Next Article in Journal
Ascorbic Acid Priming Enhances Seed Germination and Seedling Growth of Winter Wheat under Low Temperature Due to Late Sowing in Pakistan
Next Article in Special Issue
Potential and Actual Water Savings through Improved Irrigation Scheduling in Small-Scale Vegetable Production
Previous Article in Journal
Recovery of Wheat Heritage for Traditional Food: Genetic Variation for High Molecular Weight Glutenin Subunits in Neglected/Underutilized Wheat
Previous Article in Special Issue
Deficit Irrigation as a Sustainable Practice in Improving Irrigation Water Use Efficiency in Cauliflower under Mediterranean Conditions
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Lysimeter-Based Water Use and Crop Coefficient of Drip-Irrigated Potato in an Arid Environment

1
Prince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz International Prize for Water Chair, Prince Sultan Institute for Environmental, Water and Desert Research, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
2
Department of Agricultural Engineering, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2019, 9(11), 756; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9110756
Submission received: 3 August 2019 / Revised: 24 October 2019 / Accepted: 8 November 2019 / Published: 14 November 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Increasing Agricultural Water Productivity in a Changing Environment)

Abstract

:
The determination of the water requirements and crop coefficient (Kc) of agricultural crops helps to create an appropriate irrigation schedule, and with the effective management of irrigation water. The aim of this research was to estimate the water requirement, Kc, and water-use efficiency (WUE) of potato using non-weighing-type lysimeters in four regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern). Our results clearly show that the accumulated values of the measured crop evapotranspiration of potato derived from the lysimeters were 573, 554, 592, and 570 mm, while the accumulated values of the predicted crop evapotranspiration from Penman-Monteith equation based on FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) were 651, 632, 672, and 647 mm for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. The Kc values of potato obtained from the lysimeters were Kc initial (0.58, 0.54, 0.50, and 0.52), Kc middle (1.02, 1.05, 1.13, and 1.10), and Kc end (0.73, 0.74, 0.74, and 0.75) for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. Based on the amount of water used and the yield achieved, the highest WUE (3.6 kg m−3) was observed in the Riyadh region, while the lowest WUE (1.5 kg m−3) was observed in the Al-Jouf region.

1. Introduction

In agriculture, a precise estimate of both the crop evapotranspiration (ET) and reference evapotranspiration (ETo) is indispensable for determining crop water requirements, irrigation scheduling, irrigation system designs, and hydrological studies [1]. ET is defined as the sum of evaporation from soil and transpiration from plants [2].
Micrometeorological approaches, like the Eddy covariance and Bowen ratio techniques, have been widely used in recent times for indirectly measuring ET [3,4,5,6,7]. On the other hand, lysimeters are still the standard method for directly measuring ET [8].
Based on the available resources and necessity, lysimeters in different sizes and types are designed to study the water and solute transport [9], as well as ET rates [10,11,12,13]. The shapes of lysimeters are varied, including a rectangular shape [14,15,16,17,18], circular shape [19,20,21], and square shape [22,23]. Furthermore, researchers use another type of lysimeter with a small area of 0.006 m2, usually known as a microlysimeter, in order to measure the evaporation of soil water [24].
Another classification of lysimeters is dependent on how the soil is collected inside the lysimeters. In other words, lysimeters can be repacked, monolithic, or a combination of repacked and monolithic [25]. In repacked lysimeters, the soil within the lysimeter is disturbed soil that is repacked to imitate the features of the intact soil [19,21]. In monolithic lysimeters, the soil inside the lysimeter is intact soil [15,20,22,26].
Lysimeters can be weighing and non-weighing. Weighing lysimeters measure the crop ET directly by estimating the change in mass of an isolated soil volume [25]. The non-weighing lysimeters, on the other hand, measure the crop ET by estimating the soil water balance components, including water inputs (irrigation), water outputs (drainage), and changes in soil water storage [27].
Potato production (Solanum tuberosum L.) takes an imperative place in the world’s agriculture, with a global production of about 327 million t harvested, and an area of 18.6 million ha [28]. Potatoes are highly sensitive to moisture stress, as 85% of their root system is settled in the upper 0.30 m of the soil layer [29]. For potato irrigation, drip irrigation is one of the best methods for row crop production, because of its effect on minimizing the evaporation from soil water, reducing the leaching of fertilizers, and improving the yield [29,30].
Potatoes of 120 to 150 days consume 500 to 700 mm of irrigation water, depending on the climate [1]. For example, Kashyap and Panda [31] found that the average value of ET for potato was 509 mm in a sub-humid area of India under furrow irrigation conditions. On the other hand, under hot dry conditions and sprinkler irrigation system in northeastern Portugal, the water requirement for potato reached 569 mm [32]. Another example of dry areas, such as Wadi Sirhan, Al-Jouf (Saudi Arabia), Al-Rumkhani and Din [33] found that the water requirement for potato was 652 mm.
The crop coefficient, Kc, is the ratio of ET to ETo [1]. Kc represents the integration of the impacts of three basic characteristics that recognize the crop from the reference ETo. These characteristics are as follows: crop–soil surface resistance, crop height, and albedo of the crop–soil surface [1]. Several researchers have assigned different values of Kc for potato [34]. For example, Ferreira and Carr [32] showed that the seasonal Kc values of potato ranged from 0.50 to 0.85. The Kc values of potatoes based on the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) results during the initial stage, mid stage, and end stage are 0.50, 1.15, and 0.75, respectively [1].
Water-use efficiency (WUE) is another essential factor in irrigation systems and water management [35]. In most agricultural studies, the WUE is determined as the total production of the aboveground biomass per amount of water used [36]. An example of the importance of WUE in water management is what Pereira et al. [37] reported, where they developed a deficit irrigation strategy based on the economic indicators for WUE and productivity, which takes into account the full awareness of the crop water requirements. The goal of this work was, over a three-season period, (1) to estimate the irrigation requirements, Kc, and WUE of potato crop in four regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and (2) to assess the potential economic returns of potato production.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Descriptions of the Study Sites

