4.7 Article

Influence of different irrigation regimes on crop yield and water use efficiency of olive

Journal

PLANT AND SOIL
Volume 333, Issue 1-2, Pages 35-47

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11104-010-0294-5

Keywords

Olive; Irrigation; Growth; Evapotranspiration; Yield; Water use eficiency

Funding

  1. Ministerio da Agricultura (Portugal) [AGRO 175]
  2. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia do Ministerio da Ciencia, Tecnologia e do Ensino Superior (Portugal)
  3. Consejeria de Innovacion, Junta de Andalucia (Spain) [AGR 595]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A field experiment with 2,200 m(2) was performed from 2004 to 2006, in northeast Portugal, to evaluate the response of a commercial olive (Olea europaea L. cv. Cobran double dagger osa) orchard to different irrigation regimes on growth and yield. The trees were subjected to three irrigation treatments: rainfed conditions (T0), irrigation with 30% (T1) and 100% (T2) of crop evapotranspiration (ETc). Seasonal dynamics of stomatal conductance (g(s)) and shoot water potential varied among treatments, and responded to soil water content and atmospheric evaporative demand. Irrigation increases g(s), in association with increases in water status. Annual ETc varied from around 300 mm in T0 to 700 mm in T2. Irrigation increased fruit yield, due to the greater number of fruits per tree and higher mass per fruit. Differences in oil yield among treatments were closely related to fruit yield. Moreover, oil accumulation in the fruit was delayed in rainfed conditions. Variations in fruit and oil yield was strongly influenced by variations in ETc. On average, the amount of oil produced per unit intercepted PAR increased with irrigation and for both irrigated treatments was more than double those of T0. A strategy of continuous deficit irrigation with only 30% of maximum ETc may have a very beneficial effect, since it allows increasing oil yield to more than double that of rainfed conditions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available