Effect of alternate and fixed partial furrow irrigation and water quality on depth of water applied, Maize(Zea mays L.) and productivity. | ||
| Euphrates Journal of Agriculture Science | ||
| Article 1, Volume 8, Issue 4, December 2016, Pages 49-58 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Ahmed .M . Abood; Nameer. T . Mahdi | ||
| Abstract | ||
| A Field experiment was conducted during fall of 2015 season at AL-Mashrooaa Township, North of Babylon Governorate to evaluate the effect of different Furrow irrigation styles and irrigation water quality on depth of applid water and Maize productivity. The experiment was designed according to RCBD in three replications. Treatments included three Furrow irrigation styles: Conventional( C), Partially Alternate (A) , and partially Fixed(F) Furrow irrigation and three water quality: 100% Fresh river water (1.3 dSm-1) ( Q1) , 25% saline water ( 6.0 dSm-1) followed by 75% fresh water (CQ2 ) and 50% saline water( 6.0 dSm-1) followed by50% fresh water (CQ3) in what being cyclic irrigation. All sort of water applied at 25% and 50% of water requirements of maize. Depthe of water applied and times among irrigations were calculated according to water balance equation and 50% depletion of available water, respectively. Results indicated that depth of water applied differed according to style of irrigation and water quality. Depth of irrigation water was 699 mm season -1 for CQ1 compared to 350 mm season -1for alternate furrow irrigation with fresh water (AQ1) and (FQ1) consuming (saving) 50% of required fresh water only .Amount of water applied was 633 mm Season-1 with CQ2 decreased to around 40% with AQ2 and FQ2 (i.e. using only 40% of fresh water ). Depth of water applied was 579 mm Season-1 with CQ3 decreased to 50% with AQ3 and FQ3 using only 25% of fresh water only. Results also indicated quite comparable results (in plant growth and yield) in CQ1 and AQ1trements indicating the importance of alternate furrow irrigation in saving water. However, plant parameters decreased with saline water especially with fixed furrow (FQ3). It can be concluded that Alternate partial furrow irrigation can be quite an effective method for irrigation for good yield of maize especially with fresh river water consuming (saving) 50% of amount of water required. For ther more, water productivity was increased especially with AQ1 . Treatment AQ1 gave water productivity of 2.60 kg m-3 compared to 1.08 kg m-3 for CQ3. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Partially Alternate and partially FixedFurrow irrigation; Depth of water applied; Water quality; Water Productivity | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 98 PDF Download: 34 |
||