The field experiments were carried out at (Qassiem University, Qassiem, Saudi Arabia), (Ministry of Agriculture, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia), (Alwatania Agricultural Company, Al-Jouf, Saudi Arabia), and (King Faisal University, Eastern, Saudi Arabia) regions. The geographical coordinates and locations of the four regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) are presented in Table 1. The average values of the annual rainfall in the KSA ranges between 80 and 140 mm, except for in the southwestern mountains [38]. The average values for the temperatures in the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions were 35, 36, 33, and 37 °C, respectively. The relative humidity was low, and the average values for the relative humidity were 12%, 13%, 17%, and 24% in the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. Other meteorological data for each area of the four regions are illustrated in Figure 1.

2.2. Lysimeters

Two non-weighing lysimeters were designed to grow alfalfa (Mcdicago sativa) and potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) in four regions of KSA (Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern; Figure 2). The lysimeters were used to obtain the measured crop evapotranspiration (METc), measured reference evapotranspiration (METr), and crop coefficient of potatoes. Lysimeters were filled with repacked soil, which imitates the features of the native soil. A 15-cm-thick layer of graded gravel was placed at the bottom of the lysimeters plots so as to facilitate the drainage process. An underground passageway was constructed to easily collect the drained water. The alfalfa and potato crops in both lysimeters were irrigated by sprinkler and drip irrigation systems, respectively, as were the crops in the surrounding areas, so as to avoid any potential discrepancies in the estimation process.

2.3. Prediction of the Reference Evapotranspiration

The lysimeters grown with alfalfa at the four regions were irrigated daily, with various amounts of water according to the reference evapotranspiration (ETo) acquired from a nearby weather station (Equation (1)). Similarly, the lysimeters cultivated with potatoes at the four regions were irrigated on a daily basis, according to the ETo values and FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) crop coefficients [1]. The amounts of irrigation and drainage water were measured after each irrigation event, where the lysimeters were fitted with suitable inlets for irrigation and outlets for drained water.
ET o = 0.408 Δ ( R n G ) + γ [ ( 900 U 2 ) T + 237 ] ( e s e a ) Δ + γ ( 1 + 0.34 U 2 )
where ETo is the daily reference crop evapotranspiration rate (mm/day), Rn is the net radiation at the canopy surface (MJ/m2/d), G is the soil heat flux at the soil surface (MJ/m2/d), T is the mean daily air temperature (°C), γ is the psychometric constant (kPa/°C), U2 is the mean daily wind speed at a height of 2.0 m (m/s), es is the mean saturation vapor pressure (kPa), ea is the mean actual vapor pressure (kPa), (es − ea) is the saturated vapor pressure deficit (kPa), and Δ is the slope of the saturated vapor pressure temperature curve (kPa/°C).

