Improving energy efficiency in tillage is critical for developing sustainable agriculture and mitigating fuel-related CO2 emissions. However, data on energy efficiency and CO2 emissions across various tillage-sowing practices remain scarce in terms of vetch production. The study aimed at evaluating the impact of four tillage-sowing practices (conventional tillage [CT], Reduced-I and II, and no-tillage [NT]) on the fuel consumption, energy productivity, and fuel-related CO2 releases in Hungarian vetch production. The study was performed in Turkey, in semiarid conditions using two water applications (rainfed and irrigated) under two different crop rotations (rainfed: vetch-wheat-fallow and irrigated: vetch-wheat-sunflower). The study findings revealed that while CT had the highest diesel-fuel consumptions (52.2 L/ha in irrigated and 53.1 L/ha in rainfed), the lowest values were determined in NT (16.4 L/ha in irrigated and 16.6 L/ha in rainfed). Total energy requirements were the highest in CT, and determined 11827.4 MJ/ha (5229.1 MJ/ha direct and 10502.5 MJ/ha nonrenewable) in irrigated rotation and 9328.5 MJ/ha (3013.6 MJ/ha direct and 8004.6 MJ/ha nonrenewable) in rainfed conditions. Moreover, CT provided the lowest energy ratio (4.41 in irrigated and 3.87 in rainfed). NT practice required significantly lower total (20.6% in irrigated and 27.8% in rainfed), direct (52.5% in irrigated and 68.8% in rainfed), and nonrenewable energies (23.1% in irrigated and 32.3% in rainfed) and provided higher energy ratio (24.0% in irrigated and 53.2% in rainfed) compared to CT. Irrigation increased energy gain by 48.2% on average. Conservation tillage logarithmically reduced CO2 emissions in both rotations. NT and reduced tillage practices generated 68.7% and 42.2% lower emissions on average compared to CT (151.1 kg CO2/ha), respectively. It was concluded that NT can be a suitable practice to achieve higher energy efficiency and lower CO2 emissions in vetch production. However, reduced tillage can be favorable due to the limited application of NT in most countries.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbdallaK., ChivengeP., CiaisP., and ChaplotV. (2016). No-tillage lessens soil CO2 emissions the most under arid and sandy soil conditions: Results from a meta-analysis. Biogeosciences, 13, 3619.
2.
AbdiR., HematianA., ShahamatE.Z., and BakhtiariA.A. (2012). Optimization of energy consumption pattern in the maize production system in Kermanshah province of Iran. Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Tech. 4, 2548.
3.
AkbarniaA., and FarhaniF. (2014). Study of fuel consumption in three tillage methods. Res. Agr. Eng. 60, 142.
4.
BanaeianN., and ZangenehM. (2011). Study on energy efficiency in corn production of Iran. Energy, 36, 5394.
5.
BaranM.F. (2017). Energy and economic analysis of vetch production in Turkey: A case study from Thrace region. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 26, 1966.
6.
BarutZ.B., ErtekinC., and KaraagacH.A. (2011). Tillage effects on energy use for corn silage in Mediterranean Coastal of Turkey. Energy, 36, 5466.
7.
BusariM.A., KukalS.S., KaurA., BhattR., and DulaziA.A. (2015). Conservation tillage impacts on soil, crop and the environment. Int. Soil Water Con. Res. 3, 119.
8.
DaliasP. (2012). Increased yield surplus of vetch-wheat rotations under drought in a Mediterranean environment. Sci. World J. 2012, 658518.
9.
Eastern Anatolia Agricultural Research Institute (DATAE). (2016). Hydro-meteorological observation data. Erzurum: Eastern Anatolia Agricultural Research Institute.
10.
Eastern Anatolia Project (DAP). (2014). Eastern Anatolia Project (DAP) Action Plan (2014–2018) [in Turkish]. Erzurum: DAP Regional Development Administration. Available at: www.dap.gov.tr/dap-eylem-plani/eylem-plani (accessed February27, 2019).
FarooqM., FlowerK.C., JabranK., WahidA., and SiddiqueK.H.M. (2011). Crop yield and weed management in rainfed conservation agriculture. Soil Till. Res. 117, 172.
13.
FilipovićD., KošutićS., and GospodarićZ. (2004). Influence of different soil tillage systems on fuel consumption, labour requirement and yield in maize and winter wheat production. Poljoprivreda, 10, 17.
