The effect of submergence depth on evaporation losses in paddy fields

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Authors

Abstract

Background and objective: Evaporation is one of the main components of water losses in submerged irrigation method in paddy fields. The amount of evaporation is a function of temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, vegetated surface, submerges depth, water table level and other elements. In different intermittent irrigation managements, paddy fields frequently are under submerged and non-submerged situation. In each irrigation practice, the water level changes from submerged to capillary crack. This research aims measuring of evaporation rate during rice growth in different submerged depths in Guilan Province paddy fields in Rice Research Institute near meteorological research station in 2013.
Material and methods: Five different water level treatments (5, 2.5, 0, -5, -10 cm) where applied to the farm in three repetition and using mini Lysimeters the evaporation is measured in daily scale in the middle of pig plots.
Results: The results show that evaporation in different submerged levels is significantly different in 5%.The most and least evaporation amounts are consequently seen in 0 cm and 10 cm treatments respectively 120.8 millimeter and 94 millimeter. In all treatments the evaporation reduces during the time to the half. Precipitation minimize also evaporation rate till 75 %. Neglecting precipitation dates also does not change the difference between treatments. The comparisons show that higher levels of water on the soil surface cause higher evaporation losses. By reducing water level and narrowing water depth on soil surface, especially in vegetation period evaporation reduces. If the thickness of this layer reduces and reaches to zero or soil became semi saturated, evaporation increases again. If the thickness of this layer reduces and reaches to zero or soil became semi saturated evaporation increases again. Then when the soil became dryer and the water level stays at -10 cm below soil level, the evaporation decreases significantly.
Conclusion: The results of evaporation measurements and its fluctuations are highly strongly to fluctuations of soil temperature in every treatment (in depth of 5 and 10 cm under the top soil) and water temperature and treatments which have higher records of temperature in the soil and water environment, have severer evaporation rates. In case of enough available water, presence a thin layer of water on top soil surface can reduce effectively evaporation. But in the absence of water necessary to maintain submergence, to reduce evaporation losses it is recommended to keep water level table in lower than 5 cm from top soil surface.