2.4. Crop Data

Alfalfa (Mcdicago sativa) and potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) were cultivated in the plots of the first and second lysimeters, respectively, at the four regions of KSA over a three-season period (2012 to 2015). The conditions surrounding the alfalfa plots were similar to the standard conditions (height of 0.12 m, surface resistance of 70 s m−1, and an albedo of 0.23) of the Penman-Monteith equation. Nutrients N, P, and K were delivered to potatoes at rates of 200, 200, and 150 kg/ha, respectively, in accordance with the recommendations set out by the Ministry of Agriculture. Pesticides were used whenever needed so as to control insects and pathogens. The fungicide Penncozeb 75 DG and Imidor 200SL (Astra Agricultural Co. Ltd., Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) were applied at a rate of 2.5 g/L and 0.5 mL/L, respectively, for all of the treatments at the four regions. The potatoes were planted on 15 March in the four regions, while 28 July was the date of harvesting in the four regions. The average yields of the potatoes for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions were 24.40 t ha−1, 26.97 t ha−1, 17.69 t ha−1, and 18.25 t ha−1, respectively.

2.5. Crop Coefficient

Kc is the ratio of the well-watered crop evapotranspiration and reference evapotranspiration (i.e., METc/METr) [1]. The Kc values reflect the relative water consumption capacity of a specific crop during the different growing stages. The Kc curve is divided into four stages—the initial, development, mid-season, and late season periods. Three values are required to generate the Kc curve, namely the Kc during the initial period (Kc ini), the Kc during the mid-season (Kc mid), and the Kc at the late season (Kc end).

2.6. Water-Use Efficiency

WUE is defined as the total production of the biomass aboveground per amount of water used [39], as follows:
WUE = i = 1 n [ ( y ) / ( wa ) ]
where WUE is the water-use efficiency (kg/m3), n is the number of plots with each irrigation strategy, y is the total yield (kg), and wa is the amount of seasonally applied water (m3).

2.7. Economic Analysis

The economic potential of the production of irrigated potatoes was investigated through the following two perspectives:
  • The estimated net return;
  • The return from water use.
The economic analysis included the water requirements (m3 ha−1), area productivities (t ha−1), water costs (US $ m−3), variable costs (US $ ha−1), market prices (US $ t−1), net return (US $ ha−1), economic return (US $ ha−1), and water return (US $ m−3).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. The Reference Evapotranspiration

Figure 3 shows the measured evapotranspiration of the alfalfa (METr) acquired from the lysimeters for the studied locations (Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern) of KSA. As can be seen from Figure 3, the values of METr were relatively low during the growth stage, then it increased gradually and peaked over the flowering stage. For example, the average values of METr, which were derived from the lysimeters, were 2.16, 2.10, 2.64, and 2.4 mm/day in the initial stage; 5.46, 5.10, 5.11, and 5.22 mm/day in the mid-season stage, and 5.28, 4.98, 4.87, and 4.85 mm/day in the late stage for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively.

3.2. The Crop Evapotranspiration

Figure 4 illustrates the measured crop evapotranspiration (METc) gained from the lysimeters on the one hand, and the predicted crop evapotranspiration (PETc) acquired from a nearby weather station for potato crop, on the other hand, in the four regions of KSA. The values of METc and PETc varied from a low of 1.92 and 1.95 mm/day in the Riyadh, respectively, during the germination stage, to a high of 12.1 and 15.2 mm/day in Al-Jouf region over the flowering stage. The average values of the METc for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions were 1.26, 1.14, 1.32, and 1.26 mm/day; 5.58, 5.40, 5.76, and 5.74 mm/day; and 3.90, 3.72, 3.60, and 3.66 mm/day in the initial stage, the mid-season stage, and the late season periods, respectively. Similarly, the values of PETc were 1.38, 1.26, 1.50, and 1.38 mm/day in the initial stage; 8.46, 8.40, 9, and 8.82 mm/day in the mid-season stage; and 4.56, 4.38, 4.20, and 4.26 mm/day in the late season stage for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. Overall, the measured values, METc, were somewhat close to the predicted values, PETc. However, the values of PETc were slightly higher than the values of METc. These results are in agreement with the literature [40,41].

