|
|
|
|
|
| Comparison of Two Dripper Line Designs to Assess Cotton Yield, Water Use, and Net Return in Northwest China |
| WANG Ruo-shui; ;WAN Shu-qin;KANG Yue-hu ; LIU Shi-ping |
1.Key Laboratory of Water Cycle and Related Land Surface Processes, Institute of Geographic Science and Natural Resources Research,Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, P.R.China
2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, P.R.China |
|
|
|
摘要 This study aimed to compare the effects of two types of drip irrigation line design on cotton yield, water use, and net returns. The experiments were carried out in the arid region of Xinjiang, Northwest China, during 2009-2010 growing years. The two types of lateral placement are commonly used by the local farmers in the area: double lines (two laterals controlling four rows) and single line designs (one lateral controlling four rows). The results indicated that less irrigation water was applied by single line compared with double lines design. This implies that more irrigation water could be saved using single line, by reducing the water consumption of cotton. The emergence rates for double lines were 2 and 6% higher than those for single line design in 2009 and 2010. The seed cotton yields for double lines design were 5.76 and 6.41 Mg ha-1 which were 13 and 9% higher than for single line design in 2009 and 2010, respectively. Single lines could however lower the investment cost compared to double lines, which produced 10 and 7% more net income in 2009 and 2010, respectively. By contrast, the double lines was more profitable and suitable for the farmers in Northwest China than single line design.
Abstract This study aimed to compare the effects of two types of drip irrigation line design on cotton yield, water use, and net returns. The experiments were carried out in the arid region of Xinjiang, Northwest China, during 2009-2010 growing years. The two types of lateral placement are commonly used by the local farmers in the area: double lines (two laterals controlling four rows) and single line designs (one lateral controlling four rows). The results indicated that less irrigation water was applied by single line compared with double lines design. This implies that more irrigation water could be saved using single line, by reducing the water consumption of cotton. The emergence rates for double lines were 2 and 6% higher than those for single line design in 2009 and 2010. The seed cotton yields for double lines design were 5.76 and 6.41 Mg ha-1 which were 13 and 9% higher than for single line design in 2009 and 2010, respectively. Single lines could however lower the investment cost compared to double lines, which produced 10 and 7% more net income in 2009 and 2010, respectively. By contrast, the double lines was more profitable and suitable for the farmers in Northwest China than single line design.
|
|
Received: 15 February 2012
Accepted:
|
| Fund: This study was supported by the National High-Tech R&D Program of China (2011AA100507), the Action Plan for the Development of Western China of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (KZCX2-XB3-16), and the National Science Foundation for Young Scientists of China (51009126). |
|
Corresponding Authors:
Correspondence WAN Shu-qin, Mobile: 18901115998, Fax: +86-10-64856516, E-mail: wansq@iqsnrr.ac.cn
E-mail: wansq@iqsnrr.ac.cn
|
Cite this article:
WANG Ruo-shui, WAN Shu-qin, KANG Yue-hu , LIU Shi-ping.
2012.
Comparison of Two Dripper Line Designs to Assess Cotton Yield, Water Use, and Net Return in Northwest China. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 12(11): 1924-1932.
|
| [1]Aujla M S, Thind H S, Buttar G S. 2005. Cotton yield andwater use efficiency at various levels of water and Nthrough drip irrigation under two methods of planting.Agricultural Water Management, 71, 167-179[2]Bozkurt Y, Yazar A, Gencel B, Sezen M S. 2006. Optimumlateral spacing for drip-irrigated corn in theMediterranean Region of Turkey. Agricultural WaterManagement, 85, 113-120[3]Camp C R, Bauer P J, Hunt P G. 1997. Subsurface drip irrigation lateral spacing and management for cotton inthe southeastern coastal plain. Transaction of theASAE, 40, 993-999[4]Cai H, Shao G, Zhang Z. 2002. Lateral layout of dripirrigation under plastic mulch for cotton. Transactionsof the CSAE, 18, 45-48 (in Chinese)[5]Cetin O, Uygan D. 2008. The effect of drip line spacing,irrigation regimes and planting geometries of tomatoon yield, irrigation water use efficiency and net return.Agricultural Water Management, 95, 949-958[6]Cetin O, Bilgel L. 2002. Effect of different irrigation methodson shedding and yield of cotton. Agricultural WaterManagement, 54, 1-15[7]Da delen N, Baþal H, Yýlmaz E, Gürbüz T, Akçay S. 2009.Different drip irrigation regimes affect cotton yield,water use efficiency and fiber quality in western Turkey.Agricultural Water Management, 96, 111-120[8]Ertek A, Kanber R. 2003. Effects of different drip irrigationprograms on the boll number and shedding percentageand yield of cotton. Agricultural Water Management,60, 1-11[9]Hunsaker D J, Clemmens A J, Fangmeier D D. 1998. Cottonresponse to high frequency surface irrigation.Agricultural Water Management, 37, 55-74[10]Hu X, Chen H, Wang J, Meng X, Chen F. 2009. Effects ofsoil water content on cotton root growth and distributionunder mulched drip irrigation. Agricultural Sciencesin China, 8, 709-716[11]Ibragimov N, Evett S R, Esanbekov Y, Kamilov B S, MirzaevL, Lamers J P A. 2007. Water use efficiency of irrigatedcotton in Uzbekistan under drip and furrow irrigation.Agricultural Water Management, 90, 112-120[12]Karam F, Lahoud R, Masaad R, Daccache A, Mounzer O,Rouphael Y. 2006. Water use and lint yield response ofdrip irrigated cotton to the length of irrigation season.Agricultural Water Management, 85, 287-295[13]Kanwar R S, Rizvi H A, Ahmed M, Horton R, Marlev S J.1989. Measurement of field-saturated hydraulicconduct ivi ty by using Guelph and Veloci typermeameters. Transactions of the American Societyof Agricultural Engineers, 32, 1885-1890[14]Lamm F R, Stone L R, Manges H L, O’Brien D M. 1997.Optimum lateral spacing for drip-irrigated corn.Transaction of the ASAE, 40, 1021-1027[15]Onder D, Akiscan Y, Onder S, Mert M. 2009. Effect ofdifferent irrigation water level on cotton yield and yieldcomponents. African Journal of Biotechnology, 8,1536-1544[16]Patel N, Rajput T B S. 2007. Effect of drip tape placementdepth and irrigation level on yield of potato.Agricultural Water Management, 88, 209-223[17]Plaut Z, Carmi A, Grava A. 1988. Cotton growth andproduction under drip-irrigation restricted soil wetting.Irrigation Sciences, 9, 143-156[18]Rawitz E, Lior H, Rimon M. 1990. The effect of drip-lineplacement and residue incorporation on the growth ofdrip-irrigated cotton. Soil and Tillage Research, 16,227-232[19]Ünlü M, Kanber R, Koç D L, Tekin S, Kapur B. 2011. Effectsof deficit irrigation on the yield and yield componentsof drip irrigated cotton in a Mediterranean environment.Agricultural Water Management, 98, 597-605[20]Wang X, Tian C, Wen Q, Wu H, Mao J. 2007. Influence ofland utilization way on soil salt in Karamay AgriculturalDevelopment Zones. Journal of Xinjiang AgriculturalUniversity, 30, 38-40[21](in Chinese)Xu F, Li Y, Ren S. 2003. Investigation and discussion ofdrip irrigation under mulch in Xinjiang UygurAutonomous Region. Transaction of the CSAE, 19, 25-27. (in Chinese) |
| No Suggested Reading articles found! |
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
