Abstract
Abstract. Controlled traffic farming (CTF) is a mechanization management system in which: (1) all machinery has the same or modular working and wheel track gauge so that field traffic can be confined to the least possible area of permanent traffic lanes, (2) all machinery is capable of precise guidance along those traffic lanes, and (3) the layout of traffic lanes is designed to optimize surface drainage and logistics. With existing machinery, it is rarely possible within a CTF system to achieve tracked areas of less than around 15%, and many CTF systems operate with areas of up to 30%, particularly in Europe. To compensate for this potential loss in area, all traffic lanes other than those used for agrochemical and fertilizer applications, are sown with crop. This research focused on assessing the effectiveness of different traffic lane management systems adopted by eight farmers from the United Kingdom to maximize yields from these lanes without compromising their ability to carry traffic. In terms of yields and ear numbers, results suggested that there was little advantage from carrying out any remedial work on the traffic lanes, whether this was loosening in the center or on the shoulders of the lanes. Lower ear numbers observed in the traffic lanes led to heavier grains, but increased grain weight was insufficient to avoid a yield loss, which on average was around 17% compared with the non-trafficked beds. At one site, where the effect of a combine harvester could be isolated from other traffic in the system, yield losses were more than doubled by this machine. Length of time as a traffic lane had no measurable impact on the extent of yield reduction. Future research should ensure sufficient lead time to enable established plant numbers to be included in the measurements and a more controlled field experiment.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Remedial work on traffic lanes (loosening in the center or on the shoulders) gave little advantage in yields and ear numbers.
- Taxon
- Cerealt0
- Treatment
- remedial work on the traffic lanese0
- Outcome
- yields and ear numberse0
- Direction
- little advantagee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Cereal”
e0“In terms of yields and ear numbers, results suggested that there was little advantage from carrying out any remedial work on the traffic lanes”
Claim · model-written summary
Ear numbers were lower in traffic lanes than in non-trafficked beds.
Verbatim
t0“Cereal”
e0“Lower ear numbers observed in the traffic lanes led to heavier grains, but increased grain weight was insufficient to avoid a yield loss, which on average was around 17% compared with the non-trafficked beds”
Claim · model-written summary
Grains from traffic lanes were heavier than those from non-trafficked beds, but the increased grain weight did not avoid a yield loss.
Verbatim
t0“Cereal”
e0“Lower ear numbers observed in the traffic lanes led to heavier grains, but increased grain weight was insufficient to avoid a yield loss, which on average was around 17% compared with the non-trafficked beds”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield in traffic lanes was on average around 17% lower than in non-trafficked beds.
Verbatim
t0“Cereal”
e0“Lower ear numbers observed in the traffic lanes led to heavier grains, but increased grain weight was insufficient to avoid a yield loss, which on average was around 17% compared with the non-trafficked beds”
Claim · model-written summary
At one site where the combine harvester effect could be isolated, the combine harvester more than doubled yield losses.
- Taxon
- Cerealt0
- Treatment
- combine harvestere0
- Outcome
- yield lossese0
- Direction
- more than doublede0
- Qualifier
- At one sitee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Cereal”
e0“At one site, where the effect of a combine harvester could be isolated from other traffic in the system, yield losses were more than doubled by this machine”
Claim · model-written summary
Length of time as a traffic lane had no measurable impact on the extent of yield reduction.
- Taxon
- Cerealt0
- Treatment
- Length of time as a traffic lanee0
- Outcome
- extent of yield reductione0
- Direction
- no measurable impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Cereal”
e0“Length of time as a traffic lane had no measurable impact on the extent of yield reduction”