3.3. Crop Coefficient of Potato

Figure 5 shows the Kc values of the potato crop obtained from lysimeters (i.e., METc and METr) at the four regions of KSA. The values measured from the lysimeters were Kc ini 0.58, 0.54, 0.50, and 0.52; Kc mid 1.02, 1.05, 1.13, and 1.10; and Kc end: 0.73, 0.74, 0.74, and 0.75 for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. It can be noted that the Kc values were relatively low at the initial stage, mainly because the evapotranspiration at this stage depended on the evaporation from the soil, as the crop had no ground cover. On the other hand, the highest values of Kc were found within the mid-season stage, as the evapotranspiration was significantly high. At the late stage period, the Kc values decreased steadily because of the maturity and senescence of the leaves. Compared to the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) results, the obtained Kc values were similar to what the FAO recommends [1].

3.4. Water-Use Efficiency (WUE)

Figure 6 shows the WUE, which represents the relationship between the crop yield and quantity of water used at the four regions of KSA. The spatial patterns of the WUE were generally consistent with those of the yield and evapotranspiration (i.e., a high-yield was accompanied by a high WUE, and vice versa). For example, the drip-irrigated treatments in the Riyadh and Qassiem regions produced a higher WUE in comparison with those treatments irrigated in the Eastern and Al-Jouf regions. In other words, the highest WUE (3.6 kg m−3) was observed in the Riyadh region, while the lowest WUE (1.5 kg m−3) was observed in the Al-Jouf region. This was mainly because of the climatic conditions and different soil characteristics in each region.

3.5. Economic Analysis

The economic analysis for the irrigated potatoes in the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions are given in Table 2. As is clear from Table 2, the economic potential of the irrigated potato production is greatest in the Riyadh region, followed, in descending order, by the Qassiem, Eastern, and Al-Jouf regions. Also, the maximum value of the average water return was observed in the Riyadh region, while the minimum average value was noted in the Al-Jouf region. Furthermore, the average net return values for the irrigated potatoes were estimated as 7426.90 US $ ha−1, 4601.30 US $ ha−1, 2202.70 US $ ha−1, and 865.30 US $ ha−1 for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. This could be attributed to the changes in both the market prices and average variable costs at the study regions.

4. Conclusions

Two non-weighing lysimeters were designed to grow alfalfa (Mcdicago sativa) and potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) in four regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern). The experiments were aimed at determining the irrigation requirements, Kc, and the economic returns of the potato crop. The results show that the accumulated values of the measured crop evapotranspiration obtained from the potato lysimeters were 573, 554, 592, and 570 mm for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. The Kc values were Kc ini 0.58, 0.54, 0.50, and 0.52; Kc mid 1.02, 1.05, 1.13, and 1.10; and Kc end 0.73, 0.74, 0.74, and 0.75 for the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions, respectively. The average values of the water return for the irrigated potatoes at the Qassiem, Riyadh, Al-Jouf, and Eastern regions were estimated to be approximately 0.72 $ m−3, 1.49 $ m−3, 0.59 $ m−3, and 0.67 $ m−3, respectively.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.A. and H.A.-G.; methodology, F.M. and H.A.-G.; formal analysis, A.A. and A.D.; writing (original draft), A.D.; writing (review and editing), all.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by the Vice Deanship of Research Chairs at King Saud University.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest concerning this article.

