Cotton yield and applied water relationships under drip irrigation |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Texas A&M AgriLife Research (Texas A&M University System), Vernon, TX 76385, United States;2. Texas A&M AgriLife Research (Texas A&M University System), Plainview, TX 79072, United States;1. Federal University of Mato Grosso, Sinop, Mato Grosso, Brazil;2. Embrapa, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brazil;3. Mato Grosso Cotton Institute, Primavera do Leste, Mato Grosso, Brazil;4. Carbon Management and Sequestration Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States;1. University of Georgia, Crop & Soil Sciences Department, 2360 Rainwater Rd, Tifton, GA 31793-5766, United States;2. University of Florida, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, PO Box 110570, 1741 Museum Road, Gainesville, FL 32611-0570, United States;3. University of Georgia, Stripling Irrigation Research Park, 8207 GA-37, Camilla, GA 31730, United States;4. Cotton Incorporated, 6399 Weston Parkway, Cary, NC 27513, United States;5. University of Florida, IFAS Southwest Research and Education Center, 2685 SR 29 North Immokalee, FL 34142, United States;1. College of Plant Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, P.R.China;2. Key Laboratory of Crop Ecophysiology and Farming System in Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River, Ministry of Agriculture, Wuhan 430070, P.R.China;1. Key Laboratory of Oasis Eco-agriculture, Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, College of Agriculture, Shihezi University, Shihezi 832003, Xinjiang, China;2. Key Laboratory of Plant Resources, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100093, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Different irrigation scheduling methods and amounts of water ranging from deficit to excessive amounts were used in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) irrigation studies from 1988 to 1999, at Lubbock, TX. Irrigation scheduling treatments based on canopy temperature (Tc) were emphasized in each year. Surface drip irrigation and recommended production practices for the area were used. The objective was to use the 12-year database to estimate the effect of irrigation and growing season temperature on cotton yield. Yields in the irrigation studies were then compared with those for the northwest Texas production region. An irrigation input of 58 cm or total water application of 74 cm was estimated to produce maximum lint yield. Sources of the total water supply for the maximum yielding treatments for each year averaged 74% from irrigation and 26% from rain. Lint yield response to irrigation up to the point of maximum yield was approximated as 11.4 kg ha?1 cm?1 of irrigation between the limits of 5 and 54 cm with lint yields ranging from 855 to 1630 kg ha?1. The intra-year maximum lint yield treatments were not limited by water input, and their inter-year range of 300 kg ha?1 was not correlated with the quantity of irrigation. The maximum lint yields were linearly related to monthly and seasonal heat units (HU) with significant regressions for July (P=0.15), August (P=0.07), and from May to September (P=0.01). The fluctuation of maximum yearly lint yields and the response to HU in the irrigation studies were similar to the average yields in the surrounding production region. The rate of lint yield increase with HU was slightly higher in the irrigation studies than in the surrounding production area and was attributed to minimal water stress. Managing irrigation based on real-time measurements of Tc produced maximum cotton yields without applying excessive irrigation. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
