Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit

G Model AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8

ARTICLE IN PRESS Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Agricultural Water Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat

Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit M.H. Abd El-Wahed a,∗ , E.A. Ali b a b

Soil and Water Dept. (Agric. Eng.), Fac. of Agric., Fayoum Univ., 63514-Fayoum, Fayoum, Egypt Agronomy Dept. Fac. of Agric., Assiut Univ., Egypt

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Available online xxx Keywords: Drip and sprinkler irrigation Irrigation scheduling Farmyard manure Corn Water use efficiency and net profit

a b s t r a c t Two field experiments were conducted in a sandy soil to study the effects of two irrigation systems [drip (DIS) and sprinkler (SIS)], three amounts of irrigation water (AIW) [I100 = 100%, I85 = 85% and I70 = 70% of the crop evapotranspiration] and five mulching [farmyard manure (FYM)] treatments [0 ton ha−1 (FYM0 ), 10 ton ha−1 spread on the soil surface or incorporated with surface layer (FYM10s or FYM10m , respectively) and 20 ton ha−1 spread on the soil surface or incorporated with surface layer (FYM20s or FYM20m , respectively)] on corn yield, water use efficiency (WUE) and net profit. The maximum values of grain yield (GY) were obtained under DIS compared to SIS. The highest values of GY were obtained from I100 treatment while the lowest ones were observed in I70 treatment. FYM20m enhanced GY than FYM0 , FYM10s , FYM10m and FYM20s in the two growing seasons. The highest GY and WUE were recorded for plants irrigated with I100 and receiving FYM20m under DIS. Under Sebha environmental conditions and similar regions, we recommend applying the cultivation of corn plants under the treatment (I100 × FYM20m ) as it is the most suitable for producing high GY and consequently net profit, using either DIS or SIS wherever either of the two systems is available. Under limited irrigation water, application of (I85 × FYM20m ) treatment using DIS was found to be favorable to save 15% of the applied irrigation water, at the time in which produced the same GY and consequently net profit. © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Corn (Zea maize) production has a major role in global Agronomy, ranking third in importance to wheat and rice in many countries. Allover the world, the total sowing area was 159,531,007 ha which produced 817,110,509 ton at an average yield of 5.12 ton ha−1 in 2008 (FAO Statistical Yearbook, 2008). Corn is desired for its multiple purposes as human food, animal feed, and pharmaceutical and industrial manufacturing. It is consumed in many countries as, for example, cornflakes, corn syrup and oil. For animal feed, it is highly desirable because of its high yield and feed value of grain, leaf and stem. For industrial and pharmaceutical applications, it can be used to produce starch, ethanol, plastics, and as a base for antibiotic production. The declining availability of fresh water has become a worldwide problem, especially in arid and semi-arid regions. In these regions, irrigation water supplies are mainly from groundwater (Chauhan et al., 2008). More than 80% of water resources have

∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (M.H. Abd El-Wahed).

been exploited for agricultural irrigation (Wang et al., 2001). To cope with the water shortage, it is necessary to adopt water saving agriculture countermeasures as efficient use of irrigation water is becoming increasingly important. Irrigation scheduling for crops, using advanced irrigation methods (sprinkler and drip) and improved water management practices are very important to water saving (Zaman et al., 2001). Proper scheduling of both sprinkler and drip irrigation is critical for efficient water management in crop production, particularly under conditions of water scarcity (Pereira et al., 2002; Zeng et al., 2009). Drip and sprinkler irrigation has many advantages for agronomic, water conservation and economic aspects and using these systems is continuously increasing worldwide. Regarding the drip irrigation method, not only some savings in water usage occurs, but also the yield increases (Tiwari et al., 2003; Yuan et al., 2003; Dhawan, 2002), and the on-farm irrigation efficiency can reach 90% when a properly designed and managed drip irrigation system as applied. Sprinkler irrigation method has relatively less water saving (up to 70% efficiency), since it supplies water over the entire field of the crop (INCID, 1998; Kulkarni, 2005). Using sprinkler systems with its easier operation and automation, have the capacity to attain highly uniform and efficient irrigation results in water saving and

0378-3774/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

G Model AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8

ARTICLE IN PRESS M.H. Abd El-Wahed, E.A. Ali / Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