References

  1. Allen, R.G.; Pereira, L.S.; Raes, D.; Smith, M. Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. Faorome 1998, 300, D05109. [Google Scholar]
  2. Rafi, Z.; Merlin, O.; Le Dantec, V.; Khabba, S.; Mordelet, P.; Er-Raki, S.; Amazirh, A.; Olivera-Guerra, L.; Hssaine, B.A.; Simonneaux, V.; et al. Partitioning evapotranspiration of a drip-irrigated wheat crop: Inter-comparing eddy covariance-, sap flow-, lysimeter-and FAO-based methods. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2019, 265, 310–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Payero, J.O.; Neale, C.M.U.; Wright, J.L.; Allen, R.G. Guidelines for validating Bowen ratio data. Trans. Asae 2003, 46, 1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Todd, R.W.; Evett, S.R.; Howell, T.A. The Bowen ratio-energy balance method for estimating latent heat flux of irrigated alfalfa evaluated in a semi-arid, advective environment. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2000, 103, 335–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Verhoef, A.; Allen, S.J.; Lloyd, C.R. Seasonal variation of surface energy balance over two Sahelian surfaces. Int. J. Climatol. A J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 1999, 19, 1267–1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Liu, J.; Kotoda, K. Estimation of regional evapotranspiration from arid and semi-arid surfaces 1. Jawra J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 1998, 34, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Laubach, J.; Raschendorfer, M.; Kreilein, H.; Gravenhorst, G. Determination of heat and water vapour fluxes above a spruce forest by eddy correlation. Agric. For. Meteorol. 1994, 71, 373–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Allen, R.G.; Howell, T.A.; Pruitt, W.O.; Walter, I.A.; Jensen, M.E. Lysimeters for Evapotranspiration and envIronmental Measurements; American Society of Civil Engineers: New York, NY, USA, 1991; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  9. Robbins, C.W.; Willardson, L.S. An instrumented lysimeter system for monitoring salt and water movement. Trans. ASAE 1980, 23, 109–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Goddard, W.B. A floating drag-plate lysimeter for atmospheric boundary layer research. J. Appl. Meteorol. 1970, 9, 373–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Armijo, J.D.; Twitchell, G.A.; Burman, R.D.; Nunn, J.R. A large, undisturbed, weighing lysimeter for grassland studies. Trans. ASAE 1972, 15, 827–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dylla, A.S.; Cox, L.M. An Economical hydraulic weighing evapotranspiration tank. Trans. ASAE 1973, 16, 294–0295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. LeDrew, E.F.; Emerick, J.C. A mechanical balance-type lysimeter for use in remote environments. Agric. Meteorol. 1974, 13, 253–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Schneider, A.D.; Ayars, J.E.; Phene, C.J. Combining monolithic and repacked soil tanks for lysimeters from high water table sites. Appl. Eng. Agric. 1996, 12, 649–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Malone, R.W.; Bonta, J.V.; Stewardson, D.J.; Nelsen, T. Error analysis and quality improvement of the Coshocton weighing lysimeters. Trans. ASAE 2000, 43, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Klocke, N.L.; Heermann, D.F.; Duke, H.R. Measurement of Evaporation and Transportation with Lysimeters. Trans. ASAE 1985, 28, 183–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tyagi, N.K.; Sharma, D.K.; Luthra, S.K. Determination of evapotranspiration for maize and berseem clover. Irrig. Sci. 2003, 21, 173–181. [Google Scholar]
  18. Marek, T.; Piccinni, G.; Schneider, A.; Howell, T.; Jett, M.; Dusek, D. Weighing lysimeters for the determination of crop water requirements and crop coefficients. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2006, 22, 851–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. McFarland, M.J.; Worthington, J.W.; Newman, J.S. Design, installation and operation of a twin weighing lysimeter for fruit trees. Trans. ASAE 1983, 26, 1717–1721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Meshkat, M.; Warner, R.C.; Walton, L.R. Lysimeter design, construction, and instrumentation for assessing evaporation from a large undisturbed soil monolith. Appl. Eng. Agric. 1999, 15, 303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yang, S.; Aydin, M.; Yano, T.; Li, X. Evapotranspiration of orange trees in greenhouse lysimeters. Irrig. Sci. 2003, 21, 145–149. [Google Scholar]
