AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS - Latvijas Lauksaimniecības universitāte

AGRONOMIJAS VĒSTIS (Latvian Journal of Agronomy), No.10, LLU, 2008obtained in 8 cases out of 12 growing winter wheat in recurrent sowing and in 50 % of casesgrowing wheat after winter rape. Both minimal and traditional tillage gave profits in 7 cases of 12.The use of herbicide created a profit in soil tillage in 75 % of cases but in treatments withoutherbicide there was a profit in only in 5 of 12 cases.Total expenses for production, LVL t -110,00y = 0,2126x + 0,02439,00R 2 = 0,83638,007,006,005,004,003,002,001,000,000,00 5,00 10,00 15,00 20,00 25,00 30,00 35,00Expenses for soil tillage, LVLFigure 2. Expenses of winter wheat production depending on expenses of soil tillageData analysis shows a tight coherence between the expenses of soil tillage and the totalexpenses for the production of winter wheat (Fig. 2). That means that the expenses of soil tillagehave a determinative impact on the actual cost of production which we all know is a cornerstone ofsuccessful farming.Fuel consumption, L ha -140,0035,0030,0025,0020,0015,0010,005,000,00y = 1,0309x + 1,2731R 2 = 0,93950,00 5,00 10,00 15,00 20,00 25,00 30,00 35,00Expenses for soil tillage, LVLFigure 3. Expenses of soil tillage depending on fuel consumptionThe highest impact to changes of expenses of soil tillage was fuel consumption. It can bedescribed as very tight linear regression (Fig. 3) and equation - y = 1.0309x + 1.2731.ConclusionsThe epenses of soil tillage were 36 % lower using minimal soil tillage but almost 5-foldlower using direct drilling compared to traditional tillage with soil reversing and cultivatingafterwards.Winter wheat grain yields were significantly lower with the use of direct sowing compared totreatment with traditional and minimal soil tillage.The highest increase of winter wheat grain yield from additional investments was observed intreatment with minimal soil tillage in recurrent sowing and using herbicides.72