Irrigation application efficiency and deep drainage potential under surface irrigated cotton

Smith, R. J.; Raine, Steven R.; Minkevich, John

doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2004.07.008

Cited by 97 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Losses of up to 83 % of the water to deep drainage (including preferential and/or matrix flows) during furrow irrigation of cotton and sugar cane in vertisols were reported (Raine and Bakker, 1996;Dalton et al, 2001;Moss et al, 2001;Smith et al, 2005). Losses to deep drainage averaged 42.5 mm per irrigation (Smith et al, 2005), ranging from 50 to 300 mm yr −1 (Silburn and Montgomery, 2004 At the small-watershed scale (∼ 10 000 m 2 ), Pathak et al (2013) indicated that runoff from vertisols is smaller than runoff from sandier soils (alfisols) in an agricultural watershed near Hyderabad, India. The smaller runoff from the vertisols was attributed to preferential infiltration of local runoff into the soil cracks.…”

Section: Preferential Flow Of Water In Vertisols -Evidence From the Lmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil–aquifer phenomena affecting groundwater under vertisols: a review

Kurtzman

Baram

Dahan

2016

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Vertisols are cracking clayey soils that (i) usually form in alluvial lowlands where, normally, groundwater pools into aquifers; (ii) have different types of voids (due to cracking), which make flow and transport of water, solutes and gas complex; and (iii) are regarded as fertile soils in many areas. The combination of these characteristics results in the unique soil-aquifer phenomena that are highlighted and summarized in this review. The review is divided into the following four sections: (1) soil cracks as preferential pathways for water and contaminants: in this section lysimeter-to basin-scale observations that show the significance of cracks as preferential-flow paths in vertisols, which bypass matrix blocks in the unsaturated zone, are summarized. Relatively fresh-water recharge and groundwater contamination from these fluxes and their modeling are reviewed; (2) soil cracks as deep evaporators and unsaturated-zone salinity: deep sediment samples under uncultivated vertisols in semiarid regions reveal a dry (immobile), saline matrix, partly due to enhanced evaporation through soil cracks. Observations of this phenomenon are compiled in this section and the mechanism of evapoconcentration due to air flow in the cracks is discussed; (3) impact of cultivation on flushing of the unsaturated zone and aquifer salinization: the third section examines studies reporting that land-use change of vertisols from native land to cropland promotes greater fluxes through the saline unsaturated-zone matrix, eventually flushing salts to the aquifer. Different degrees of salt flushing are assessed as well as aquifer salinization on different scales, and a comparison is made with aquifers under other soils; (4) relatively little nitrate contamination in aquifers under vertisols: in this section we turn the light on observations showing that aquifers under cultivated vertisols are somewhat resistant to groundwater contamination by nitrate (the major agriculturally related groundwater problem). Denitrification is probably the main mechanism supporting this resistance, whereas a certain degree of anion-exchange capacity may have a retarding effect as well.

show abstract

Section: Preferential Flow Of Water In Vertisols -Evidence From the Lmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil–aquifer phenomena affecting groundwater under vertisols: a review

Kurtzman

Baram

Dahan

2016

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These values were considered low when compared to potential values previously reported (Bos, 1980;Elliot & Walker, 1982;Solomon et al, 2007). Nevertheless, these AE values were similar or only slightly lower than those obtained under normal grower control as others have reported (Smith et al, 2005). These small values were partially justified by the small D req value due, in turn, to the shallow chufa plant root system (20 cm).…”

Section: Actual Irrigation Performancesmentioning

confidence: 56%

Furrow-irrigated chufa crops in Valencia (Spain). II: Performance analysis and optimization

