Trajectories for Sustainable Motorized Pilling in Sub-Saharan Africa: Advantages and Disadvantages

Wilfried Agbasse *

Rural Engineering Laboratory, National University of Agriculture, Benin.

Christelle Sandra Ayina. Boko

Rural Engineering Laboratory, National University of Agriculture, Benin.

Amagbégnon Edna Zimonse

Rural Engineering Laboratory, National University of Agriculture, Benin.

Gontrand Comlan. Bagan

Rural Engineering Laboratory, National University of Agriculture, Benin.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

Four trajectories for motorized plowing were compared on sandy loamy soil in the Benin plateau in order to identify the most effective. We have: Flat plowing (LP), Backing board plowing (LPA), Splitting board plowing (LPR) and alternating superimposed plowing (LAS). A randomized complete block design with three repetitions was experimented with a 60 HP tractor coupled to a 1 m three-share plow at a speed of 6 km/h. Fifteen plots of 300 m² each divided into 3 blocks of 5 named plots (S0: control, S1: LP, S2: LPA, S3: LPR and S4: LAS) were used to execute the trajectories. The agroeconomic parameters considered are: soil texture, wheel slip, fuel consumption, effective-lost-total plowing time, time efficiency and field capacity. The results indicate that the LAS trajectory is advantageous in the case where plowing is carried out with a reversible plow or with a hiller because it has an average consumption of 5845.17 g/ha, an average plowing time of 284 s with an efficiency average of 58.34%. With the simple plow, simultaneously the LPA trajectory (6246.04 g/ha, 270 s and 56.3%) is more economical than the LPR trajectory (6593.81 g/ha, 306 s and 54.17%). This work will help tractor operators and producers perform economical motorized plowing.

Keywords: Soil work, route, economy, decision, yield


How to Cite

Agbasse , Wilfried, Christelle Sandra Ayina. Boko, Amagbégnon Edna Zimonse, and Gontrand Comlan. Bagan. 2024. “Trajectories for Sustainable Motorized Pilling in Sub-Saharan Africa: Advantages and Disadvantages”. Journal of Experimental Agriculture International 46 (7):354-73. https://doi.org/10.9734/jeai/2024/v46i72591.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.