Water Depletion Pattern and Water Use Efficiency of Forage Sorghum, Pearl millet, and Corn Under Water Limiting Condition

Bhattarai, Bishwoyog; Singh, Sukhbir; West, Charles P.; Ritchie, Glen L.; Trostle, Calvin

doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106206

Cited by 35 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Greater productivity, water use, and water productivity for forage sorghum here also agrees with results of Bhattarai et al. (2020), who reported greater dry matter accumulation and water use efficiency of forage sorghum than pearl millet [ Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.]…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Rotation and tillage effects on forage cropping systems productivity and resource use

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Limited information is available on what forage rotations and tillage practices increase forage productivity in the U.S. Great Plains region. The objectives of this study were to evaluate crop rotation and tillage effects on individual crop and overall system productivity. The study was conducted from 2012-2020 near Garden City, KS. The experiment was an incomplete factorial combination of four rotations and two tillage practices including sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]sorghum (S-S) no-till (NT), triticale [×Triticosecale Wittm. ex A. Camus (Secale ×Triticum)]/sorghum-sorghum-oat (Avena sativa L.; T/S-S-O) reduced till (RT), triticale/sorghum-sorghum-sorghum-oat

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Rotation and tillage effects on forage cropping systems productivity and resource use

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With regards to WUE, Singh and Singh (1995) and Farré and Faci (2006) have reported a similar range of values for maize, sorghum, and pearl millet, with a slight advantage for sorghum under water stress. Zegada-Lizarazu et al (2012) found that sweet sorghum had higher WUE than maize under water deficit, and similar results were reported by Bhattarai et al (2020) and Roby et al (2017) . However, few genotypes were used in these studies compared to the 36 that we used.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…For instance, Zegada-Lizarazu et al (2012) found that TE was high and similar to maize in a sweet sorghum line, which could be a consequence of the sucrose sink in the sorghum stem acting on photosynthetic efficiency. Similarly, TE has been shown to be high and comparable with maize in forage sorghum lines ( Roby et al , 2017 ; Bhattarai et al , 2020 ), which could be the result of less leaf area supporting a higher biomass sink, leading to a higher TE ( Condon et al , 2002 ). In sunflower, TE is positively associated with a decrease in the biomass allocation to leaf area, and to a decrease in the leaf area to biomass ratio ( Velázquez et al , 2017 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transpiration efficiency: insights from comparisons of C4 cereal species

Vadez

Choudhary

Kholová

et al. 2021

Journal of Experimental Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An earlier review on transpiration efficiency (TE) reported a tight link between high TE and transpiration restriction under high vapor pressure deficit (VPD). This paper builds on it and addresses other factors altering TE (shoot biomass/water transpired), namely species difference among major C4 cereals, soil texture, and source/sink relationships. Maize genotypes (n=10) had overall higher TE than pearl millet (n=10), and somewhat higher than sorghum (n=16). TE was higher in high clay- than in sandy soil, and that effect was crop-dependent. Maize showed large TE and yield variations among soils, while pearl millet TE showed no soil variation. This also suggested specific soil-species fitness. Removal of cobs drastically decreased TE in maize, but not in pearl millet, suggesting that source/sink balance also drove TE variations. The species differences in TE are interpreted to account for differences in transpiration restriction capacity under high VPD but also to breeding history having possibly favored maize’s source/sink balance, suggesting a breeding scope to increase TE in pearl millet and sorghum. The soil results open a new avenue to better understand stomatal regulation and transpiration restriction under high VPD leading to TE differences, where considering soil hydraulic characteristics and root system together appears to be critical. Finally, the results on sink alteration highlight the importance of sink strength in regulating transpiration / photosynthesis and consequently in influencing TE.

show abstract

“…A biomass study in Texas using deficit SDI found greater silage yield for forage sorghum than for pearl millet or corn (Bhattarai et al, 2020). In two energy biomass studies, biomass sorghums out yielded traditional forage sorghums (Chavez et al, 2019) and biomass sorghum chemical quality did not vary with irrigation level (Enciso et al, 2015a).…”

Section: Sdi As An Efficient or Convenient Irrigation System For Forage Cropsmentioning

confidence: 98%

A 2020 Vision of Subsurface Drip Irrigation in the U.S.

Lamm¹,

Colaizzi²,

Sorensen³

et al. 2021

Transactions of the ASABE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HighlightsSubsurface drip irrigation (SDI) has continued to expand in irrigation area within the U.S. during the last 15 years.Research with SDI continues for multiple crop types (fiber, grain and oilseed, horticultural, forage, and turf).SDI usage on many crops has matured through research and development of appropriate strategies and technologiesDespite some persistent challenges to successful use of SDI, important opportunities exist for further adoption.Abstract. Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) offers several advantages over alternative irrigation systems when it is designed and installed correctly and when best management practices are adopted. These advantages include the ability to apply water and nutrients directly and efficiently within the crop root zone. Disadvantages of SDI in commercial agriculture relative to alternative irrigation systems include greater capital cost per unit land area (except for small land parcels), unfamiliar management and maintenance protocols that can exacerbate the potential for emitter clogging, the visibility of system attributes (components and design characteristics) and performance, and the susceptibility to damage (i.e., rodents and tillage) of the subsurface driplines. Despite these disadvantages, SDI continues to be adopted in commercial agriculture in the U.S., and research efforts to evaluate and develop SDI systems continue as well. This article summarizes recent progress in research (2010 to 2020) and the status of commercial adoption of SDI, along with a discussion of current challenges and future opportunities. Keywords: Drip Irrigation, Irrigation, Irrigation systems, Microirrigation, SDI, Water management.

show abstract

Water Depletion Pattern and Water Use Efficiency of Forage Sorghum, Pearl millet, and Corn Under Water Limiting Condition

Cited by 35 publications

References 34 publications

Rotation and tillage effects on forage cropping systems productivity and resource use

Rotation and tillage effects on forage cropping systems productivity and resource use

Transpiration efficiency: insights from comparisons of C4 cereal species

A 2020 Vision of Subsurface Drip Irrigation in the U.S.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About