The most important aspect of precision farming is the prediction of crop yield and quality. Digital technologies (soil maps and combine harvester with telemetry functions) were used to determinate the yield of organically grown winter wheat (variety Skagen) in two fields of 18.8 and 4.5 ha in Lithuanian regional conditions, in an area classified as low-performance for farming. The objective of the research was to determine the effectiveness of digital technologies (soil maps and combine harvester with telemetry functions) in assessment of the dynamics of soil pH, P2O5, and K2O, humus and organic winter wheat (variety Skagen) productivity, and grain crude-protein dependence in low-performance soils. Haplic Luvisol soils predominated, while Eutric Gleysols, Haplic Arenosols, and Eutric Planosols soils intervened in smaller areas, and the granulometric composition of the soil in the arable layer and the subsoil varied from sand to sandy loam, loam, and silt loam. In the sandy areas of Haplic Arenosols and in the lower parts of the field, where Eutric Gleysols, intervened in predominant Haplic Luvisols soils, winter wheat crude protein content and grain yield were lower. The biggest grain yield of 6.95 t ha−1 was obtained in Haplic Luvisols soils. Crude protein of winter wheat grains varied from 9.70 to 13.34%. Although both technologies reflected the non-uniform yields of the fields and correlation between them well, the information on the soil cover of the field better explained the reasons for lower yields. In the case of this research, sand inclusions and lower areas in winter wheat fields, causing plants to soak during winter, were identified. The combination of two digital technologies (soil maps and combine harvester with telemetry functions) made it possible to determine yields accurately, and quickly. Moreover, there is a need, in the future, to evaluate the reasons for yield variation and address changes in yields due to the improvement of certain low-performance soil areas. The complex use of these technologies can be beneficial in terms of labour and economy. However, the accurate benefit of labour time and economic should be investigated.

The experiment was carried out in 2018-2021 in the Baltic Upland of the Eastern Lithuania, where the soil cover was very different. The objective was to determine the yield and grain quality of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in fields with a different soil cover, their variation and dependence on soil texture and typology. For the experiment, three fields with a different soil cover were selected and 30 observation sites were set up. The results showed that the field with light-textured soils of sand, loamy sand, and sandy loam produced a lower number of productive stems and a lower grain yield of winter wheat compared to the field with heavier-textured soils. The average grain yield in sites, where the sandy loam fraction predominated, was 7.22 t ha -1 compared with 5.55 t ha -1 for loamy sand and 4.33 t ha -1 for loamy sand and sand fractions. The yield and productivity of winter wheat in the experimental field with the heavy-textured subsoil depended on the distribution of soil particles throughout the soil profile. Eutric Planosol, where the sand and loamy sand fraction in the top layer, and sandy clay at 60-70 cm depth dominated, produced the highest grain yield of 9.20 t ha -1 . The variation in winter wheat yield of the field in the hilly terrain was as much as 2.3 times. Winter wheat yield was higher in Gleyic Luvisol and Eutric Fluvisol in the lowlands, while yield was lower on the hilltops and slopes, where Haplic Luvisol predominated. Winter wheat was less fertile in organic soils in the lowlands due to the intensive growth and lodging of the vegetative part. The content of crude protein in winter wheat grains was influenced by the annual weather conditions and soil properties. In dry years, in the fields, where the lightest-textured loamy sand and sand, sandy loam and sandy clay loam prevailed, the grains were finer and at the same time had a higher level of crude protein.