2

farm profitability. This is a major issue for the present and future of irrigable lands in arid and semi-arid regions, where great deal of irrigating water is required (Tarjuelo et al., 1999). Among the water management practices for increasing WUE, mulching was considered (Khurshid et al., 2006). In semi-arid regions, as much as 50% of total evapotranspiration from a crop can be lost through evaporation from the soil surface (Unger and Stewart, 1983). Mulching is an efficient way to reduce evaporation, improve WUE (Hartkamp et al., 2004) and maintain soil under stable temperature (Lal, 1974; Ji and Unger, 2001; Kar and Kumar, 2007). Many different materials can be used to mulch the soil’s surface such as farmyard manure (FYM). FYM is mostly available and produced in farms, and is an important organic resource for agricultural production in livestock based farming systems (Motavalli et al., 1994). The application of organic mulches as a soil cover is effective in improving the quality of soil and increasing crop yield, especially in organic farming (Sinkeviˇciene˙ et al., 2009). Mulching is an effective method in manipulating crop growing environment to increase yield and improve product quality by controlling weeds, ameliorating soil temperature, conserving soil moisture, reducing soil erosion, improving soil structure and enhancing organic matter content (Opara-Nadi, 1993; Hochmuth et al., 2001; Awodoyin and Ogunyemi, 2005). It is important to determine the relative monetary gains or economic advantage under both well-irrigated and irrigation scheduling conditions. Many investigators have concluded that irrigation scheduling can increase net farm income (Fardad and Golkar, 2002). The potential returns of irrigation scheduling are derived from three factors: increased irrigation efficiency, reduced cost of irrigation and the opportunity cost of water (English et al., 1990). This research was planned to: (i) evaluate corn yield and WUE in response to irrigation scheduling and FYM treatments under drip and sprinkler irrigation systems and (ii) estimate the total return and net profit of corn crop grown in a sandy soil under Sebha environmental conditions. 2. Materials and methods Two field experiments were conducted during 2009 and 2010 summer seasons at the experimental farm of the Agricultural Research Center, Sebha branch, Libya. Sebha co-ordinates are latitude: 27◦ 01 N, longitude: 14◦ 26 E and 432 m above sea level. The soil at the experimental site is sandy (93.9% sand, 4.0% silt and 2.1% Clay). Some physical properties relevant to irrigation in the experimental site are given in Table 1. 2.1. Irrigation systems (IS) Drip and sprinkler irrigation systems were used in the experimental farm and designed as follows: (a) The drip irrigation system (DIS) was divided into three treatments, each treatment has one valve to on and off and one pressure gauge to control the operating pressure. In addition, each treatment has three pairs of laterals, with one drip lateral per corn row and drippers with 2.5 l h−1 flow rate, 30 cm apart. The laterals were spaced at 50 cm with 16 mm diameter. (b) The sprinkler irrigation system (SIS) was designed as a solid system. The manifold was posited in the center of the field. It has three pairs of sprinkler laterals. Each pair has a valve for on and off. The sprinkler lateral includes four rotating sprinklers. The spacing between laterals and sprinklers were 14 m × 12 m. Sprinkler discharge was 1.5 m3 h−1 at 3 bar nozzle pressure.

2.2. Amount of irrigation water (AIW) The corn plants were irrigated 2 days intervals by different amounts of water, AIW were determined as a percentage of the crop evapotranspiration (ETc) representing one of the following three treatments: I100 = 100%, I85 = 85% and I70 = 70% of ETc. The daily ETo was computed according to the equation (1) (Allen et al., 1998) as follows: ETo =

0.408(Rn − G) + (900/(Tmean+273 ))u2 (es − ea )  + (1 + 0.34u2 )

(1)

where ETo is the reference evapotranspiration (mm day−1 ),  the slope of the saturation vapor pressure curve at air temperature (kPa C−1 ), Rn the net radiation at the crop surface (MJm−2 d−1 ), G Soil heat flux density (MJm−2 d−1 ), ␥ psychometric constant = (0.665 × 10−3 × P), kPa C−1 (Allen et al., 1998), P is the atmospheric pressure (kPa), U2 wind speed at 2 m height (m s−1 ), es is the saturation vapor pressure (kPa), ea actual vapor pressure (kPa) (es − ea ) is the saturation vapor pressure deficit (kPa), and Tmean mean daily air temperature at 2 m height (◦ C). The average daily ETo in Sebha region was estimated using the monthly mean weather data for a 12-year period (January 1994–December 2005) of Sebha airport station. The average of daily ETo in Sebha was 12.75, 12.94, 12.48 and 10.92 mm day−1 in June, July, August and September, respectively. The crop water requirements (ETc) were estimated using the crop coefficient according to Eq. (2): ETc = ETo × Kc

(2)

where ETc is the crop water requirements (mm day−1 ) and Kc is the crop coefficient. The duration of the different crop growth stages were 25, 40, 45, and 30 days for initial, crop development, mid-season and late season stages, respectively and the crop coefficients (Kc) of initial, mid and end stages were 0.70, 1.20 and 0.35, respectively, according to Allen et al. (1998). The amount of irrigation water applied to each treatment during the irrigation regime was determined by using Eq. (3): IWA =

A × ETc × Ii + LR Ea × 1000

(3)

where IWA is the irrigation water applied (m3 ), A is the plot area (m2 ), ETc is the crop water requirements (mm day−1 ), Ii is the irrigation intervals (day), Ea is the application efficiency (%) (Ea = 85 and 70% for DIS and SIS, respectively), LR is the leaching requirements (m3 ). The amounts of irrigation water applied under DIS were 5590, 4752 and 3913 m3 ha−1 . The corresponding values for SIS were 6820, 5797 and 4774 m3 ha−1 for I100 , I85 and I70 , respectively. Irrigation treatments were started after full emergence at which each treatment was irrigated according to prescribed irrigation scheduling treatments. 2.3. Mulching treatments Five mulching [farmyard manure (FYM)] treatments were applied as follows: 0 ton ha−1 (FYM0 ) as a control, 10 ton ha−1 was spread on the soil surface or incorporated with surface layer (FYM10s or FYM10m ) as a second or a third treatment, respectively. In addition, 20 ton ha−1 was spread on the soil surface or incorporated with surface layer (FYM20s or FYM20m ) as a forth or fifth treatment, respectively. The chemical analysis of the used FYM is shown in Table 2.

