Document Type : Research Article

Authors

University of Tehran

Abstract

Introduction: Crop coefficient varies in different environmental conditions, such as deficit irrigation, salinity and intercropping. The effect of soil fertility and texture of crop coefficient and evapotranspiration of maize was investigated in this study. Low soil fertility and food shortages as a stressful environment for plants that makes it different evapotranspiration rates of evapotranspiration calculation is based on the FAO publication 56. Razzaghi et al. (2012) investigate the effect of soil type and soil-drying during the seed-filling phase on N-uptake, yield and water use, a Danish-bred cultivar (CV. Titicaca) was grown in field lysimeters with sand, sandy loam and sandy clay loam soil. Zhang et al (2014) were investigated the Effect of adding different amounts of nitrogen during three years (from 2010 to 2012) on water use efficiency and crop evapotranspiration two varieties of winter wheat. The results of their study showed. The results indicated the following: (1) in this dry land farming system, increased N fertilization could raise wheat yield, and the drought-tolerant Changhan No. 58 showed a yield advantage in drought environments with high N fertilizer rates; (2) N application affected water consumption in different soil layers, and promoted wheat absorbing deeper soil water and so increased utilization of soil water; and (3) comprehensive consideration of yield and WUE of wheat indicated that the N rate of 270 kg/ha for Changhan No. 58 was better to avoid the risk of reduced production reduction due to lack of precipitation; however, under conditions of better soil moisture, the N rate of 180 kg/ha was more economic.
Materials and Methods: The study was a factorial experiment in a completely randomized design with three soil texture treatment, including silty clay loam, loam and sandy-loam soil and three fertility treatment, including without fertilizer, one and two percent fertilizer( It was conducted at the experimental farm in Jey and Qahab district of Isfahan. Reference evapotranspiration and actual evapotranspiration of maize were measured by evaporation pan method and volumetric soil water balance method using micro lysimeters, respectively. In order to accommodate the growing field conditions, a ditch with a depth of 25 cm, length of 240 cm and width of 300 cm were dug and micro-lysimeters were placed it in three rows (three replications) with a distance of 75 cm. After preparing the treatments, four seed Maize with variety of NS540 were planted at a depth of 3-5 cm on 5 August. To reduce the oasis effect on evapotranspiration, the same corn was planted in the vicinity of the project area with 500 square meters..
Results and Discussion: The results showed that using fertilizer caused increasing of crop evapotranspiration and crop coefficient of maize. Maximum of the ten-day average evapotranspiration of maize in the silty clay loam soil with two percent fertilizer was obtained 8.76 (mm/ day) on the fifth decade of growth and this value was found 45.5 percent higher than the lowest mean evapotranspiration value of the ten-day. Comparison evapotranspiration of maize in different soil fertility treatments showed that the greatest impact on increasing of maize evapotranspiration in SLF2, SCLF2, SLF2 treatments were obtained that was equal %19.1, %14.3 and %10.6, respectively (table 4). Most of the effects of fertility the crop coefficient of maize at the middle stage of growth was influenced more than other stages by the different treatments of soil fertility. Adding one and two percent of the fertilizer to treatment SCLF0 increased maize crop coefficient about 3.5 and 9.7 percent at development stage, respectively, That measured %6 and 11% for LF1 and LF2 treatments, respectively, and about 1.6 and 5.6% for SLF2 SLF1 treatment, respectively (Table 6). Comparison of maize middle crop coefficient in SLF2 and SLF1 for different soil fertility treatments showed that effect of increasing soil fertility on middle Kc of maize was more than other stages of plant growth (Table 6). The obtained results showed that the addition of one and two percent fertilizer to the silty clay loam soil increased, the middle crop coefficient 13.3% and 27%, respectively in.
Conclusion: Maximum and minimum effect of soil fertility on increasing crop coefficient of maize in the middle stage was equal to 37.8% in the loamy soil and 18.3% in the sandy loam soil with two percent fertilizer. The greatest effect of soil fertility on crop coefficient of maize was measured 8.37% in the middle stage of growth in LF2. The effect of soil fertility on crop coefficient of maize in loam and silty clay loam soils more than sandy loam soil, Because can be a further organic matter in these soils (loam and silty clay loam and also decreasing evaporation in sandy loam soil.

Keywords

1- Amiri M. 1999. Determination of plant cucumbers, tomatoes and peppers in the greenhouse. College of Agriculture. Isfahan University of Technology. Master thesis. (in Persian with English abstract).
2- Alizadeh A., and Kamali Gh. 1998. Crop water requirement in Iran. Publication of Emam Reza. pp. 228. (in Persian)
3- Allen R.G., Pereira L.S., Raes D and Smith M. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration. Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. FAO Irrigation Drainage Paper No. 56, FAO. Rome, Italy. pp 1-326.
4- Benli B., Kodal S., Ilbeyim A., and Ustun H. 2006. Determination of evapotranspiration & basal crop coefficient of alfalfa with a weighing lysimeter. Agricultural Water Management. 81: 358–370.
5- Edalatnasab M. 2002. Fertilizer prices reduces the profits of wheat. Iranian Journal. 19th years. 5496: 24-25. (in Persian)
6- Erkossa T., Awulachew S.B., and Aster D. 2011. Soil fertility effect on water productivity of maize in the upper Blue Nile basin, Ethiopia, Agricultural Scinences, Vol.2, No.3, 238-247.
7- Ghamarnia H., Jafari Zadeh M., Miri E., and Eghbal Ghobadi E. 2002. Coriandrum sativum L. crop coefficient determination in a semi-arid climate. Journal of Water and Irrigation Management. 1(2): 73-83. (in Persian with English abstract).
8- Hashemi Garmdarrei. S. E., Mostafa Zadeh B., and Heidarpour M. 1996. Investigating methods of Estimating crop evapotranspiration in Isfahan. 2th Conference on Water Resources Management. Isfahan, Iran. (in Persian)
9- Kashyap P.S., and Panda R.K. 2001. Evaluation of evapotranspiration estimation methods and development of crop coefficients for potato crop in a sub-humid region. Agricultural water management. 50: 9-25.
10- Katerji N., Mastrorilli M., and Lahmar F. 2011. Fao-56 methodology for the stress coefficient evaluation under sline environment condition, validation on potato & board bean crops. Agriculture water management. 98: 588-596.
11- Mirzaei M. 1997. Determination of evapotranspiration under real conditions for maize and sugar beet in Qazvin and comparison with FAO. College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Tehran University. Master thesis. (in Persian with English abstract).
12- Panahi M., Aghdaee M., and Rezaee M. 1997. Determination of sugar beet standard evapotranspiration by lysimeter method in Kabotar-Abad, Esfahan. Sugar beet Journal, 22 (1): 25-37. (in Persian)
13- Rahimzadegan R. 1991. Determination of an appropriate estimating method of evapotranspiration in Isfahan. Iranian Journal of Agriculture Sciences, Volume 22 (1, 2): 1-10. (in Persian with English abstract).
14- Razzaghi F., Plauborg F., Jacobsen S.E., and Richardt Jensen Ch. 2012. Effect of nitrogen and water availability of three soil types on yield, radiation use efficiency and evapotranspiration in field-grown quinoa. Agricultural Water Management 109: 20– 29
15- Zhong Y., and Shangguan Zh. 2014. Water Consumption Characteristics and Water Use Efficiency of Winter Wheat under Long-Term Nitrogen Fertilization Regimes in Northwest China. PLoS ONE 9(6): e98850. doi:10.1371/journal. pone. 0098850.
16- Zhang X., Chen S., Sun H., Shao L., and Whang Y. 2011. Change of evapotranspiration over irrigated winter wheat and maize in north china plain over treedecades.Agriculture water management. 98: 1097-1104.
CAPTCHA Image