Microsoft Word - 1-605-ed.doc
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 5, No. 6, 2015, 871-875 871
www.etasr.com Wu: Developing Situation of Tea Harvesting Machines in Taiwan
Developing Situation of
Tea Harvesting Machines in Taiwan
Chia-Chang Wu
Tea Machinery
Tea Research and Extension Station
Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C.
tds311@ttes.gov.tw
Abstract—In recent years rapid social change and industrial and
commercial development in Taiwan has lead to migration of
rural labor, population ageing, high wages and labor shortages,
which resulted in significant problems for the tea industry. Thus,
mechanization in the tea industry emerges as the direction for the
future. According to a survey, tea harvesting and tea
manufacturing use 87% and 5% of available labor, so the
mechanization of tea harvesting is a priority. The application and
development of tea harvesting machines worldwide and especially
in Taiwan in recent years is investigated in this paper.
Recommendations are made for the implementation of tea
harvesting machinery in Taiwan in the future. This report may
also used as a reference for the use of mechanical harvesting.
Keywords- tea; plucking; machine; tea harvesting
I. INTRODUCTION
Taiwan is the sole producer of non-fermented tea, partially
fermented tea and completely fermented tea in the world. In
2013, the value of primary processed tea was NT$6.7 billion.
The sum of the value of tea-related marketing and connected
industry (such as, leisure, arts, cultural and creative and
tourism) of bonus is estimated to be more than NT$30 billion.
With canned tea drinks and tea shops, the total is more than
NT$70 billion. In recent years tea has become the most
competitive agricultural product. Social changes have affected
the industry and migration of young people from the
countryside resulted to a gradual ageing of the labor pool and a
labor shortage in tea producing areas. Wages have also
increased, so the production and manufacturing costs have
increased. Therefore, the introduction of machinery emerges as
a necessity for the tea harvesting industry in order to reduce the
dependence on labor and costs.
Tea production, manufacturing and marketing are highly
labor-intensive. Harvesting and transportation labor is intensive
In the tea production process, including tea plantation
reclamation, planting, cultivation, irrigation, fertilization, pest
and disease control, weed control and pruning. In tea leaf
processing, fresh leaves are withered in the sun, set and tossed
indoors, fermented, stirred, rolled, dried, de-stemmed, roasted
and packaged, which requires much labor and capital.
According to a Chinese academic report, the cost in working
hours for tea harvesting accounts for 45% and 50-60% of tea
production and management [1]. According to a survey by the
Taiwan Tea Experiment Station in 2014, the tea industry is
especially in need of labor. The manual harvesting of tea
accounts for 87% and tea manufacturing accounts for 5%. The
greatest shortage of labor occurs in April and May, so there is a
seasonal lack of labor. The report also shows that tea
production costs account for 40%, with labor expenditure for
tea harvesting accounting for 80%. The time at which tea is
harvested affects the quality and price of tea, so labor
availability. Labor shortages, aging workforce and increasing
wages result to mechanical harvesting becoming rather
important for the tea production and manufacturing processes.
Japan has the highest penetration of tea harvesting machines. In
Taiwan, the Mingjian tea area in Nantou and the northern part
of the Pinglin tea area have used mechanical harvesting for
many years with good results. In China, Sri Lanka and India
mechanical harvesting also increased gradually.
This study focuses on the tea producing countries of the
world, the harvesting machinery and its use for systemic
collation. The study shows that Taiwanese tea plantations
should increase their mechanical harvesting in the future. This
paper aims to serve as a reference for agricultural authorities
during policy setting and also as a guide for tea plantations
managers and farmers.
II. THE STUDY AND APPLICATION OF TEA HARVESTING
MACHINES
Taiwan, China, Japan, India and Kenya are the major
producers of tea harvesting machinery. Japan is the biggest and
most advanced producer. Japan was the first country to use
mechanical plucking for tea, when the big scissor was
introduced in 1910. In 1915 the patent was approved and in
1920 the spreader big scissor was used in tea plantations. In
1960, a self-propelled tea plucking machine and a ride-on tea
plucking machine were designed. Some more specialized teas
in the Yulu tea plantation were still hand-plucked, but the
mechanical plucking of tea accounted for almost 90 % of all tea
plucked in Japanese tea plantations. By 1980, tea plantations
were commonly using tea plucking machines and the quantity
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 5, No. 6, 2015, 871-875 872
www.etasr.com Wu: Developing Situation of Tea Harvesting Machines in Taiwan
of tea plucking machine reached 10, 0000 [2-4]. Using tea
plucking machines significantly increased the productivity,
reduced the dependence on labor and the production costs.
In 1960, China began to consider the use of tea plucking
machines and later studies concerned the cutting, fracture,
folding and rolling of plucked tea leaves. Manual, saddle-
maneuvered and manually dragged tea machineries were
subjected to experiments. By the 1980s, Chinese manufacturers
began to study double type plucking machines. However,
single and double tea plucking machinery remains all imported
[3]. In 1929, Russia imported plucking shears from Japan and
in 1930 developed a reciprocating cut tricycle-type tea plucking
machine. In 1953, studies began to focus on tea plucking
machines and in 1965 a self-propelled tea plucking machine
was developed but it was only suitable for use on plains with
gradients less than 10 degrees and on gently sloping tea
plantations. Therefore, it could only be used in 40% of
plantations. In 1970, a cutting tea plucking machine was
developed.
Taiwan began to use the big scissor in 1951. It replaced the
manual plucking of tea leaves and was being widely used in
Longtan and Yangmei, in northern Taiwan, by 1957. The big
scissor only allowed 120kg of leaves to be plucked, and it was
a difficult task, so its use was not that widespread [5]. The tea
experiment station in Pingzhen (The predecessor of Taiwan
Tea Experiment Station) introduced a single burden Japanese
tea plucking machine in 1964. The farmer used the single tea
plucking machine instead of the big scissor for tea leaf
plucking. Funding came from the Joint Commission on Rural
Reconstruction (The predecessor of Council of Agriculture)
and 42 Japanese single reciprocating tea plucking machines
were introduced in 1970. In 1973, experiments took place
involving reciprocating and rotary type double tea plucking
machines. These machines plucking replaced manual plucking
in tea plantations in Dongshan, Pinglin and Lugu counties from
1983 to 1985 [4].
In order to reduce the operating costs for the double type
plucking machine, the Taiwan Tea Experiment Station
introduced a Japanese rail operating system in 1992. At the
same time the rail operating material and the operation vehicles
were localized and the system was used in the Mingjian tea
plantation [6].
III. MECHANICAL TEA HARVEST EXPERIMENTS
A comprehensive analysis of the literature on tea harvesting
machine experiments from 1996-2014 follows. The harvesting
efficiency of different harvesting machines, the pruning
operation period, the cost of management operations for
machine harvesting and manual harvest of tea and the
efficiency of rail mounted machines are detailed. This is a
comprehensive and authoritative guide to the use of harvesting
machines in tea plantations.
A. A comparison of the harvesting efficiency of different
harvesting machines
Chang [7] compared the efficiency of manual plucking and
machine plucking (Big scissor, Ochiai type tea plucking
machine, Uchida type tea plucking machine and Fujimi type
tea plucking machine) for different types of tree crown
(mountain type, semicircular type and level type). The weight
of the tea harvest for different plucking methods was
determined and it was found that the harvesting efficiency of
power plucking machines is greater than that for manual
plucking (Table I). The results showed that the Ochiai type tea
plucking machine (rotary cutting type), the Uchida type tea
plucking machine and the Fujimi type tea plucking machine
were 5-8 times more efficient than manual plucking. The
Fujimi type plucking machine rotates more slowly than the
Ochiai type tea plucking machine (rotary cutting type) and the
Uchida type tea plucking machine. The results show that
manual tea plucking is more labor intensive and incurs greater
production costs than machine plucking. These studies clearly
show that in tea plantations, mechanization improves
harvesting and increases production. The best results were
obtained using a dynamic tea plucking machine that used the
reciprocating cutting method. This increased the quality of tea
bud selection and avoided coarseness that is associated with old
leaves (data not shown). The report stated that the intense
vibration of the machine induced operator fatigue so improving
the performance of tea plucking machines would be crucial.
TABLE I. A COMPARISON OF THE EFFICIENCY OF DIFFERENT
HARVESTING METHODS IN G/MIN (SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF [7])
Plucking
Surface
Manual
harvest
Plucking
Shears
Orgiaii
plucking
machine
Ugita
plucking
machine
Fuji
Plucking
machine
Triangular
plane
21.64* 74.11 142.00 132.75 110.50
Hemispherical
plane
17.42 67.53 159.00 144.25 94.67
Horizontal
plane
24.00 83.10 162.00 176.25 99.78
B. The effect of a transition from manual plucking to
mechanical plucking in terms of yield and tea quality
Hung et al. [8] evaluated the transition from manual
plucking to mechanical plucking in Pinglin and Mingjian. The
feasibility of a tea plantation’s transition from manual to
mechanical plucking is shown in the second year’s data.
Manual plucking of tea after shaping was necessary before
mechanical plucking, because the density of tea buds must be
uniform, so the yield of fresh tea leaves increased (Table II). In
terms of quality, tea buds do not grow uniformly in the Pinlin
tea area, so the tea evaluation scores after manufacturing were
lower than those for the mechanical plucking experimental
area, but the scent was similar for manually harvested and
mechanically harvested tea in both areas (Tables III and IV).
Mechanical plucking allows more centralization and fresh tea
leaves can be withered indoors, so leaf moisture evaporates
uniformly, which results in a better fragrance. For a large area
and flat terrain in the Mingjian tea area, manual plucking and
mechanical plucking should produce more significant
differences. Hung et al. concluded that a transition from
manual plucking to mechanical plucking was possible, but its
feasibility depended on the manner in which the tea was grown
and mechanical plucking required the formation of a curved
plucking crown [8].
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 5, No. 6, 2015, 871-875 873
www.etasr.com Wu: Developing Situation of Tea Harvesting Machines in Taiwan
TABLE II. THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT HARVESTING METHODS ON
THE WEIGHT OF FRESH TEA LEAVES HARVESTED IN KG/EXPERIMENT AREA
(SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF [8])
Pyng Len Ming Jian
Crop
season
Machine
harvest
Manual
harvest
Machine
harvest
Manual
harvest
Spring 37.3 29.7 108.4 120.0
Summer 26.1 16.8 109.4 94.4
Autumn 34.5 30.0 90 80
Winter 22.8 21.6 47 42
TABLE III. THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT HARVESTING METHODS ON
THE QUALITY OF TEA (PYNG LEN) (SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF [8])
Crop
season
Harvest
Appea
rance
(20%)
Color
(20%)
Color of
liquid
(10%)
Aroma
&taste
(30%)
Tea
dregs
(10%)
Total
scores
(100%)
Machine 16.0 15.5 16.2 24.2 8.3 80.5
Spring
Manual 16.5 16.5 16.5 24.5 8.5 82.5
Machine 13.5 13.0 14.5 19.5 6.8 67.3
Summer
Manual 14.2 14.2 15.0 20.0 7.5 70.9
Machine 14.0 14.0 15.5 19.5 7.2 70.2
Autumn
Manual 14.6 14.5 15.0 21.5 7.2 72.2
Machine 15.0 15.0 16.0 22.0 7.8 75.8
Winter
Manual 14.0 14.5 15.2 20.5 7.2 71.4
TABLE IV. THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT HARVESTING METHODS ON
THE QUALITY OF TEA (MING JIAN) (SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF [8])
Crop
season
Harvest
Appea
rance
(20%)
Color
(20%)
Color of
liquid
(10%)
Aroma
&taste
(30%)
Tea
dregs
(10%)
Total
scores
(100%)
Machine 15.0 15.0 15.0 22.8 7.8 74.6
Spring
Manual 15.5 15.5 15.0 23.0 7.8 76.8
Machine 14.8 15.0 14.8 21.3 6.8 72.7
Summer
Manual 15.0 15.2 15.0 21.8 7.2 74.2
Machine 15.8 16.0 15.5 22.5 7.5 77.3
Autumn
Manual 15.8 15.5 14.8 21.0 7.2 74.3
Machine 15.8 16.2 15.8 23.0 7.5 78.3
Winter
Manual 15.6 15.8 15.8 23.5 7.5 78.2
C. The effect on leaf quality of pruning at different times
Lee [9] investigated the effects of pruning tea at different
times: in winter (a week after the winter solstice) and spring (a
week after spring tea plucking). The crown continued to be
pruned (depth of pruning is 5cm) at Chin Shin Oolong
(Camellia sinensis (L.) O. kuntz) tea plantation and the height
and growth of the crown were measured during the harvesting
period. Table V shows the results for crown pruning operations
in winter and spring. The height of the tea plant and the crown
in the manual plucking experimental tea area show less
significant differences. The experimental area that used
machine plucking for pruning operations in winter or spring,
also showed less significant differences in the height of the tea
plant and the crown. The height of the plant increased by 1.2-
1.5cm, and the crown was larger by 2.1-2.7cm in the
mechanical plucking area than in the manual plucking area.
The density of tea buds affects yield and quality, so this must
be controlled within a certain range. A large number of tall
plants could cause a nutrient shortage, which would result in
smaller tea buds and thinning. A smaller density of buds can
result excessive vegetative growth in plant and the quality of
the fresh leaves is lower.
TABLE V. A COMPARISON OF THE HEIGHT AND WIDTH OF TEA
BUSHES IN CM (SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF [9])
After pruning
the previous year
Before pruning
current year
Total growth
Treatment Bush
height
Bush
width
Bush
height
Bush
width
Bush
height
Bush
width
Manual harvest
Prune after
winter tea
54.2 106.8 59.5 111.8 5.3 5.0
Prune after
spring tea
54.6 104.8 60.0 108.9 5.4 4.1
Machine harvest
Prune after
winter tea
54.9 104.3 61.7 111.4 6.8 7.1
Prune after
spring tea
53.3 103.5 59.9 110.3 6.6 6.8
Table VI shows the results for pruning in the spring. Both
the manually plucked and mechanically plucked buds retain a
high density after pruning operations in winter and the density
of the tea buds increased by 24% per annum. For 2 - 3 harvests
in each area, tea bud density in winter was not affected by
pruning in winter or spring, either for manual or mechanical
plucking methods. Table VII shows the results for tea after
pruning in winter, to study the yield of tea leaves either for
manual or mechanical plucking and compares these with those
for significant pruning in spring. After pruning in winter,
thinning of the spring buds significantly reduces yield but
balancing autumn and winter tea produces less than significant
differences.
TABLE VI. A COMPARISON OF THE DENSITY OF TEA SHOOTS FOR
DIFFERENT SEASONS IN BUD/900 CM2 (SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF [9])
Crop season
Treatment Spring
tea
Summer
tea
2nd Summer
tea
Autumn
tea
Winter
tea
Manual harvest
Prune after
winter tea
87.1 95.2 101.5 75.3 90.0
Prune after
spring tea
117.9 73.5 89.8 70.8 99.1
Machine harvest
Prune after
winter tea
93.9 87.2 95.4 74.7 97.3
Prune after
spring tea
118.9 69.1 88.8 69.6 96.9
TABLE VII. A COMPARISON OF THE YIELD OF FRESH TEA LEA
LEAVES FOR DIFFERENT PRUNING AND HARVESTING METHODS IN
DIFFERENT SEASONS IN KG/40M LENGTH OF TEA BUSH (%) (SOURCE: AN
ADAPTATION OF [9])
Crop season
Treatment Spring
tea
Summer
tea
2nd Summer
tea
Autumn
tea
Winter
tea
Manual harvest
Prune after
winter tea
15.5
(66.8)
15.6
(219.7)
18.5
(149.2)
12.5
(112.6)
13.5
(95.7)
Prune after
spring tea
25.0
(107.8)
10.3
(145.0)
13.8
(111.3)
11.8
(106.3)
14.7
(104.3)
Machine harvest
Prune after
winter tea
16.2
(69.8)
12.2
(171.8)
15.7
(126.6)
14.1
(127.0)
13.2
(93.6)
Prune after
spring tea
23.2
(100.0)
7.1
(100.0)
12.4
(100.0)
11.1
(100.0)
14.1
(100.0)
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 5, No. 6, 2015, 871-875 874
www.etasr.com Wu: Developing Situation of Tea Harvesting Machines in Taiwan
In order to maintain yield and quality in the Chin Shin
Oolong (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. kuntz) tea plantation,
shaping operations (pruning) were necessary. To maintain the
density and growth of buds and to give an increased yield in
spring after the winter tea season partially fermented tea was
produced in spring and winter. When the Chin Shin Oolong
(Camellia sinensis (L.) O. kuntz) tea plantation underwent
shallow pruning, the experimental results show that pruning
after spring is more favorable. The total yields for the spring
and winter seasons with pruning in winter are 29-37% greater.
D. A comparison of the management of manual plucking and
machine plucking
A comparison of the management of tea plantations in the
Lugu tea area (manual plucking) and the Mingjian tea area
(machine plucking) is considered next. Since 1980, the
Mingjian tea area has implemented machine plucking. In this
area the altitude is 100-200m and the topography is flat.
However, in the Lugu tea area tea plucking is still primarily
dine manually. In this area the altitude is 300-1,500m and the
topography is mountainous. The tea plantation working hours
and production costs in Mingjian and Lugu tea areas in 1989
are summarized in Table VIII.
TABLE VIII. THE LABOR AND COST FOR TEA PRODUCTION FOR
DIFFERENT TYPES OF TEA CULTIVATION (SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF
[10])
Lugu Ming Jian
Items Time
(hour)
Cost of
production
(dollar/
hectare)
Time
(hour)
Cost of
production
(dollar/
hectare)
Weeding* 582
(16.9)
***
32,837
(10.6)
448.6
(35.0)
23,269
(14.9)
Fertilizing 244
(7.1)
24,145 (7.8) 204
(15.9)
13,417
(8.6)
Pest control 362
(10.5)
33,923
(10.9)
257
(20.1)
19,621
(12.6)
Tea harvest 2080
(60.4)
173,000
(55.6)
220
(17.2)
40,400
(26.0)
Others** 174
(5.1)
46,999
(15.1)
151
(11.7)
58,881
(37.9)
Total 3,442
(100)
310,904
(100)
1280.6
(100)
155,588
(100)
Note: *, includes weeding, mowing by machine, herbicides and artificial
grass. **, includes deep, mulching, pruning, machinery depreciation and
maintenance, fuel costs, wages and depreciation, irrigation, irrigation
equipment and other operations.
In the Lugu tea area, manual plucking working hours
constitute 60.4% of operation hours and manual plucking
accounts for 55.6% of production costs. In the Mingjian tea
area, manual plucking working hours constitute 17.2% of
operation hours and manual plucking accounts for 26.3% of
production costs. Huang [10] determined the cost of plucking
tea. In the Mingjian tea area (machine plucking), the cost per
hectare was NT$ 40,400 and in the Lugu tea area (manual
plucking) the cost per hectare was NT$ 173,000 [10]. The
wage for manual plucking of fresh leaves was NT$ 40-60 per
kilogram and the cost of machine plucking per hour was NT$
1000-1200, giving an average cost per kilogram of NT$ 2.5-
3.0 [10].
Huang [10] compared the results for the different
production methods and confirmed that the tea harvest
accounted for the highest percentage of tea plantation
management costs [10]. Therefore, it is concluded that
mechanical plucking is more profitable than manual plucking.
Over a full year, mechanical plucking significantly reduces
production costs.
E. The effect of different plucking methods on yield and
operational efficiency
Huang et al. [11] found that rail type mechanical plucking
reduces double type plucking machine labor costs. The tea
plantation was pruned in winter and the yield and efficiency for
the next year for aril type plucking machine harvest, double
type plucking machine and manual plucking were determined
[6]. Table IX shows the yield for manually harvested leaves is
significantly less than that for a rail type plucking machine or a
double type plucking machine. Rail type and double type
plucking machine give similar yields. Table X shows the
comparison of the yield of tea shoots and plucking time for a
rail type plucking machine, a double type plucking machine
and manual plucking. The data only concerns labor, collection
and transport costs ignored. Rail type plucking machine
harvesting requires only one person and double type plucking
machine operations requires two people. Each experimental
row was only 30m so the rail type plucking machine had to
stop and change direction, which increases the operating time.
TABLE IX. A COMPARISON OF THE YIELD OF FRESH TEA (SOURCE:
AN ADAPTATION OF [6])
Crop season
Plucking Spring
crop
Autumn
crop
Winter
crop
Rail machine 24.8* 21.4 24.0
Double type machine 23.1 24.3 22.3
Hand 15.7 17.9 15.1 `
Note: *, kg/4rows×30m length.
TABLE X. A COMPARISON OF THE YIELD OF TEA SHOOTS AND
PLUCKING TIME (SOURCE: AN ADAPTATION OF [6])
Plucking
Labor
(people)
Time
(hour)
Total
time
(hour)
Total
time per
hectare
(hour)
Cost of
harvest
(NT$)
Rail
machine
1 0.42 0.42 23.3 6,990
Double type
machine
2 0.20 0.40 22.2 6,660
Hand 16 1.57 25.12 1359.6 140,000
Hung et al. [11] suggested increasing the length of the tea
row to reduce the overall operating time by reducing
mechanical shutdown and changes of direction. Table X shows
that the harvest weight of fresh leaves for the rail type plucking
machine and double type plucking machine are both significant
higher than that for manual plucking, mainly because manually
plucked tea plantations have a lower growth density. There is
no significant difference in the density of tea buds and the
harvest weights between the rail type plucking machine harvest
and a double type plucking machine harvest. Lee [12] used
imported semi-self-propelled and self-propelled plucking
machine in a tea plantation to reduce the physical burden on the
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 5, No. 6, 2015, 871-875 875
www.etasr.com Wu: Developing Situation of Tea Harvesting Machines in Taiwan
operator, but this requires the coordination of two people. The
efficiency and effectiveness are no greater than that for a
double type plucking machine. These two types of plucking
machines impose restrictions on the width, slope and length of
rows and a self-propelled plucking machine is expensive, so it
is not generally feasible. A self-propelled plucking machine
was found to be suitable only for long rows with minimal
gradient. The cost of self-propelled plucking machine machines
is now $NT 1,000,000-4,000,000 and there is an additional
need to allot the space for mechanical rotating operations, so
they are only suitable for very large tea plantations.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Harvesting tea involves a large expenditure on seasonal
labor. Labor shortages in the labor and an aging workforce
mean that traditional manual plucking of tea leaves must be
replaced by mechanical plucking. The mechanical plucking of
tea leaves is quite common in Japan and Argentina. The
mechanical plucking of tea leaves has been used for many
years and the mechanical plucking technology has improved in
the Mingjian tea area of Nantou, Taiwan. China, Sri Lanka and
India are also currently mechanically plucking tea leaves. The
mechanical plucking of tea leaves of tea gives 8-15 time better
harvesting efficiency than manual harvesting. Compared with
manual plucking, mechanical plucking reduces production
costs by 50-70%. Mechanical plucking also leads to time
saving and superior quality since tea leaves arrive in less time
(and thus are fresher) to the factory. However, it should be
noted that manual plucking causes fewer tea leaves to be lost
during plucking, and thus improves tea quality, and that
mechanical plucking requires a pre-classification of tea leaves
to get a superior quality tea.
In order to reduce the production costs and to address the
labor shortage in Taiwan, the development of the mechanical
plucking of tea leaves is inevitable. However, machine
plucking over a long time, causes the tea buds to germinate and
there is an excessive increase in density. Tea leaves with a
density greater than 900cm² have more than 140 buds and the
shoot is thin. This causes the tea buds to develop facing-leaves,
the leaves become thin and tea quality is reduced. Therefore,
during the tea leaf harvest, there must be an appropriate control
of the mechanical blade and suitable pruning operations. In the
future, tea plantations that use mechanical plucking will require
more planning of the selection of the correct tea variety and
cultivator, deep plowing, fertilization, irrigation, disease and
pest management, tree crown pruning, machinery and tea
manufacturing techniques so that the tea is robust vigorous and
has an even branch size and distribution. The tea bud
germination density must be appropriate and there must be tidy
growth, to allow mechanical plucking and to maintain tea leaf
quality.
Mechanized tea plucking in Taiwan will require
coordination between tea plantations and automation, so that
production costs are reduced and competitiveness is improved.
To increase mechanization, the agricultural authorities must
provide mechanical means and management technology and
assistance for machine purchases by farmers, to ensure that the
Taiwanese tea industry remains internationally competitive and
to allow sustainable development.
References
[1] Z. F. Mao, D. B. Chen, “Discussion of the excellent tea on plucking
mechanized”, China Tea, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 4-5, 2006
[2] S. L. Tsai, China encyclopedia of agriculture, Tea Volumes, Agriculture
Publishing House, Beijing, China, pp. 7-8, 1988
[3] Z. M. Chen, Zhong-guo chajing, Shanghai Culture Publishing House,
Shanghai, China. pp. 353-354, 1992
[4] Y. Han, H. Xiao, G. Qin, Z. Song, W. Ding, S. Mei, “Developing
situations of tea plucking machine”, Engineering, Vol. 6, pp. 268-273,
2014
[5] J. M. Chang, “A study of effect on the growth and quality of tea bush
with mechanical plucking”, Journal of Chinese Agricultural
Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 1-10, 1996
[6] C. L. Lee, T. F. Huang, “Development and application of rail
management system for tea field management machines”, Taiwan Tea
Research Bulletin, Vol. 19, pp. 29-36, 2000
[7] J. M. Chang, “The province of implemented general situation on tea
garden mechanization ”, Tea Newsletter, Vol. 346, pp. 87, 1971
[8] T. F. Huang, C. L. Lee, Y. K. Chang, “Study and extension on
mechanical plucking of hand plucking tea area”, Taiwan Tea Research
Bulletin, Vol. 5, pp. 15-30, 1986
[9] C. L. Lee, “Technical improvement mechanical plucking in Chin-shin
oolong tea garden- Effects of plucking periods and depths on tea yields
of different tea crop seasons”, Taiwan Tea Research Bulletin, Vol. 10,
pp. 115-127, 1991
[10] T. F. Huang, “Development of hand-pluck tea garden mechanized in the
future”, Development and Promotion of Taiwan Tea research Seminars
Monograph. Taoyuan, Taiwan, pp. 38-43, 2001
[11] T. F. Huang, C. L. Lee, Y. K. Chang, “Study on using the rail
mechanical plucking management system in hand plucking tea area”,
Taiwan Tea Research Bulletin, Vol. 22, pp. 79-86, 2003
[12] C. L. Lee, “Study and promotion on tea plucking mechanization”, Tea
Production Technology Seminars Monograph, Taoyuan, Taiwan, pp.
115-124, 1992