The impact of biological products on winter wheat productivity and economic and energy efficiency of the technology of its cultivation in conditions of the Southern Ukraine

UDC 631.147:631.874:631.51(477.7)

DOI: 10.31521/2313-092X/2019-1(101)-6

 

R. Vozhegova
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-3895-5633
A. Kryvenko
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2133-3010

 

       

          For the formation of high and high-quality winter wheat crops, it is necessary to determine the optimum level of fertilization and the ratio of the main nutrient elements, taking into account agrochemical fertility indices for each field, as well as its local areas. It is important to use sulphur, zinc, manganese, and iron for the cultivation of seeds and in the system of folic feeding. According to the results of field studies, it has been established that on the average level of fertility of chernozem, the southern efficacy of Gumatal Nano, Azotofit and Stimpo is manifested differently. Thus, for the influence on the productivity of winter wheat, the preparation Gumatal Nano is allocated, which provides significant yield gains in relation to the corresponding background control at the level from 0.12 to 0.95 t/ha, but for obtaining the grain of food quality it should be used under pre-planting conditions making N64P64K64. The Azotophyte preparation should be used on an uncooked background irrespective of its predecessor, or with the introduction of N32P32K32 in the cultivation of winter wheat in crop rotation after cross-flowering crops (increase in grain yield from 0.18 to 0.35 t/ha). The use of Azotophyte after a black steam (seed cultivation + three times foliar fertilization) ensures the formation of grain quality parameters at the level of the third class irrespective of the rate of application of mineral fertilizers (protein – 12,15%, gluten 20,4%). The use of the Stimpo preparation with an average fertility level of southern black earth at all levels of mineral nutrition can yield increments less than or within the smallest significant difference regardless of the predecessor. Without the use of mineral fertilizers for the use of the drug Stimpo formed grain of grade 5, to obtain the third grade grain, it is advisable to use this drug against a background of mineral fertilizers in a dose N32P32K32. The highest levels of net profit of 17.5 thousand UAH/ha and profitability of 184.1% were obtained in the variant with the introduction of the main fertilizer at a dose of N32P32K32 in conjunction with the biomedicine Gumatal Nano. The best energy efficiency with an increase in energy at the level of 43.5-44.7 GJ/ha, the energy coefficient of 2.43-2.59 is indicated in variants with the introduction of the main fertilizer in a dose of N32P32K32 in combination with non-carbohydrate feeding with the biomedical Gumatal Nano nanotube and nitric fertilizer N60.

       Key words: winter wheat, biological products, predecessor, mineral fertilizers, yield, quality, economic and energy efficiency.

Reference

  1. Hrytsayenko, Z. M., Ponomarenko S. P., Karpenko V. P., &Leontyuk I. B. (2008) Biolohichnoaktyvnirechovyny v roslynnytstvi. Kyiv: Nichlava.
  2. Bykina, A. M., &Kosyak, A. S. Humatyyakfaktoroptymizatsiyiumovzhyvlennyasoyi. Retrievedfrom https://www.sworld.com.ua/konfer48/42.pdf.
  3. Ivankevych, M. (2009) Vplyvstymulyatorivrostunaurozhaynistʹ zernovykhkulʹtur. Tekhniko-ekonomichniaspektyrozvytkutavyprobuvannyanovoyitekhniky i tekhnolohiydlyasilʹsʹkohohospodarstvaUkrayiny. Doslidnytsʹke, 13 (27), 223–225.
  4. Kononchuk, O. B., Pyda S. V., &HryhoryukS. V. (2014) VplyvristrehulyatorivRehoplant i Stymponasymbiotychnusystemutaproduktyvnistʹ kvasoli. Nauk. zap. Ternop. Nats. ped. un-tu, Ser. Biol.,3(60), 109–114.
  5. Smetanko, O. V., &Velver, M. O. (2017) Urozhaynistʹ pshenytsiozymoyitayakistʹ zernapryzastosuvannibiolohichnykhdobryv. AhrarnanaukataosvitaPodillya: Zb. nauk. pratsʹ mizhn. n-pr. konf.Ternopil:Krok, 1, 135–137.
  6. Biorehulyatoryroslyn: rekomendatsiyipozastosuvannyu (2015). Kyiv: Ahrobiotekh, 35.
  7. GOST 13586.1-68. Zerno. Metodyopredelenyyakolychestva y kachestvakleykovyny v pshenytse (s yzmenenyyamy 1,2) (2009). Moskva: Standartynform,, 6.
  8. DSTU 4117:2007. Zernotaproduktyyohopererobky. Vyznachennyapokaznykivyakostimetodominfrachervonoyispektroskopiyi. Kyiv: DerzhspozhyvstandartUkrayiny, 7.
  9. GOST 10842-89 (YSO 520-77). Zernozernovykh y bobovykhkulʹtur y semyanmaslychnykhkulʹtur. Metodopredelenyyamassy 1000 zerenyly 1000 semyan. [Chynnyyvid 1995-06-01.]. Yzd. ofyts. Moskva: Standartynform, 4.
  10. GOST 10840-64. Zerno. Metodyopredelenyyanatury. [Chynnyyvid 1988-07-01]. Yzd. ofyts. Moskva: Standartynform, 2009. 4.
  11. GOST 13586.5-93. Zerno. Metodopredelenyyavlazhnosty. Yzd. ofyts. Mezhhosudarstvennyysonetpostandartyzatsyy, metrolohy y sertyfykatsyy. Mynsk, 1993. 8.
  12. Yakistgruntuvidbyrannyaprob (2005): DSTU 4287:2004.Kyiv: UkrNDNTS, 9.
  13. Andriychuk, V. H. (2002) Ekonomikaahrarnykhpidpryyemstv. Kyiv: KNEU. 624.
  14. Dorohuntsov, S. I., Mukhovykov, A. M., &Khvesyk, M. A. tain. (2004) Optymizatsiyapryrodokorystuvannya v 5-ty t.: navchalniy posibnyk. T. 1. Pryrodniresursy: ekoloho-ekonomichnaotsinka. Kyiv: Kondor, 291.
  15. Ushkarenko, V. O., Lazar, P. N., Ostapenko, A. I., &Boyko, I. O. (1997) Metodykaotsinkybioenerhetychnoyiefektyvnostitekhnolohiyvyrobnytstvasilskohospodarskykhkultur. Kherson: Kolos, 21.
  16. Zhuchenko, A. A., Kazantsev, E. F., &Afanas’yev, V. N. (1983) Energeticheskiyanaliz v selskomkhozyaystve. Kishinev: Shtiintsa, 82.