You are in:Home/Publications/Strip Till-Planting Method for Conserving Power and Costs Through Faba Bean Planting

Dr. Mohamed Tohamey Mohamed Tohamey Afify :: Publications:

Title:
Strip Till-Planting Method for Conserving Power and Costs Through Faba Bean Planting
Authors: M.T.Afify
Year: 2021
Keywords: Not Available
Journal: Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering
Volume: 12
Issue: 7
Pages: 537-542
Publisher: Not Available
Local/International: Local
Paper Link: Not Available
Full paper Mohamed Tohamey Afify_Research No.8.pdf
Supplementary materials Not Available
Abstract:

The main objective of this study is to investigate the effect of using strip till-planting method as the minimum tillage system for reducing power and cost requirements of faba bean seedbed preparation and planting under Egyptian conditions. Field experiments were conducted in a clay soil. A split-spit-plot statistical experimental design with three replicates was conducted. Three tillage and planting systems were studied under various levels of planting depths and planting speeds. Measurements were taken for soil mean weight diameter, planting depth, planting speed, fuel consumption and the percentage of seed germination. Results indicated that the soil mean weight diameter were 19.63, 16.79 and 12.52 mm for traditional system (TS), mechanized system (MS) and strip till-planting system (STP), respectively. The strip till-planting system (STP) resulted in the lowest values for the energy requirements and total costs compared with the other two systems. The percentage of seed germination decreased as the planting speed increased for mechanized (MS) and strip till-planting (STP) systems. However, there is no appreciable change in the seed germination when the speed increased for traditional system (TS). From the results of this study, it could be concluded that the strip till-planting system (STP) conserved the power requirements for seedbed preparation and planting faba bean by 40% and 46% compared with the traditional (TS) and mechanized (MS) systems, respectively. It also reduced the total costs by 56% and 69%, respectively.

Google ScholarAcdemia.eduResearch GateLinkedinFacebookTwitterGoogle PlusYoutubeWordpressInstagramMendeleyZoteroEvernoteORCIDScopus