Sera Tarımında Domates Hasadının Ergonomik Analizi

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 2, 601 - 609, 16.03.2026

Kübra Meriç Uğurlutepe , Hüseyin Sauk

https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.1665487

https://izlik.org/JA93GE54WM

Öz

Bu çalışma, sera ortamında yetiştirilen salkım domateslerin elle hasadında işçilerin yaşadığı zorlanma, yüklenme ve buna bağlı olarak ortaya çıkan ergonomik riskleri belirlemek amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Türkiye, yıllara bağlı olarak değişmekle birlikte domates yetiştiriciliğinde ilk üç sırada yer almaktadır ve domates üretimi yaklaşık 13 milyon tondur. Bu pay içerisinde serada yetiştirilen domates miktarı ise yaklaşık 4,1 milyon tondur. Domates yetiştiriciliğinin iç ve dış pazarda ülke ekonomisine önemli katkısı bulunmaktadır. Tarım ürünlerinin yetiştiriciliğinde insan emeği ve zaman açısından en önemli payı hasat süreci almaktadır. Ülkemizde, sera tarımında çalışmalar, fiziksel koşulların uygunsuzluğu, mekanizasyon eksikliği vb. Nedenlerle ağırlıklı olarak elle yapılmaktadır. Hasat sırasında yapılan işe göre değişmekle birlikte, işçiler farklı ve garip vücut duruşlarında çalışmaktadır. Ayrıca domates hasadında, domateslerin olgunlaşma süreleri çeşide göre farklılık gösterebilmektedir. Bu da hasat işleminin tek seferde yapılmasını engellemektedir. Dolayısıyla hasat sırasında yapılan iş ve sergilenen vücut duruşları sürekli olarak tekrarlanmaktadır. Domates hasadı sırasında meyveler elle koparılsa da, bu durum meyvenin etli kısmına zarar vereceği ve değerini düşüreceği için istenmeyen bir durumdur. Bu sebeple hasat yapılırken yaygın olarak budama makasları kullanılır. Domates hasadında manuel yürütülen temel işler; meyvelerin salkımlarından kesilmesi, kasalara yerleştirilmesi ve kasaların depolama alanına taşınmasından oluşur. Bu süreçte, işçiler, domates salkımlarını keserken, dizler üzerinde uzanma, ayaklar üzerinde öne eğilme, çömelme, ayakta durma ve yukarı doğru uzanma olmak üzere 5 farklı iş istasyonunu takip etmektedirler. Çalışmada hasat sırasında işçilerin çalışma duruşları kaydedilmiş ve tarımda kullanılmak üzere geliştirilen AWBA skor belirleme cetveli kullanılmıştır. Buna göre, beş iş istasyonundan, yukarı doğru uzanarak toplamanın en yüksek, diğer duruşların ise yüksek risk skorunda olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ergonomik riskin yüksek olması, hareketlerin sürekli tekrarlamalı olması ve hasat esnasında seranın iklim koşulları çalışanlar üzerinde kas iskelet sistemi rahatsızlıklarına sebebiyet verecek ölçüde bulunmuştur. Ergonomik risk skorunun düşürülmesi amacıyla bazı basit mekanizasyon önerileri geliştirilmiştir. Bu önerilerin uygulanarak test edilmesinin önemli ve gerekli olduğu düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ergonomik risk , Tarımsal ergonomi , Manuel hasat , AWBA , Domates

Etik Beyan

There is no need to obtain permission from the ethics committee for this study.

Ergonomic Analysis of TomatoHarvesting in Greenhouse Agriculture

https://izlik.org/JA93GE54WM

Öz

This study was conducted to determine the strain, stress, and resulting ergonomic risks experienced by workers during the manual harvest of cluster tomatoes grown in greenhouses. Türkiye ranks among the top three tomato producers, with tomato production varying from year to year, at approximately 13 million tons. Of this total, approximately 4.1 million tons are grown in greenhouses. Tomato cultivation contributes significantly to the national economy in both domestic and international markets. The harvesting accounts for the largest share of labor and time in the cultivation of agricultural products. In Türkiye, greenhouse farming is predominantly carried out manually due to inadequate physical conditions, lack of mechanization, and other factors. While harvesting varies depending on the task, workers often work in unusual and awkward postures. Furthermore, ripening times for tomatoes can vary depending on the variety, preventing the harvest from being completed in a single harvest. Consequently, the work performed and postures adopted during harvest are constantly repeated. Although the fruits are hand-picked during tomato harvest, this is undesirable because it damages the flesh and reduces the fruit's value. For this reason, pruning shears are widely used during harvesting. The primary manual tasks in tomato harvesting include cutting the fruit from the bunches, placing them in crates, and transporting the crates to the storage area. During this process, workers maintain five different workstations while cutting the tomato bunches: kneeling, bending forward, squatting, standing, and reaching upward. Workers' working postures were recorded during harvesting, and the AWBA scoring scale, developed for agricultural use, was used. Accordingly, of the five workstations, reaching upward picking was found to be the highest, while other postures were found to have a high risk score. The high ergonomic risk, the repetitive movements, and the greenhouse climate during harvesting were found to be sufficient to cause musculoskeletal disorders in workers. Some simple mechanization recommendations have been developed to reduce the ergonomic risk score. It is considered important and necessary to implement and test these recommendations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ergonomic risk , Agricultural ergonomics , Manual harvest , AWBA Tomato

Etik Beyan

There is no need to obtain permission from the ethics committee for this study.

