- Email: [email protected]
Responses of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) to full and limited irrigation at different growth stages
Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
Responses of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) to full and limited irrigation at different growth stages A.T. Go¨ksoya,*, A.O. Demirb, Z.M. Turana, N. Dag˘u¨stu¨a a
b
Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Uludag˘ University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey Department of Agricultural Structures and Irrigation, Faculty of Agriculture, Uludag˘ University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey Received 10 June 2003; received in revised form 25 September 2003; accepted 1 November 2003
Abstract This study was carried out to understand the relationships between yield and irrigation water applied at different growth periods and to determine the most critical period(s) for sunflower. A rainfed (non-irrigated) treatment as the control and 13 different irrigation treatments (H, F, M, HF, HM, FM, HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40) with full (about 360 mm) or limited (40 and 60%) irrigation water, were applied to the hybrid Sanbro (Novartis Seed Company) planted on clay soil, at three critical development periods: heading (H), flowering (F), and milking (M). Evapotranspiration (ET) increased as an increasing amount of irrigation water was applied. The highest seasonal ET (an average of 674 mm) was measured in the HFM treatment. Limited irrigation applied at different growing periods had different effects on the yield-related characters examined. The highest seed yield (4056 kg ha1) and oil yield (1841 kg ha1) were obtained from the HFM treatment; 85.4 and 88% increases, respectively, compared with the control. The seed yield and oil yield increases for the limited-irrigation treatments were: 78.7 and 77.4% for H60FM; 77.4 and 78.9% for H40FM; 72.2 and 75% for HF60M; 76.4 and 79.2% for HF40M; 72.7 and 73.6% for HFM60; 77.6 and 79.1% for HFM40. Therefore, we confirm that HFM irrigation is the best choice for maximum yield under the local conditions, but these irrigation schemes must be re-considered in areas where water resources are more limited. In case of more restricted irrigation, the limitation of irrigation water at the flowering period should be avoided. # 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Sunflower; Irrigation; Water deficit; Evapotranspiration; Growth periods; Yield
1. Introduction In Turkey, sunflower (Helianthus annus L.) is grown on around 0.6 M ha per year with average seed yields of 1.2–1.6 t ha1 (Anonymous, 1999), a production insufficient for national seed and oil requirements. The low yield is mainly due to low Abbreviations: ET, evapotranspiration; F, flowering; H, heading; M, milking; LAI, leaf area index; T, ton * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90-224-442-89-70x208; fax: þ90-224-442-88-36. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.T. Go¨ksoy).
precipitation during the summer. Sunflower responds to irrigation and yield increments exceeding 100% are common on soils of low water holding capacity (Robinson, 1971). Especially, hybrid cultivars having high seed-cost give the highest yield only when irrigated (Unger, 1982; Flagella et al., 2002). In the Marmara region, the largest sunflower production center of Turkey, vegetables, fruits and sugarbeets are largely grown in irrigated areas, but wheat and sunflower are grown in dryer areas (Anonymous, 1996). As a result, sunflower yield decreases in years of low rainfall.
0378-4290/$ – see front matter # 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2003.11.004
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
168
Even limited irrigation-water, applied at different growth stages of sunflower, can significantly increase seed yields (Stone et al., 1996), especially during three growth periods: heading, flowering, and milking stages (Osman and Talha, 1975; Demiro¨ ren, 1978); at three growth stages (heading, beginning of flowering and end of flowering) (Unger, 1983); and at 50% ray flower stage (Alessi et al., 1977). In the Marmara region, Karaata (1991) found that the highest seed yield (3900 kg ha1) and seasonal evapotranspiration (867 mm) were obtained after irrigations at heading, flowering, and milking with no water-stress. Because of limited irrigation water, it is generally acceptable that deficit irrigation should be used in dryland conditions (Anonymous, 1994). However, before introducing this cultural practice, its effects on yield and quality of sunflower should be investigated. The aim of this research was to study the effects of full and limited irrigation applied at different growth periods of sunflower, on yield, certain yield-components and quality traits and to determine the most critical growth period(s) of sunflower for water usage under southern Marmara conditions. The results utilized by the Turkish irrigation agencies and the regional growers can promote the introduction of new costeffective management techniques in sunflower production in the region.
2. Materials and methods Field trials were conducted for 3 years (1999–2001) at the Research and Training Centre of the Agricultural Faculty, Uludagˇ University, Bursa, Turkey on a clay (average 45.6% clay content) soil having 0.1%
total nitrogen content (Kjeldhal method), 0.40 kg ha1 phosphorus (Olsen method, P2O5), 5.70 kg ha1 exchangeable potassium (ammonium acetate method, K2O), 1.9% organic matter (Walchey–Black method), and a bulk density of 1.45, 1.53 and 1.50 g cm3 in 0– 0.30, 0.30–0.60 and 0.60–0.90 m profile, respectively. The soil pH was 7.2. The water holding capacity (WC) of the experimental site was observed as 130 mm in a 0.90 m soil profile. WC was determined by the difference between the water content at field capacity (FC) and at permanent wilting point (PWP). Water lodging is not observed in the area and the water table of soil is deeper than 100 cm in early spring. It is located in the southern Marmara region, with average annual rainfall of 713 mm and 14.4 8C mean monthly temperature. Total monthly precipitation and mean air temperature data during the sunflower growing period are presented in Table 1. Total rainfall from March to August were 219, 290, 232 mm in 1999, 2000 and 2001, respectively. This correspond to 37% of the annual precipitation. It is insufficient for sunflower production as expected. The hybrid cultivar Sanbro obtained from Novartis Seed Company was used as plant material. In the experiments, plot size was 20.8 m2 (8:0 m 2:6 m); row spacing was 0.65 m; plant–plant spacing was 0.30 m. Planting was done on 13 May 1999; 4 April 2000; and 6 April 2001. Sixty kilograms of nitrogen per hectare as ammonium nitrate was applied prior to sowing and a further 60 kg N ha1 was added when the plants were 30–40 cm in height. After planting, Linuron was sprayed at a rate of 0.20 cm3 m2 for weed control. Three growth periods of sunflower which were suggested by Doorenbos and Kassam (1979): heading (H), flowering (F), and milking
Table 1 Mean air temperature and total monthly precipitation in 1999–2001 and between 1928 and 1986 at Bursa Months
March April May June July August Total
Temperature (8C)
Precipitation (mm)
1999
2000
2001
1928–1986
9 14 18 23 26 25
8 15 18 22 26 25
14 18 18 24 28 26
8 12 18 22 24 24
1999
2000
2001
1928–1986
71 25 8 74 1 40
96 109 49 16 9 11
49 86 65 17 2 13
70 60 52 30 27 22
219
290
232
261
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
169
Table 2 Irrigation treatments applied Treatments
Description
Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
Rainfed (non-irrigated) treatment Irrigation applied only at heading period Irrigation applied only at flowering period Irrigation applied only at milking period Irrigation at heading and flowering periods Irrigation at heading and milking periods Irrigation at flowering and milking period Irrigation at all the periods. No water stress The same as HFM, but a 40% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 60% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 40% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 60% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 40% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 60% of water deficit
(M), sensitive to water stress, were considered. Fourteen irrigation treatments were applied as described below (Table 2). Twenty plants were randomly selected from each plot (at maturity period of the plants) for measurement of plant height, head diameter, number of leaves/plant and number of seeds/head. On the other hand, leaf area and LAI were measured at three growth periods in only one replication. LAI was determined using the methodology described in Pereyra et al. (1982) using measurements of individual leaf width. After plots were harvested, seed yield, 1000 seed weight, oil percentage, oil yield and stem yield were recorded. Crude oil percentage was determined by the Soxhlet extraction technique (Pomeranz and Clifton, 1994). Oil yield was calculated as a function of seed yield and crude oil percentage. All data were subjected to analysis of variance for each character using MSTAT-C (version 2.1, Michigan State University, 1991) and MINITAB (University of Texas at Austin) software. The experiments were designed in a randomized complete block with four replications. The significance of irrigation treatment, main effects and treatment year interactions were determined at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels, by the F-test. The F-protected least significant difference (LSD) was calculated at the 0.05 probability level according to Steel and Torrie (1980). Soil water contents were monitored prior to irrigation at three growth stages (heading, flowering and milking) using the gravimetric method (Black, 1965)
was was was was was was
applied applied applied applied applied applied
at at at at at at
heading period heading period flowering period flowering period milking period milking period
from the plots of the second replication of the various treatments, and then these values were converted to volumetric water contents using bulk density. According to the soil water contents measured, the plots of the treatments were irrigated from deficit moisture content of 0–90 cm soil layer to FC at each growth stage. More water than the estimated (FC—available water content) was not applied to 0.90 m soil profile to reach FC because it was assumed that deep percolation would be very low due to very clayey soil characteristics. Consequently, a water table rising problem would not occur. A water meter was used to measure the amount of water applied by the furrow system. Soil water contents were not statistically analyzed because of insufficient replications. Rainfall was measured also. Evapotranspiration (ET) at each irrigation treatment (H, F, M, HF, etc.) was estimated using the following water balance equation (Beyce et al., 1972): ET ¼ I þ P DS where I is the irrigation water, P the rainfall, and DS the moisture variation in the soil profile. Moisture variation was obtained from moisture measurements in the soil profile. Seasonal ET was determined by adding the ET values for different stages of growth (i.e., heading, flowering, milking, and maturity). Runoff and runon was assumed as zero because the plots had earthen embankments. Deep percolation was assumed as zero in practice (Hanks et al., 1976).