  22. Marek, T.H.; Schneider, A.D.; Howell, T.A.; Ebeling, L.L. Design and construction of large weighing monolithic lysimeters. Trans. ASAE 1988, 31, 477–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Schneider, A.D.; Howell, T.A.; Moustafa, A.T.A.; Evett, S.R.; Abou-Zeid, W. Asimplified Weighing Lysimeter for Monolithic or Reconstructed Soils. Appl. Eng. Agric. 1998, 14, 267–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Evett, S.R.; Warrick, A.W.; Matthias, A.D. Wall material and capping effects on microlysimeter temperatures and evaporation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1995, 59, 329–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Payero, J.O.; Irmak, S. Construction, installation, and performance of two repacked weighing lysimeters. Irrig. Sci. 2008, 26, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Seyfried, M.S.; Hanson, C.L.; Murdock, M.D.; Van Vactor, S. Long-Term Lysimeter Database, Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed, Idaho, United States. Water Resour. Res. 2001, 37, 2853–2856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Garcia, M.; Raes, D.; Allen, R.; Herbas, C. Dynamics of reference evapotranspiration in the Bolivian highlands (Altiplano). Agric. For. Meteorol. 2004, 125, 67–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ati, A.S.; Iyada, A.D.; Najim, S.M. Water use efficiency of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) under different irrigation methods and potassium fertilizer rates. Ann. Agric. Sci. 2012, 57, 99–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, F.X.; Kang, Y.; Liu, S.P. Effects of drip irrigation frequency on soil wetting pattern and potato growth in North China Plain. Agric. Water Manag. 2006, 79, 248–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Waddell, J.T.; Gupta, S.C.; Moncrief, J.F.; Rosen, C.J.; Steele, D.D. Irrigation and nitrogen management effects on potato yield, tuber quality, and nitrogen uptake. Agron. J. 1999, 91, 991–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kashyap, P.S.; Panda, R.K. Effect of irrigation scheduling on potato crop parameters under water stressed conditions. Agric. Water Manag. 2003, 59, 49–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ferreira, T.C.; Carr, M.K.V. Responses of potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) to irrigation and nitrogen in a hot, dry climate: I. Water use. Field Crop. Res. 2002, 78, 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Al-Rumkhani, Y.A.; Din, S.U. Use of remote sensing for irrigation scheduling in arid lands of Saudi Arabia. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 2004, 32, 225–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kashyap, P.S.; Panda, R.K. Evaluation of evapotranspiration estimation methods and development of crop-coefficients for potato crop in a sub-humid region. Agric. Water Manag. 2001, 50, 9–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tallec, T.; Béziat, P.; Jarosz, N.; Rivalland, V.; Ceschia, E. Crops’ water use efficiencies in temperate climate: Comparison of stand, ecosystem and agronomical approaches. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2013, 168, 69–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Oberholzer, S.; Prasuhn, V.; Hund, A. Crop water use under Swiss pedoclimatic conditions—Evaluation of lysimeter data covering a seven-year period. Field Crop. Res. 2017, 211, 48–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Pereira, L.S.; Cordery, I.; Iacovides, I. Improved indicators of water use performance and productivity for sustainable water conservation and saving. Agric. Water Manag. 2012, 108, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Alkolibi, F.M. Possible effects of global warming on agriculture and water resources in Saudi Arabia: Impacts and responses. Clim. Chang. 2002, 54, 225–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Stanhill, G. Water use efficiency. Adv. Agron. 1986, 39, 53–85. [Google Scholar]
  40. Al-Omran, A.M.; Shalaby, A.A. Calculation of water requirements for some crops in the eastern and central regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. J. Coll. Agric. King Saud Univ. 1992, 4, 97–114. [Google Scholar]
  41. Al-Ghobari, H.M. Estimation of reference evapotranspiration for southern region of Saudi Arabia. Irrig. Sci. 2000, 19, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Average monthly climatic data for the: (a) Qassiem area, (b) Riyadh area, (c) Al-Jouf area, and (d) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). T is the temperature (°C), W is the wind speed (km/h), and R is the rainfall (mm/month).
