Zero-Till Drill For The Establishment of Mungbean and Comparison of Its Performance With The Conventional Method
Zero-Till Drill For The Establishment of Mungbean and Comparison of Its Performance With The Conventional Method
Zero-Till Drill For The Establishment of Mungbean and Comparison of Its Performance With The Conventional Method
net/publication/342431789
CITATIONS READS
0 367
5 authors, including:
Rajesh Nandi
Bangladesh Agricultural University
15 PUBLICATIONS 41 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Rajesh Nandi on 23 July 2020.
1. Seedbox, 2. Fertilizer box, 3. Toolbar frame, 4. Chain and sprocket, 5. Seed tube, 6. A depth control device, 7. Furrow opener,
8. Press wheel, 9. Hitch plate, 10. Seed metering device
510
Islam et al.
Table 1. Technical specification of zero-till drill used for the establishment of mungbean
Particulars Number Dimension (mm) Material
Hitch plate 1 255 × 230 & 130 × 135 MS steel
Toolbar frame 1 980 × 660 MS bar
Seedbox 1 810 × 210 × 180 Plain sheet
Fertilizer box 2 850 × 240 × 160 Plain sheet
Seed tube 4 100 × 170 × 90 Plastic
Furrow opener 4 233 × 125 Heavy flat bar
Press wheel 4 280 × 50 Rubber
Depth control devices 2 270 × 360 MS bar
Seed metering device 4 Flute type Moulded plastic
Power transmission system 1 Roller-420 Roller chain
Chain-Sprocket 2 22 and 19 teeth Steel
Clutch 1 dog clutch MS iron
Calibration of zero-till drill for seed rate ploughed by 3 passes of power tiller followed by 2 passes
Before the actual planting operation, the zero-till drill was of laddering with straight alternation pattern. Land size of
calibrated for correct seed rate. During calibration for 11.20 decimals with 3 replication plots for each
seed rate, two-third of the seedbox was filled with seed cultivation method was prepared.
and transparent polythene bags were tagged with each of
the seed delivery tubes. After that zero-till drill was Fertilizer application
operated on a pre-measured 20 m travel distance with a As mungbean is a leguminous crop which can store
sowing width of 80 cm. Then, seed collected in polythene nitrogen in its root zone from the air. So only TSP
bags that passed through tubes were weighed and seed fertilizer was applied at the rate of 100 kg/ha during
rate was determined according to the equation (1) as planting followed by the broadcasting method in both
described by Michael and Ojah (1978). This procedure zero-tillage system and conventional method.
was repeated by adjusting the seed metering device until
the desired seed rate obtained. The seed rate was kept at Experimental procedure
30.0 kg/ha for zero-till drill. During mungbean planting time, the average moisture
content of the soil for the top 50 mm was 25% (dry basis).
10W
S s ................................................ (1) In the case of zero tillage system, the seed was applied in
d A an untilled previously harvested rice field. Straight
m alternation pattern was used for sowing. For proper seed
Where, placement, the speed of operation was maintained at 2.5
Sd = Seed rate (kg/ha) km/hr. In the conventional system, both seed and fertilizer
Ws = Total weight of seed (gm) were sown by manual broadcasting after the second pass
Am = Measured experimental area, m2 of ploughing followed by laddering. After
sowing/planting operation, all the cultural practices such
Land preparation as fertilizer application, irrigation and plant protection
Land preparation was not required for the establishment were done in all the plots as per the agronomical
of mungbean under zero tillage system. However, land requirement. A photographic view of mungbean
preparation was a precondition for the cultivation of establishment using a zero-till drill and conventional
mungbean in the conventional method. The land was method were shown in Fig. 2.
(a) The conventional method of planting (b) Zero tillage system of planting
(Ansari et al., 2016)
Fig. 2. Photographic views of mungbean establishment in the field
511
Zero-till drill for the establishment of mungbean
Performance evaluating parameters take into account and was calculated using equation (6)
Overall performance of zero tillage and conventional and shelter cost which is necessary to protect a machine
system in mungbean cultivation was evaluated based on- against adverse weather condition was calculated using
field performance, yield and yield contributing equation (7).
parameters and economic of performance.
