted with clay dust, ash, and Jivamrutham before sowing. The Jivamrutham coat — fermented animal dung, urine, jaggery, and legume flour — inoculates each seed with a microbiome at the point of germination, establishing root-zone biological activity from day one. Atmospheric moisture harvested through overnight condensation on the developing canopy is drawn into the biologically active soil through capillary action, feeding germination and early root growth without irrigation.
By the time the monsoon arrives, the field carries a standing biomass of multiple species at different growth stages. This is not harvested and removed — it is managed in place. The fast-growing species are slashed and incorporated as green manure directly into the soil. The standing residue of others becomes the mulch layer that protects soil during the monsoon. Root biomass — at multiple depths across fifteen to twenty species — remains in the soil, decomposing slowly and feeding soil biology through the entire wet season. The soil enters the Kharif season already biologically charged, structurally porous, and covered. The carbon sponge is switched on before the rains begin.
Navadanya: Year-Round Biomass Through Crop Diversity
Navadanya — from nava (nine) and dhanya (grains) — is a traditional South Indian cropping practice rooted in the agricultural culture of the Deccan plateau, involving the simultaneous cultivation of nine or more crop species on the same plot. Its in-situ biomass logic is structural: different species generate different types of biomass at different times and at different locations in the soil profile, ensuring that the field is never biologically empty.
The biomass generation architecture of a Navadanya field operates on three axes simultaneously:
• Vertical: short groundcover species (horsegram, vegetables) generate surface root mats and canopy cover; mid-height pulses and oilseeds produce intermediate root systems and above-ground biomass; tall cereals (jowar, maize) produce high structural biomass and deep root channels. The total leaf area index — the ratio of leaf surface to ground area — is significantly higher than any monoculture
• Temporal: different species reach peak biomass production at different points in the season. As early-maturing species are harvested, their root biomass remains in the soil while later-maturing species are still generating above-ground mass. The field is never simultaneously emptied
• Chemical: legumes generate nitrogen-rich fine root biomass and leaf litter; cereals generate carbon-rich structural residues; oilseeds generate high-energy root exudates. The diversity of inputs to soil biology is qualitatively superior to any single-species residue
Research across rainfed districts of Andhra Pradesh demonstrates that this biomass diversity produces measurable yield advantages: groundnut yields in Navadanya plots run 4.94% above the state average at five species, 27.87% at six species, and 42.67% at seven species. This scaling effect reflects the progressive activation of complementary ecological functions as diversity increases — each additional species adds a biomass type and a biological process that the others do not provide. The soil productivity gains are a consequence of the in-situ biological activity, not a separate variable.
Natueco (Dabholkar Method): The 200-Day Soil Rebuilding Protocol
Prof. S.A. Dabholkar’s Natueco method, developed through the Prayog Pariwar network in Maharashtra from the 1960s, is built on mathematical discipline — every recommendation traceable to a measured outcome. Its central thesis is that a farm is a solar energy harvester: sunlight falling on bare soil is wasted energy. Productive capacity is therefore a function of total functional leaf surface and the efficiency with which it converts incident radiation into biomass.
The first and most fundamental step in Natueco is also its most distinctive: grow a variety of crops on the land and plough the entire green matter back into the soil in situ. Dabholkar’s claim is precise — even land depleted of all nutrients through years of chemical farming can be resuscitated in two hundred days using this method alone. The protocol involves sowing a carefully composed seed mixture, allowing it to grow for 50–60 days, incorporating the entire standing biomass back into the soil, and repeating the cycle two more times. Three cycles of grow-and-incorporate within a year complete the basic restoration.
The seed mixture for one acre is composed of five functional categories, with approximately 5 kg from each:
- Grains (5 kg): e.g., 1 kg sorghum, 500 g pearl millet, 250 g foxtail millet, 250 g little millet — for structural above-ground biomass and dense fibrous root systems
- Pulses (5 kg): e.g., 1 kg blackgram, 1 kg greengram, 1 kg pigeon peas, 1 kg Bengal gram — for nitrogen fixation and fine root exudates that feed soil microbiology
- Oilseeds (5 kg): e.g., 500 g sesame, 2 kg groundnuts, 2 kg sunflower, 2 kg castor — for deep taproot penetration that opens subsoil layers and generates diverse root chemistry
- Green manure species (5 kg): e.g., 2 kg dhaincha, 2 kg sunn hemp, 500 g moth bean, 1 kg horsegram — selected specifically for high biomass yield and rapid canopy establishment
- Spices (5 kg): e.g., 500 g mustard, 500 g coriander, 500 g fenugreek, 500 g ajwain — for allelopathic root exudates and the diversity of microbial associations they support
One crop from each category is selected, giving five representative species per cycle. The entire above-ground biomass is incorporated at the end of 50–60 days. This has to be repeated two more times for best results. The cumulative effect is a progressive increase in soil organic carbon, microbial population, water retention capacity, and nutrient availability — achieved entirely from within the farm, using seeds that cost very little and require no external inputs.
