Comparison of Water Uptake Reduction Functions in Water Stress Conditions, by Using the Constant and Separate Coefficients in Maize Growth Stages

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Author

Corresponding Author, Dept. of Water Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

Background and objectives: For reduction of water deficiency effects in agricultural sector, it is needed to management of optimal water consumption. Irrigation scheduling should be based on the actual water requirement during the crop growth period. So that the crop growth stages sensitivity is considered in the water uptake process. The application of water uptake reduction functions (α(h)) in water stress conditions, is one of methods for irrigation scheduling. In past researches, the calibration and evaluation of water uptake reduction functions have been done by constant coefficients in the crop growth period. But the aim of this research, is to compare the water uptake reduction functions by application of constant and separate coefficients, in crop growth stages. Therefore, the accuracy of estimation of actual α(h) data, is investigated in crop growth period.
Materials and methods: This research was conducted on maize S. C 704, in Qazvin region. The mini-lysimeter with diameter of 40 cm and height of 70 cm was used for crop cultivation. The main factor was defined as soil water depletion at levels of 45%(I1), 55%(I2), 60%(I3), 65%(I4), 70%(I5), 75%(I6), 80%(I7) and 85%(I8), relative to total available water. Sub main factor was selected as the sensitivity to water stress in growth stages of initial (P1), development (P2), mid (P3) and late (P4). So that, the effect of soil water depletion (water stress) on water uptake amount, was investigated in maize growth stages (as separately). The experiment was performed as factorial and in a completely randomized design, with 32 treatments and three repetitions. Daily soil moisture was measured by moisture meter (HH2 model and made by ΔT company). For simulation the water uptake reduction (in water stress conditions), were applied the models of Van Genuchten (1987), Dirksen et al (1988) and Homaee et al (2002). The actual data of α(h) in I1, I3, I5 and I7 treatments, were used for models calibration. For this work, the models coefficients were estimated constantly (in whole growth period) and variably (in 4 growth stages). The models evaluation were performed for estimation of α(h) actual values in I2, I4, I6 and I8 treatments. The statistics indicators of CRM, EF, R2, RMSE and ME were used for models evaluation.
Results: The effect of soil water depletion and crop growth stages sensitivity on water uptake, was significant at the level of 1%. From I1 to I8 treatments, the water uptake amount in the whole of growth period, was decreased by slope of 7.4%. But the water uptake amounts in the initial, development, mid and late stages were decreased to 5%, 6.9%, 9% and 4.6%, respectively. As a result, the most sensitive growth stage of maize (relative to water stress) was included the mid, development, initial and late, respectively. The models calibration showed that in a specific model, the function coefficients amounts were different in growth stages (compared to whole of growth period). The best priorities for optimal model choosing, was assigned to application of separate coefficients in the crop growth stages. Among the different models, the Van Genuchten model with statistical indices of CRM=0.032, EF=0.928, R2=0.942, RMSE=0.057 and ME=0.1, was determined as the optimal model.
Conclusion: The results of this research showed that the modeling accuracy was increases, by application of variable coefficients in water uptake reduction functions. Due to different sensitivity in crop growth stages, is done a better estimation of actual water uptake amount, in water stress conditions. As a result, the actual crop water requirement is calculated by more accurately. Also, the water consumption amount is considered according to actual crop needs, which will cause to better management of water resources.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1.Mukherjee, S., Kumar Dash, P., Das, D., & Das, S. (2023). Growth, yield and water productivity of tomato as influenced by deficit irrigation water management. Journal of environmental processes. 10, 1-21.
2.Mahrokh, A., Nabipour, M., Roshanfekr, H., & Choukan, R. (2019). Response of some grain maize physiological parameters to drought stress and application of auxin and cytokinin hormones. Journal of environmental stresses in crop sciences. 12 (1), 1-15. [In Persian]
3.Hayat, F., Ahmed, M. A., Zarebanadkouki, M., Javaux, M., Cai, G., & Carminati, A. (2020). Transpiration reduction in maize (Zea mays L.) in response to soil drying. Journal of frontiers in plant science. 10, 1965.
4.Seifi, S., Alizadeh, A., Davari, K., & Banayan Aval, M. (2015). Evaluation of water uptake functions under simultaneous salinity and water stress conditions in Turf Grass. Iranian journal of irrigation and drainage. 9 (1), 131-142. [In Persian]
5.Feddes, R. A., Kowalik, P. J., & Zaradny, H. (1978). Simulation of field water use and crop yield. Production, Wageningen. 189 P.
6.Alizadeh, H. A., Liaghat, A. M., & Noorimohamadeh, M. (2009). Evaluating water uptake reduction functions under salinity and water stress conditions. Journal of water and soil. 23 (3), 88-97.
7.Van Genuchten, M. Th. (1987). A numerical model for water and solute movement in and below the root zone. Research report. US Salinity Laboratory, Riverside, CA.
8.Dirksen, C., & Augustijn, D. C. (1988). Root water uptake function for non-uniform pressure and osmotic potentials. Agriculture. Pp. 188.
9.Homaee, M., Feddes, R. A., & Dirksen, C. (2002a). A macroscopic water extraction model for non-uniform transient salinity and water stress. Journal of soil science. 66, 1764-1772.
