EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT SOIL TILLAGE METHODS OF WINTER WHEAT PRODUCTION

被引:0
|
作者
Sarec, Petr [1 ]
Sarec, Ondrej [1 ]
机构
[1] Czech Univ Life Sci Prague, Prague 16521 6, Suchdol, Czech Republic
来源
TRENDS IN AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING 2013 | 2013年
关键词
winter wheat; conventional technology; reduced tillage; costs; fuel consumption; labor consumption; CONSERVATION TILLAGE; LEGUME PRODUCTION; EUROPE; EROSION; SPAIN; ADOPTION; SYSTEMS; GROWTH; CEREAL; BARLEY;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
S2 [农业工程];
学科分类号
0828 ;
摘要
Several years already, field monitoring and measurements focused on technological and economic comparison of conventional and reduced-tillage technologies of soil cultivation and drilling of winter wheat have been carried out in around 40 farm businesses located in all of the districts of the Czech Republic. The paper presents six-year results starting from the production year 2006/07, where around 240 fields were monitored over that period. In general, reduced-tillage technologies prevailed. Conventional technology was more frequent only in potato production region. In each of the years in question, average wheat yield produced by the reduced-tillage technology slightly surpassed the yield of the conventional technology. The six-year average difference in yields amounted then to 7.7 %, i.e. to 0.52 t.ha(-1). Over the six years, the highest yields were reached in sugar-beet production area, the lowest on the other hand in potato production area. But the difference in average yield among the latter mentioned and the forage and wheat production areas were minor. Over the period in question, reduced-tillage technology demonstrated by 20 % lower fuel consumption, by 19 % lower labour consumption and by 5 % lower total direct costs. The average unit costs per ton of production gained using conventional technology thus surpassed those gained using reduced-tillage technology by 11 %., i.e. by 314 CZK.t(-1)
引用
收藏
页码:567 / 572
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT SOIL TILLAGE TECHNOLOGIES OF GRAIN MAIZE PRODUCTION
    Sarec, Ondrej
    Sarec, Petr
    Hajek, Petr
    TRENDS IN AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING 2013, 2013, : 562 - 566
  • [2] TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC PARAMETERS OF WINTER WHEAT PRODUCTION USING DIFFERENT SOIL CULTIVATION METHODS
    Sarec, Petr
    Sarec, Ondrej
    Maly, Milos
    TRENDS IN AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING 2010, 2010, : 561 - 566
  • [3] Maize and winter wheat production with different soil tillage systems on silty loam
    Kosutic, S
    Filipovic, D
    Gospodaric, Z
    AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD SCIENCE IN FINLAND, 2001, 10 (02): : 81 - 90
  • [4] Utilization of different soil tillage systems in maize and winter wheat production
    Kosutic, S
    Filipovic, D
    Gospodaric, Z
    ACTUAL TASKS ON AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING, PROCEEDINGS, 2000, 28 : 151 - 158
  • [5] Utilization of different soil tillage systems in maize, winter wheat and soybean production
    Kosutic, S
    Filipovic, D
    Gospodaric, Z
    Kovacev, I
    Copec, K
    ACTUAL TASKS ON AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING, 2001, 29 : 161 - 169
  • [6] The effect of different soil tillage on the yields of winter wheat
    Procházková, B
    Dovrtel, J
    ROSTLINNA VYROBA, 2000, 46 (10): : 437 - 442
  • [7] WEED INFESTATION OF WINTER WHEAT AT DIFFERENT SOIL TILLAGE
    Dockalik, M.
    Chovancova, S.
    Winkler, J.
    MENDELNET 2013, 2013, : 27 - 31
  • [8] Effects of tillage systems on soil water content and yield in maize and winter wheat production
    Copec, K.
    Filipovic, D.
    Husnjak, S.
    Kovacev, I.
    Kosutic, S.
    PLANT SOIL AND ENVIRONMENT, 2015, 61 (05) : 213 - 219
  • [9] Sustainable tillage methods for irrigated wheat production in different regions of Iran
    Javadi, Arzhang
    Rahmati, Mohammad Hashem
    Tabatabaeefar, Ahmad
    SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH, 2009, 104 (01) : 143 - 149
  • [10] SOIL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES AND WINTER WHEAT YIELD AS AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT TILLAGE SYSTEMS
    Calistru, A. E.
    Topa, D.
    Rostek, J.
    Puschmann, D. U.
    Peth, S.
    Horn, R.
    Jitareanu, G.
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND ECOLOGY, 2016, 17 (03): : 978 - 989