What are the significances of a practical approach to sugarcane production known as 'Sustainable Sugarcane Initiative'? 1. Seed cost is very low in this compared to the conventional method of cultivation. 2. Drip irrigation can be practiced very effectively in this. 3. There is no application of chemical/inorganic fertilizers at all in this. 4. The scope for intercropping is more in this compared to the conventional method of cultivation. Select the correct answer using the code given below.

Defines Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) as a judicious combination of organic, inorganic and biofertilizers to sustain productivity.

A student could infer that sustainability practices often incorporate, rather than wholly eliminate, chemical fertilizers and thus test whether SSI follows an INM-like approach.

Notes doubts among scientists about producing adequate food without chemical fertilizers and that conversion to sustainable agriculture takes years.

One could use this to question claims of immediate or total elimination of chemical fertilizers under SSI and look for gradual reduction timelines or yield trade-offs.

Explains eco-farming/‘feed the soil, not the plant’ and distinguishes organic fertilizers from inorganic ones (noting drawbacks of inorganics).

This suggests sustainable methods favor organic inputs; a student could compare SSI practices against pure eco-farming to see if inorganic inputs are fully dropped or partly retained.

Contrasts organic farming (external organic inputs used) with natural farming (no external chemical or organic fertilizers).

A student could place SSI on this spectrum (organic vs natural vs integrated) and check if SSI's description aligns with 'natural' (no external fertilizers) or not.

Mentions policy interest in developing alternative non-chemical nutrients and improving fertilizer efficiency, implying current systems still rely on chemical fertilizers.

Use this to infer that institutional support exists for alternatives but that transition is ongoing—so investigate whether SSI is part of such a transition or a complete replacement.

Defines intercropping as utilising space between rows of a main crop, implying that row spacing and crop duration/geometry affect feasibility of intercrops.

A student could compare typical row spacing/plant geometry of SSI vs conventional systems (basic outside fact) to judge if SSI's spacing would permit more intercrops.

Explains relay intercropping suited to long-duration base crops by growing sequential intercrops, showing sugarcane (a long-duration crop) can host multiple intercrop sequences.

Knowing sugarcane's long season, a student can check whether SSI management (timing of operations) would better allow relay intercrops than conventional methods.

Gives a concrete example: lentil is grown as an intercrop in autumn-planted sugarcane, proving sugarcane fields can be intercropped in practice.

Using this example, a student could assess whether SSI practices (if they alter planting date or plant geometry) would expand the range or timing of such intercrops.

Lists general advantages of intercropping (better resource use, weed suppression, yield stability), implying why adopting a system that facilitates intercropping could be desirable for sugarcane.

A student can combine these benefits with knowledge of SSI objectives (sustainability-focused) to infer whether SSI would likely adopt practices that increase intercropping opportunities and then verify experimentally or from practice notes.

Classifies sugarcane as an irrigated crop, indicating water/management intensity which can influence choices about intercrops and their water competition.

A student could use basic agronomic facts about water needs to evaluate whether SSI's water-management changes (if any) would make intercropping more or less feasible compared with conventional irrigated sugarcane.