Yield and Economics of Shallow Subsurface Drip Irrigation (S³ DI) and Furrow Diking

Abstract

A S3DI system was installed annually with and without furrow diking to document yield and economic benefits of these techniques on peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), and corn (Zea mays L.). This research was conducted for three years and each crop had four treatments replicated three times in a randomized complete block design. Treatments included irrigation, irrigation plus furrow diking, non‐irrigation, and non‐irrigation plus furrow diking. In 2005, a high precipitation year, there was no yield or gross revenue difference between treatments for any crop. Net revenue was reduced in all irrigated crops in 2005 compared with non‐irrigated crops. In low precipitation years (2006 and 2007), irrigated yield of peanut, corn, and cotton increased an average 1.3, 7.3, and 2.8 times, respectively, over non‐irrigated yield. Net revenue increased for irrigated corn and cotton, but not for irrigated peanut compared with non‐irrigated crops. In limited precipitation years, installing a S3DI system annually was economically beneficial for corn and cotton but not for peanut. Furrow diking did not increase crop yield in any year, crop, or treatment, and may or may not be economically beneficial.

Chemical Interruption of Late Season Flowering to Improve Harvested Peanut Maturity

“…Irrigated and non-irrigated treatments were included. Irrigation in 2012 was done with shallow sub-surface drip (which has shown no yield difference from overhead sprinkler) and overhead sprinkler was used in 2013 and 2014 (Sorensen et al, 2010). Planting dates were 17 April 2012, 26 April 2013, and 24 April 2014.…”

Longevity of Shallow Subsurface Drip Irrigation Tubing under Three Tillage Practices

“…Previous research (Sorensen and Lamb, 2008, 2009) has shown that surface drip irrigation (SDI) can be installed with low initial investment and labor, be used on a variety of crops, and increase crop yield compared with nonirrigated areas. Burying the drip tubing 1.5 to 2 inches below the soil surface (shallow subsurface drip irrigation– S 3 DI) can significantly reduce rodent damage (Sorensen et al, 2010). Yield potential of irrigated crops using S 3 DI was over two, three, and seven times greater than nonirrigated crops of peanut, cotton, and corn, respectively, depending on yearly precipitation timing and amount (Sorensen et al, 2010).…”

“…Burying the drip tubing 1.5 to 2 inches below the soil surface (shallow subsurface drip irrigation– S 3 DI) can significantly reduce rodent damage (Sorensen et al, 2010). Yield potential of irrigated crops using S 3 DI was over two, three, and seven times greater than nonirrigated crops of peanut, cotton, and corn, respectively, depending on yearly precipitation timing and amount (Sorensen et al, 2010). The increased yield and eventual gross revenue were great enough in the installation year to cover the cost of the in‐field portion of the S 3 DI system expenses compared with the nonirrigated revenue (Sorensen et al, 2010).…”

“…Subsurface (SSDI) and surface (SDI) drip irrigation on crop rotations in the southeast has been effective in increasing crop yield when compared with nonirrigated crop production (Sorensen et al, 2000; Sorensen and Lamb, 2008, 2009; Sorensen et al, 2010). The use of S 3 DI with conservation tillage techniques on agronomic crops and rotations could be of major interest in conserving water, reducing agronomic inputs, and possibly increasing on‐farm revenue that would benefit the agricultural community.…”

“…If a grower implemented a conservation tillage technique, either strip‐ or no‐till, then S 3 DI could be installed and maintained for multiple years which would be more economical than removing the tubing on a yearly basis as describe previously (Sorensen et al, 2010). If tubing can be left in the field for multiple years and if crop yield increased as described above, then using S 3 DI may be economically feasible for traditional row crops in the southeastern U.S.…”