Effect of high frequency surface and subsurface drip irrigation on root distribution of sweet corn

Phene, C. J.; Davis, Keith; Hutmacher, Robert B.; Bar‐Yosef, B.; Meek, D. W.; Misaki, J.

doi:10.1007/bf00192284

“…Fertigation of P through SDI increased marketable ear yield by 12% compared to DI and moved the center of the root density to a deeper depth (i.e., 0.3 m for SDI and 0.1 m for DI) on a loessial soil under net/screen house production in Israel (Martinez-Hernandez et al, 1991). Similar results were reported for a field study in California on a clay loam soil for sweet corn P fertigation by Phene et al (1991), who found that DI had the greatest root density in the 0 to 0.3 m depth, whereas SDI had greater root density below 0.3 m. Sweet corn yield increases of 4% to 10% were reported on a loessial soil in Israel for SDI when compared with DI (Bar-Yosef et al, 1989). Although, total biomass P uptake was unaffected by irrigation system type, the increased ear yield response with SDI was attributed to greater dry matter allocation to the ear.…”

Section: Conjunctive Nutrient and Water Management For Cornsupporting

confidence: 79%

Cotton, Tomato, Corn, and Onion Production with Subsurface Drip Irrigation: A Review

Lamm

¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The usage of subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) has increased by 89% in the U.S. during the past ten years according to USDA-NASS estimates, and over 93% of the SDI land area is located in just tenubsurface drip irrigation (SDI), the application of irrigation below the soil surface by microirrigation emitters (ASAE, 2007) is growing in usage in the U.S. and around the world. In the ten-year period from 2003 to 2013, SDI in the U.S. increased by 89% from 164,017 to 310,361 ha ( fig. 1) according to USDA-NASS irrigation surveys (USDA-NASS, 2004, 2010. During the same period, SDI averaged approximately 25% of the surface drip irrigation (DI) land area. (Note: microsprinkler and bubbler irrigation are not included in these estimates). However, this comparison can perhaps be skewed by the fact that some of the reported SDI land area contains shallow, annually removed systems that are not intended for multi-year use. The focus of this review is primarily on deeper systems intended for multi-year use.SDI has been the subject of three review articles during the past 20 years: Camp (1998) provided an extensive characterization of the knowledge and studies that had been carried out to date, Rodriguez-Sinobas and Gil-Rodriguez (2012) concentrated on design, uniformity, and soil water redistribution aspects, and Devasirvatham (2009) focused on SDI for vegetable production. The status of the technology was also discussed in the 2000 and 2010 national irrigation symposiums sponsored by ASABE and the Irrigation Association (Camp et al., 2000;Lamm et al., 2012). The goal of this review is to augment and supplement those earlier articles with a focus on the important SDI crops currently grown in the U.S.In 2013, the ten U.S. states with the largest SDI area (289,812 ha) comprised over 93% of the total SDI area but had a wide variation in the ratio of SDI/(SDI+DI) land area ( fig. 2). The variation can probably be explained by the crop production in these states, with DI often used on higher-value crops (typically fruits, nuts, and vegetables) and SDI used on lesser-value commodity crops (e.g., corn, cotton, alfalfa, and other grain crops). There can be also the persistent perception that SDI is harder to manage, mainly because it provides fewer visual cues when irrigation problems are occurring. As a result, many producers growing the higher-value crops choose DI as a less risky option and because the cost of the irrigation system and its installation are not of paramount concern. When growing the lesservalue commodity crops with microirrigation, a deeper, multi-year SDI system that can be amortized over several years is often the only economical option for a producer. This is particularly true in the Great Plains region, where centerpivot sprinkler irrigation has a good economy of scale and where the major sprinkler manufacturers are located (Nebraska). Although the SDI land area in Nebraska and Kansas (near the center of the Great Plains) is relatively small 264TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASABE ( fig. 2), the land area using...

show abstract

“…Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) has been developed to improve salinity management and water use efficiency. According to Phene et al (1991) and Oron et al (1998), SDI decreases the accumulation of salts at the root zone level of plants, producing an improved yield and fruit quality. This has been observed in tomato (Ayars et al, 2001;Hanson et al, 2004), onion (Enciso et al, 2007), cotton (Detar, 2007), bean (Gençoglan et al, 2006), potato (Patel and Rajput, 2008) and corn (Payero et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Saline Water on Tomato Under Subsurface Drip Irrigation: Nutritional and Foliar Aspects

Kahlaoui

¹

,

Hachicha

²

,

Rejeb

³

et al. 2011

J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A field experiment on the effects of drip irrigation (DI) and subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) with saline water (6.57 dS m -1 ) on three tomato cultivars (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., cvs. Río Tinto, Río Grande and Nemador) was carried out with the purpose to quantify physiological responses. The aim was to improve irrigation water management under saline conditions of Tunisia. The trial was established in a siltclayey soil with three regimes of irrigation: 100 %, 85 % and 70 % of crop water requirement. Results evidenced a significant difference between the two irrigation systems for the three cultivars. Growth parameters such as leaf area, chlorophyll content and mineral composition of leaves, petioles, stems and roots were affected significantly by the different treatments, particularly for Río Tinto and Nemador, being Río Grande the more adapted. The fruit was the organ less affected. Strong accumulation of Na + and Cl -accompanied a reduction in Ca 2+ , K + , Mg 2+ and P content in the case of DI. The distribution of these last necessary elements for plants nutrition under a strong accumulation of Na + and Cl -depends on the cultivar and changes from one organ to another. SDI can be included as an effective option for tomato production in Tunisia.

show abstract

“…Greater N use efficiency when using SDI fertigation compared to surface N applications was also reported for corn production on a silt loam soil in Delaware (Mitchell, 1981), with greater P and K availability mentioned as well. Several SDI studies (Bar-Yosef et al, 1989;Martinez-Hernandez et al, 1991;Phene et al, 1991;Ben-Gal and Dudley, 2003) examined the effect of P fertigation on sweet corn production, and their results may suggest that new research for field corn is needed as both irrigation and nutrient management become more intensively managed. Fertigation of P through SDI increased marketable ear yield by 12% compared to DI and moved the center of the root density to a deeper depth (i.e., 0.3 m for SDI and 0.1 m for DI) on a loessial soil under net/screen house production in Israel (Martinez-Hernandez et al, 1991).…”

Section: Conjunctive Nutrient and Water Management For Cornmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cotton, Tomato, Corn, and Onion Production with Subsurface Drip Irrigation - A Review

Lamm

¹

2015

2015 ASABE / IA Irrigation Symposium: Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Irrigation - A Tribute to the Career of Terry Howel

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The usage of subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) has increased by 89% in the U.S. during the past ten years according to USDA-NASS estimates, and over 93% of the SDI land area is located in just tenubsurface drip irrigation (SDI), the application of irrigation below the soil surface by microirrigation emitters (ASAE, 2007) is growing in usage in the U.S. and around the world. In the ten-year period from 2003 to 2013, SDI in the U.S. increased by 89% from 164,017 to 310,361 ha ( fig. 1) according to USDA-NASS irrigation surveys (USDA-NASS, 2004, 2010. During the same period, SDI averaged approximately 25% of the surface drip irrigation (DI) land area. (Note: microsprinkler and bubbler irrigation are not included in these estimates). However, this comparison can perhaps be skewed by the fact that some of the reported SDI land area contains shallow, annually removed systems that are not intended for multi-year use. The focus of this review is primarily on deeper systems intended for multi-year use.SDI has been the subject of three review articles during the past 20 years: Camp (1998) provided an extensive characterization of the knowledge and studies that had been carried out to date, Rodriguez-Sinobas and Gil-Rodriguez (2012) concentrated on design, uniformity, and soil water redistribution aspects, and Devasirvatham (2009) focused on SDI for vegetable production. The status of the technology was also discussed in the 2000 and 2010 national irrigation symposiums sponsored by ASABE and the Irrigation Association (Camp et al., 2000;Lamm et al., 2012). The goal of this review is to augment and supplement those earlier articles with a focus on the important SDI crops currently grown in the U.S.In 2013, the ten U.S. states with the largest SDI area (289,812 ha) comprised over 93% of the total SDI area but had a wide variation in the ratio of SDI/(SDI+DI) land area ( fig. 2). The variation can probably be explained by the crop production in these states, with DI often used on higher-value crops (typically fruits, nuts, and vegetables) and SDI used on lesser-value commodity crops (e.g., corn, cotton, alfalfa, and other grain crops). There can be also the persistent perception that SDI is harder to manage, mainly because it provides fewer visual cues when irrigation problems are occurring. As a result, many producers growing the higher-value crops choose DI as a less risky option and because the cost of the irrigation system and its installation are not of paramount concern. When growing the lesservalue commodity crops with microirrigation, a deeper, multi-year SDI system that can be amortized over several years is often the only economical option for a producer. This is particularly true in the Great Plains region, where centerpivot sprinkler irrigation has a good economy of scale and where the major sprinkler manufacturers are located (Nebraska). Although the SDI land area in Nebraska and Kansas (near the center of the Great Plains) is relatively small 264TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASABE ( fig. 2), the land area using...

show abstract

Effect of high frequency surface and subsurface drip irrigation on root distribution of sweet corn

Cited by 106 publications

References 12 publications

Cotton, Tomato, Corn, and Onion Production with Subsurface Drip Irrigation: A Review

Cotton, Tomato, Corn, and Onion Production with Subsurface Drip Irrigation: A Review

Effects of Saline Water on Tomato Under Subsurface Drip Irrigation: Nutritional and Foliar Aspects

Cotton, Tomato, Corn, and Onion Production with Subsurface Drip Irrigation - A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About