Abstract

This work was excuted during seasons 2018/2019, and 2019/2020, in Tayba Block-the Sudan - Gezira central clay plains, to evaluate the field operation performance of four land preparation methods using three tillage equipment: chisel plow "intensive tillage", disc harrow "medium tillage", ridger "minimum or reduced tillage" and no tillage machine. An overall operation index is estimated from four measured machine operating characteristics. Diagnosis of land preparation methods was made using analytical hierarchy method for weight assignment for assignment of relative weights for the operating parameters, and compromise programming technique for ranking of tillage methods. The experiment was conducted as a factorial experiment with RCBD, the LSD test at 1%and 5 % was used to compare between means. Results indicate that no significant differences (P<0.05) in field efficiency between Chisel plow and ridger and harrow showed the least efficiency value. There is significant differences in fuel consumption rate between all treatments with highest consumption is by Chisel plow and lowest is by ridger. The significantly highest rear wheel slippage is attained by ridger while there is no significant differences in that resulted from chisel or disc harrow. The significantly highest field capacity (P<0.05) is attained by ridger followed by harrow and then chisel plow. The analytical hierarchy procedure ranked the machines operation indicators in descending order by weight values of 1.02, 0.62, 0.29 and 0.12 for. Multi-criteria analysis by compromise programming technique results in overall indices of tillage equipments: ridger, chisel plow, disc harrow in descending values of 67.53, 61.00, and 57.29 respectively. The overall performance index (OPI) for the operation of the agricultural equipment could be used to take the tillage decision-making process by selecting the most effective machinery to give optimum seed bed with minimum energy input. However, it is not possible to calculate the overall index for no tillage method because without using a machine there is no fuel consumption, no field efficiency, no field capacity, and no wheel slippage. This imply that for heavy clay soils of Gezira Scheme and in other similar environments it is recommended to use reduced tillage "ridging only" as the most technically feasible tillage method, other wise use chisel plowing if funds are available.

Keywords

Tilth Index, Tillage Methods, Heavy Clay, Analytical Hierarchy Procedure (AHP), Compromise Programming Technique, Field Efficiency, Rear Wheel Slippage, Fuel Consumption Rate,

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. M.A. Bashir, M.I. Dawelbeit, M.O. Eltom, H. Tanakamaru, Performance of Different Tillage Implements and Their Effects On Sorghum and Maize Grown in Gezira Vertisols, Sudan, International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 4 (2015) 237-242.
  2. M.H. Rahmati, V.M. Salokhe, Effect of tillage practices on Hydraulic conductivity, cone Index, Bulk Density, Infiltration and Rice Yield during Rainy Season in Bangkok Clay Soil, Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa & Latin America, 32 (2001) 31-37.
  3. A. Hussein, H.M. Munir, Factors Affecting Choice and Use of Tillage Implements in Pakistan Settings, Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa & Latin America, 17 (1986) 35-38.
  4. S. Melvin, (2005) Conservation tillage planning, Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames.
  5. C.G. Bowers, Tillage, Draft and Energy Measurements for twelve Soil Series, American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 32 (1989) 1492-1502.
  6. M.H. Dahab, S.A. Elzain, (2011) Effect of Selected Tillage Implements on Physical Properties of Two Types of Soils in Khartoum Area (Sudan), Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa & Latin America, 42 (2011) 9-13.
  7. C. Chenu, Y. Le Bissonnais, D. Arrouays, Organic Matter Influence on Clay Wettability and Soil Aggregate Stability, Soil Science Society of America Journal, 64 (2000) 1479-1486.
  8. W. E. Coates, G. W. Thacker, (2001) Reduced Tillage Systems for Arizona Cotton Growers, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Arizona, USA.
  9. A.J. Franzluebbers, F.M. Hons, D.A. Zuberer, Tillage and crop effects on seasonal dynamics of soil CO2 evolution, water content, temperature, and bulk density, Applied Soil Ecology, 2 (1995) 95-109.
  10. S.S. Ray, R.P. Gupta. Effect of Green Manuring and Tillage practices on Physical Properties of Puddled loam soil under Rice – Wheat Cropping, Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Sciences, 49 (2001) 670-678.
  11. A.M. Michael, (1978) Irrigation, Theory and Practices, Vikas Publishing House, Uttar Pradesh.
  12. R. Lal, (1995) Tillage systems in the tropics: management options and sustainability implications, Land and Water Development Division, Rome, Italy.
  13. D. Karayel, A. Ozmerzi, Effect of different seed bed preparation methods on physical properties of soil, Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa & Latin America, 34 (2003) 9-11.
  14. K.M.V. Cavalieri, C.A. Tormena, P.S. Vidigal Fillo, A.C. Goncalves, A.C. Saraiva da Costa. Effects of tillage systems on the soil physical properties of a dystrophic Red Latosol, Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, 30 (2006) 137-147.
  15. M.R. Carter, Relative Measures of Soil Bulk Density to Characterize Compaction in Tillage Studies on Fine Sandy Loams, Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 70 (1990) 425-433.
  16. Hakansson, J. Lipiec, A review of the usefulness of relative bulk density values in studies of soil structure and compaction, Soil and Tillage Research, 53 (2000) 71-85.
  17. I.C.K. Singh, T.S. Colvin, (1992) Tilth Index and crop yield, ASAE Paper No. 92-1023. ASAE. St Joseph, Mich.
  18. Tapela, T.S. Colvin, The Soil Tilth Index: an evaluation and proposed modification, Transactions of the ASAE, 44 (1998) 43-48.
  19. R.F. Harris, D.L. Karlen, D.J. Mulla, A Conceptual Framework for Assessment and Management of Soil Quality and Health, Methods for Assessing Soil Quality, 49 (1996) 61-82.
  20. M.R. Abualgasim, M.H. Dahab, Study of suitable effective use of machinery farming research station (Elrawakeeb) –west of Khartoum – Sudan, Research Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Management, 2 (2013) 164-168.
  21. O.M. Abbas, M. H. Tabidi, A.E.A. Ahmed, Effect of Different Tillage Methods On Some Soil Physical Properties, Effective Field Capacity and Fuel Consumption Under Semi-Arid Climate of North Kordofan State, Sudan, Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 12 (2016) 17-23.
  22. S.A. Elzain, (2007) Tillage Implements Performance and their Effects on Two Types of Soil in Khartoum Area, Msc. thesis in Agricultural Engineering, University of Khartoum, Sudan.
  23. T.L. Saaty, A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15 (1977) 234–281.
  24. E. Wasil, B. Golden, Celebrating 25 years of AHP-Based Decision Making, Computers and Operations Research, 30 (2003) 1419–1420.
  25. B. Golden, E. Wasil, P. Harker, (1989) The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Applications and Studies, Springer, Berlin.
  26. D.L. Karlen, M.J. Rosek, J.C. Gardner, D.L. Allan, M.J. Alms, D.F. Bezdicek, M. Flock, D.J.L. Huggins, B.S. Miller, M.X. Staben, Conservation Reserve Program Effects on soil Quality Indicators, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 54 (1999) 439-444.
  27. W.C. Wang, W.D. Yu, I.T. Yang, C.C. Lin, M.T. Lee, Y.Y. Cheng, Applying the AHP to Support the Best-Value Contractor Selection-Lessons Learned from Two Case Studies in Taiwan, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 19 (2013) 24-36.
  28. Z. Hatush, M. Skitmore, Contractor selection using multicriteria utility theory: An additive model, Building and Environment, 33 (1998) 105-115.
  29. Pongpeng, J. Liston, TenSeM: A Multicriteria and Multidecision-Makers' Model in Tender Evaluation, Construction Management and Economics, 21 (2003) 21-30.
  30. D. Singh, R.L.K. Tiong, A Fuzzy Decision Framework for Contractor Selection, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131 (2005) 62-70.
  31. Y. Li, X. Nie, S. Chen, Fuzzy Approach to Prequalifying Construction Contractors, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133 (2007) 40-49.
  32. T.L. Saaty, Exploring the Interface between Hierarchies, Multiple Objectives and the Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1 (1978) 57-68.
  33. T.L. Saaty, (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, New York, 287.
  34. Zeleny, (1982) Multiple Criteria Decision Making, McGraw-Hill, New York.
  35. C. Romero, F. Amador, A. Barco, Multiple Objectives in Agricultural Planning: A Compromise Programming Application, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 69 (1987) 78–86.
  36. Cohon, (1978) Multiobjective Programming and Planning, Academic Press, United States. J. Dijkstra, J. France, M. S. Dhanoa, J. A. Maas, M. D. Hanigan, A. S. Rook, D. E. Beever, A Model to Describe Growth Patterns of the Mammary Gland During Pregnancy and Lactation, Journal of Dairy Science, 80 (1997) 2340–2354.