14.
FilipovicD., KosuticS., GospodaricZ., ZimmerR., and BanajD. (2006). The possibilities of fuel savings and the reduction of CO2 emissions in the soil tillage in Croatia. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 115, 290.
15.
GözübüyükZ., ÇelikA., Öztürk, İ., DemirO., and AdıgüzelM.C. (2012). Comparison of energy use efficiency of various tillage-seeding systems in prodction of wheat [in Turkish]. J. Agr. Machin. Sci. 8, 29.
16.
GözübüyükZ., Öztürk, İ., ÇelikA., EvrenS., DaşçıE., and AdıgüzelM.C. (2015). Comparison of various tillage-seeding systems in terms of energy use efficiency in production of sunflower [in Turkish]. J. Agr. Machin. Sci. 11, 113.
17.
GungorC., KusekG., KucukerdemH.K., OzturkH.H., and AkdemirS. (2018). Carbon dioxide emissions related to fuel consumption for groundnut production in Turkey. In: VîrstaA.Ed., Land Reclamation, Earth Observation and Surveying, Environmental Engineering, Vol VII, Scientific papers, Series E. Bucharest, Romania: CERES Publishing House, p. 1.
18.
HamzeiJ., and SeyyediM. (2016). Energy use and input–output costs for sunflower production in sole and intercropping with soybean under different tillage systems. Soil Till. Res. 157, 73.
HoushyarE. (2017). Environmental impacts of irrigated and rain-fed barley production in Iran using life cycle assessment (LCA). Spanish J. Agr. Res. 15, e0204.
21.
HuynhH.T., HufnagelJ., WurbsA., and Bellingrath-KimuraS.D. (2019). Influences of soil tillage, irrigation and crop rotation on maize biomass yield in a 9-year field study in Müncheberg, Germany. Field Crop. Res. 241, 107565.
22.
JaiswalB., and AgrawalM. (2019). Carbon footprints of agriculture sector. In: MuthuS.S. Ed., Carbon Footprints. Case Studies from the Building, Household, and Agricultural Sectors. Springer, Singapore, p. 81.
23.
KaraağaçH.A., AykanatS., GültekinR., and BaranM.F. (2014). Determination of energy using efficiency at corn production in Adana. J. Tekirdag Agr. Fac. 11, 75.
24.
KarayelD., and ŠarauskisE. (2019). Environmental impact of no-tillage farming. Environ. Res. Eng. Manag. 75, 7.
25.
KhaledianM., MailholJ.C., and RuelleP. (2014). Diesel oil consumption, work duration, and crop production of corn and durum wheat under conventional and no-tillage in southeastern France. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 60, 1067.
26.
KizilaslanH. (2009). Input–output energy analysis of cherries production in Tokat province of Turkey. Appl. Energ. 86, 1354.
27.
KogaN., TsurutaH., TsujiH., and NakanoH. (2003). Fuel consumption-derived CO2 emission under conventional and reduced tillage cropping systems in northern Japan. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 99, 213.
28.
KumarV., SaharawatY.S., GathalaM.K., JatA.S., SinghS.K., ChaudharyN., and JatM. (2013). Effect of different tillage and seeding methods on energy use efficiency and productivity of wheat in the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Field Crop. Res. 142, 1.
29.
KumlayA.M., OlgunM., ŞanalT., and TurgutB. (2007). The effect of the first tillage times and rotation systems on productivity of wheat (T. aestivum L.). Lucrări Ştiinţifice, 50, 257.
30.
KüsekG. (2018). Assessment of carbon dioxide emissions due to fuel consumption in lentil production in Southeastern Anatolia Region. Harran J. Agr. Food Sci. 22, 572.
LekavičienėK., ŠarauskisE., NaujokienėV., BuragienėS., and KriaučiūnienėZ. (2019). The effect of the strip tillage machine parameters on the traction force, diesel consumption and CO2 emissions. Soil Till. Res. 192, 95.
33.
LiL.L., HuangG.B., ZhangR.Z., JinX.J., LiG.D., and ChanK.Y. (2005). Effects of conservation tillage on soil water regimes in rainfed areas. Acta Ecol. Sin. 25, 2326.
34.
LiT., BaležentisT., MakutėnienėD., StreimikieneD., and KriščiukaitienėI. (2016). Energy-related CO2 emission in European Union agriculture: Driving forces and possibilities for reduction. Appl. Energ. 180, 682.
