Comparative performance of six planter attachments in two residue management corn production systems

  • V. Dadi Department of Farm Machinery Engineering, College of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz
  • M. H. Raoufat Department of Farm Machinery Engineering, College of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz
Keywords: conservation agriculture, furrow opener, row cleaner, row-cop planter, treader wheelsr attachments, Treader wheels

Abstract

Field performance of six combinations of planter attachments on a conventional row-crop planter in two residue management corn production systems was evaluated. The management systems consisted of baled-out residue plots worked by a single pass of disc harrow (RMS1) or untouched residue plots worked by a single pass of chisel plow followed by a disc harrow (RMS2); both systems were planted by a row crop planter with one out of six attachments. Results revealed that both systems fell within residue cover limits defined for conservation farming. The winged chisel furrow opener preceded by a row cleaner equipped with treader wheels (WCRT) arrangement removed appreciable amounts of residues on the row for both systems, but more residues were removed for RMS2 plots. The WCRT pushed almost double amount of residue aside. In spite of higher initial residue in RMS2, chisel plowing and subsequent disc harrowing reduced more residues paving the way for planting in a more seeding depth. Higher percentage of emergence rate index was noticed for RMS2 plots. For both systems, the WCRT and chisel furrow opener preceded by a row cleaner (CR) showed the maximum and minimum quality of feed index, respectively. However this index was higher for RMS2 plots. The WCRT and CR arrangements had the minimum and the maximum multiple index values, respectively. However this index decreased significantly in RMS2 plots compared to RMS1 plots. The RMS2 treatments showed lower values of precision index, which is favorable. The results suggest that adoption of WCRT to planters in soil prepared under RMS2 is useful for a satisfactory conservation crop production system.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Cherubini F, Ulgiati S, 2009. Crop residue as raw materials for bio-refinery systems, a LCA case study. Appl Energ 87: 47-57.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.08.024 

Dick WA, McCoy EL, Edwards WM, Lal R, 1991. Continuous application of no tillage to Ohio soils. Agron J 83: 65-73.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1991.00021962008300010017x 

Erbach DC, 1981. Planting for corn production with conservation. In: Crop production with conservation in the 1980s. ASAE Publ 7-81. St. Joseph MI, USA, pp: 50-56.

 

Erbach DC, 1982. Tillage for continuous corn and corn-soybean rotation. T ASAE 25: 906-911. 

Fallahi S, Raoufat MH, 2008. Row-crop planter attachments in a conservation tillage system: A comparative study. Soil Till Res 98: 27-34.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2007.10.005 

ISO, 1984. Sowing equipment-Test methods. Part 1. Single seed drills (precision drills) [7256/1]. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. 

Kachman SD, Smith JA, 1995. Alternative measure of accuracy in plant spacing for planter using single seed metering. T ASAE 38: 379-387. 

Martin Company, 2009. Martin-Till™ Planting System. Available in http://flatrockprecision.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Martin-Till_Row_Cleaners_2009-10.3960215.pdf. [16 December 2010].

 

McCarthy JR, Pfost DL, Currence HD, 1999. Conservation tillage and residue management to reduce soil erosion. Agr Publ G1650, Univ Extens, Univ of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. 

Morris NL, Miller PCH, Orson JH, Froud-Williams RJ, 2010. The adoption of non-investigation tillage systems in the United Kingdom and the agronomic impact on soil, crops and the environment-A review. Soil Till Res 108: 1-15.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2010.03.004 

Needham Ag Technologies, 2009. LLC-4911. Wheat Manage Publ, Calhoun, KY, USA. Available in www.needhamag.com. [8 October 2009].

 

Raoufat MH, Mahmoodieh RA, 2005. Stand establishment response of maize to seedbed residue, seed drill coulters and primary tillage systems. Biosyst Eng 90: 261-269.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2004.11.012 

Raoufat MH, Matbooei A, 2007. Row cleaners enhance reduced tillage planting of corn in Iran. Soil Till Res 93: 152-161.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2006.03.026 

Ritchie W, Hanway JJ, Benson GO, 1993. How a corn plant develops. CES special report No. 48, Iowa Stat Univ, Ames, IA, USA. 21 pp. 

Sanavi Shiri N, Raoufat MH, 2006. Comparative performance of four planter furrow opener and row cleaner arrangements in a conservation tillage corn production system. Iran Agr Res 25(1): 53-66. 

Siemens MC, Wilkins DE, 2006.Effect of residue management methods on no-till drill performance. Appl Eng Agr 22(1): 51-60. 

Staggenborg SA, Taylor RK, Maddux LD, 2004. Effect of planter speed and seed firmer on corn stand establishment. T ASAE 20(5): 573-580. 

Triplett GB, Doren DM, 1977. Agriculture without tillage. Sci Am 236: 28-33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0177-28 

Wagger MG, Denton HP, 1992. Crop and tillage rotations: grain yield, residue cover, and soil water. Soil Sci Soc Am J 56: 1233-1237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1992.03615995005600040037x 

Wall DA, Stobbe EH, 1984. The effect of tillage on soil temperature and corn (Zea mays L.) growth in Manitoba. Can J Plant Sci 64: 59-67.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/cjps84-009 

Wicks GA, Cruchfield A, Burnside O, 1994. Influence of wheat (Triticum aestivum) straw mulch on metolachlor corn (Zea mays) growth and yield. Weed Sci 1: 141-147.

Published
2012-11-05
How to Cite
Dadi, V., & Raoufat, M. H. (2012). Comparative performance of six planter attachments in two residue management corn production systems. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 10(4), 950-958. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2012104-2817
Section
Agricultural engineering