Field performance of a pneumatic row crop planter equipped with active toothed coulter for direct planting of corn in wheat residue

20Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In this research effects of active toothed coulter on planter penetration in semi-dried soils covered with previous wheat (Triticum aestivum) residue was studied. Therefore, effects of three levels of speed ratio (coulter peripheral speed/tractor forward speed; 1.22, 2, 3) at two previous residue levels (baled and non-baled) and two modes of planter attachment (with and without row cleaner) on the corn (Zea mays) planting depth and its uniformity, amount of surface residue, emergence rate index and seed spacings indices were investigated. Results showed that planting depth and its uniformity increased significantly with increasing speed ratio, so that desired planting depth was obtained at speed ratio of 2. The emergence rate index decreased with increase in speed ratio mainly due to increase in seeding depth at higher speed ratios. Miss and precision indices decreased in a significant manner with increase in the speed ratio. Other results showed that planting with row cleaner attachment into baled-out residue plots at speed ratio of 2 resulted in 31% decrease in miss and 30% decrease in precision indices as compared to control (inactive coulter). Quality of feed index at same conditions was 72%, the increase was up to 11% as compared to control. No significant difference was found between speed ratios of 2 and 3 for all the parameters studied. The results suggest that the row crop planter equipped with active toothed coulter and row cleaner attachment can be satisfactorily used for direct corn planting in hard soils covered with previous crop residues.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nejadi, J., & Raoufat, M. H. (2013). Field performance of a pneumatic row crop planter equipped with active toothed coulter for direct planting of corn in wheat residue. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 11(2), 327–334. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2013112-2632

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free