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

ARTICLE IN PRESS

G Model AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8

M.H. Abd El-Wahed, E.A. Ali / Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

3

Table 1 Some physical properties of different soil layers of the experimental site. Depth (cm)

Field capacity (%)

Wilting point (%)

Available water (%)

Bulk density (g/cm3 )

0–20 20–40

11.5 11.0

5.6 5.3

5.9 5.6

1.51 1.61

2.4. Experimental design An experiment was subjected to drip irrigation system and another one was exposed to sprinkler irrigation. Each experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design by strip–plot arrangement with three replicates. The irrigation schedule, i.e.100, 85 and 70% of ETc were assisted in main plots, while the farmyard manure (FYM) treatments (FYM0 , FYM10s , FYM10m , FYM20s and FYM20m ) were allocated in the sub-plots. The experimental unit area was 3 m × 3.5 m (10.5 m2 ), 100 kg N ha−1 was applied as urea form (46% N) after 30 days of sowing. Grains of corn (local variety) were planted (on June 1, 2009 and June 5, 2010) manually in drills 50 cm apart and 30 cm within hills. Plants were thinned to secure one plant per hill 3 weeks after planting. All other agricultural practices were carried out as recommended for corn production in both seasons. At harvest, random sample of five guarded plants were taken from each experimental unit, and 100-grain weight and grain weight per ear were measured. Grain yield ha−1 was determined per each experimental unit then converted to grain yield (kg ha−1 ), after modifying the moisture content to 15%. 2.5. Water use efficiency Water use efficiency (WUE) values as kg grain m−3 of the applied water were calculated for different treatments after crop harvest according to Eq. (4) (Jensen, 1983). WUE =

Grain yield (kg ha−1 ) water applied (m3 ha−1 )

(4)

2.6. Economic analysis Economic analysis was conducted according to Worth and Xin (1983). The total costs of corn yield including the costs of irrigation system, fertilization program, as well as weed and pest control. 2.7. Net profit The net profit of corn yield was calculated using the formula (5) (Younis et al., 1991): NP = [(SE Y × SE P) + (ST Y × ST P)] − Tc

(5)

where NP is the net profit ($ ha−1 ), SE Y the seed yield (ton ha−1 ), SE P the seed yield price ($ ton−1 ), ST Y is the straw yield (ton ha−1 ), ST P is the straw yield price ($ ton−1 ), and TC is the total costs ($ ha−1 ). Each experiment was subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedures using the MSTAT-C Statistical Software Package (Michigan State University, 1983). Combined analysis was carried out for irrigation system to reveal the effect of these variables and Table 2 Chemical analysis of the applied farmyard manure fertilizer (FYM). Total N % Total P % Total K % O.M. % C/N ratio

0.7 0.4 1.9 25.5 22.8

their interactions involved. Means were compared by using least significant difference (LSD) at 5% level of probability in both seasons (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Grain yield and its components Data in Tables 3 and 4 show that the 100-grain weight, grain weight per ear and GY were positively affected by the IS, AIW, FYM and their interactions. Drip irrigation system produced the higher values of these traits as compared to sprinkler one. The GY was increased by 28.9 and 28.3% under DIS compared to SIS in the two seasons, respectively. AIW accompanied with DIS were 5590, 4752 and 3913 m3 ha−1 , while were 6820, 5797 and 4774 m3 ha−1 under SIS for I100 , I85 and I70 , respectively. Therefore, DIS produced not only higher corn yield, but also water saving by about 22% in the two seasons. As shown in Tables 3 and 4, the maximum values of previous traits were registered at I100 irrigation level. This is may be mainly due to the sufficient available water in the soil under this level which led to an increase in both water and nutrients’ absorption and consequently an increase in the metabolic mechanisms in the plants leading to an increase in 100-grain weight and grain weight per ear. The same trend was observed by Tahir (1983). As average, the maximum values of GY (7661 and 7743 kg ha−1 ) were obtained when the plants were irrigated with the highest amounts of irrigation water (I100 ), while the minimum values of GY (4596 and 4719 kg ha−1 ) were recorded for the lowest one (I70 ). It is clear that average grain yield of corn crop was increased with increasing AIW (Fig. 1). This result was found to be in agreement with Mahfouz and Abd El-Wahed (2008). Moreover, the reduction in irrigation water by 15 and 30% from AIW for I85 and I70 treatments reduced corn yield by 26.1 and 39.8% in the first season and by 25.4 and 38.8% in the second one, respectively when compared with I100 treatment. The reduction in GY by the decrease in AIW caused a reduction in yield components under water stress conditions (I85 and I70 treatments). Tahir (1983) indicated that, in arid and semi-arid regions, moisture stress is a limiting factor for crop growth and yield production. The shortage in GY of many crops under lower AIW may be due to reduced soil water content that have been shown to delay rooting (Bathke et al., 1992) with a concomitant reduction in leaf area, root system, shoot dry weight and low photosynthesis rate (Masle and Passiour, 1987). Regarding FYM treatments (Tables 3 and 4) also showed that, corn plants received FYM20m gained the highest values of all studied traits in both seasons. The average GY of FYM20m treatment was increased by 57.8, 34.4, 23.8 and 9.3% than FYM0 , FYM10s , FYM10m and FYM20s in 2009 seasons, respectively. The corresponding values in 2010 season were 56.0, 33.3, 22.6 and 8.0% in the same order. This result found to be expected since the same FYM treatment produced the highest values of GY. The obtained results are found to be in agreement with those obtained by Abou El-Magd et al. (2008), Abd El-Wahed (2009) and Ofosu-Anim and Leitch (2009). This may be due mainly to the roles of FYM in improving soil physical properties as well as increasing soil water holding capacity which enhanced aeration and drainage and encouraged better root growth and nutrient absorption (Abou El-Magd et al., 2008). In