10.Saeidi, R., & Liaghat, A. M. (2023). Use of water uptake functions for maize yield simulation under the conditions of interaction of soil salinity stress and growth stages. Journal of water research in agriculture. 37 (1), 1-15.
[In Persian]
11.Homaee, M., Feddes, R. A., & Dirksen, C. (2002b). Simulation of root water uptake. III. Non-uniform transient combined salinity and water stress. Journal of agriculture and water management. 57, 127-144.
12.Babazadeh, H., Alizadeh, H., & Saraei-Tabrizi, M. (2016). Developing modified conceptual model for plants response to simultaneous salinity and water stress. Iranian journal of soil and water research. 47 (2), 281-292. [In Persian]
13.Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., & Smith, M. (1998). Crop evapotranspiration. Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation Drainage Paper No.56. Pp. 1-326.
14.Saeidi, R., & Sotoodenia, A. (2021). Yield reaction to evapotranspiration of maize, under the effect of water stress at different growth stages (in Qazvin plain). Iranian journal of soil and water research. 52 (3), 611-620. [In Persian]
15.Mohammadi Behmadi, M., & Armin, M. (2017). Effect of drought stress on yield and yield components of different corn cultivars in delayed planting conditions. Journal of applied research of plant eco physiology. 4 (1), 17-34. [In Persian]
16.Saeidi, R., Ramezani-Etedali, H., Sotoodenia, A., Kaviani, A., & Nazari, B. (2021). Salinity and fertility stresses modifies  and readily available water coefficients in maize (Case study: Qazvin region). Journal of irrigation science. 39, 299-313.
17.Yang, X., Soothar, R., Rahu, A., Wang, Y., Li, B., Mirjat, M., Soomro, S., Shaikh, S., & Chandio, F. (2023). Integrated effects of water stress and plastic film mulch on yield and water use efficiency of grain maize crop under conventional and alternate furrow irrigation method. Journal of water. 15 (5), 1-16.
18.Dehghanisanij, H., Kanani, E., & Akhavan, S. (2018). Evaluation of corn evapotranspiration and its components and relationship between leaf area index and components in surface and subsurface drip irrigation systems. Journal of water and soil. 31 (6), 1549-1560. [In Persian]
19.Saeidi, R. (2022a). Application of the stomatal resistance, canopy temperature and crop water stress index in determining of maize irrigation time. Journal of water and soil science.32 (1), 159-175. [In Persian]
20.Saeidi, R. (2021a). Separation the evaporation and transpiration in maize cultivation and investigation of their response to different irrigation levels. Iranian journal of soil and water research. 52 (5), 1263-1273. [In Persian]
21.Saeidi, R. (2021b). Investigation the intra-seasonal sensitivity of maize evapotranspiration to water stress,
at different irrigation levels. Journal of water and soil. 35 (3), 335-348. [In Persian]
22.Ayers, R. S., & Westcot, D. W. (1985). Water quality for agriculture. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29. Pp. 32.
23.Saeidi, R. (2022b). Separate estimation of maize evapotranspiration components by using experimental models under water stress conditions. Journal of water research in agriculture. 36 (2), 233-251. [In Persian]
24.Homaee, M., Feddes, R. A., & Dirksen, C. (2002c). Simulation of root water uptake: II. Non-uniform transient water stress using different reduction functions. Journal of agricultural water management. 57 (2), 111-126.
25.Hoseini, Y., Ramezani-Moghaddam, J., Nikpour, M. R., & Abdoli, A. (2018). Evaluating water uptake functions under simultaneous salinity and water stress conditions in cherry tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Journal of water research in agriculture. 32 (2), 248-266. [In Persian]
26.Farre, I., & Faci, J. M. (2009). Deficit irrigation in maize for reducing agricultural water use in a Mediterranean environment. Journal of agricultural water management. 96, 383-394.
27.Hemati, R., Maghsoudi, K., & Emam, Y. (2014). Morpho-physiological responses of maize to drought stress at different growth stages in northern semi-arid region of Fars. Journal of crop production and processing. 4 (11), 67-75. [In Persian]
28.Zhou, S., Liu, W., & Lin, W. (2017). The ratio of transpiration to evapotranspiration in a rain fed maize field on the Loess Plateau of China. Journal of water science and technology. 17 (1), 221-228.
29.She, R., Tong, L., Du, T., & Shukla, M. (2020). Response and modeling of hybrid maize seed vigor to water deficit at different growth stages. Journal of water. 12 (11), 1-20. 
30.Alkaisi, M. M., & Broner, I. (2009). Crop water use and growth stages. Colorado state university extension. 4, 1-189.
31.Doorenbos, J., & Kassam, A. K. (1979). Yield response to water. Irrigation and drainage paper 33. FAO. 1-201.
32.Verdinejad, V. R., Besharat, S., Abghari, H., & Ahmadi, H. (2011). Estimation of maximum allowable deficit in different growth stages of fodder mays using canopy-air temperature difference. Journal of water and soil. 25 (6), 1344-1352.
[In Persian]
33.Veisipoor, A., Majidi, M. M., & Mirlohi, A. (2012). Traits relationship in sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia) under normal and water stress conditions. Iranian journal of field crop science. 42 (4), 745-756. [In Persian]
34.Shirmohammadi, A., Soltani Mohammadi, A., & Broumand Nasab, S. (2020). Evaluation of reduced grain water absorption models in Ahwaz climatic conditions. Iranian journal of irrigation and drainage. 3 (14), 930-941. [In Persian]
35.Hoseini, Y., Babazadeh, H., & Khakpoor, B. (2016). Evaluating water uptake reduction functions under salinity and water stress conditions in pepper. Journal of water research in agriculture. 29 (4), 509-523. [In Persian]
Journal of Water and Soil Conservation
Volume 30, Issue 3
January 2024
Pages 23-44

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics