ارزیابی توابع کاهش عملکرد گندم در شرایط توأم شوری و کم آبی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 عضو هیئت علمی (استاد یار پژوهش) مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گلستان، دانشیار گروه خاکشناسی و استادیار گروه آبیاری دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

2 دانشیار گروه خاکشناسی

3 استادیار گروه آبیاری دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

چکیده

برای بیان چگونگی جذب آب بوسیله ریشه گیاهان تحت تنش، توابع ریاضی متعددی ارائه شده است. این توابع در صورتی که پیش‌بینی درستی از واکنش گیاه در شرایط تنش ارائه دهند، ابزار مفیدی برای برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت آبیاری به شمار می‌آیند. در این پژوهش پنج تابع شامل توابع جمع‌پذیر و ضرب‌پذیر وان گنوختن، دیرکسن و همکاران، وان دم و همکاران و همایی و همکاران که عملکرد نسبی گیاه را در شرایط شوری و کم آبی پیش‌بینی می‌کنند، ارزیابی شدند. داده‌های مورد نیاز این مطالعه به استناد نتایج یک طرح پژوهشی که به مدت دو سال زراعی (81-1380  و 82-1381 ) در شمال گرگان و در مزرعه تحت کشت گندم به اجرا در آمده بود مبنای تحلیل قرار گرفتند. پژوهش فوق دارای چهار سطح آب 50 (W1 ) ، 75 ( W2) ، 100 ( W3 ) و 125 (W4) درصد نیاز گیاه و چهار سطح شوری آب آبیاری 5/1 (S1 ) ، 5/8 (S2 ) ، 5/11 (S3) و 2/14 (S4) دسی‌زیمنس بر متر بود که در یک آزمایش کرت‌های خرد شده در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کاملاً تصادفی با سه تکرار انجام شد. نتایج نشان داد گرچه کاهش عملکرد به واسطه وجود توأم شوری و کم‌آبی در محیط جمع‌پذیر است، ولی اثر کمّی هر کدام از تنش‌های اشاره شده بر عملکرد یکسان نبوده و اثر توأم شوری و کم‌آبی کمتر از مجموع اثرات هر یک از تنش‌های فوق می‌باشد. ارزیابی مدل‌های مورد بررسی نشان داد، مدل پیشنهادی همایی و همکاران و مدل ضرب‌پذیر وان‌گنوختن بهتر از مدل‌های دیگر کاهش عملکرد نسبی را پیش‌بینی می‌کنند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating Yield Reduction Functions under Salinity and Water Stress Conditions

نویسندگان [English]

  • A. R. Kiani 1
  • M. Homaee 2
  • M. Mirlatifi 3
1 Research Staff, Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Golestan Province, Gorgan, Iran. Associate professor, Soil Science Department, and Assistant professor, Irrigation and Drainage Department, Respectivley, Tarbiat Modares University, Theran, Iran.
2 Associate professor, Soil Science Department, and Assistant professor, Irrigation and Drainage Departmen
3 Respectivley, Tarbiat Modares University, Theran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Various water uptake models have been developed under salinity and water stress conditions. These models can be considered as useful tools in irrigation scheduling and management, because often they predict reliable crop response under stress conditions. Simulated relative yield of wheat from the five macroscopic water uptake models (Van Genuchten (additive and multiplicative), Dirksen et al., Van Dam et al. and Homaee) were evaluated against the measured results from field experiment that had been conducted during the wheat growing season of 2002 and 2003 north of Gorgan. The treatments consisted of four water quantities 50 (W1), 75 (W2), 100 (W3) and 125 (W4) percent of crop water requirement and four water qualities 1.5 (S1), 8.5 (S2), 11.5 (S3) and 14.2 (S4) dS/m. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with split plot plan with three replications. It was found that the yield decrease under combined salinity and water stress was additive. However, the effect of osmotic potential on wheat yield was not the same as matric potential. The effect of combined stresses on wheat yield was less compared to sum of the separate effects due to salinity and water stress. The results also indicated that reduction function of Homaee's model was more accurate than the other functions. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Salinity
  • Water stress
  • Wheat
  • Water uptake models
  • Gorgan