Dabholkar’s approach makes a critical technical distinction from conventional green manuring. Conventional practice recommends incorporating green manure at the end of the vegetative growth phase, when the plant is succulent and soft. This material decomposes rapidly and releases nutrients quickly — but contributes little to long-term humus formation. Dabholkar’s method deliberately incorporates plants at or near the completion of their life cycles, when lignin and pectin content is high. This mature biomass decomposes slowly, building stable humus rather than providing a short-term nutrient flush. The implication for soil health is substantial: it is the humus that gives soil its long-term water retention, aggregate structure, and biological carrying capacity — not the soluble nutrients from premature incorporation.
The second distinction is equally important. Conventional green manuring typically uses a single high-nitrogen species — dhaincha or sunn hemp — on the assumption that nitrogen is the primary limiting nutrient. Dabholkar’s five-category mixture is designed not primarily for nutrient content but for diversity of microbial associations at root zones. Each plant family supports a different community of soil organisms. Grasses support mycorrhizal fungi; legumes support nitrogen-fixing bacteria; oilseeds support phosphate-solubilising bacteria; spice-family plants support a range of actinomycetes and other soil microbes. The result is a soil microbial community that is diverse, active, and capable of cycling all nutrients — not just nitrogen. Secondly, choosing several plants that are each rich in specific nutrients builds a balanced soil chemistry rather than correcting one deficiency while ignoring others.
Dabholkar’s explicit instruction to each farmer is to execute this protocol using only what is available on the farm itself — seeds saved from previous harvests, water from existing sources, soil from the field being treated. This is the first step toward self-reliance, in his framing: not dependence on a supply chain for organic inputs, but the farm’s own biological capacity to generate, process, and return its own biomass.
Subhash Palekar Natural Farming: In-Situ Biomass Through Mulch and Microbiology
Subhash Palekar’s natural farming model, developed in Vidarbha, Maharashtra in the 1990s, arrived at in-situ biomass management through the lens of zero external input: if the farm cannot generate and recycle its own biological material, the farm is not sustainable. The four pillars of the system each address a distinct aspect of how biomass is generated, maintained, and activated in place.
Acchadana — mulching — is the most direct in-situ biomass practice in the Palekar system. Crop residues, dry leaves, and any other available organic material are laid as a thick cover directly on the soil surface between and around growing plants, where they remain. They are not composted, not removed, not burned. The mulch serves simultaneously as a soil cover (preventing bare soil exposure), a moisture retainer, a weed suppressor, and a continuous food source for soil biology as it decomposes from below. Palekar’s insistence that mulch material should be generated from within the farm — from crop residues, border trees, and weeds controlled rather than eliminated — makes this an in-situ practice in the full sense.
Jeevamrutha — the fermented preparation of cow dung, cow urine, jaggery, legume flour, and water, applied after 48 hours of fermentation — does not itself generate biomass but activates the in-situ biomass that is already present. Applied to the soil or used to drench mulch, it introduces a large and diverse microbial inoculant that dramatically accelerates the conversion of in-situ organic material into plant-available nutrients and stable humus. Beejamrutha, the seed treatment version, ensures this microbial activation begins at the root zone from germination. Waaphasa — the maintenance of the soil aeration condition — creates the physical environment in which in-situ root biomass and mulch decomposition can proceed simultaneously, without the waterlogging that suppresses aerobic microbial activity.
The ZBNF model spread rapidly through Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh in the 2000s, and its Jeevamrutha preparation was incorporated almost directly into APCNF as Jivamrutham. The scaling of APCNF to one million farmers is, in a meaningful sense, the institutional scaling of Palekar’s approach to in-situ biomass activation.
Barahnaja: The Himalayan Closed-Loop Biomass System
From the terraced hillsides of Uttarakhand, the Barahnaja system — twelve to twenty crop species sown simultaneously on a single terraced plot — represents a complete in-situ biomass economy. Nothing leaves the farm in a form that cannot return. Everything generated on the terrace cycles back to it.
