REDUCING SURFACE IRRIGATION WATER LOSSES IN THE NILE DELTA

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Prof. of Ag. Eng., Ag. Eng. Dept., Fac. of Ag., Mansoura Univ., Egypt.

2 Assist. Prof., of Ag. Eng., Ag. Eng. Dept., Fac. of Ag., Mansoura Univ., Egypt.

3 Sen. Res., Water Management Res. Inst., National Water Res. Center, Egypt.

4 Agricultural Engineer

Abstract

Due to the serious water shortages the saving of irrigation water is very important, particularly in countries with limited water like as Egypt. A field experiment was conduct during the summer season of 2012 at El-Karada Water Research Station, Water Management and Irrigation Systems Research Institute, Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt. This research aims to study the effect of new method of mulching on water saving and yield of maize. Four treatments were tested : no mulch (control) (A); straw mulch (B); 30 % plastic mulch (C), and 60 % plastic mulch (D). Mulching was performed with  30 and 60 % furrows preimeter, along 50 % furrows length. Applied irrigation water (AIW), water advance time (WAT), soil moisture content (SMC), water use efficiency (WUE), application water efficiency (Ea), ground water level (GWL), and grain yield (GY) were computed.
Results showed that both treatments D and C decreased AIW  about of 24.65 % and 21.65 %, while straw mulch treatment increased AIW about of 3.37 % compared with control treatment. Both treatments of C and D reduced  (WAT) with 20.9 and 21.3 %, while treament of B increased it with 19.1 % compared with control treatment. Plastic mulch had siginficantly effect on SMC which the minimum values were recorded under treatments of D and C, respectively. On the other hand, highest values of SMC were obtained under straw mulch treatment. It was observed that WUE had the highest value under treatments C and D, respectively. While, the lowest value was obtained under straw mulch treatment. Application water efficiency  invistegated the highest values under treatment of C and B, respectively. But, it had the lowest values under control treatment. Results of GWL indicated that the highest values were obtained under treatments D, A, B and C, respectively. Mulching affected grain yield non-significantly, but the highest grain production was observed in treatment of C (3034.2 Kg/fed.), and minimum in treatment of B (2401.1Kg/fed.). It was concluded that plastic mulch is the best method to save water under surface irrigation system. 

Main Subjects


Awan, Q.A. and A. Ali. 1988. Irrigation efficiencies in the farm irrigation system: Water as a constraint. Univ. of Agric. Faisalabad.
Baumhardt R.L., and O. R. Jones. 2002.  Residue  management  and  tillage effects  on  soil-water  storage  and  grain  yield  of  dryland  wheat  and sorghum for a clay loam in Texas. Soil Till. Res. 68: 71-82.
Brouwer, C., K. Prins, and M. Heibloem. 1989. Irrigation Scheduling. FAO Irrigation Water Management, Training manual no.4.
Chen, L., and Q. Feng .2013. Soil water and salt distribution under furrow irrigation of saline water with plastic mulch on ridge. J Arid Land 5(1): 60− 70.
Deng, Xi-p., Shan, L., Zhang, H., and Turner, N.S., 2006. Improving agricultural water use efficiency in arid and semiarid areas of china. Agricultural Water Management 80, 23-40.
Donahue, R.L., R.W. Miller and J.C. Shickluna 1977. Soils:  an  introduction  to  soils  and  plant  growth. Prentice. Hall. Inc. Englewood Cliffs. New Jeresy 07632 4th edition pp. 383-393.
Eid, S.A. (1998). Surge  flow  irrigation  for corn and wheat  under different  land leveling  practices  in  heavy  clay  soils.  Ph.  D.  Thesis  Soil  Sc.  Dept., Fac. of Ag. Kafr El-Sheikh, Tanta Uni., Egypt.
García-Orenes, F., Cerdà. A., Mataix-Solera, J., Guerrero, C., Bodí, M.B., Arcenegui, V., Zornoza, R., and Sempere, J.G., 2009. Effects agricultural management on surface soil properties and soil-water losses in eastern Spain. Soil & Tillage Research 106: 117-123.
Jensen, M.C. 1983. "Organization Theory and Methodology." Accounting Re- view 50 (April 1983).
Ji, S., Unger, P.W. 2001. Soil water accumulation under different precipitation, potential evaporation, and straw mulch conditions. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65, 442- 448.
Jones, H.G. 1990. Plant water relations and implications for irrigation scheduling. Acta Horticulturae. 278: 67-76.
Mao, Z. 1996. Enviromental impact of water-saving irrigation for rice. In : Irrigation scheduling: From theory of practice. Proc. ICID/FAO workshop. Rome.
Minsitry of Water Resources and Irrigation, 2005. Integrated Water Resources Management plan. Page 9.
Puustinen, M., Koskiaho, J., and Peltonen, K., 2005. Influence of cultivation methods on suspended solids and phosphorus concentrations in surface runoff on clayey sloped fields in boreal climate. Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment 105, 565– 579.
Rathore, A.L., A.R. Pal and K.K. Sahu, 1998. Tillage and mulching effects on water use, root growth and yield of rainfed mustard and chickpea grown after lowland rice.  J. Sci. Food Agric ., 78: 149–161.
Soares, A. A.; R. A. Oliveira; M. M. Ramos; A. Rasch and J. H. T. D-Avila (2000). Cutting-back furrow irrigation design - a new methodology. 20 (2): 119-129.
Swelam, A., and Y. Atta. 2009. New approach of farm management under surface irrigation to improve water saving and productivity. New Horizons in Science & Technology (NHS&T), 1(3):76 -83.
Trout, T.J., and  B.E. Mackey. 1988. Furrow inflow and infiltration variability.Trans. ASAE, 31(2), 531-537.
Wolters, W. and G.K. Berisavljevic. 1991. Patterns and trends in field application efficiency. Int’l Commission on Irrig. and Drainage Bulletin. 40(2): 11-26.
Zhang, D.Q., Y.C. Liao, and Z.K. Jia. 2005. Research advances and prospects of  film  mulching  in  arid  and  semi-arid  areas.  Agric.  Res. Arid Areas, 23(1): 208-213(in chinese with English abstract).
Zhang SL, Lövdahl  L, Grip H, Tong YA, Yang XY, and Wang QJ (2009). Effects of  mulching  and  catch  cropping  on  soil  temperature,  soil moisture  and  wheat  yield  on  the  Loess  Plateau  of  China.  Soil  Till. Res., 102: 78-86.