Next Article in Journal
Smart Farming Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture: A Case Study of a Mediterranean Aromatic Farm
Previous Article in Journal
Design of Dynamic Deep Sowing System for Peanut Planter with Double-Loop Feedback Fuzzy PID Control
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 15
Issue 8
10.3390/agriculture15080809
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Cumin-Harvesting Mechanization of the Xinjiang Cotton–Cumin Intercropping System: Review of the Problem Status and Solutions

by
Sheng Tai
1,
Zhong Tang
1,2,*,
Bin Li
3,
Shiguo Wang
3 and
Xiaohu Guo
1
1
College of Agricultural Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China
2
Key Laboratory Equipment of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology (Jiangsu University), Ministry of Education, Zhenjiang 212013, China
3
Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural and Reclamation Science, Shihezi 832000, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2025, 15(8), 809; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080809
Submission received: 27 February 2025 / Revised: 2 April 2025 / Accepted: 4 April 2025 / Published: 8 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Agricultural Technology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) is a globally important spice crop, particularly significant in Xinjiang, China, where it is extensively cultivated in cotton–cumin intercropping systems. This review concentrates on the serious bottleneck hindering the development of the cumin industry: the low level of harvesting mechanization. Traditional manual harvesting methods are labor-intensive, inefficient, and result in high yield losses. This paper fully explores the prospects and challenges of mechanizing cumin harvesting in accordance with the particular biological characteristics of cumin plants and the complexity of intercropping systems. We review the current status of research in the following domains: (1) cumin biological traits and intercropping models; (2) grain loss and stalk damage patterns in stripper harvesting of similar crops; (3) factors influencing root–soil interaction during mechanical extraction; (4) uprooting–conveying harvesting techniques and row division/plant singulation methods applicable to root and tuber crops; and (5) cumin-threshing and -cleaning technologies. This review highlights the inadequacy of current grain-harvesting machinery for cumin and underscores the urgent need for specialized, low-loss harvesting technologies tailored to cumin’s delicate nature and intercropping context. Finally, we propose future research directions to overcome these mechanization challenges and promote the sustainable development of the cumin industry.

1. Introduction

Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) was disseminated to Asia via the ancient Silk Road and has become a staple spice in regions such as the Mediterranean, Middle East, and South Asia, with a trade volume second only to pepper. As the second largest spice crop globally, cumin is a significant spice crop worldwide due to its distinctive aroma and flavor, finding extensive application in food-seasoning, pharmaceutical, and health-promoting fields [1,2,3]. Cumin is not only rich in various nutrients, vitamins, and minerals but also contributes to alleviating the globally prevalent issue of iron deficiency [4,5,6]. The unique desert oasis climate and soil conditions in Southern Xinjiang, China, provide favorable natural conditions for cumin growth [7,8,9,10]. This region ranks among the top in China in terms of cumin-planting area and total yield, significantly contributing to increasing farmers’ income and prosperity. In 2024, the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps cultivated 1.112 × 109 m2 of cumin, including 1.021 × 109 m2 of intercropping and 9.076 × 107 m2 of full sowing. In recent years, the efficient cotton–cumin intercropping model (Figure 1) has rapidly developed in the cotton-growing areas of Southern Xinjiang. This planting model achieves efficient integration of land resources and photothermal conditions, realizing two crops per year, significantly improving planting efficiency, and contributing to the optimization of agricultural industrial structure [11,12].
Currently, the mechanization level of cumin harvesting is lagging, characterized by high labor intensity, low harvesting efficiency, and high labor costs. The primary harvesting method remains segmented harvesting (Figure 1), involving manual uprooting, sun-drying, threshing, and cleaning. During the cumin harvest season in Xinjiang, approximately four laborers are required per mu, with each earning Chinese Yuan Renminbi 110 per day. The fragility of cumin seeds and the inefficiency of traditional harvesting methods result in cumin production struggling to meet current market demand. In 2023, global cumin production areas experienced yield reductions due to the El Niño phenomenon [13,14,15,16], leading to record-high domestic cumin prices in China. However, the continuous expansion of the cumin industry is still hindered by the bottleneck of low harvesting efficiency. Kumar et al. developed an experimental setup for simulating the field conditions to determine the force and power required for cutting Indian cumin crops in dynamic conditions [17].
Cumin plants typically reach a height of approximately 40 cm with a plant spread area of approximately 29 cm × 28 cm. The stems are hollow with a diameter of only 3–5 mm [18]. Cumin roots are taproots, relatively shallow at about 5–6 cm, and are primarily grown in sandy loam soil. These factors contribute to cumin plants being prone to lodging and yield loss during harvesting. Harvesting machinery designed for grain crops is not suitable for cumin-harvesting operations. Existing modified grain harvesters easily cause cumin seed shattering during harvesting, resulting in high loss rates [19]. Currently, the key challenges in the development of mechanized cumin-harvesting equipment are focused on the lack of low-loss cumin uprooting and anti-lodging loss reduction technologies, which severely impedes the mechanization progress of the cumin industry because the efficiency of mechanized harvesting is crucial [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31].
In addressing the current bottlenecks in cumin-harvesting mechanization, this paper synthesizes the research progress across the following five domains, with the aim of providing technical pathways to overcome these challenges: 1. current research on the biological traits of cumin and cultivation models of cumin intercropping; 2. current research status on grain loss and stalk damage patterns in stripper harvesting; 3. current research status on factors influencing the root–soil interaction during mechanical extraction; 4. current research status on uprooting–conveying harvesting techniques and row division and plant singulation for root and tuber crop harvesting; 5. research status of cumin-threshing and -cleaning devices.
We initiated this study by conducting a comprehensive literature review. Articles were retrieved from the Web of Science database and “CNKI” (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), resulting in the examination of 160 manuscripts.

2. Current Research on Biological Traits of Cumin and Cultivation Models of Cumin Intercropping

2.1. Biological Traits of Cumin

Cuminum cyminum L., belonging to the Apiaceous family and genus Cuminum, is an annual herbaceous spice crop. The plant typically reaches a height of 20–40 cm. Its leaves exhibit triternate-bipinnately dissected morphology, with ultimate segments narrowly linear, measuring 1.5–5 cm in length and a mere 0.3–0.5 mm in width. The petiole base is characterized by a narrow lanceolate sheath. Compound umbels are multi-branched and measure 2–3 cm in diameter. The fruit is a schizocarp, oblong in shape, and tapering towards both ends. It typically exhibits a color range from yellow–green to brownish-brown and is characterized by a distinctive aromatic odor, as shown in Figure 2. The flowering period predominantly occurs in April, while the fruiting period is concentrated in May. Timely harvesting and drying upon fruit maturation are necessary to preserve its medicinal and culinary values. Its widespread application across culinary, traditional medicine, and modern nutraceutical industries [1] stems from its distinctive aromatic flavor and medicinal attributes.
The morphological characteristics of cumin present challenges to mechanized harvesting. This limitation is primarily attributed to its inherent morphology, notably its diminutive stature, slender stems, and limited branching [32]. Mohit Kumar investigated the cutting-force characteristics of cumin stems, revealing a positive correlation between cutting force and stem count. The static cutting forces required to sever one, two, and three stems were 13.33 N, 28.25 N, and 49.13 N, respectively. Furthermore, high vibration frequencies during harvesting were found to increase the frequency of cumin seed shattering, and elevated stem-cutting heights exacerbated shattering losses [33]. Consequently, the fragility of cumin plants is a critical factor limiting the effective application of existing grain-harvesting machinery in cumin harvesting.
In addition to its role as a flavoring agent, cumin is nutritionally significant, providing a range of beneficial compounds. Research findings demonstrate that cumin is a good source of iron and dietary fiber. Moreover, it contains vitamins (including vitamin E and B vitamins) and minerals (including calcium, magnesium, and manganese) to a lesser extent. One teaspoon of ground cumin contains approximately 1.4 mg of iron, accounting for 17.5% of the adult Recommended Daily Intake (RDI) [4]. Globally, approximately 20% of the population suffers from iron deficiency anemia, a prevalent nutritional deficiency [5]. Therefore, cumin, as a natural iron-rich food, holds significant potential for improving iron nutritional status in populations. Cumin also exhibits a range of pharmacological activities, including digestive aid, antibacterial, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-tumor effects, primarily attributed to its rich content of active compounds, such as cumin aldehyde, cymene, and β-pinene.

2.2. Cultivation Models of Cumin Intercropping

Originating from the Mediterranean coast and the Middle East, cumin is now extensively cultivated in countries such as India, Iran, Turkey, Egypt, and Morocco. In China, Xinjiang is the primary cumin-producing region, accounting for over 90% of the country’s total planting area [34]. Xinjiang’s agricultural planting areas are predominantly located on the edges of deserts, where the thermal effect of the desert and the moisture island effect of the Tianshan Mountains synergistically contribute to a unique endowment of light, heat, and water resources. Xinjiang’s distinctive high-intensity solar radiation environment, coupled with a significant diurnal temperature variation, creates a synergistic effect that enhances photosynthetic efficiency in cumin plants and facilitates the efficient accumulation of organic matter by suppressing nocturnal respiration. Xinjiang soil is predominantly sandy, exhibiting good drainage, which is conducive to cumin’s drought-tolerant and waterlogging-sensitive growth characteristics [35]. These natural conditions have positioned Xinjiang as an ideal region for cumin cultivation in China. Currently, cumin cultivation in Southern Xinjiang is mainly concentrated in Yuepu Lake County and Shufu County in Kashgar Prefecture, Kuche County and Shaya County in Aksu Prefecture, Moyu County and Pishan County in Hotan Prefecture, and Yanqi Hui Autonomous County in Bayingolin Mongol Autonomous Prefecture. In Eastern Xinjiang, cultivation is primarily focused in Toksun County, Turpan City [36]. To further enhance land utilization and economic benefits, the cumin–cotton intercropping model has experienced rapid development and promotion in the cotton-growing areas of Southern Xinjiang in recent years [11]. This model effectively leverages the long growth cycle, slow early growth, and wide row spacing of cotton, along with the short growth period and early sowing and emergence advantages of cumin, achieving “two crops per year” on the same land [12]. Cumin–cotton intercropping can significantly improve the total output value and economic benefits per unit land area. The specific advantages of cumin–cotton intercropping are as follows:
(1)
Enhanced Land Use Efficiency: Cotton cultivation under mechanized picking mode requires a larger row spacing, reaching up to 66 cm [11], as shown in Figure 3, which provides ample inter-row space for cumin growth. Cumin has a shorter growth cycle, allowing for sowing, growth, and harvesting to be completed early in the cotton growing season, thereby efficiently utilizing land, light, and heat resources [12].
(2)
Improved Soil Microenvironment: Cumin plants act as a ground cover, reducing soil moisture evaporation, lowering soil temperature, and improving the soil microclimate, consequently promoting cotton seedling growth.
(3)
Biological Pest Control: Cumin intercropping demonstrates effective biological pest control benefits. It enhances biodiversity in the field, attracts beneficial insects, and contributes to building a stable ecosystem. This facilitates biological control of cotton pests and diseases, reduces reliance on chemical pesticides, and promotes green production [12].
(4)
Wind and Sand Fixation: In areas prone to wind and sandstorms, cumin plants exhibit sand fixation and windbreak effects, protecting young cotton seedlings from wind and sand damage [12].
Current research on the cumin–cotton intercropping model primarily focuses on the following aspects:
(1)
Optimization of Planting Models: Research should be conducted to optimize planting models based on regional climate, soil, and cotton varieties, such as cumin-sowing time, planting density, row spacing, fertilization, and irrigation management. Reasonably adjusting cumin-sowing time and density is crucial for minimizing competition between cumin and cotton for nutrients and light, thereby promoting their co-growth and high yield.
(2)
Water Resource Management: In arid and semi-arid environments, water scarcity is a significant limiting factor for agricultural production. Research should prioritize exploring efficient under-film drip irrigation techniques to improve water use efficiency and provide adequate water supply for both cumin and cotton production.
Despite the numerous advantages of the cumin–cotton intercropping model, the mechanization level of cumin production remains low, particularly in the harvesting stage, which is predominantly reliant on manual labor. Harvesting machinery designed for grain crops is not entirely suitable for cumin, primarily due to the biological characteristics of cumin plants, such as their short stature, slender stems, and propensity for seed shattering [19]. Mohit Kumar’s research [33] has confirmed that existing mechanized-harvesting methods readily cause cumin seed losses. Therefore, the development of mechanized-harvesting technologies specifically tailored for cumin needs to be strengthened.
Based on the current research status of cumin biological traits and cumin–cotton intercropping models, cumin is a seed spice crop with significant economic value. Xinjiang’s unique natural environment is highly suitable for cumin cultivation, and the intercropping model with cotton not only enhances land use efficiency and economic benefits but also provides biological pest control advantages. However, the insufficient mechanization level in cumin harvesting, coupled with the inadequacy of existing harvesting equipment to meet cumin-harvesting needs, necessitates the development of specialized harvesting equipment tailored to the characteristics of cumin plants.

3. Current Research Status on Grain Loss and Stalk Damage Patterns

3.1. Grain Loss in Stripper Harvesting

Grain loss during crop harvesting directly impacts the efficiency and economic returns of agricultural production. Therefore, in-depth investigation into the mechanisms of grain loss during harvesting operations is crucial for optimizing the structural design of harvesting machinery and minimizing harvest losses [37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46].
Currently, research on grain loss in swath harvesting primarily concentrates on the structural optimization and parameter adjustment of the pick-up reel. Du’s research demonstrated that the rotational speed of the pick-up reel in rice–wheat combine harvesters significantly affects operational quality and crop loss rate, leading to the development of an automatic rotational speed control device for the pick-up reel to reduce losses [47]. Yang analyzed the entry trajectory of the pick-up reel into the crop during rapeseed harvesting, finding that a tooth-inclined entry pattern can more effectively reduce header losses [48]. Huang, addressing pick-up loss in sunflower harvesting, designed a sunflower header with a grain recovery function, employing a plate-type pick-up reel to minimize impact loss to the sunflower heads [49]. Jin investigated the effects of pick-up batten speed, stubble height, and forward speed on sunflower grain loss rate and damage rate [50]. Li addressing the issue of excessive impact force of existing eccentric pick-up reels on rapeseed plants, studied the main factors influencing pod shattering, including impact velocity, pod pedicel clamping position, and rapeseed variety, and measured the bending–shear elastic modulus of the pods [51]. Jin’s research revealed that harvest loss in soybean combine harvesters is related to improper parameter settings of the pick-up reel, elucidating how to determine the optimal parameters for the pick-up reel based on soybean plant height [52].

3.2. Stalk Damage Patterns

Research into the mechanical properties of crop stalks is foundational for the design and optimization of harvesting machinery. A thorough understanding of the stress state and failure modes of crop stalks during the harvesting process is crucial for improving and optimizing mechanical components, reducing the operational energy consumption of harvesting equipment, and enhancing harvesting efficiency.
Neenan et al. found that the stalk-bending resistance primarily depends on Young’s modulus and stalk diameter, with Young’s modulus being influenced by the stalk maturity stage [53]. Prasad et al.’s study on corn stalk cutting revealed that both energy consumption and peak load values during stalk cutting exhibit a linear increasing trend with the increase in material cross-sectional area while showing a decreasing trend with increasing tissue moisture content [54]. Iwaasa et al. developed a rapid method for measuring the shear properties of forage stalks, finding that shear force was significantly correlated with stalk diameter, weight, and linear density [55]. İnce et al. measured the bending and shear characteristics of sunflower stalks, and their study showed that bending stress was negatively correlated with moisture content, and the simultaneous increase in stalk moisture content and diameter led to a decrease in bending elastic modulus. The shear stress value at the stalk base was significantly higher than in the upper sections, forming a distinct stress gradient distribution [56]. Igathinathane et al., using a linear blade grid system to cut corn stalks, found that peak failure load, ultimate shear stress, and cutting-energy values were directly proportional to cutting depth and inversely proportional to blade grid spacing [57]. Zbek et al. measured the physical and mechanical properties of safflower stalks, revealing that mechanical stalk properties were significantly affected by moisture content [58]. Igathinathane et al. further developed equipment for rapidly measuring the cutting-energy requirements of plant stalks, providing a basis for optimizing cutting components [59]. In the rotary cutting of sugarcane stalks, Gedam et al. systematically investigated the mechanism of action of key parameters, such as shear angle, blade tilt angle, and equipment speed, on cutting force [60]. Liu et al., in 2006, studied the failure modes of sugarcane stalks under different loads, finding axial cracks under torsional load, yielding, and axial cracks under compressive load, and fractures of both sugarcane rind and pith under tensile load [61]. Chen et al. investigated the time-varying characteristics and vertical variation in corn stalk shear force, revealing that the shear resistance of the corn stalk base was significantly higher than the upper part and increased with the increase in cellulose and lignin content and maturity [62]. Zhao et al., in 2009, through analyzing the mechanical properties of different varieties of forage stalks, found that the tensile strength of leguminous and gramineous forage stalks had a significant negative power function relationship with stalk diameter, and the stalk shear strength also showed a significant decreasing trend with increasing diameter [63]. He et al. conducted axial compression tests on soybean stalks, finding that the axial maximum stress of soybean stalks showed no significant fluctuation with height variation, while the maximum bearing capacity and moment of inertia parameters exhibited a linear decreasing trend with increasing height [64]. Yan et al.’s analysis in 2012 of the mechanical properties of mature soybean stalks indicated that the elastic modulus of the middle internode was the lowest, while the shear force and bending stiffness of the bottom internode were greater [65]. Men et al., in 2014, studied the agronomic traits of Welsh onions/leeks, and a correlation analysis showed that the relationships between various traits were close, with regression analysis pointing out that the white diameter and plant height of leek/Welsh onion were the main factors affecting yield [66]. Chen, in 2015, studied the mechanical properties of cassava stalks by abstracting them as sandwich composite materials [67]. Liang used the MLS method to analyze the mechanical property curves of Pennisetum giganteum stalks [68]. Li studied the tensile mechanical properties of cassava stalks at different moisture contents and sampling locations, finding that growth location had a significant impact on the maximum load [69]. Wu et al. found that oat stalks exhibit viscoelastic properties and fitted creep and stress relaxation curves using the Burgers and Maxwell models [70]. Liu et al., in 2019, revealed the variation pattern of Welsh onion agronomic traits with planting density [71]. Du et al. studied the physical, mechanical, and chemical properties of tea stalks; established mechanical property models; and found that cellulose content, bending strength, and shear strength increased with increasing stem segment number [72]. Yang et al., in 2021, studied licorice stalk characteristics, finding that the bending force increased with increasing diameter, but bending strength decreased, and analyzed the influence of chemical composition and microstructure [73]. Wang et al. studied the cutting-energy consumption of sugarcane stalk bases, finding that energy consumption increased with increasing speed and diameter and decreased with increasing inclination angle and feed speed [74]. Sun et al., in 2022, studied the physical and mechanical properties of Welsh onions/leeks, determining that the diameter had a significant impact on the compressive strength, and the location had a very significant impact on the shear strength, and quantified the influence of each factor [75].
Building upon the current research status regarding grain loss and stem damage patterns during reel harvesting, researchers have conducted extensive investigations into crop stem mechanical properties and grain loss in reel harvesting systems. This has lain a theoretical foundation and provided technical support for a deeper understanding of crop stem mechanical properties, optimizing harvesting equipment design, and minimizing grain loss.

4. Current Research Status on Factors Influencing Root–Soil Interaction During Mechanical Extraction

When a plant is pulled vertically, the root system interacts with the soil (Figure 4). Root types include storage roots, fibrous roots, and taproots. Cumin roots are taproots, and the resistance during uprooting primarily originates from this root type. As a vital organ for sustaining plant life activities, the plant root system plays a crucial role in soil stabilization, slope protection, and ecological environment conservation. Depending on the type of vegetation, the mechanical mechanisms of root systems exhibit significant differentiation characteristics. Herbaceous plant root systems primarily exert a reinforcement effect, while woody plant root systems mainly provide anchoring and supporting effects [76,77,78,79]. In-depth research into the interaction mechanism between plant roots and soil is of significant theoretical and practical value for revealing the sources of resistance during mechanical uprooting, enhancing harvesting efficiency, and optimizing operational parameters. This is particularly crucial in the research and development of harvesting machinery for root and tuber crops and cash crops, where the study of soil–root interaction mechanisms serves as a fundamental basis for the manufacturing of harvesting equipment.
Regarding the study of factors influencing the soil–root interaction during mechanical uprooting, researchers have conducted extensive work, encompassing diverse plants and employing varied research methodologies, as follows:
(1)
Field-Experiment-Based Research on Influencing Factors of Uprooting Force: To explore suitable methods and key parameters for mechanized crop harvesting, numerous scholars have focused on directly measuring crop-uprooting force through field experiments and analyzing the primary factors influencing this force. Xin et al. investigated mature Zhongshu No. 8 potato plants as their research subject. They directly measured the uprooting force of potato plants in the field using a pointer-type push–pull dynamometer and simultaneously measured soil hardness and moisture content. Their findings revealed a significant positive linear correlation between potato plant quality, soil hardness, moisture content, and uprooting force [80]. Liu et al. concentrated on the mechanized harvesting of carrots. By statistically analyzing experimental data from a self-developed numerically controlled vegetable-uprooting force testing platform, they elucidated the influence patterns of key soil physical parameters, such as soil moisture content, hardness, and bulk density, on carrot-uprooting force [81].
Xue et al. utilized response surface methodology to construct an experimental system, aiming to optimize cotton-stalk-uprooting resistance. They designed a three-factor, three-level experimental scheme, setting uprooting angle, machine forward speed, and soil moisture content as influencing factors. They established a three-dimensional response surface model, and the significance ranking of the three factors on uprooting force was uprooting angle > forward speed > soil moisture content [82]. Wang et al. selected six dominant grass species in the alpine grassland of the Yellow River source region as their research area. Through in situ pull-out experiments, single-root tensile tests, and direct shear tests of the root–soil composite system, they systematically analyzed the root pull-out resistance characteristics of these six grass species. Their research indicated that multiple factors, including rhizome, root number, root length, soil density, moisture content, compactness, root content, single-root tensile strength, and cohesion, collectively influence the pull-out resistance performance of the root–soil composite system [83].
(2)
Discrete Element Method (DEM)-Based Research on Soil–Root Interaction Mechanism: With the rapid development of computer technology, the Discrete Element Method (DEM) has gradually become a crucial approach for studying soil–root interaction mechanisms. The DEM can simulate the discrete characteristics of soil particles and the contact interaction between roots and soil, thereby revealing the mechanical behavior of soil–root interaction during mechanical uprooting at a microscopic level. Liu et al. employed discrete element theory to establish a soil–carrot model for the carrot-uprooting process. Through a simulation analysis, they deeply investigated the soil disturbance caused by mechanical uprooting and explored the influence of key mechanical uprooting operating parameters on the carrot mechanical uprooting force [84]. Yan et al., based on the field growth characteristics of white radish, developed a corresponding DEM model, calculated the pull-out force, and analyzed the effects of soil bed compactness, pulling speed, and angle on the pull-out force. They also conducted laboratory pull-out mechanical tests, and the results showed good agreement between simulation results and experimental results, validating the effectiveness of DEM in predicting root system pull-out force [85].
(3)
Root–Soil Friction Research Based on Root System Mechanical Properties: The friction between the roots and soil is a significant component of the soil–root interaction, directly affecting the magnitude of resistance during uprooting. To delve into the characteristics of root–soil friction, some scholars have conducted root–soil friction experiments from the perspective of the root system’s mechanical properties. Wu et al. used shrub Indigofera amblyantha and Senna biflora as research subjects and found that there are three failure modes in root and branch uprooting: pull-out failure, taproot fracture failure, and branch–root fracture failure, with pull-out failure being the primary mode [86]. Peng established a mechanical model for the uprooting force of long rhizome crops like scallions. His research indicated that scallions are not easily damaged during uprooting, and the uprooting resistance primarily originates from the tensile force of fibrous roots. The number of fibrous roots, scallion white diameter, fibrous root depth, and scallion quality are significant factors influencing uprooting force [87].
Based on the current research status of factors influencing the soil–root interaction during mechanical uprooting, researchers have conducted in-depth studies on aspects including the analysis of factors influencing uprooting force, the revelation of soil–root interaction mechanisms, and the research on root–soil friction characteristics. These efforts provide crucial theoretical support for a deeper understanding of soil–root interaction patterns during mechanical uprooting, optimizing the design of harvesting machinery, and improving operational efficiency.

5. Current Research Status on Uprooting–Conveying Harvesting Techniques and Row Division and Plant Singulation for Root and Tuber Crop Harvesting

Mechanization of root and tuber crop harvesting is crucial for achieving comprehensive agricultural mechanization. Addressing the challenges of crop damage, separation difficulty, and low efficiency encountered during root and tuber crop harvesting, researchers have extensively investigated uprooting, conveying, and harvesting techniques, as well as orderly row division and plant singulation techniques. These efforts aim to improve harvesting efficiency and minimize crop damage in root and tuber crop harvesting.

5.1. Uprooting–Conveying Harvesting of Root and Tuber Crops

In the field of uprooting, conveying, and harvesting techniques for root and tuber crops, researchers have developed various types of uprooting mechanisms and conveying devices (Table 1), specifically designed to address the unique characteristics of different root and tuber crops.
Addressing the issue of easy damage during carrot harvesting, Han designed a double-row pull-type carrot harvester. The core innovation lies in its active and passive clamping mechanisms. The active clamping mechanism ingeniously utilizes tension springs to provide appropriate clamping force, ensuring effective gripping of carrot stems and leaves while minimizing mechanical damage. The passive clamping mechanism ensures stability during the uprooting process [88].
Liu et al. developed a clamping chain-type cotton-stalk-uprooting header. Through the synergistic action of multiple components, including an active sprocket stem-pulling roller combination and a clamping chain combination, effective uprooting of cotton stalks was achieved. Flexible adjustment of the cotton stalk clamping angle, clamping-chain gap, and tightness was realized through the cotton stalk insertion sprocket combination, clamping sprocket tension plate combination, and tension sprocket combination to adapt to harvesting needs under different working conditions [89]. Wang developed a clamping-chain-type uprooting device featuring a wave-tooth clamping chain structure. Through tooth-shaped engagement, it enhances the gripping stability of cotton stalks. In coordination with a stem-guiding wheel and a guide plate, it forms an orderly conveying channel, achieving directional conveying and strip-laying of cotton stalks, thereby improving field efficiency [90].
Song designed a whole-plant orderly spinach harvester, employing a flexible belt-type uprooting and conveying device. A motor drives the driving roller to rotate, synchronously moving the flexible belt to achieve spinach uprooting and conveying. Adjustable frames and floating rollers designed with torsion springs allow for adjustable flexible belt spacing and a certain degree of floating adaptability, reducing mechanical damage to spinach [91]. Zou, in his design of a clamping and uprooting mechanism for spinach harvesters, deeply analyzed the contradiction between clamping force and spinach damage. Through variable stiffness design, adjusting the clamping wheel spacing to precisely control the clamping force, he adapted to different feeding quantities of spinach, achieving flexible clamping and significantly reducing the spinach damage rate [92].
In the harvesting of bulb crops such as cabbage, Yao designed an uprooting rod mechanism with adjustable threads for cabbage uprooting and harvesting. After the uprooting rod is inserted obliquely into the cabbage root, the threaded rod generates increasing frictional resistance through reverse rotation. When the resistance exceeds the root adhesion force, the cabbage plant separates from the soil and is conveyed backward along the thread structure [93]. Yang combining key component design conclusions and dynamic behavior analysis of cabbage uprooting and conveying device harvesting, found that increasing the machine’s forward speed and the screw rod rotation speed can enhance the contact force but may lead to a decrease in verticality. Increasing the outer diameter of the spiral ridge can simultaneously improve contact force and vertical stability, while increasing the limit spacing will significantly reduce both contact force and verticality [94]. Ma, addressing the advantages and disadvantages of existing uprooting devices, designed a new type of cabbage-uprooting harvester device. This device consists of a pulling shovel, a star-tooth disk, and feeding rollers. A belt drives the star-tooth disk to rotate, cooperating with the feeding rollers to uproot cabbages, aiming to straighten the roots, prevent mis-cutting and missed cutting, improve uprooting stability, and reduce harvest loss rate [95]. Wang designed an uprooting roller assembly that adapts to different cabbage variety sizes by adjusting the opening angle, inclination angle, and the opening and closing angle of the guide rod. A cross-slider coupling ensures the stability of power transmission, while tension arms and forward-extending frames enable adjustability of clamping force and spacing [96].
For vining crops such as peanuts, Yang designed a three-belt clamping and conveying device, cleverly employing a structure with a single belt between double belts. The synergistic effect of the overlapping area between the single and double belts enhances the clamping force, successfully overcoming the shortcomings of traditional flat belt systems in terms of clamping force. This device is also adjustable, allowing it to adapt to the characteristics of different peanut varieties [97]. Hu, in his research on peanut harvesters, compared design schemes with different opening angles in the peanut vine converging area. He found that a smaller opening angle may negatively affect the swath-laying state of the crop lifter. A large opening design should be chosen to achieve rapid clamping of vines and reduce converging time, especially suitable for low-growing crops [98].
Table 1. Overview of uprooting and conveying harvesting technologies for root and tuber crops.
Table 1. Overview of uprooting and conveying harvesting technologies for root and tuber crops.
No.CropDescriptionAuthor Name and Title
1Agriculture 15 00809 i001
Carrot		A multi-functional machine that integrates ridge-bottom tillage, extraction, haulm removal, conveying, and loading capabilities.[88] Han Design and Research of Double-Row Pulling Carrot Harvester 2012
2Agriculture 15 00809 i002
Cotton		It utilizes wavy-toothed clamping chains to grip and pull cotton stalks, supplemented by stalk diverting wheels and guide plates for stalk harvesting.[90] Wang Design of a Gripping-Chain Type Uprooting Machine for Xinjiang Cotton Stalks 2023
3Agriculture 15 00809 i003
Spinach		It employs an ordered root-cutting, clamping, conveying method, vibration-assisted root cutting and variable stiffness flexible clamping.[92] Zou Research on the Key Technologies of Low Damage and Orderly Harvest for Spinach with Root 2022
4Agriculture 15 00809 i004
Cabbage		It utilizes a double spiral picking structure and a double spiral rod with a top-pressing conveyor belt.[94] Yang Design and experimental study of cabbage picking and conveying device 2023
5Agriculture 15 00809 i005
Peanut		It features a self-propelled design, integrated digging and picking mechanisms, and advanced cleaning and separation systems.[98] Hu Study on Key Technologies of Half-Feed Peanut Combine Harvester 2011
6Agriculture 15 00809 i006
Garlic		It integrates digging, cleaning, conveying, and collecting into a single, simplified, smaller, and more cost-effective.[99] Yang Research on the Key Components of Garlic Harvester Based on the Disruptive Innovation Theory 2017
7Agriculture 15 00809 i007
Napa Cabbage		It utilizes a horizontal and vertical double-disk cutter and a conveying system.[100] Zhang Research on physical and mechanical properties of headed Chinese cabbage and its crawler self-propelled harvesting equipment 2022
8Agriculture 15 00809 i008
Broccoli		It features a bio-inspired cutter based on locust mandible morphology, a wavy conveying system, and a manual sorting station.[101] Zhao Structural Design and Performance Experimental Research of Self-Propelled Harvester for Densely Planted Broccoli 2023
Guo designed a clamping and conveying device that addresses the issue of uneven stem thickness. In the feeding and clamping stage, compression springs are used. Subsequently, the compression springs are replaced with tension springs, and a pressure rod is hinged and fixed. A four-section pressure rod design with staggered upper and lower distribution effectively solves the problem of poor clamping effect when stems are of uneven thickness and reduces structural complexity [102]. Yang, based on disruptive innovation theory, optimized the clamping and conveying device, enabling it to simultaneously clamp and convey three rows of garlic. Structurally, the device adopts double-row pulleys for conveying, which are mutually asymmetrical, ensuring the stability of the clamping force during garlic seedling clamping and conveying. The application of limiters achieves angle limitation of the clamping and conveying device [99]. For spinach harvesting, Song studied the influence of two key parameters: flexible belt spacing and linear velocity. Research found that increasing the flexible belt spacing and increasing the linear velocity can reduce spinach damage. However, an excessively large inclination angle of the uprooting and conveying device will increase the spinach damage rate; therefore, the inclination angle should be controlled within the range of 10° to 30° [91]. Zhang designed a tilting conveying and lifting device for a track-type self-propelled Chinese cabbage harvester. It uses a hydraulically driven transmission chain, combined with the gravity of the Chinese cabbage itself and rubber rods linked to the chain, to achieve upward conveying of cabbage to a designated height, avoiding secondary clamping and reducing damage [100]. Wang and Zhao’s research both emphasized the importance of clamping and conveying speed on the operating performance of harvesters. Wang found that an excessively high clamping and conveying speed can lead to incomplete cutting of cabbage roots, while an excessively low speed may cause congestion. The forward component of the conveying belt clamping speed should be slightly greater than the forward speed of the entire machine [96]. Zhao found that an improper conveying speed will affect the efficiency and quality of broccoli cutting and conveying. Too slow a speed can cause broccoli plants to tilt and become blocked, while too fast a speed will affect the stability and operation quality. Therefore, the conveying linear velocity of the clamping conveyor belt should match the forward speed of the harvester [101]. Hu emphasized the influence of mechanism dimensions on stem stability and feeding posture. Research found that a too-short conveying distance may lead to missed ear picking, while a too-long distance may cause unstable stem clamping, increasing the risk of stem breakage [103]. Fan theoretically analyzed the conditions for stable clamping of stems by conveyor belts; i.e., the friction angle θ between the stem and the conveyor belt needs to exceed the initial nip angle γ [104]. Zhu designed a biomimetic ear-picking machine clamping and conveying mechanism for fresh sweet corn. Through specific V-shaped openings, angle design, and longitudinal differential arrangement of the frame, the initial nip angle was reduced, ensuring that the initial nip angle γ is less than the friction angle θ, thus achieving orderly entry of fresh sweet corn stalks into the clamping conveyor belt [105]. Tong used EDEM simulation software to study the influence of parameters, such as harvester forward speed, uprooting roller speed, conveying belt speed, and cutter speed on the stress state of cabbage [106].

5.2. Techniques for Row Division and Plant Singulation

In the realm of orderly row division and plant singulation techniques, researchers have also conducted in-depth investigations aimed at enhancing crop swath formation and crop-lifting effects, thereby creating favorable conditions for subsequent harvesting operations [107,108,109].
Han designed a contour-following swath formation mechanism, utilizing the principle of permanent magnets and reed switches to achieve effective swath formation. This design offers advantages, such as structural simplicity, no requirement for additional power, and non-tangling with crops [88]. Hu developed a crane-beak-tipped row divider, symmetrically installed at the front end of the harvesting platform. Through the crane-beak-tipped front end and “eyebrow”-shaped crop-gathering bars, it achieves the lifting and converging of lodged peanut vines, while pushing adjacent row vines or weeds outwards to avoid operational interference. He further investigated the relationship between the swath formation chain speed and the machine’s forward speed, the structural dimensions and positional configuration of the swath former, pointing out that excessively high or low swath formation chain speeds are detrimental to swath formation effectiveness. He proposed reasonable parameters such as the swath formation speed ratio, inclination angle, and tine spacing [98]. Yao’s research revealed that the motion trajectory and swath formation effect of the picking wheel are significantly influenced by the picking speed ratio. The picking-speed ratio must be greater than 1 to effectively guide and push the cabbage. He also analyzed the number of blades and radius of the picking wheel, as well as its relationship with the cabbage-planting-row spacing, and determined appropriate picking-speed ratio values [93]. Xin designed a vertical clamping and conveying channel with an auxiliary picking star wheel at the front end of the inner arm. This ensures that the chain plate teeth can accurately pick up individual plants and effectively prevent interference with the picking star wheel teeth. He also studied the influence of the row divider’s edge cone angle on the pushing and bending of maize plants, finding that both excessively large and small edge cone angles are unfavorable for row division effectiveness [110]. Tong’s research indicated that when the picking rate ratio λ ≤ 1, the picking wheel’s support and straightening function cannot effectively act on cabbage, while when λ > 1, the picking effect is good [106]. Zhu designed a row divider for a fresh sweet corn biomimetic ear-picking machine, adopting a triangular cone structure with a narrow front end and a wide rear end and a low front and high rear configuration, to enhance the ability to lift lodged stems [105]. Wang’s designed picking-wheel assembly emphasizes the adaptability of the device. The working height is adjusted by regulating the relative position of the picking-wheel adjustment plate and the mounting tube, and the extension length of the mounting frame is adjusted to adapt to different cabbage varieties [96]. Li designed a foldable rapeseed swather, employing a combination of active and passive row division devices to achieve effective rapeseed row division and cutting [111]. Zhang et al. designed a swath formation mechanism composed of symmetrical double swath guide plates and a support structure, which was used to lift laterally tilted chive plants and was equipped with visual sensors to achieve obstacle avoidance [112]. Yan designed a swath formation device, utilizing a lugged chain and elastic hard plastic swath formation bars. A motor drives the chain and swath formation bars to move, realizing plant guidance and support [113]. Wang conducted in-depth research on the working performance of the swath board through force and motion analysis. He proposed methods to reduce the tip wedge angle of the swath board and polish the surface to reduce bending damage to plants [114]. Li designed a picking and lifting type orderly swath formation device. Relying on the orderly rotation of the swath wheel and the repeated contact and picking action of flexible rubber picking teeth with garlic plants, it effectively achieved the posture correction of lodged garlic plants [115]. Liu designed a row divider for a sunflower combine harvester header that takes into account the collection function of dropped seeds and sunflower heads. Through force analysis and dynamics research, he determined key dimensional parameters, such as the width, apex angle, length, and gap of the row divider [116].
Significant progress has been made in research on uprooting, conveying, and harvesting techniques, as well as row division and plant singulation techniques for root and tuber crops. Researchers have designed a variety of uprooting and conveying mechanisms and row division and plant singulation devices based on the harvesting requirements of different root and tuber crops. They have also optimized key parameters using a combination of simulation and experimentation, improving the efficiency and quality of root and tuber crop harvesting and reducing crop damage rates. This has lain a solid foundation for the further development of intelligent, efficient, and low-damage root-and-tuber-crop-harvesting equipment.

6. Research Status of Cumin-Threshing and -Cleaning Devices

6.1. Research Status of Cumin-Cleaning Devices

As a leading global producer of spices and the world’s largest cumin exporter, India commenced research on the cleaning and grading of spice crops as early as 1990.
Kachru et al. [117] researched and manufactured a pneumatic cleaning device with a moderate feed rate for cleaning various oil crops. While demonstrating good versatility, its application to cumin cleaning resulted in relatively high loss and impurity rates. Srivastav et al. [118] developed a double-roller cleaning sieve-type cumin cleaning machine, highlighting the significant influence of vibrating screen frequency, screen installation angle, and feed rate on cleaning performance. Through experiments, they determined the optimal operating parameters for the machine, achieving a cleaning efficiency of 80% when the screen installation angle was between 5° and 7°. Jethva et al. [119] researched and designed a low-cost reciprocating cumin cleaning and grading device suitable for small farmers. They investigated and optimized parameters such as feed rate, screen rotation speed, and screen inclination angle, determining the optimal working parameters to achieve the best cleaning efficiency and minimum machine power consumption, and also evaluated the machine’s economic benefits. Aradwad et al. [120] pointed out that the fruit stalk attached to cumin seeds is the primary reason for the decline in threshing and cleaning performance. They designed a double-plate centrifugal mechanism to improve cleaning effectiveness, using destemming rate and seed breakage rate as evaluation criteria. By adjusting the feeding rate, disk speed, and disk gap, they obtained the optimal operating parameters, significantly reducing the occurrence of cumin seeds still connected to fruit stalks after cleaning.

6.2. Research Status of Vibrating Screening Devices

Vibrating screening is a method of impurity removal that utilizes the relative motion between materials and screening components within a sieving system. This motion, combined with the differences in component characteristics among materials, allows for the separation of materials being cleaned. Exploring the material movement patterns during the sieving process and summarizing the influence of sieving factors on sieving performance are of significant importance for the design of vibrating screening devices.
Alkhaldi H et al. [121] posited that the sieving process is highly sensitive to machine operating and structural parameters. They used the Discrete Element Method (DEM) to analyze the sieving efficiency under different particle size distributions. By varying screen inclination, aperture size, vibration frequency, and feed rate, they derived the trends of how these factors influence cleaning performance. Zhao et al. [122] constructed a virtual sieving test simulation system to predict the impact of screen vibration frequency, amplitude, and screen surface inclination angle on the motion of single particles. Based on these predictions, they conducted simulation experiments, concluding that screen surface amplitude and vibration angle significantly affect particle migration speed and throwing height, while vibration frequency and screen surface inclination angle have less impact on particle motion. Li J et al. [123] used the Discrete Element Method to build a model for a two-dimensional numerical simulation study of soybean and mustard seed screening and separation. With particle bed depth as the research variable, the simulation results indicated that particle bed thickness significantly affects sieving performance, with thinner particle beds leading to more ideal cleaning effects. Myhan R et al. [124] argued that the cleaning performance of vibrating screening is not a result of a single factor, but rather the combined effect of numerous related factors. The main factors influencing cleaning quality include crank speed, vibrating screen frequency, vibrating screen installation angle, and cleaning fan speed. Lawinska et al. [125] suggested that sieve hole clogging under high feed rates is a major problem affecting cleaning performance. They analyzed this issue, using three types of particle materials—spheres, irregular bodies, etc.—for sieve testing, which included intermittent and continuous sieving. They identified key operating parameters that significantly affect sieve hole clogging. Li J et al. [123] proposed that the effective sieving distance of the screen body varies under different feed rates. Using the Discrete Element Method, they studied the relationship between different feed rates and the required screen length, further analyzing the particle motion state on the screen surface. They also obtained the optimal screen body length for different feed rates through experiments. Ma et al. [126] used the Discrete Element Method to construct a dynamic model of rice grains and rice stalk. Taking the conventional screening component, the winnowing pan, as the research object, they explored the separation mechanism of rice grains and rice stalks under vertical vibration. From an energy perspective, they used simulation experiments to determine the low-energy influence sieving area in the sieving system and added baffles to the bottom of the sieving equipment to improve the device’s sieving performance.

6.3. Research Status of Air Separation Devices

Air separation is a cleaning method that utilizes the difference in terminal velocities of materials being cleaned to remove impurities. It is widely used in grain and seed processing machinery. Given the similar shape and size of cumin seeds and cumin stems, air separation is the most effective means to reduce the impurity rate in the threshing output. Exploring the material movement patterns during air separation and summarizing the influence of air separation factors on air separation performance are of significant importance for the design of air-screen cleaning devices.
Yang L et al. [127] argued that, to achieve ideal cleaning performance, the air volume of the cleaning device is closely related to the feed rate. Through experiments, they analyzed the impact of feed rate on the cleaning performance of the cleaning device. The experiments showed that for every 1.0 kg/s increase in feed rate, the airflow velocity above the vibrating screen decreases by 1.3% to 15.5%, and the airflow velocity below the vibrating screen decreases by 2.7% to 8.1%. They concluded that fan speed is positively correlated with the overall airflow velocity within the cleaning device, and higher feed rates should be matched with higher cleaning air velocities. Gebrehiwot MG et al. [128,129] pointed out that uneven airflow distribution and velocity of the cleaning fan are the main reasons for high impurity rates in cleaning. To address this issue, they designed a staggered-opening fan system. Using CFD simulation combined with experiments, they concluded that the fan’s cross-flow opening plays a decisive role in the airflow uniformity in the width direction of the fan. They also optimized the fan vortex position using computational fluid dynamics methods, thereby achieving a more uniform airflow distribution. Marian Panasiewicz et al. [130], to clarify the factors affecting seed sieving during air separation, conducted single-factor experiments using an air separation test bench. They also analyzed the motion characteristics of mixed seeds during the cleaning process. Under the condition that the airflow field presented a certain regular distribution, they conducted a theoretical analysis of the motion of mixed seeds, and derived the motion equations of mixed seeds in a uniform airflow field.

7. Prospects

Mechanized cumin harvesting is poised to revolutionize, with the promise of increased efficiency, reduced labor dependence, and significant yield gains, thereby driving economic gains and industry growth. The current levels of mechanization are not optimal, but the technological revolution being witnessed in agriculture, with emphasis on precision agriculture and automatons, provides the path forward. Customized cumin harvesting machinery, moving from design concepts to actual practice, will be key to realizing efficient and low-loss harvesting. Using smart systems, like optimization sensors and simulation for adjustment [131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148], can improve harvesting accuracy and reduce grain loss under diverse field conditions. Greater adoption of machine harvesting will not only boost yields and income but also make cumin production more sustainable by reducing its reliance on human labor and making it possible to manage resources more effectively. However, there are constraints to expanding the number of adopters. They include the cost of specialized machinery, the difficulty in operation and maintenance, and the need to train farmers and transfer technology. Future endeavors should be aimed at creating affordable, long-lasting, and easy-to-operate harvesting machines [149,150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160] and overall support services so that the farmers can utilize the machines and gain the utmost benefits to the farmers and the industry as a whole from the mechanized cumin harvesting. With the advancing technology and falling prices, mechanical cumin harvesting will become prevalent, driving sustainable agricultural growth and food security in cumin-producing regions.

8. Conclusions

Manual harvesting of cumin in the Xinjiang cotton–cumin intercropping system is a major bottleneck, restraining the development of the industry because of its labor demand, inefficiency, and considerable yield losses. Conventional grain-harvesting machinery is not compatible with cumin mainly because of the low height of the crop, weak stems, and seed-shattering habit. This incompatibility highlights the urgent requirement for innovations in harvesting systems to match the specific biological traits of cumin and the complexity of the intercropping system. The development of such equipment should focus on mechanisms that reduce loss during uprooting, technologies to mitigate losses due to lodging, and efficient cleaning systems. The solutions must also be adaptable enough to fit the specific constraints involved in cotton–cumin intercropping so that there is minimal interference with cotton plants while maximizing efficiency in harvesting in the inter-row spaces. Overcoming these technological challenges is important for achieving sustainable development and enhanced productivity in the cumin industry. Mechanized harvesting is not merely an efficiency gain; it is a fundamental prerequisite for achieving the complete economic promise of cumin production in Xinjiang and beyond.

Author Contributions

S.T. conceived the project, consulted the literature and collected the data, wrote the manuscript, and prepared the figures. Z.T., B.L., S.W. and X.G. revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study has been supported by the Key Laboratory Equipment of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology (Jiangsu University), Ministry of Education (MAET202306), and the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps Youth Talent Development Program.

Data Availability Statement

The data and the related conclusions presented in this article were all derived from the Web of Science database and “CNKI” (China National Knowledge Infrastructure).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. El-Ghorab, A.H.; Nauman, M.; Anjum, F.M.; Hussain, S.; Nadeem, M. A Comparative Study on Chemical Composition and Antioxidant Activity of Ginger (Zingiber officinale) and Cumin (Cuminum cyminum). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 8231–8237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ma, M.-m.; Mu, T.-h. Effects of extraction methods and particle size distribution on the structural, physicochemical, and functional properties of dietary fiber from deoiled cumin. Food Chem. 2016, 194, 237–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Vallverdu-Queralt, A.; Regueiro, J.; Martinez-Huelamo, M.; Rinaldi Alvarenga, J.F.; Leal, L.N.; Lamuela-Raventos, R.M. A comprehensive study on the phenolic profile of widely used culinary herbs and spices: Rosemary, thyme, oregano, cinnamon, cumin and bay. Food Chem. 2014, 154, 299–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ancuceanu, R.; Dinu, M.; Hovaneţ, M.V.; Anghel, A.I.; Popescu, C.V.; Negreş, S. A survey of plant iron content—A semi-systematic review. Nutrients 2015, 7, 10320–10351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Levi, M.; Rosselli, M.; Simonetti, M.; Brignoli, O.; Cancian, M.; Masotti, A.; Pegoraro, V.; Cataldo, N.; Heiman, F.; Chelo, M. Epidemiology of iron deficiency anaemia in four European countries: A population-based study in primary care. Eur. J. Haematol. 2016, 97, 583–593. [Google Scholar]
  6. Man, Y.; Xu, T.; Adhikari, B.; Zhou, C.; Wang, Y.; Wang, B. Iron supplementation and iron-fortified foods: A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 62, 4504–4525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tao, S. A Survey on the Current Status of Improved Cumin Cultivar Breeding in Bazhou Prefecture. Agric. Technol. China 2021, 41, 117–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Xu, N.; Qiao, Y.; Zhao, S.; Yang, X.; Li, J.; Fok, M. Optimizing the test locations and replicates in multi-environmental cotton registration trials in southern Xinjiang, China. Crop Sci. 2022, 62, 1866–1879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wang, X.; Hong, T.; Fang, W.; Chen, X. Optimized Design for Vibration Reduction in a Residual Film Recovery Machine Frame Based on Modal Analysis. Agriculture 2024, 14, 543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, J.; Tian, Z.; Yang, T.; Li, X.; He, Q.; Wang, D.; Chen, R. Characteristics of limited flow and soil water infiltration boundary of a subsurface drip irrigation emitter in silty loam soil. Agric. Water Manag. 2024, 291, 108636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Feng, N.; Yi, G.; Pengxiang, C.; Lixia, L.; Qianwen, C. A Comparative Study on Different Planting Patterns in Cotton-Cumin Intercropping Systems. Xinjiang Farm Res. Sci. Technol. China 2024, 47, 6–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Guojun, W. Three Highly Efficient Intercropping Modes and Cultivation Essentials for Cumin. Gansu Agric. Sci. Technol. China 2010, 6, 50–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jiang, N.; Zhu, C.; Hu, Z.-Z.; McPhaden, M.J.; Lian, T.; Zhou, C.; Qian, W.; Chen, D. El Niño and Sea Surface Temperature Pattern Effects Lead to Historically High Global Mean Surface Temperatures in 2023. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2025, 52, e2024GL113733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kasera, R.; Minocha, V.K. Impact of El Nino onset timing on Indian Monsoon Rainfall patterns. Glob. Planet. Chang. 2025, 245, 104689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Velivelli, S.; Satyanarayana, G.C.; Chowdary, J.S.; Srinivas, G.; Darshana, P.; Konda, G.; Attada, R.; Parekh, A.; Gnanaseelan, C. Surface air temperature variability over India in CMIP6 models during spring and early summer: After effect of El Niño. Clim. Dyn. 2025, 63, 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Yen, N.T.H.; Nguyet, L.T. Climate variability induced the impact of El-Niño Southern Oscillation events on rice-growing areas in the Mekong Delta region1. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agric. Ambient. 2025, 29, e288921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kumar, M.; Sahoo, P.K.; Kushwaha, D.K.; Mani, I.; Pradhan, N.C.; Patel, A.; Tariq, A.; Ullah, S.; Soufan, W. Force and power requirement for development of cumin harvester: A dynamic approach. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 13666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Wang, J.; Luo, X.; Yan, X.; Ni, Z.; Ma, J.; Ayixiamuguli. Breeding of a New Cumin Variety: “New Cumin No. 3”. Rural. Sci. Technol. China 2010, 6, 15–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dar, E.A.; Mehdi, M.; Ahmad, M.; Bhat, F.; Hussain, N.; Hussain, M. Cumin: The flavour of Indian cuisines-history, cultivation and uses. Chem. Sci. Rev. Lett 2019, 8, 129–135. [Google Scholar]
  20. Guan, C.; Fu, J.; Cui, Z.; Wang, S.; Gao, Q.; Yang, Y. Evaluation of the tribological and anti-adhesive properties of different materials coated rotary tillage blades. Soil Tillage Res. 2021, 209, 104933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Jin, Y.; Liu, J.; Xu, Z.; Yuan, S.; Li, P.; Wang, J. Development status and trend of agricultural robot technology. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2021, 14, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Liu, Z.; Wang, E.; Mao, H.; Zuo, Z.; Peng, H.; Zhao, M.; Yu, Y.; Li, Z. Design and Testing of an Electric Side-Mounted Cabbage Harvester. Agriculture 2024, 14, 1741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ma, Z.; Wu, Z.; Li, Y.; Song, Z.; Yu, J.; Li, Y.; Xu, L. Study of the grain particle-conveying performance of a bionic non-smooth-structure screw conveyor. Biosyst. Eng. 2024, 238, 94–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ma, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Wu, Z.; Traore, S.N.; Chen, D.; Xing, L. BP neural network model for material distribution prediction based on variable amplitude anti-blocking screening DEM simulations. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2023, 16, 190–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Qing, Y.; Li, Y.; Xu, L.; Ma, Z. Screen oilseed rape (Brassica napus) suitable for low-loss mechanized harvesting. Agriculture 2021, 11, 504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Qing, Y.; Li, Y.; Yang, Y.; Xu, L.; Ma, Z. Development and experiments on reel with improved tine trajectory for harvesting oilseed rape. Biosyst. Eng. 2021, 206, 19–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Wang, F.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y.; Ji, K. Research and experiment on variable-diameter threshing drum with movable radial plates for combine harvester. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yang, Q.; Shi, L.; Shi, A.; He, M.; Zhao, X.; Zhang, L.; Addy, M. Determination of key soil characteristic parameters using angle of repose and direct shear stress test. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2023, 16, 143–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhang, Q.; Hu, J.; Xu, L.; Cai, Q.; Yu, X.; Liu, P. Impurity/breakage assessment of vehicle-mounted dynamic rice grain flow on combine harvester based on improved Deeplabv3+ and YOLOv4. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 49273–49288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zhang, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Li, X.; Xue, Z.; Jin, M.; Deng, B. Near-Infrared-Based Measurement Method of Mass Flow Rate in Grain Vibration Feeding System. Agriculture 2024, 14, 1476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zhu, Z.; Chai, X.; Xu, L.; Quan, L.; Yuan, C.; Tian, S. Design and performance of a distributed electric drive system for a series hybrid electric combine harvester. Biosyst. Eng. 2023, 236, 160–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Moghaddam, M.; Pirbalouti, A.G. Agro-morphological and phytochemical diversity of Iranian Cuminum cyminum accessions. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017, 99, 205–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Mohit, K. Design and Development of Cumin Harvester for Small Farmers; Division of Agricultural Engineering Icar-Indian Agricultural Research Institute: New Delhi, India, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  34. Li, Y. Effect of Replacing Wheat Straw with Cumin Straw on Performance, Rumenmicrobial Composition and Gastrointestinal Tract Morphology in Lambs. Master’s Thesis, Tarim University, Alar, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, F.; Wu, S.; Zhang, W.; Sun, X. Cumin Planting Modes Survey and Quality Evaluation of China. Food Ind. China 2015, 36, 171–173. [Google Scholar]
  36. Tian, X. The Study and Evaluation on Ecological Adaptability of Cumin Germplasm Resources in Southern Xinjiang. Master’s Thesis, Tarim University, Alar, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  37. Chandio, F.A.; Li, Y.; Ma, Z.; Ahmad, F.; Syed, T.N.; Shaikh, S.A.; Tunio, M.H. Influences of moisture content and compressive loading speed on the mechanical properties of maize grain orientations. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2021, 14, 41–49. [Google Scholar]
  38. Jin, M.; Zhao, Z.; Chen, S.; Chen, J. Improved piezoelectric grain cleaning loss sensor based on adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Precis. Agric. 2022, 23, 1174–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Li, Y.; Xu, L.; Gao, Z.; Lu, E.; Li, Y. Effect of vibration on rapeseed header loss and optimization of header frame. Trans. Asabe 2021, 64, 1247–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lian, Y.; Chen, J.; Guan, Z.; Song, J. Development of a monitoring system for grain loss of paddy rice based on a decision tree algorithm. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2021, 14, 224–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Liu, Y.; Li, Y.; Chen, L.; Zhang, T.; Liang, Z.; Huang, M.; Su, Z. Study on Performance of Concentric Threshing Device with Multi-Threshing Gaps for Rice Combines. Agriculture 2021, 11, 1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Qian, P.; Lu, T.; Shen, C.; Chen, S. Influence of vibration on the grain flow sensor during the harvest and the difference elimination method. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2021, 14, 149–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Qing, Y.; Li, Y.; Xu, L.; Ma, Z.; Tan, X.; Wang, Z. Oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) pod shatter resistance and its relationship with whole plant and pod characteristics. Ind. Crops Prod. 2021, 166, 113459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Liang, Z. Selecting the proper material for a grain loss sensor based on DEM simulation and structure optimization to improve monitoring ability. Precis. Agric. 2021, 22, 1120–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Xing, D.; Chen, X.; Wu, Y.; Li, Z.; Khan, S. Changes in elastic modulus, leaf tensity and leaf density during dehydration of detached leaves in two plant species of Moraceae. Chil. J. Agric. Res. 2021, 81, 434–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Li, J.; Liang, Z.; Zhu, F.; Liu, C. Optimum of Grain Loss Sensors by Analyzing Effects of Grain Collision Attitude on Signal Characteristics. Electronics 2022, 11, 3187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Juan, D.; Bin, J.; Haifeng, Y.; Longmei, Z.; Chengqian, J.; Xiang, Y. Development of automatic control system for the rotation speed of combine harvester reel. J. Chin. Agric. Mech. China 2020, 41, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Yang, Y.; Li, Y.; Qing, Y. Adaptability Analysis of Mechanized Transplanting of Pepper in Hilly Mountainous Area. J. Agric. Mech. Res. China 2020, 42, 189–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Huang, X.; Fu, J.; Ma, L.; Zong, W.; Liu, W.; Liu, Y. Design and bench test of the dividing and supporting collecting tank on oil sunflower header. J. Anhui Agric. Univ. China 2020, 47, 664–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jin, W.; Ding, Y.; Bai, S.; Zhang, X.; Yan, J.; Zhou, X. Design and experiments of the reel board header device for an oil sunflower harvester. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. China 2021, 37, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Gang, L. Key Technology Research and Mechanism Optimisation for Plucking and Damage Reduction During Oilseed Rape Harvest. Master’s Thesis, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Jin, C.; Qi, Y.; Liu, G.; Yang, T.; Ni, Y. Mechanism Analysis and Parameter Optimization of Soybean Combine Harvester Reel. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. China 2023, 54, 104–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Neenan, M.; Spencer-Smith, J. An analysis of the problem of lodging with particular reference to wheat and barley. J. Agric. Sci. 1975, 85, 495–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Prasad, J.; Gupta, C. Mechanical properties of maize stalk as related to harvesting. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1975, 20, 79–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Iwaasa, A.; Beauchemin, K.; Buchanan-Smith, J.; Acharya, S. A shearing technique measuring resistance properties of plant stems. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 1996, 57, 225–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. İnce, A.; Uğurluay, S.; Güzel, E.; Özcan, M. Bending and shearing characteristics of sunflower stalk residue. Biosyst. Eng. 2005, 92, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Igathinathane, C.; Womac, A.; Sokhansanj, S.; Narayan, S. Size reduction of high-and low-moisture corn stalks by linear knife grid system. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33, 547–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Özbek, O.; Seflek, A.; Carman, K. Some mechanical properties of safflower stalk. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2009, 25, 619–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Igathinathane, C.; Pordesimo, L.; Schilling, M.; Columbus, E. Fast and simple measurement of cutting energy requirement of plant stalk and prediction model development. Ind. Crops Prod. 2011, 33, 518–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Gedam, K.V.; Deshmukh, M.; Thakare, S. Effect of blade parameters on force for cutting sugarcane stalk. BIOINFOLET-A Q. J. Life Sci. 2015, 12, 994–997. [Google Scholar]
  61. Liu, Q.; Qu, Y.; Qing, S.; Cheng, H. Failure tests of sugarcane stalks under torsion, compression and tension load. Trans. CSAE China 2006, 22, 201–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Chen, Y.; Chen, J.; Zhang, Y.; Zhou, D. Effect of harvest date on shearing force of maize stems. Livest. Sci. 2007, 111, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhao, C.; Zhang, F.; Cao, Z. Experiment on stalk mechanical properties of legume forage and grasses. Trans. CSA China 2009, 25, 122–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. He, X.; Wu, X.; Zhang, L.; Chen, L. Research of Mechanics Characteristics for Soybean Stalks Compression. J. Agric. Mech. Res. China 2010, 32, 164–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Yan, Y.; Zhao, S.; Yang, Y.; Tian, B. Study on mechanics properties of soybean stems in mature stage. J. Northeast. Agric. Univ. China 2012, 43, 46–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Men, H.; Zhang, R.; Yuan, Y.; Zhu, C.; Yang, Q. Multiple Regression Analysis of Seedling Characters and Transplanting Modes on Yield of Welsh Onion. Shandong Agric. Sci. China 2014, 46, 23–25+32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Chen, S. Finite Element Modeling and Analysis of Cassava Stalk Statics Simulation Based on ANSYS. Master’s Thesis, Hainan University, Hainan, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  68. Xiao, L. The Experiment Study on Mechanic Characteristic of Puelia Stalks and Single Disc Cutting Experiment Simulation. Master’s Thesis, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou, China, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Li, C. Experimental Study of the Mechanical Properties of Cassava Stalk. Master’s Thesis, Hainan University, Hainan, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  70. Min, W.; Hongyu, P.; Donglin, Z.; Dong, L. Analysis of Physicochemical Composition and Dynamic Mechanical Properties of Avena sativa Stalk. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. China 2018, 49, 447–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Liu, X.; Liang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Cao, J. Impact of Planting Density on the Agronomic Traits and Yield of Chinese Onion. Inn. Mong. Agric. Sci. Technol. China 2019, 47, 86–89. [Google Scholar]
  72. Du, Z.; Hu, Y.; Buttar, N.A. Analysis of mechanical properties for tea stem using grey relational analysis coupled with multiple linear regression. Sci. Hortic. 2020, 260, 108886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Yang, L.; Min, W.; Baoqin, W.; Jingbin, L.; Liqiao, L.; Za, K. Experimental study on the mechanical properties of Glycyrrhiza glabra stem on the grey correlation theory. J. Chin. Agric. Mech. China 2021, 42, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Wang, F.; Ma, S.; Xing, H.; Bai, J.; Ma, J.; Yang, Y.; Hu, J. Base cutting energy consumption for sugarcane stools using contra-rotating basecutters. Trans. ASABE 2021, 64, 221–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Sun, G.; Pan, Y.; Wang, F. Study on Physical and Mechanical Properties of Green Onion. J. Agric. Mech. Res. China 2022, 44, 159–165+172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Yu, Q.; Qiao, N.; Lu, H.; Hu, X.; Li, G.; Zhu, H. Effect Study of Plant Roots Reinforcement on Soil. Chin. J. Rock Mech. Eng. China 2012, 31, 3216–3223. [Google Scholar]
  77. Zhou, Y.; Chen, J.; Wang, X. Progress of study on soil reinforcement mechanisms by root and its expectation. Ecol. Environ. Sci. China 2012, 21, 1171–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Liu, X. Study on Friction and Anchorage Characteristics Between Root System and Soil. Master’s Thesis, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  79. Yun, S. The Research on the Mechanism of Vegetation for Slope Stabilization and the Design and Management of the Vegetation. Master’s Thesis, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha, China, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  80. Xin, Q.; Lv, Z.; Zhang, W.; Liu, L.; Cheng, X. Study on Pulling Force and Influencing Factors of Potato Seedling in Mature Period. J. Agric. Mech. Res. China 2020, 42, 173–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Liu, Q.; Tian, C.; Xu, L.; Lv, Z.; Liu, X.; Song, Y.; Yun, Y. Effect of Soil Physical Properties on Mechanical Pulling Process of Carrot. Agric. Eng. China 2019, 9, 63–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Xue, D.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, J.; Liu, X. Design and experimental research of mobile cotton stalk pulling resistance test device based on response surface method. J. Chin. Agric. Mech. China 2021, 42, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Wang, C.; Hu, X.; Liu, C.; Li, X.; Fu, J.; Lu, H.; Zhao, J.; Xing, G.; He, W.; Yang, F.; et al. Study on the Characteristics and Influence Factors of Root Pull-out Resistance of Six Grasses in the Source Region of the Yellow River. Acta Agrestia Sin. China 2023, 31, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Liu, Q.; Xu, L.; Liu, X.; Lv, Z.; Song, Y.; Li, C. Research on dynamic behavior during mechanical pulling of carrot based on distinct element method. J. Chin. Agric. Mech. China 2018, 39, 61–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Yan, K.; Yao, S.; Huang, Y.; Zhao, Z. Study on pulling dynamic characteristics of white radish and the optimal design of a harvesting device. Agriculture 2023, 13, 942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Wu, W.; Pan, L.; Tang, L.; Liao, L.; Ruan, S. Friction characteristics of root-soil interface during branches root pull-out of Indigofera amblyantha and Cassia bicapsulafis. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. China 2023, 39, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Peng, S. Design and Research on Key Technology of Double-Row Self-Propelled Welsh Onion Combine Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Qingdao University of Technology, Qingdao, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  88. Feng, H. Design and Research of Double-Row Pulling Carrot Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  89. Liu, Y.; Guo, H.; Li, L.; Sun, Y.; Simayi, A.; Li, Q. Developing of Gripping Chain Cotton Straw pulling up Machine. Xinjiang Agric. Mech. China 2017, 10–11+15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Wang, Z.; Baikeli, Y.; Song, L. Design of a Gripping-Chain Type Uprooting Machine for Xinjiang Cotton Stalks. Jiangsu Agric. Mech. China 2023, 4, 11–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Song, Y. Low Damage Optimization and Test of the Pulling and Conveying Device of Spinach Whole Plant Orderly Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Shandong Agricultural University, Jinan, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  92. Zou, L. Research on the Key Technologies of Low Damage and Orderly Harvest for Spinach with Root. Doctoral Thesis, Shandong Agricultural University, Jinan, China, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Yao, S. Optimal Design and Experimental Research on Key Components of Cabbage Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  94. Yang, J. Design and Experimental Study of Cabbage Picking and Conveying Device. Master’s Thesis, Jiamusi University, Jiamusi, China, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Ma, M. Design and Optimization of Harvesting Components of Self-Propelled Cabbage Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Jiamusi University, Jiamusi, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  96. Wang, S. Design and Experimental Research of Self-Propelled Cabbage Harvesting Test Platform. Master’s Thesis, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  97. Yang, R. Study on Design Principle and Tests for Main Parts of 4HQL-2 Peanut Combine. Doctoral Thesis, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang, China, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  98. Hu, Z. Study on Key Technologies of Half-Feed Peanut Combine Harvester. Doctoral Thesis, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  99. Yang, J. Research on the Key Components of Garlic Harvester Based on the Disruptive Innovation Theory. Master’s Thesis, University of Jinan, Jinan, China, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Zhang, J. Research on Physical and Mechanical Properties of Headed Chinese Cabbage and Its Crawler Self-Propelled Harvesting Equipment. Doctoral Thesis, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Zhao, Y. Structural Design and Performance Experimental Research of Self-Propelled Harvester for Densely Planted Broccoli. Master’s Thesis, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  102. Guo, X. Study on Gripping Delivery Mechanism For Vertical-roller Corn Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Shandong University of Technology, Zibo, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  103. Hu, S. The current research status and prospective development directions of corn harvesting machinery. Mod. Agric. China 2013, 3, 59–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Fan, G.; Yang, Q.; Zhang, X.; Wang, J.; Chen, R.; Ge, Y. Design and Test of Intelligent Tobacco Topping Machine with Clamping Belt. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. China 2017, 48, 121–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Zhu, G. Study on the Mechanism and Device of Biomimetic Ear Picking for Fresh Corn. Doctoral Thesis, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  106. Tong, W. Structural Design and Test Optimization of Key Components of Hand-Held Cabbage Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang, China, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Chen, J.; Song, J.; Guan, Z.; Lian, Y. Measurement of the distance from grain divider to harvesting boundary based on dynamic regions of interest. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2021, 14, 226–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Ji, K.; Li, Y.; Liang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Cheng, J.; Wang, H.; Zhu, R.; Xia, S.; Zheng, G. Device and Method Suitable for Matching and Adjusting Reel Speed and Forward Speed of Multi-Crop Harvesting. Agriculture 2022, 12, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Zhuang, X.; Li, Y. Segmentation and Angle Calculation of Rice Lodging during Harvesting by a Combine Harvester. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Xin, S. Study on the Mechanism and Key Technology of Corn Ear Picking with Vertical Roller. Doctoral Thesis, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, China, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Li, Y.; Wan, X.; Liao, Q.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Liao, Y. Design and experiment of wide folding rape windrower based on crawler type power chassis. J. Jilin Univ. (Eng. Technol. Ed.) China 2023, 54, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Zhang, W.; Yang, X.; Guo, H.; Sun, R.; Huo, Y.; He, Q. Design and experiment of track–type and self–propelledchive harvester. Agric. Equip. Veh. Eng. China 2024, 62, 1–6+13. [Google Scholar]
  113. Yan, D. Design and Test of Brush Roller Safflower Harvesting Device. Master’s Thesis, Shandong Agricultural University, Jinan, China, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Wei, W. Design and Experimental Study on Key Components of Brassica Chinensis Orderly Harvester. Doctoral Thesis, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Chao, L. Design and Test of Walking Garlic Combine Harvester. Master’s Thesis, Shandong Agricultural University, Jinan, China, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Wei, L. Research on Key Technologies and Equipment For Reducing Losses in Cutting and Threshing of Oil Sunflower Combine Harvester. Doctoral Thesis, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  117. Kachru, R.; Sahay, K. Developing and testing of pedal-cum-power operated air screen grain cleaner. Agric. Mech. Asia Afr. Lat. Am. 1990, 21, 29–32. [Google Scholar]
  118. Srivastav, S.; Joshi, D. Mathematical model for design and development of double drum rotary screen cleaner-cum-grader for cumin seed. Agric. Mech. Asia Afr. Lat. Am. 2013, 44, 70–74. [Google Scholar]
  119. Jethva, K.; Varshney, A. Design and development of reciprocating type cumin cleaner cum grader. Agric. Mech. Asia Afr. Lat. Am. 2016, 47, 8. [Google Scholar]
  120. Aradwad, P.P.; TV, A.K.; Mani, I.; Sahoo, P. Design and Development of Cumin Destalker Machine. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 2022, 81, 705–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Alkhaldi, H.; Eberhard, P. Particle screening phenomena in an oblique multi-level tumbling reservoir: A numerical study using discrete element simulation. Granul. Matter 2007, 9, 415–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Zhao, L.; Liu, C.; Yan, J. A virtual experiment showing single particle motion on a linearly vibrating screen-deck. Min. Sci. Technol. China 2010, 20, 276–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Li, J.; Webb, C.; Pandiella, S.; Campbell, G.M. A numerical simulation of separation of crop seeds by screening—Effect of particle bed depth. Food Bioprod. Process. 2002, 80, 109–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Myhan, R.; Jachimczyk, E. Grain separation in a straw walker unit of a combine harvester: Process model. Biosyst. Eng. 2016, 145, 93–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Lawinska, K.; Modrzewski, R. Analysis of sieve holes blocking in a vibrating screen and a rotary and drum screen. Physicochem. Probl. Miner. Process. 2017, 53, 812–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Ma, X.; Guo, B.; Li, L. Simulation and experiment study on segregation mechanism of rice from straws under horizontal vibration. Biosyst. Eng. 2019, 186, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Li, Y.; Xu, L.; Zhou, Y.; Li, B.; Liang, Z.; Li, Y. Effects of throughput and operating parameters on cleaning performance in air-and-screen cleaning unit: A computational and experimental study. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2018, 152, 141–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Gebrehiwot, M.G.; De Baerdemaeker, J.; Baelmans, M. Effect of a cross-flow opening on the performance of a centrifugal fan in a combine harvester: Computational and experimental study. Biosyst. Eng. 2010, 105, 247–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Gebrehiwot, M.G.; De Baerdemaeker, J.; Baelmans, M. Numerical and experimental study of a cross-flow fan for combine cleaning shoes. Biosyst. Eng. 2010, 106, 448–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Panasiewicz, M.; Sobczak, P.; Mazur, J.; Zawiślak, K.; Andrejko, D. The technique and analysis of the process of separation and cleaning grain materials. J. Food Eng. 2012, 109, 603–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Chen, X.; Bai, J.; Wang, X.; Fang, W.; Hong, T.; Zang, N.; Fang, L.; Wang, G. Calibration and Testing of Discrete Elemental Simulation Parameters for Pod Pepper Seeds. Agriculture 2024, 14, 831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Chen, X.; Wang, X.; Bai, J.; Fang, W.; Hong, T.; Zang, N.; Wang, G. Virtual parameter calibration of pod pepper seeds based on discrete element simulation. Heliyon 2024, 10, e31686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Du, C.; Han, D.; Song, Z.; Chen, Y.; Chen, X.; Wang, X. Calibration of contact parameters for complex shaped fruits based on discrete element method: The case of pod pepper (Capsicum annuum). Biosyst. Eng. 2023, 226, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Fang, W.; Wang, X.; Han, D.; Chen, X. Review of material parameter calibration method. Agriculture 2022, 12, 706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Liang, Z.; Li, J.; Liang, J.; Shao, Y.; Zhou, T.; Si, Z.; Li, Y. Investigation into experimental and DEM simulation of guide blade optimum arrangement in multi-rotor combine harvesters. Agriculture 2022, 12, 435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Wang, L.; Chai, X.; Huang, J.; Hu, J.; Cui, Z. Efficient and Low-Loss Cleaning Method for Non-Uniform Distribution of Threshed Materials Based on Multi-Wing Curved Combination Air Screen in Computational Fluid Dynamics/Discrete Element Method Simulations. Agriculture 2024, 14, 895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Yuan, H.; Cai, Y.; Liang, S.; Ku, J.; Qin, Y. Numerical simulation and analysis of feeding uniformity of viscous miscellaneous fish bait based on EDEM software. Agriculture 2023, 13, 356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Yuan, H.; Liang, S.; Wang, J.; Lu, Y. Numerical simulation and analysis of vibrating rice filling based on EDEM software. Agriculture 2022, 12, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Gierz, L.; Kruszelnicka, W.; Robakowska, M.; Przybl, K.; Koszela, K.; Marciniak, A.; Zwiachel, T. Optimization of the Sowing Unit of a Piezoelectrical Sensor Chamber with the Use of Grain Motion Modeling by Means of the Discrete Element Method. Case Study Rape Seed. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 1594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Jawad, H.M.; Jawad, A.M.; Nordin, R.; Gharghan, S.K.; Abdullah, N.F.; Ismail, M.; Abu-AlShaeer, M.J. Accurate Empirical Path-Loss Model Based on Particle Swarm Optimization for Wireless Sensor Networks in Smart Agriculture. IEEE Sens. J. 2020, 20, 552–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Kumar, B.; Shaloo, H.; Bisht, H.; Meena, M.C.; Dey, A.; Dass, A.; Paramesh, V.; Babu, S.; Upadhyay, P.K.; Prajapati, V.K.; et al. Nitrogen management sensor optimization, yield, economics, and nitrogen use efficiency of different wheat cultivars under varying nitrogen levels. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2023, 7, 1228221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Sharma, C.; Choudhury, R.; Sarma, U. Sensor Array Optimization to Design and Develop an Electronic Nose System for the Detection of Water Stress in Khasi Mandarin Orange. J. Circuits Syst. Comput. 2022, 31, 2250172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Tang, R.; Yang, J.; Tang, J.; Aridas, N.K.; Abu Talip, M.S. Design of agricultural wireless sensor network node optimization method based on improved data fusion algorithm. PLoS ONE 2024, 19, e0308845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Xu, S.; Xu, X.; Blacker, C.; Gaulton, R.; Zhu, Q.; Yang, M.; Yang, G.; Zhang, J.; Yang, Y.; Yang, M.; et al. Estimation of Leaf Nitrogen Content in Rice Using Vegetation Indices and Feature Variable Optimization with Information Fusion of Multiple-Sensor Images from UAV. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Luo, Y.; Wei, L.; Xu, L.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, J.; Cai, Q.; Zhang, W. Stereo-vision-based multi-crop harvesting edge detection for precise automatic steering of combine harvester. Biosyst. Eng. 2022, 215, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Liang, Z.; Huang, Y.; Li, D.; Wada, M.E. Parameter determination of a viscoelastic-plastic contact model for potatoes during transient collisions. Biosyst. Eng. 2023, 234, 156–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Shi, M.; Liang, Z.; Zhang, J.; Xu, L.; Song, X. A robust prediction method based on Kriging method and fuzzy c-means algorithm with application to a combine harvester. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 2022, 65, 260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Chen, H.; Dai, S.; Ou, M.; Li, S.; Wang, C.; Li, Z.; Wang, G.; Chen, Y.; Jia, W. Multibody Dynamics Simulation and Vibration Test for High Clearance Orchard Sprayer. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Han, L.; Liu, Y.; Mo, M.; Ma, H.; Kumi, F.; Mao, H. Development and Evaluation of a Walking Type Two-row Semi-automatic Transplanter for Vegetable Plug Seedlings. Ama-Agric. Mech. Asia Afr. Lat. Am. 2023, 54. [Google Scholar]
  150. Huang, M.; Jiang, X.; He, L.; Choi, D.; Pecchia, J.; Li, Y. Development of a robotic harvesting mechanism for button mushrooms. Trans. Asabe 2021, 64, 565–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Ji, W.; He, G.; Xu, B.; Zhang, H.; Yu, X. A New Picking Pattern of a Flexible Three-Fingered End-Effector for Apple Harvesting Robot. Agriculture 2024, 14, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Liu, H.; Yan, S.; Shen, Y.; Li, C.; Zhang, Y.; Hussain, F. Model predictive control system based on direct yaw moment control for 4WID self-steering agriculture vehicle. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2021, 14, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Liu, J.; Liang, J.; Zhao, S.; Jiang, Y.; Wang, J.; Jin, Y. Design of a Virtual Multi-Interaction Operation System for Hand-Eye Coordination of Grape Harvesting Robots. Agronomy 2023, 13, 829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Xu, Z.; Liu, J.; Wang, J.; Cai, L.; Jin, Y.; Zhao, S.; Xie, B. Realtime Picking Point Decision Algorithm of Trellis Grape for High-Speed Robotic Cut-and-Catch Harvesting. Agronomy 2023, 13, 1618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Zhu, Q.; Zhang, H.; Zhu, Z.; Gao, Y.; Chen, L. Structural Design and Simulation of Pneumatic Conveying Line for a Paddy Side-Deep Fertilisation System. Agriculture 2022, 12, 867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Lu, E.; Tian, Z.; Xu, L.; Ma, Z.; Luo, C. Observer-based robust cooperative formation tracking control for multiple combine harvesters. Nonlinear Dyn. 2023, 111, 15109–15125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Xue, H.; Ding, D.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, M.; Wang, H. A Fuzzy System of Operation Safety Assessment Using Multimodel Linkage and Multistage Collaboration for In-Wheel Motor. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 2022, 30, 999–1013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Fue, K.; Porter, W.; Barnes, E.; Li, C.; Rains, G. Center-Articulated Hydrostatic Cotton Harvesting Rover Using Visual-Servoing Control and a Finite State Machine. Electronics 2020, 9, 1226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Gu, S.; Sun, S.; Wang, X.; Wang, S.; Yang, M.; Li, J.; Maimaiti, P.; van der Werf, W.; Evers, J.B.; Zhang, L. Optimizing radiation capture in machine-harvested cotton: A functional-structural plant modelling approach to chemical vs. manual topping strategies. Field Crops Res. 2024, 317, 109553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Ju, Y.; Sun, W.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, H.; Liu, X.; Zhang, H.; Li, H.; Simionescu, P.A. Development and Testing of a Self-Propelled Machine for Combined Potato Harvesting and Residual Plastic Film Retrieval. Machines 2023, 11, 432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agriculture 15 00809 g001
Figure 1. Cumin planting and segmented-harvesting process (The entire process proceeds sequentially in the direction indicated by the arrows).
Figure 1. Cumin planting and segmented-harvesting process (The entire process proceeds sequentially in the direction indicated by the arrows).
Agriculture 15 00809 g001
Agriculture 15 00809 g002
Figure 2. (a) Detailed morphological diagram of cumin plant and (b) authentic photograph of cumin plant morphology.
Figure 2. (a) Detailed morphological diagram of cumin plant and (b) authentic photograph of cumin plant morphology.
Agriculture 15 00809 g002
Agriculture 15 00809 g003
Figure 3. Agronomic parameters of the cotton–cumin intercropping planting model (The dashed line is the Centerline of a planting module).
Figure 3. Agronomic parameters of the cotton–cumin intercropping planting model (The dashed line is the Centerline of a planting module).
Agriculture 15 00809 g003
Agriculture 15 00809 g004
Figure 4. Structural diversity in plant root systems: a comparative analysis of fibrous root, storage root, and taproot.
Figure 4. Structural diversity in plant root systems: a comparative analysis of fibrous root, storage root, and taproot.
Agriculture 15 00809 g004
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tai, S.; Tang, Z.; Li, B.; Wang, S.; Guo, X. Cumin-Harvesting Mechanization of the Xinjiang Cotton–Cumin Intercropping System: Review of the Problem Status and Solutions. Agriculture 2025, 15, 809. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080809

AMA Style

Tai S, Tang Z, Li B, Wang S, Guo X. Cumin-Harvesting Mechanization of the Xinjiang Cotton–Cumin Intercropping System: Review of the Problem Status and Solutions. Agriculture. 2025; 15(8):809. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080809

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tai, Sheng, Zhong Tang, Bin Li, Shiguo Wang, and Xiaohu Guo. 2025. "Cumin-Harvesting Mechanization of the Xinjiang Cotton–Cumin Intercropping System: Review of the Problem Status and Solutions" Agriculture 15, no. 8: 809. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080809

APA Style

Tai, S., Tang, Z., Li, B., Wang, S., & Guo, X. (2025). Cumin-Harvesting Mechanization of the Xinjiang Cotton–Cumin Intercropping System: Review of the Problem Status and Solutions. Agriculture, 15(8), 809. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080809

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop