Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Academic member of Agricultural Engineering Research Department, Khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Mashhad, Iran.

2 Professor, Water Engineering Department, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction
Various studies have investigated the response of crops and pasture plants to water for non-saline waters and their reaction to salinity in full irrigation. A set of such studies can determine water-yield or salinity-yield relationships. However, quantitative research has been done to study the effects of salinity and drought stress. However, we are proposing perpendicular system as a new alternative to learn wheat yield under simultaneous water and salinity stresses.

Materials and Methods
Response of grain and straw of wheat, Back Cross Roshan 6611 cultivar, to combined effects of quantity and quality of water was traced under crossed sprinkler line source irrigation. The field area was 3232 m2 which was located in the west of Birjand city in southeast of Iran. The soil was sandy loam (=1.41 gr/cm3) and two different sources of water, normal (EC=1.5 dS/m) and saline (EC=5.5 dS/m) were adopted for two line sources, respectively. Crops located in the center of the field, were fully irrigated without any stress. While the other crops far beyond irrigation lines, were under water stress. Water salinity was differ among different points of the field and varied between 1.5 and 5.5 dS/m, based on the quantity of water received. After each irrigation procedure, the volume and salinity of water collected in 256 cans, which were placed in 2'2 square meters, were measured. At the end of the growing season, one square meter around the cans was taken to measure yield and yield components. General form of yield function for different salinities and irrigation water is Y=f (AW, EC) in which Y is the wheat yield in kg/hectare, AW is irrigation water depth during growth period in cm and EC is mean salinity of irrigation water in dS/m. Five types of production function (Linear, Cobb-Douglas, Quadratic, Laty-Dinar, and Transcendental) were evaluated using field data. Slide Write software was used for calculating R2, F-statistics, t-statistics and constant parameters of the equations. All statistics were tested at significant levels of 1% and 5%. The best function was selected based on goodness of fit and significance of factors.


Results and Discussion
The results showed that yield prediction of wheat and straw was better than other functions under the influence of combined conditions of drought and salinity with Cobb Douglas function. Datta et al. used second polynomial non-linear function among three linear, power and Second polynomial functions. Rosso and Baker concluded that Second polynomial function estimates the relationship between yield, salinity and water better than Maximum and Hoffman function. Kiani used transducer function for result analysis. The marginal rate of technical substitution indicated that each one of the factors can be substituted for the other one for a wide range in order to achieve equal amount of yield (grain/straw). These results are consistent with results of Rosso and Baker, Dota et al. and Letti and Dinar. Also, the results showed that in lower performances, the effect of water content on reduction of crop was higher than that of salinity.

Conclusions
1-Regarding this research, reduction of grain and straw weight due to the reduction of irrigation water and increase in water salinity follows Cobb-Douglass function and outperforms other functions in predicting changes of grain and straw weight due to the effect of changes in two abovementioned factors.
2-Results showed that changes in grain and straw weights are more sensitive to changes of irrigation water than water salinity.
3-Using substitution rate curve, it is possible to substitute salinity and water content in order to achieve same yield.


Keywords

Agnihotri, A.K., Kumghare, P.S., Rao, K.V.G.K., Sharm, D.P., 1992. Econometric consideration for reuse of drainage in wheat production. Agricultural Water Management. 22, 249-270.
Aragues, S.R., Royo, A., Faci, J., 1992. Evaluation of triple line source sprinkler system for salinity crop production studies. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 56, 377-383.
Colmer, T.D., Flowers, T.J., Munns, R., 2006. Use of wild relative to improve salt tolerance in wheat. Experimental Botany. 57, 1059-1078.
Datta, K.K., Sharma, V.P., Sharm, D.P., 1998. Estimation of a production function for wgeat under saline conditions. Agricultural Water Management. 36, 85-94.
Dinar, R., Letey J,. Vaux, H.J.Jr., 1985. Optimal rates of saline and non- saline irrigation waters for crop production. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 50, 440-443.
Doorenbos, J., Kassam, A.H., 1979. Yield response to water. Irrigation and Drainage Paper 33. FAO, ROME.
Doorenbos, J., Pruitt, W.O., 1977. Guidelinws for prediction of field water use and crop yield. Pudoc. Wagenengen. 189p.
FAO. 2010. Extent and causes of salt-affected soils in participating countries. Available on URL: http://www.fao.org/ag/AGL/agll/spuch/topic4.htm.
FAO. 2013. http://www.fao.org
Faria, R.D., Olitta, A., 1987. Irrigation depth for wheat crops using a line source sprinkler system. Pesquisa-Agropecuaria-Brasileira. 22(9-10), 999-1008.
Frenkel, H., Mantell, A., Vinten, A., Meiri, A., 1990. Double line–source sprinkler system for determining the separate and interactive effects of water and salinity on forage corn. Irrigation Science. 11, 227-231.
Gupta, N.K., Gupta. S., 2005. Plant Physiology. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. 256p.
Hang, A., Miller, D., 1983. Wheat development as affected by deficit, high frequency sprinkler irrigation. Agronomy Journal. 75(2), 234-239.
Hanks, R.J., Keller, J. Rasmussen, V.P., and Wilson, G.D., 1976. line source sprinkler for continuous variable irrigation- crop – production studies. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 40, 426-429.
Hexem, R.Q., Heady, E.O., 1978. Water production funection and irrigated agriculture. Iowa State University Press, Amesterdam.
Jensen, C.R., 1982. Effect of soil water osmotic potential on growth and water relationship of barely during soil water depletion. Irrigation Science. 3, 11-121.
Kachel, K., Roth, D., 1984. Results of trials over many years of the effect of sprinkler irrigation on winter wheat and spring barley yield on a shalliw clay-chernoxem soil. Archiv - fur - Acker- und - Pflanzenbau - und-Bodenkunde. 28, 1, 35-45.
Kiani, A.R., Mirlatifi, M., Homaee, M., Cheraghi, A.M., 2004. Effects of different regimes of irrigation and salinity on wheat in Gorgan region. Agricultural Science and Natural Resources. 11(1), 79-89 [In Persian with English Summary]
Komatsua, S., Shirasakab, N., Sakatab, K., 2013. ‘Omics’ techniques for identifying flooding– response mechanisms in soybean. Journal of Proteomics. 93, 169-178.
Lauer, D.A., 1983. Line–source sprinkler systems for experimentation with sprinkler-applied nitrogen fertilizers. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 47: 124-128.
Letey, J., Dinar, A., 1986. Simulated crop productions for several crops when irrigated with saline waters. Hilgardia. 54, 1-32.
Letey, J., Dinar, A., Knapp, K.C., 1985. Crop-water production model for saline irrigation waters. Soil Science Society American Journal. 49, 1005-1009.
Maas, E.V., 1986. Salt tolerance of plants. Application Agricultural Research. 1, 12-26.
Maas, E.V., 1990. Crop Salt Tolerance. ASAE. Monograph. 71. pp 262-304.
Maas, E.V., Hoffman, G.J., 1977. Crop Salt Tolerance: Current Sssessment. Irrigation and Drainage Divitsion, ASCE, 103(IR2), 115-134.
Meiri, A., Shalhevet, J., 1973. Pepper plant response to irrigation water quality and timing and leaching. Ecological Studies. Vol IV. Springer-Verlag. Berlin. Pp. 421-429.
Munns, R. James, R.A., 2003. Screening methods for salinity tolerance: a case study with tetraploid wheat, Plant and Soil. 253, 201-218.
Parra, M.A., Romero, G.C., 1980. On thedependence of salt tolerance of beans on soil water matric potential. Plant and Soil. 56, 3-16.
Rao, G.D., 1991. Line source vs.Irrigated - Nonirrigatedtreatments for Evaluation of Genotype Drought Response. Agronomy Journal. 82 (4), 841-844.
Rivest, D., Lorente, M., Olivier, A., Messier, Ch., 2013. Soil biochemical properties and microbial resilience in agroforestry systems: Effects on wheat growth under controlled drought and flooding conditions. Science of the Total Environment. 463-464, 51–60.
Russo, D., Bakker, D., 1986. Crop water production tunctions for sweet corn and cotton irrigated with saline waters. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 51, 1554-1562.
Sammis, T.W., Smeal, D., 1983. The Effects of Decreased Watering on Wheat and Barley Yields, WRRI Report. No.179 January 1983.72 p.
Schneider, A.D., Howell, T.A., 1999. LEPA and spray irrigation for Grain crops. Irrigation and Drainage Engineering. 125(4), 167-172.
Sepaskhah, A.R., Boersma, L., 1979. Shoot and root growth expwsed to several levels of matric potential and NACL induced osmotic potential of soil water. Agronomy Journal. 71, 746-752.
Stewart, J.I., Danielson, R.E., Hank, R.J., Jackson, E.B., Hagan, R.M., Pruitt, W.O., Jranklinand, W.T., Riley, J.P., 1977. Optimizing crop production through control of water and salinity lecels in the soil. Utah water Lab. PRWG 151-1. Logan. Utah.
Van Genuchten, M.Th., 1983. Analyzing crop salt tolerance data: model description and user’ manuao. Research report No. 120, U. S. Salinity Lab. Reerside. C.A.
 
 
Vaux, H.J.Jr., and Pruitt, W.V., 1983. Crop-water production functuins. In: Hillel, D. (ed.), Advances in Irrigation, Vol. 2, Academic Press, Inc., Mew, NY.
Yildirim, E., Taylor, A.G., Spittler, T.D., 2006. Ameliorative effects of biological treatments on growth of squash plants under salt stress. Scientia Horticulture. 111, 1–6.
Zolfagharan, A., 2005. Investigation the effects of applied water at different salinities on grain yield in sprinkler irrigation. Final Report of a Research Project in Agricultural Research and Education Division, Agricultural Engineering Research Institute. 84.1. [In Persian].