ESMAEL, M. (2015). AN ECONOMIC STUDY FOR ESTIMATION WHEAT AND MAIZE PROFITABILITY BY USING SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ACCORDING TO FIELD LOCATION AND WATER IRRIGATION QUALITY IN KAFR EL-SHIKH GOVERNORATE. Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, 93(4), 1370-1353. doi: 10.21608/ejar.2015.157084
MANAL A. M. ESMAEL. "AN ECONOMIC STUDY FOR ESTIMATION WHEAT AND MAIZE PROFITABILITY BY USING SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ACCORDING TO FIELD LOCATION AND WATER IRRIGATION QUALITY IN KAFR EL-SHIKH GOVERNORATE". Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, 93, 4, 2015, 1370-1353. doi: 10.21608/ejar.2015.157084
ESMAEL, M. (2015). 'AN ECONOMIC STUDY FOR ESTIMATION WHEAT AND MAIZE PROFITABILITY BY USING SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ACCORDING TO FIELD LOCATION AND WATER IRRIGATION QUALITY IN KAFR EL-SHIKH GOVERNORATE', Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, 93(4), pp. 1370-1353. doi: 10.21608/ejar.2015.157084
ESMAEL, M. AN ECONOMIC STUDY FOR ESTIMATION WHEAT AND MAIZE PROFITABILITY BY USING SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ACCORDING TO FIELD LOCATION AND WATER IRRIGATION QUALITY IN KAFR EL-SHIKH GOVERNORATE. Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, 2015; 93(4): 1370-1353. doi: 10.21608/ejar.2015.157084
AN ECONOMIC STUDY FOR ESTIMATION WHEAT AND MAIZE PROFITABILITY BY USING SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ACCORDING TO FIELD LOCATION AND WATER IRRIGATION QUALITY IN KAFR EL-SHIKH GOVERNORATE
Researchers at Agricultural Economics Research Institute- ARC.
Abstract
wheat and corn are very important cereal crops in Egypt on both production and consumption sides. According to their importance, the government of Egypt put a lot of attention to increase their areas, yields, and production .the area of wheat was increased by 3.3 th .feddan yearly the wheat yield by about .007T\F, while the production was increased by 23the.Tper year during the period of 1992/2012. The number of factors affecting the crop yield level, irrigation water one of those factors, Measuring the effect of water quality and yield location an irrigation canal represents the research problem. The research was conducted in Kafr Elshikh gov. Data were collected by questionnaire from 36 farms was selected to collect the needed data. Data of costs and returns were collected, The sample was distributed at:1-irrigation water quality (fresh, mixed, and drainage) at equal numbers (12 for each on 3 canals). 2- field location on the canal (front- middle, and the end), 12 fields for each, 4 for each canal. For wheat crop, the results show that a maximum yield was obtimal from fresh water. The average yield was estimated at 16.81 ardabe/ fed. It increased to about 17.56 and /fed in front of the canal fields, 17.72 ardabe/ fed in middle fields, and 15.14 for the ard/fed . The average wheat yield in the mixed water was estimating at 10.2 (6.61 ardabe/ fed, less than fresh water yields, while the drainage water yield was estimated at 17.43 ardabe/ fed(103% from fresh water yield. The differences of yield according to water quality and field location were statistically significant based on ANOVA (analysis of variance). The gross margin indicator was measured to reflect the economic efficiency of using water quality and field location. The results showed that the gross margin of wheat crops in fresh water amounted to LE 6238 per fedden, representing 221% from its value of mixed water (L.E2807)and 123%from its value of drainage water (L.E5070). The differences among those values were statistically significant . For maize crop,the same direction was foundThe average yield for fresh water was estimated at 16.83 ard/F, comparing with 9.54 ard /F for nixed water ,and 15.45 ard /f for drainage water. The differences of yields according to water quality were statistically significant . For field location it was found that the average yield of front canal was 17.09 ard/fed 20ard/F for middle ,and 14 ard /f for end canal fields in fresh water .the differences among yields according to field location were statistically signicanal . The estimates of gross margin indicator showed that ,it was about L.E 3115 in fresh water, L.E28, L. 2677 in mixed water, and L.E1201 in drainage water . The differences of.
View on SCiNiTO
Top