AGRONOMIJAS VÄSTIS - Latvijas LauksaimniecÄ«bas universitÄte

More documents

Recommendations

Info

AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journal of Agronomy), No.10, LLU, 20083. Bruelheide, H. (2000) A new measure of fidelity and its application to defining species groups. Journalof Vegetation Science, 11, 167-178.4. Bruelheide, H., Chytry, M. (2000) Towards unification of national vegetation classifications: Acomparison of two methods for analysis of large data sets. Journal of Vegetation Science, 11, 295-306.5. Dierschke, H. (1994) Pflanzensoziologie. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart. -683.6. Ellenberg, H., Weber, H.E., Düll, R., Wirth, V., Werner, W., Paulißen, D. (1992) Zeigerwerte vonPflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Verlag Erich Goltze KG, Göttingen. -258.7. Hennekens, S.M., Schaminee, J.H.J. (2001) TURBOWEG, a comprehensive data base managementsystem for vegetation data. Journal of Vegetation Science, 12, Opulus Press Uppsala, Sweden, 589-591.8. Hill, M.O. (1979) TWINSPAN – a FORTRAN program for arranging multivariate data in an orderedtwo way table by classification of the individuals and atributes. Ecology and Systematics CornellUniversity Ithaca, New York. -47.9. Hill, M.O., Gausch, H.G. (1980) Detrended correspondence analysis: an improved ordination technique.Vegetatio, 42, 47-58.10. Kent, M., Coker, P. (1994) Vegetation Description and Analysis – a Practical Approach. BelhavenPress, London. -363.11. LaiviĦš, M., Jermacāne, S. (2002) Ellenberga ekoloăisko skalu izmantošana veăetācijas pētījumosLatvijā. Latvijas Universitātes 60. zinātniskā konference. Ăeogrāfija, ăeoloăija, vides zinātne. Referātutēzes. Rīga, 83-85.12. Lososová, Z., Chytrý, M., Cimalová, Š. Kropáč, Z., Otýpková, Z., Pyšek, P., Tichý, L. (2004) Weedvegetation of arable land in Central Europe: Gradients of diversity and species composition. Journal ofVegetation Science, 15, 415-422.13. Lososová, Z., Chytrý, M., Cimalová, Š. Otýpková, Z., Pyšek, P., Tichý, L. (2006) Classification of weedwegetation of arable land in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Folia Geobotanica, 41, 259-273.14. McCune, B., Mefford, M.J. (1999) PC-ORD. Multivariate analysis of ecological data, version 4. MjMSoftware Design, Gleneden BEach, OR, US. -237.15. Pakalne, M., ZnotiĦa, V. (1992) Veăetācijas klasifikācija: Brauna-Blankē metode. LU, Rīga. -35.16. RūsiĦa, S. 2005. Diagnostic species of mesophylous and xerophylous grassland plant communities inLatvia. Acta Universitatis Latviensis. Earth and Environment Sciences 685, 69-95.17. RūsiĦa, S., Piliksere, D. (2005) Latvijas sausieĦu egĜu mežu augu sugu socioloăiskās grupas. LLURaksti, 14 (309), 30-39.18. Scialabba, N.E., Hattam, C. (eds.) (2002) Organic agriculture, environment and food security. Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. -252.19. Tichý, L. (2002) JUICE, software for vegetation classification. Journal of Vegetation Science, 13, 451-453.COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT SOIL TILLAGE METHODS ON THE ECONOMICALPARAMETERS OF WINTER WHEAT PRODUCTIONDAŽĀDU AUGSNES APSTRĀDES METOŽU IETEKMES UZ ZIEMAS KVIEŠUAUDZĒŠANAS EKONOMISKAJIEM RĀDĪTĀJIEM SALĪDZINĀJUMSStašinskis Ē.Latvia University of Agriculture, Institute of Soil and Plant Sciences, Liela iela 2, Jelgava, Latvia,LV-3001, phone: +371 63005632, e-mail: eriks@dobeleagra.lvAbstractReduced soil tillage in cereals has become more significant and popular in the last years inLatvia and EU. Many new minimum tillage and no-till machines are available for use for Latvianfarmers. Real efficiency and economical aspects of those technologies against traditional ploughingare very important.The research of soil tillage- sowing technologies on winter wheat was done on heavy claysoils in the Dobele region of Latvia during the years 2000 - 2003. Field trials were established aftertwo different previous crops – winter wheat and winter rape (factor A). Three different soil tillagesowingtechnologies were compared. Traditional tillage soil ploughing and cultivating wascompared against minimum soil surface tillage with using Simba Discs 34C 4.6 + Simba doublepress 4.6 and no-till sowing with direct drilling (factor B). The vaderstad Rapid 600P seed drill was68
AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journal of Agronomy), No.10, LLU, 2008used for all experiments. The impact of the weed infestation was investigated comparing herbicideSecator 0.3 kg ha -1 usage and a no herbicide treatment (factor C).Meteorological conditions were different in all trial years with great differences in thelong-term observations. That was a reason for the variation in the obtained results.Traditional soil tillage has advantages in years with great amount of precipitation (growingseason 2000 - 2001 and especially 2001 - 2002) but in dry conditions (autumn 2002) asignificanthy higher yield was produced by direct sowing.Comparing additional expenses for soil tillage and additional obtained yield bothtreatments – minimal tillage and traditional tillage – gave additional profit on average in threeyears. The highest increase of winter wheat grain yield from additional investments was observedin treatment with minimal soil tillage growing winter wheat in recurrent sowing and usingherbicides – 81.2 kg from 1 additionally expended LVL. A higher profit is realized fromadditionally expended resources in this treatment on average in three years.Key wordsWheat, tillage, previous crop, economical evaluation.IntroductionThe tendency of using reduced soil tillage technologies is beecoming more important andpopular in Latvia and in EU countries (Romaneckas, 1999; Satkus, 2000; Simanskaite, 2000). It ismainly caused by a more economical use of production sources in agriculture. Many newagricultural machines for minimal soil tillage and no-till are now offered from producers ofagricultural machinery. Many experiments about those methods were done in EU counties duringthe period of years 1970 – 1988 when many different soil cultivation and tillage methods onvarious crops were compared (Cannel, 1985; Finney and Knight, 1973; Ellis and Hause, 1980;Lutch and Vaidyanathan, 1983). On those results presently are done the main part of engineering ofagricultural machinery and recommendations of use.Research and experiments on different technological solutions for soil tillage systems andtheir impact on the productivity of different crops happens in many places in Latvia. Research insoil tillage systems in winter wheat production after different previous crops, together with theefficiency of herbicide use, were not done previously in Latvia. Also agricultural machinery usedfor those experiments Simba Discs 34C 4.6 + Simba double press 4.6 were not compared inLatvian conditions, especially on heavy clay soils.The target of the scientific work is to clarify benefits or disadvantages of minimal soiltillage and no-till against traditional soil ploughing with stubble reversing. Also to find thedifferences in costs of those technologies and the economical profit or loss using them. The resultswill create the possibility to find optimal ways of using those technologies and work outrecommendations on practical production.Materials and MethodsThe three years experiments (2001 – 2003) were carried out at the farm SIA Dobele Agralocated in the Dobele region of Latvia. The soil there is heavy clay. Trials were established in twodifferent crop rotations: 1. winter wheat sown after winter wheat, 2. winter wheat sown after winterrape (Factor A). Three different soil tillage and sowing methods were compared: 1.minimalconservation soil tillage 10 – 15 cm deep with mixing of soil, 2. direct sowing into stubble withoutany soil cultivation, 3.traditional soil tillage with ploughing on 25 cm with cultivation beforesowing (Factor B). Additionally compared impact of those soil tillage methods on weed infestationin winter wheat: 1. with herbicide, 2. without herbicide treatment (Factor C). The field trials weredesigned with sizes 24 x 100 m.The winter wheat variety ‘Zentos’ was sown on 25.09.2000., 29.09.2001. and 30.09.2002at optimal soil conditions. Sowing was done with the pneumatical cultivator seed drill VaderstadRapid 600P which is equipped with 2 rows of cultivator tines (Agrilla system) and one row oflevelling tines (crossboard system). Soil ploughing was done with the 6 furrow conventionalplough Kverneland, soil cultivation prior to ploughing was done with the equipment VaderstadRexius which consist of levelling board (crossboard) and rollers (Cambridge type). Minimal soil69
Page 1 and 2:
LATVIJAS LAUKSAIMNIECĪBAS UNIVERSI
Page 4 and 5:
AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journa
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18: AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journa
Page 45: AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journa
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
show all

AGRONOMIJAS VÄSTIS - Latvijas LauksaimniecÄ«bas universitÄte

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?

AGRONOMIJAS VÄSTIS - Latvijas LauksaimniecÄ«bas universitÄte