Microclimatic and crop responses to center pivot sprinkler and to surface irrigation

Steiner, Jean L.; Kanemasu, E. T.; Hasza, David P.

doi:10.1007/bf00285526

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The microclimatic changes (reduction of air temperature and VPD) during and after sprinkler irrigation recorded in this work were similar to previous reports (Thompson et al, 1993; Tolk et al, 1995; Saadia et al, 1996; Cavero et al, 2009), and induced plant physiological responses such as the decrease in canopy temperature (Steiner et al, 1983; Tolk et al, 1995; Saadia et al, 1996; Liu and Kang, 2006a,b; Cavero et al, 2009). The decrease in canopy temperature of maize found in our study was similar to that found by Tolk et al (1995) using a lateral‐move sprinkler irrigation system and by Cavero et al (2009) using a solid‐set sprinkler irrigation system.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…A relevant physiological change during sprinkler irrigation is the reduction in crop transpiration (McNaughton, 1981; Tolk et al, 1995; Martínez‐Cob et al, 2008), which is considered positive because it represents a reduction of wind drift and evaporation losses (WDEL) (Martínez‐Cob et al, 2008). Another major physiological change during sprinkler irrigation is the decrease in crop canopy temperature (Steiner et al, 1983; Tolk et al, 1995; Saadia et al, 1996; Cavero et al, 2009), which could have a positive effect on photosynthesis when leaf temperatures are too high (Mahan et al, 1995; Wanjura and Upchurch, 2000); for instance, during the afternoon of summer months in semiarid climates. However, if leaf temperature decreases below an optimum value, photosynthesis could also decrease (Mahan et al, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Daytime Sprinkler Irrigation Effects on Net Photosynthesis of Maize and Alfalfa

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During sprinkler irrigation some water is lost due to drift and evaporation. After irrigation, plant-intercepted water is lost due to evaporation. The water loss causes microclimatic changes, which may involve positive or negative plant physiological responses. We studied the changes in net photosynthesis of maize (Zea mays L.) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) associated with irrigation with a solid-set sprinkler system. For each species, measurements were made simultaneously in two plots, one being irrigated and the other not being irrigated. Two automatic canopy chambers connected to two CO 2 infrared gas analyzers were used. Sprinkler irrigation decreased air temperature (1.5°C on maize, 1.7°C on alfalfa), air vapor pressure deficit (VPD) (0.44 kPa for both crops) and canopy temperature (5.1°C on maize, 5.9°C on alfalfa). Sprinkler irrigation decreased maize net photosynthesis on 80% of the days and the mean reduction was 19%. Sprinkler irrigation increased alfalfa net photosynthesis on 36% of days, decreased it on 14% of days, and had no effect on half of the days. The decrease of maize net photosynthesis during sprinkler irrigation was linked to the high leaf wettability (water contact angles from 60-80°) and the decrease in temperature below the optimum range for photosynthesis. The higher hydrophobicity of alfalfa leaves (water contact angles >120°) and the wide range of optimum temperature for alfalfa photosynthesis may be the reasons why photosynthesis remained unaffected by sprinkler irrigation. The results suggest that daytime sprinkler irrigation with solid-set should be avoided for maize but can be used for alfalfa.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Daytime Sprinkler Irrigation Effects on Net Photosynthesis of Maize and Alfalfa

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even though positive microclimatic changes (decrease of VPD and temperature) have been found with sprinkler irrigation during daytime (Robinson, 1970; Steiner et al, 1983b; Tolk et al, 1995; Saadia et al, 1996; Liu and Kang, 2006), our results indicate that these changes cannot compensate the negative effects caused by increased WDEL and reduced irrigation uniformity. In that regard, Martínez‐Cob et al (2008) working with maize, reported that consideration of the decrease in transpiration during daytime sprinkler irrigation as a contribution to crop water requirements only reduced the WDEL from 19 to 14% for a season.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

Maize Growth and Yield under Daytime and Nighttime Solid‐Set Sprinkler Irrigation

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nighttime sprinkler irrigation usually results in lower wind drift and evaporation losses (WDELs) and better irrigation uniformity compared with daytime irrigation. However, daytime sprinkler irrigation modifies the microclimatic conditions within the crop canopy which could result in improved crop growth. We studied the effect of daytime and nighttime irrigation on the growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) irrigated with a solid‐set sprinkler system. Two irrigation treatments were tested: daytime irrigation (starting at 1000 Greenwich Mean Time, GMT) and nighttime irrigation (starting at 2200 GMT). The same irrigation amount was applied in both treatments. The irrigation amount was determined as the difference between the crop evapotranspiration (ETc) and the effective precipitation. The WDELs of daytime irrigation were twice the nighttime irrigation WDELs. Daytime irrigation decreased the mean Christiansen coefficient of uniformity (CU) by 5 to 7% and the seasonal CU by 4%. Daytime irrigation caused a 10% reduction in maize grain yield, mostly due to a reduction in biomass production. The lower soil matric potential found with daytime irrigation late in the season indicated that a progressive water stress occurred that was due to less water availability and was caused by the higher WDEL for daytime irrigation. Even though positive microclimatic changes have been reported with daytime sprinkler irrigation, the results of our study indicate that they cannot compensate the negative effects caused for the crop by less water reaching the soil root zone because of increased WDEL and by poorer irrigation uniformity.

show abstract

“…The water lost causes microclimatic changes during the irrigation event: the temperature and VPD of the air decrease (Robinson, 1970; Thompson et al, 1993; Tolk et al, 1995). In addition, Steiner et al (1983b) in one of the two studied years, and Liu and Kang (2006) reported that these microclimatic changes lasted for several days after the irrigation event. The microclimatic changes can also affect areas downwind from the irrigated area (Kraus, 1966; Kohl and Wright, 1974; Longley et al, 1983).…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Sprinkler Irrigation Changes Maize Canopy Microclimate and Crop Water Status, Transpiration, and Temperature

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During a sprinkler irrigation event some water is lost due to wind drift and evaporation (WDEL). Aft er the irrigation event, plant-intercepted water is lost due to evaporation. Th e water lost causes microclimatic changes which could result in positive or negative plant physiological changes. We studied the microclimatic and physiological changes on two fi elds grown with maize (Zea mays L.) irrigated with a solid-set sprinkler system. Th e temperature and vapor pressure defi cit (VPD) of the air were measured at the crop canopy level and above and below the canopy. Changes in maize canopy temperature, transpiration, and leaf water potential (LWP) were determined. Sprinkler irrigation during daytime strongly modifi ed the microclimate where plants grow during the irrigation time and for a short period aft er the irrigation event fi nished. Daytime irrigation decreased air temperature by 3.3 to 4.4°C and VPD by 1.0 to 1.2 kPa at 0.5 m below the crop canopy height. Th e decrease was lower as the measurement height increased. Microclimatic changes during nighttime irrigation were minimal. Daytime irrigation reduced maize canopy temperature by 4 to 6°C and plant transpiration by 58%, and increased LWP from -1.2 and -1.4 MPa to -0.54 MPa. Transpiration reduction must be considered positive because it supposes a reduction of WDEL. Th e decrease in maize canopy temperature could be positive or negative, but the increase in LWP is a positive eff ect.

show abstract

Microclimatic and crop responses to center pivot sprinkler and to surface irrigation

Cited by 24 publications

References 10 publications

Daytime Sprinkler Irrigation Effects on Net Photosynthesis of Maize and Alfalfa

Daytime Sprinkler Irrigation Effects on Net Photosynthesis of Maize and Alfalfa

Maize Growth and Yield under Daytime and Nighttime Solid‐Set Sprinkler Irrigation

Sprinkler Irrigation Changes Maize Canopy Microclimate and Crop Water Status, Transpiration, and Temperature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About