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
170
Soil water content obtained at the beginning of experiments were 359.8, 414.4 and 382.3 mm in a 0.90 m profile for the 1999, 2000 and 2001, respectively. Differences between years in terms of soil water content were significant. Soil water content at the beginning of experiment was the lowest in 1999, because planting was later than in the last 2 years. Consequently, in the first year some decrease was observed in soil moisture content due to late seasonal weather conditions. Hence, at planting time in 1999, 70 mm irrigation water was applied to all plots (treatments) by the sprinkler method to reach 100% of the total available water (or approximately FC) that decreased to 50% level at planting time. Water use efficiency was determined to evaluate the productivity of irrigation in the treatments. Water use efficiency (WUE) and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) are two terms used to promote the efficient use of irrigation water at the crop production level (Bos, 1980). Water use efficiency was calculated as the ratio of seed yield (YLD) to evapotranspiration (ETa), given as WUE ¼ YLD=ETa (kg ha1 mm1). IWUE was estimated by following equation: IWUE ðkg ha1 mm1 Þ ¼
YLD YLDrainfed IRGA
where YLDrainfed is the seed yield obtained from rainfed treatment or dryland yield and IRGA the seasonal irrigation amount used in mm.
3. Results and discussion 3.1. Analysis of variance The analysis of variance indicated that years significantly affected all the characters measured. According to the data combined over 3 years, irrigation treatments significantly affected all characters except the number of leaves per plant and the oil percentage. Differences between irrigation treatments were significant for plant height in 1999 and 2000; for head diameter and 1000 seed weight in 1999 and 2001; for the number of seeds per head, stem yield and seed yield in each individual year. On the other hand, ‘‘year treatment’’ interactions were significant at 1% level of probability for plant height, stem yield and seed yield and at 5% for number of seeds per head
(Table 3). These interactions, statistically significant for plant height, number of seeds per head, stem yield and seed yield, indicated that treatments responded variously to different years. 3.2. Plant height, head diameter, leaves per plant and stem yield The mean values of all characters measured in different treatments are summarized in Table 4. Irrigation at three growth periods (HFM treatment) and limited irrigation (H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40) produced the tallest plants (154– 159 cm). The shortest plants (145 cm) were obtained from the non-irrigated treatment. These results indicate that full and limited irrigation applied at different growth stages significantly increased plant height in sunflower. Our findings were in agreement with the results reported by Karami (1977), Andhale and Kalbhlor (1978), Unger (1982), Karaata (1991) and Tan et al. (2000). Irrigation treatments also significantly affected head diameter. Irrigation applied at two growth stages (HF, HM), as well as full and limited irrigation at three growth stages (HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, and HFM40) increased head diameter much more than the other methods. An increase in head diameter after irrigation at different growth periods was also reported by others (Karami, 1977; Jana et al., 1982; Karaata, 1991). Irrigation treatments had no statistically significant effect on the number of leaves per plant and their average values varied from 28.1 to 30.0 per plant in all treatments (Table 4). These results are contrary to the reports that irrigation increases the number of leaves per plant and leaf area index (LAI) as a related character (Andhale and Kalbhlor, 1978; Karaata, 1991; Gajri et al., 1997). This disagreement may be due to the different sunflower cultivars used in the experiments. On the other hand, leaf areas and LAI recorded at three growth periods in only one replication, increased when irrigating at all three growth periods (HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40), comparing with the other treatments (Table 5). But the differences between treatments were obvious mainly at the milking stage. In this stage, leaf area and LAI varied from 3128 to 5258 cm2 and from 1.80 to 3.08, respectively, with irrigation applied at M
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
171
Table 3 Results of variance analysis of seed yield, oil percentage, oil yield and certain agronomic traits of sunflower under different irrigation treatments in 1999–2001 and combined years Source
d.f.a
Significance of F-ratios Plant height
1 Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a 1
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a 1
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a 1
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error a
2 2 9 13 26 117
1999
Head diameter 2000
2001
b
ns
ns
**
**
ns ns
ns **
2 9 13 26 117
2 9 13 26 117
1999
2000
2001
3-year
ns ns
ns ns
ns ns
1999
2000
2 9 13 26 117
ns ns ns
2
– 3 13 – 39
2 9 13 26 117
ns ns
ns
ns
**
**
ns
1999
2000
2001
**
ns ns
ns
*
ns
ns
**
**
**
**
**
*
2001
3-year
1999
2000
2001
3-year **
ns
ns
**
**
ns
**
**
**
**
**
**
** **
ns
1999
3-year
Stem yield
Oil percentage 2000
2001
3-year
1999
2000
2001
ns ns
*
ns ns
**
ns
*
ns
ns
**
**
**
** **
Oil yield
1
ns ns
**
ns
3-year **
**
Seed yield 2
2001
Number of seeds per head
1000 Seed weight 2
2000
**
Number of leaves per plant 2
1999
**
1999
2000
2001
3-year
ns
ns
ns
ns
**
**
**
**
*
Degrees of freedom for (1) individual year and (2) combined over 3 years. Non-significant. * Significant at the 5% of probability level ðP < 0:05Þ. ** Significant at the 1% of probability level ðP < 0:01Þ. b
3-year
*
3-year **
ns
ns ns ns
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
172
Table 4 The effects of irrigation treatments on seed yield, oil percentage, oil yield, stem yield and certain plant characters at Bursa, Marmara Region (3-year average, 1999–2001) Treatments
Plant height (cm)
Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
145.4 156.1 152.3 145.2 158.1 157.2 147.3 154.2 153.9 155.9 157.4 158.0 155.3 159.1
Mean LSD (0.05)
153.9 5.4
d ab bc d a ab cd ab ab ab ab a ab a
Head diameter (cm)
Number of leaves per plant
Number of seeds per head
1000 seed weight (g)
Stem yield (kg ha1)
Seed yield (kg ha1)
Crude oil (%)
Oil yield (kg ha1)
15.1 16.4 16.5 15.7 17.9 17.2 17.1 17.9 17.7 17.4 17.5 17.5 17.3 17.6
28.6 29.0 29.1 28.1 29.2 29.0 28.1 28.7 28.9 29.2 28.4 29.3 28.4 30.0
803 909 1056 944 987 1043 1033 1204 1224 1215 1143 1166 1177 1219
52.5 57.3 58.0 55.5 64.2 60.9 61.0 64.2 61.1 61.1 63.4 63.1 61.7 60.6
4908 5725 5529 5815 6327 6294 6401 7360 6877 6683 7095 6978 6774 6692
2188 2718 3190 2795 3325 3322 3272 4056 3911 3883 3767 3860 3779 3887
44.7 43.7 43.9 44.8 44.6 44.8 45.8 45.4 44.5 45.1 45.5 45.4 45.4 45.0
979 1189 1403 1249 1485 1489 1496 1841 1737 1752 1713 1755 1700 1754
28.8 ns
1081 71
45.1 ns
1538 103
e cd bcd de a abc abc a a ab a a abc a
17.1 0.9
f e c de cd c c ab a a b ab ab a
e d cd de a bc abc a abc abc ab ab ab bc
60.3 3.2
g f f ef d de cd a abc bcd ab ab bcd bcd
6390 500
e d c d c c c a ab ab b b b ab
3425 175
e d c d c c c a b ab b ab b ab
stem yields were obtained from HFM (7360 kg ha1), HF60M (7095 kg ha1), HF40M (6978 kg ha1) and H60FM (6877 kg ha1) treatments while the lowest by the control (4908 kg ha1). In other studies, it was reported that stem yield increased with frequent irrigation (Turner and Rawson, 1982) and irrigation
and HFM stages. In addition, Connor et al. (1985) and Connor and Jones (1985) reported that the highest leaf area index (LAI) in sunflower was 2.5 and water stress decreased leaf area and leaf area index (LAI) of plants. Significant differences in stem yield were observed between irrigation treatments (Table 3). The highest
Table 5 Leaf area (cm2 per plant) and leaf area index (LAI) measured at three growth periods of irrigation treatments Treatments
Growth periods Heading stage 2
Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
Flowering stage 2
Milking stage
Leaf area (cm )
LAI
Leaf area (cm )
LAI
Leaf area (cm2)
LAI
2935 2556 2859 2746 2389 2790 2392 3681 2865 3371 2733 2983 3564 2614
1.67 1.46 1.63 1.56 1.38 1.60 1.36 2.11 1.64 1.95 1.58 1.73 2.04 1.51
3652 4106 4367 4581 3903 3763 4479 4800 3756 4271 4722 5031 4224 4427
2.08 2.35 2.49 2.62 2.26 2.17 2.55 2.77 2.15 2.44 2.72 2.89 2.43 2.54
3485 3607 4170 3128 4491 3868 4287 5258 4573 5076 5187 4572 4524 5187
1.98 2.10 2.38 1.80 2.55 2.23 2.47 3.08 2.59 2.97 2.92 2.65 2.61 2.91
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
applied at heading (Harman et al., 1982) or flowering (Unger, 1982) periods. In a similar study, Karaata (1991) found that full irrigation applied at heading, flowering and milking stages and limited irrigations at milking stage gave the highest stem yield whereas the non-irrigated treatment and single irrigation at milking stage produced lowest yield. 3.3. Seed yield and seed characteristics The full and limited irrigation at three growth periods (HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40) produced more seeds per head. The mean values varied from 1143 to 1224 seeds per head (Table 4). The lowest number of seeds per head was obtained from the non-irrigated treatment (803 seeds per head). The number of seeds per head is positively associated with seed yield in sunflower (Punia and Gill, 1994; Doddamani et al., 1997). Our results are in close agreement with those of Jana et al. (1982) and Flagella et al. (2002). The 1000 seed weight generally increased as the number of irrigations increased (Table 5). The highest mean values were obtained from the irrigations applied at two or three growth stages (60.6–64.2 g) and the lowest from the control (52.5 g). Murriel (1975), Talha and Osman (1975) reported that 1000 seed weight significantly increased as the amount of irrigation increased, while Jana et al. (1982) and Karaata (1991) found that 1000 seed weight increased with irrigations applied at flowering and milking periods. Our results indicate that the highest seed yields were achieved from HFM treatment, limited irrigations at heading period (H40FM and H60FM) and 60% deficit irrigation at milking period (HFM40). The mean of 3 years data showed that seed yields of HFM, H60FM, HFM40 and H40FM treatments were 4056, 3911, 3887 and 3884 kg ha1, respectively. Seed yield significantly reduced as the amount and the number of irrigations decreased. The lowest seed yield was obtained from the non-irrigated treatment (control) with 2188 kg ha1 (Table 4). Water stress and limited irrigation in the flowering period significantly reduced seed yield in some years (Fig. 1). For that reason, in case of limited irrigation, limitation of irrigation water during the flowering period should be avoided. In addition, ‘‘year treatment’’ interactions
173
with statistically significant seed yields, indicated that some treatments affected seed yield differently, according to the experimental years. Seed yields decreased at M, FM, HFM, H60FM, HF60M, HFM60 and HFM40 treatments in 2001 while these treatments produced higher seed yields in the other years (Fig. 1). It is known that the amount and distribution of precipitation and differentiation in temperature and soil conditions are the major factors affecting seed yield and some yield components of sunflower in arid and semi-arid regions. The ‘‘year treatment’’ interactions were statistically significant because of changing soil characteristics and climatic data corresponding to different dates of growth stages (heading, flowering, milking) according to the experimental year. This resulted in significant ‘‘year’’ effects for all characters, also. Seed yields of the treatments as a percentage of the control were also determined (Fig. 2). HFM produced 85.4% higher seed yield than the control. However, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60 and HFM40 produced 72.7–78.7% more seed yield than the control. The other treatments (H, F, M or HF, HM, FM) also produced 24.2–51.9% more seed yield (Table 4 and Fig. 2). Murriel (1975) reported that the highest seed yield was obtained from a treatment having no water stress whereas the lowest yield was produced from a non-irrigated application. Osman and Talha (1975) reported that seed yield increased as the amount of water and irrigation number increased. Demiro¨ ren (1978) suggested that sunflowers should be irrigated three times at heading, flowering and milking stages under Tokat conditions in Turkey. Similarly, Unger (1982) reported that seed yield was the highest with irrigation treatment with no water stress, followed by irrigation treatments applied at flowering and at the end of flowering. Karaata (1991) found that seed yield was the lowest in non-irrigated treatments whereas it was the highest in the normal irrigation treatment at heading, flowering and milking stages of sunflower plant. On the other hand, the same researcher reported that in case of limited irrigation, water stress should be scheduled on two growth stages (heading and milking stages) instead of one growth stage. In the first blooming stage, limitation of irrigation water should be avoided (Karaata, 1991; Stone et al., 1996). In addition, Tan et al. (2000) and Rinaldi (2001) suggested that one irrigation at heading or flowering stage
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
174
4500
Seed Yield (Kg ha-1)
4000
3500
3000
1999 2000 2001
2500
3-year
FM 60 FM H 40 FM H F6 0M H F4 0M H FM 6 H 0 FM 40
FM
H
H
H F H M
M
F
H
Co nt ro
l
2000
Irrigation Treatments Fig. 1. Seed yields of the treatments in 1999–2001 and 3-year average.
centage increased with irrigations. On the other hand, Karaata (1991) reported that oil percentage did not significantly increase as the amount of irrigation water increased, but increased after irrigations applied at flowering and milking stages. Since oil percentage is determined by several environmental factors (especially temperature) as well as genotypic structure (Fick and Zimmerman, 1973; Harris et al., 1978), it is likely that these differences are mainly due to
produced the highest net income in sunflower production. Oil percentage, an important quality component in sunflower, was not affected by irrigation treatments applied at different growth stages. Mean oil percentages varied from 43.7 to 45.8% in all treatments (Table 4). Our findings do not correspond to those of Murriel (1975), Jana et al. (1982), Tan et al. (2000) and Flagella et al. (2002) who reported that oil per-
Seed and Oil Yields (% of Control)
200
175
150
Seed 125
Oil
40
60
FM H
FM
F4 0M
H
H
F6 0M
40 FM
H
H
60 FM
H
FM H FM
F
H M
H
M
F
H
Co nt ro l
100
Irrigation Treatments
Fig. 2. Seed and oil yields of the irrigation treatments as a percentage of the control.
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
environmental conditions. The high-oil hybrid genotypes are considered to have less yield advantage under higher (i.e., non-limited) water supply (Focteau et al., 2001). Importantly, all our irrigation treatments resulted in more and heavier seeds, compared with the non-irrigated control (Table 4). Since, as reported by Pereira Lopez et al. (1999), a higher oil percentage is oftenly correlated with a reduction of seed weight, our results for oil percentage are not unexpected. In contrast to the oil percentage, oil yield was affected by the irrigation treatments, because of the different seed yields. In this study, the highest oil yield (1841 kg ha1) was obtained from HFM treatment, followed by the 60% deficit-irrigation treatments (H40FM, HF40M, and HFM40). The lowest mean oil yield (979 kg ha1) was obtained from the non-irrigated treatment (Table 4). When compared as a percentage, full irrigation at three growth stages (HFM) produced 88% more oil yield per ha compared with the non-irrigated treatment while H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, and HFM40 produced 74– 79% more. The other treatments (H, F, M or HF, HM, FM) produced 30.7–52.2% more oil yield (Table 4 and Fig. 2). Our results are in agreement with those of Osman and Talha (1975), Jana et al. (1982) and Kadayıfc¸ı and Yıldırım (2000) who reported that oil yield increased as the amount of irrigation water increased. 3.4. Evapotranspiration (ET) and yield–ET relations The ET of sunflower was determined also (Table 6). ET increased markedly when irrigation water increased. The highest seasonal evapotranspiration was obtained from the HFM treatment with no water stress (674 mm). The lowest value was observed in non-irrigated treatment with water stress (306 mm). The other treatments gave ET values between these extremes. As a result, seed and oil yields significantly increased as seasonal ET increased from 306 mm for the non-irrigated treatment to 674 mm for HFM treatment. Seasonal ET when soil water is sufficient ranges from 600 to 1000 mm in sunflower (Doorenbos and Kassam, 1979). Browne (1977) found that seasonal evapotranspiration in sunflower varied between 546 and 677 mm depending on irrigation frequency. Other researchers reported similar results (Demiro¨ ren, 1978; Unger, 1982; Karaata, 1991; Tyagi et al., 2000), but
175
Table 6 Seasonal total evapotranspiration (ET) of sunflower plants in 14 irrigation programs Treatments 1999 (mm) 2000 (mm) 2001 (mm) Mean (mm) Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
261 486 460 364 524 652 542 719 634 631 655 649 660 638
356 486 449 453 585 590 576 688 656 632 654 627 666 635
301 428 376 401 499 522 495 616 559 538 589 561 574 543
306 467 428 406 536 588 538 674 616 600 633 612 633 605
since ET is influenced by environmental factors as well as plant characteristics, this is not unexpected. On the other hand, Unger (1990) reported maximum ET from about 500 to 700 mm resulted in near top yields of sunflower in low rainfall regions. Table 7 presents the seasonal applied water, seed yield, WUE and IWUE for the 14 treatments. Seasonal applied water varied from 355 and 311 mm, respectively, for HFM and HF60M treatments, to 110 and 118 mm, respectively, for F and M treatments. Seed yield increased significantly as irrigation amount increased (Table 7). WUE did not significant change when irrigation amount increased. However, WUE values ranged from 7.66 and 7.12 kg ha1 mm1, respectively, for M and rainfed (control) treatments, to 5.09 and 5.59 kg ha1 mm1, respectively, for HM and H treatments. Previous studies indicated that the WUE ranged from 5.39 to 10.5 kg ha1 mm1 (Connor et al., 1985; Stone et al., 1996; Rinaldi, 2001). Our results are in agreement with Stone et al. (1996) who reported that seed yield increased with irrigation frequency and seasonal irrigation amount and the WUE between treatments was not significantly different. The highest IWUE value was obtained from the F treatment and the lowest value from the H treatment (Table 7). Results indicate that flowering is the most important stage for irrigation of sunflower, because, sunflower is more sensitive to water stress at flowering than at other growth stages. Therefore, when seasonal
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
176
Table 7 Sunflower response to irrigation treatments (3-year average, 1999–2001) Treatments
Seasonal applied water (mm)
Seed yield (t ha1)
WUE (kg ha1 mm1)
IWUE (kg ha1 mm1)
Control (rainfed) H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
– 128 110 118 237 246 227 355 304 278 311 289 308 284
2.18 2.72 3.19 2.79 3.32 3.32 3.27 4.05 3.91 3.88 3.77 3.86 3.78 3.88
7.12 5.59 6.93 7.66 6.33 5.09 6.03 5.63 6.17 6.15 5.75 5.95 5.73 6.08
0.00 4.22 9.18 5.17 4.81 4.63 4.80 5.27 5.69 6.11 5.11 5.81 5.19 5.98
irrigation water was limited, one irrigation at flowering should be applied. Our results support the previous work of Rinaldi (2001) who reported that when seasonal irrigation water was limited, one or two irrigations in the central phase (heading and flowering stages) is profitable, for irrigation use efficiency and net income. Also, Rinaldi (2001), reported that in a water-limited environment even a single irrigation would double net income as compared to a rainfed treatment.
4. Conclusions Sunflower is commonly grown as a dryland crop in the world but it responds significantly to irrigation. Our results, from 3-year period, indicated that full and limited irrigation treatments at three growth periods (heading, flowering, and milking) increased seed yield, oil yield and other traits observed, more than the non-irrigated (control) and single irrigation applications. The highest seed yield (4056 kg ha1) and oil yield (1841 kg ha1) were obtained from the HFM treatment with no water stress. Limited irrigations applied at the three growth stages produced higher seed and oil yields as well as HFM treatment. The lowest seed and oil yields (2188 and 979 kg ha1, respectively) were found in non-irrigated treatment. The HFM irrigation program increased seed yield
about 85.4%, and oil yield about 88% compared with the control. The average seed yields of full and limited irrigations applied at three growth periods were about 77.2% higher than that of the non-irrigated treatment. Limited irrigation applied at one or two growth stages produced lower seed and oil yields than those of treatments applied at three growth stages. Our results indicate that sunflower should be irrigated three times with full or limited irrigation water at heading, flowering and milking periods for high seed yield. In case of limited irrigation, reduced irrigation water during the flowering period should be avoided. When seasonal irrigation water was limited, one irrigation at the flowering stage should be applied for the irrigation efficiency.
Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to The Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) for financial support as the results reported in this paper are part of ‘‘Determination of Relationships between Water and Yield in Sunflower (H. annuus L.) under Bursa Conditions’’ scheme (fully financed by the TUBITAK). We also thank Dr. G.A. Fragkiadakis, Superior Technological Institute of Crete, Greece, for critical reading of the manuscript and his valuable suggestions.
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
References Alessi, J., Power, J.F., Zimmerman, D.C., 1977. Sunflower yield and water use as influenced by planting date, population, and row spacing. Agron. J. 69, 465–469. Andhale, R.K., Kalbhlor, P.N., 1978. Effect of irrigation schedules under varying levels of nitrogen on growth, yield, quality and water use of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Indian J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ. 3, 200–203. Anonymous, 1994. Agricultural Production and DSI Constructed and Operated Irrigation and Drainage Schemes. DSI, Ankara (in Turkish). Anonymous, 1996. IGEME Export Promotion Center of Turkey. Publications Turkey 95 and 96. Prime Ministry Undersecretaries for Foreign Trade, Ankara. Anonymous, 1999. Sunflower crude and refined oils. In: Agribusiness Handbooks. Food and Agriculture Organization, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, pp. 17–26. ¨ .K., Madanog˘ lu, K., Ayla, C¸., 1972. Evapotranspirations Beyce, O of some irrigated crops grown in Turkey, No. 15. Journal of Centre Soil and Water Conservation Research Institute, Ankara, Turkey, 213 pp. Black, C.H., 1965. Methods of Soil Analysis. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, pp. 63–66. Bos, M.G., 1980. Irrigation efficiencies at crop production level. ICID Bull. 29, 18–25. Browne, C.L., 1977. Effect of date of final irrigation on yield and yield components of sunflowers in a semiarid environment. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 17, 482–488. Connor, D.J., Jones, T.R., Palta, J.A., 1985. Response of sunflower to strategies of irrigation. I. Growth, yield and the efficiency of water-use. Field Crops Res. 10, 15–36. Connor, D.J., Jones, T.R., 1985. Response of sunflower to strategies of irrigation. II. Morphological and physiological responses to water stress. Field Crops Res. 12, 91–103. Demiro¨ ren, T., 1978. Determination of evapotranspiration of sunflower in Tokat, No. 25. Journal of Tokat Region Soil Water Research Institute, Tokat, 27 pp. Doddamani, I.K., Patil, S.A., Ravikumar, R.L., 1997. Relationship autogamy and self fertility with seed yield and yield components in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Helia 20, 95–102. Doorenbos, J., Kassam, A.H., 1979. Yield Respond to Water. Pub. 33. United Nations FAO, Rome, 193 pp. Fick, G.N., Zimmerman, D.C., 1973. Variability in oil content among heads and seeds within heads of sunflowers (Helianthus annuus L.). J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 50, 529–531. Flagella, Z., Rotunno, T., Tarantino, R., Di Caterina, R., De Caro, A., 2002. Changes in seed yield and oil fatty acid composition of high oleic sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) hybrids in relation to the sowing date and the water regime. Eur. J. Agron. 17, 221–230. Focteau, V., El Daouk, M., Baril, C., 2001. Interpretation of genotype by environment interaction in two sunflower experimental networks. Theoret. Appl. Genet. 102, 327–334. Gajri, P.R., Gill, K.S., Chaudhary, M.R., Singh, R., 1997. Irrigation of sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in relation to tillage and mulching. Agric. Water Manage. 34, 149–160.
177
Hanks, R.J., Aschroft, B.L., Rasmussen, W.P., Wilson, G.D., 1976. Corn production as influenced by irrigation and salinity. 1. Utah studies. Irrig. Sci. 1, 47–59. Harman, W.L., Unger, P.W., Jones, O.R., 1982. Sunflower yield response to furrow irrigation on fine textured soils in the Texas high plains. Miscellaneous Publication 1521. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, 35 pp. Harris, H.C., Mc William, J.R., Mason, W.K., 1978. Influence of temperature on oil content and composition of sunflower seed. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 29, 1203–1212. Jana, P.K., Mısra, B., Kar, P.K., 1982. Effect of irrigation at different physiological stages of growth on yield attributes. Yield consumptive use and water use efficiency on sunflower. Indian Agric. 26, 39–42. Kadayıfc¸ı, A., Yıldırım, O., 2000. Relationships between water and yield in sunflower. Turkish J. Agric. For. 24, 137–145. Karaata, H., 1991. Water-production functions of sunflower under Kırklareli conditions, No. 28. Journal of Atatu¨ rk Village Affair Research Institute, Kırklareli, 92 pp. Karami, E., 1977. Effect of irrigation and plant population on yield and yield components of sunflower. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 47, 15–17. Murriel, J.L., 1975. Yield of sunflower in field plots in response to various watering regimes and to irrigation during critical phases of growth. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Sunflower Conference. International Sunflower Association, Romania, pp. 577–582. Osman, F., Talha, M., 1975. The effect of irrigation regime on yield and consumption of sunflower seed oil. Egypt J. Soil Sci. 15, 211–218. Pereira Lopez, M., Sandras, V.O., Trapani, N., 1999. Genetic improvement of sunflower in Argentina between 1930 and 1995. I. Yield and its components. Field Crops Res. 62, 157– 166. Pereyra, V.R., Farizo, C., Cardinali, F., 1982. Estimation of leaf area on sunflower plants. In: Kochman, J.K. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th International Sunflower Conference. Australian Sunflower Association, Toowoomba, Qld., Australia, pp. 21– 23. Pomeranz, Y., Clifton, E., 1994. Food Analysis Theory and Practice, 3rd ed., Kluwer Academic Publisher, San Diego, pp. 689–692. Punia, M.S., Gill, H.S., 1994. Correlations and path coefficient analysis for seed yield traits in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Helia 17, 7–11. Rinaldi, M., 2001. Application of EPIC model for irrigation scheduling of sunflower in Southern Italy. Agric. Water Manage. 49, 185–196. Robinson, R.G., 1971. New crops for irrigated sandy soils. Minnesota Sci. 27, 10–11. Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H., 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biometrical Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 186–187. Stone, L.R., Schlege, A.J., Gwin, R.E., Khan, A.H., 1996. Response of corn, grain sorghum, and sunflower to irrigation in the high plains of Kansas. Agric. Water Manage. 30, 251– 259.
178
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
Talha, M., Osman, F., 1975. Effect of soil water stress on water economy and oil composition in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). J. Agric. Sci. 84, 49–56. Tan, S¸., Beyazgu¨ l, M., Avcıeri, Z., Kayam, Y., Kaya, H.G., 2000. Effect of irrigation at various growth stages on some economic characters of first crop sunflower. J. Aegean Agric. Res. Inst. 10, 1–34. Turner, N.C., Rawson, H.M., 1982. Yield and harvest index of sunflowers cultivars influence of duration and water stress. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Sunflower Conference. Australian Sunflower Association, Toowoomba, Australia, pp. 38–42.
Tyagi, N.K., Sharma, D.K., Luthra, S.K., 2000. Determination of evapotransipation and crop coefficients of rice and sunflower with lysimeter. Agric. Water Manage. 45, 41–45. Unger, P.W., 1982. Time and frequency of irrigation effects on sunflower production and water use. USDA Conservation and Production Research Laboratory. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46, 1072–1076. Unger, P.W., 1983. Irrigation effects on sunflower growth development and water use. Field Crops Res. 3, 181–194. Unger, P.W., 1990. Sunflower. In: Stewart, M.S., Nielsen, D.R. (Eds.), Irrigation of Agricultural Crops. Agronomy No. 30. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, pp. 775–794.
Responses of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) to full and limited irrigation at different growth stages A.T. Go¨ksoya,*, A.O. Demirb, Z.M. Turana, N. Dag˘u¨stu¨a a
b
Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Uludag˘ University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey Department of Agricultural Structures and Irrigation, Faculty of Agriculture, Uludag˘ University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey Received 10 June 2003; received in revised form 25 September 2003; accepted 1 November 2003
Abstract This study was carried out to understand the relationships between yield and irrigation water applied at different growth periods and to determine the most critical period(s) for sunflower. A rainfed (non-irrigated) treatment as the control and 13 different irrigation treatments (H, F, M, HF, HM, FM, HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40) with full (about 360 mm) or limited (40 and 60%) irrigation water, were applied to the hybrid Sanbro (Novartis Seed Company) planted on clay soil, at three critical development periods: heading (H), flowering (F), and milking (M). Evapotranspiration (ET) increased as an increasing amount of irrigation water was applied. The highest seasonal ET (an average of 674 mm) was measured in the HFM treatment. Limited irrigation applied at different growing periods had different effects on the yield-related characters examined. The highest seed yield (4056 kg ha1) and oil yield (1841 kg ha1) were obtained from the HFM treatment; 85.4 and 88% increases, respectively, compared with the control. The seed yield and oil yield increases for the limited-irrigation treatments were: 78.7 and 77.4% for H60FM; 77.4 and 78.9% for H40FM; 72.2 and 75% for HF60M; 76.4 and 79.2% for HF40M; 72.7 and 73.6% for HFM60; 77.6 and 79.1% for HFM40. Therefore, we confirm that HFM irrigation is the best choice for maximum yield under the local conditions, but these irrigation schemes must be re-considered in areas where water resources are more limited. In case of more restricted irrigation, the limitation of irrigation water at the flowering period should be avoided. # 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Sunflower; Irrigation; Water deficit; Evapotranspiration; Growth periods; Yield
1. Introduction In Turkey, sunflower (Helianthus annus L.) is grown on around 0.6 M ha per year with average seed yields of 1.2–1.6 t ha1 (Anonymous, 1999), a production insufficient for national seed and oil requirements. The low yield is mainly due to low Abbreviations: ET, evapotranspiration; F, flowering; H, heading; M, milking; LAI, leaf area index; T, ton * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90-224-442-89-70x208; fax: þ90-224-442-88-36. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.T. Go¨ksoy).
precipitation during the summer. Sunflower responds to irrigation and yield increments exceeding 100% are common on soils of low water holding capacity (Robinson, 1971). Especially, hybrid cultivars having high seed-cost give the highest yield only when irrigated (Unger, 1982; Flagella et al., 2002). In the Marmara region, the largest sunflower production center of Turkey, vegetables, fruits and sugarbeets are largely grown in irrigated areas, but wheat and sunflower are grown in dryer areas (Anonymous, 1996). As a result, sunflower yield decreases in years of low rainfall.
0378-4290/$ – see front matter # 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2003.11.004
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
168
Even limited irrigation-water, applied at different growth stages of sunflower, can significantly increase seed yields (Stone et al., 1996), especially during three growth periods: heading, flowering, and milking stages (Osman and Talha, 1975; Demiro¨ ren, 1978); at three growth stages (heading, beginning of flowering and end of flowering) (Unger, 1983); and at 50% ray flower stage (Alessi et al., 1977). In the Marmara region, Karaata (1991) found that the highest seed yield (3900 kg ha1) and seasonal evapotranspiration (867 mm) were obtained after irrigations at heading, flowering, and milking with no water-stress. Because of limited irrigation water, it is generally acceptable that deficit irrigation should be used in dryland conditions (Anonymous, 1994). However, before introducing this cultural practice, its effects on yield and quality of sunflower should be investigated. The aim of this research was to study the effects of full and limited irrigation applied at different growth periods of sunflower, on yield, certain yield-components and quality traits and to determine the most critical growth period(s) of sunflower for water usage under southern Marmara conditions. The results utilized by the Turkish irrigation agencies and the regional growers can promote the introduction of new costeffective management techniques in sunflower production in the region.
2. Materials and methods Field trials were conducted for 3 years (1999–2001) at the Research and Training Centre of the Agricultural Faculty, Uludagˇ University, Bursa, Turkey on a clay (average 45.6% clay content) soil having 0.1%
total nitrogen content (Kjeldhal method), 0.40 kg ha1 phosphorus (Olsen method, P2O5), 5.70 kg ha1 exchangeable potassium (ammonium acetate method, K2O), 1.9% organic matter (Walchey–Black method), and a bulk density of 1.45, 1.53 and 1.50 g cm3 in 0– 0.30, 0.30–0.60 and 0.60–0.90 m profile, respectively. The soil pH was 7.2. The water holding capacity (WC) of the experimental site was observed as 130 mm in a 0.90 m soil profile. WC was determined by the difference between the water content at field capacity (FC) and at permanent wilting point (PWP). Water lodging is not observed in the area and the water table of soil is deeper than 100 cm in early spring. It is located in the southern Marmara region, with average annual rainfall of 713 mm and 14.4 8C mean monthly temperature. Total monthly precipitation and mean air temperature data during the sunflower growing period are presented in Table 1. Total rainfall from March to August were 219, 290, 232 mm in 1999, 2000 and 2001, respectively. This correspond to 37% of the annual precipitation. It is insufficient for sunflower production as expected. The hybrid cultivar Sanbro obtained from Novartis Seed Company was used as plant material. In the experiments, plot size was 20.8 m2 (8:0 m 2:6 m); row spacing was 0.65 m; plant–plant spacing was 0.30 m. Planting was done on 13 May 1999; 4 April 2000; and 6 April 2001. Sixty kilograms of nitrogen per hectare as ammonium nitrate was applied prior to sowing and a further 60 kg N ha1 was added when the plants were 30–40 cm in height. After planting, Linuron was sprayed at a rate of 0.20 cm3 m2 for weed control. Three growth periods of sunflower which were suggested by Doorenbos and Kassam (1979): heading (H), flowering (F), and milking
Table 1 Mean air temperature and total monthly precipitation in 1999–2001 and between 1928 and 1986 at Bursa Months
March April May June July August Total
Temperature (8C)
Precipitation (mm)
1999
2000
2001
1928–1986
9 14 18 23 26 25
8 15 18 22 26 25
14 18 18 24 28 26
8 12 18 22 24 24
1999
2000
2001
1928–1986
71 25 8 74 1 40
96 109 49 16 9 11
49 86 65 17 2 13
70 60 52 30 27 22
219
290
232
261
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
169
Table 2 Irrigation treatments applied Treatments
Description
Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
Rainfed (non-irrigated) treatment Irrigation applied only at heading period Irrigation applied only at flowering period Irrigation applied only at milking period Irrigation at heading and flowering periods Irrigation at heading and milking periods Irrigation at flowering and milking period Irrigation at all the periods. No water stress The same as HFM, but a 40% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 60% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 40% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 60% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 40% of water deficit The same as HFM, but a 60% of water deficit
(M), sensitive to water stress, were considered. Fourteen irrigation treatments were applied as described below (Table 2). Twenty plants were randomly selected from each plot (at maturity period of the plants) for measurement of plant height, head diameter, number of leaves/plant and number of seeds/head. On the other hand, leaf area and LAI were measured at three growth periods in only one replication. LAI was determined using the methodology described in Pereyra et al. (1982) using measurements of individual leaf width. After plots were harvested, seed yield, 1000 seed weight, oil percentage, oil yield and stem yield were recorded. Crude oil percentage was determined by the Soxhlet extraction technique (Pomeranz and Clifton, 1994). Oil yield was calculated as a function of seed yield and crude oil percentage. All data were subjected to analysis of variance for each character using MSTAT-C (version 2.1, Michigan State University, 1991) and MINITAB (University of Texas at Austin) software. The experiments were designed in a randomized complete block with four replications. The significance of irrigation treatment, main effects and treatment year interactions were determined at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels, by the F-test. The F-protected least significant difference (LSD) was calculated at the 0.05 probability level according to Steel and Torrie (1980). Soil water contents were monitored prior to irrigation at three growth stages (heading, flowering and milking) using the gravimetric method (Black, 1965)
was was was was was was
applied applied applied applied applied applied
at at at at at at
heading period heading period flowering period flowering period milking period milking period
from the plots of the second replication of the various treatments, and then these values were converted to volumetric water contents using bulk density. According to the soil water contents measured, the plots of the treatments were irrigated from deficit moisture content of 0–90 cm soil layer to FC at each growth stage. More water than the estimated (FC—available water content) was not applied to 0.90 m soil profile to reach FC because it was assumed that deep percolation would be very low due to very clayey soil characteristics. Consequently, a water table rising problem would not occur. A water meter was used to measure the amount of water applied by the furrow system. Soil water contents were not statistically analyzed because of insufficient replications. Rainfall was measured also. Evapotranspiration (ET) at each irrigation treatment (H, F, M, HF, etc.) was estimated using the following water balance equation (Beyce et al., 1972): ET ¼ I þ P DS where I is the irrigation water, P the rainfall, and DS the moisture variation in the soil profile. Moisture variation was obtained from moisture measurements in the soil profile. Seasonal ET was determined by adding the ET values for different stages of growth (i.e., heading, flowering, milking, and maturity). Runoff and runon was assumed as zero because the plots had earthen embankments. Deep percolation was assumed as zero in practice (Hanks et al., 1976).
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
170
Soil water content obtained at the beginning of experiments were 359.8, 414.4 and 382.3 mm in a 0.90 m profile for the 1999, 2000 and 2001, respectively. Differences between years in terms of soil water content were significant. Soil water content at the beginning of experiment was the lowest in 1999, because planting was later than in the last 2 years. Consequently, in the first year some decrease was observed in soil moisture content due to late seasonal weather conditions. Hence, at planting time in 1999, 70 mm irrigation water was applied to all plots (treatments) by the sprinkler method to reach 100% of the total available water (or approximately FC) that decreased to 50% level at planting time. Water use efficiency was determined to evaluate the productivity of irrigation in the treatments. Water use efficiency (WUE) and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) are two terms used to promote the efficient use of irrigation water at the crop production level (Bos, 1980). Water use efficiency was calculated as the ratio of seed yield (YLD) to evapotranspiration (ETa), given as WUE ¼ YLD=ETa (kg ha1 mm1). IWUE was estimated by following equation: IWUE ðkg ha1 mm1 Þ ¼
YLD YLDrainfed IRGA
where YLDrainfed is the seed yield obtained from rainfed treatment or dryland yield and IRGA the seasonal irrigation amount used in mm.
3. Results and discussion 3.1. Analysis of variance The analysis of variance indicated that years significantly affected all the characters measured. According to the data combined over 3 years, irrigation treatments significantly affected all characters except the number of leaves per plant and the oil percentage. Differences between irrigation treatments were significant for plant height in 1999 and 2000; for head diameter and 1000 seed weight in 1999 and 2001; for the number of seeds per head, stem yield and seed yield in each individual year. On the other hand, ‘‘year treatment’’ interactions were significant at 1% level of probability for plant height, stem yield and seed yield and at 5% for number of seeds per head
(Table 3). These interactions, statistically significant for plant height, number of seeds per head, stem yield and seed yield, indicated that treatments responded variously to different years. 3.2. Plant height, head diameter, leaves per plant and stem yield The mean values of all characters measured in different treatments are summarized in Table 4. Irrigation at three growth periods (HFM treatment) and limited irrigation (H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40) produced the tallest plants (154– 159 cm). The shortest plants (145 cm) were obtained from the non-irrigated treatment. These results indicate that full and limited irrigation applied at different growth stages significantly increased plant height in sunflower. Our findings were in agreement with the results reported by Karami (1977), Andhale and Kalbhlor (1978), Unger (1982), Karaata (1991) and Tan et al. (2000). Irrigation treatments also significantly affected head diameter. Irrigation applied at two growth stages (HF, HM), as well as full and limited irrigation at three growth stages (HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, and HFM40) increased head diameter much more than the other methods. An increase in head diameter after irrigation at different growth periods was also reported by others (Karami, 1977; Jana et al., 1982; Karaata, 1991). Irrigation treatments had no statistically significant effect on the number of leaves per plant and their average values varied from 28.1 to 30.0 per plant in all treatments (Table 4). These results are contrary to the reports that irrigation increases the number of leaves per plant and leaf area index (LAI) as a related character (Andhale and Kalbhlor, 1978; Karaata, 1991; Gajri et al., 1997). This disagreement may be due to the different sunflower cultivars used in the experiments. On the other hand, leaf areas and LAI recorded at three growth periods in only one replication, increased when irrigating at all three growth periods (HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40), comparing with the other treatments (Table 5). But the differences between treatments were obvious mainly at the milking stage. In this stage, leaf area and LAI varied from 3128 to 5258 cm2 and from 1.80 to 3.08, respectively, with irrigation applied at M
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
171
Table 3 Results of variance analysis of seed yield, oil percentage, oil yield and certain agronomic traits of sunflower under different irrigation treatments in 1999–2001 and combined years Source
d.f.a
Significance of F-ratios Plant height
1 Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a 1
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a 1
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a 1
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error
– 3 13 – 39
Source
d.f.a
Years (Y) Blocks Treatments (T) YT Error a
2 2 9 13 26 117
1999
Head diameter 2000
2001
b
ns
ns
**
**
ns ns
ns **
2 9 13 26 117
2 9 13 26 117
1999
2000
2001
3-year
ns ns
ns ns
ns ns
1999
2000
2 9 13 26 117
ns ns ns
2
– 3 13 – 39
2 9 13 26 117
ns ns
ns
ns
**
**
ns
1999
2000
2001
**
ns ns
ns
*
ns
ns
**
**
**
**
**
*
2001
3-year
1999
2000
2001
3-year **
ns
ns
**
**
ns
**
**
**
**
**
**
** **
ns
1999
3-year
Stem yield
Oil percentage 2000
2001
3-year
1999
2000
2001
ns ns
*
ns ns
**
ns
*
ns
ns
**
**
**
** **
Oil yield
1
ns ns
**
ns
3-year **
**
Seed yield 2
2001
Number of seeds per head
1000 Seed weight 2
2000
**
Number of leaves per plant 2
1999
**
1999
2000
2001
3-year
ns
ns
ns
ns
**
**
**
**
*
Degrees of freedom for (1) individual year and (2) combined over 3 years. Non-significant. * Significant at the 5% of probability level ðP < 0:05Þ. ** Significant at the 1% of probability level ðP < 0:01Þ. b
3-year
*
3-year **
ns
ns ns ns
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
172
Table 4 The effects of irrigation treatments on seed yield, oil percentage, oil yield, stem yield and certain plant characters at Bursa, Marmara Region (3-year average, 1999–2001) Treatments
Plant height (cm)
Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
145.4 156.1 152.3 145.2 158.1 157.2 147.3 154.2 153.9 155.9 157.4 158.0 155.3 159.1
Mean LSD (0.05)
153.9 5.4
d ab bc d a ab cd ab ab ab ab a ab a
Head diameter (cm)
Number of leaves per plant
Number of seeds per head
1000 seed weight (g)
Stem yield (kg ha1)
Seed yield (kg ha1)
Crude oil (%)
Oil yield (kg ha1)
15.1 16.4 16.5 15.7 17.9 17.2 17.1 17.9 17.7 17.4 17.5 17.5 17.3 17.6
28.6 29.0 29.1 28.1 29.2 29.0 28.1 28.7 28.9 29.2 28.4 29.3 28.4 30.0
803 909 1056 944 987 1043 1033 1204 1224 1215 1143 1166 1177 1219
52.5 57.3 58.0 55.5 64.2 60.9 61.0 64.2 61.1 61.1 63.4 63.1 61.7 60.6
4908 5725 5529 5815 6327 6294 6401 7360 6877 6683 7095 6978 6774 6692
2188 2718 3190 2795 3325 3322 3272 4056 3911 3883 3767 3860 3779 3887
44.7 43.7 43.9 44.8 44.6 44.8 45.8 45.4 44.5 45.1 45.5 45.4 45.4 45.0
979 1189 1403 1249 1485 1489 1496 1841 1737 1752 1713 1755 1700 1754
28.8 ns
1081 71
45.1 ns
1538 103
e cd bcd de a abc abc a a ab a a abc a
17.1 0.9
f e c de cd c c ab a a b ab ab a
e d cd de a bc abc a abc abc ab ab ab bc
60.3 3.2
g f f ef d de cd a abc bcd ab ab bcd bcd
6390 500
e d c d c c c a ab ab b b b ab
3425 175
e d c d c c c a b ab b ab b ab
stem yields were obtained from HFM (7360 kg ha1), HF60M (7095 kg ha1), HF40M (6978 kg ha1) and H60FM (6877 kg ha1) treatments while the lowest by the control (4908 kg ha1). In other studies, it was reported that stem yield increased with frequent irrigation (Turner and Rawson, 1982) and irrigation
and HFM stages. In addition, Connor et al. (1985) and Connor and Jones (1985) reported that the highest leaf area index (LAI) in sunflower was 2.5 and water stress decreased leaf area and leaf area index (LAI) of plants. Significant differences in stem yield were observed between irrigation treatments (Table 3). The highest
Table 5 Leaf area (cm2 per plant) and leaf area index (LAI) measured at three growth periods of irrigation treatments Treatments
Growth periods Heading stage 2
Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
Flowering stage 2
Milking stage
Leaf area (cm )
LAI
Leaf area (cm )
LAI
Leaf area (cm2)
LAI
2935 2556 2859 2746 2389 2790 2392 3681 2865 3371 2733 2983 3564 2614
1.67 1.46 1.63 1.56 1.38 1.60 1.36 2.11 1.64 1.95 1.58 1.73 2.04 1.51
3652 4106 4367 4581 3903 3763 4479 4800 3756 4271 4722 5031 4224 4427
2.08 2.35 2.49 2.62 2.26 2.17 2.55 2.77 2.15 2.44 2.72 2.89 2.43 2.54
3485 3607 4170 3128 4491 3868 4287 5258 4573 5076 5187 4572 4524 5187
1.98 2.10 2.38 1.80 2.55 2.23 2.47 3.08 2.59 2.97 2.92 2.65 2.61 2.91
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
applied at heading (Harman et al., 1982) or flowering (Unger, 1982) periods. In a similar study, Karaata (1991) found that full irrigation applied at heading, flowering and milking stages and limited irrigations at milking stage gave the highest stem yield whereas the non-irrigated treatment and single irrigation at milking stage produced lowest yield. 3.3. Seed yield and seed characteristics The full and limited irrigation at three growth periods (HFM, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, HFM40) produced more seeds per head. The mean values varied from 1143 to 1224 seeds per head (Table 4). The lowest number of seeds per head was obtained from the non-irrigated treatment (803 seeds per head). The number of seeds per head is positively associated with seed yield in sunflower (Punia and Gill, 1994; Doddamani et al., 1997). Our results are in close agreement with those of Jana et al. (1982) and Flagella et al. (2002). The 1000 seed weight generally increased as the number of irrigations increased (Table 5). The highest mean values were obtained from the irrigations applied at two or three growth stages (60.6–64.2 g) and the lowest from the control (52.5 g). Murriel (1975), Talha and Osman (1975) reported that 1000 seed weight significantly increased as the amount of irrigation increased, while Jana et al. (1982) and Karaata (1991) found that 1000 seed weight increased with irrigations applied at flowering and milking periods. Our results indicate that the highest seed yields were achieved from HFM treatment, limited irrigations at heading period (H40FM and H60FM) and 60% deficit irrigation at milking period (HFM40). The mean of 3 years data showed that seed yields of HFM, H60FM, HFM40 and H40FM treatments were 4056, 3911, 3887 and 3884 kg ha1, respectively. Seed yield significantly reduced as the amount and the number of irrigations decreased. The lowest seed yield was obtained from the non-irrigated treatment (control) with 2188 kg ha1 (Table 4). Water stress and limited irrigation in the flowering period significantly reduced seed yield in some years (Fig. 1). For that reason, in case of limited irrigation, limitation of irrigation water during the flowering period should be avoided. In addition, ‘‘year treatment’’ interactions
173
with statistically significant seed yields, indicated that some treatments affected seed yield differently, according to the experimental years. Seed yields decreased at M, FM, HFM, H60FM, HF60M, HFM60 and HFM40 treatments in 2001 while these treatments produced higher seed yields in the other years (Fig. 1). It is known that the amount and distribution of precipitation and differentiation in temperature and soil conditions are the major factors affecting seed yield and some yield components of sunflower in arid and semi-arid regions. The ‘‘year treatment’’ interactions were statistically significant because of changing soil characteristics and climatic data corresponding to different dates of growth stages (heading, flowering, milking) according to the experimental year. This resulted in significant ‘‘year’’ effects for all characters, also. Seed yields of the treatments as a percentage of the control were also determined (Fig. 2). HFM produced 85.4% higher seed yield than the control. However, H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60 and HFM40 produced 72.7–78.7% more seed yield than the control. The other treatments (H, F, M or HF, HM, FM) also produced 24.2–51.9% more seed yield (Table 4 and Fig. 2). Murriel (1975) reported that the highest seed yield was obtained from a treatment having no water stress whereas the lowest yield was produced from a non-irrigated application. Osman and Talha (1975) reported that seed yield increased as the amount of water and irrigation number increased. Demiro¨ ren (1978) suggested that sunflowers should be irrigated three times at heading, flowering and milking stages under Tokat conditions in Turkey. Similarly, Unger (1982) reported that seed yield was the highest with irrigation treatment with no water stress, followed by irrigation treatments applied at flowering and at the end of flowering. Karaata (1991) found that seed yield was the lowest in non-irrigated treatments whereas it was the highest in the normal irrigation treatment at heading, flowering and milking stages of sunflower plant. On the other hand, the same researcher reported that in case of limited irrigation, water stress should be scheduled on two growth stages (heading and milking stages) instead of one growth stage. In the first blooming stage, limitation of irrigation water should be avoided (Karaata, 1991; Stone et al., 1996). In addition, Tan et al. (2000) and Rinaldi (2001) suggested that one irrigation at heading or flowering stage
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
174
4500
Seed Yield (Kg ha-1)
4000
3500
3000
1999 2000 2001
2500
3-year
FM 60 FM H 40 FM H F6 0M H F4 0M H FM 6 H 0 FM 40
FM
H
H
H F H M
M
F
H
Co nt ro
l
2000
Irrigation Treatments Fig. 1. Seed yields of the treatments in 1999–2001 and 3-year average.
centage increased with irrigations. On the other hand, Karaata (1991) reported that oil percentage did not significantly increase as the amount of irrigation water increased, but increased after irrigations applied at flowering and milking stages. Since oil percentage is determined by several environmental factors (especially temperature) as well as genotypic structure (Fick and Zimmerman, 1973; Harris et al., 1978), it is likely that these differences are mainly due to
produced the highest net income in sunflower production. Oil percentage, an important quality component in sunflower, was not affected by irrigation treatments applied at different growth stages. Mean oil percentages varied from 43.7 to 45.8% in all treatments (Table 4). Our findings do not correspond to those of Murriel (1975), Jana et al. (1982), Tan et al. (2000) and Flagella et al. (2002) who reported that oil per-
Seed and Oil Yields (% of Control)
200
175
150
Seed 125
Oil
40
60
FM H
FM
F4 0M
H
H
F6 0M
40 FM
H
H
60 FM
H
FM H FM
F
H M
H
M
F
H
Co nt ro l
100
Irrigation Treatments
Fig. 2. Seed and oil yields of the irrigation treatments as a percentage of the control.
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
environmental conditions. The high-oil hybrid genotypes are considered to have less yield advantage under higher (i.e., non-limited) water supply (Focteau et al., 2001). Importantly, all our irrigation treatments resulted in more and heavier seeds, compared with the non-irrigated control (Table 4). Since, as reported by Pereira Lopez et al. (1999), a higher oil percentage is oftenly correlated with a reduction of seed weight, our results for oil percentage are not unexpected. In contrast to the oil percentage, oil yield was affected by the irrigation treatments, because of the different seed yields. In this study, the highest oil yield (1841 kg ha1) was obtained from HFM treatment, followed by the 60% deficit-irrigation treatments (H40FM, HF40M, and HFM40). The lowest mean oil yield (979 kg ha1) was obtained from the non-irrigated treatment (Table 4). When compared as a percentage, full irrigation at three growth stages (HFM) produced 88% more oil yield per ha compared with the non-irrigated treatment while H60FM, H40FM, HF60M, HF40M, HFM60, and HFM40 produced 74– 79% more. The other treatments (H, F, M or HF, HM, FM) produced 30.7–52.2% more oil yield (Table 4 and Fig. 2). Our results are in agreement with those of Osman and Talha (1975), Jana et al. (1982) and Kadayıfc¸ı and Yıldırım (2000) who reported that oil yield increased as the amount of irrigation water increased. 3.4. Evapotranspiration (ET) and yield–ET relations The ET of sunflower was determined also (Table 6). ET increased markedly when irrigation water increased. The highest seasonal evapotranspiration was obtained from the HFM treatment with no water stress (674 mm). The lowest value was observed in non-irrigated treatment with water stress (306 mm). The other treatments gave ET values between these extremes. As a result, seed and oil yields significantly increased as seasonal ET increased from 306 mm for the non-irrigated treatment to 674 mm for HFM treatment. Seasonal ET when soil water is sufficient ranges from 600 to 1000 mm in sunflower (Doorenbos and Kassam, 1979). Browne (1977) found that seasonal evapotranspiration in sunflower varied between 546 and 677 mm depending on irrigation frequency. Other researchers reported similar results (Demiro¨ ren, 1978; Unger, 1982; Karaata, 1991; Tyagi et al., 2000), but
175
Table 6 Seasonal total evapotranspiration (ET) of sunflower plants in 14 irrigation programs Treatments 1999 (mm) 2000 (mm) 2001 (mm) Mean (mm) Control H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
261 486 460 364 524 652 542 719 634 631 655 649 660 638
356 486 449 453 585 590 576 688 656 632 654 627 666 635
301 428 376 401 499 522 495 616 559 538 589 561 574 543
306 467 428 406 536 588 538 674 616 600 633 612 633 605
since ET is influenced by environmental factors as well as plant characteristics, this is not unexpected. On the other hand, Unger (1990) reported maximum ET from about 500 to 700 mm resulted in near top yields of sunflower in low rainfall regions. Table 7 presents the seasonal applied water, seed yield, WUE and IWUE for the 14 treatments. Seasonal applied water varied from 355 and 311 mm, respectively, for HFM and HF60M treatments, to 110 and 118 mm, respectively, for F and M treatments. Seed yield increased significantly as irrigation amount increased (Table 7). WUE did not significant change when irrigation amount increased. However, WUE values ranged from 7.66 and 7.12 kg ha1 mm1, respectively, for M and rainfed (control) treatments, to 5.09 and 5.59 kg ha1 mm1, respectively, for HM and H treatments. Previous studies indicated that the WUE ranged from 5.39 to 10.5 kg ha1 mm1 (Connor et al., 1985; Stone et al., 1996; Rinaldi, 2001). Our results are in agreement with Stone et al. (1996) who reported that seed yield increased with irrigation frequency and seasonal irrigation amount and the WUE between treatments was not significantly different. The highest IWUE value was obtained from the F treatment and the lowest value from the H treatment (Table 7). Results indicate that flowering is the most important stage for irrigation of sunflower, because, sunflower is more sensitive to water stress at flowering than at other growth stages. Therefore, when seasonal
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
176
Table 7 Sunflower response to irrigation treatments (3-year average, 1999–2001) Treatments
Seasonal applied water (mm)
Seed yield (t ha1)
WUE (kg ha1 mm1)
IWUE (kg ha1 mm1)
Control (rainfed) H F M HF HM FM HFM H60FM H40FM HF60M HF40M HFM60 HFM40
– 128 110 118 237 246 227 355 304 278 311 289 308 284
2.18 2.72 3.19 2.79 3.32 3.32 3.27 4.05 3.91 3.88 3.77 3.86 3.78 3.88
7.12 5.59 6.93 7.66 6.33 5.09 6.03 5.63 6.17 6.15 5.75 5.95 5.73 6.08
0.00 4.22 9.18 5.17 4.81 4.63 4.80 5.27 5.69 6.11 5.11 5.81 5.19 5.98
irrigation water was limited, one irrigation at flowering should be applied. Our results support the previous work of Rinaldi (2001) who reported that when seasonal irrigation water was limited, one or two irrigations in the central phase (heading and flowering stages) is profitable, for irrigation use efficiency and net income. Also, Rinaldi (2001), reported that in a water-limited environment even a single irrigation would double net income as compared to a rainfed treatment.
4. Conclusions Sunflower is commonly grown as a dryland crop in the world but it responds significantly to irrigation. Our results, from 3-year period, indicated that full and limited irrigation treatments at three growth periods (heading, flowering, and milking) increased seed yield, oil yield and other traits observed, more than the non-irrigated (control) and single irrigation applications. The highest seed yield (4056 kg ha1) and oil yield (1841 kg ha1) were obtained from the HFM treatment with no water stress. Limited irrigations applied at the three growth stages produced higher seed and oil yields as well as HFM treatment. The lowest seed and oil yields (2188 and 979 kg ha1, respectively) were found in non-irrigated treatment. The HFM irrigation program increased seed yield
about 85.4%, and oil yield about 88% compared with the control. The average seed yields of full and limited irrigations applied at three growth periods were about 77.2% higher than that of the non-irrigated treatment. Limited irrigation applied at one or two growth stages produced lower seed and oil yields than those of treatments applied at three growth stages. Our results indicate that sunflower should be irrigated three times with full or limited irrigation water at heading, flowering and milking periods for high seed yield. In case of limited irrigation, reduced irrigation water during the flowering period should be avoided. When seasonal irrigation water was limited, one irrigation at the flowering stage should be applied for the irrigation efficiency.
Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to The Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) for financial support as the results reported in this paper are part of ‘‘Determination of Relationships between Water and Yield in Sunflower (H. annuus L.) under Bursa Conditions’’ scheme (fully financed by the TUBITAK). We also thank Dr. G.A. Fragkiadakis, Superior Technological Institute of Crete, Greece, for critical reading of the manuscript and his valuable suggestions.
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
References Alessi, J., Power, J.F., Zimmerman, D.C., 1977. Sunflower yield and water use as influenced by planting date, population, and row spacing. Agron. J. 69, 465–469. Andhale, R.K., Kalbhlor, P.N., 1978. Effect of irrigation schedules under varying levels of nitrogen on growth, yield, quality and water use of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Indian J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ. 3, 200–203. Anonymous, 1994. Agricultural Production and DSI Constructed and Operated Irrigation and Drainage Schemes. DSI, Ankara (in Turkish). Anonymous, 1996. IGEME Export Promotion Center of Turkey. Publications Turkey 95 and 96. Prime Ministry Undersecretaries for Foreign Trade, Ankara. Anonymous, 1999. Sunflower crude and refined oils. In: Agribusiness Handbooks. Food and Agriculture Organization, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, pp. 17–26. ¨ .K., Madanog˘ lu, K., Ayla, C¸., 1972. Evapotranspirations Beyce, O of some irrigated crops grown in Turkey, No. 15. Journal of Centre Soil and Water Conservation Research Institute, Ankara, Turkey, 213 pp. Black, C.H., 1965. Methods of Soil Analysis. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, pp. 63–66. Bos, M.G., 1980. Irrigation efficiencies at crop production level. ICID Bull. 29, 18–25. Browne, C.L., 1977. Effect of date of final irrigation on yield and yield components of sunflowers in a semiarid environment. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 17, 482–488. Connor, D.J., Jones, T.R., Palta, J.A., 1985. Response of sunflower to strategies of irrigation. I. Growth, yield and the efficiency of water-use. Field Crops Res. 10, 15–36. Connor, D.J., Jones, T.R., 1985. Response of sunflower to strategies of irrigation. II. Morphological and physiological responses to water stress. Field Crops Res. 12, 91–103. Demiro¨ ren, T., 1978. Determination of evapotranspiration of sunflower in Tokat, No. 25. Journal of Tokat Region Soil Water Research Institute, Tokat, 27 pp. Doddamani, I.K., Patil, S.A., Ravikumar, R.L., 1997. Relationship autogamy and self fertility with seed yield and yield components in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Helia 20, 95–102. Doorenbos, J., Kassam, A.H., 1979. Yield Respond to Water. Pub. 33. United Nations FAO, Rome, 193 pp. Fick, G.N., Zimmerman, D.C., 1973. Variability in oil content among heads and seeds within heads of sunflowers (Helianthus annuus L.). J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 50, 529–531. Flagella, Z., Rotunno, T., Tarantino, R., Di Caterina, R., De Caro, A., 2002. Changes in seed yield and oil fatty acid composition of high oleic sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) hybrids in relation to the sowing date and the water regime. Eur. J. Agron. 17, 221–230. Focteau, V., El Daouk, M., Baril, C., 2001. Interpretation of genotype by environment interaction in two sunflower experimental networks. Theoret. Appl. Genet. 102, 327–334. Gajri, P.R., Gill, K.S., Chaudhary, M.R., Singh, R., 1997. Irrigation of sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in relation to tillage and mulching. Agric. Water Manage. 34, 149–160.
177
Hanks, R.J., Aschroft, B.L., Rasmussen, W.P., Wilson, G.D., 1976. Corn production as influenced by irrigation and salinity. 1. Utah studies. Irrig. Sci. 1, 47–59. Harman, W.L., Unger, P.W., Jones, O.R., 1982. Sunflower yield response to furrow irrigation on fine textured soils in the Texas high plains. Miscellaneous Publication 1521. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, 35 pp. Harris, H.C., Mc William, J.R., Mason, W.K., 1978. Influence of temperature on oil content and composition of sunflower seed. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 29, 1203–1212. Jana, P.K., Mısra, B., Kar, P.K., 1982. Effect of irrigation at different physiological stages of growth on yield attributes. Yield consumptive use and water use efficiency on sunflower. Indian Agric. 26, 39–42. Kadayıfc¸ı, A., Yıldırım, O., 2000. Relationships between water and yield in sunflower. Turkish J. Agric. For. 24, 137–145. Karaata, H., 1991. Water-production functions of sunflower under Kırklareli conditions, No. 28. Journal of Atatu¨ rk Village Affair Research Institute, Kırklareli, 92 pp. Karami, E., 1977. Effect of irrigation and plant population on yield and yield components of sunflower. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 47, 15–17. Murriel, J.L., 1975. Yield of sunflower in field plots in response to various watering regimes and to irrigation during critical phases of growth. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Sunflower Conference. International Sunflower Association, Romania, pp. 577–582. Osman, F., Talha, M., 1975. The effect of irrigation regime on yield and consumption of sunflower seed oil. Egypt J. Soil Sci. 15, 211–218. Pereira Lopez, M., Sandras, V.O., Trapani, N., 1999. Genetic improvement of sunflower in Argentina between 1930 and 1995. I. Yield and its components. Field Crops Res. 62, 157– 166. Pereyra, V.R., Farizo, C., Cardinali, F., 1982. Estimation of leaf area on sunflower plants. In: Kochman, J.K. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th International Sunflower Conference. Australian Sunflower Association, Toowoomba, Qld., Australia, pp. 21– 23. Pomeranz, Y., Clifton, E., 1994. Food Analysis Theory and Practice, 3rd ed., Kluwer Academic Publisher, San Diego, pp. 689–692. Punia, M.S., Gill, H.S., 1994. Correlations and path coefficient analysis for seed yield traits in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Helia 17, 7–11. Rinaldi, M., 2001. Application of EPIC model for irrigation scheduling of sunflower in Southern Italy. Agric. Water Manage. 49, 185–196. Robinson, R.G., 1971. New crops for irrigated sandy soils. Minnesota Sci. 27, 10–11. Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H., 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biometrical Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 186–187. Stone, L.R., Schlege, A.J., Gwin, R.E., Khan, A.H., 1996. Response of corn, grain sorghum, and sunflower to irrigation in the high plains of Kansas. Agric. Water Manage. 30, 251– 259.
178
A.T. Go¨ ksoy et al. / Field Crops Research 87 (2004) 167–178
Talha, M., Osman, F., 1975. Effect of soil water stress on water economy and oil composition in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). J. Agric. Sci. 84, 49–56. Tan, S¸., Beyazgu¨ l, M., Avcıeri, Z., Kayam, Y., Kaya, H.G., 2000. Effect of irrigation at various growth stages on some economic characters of first crop sunflower. J. Aegean Agric. Res. Inst. 10, 1–34. Turner, N.C., Rawson, H.M., 1982. Yield and harvest index of sunflowers cultivars influence of duration and water stress. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Sunflower Conference. Australian Sunflower Association, Toowoomba, Australia, pp. 38–42.
Tyagi, N.K., Sharma, D.K., Luthra, S.K., 2000. Determination of evapotransipation and crop coefficients of rice and sunflower with lysimeter. Agric. Water Manage. 45, 41–45. Unger, P.W., 1982. Time and frequency of irrigation effects on sunflower production and water use. USDA Conservation and Production Research Laboratory. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46, 1072–1076. Unger, P.W., 1983. Irrigation effects on sunflower growth development and water use. Field Crops Res. 3, 181–194. Unger, P.W., 1990. Sunflower. In: Stewart, M.S., Nielsen, D.R. (Eds.), Irrigation of Agricultural Crops. Agronomy No. 30. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, pp. 775–794.