The in-situ biomass generation in Barahnaja operates through three interlocking loops:
- Above-ground crop biomass: twelve or more species including finger millet, amaranth, kidney beans, horsegram, cucumber, and mustard generate a multi-layered canopy that produces far more total above-ground biomass per unit area than any single crop. Crop residues after harvest are not burned or removed — they are fed to cattle stalled on the terrace itself
- Animal-mediated biomass conversion: cattle fed on crop residues convert the biomass into dung and urine, which are returned to the terrace as the primary soil amendment. The animal is not a separate enterprise; it is the biomass conversion mechanism that closes the nutrient loop between the residue and the soil
- Root biomass at multiple depths: the simultaneous presence of shallow-rooted groundcovers, medium-rooted pulses, and deep-rooted cereals and oilseeds generates root biomass across the entire soil profile. In the steep terrain of Uttarakhand, this below-ground biomass is also the primary structural mechanism preventing soil erosion and landslip
ICAR-VPKAS research at Almora has validated the traditional varieties at the heart of this system: finger millet variety VL Mandua 382 under Barahnaja organic management recorded grain yields of 1,198 kg/ha with 15–20% higher calcium and protein concentrations than conventional varieties. The biomass economy that produced these outcomes is entirely self-contained within the terrace.
EverGreen Agriculture and Zai Pits: In-Situ Biomass in Degraded Landscapes
In sub-Saharan Africa, where decades of soil degradation have left vast areas with minimal organic matter and no viable biomass base to work from, two practices demonstrate how in-situ biomass generation can be initiated even from near-zero conditions.
Faidherbia albida, the keystone species of EverGreen Agriculture, generates in-situ biomass through a phenology that is uniquely suited to cereal cropping systems. It produces leaf mass during the dry season — when it shades and protects the soil surface, suppresses evaporation, and provides livestock fodder — and drops its nitrogen-rich leaves precisely at the onset of the rains, when decomposing leaf litter releases nitrogen directly into the rooting zone of establishing food crops. A single mature Faidherbia tree deposits approximately 40–60 kg of nitrogen-rich leaf biomass annually in the zone beneath its canopy. Farmers manage the tree density and spacing to distribute this biomass input across the field. In Niger, farmer-managed natural regeneration of Faidherbia has expanded across five million hectares through the simple act of protecting naturally regenerating seedlings rather than clearing them — generating in-situ biomass at landscape scale without purchase, transport, or application.
Zai pits address the prior challenge: how to initiate in-situ biomass generation in soils so degraded that no vegetation will establish. Small pits — 30 cm wide, 15 cm deep, dug in a grid pattern during the dry season — are filled with a small quantity of compost or manure. The organic material attracts termites, whose burrowing creates macropore networks that restore water infiltration. Once the first season’s crop establishes in the pit, its root biomass begins rebuilding soil biology in the immediate zone. The following season, the root zone expands. Within three to five years, in-situ biomass generation is self-sustaining across the formerly crusted soil. Research in Ethiopia and Burkina Faso documents yield increases of 500–2,000% over flat planting on identical soils: the entire gain comes from the restoration of biological function initiated by that first in-situ root mass.
The Common Architecture: What All These Models Share
Across five countries, multiple ecological contexts, and practices developed entirely independently of each other, every model examined here converges on the same operational logic for in-situ biomass generation:
- Maximise the number of days per year on which living roots are present in the soil — through pre-season sowing (PMDS), multi-species diversity (Navadanya, Barahnaja), or perennial integration (Faidherbia)
- Generate biomass at multiple canopy tiers simultaneously to maximise total photosynthetic capture per unit area (Natueco canopy management, Barahnaja multi-species stratification)
- Keep all generated biomass within the farm system — as mulch (Acchadana), incorporated green manure (PMDS slash-and-incorporate), animal-mediated nutrient return (Barahnaja), or decomposing leaf litter (Faidherbia)
- Activate in-situ biomass with microbial inoculants at the soil-root interface — Jivamrutham, Jeevamrutha, Amrutjal — to accelerate conversion of organic material into stable humus and plant-available nutrients
- Build root biomass deliberately across the entire soil profile, not just the topsoil, through deep-rooted species inclusion and planting geometry that prevents root competition in a single zone
The policy implication follows directly. Supporting in-situ biomass generation requires investment in seed diversity (the raw material of multi-species systems), in biological input infrastructure (quality Jivamrutham and equivalent preparations at scale), and in farmer knowledge networks capable of transmitting the management precision these systems require. Subsidy systems that reward purchased inputs and penalise the time investment of biological management work directly against every practice described in this article.
One million farmers in Andhra Pradesh, five million hectares of regenerated Sahelian farmland, the Tasgaon grape belt — these are not demonstrations. They are the measurable outcomes of in-situ biomass generation at scale. The soil is not asking for more chemistry. It is asking for more life.
Recent Comments