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

Grain weight (g/ear)

100-grain weight(g) Drip

Traits

Mean

2010 DIS

SIS

Mean

2009 DIS

SIS

Mean

2010 DIS

SIS

Mean

I100

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m Mean

35.0 36.2 39.0 41.0 45.5 39.3

30.0 31.2 32.2 33.1 35.8 32.5

32.5 33.7 35.6 37.1 40.7 35.9

35.5 37.0 40.6 42.0 46.5 40.3

31.0 32.0 33.5 34.0 36.0 33.3

33.3 34.5 37.1 38.0 41.3 36.8

97.3 116.7 133.7 141.5 151.0 128.0

80.0 90.5 100.5 120.0 140.0 106.2

92.4 110.7 124.1 135.9 150.3 122.7

100.0 125.0 138.2 146.2 160.0 133.9

85.2 96.0 105.2 122.2 142.0 110.1

92.6 110.5 121.7 134.2 151.0 122.0

I85

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m Mean

34.0 36.0 39.0 39.0 42.0 38.0

27.0 29.0 29.9 30.1 33.2 29.8

30.5 32.5 34.5 34.6 37.6 33.9

35.1 37.5 40.5 40.1 43.2 39.3

28.0 29.5 29.8 30.5 33.5 30.3

31.6 33.5 35.2 35.3 38.4 34.8

95.2 70.3 84.2 88.7 95.2 86.7

65.5 70.1 77.8 85.4 98.6 79.5

86.3 71.9 83.1 88.1 97.4 85.4

98.3 75.2 87.3 90.2 98.3 89.9

66.5 71.5 79.0 86.0 100.0 80.6

82.4 73.4 83.2 88.1 99.2 85.3

I70

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m Mean

32.0 33.2 34.3 36.2 38.0 34.7

24.2 26.2 28.0 27.2 30.1 27.1

28.1 29.7 31.2 31.7 34.1 30.9

33.0 33.5 35.0 37.0 38.5 35.4

25.0 26.9 28.5 27.8 30.5 27.7

29.0 30.2 31.8 32.4 34.5 31.6

63.0 90.0 97.0 105.0 110.0 93.0

55.6 60.1 65.0 70.2 80.1 66.2

62.9 81.5 87.3 94.1 101.7 85.5

70.0 94.5 100.0 107.0 115.0 97.3

57.2 63.0 67.8 74.0 85.4 69.5

63.6 78.8 83.9 90.5 100.2 83.4

37.3

29.8

–

38.3

30.4

–

102.6

84.0

–

107.0

86.7

–

33.7 35.1 37.4 38.7 41.8

27.1 28.8 30.0 30.1 33.0

30.4 32.0 33.7 34.4 37.4

34.5 36.0 38.7 39.7 42.7

28.0 29.5 30.6 30.8 33.3

31.3 32.8 34.7 35.3 38.0

85.2 92.3 105.0 111.7 118.7

67.0 73.6 81.1 91.9 106.2

80.5 88.0 98.2 106.0 116.4

89.4 98.2 108.5 114.5 124.4

69.6 76.8 84.0 94.1 109.1

79.5 87.5 96.3 104.3 116.8

General mean

FYM × IS

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m

F value for IS LSD 0.05 for AIW LSD 0.05 for AIW × IS LSD 0.05 for FYM LSD 0.05 for FYM × IS LSD 0.05 for FYM × AIW LSD 0.05 for IS × AIW × FYM

* 0.30 0.32 0.82 0.60 1.40 2.00

* 0.80 0.82 1.32 1.10 1.90 2.50

* 1.80 1.90 1.90 1.60 2.90 4.30

IS, irrigation system; DIS, drip irrigation system; SIS, sprinkler irrigation system; AIW, amount of irrigation water; FYM, Farmyard manure; I100 , I85 and 70%: 100, 85 and I70 % of the crop evapotranspiration.

* 1.60 1.30 2.00 1.90 3.80 5.60

M.H. Abd El-Wahed, E.A. Ali / Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

SIS

IS

ARTICLE IN PRESS

2009 DIS

Seasons FYM

G Model

AIW

AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8

4

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

Table 3 Effect of irrigation systems, amount of applied water, farmyard manure and their interactions involved on 100-grain weight and grain weight per weigh (g/ear).

AIW

Grain yield (kg ha−1 )Drip

Traits Seasons FYM

Water use efficiency (kg/m3 )

2009 IS

DIS

2010 SIS

Mean

DIS

2009

2010

SIS

Mean

DIS

SIS

Mean

DIS

SIS

Mean

6784 8324 8918 9438 10,071 8707

5115 5933 6274 7706 8047 6615

5949 7129 7596 8572 9059 7661

6810 8445 8999 9589 10,100 8789

5183 6070 6411 7775 8047 6697

5997 7257 7705 8682 9074 7743

1.21 1.49 1.60 1.69 1.80 1.56

0.75 0.87 0.92 1.13 1.18 0.97

0.98 1.18 1.26 1.41 1.49 1.27

1.22 1.51 1.61 1.72 1.81 1.57

0.76 0.89 0.94 1.14 1.18 0.98

0.99 1.20 1.28 1.43 1.50 1.28

I85

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m Mean

4889 5803 6160 6953 7858 6333

3884 4290 4753 5449 6434 4962

4386 5046 5457 6201 7146 5647

4910 5999 6270 7195 8058 6487

4000 4348 4869 5565 6492 5055

4455 5173 5570 6380 7275 5771

1.03 1.22 1.30 1.46 1.65 1.33

0.67 0.74 0.82 0.94 1.11 0.92

0.85 0.98 1.06 1.20 1.38 1.13

1.03 1.26 1.32 1.51 1.70 1.37

0.69 0.75 0.84 0.96 1.12 0.93

0.86 1.01 1.08 1.24 1.41 1.15

I70

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m Mean

4202 4851 5150 5452 5968 5125

2864 3485 4106 4774 5108 4067

3533 4168 4628 5113 5538 4596

4350 4925 5250 5560 6000 5217

3055 3533 4249 5013 5251 4220

3703 4229 4750 5286 5626 4719

1.07 1.24 1.32 1.39 1.53 1.31

0.60 0.73 0.86 1.00 1.07 0.90

0.84 0.99 1.09 1.20 1.30 1.11

1.11 1.26 1.34 1.42 1.53 1.33

0.64 0.74 0.89 1.05 1.10 0.92

0.88 1.00 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.13

6721

5215

–

6831

5324

–

1.40

0.89

–

1.42

0.91

–

5292 6326 6743 7281 7966

3954 4569 5044 5976 6530

4623 5448 5894 6629 7248

5357 6457 6840 7448 8053

4079 4650 5176 6117 6597

4718 5553 6008 6783 7325

1.11 1.32 1.40 1.51 1.66

0.67 0.78 0.87 1.02 1.12

0.89 1.05 1.14 1.27 1.39

1.12 1.34 1.42 1.55 1.68

0.70 0.79 0.89 1.05 1.13

0.91 1.07 1.16 1.30 1.41

FYM × IS

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m

F value for IS LSD 0.05 for AIW LSD 0.05 for AIW × IS LSD 0.05 for FYM LSD 0.05 for FYM × IS LSD 0.05 for FYM × AIW LSD 0.05 for IS × AIW × FYM

* 140.1 141.0 160.2 154.2 277.1 390.7

* 142.0 150.0 166.2 155.0 287.5 405.4

* 0.09 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.21

* 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.21

M.H. Abd El-Wahed, E.A. Ali / Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m Mean

IS, irrigation system; DIS, drip irrigation system; SIS, sprinkler irrigation system; AIW, amount of irrigation water; FYM, Farmyard manure; I100 , I85 and 70%: 100, 85and I70 % of the crop evapotranspiration.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

I100

General mean

G Model

AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

Table 4 Effect of irrigation systems, amount of applied water, farmyard manure and their interactions on grain yield and water use efficiency.

5

G Model AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8

ARTICLE IN PRESS M.H. Abd El-Wahed, E.A. Ali / Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

