4.7 Article

Regulated deficit irrigation during the kernel-filling period and optimal irrigation rates in almond

期刊

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT
卷 75, 期 2, 页码 152-167

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2004.12.008

关键词

RDI; kernel growth; Prunus amygdalus; soil water content; cumulative effects

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of Regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) in almond, applied during the kernel-filling phase, was evaluated over four consecutive years. To determine the reference optimal irrigation rate, three treatments were applied: T-100, which was irrigated by replacing crop evapotranspiration; T-130, which was irrigated by applying 30% more water than in T-100 and T-70, which received 30% less water than T-100. The RDI treatment received the same irrigation rate as T-100, but during the kernel-filling period irrigation was reduced to 20% of T-100. The optimum yield response was observed in treatment T-100, while T-130 trees never improved on T-100 kernel production over the 4 years of the study. During the first two experimental years, kernel dry matter accumulation did not decrease with drought in the RDI treatment. However, both cropping and kernel growth were reduced during the third and fourth years of the experiment. A possible explanation for this decrease could be found in a hypothetical depletion of the carbohydrate reservoir in RDI trees and also to the negative soil water balance that was evident in the T-70 and RDI treatments during winter and spring of the last 2 years. Although yield reductions for RDI trees were significant (20% with respect to T-100), the water savings obtained (about 60% of that applied with respect to T-100), may help to promote the adoption of RDI in areas, where water availability has been reduced. Bearing in mind the water conservation aspect in almond, RDI, as applied in this case, seemed more interesting than a seasonal sustained deficit irrigation strategy like T-70. (c) 2005 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