Depreciation cost
Tk. P - S ............................. (5)
Field performance hr L H
Field performance of zero-till drill was evaluated based
Interest on investment
Tk. P S i ............ (6)
on field capacities, field efficiency and seed rate. Amount
of seed required per hectare area was calculated using hr 2 H
equation (1). And field capacities and field efficiency Tk. 1% of P ................................... (7)
Shelter cost
were calculated using equation (2), (3) and (4) according hr H
to Kepner et al. (1978). Where, P = purchase price of a zero-till drill (Tk.); S =
SW salvage value i.e. 10% of purchase price (Tk.); i =
Theoretical field capacity (ha/hr) ............... (2)
10 interest rate i.e. 10%; L = life of zero-till drill, 7 year
Area covered
H = annual use of zero-till drill, 300 hr
Effective field capacity (ha/hr) ...... (3)
Time required Variable cost
Effective field capacity Variable cost is defined as one which changed with the
Field capacity 100 ..... (4)
Theoretical field capacity changing level of output. In this research repair and
maintenance cost and hiring cost for power tiller were
Where, S = Rated forward speed for zero-till drill, considered as a variable cost. Repair and maintenance
(km/hr), W = Rated width of the machine (m) cost of the zero-till drill was calculated using equation (8)
and power tiller was hired during this experiment @ Tk.
Yield and yield contributing parameters 150 per hour including fuel cost, oil cost and operator
Yield and yield contributing parameters of mungbean cost.
cultivation under zero tillage system and the conventional
method were evaluated based on the number of plants per Repair & Maintenance cost
Tk. 5% of P ........... (8)
unit area, number of pods per plant, number of seeds per hr H
pod and total grain yield per hectare.
Land preparation cost in conventional method was
Economic of Performance calculated as 3 passes of ploughing by power tiller @ Tk.
Economic of performance of zero tillage system and 1200 per pass plus 2 passes of laddering @ Tk. 400 per
conventional method for mungbean cultivation was pass.
evaluated based on the cost of mungbean establishment,
Benefit-cost ratio (BCR)
the total cost of production, total output, net saving and
benefit-cost ratio (BCR). In the case of zero tillage system, It is a ratio used in a cost-benefit analysis to summarize
mungbean establishment cost consists of seed cost and the overall relationship between the relative costs and
planting cost, whereas the conventional method consists benefits of a proposed project. If a project has a BCR
of seed cost, land preparation and seeding cost. greater than 1.0, the project is expected to deliver a
positive net present value to a firm and its investors. It
Zero-till drill operational cost was calculated using equation (9).
Operating cost of zero-till drill consists of fixed cost like Net saving from a project
depreciation cost, interest on investment, taxes, insurance BCR ...................... (9)
and shelter cost, and variable costs like repair and The total cost of production
maintenance cost, fuel cost, oil cost and labour cost. All
parameters of operational cost were calculated using the Results and Discussion
standard formula (Hunt, 1973; Singh et al., 2016). Field performance
Fixed cost Field performance of zero-till drill and conventional
method for the establishment of mungbean was evaluated
Fixed cost is defined as one which remains unchanged based on seed rate, a line to line spacing and depth of
regardless of the level of output alters. In this research, planting. Parameters related to field performance of zero-
depreciation cost, interest on investment and shelter cost till drill and conventional methods are shown in Table 2.
was taken into account as fixed cost items. The straight- From Table 2, it is observed that applied seed rate was
line method of depreciation analysis was used to calculate 30.0 kg/ha in the zero-tillage system and 35.5 kg/ha in the
the depreciation cost of the zero-till drill as shown in conventional method. Therefore, zero tillage system
equation (5). Since the invested money cannot be used for required 5.5 kg less seed per hectare compare to the
other interest making business, interest on investment was
512
Islam et al.
Table 3. Yield and yield contributing parameters of mungbean cultivated under different tillage system
Methods Ave. No. of Ave. No. of Ave. No. of Grain yield Yield increased
plants/m2 pods/plant seeds/pod (kg/ha) (%)
Zero-till drill 108 45 11.4 1247.5 30.4
Conventional (Broadcasting) 87 31 8.8 956.5 -
conventional system. Besides, a line to line space was 20 production, total output, net saving and benefit-cost ratio
cm and the average width of opening slits was 2.0-3.0 cm (BCR). Operating cost of the zero-till drill for the
and depth of planting was 3.0-3.5 cm in zero tillage establishment of mungbean was found Tk. 1515/ha as
system. The adjustment of row spacing between two shown in Table 4. The planting cost of mungbean
successive passes was maintained by operator skill and including seed cost under zero tillage and the
experience. However, seed spacing and depth of seeding conventional method was Tk. 4515/ha and Tk. 8400/ha,
were found uneven in the conventional method which is respectively (shown in Table 5). From Table 5, it is
due to broadcasting and laddering. observed that the establishment cost-saving for mungbean
under zero tillage system was Tk. 5485/ha (65.3%) over
Yield and yield contributing parameters the conventional method. This result is following Sindh
A photographic view of the growing stage of mungbean et al. (2007) who reported that the cost of establishment
established by zero tillage system and the conventional of wheat under zero tillage system was about half of the
method is shown in Fig. 3. From the figure, it is observed cost of the establishment using the conventional method.
that vegetative growth of mungbean was better under zero Also, the total cultivation cost of mungbean under zero
tillage system compared to the conventional method. tillage and conventional system were found Tk. 20715/ha
Yield and yield contributing parameters of mungbean and Tk. 26200/ha, respectively, which indicates that
under zero tillage and the conventional method were 20.9% production cost was saved under zero tillage
evaluated based on number of plants per unit area, system over the conventional method. Again, total
number of pods per plant, number of seeds per pod and income from mungbean cultivation under zero tillage
grain yield. Yield and yield contributing parameters of system and conventional method were found Tk.
mungbean cultivated under zero tillage and conventional 87325/ha and Tk.67585/ha, respectively. Further, net
method are shown in Table 3. saving from mungbean cultivation under zero tillage
system and the conventional method was Tk. 66610/ha
Economic analysis and Tk. 41385/ha, respectively, which indicates that
The economics of performance of zero tillage system and 60.9% higher net saving was generated from mungbean
conventional method for the establishment of mungbean cultivation under zero tillage system. A similar trend of
was evaluated based on the cost of planting, total cost of the result was obtained by Micheni et al. (2015) during
513
Zero-till drill for the establishment of mungbean
on-farm experimentation on conservation agriculture in a Conclusion
maize-league cropping system. Furthermore, a higher This research focused on the performance evaluation of
benefit-cost ratio was obtained from the zero-tillage zero-till drill for the establishment of mungbean and
system (BCR = 3.2) than the conventional system (BCR comparing with the conventional method. Zero tillage
=1.6) which indicates that zero tillage system is profitable system showed distinct advantages over the conventional
than the conventional method. This result is following the method which was evaluated based on seed rate, planting
results obtained by Uddin and Dhar (2016). Furthermore, cost, cost of production, yield, total income, net saving
it was also observed that zero tillage system is able to and BCR. Zero tillage system could save 5.5 kg of seed
minimize turn-around time 8-10 days between previous per hector and maintains uniform line to line spacing and
harvesting and mungbean establishment, as the depth of planting. Mungbean yield under zero tillage
conventional method, needs about 10-12 days after system was found 30.4 % higher than the conventional
harvesting of the previous crop for the establishment of method. Besides, mungbean planting cost and production
mungbean. This result is following Hossain et al. (2015) cost under zero tillage system were 65.3% and 20.9% less
who reported that zero tillage farming could minimize the than the conventional method. Also, zero tillage system
average turn-around time 9-10 days between the two increased net saving by 60.9% than the conventional
successive crops. method. Furthermore, a higher benefit-cost ratio was
obtained from the zero-tillage system (BCR = 3.2) than
Table 4. The operational cost of zero-till drill the conventional system (BCR = 1.6) which indicates that
zero tillage system is profitable than the conventional
Parameters Cost (Tk.)
