SUSTAINABLE-AGRICULTURE-AND-LIVESTOCK-FOR-FOOD-SECURITY-UNDER-THE-CHANGING.pdf

S U S T A I N A B L E
A G R I C U L T U R E
A N D
L I V E S T O C K
F O R F O O D
S E C U R I T Y
U N D E R T H E
C H A N G I N G
C L I M A T E
E D I T E D B Y
A s s o c . P r o f . D r . M e h m e t F ı r a t B A R A N
A s s o c . P r o f . D r . K o r k m a z B E L L İ T Ü R K
A s s o c . P r o f . D r . A h m e t Ç E L İ K
A s s s t . P r o f . D r . T e f d e K I Z I L D E N İ Z

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK
FOR FOOD SECURITY UNDER THE CHANGING
CLIMATE
EDITED BY:
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mehmet Fırat BARAN
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Korkmaz BELLİTÜRK
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet ÇELİK
Assist. Prof. Dr. Tefide KIZILDENİZ
AUTHORS:
Prof. Dr. Erdal SAKİN
Prof. Dr. Melek EKİNCİ
Prof. Dr. Mustafa BOĞA
Prof. Dr. Murat ERMAN
Prof. Dr. Recep KOTAN
Prof. Dr. Yılmaz BAYHAN
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elif AKPINAR
KÜLEKÇİ
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fatma HEPSAĞ
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fatih ÇIĞ
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fulya TAN
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gürsel ÖZKAN
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Işık SEZEN
Assoc.Prof. Dr. Mehmet Fırat
BARAN
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Raziye IŞIK
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vedat BEYYAVAŞ
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ali İhsan KAYA
Assist. Prof. Dr. Cavidan GÜL
VARIŞ
Assist. Prof. Dr. Gökhan ERKAL
Assist. Prof. Dr. Hülya SAYĞI
Assist. Prof. Dr. Kaan Emre ENGİN
Dr. Aneela AFZAL
Dr. Asif SARDAR
Dr. Cevher İlhan CEVHERİ
Dr. José I. Ruiz de GALARRETA
Dr. Khandakar Rafiq ISLAM
Medical Dr. Mohmmad Mouammer
HAKKI
Dr. Muhamad N. ROFIQ
Dr. Mutlu BULUT
Dr. Nelly Arévalo SOLSOL
Dr. Nestor Alor ROMERO
Dr. Oscar Fernández CUTIRE
Dr. Rosario Zegarra ZEGARRA
Dr. Sipan SOYSAL
Dr. Thomas PARKINSON
Dr. Yusuf SOLMAZ
Dr. Anas Alkaddour
Pharmacy Rajaa AL-ZAGLOL
PhD Candidate Emrah
RAMAZANOĞLU
PhD Candidate Hatice Nur KILIÇ
PhD Candidate Muhammad Yasir
NAEEM
Lecturer Demet CANGA
Res. Asst. Cem ARIK
Res. Asst. Sena GÜLTEKİN
Ahmet Fatih AKANSU
Beyza YILMAZ
Metehan ÜSTÜNDAĞ
Seray DÖNMEZ
Taha Kutay AYDIN

Copyright © 2021 by iksad publishing house
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
distributed or transmitted in any form or by
any means, including photocopying, recording or other electronic or
mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher,
except in the case of
brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other
noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. Institution of Economic
Development and Social
Researches Publications®
(The Licence Number of Publicator: 2014/31220)
TURKEY TR: +90 342 606 06 75
USA: +1 631 685 0 853
E mail: iksadyayinevi@gmail.com
www.iksadyayinevi.com
It is responsibility of the author to abide by the publishing ethics rules. The
first degree responsibility of the works in the book belongs to the authors.
Iksad Publications – 2021©
ISBN: 978-625-8423-56-3
December / 2021
Ankara / Turkey
Size = 16x24 cm

CONTENTS
PREFACE
Assist. Prof. Dr. Tefide KIZILDENİZ………………...……………………..1
ABOUT THE EDITORS…………………………………………..……….3
CHAPTER 1
PROJECTION OF TOOL AND MACHINE UTILIZATION
IN AGRICULTURE
(A CASE STUDY OF ŞANLIURFA PROVINCE FOR 15 YEARS)
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ali İhsan KAYA……………………………………...……9
CHAPTER 2
GREEN COMPOSITES, ITS CONSTITUENTS AND BIO-DERIVED
RESINS
Assist. Prof. Kaan Emre ENGİN
Assist. Prof. Ali İhsan KAYA…………………………………………37
CHAPTER 3
LABORATORY TYPE SILAGE MAKING TECHNIQUE
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fulya TAN……………………………………………..…85
CHAPTER 4
AUTOMATED HYDROPONIC GREEN FODDER MACHINE
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fulya TAN…………………………………..…….…….107

CHAPTER 5
COVER CROPS SYSTEMS
Prof. Dr. Yılmaz BAYHAN
Dr. Khandakar Rafiq ISLAM…………………………………………..…119
CHAPTER 6
BIOFERTILIZERS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON MEDICINAL AND
AROMATIC PLANTS
Dr. Yusuf SOLMAZ…………………….…….……………………….….141
CHAPTER 7
FOOD SAFETY AND A COVID-19
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fatma HEPSAĞ…………………………………...…….163
CHAPTER 8
CLIMATE-SMART AGRICULTURE APPLICATION FOR CLOSING
TO GENDER GAP IN AGRICULTURE
Dr. Thomas PARKINSON
Dr. Aneela AFZAL
Dr. Asif SARDAR……………………………………………...…………175
CHAPTER 9
EFFECTS OF SOIL SALINITY ON COTTON PLANT GROWTH
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vedat BEYYAVAŞ
PhD Candidate Emrah RAMAZANOĞLU
Dr. Cevher İlhan CEVHERİ
Prof. Dr. Erdal SAKİN………………………………………………….…201
CHAPTER 10
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION STATISTICS IN TURKEY
Assist. Prof. Dr. Hülya SAYĞI……………………………………………221

CHAPTER 11
THE POTENTIAL OF TOTAL MIXED RATION (TMR) SILAGE IN
RUMINANT NUTRITION
Prof. Dr. Mustafa BOĞA
PhD Candidate Hatice Nur KILIÇ
Dr. Muhamad N. ROFIQ
Assist. Prof. Dr. Cavidan GÜL VARIŞ
Lecturer Demet CANGA…………………………….……………………235
CHAPTER 12
SUSTAINABLE FOOD SYSTEMS IN FOOD SAFETY
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fatma HEPSAĞ…………………………………………259
CHAPTER 13
SUSTAINABLE LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION IN A CHANGING
CLIMATE
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Raziye IŞIK…………………………………..…………271
CHAPTER 14
ANALYSIS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION IN TURKEY IN
TERMS OF PRODUCTION FACTORS
Assist. Prof. Dr. Gökhan ERKAL
Res. Asst. Sena GÜLTEKİN
Res. Asst. Cem ARIK…………………………………………..…………293
CHAPTER 15
CLIMATE CHANGE AND FOOD SECURITY
PhD Candidate Muhammad Yasir NAEEM……………...........…….……315
CHAPTER 16
EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON AGRICULTURE AND FOOD
SECURITY
Dr. Mutlu BULUT
Prof. Dr. Mustafa BOĞA………………………………….………………339

CHAPTER 17
LAVENDER AS LESS WATER REQUIRED-CROP CULTIVATION
FOR CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION STRATEGIES IN TURKEY
Ahmet Fatih AKANSU
Beyza YILMAZ
Seray DÖNMEZ
Taha Kutay AYDIN
Metehan ÜSTÜNDAĞ
Dr. Anas Alkaddour…………………………………….…………………369
CHAPTER 18
POTATO LATE BLIGHT: SPAIN
MOLECULAR IDENTIFICATION OF RACES A1 AND A2, AND THE
DETERMİNATİON OF THE GENETIC STRUCTURE OF THE
ISOLATES OF PHYTOPHTHORA INFESTANS PROSPECTED IN
SPAIN
Dr. Nestor Alor Romero
Dr. José I. Ruiz de Galarreta
Dr. Rosario Zegarra Zegarra
Dr. Nelly Arévalo Solsol
Dr. Oscar Fernández Cutire………………………………..………………385
CHAPTER 19
THE EFFECTS OF BACTERIA AND HORMONES ON THE
ROOTING OF NATURAL LANDSCAPE AND SOME ORNAMENTAL
SHRUBS OF ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elif AKPINAR KÜLEKÇİ
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gürsel ÖZKAN
Prof. Dr. Melek EKİNCİ
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Işık SEZEN
Prof. Dr. Recep KOTAN …………………………………….……………423

CHAPTER 20
THE EFFECT OF CROP PRODUCTION and LIVESTOCK ON
GLOBAL WARMING
Assist. Prof. Dr. Hülya SAYĞI……………………………………………447
CHAPTER 21
AZOLLA AS A POTENTIAL PARTIAL SUBSTITUTE OF ANIMAL
FODDER IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES UNDER
CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS
Medical Dr. Mohmmad Mouammer HAKKI
Pharmacy Rajaa AL-ZAGLOL……………………………………………463
CHAPTER 22
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE INCLUDING BIOLOGICAL
LIVING ENTITIES
Dr. Sipan SOYSAL
Prof. Dr. Murat ERMAN
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fatih ÇIĞ…………………………………………..……503

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK FOR FOOD SECURITY UNDER THE
CHANGING CLIMATE | 1
PREFACE
Whilst world's climate crises worsen, the crucial limitations of natural assets
are quickly dwindling. Since agriculture is the initial step of the food chain,
the basic concepts of sustainability in agriculture are to protect the soil, and
nature, agriculture and livestock resources while increasing productivity in
agriculture with providing sufficient and quality food to insure the food
security for the rapidly increasing world population. Both food and nutrition
security is one of the key issues for current and close future of humanity. Thus,
we have to practice the most effective agricultural activities in order to provide
the maximum and best quality yield from the unit area of agricultural lands.
In a drastically changing world, considering the changing climate and
changing needs, different disciplines come together to provide innovative
remedies, and we aim to determine and find solutions to the problems of the
world we live in together with interdisciplinary approaches. In this context,
new engineering sciences including the application of interdisciplinary
engineering sciences such as Biosystems Engineering and Bioengineering to
biological systems and processes have emerged, bringing together
complementary and comparative studies in changing conditions, and
increasing interdisciplinary studies with the application of multidisciplinary
approaches and opportunities. In the book in your hand, you will find the
comparative studies of different disciplines such as agricultural engineering,
biosystem engineering, livestock, agricultural economics, and soil science for
the changing world and climate conditions. We would like to thank our
respected colleagues for their contributions to the book and engineering
science via their scientific investigations, and we wish the best of success to
the readers and all science enthusiasts who pursue multidisciplinary studies.
December, 2021

2 | SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK FOR FOOD SECURITY UNDER THE
CHANGING CLIMATE
Assoc.Prof. Dr. Mehmet Fırat BARAN
He graduated from Trakya University,
Faculty of Agriculture, and Department of
Agricultural Machinery in 1997 as head of the
department. At the same year, he both started
to MSc. in institute of natural and applied
sciences in Trakya University and started to
work as research assistant in Trakya
University, Faculty of Agriculture,
Department of Agricultural Machinery. He
assumed title “MSc Engineer” in 2000 and “PhD” in 2010. He is still working
as Associate Professor in Siirt University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department
of Biosystems Engineering. He attended many conferences, meetings,
courses, seminary, panels, workshops, congress and festivals at home and
abroad. He served as project head and researcher in 7 projects supported by
Trakya University, Adiyaman University, Siirt University, TAGEM,
University of Agriculture- Scientific Research Projects Units. He has 148
articles and 10 Chapters on agricultural energy systems, energy use in
agriculture, renewable energy technologies, recycling of agricultural waste,
agricultural mechanization. topics as research articles and papers presented in
domestic and abroad scientific meetings. Also, 30 of them are the articles
published in international periodicals cited by international science indexes
(SCI-SCI-Exp.). He studies the subjects about recycling of agricultural waste,
biogas, energy use in agriculture and agricultural mechanization which are
popular subjects all around the world recently. He still continuing his
academic studies, trainings and projects in Siirt University.
Research Interests: Energy Systems, Energy Use In Agriculture, Renewable
Energy Technologies, Recycling of Agricultural Waste, Agricultural
Mechanization.

