HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Decker, J. E. Articles by Peeper, T. F. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Decker, J. E. Articles by Peeper, T. F. Agricola Articles by Decker, J. E. Articles by Peeper, T. F. Related Collections Economics Dryland Cropping Systems Wheat Residue management Crop Systems Production Agriculture Tillage

WHEAT

Economics of Five Wheat Production Systems with No-Till and Conventional Tillage

^a Dep. of Agric. Economics
^b Dep. of Plant and Soil Sci., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078-6026

^* Corresponding author (f.epplin{at}okstate.edu).

Conventional tillage (CT) continues to be used on the vast majority of land seeded to monoculture winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the Southern Plains of the United States. In the region, wheat can be grown for either grain-only, forage-only, or for both fall–winter forage + grain (dual-purpose). This study was conducted to determine the net returns of five alternative wheat production systems, for both CT and no-till (NT). The five production systems included one for forage-only, two for dual-purpose (fall–winter grazing + grain) with different planting dates, one grain-only, and one forage-only double cropped with foxtail millet [Setaria italica (L.) Beauv.]. The field research was conducted on three farm fields for 3 yr. Average wheat grain yields were greater with CT, whereas average fall wheat forage yields were significantly greater on the NT plots. Wheat hay and millet hay yields were not significantly different across tillage systems. Economic analysis was conducted for both a machinery complement sized for a 260-ha farm and a machinery complement sized for a 1036-ha farm. For both farm sizes and both tillage systems, the early-September-planted dual-purpose system (ESD) produced the greatest net returns. For the 260-ha farm, CT produced greater net returns than NT for each of the five production systems. Conventional tillage also produced greater economic returns for the three systems that included grain harvest for the 1036-ha farm. However, for the larger farm size, NT generated greater net returns for both total forage systems.

Abbreviations: CT, conventional tillage • NT, no-till • ESD, early-September-planted dual-purpose wheat • ESFM, early-September-planted forage-only wheat double-cropped to foxtail millet • ESF, early-September-planted wheat for forage-only, LSD, late-September-planted dual-purpose wheat • OG, October-planted wheat for grain-only

All rights reserved. No part of this periodical may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Received for publication May 9, 2008.