Abstract
Weeds constitute a serious problem to wheat crops and cause a great loss to the yield. Manual weeding is labor-intensive and time-consuming. Chemical weed control has a negative impact on both the environment and humans. Today the agricultural sector requires non-chemical weed control that safeguards consumers demand for high quality food products and pay special attention to food safety. The objectives of the study was to evaluate the performance of an-engine operated weeder by evaluating the weeding efficiency, plant damage, effective field capacity, field efficiency, fuel consumption, performance index, energy consumption, and cost economics of engine operated weeder in wheat crop. The experimental design was a randomized complete block design and evaluation was conducted at three weeder forward speeds (1.5, 2, and 2.5 km/hr), two depths of operation (from 0 to 20 and from 0 to 40 mm), and three levels of soil moisture content (9.4, 12.34 and 15.25%). The performance of the weeder was found to be optimum at 15.25 percent soil moisture content with 0 to 40 mm depth of operation at a forward speed of 1.5 km/hr. The results revealed that maximum weeding efficiency of 90.1 percent was obtained with lower plant damage of 3.31 percent whereas the effective field capacity, field efficiency, fuel consumption, performance index, and energy consumption were found to be 0.052 ha/hr, 85.99%, 0.41 l/hr, 276.78 ha/hp, and 481.71 MJ/ha, respectively. The analysis revealed that forward speed, depth of operation, and soil moisture had significant effects on weeding efficiency, plant damage, effective field capacity, and fuel consumption at P<0.05 level of significance. The cost of weeding per hectare were 758 and 1920 ETB/ha for engine-operated weeders and traditional weeding methods, respectively. Based on the performance results, it can be concluded that the weeding machine is efficient, effective, and economically viable option with high scope for acceptability among small and medium scale farmers.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 12
Claim · model-written summary
The weeder performed optimally at 15.25 percent soil moisture, 0 to 40 mm depth and 1.5 km/hr.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume1 - Outcome
- performance of the weedere0
- Value
- 15.25 percente0
- Qualifier
- 0 to 40 mm depth of operation at a forward speed of 1.5 km/hre0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The performance of the weeder was found to be optimum at 15.25 percent soil moisture content with 0 to 40 mm depth of operation at a forward speed of 1.5 km/hr”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum weeding efficiency was 90.1 percent.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- weeding efficiencye0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 90.1 percente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maximum weeding efficiency of 90.1 percent was obtained”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant damage was 3.31 percent.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- plant damagee0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 3.31 percente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“lower plant damage of 3.31 percent”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Effective field capacity was 0.052 ha/hr.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- effective field capacitye0
- Value
- 0.052 ha/hre0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effective field capacity, field efficiency, fuel consumption, performance index, and energy consumption were found to be 0.052 ha/hr, 85.99%, 0.41 l/hr, 276.78 ha/hp, and 481.71 MJ/ha, respectively”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Field efficiency was 85.99%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- field efficiencye0
- Value
- 85.99%e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field efficiency, fuel consumption, performance index, and energy consumption were found to be 0.052 ha/hr, 85.99%, 0.41 l/hr, 276.78 ha/hp, and 481.71 MJ/ha, respectively”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Fuel consumption was 0.41 l/hr.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- fuel consumptione0
- Value
- 0.41 l/hre0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“fuel consumption, performance index, and energy consumption were found to be 0.052 ha/hr, 85.99%, 0.41 l/hr, 276.78 ha/hp, and 481.71 MJ/ha, respectively”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Performance index was 276.78 ha/hp.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- performance indexe0
- Value
- 276.78 ha/hpe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“performance index, and energy consumption were found to be 0.052 ha/hr, 85.99%, 0.41 l/hr, 276.78 ha/hp, and 481.71 MJ/ha, respectively”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Energy consumption was 481.71 MJ/ha.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- energy consumptione0
- Value
- 481.71 MJ/hae0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“energy consumption were found to be 0.052 ha/hr, 85.99%, 0.41 l/hr, 276.78 ha/hp, and 481.71 MJ/ha, respectively”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Forward speed, depth and soil moisture significantly affected weeding efficiency, plant damage and effective field capacity.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- forward speed, depth of operation, and soil moisturee0
- Outcome
- weeding efficiency, plant damage, effective field capacitye0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“forward speed, depth of operation, and soil moisture had significant effects on weeding efficiency, plant damage, effective field capacity, and fuel consumption at P<0.05 level of significance”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Forward speed, depth and soil moisture significantly affected fuel consumption.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- forward speed, depth of operation, and soil moisturee0
- Outcome
- fuel consumptione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“forward speed, depth of operation, and soil moisture had significant effects on weeding efficiency, plant damage, effective field capacity, and fuel consumption at P<0.05 level of significance”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Engine-operated weeding cost 758 ETB/ha versus 1920 ETB/ha for traditional weeding.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- cost of weeding per hectaree0
- Value
- 758e0
- Qualifier
- 1920 ETB/hae0
- Comparator
- traditional weeding methodse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The cost of weeding per hectare were 758 and 1920 ETB/ha for engine-operated weeders and traditional weeding methods, respectively”
e1“in wheat crop”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors consider the weeder efficient, effective and economically viable for small and medium scale farmers.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- efficient, effective, and economically viable optione0
- Qualifier
- small and medium scale farmerse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the weeding machine is efficient, effective, and economically viable option with high scope for acceptability among small and medium scale farmers”
e1“in wheat crop”