6

observed in I70 treatment. This result is attributed to the highest yield obtained from I100 treatment which compensated the highest amount of water used and gave the highest return from the water unit in both seasons. The average WUE values of FYM20m were increased by 58.4, 34.7, 23.6 and 9.9% over FYM0 , FYM10s , FYM10m and FYM20s in 2009 seasons, respectively. While the corresponding values in 2010 season were 55.7, 34.2, 22.6 and 8.0% in the same order. This is logic since the same treatment gained the highest GY which compensated the I100 . In this respect, the interaction between DIS and AIW had a significant effect, in the two growing seasons. It was obvious that the WUE values were: 1.56, 1.33 and 1.31 kg grain m−3 water under DIS, while under SIS were 0.97, 0.92 and 0.90 kg grain m−3 water for I100 , I85 and I70 treatments in 2009 season. Being 1.57, 1.37 and 1.33 kg grain m−3 water under DIS, while under SIS were 0.98, 0.93 and 0.92 kg grain m−3 water in 2010 season, where they were reduced as a consequence of the reduction in grain yield by irrigation water deficit. The interaction between IS, AIW and FYM had a significant effect on WUE. The highest WUE values (1.80 and 1.81 kg grain m−3 water in first and second seasons, respectively) were obtained from plants irrigated with the highest amount of irrigation water (I100 ) and received FYM20m under DIS, while the lowest values (0.60 and 0.64 kg grain m−3 in first and second seasons, respectively) were obtained from corn plants irrigated with the lowest amount of irrigation water (I70 ) and received FYM0 under SIS.

3.3. Economic analysis Fig. 1. The relationship between amount of applied water and grain yield at different FYM treatments under drip and sprinkler irrigation systems.

addition, Saleh et al. (2003) revealed that organic manure enhanced the availability of certain elements and their supply to onion plants during growth period. Also, these results stood in coincident with those obtained by Ofosu-Anim and Leitch (2009). The interaction between IS, AIW and FYM had a significant effect on GY in both seasons. The highest GY (10,071 and 10,100 kg ha−1 ) was recorded for plants irrigated with the highest level (I100 ) and received FYM20m under DIS. In contrast, the lowest GY (2864 and 3055 kg ha−1 ) was obtained from plants irrigated with the lowest level of AIW (I70 ) and FYM0 under SIS in both seasons, respectively. Average GY for I85 × FYM20m treatment under DIS (7958 kg ha−1 ) produced nearly the identical value for I100 × FYM20m treatment under SIS (8048 kg ha−1 ). Therefore, under limited irrigation water, applying the I85 × FYM20m treatment under DIS was found to be favorable to save 15% of the applied irrigation water accompanied with producing the same GY. The components of 100-grain weight and grain weight ear−1 were found to follow the same trends. 3.2. Water use efficiency Data introduced in Table 4 cleared that WUE was significantly affected by the IS, AIW, FYM and their interactions. The highest WUE (1.40 and 1.42 kg m−3 ) values were obtained under DIS compared to 0.89 and 0.91 kg m−3 under SIS in both seasons, respectively. This confirmed that DIS produced not only higher corn yield, but also saved irrigation water in the two seasons: 2009 and 2010. With regard to the effect of AIW, data showed that the highest values of WUE (1.27 and 1.28 in 2009 and 2010 seasons, respectively) were obtained from I100 treatment while the lowest ones (1.11 and 1.13 in 2009 and 2010 seasons, respectively) were

As shown in Table 5, the total return and net profit were affected by IS, AIW and FYM treatments. These results indicate that, the average value of total return and net profit was 3939 and 3014 $ ha−1 for DIS and 3035 and 2071 $ ha−1 for SIS, respectively. These results confirm that the plants gave the higher yield and demand lower total costs under the DIS in the two seasons. The average of total return values were 4427, 3294 and 2740 $ ha−1 , meanwhile the average of net profit were 3445, 2349 and 1833 $ ha−1 for I100 , I85 and I70 treatments, respectively. In addition, the average value of net profit of I100 was higher than I70 and I80 by 31.9 and 47.9%, respectively. This result is due to the I100 treatment that gave the highest value of GY compared with other treatments. It is clear that total return and net profit of corn was increased with increasing the amount of irrigation water. This result was in agreement with Abdel-Aal (2005) and Hana Mohammed and Abd El-Wahed (2009). Regarding the effect of FYM treatments on the net profit, the average net profit was 1768, 2235, 2503, 2921 and 3286 $ ha−1 for FYM0 , FYM10s , FYM10m , FYM20s and FYM20m , respectively. The average values of net profit of FYM20m were 46.7, 32.9, 24.5 and 11.2% higher than those of FYM0 , FYM10s , FYM10m and FYM20s , respectively. This result was found to be in harmony with the previous results which showed that the values of GY were higher for FYM20m treatment than other FYM treatments. The highest net profit values under drip and sprinkler irrigation systems (4944 and 3687 $ ha−1 , respectively) were obtained from plants irrigated with the combined treatment of (I100 ) and FYM20m . At the same time, the lowest net profit values under drip and sprinkler irrigation systems (1604 and 856 $ ha−1 , respectively) were recorded when plants irrigated with the (I70 ) and FYM0 treatment. Average net profit for I85 × FYM20m treatment under DIS (3677 $ ha−1 ) nearly produced the same value for I100 × FYM20m treatment under SIS (3687 $ ha−1 ). Therefore, under limited irrigation water, applying the I85 × FYM20m treatment under DIS was found to be the

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

ARTICLE IN PRESS

G Model AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8

M.H. Abd El-Wahed, E.A. Ali / Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

7

Table 5 Effect of irrigation systems, amount of applied water, farmyard manure and their interactions on total cost, total return and net profit. AIW

Traits FYM

Total cost ($/ha) IS

Total return ($/ha)

