ontario sugar beet growers - Atrium - University of Guelph

COMMENTS
Location B
CONTROL
A very different series of events occurred at this site. After a series of significant rainfall
events between July 15 and 26, the ground was never able to rewet itself especially at the
most effective growing depth of 30cm. The heavier soil type sealed over and later in the
season began to crack, Fig 6. This did not provide a very effective soil-root growth
opportunity capable of producing high sugar beet yields. All three soil depths showed a
depletion of soil moisture as the roots tried to grow in this relatively inhospitable, tight,
condition. Yields were considerably lower than at Location A.
PIVOT IRRIGATION
The three imgation events on August 15,22 and 23 apparently provided enough soil
moisture to softened the soil sufficiently with adequate water penetration into the root
zone at all depths that the sugar beets began to grow resulting in higher beet yields than
the non-imgated control (Fig. 11). Each time water was added, whether through
imgation or rainfall the roots quickly took up the moisture noted by the rounded peaks
with very little lost water through gravitational drainage. In contrast to Location A, sugar
beet roots were active at the 60cm depth as they may have been forced to grow in this
less compacted soil region. Unfortunately for there is little nutrients at that soil level. It
appears that additional water could have improved the yield at this location.
HAND IRRIGATED PLOT
Similarly to that of the Pivot irrigated plot, the imgation events on August 9,24 and 3 1
provided sufficient moisture to soften and oxygenate the soil to promote a reasonable rate
of sugar beet growth. The yields and sugar content were similar for both the imgated
plots and considerably higher than in the non-irrigated control plots.
Fig. 10. Total rainfall + irrigation at locations A and B in the three irrigation
treatments.
Irrigation Comparison
Hard higation (OW
A
Site Location
B