Keywords


-1.Agam, N., Evett, S.R., Tolk, J.A., Kustas, W.P., Colaizzi, P.D., Alfieri, J.G., Mckee, L.G.,
Copeland, K.S., Howell, T.A., and Chavez, J.L. 2012. Evaporative loss from irrigatedinter
rows in a highly advective semi-arid agricultural area. Adv. Water Res. 50: 20-30.
2.Alizadeh, A. 2004. Soil, Water, Plant relationship. Astan Quds Razavi, press, 470p.
3.Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., and Smith, M. 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines
for Computing Crop Requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage paper no. 56. Food and
Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
4.Ashktorab, H., Pruitt, W., and Paw, U.K. 1994. Partitioning of Evapotranspiration Using
Lysimeter and Micro-Bowen-Ratio System. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 120: 450-464.
5.Balwinder, S., Eberbach, P.L., Humphreys, E., and Kukal, S.S. 2011. The effect of ricestraw
mulch on evapotranspiration, transpiration and soil evaporation of irrigated wheat in Punjab.
India. Agric. Water Manage. 98: 1847-1855.
6.Borhan, A. 1990. Plant water requirement and irrigation planning. Interior ministry.
(In Persian)
7.Ding, R., Kang, S., Zhang, Y., Xinmei, H., Tong, L., and Du, T. 2013. Partitioning
evapotranspiration into soil evaporation and transpiration using a modified dual crop
coefficient model in irrigated maize field with ground-mulching. Elsevier. 127: 85-96.
8.Ehleringer, J.R., Roden, J.R., and Dawson, T.E. 2000. Assessing ecosystem-level water
relations through stable isotoperation analyses. P 181-198, In: O.E. Sala, R. Jackson, H.A.
Mooney and R. Howarth (Eds.), Methods in Ecosystem Science. SpringerVerlag, New York,
USA.
9.FAO. Crop Evapotranspiration (Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements), FAO
Irrigation and Drainage Paper No.56.
10.Ferretti, D.F., Pendall, E., Morgan, J.A., Nelson, J.A., LeCain, D., and Mosier, A.R. 2003.
Partitioning evapotranspiration fluxes from a Colorado grassland using stable isotopes:
seasonal variations and ecosystem implications of elevated atmospheric CO2. Plant and Soil
J. 254: 291-303.
11.Ham, J.M., Heilman, J.L., and Lascano, R.J. 1990. Determination of soil water evaporation
and transpiration from energy balance and stem flow measurement. Agricultural and Forest
Meteorology. 52: 287-301.
12.Harrold, L.L., Peters, D.B., Driebelbis, F.R., and Mc-Guiness, J.L. 1959. Transpiration
evaluation of corn grown on a plastic-cove red lysimeter. Soil Sci. Soc. Of Am. Proc.
23: 174-178.
13.Jara, J., Stockle, C.O., and Kjelgard, J. 1998. Measurement of evapotranspiration and its
components in a corn (Zea Mays L.) field. Agric. For. Meteorol. 92: 131-145.
14.Kool, D., Agam, N., Lazarovitch, N., Heitman, J.L., Sauer, T.J., and Ben-gal, A. 2014. A
review of approaches for evapotranspiration partioning. Agric. For. Meteorol. 184: 56-70.
15.Kustas, W.P., and Agam, N. 2014. Soil Evaporation. Encyclopedia of Natural Resources.
DOI: 10.1081/E-ENRL-120049129.
16.Kustas, W.P., and Norman, J.M. 1999a. Evaluation of soil and vegetation heat flux
predictions using a simple two-source model with radiometric temperatures for partial
canopy cover. Agric. For. Meteorol. 94: 13-29.
17.Kustas, W.P., and Norman, J.M. 1999b. Reply to comments about the basic equations of
dual-source vegetation-atmosphere transfer models. Agric. For. Meteorol. 94: 275-278.
18.Lauenroth, W.K., and Bradford, J.B. 2006. Ecohydrology and the Partitioning AET between
Transpiration and Evaporation in a Semiarid Steppe. Ecosystems. 9: 756-767.
19.Lawrence, D.M., Thornton, P.E., Oleson, K.W., and Bonan, G.B. 2007. The Partitioning of
Evapotranspiration into Transpiration, Soil Evaporation and Canopy Evaporation in a GCM:
Impacts on Land–Atmosphere Interaction. J. Hydrometeor. 8: 862-880.
20.Modabberi, H. 2010. Determining evapotranspiration and crop coefficient of rice varieties in
swamp plain (Guilan). Irrigation and Drainage Master's Thesis. Agricultural Faculty, Tarbiat
Modarres University. (In Persian)
21.Peters, D.B., and Russell, M.B. 1959. Relative water losses by evaporation andtranspiration
in field corn. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 23: 170-173.
22.Sakuratani, T. 1987. Studies on evapotranspiration from crops. (2) Separate estimation of
transpiration and evaporation from a soybean field without water shortage. J. Agric.
Meteorol. 42: 309-317.
23.Shaw, R.H. 1959. Water use from plastic covered and uncovers corn plots. Agron. J.
51: 172-173.
24.Shawcroft, R.W., and Gardner, H.R. 1983. Direct evaporation from soil under a row crop
canopy. Agric. Meteorol. 28: 229-238.
25.Sutanto, S.J., Wenninger, J., Coenders-Gerrits, A.M.J., and Uhlenbrook, S. 2012.
Partitioning of evaporation into transpiration, soil evaporation and interception: a
comparison between isotope measurements and a HYDRUS-1D model, Hydrol. Earth Syst.
Sci. 16: 2605-2616.
26.Tolk, J.A., Howell, T.A., Steiner, J.L., Krieg, D.R., and Schneider, A.D. 1995. Role
of transpi-ration suppression by evaporation of intercepted water in improving irrigation
efficiency. Irrig. Sci. 16: 89-95.
27.Yazdani, M.R., Sharifi, M.M., Razavi poor, T., and Sharafi, N. 2002. Comparison of several
water management methods in rice fields Of Guilan province. 11th National Committee
Conference on Irrigation and Drainage. (In Persian)