Sprinkler and Furrow Irrigation Trends  Texas High Plains

Abstract. Greater than 80% of the irrigated area in the Southern High Plains is served by center-pivot irrigation, but the area served by subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) is increasing due to several factors including declining well yields and improved yields and crop water productivity (CWP), particularly for cotton. Not as well established is the degree to which the reduced soil water evaporation (E) in SDI systems affects the soil water balance, water available to the crop, and overall water savings. Grain corn ( L.) and sorghum ( L. Moench) were grown on four large weighing lysimeters at Bushland, Texas, in 2013 (corn), 2014 and 2015 (sorghum), and 2016 (corn). Evapotranspiration (ET) was measured using the lysimeters and using a neutron probe in the surrounding fields. Two of the lysimeters and surrounding fields were irrigated with SDI, and the other two were irrigated with mid-elevation spray application (MESA). The lysimeter-measured evaporative losses were 149 to 151 mm greater from sprinkler-irrigated corn fields than from SDI fields. When growing sorghum, the lysimeter-measured evaporative losses were 44 to 71 mm greater from sprinkler-irrigated fields than from SDI fields. The differences were affected by plant height and became smaller when plant height reached the height of the spray nozzles, indicating that the use of LEPA or LESA nozzles could decrease the evaporative losses from sprinkler-irrigated fields in this region with its high evaporative demand. Annual weather patterns also influenced the differences in evaporative loss, with increased differences in dry years. SDI reduced overall corn water use by 13% to 15%, as determined by neutron probe, while either not significantly affecting yield (2016) or increasing yield by up to 19% (2013) and increasing CWP by 37% (2013) to 13% (2016) as compared with MESA full irrigation. However, sorghum yield decreased by 15% and CWP decreased by 14% in 2014 when using SDI compared with MESA full irrigation due to an overly wet soil profile in the SDI fields and deep percolation that likely caused nutrient losses. In 2015, there were no significant sorghum yield differences between irrigation methods. Sorghum CWP was significantly greater (by 14%) in one SDI field in 2015 compared with MESA fully irrigated sorghum. Overall, sorghum CWP increased by 8% for SDI compared with MESA full irrigation in 2015. These results indicate that SDI will be successful for corn production in the Texas High Plains, but SDI is unlikely to benefit sorghum production. Keywords: Corn, Crop water productivity, Evaporative loss, Evapotranspiration, Irrigation application method, Sorghum, Water use efficiency, Weighing lysimeter.

Section: Site Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corn and Sorghum ET, E, Yield, and CWP as Affected by Irrigation Application Method: SDI versus Mid-Elevation Spray Irrigation

Evett¹,

Marek²,

Colaizzi³

et al. 2019

“…Water accessible from this aquifer prompted an agricultural revolution in the area and aided in building the economy (Allen et al, 2008). However, groundwater withdrawal for irrigation has outpaced natural recharge, resulting in a rapid depletion of the groundwater levels and increases in groundwater pumping cost (Musick et al 1988;Torell et al, 1990;Colaizzi et al, 2009;Scanlon et al, 2012;Ale, 2014a, 2014b). To ensure certain desirable future conditions, the Groundwater Conservation Districts in the THP region have started imposing restrictions on the amount of groundwater that non-exempt wells, including irrigation wells, are authorized to produce from the Ogallala Aquifer during each calendar year (HPWD, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Determining Optimum Irrigation Termination Periods for Cotton Production in the Texas High Plains

Ale¹,

Omani²,

Himanshu³

et al. 2020

HighlightsIrrigation water use efficiency was consistently higher under deficit irrigation as compared to full irrigation.Irrigation water use was always less than the annual allowable pumping limit under deficit irrigation.The first/second week of September was ideal for terminating irrigation under full/deficit irrigation in normal years.Ideal irrigation termination periods in wet/dry years were a week earlier/later than those in normal years.Abstract. Cotton ( L.) production in the Texas High Plains (THP) region relies heavily on irrigation with groundwater from the underlying Ogallala Aquifer. However, rapidly declining groundwater levels in the aquifer and increasing pumping costs pose challenges for sustainability of irrigated cotton production in this region. Adoption of efficient irrigation strategies, such as terminating irrigation at an appropriate time in the growing season, could enable producers to increase irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) while maintaining desired yield goals. The objective of this study was to determine optimum irrigation termination periods for cotton production in the THP under full and deficit irrigation conditions using the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) CROPGRO-Cotton model, which was evaluated in a prior study in the THP using measured data from an IWUE field experiment at Halfway, Texas. The treatment factors in the field experiment included irrigation capacities of 0 mm d-1 (low, L), 3.2 mm d-1 (medium, M), and 6.4 mm d-1 (high, H), applied during the vegetative, reproductive, and maturation growth stages. This study focused on a full irrigation (HHH) treatment and three deficit irrigation (LMH, LHM, and LMM) treatments. Eight irrigation termination dates with a one-week interval between 15 August and 30 September were simulated, and the impact of irrigation termination date on cotton IWUE and seed cotton yield were studied by dividing the 39-year (1978 to 2016) simulation period into dry, normal, and wet years based on the precipitation received from 1 April to the simulated irrigation termination date. Results indicated that the simulated IWUE was consistently higher under the LHM, LMH, and LMM treatments when compared to the HHH treatment. Based on the simulated average seed cotton yield and IWUE, optimum irrigation termination periods for cotton were found to be the first week of September (about 118 days after planting, DAP) for the HHH and LMH treatments and the second week of September (125 DAP) for the LHM and LMM treatments in normal years. In wet years, optimum irrigation termination periods were a week earlier than those in normal years and a week later in dry years for the HHH, LHM, and LMM treatments. For the LMH treatment, the optimum irrigation termination period in wet years was the same as that in normal years and two weeks later in dry years. The results from this study along with field-specific, late-season information will assist THP cotton producers in making appropriate irrigation termination decisions for improving economic productivity of the Ogallala Aquifer and thereby ensuring water security for agriculture. However, the recommendations from this study should be used with caution, as the optimum irrigation termination periods could potentially change with changes in cultivar characteristics, soil type, climate, and, crop management practices. Keywords: CROPGRO-Cotton, Deficit irrigation, DSSAT, Full irrigation, Irrigation water use efficiency, Seed cotton yield.

“…By 1990, the percentage of sprinkler-irrigated land had increased to 44% in the northern Texas Panhandle . Irrigation application efficiencies increased from the less than 60% achieved with gravity irrigation to >80% with impact sprinklers in the Texas Panhandle and elsewhere on the Great Plains (Musick et al, 1988). Lyle and Bordovsky (1983) demonstrated consistent application efficiencies of >95% with LEPA systems in furrow-diked fields.…”

Section: Irrigation Research Advances Efficiency and Productivitymentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Moving systems replaced solid set (stationary) systems so that, by 1984, 37% of the total irrigated area in the Texas High Plains was irrigated by moving systems (Musick and Walker, 1987). LEPA technology became more important by the end of the 1980s as the gravity-irrigated area continued to decline, particularly on more permeable soils (Musick et al, 1988). By 1990, the percentage of sprinkler-irrigated land had increased to 44% in the northern Texas Panhandle .…”

Section: Irrigation Research Advances Efficiency and Productivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Past, Present, and Future of Irrigation on the U.S. Great Plains

Evett¹,

Colaizzi²,

Lamm

et al. 2020

Highlights Irrigation is key to the productivity of Great Plains agriculture but is threatened by water scarcity. The irrigated area grew to >9 million ha since 1870, mostly since 1950, but is likely to decline. Changes in climate, water availability, irrigated area, and policy will affect productivity. Adaptation and innovation, hallmarks of Great Plains populations, will ensure future success. Abstract. Motivated by the need for sustainable water management and technology for next-generation crop production, the future of irrigation on the U.S. Great Plains was examined through the lenses of past changes in water supply, historical changes in irrigated area, and innovations in irrigation technology, management, and agronomy. We analyzed the history of irrigated agriculture through the 1900s to the present day. We focused particularly on the efficiency and water productivity of irrigation systems (application efficiency, crop water productivity, and irrigation water use productivity) as a connection between water resource management and agricultural production. Technology innovations have greatly increased the efficiency of water application, the productivity of water use, and the agricultural productivity of the Great Plains. We also examined the changes in water stored in the High Plains aquifer, which is the region’s principle supply for irrigation water. Relative to other states, the aquifer has been less impacted in Nebraska, despite large increases in irrigated area. Greatly increased irrigation efficiency has played a role in this, but so have regulations and the recharge to the aquifer from the Nebraska Sand Hills and from rivers crossing the state. The outlook for irrigation is less positive in western Kansas, eastern Colorado, and the Oklahoma and Texas Panhandles. The aquifer in these regions is recharged at rates much less than current pumping, and the aquifer is declining as a result. Improvements in irrigation technology and management plus changes in crops grown have made irrigation ever more efficient and allowed irrigation to continue. There is good reason to expect that future research and development efforts by federal and state researchers, extension specialists, and industry, often in concert, will continue to improve the efficiency and productivity of irrigated agriculture. Public policy changes will also play a role in regulating consumption and motivating on-farm efficiency improvements. Water supplies, while finite, will be stretched much further than projected by some who look only at past rates of consumption. Thus, irrigation will continue to be important economically for an extended period. Sustaining irrigation is crucial to sustained productivity of the Great Plains “bread basket” because on average irrigation doubles the efficiency with which water is turned into crop yields compared with what can be attained in this region with precipitation alone. Lessons learned from the Great Plains are relevant to irrigation in semi-arid and subhumid areas worldwide. Keywords: Center pivot, Crop water productivity, History, Sprinkler irrigation, Subsurface drip irrigation, Water use efficiency.