35.
López-VázquezA., Cadena-ZapataM., Campos-MagañaS., Zermeño-GonzalezA., and Mendez-DoradoM. (2019). Comparison of energy used and effects on bulk density and yield by tillage systems in a semiarid condition of Mexico. Agronomy, 9, 189.
36.
LorzadehS.H., MahdavidamghaniA., EnayatgholizadehM.R., and YousefiM. (2012). Research of energy use efficiency for maize production systems in Izeh, Iran. Acta Agr. Sloven. 99, 137.
37.
LuX., and LuX. (2017). Tillage and crop residue effects on the energy consumption, input–output costs and greenhouse gas emissions of maize crops. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 108, 323.
38.
MangalasseryS., SjögerstenS., SparkesD.L., SturrockC.J., CraigonJ., and MooneyS.J. (2014). To what extent can zero tillage lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from temperate soils? Sci. Rep. 4, 4586.
39.
MoitziG., SzalayT., SchüllerM., WagentristlH., RefennerK., WeingartmannH., LiebhardP., BoxbergerJ., and GronauerA. (2013). Effects of tillage systems and mechanization on work time, fuel and energy consumption for cereal cropping in Austria. Agric. Eng. Int. CIGR J. 15, 94.
40.
MoitziG., WagentristlH., RefennerK., WeingartmannH., PiringerG., BoxbergerJ., and GronauerA. (2014). Effects of working depth and wheel slip on fuel consumption of selected tillage implements. Agric. Eng. Int. CIGR J. 16, 182.
41.
MorenoM.M., LacastaC., MecoR., and MorenoC. (2011). Rainfed crop energy balance of different farming systems and crop rotations in a semi-arid environment: Results of a long-term trial. Soil Till. Res. 114, 18.
42.
NamdariM., RafieeS., and JafariA. (2011). CO2 emission as a result of the fuel consumption and tillage quality in different tillage conditions. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 1, 1659.
43.
NkakiniS.O., and VurasiN.M. (2015). Effects of moisture content, bulk density and tractor forward speeds on energy requirement of disc plough. Int. J. Adv. Res. Eng. Tech. 6, 69.
44.
OlgunM., SerinY., KumlayA.M., and TurgutB. (2007). The effects of tillage and rotation systems in vetch (Vicia pannonica) yield, some yield components and soil characters [in Turkish]. Presented at the Turkey VII. Field crops congress, Erzurum, Turkey, June 25–27.
45.
OliverJ.G.J., and PetersJ.A.H.W. (2018). Trends in Global CO2 and Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 2018 Report. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague, Netherlands, Publication number: 3125.
46.
ÖzdenD.M. (1995). Time Study Analysis and Database Generation in Agricultural Mechanization. General Directorate of Rural Services, Soil and Water Resources Research Department, Ankara, Turkey, Publication No. 81.
47.
ÖzgülM. (2003). Classifying and mapping of great soil groups commonly found in Erzurum [in Turkish]. PhD thesis. Atatürk University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Erzurum.
48.
ÖztürkH.H., GözübüyükZ., and Atay, Ü. (2017a). An assessment of carbon dioxide emissions related to fuel consumption for cotton production in Turkey. Presented at the 3rd ASM International Congress of Agriculture and Environment, Antalya, Turkey, November 16–18.
49.
ÖztürkM.Z., ÇetinkayaG., and AydınS. (2017b). Climate types of Turkey according to Köppen-Geiger climate classification [in Turkish]. Istanbul Univ. J. Geo. 35, 17.
50.
PittelkowC.M., LinquistB.A., LundyM.E., LiangX., van GroenigenK.J., LeeJ., van GestelN., SixJ., VentereaR.T., and van KesselC. (2015). When does no-till yield more? A global meta-analysis. Field Crop. Res. 183, 156.
51.
PlatisD.P., AnagnostopoulosC.D., TsaboulaA.D., MenexesG.C., KalburtjiK.L., and MamolosA.P. (2019). Energy analysis, and carbon and water footprint for environmentally friendly farming practices in agroecosystems and agroforestry. Sustainability, 11, 1664.
52.
RathkeG.W., WienholdB.J., WilhelmW.W., and DiepenbrockW. (2007). Tillage and rotation effect on corn–soybean energy balances in eastern Nebraska. Soil Till. Res. 97, 60.
