My Account: Log In | Join | Renew
Search
Author
Title
Vol.
Issue
Year
1st Page

Abstract

 

This article in AJ

  1. Vol. 101 No. 2, p. 364-372
     
    Received: May 9, 2008
    Published: Mar, 2009


    * Corresponding author(s): f.epplin@okstate.edu
 View
 Download
 Alerts
 Permissions
 Share

doi:10.2134/agronj2008.0159

Economics of Five Wheat Production Systems with No-Till and Conventional Tillage

  1. JonAnn E. Deckera,
  2. Francis M. Epplin *a,
  3. Deena L. Morleyb and
  4. Thomas F. Peeperb
  1. a Dep. of Agric. Economics
    b Dep. of Plant and Soil Sci., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078-6026

Abstract

Conventional tillage (CT) continues to be used on the vast majority of land seeded to monoculture winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the Southern Plains of the United States. In the region, wheat can be grown for either grain-only, forage-only, or for both fall–winter forage + grain (dual-purpose). This study was conducted to determine the net returns of five alternative wheat production systems, for both CT and no-till (NT). The five production systems included one for forage-only, two for dual-purpose (fall–winter grazing + grain) with different planting dates, one grain-only, and one forage-only double cropped with foxtail millet [Setaria italica (L.) Beauv.]. The field research was conducted on three farm fields for 3 yr. Average wheat grain yields were greater with CT, whereas average fall wheat forage yields were significantly greater on the NT plots. Wheat hay and millet hay yields were not significantly different across tillage systems. Economic analysis was conducted for both a machinery complement sized for a 260-ha farm and a machinery complement sized for a 1036-ha farm. For both farm sizes and both tillage systems, the early-September-planted dual-purpose system (ESD) produced the greatest net returns. For the 260-ha farm, CT produced greater net returns than NT for each of the five production systems. Conventional tillage also produced greater economic returns for the three systems that included grain harvest for the 1036-ha farm. However, for the larger farm size, NT generated greater net returns for both total forage systems.

  Please view the pdf by using the Full Text (PDF) link under 'View' to the left.

Copyright © 2009. American Society of AgronomyCopyright © 2009 by the American Society of Agronomy