method. Therefore, it can be concluded that mungbean
1. Purchase price 40000 establishment using zero tillage system is better than the
2. Salvage price 4000 conventional method.
3. Fixed cost [(i) + (ii) + (iii)], Tk/hr 25.75
(i) Depreciation 17.15 References
(ii) Interest on investment 7.30 Ansari, M. S., Islam, M. H., Hossain, M. M., Ali, M. R. and Hossain,
1.30 M. I. 2016. Zero-till drill for wheat establishment and
(iii) Shelter cost
comparison of performance with power tiller operated seeder
4. Variable cost [(i) + (ii)], Tk./hr 157.7 (PTOS) and conventional method. Journal of Agricultural
(i) Repair & Maintenance cost 7.7 Machinery and Bioresources Engineering, 7 (1): 55-62.
150 Bashour, A., Ali-Ouda, A., Kassam, A., Bachour, R. Touni, K.,
(ii) Power tiller hiring cost
Hensmann, B. and Estephan, C. 2016. An overview of CA in
5. Total operational cost (No. 3 + No. 4) Tk./hr 182.50 the dry Mediterranean environment with special focus in
6. Effective operating time, hr/ha 8.30 Syria and Lebanon. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 1(1): 67-
1515 84.
7. Operating cost (No. 5 * No. 6), Tk./ha
http://dx.doi.org/10.3934/agrfood.2016.1.67
Derpsch, R., Friedrich, T., Kassam, A. and Li, H. W. 2010. Current
status of adoption of notill farming in the world and some of
Table 5. Economics of operation in Mungbean establishing its main benefits. International Journal of Agricultural and
method Biological Engineering, 3:1-25.
https://doi.org/10.25165/ijabe.v3i1.223
Mungbean Establishing Erenstein, O. and Laxmi, V. 2008. Zero tillage impacts in India’s rice–
Method
Parameters wheat systems: A review. Soil and Tillage Research, 100(1-
Conventional 2):1–14.
Zero-Till Drill
Method https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2008.05.001
Land condition before Hatfield, J. L. and Karlen, D. L. 1992. Sustainable Agriculture Systems.
Un-ploughed Ploughed
planting/seeding CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
Land preparation (Tk./ha) - 4400 Hobbs, P. R, Sayre, K. and Gupta, R. 2008. The role of conservation
Seed cost (Tk./ha) @Tk. 100/kg 3000 3550 agriculture on sustainable agriculture. Philosophical
Transections of the Royal Society: Biological Science,
Planting/Seeding cost (Tk./ha) 1515 450
363:543–555 http://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2169
Weeding cost (Tk./ha) 3200 4800 Hossain, M. I., Sarker, M. F. U. and Haque, M. A. 2015. Status of
Fertilizer cost (Tk./ha) 4500 4500 conservation agriculture-based tillage technology for crop
Harvesting & Threshing cost production in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of
8500 8500 Agricultural Research, 40(2):235-248.
(Tk./ha)
https://doi.org/10.3329/bjar.v40i2.24561
Total production cost (Tk./ha) 20715 26200
Hunt, D. 1995. Farm Power and Machinery Management (9 th Edition).
Grain yield (kg/ha) 1247.5 965.5 Iowa State University Press, USA.
