4.7 Article

Water relations and yield of lysimeter-grown strawberries under limited irrigation

期刊

SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE
卷 111, 期 2, 页码 128-132

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2006.10.006

关键词

Fragaria x ananassa Duch.; deficit irrigation; irrigation water use efficiency; partial root-zone drying

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of partial root-zone drying (PRD), as compared to deficit irrigation (DI) and full irrigation (FI), on strawberry (cv. Honeoye) berry yield, yield components and irrigation water use efficiency (WUEI) were investigated in a field lysimeter under an automatic rain-out shelter. The irrigation treatments were imposed from the beginning of flowering to the end of fruit maturity. In FI the whole root zone was irrigated every second day to field capacity viz. volumetric soil water content (theta) of 20%; while in DI and PRD 60% water of FI was irrigated to either the whole or one-half of the root system, respectively, at each irrigation event. In PRD, irrigation was shifted from one side to the other side of the plants when theta of the drying side had decreased to 8-11%. Compared to FI plants, leaf water potential was significantly lower in DI and PRD plants in 3 out of 10 measurement occasions, while stomatal conductance was similar among the three treatments. Leaf area, fresh berry yield (FY), individual berry fresh weight, berry water content, and berry dry weight (DW) were significantly lower in DI and PRD plants than those of FI plants; whereas the total number of berry per plant was similar among treatments. Compared with FI, the DI and PRD treatments saved 40% of irrigation water, and this led to a 28 and 50% increase of WUEI based on berry FY and DW, respectively, for both DI and PRD. Conclusively, under the conditions of this study PRD had no advantage compared to DI in terms of berry yield and WUEI. DI and PRD similarly decreased berry yield and yield components and thus cannot be recommended under similar conditions. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据