53.
RusuT. (2014). Energy efficiency and soil conservation in conventional, minimum tillage and no-tillage. Int. Soil Water Con. Res. 2, 42.
54.
SainjuU.M. (2016). A global meta-analysis on the impact of management practices on net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity from cropland soils. PLoS One, 11, e0148527.
55.
ŠarauskisE., BuragienėS., MasilionytėL., RomaneckasK., AvižienytėD., and SakalauskasA. (2014). Energy balance, costs and CO2 analysis of tillage technologies in maize cultivation. Energy, 69, 227.
56.
SarauskisE., BuragieneS., RomaneckasK., SakalauskasA., JasinskasA., VaiciukeviciusE., and KarayelD. (2012). Working time, fuel consumption and economic analysis of different tillage and sowing systems in Lithuania. Presented at the 18th International Scientific Conference, Engineering for Rural Development, Jelgava, Latvia, May 24–25.
57.
ŠarauskisE., VaitauskienėK., RomaneckasK., JasinskasA., ButkusV., and KriaučiūnienėZ. (2017). Fuel consumption and CO2 emission analysis in different strip tillage scenarios. Energy, 118, 957.
58.
SayedA., SarkerA., KimJ.E., RahmanM., and Mahmud, Md.G.A. (2019). Environmental sustainability and water productivity on conservation tillage of irrigated maize in red brown terrace soil of Bangladesh. J. Saudi Soc. Agr. Sci. DOI: 10.1016/j.jssas.2019.03.002.
59.
SessizA., SogutT., AlpA., and EsgiciR. (2008). Tillage effects on sunflower (Helianthus annuus, L.) emergence, yield, quality, and fuel consumption in double cropping system. J. Central Eur. Agr. 9, 697.
60.
SharifM., IjazS.S., AnsarM., AhmadI., and SadiqS.A. (2018). Evaluation of conservation tillage system performance for rainfed wheat production in upland of Pakistan. Pakistan J. Agr. Res. 31, 37.
61.
SørensenC.G., and NielsenV. (2005). Operational analyses and model comparison of machinery systems for reduced tillage. Biosyst. Eng. 92, 143.
62.
StagnariF., MaggioA., GalieniA., and PisanteM. (2017). Multiple benefits of legumes for agriculture sustainability: An overview. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 4, 2.
63.
StajnkoD., LakotaM., VučajnkF., and BernikR. (2009). Effects of different tillage systems on fuel savings and reduction of CO2 emissions in production of silage corn in Eastern Slovenia. Polish J. Environ. Stud. 18, 711.
64.
TabatabaeefarA., EmamzadehH., VarnamkhastiM.G., RahimizadehR., and KarimiM. (2009). Comparison of energy of tillage systems in wheat production. Energy, 34, 41.
65.
TanerA., KayaY., ArısoyR.Z., Gültekin, İ., and PartigöçF. (2016). Effect of tillage systems on energy use efficiency in wheat based cropping sequence. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 18, 353.
66.
TaşN. (2010). Determination of optimum mixture rate and cutting time for vetch+wheat mixtures sown in spring and autumn under irrigated conditions I. hay yield and yield components. Anadolu J. AARI, 20, 45.
67.
Xi-LiuY., and Qing-XianG. (2018). Contributions of natural systems and human activity to greenhouse gas emissions. Adv. Clim. Change Res. 9, 243.
68.
XueR., ShenY., and MarschnerP. (2017). Soil water content during and after plant growth influence nutrient availability and microbial biomass. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 17, 702.
69.
YousefiM., KhoramivafaM., DamghaniA.M., MohammadiG., and AlaghaA.B. (2019). Soil tillage systems impact on energy use pattern and economic profitability in wheat agroecosystems. Mod. Concept Dev. Agron. 3, 1.
70.
YuH., PengW., MaX., and ZhangK. (2011). Effects of no-tillage on soil water content and physical properties of spring corn fields in semiarid region of northern China. Chinese J. Appl. Ecol. 22, 99.
71.
ZentnerR.P., LafondG., DerksenD.A., NagyC.N., WallD.D., and MayW.E. (2004). Effects of tillage method and crop rotation on non-renewable energy use efficiency for a thin Black Chernozem in the Canadian Prairies. Soil Till. Res. 77, 125.