Total return (Tk./ha) @ Tk. 70/kg 87325 67585 Iqbal, M. F., Hussain, M., Faisal, N., Iqbal, J., Rehman, A. U., Ahmad,
M. and Padyar, J. A. 2017. Happy seeder zero tillage
Net saving (Tk/ha) 66610 41385
equipment for sowing wheat in standing rice stubbles.
Production cost saving over the International Journal of Advanced Research in Biological
20.9 -
conventional method (%) Sciences, 4(4):101-105.
Benefit cost ratio (BCR) 3.2 1.6 http://dx.doi.org/10.22192/ijarbs.2017.04.04.017
514
Islam et al.
Michael, A. M. and Ojha, T. P. 1978. Principle of Agriculture Sharma, R. K., Chhokar, R. S., Singh, R. K. and Gill, S. C. 2008. Zero
Engineering (Vol. 1), Jain Brothers, New Delhi. tillage wheat and unpuddled rice: the energy, labour and
Micheni, A. N., Kanampiu, F., Kitonyo, O, Mburus, O. M., Mugai, E. cost-efficient alternatives to conventional rice-wheat system.
N. Makumbi, d. and Kassie, M. 2015. On-farm Proceedings of the 14th Australian Agronomy Conference,
experimentation on conservation agriculture in maize- Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 147-158.
legume based cropping system in Kenya: Water use Sidhu, H. S., Singh, M. Humphreys, E., Singh, Y., Singh, B., Dhillon,
efficiency and Economic impacts. Experimental Agriculture, S. S., Blackwell, J., Bector, V., Singh, M. and Singh, S. 2007.
52(1), 51-68. http://doi:10.1017/S0014479714000556 The Happy Seeder enables direct drilling of wheat into rice
Kahloon, M. H., Iqbal, M. F., Farooq, M., Ali, L. Fiaz, M. and Ahmad, stubble. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 47:
I. 2012. A comparison of conservation technologies and 844-854.
traditional techniques for sowing of wheat. Journal of https://doi.org/10.1071/EA06225
Animal and Plant Science, 22(3): 827-830. Singh, U. V., Kumar, D. and Moses, S. C. 2016. Performance evaluation
http://www.thejaps.org.pk/docs/v-22-3/50.pdf of manually operated paddy drum seeder in puddled field.
Kepner, R. A., Bainer, R. and Barger, E. L. 1978. Principle of Farm ISOR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, 9(6):
Machinery (3rd Edition). CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. 69-83.
Ltd, pp. 209-234. https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-javs/papers/vol9-
Naresh, R. K., Singh, S. P., Dwivedi, A., Sepat, N. K., Kumar, V., issue6/Version-2/K0906026983.pdf
Ronaliya, L. K., Kumar, V. and Singh, R. 2013. Uddin, M. S., Amin, A. K. M. R., Ullah, M. J. and Asaduzzaman, M.
Conservation agriculture improving soil quality for 2009. Interaction effect of variety and different fertilizers on
sustainable production systems under smallholder farming the growth and yield of summer mungbean. American-
conditions in North West India: A review. International Eurasian Journal of Agronomy, 2(3):180-184.
Journal of Life Sciences Biotechnology and Pharma https://doi.org/10.1.1.626.7036
Research, 2(4):151-213. Uddin, M. T. and Dhar, A. R. 2016. Conservation agriculture practices
http://www.ijlbpr.com/index.php?m=content&c=index&a= and its impacts on farmer’s livelihood status in Bangladesh.
show&catid=121&id=215 SAARC Journal of Agriculture, 14(1): 119-140.
Qaisrani,S., Akbar, A. N., Ullah, E. and Rajtha, A. M. 2014. Cost https://doi.org/10.3329/sja.v14i1.29582
analysis on wheat with operational time and fuel ingestion of USDA. 2018. FoodData Central: SR Legacy, Legumes and Legume
different tillage practice in rice-wheat cropping system of Products, FDC ID: 174256, NDB Number:16080.
Panjab, Pakistan, Pakistan Journal of Life and Social https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-
Science, 12(2): 114-119. details/174256/nutrients
515