Potential To Increase Productivity And Sustainability In Argentinean Agriculture With Controlled Traffic Farming: A Short Discussion

Abstract

Drivers for and potential barriers against adoption of controlled traffic farming (CTF) systems in Argentina are reviewed. Traffic compaction is one of the main factors affecting crop productivity within Argentinean agriculture, and has significant although less quantified impacts on the whole-of-farm system. This suggests that the benefits of no-tillage (NT), which represents the dominant form of cropping in Argentina, are not fully realised. Conservative estimates indicate that crop yields could be improved by at least 15% if NT is used in conjunction with CTF. Cost-benefit analyses of available options for compaction management are required. Despite this, and based on reported evidence internationally, a shift toward increased uptake of CTF within Argentinean agriculture is likely to: (1) improve productivity and farm profitability, (2) enhance environmental performance, and (3) maintain competitiveness of the agricultural sector. Appropriate technical advice and support is a key requirement to drive adoption of CTF. Therefore, the adoption process will benefit from collaboration developed with well-established research and extension organisations in Australia and the United Kingdom, and active engagement of machinery manufacturers.

Recarbonizing global soils: A technical manual of recommended sustainable soil management

“…In Brazil, some sugarcane farmers use CTF because it increases sugar yield by 20 percent compared to random traffic (De Souza et al, 2014). In Argentina, this system is not applied yet despite its benefits (Antille et al, 2015a). One of the reasons is that the application of CTF requires that the width of wheel tracks of all agricultural machinery match, which is challenging for farmers because in Argentina, unlike other countries, no CTF ready machinery is offered in the market.…”

“…Soil compaction by agricultural traffic machinery increases the WFPS and N2O emissions. As CTF improves soil structure and aeration on PCB, it reduces N2O emissions from 20 percent to 50 percent compared with non-CTF (Antille et al, 2015a). However, a higher risk of GHG emissions from the PTL exists if these lanes are not handled appropriately.…”

“…There are many studies regarding the use of CTF in many countries. However, it is necessary to generate evidence of the benefits of the adoption of CTF or OWTL under local conditions (Antille et al, 2015a).…”

Autonomous Technologies in Agricultural Equipment: A Review of the State of the Art

“…Such systems reduce driver fatigue (Kvíz and Kroulík, 2017) and enable the driver to better monitor implement and machine operations. They also enable more advanced agronomic techniques such as precision seeding and controlled traffic (Dijksterhuis et al, 1998;Antille et al, 2015Antille et al, , 2016Seyyedhasani and Dvorak, 2018). A primary benefit of automatic guidance is the reduction in overlap during seeding, spraying, fertilizing, and harvesting, which © American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers reduces input costs and increases machine efficiency (Hameed et al, 2016;Antille et al, 2018b).…”

<i>Agronomic performance of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and fertiliser use efficiency as affected by controlled and non-controlled traffic of farm machinery</i>

“…In well-design CTF systems in Australia, the area subject to traffic typically occupies 15% (or less) of the cultivated field area, particularly when permanent no-tillage is practiced. By contrast, in non-CTF systems, this area is often greater than 45% and it can be as high as 85% in conventional tillage systems that require primary tillage operations prior to crop establishment (Tullberg et al, 2007;Antille et al, 2015b). Therefore, GM calculations were adjusted to reflect the effect on yield of the relative areas affected by traffic compaction in typical CTF and non-CTF systems, respectively.…”