Pascual-Seva¹,

Bautista²,

López-Galarza³

et al. 2013

Span. j. agric. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chufa (Cyperus esculentus L. var. sativus Boeck.) is a traditional crop in the Mediterranean region of Spain, where it is only furrow irrigated. This article analyzes the irrigation performance for this crop, conducting field studies over three consecutive seasons in Valencia (Spain). Irrigation schedule was based on the volumetric soil water content, which was measured with capacitance sensors. Infiltrability was measured with blocked-furrow infiltrometers. An area velocity flow module measured the water flow, the cross-sectional geometry of furrows was determined using furrow profilometers, and times for advance and recession were recorded. WinSRFR software was used to analyze every irrigation event, determining the application efficiency (AE) and distribution uniformity of the minimum (DU min ), and to optimize the combination of furrow inflow (q) and cut-off time (T co ). Average values obtained for AE were 30. 1%, 25.6%, and 26.7% in 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively, and the corresponding DU min values were 0.54, 0.61, and 0.67. Optimized results showed that it is possible to reach AE and DU min values up to 87% and 0.86, respectively. However, understanding the q-T co relationship that maximizes both AE and DU min is more important than knowing the specific values. A function that related q and T co was obtained for the typical plot dimensions, and this was validated in 2011. Therefore, this function can be used in most of the plots in the cultivation area.Additional key words: application efficiency; cut-off time; distribution uniformity; furrow inflow rate; irrigation management; vegetable crop. * Corresponding author: bpascual@prv.upv.es Received: 31-07-12. Accepted: 09-01-13.Abbreviations used: AE (application efficiencies); D app (average depth of the water applied to the field); D av (average depth of the water infiltrated to the field); D min (minimum depth of the water applied to the field); D req (average depth of the water required to fill the root zone); DOY (day of the year); DU (distribution uniformity); DU min (distribution uniformity of the minimum); EY (experimental year); FC (field capacity); n (roughness coefficient); Q (water flow); q (furrow inflow); RP (refill point); T co (cut-off time); VSWC (volumetric soil water content.

show abstract

“…However, recent studies have shown that significant losses do in fact occur. For example, [19] evaluated surface irrigation events in cotton fields in Queensland and found that at the field level, irrigation application efficiencies varied widely from 17% -100% with an average of 48%. They also found that deep percolation losses averaged 42.5 mm per irrigation event, representing an annual loss of up to 2.5 ML/ha (250 mm).…”

Section: Seasonal Water Extraction From Each Soil Depthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field Evaluation of Soil Water Extraction of Cotton

Payero¹,

Harris²,

Robinson³

2017

OJSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water scarcity is often a major limiting factor in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) production, and sustaining productivity and profitability with limited water is a major challenge for the cotton industry. A good understanding of the magnitude, timing and spatial distribution of cotton soil water extraction is important for proper irrigation management, and for development of accurate crop models and decision support systems. The overall objective of this study was to evaluate the water extraction distribution of cotton under different irrigation regimes. Specific objectives were to quantify: 1) the depth of soil water extraction as a function of time, 2) the percent of seasonal water extraction from each soil depth, and 3) the relationship between depth of soil water extraction and canopy height. To meet these specific objectives, daily and seasonal cotton soil water extraction were determined from continuous records of water content in the soil profile measured from four irrigation treatments during a field experiment. We found that cotton extracted soil water from as deep as 150 cm, but the percent of seasonal extraction sharply decreased with soil depth. The top 50 cm soil layer accounted for 75% of the seasonal extraction and the top 80 cm, for 90%. We also found that from 32 days after sowing (DAS) to 100 DAS, the depth of soil water extraction increased linearly at a rate of 1.89 cm•day −1 or 2.36 times the increase in crop canopy height. These findings suggest that cotton producers should manage irrigations to maintain adequate moisture in the top 80 cm of the soil profile rather than relying on moisture stored deeper in the profile.

show abstract

Irrigation application efficiency and deep drainage potential under surface irrigated cotton

Cited by 97 publications

References 8 publications

Soil–aquifer phenomena affecting groundwater under vertisols: a review

Soil–aquifer phenomena affecting groundwater under vertisols: a review

Furrow-irrigated chufa crops in Valencia (Spain). II: Performance analysis and optimization

Field Evaluation of Soil Water Extraction of Cotton

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About