Figure 1. Average monthly climatic data for the: (a) Qassiem area, (b) Riyadh area, (c) Al-Jouf area, and (d) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). T is the temperature (°C), W is the wind speed (km/h), and R is the rainfall (mm/month).
Agronomy 09 00756 g001
Figure 2. Constructing the lysimeter at the experimental field.
Figure 2. Constructing the lysimeter at the experimental field.
Agronomy 09 00756 g002
Figure 3. Measured evapotranspiration of the alfalfa (METr) at the: (a) Qassiem area, (b) Riyadh area, (c) Al-Jouf area, and (d) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).
Figure 3. Measured evapotranspiration of the alfalfa (METr) at the: (a) Qassiem area, (b) Riyadh area, (c) Al-Jouf area, and (d) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).
Agronomy 09 00756 g003
Figure 4. The left-hand panel (a,c,i,g) shows the crop evapotranspiration (crop ET) associated with days after planting at the: (a) Qassiem area, (c) Riyadh area, (i) Al-Jouf area, and (g) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). The right-hand panel (b,d,f,h) shows the measured crop evapotranspiration (METc) and predicted crop evapotranspiration (PETc) of potato at the: (b) Qassiem area, (d) Riyadh area, (f) Al-Jouf area, and (h) Eastern area of the KSA.
Figure 4. The left-hand panel (a,c,i,g) shows the crop evapotranspiration (crop ET) associated with days after planting at the: (a) Qassiem area, (c) Riyadh area, (i) Al-Jouf area, and (g) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). The right-hand panel (b,d,f,h) shows the measured crop evapotranspiration (METc) and predicted crop evapotranspiration (PETc) of potato at the: (b) Qassiem area, (d) Riyadh area, (f) Al-Jouf area, and (h) Eastern area of the KSA.
Agronomy 09 00756 g004
Figure 5. Crop coefficient, Kc, of the potato crop at the: (a) Qassiem area, (b) Riyadh area, (c) Al-Jouf area, and (d) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).
Figure 5. Crop coefficient, Kc, of the potato crop at the: (a) Qassiem area, (b) Riyadh area, (c) Al-Jouf area, and (d) Eastern area of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).
Agronomy 09 00756 g005
Figure 6. Water-use efficiency of the potato crop at the studied regions of KSA.
Figure 6. Water-use efficiency of the potato crop at the studied regions of KSA.
Agronomy 09 00756 g006
Table 1. The geographical coordinates of the experimental locations at the four regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).
Table 1. The geographical coordinates of the experimental locations at the four regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).
LocationLongitudeLatitudeAltitude (m)Region
QU43°46′ E26°21′ N648Qassiem
MOA46°43′ E24°43′ N600Riyadh
AAC39°29′ E29°29′ N724Al-Jouf
KFU49°33′ E25°21′ N179Eastern
QU—Qassiem University; MOA—Ministry of Agriculture; AAC—Alwatania Agricultural Company; KFU—King Faisal University.
Table 2. Economic potential of irrigated potato production at four regions of KSA.
Table 2. Economic potential of irrigated potato production at four regions of KSA.
ParameterRegion
QassiemRiyadhAl-JoufEastern
Average production (t ha−1)24.4026.9717.6918.25
Average water cost ($ m−3)0.060.060.070.06
Average market price ($ t−1)466.7409.3186.7266.7
Water requirement (m3 ha−1)11843671285647130
Average variable cost ($ ha−1)1089.65387.52831.33852.3
Average return ($ ha−1)8516.89989.15033.84717.6
Average net return ($ ha−1)7426.94601.32202.7865.3
Average water return ($ m−3)0.721.490.590.67

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alataway, A.; Al-Ghobari, H.; Mohammad, F.; Dewidar, A. Lysimeter-Based Water Use and Crop Coefficient of Drip-Irrigated Potato in an Arid Environment. Agronomy 2019, 9, 756. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9110756

AMA Style

Alataway A, Al-Ghobari H, Mohammad F, Dewidar A. Lysimeter-Based Water Use and Crop Coefficient of Drip-Irrigated Potato in an Arid Environment. Agronomy. 2019; 9(11):756. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9110756

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alataway, Abed, Hussein Al-Ghobari, Fawzi Mohammad, and Ahmed Dewidar. 2019. "Lysimeter-Based Water Use and Crop Coefficient of Drip-Irrigated Potato in an Arid Environment" Agronomy 9, no. 11: 756. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9110756

APA Style

Alataway, A., Al-Ghobari, H., Mohammad, F., & Dewidar, A. (2019). Lysimeter-Based Water Use and Crop Coefficient of Drip-Irrigated Potato in an Arid Environment. Agronomy, 9(11), 756. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9110756

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop