2014
DOI: 10.1007/s00271-014-0436-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance of different filter combinations with surface and subsurface drip irrigation systems for utilizing municipal wastewater

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
17
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
17
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Yavuz et al . () also observed more pronounced emission uniformity reduction in surface placed laterals due to their exposure to higher temperatures in comparison with subsurface placed laterals, which achieved the best system performance in terms of emission uniformity and flow rate reduction (Tripathi et al ., ). Kirnak et al .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Yavuz et al . () also observed more pronounced emission uniformity reduction in surface placed laterals due to their exposure to higher temperatures in comparison with subsurface placed laterals, which achieved the best system performance in terms of emission uniformity and flow rate reduction (Tripathi et al ., ). Kirnak et al .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Lower flow rate in surface placed laterals may also cause less soil volume wetting. Yavuz et al (2010) also observed more pronounced emission uniformity reduction in surface placed laterals due to their exposure to higher temperatures in comparison with subsurface placed laterals, which achieved the best system performance in terms of emission uniformity and flow rate reduction (Tripathi et al, 2014). Kirnak et al (2002) also reported that water stress resulted in reduction of fresh fruit yield and fruit size in eggplants.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…El filtro con medio poroso mostró una reducción de turbidez (26.29%) significativamente mayor (P<0.05) que las conseguidas por el filtro de cúpulas insertadas (18.53%) y el de brazos colectores (13.45%). Las menores reducciones de turbidez obtenidas con respecto estudios anteriores [7,18,21,22] podrían ser explicadas por los bajos niveles de turbidez del agua de entrada utilizada en el presente ensayo, y por la altura de lecho filtrante fijada en 0.30 m, ya que estaba limitada por el filtro de brazos colectores, cuya altura máxima era de 0.40 m.…”
Section: Evaluación De Los Filtrosunclassified