Abstract
One of the main costs in agriculture is related to mechanized operations, which, in turn, are associated with the capital invested in machinery and equipment, the scale of production, and the operating efficiency. Thus, the choice of technology to carry out these operations must take these factors into account to minimize the production cost. In this context, this study aimed to evaluate the most economical investment option for the set of sprayings on a farm located in the municipality of Mineiros, Goiás, Brazil, by comparing two technologies (ground and aerial spraying) and identifying the scale of production that makes each of the technologies more feasible. This study covers the period of one year with the soybean crop in the summer season, followed by the cultivation of corn in the off-season. Economic feasibility indicators were calculated, and the total average costs of both technologies were compared. The results allowed concluding that the investment in aerial spraying with the aircraft acquisition is assertive, as it reduced losses due to crushing. Contracting the service via third parties is feasible and can be used not only in cases of emergency, as it allows for increased profitability.
Highlights
Agribusiness is a segment of great importance for the Brazilian economy, representing 25% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2018 (Spring, 2018)
A trend in increasing the size of machinery has been observed in recent decades aiming at a greater operational field capacity, which has led to an increase in the wheelsets and weight of sprayers
The total cost of ground spraying was obtained from the sum of fixed (Table 1) and variable costs (Table 2) of the four ground sprayers and reached R$ 874,200.00, that is, R$ 218,550.00 for each sprayer
Summary
Agribusiness is a segment of great importance for the Brazilian economy, representing 25% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2018 (Spring, 2018). A trend in increasing the size of machinery has been observed in recent decades aiming at a greater operational field capacity, which has led to an increase in the wheelsets and weight of sprayers. This change has aggravated production losses due to damage to the root system, plant crushing, and possible crop contamination due to the presence of pathogens such as fungi and bacteria, which remain in the equipment coming from other sprayed areas. According to Boller, cited by Abi Saab et al (2007), the reduction in productivity due to damage caused by the use of ground-based equipment can reach up to 2.24%, while Hanna et al (2007) reported losses between 0.8 and 6.3%
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
