ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of controlled traffic farming (CTF) with respect to soil physical properties and crop yield for Swedish conditions. Three field trials were conducted for six growing seasons in central and southern Sweden. In two of the trials, we compared CTF with random traffic farming (RTF) in deep chiseling (DC, 15–20 cm), shallow cultivation (SC, 5–10 cm) and no-till. The third trial was on farm study by using the existing CTF module at the farm. In the tracks of CTF (traffic zone) dry bulk density was increased and water movement was decreased. Soil penetration resistance was greater in the traffic zone than in the crop zone in some of the trials but the difference was not statistically significant. On average, crop yield was similar between CTF and RTF for all trials. Yield in the traffic zone was significantly less than that in the crop zone in the on-farm trial, but the yield in both zones were similar in the field trial at Lönnstorp, south Sweden. On the contrary, in the field trial at Säby 1 in Uppsala, central Sweden, crop zone produced less yield than traffic zone probably because of too loose soil, which impaired the uptake of nutrients and water. We conclude that if vehicle weight is not very high and the soil is not vulnerable to compaction, dual wheels and CTF are equal options.

摘要

这项研究的目的是调查受控交通耕作（CTF）对瑞典条件下土壤物理特性和作物产量的影响。在瑞典中部和南部对六个生长季节进行了三个田间试验。在两个试验中，我们在深凿（DC 15-20厘米），浅耕（SC 5-10厘米）和免耕种植方面比较了CTF和随机贩运（RTF）。第三项试验是通过使用农场中现有的CTF模块进行农场研究。在CTF（交通区）的径迹中，干容密度增加，水分运动减少。在某些试验中，交通区的土壤渗透阻力大于农作物区，但差异无统计学意义。平均而言，所有试验的CTF和RTF作物产量相似。在农场试验中，运输区的产量明显低于农作物区，但在瑞典南部的伦斯托普的田间试验中，这两个区的产量相似。相反，在瑞典中部乌普萨拉Säby1的田间试验中，农作物区的产量低于交通区，原因可能是土壤太疏松，从而阻碍了养分和水的吸收。我们得出的结论是，如果车辆重量不是很高并且土壤不易压实，则双轮和CTF是相同的选择。这会损害营养和水的吸收。我们得出的结论是，如果车辆重量不是很高并且土壤不易压实，则双轮和CTF是相同的选择。这会损害营养和水的吸收。我们得出的结论是，如果车辆重量不是很高并且土壤不易压实，则双轮和CTF是相同的选择。