مراجع

  1. کیانی، ع. ر. (1383). مدیریت آبیاری گندم تحت شرایط شوری و کم‌آبی. رساله دکترای مهندسی آبیاری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، 226 ص.
  2. Belmans, C.J., Wesseling, G. and Feddes, R.A. (1983). Simulation of the water balance of the cropped soil : SWATRE . Journal of Hydrology 63: 271-286.
  3. Bradford, S. and Letey, J. (1992). Simulated effects of water table and irrigation scheduling as factors in cotton production. Irrig. Sci. 117: 311-314.
  4. Cardon, G.E. and Letey, (1992a). Plant water uptake terms evaluated for soil water and solute movement models. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 32: 1876-1880.
  5. Cardon, G.E. and Letey, J. (1992b). A soil-based model for irrigation and soil salinity management. Tests of plant water uptake calculations. Soil Sci. Soc.Am. Proc. 56: 1881-1887.
  6. Cardon, G.E. and Letey, J. (1992c). A soil-based model for irrigation and soil salinity management. water and solute movement calculations. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 56: 1889-1894.
  7. Dirksen, C. and Augustijn, D.C. (1988). Root water uptake function for nonuniform pressure and osmotic potentials. Agric. Abstracts, pp. 188.
  8. Dirksen, C. and Dasberg, S. (1993). Improved calibration of time domain reflectometry, soil water content measurements. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57: 660-667.
  9. Feddes, R.A., Bresler, E. and Neuman, S.P. (1974). Field test of a modified numerical model for water uptake by root system. Water Resources Research 10(6): 1199-1206.
  10. Feddes, R.A., Kowalik, P.J. and Zaradny, H. (1978). Simulation of field water use and crop yield. Prudoc, Wageningen, 189 P.
  11. Feng, G.L., Meiri, A. and Letey, J. (2003a). Evaluation of a model for irrigation management under saline conditions: I. Effects of plant growth. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 67: 71-76. 
  12. Feng, G.L., Meiri, A. and Letey, J. (2003b). Evaluation of a model for irrigation management under saline conditions: II. Salt distribution and rooting pattern effects. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 67: 77-80.
  13. Gardner, B.W.R. (1964). Relation of root distribution to water uptake and availability. Agronomy Journal 56: 41-45.
  14. Hillel, D., Van Bakle, C.G.E.M. and Talpaz, H. (1975). A microscopic- scale model of soil water uptake and salt movement to plant roots. Soil Sci. 120: 385-399.
  15. Homaee, M. (1999). Root water uptake under non-uniform transient salinity and water stress. Ph.D. Thesis , Wageningen Agricultural University, 173 P.
  16. Homaee, M., Dirksen C. and Feddes R.A. (2002a). Simulation of root water uptake. I. Non-uniform transient salinity using different macroscopic reduction functions. Agric . Water Manage. 57: 89 -109.
  17. Homaee, M., Feddes R. A. and Dirksen C. (2002b). Simulation of root water uptake. II. Non-uniform transient water stress using different macroscopic reduction functions. Agric. Water Manage. 57: 111-126.
  18. Homaee, M., Feddes R.A. and Dirksen C. (2002c). Simulation of root water uptake. III. Non-uniform transient combined salinity and water stress. Agric. Water Manage. 57: 127-144.
  19. Hoogland, J.C., Feddes, R.A. and Belmans C. (1981). Root water uptake model depending on soil water pressure head and maximum extraction rate. Acta. Horti. 119: 123-136.
  20. Jensen, C.R. (1982). Effect of soil water osmotic potential on growth and water relationship of barely during soil water depletion. Irrigation Science 3: 111-121.
