# Design and Comparative Analysis of a Ground-Level Trellising Tool for Greenhouse Tomato Cultivation
## 4 Discussion  
The results obtained from the design of the tool and the experiments carried out in greenhouses provide valuable information on the feasibility and efficiency of integrating this tool into the agricultural activity of Almeria. This discussion interprets the design of the tool and the results of the experiments in the context of the existing literature while exploring possible design improvements and future research directions. During the tests, the design of the tool and the prototype developed demonstrated its successful practical applicability in tomato crops in the greenhouses of the province of Almeria. This tool has allowed us to propose a new method of trellising for Almeria farmers that allows them to avoid working from a height; in addition, we compared the efficiency and safety of this method with the current methods that are present in the agricultural sector. Following the tests that were carried out, the results obtained in the field revealed significant differences in terms of time efficiencies and costs associated with the different trellising methods used in tomato cultivation. First, the analysis of the trellising times (Figure 15) shows that stilts are the fastest method, with a total time of 4 min and 23 s for the 44-hanger line and an average time of 5.97 s per hanger. This suggests that, from the point of view of efficiency, stilts offer a notable advantage over other tools and methods, especially when compared with manual ladders, which performed the worst, with a total time of 10 min and 47 s and an average time of 14.7 s per hanger. If we analyze these times with respect to the average labor cost per hectare during a campaign, which is EUR 30,494 [2], the percentage of trellising costs would be between 25% and 60% depending on the method used--hence the importance of choosing an efficient trellising method. The average percentage of temporary labor hired for trellising tasks in the province of Almeria is 17.3% [5]. However, when considering the cost analysis (Figure 16), we observe that although stilts have a relatively low cost of EUR 7583.90 per campaign, their use implies a significant risk for workers, classified as 'intolerable'. This finding is consistent with previous studies that indicate that the use of stilts in agricultural tasks considerably increases the risk of work accidents, especially falls from heights, which represents a challenge in terms of occupational safety in intensive agriculture. On the other hand, the newly designed tool is presented as a competitive alternative both in terms of operating time (4\({}^{\prime}\)38\({}^{\prime\prime}\) total and 6.34\({}^{\prime\prime}\) per hanger) and cost (EUR 8026.93 per campaign), which makes it a viable option for farmers. Furthermore, it is important to note that this new device significantly minimizes the risk of accidents, as it does not require the worker to work at dangerous heights, which is a step forward in the prevention of occupational risks in the agricultural sector. The use of stilts allows the farmer to reach the height required for trellising without taking up practically any space on the line. However, it is the most dangerous method of those presented to perform this task in terms of falls from height (Table 4). The probability of falling is high, with climbing on stilts being one of the actions that leads to a greater loss of balance [31]. Other factors observed in situ in the greenhouse of the study where the worker uses stilts are uneveness of the ground (sandy surface) and the lack of safety measures for use (Figure 2d). The loss of postural stability is common and increases as the height of the stilts increases and with different foot arrangements(having one foot in front of the other produces a greater swing). Trips on obstacles are more frequent with their use [32]. The consequences of such a fall can be extremely harmful. Stilts also have risks of musculoskeletal disorders in the lower extremities [33; 34].