search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
GRAPH: AGCO


PHOTO: AGCO


the overall message is clear,” he says. “I’d be cu- rious to see what happens a bit deeper. I might suspect there would be a significant compac- tion in the subsoil under the wheel tracks.” Barrie also says crop height may not be the best way to measure overall compaction im- pact, although he recognises the practical dif- ficulties of gathering yield data in such a study. Collecting yield data in very narrow strips within a 30-foot planter swath, for example, is quite tedious. “Tires can have an impact on emergence, but you can still achieve your yield on short corn.” Lee reiterates that crop height and penetrome- ter data alone are not sufficient to draw com- plete conclusions about profitability. But re- sults indicating that the Momentum planter did not add any additional compaction when it’s Load Logic system was switched on are still significant.


Yield data forthcoming Yield data is forthcoming, though. Similar to a 2011 Pioneer study comparing compaction and yield, Lee says they will be analysing plots by separately harvesting each planter path in thirds – i.e. a centre section and two wings. Do- ing so should highlight differences between each of the three sections when the planter’s compaction systems are engaged, as well as differences between control groups. Lee adds that they are also going a step further by


The new Fendt Momentum planter has been designed to help overcome planting conditions that have historically challenged even emergence and resulted in less than optimum crop yields.


harvesting select plots one row at a time. This, he says, should provide very specific informa- tion for their overall analysis. From Barrie’s perspective, the most significant and severe compaction issues remain linked to the combines and grain carts employed during harvest – but that doesn’t mean steps to limit damage at sowing shouldn’t be taken. Deter- mining the return on investment for compac- tion-mitigating systems such as tire inflation and weight distribution technology being mar- keted by Fendt can be a challenge. “It’s a good


piece of kit, because it has everything you might think to put on after the fact, but you’re paying for it,” says Barrie. Regardless of the costs, though, his experience indicates that growers who have adopted compaction miti- gation systems see their investment as positive, if not one they should have made earlier. He believes the development of compaction tech- nologies by Fendt is something to watch. “The more manufacturers get onboard with this tech, the easier it will be for people to adopt it.”


Small efforts can have an impact Lee points out that growers are not completely dependent on new technology to reduce com- paction damage. Small efforts, such as con- trolling traffic, can have a significant impact. “Think about axle loads and, when its practical, maybe don’t fill the cart or liquid tank so full. We don’t want to sacrifice productivity but, whenever we can reduce weight, it can help.”


Soil penetrometers provide an indication of soil compaction by measuring the resistance of the soil to the probe in pounds per square inch as the probe is slowly pushed into the ground. The tractor-only tire track was made by the inside dual wheel of the tractor, while the tractor-and-planter track was made by the outside tractor dual wheel followed by the in-line tandem centre transport wheels of a Fendt Momentum planter.


▶ FUTURE FARMING | 20 November 2020 59


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68