DIS

SIS

I100

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m

930 950 965 970 985

I85

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m

I70

FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m

Net profit ($/ha)

DIS

SIS

DIS

SIS

975 995 1010 1005 1030

3810 4713 5154 5492 5929

2944 3413 3675 4418 4717

2880 3763 4189 4522 4944

1969 2418 2665 3413 3687

895 915 930 935 950

935 955 970 975 990

2832 3384 3583 4120 4627

2295 2500 2770 3144 3689

1937 2469 2653 3185 3677

1360 1545 1800 2169 2699

860 880 895 900 915

895 915 930 935 950

2464 2942 3121 3289 3620

1751 2065 2413 2784 2954

1604 2062 2226 2389 2705

856 1150 1483 1849 2004

Main effects Total cost ($/ha)

Total return ($/ha)

Net profit ($/ha)

925 964

3939 3035

3014 2071

982 945 908

4427 3294 2740

3445 2349 1833

915 935 950 953 970

2683 3170 3453 3874 4256

1768 2235 2503 2921 3286

IS DIS SIS AIW I100 I85 I70 FYM FYM0 FYM10s FYM10m FYM20s FYM20m

IS, irrigation system; DIS, drip irrigation system; SIS, sprinkler irrigation system; AIW, amount of irrigation water; FYM, Farmyard manure; I100 , I85 and 70% = 100, 85 and I70 % of the crop evapotranspiration.

favorable to save 15% of the applied irrigation water at the time in which produced the same net profit. 4. Conclusion The previous results led to conclude that planting the corn plants under the treatment (I100 × FYM20m ) was found to be suitable for producing high GY and consequently net profit, under either DIS or SIS. The treatment I85 × FYM20m produced relatively high yield with saving 15% of the applied irrigation water under DIS or SIS wherever any of the two systems is available. Under limited irrigation water, I85 × FYM20m treatment accompanied with DIS was found to be favorable to save 15% of the applied irrigation water and produced the same GY and consequently net profit. Under Sebha environmental conditions and similar regions, we recommend planting corn under the treatment (I100 × FYM20m ) which was found to be suitable for producing high GY and consequently net profit, using either DIS or SIS according to their availability. References Abd El-Wahed, M.H., 2009. Effect of irrigation scheduling and organic manure on barley yield, yield components and water use efficiency under arid regions conditions. Egyptian Journal of Applied Sciences 24, 856–877. Abdel-Aal, E.E., 2005. Relationship between different levels of available water and fertilization methods on cantaloupe production by subsurface irrigation system. Misr Journal of Agricultural Engineering 22, 592–611. Abou El-Magd, M.M., Zaki, M.F., Abou-Hussein, S.D., 2008. Effect of organic manure and different levels of saline irrigation water on growth, green yield and

chemical content of sweet fennel. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 2, 90–98. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D. and Smith, M. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56 United Nations – Food and Agricultural Organization, Roma, Italy. Awodoyin, R.O., Ogunyemi, S., 2005. Use of sickle pod, Senna obtusifolia (L.) Irwin and Barneby, as mulch interplant in cayenne pepper, Capsicum frutescens L., production. Emirate Journal Agricultural Science 17, 10–22. Bathke, G.R., Gassel, D.K., Hargrove, W.L., Porter, P.M., 1992. Modification of soil physical properties and root growth response. Soil Science 154, 316–329. Chauhan, C.P.S., Singh, R.B., Gupta, S.K., 2008. Supplemental irrigation of wheat with saline water. Agricultural Water Management 95, 253–258. Dhawan, B.D., 2002. Technological Change in Indian Irrigated Agriculture: A Study of Water Saving Methods. Commonwealth Publishers, New Delhi. English, M.J., Musich, J.T., Murty, V.V.N., 1990. Deficit irrigation. In: Hoffman, G.J., Howell, T.A., Soloman, K.H. (Eds.), Management of Farm Irrigation Systems. ASAE, At. Joseph, MI. 2008. FAO Statistical Yearbook, http://faostat.fao.org. Fardad, H., Golkar, H., 2002. An economic evaluation of deficit irrigation on wheat yield in Karaj. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 33, 305–312. Gomez, K.A., Gomez, A.A., 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agriculture Research. A Wiley–Inter Science Publication. John Wiley Sons, Inc, New York, USA. Hana Mohammed, H., Abd El-Wahed, M.H., 2009. Effect of irrigation systems, soil water tension, phosphorus fertilizer rates and hill spacing on safflower yield and water use efficiency. Egyptian Journal of Applied Sciences 24, 178–193. Hartkamp, A.D., White, J.W., Rossing, W.A.H., van Ittersum, M.K., Bakker, E.J., Rabbinge, R., 2004. Regional application of a cropping systems simulation model: crop residue retention in maize production systems of Jalisco, Mexico. Agricultural Systems 82, 117–138. Hochmuth, G.J., Hochmuth, R.C., Olson, S.M., 2001. Polyethylene Mulching for Early Vegetable Production in North Florida. University of Florida/Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS), Florida A & M University Cooperative Extension Program, http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu. INCID, 1998. Sprinkler Irrigation in India. Indian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, New Delhi. Jensen, M.E., 1983. Design and Operation of Farm Irrigation Systems. ASAE, Michigan, USA, p. 827.

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017

G Model AGWAT-3479; No. of Pages 8 8

ARTICLE IN PRESS M.H. Abd El-Wahed, E.A. Ali / Agricultural Water Management xxx (2012) xxx–xxx

Ji, S., Unger, P.W., 2001. Soil water accumulation under different precipitation, potential evaporation and straw mulch conditions. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65, 442–448. Kar, G., Kumar, A., 2007. Effects of irrigation and straw mulch on water use and tuber yield of potato in Eastern India. Agricultural Water Management 94, 109–116. Khurshid, K., Iqbal, M., Arif, M.S., Nawaz, A., 2006. Effect of tillage and mulch on soil physical properties and growth of maize. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 5, 593–596. Kulkarni, S.A., 2005. Looking Beyond Eight Sprinklers. Paper presented at the National Conference on Micro-irrigation. G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India, June 3–5, 2005. Lal, R., 1974. Soil temperature, soil moisture and maize yield from mulched and unmulched tropical soils. Plant & Soil 40, 129–143. Mahfouz, S.A., Abd El-Wahed, M.H., 2008. Effect of deficit irrigation and bio-fertilizer on barley crop under sprinkler irrigation system in sandy soils. Egyptian Journal of Applied Sciences 23, 756–771. Masle, J., Passiour, J.B., 1987. The effect of soil strength on the growth of young wheat plants. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 14, 643–656. Michigan State University, 1983. MSTAT-C Micro-Computer Statistical Programe, Version 2. Michigan State University, East Lansing, USE. Motavalli, P.P., Singh, R.P., Anders, M.M., 1994. Perception and management of farmyard manure in the semiarid tropics of India. Agricultural Systems 2, 189–204. Ofosu-Anim, J., Leitch, M., 2009. Relative efficiency of organic manures in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) production. Australian Journal of Crop 3, 13–19. Opara-Nadi, O.A., 1993. Effect of elephant grass and plastic mulch on soil properties and cowpea yield. In: Mulongoy, K., Merckx, R. (Eds.), Soil Organic Matter Dynamics and Sustainability of Tropical Agriculture. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 351–360. Pereira, L.S., Oweis, T., Zairi, A., 2002. Irrigation management under water scarcity. Agricultural Water Management 57, 175–206. Saleh, A.L., Abd El-Kader, A.A., Hegab, S.A.M., 2003. Response of onion to organic fertilizer under irrigation with saline water. Egyptian Journal of Applied Sciences 18, 707–716.

˙ A., Jodaugiene, ˙ D., Pupaliene, ˙ R., Urboniene, ˙ M., 2009. The influence Sinkeviˇciene, of organic mulches on soil properties and crop yield. Agronomy Research 7, 485–491. Tahir, S.M., 1983. Fertilizers alleviate moisture stress. In: Worth, B., Xin, J. (Eds.), 17th Coll. Int. Potash Institute. Farm Mechanization for Profit. Granada Publishing, London, UK, p. 269. Tarjuelo, J.M., Montero, J., Honrubia, F.T., Ortiz, J.J., Ortega, J.F., 1999. Analysis of uniformity of sprinkler irrigation in a semi-arid areas. Agricultural Water Management 40, 315–331. Tiwari, K.N., Singh, A., Mal, P.K., 2003. Effect of drip irrigation on yield of cabbage (Brassica oleracea L., va. Capitata) under mulch and non-mulch conditions. Agricultural Water Management 58, 19–28. Unger, P.W., Stewart, B.A., 1983. Soil management for efficient water use: an overview. In: Taylor, H.M., Jordan, W.R., Sinclar, T.R. (Eds.), Limitations to Efficient Water Use in Crop Production. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 419–458. Wang, H., Zhang, L., Dawes, W.R., Liu, C., 2001. Improving water use efficiency of irrigated crops in the North China. Plain measurements and modeling. Agricultural Water Management 48, 151–167. Worth, B., Xin, J., 1983. Farm Mechanization for Profit. Granada Publishing, London, UK, p. 269. Younis, S.M., Shiboon, M.A., Aref, A.O., 1991. Evaluation of some mechanical methods of rice production in Egypt. Misr Journal Of Agricultural Engineering 8, 39–49. Yuan, B.-Z., Nishiyama, S., Kang, Y., 2003. Effects of different irrigation regimes on the growth and yield of drip irrigated potato. Agricultural Water Management 63 (3), 153–167. Zaman, W.U., Arshad, M., Saleem, A., 2001. Distribution of nitrate nitrogen in the soil profile under different irrigation methods. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 2, 208–209. Zeng, C., Bie, Z., Yuan, B., 2009. Determination of optimum irrigation water amount for drip-irrigated muskmelon (Cucumis melon L.) in plastic greenhouse. Agricultural Water Management 96, 595–602.

Please cite this article in press as: Abd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigation water and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agric. Water Manage. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017