An Agronomic and Economic Evaluation of Commonly Used Wheat Planting Methods in the Lower Mississippi River Delta

The four most commonly used methods of seeding wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the lower Mississippi River Valley are conventionally drilled into prepared seedbed (DP), broadcast incorporated (BI), drilled no-till (DN) and broadcast unincor-porated (BU). The objective of this study was to determine the effects of these four wheat seeding methods on net returns, yields, yield components, and stand establishment. Experiments were conducted at four locations from 1992 to 1995. Grain yields were adjusted to a constant 13% moisture content. Yield components of culms per plant, kernels per spike, and kernel weight were analyzed. Percentage residue measure-ments were taken to characterize the effects of residue on stand. An enterprise budget technique was used to estimate expenses associated with each production strategy. BI and DP yields were rather similar and were greater than those of the other two alternatives. No-till and BU resulted in about a 17% and 24% reduction in yield, respectively, compared with BI. DN, while yielding slightly less than DP and BI, also had more stable yields than DP or BU. Thus, BU displays characteristics of a high-risk planting method. Net returns ranged from 431.31 to $84.18/acre. BI had the highest average net returns followed by DP. Moreover, results were mixed with DP, BI, and BU each being the most profitable in two of six experiments. P was consistently the most profitable at one site while BI was otherwise most profitable in 1993–1994 and BU in 1994–1995. The economics of production indicates that total expenses are similar for DP, DN, and BI except for varied seeding rates. Therefore, yield is directly proportional to net returns in those cases. Research QuestionThe four most commonly used methods of seeding wheat in the lower Mississippi River Valley are conventionally drilled into prepared seedbed (DP), broadcast incorporated (BI), drilled no-till (DN) and broadcast unincorporated (BU). The importance of wheat as an Arkansas field crop is evidenced by its rank of fifth in terms of harvested acreage and value of production. Generally, Arkansas farmers will choose between DP and BI. DP is also the'most precise method of planting because of accurate seed placement and metering. BI wheat is widely used because of reduced labor, number of field trips, planting speed, and timeliness of completing the planting operation. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of the previously discussed alternative wheat seed-ing methods on net returns, yields, yield components and stand establishment. Literature SummaryPrevious studies have emphasized the importance of management in wheat pro-duction. Demonstrated benefits of broadcast wheat seeding include improved labor distribution, timeliness, and reduced labor requirements. Nonetheless, research has shown that poor stand establishment has been the primary problem associated with broadcast seeding of wheat under conditions in Canada and Germany. Study DescriptionExperiments were conducted at four locations between the fall of 1992 and the summer of 1995. The four methods of planting employed were (i) BI, (ii) DP, (iii) DN, and (iv) BU. Grain yields were adjusted to a constant 13% moisture content. Yield components of culms per plant, kernels per spike, and kernel weight were analyzed. Percentage residue measurements were taken to charac-terize the effects of residue on stand. An enterprise budget framework was used to estimate expenses associated with each production strategy. The Mississippi State Budget Generator computer program was used to compile economic infor-mation from the four different planting tests. Applied QuestionsWhat wheat planting method had the greatest net returns for the condi-tions analyzed? Net returns ranged from $31.31 to $84.18/acre. BI had the highest average net returns followed by DP. Moreover, results were mixed with DP, BI, and BU each being the most profitable in two of six experiments. DN had about half the net returns of BI on average. BU experienced a loss two out of six times and had net returns about 35% of those for BI. The economics of production indicates that, except for varied seeding rates, total expenses are similar for DP, DN, and BI. Therefore, yield is directly proportional to net returns in those cases. What are the yields for the different wheat planting methods for the conditions analyzed? The broadcast incorporated and conventionally drilled yields were equivalent and were superior to those of the other two tests. No-till and broadcast unincor-porated resulted in about a 17% and 24% reduction in yield, respectively. DP and BI yields were similar and consistently the highest yielding. DN, while yielding slightly less than DP and BI, also had more stable yields than DP or BU. Yields for BU were erratic. The yields ranged from being equivalent to the best for some locations and years, to being as low as 44% of the best. Thus, BU displays characteristics of a high-risk planting method. What are the labor considerations of the different wheat planting methods? The labor required at planting time for each planting method is given in hours per acre as follows: BI, 0.15 h/acre; DP, 0.30 h/acre; DN, 0.37 Nacre; and BU, 0 h/acre. BU requires no labor at planting because the procedure is custom hired. DN had the highest consumption of labor because of the use of a narrow width drill, the operating speed of which must be 4.1 mph or less. DP required about 20% less labor than DN while BI required about 60% less labor than DN. Typically during the window for planting wheat, labor and equipment are primarily being used for harvest of other crops. During this time, a shortage of labor and equipment often exists. Consequently, a farmer may choose BI because of the speed at which the crop can be planted without sacrificing net returns. If time and equipment are not a constraining factor, a farmer may choose DP and still expect the same net return as with BI. For no-till crop production in row crops, labor savings as well as speed of operation is usually given as an advantage of no-till. The results of this study show that no-till drilling of wheat requires more labor, money, and time than any other planting method. The reasons for this are the equipment size and cost combined with operating speed.