Korkmaz Bellitürk is Associate Professor of
Soil Science and Plant Nutrition Department of
Agriculture Faculty at the Tekirdag Namık
Kemal University, in Tekirdag, Turkey. He did
his undergraduate degree at the Trakya
University in Turkey in 1996 as head of the
department, followed by a Ph. D project on
hydrolysis of urea. He started at the Trakya
University in 1996, focusing on plant mineral
nutrition, and was a Research Assistant at the
Faculty of Agriculture from 1996 till 2007. In
2007, he became Assistant Professor of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition
Department, Tekirdag Namık Kemal University, Turkey. He was assigned to
lecture for one week each within the context of Erasmus teaching staff
mobility at Trakia Democritus University in Greece in 2011 and at University
of Technology and Life Sciences in Poland in 2013. He was assigned for 3
months between 11 July and 11 October at the University of Vermont in
Burlington/Vermont, USA to take a part in a project called “use of soil
earthworms in agriculture” in 2011. From 2014 to 2015, he worked as a
postdoc researcher at the University of Vermont in USA, working on soil
ecology, earthworms and vermicompost. After the postdoc he became
Associate Professor of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition Department of
Agriculture Faculty at the Tekirdag Namık Kemal University, in Tekirdag, in
2018, where he focused of phytoremediation, plant nutrition, soil and water
pollution, soil ecology, organic farming, composting and vermicomposting.
He conducts one of the bilateral cooperation projects signed between the
Council of Higher Education-Turkey and Higher Education Commission-
Pakistan. The universities involved in the project are Tekirdag Namık Kemal
University-Turkey and University of Agriculture Faisalabad-Pakistan in 2019.
He served as project head and researcher in 29 projects supported by
TUBITAK, Trakya University, Tekirdag Namık Kemal University, Nevsehir
Hacı Bektas Veli University, Bilecik Seyh Edebali University, TAGEM,
University of Agriculture-Faisalabad and Yozgat Bozok University Scientific
Research Projects Units. He has 145 articles (Totally, 21 of them are the
articles published in international periodicals cited by international science
indexes [SCI-SCI-Exp.]), 9 book chapters and 3 books on soil science,

CHANGING CLIMATE
ecological management for soil quality, plant nutrition, soil-water pollution,
ecologic agriculture, vermicomposting and fertilization topics as research
articles and papers presented in domestic and abroad scientific meetings. He
has been awarded many projects and scientific publication awards in his field
of study. He has been editor-in-chief of the journal Rice Research since 2015.
He has one national patent. He features on ISI’s list of highly cited authors in
the field of soil fauna, soil fertility and plant sciences since 2010.
Research Interests: Soil Fertility, Soil Fauna, Soil Chemistry, Plant
Nutrition, Soil Biology, Ecological Management for Soil Quality, Soil
Pollution, Composting and Vermicomposting, Sustainable and Organic
Agriculture, Fertilizers (Chemical, Organic and Organo-mineral fertilizers).

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet ÇELİK: He
completed his undergraduate (Harran
University) education in 1995, his master's
degree (Harran University) in 1997 and his
doctorate (Çukurova University) in 2012. He
worked in the private sector for 1 year in 1992.
He started to work at the Ministry of National
Education in 1997. Between 2000-2007, he
worked as an Voluntary Instructor in the
Directorate of Kahta Vocational School of
Harran University. In 2007, he held various administrative positions at
Adıyaman University. In 2013, he was appointed as Assistant Professor
Doctor at Adıyaman University Kahta Vocational School, Department of
Plant and Animal Production. He is still working as an Associate Professor at
Adıyaman University, Faculty of Agriculture. He worked as an executive and
assistant researcher in approximately 15 projects supported by the European
Union, World Bank, GAP Administration, Çukurova, Adıyaman Universities
and Non-Governmental Organizations. Assoc. Dr. Ahmet Çelik took part in 2
second thesis advisory and 22 graduate thesis juries. He is the Adıyaman
Provincial Representative of TEMA Foundation and a member of the Turkish
Soil Science Association. Assoc. Dr. Ahmet Çelik has been an assistant editor
and member of the editorial board, columnist and section writer in various
newspapers and scientific journals since 1994, as well as in DÜNYA
Newspaper; He prepared research and informational supplements and
supplements published alongside the newspaper. He has many national and
international articles and papers published on soil quality, soil organic carbon,
agriculture and waste management in environmentally friendly practices. He
is married and has three children.

CHANGING CLIMATE
Assist. Prof. Dr.Tefide KIZILDENİZ
Tefide Kizildeniz is Assisstant Professor
Doctor at Biosystem Engineering
Department in Faculty of Agricultural
Sciences and Technologies, Niğde Ömer
Halisdemir University in Niğde, Turkey.
She graduated with a BSc degree from
Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey in
Plant Protection specialization in 2009.
She has got full master scholarship from
Spain for studying Joint International
Programme of Plant Breeding Master degree from the International Center for
Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies (CIHEAM) and Lleida
University, Spain in 2013. She has got full doctorate scholarship from
“Asociacion de Amigos” Navarra University for completing her PhD degree
in Environmental Biology at Navarra University, Spain in 2017. She has been
focusing on the effects of climate change on crops during her research and she
delivered several practical courses in Navarra University from 2013-2016.
She has worked as National Agronomist and acted as Gender and PSEA
(Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse) Focal Points with United
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) under Programme and
Operational Support to Syria Crisis (Cross-border Operations) in Gaziantep,
Turkey from January 2017 to January 2019. During her work under FAO, she
has delivered several training courses related to agriculture, including gender
related food security, livelihoods and agriculture. She also completed her
second master’s degree in Women Studies in Gaziantep University, Turkey in
2019. She has also worked under the Inter-Agency Standing Committee
(IASC) as a Senior Prevention from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA)
Assistant hosted by United Nations International Organization for Migration
(IOM). Currently, she is working as Assistant Professor Doctor, lecturer and
acting both as Head of Biosystem Engineering Department and Head of Land
and Water Resources Sub-Department in the Faculty of Agricultural Sciences
and Technologies, Niğde Ömer Halisdemir University, in Turkey. She is
leading and contributing to national and international multidisciplinary
projects related to agriculture, the effects of climate change on crops, gender-
related food security, agriculture, livelihoods and climate change topics.
Research Interests: effects of climate change on crops, climate-smart
agriculture, gender-related food and nutrition security

CHANGING CLIMATE
CHAPTER 1
PROJECTION OF TOOL AND MACHINE UTILIZATION IN
AGRICULTURE (A CASE STUDY OF ŞANLIURFA
PROVINCE FOR 15 YEARS)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mehmet Fırat BARAN1
*
Assist. Prof. Dr. Ali Ihsan KAYA2
1
Siirt University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Biosystem
Engineering-Siirt/ Turkey, Email: mfb197272@gmail.com,
Orcid No: 0000-0002-7657-1227
2
Adıyaman University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Mechanical
Engineering-Adıyaman/ Turkey, Orcid no: 0000-0002-3040-5389

CHANGING CLIMATE
INTRODUCTION
Developments in agricultural technologies stimulates agricultural
mechanization process which is really crucial for increasing efficiency
and quality of the work done and facilitating heavy duty job in the
agriculture field. This process increases production, reduces costs and
results in leisure time which can greatly contribute opening new
business areas and causing socio-economic improvement in the life
conditions of farmers (Altay and Turhal, 2011). Nowadays, engines,
hydraulic systems, pneumatic systems, tractors, sowing-planting
machines, spraying machines, fertilizer spreaders, harvesters, elevators,
cultivators, harvesters are common examples of mechanized farm lives
(Baran. 2021). However, it has to be stressed that no matter how well
state-of-the-art tools and machines are used, if diseases and pests are
not effectively taken under control in a crop field, all efforts will be in
vain in terms of production (Küçüker and Baran, 2021). However,
thanks to agricultural mechanization, a safe workflow can be planned
as the relationship between agriculture/animal and machinery increases.
Factors such as systematic planning, cause-effect analysis, rational
method etc., are elements to redefine the forming of a mechanization
structure, namely materials, time, labor, etc. (Anonymous 2021a).
Agricultural industry constitutes the basis of the national economy in
all developing countries as in Turkey. This argument can be evidenced
by analyzing the industry-specific distribution of employment data of
all developing countries. As a result of that, not a large agricultural
industry but also a strong agricultural equipment and machinery sector

has been formed in Turkey as in all developing countries (Anonymous
2021b). As mentioned, technological developments are the driving
force of the agricultural mechanization process. For that reason,
determining the mechanization projections in the fields of agriculture,
especially in developing countries, is of great importance in terms of
creating new employment, increasing farmer productivity and reviving
the technological sector in agriculture industry.
Mechanization and energy costs usually take the first place among
agricultural production inputs although it varies depending on what
product to be planted (Saral et al., 2000, Koçtürk and Avcıoğlu, 2007,
Bozkurt and Aybek, 2016, Tan, 2020; Saglam and Tan, 2017). For
example, processing tomato production costs are largely dominated by
labour, machinery and electricity costs, which are 55% of the total
production costs (Engindeniz and Ozturk Cosar, 2013). From soil
preparation to harvesting the crop in agricultural production process,
agricultural mechanization constitutes about half of the total
agricultural production inputs (Ruiyin et al., 1999; Landers, 2000,
Koçtürk and Avcıoğlu, 2007; Bozkurt and Aybek, 2016). Thus, modern
management of technological equipment are drawing ever-increasing
attention to have the most properly utilization of agricultural inputs and
reduced costs (Bozkurt and Aybek, 2016).
In order to obtain maximum efficiency from a planted crop,
mechanization applications should be evaluated based on scientific
principles from beginning of the production period to the harvesting
period. Moreover, adopting scientific principles enables officials to

CHANGING CLIMATE
compare family and corporate farm business enterprises in terms of
mechanization application intensities and their efficiencies in the same
region or in different countries under similar production conditions
(Korucu et al., 2015, Bozkurt and Aybek, 2016).
Irrigated agricultural areas are increasing not only in Şanlıurfa province
but also in the GAP region day by day. The cultivation water-dependent
industrial and natural-based plants like maize, cotton etc., (Kaya and
Engin, 2021) are becoming widespread in those irrigable areas. Inorder
to plant industrial plants with a higher profit margin than dry agriculture
conditions, farmers who do not have access to the existing GAP dam
irrigation facilities in this region drill wells with the support of the state
incentives or personal resources. Thus, the more irrigated acreages
increase with the contribution of GAP dam and wells, the more need
and demand for mechanization increases. This cycle causes the
considerable increase in terms of tools and machinery not only in
Şanlıurfa province but also in the other GAP cities. The increasing
utilization of machinery in agriculture provides productivity by
enabling the application of advanced technologies and the effective use
of soil, water, fertilizer, pesticides, and etc. inputs as mentioned.
Mechanization has a key role in development of agricultural because of
productivity as developed countries obviously proves that (Bozkurt and
Aybek, 2016).
In this study, by using the data of the Turkish Statistics Institute
covering the years of 2011-2020, it is aimed to determine the
agricultural mechanization projection of the next fifteen years (2021-

2035) of the province of Şanlıurfa. In this province, intensive
agricultural activities are carried out and the driving force of the
economy in local area is the agricultural industry because of fertile soil
of the Harran plain. This projection will guide not only to the
mechanization plans for local administrative officials in the region but
also to the dealers in the agricultural industry for future production
plans.
There are some studies conducted on the mechanization structure and
other features of mechanization in the GAP region (Işık et al. 1995; Işık
and Atun, 1998; Polat and Sağlam, 2001; Sağlam, 2005; Vurarak et al.,
2007; Sessiz et al., 2006; Sessiz et al., 2009; Sessiz et al., 2014, Baran
et al, 2019a). These studies are insufficient to express the ever-changing
mechanization characteristics of farms as the irrigated agricultural areas
increase. This increase is occurring not only in the certain regions of
GAP but also in Şanlıurfa province. It is obvious that, with the
introduction of irrigation to a new land, industrial crops, which
necessitates certain mechanization planning, get widespread and
planted. Therefore, as irrigated areas increase, it would be useful to
repeat the studies on the determination of the mechanization structure
progress in agricultural farms in every GAP cities in order to monitor
the development of the effect of mechanization on the farms’ crop
production and efficiency.
MATERIAL VE METHOD
Şanlıurfa is surrounded by Mardin in the east, Gaziantep in the west,
Adıyaman in the northwest and Diyarbakır in the northeast provinces.

CHANGING CLIMATE
The border of Turkey-Syria stretches in the south of the Şanlıurfa
province. The surface area is 19,336 km² and the altitude of the city
center, which generally looks like a plain, is 518 m. Şanlıurfa province
is located on the northern parts of the Arabian Platform and the southern
skirts of the middle part of the Southeast Taurus Mountains. The heights
of the mountains in the north of the province are low. There are wide
plains between the mountains. The most important river of the province
is the Euphrates. There are two lakes can be mentioned in the city of
Şanlıurfa, namely Halil-Ür-Rahman and Aynzeliha. In addition,
Atatürk Dam Lake, which is created artificially in the part of GAP
Project, is Turkey's largest dam lake and is located within the provincial
borders. Şanlıurfa province has a plateau appearance in general and its
main plains are; Harran, Suruç, Viranşehir, Hilvan, Ceylanpınar,
Bozova and Siverek plains. Şanlıurfa is the third province with the most
agricultural land in Turkey after Ankara and Konya (Anonymous
2021c). The agricultural area distribution of Şanlıurfa province is given
in Table 1.
Table .1 Distributions of Agricultural Lands of Sanliurfa Province (ha.)*
Total
Area
Cultivated
Area
Fallow
Area
Vegetable
Gardens
Fruits,
Beverages
and Spice
Plants Area
Ornamental
Plants Area
10 729
252
7 246 399 1 683 737 194 232 1 604 859 25
*Resource (Anonymous, 2021d; Bozkurt and Aybek, 2016)

The amount of agricultural areas in Şanliurfa is 64.1% in general land
division of the total province. Şanliurfa province has a more
advantageous ratio (64.1%) in terms of agricultural general land
division than both agricultural areas average in Turkey (36%) and
agricultural areas average among surrounding cities (43.6%). In
addition, this province accounts for 36.2% of the total agricultural areas
in the GAP region and 4.2% of the agricultural areas in Turkey (Benek,
2006).
The material of the study is agricultural tools and machinery utilization
data covering the years 2011-2021 in Şanlıurfa province acquired from
Turkish Statistics Institute (Anonymous 2021d). Firstly, this data is
used to determine the percentage ratios, either an increase or a decrease,
for every agricultural tools and machinery by analyzing the covering
years. Secondly, average coefficients of these ratios are calculated to
project future years. By using the coefficients determined based on the
data of previous years, the projections of agricultural tools and
machines widely used in Şanlıurfa until 2035 are calculated using the
same method in cited studies (Demir and Kuş 2016; Baran et al. 2019b;
Baran 2021). A positive projection coefficient indicates an increase in
the number of available tools and machines, and a negative one
indicates a decrease (Demir 2013; Demir and Kuş 2016; Akbaş, 2019;
Baran et al. 2019b; Baran 2021).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Farmers are using tillage to take advantage from it for ensuring to
optimize the physical properties of the soil in terms of plant growth, to

CHANGING CLIMATE
mix the organic residues from the previous cash crop stubble into the
soil, destroying weeds, preparing seedbed, and preparing the field for
optimum irrigation condition. Although it has some certain negative
effects such as promoting soil erosion, mixing the organic matter in the
upper layer into the lower layers of soil etc., soil tillage tools and
machines have common usage areas in Turkey. Utilization amounts of
some soil tillage tools and machines commonly used in Şanlıurfa
province in the past ten years pave the way for this study to calculate
the change rates of previous years and projection coefficients, which
are given in tables, based on these numbers.
First of all, the change rates and projections of the production and usage
amounts of some soil cultivation tools and machines commonly used in
Şanlıurfa for the covering years are given in Table 1. Secondly, the
change rates of sowing-planting and fertilizing machines in the past ten
years and the projection coefficients calculated based on these numbers
are summarized in Table 2. In addition, the change rates of harvesting
and baling machinery in the past ten years and the projection
coefficients calculated based on these numbers are given in Table 3.
Moreover, the change rates of the commonly used sprayers for the past
ten years and the projection coefficients calculated based on these
numbers are summarized in Table 4. Lastly, the change rates of tractors,
agricultural trolleys, silage and mowers over the past ten years and the
projection coefficients calculated based on these numbers are given in
Table 5.

In Table 1, seventeen different soil tillage tools and machines widely
used in Şanlıurfa province between 2011 and 2020 are considered and
listed. When the projection coefficients are calculated according to the
data of covering years in Table 1, the highest coefficient is calculated
as 31.61% for the rotary tiller. When other projection coefficients are
ordered from highest to lowest in the same table, it can be seen that
percentage of tools can be listed as toothed harrow with 9.33%, rotary
cultivator with 5.49%, stone picker machine with 4.57%, subsoiler with
3.90%, stalk cutting machine 3.86%, disc type stubble plough with
2.43%, land roller with 2.41%, disc type tractor plough and hoeing tiller
with 2.32%, land leveling machine with 2.17%, cultivator with 2.05%,
furrow opener plough with 2.02%, stubble plough (moldboard type)
with 1.88%, hay rake with 1.40%, disc harrow with 1.25% and
mouldboard type tractor plough with 1.04% respectively. When the data
for covering years 2011 and 2020 are reviewed, it can be stated that
seventeen tools and machines have positive projection coefficients due
to increases of ratios comparing to the succeeding years (Table 1).
In Table 1, while the rotary tiller number was only one (1) in 2011, it
reached 178 in 2020. Due to an increase in the projection coefficient of
31.61%, which are calculated based on numbers of last ten years, it is
possible to predict that the rotary tiller will increase to 703 in 2025,
2276 in 2030 and 10962 in 2035 considering Table 1. The production
and utilization amounts of four different types of sowing and two
different types of fertilization widely used machines in Şanlıurfa
province are given in Table 2. Moreover, the change rates of succeeding

CHANGING CLIMATE
years and the projection coefficients calculated based on the change
rates of covering years are listed in the same data.
By examining the Table 2 for the types of sowing machines; it could be
seen that direct drill tools known as the stubble drilling machinery were
20 in 2011 year and it reached 123 in 2020. With the calculated
projection coefficient of 10.96% specified in the same table, it possible
to predict that the stubble drilling machinery will increase to 586 units
in 2035. In case of the pneumatic precision drill machine, this number
can be predicted to be 4537 units in 2035 due to a positive projection
coefficient of 6.94% in hand and 7919 units for the tractor-drawn seed
drill machine in 2035 with a projection coefficient of 1.64% as
indicated in the table. In addition, it is possible to anticipate that 7935
units in 2035 with a projection coefficient of 1.15% for the combined
seed drill machinery. In the case of widely used fertilization machines,
the projection coefficient can be found as 12.06% for the farm manure
spreading machinery and 1.92% for the chemical fertilizer broadcaster.
By using these projection coefficients, depending on covering years, it
can be predicted that utilization numbers may increase up to 480 units
for farm manure spreading machinery and 9768 units for chemical
fertilizer broadcaster in 2035.
Harvesting machines commonly used in Şanlıurfa province are given in
Table 3. It can be observed that a positive projection coefficient of
11.95% for the baler, 11.35% for the cotton picking machinery, 10.93%
for the straw conveyor and unloader machine, 6.60% for the maize
harvester, 5.77% for the combine harvester, 4.25% for the straw

collector and baler, 1.67% for the winnowing harvester and 0.78% for
the straw thresher machinery are in hand according to Table 3. These
coefficients can be speculated by using the data of covering years. By
taking the projection coefficient ratio into calculation, it can be
anticipated that there will be 707 units for the baler, 1850 units for the
cotton picking machine, 938 units for the straw conveyor and unloader
machine, 365 units for the maize harvester, 719 units for the combine
harvester, 686 units for the straw collector and baler, 145 units for the
winnowing harvester and 2129 units for thresher machinery in 2035.
When spraying equipment and machinery in Table 4 is reviewed, it can
be seen that the numbers of barrow duster and combine sprayer were
118 in 2011 and reached to 208 in 2020. Based on these numbers, the
projection coefficient of 5.75% is calculated for barrow duster and
combine sprayer. Besides, it is possible to anticipate that the number of
barrow duster and combine sprayer will increase up to 481 in 2035.
Projection coefficients of other spraying tools and machines commonly
used in Şanlıurfa such as PTO-driven sprayer is calculated as 4.38%,
engine-driven sprayer as 4.38%, atomizer as 2.44%, and knapsack
sprayer as 1.92%. Thus, units of the engine-driven sprayer, PTO-driven
sprayer, barrow duster and combine sprayer, atomizer and knapsack
sprayer can be anticipated as 2336, 9541, 481, 5146 and 7874 units
respectively.
Finally, it can be seen that tractor numbers in Şanlıurfa were 14910 in
2011 and it were reached to 18069 in 2020 by considering the Table 5.
Based on numbers of between 2011 and 2020, a projection coefficient

CHANGING CLIMATE
can be calculated with same method for tractor in the table. Thus, it is
possible to predict that the number of tractors in Şanlıurfa will increase
to 24693 units in 2035. In case of trailers used with the tractor units
were 13826 and 16625 in 2011 and 2020 respectively. According to the
numbers of the table, it is possible to calculate a projection coefficient
of 1.97% for the trailer (agricultural carts) and by using this projection
coefficient, trailer units in 2035 can be anticipated as 22282 units in
Şanlıurfa province. Another projection coefficient can also be
calculated with same method as 4.84% and it is possible to say that the
number of corn forage harvester will increase to 319 units in 2035.
However, the forage harvester and the tractor-driven mower units will
decline to three and 833 units because of a decrease in the projection
coefficients with -12.34% and -0.87% respectively.

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK FOR FOOD SECURITY UNDER
THE CHANGING CLIMATE | 21
Table 1. Projection of Some Soil Tillage Tools and Machines Widely
Used in Şanlıurfa Province
YEARS
Tillage Tools and Machines
Subsoiler
Disc
Type
Stubble
Plough
(Oneway)
Disc
Harrows
Disc
Type
Tractor
Plough
Toothed
Harrow
Furrow
Opener
Plough
Rotary
Tiller
Land
Leveling
Machine
Stubble
Plough
(Moldboard
Type)
Cultivator
Mouldboard
Type
Tractor
Plough
Land
Roller
Rotary
Cultivator
Stone
Picker
Machine
Hay
Rake
Hoeing
Tiller
Machine
Stalk
Cutter
2011 809 1225 1932 4237 472 2741 1 653 1067 11937 9482 1273 352 190 1063 2175 667
2012 849 1224 1962 4413 494 2784 13 667 1100 12113 9538 1287 359 211 1076 2346 673
2013 883 1239 1893 4513 500 2847 13 676 1116 12195 9578 1300 369 213 1081 2282 685
2014 900 1265 1969 4738 522 2909 38 729 1152 12613 9624 1405 407 229 1089 2365 703
2015 908 1275 1999 4804 542 2978 42 740 1178 12951 9940 1431 419 230 1094 2376 709
2016 965 1314 2041 4860 548 3056 70 750 1197 13391 9982 1464 455 232 1106 2449 727
2017 992 1378 2100 4977 556 3069 77 760 1241 13878 10005 1501 467 248 1124 2475 742
2018 1022 1387 2143 5040 573 3137 80 760 1254 14103 10097 1513 474 241 1135 2380 743
2019 1038 1412 2132 5074 579 3169 101 770 1250 14223 10169 1544 488 247 1152 2317 755
2020 1162 1533 2168 5239 1601 3294 178 797 1267 14387 10419 1588 593 294 1208 2729 974
YEARS PERCENTAGE CHANGE
2011/ 2012 4,71 -0,08 1,53 3,99 4,45 1,54 92,31 2,10 3,00 1,45 0,59 1,09 1,95 9,95 1,21 7,29 0,89
2012/ 2013 3,85 1,21 -3,65 2,22 1,20 2,21 0,00 1,33 1,43 0,67 0,42 1,00 2,71 0,94 0,46 -2,80 1,75
2013/ 2014 1,89 2,06 3,86 4,75 4,21 2,13 65,79 7,27 3,13 3,31 0,48 7,47 9,34 6,99 0,73 3,51 2,56
2014/ 2015 0,88 0,78 1,50 1,37 3,69 2,32 9,52 1,49 2,21 2,61 3,18 1,82 2,86 0,43 0,46 0,46 0,85
2015/ 2016 5,91 2,97 2,06 1,15 1,09 2,55 40,00 1,33 1,59 3,29 0,42 2,25 7,91 0,86 1,08 2,98 2,48
2016 2017 2,72 4,64 2,81 2,35 1,44 0,42 9,09 1,32 3,55 3,51 0,23 2,47 2,57 6,45 1,60 1,05 2,02
2017/ 2018 2,94 0,65 2,01 1,25 2,97 2,17 3,75 0,00 1,04 1,60 0,91 0,79 1,48 -2,90 0,97 -3,99 0,13
2018/ 2019 1,54 1,77 -0,52 0,67 1,04 1,01 20,79 1,30 -0,32 0,84 0,71 2,01 2,87 2,43 1,48 -2,72 1,59
2019/ 2020 10,67 7,89 1,66 3,15 63,84 3,79 43,26 3,39 1,34 1,14 2,40 2,77 17,71 15,99 4,64 15,10 22,48
Projection
Coefficient
3,90 2,43 1,25 2,32 9,33 2,02 31,61 2,17 1,88 2,05 1,04 2,41 5,49 4,57 1,40 2,32 3,86
2021 1207 1570 2195 5361 1750 3360 234 814 1291 14682 10527 1626 626 307 1225 2792 1012
2022 1254 1608 2223 5485 1914 3428 308 832 1315 14982 10636 1665 660 321 1242 2857 1051
2023 1303 1648 2250 5613 2092 3497 406 850 1340 15289 10746 1705 696 336 1260 2923 1091
2024 1354 1688 2279 5743 2287 3568 534 868 1365 15602 10858 1747 734 352 1277 2991 1133
2025 1407 1729 2307 5876 2500 3640 703 887 1391 15921 10970 1789 775 368 1295 3061 1177
2026 1462 1771 2336 6013 2734 3713 925 907 1417 16247 11084 1832 817 384 1313 3131 1223
2027 1519 1814 2365 6152 2988 3788 1218 926 1444 16580 11199 1876 862 402 1332 3204 1270
2028 1578 1858 2395 6295 3267 3865 1602 946 1471 16919 11315 1921 909 420 1350 3278 1319
2029 1640 1903 2425 6441 3572 3943 2109 967 1499 17265 11433 1967 959 440 1369 3354 1370
2030 1704 1950 2455 6591 3905 4022 2776 988 1527 17619 11551 2015 1012 460 1389 3432 1423
2031 1770 1997 2486 6744 4269 4103 3653 1009 1556 17979 11671 2063 1067 481 1408 3512 1478
2032 1839 2046 2517 6901 4667 4186 4808 1031 1585 18347 11792 2113 1126 503 1428 3593 1535
2033 1911 2095 2548 7061 5102 4270 6328 1053 1615 18723 11914 2164 1188 526 1448 3677 1594
2034 1986 2146 2580 7225 5578 4357 8329 1076 1645 19106 12038 2216 1253 550 1468 3762 1656
2035 2063 2198 2613 7393 6098 4444 10962 1100 1676 19497 12162 2269 1322 575 1489 3849 1719

Table 2. Projection of Some Sowing-Planting Fertilizer Machines
Widely Used in Şanlıurfa Province
YEARS
Sowing-Planting and Fertilization Equipment
Stubble
Drilling
Machinery
Chemical
Fertilizer
Broadcaster
Combined
Seed
Drill
Tractor-Drawn
Seed
Drill
Pneumatic
Precision
Drill
Manure
Spreading
Machinery
2011 20 6157 6021 5337 850 22
2012 87 6257 6055 5597 1091 37
2013 111 6337 6223 5668 1189 35
2014 81 6375 6350 5770 1337 64
2015 101 6721 6447 5922 1355 66
2016 108 6833 6480 6028 1390 77
2017 97 6990 6534 6042 1443 80
2018 102 7061 6585 6063 1491 86
2019 103 7158 6582 6013 1523 79
2020 123 7339 6684 6202 1659 87
2011/ 2012 77,01 1,60 0,56 4,65 22,09 40,54
2012/ 2013 21,62 1,26 2,70 1,25 8,24 -5,71
2013/ 2014 -37,04 0,60 2,00 1,77 11,07 45,31
2014/ 2015 19,80 5,15 1,50 2,57 1,33 3,03
2015/ 2016 6,48 1,64 0,51 1,76 2,52 14,29
2016 2017 -11,34 2,25 0,83 0,23 3,67 3,75
2017/ 2018 4,90 1,01 0,77 0,35 3,22 6,98
2018/ 2019 0,97 1,36 -0,05 -0,83 2,10 -8,86
2019/ 2020 16,26 2,47 1,53 3,05 8,20 9,20
Projection
Coefficient
10,96 1,92 1,15 1,64 6,94 12,06
2021 136 7480 6761 6304 1774 97
2022 151 7624 6839 6407 1897 109
2023 168 7771 6917 6513 2029 122
2024 186 7920 6997 6620 2170 137
2025 207 8073 7078 6728 2320 154
2026 230 8228 7159 6839 2481 172
2027 255 8386 7241 6951 2653 193
2028 283 8548 7325 7066 2837 216
2029 314 8712 7409 7182 3034 242
2030 348 8880 7494 7300 3245 272
2031 386 9051 7580 7419 3470 304
2032 429 9225 7668 7541 3710 341
2033 476 9402 7756 7665 3968 382
2034 528 9583 7845 7791 4243 428
2035 586 9768 7935 7919 4537 480

28 | SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK FOR FOOD SECURITY
UNDER THE CHANGING CLIMATE
Table 3. Projection of Harvest, Hay and Bale Machinery Widely Used
in Şanlıurfa Province
YEARS
Harvesting and Baling Machinery
Combine
Harvester
Thresher
Machinery
Cotton
Picker
Machinery
Winnowing
Machinery
Straw
Conveyor
and
Unloader
Straw
Collector
and
Baler
Maize
Harvester
Baler
2011 173 1763 102 97 65 247 75 39
2012 195 1810 215 99 92 261 88 48
2013 167 1829 226 100 95 276 89 59
2014 204 1893 292 103 118 297 96 77
2015 218 1897 298 107 118 301 98 75
2016 224 1913 308 109 126 309 112 82
2017 244 1878 336 111 129 324 119 88
2018 250 1877 366 113 135 324 127 93
2019 253 1864 342 114 142 329 132 94
2020 310 1894 369 113 198 367 140 130
2011/ 2012 11,28 2,60 52,56 2,02 29,35 5,36 14,77 18,75
2012/ 2013 -16,77 1,04 4,87 1,00 3,16 5,43 1,12 18,64
2013/ 2014 18,14 3,38 22,60 2,91 19,49 7,07 7,29 23,38
2014/ 2015 6,42 0,21 2,01 3,74 0,00 1,33 2,04 -2,67
2015/ 2016 2,68 0,84 3,25 1,83 6,35 2,59 12,50 8,54
2016 2017 8,20 -1,86 8,33 1,80 2,33 4,63 5,88 6,82
2017/ 2018 2,40 -0,05 8,20 1,77 4,44 0,00 6,30 5,38
2018/ 2019 1,19 -0,70 -7,02 0,88 4,93 1,52 3,79 1,06
2019/ 2020 18,39 1,58 7,32 -0,88 28,28 10,35 5,71 27,69
Projection
Coefficient
5,77 0,78 11,35 1,67 10,93 4,25 6,60 11,95
2021 328 1909 411 115 220 383 149 146
2022 347 1924 457 117 244 399 159 163
2023 367 1939 509 119 270 416 170 182
2024 388 1954 567 121 300 434 181 204
2025 410 1969 632 123 333 452 193 229
2026 434 1985 703 125 369 471 205 256
2027 459 2000 783 127 409 491 219 287
2028 486 2016 872 129 454 512 233 321
2029 514 2031 971 131 503 534 249 359
2030 543 2047 1081 133 558 557 265 402
2031 575 2063 1204 136 619 580 283 450
2032 608 2079 1340 138 687 605 301 504
2033 643 2096 1492 140 762 631 321 564
2034 680 2112 1661 143 845 658 343 632
2035 719 2129 1850 145 938 686 365 707

Table 4. Projection of Spraying Machines Widely Used in Şanlıurfa
YEARS
Spraying Equipment and Machinery
Engine-Driven
Sprayer
PTO-Driven
Sprayer
Barrow
Duster
and
Combine
Sprayer
Atomizer
Knapsack
Sprayer
2011 809 3314 118 2854 4963
2012 989 3432 114 2914 5135
2013 999 3570 123 3258 5154
2014 1063 3897 121 3378 5308
2015 1077 4007 122 3404 5362
2016 1094 4209 160 3429 5504
2017 1122 4351 166 3447 5650
2018 1135 4436 171 3522 5657
2019 1167 4604 180 3550 5697
2020 1228 4988 208 3582 5916
2011/ 2012 18,20 3,44 -3,51 2,06 3,35
2012/ 2013 1,00 3,87 7,32 10,56 0,37
2013/ 2014 6,02 8,39 -1,65 3,55 2,90
2014/ 2015 1,30 2,75 0,82 0,76 1,01
2015/ 2016 1,55 4,80 23,75 0,73 2,58
2016 2017 2,50 3,26 3,61 0,52 2,58
2017/ 2018 1,15 1,92 2,92 2,13 0,12
2018/ 2019 2,74 3,65 5,00 0,79 0,70
2019/ 2020 4,97 7,70 13,46 0,89 3,70
Projection Coefficient 4,38 4,42 5,75 2,44 1,92
2021 1282 5208 220 3670 6030
2022 1338 5439 233 3759 6146
2023 1397 5679 246 3851 6264
2024 1458 5930 260 3945 6385
2025 1522 6192 275 4042 6508
2026 1588 6465 291 4140 6633
2027 1658 6751 308 4242 6760
2028 1730 7049 325 4345 6890
2029 1806 7361 344 4452 7023
2030 1885 7686 364 4560 7158
2031 1968 8026 385 4672 7296
2032 2054 8380 407 4786 7436
2033 2144 8751 430 4903 7579
2034 2238 9137 455 5023 7725
2035 2336 9541 481 5146 7874

Table 5. Tractor, Trailer, Silage and Mower Machinery
YEARS
Tractor, Trailer, Silage and Mower Machinery
Trailer
(Agricultural
Carts)
Tractor
Corn
Forage
Harvester
Forage
Harvester
(Hay
Silage)
Tractor-Drawn
Mover
2011 13826 14 910 97 8 1022
2012 14458 15 693 108 12 1024
2013 13839 15 740 100 3 944
2014 15146 16 203 101 5 927
2015 15374 16 549 102 5 928
2016 15837 16 729 110 12 930
2017 16093 17 206 112 13 944
2018 16296 17 385 114 17 944
2019 16262 17 760 120 17 938
2020 16625 18 069 157 23 949
2011/ 2012 4,37 4,99 10,19 33,33 0,20
2012/ 2013 -4,47 0,30 -8,00 -300,00 -8,47
2013/ 2014 8,63 2,86 0,99 40,00 -1,83
2014/ 2015 1,48 2,09 0,98 0,00 0,11
2015/ 2016 2,92 1,08 7,27 58,33 0,22
2016 2017 1,59 2,77 1,79 7,69 1,48
2017/ 2018 1,25 1,03 1,75 23,53 0,00
2018/ 2019 -0,21 2,11 5,00 0,00 -0,64
2019/ 2020 2,18 1,71 23,57 26,09 1,16
Projection Coefficient 1,97 2,10 4,84 -12,34 -0,87
2021 16953 18449 165 20 941
2022 17287 18837 173 18 933
2023 17628 19234 181 15 925
2024 17975 19638 190 14 917
2025 18330 20052 199 12 909
2026 18691 20473 208 10 901
2027 19060 20904 219 9 893
2028 19436 21344 229 8 885
2029 19819 21793 240 7 878
2030 20210 22252 252 6 870
2031 20608 22720 264 5 862
2032 21014 23198 277 5 855
2033 21429 23686 290 4 848
2034 21851 24184 304 4 840
2035 22282 24693 319 3 833

CONCLUSIONS
Agricultural mechanization is a very important and
complementary technology for farmers because of capabilities
such as increasing the efficiency of agricultural production
process, ensuring their economical status and improving working
conditions.
In this study, agricultural equipment-machine projection of
Şanlıurfa province for the next fifteen years (2021-2035) is
anticipated. Forty-one commonly used equipment are classified
under the five titles, namely tillage tools and machines, sowing-
planting and fertilization equipment, harvesting and baling
machinery, spraying equipment and machinery and tractor,
trailer, silage and mower machinery. It is seen that while thirty-
nine agricultural tools and machines have positive projection
coefficients, two agricultural tools and machines have negative
projection coefficients. In line with these projection coefficients,
it can be interpreted that thirty-nine agricultural tools and
machines’ units will increase and two agricultural tools and
machines’ units will decrease in Şanlıurfa province for future
years. Obtaining low projection coefficients of technology
utilization in agriculture also shows that the efficiency of machine
usage in the province is low. Therefore, the main objective should
be to increase the dissemination and awareness of agricultural
technology applications in agricultural production to reduce
inputs. In addition, by providing the necessary infrastructure and
support to farmers in the field of agricultural mechanization,

which is one of the indispensable input of agriculture in today’s
practice, there will be increase in production and productivity and
contribute the country's economy profoundly.

REFERENCES
Akbaş, T. 2019 Aydın İlinin Tarımsal Mekanizasyon Projeksiyonunun
Belirlenmesi Üzerine Bir Araştırma, 29 Ekim Bilimsel Araştırmalar
Sempozyumu, İksad.org.tr /www.29ekim.org, Sayfa :344-350
Altay, F., & Turhal, K. (2011, May). Bilecik İlindeki tarımsal mekanizasyonun
durumu ve çözüm önerileri. In 6th International Advanced
Technologies Symposium (IATS’11) (pp. 16-18).
Anonymous 2021a, Tarımsal Mekanizasyon, erişim linki:
https://www.tarnet.com.tr/medya-merkezi/blog/tarimsal-mekanizasyon/,
erişim tarihi: 21.08.2021
Anonymous 2021b, Tarım alet ve Makine Sektörü, Erişim linki:
https://www.karacadag.gov.tr/Dokuman/Dosya/www.karacadag.gov.tr_3
04_XF4V98JS_istihdam_ve_isgucu_piyasasi_raporu_mayis_2018.pdf ,
Erişim Tarihi: 31.08.2021
Anonymous 2021c. Şanlıurfa coğrafi konumu, Erişim linki:
https://www.investsanliurfa.com/sanliurfa/cografi-durum--409, Erişim
tarihi: 31.08.2021
Anonymous 2021d, Şanlıurfa ili tarım alet makine varlığı,
https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=134&locale=tr, Erişim tarihi:
01.02.2021
Baran, MF., Gökdoğan, O., Kaya, AI., & Oğuz, HI. (2019a). Projection of
technology equipment usage in agriculture in Turkey. Türk Tarım ve
Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 1-9.
Baran, M. F, Gökdoğan, O, Eren, Ö, Bayhan, Y., (2019b), Projection of
Technology Equipment Usage in Agricultural in Turkey, Türk Tarım
ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1): 1-9, 2019,
https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans
Baran, M.F, 2021. Projectıon of Agricultural Tools And Machinery Usage in
Agriculture in Van, 3rd
Internatıonal Conference on Food, Agriculture
and Veterinary, page: 712-723, 19-20 June, Izmir-TURKEY

Benek, S. (2006). Şanlıurfa İlinin Tarımsal Yapısı, Sorunları ve Çözüm
Önerileri. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 4(1), 67-91.
Bozkurt, M., & Aybek, A. (2016). Şanlıurfa ili harran ovasının tarımsal yapı
ve mekanizasyon özellikleri. KSÜ Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(3), 319-
331.
Demir, B.,2013 , Mersin İlinin Tarımda Teknoloji Kullanım Projeksiyonu ,
Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi, 24(B), 29-34, 2013
Demir, B., & Emrah, K. U. Ş. (2016). İç Anadolu bölgesinin tarımda teknoloji
kullanım projeksiyonu. Nevşehir Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 5, 89-95.
Engindeniz, S, Ozturk Cosar, G. (2013). An economic comparison of pesticide
applications for processing and table tomatoes: a case study for Turkey.
Journal of Plant Protectıon Research, 53(3): 230-237.
Işık, A., Akıncı, I., & Sabancı, A. (1995). GAP bölgesine uygun tarım
makinaları seçimi ve 2000’li yıllarda park talebi. Tarımsal
Mekanizasyon, 16, 5-7.
Işık, A., Atun, İ., 1998. Şanlıurfa-Harran Ovasında Tarımsal Yapı ve
Mekanizasyon Özellikleri. Tr. J. of Agr. and Forestry 22(1998), 151-
160.
Kaya, A.I., & Engin, K.E. (2021). Tarımsal Kökenli Doğal Lifler ve
Kullanılma Potansiyelleri, In Bellitürk, K., Baran, M.F., Çelik, A.,
(Eds) “Sürdürülebilirlik İçin Gıda, Çevre, Tarımsal Ormancılık ve
Tarımda Yeni Araştırmalar” 127-174.
Koçtürk, D., & Avcıoğlu, A. (2007). Türkiye’de bölgelere ve illere göre
tarımsal mekanizasyon düzeyinin belirlenmesi. Tarım Makinaları
Bilimi Dergisi, 3(1), 17-24.
Korucu, T., Aybek, A., Sivrikaya, F., Gürlek, E., Mert, C., Kozak, B., 2015a.
Kahramanmaraş İlinin Tarımsal Mekanizasyon Düzeyinin
Haritalanması ve Değerlendirilmesi. KSÜ Doğa Bil. Derg., 18(2): 10-
24.
Küçüker, E, Baran, M.F., 2021, Siirt ili Antepfıstığı Üretimi ve Yetiştiriciliği
Sınırlandıran Faktörler “Akademik Perspektiften Tarım’a Bakış” İksad
Publishing House, sayfa: 227-250

Landers, A. (2000). Farm machinery: selection, investment and management.
Farming Press, United Business Media.
Polat, R., & Sağlam, R. (2001). GAP Bölgesinin mekanizasyon durumu ve
sorunları. Tarımsal Mekanizasyon, 20, 13-15.
Ruiyin, H., Wenqingv, Y., Yadong, Z., & Van Sonsbeek, G. (1999). Improving
management system of agricultural machinery in jiangsu. In
Proceedings of 99 International Conference on Agri. Engine, Beijing,
China, pp. I-42-45.
Saglam, C., Tan, F. (2017). An Environmentally Friendly Method Of Fertilizer
Application In Agriculture; Anhydrous Ammonia Application.
International Conference on Environment and Natural Science.
(ICENS). 9-10 September, P.7-9. Moscow, Russia.
Saral, A., Vatandaş, M., Güner, M., Ceylan, M., & Yenice, T. (2000). Türkiye
tarımının makinalaşma durumu. Ziraat Mühendisliği V. Teknik
Kongresi, 17-21.
Sessiz, A., Turgut, M. M., Pekitkan, F. G., & ESGİCİ, R. (2006). Diyarbakır
ilindeki tarım işletmelerinin tarımsal yapı ve mekanizasyon özellikleri.
Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, 2(1), 87-93.
Sessiz, A., Turgut, M. M., & Pekitkan, F. G. (2009). Dicle Vadisinde Pamuk
Üretimi Yapan İşletmelerin Mekanizasyon Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi
Üzerine Bir Çalışma (A Study to Determine the Cotton Mechanization
Properties of the Managements in Dicle Valley). Tarımsal
Mekanizasyon, 25, 65-69.
Sessiz, A., Esgici, R., Eliçin, A. K., & Gürsoy, S. (2014). The level of
agricultural mechanization in Turkey and GAP Region. In 12th.
International Congress on Mechanization and Energy in Agriculture
(pp. 3-6).
Tan, F. (2020). Anhydrous ammonia application. New approaches and
applications in agriculture. p.136-148.
Vurarak, Y., Sağlam, C., & Çıkman, A. (2007). Şanlıurfa ilinde bulunan büyük
tarım işletmelerinin mekanizasyon düzeyi. Tarımsal Mekanizasyon, 24,
98-107.

CHAPTER 2
GREEN COMPOSITES, ITS CONSTITUENTS AND BIO-
DERIVED RESINS
Asst. Prof. Kaan Emre ENGİN1*
Asst. Prof. Ali İhsan KAYA2
1-2
Adıyaman University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Mechanical
Engineering-Adıyaman/ Turkey, kengin@adiyaman.edu.tr Orcid: Orcid no:
0000-0002-6439-7700, Orcid no: 0000-0002-3040-5389,

INTRODUCTION
Environmental concerns have an increasing rate in today’s world.
The need for a cleaner and safer environment rises each day
(Satyanarayana, 2015). Sustainability is an important concept and
to achieve improvement and continuity, new regulatory
arrangements should be made to prevent environmental pollution
and the material system used in our daily life should contain
existing green materials and new sustainable materials should be
introduced (Dicker et al., 2014:281).
Many daily products are in the form of composites. Composites
can be defined as the mixture of two or more constituents in a
heterogeneous combination. A constitution of a composite is
composed of a matrix which serves as an outer shell and
reinforcement materials which fills the matrix. Reinforcement
materials can have different forms as short/long fibers, powders,
woven or spherical particles (Strong, 2008). Many times, a
composite shows more durability and can have improved
mechanical properties than each of the composing materials.
From the perspective of sustainability and environmental
pollution, traditional composites based on polymeric matrices
may pose a threat because of their resistant to degradation at
biological, physical and chemical level. Their durability to
external effects turns them into environmental polluters and their
human related daily life usages covers many areas like health,
pharmaceutical and agricultural applications. This situation leads

to excessive usage of these materials. The combination of this
amount of usages and their natural polluter potential require new
materials to be replaced with the existing ones.
In this context, renewable bio-based and biodegradable materials
offer more environment friendly approach to the problem. Green
composite materials refer to these kinds of materials carrying the
specialty of being renewable and biodegradable which can
directly support the concept of sustainability and can be
considered to have zero environmental impact. Green composites
can be identified as a special type of composites where the matrix
and reinforcement materials both derived from renewable and
biological sources (Signori et al., 2012; Terzopoulou et al., 2015).
Similar to traditional composites, green composites consist of two
or more materials. However, in this case, every material is bio-
derived from natural sources. Generally, the reinforcing material
consists of natural fibers which can carry loads exerted on
themselves by having acceptable stiffness and tensile strength.
The matrix which is also a bio-derived resin, is the outer shell that
protects the fibers from outer damaging sources and radiation.
Matrix also offers the shape of the composite while serving as a
force transmitter which transmits exerted tensile and shearing
forces to fibers (Thakur et al., 2015; Karim et al., 2016). Green
composites can be durable as a glass fiber reinforced composite.
This durability and degradability without causing harm to the
environment make green composites preferable over traditional
composites especially for short life products that have daily

disposable usages. (Nickel and Riedel, 2003). The composition
for the constituents of a green composite was given in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Constituents of a Green Composite
REINFORCEMENT MATERIALS (NATURAL FIBERS)
In a composite system, reinforcing materials have a crucial
importance. They alter the general mechanical properties of the
polymeric product by serving as the support element that help the
matrix to withstand applied forces and lower the cost of the
product (John and Thomas, 2008; Qui et al. 2012).
In a traditional polymeric system, the reinforcement elements,
generally include glass fiber, carbon fiber, graphene, graphite,
silica, nanotubes, clay etc. They contribute to improve the
mechanical properties of the matrix and provide extra strength
against the applied force on the composite. They can also be used
as fillers in the composite system. However, the synthetic natures
of the reinforcement materials act as polluters which conflict the
understanding of sustainability. As a result, usage of more natural
approaches becomes more important. Natural fibers may be the
solution to this problem and they may replace traditional fibers
due to their biodegradability, minimal toxicity, low

environmental impact, high specific strength, light weight, and
low cost (Gurunathan et al. 2015; Jawaid et al, 2016).
Renewable sources constitute the main source of natural fibers.
These sources can vary into two main categories such as plant and
animal based fibers. The plant fibers can be categorized as grass
fiber, bark fiber, seed fiber, fruit fiber, stem fiber, leaf fiber, and
so on (John and Thomas, 2008, Saba et al., 2017). While plant
fibers consist of cellulose, lignin, hemicellulose etc., animal
fibers are protein based such as silk, wool, and feather. Plants
have a wide variety of usable parts and easily obtainable due their
vast spread all around the world. The fibers can directly be taken
from the plant itself as well as can be recovered from bio-
agricultural wastes, by-products from food crops, regenerated
cellulose fibers (viscose/rayon), and recycled wood or wastepaper
(Netravali and Chabba, 2003).
Natural fibers are materials that have a very high potential to be
used instead of synthetic fibers and these fibers can meet the
demands expected from the fibers to be replaced. Only reasons
that limit the wide usage of the natural fibers are their lower
wetting properties and compatibility issues with polymer matrices
(Saenghirunwattana et al. 2014; Džalto et al. 2014). To have more
coherent relation between the fibers and matrix, special surface
treatments are needed to be applied onto fibers including alkaline
or acidic agents. This issue can be solved by introducing new
natural matrix types but before that, natural fibers that have

popular usage in composite production should be introduced
(Cruz and Fangueiro, 2016).
Natural fibers are classified under different approaches. One
approach classify fibers with regard to their industrial use
including composites, textiles, papermaking, etc., while other
approach classify them according to their physical and chemical
properties as soft and hard, short and long fiber, color, strength,
cellulose content, etc. In this study, commonly used botanical
type classification will be presented. Based on this classification
method it is possible to identify six basic types of natural fibers
(Faruk et al. 2012; Muthuraj et al. 2015, Pandey et al. 2015):
1. Bast fibers; kenaf, ramie, hemp, flax, jute, etc.,
2. Leaf fibers; pineapple, agave, sisal, banana, etc.,
3. Seed fibers; kapok, cotton, coconut, etc.,
4. Core fibers; jute, hemp, kenaf, etc.,
5. Grass and reed fibers; rice, corn, wheat, etc.,
6. Other fibers; root, tree, etc.,
Fibers gathered from natural resources can exhibit acceptable
stiffness, high modulus, and tensile strength. Some bast fibers and
leaf fibers are used in particle boards, fiber-containing boards,
automotive components, infrastructure and housing applications
(Anandjiwala and Blouw, 2007).

Bast Fibers
These fibers have a wide range of usage and can be found usually
in the inner bark of plants. Fibers make the plant body more rigid
and durable to outer effects. Bast fibers are thin and lie under a
shell. Bast fibers can be found in the form of bundles or strips
placed in the same direction through the length of the body. Flax,
ramie, hemp, kenaf and jute are belonged to this fiber group.
Crystallinity degree of bast fibers are high, which makes them
more rigid but also brittle (Soni and Mahmoud, 2015, Kılınç et al.
2017).
Hemp Fibers
Hemp is an annual herb that belongs to the Cannabis family and
can be cultivated in temperate climates which is in the bast fiber
class. Cannabis is the oldest plant that have been cultivated
carrying the purpose of fiber usage. There are two species;
Cannabis sativa L. is cultivated for fiber reinforcements while
Cannabis sativa Indica is cultivated for medical purposes
(Rowell, 2008).
Ramie Fibers
Ramie (Chinese hemp) belongs to the nettle family Urticaceae
(Boehmeria) and is another notable bast fiber group. There are
about 100 different species of ramie (Faruk et al., 2012). It is a
mature perennial herb that can be cultivated in hot and humid
climates. Ramie fiber is located in the cortex layer of the trunk

below the bark layer. Due to the gummy pectin nature of the shell,
it is difficult to isolate the fibers from the shell. Ramie fibers are
similar to jute and flax fibers as a bast fiber but much thinner
(Rowell, 2008).
Jute Fibers
Jute fiber, which has about 100 species, comes from plants in the
Corchorus family. Its natural growth area is Bangladesh, India
and China. It grows in the warm and rainy climatic areas of these
countries. They had a wide range of daily usages as burlap and its
core and rod fibers are used in paper production (Ramamoorthy
et al., 2015). It is a cheap fiber and can be ranked after cotton in
terms of production amount.
Linen Fibers
It belongs to the Linaceae family and has been used nearly for
5000 years. It can be cultivated in temperate climates, and it is an
annual plant. The countries with the highest production are China,
France and Belarus. The purpose of cultivating linen is to extract
linseed oil from its seeds and also make us of its fibers. The fibers
have a wide usage in natural reinforced composite production
(Mohammed et al., 2015).
Kenaf Fibers
Kenaf has more than 300 species and from genus Hibiscus. It is
an annual plant. Kenaf fibers are grown in Africa, India, Asia,
Thailand, and Bangladesh, all of which have temperate climates.

The trunk consists of outer bark, bast fibers and a large central
core or rod fibers. Improvements in decortication (the process of
removing the outer layer or cortex from a structure) equipment
have led to the consideration of the kenaf plant as a source of
fiber. It has been reported in the literature that this fiber shows a
good potential for use in composite products (Krishna and Kanny,
2016; Kiruthika, 2017). Bast fibers and some of their mechanical
properties are given in Table 1.
Table 1. Mechanical properties of commonly used bast fibers
(Zimniewska et al., 2011)
Fiber
Tensile
strength
(MPa)
Young’s
Modulus
(GPa)
Density
(g/cc)
Moisture
Content
(%)
Elongation
(%)
Flax 345-1035 27.6 1.5 10.0 1.5-4.1
Hemp 690 70.0 1.47 10.8 1.5-4.2
Ramie 560 24.5 1.5 8 1.5-5.0
Jute 393-773 26.5 1.3 12.6 0.8-3.0
Kenaf 930 53.0 1.45 - 1.7-2.1
Leaf Fibers
Leaf fibers aka hard fibers are located in the vascular bundles of
plant leaves which can be pointed out as monocotyledonous
leaves to be more precise. They are much tougher and durable
than conventional plant fibers and they have been already used in
the manufacturing of ropes and dresses. Their toughness comes
from the increased lignin ratio than the other plant fibers. The
fibers are harvested through decortication process which is the
scraping away of non-fibrous tissue from the fibers by using a

machine or by hand. Decortication is a time and labor consuming
process relying mostly on hand-picking in the case of leaf fibers.
This is the main reason synthetic fibers are much favorable than
leaf fibers (Croft and Chen, 2017). The most used leaf fibers are
pineapple, sisal and agave fibers.
Pineapple Fibers
Ananas comosus is a perennial herbaceous plant. It is native to
Brazil. The leaves surround a thick stem, while the fibers come
from the leaves and form long bundles of fibers along the length
of the leaves. In fact, extraction of fibers is the result of the
production process where fibers can be counted as waste products
(Rowell, 2008). In addition, pineapple leaf fiber is a cheap
product, and plenty around. Also the fibers have high cellulose
content carrying the potential to be used in composite applications
(Jain and Jain, 2021).
Sisal Fibers
The sisal plant is a perennial herb and produces dark to light green
leaves. Each leaf contains approximately 1000 fibers. Sisal is an
agave (Agave sisalana). Sisal leaves have the shape of a sword.
Main production regions of sisal are Brazil and East Africa. In
western hemisphere it is particularly native to Mexico. Sisal
fibers, which cover 4% of the plant’s weight, are obtained through
decortication process. The level of use of these fibers is
decreasing due to the introduction of new synthetic products and
harvesting techniques (Mohanty et al., 2005; Kalia et al., 2011).

Agave Fibers
Agave belongs to the family Agavaceae. The fibers carry the
same name of the plant and shows resemblance to sisal having
dark green leaves. It grows slowly, as each rosette blooms only
once. A long stem grows from the center of the leaf rosette during
flowering. Agave americana, A. angustifolia, blue agave (A.
tequilana) and A. attenuate are the most cultivated species. Agave
fiber has a very coarse structure but can be used as composite
fiber, geotextiles and filters, (Rowell, 2008; Chandramohan and
Marimuthu, 2011). The mechanical properties of commonly used
leaf fibers are given in Table 2.
Table 2. Mechanical properties of commonly used leaf fibers
(Munawar et al., 2007; Bezazi et al., 2014; Pai and Jagtap, 2015).
Fiber
Tensile
strength
(MPa)
Young’s
modulus
(GPa)
Density
(g/cc)
Moisture
Content
(%)
Elongation
(%)
Pineapple 413-1627 34.5-82.5 1.52-1.56 11.8 -
Sisal 510-635 9-22 1.5 11 2.5
Agawe 124-375 1.48-9.10 1.49 7.69 1.5-5.0
Seed Fibers
Seed fibers may have the oldest usage in human history. They
have been generally used for textile products. The most known
seed fiber; cotton which has been used for millenia starting from
ancient civilizations up to today and still has a wide range of
usage. Seed fibers grow in the seedpod of the plant. Fibers should
be separated from the plant in order to be used (Chen and Burns,

2006). Most common seed fibers are cotton fiber, kapok fiber,
luffa sponge fiber, coir, raffia and rice husk.
Cotton Fibers
The cotton plant (Gossypium) is a shrub. It can be cultivated at
tropical and subtropical zones. It is an annual plant. The
cultivation is heavily made for Gossypium hirsutum (Highland
cotton) and G. barbadense (Egyptian cotton) species (Rowell,
2008). The conversion process of seed covers to usable fibers
causes a weight loss of less than 10%. From this perspective, the
process can be counted as efficient. Cotton fibers have two
subgroups, longer fibers are called lint and shorter fibers are
called as linters. India, USA, Russia and China are the largest
cotton producers.
Kapok Fibers
Kapok fibers can be found in Mexico, Central America and the
Caribbean. It belongs to Malvaceae family and Malvales order
and comes from Ceiba pentandra tree which has fast growing
properties. Seed pods are covered by yellowish fibers and when
the tree reaches maturity, it produces hundreds of seed pods. Fiber
lumens cause the air to get trapped. This situation makes the fibers
water resistant and buoyant. So, kapok fibers have usages in the
production of life jackets. But yarn production is not possible
from kapok fibers. Also, the separation process of seeds from the
plant requires an intense work (Rowell, 2008).

Luffa Sponge Fiber
Luffa sponge is an annual plant and Luffa acutangula and L.
aegyptiaca are basically cultivated as vegetables. Luffa sponge
fibers are the vines of genus luffa that can be cultivated at tropical
and subtropical regions. When luffa sponge reaches maturity, the
fruits will have a fibrous and also porous skeletal stem. Fibers
have a wide range of usages from filtering in ships, to hat making
and cleaning apparatuses as sponge and brush or body peeling.
(Paglicawan et al. 2005; Rowell, 2008). To produce stronger and
tougher kind of fibers that are suitable to be used in composites,
the fiber structure can be broken down, mechanically.
Coir Fiber
Coir fibers come from coconuts which are the seeds of a palm
tree, Tamil and Malayalam (Rowell, 2008). The maturation of the
fruits takes a year. Coir fibers are byproducts of coconut
production process. Fibers can be located at the coconut shell and
outer shell (Paglicawan et al. 2005). Fibers are extracted using
hand or machine. Coir fibers has two types. They have distinct
colors as white and brown which refers to the extraction was
made from unmatured or matured coconuts. Brown colored fibers
contain more lignin, but whiter coir fibers are much thinner and
elastic. The main cultivation regions of coir fibers are India and
Sri Lanka. These regions are the main sources for the annual
amount of production of coir fibers. They also consume more than
the half of the production amount. Their production rate is

demand oriented due to the hard laboring conditions and input
costs that can cause fluctuations in the market prices (Paglicawan
et al., 2005).
Oil Palm Fiber
Oil Palm fibers can be extracted from the reddish berries that
grew in large panicles of oil palms (Elaeis). Oil palm tree can
reach to 20 m height at maturity. E. oleifera aka the American
palm tree is native to Central and South America whereas Elaeis
guineensis, the African palm tree, is native to West Africa. Every
reddish berry contains a single seed. This lone seed is named palm
kernel. Palm kernel is surrounded by a pulp which is soft and oily.
The main oil extraction reason is soap production, but the oil can
also be eaten. Apart from the usage of oil, fruit bundle fibers of
the palm tree can be used as a reinforcement material in
composite materials (Paglicawan et al., 2005).
Rice Husk
Rice (Oryza sativa) is amongst the many kinds of grains that husk
and stem fibers can be extracted. The other grains are corn, oats,
rye and wheat. Also, other compatible grain products can be used
as a fiber source (Rowell, 2008). The silicon content of rice husk
and its abrasive nature renders the husks unusable as forage and
industrial raw materials. Instead, rice straws are burned for their
energy output or used as floor covering, chipboard making,
composting and different kind of applications carrying low value-
added purposes. If correct chemical techniques and

morphological approaches can be applied, rice husk has a big
potential to be used in green composites (Sung et al., 2009).
Mechanical properties of seed fibers were given in Table 3.
Table 3. Mechanical properties of commonly used seed fibers
(Munawar et al., 2007; Meiwu et al. 2010; Pai and Jagtap, 2015; Almi
et al, 2015; Purnawati, 2018; Mittal and Chaudhary, 2018; Hasan et al.,
2021)
Fiber
Tensile
strength
(MPa)
Young’s
modulus
(GPa)
Density
(g/cc)
Moisture
Content
(%)
Elongation
(%)
Cotton 400 5.5-12.6 1.5-1.6 - 7-8
Kapok - - 0.3 - 11
Luffa sponge 100 1.33 0.3 8-10 10-11
Coir 593 3.70 1.1.-1.5 7-8 2.4
Oil Palm 222 5.2 0.7-1.55 12 15-19
Core Fibers
Core fibers reside in the inner parts of bast fibers such as kenaf,
jute and hemp which have lower densities than bast fibers and
have thinner cell walls. The average lengths of the fibers are
shorter than 1mm and their width to length ratio is lower than 20
(Rowell, 2008).
Grass and Reed Fibers
This classification content includes by-products of grass and cane
plants such as wheat, rice, soybeans, sugarcane etc. They are easy
to obtain, cheap and abundant renewable sources. The amount of
by-products is estimated to reach 2000 million tons per year,

worldwide (Huda et al., 2007). Synthetic fiber sources bring
many disadvantages alongside with them including
environmental pollution, greenhouse gas emissions during the
production of the fibers, price and availability problems in the
future. These disadvantages make agricultural by-products like
grass and reed more favorable than synthetic fibers.
Sugar Cane Fiber
Tropical regions of the world are where sugar cane is native to
and vegetate. Therefore, in the world, tropical Pacific islands and
tropical regions of Brazil can be mentioned as the main producers.
Sugar cane has strong and joint stems. These stems are rich in
sugar. It can re-propagate after cutting due to the regrow of stems
aka rations and can be harvested several times. But it should be
noted that a continuous cycle of harvesting decreases the amount
of production. Replantation should be made after a certain
amount of harvesting cycle (Rowell, 2008).
During the processing of sugarcane, residues such as straw and
pulp are produced as residues. Straw is the material which is
removed before the cane is crushed (Costa et al., 2013; Saad et
al., 2008). Sugar cane straw harvesting amount can reach up to
140 kg of sugarcane from one ton of sugar cane cultivated land.
Sugarcane straw consists of three main macromolecular
components: cellulose, polyoses and lignin (Lu et al., 2009).
Separation of lignocellulosic materials from this macromolecular

fraction can be accomplished by physical, biological and
chemical processes.
Bamboo (Rattan) Fiber
Tropical and subtropical regions are where bamboo’s
(Dendrocalamus strictus) cultivated areas in the world. It has a
rapid grow rate, and an abundant amount can be found in South
America and Asia. Bamboo fiber can be classified in 91 genera
and there are about 1000 species of this fiber (Rowell, 2008).
Monopodial (sympodial) and densely clustered (monopodial)
plants are two different forms of their vegetation phase (Rowell,
2008). Although it can grow very fast, the maturity comes only
after 3 or 4 years.
Bamboo fibers are brittle and hard. Their characteristic features
are thick-walled cells with blunt or pointed ends and long narrow
fibers with oblong (Rowell, 2008). These fibers have many
applications areas in construction, carpentry, weaving, knitting
and etc.
Bamboo fibers carry potential usages in composite materials.
They exhibit high strength to weight ratio thanks to the aligned
fibers longitudinal to the body. Bamboo fibers’ inner structures
are like composites with unidirectional fibers. Bamboo fibers are
embedded in woody matrix have several knots along its length
(Okubo et al., 2004).

Bamboo fibers are generally referred as “natural glass fiber”. But
only downside is the lack of development for the extraction of
fibers from the woody matrix. Research including bamboo fibers
are very few and should be investigated to fully apprehend and
extend the usages in composite materials (Deshpande et al.,
2000).
Sorghum Fiber
Sorghum which is also known as Johnson grass (Sorghum
halepense) is one of the examples of grasses of sorghum family
which the fiber content can be used for different applications.
Other examples of this family can be counted as rice, corn, wheat
and etc. The structure consists of narrow thick-walled fibers with
blunt or pointed ends (Rowell, 2008).
Sorghum is an important food crop and during the processing of
sorghum, a considerable amount of byproducts reaching to 58
million tons are produced. These byproducts mainly consist of
lignin, cellulose and hemicellulose. They may not have a wide
range of usage, but they hold the potential to be used as natural
cellulose fibers. Due to its abundance, sorghum fibers can easily
be adapted to be used in textile industry, composite industry and
in various fibrous applications (Reddy and Yang, 2007). In Table
4, the mostly cultivated seed and reed fibers’ mechanical
properties are given.
Table 4. Mechanical properties of commonly used grass and reed fibers
(Bakeer et al., 2013; Ogunbiyi et al. 2015; Chen et al., 2015; Vikram
and Arivalagan, 2017; Stubbs et al., 2019; Qian et al., 2021)

Fiber
Tensile
strength
(MPa)
Young’s
modulus
(GPa)
Density
(g/cc)
Moisture
Content
(%)
Elongation
(%)
Sugar
Cane
- - 0.6 12-19 -
Bamboo 98 1.7 0.3 7 11
Sorghum 280 7 1.02 30 -
Other Fibers
Wood fibers cover the main topic in this section. Wood fibers like
other fibers contains lignin, cellulose, hemicellulose and other
natural structures within themselves. Rigidness, cost
effectiveness and performance of wood fibers allowed them to be
used as structural materials in weight and mechanical properties
(Clemons, 2008). Wood fibers rest parallel to the trunk of the tree.
They consist of hollow, spindle- shaped cells. The lumens of these
fibers are filled with resins, gums or tylos (Miller,1999).
Trees according to the perspective of wood fibers can be
classified into two sub groups called hardwoods and softwoods.
Softwoods are conifers called gymnosperms that are non-porous,
vein-free, and the flower is not visible in the ovaries. In general,
softwoods grow in a pyramidal shape: broad near the ground and
getting smaller as they approach the apex. Examples of the
softwood fibers of this type can be given as redwood, pine, cedar,
hemlock, spruce, fir, and tamarind tree species. They have been
reported to be longer than hardwood fibers (Rowell, 2008).

Hardwoods are broad-leaved, porous, containing vascular
elements that disappear in autumn, and unlike softwoods, their
seeds are angiosperms that are found in the ovaries of the flower.
Full upper crown is the common characteristic of hardwoods.
Elm, beech, ash, nut, acacia, cherry, maple, aspen, walnut,
cottonwood, poplar, sycamore, birch, magnolia, linden, pumpkin,
willow, and oak are examples of hardwoods (Rowell, 2008).
Many wood fibers have better mechanical properties and are
cheaper than many conventional synthetic fibers (Miller,1999).
This feature makes it possible to use the mentioned fibers as
reinforcement material in composite applications. Wood
composites can be classified as board composites, structural
composites, mechanically laminated elements, molded products
and wood-non-wood product composites (Güller, 2001).
BIODEGRADABLE MATRICES
"Green chemistry" and biocomposites have become the motto of
the changing world where agricultural products are demanded
natural, organic and drug-free. Natural-fiber based composites are
becoming increasingly popular. Concerns about natural resource
preservation and recycling have incentive to take in biomaterials,
with an emphasis on renewable raw materials. To create
biodegradable 'green' composites of new types to respond to the
demand in the world, the researchers are mixing natural/biofibers
with biodegradable resins. It is stated that green composites have
several advantages, including being ecologically friendly, totally

degradable, and long-lasting. These properties make the way for
simply being composted or disposed at the end of their life cycle
without damaging the nature and exhibit high mechanical
properties (Pickering, 2008). Matrices serve as the outer shell to
hold the fibers, to distribute the applied load to the whole body of
the composite and act as a protector from effects of outer sources.
Generally, a conventional composite consists of a synthetic fiber
and a polymer matrix. The matrix material can be a thermoset or
a thermoplastic which are not biodegradable. However, in green
composites, the matrix material is also biodegradable and can be
gathered by different methods. In this section, all attention will be
given to the biodegradable matrices and other types of polymer
matrices will not be mentioned.
Aliphatic Polyesters
Aliphatic polyesters are synthetic polymers but also
biodegradable. Based on the method of bonding of component
monomers, aliphatic polyesters are divided into poly(lactic acid)
(PLA), poly(butylene succinate) (PBS), poly(ε-caprolactone)
(PCL), and poly(p-dioxanone) (PPDO).
Poly(Lactic Acid) (PLA)
Poly(lactic–acid) (PLA) is a member of thermoplastic aliphatic
polyester which is biocompatible, biodegradable and for all-
purpose utilization. PLA is made from plant materials like starch
and sugar, which are renewable and biodegradable. Lactic acid is
a monomeric PLA building component that, because to its chiral

nature, occurs as L- and D-lactic acid optical isomers. The L-
isomer rotates clockwise, whereas the D-isomer rotates
counterclockwise on the plane of polarized light. L-isomers,
which are a biological metabolite, make up the majority of PLA
produced from renewable resources. Microorganisms or
racemization can create D-lactic acid isomers (Lasprilla et al.,
2012). While fermented milk products are the main source of
lactic acid, it is possible to produce it and a variety of
carbohydrates by utilizing a bacterial fermentation method for
commercial purposes. Polymerization and direct
polycondensation are the two major synthesis techniques of lactic
acid monomers including solution and melt polycondensation
(Ahmed and Varshney, 2011; Avérous and Pollet, 2012).
PLA has unique characteristics, which makes it a promising
thermoplastic polymer that can be utilized in packaging,
electronics, and cars to substitute conventional Polyethylene
terephthalate (PET), Polystyrene (PS), and Polycarbonates (PC)
polymers. Besides, PLA has greater tensile and flexural moduli
compared to high-density polyethylene (HDPE), polypropylene
(PP), and PS (Lim et al. 2008). However, these good mechanical
properties are restricted to only oriented PLA, while neat PLA
with 5% fracture strain has poor shear resistance and impact
behavior stems from its brittle structure. PLA has poor heat
stability and low heat deflection temperature. It is also moderately
hydrophobic and chemically inert due to the absence of a reactive
side chain group. PLA's commercial applications in large-scale

are very rare due to mentioned disadvantages (Rasal et al., 2010;
Zhang et al., 2011).
Poly (β-hydroxyalkanoate) (PHA)
A further form of biopolymer produced by bacteria is bacterial
polyhydroxyalkanoates to provide internal energy and carbon
storage. In a broad variety of bacteria, Poly(hydroxybutyrate)
(PHB), which is a polyester manufactured biotechnologically, is
an example of providing carbon storage. Moreover, PHB’s
property of being a biodegradable thermoplastic polyester give
rise to drawing a lot of attention (Plackett and Vazquez, 2004).
Thanks to various microorganisms, PHA can be separated into
water and carbon dioxide components in decomposition process
and it has a lot of promise for use in ecologically friendly
polymers. However, restricted processability window and
brittleness are significant drawbacks of it compared to traditional
plastics. Several copolymers incorporating hydroxyalkanoate
units have been biosynthesized to enhance these properties other
than 3-hydroxybutyrate (3HB). The most commonly known
member of the PHA family is Poly-3-hydroxybutyrate (PHB)
which contains monomers with 4–5 carbon atoms and belongs to
the short chain length PHA (scl-PHA) family. Poly
(hydroxyoctanoate-co-hydroxydecanoate) or P (HO-co-HD) with
a medium chain length (mcl-PHA) has 6–12 carbon atoms as a
member of PHA. 3-hydroxybutyrate (3HB) and 3-
hydroxyexanoate (HHx) are copolyesters with scl- and mcl-

monomers outperform PHB in terms of mechanical properties.
Hydroxybutyrate (HB) and hydroxyvalerate (HV) are monomer
units that constitute copolymer of poly (3-hydroxybutyrate-co-
hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV) biopolymer. As a PHA family
member, PHBV (poly (3-hydroxybutyrate-co-hydroxyvalerate))
in comparison to polypropylene has appealing features including
good biocompatibility, biodegradability, and certain properties
(Zhang et al., 2012). With 1.2 GPa modulus, 25 MPa fracture
stress and less than 15% elongation at break values, PHBV can
be classified as a brittle polymer. It can be used in the packaging
industry as the inside lining of packing cardboard instead of
aluminum because of its strong barrier properties. Various
quantity of hydroxyvalerate (HV) content in PHBV can alter the
thermal and mechanical properties of it. For instance, as the HV
content increases, crystallinity, melting point, impact and tensile
strength and glass transition temperature all decrease. However,
PHBV's brittleness, poor impact strength, and expensive
manufacturing cost limit its wide variety of applications (Pilla,
2011; Ghanbarzadeh and Almasi 2013; Bugnicourt et al.,2014).
Poly (α-hydroxyalkanoate) (PCL)
As a cyclic ester monomer, PCl is made from lactone by
performing a ring opening reaction with a catalyst like stannous
octanoate in the presence of an active hydrogen atom initiator.
PCL, which is compatible with a wide range of materials, has
glass transition temperature (Tg) of -60o
C and primer melting
temperature (Tm) of 60o
C. Because of compatibility with the most

of organic materials and polymers, it is employed as a
compatibilizer in many polymer compositions. As a semi-rigid
and strong polymer, PCL has a modulus in the range of high-
density polyethylene (HDPE) and low-density polyethylene
(LDPE) at room temperature. Hereafter, large-scale utilization of
PCL polymer may happen in starch-based formulations because
of its ability of delivering water resistance (Pickering, 2008).
Poly (Alkylene Dicarboxylate)
Widely known as Bionelle, Poly (alkylene dicarboxylate) is an
aliphatic polyester with high biodegradable properties. Ethylene
glycol and butanediol-1,4 glycols are combined with succinic and
adipic acid of aliphatic dicarboxylic acids to manufacture this
polyester in a polycondensation process. The properties of
Bionolle can be listed as, around 90°C melting point, 45°C about
glass transition temperature, 1.25 g/cm3
around density properties
corresponding to similar to LDPE, in the range of PE and PP,
similar to PET, respectively. Besides, this white crystalline
thermoplastic polyester has stiffness in the range of LDPE and
HDPE, tensile strength in the range of PE and PP and less than 6
kcal/g heat of combustion. At temperatures of 160°C, Bionolle
can be blown, injected and extruded into a wide range of products
using polyolefin processing equipment because of its good
processability. Three grades of Bionolle are available as; PBS
#1000 series, PBSA (polybutylene succinate-co-butylene
adipate) #3000 series and PES (polyethylene succinate) #6000
series.

The environmental conditions that Bionolle polymers are used,
and their structure determine the biodegradability of these type of
polymers. Moreover, it is stated that for various Bionelle grades,
the biodegradability of #3000 series have the most
biodegradability in soils while #6000 series can degrade best in
sludges (Nishioka et al. 1994).
Polyester Amides
Susceptibility to degradation and processing capabilities along
with strong mechanical and thermal properties pave the way for
aliphatic polyester amides and they are being reviewed as a
promising potential family of polymers (Arvanitoyamis et
al.,1995). The synthesis and characterization of aliphatic
polyester amides are available in the literature. A varying number
of methylene groups with 1,6-hexanediol, glycine, and diacids are
used to produce this biodegradable series of polymers. Alanine,
glycine or phenylalanine of -amino acids group and 1,6-
hexanediol, sebacic acid are being used to synthesize new kind of
polyester amides and their certain physicochemical
characteristics have been described. On the other hand,
phenylalanine, leucine, and glycine of -amino acids group and
1,2-ethanediol, adipic acid are being used to synthesize a series
of different polyester amides. Only glycine-containing polymers
were not degraded by any of the enzymes tested in degradation
tests utilizing proteolitic enzymes (chymiotripsine and elastase)
(Saotome et al., 1991).

Furthermore, it is stated in another study that substantial amount
of methylene groups with diacids are sufficient to offer film and
fiber-forming characteristics. It is also stressed that these
polyester amides may be treated directly from the melt because
of the melting temperatures being smaller than the decomposition
temperatures of polymers in hand. In order to determine the
biodegradability of all series of the polyester amides, Enzymatic
incubation with papain is utilized. The polymers were very
susceptible to enzymatic breakdown in all situations (Paredes et
al., 1998).
Starch Based Matrices (Plastics)
Annual renewability, plentiful availability, and its inherent
biodegradability make natural starch polymer as one of the most
promising green matrices. Starch has formed a price basis for new
types of biodegradable polymers due to their low cost and
flexibility to be used in plastic production systems. Starch-based
materials are getting more and more attention day by day due to
the well-known concerns like global warming, oil scarcity, and
the polluting effects of overuse of petroleum-based chemical
polymers in nature. As a polysaccharide, Starch is produced by
plants to store energy. This energy is stored intracellularly as
spherical granules of 2 to 100 micrometers of varying diameters.
Grains like wheat, rice, and corn or tubers like cassava (tapioca)
and potato are the main source of the most of the bulk starches in
the market (Jiang et al., 2020).

Starch mainly used with natural fibers to create a composite form.
Cellulose fibers reinforced thermoplastic wheat starches were
found to have four times better tensile properties in comparison
to neat ones. Wood, kenaf, straw, jute, bamboo, cotton, and sisal
like natural cellulosic fibers are being used to improve the
mechanical characteristics of starch-based materials
(Wollerdorfer and Bader, 1998).
There are several advantages of natural fiber composites in
comparison with inorganic fillers such as low density, low cost,
comparatively easy processability, low energy consumption, high
specific strength and modulus, a relatively reactive surface, high
sound attenuation, and more importantly of a vast variety
availability of fillers and a renewable nature (Dufresne et al.,
2000). Starch, again, is one of the most promising natural
matrices to sustain these demands and holds the potential to be
used in different areas.
Cellulose Acetate
Cellulose acetate (CA) as a member of cellulose esters, are
thought to be beneficial in biodegradable applications. A
modified polysaccharide of CA is constituted with the interaction
of acetic anhydride and cotton linters or wood pulp. It has also
been proven that cellulose esters may be made from recycled
paper and sugar cane (Buchanan et al.1993).
When microorganisms attacked the polymer’s unsubstituted
residues, it was commonly expected that less than 1.0 degree of

substitution with cellulose esters would disintegrate, but
microbial assault resistance of the cellulose backbone would
develop in the ether linkages. Besides, CA is said to be a difficult
substrate for microbial assault. CA biodegradation is a word that
refers to the process by which a material degrades. The
biodegradation of CA and diluents has received little attention
despite widespread interest in recent years. The majority of
cellulose acetates must be plasticized before being used in
thermoplastic applications because of the decomposition
temperature of cellulose acetates is smaller than the melting
processing temperature (Wypych, 2004).
Tensile strengths of CA films are nearly equal to polystyrene,
making them ideal for injection molding. Common usage
materials like fabrics, eyeglass frames, tool handles, clear
adhesive tape, and other materials all contain CA (John et al.,
2007).
Soy Plastic
Most of the soybeans, approximately 60%, produced in the
United States are used in food industry, as well as the bulk of feed
protein. Soybeans generally have a 15-22 % oil content and a30-
45 % protein content. Soybeans have been shown to contain up to
55% protein levels. Soybean consists of non-polar and polar
different protein groups (polypeptides), and the non-reactive
amino acid residues portion is about 38%, while the reactive
amino acid residues portion is 58% of various molecular sizes

SUSTAINABLE-AGRICULTURE-AND-LIVESTOCK-FOR-FOOD-SECURITY-UNDER-THE-CHANGING.pdf

SUSTAINABLE-AGRICULTURE-AND-LIVESTOCK-FOR-FOOD-SECURITY-UNDER-THE-CHANGING.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to SUSTAINABLE-AGRICULTURE-AND-LIVESTOCK-FOR-FOOD-SECURITY-UNDER-THE-CHANGING.pdf

Similar to SUSTAINABLE-AGRICULTURE-AND-LIVESTOCK-FOR-FOOD-SECURITY-UNDER-THE-CHANGING.pdf (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

SUSTAINABLE-AGRICULTURE-AND-LIVESTOCK-FOR-FOOD-SECURITY-UNDER-THE-CHANGING.pdf