Evaluation of different soil water potential by field capacity threshold in combination with a triggered irrigation module
M. Marković, V. Filipović, T. Legović, M. Josipović, V. Tadićhttps://doi.org/10.17221/189/2014-SWRCitation:Marković M., Filipović V., Legović T., Josipović M., Tadić V. (2015): Evaluation of different soil water potential by field capacity threshold in combination with a triggered irrigation module. Soil & Water Res., 10: 164-171.
Irrigation efficiency improvement requires optimization of its parameters like irrigation scheduling, threshold and amount of water usage. If these parameters are not satisfactorily optimized, negative consequences for the plant-soil system can occur with decreased yield and hence economic viability of the agricultural production. Numerical modelling represents an efficient, i.e. simple and fast method for optimizing and testing different irrigation scenarios. In this study HYDRUS-1D model assuming single- and dual-porosity systems was used to evaluate a triggered irrigation module for irrigation scheduling in maize/soybean cropping trials. Irrigation treatment consisted of two irrigation regimes (A2 = 60–100% field capacity (FC) and A3 = 80–100% FC) and control plot (A1) without irrigation. The model showed a very good fit to the measured data with satisfactory model efficiency values of 0.77, 0.69, and 0.93 (single-porosity model) and 0.84, 0.67, and 0.92 (dual-porosity model) for A1, A2, and A3 plots, respectively. The single-porosity model gave a slightly better fit in the irrigated plots while the dual-porosity model gave better performance in the control plot. This inconsistency between the two approaches is due to the manual irrigation triggering and uncertainty in field data timing collection. Using the triggered irrigation module provided more irrigation events during maize and soybean crop rotation and consequently increased cumulative amounts of irrigated water. However, that increase resulted in more water available in the root zone during high evapotranspiration period. The HYDRUS code can be used to optimize irrigation threshold values further by assuming different scenarios (e.g. different irrigation threshold or scheduling) or a different crop.Keywords:field water capacity; dual-porosity model; HYDRUS-1D; numerical modelling; single-porosity model; triggered irrigationReferences:
Barnabás B., Jäger K., Fehér A. (2008): The effect of drought and heat stress on reproductive processes in cereals. Plant, Cell & Environment, 1: 11–38.Ben-Gal A., Lazorovitch N., Shani U. (2004): Subsurface Drip Irrigation in Gravel-Filled Cavities. Vadose Zone Journal, 3, 1407-1413 https://doi.org/10.2113/3.4.1407Dabach Sharon, Lazarovitch Naftali, Šimůnek Jirka, Shani Uri (2013): Numerical investigation of irrigation scheduling based on soil water status. Irrigation Science, 31, 27-36 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-011-0289-xDudley L.M., Hanks R.J. (1991): Model SOWACH: Soil-plant-atmosphere-salinity Management Model Users’ Manual. Utah Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report No. 140. Logan, Utah State University.Dudley Lynn M., Ben-Gal Alon, Lazarovitch Naftali (2008): Drainage Water Reuse: Biological, Physical, and Technological Considerations for System Management. Journal of Environment Quality, 37, S-25- https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2007.0314Feddes R.A., Kowalik P.J., Zaradny H. (1978): Simulation of Field Water Use and Crop Yield. New York, John Wiley & Sons.Gee G.W., Or D. (2002): Particle size analysis. In: Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 4, Physical Methods. Madison, SSSA: 255–293.George B.A, Shende S.A, Raghuwanshi N.S (2000): Development and testing of an irrigation scheduling model. Agricultural Water Management, 46, 121-136 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(00)00083-4Heimovaara T.J., Bouten W. (1990): A computer-controlled 36-chanell time domain reflectrometry system for monitoring soil water content. Water Resource Research, 26: 2311–2316.Jones H. G. (2004): Irrigation scheduling: advantages and pitfalls of plant-based methods. Journal of Experimental Botany, 55, 2427-2436 https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh213Klute A., Dirksen C. (1986): Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: laboratory methods. In: Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 1, Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Agronomy Monograph No. 9. Madison, ASA-SSSA.Kodešová R., Brodský L. (2006): Comparison of CGMS-WOFOST and HYDRUS-1D simulation results for one cell of CGMS-GRID50. Soil and Water Research, 2: 39–48.Lazarovitch N., Šimůnek J., Shani U. (2005): System-Dependent Boundary Condition for Water Flow from Subsurface Source. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 69, 46- https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2005.0046Monteith J. L. (1981): Evaporation and surface temperature. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 107, 1-27 https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710745102Mualem Yechezkel (1976): A new model for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resources Research, 12, 513-522 https://doi.org/10.1029/WR012i003p00513Mubarak Ibrahim, Mailhol Jean Claude, Angulo-Jaramillo Rafael, Bouarfa Sami, Ruelle Pierre (2009): Effect of temporal variability in soil hydraulic properties on simulated water transfer under high-frequency drip irrigation. Agricultural Water Management, 96, 1547-1559 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.06.011Nash J.E., Sutcliffe J.V. (1970): River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, 10, 282-290 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6Pang X. P., Letey J. (1998): Development and Evaluation of ENVIRO-GRO, an Integrated Water, Salinity, and Nitrogen Model. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 62, 1418- https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1998.03615995006200050039xShani Uri, Tsur Yacov, Zemel Amos (2004): Optimal dynamic irrigation schemes. Optimal Control Applications and Methods, 25, 91-106 https://doi.org/10.1002/oca.740Šimůnek Jirka, Jarvis Nick J., van Genuchten M.Th., Gärdenäs Annemieke (2003): Review and comparison of models for describing non-equilibrium and preferential flow and transport in the vadose zone. Journal of Hydrology, 272, 14-35 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00252-4Šimůnek Jirí, van Genuchten Martinus Th., Šejna Miroslav (2008): Development and Applications of the HYDRUS and STANMOD Software Packages and Related Codes. Vadose Zone Journal, 7, 587- https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2007.0077van Genuchten M. Th. (1980): A Closed-form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils1. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 44, 892- https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002xVan Genuchten M.T., Leij F.J., Yates S.R. (1991): Version 1.0. The RETC Code for Quantifying the Hydraulic Functions of Unsaturated Soils. Riverside, U.S. Salinity Laboratory USDA, ARS.Zhou Qi You, Shimada Jun, Sato Akira (2001): Three-dimensional spatial and temporal monitoring of soil water content using electrical resistivity tomography. Water Resources Research, 37, 273-285 https://doi.org/10.1029/2000WR900284