4.7 Article

Effects of furrow irrigation methods, mulching and soil water suction on the growth, yield and water use efficiency of tomato in the Nigerian Savanna

Journal

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT
Volume 45, Issue 3, Pages 317-330

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-3774(99)00104-3

Keywords

alternate; conventional; conventional with cutback; furrow irrigation method; soil water suction; fruit yield; water-use efficiency

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A field experiment was conducted during the dry season of 1993/1994 at the Irrigation Research Farm, Institute for Agricultural Research, Samaru, Nigeria to evaluate water management options on the performance of tomato. The trial involved three furrow irrigation methods (conventional furrow, conventional furrow with cutback, and alternate furrow), two mulch treatments (without mulch and straw mulch), and three irrigation schedules (5-day interval, irrigation at 30 and 60 kPa soil moisture suction). The 18 treatments were laid out in a split-plot design in three replications. The irrigation method was assigned to the main plot while the mulch and irrigation schedule were in the subplots. Days to 50% flowering and fruiting of tomato were unaffected by furrow irrigation methods. But, the applications of mulch and irrigation at the specified suction levels have had influence on growth of tomato. The rice straw mulch on furrows significantly delayed the attainment of 50% fruiting by 6 days compared to the un-mulched plots. Fruit sizes at the ages of 17, 19 and 21 weeks after planting, marketable fruit yield, crop water use and water use efficiency were significantly affected by all the three factors. Fruit weight was affected only by soil water suction. The interaction of furrow irrigation method, mulch and soil water suction had significant effect on water use efficiency (WUE) of the crop. Use of alternate furrow method was statistically at par, in terms of WUE with the conventional furrow method if it was mulched and irrigated at 5-days interval. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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