Irrigation Science

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 65–73 | Cite as

Effects of soil properties on precipitation use efficiency

  • W. D. Kemper
Article

Abstract

As other non-agricultural users need and are able to pay higher prices for irrigation waters it will be increasingly essential to make more efficient use of precipitation in crop production. Major problems constraining the efficiency with which rainfall is used are: large portions of this water run off or are evaporated from soil surfaces; root zone water holding capacity is not sufficient to hold water needed to sustain good crop production; and the random nature of the precipitation and associated probabilities of crop failure deter investments needed to achieve improved efficiency of water use on high value crops in rain fed lands. Gravel and organic mulches have shown potential for reducing annual evaporation to as low as 10 cm of water and for facilitating entry of expected intensities of rainfall. Under such mulches, soil water is almost as dependable as “money in the bank”, and can be retained for use in seasons when high value crops are most efficiently grown. Measurements of such stored water plus past weather records can provide bases for calculating probabilities of adequate water being available for crops whose water requirements are known. Most of these water requirements have been determined when these crops were planted close together and root zones, and in some cases the crop canopy, overlapped. Research is needed to determine the degree to which wider spacing of high value vegetables and fruit crops under mulched conditions can be used to increase probabilities of economic production when water supplies are marginal. For tree crops, where planting density is not temporally flexible, but small amounts of irrigation water may be available at high cost, management systems are needed to optimize use of rain and ascertain when the economic benefits are sufficiently great to justify use of the irrigation water. Such sporadic use requires that the supply system can provide water on demand. Increases in rooting depths by modifying soils with restricting layers can serve as a cost effective alternative to irrigation under some climatic regimes. Such regimes should be identified and costs of increasing rooting depths should be evaluated and reduced where possible. Availability of municipal and industrial waste products, whose producers may be willing to pay costs of transport and incorporation, may provide economically feasible means of removing such restrictions. Production levels and environmental consequences of incorporating such wastes-cum-amendments in soils need evaluation to provide bases for developing optimized and acceptable management systems.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agassi M, Morin J, Shainberg I (1981) Effects of electrolyte concentration and soil sodicity on the infiltration rate and crust formation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 45:848–851Google Scholar
  2. Akram M, Kemper WD (1979) Infiltration of soils as affected by the pressure and water content at the time of compaction. Soil Sci Soc Am J 43:1080–1086Google Scholar
  3. Bradford JM, Blanchar RW (1977) Profile modification of a fragiudalf to increase crop production. Soil Sci Soc Am J 41:127–131Google Scholar
  4. Bruce RR, Langdale GW (1990) Modification of soil characteristics of degraded soil surfaces by biomass input and tillage affecting soil water regime. Trans XIV Congr of the Intl Soil Sci Soc IV: 4–9Google Scholar
  5. Bullock MS, Kemper WD, Nelson SD (1988) Soil cohesion as affected by freezing, water content, time and tillage. Soil Sci Soc Am J 52:770–776Google Scholar
  6. Chichester FW, Richardson CW (1992) Sediment and nutrient loss from claypan soils as affected by tillage. J Environ Qual 21:587–590Google Scholar
  7. Corey AT, Kemper WD (1968) Conservation of soil water by gravel mulches. Hydrology Paper no 30, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, CO, 23 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Edwards WM, Amerman CR (1983) Watershed evaluations of infiltration under conventional and no-till corn on two Ohio soils. ASAE Special Pub, no 11-83, Advances in Infiltration, pp 341–349Google Scholar
  9. Edwards WM, Norton LD, Redmon CE (1988) Characterizing macropores that affect infiltration into non-tilled soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J 52:483–487Google Scholar
  10. Edwards WM, Shipitalo MJ, Norton LD (1988) Contributions of macroporosity to infiltration in a continuous corn no-tilled water shed: Implications for contaminant movements. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 3:193–205Google Scholar
  11. Ehlers W (1975) Observations on earthworm channels and infiltration on tilled and untilled loess soil. Soil Sci 119:242–248Google Scholar
  12. Emmrich W, Frasier GW, Fink DH (1987) Relation between soil properties and effectiveness of low cost water harvesting treatments. Soil Sci Soc Am J 51:213–219Google Scholar
  13. Greb BW, Smika DE, Welsh JR (1979) Technology and wheat yields in the Central Great Plains: Experiment Station advances. J Soil Water Conserv 34:264–268Google Scholar
  14. Hudson B (1994) Soil organic matter and available water holding capacity. Soil Water Conserv 49 (in press)Google Scholar
  15. Jones OR (1992) Water conservation practices in the southern high plain. In: Hinkle SE (ed) Proceedings of the 4th Ann. Conf. of the Colorado Conservation Tillage Association, Feb. 3–4, 1992, Sterling, Colorado, pp 21–25Google Scholar
  16. Kemper WD, Noonan L (1970) Runoff as affected by salt treatments and soil textures. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 34:126–130Google Scholar
  17. Kemper WD, Rosenau RC (1984) Soil cohesion as affected by time and water content. Soil Sci Soc Am J 48:1001–1006Google Scholar
  18. Kemper WD, Trout TJ, Seqeren A, Bullock M (1987) Worms and water. J Soil Water Conserv 42:401–404Google Scholar
  19. Kemper WD, Jolley P, Rosenau RC (1988) Soil management to prevent earthworms from riddling irrigation ditch banks. Irrig Sci 9:79–87Google Scholar
  20. Kemper WD, Nicks AD, Corey AT (1994) Accumulation of water in soils under gravel and sand mulches. Soil Sci Soc Am J (in press)Google Scholar
  21. Korcak RF (1988) Fluidized bed material applied at disposal levels: Effects on an apple orchard. J Environ Qual 17:469–473Google Scholar
  22. Miller DE, Kemper WD (1962) Water stability of aggregates of two soils as influenced by incorporation of alfalfa. Agron J 54:494–496Google Scholar
  23. Nicks AD, Lane LJ (1987) Weather generator. Chap. 2. In: Lane LJ, Nearing M (eds) Water erosin prediction project, profile model documentation NSERL Report no 2, National Soil Erosion Lab., USDA-ARS, 1196 Soil Building, W Lafayette, IN 47907–1196Google Scholar
  24. Ransome LS, Dowdy RH (1987) Soybean growth and boron distribution in a sandy soil amended with scrubber sludge. J Environ Qual 16:171–175Google Scholar
  25. Richards LA (ed) (1954) Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. USDA Handbook 60, U.S. Gov't. Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  26. Richards SJ (1965) Porous block mulch for ornamental plantings. Calif Agric (December issue)Google Scholar
  27. Savage SM, Osborn J, Letey J, Heaton C (1972) Substances contributing to fire-induced water repellency in soils. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 36:674–678Google Scholar
  28. Shainberg I, Bresler E, Klausner Y (1971) Studies on Na/Ca montmorillonite systems. I. The swelling pressure. Soil Sci 3:214–219Google Scholar
  29. Shainberg I, Sumner ME, Miller WP, Farina MPW, Dyan MA, Fey MV (1989) Use of gypsum on soils: a review. Adv Soil Sci 9:1–137Google Scholar
  30. Sinclair TR (1994) Limits of crop yield. In: Boote KJ, Bennett JM, Paulsen GM (eds) Physiology and determination of crop yield. Am Soc Agron, Madison, WI (in press)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Stanhill G, Rapaport C (1988) Temporal and spatial variation in the volume of rain falling annually in Israel. Israel J Earth Sci 37:211–221Google Scholar
  32. Stewart BA (1988) Dryland farming: The North American experience in challenges in dryland agriculture: global perspective. In: Unger PW, Jordan WR, Sneed JV, Jensen RW (eds) Proc Intl Conf on Dryland Farming. Texas Agriculture Experiment Station, College Station, TX, pp 54–59Google Scholar
  33. Sumner ME (1990) Gypsum as an ameliorant for the subsoil acidity syndrome. Report submitted to the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research by the Agronomy Dept, University of Georgia, Athens, GAGoogle Scholar
  34. Unger PW (1978) Straw mulch rate effect on soil-water storage and sorghum yield. Soil Sci Soc Am J 42:485–491Google Scholar
  35. Voorhees WB (1992) Wheel induced soil physical limitations to root growth. Adv Soil Sci 19:73–95Google Scholar
  36. Wang J, Hesketh JD, Woolley JT (1986) Preexisting channels and soybean rooting patterns. Soil Sci 41:432–441Google Scholar
  37. Wood CW, Edwards JH (1992) Agro-ecosystem management effects on soil nitrogen and carbon. Agric Ecosystems Environ 39:123–138Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. D. Kemper
    • 1
  1. 1.Agricultural Research ServiceUSDABeltsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations