نوع مقاله : کاربردی
نویسنده
استادیار پژوهشی، موسسه تحقیقات برنج کشور، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، رشت، ایران.
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
Introduction: Given the extensive rice cultivation in Gilan province, second cropping after rice is a key strategy for increasing production, farmer income, and economic sustainability. This is particularly important in areas facing challenges like small land parcels and traditional farming methods. Second cropping creates employment opportunities and helps move away from a monoculture system. However, due to the lack of suitable crop introductions and efficient technical solutions, many paddy fields remain fallow after rice harvest. Developing annual forage crops such as triticale can meet the needs of livestock farming at a lower cost. Numerous studies have shown that second cropping (including triticale, rapeseed, and fava beans) offers a positive cost-benefit ratio, increases farmers’ income, and has positive social effects like reduced migration and unemployment. Triticale, due to its high production and nutritional capacity, has good potential for meeting the country’s forage needs. Proper management, provision of technical and financial support, and selecting appropriate crops with optimal agronomic techniques are essential for the success of second cropping. Ultimately, considering the importance of second cropping and the high potential of triticale, evaluating the technical and economic parameters of its mechanized harvesting as a second crop in Gilan’s paddy fields can aid in effective supportive and extension policies.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted to evaluate the technical and economic indicators of mechanized triticale production, with a focus on the machinery used in tillage, planting, and harvesting stages, under two harvesting methods (wet and dry). The research was carried out over two cropping years (2019–2020) at the Soil and Water Rice Research Station, affiliated with the Rice Research Institute of Iran. To determine the fresh forage yield per unit area, after removing the border effect (including side rows and half a meter from the beginning and end of each plot), harvesting was carried out, and the produce was immediately weighed. To measure the dry forage yield, one kilogram of fresh forage from each treatment was randomly selected, and the samples were dried in an oven at 75°C for 48 hours and then weighed. This study was divided into two main sections: a) Technical Assessments and b) Economic Assessments. To measure technical indicators such as fuel consumption, theoretical and effective field capacity, and the time required for each operation in both dry and wet harvesting systems, the experimental field was divided into two plots of 50x120 meters. The economic analysis of the two harvesting methods was performed using indicators such as the cost per kilogram of product, net profit, benefit-cost ratio, sales return percentage (SRP), and investment return percentage (IRP). In this analysis, if the Gross Margin (GM) is negative, the product is not economically justifiable, and if GM is positive, the production is considered economical. The Sales Return Percentage (SRP) indicates the profit generated per unit of sales revenue, and the Investment Return Percentage (IRP) shows the profit generated per unit of investment.
Results and Discussion: The technical evaluation of mechanized triticale production in Guilan province revealed significant differences in machine performance between wet and dry harvesting methods. Among the machines studied, the fertilizer spreader demonstrated the highest effective field capacity (1 ha/h), lowest operation time (1 hr/ha), and lowest fuel consumption (~11.8 L/ha) during wet harvesting, indicating superior efficiency and energy use. Conversely, the rotivator showed the lowest capacity (0.29 ha/h) and highest fuel consumption (~41.07 L/ha), making it the least efficient operation due to higher soil resistance and repeated passes. In dry harvesting, two machine combinations were compared. The second combination, which replaced the self-propelled reaper with a disc mower, doubled the harvesting capacity (0.6 ha/h vs. 0.24 ha/h) and reduced operation time significantly (1.7 vs. 4.1 hr/ha), though fuel consumption was somewhat higher. The rake and fertilizer spreader consistently showed high efficiency and low fuel consumption in both combinations. Overall, wet harvesting with a forage chopper was approximately 2.7 times faster and consumed 64% less fuel per hectare than dry harvesting. However, dry harvesting, despite higher fuel use and operation time, provides advantages for producing dry forage suitable for long-term storage and transport. Economically, although the wet harvesting method had higher total production costs (~199 million IRR/ha) compared to dry harvesting (~146 million IRR/ha), the gross revenue was equal for both due to the higher yield in wet harvesting (35,000 kg/ha vs. 7,700 kg/ha). Notably, dry harvesting yielded a positive profit (~8.4 million IRR/ha) and return on investment (~5.8%), while wet harvesting resulted in a significant loss (-45.1 million IRR/ha). The primary economic challenge in wet harvesting arises from high fixed costs (e.g., land rent) and variable costs related to handling large volumes of moist product. In conclusion, while wet harvesting is technically more efficient and environmentally flexible, dry harvesting is currently more economically viable under the studied conditions. Selecting machines with higher capacity and efficiency, alongside managing energy consumption, is critical to improving mechanized triticale production.
Conclusion: The study shows that under current agricultural and economic conditions in Gilan Province, the dry harvesting method for triticale is more economically beneficial than the wet harvesting method. Dry harvesting yielded a net profit of over 4.8 million IRR per hectare and an ROI of about 8.5%, while wet harvesting incurred a loss exceeding 45 million IRR per hectare with a negative ROI of –22.7%. High rental costs for paddy fields and increased transportation expenses mainly caused the economic loss in the wet method. Technically, wet harvesting with forage choppers is about 2.7 times faster and consumes over 60% less fuel than dry harvesting, making it preferable in unfavorable weather conditions. Some dry harvesting machinery consumes more time and fuel, but equipment like rakes and manure spreaders reduce fuel consumption and speed up operations. The study recommends future focus on optimizing or replacing less efficient machines used in dry harvesting to improve overall efficiency.
کلیدواژهها English
References