  21. Kiani, A.R., Asadi, M.E., Homaee, M. and Mirlatifi, M. (2005). Wheat production function under salinity and water stress conditions. MTERM International Conference Proc., AIT, Thailand.
  22. Loague, K. and Green, R.E. (1991). Statistical and graphical methods for evaluating solute transport models: overview and application. J. Contaminant Hydrology 7: 51-73.
  23. Maas, E. V. and Hoffman, G. J. (1977). Crop salt tolerance current assessment. J. Irrig. and Drain. Div., ASCE 103(2): 115-134.
  24. Mathur, S. and Rao, S. (1999). Modeling water uptake by plant roots. J. Irrig. and Drain. Div., ASCE 125(3): 156-165.
  25. Meiri, A. and Shalhevet, J. (1973). Pepper plant response to irrigation water quality and timing and leaching. Ecological Studies Vol. IV, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 421-429.
  26. Minhas, P.S. and Gupta, R.K. (1993a). Conjunctive use of saline and non saline waters. Response of wheat to initial salinity profiles and stalinization patterns. Agric. Water Manage. 23: 125-137.
  27. Minhas, P.S. and Gupta, R.K. (1993b). Conjunctive use of saline and non saline waters. III. Validation of applications of transient model for wheat. Agric. Water Manage. 23: 149-160.
  28. Molz, F.J. and Remson, I. (1970). Extraction term models of soil moisture use by transpiring plants. Water Resources Research 6: 1346-1351.
  29. Parra, M.A. and Romero, G.C. (1980). On the dependence of salt tolerance of beans on soil water matric potential. Plant and Soil 56: 3-16.
  30. Passioura, J. B. and Cowen, I. R. (1968). On solving the nonlinear diffusion equation for the radial flow of water to roots. Agric. Meteorology 5: 129-134.
  31. Richards, L.A. (1931). Capillary conduction of liquids in porous mediums. Physics 1: 318-333.
  32. Rowse, H.R., Stone, D.A. and Gerwitz, A. (1978). Simulation of the water distribution in soil. II. The model for cropped and its comparison with experiment. Plant and Soil 49: 534-550.
  33. Scheierling, S.M., Cardon, G. E. and Young, R.A. (1997). Impact of irrigation timing on simulated water-crop production functions. Irrig. Sci.18: 23-31.
  34. Shalhevet, J. and Hsaio, T.C. (1986). Salinity and drought, a comparison of their effect on osmotic adjustment, assimilation, transpiration and growth. Irrigation Science 7: 249-264.
  35. Van Dam, J.C., Huygen, J., Wesseling, J.G., Feddes, R.A., Kabat, P., Van Walsum, P.E.V., Groenendijk, P. and Van Diepen, C.A. (1997). Theory of SWAP, version 2. Simulation of water flow, solute transport plant growth in the soil-water-atmosphere-plant environment. Report No.71, Dept. of Water Resources, Wageningen Agricultural Univ., 167 P.
  36. Van Genuchten, M. Th. (1987). A numerical model for water and solute movement in and below the root zone. Research Report, U. S. Salinity Lab. Reverside CA.
  37. Van Genuchten, M. Th. and Hoffman, G.J. (1984). Analysis of crop production. in: Shainberg, I. and Shalhevet, J. (Eds.), soil salinity under irrigation, pp. 258-271, Springer-Verlag.
  38. Warrick, A.W. and Gardner, W.R. (1983). Crop yield as affected by spatial variations of soil and irrigation. Water Resources Research 19: 181-186.
  39. Whisler, F.D., Klute, A. and Millington, R.J. (1968). Analysis of steady state evapotranspiration from a soil column. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 32: 167-174.
  40. Wyseure, G.C.L., Sanmuganathan, K. and O’Callaghan, J.R. (1994). Use of simulation for combining rainfed and irrigated sugarcane production in dry zone of Sri Lanka. Electron Agri. 11: 323-335.
پژوهش های خاک
دوره 20، شماره 1
خرداد 1385
صفحه 71-78

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار