A Model to Assess the Economic Viability of Alfalfa Production Under Subsurface Drip Irrigation in California

Montazar, Aliasghar; Zaccaria, Daniele; Bali, Khaled M.; Putnam, Daniel H.

doi:10.1002/ird.2091

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further measurement is necessary to provide a more solid conclusion on the impact of the deficit irrigation strategies on ET a . Overall, the ETWP values computed for the normal farmer irrigation practices and deficit irrigation trials at the experimental sites (an average of 16.1 kg ha −1 mm −1 ) were as high as the values predicted by Montazar et al [45] for alfalfa fields, under subsurface drip irrigation in the low desert of California.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 46%

Feasibility of Moderate Deficit Irrigation as a Water Conservation Tool in California’s Low Desert Alfalfa

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Irrigation management practices that reduce water use with acceptable impacts on yield are important strategies to cope with diminished water supplies and generate new sources of water to transfer for other agricultural uses, and urban and environmental demands. This study was intended to assess the effects of moderate water deficits, with the goal of maintaining robust alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) yields, while conserving on-farm water. Data collection and analysis were conducted at four commercial fields over an 18-month period in the Palo Verde Valley, California, from 2018–2020. A range of deficit irrigation strategies, applying 12.5–33% less irrigation water than farmers’ normal irrigation practices was evaluated, by eliminating one to three irrigation events during selected summer periods. The cumulative actual evapotranspiration measured using the residual of energy balance method across the experimental sites, ranged between 2,031 mm and 2.202 mm, over a 517-day period. An average of 1.7 and 1.0 Mg ha−1 dry matter yield reduction was observed under 33% and 22% less applied water, respectively, when compared to the farmers’ normal irrigation practice in silty loam soils. The mean dry matter yield decline varied from 0.4 to 0.9 Mg ha−1 in a clay soil and from 0.3 to 1.0 Mg ha−1 in a sandy loam soil, when irrigation water supply was reduced to 12.5% and 25% of normal irrigation levels, respectively. A wide range of conserved water (83 to 314 mm) was achieved following the deficit irrigation strategies. Salinity assessment indicated that salt buildup could be managed with subsequent normal irrigation practices, following deficit irrigations. Continuous soil moisture sensing verified that soil moisture was moderately depleted under deficit irrigation regimes, suggesting that farmers might confidently refill the soil profile following normal practices. Stand density was not affected by these moderate water deficits. The proposed deficit irrigation strategies could provide a reliable amount of water and sustain the economic viability of alfalfa production. However, data from multiple seasons are required to fully understand the effectiveness as a water conservation tool and the long-term impacts on the resilience of agricultural systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 46%

Feasibility of Moderate Deficit Irrigation as a Water Conservation Tool in California’s Low Desert Alfalfa

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The information our team collected from the UCD field trial and surveyed growers is in line with findings from earlier studies [3,14,36,40,53,54], indicating that greater WP could potentially be achieved with SDI relative to SI as a result of better irrigation management. However, the following considerations can help explain the differences between our field observations and growers' claims on water savings, HY and WP gains of SDI with respect to SI:…”

Section: Water and Energy Use And Productivitysupporting

confidence: 81%

“…When SDI systems are designed and installed, not much attention is given to dripline spacing and to spacing and flow rates of emitters along the driplines to tailor the system capacity and application rates to soil hydraulic features, crop water uptake, and evapotranspiration rates. Although possible solutions to these problems could be deeper SDI installations (>0.30 m) or closer dripline and emitter spacing (see also [35,36]), growers are normally quite sensitive and concerned about the additional costs of closer dripline installations and leak repairs.  The high frequency of SDI requires some type of on-farm water storage to buffer for infrequent surface water delivery (7-10 days) by irrigation agencies or water districts; this aspect, along with the need for energy to pressurize and filter water, and the additional cost of storage reservoirs, often leads growers to rely mainly on groundwater pumping for SDI rather than on surface-water supplies, thus further increasing the energy usage of SDI and the potential environmental burdens.…”

Section: The Uc Survey On Forage Growers Utilizing Sub-surface Drip Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Viability of Sub-Surface Drip Irrigation for Resource-Efficient Alfalfa Production in Central and Southern California

Zaccaria

Carrillo-Cobo²,

Montazar

et al. 2017

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In California, alfalfa is grown on a large area ranging between 325,000 and 410,000 hectares and ranks among the thirstiest crops. While the hay production industry is often scrutinized for the large usage of the state's agricultural water, alfalfa is a crucial feed-supplier for the livestock and dairy sectors, which rank among the most profitable commodity groups in the state. Sub-surface drip irrigation (SDI), although only practiced on approximately 2% of the alfalfa production area in California, is claimed to have the potential to significantly increase hay yield (HY) and water productivity (WP) compared with surface irrigation (SI). In 2014-2016 we interviewed a number of growers pioneering SDI for alfalfa production in Central and Southern California who reported that yield improvements in the order of 10-30% and water saving of about 20-30% are achievable in SDI-irrigated fields compared with SI, according to their records and perceptions collected over few years of experience. Results from our research on SDI at the University of California, Davis, revealed significantly smaller yield gain (~5%) and a slight increase of water use (~2-3%) that are similar to findings from earlier research studies. We found that most of the interviewed alfalfa producers are generally satisfied with their SDI systems, yet face some challenges that call for additional research and educational efforts. Key limitations of SDI include high investment costs, use of energy to pressurize water, the need for more advanced irrigation management skills, and better understanding of soil-water dynamics by farm personnel. SDI-irrigated fields also need accurate water monitoring and control, attentive prevention and repair of rodent damages, and careful salinity management in the root zone. In this paper we attempt to evaluate the viability of the SDI technology for alfalfa production on the basis of preliminary results of our research and extension activities, with focus on its water and energy footprints within the context of resource efficiency.

show abstract

“…According to Massatbayev et al (2016) the main components structured the properties of subsurface irrigation are emission products, construction methods, materials, and packing of the soil. Furthermore, the vital advantage of subsurface irrigation systems is reducing the losses such as evaporation and surface runoff comparing to the surface irrigation (Montazar et al, 2017). Over the past two decades, subsurface irrigation systems had widely developed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

2021

JST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main purpose of this review is to find the diversity in research studies of subsurface irrigation systems in the past two decades. Two periods of five years were selected to reflect the research studies at the beginning and the end of the comparing periods range. A statistical sorting was used to investigate the distribution of papers according to objectives, types of irrigation systems, research methods, and limitations of the studies. Results showed that the measurements and evaluations were the most presented objectives of the selected papers for both periods. Furthermore, almost 90 percent of the recent papers used multiple research methods, unlike the papers published in the former period which only 56 percent of them used multiple methods. Also, more than 90 percent of the recent papers used a single irrigation system. In conclusion, knowledge of subsurface irrigation systems had been advanced in the former studies mostly by analyzing the measurements and evaluations of the traditional irrigation systems. Unlike the former period, the advancement in knowledge has been produced in the current period by introducing new subsurface irrigation systems and more concentration by the order of measurements, evaluation, and designing, respectively.

show abstract

A Model to Assess the Economic Viability of Alfalfa Production Under Subsurface Drip Irrigation in California

Cited by 18 publications

References 8 publications

Feasibility of Moderate Deficit Irrigation as a Water Conservation Tool in California’s Low Desert Alfalfa

Feasibility of Moderate Deficit Irrigation as a Water Conservation Tool in California’s Low Desert Alfalfa

Assessing the Viability of Sub-Surface Drip Irrigation for Resource-Efficient Alfalfa Production in Central and Southern California

Untitled

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About