A websearch has turned up three research papers on SRI presented at the 4th International Soil Science Congress held in Australia last September.  They represent the kind of serious scientific engagement with SRI that skeptics have been asking for. I encourage you to download them and read them. Below I will give brief summaries.

http://www.regional.org.au/au/cs/2004/symposia/2/4/1869_horiet.htm

http://www.regional.org.au/au/cs/2004/poster/2/3/319_zhengjg.htm

http://www.regional.org.au/au/cs/004/poster/1/2/1177_nissankara.htm

(note: in the last segment of the address, there is an underline ( _ ) between the number and the author's name)

Also, a paper by Juergen Anthofer has been posted on the web summarizing his evaluation of SRI in Cambodia done for GTZ. It was presented at the annual Tropentag meetings in Berlin last October.

http://www.tropentag.de/2004/abstracts/full/399.pdf

1. The first paper, by Prof. Takeshi Horie and colleagues at the University of Kyoto, Japan, is the most extensive scientific assessment of the bases for SRI result by any Japanese scientist. While not accepting all of the reports of high yield with SRI methods, Prof. Horie (a member of the WARDA board of trustees) notes that SRI practices are similar to ones used traditionally by Japanese farmers and by those farmers who won national competitions for rice yield in the 1950s and 1960s. He thus gives SRI more credibility than some other scientific discussions in the literature that have tried to show how and why SRI results are "not possible" (Dobermann, 2004; Sheehy et al., 2004). 

For example, Prof. Horie reports negative associations, documented in the literature, between continuous flooding and reductions in (a) number and diameter of lateral roots, (b) root respiration, (c) alpha-naphthylamine oxidative activity in the roots, (d) nutrient uptake, and (e) root damage and adverse effects on roots from Fe++ and H2S. These adverse effects on roots are in tujrn associated in the literature with reductions in (a) stomatal conductance in the canopy, (b) photosynthesis, (c) leaf longevity, and (d) yield. Conversely, intermittent water management (a) decreases primary crown root number but increases lateral root number, especially in deeper layers, (b) increases root respiration rate and alpha-naphthylamine oxidation power, and (c) increases photosynthetic rate and leaf longevity. The paper gives extensive citations to the Japanese rice science literature on these and many other points that illuminate how and why SRI practices lead to more productive rice phenotypes and physiological performance.

Prof. Horie is taking an active interest in SRI, visiting Madagascar the first week of December together with a PhD student from Kyoto University who will begin thesis research in Madagascar soon on SRI. Association Tefy Saina hosted their visit and will cooperate in their work.

2. The paper by Prof. Zheng Jiagjo and associates in the Sichuan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China, reports on evaluations of SRI there and modifications in spacing and other SRI practices that add to yield under the agroecological conditions of Sichuan. Conventional high-yield methods gave 8.65 t/ha yield as controls, whereas standard SRI practices produced 10.4 t/ha. Modifications of spacing (wider spacing of hills but three plants per hill in a "triangular" placement) and other adjustments gave 13.4 t/ha. By planting seedlings in plastic trays and then transplanting these plugs at the 3-4 leave stage (standard Chinese practice is to transplant at the 7-leaf stage) enables farmers to transplant more quickly and with no root disturbance. In China, labor is more costly than other countries, so fertilization, weed control and irrigation are adapted to local conditions. The SAAS adaptation of SRI uses some chemical fertilizer rather than rely entirely on organic matter, and it uses herbicide followed by mulching between rows with straw to control weeds, rather than do active soil aeration with the mechanical weeder. For irrigation, the field is formed with shallow furrows/raised beds that make water movement quicker and easier, with most of the surface soil kept well aerated. This is a good example of how the basic insights of SRI can (and should) be adjusted for local needs and opportunities. The paper also documents phenotypical changes induced by SRI practices, specifically in terms of length and width of leaves (about a 15% average gain).

3. The paper by Sarath Nissanka and Thilak Bandara at the University of Peradeniya in Sri Lanka evaluated SRI using standard agronomic methods with randomized plots and replications. They did not get a high a yield response as often reported with SRI methods, possibly because the trials were done on a chemical company seed farm, but still the 7.6 t/ha yield with SRI methods outperformed conventional transplanting (with high inputs) by 9%, and broadcasting methods by 12-20%. There was no economic evaluation, but the conclusion is: "Overall results of growth and yield parameters suggest that rice plants in the SRI farming system grow vigorously, producing more tillers and leaves ensuring enhanced resource utilization and more dry matter as grain, resulting in greater grain production compared to conventional transplanting and broadcasting systems."

4. The GTZ evaluation by Dr. Juergen Anthofer has been reported to you already when it was released. This paper is a very good 8-page summary of a 50-page report. It is based on a sample of 500 Cambodian farmers in 5 provinces, randomly selected in 4 villages in each province that were themselves randomly selected; 400 were SRI farmers and 100 non-SRI farmers for comparison. On the basis of this evaluation as well as other evidence on SRI results, GTZ has begun funding an "SRI Secretariat" within the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, to support and promote ongoing SRI evaluation and dissemination.