Cost Analysis of Different Mixture Rates and Sowing Methods of Anatolian Clover (Trifolium resupinatum L.) and Italian Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.)

Abstract

The study was carried out between 2015 and 2016 in accordance with the split plots in randomized blocks research design with 3 replications, which aimed to determine the optimal mixture rate for the production design. The results of the research were made into agricultural implementation and cost analysis was performed. Relative profit margin was used in determining the most favorable mixture rate that will be included in the production design. According to the application results, the production threshold was exceeded in all mixtures. The highest gross production value (95.90 USD da-1) and production cost (59.05 USD da-1) was obtained from the sole Anatolian Clover among the forage crop mixtures. Whereas; the lowest gross production value (71.32 USD da-1) and production cost (58.60 USD) was detected in the sole Italian ryegrass application. In addition to this, it was found that the highest relative profit margin (1.62) had been achieved in sole Anatolian clover. 50% Anatolian clover + 50% Italian ryegrass (K2) (1.40), 25% Anatolian clover + 75% Italian ryegrass (K3) (1.38) were followed to sole Anatolian clover, in terms of mixture rates. Perdenpedicular row sowing (E3) had the highest relative profit margin (1.45) in this study according to the sowing methods. As a consequently, perpendicular rows (E3) and sole Anatolian clover (T), 25A.C + 75 I.R (K3) were the most suitable sowing method and mixture ratios under Anatolian conditions, respectively.

Keywords

• Intercropping
• Net absolute profit
• The relative profit
• Forage crops

References

1. Acar, Z., Asci, O.O., Ayan, I., Mut, H., and Basaran, U., 2006. Intercropping systems for forage crops. Ondokuz Mayis University, Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 21(3): 379-386.
2. Akay Tuvanc, I., and Dagdemir, V., 2009. A study on determining production cost of corn silage in the pasinler province of Erzurum. Atatürk University, Journal of the Agricultural Faculty, 40 (1): 61-69.
3. Alemdar, T., Secer, A., Demirdogen, A., Oztornaci, B., and Aykanat S., 2014. Production cost and marketing structure of major field crops in Cukurova region. Agricultural Economic and Policy Development Institute, Publication No: 230.
4. Anonymous, 2001. Input important product usage and production costs in some regions in Turkey. Agricultural Economic and Policy Development Institute, Publication No: 64.
5. Anonymous, 2019. Crop Production Statistics. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bitkiselapp/. Access date: 20.12.2019.
6. Bayramoglu, Z., Goktolga, Z.G., and Gunduz, O., 2005. Physical production inputs and cost analysis of some important field crops in zile county of Tokat province. The Journal of Agricultural Economics Researches (JAER), 11 (2): 101-109.
7. Erkus, A., and Demirci, R., 1996. Agricultural management and planning. Ankara University, Faculty of Agriculture Textbook, Publication: 417.
8. Genckan, M.S., 1985. Breeding of pasture and meadow culture. Ege University, Faculty of Agriculture Textbook, Publication: 483.

9. Gundogmus, E., 1998. Functional analysis and calculating the production cost of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) on the farms of Akyurt district of Ankara Province. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 22: 251-260.
10. Karadas, K., 2016. Determination of wheat production cost in agricultural enterprises in Agri Province. Journal of Alınteri, 31 (B): 33-41.
11. Kıral, T., Kasnakoglu, H., Tatlidil, F., Fidan, H., and Gundogmus, E., 1999. Cost calculation methodology and database guide for agricultural products. Agricultural Economics Research Institute Publications, Publication, (37).
12. Kızıloglu, S., 1995. Erzurum İlinde çok yıllık yem bitkilerinin (yonca ve korunga) üretim maliyeti ve maliyet fonksiyonlarının ekonometrik analizi. II. Ulusal Ekonometri ve İstatistik Sempozyumu 1- 2 Haziran 1995, İzmir.
13. Mohammadi, A., Tabatabaeefar Shahan, S., Rafiee, S., and Keyhani, A., 2009. Energy use and economical analysis of potato production in Iran a case study: Ardabil province. Elsevier, Energy Conversion and Management, 49 (12): 3566-3570.
14. Ozkan, B., and Yılmaz, I., 1999. Production cost estimations for annual crops: current situation, problems and suggestions. The Journal of Agricultural Economics Researches (JAER) 4: 64-80.
15. Ziaei, S.M., Mazloumzadeh, S.M., and Jabbary, M., 2015. A comparison of energy use and productivity of wheat and barley. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 14 (1): 19-25.