Mechanical weed control, as an alternative to herbicide use, offers significant environmental and economic benefits. However, conventional methods require high labour and resource input, challenges that innovative technologies such as agricultural robots can mitigate. This study evaluates the performance of the agricultural robot Robotti 150 D (Agrointelli, Aarhus, Denmark) compared to a traditional tractor for mechanical weed control in maize and wheat fields at the University of Padova’s experimental farm in northeastern Italy. A Rotosark hoening weeder (OliverAgro s.r.l., Verona, Italy) was used in maize, while a tine harrow was employed in wheat. Each field was divided into robot- and tractor-managed plots. Weed species presence and density in 24 randomly positioned 1 x 1 m quadrats were assessed using ArcGIS Pro (v3.3.2, ESRI). Weed control efficiency was calculated by comparing weed density before and after operations, while long-term effects were evaluated by analyzing weed biomass before harvest and comparing yield differences. In maize, both methods achieved approximately 95% weed control efficiency. Weed density decreased from 88.8 ± 13.96 to 3.33 ± 0.93 plants/m² in robot-managed plots and from 99.2 ± 13.94 to 4.25 ± 1.36 plants/m² in tractor plots. Final weed biomass was 145.24 ± 22.71 g (robot) versus 137.1 ± 32.25 g (tractor), with no significant yield differences (15.14 ± 2.08 t/ha robot vs. 14.90 ± 2.80 t/ha tractor). In wheat, both methods showed lower control efficiency, reducing density from 7.5 ± 1.41 to 3.75 ± 0.95 plants/m² (robot) and from 8.83 ± 1.09 to 4.5 ± 0.65 plants/m² (tractor), with no significant differences in final biomass (9.42 ± 4.68 g robot vs. 10.3 ± 2.87 g tractor). However, robot-managed plots produced significantly higher wheat yields (6.42 ± 0.09 t/ha) compared to tractor-managed plots (5.36 ± 0.40 t/ha). These findings suggest that autonomous robots provide comparable weeding efficacy to traditional tractors while offering potential advantages such as reduced soil compaction and improved labour efficiency. Further trials are needed under diverse conditions to optimize their performance and address user requirements.
Il controllo meccanico delle infestanti, come alternativa all'uso di erbicidi, offre significativi vantaggi ambientali ed economici. Tuttavia, i metodi convenzionali richiedono un elevato impiego di manodopera e risorse, sfide che tecnologie innovative come i robot agricoli possono mitigare. Questo studio valuta le prestazioni del robot agricolo Robotti 150 D (Agrointelli, Aarhus, Danimarca) rispetto a un trattore tradizionale per il controllo meccanico delle infestanti nei campi di mais e grano presso l'azienda agricola sperimentale dell'Università di Padova nel nord-est Italia. Una sarchiatrice Rotosark (OliverAgro s.r.l., Verona, Italia) è stata utilizzata nel mais, mentre un erpice a denti è stato impiegato nel grano. Ogni campo è stato suddiviso in parcelle gestite da robot e trattore. La presenza e la densità delle specie infestanti in 24 quadrati di 1 x 1 m posizionati casualmente sono state valutate utilizzando ArcGIS Pro (v3.3.2, ESRI). L'efficienza del controllo delle infestanti è stata calcolata confrontando la densità delle infestanti prima e dopo le operazioni, mentre gli effetti a lungo termine sono stati valutati analizzando la biomassa delle infestanti prima della raccolta e confrontando le differenze di resa. Nel mais, entrambi i metodi hanno raggiunto un'efficienza di controllo delle infestanti di circa il 95%. La densità delle infestanti è diminuita da 88,8 ± 13,96 a 3,33 ± 0,93 piante/m² nelle parcelle gestite da robot e da 99,2 ± 13,94 a 4,25 ± 1,36 piante/m² nelle parcelle gestite da trattore. La biomassa finale delle infestanti è stata di 145,24 ± 22,71 g (robot) contro 137,1 ± 32,25 g (trattore), senza differenze significative nella resa (15,14 ± 2,08 t/ha robot contro 14,90 ± 2,80 t/ha trattore). Nel grano, entrambi i metodi hanno mostrato un'efficienza di controllo inferiore, riducendo la densità da 7,5 ± 1,41 a 3,75 ± 0,95 piante/m² (robot) e da 8,83 ± 1,09 a 4,5 ± 0,65 piante/m² (trattore), senza differenze significative nella biomassa finale (9,42 ± 4,68 g robot vs. 10,3 ± 2,87 g trattore). Tuttavia, le parcelle gestite da robot hanno prodotto rese di grano significativamente più elevate (6,42 ± 0,09 t/ha) rispetto alle parcelle gestite da trattore (5,36 ± 0,40 t/ha). Questi risultati suggeriscono che i robot autonomi offrono un'efficacia di diserbo paragonabile a quella dei trattori tradizionali, offrendo al contempo potenziali vantaggi come la riduzione della compattazione del terreno e una migliore efficienza del lavoro. Sono necessarie ulteriori sperimentazioni in diverse condizioni per ottimizzarne le prestazioni e soddisfare le esigenze degli utenti.
Robotica e meccanizzazione tradizionale: confronto nella gestione delle infestanti di mais e frumento
LANCELLOTTI, FEDERICO
2024/2025
Abstract
Mechanical weed control, as an alternative to herbicide use, offers significant environmental and economic benefits. However, conventional methods require high labour and resource input, challenges that innovative technologies such as agricultural robots can mitigate. This study evaluates the performance of the agricultural robot Robotti 150 D (Agrointelli, Aarhus, Denmark) compared to a traditional tractor for mechanical weed control in maize and wheat fields at the University of Padova’s experimental farm in northeastern Italy. A Rotosark hoening weeder (OliverAgro s.r.l., Verona, Italy) was used in maize, while a tine harrow was employed in wheat. Each field was divided into robot- and tractor-managed plots. Weed species presence and density in 24 randomly positioned 1 x 1 m quadrats were assessed using ArcGIS Pro (v3.3.2, ESRI). Weed control efficiency was calculated by comparing weed density before and after operations, while long-term effects were evaluated by analyzing weed biomass before harvest and comparing yield differences. In maize, both methods achieved approximately 95% weed control efficiency. Weed density decreased from 88.8 ± 13.96 to 3.33 ± 0.93 plants/m² in robot-managed plots and from 99.2 ± 13.94 to 4.25 ± 1.36 plants/m² in tractor plots. Final weed biomass was 145.24 ± 22.71 g (robot) versus 137.1 ± 32.25 g (tractor), with no significant yield differences (15.14 ± 2.08 t/ha robot vs. 14.90 ± 2.80 t/ha tractor). In wheat, both methods showed lower control efficiency, reducing density from 7.5 ± 1.41 to 3.75 ± 0.95 plants/m² (robot) and from 8.83 ± 1.09 to 4.5 ± 0.65 plants/m² (tractor), with no significant differences in final biomass (9.42 ± 4.68 g robot vs. 10.3 ± 2.87 g tractor). However, robot-managed plots produced significantly higher wheat yields (6.42 ± 0.09 t/ha) compared to tractor-managed plots (5.36 ± 0.40 t/ha). These findings suggest that autonomous robots provide comparable weeding efficacy to traditional tractors while offering potential advantages such as reduced soil compaction and improved labour efficiency. Further trials are needed under diverse conditions to optimize their performance and address user requirements.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
LANCELLOTTI_FEDERICO.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
4.45 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
4.45 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/94306