Leaching and Water Flow Patterns in Every‐Furrow and Alternate‐Furrow Irrigation

Abstract

Deep water percolation and chemical leaching is a recognized environmental problem with furrow irrigation. Alternate‐furrow irrigation (AFI) was hypothesized as a method to increase water‐use efficiency and decrease chemical leaching compared with every‐furrow irrigation (EFI). The SWMS_2D finite‐element model was used to investigate water and CaCl2 movement in EFI and AFI with furrow‐placed or ridge‐placed fertilizer bands. Model simulations were conducted for a Crook loamy sand (mixed, mesic, Ustic Torripsamment) and a Nunn clay loam (fine, montmorillonitic, mesic Aridic Argiustoll). Water isolation zones occurred with AFI and EFI that contributed little to overall profile drainage. The soil water contents after infiltration and redistribution were more uniform for EFI than for AFI for both soils. Water distribution was more uniform with AFI in the clay loam than in the loamy sand. Chemical movement was least with AFI and CaCl2 placement under the nonirrigated furrow. The greatest chemical leaching was predicted with furrow placement of CaCl2 and EFI. Results with CaCl2 suggest soluble chemicals or fertilizers placed under the nonirrigated furrow in loamy sand may not be available for plant uptake because the soil did not wet during irrigation. With either form of furrow irrigation, placement of a fertilizer in the ridge rather than in the furrow would decrease leaching of the fertilizer and keep the fertilizer in the root zone.

Furrow Irr Igation and N Management Strategies to Protect Water Quality

“…1). The sidedressed N was placed nearer the plant row than furrow so that the N would be more available to the corn (Hefner and Tracy, 1995) and less susceptible to leaching if that furrow was irrigated (Benjamin et al, 1994;Saffigna et al, 1976). In both years, the border plots were sidedressed with 90 kg N ha-1 .…”

Técnicas de conservación del agua en riego por gravedad a nivel parcelario

“…Los métodos de riego por gravedad son los más comunes para aplicar el agua en los terrenos agrícolas de zonas áridas, semiáridas y subhúmedas a nivel mundial y en México no es la excepción (Benjamin et al, 1994;González-Camacho et al, 2006). Lo anterior es atribuible a la simpleza de su operación y al bajo consumo de energía (Cabrera, 1994).…”

“…The gravity irrigation methods are the most common to apply water on agricultural land in arid, semi-arid and sub-humid worldwide and Mexico is no exception (Benjamin et al, 1994;González-Camacho et al 2006). This is attributable to the simplicity of its operation and low power consumption (Cabrera, 1994).…”

The effect of different fertigation strategies and furrow surface treatments on plant water and nitrogen use

“…The HYDRUS (2D/3D) model and its predecessors, such as SWMS-2D and HYDRUS-2D, have been widely used in the past to simulate water flow and/or solute transport for furrow irrigation systems (e.g., Benjamin et al 1994;Abbasi et al 2003aAbbasi et al , b, 2004Rocha et al 2006;Wöhling et al 2004aWöhling et al , b, 2006Mailhol et al 2007;Warrick et al 2007;Wöhling and Schmitz 2007;Wöhling and Mailhol 2007;Crevoisier et al 2008;Lazarovitch et al 2009;Ebrahimian et al 2012Ebrahimian et al , 2013aZerihun et al 2014). For example, Benjamin et al (1994) simulated fertilizer distribution in the soil under broadcast fertilization for conventional and alternate furrow irrigation.…”

“…For example, Benjamin et al (1994) simulated fertilizer distribution in the soil under broadcast fertilization for conventional and alternate furrow irrigation. They concluded that fertilizer applied on the non-irrigated furrows may not be taken up by plants because of the low water content in the upper layer of this furrow.…”