Irrigation Water Use Efficiency IWUE [ kg/mm ] - adagio

IRRIGATION WATER USEEFFICIENCY– FIELD STATIONARY EXPERIMENTJozef Takac, Pavol Nejedlik,Bernard SiskaADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

GoalStatistical evaluation of theefficiency of the irrigation of cropproductionADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

LocalityADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

LocalityADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Locality – experimental field ofIrrigation Research InstituteADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Agroclimatic regions in Slovakia

Locality - Data• Field stationary experiment:• Loamy soil• Underground water level 8 m under the ground• Yearly mean temperature 9,8°C• April-September average temp. 16,2°C• Yearly precipitation totals 554 mm• April-September prec. totals 317 mm• Mean start of the vegetation period – March 18ADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Data• Field experiment data from 1973-2006• Selected crops:• winter wheat, spring barley, maize –in 7 years• sugar beet in 4 years• Irrigated and non irrigated fields in paralel with7 variants of nutrition7 variants of nutrition 0 - NPK -N 1 P 1 K 1ADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Method /Evaluated parameters/Irrigation efficiency IE [% ]IE =YYir*100Y i yield of irrigated plant [kg/ha]Y r yield of non irrigated plant [kg/ha]ADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734workshop Jois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Evaluated parameters• Water use efficiency WUE [ kg/mm ]WUE =YETY yield of irrigated plant [kg/ha]ET actual evapotranspiration/from seeding to harvest/ADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Evaluated parametersIrrigation Water Use Efficiency IWUE [ kg/mm ]IWUE=Yi −IYrY iY rlyield of irrigated plant [kg/ha]yield of non irrigated plant [kg/ha]irrigation amount [mm]ADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734workshop Jois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

ResultsStatistical parameters of irrigation efficiency IE [%] according tofield experiment in 1973-2006Crop Average Median Min. Max.Winter wheat 9 9 -14 84Spring barley 3 0 -28 54Maize 92 30 4 727Silage maize 174 33 6 744Sugar beet 42 26 11 108Alfalfa 47 34 3 151ADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734workshop Jois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Median of amount of irrigation water [mm],evapotranspiration parameters [mm], and irrigation waterefficiency parameters [mm]CropIrrigation [mm]ET[mm]ET max[mm]ET/ET max[-]WUE[kg.mm -1 ]IWUE[kg.mm -1 ]Winterwheat60 540 623 0,859 11,29 7,920 487 623 0,775 11,28 -Spring 40 397 441 0,961 12,35 0,14barley 0 394 441 0,925 13,43 -Maize 140 600 683 0,863 17,46 21,900 407 683 0,596 20,93 -Sugar 220 718 860 0,876 98,08 87,96beet 0 495 860 0,566 115,26 -ADAGIO, CECILIA, COST734 workshopJois, AT, Oct. 6-8, 2008

Relation between actual evapotranspiration (ET) and yields/all nutrition variants/winter wheatspring barley10886yield [t.ha -1 ]64yield [t.ha -1 ]42200400 450 500 550 600 650ET [mm]250 300 350 400 450 500ET [mm]16maize100sugar beet1280yield [t.ha -1 ]8yield [t.ha -1 ]604042000300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650ET [mm]400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800ET [mm]

Relation between actual evapotranspiration (ET) and yields/optimalnutrition /10winter wheat8spring barley86yield [t.ha -1 ]64yield [t.ha -1 ]42200400 450 500 550 600 650ET [mm]250 300 350 400 450 500ET [mm]16maize100sugar beet1280yield [t.ha -1 ]8yield [t.ha -1 ]604042000300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650ET [mm]400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800ET [mm]

Relation between relative evapotranspiration (ET/ETmax) and yield/all nutrition variants/winter wheatspring barley10886yield [t.ha -1 ]64yield [t.ha -1 ]4220050 60 70 80 90 100ET/ET max[mm]50 60 70 80 90 100ET/ET max[mm]16maize100sugar beet1280yield [t.ha -1 ]8yield [t.ha -1 ]60404200040 50 60 70 80 90 100ET/ET max[mm]50 60 70 80 90 100ET/ET max[mm]

Relation between precipitation during the veg. period and WUE/non irrigated, all nutrition variants/winter wheatspring barley20201616WUE [kg.mm -1 ]128WUE [kg.mm -1 ]1284400240 280 320 360 400 440 480precipitation [mm]120 160 200 240 280precipitation [mm]30maize160sugar beetWUE [kg.mm -1 ]2010WUE [kg.mm -1 ]120804000200 300 400 500 600precipitation [mm]200 240 280 320 360precipitation [mm]

Relation between irrigation dosage and IWUE/all nutrition variants/40winter wheat60spring barleyIWUE [kg.mm -1 ]200-20IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]40200-20-40-4020 40 60 80 100 120irrigation [mm]30 40 50 60irrigation [mm]50maize500sugar beet40400IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]3020IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]30020010100000 50 100 150 200 250irrigation [mm]40 80 120 160 200 240 280irrigation [mm]

Histograms of Irrigation Water Use Efficiency IWUE/all nutrition variants/winter wheatspring barley25162012number1510number8540-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]0-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]25maize6sugar beet205number15105number432100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]040 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]

N1P1K1N1P1K1Statistics of IWUE according to the nutrition variants40winter wheat spring barley60200-2040200-20-40-40IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]ONPPKNKNPKN1PKN1P1K1ONPPKNKNPKN1PKIWUE [kg.mm -1 ]fertilizationfertilization50maize sugar beet5004030201040030020010000IWUE [kg.mm -1 ]ONPPKNKNPKN1PKN1P1K1ONPPKNKNPKN1PKIWUE [kg.mm -1 ]fertilizationfertilization

Conclusions• Positive effect of irrigation comes mainly at the cropsharvested in late summer, maize and sugar beet.Irrigation efficiency was lower at the cereals• Irrigation water use efficiency was highest at all cropsduring dry seasons when low irrigation dosages wereapplied• Precipitation totals during the vegetation season, resp.the amount of water flowing into the system is not theonly parameter determining the efficiency of water useby the crops. The way and the date of irrigation as wellas the nutrition and soil properties and theirinteractions play the decisive role.