Kaynakça

• Abouee-Mehrizi, A., Saed-Moucheshi, S. and Dianat, I. (2022). Review of anthropometric considerations for agricultural equipment design: A systematic review. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 13(2): 571-581.
• Akalp, H. G., Saklangıç, U. and Çırakoğlu, S. (2021). Analysis of working postures of olive farmers using the REBA method. Ergonomi, 4(2): 88-96. (In Turkish)
• Anonymous (2013). The Farm Safety Association (FSA). Health and Safety Guidelines for Ontario Greenhouses Ontario (Accessed Date: 02.06.2023) http://www.farmsafety.ca/public/manuals/manual-greenhouse.pdf (In English)
• Anonymous (2023). Directorate of the Institute for Agricultural Economics and Policy Development. https://arastirma.tarimorman.gov.tr/tepge (Accessed Date:02.03.2026) (In Turkish)
• Aygün, İ., Çakmak, B. and Alayunt, F. N. (2018). Ergonomic analysis of citrus harvesting. Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 6: 312-318. (In Turkish)
• Ceccihi, M., Colantoni, A., Massantini, R. and Monarca, D. (2010). The risk of musculoskeletal disorders for workers due to repetitive movements during tomato harvesting. Journal of agricultural safety and health 16(2): 87–98. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.29593
• Costa, S. E. A. and Camarotto, J. A. (2012). An ergonomics approach to citrus harvest mechanization. Work, 41(Supplement 1): 5027-5032.
• Çay, A. and Aykaş, E. (2013). Effects of different seedling bed preparation methods and cover crop application on yield and post-harvest quality parameters in tomato production. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 10(1): 105-114. (In Turkish)
• De-Benavides-Jiménez, S., Gómez-Galán, M., Rubio-Romero, J. C., Díaz-Pérez, M. and Callejón-Ferre, Á. J. (2025). Physical load assessment of gren house cucumber farmers using OWAS and RULA methods. Safety Science, 187: 106838.
• European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA), (2020). Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders – Facts and Figures Synthesis Report (of 10 national reports). ISSN: 1831-9343, ISBN 978-92-9479-148-1 https://doi.org/10.2802/443890
• Fulmer, S., Jenkins, P., Mason, C., Bresee, C. and May, J. (2004). Ergonomic analysis of New York apple harvest workusing a Posture-Activities-Tools-Handling (PATH) Works ampling approach. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 10(3): 163.
• Geniş, A. and Sümer, S. K. (2021). Ergonomic Risk Analysis of Working Postures in Seed Maize Production Using the REBA Method. Journal of Agricultural Machinery Science, 17(3): 127-138. (In Turkish)
• Gorasso, V., Van Derheyden, J., De Pauw, R., Pelgrims, I., De Ridder, K., Vandevijvere, S., Vansteelandt, S., Vaes, B., De Smedt, D. and Devleesschauwer, B. (2022). Direct and indirect costs attribut able to musculoskeletal disorders in Belgium. European Journal Of Public Health Publication, 32(3): ckac130.049. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac130.049
• Kirkhorn, S. R., Earle-Rsichardson, G. and Banks, R. J. (2010). Ergonomic risks and musculoskeletal disorders in production agriculture: recommendations for effective research to practice. Journal of Agromedicine, 15(3): 281-299.
• Kong, Y. K., Han, J. G. and Kim, D. M. (2010). Development of an ergonomic check list for the investigation of work-related lower limb disorders in farming-ALLA: Agricultural lower-limb assessment. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, 29(6): 933-942.
• Kong, Y. K., Lee, S. J., Lee, K. S., Han, J. G. and Kim, D. M. (2011). Development of an ergonomic check list for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders in farming-AULA: Agricultural Upper-Limb Assessment. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, 30(4): 481-489.
• Kong, Y. K., Lee, S. Y., Lee, K. S. and Kim, D. M. (2018). Comparisons of ergonomic evaluation tools (ALLA, RULA, REBA, and OWAS) for farm work. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 24(2): 218-223.
• Kuta, Ł., Komarnicki, P., Łakoma, K. and Praska, J. (2023). Tomato fruit quality as affected by ergonomic conditions while manually harvested. Agriculture, 13(9): 1831.
• Min, D., Baek, S., Park, H. W., Lee, S. A., Moon, J., Yang, J. E., Kim, K. S., Kim, J. Y., and Kang, E. K. (2016). Prevalence and characteristics of musculoskeletal pain in Korean agricultural workers. Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine, 40(1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2016.40.1.1
• Pinzke, S. and Lavesson, L. (2018). Ergonomic conditions in manual harvesting in Swedish outdoor cultivation. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 25(3): 481-487.
• Quiros, C. M. and Schulze, L. J. H. (2010). Analysis of the measurement tool of ergonomic risk in agriculture (AERAT). Tecnologia En Marcha, 23(5): 4-17.
• Salleha, N. F. M. and Sukadarina, E. H. (2018). Job Hazard Analyses (JHA) for ergonomics risk factors in Malaysian pineapple plantation. Journal of Occupational Safety and Health, 15(1): 17.
• Saltuk, B. and Atılgan, A. (2020). Occupational health and safety in greenhouses: The case of Siirt Province. European Journal of Science and Technology, (19): 881-890. (In Turkish)
• Sorensen, L., van Tulder, M., Johannsen, H. V., Ovesen, J., Enemark, U., Blæhr, E. E. and Oestergaard, L. G. (2022). Costs of shoulder disorders in Denmark: a nation wide cost of-illness study investigating 617,334 patients and matched controls. Pain 163(11): 2162–2171. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002610
• Sönmez, N. (2011). Ergonomic analysis of apple harvesting. (Ph.D Thesis). Ankara University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Ankara, Türkiye.
• Ulrey, B. L. and Fathallah, F. A., (2013. Effect of a personal weight transfer device on muscle activities and join tflexions in the stooped posture. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 23(2): 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2012.08.014
• Varghese, A. and Panicker, V. V. (2022). Impact of musculoskeletal disorders on various agricultural operations: a systematic review. Sādhanā, 47(1): 46.
• Yılmaz, S. K. İ. (2007). Analysis of factors determining the use of bumblebees for pollination in tomato production in glass greenhouses. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 4(1): 99-107.