Using Sap Flow to Calculate Integral Water Capacity in Pistachio Trees

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD graduate, Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Tabriz University, IranPhD Graduated, Department of soil science, College of agriculture, Tabriz University, Iran.

2 Professor, Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran

3 Associate Professor, Agricultural Engineering Research Institute (AERI), Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran

4 Assistant professor, Department of Water Sciences and Engineering, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran.

5 Assistant Professor, Soil and Water Research Department, East Azarbaijan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract

Integral Water Capacity (IWC), as one of the recently defined criteria for soil water availability, uses weighting functions to takes into account various soil physical limitations for calculating plant available water. Also, the weighting functions can be calculated from plant responses. In this study, in a pistachio orchard, surface (DI) and subsurface (SDI) drip irrigation systems were established, afterwards soil physical properties and water and salinity distribution in root zone were measured. IWC were calculated using soil physical properties and sap flow (SF) as one of the plant responses features. The result of plant measurements indicated that SF decreased progressively during the time between successive irrigation periods, but the decrease in DI was greater than SDI. By considering equal depth of irrigation water applied to DI and SDI, the more favorable moisture and salinity distribution in the root zone of SDI compared to DI treatment was the reason for more water availability in SDI. The calculated IWC by Groenevelt weighting function (  in DI and SDI showed the lowest amount (0.0557 and 0.0545  respectively) but  values were calculated as 0.176 and 0.191, respectively, and were close to IWC calculated without any salinity effect (0188 ). Van Genuchten equation led to more realistic estimates of salinity limitations on water availability (  were obtained as 0.146 and 0.151 ) and the integral energy based on  was very close to integral energy calculated by SF. These findings indicate that the salinity weighting functions used in  had the best estimates of soil physical conditions to consider water uptake energy and plant water availability. It is found that based on all soil water availability criteria, SDI provided more available water and less integral energy than DI.

Keywords

References

  1. عطایی، ا.، نیشابوری، م.ر.، اکبری، م.، زارع­حقی، د. و عنابی میلانی، ا. 1397. ارزیابی مدل هایدروس دو بعدی برای تعیین توزیع رطوبت خاک در آبیاری قطره­ای سطحی و زیر سطحی درختان پسته. نشریه پژوهش آب در کشاورزی. جلد 32. شماره 4. صفحات 581-595.
  2. عطایی ا.، نیشابوری م ر.، اکبری م.، زارع­حقی د. و عنابی میلانی، ا. 1398. پاسخ گیاه پسته به توزیع رطوبت و شوری در سامانه­های آبیاری قطره­ای سطحی و زیرسطحی. آبیاری و زهکشی ایران. جلد 13. شماره 1. صفحات 115-128.
  3. کاظمی، ز.، نیشابوری، م.ر.، زارع حقی، د. و عسگرزاده، ح. 1397. تعیین دامنه رطوبتی با حداقل محدودیت بر مبنای پاسخ گیاه آفتابگردان. نشریه پژوهش­های خاک (علوم خاک و آب). جلد 32.شماره 2. صفحات 165- 177.
  4. مسکینی ویشکایی، ف. 1393. ﺑﺮآورد داﻣﻨﻪ رﻃﻮﺑﺖ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ دﺳﺘﺮس ﺑﺮای ﮔﻴﺎه ﮔﻨﺪم و ﻛﻠﺰا ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻋﻮاﻣﻞ ﺧﺎک و گیاه. رساله دکتری، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان. ایران.
  5. Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R. and Nikbakht, A.M. 2014a. SAWCal: A user-friendly program for calculating soil available water quantities and physical quality indices. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 109: 86-93.
  6. Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R., Dexter, A.R., Mahboubi, A.A. and Neyshabouri. M.R. 2014b. Determination of soil available water for plants: Consistency between laboratory and field measurements. Geoderma. 226-227: 8-20.
  7. Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R., Mahboubi, A.A., Nosrati, A. and Dexter. A.R. 2010. Soil water availability for plants as quantified by conventional available water, least limiting water range and integral water capacity. Plant and Soil 335: 229-244.
  8. Asgarzadeh, H., Mosaddeghi, M.R., Mahboubi, A.A., Nosrati, A. and Dexter. A.R. 2011. Integral energy of conventional available water, least limiting water range and integral water capacity for better characterization of water availability and soil physical quality. Geoderma 166: 34-42.
  9. Chahal, S.S. 2010. Evaluation of soil hydraulic limitations in determining plant-available-water in light textured soils. PhD thesis. School of Agriculture, Food and Wine. The University of Adelaide. Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  10. Durner, W. 1994. Hydraulic conductivity estimation for soils with heterogeneous pore structure. Water Resources Research. 30: 211-223.
  11. Eastham, J. and Gray, S.A. 1998. A preliminary evaluation of the suitability of sap flow sensors for use in scheduling vineyard irrigation. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture. 49: 171–176.
  12. Er-Raki, S., Chehbouni, A., Ezzahar, J., Khabba, S., Boulet, G., Hanich, L. and Williams, D. 2009. Evapotranspiration partitioning from sap flow and eddy covariance techniques for olive orchards in semi-arid region. Acta Horticulturae. 846: 201–208.
  13. Ferguson, L., Heraclio, C., Blake, S., Steve, G. and Zachary, H. 2002. Salinity tolerance evaluation of pistachio rootstocks. Production Research. 7:122-124.
  14. Gee, G.W. and Bauder, J.W. 1986. Particle-size analysis. In: Klute, A. (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1 – Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Lewis Publishers. Madison, WI. pp. 383–411.
  15. Gong, D., Kang, Sh., Zhang, Lu., Du, T. and Yao, L. 2006. A two-dimensional model of root water uptake for single apple trees and its verification with sap flow and soil water content measurements. Agricultural Water Management. 83:119–129.
  16. Granier, A., 1985. A new method of sap flow measurement in tree stems. Annales des Sciences Forestieres (France).
  17. Groenevelt, P., Grant C. and Semetsa, S. 2001. A new procedure to determine soil water availability. Soil Research. 39: 577-598.
  18. Groenevelt, P., Grant, C. and Murray, R. 2004. On water availability in saline soils. Soil Research. 42: 833-840.
  19. Klute, A. 1986. Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: Laboratory methods. In: Klute, A. (ed.), Methods of soil analysis: part 1: Physical and mineralogical methods. Agronomy monograph vol 9, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy. Madison, Wisconsin. p. 687–732.
  20. Kool, D., Agam, N., Lazarovitch, N., Heitman, J.L., Sauer, T.J. and Ben-Gal, A. 2014. A review of approaches for evapotranspiration partitioning. Agriculture Forest Meteorology. 184:56–70.
  21. Lu, P., Urban, L. and Zhao, P. 2004. Granier's thermal dissipation probe (TDP) method for measuring sap flow in trees: theory and practice. Acta Botanica Sinica-english edition. 46(6): 631-646.
  22. Mehdi-Tounsi, H., Chelli-Chaabouni, A., Mahjoub-Boujnah, D. and Boukhris, M. 2017. Long-term field response of pistachio to irrigation water salinity. Agricultural Water Management. 185: 1-12.
  23. Meskini-Vishkaee, F., Mohammadi, M.H. and Neyshabouri, M.R. 2018. Revisiting the wet and dry ends of soil integral water capacity using soil and plant properties. Soil Research. 56(4): 331-345.
  24. Metselaar, K. and van Lier, Q. 2007. The shape of the transpiration reduction function under plant water stress. Vadose Zone Journal. 6(1): 124-139
  25. Nang, N.D. 2012. Plant availability of water in soils being reclaimed from the saline-sodic state. PhD Thesis. The University of Adelaide. Australia.
  26. Nelson, D.W. and Sommers, L.E. 1996. Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Sparks, D.L.,  Page, A.L., Helmke, P.A., Loeppert, R.H., Soltanpour, P.N., Tabatabaei, M.A., Johnson C.T. and Sumner M.E. (eds.). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3, Chemical Methods. Soil Science Society of America Book Serie 5. SSSA, Madison, WI, USA. pp. 967-1010.
  27. Oren, R., Philips, N., Ewers, B.E., Pataki, D.E. and Megonigal, J.P. 1999. Sap-flux scaled transpiration reponses to light, vapour pressure deficit, and leaf area reductionin a flooded Taxodium distichum forest. Tree Physiol. 19: 337–347.
  28. Pataki, D.E., Oren, R. and Smith, W.K. 2000. Sap flux of co-occurring species in a western subalpine forest during seasonal soil drought. Ecology. 81(9): 2557-2566.
  29. Remorini, D. and Massai, R. 2003. Comparison of water status indicators for young peach trees. Irrigation Science. 22: 39–46.
  30. Schröder, N., Lazarovitch, N., Vanderborght, J., Vereecken, H. and Javaux, M. 2014. Linking transpiration reduction to rhizosphere salinity using a 3D coupled soil-plant model. Plant and Soil. 377(1-2): 277-293.
  31. Tognetti, R., dĭAndria, R., Morelli, G., Calandrelli, D. and Fragnito, F. 2004. Irrigation effects on daily and seasonal variations of trunk sap flow and leaf water relations in olive trees. Plant and Soil. 263: 249–264.
  32. Van Genuchten, M.T. 1987. A numerical model for water and solute movement in and below the root zone. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, US Salinity Laboratory, Reverside.
  33. Vrugt J. A., Hopmans, J. W., & Simunek, J. 2001. Calibration of a two-dimensional root water uptake model. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 65, 1027-1037.
Iranian Journal of Soil Research
Volume 34, Issue 1
July 2020
Pages 95-109

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics