Advertisement

Sugar Tech

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 122–134 | Cite as

Modeling Sugar Beet Response to Different Combinations of On-Farm Water Management Practices Under Semi-arid Sub-tropical Environment

  • Abdul MalikEmail author
  • Abdul Sattar Shakir
  • Muhammad Jamal Khan
  • Muhammad Ajmal
  • Muhammad Shahzad Khattak
  • Taj Ali Khan
  • Zia Ul Haq
  • Mahmood Alam Khan
  • Naeem Ijaz
Research Article
  • 84 Downloads

Abstract

Crop water productivity modeling becomes a valuable tool in developing deficit irrigation strategies and optimizing agricultural water use for economical and sustainable production in arid and semi-arid regions. The objective of the current study was to test and validate the FAO-developed AquaCrop model for sugar beet under different combinations of on-farm water management practices using 2 years average measured data sets collected during the 2011–2012 and 2012–2013 cropping seasons. The model was first calibrated using the data set of nine full irrigation treatments and then validated for twenty-seven deficit irrigation treatments, respectively. The model performance was evaluated using different statistical indicators, e.g., coefficient of determination (R2), normalized root-mean-square error, degree of agreement (dindex) and the mean bias error. The results revealed that AquaCrop was able to simulate sugar beet canopy cover fairly for all treatments. The model performance was also excellent for simulating sugar beet root yield and biomass under all no-stress and mild-stress treatments. However, the model showed poor results when moderate water stress was applied without mulching or sever stresses were applied irrespective of the mulching conditions. The results further revealed that the model overestimated the water productivity for all treatments. The AquaCrop model can thus be satisfactorily used for evaluating the effectiveness of proposed irrigation management strategies for sugar beet, however, the limitations should be kept in mind when interpreting the results in severely stressed conditions. Moreover, on the basis of the obtained results, it is strongly recommended that the sugar beet growers should raise their crop on medium raised bed covered with black film or straw mulch and should apply 20–40% deficit irrigation instead of full irrigation as this will be the most advantageous treatment in terms of improved yield and increased water productivity.

Keywords

Full irrigation Deficit irrigation Black film mulch Organic mulch Furrow irrigation systems Calibration Validation Water productivity 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Authors hereby certify that there is no conflict of interest in submitting and publishing their research paper in Sugar Tech Journal.

Supplementary material

12355_2018_631_MOESM1_ESM.doc (105 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 105 kb)

References

  1. Adeboye, O.B., B. Schultz, K.O. Adekalu, and K. Prasad. 2017. Modelling of response of the growth and yield of soybean to full and deficit irrigation by using AquaCrop. Irrigation and Drainage 66: 192–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmadi, S.H., E. Mosallaeepour, A.A. Kamgar-Haghighi, and A.R. Sepaskhah. 2015. Modeling maize yield and soil water content with aquacrop under full and deficit irrigation managements. Water Resources Management 29 (8): 2837–2853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alenazi, M., H. Abdel-Razzak, A. Ibrahim, M. Wahb-Allah, and A. Alsadon. 2015. Response of muskmelon cultivars to plastic mulch and irrigation regimes under greenhouse conditions. Journal Animal and Plant Sciences 25 (5): 1398–1410.Google Scholar
  4. Alishiri, R., F. Paknejad, and F. Aghayari. 2014. Simulation of sugar beet growth under different water regimes and nitrogen levels by AquaCrop. International Journal of Biosciences 4 (4): 1–9.Google Scholar
  5. Alizade, H.A., B. Nazari, M. Parsinejad, E.H. Ramazani, and H.R. Janbaz. 2010. Evaluation of AquaCrop model in low irrigation management of wheat in Karaj region. Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage 2 (4): 273–283.Google Scholar
  6. Allen, R.G., L.S. Pereira, D. Raes, and M. Smith. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration-guidelines for computing crop water requirements. Irrigation and Drainage, paper no. 56, Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  7. Araya, A., S. Habtu, K.M. Hadgu, A. Kebede, and T. Dejene. 2010. Test of AquaCrop model in simulating biomass and yield of water deficient and irrigated barley (Hordeum vulgare). Agricultural Water Management 97: 1838–1846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bitri, M., and S. Grazhdani. 2015. Validation of Aqua Crop model in the simulation of sugar beet production under different water regimes in southeastern Albania. International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology 4 (6): 171–181.Google Scholar
  9. Carrijo, D.R., M.E. Lundy, and B.A. Linquist. 2017. Rice yields and water use under alternate wetting and drying irrigation: A meta-analysis. Field Crops Research 203: 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ćosić, M., R. Stričević, N. Djurović, D. Moravčević, M. Pavlović, and M. Todorović. 2017. Predicting biomass and yield of sweet pepper grown with and without plastic film mulching under different water supply and weather conditions. Agricultural Water Management 188: 91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cribb, J. 2017. Surviving the 21st century humanity’s ten great challenges and how we can overcome them, 1st ed. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Donovan, T.M.O. 2002. The Effects of seed treatment, sowing date, cultivar and harvest date on the yield and quality of sugar beet. M.Sc. thesis. Department of Crop Science, Horticulture and Forestry, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin.Google Scholar
  13. Doorenbos, J., and A. Kassam. 1979. Yield response to water. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Irrigation and Drainage 33: 257.Google Scholar
  14. Expósito, A., and J. Berbel. 2017. Sustainability implications of deficit irrigation in a mature water economy: A case study in southern Spain. Sustainability 9 (4): 1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evett, S.R., and J.A. Tolk. 2009. Introduction: Can water use efficiency be modeled well enough to impact crop management? Agronomy Journal 101 (3): 423–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. FAO. 2016. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved on 23 Sept 2017. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/About_us/index.stm.
  17. Fernández, J.E. 2017. Plant-based methods for irrigation scheduling of woody crops. Horticulture 3 (2): 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gebretsadik, T.W. 2016. Rapid population growth and environmental degradation in Ethiopia: Challenges and concerns. Pyrex Journal of Ecology and The Natural Environment 2 (4): 24–28.Google Scholar
  19. Gee, G.W., and J.W. Bauder. 1986. Particle-size analysis. In Methods of soil analysis, part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods. Agronomy monograph no. 9, 2nd ed, ed. A. Klute, 383–411. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy/Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
  20. Geerts, S., and D. Raes. 2009. Deficit irrigation as an on-farm strategy to maximize crop water production in dry areas. Agricultural Water Management 96: 1275–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghanbbari, A., and A. Tavassoli. 2013. Simulation of wheat yield using Aquacrop model in Shirvan region. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences 6 (6): 342–352.Google Scholar
  22. Ghane, E., M. Feizi, B. Mostafazadeh-Fard, and E. Landi. 2009. Water productivity of winter wheat in different irrigation/planting methods using saline irrigation water. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 11: 131–137.Google Scholar
  23. Greaves, G.E., and Y.-M. Wang. 2016. Assessment of FAO AquaCrop model for simulating maize growth and productivity under deficit irrigation in a tropical environment. Water 8 (12): 557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hadebe, S.T., A.T. Modi, and T. Mabhaudhi. 2017. Calibration and testing of AquaCrop for selected sorghum genotypes. Water SA 43 (2): 209–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Heerman, D.F. 1985. ET in irrigation management. In Proceedings of the national conference on advances in evapotranspiration. 323–334. American Society of Agricultural Engineers Publication.Google Scholar
  26. International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA). 2016. Effect of deficit irrigation on growth and yield of Garlic. Reducing land degradation and farmers’ vulnerability to climate change in the highland dry areas of North-Western Ethiopia. Technical report of experimental activities.Google Scholar
  27. Iqbal, M.A., Y. Shen, R. Stricevic, H. Peia, H. Sun, E. Amiric, A. Penasd, and S. del Riod. 2014. Evaluation of the FAO AquaCrop model for winter wheat on the NorthChina Plain under deficit irrigation from field experiment to regionalyield simulation. Agricultural Water Management 135: 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jensen, M.E. (ed.). 1980. Design and operation of farm irrigation system, 501–580. St. Joseph: American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Monograph.Google Scholar
  29. Klute, A. 1986. Methods of soil analysis, part 1 (physical and mineralogical methods), chapter 36, agronomy 9, 2nd ed, 901–926. Madison: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
  30. Liu, E.K., W.Q. He, and C.R. Yan. 2014. ‘White revolution’ to ‘white pollution’- agricultural plastic film mulch in China. Environmental Research Letters 9: 091001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Loague, K., and R.E. Green. 1991. Statistical and graphical methods for evaluating solute transport models: Overview and application. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 7: 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Malik, A., A.S. Shakir, M. Ajmal, M.J. Khan, and T.A. Khan. 2017. Assessment of AquaCrop model in simulating sugar beet canopy cover, biomass and root yield under different irrigation and field management practices in semi-arid regions of Pakistan. Water Resources Management 31 (13): 4275–4292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mekonnen, M.M., and A.Y. Hoekstra. 2016. Four billion people facing severe water scarcity. Science Advances 2 (2): e1500323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Michael, A.M. (ed.). 1978. Irrigation theory and practice, 542–543. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt Ltd.Google Scholar
  35. Nazeer, M., and H. Ali. 2012. Modeling the response of onion crop to deficit irrigation. Journal of Agricultural Technology 8 (1): 393–402.Google Scholar
  36. OECD. 2008. Environmental outlook to 2030. ISBN: 9789264040489.Google Scholar
  37. Pawar, G.S., M.U. Kale, and J.N. Lokhande. 2017. Response of AquaCrop model to different irrigation schedules for irrigated Cabbage. Agricultural Research 6 (1): 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Qadir, M., E. Quillérou, V. Nangia, G. Murtaza, M. Singh, R.J. Thomas, and P. Drechsel. 2014. Economics of salt-induced land degradation and restoration. Natural Resources Forum 38: 282–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raes, D., P. Steduto, T.C. Hisao, and E. Fereres. 2010. AquaCrop—the FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: Reference manual annexes. www.fao.org/nr/water/aquacrop.html.
  40. Razzaghi, F., Z. Zhou, M.N. Andersen, and F. Plauborg. 2017. Simulation of potato yield in temperate condition by the AquaCrop model. Agricultural Water Management 191: 113–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saad, A.M., M.G. Mohamed, and G.A. El-Sanat. 2014. Evaluating AquaCrop model to improve crop water productivity at North Delta soils, Egypt. Advances in Applied Sciences Research 5 (5): 293–304.Google Scholar
  42. Sahin, U., S. Ors, F.M. Kiziloglu, and Y.K. Kuslu. 2014. Evaluation of water use and yield responses of drip-irrigated sugar beet with different irrigation techniques. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 74 (3): 302–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Salemi, H., M.A.M. Soom, T.S. Lee, S.F. Mousavi, A. Ganji, and M.K. Yusoff. 2011. Application of AquaCrop model in deficit irrigation management of Winter wheat in arid region. African Journal of Agricultural Research 610: 2204–2215.Google Scholar
  44. Shulan, Z., S. Victor, C. Xinping, and Z. Fusuo. 2015. Water use efficiency of dry land maize in the loess plateau of China in response to crop management. Field Crops Research 163: 55–63.Google Scholar
  45. Siyal, A.A., A.S. Mashori, K.L. Bristow, and MTh van Genuchten. 2016. Alternate furrow irrigation can radically improve water productivity of okra. Agricultural Water Management 173: 55–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Steduto, P., T.C. Hsio, D. Raes, and E. Fereres. 2009. AquaCrop-the FAO Crop model to simulate yield response to Water. Concepts and underlying principles. Agronomy Journal 101: 426–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stricevic, R., M. Cosic, N. Djurovic, B. Pejic, and L. Maksimovic. 2011. Assessment of the FAO AquaCrop model in the simulation of rainfed and supplementally irrigated maize, sugar beet and sunflower. Agricultural Water Management 98: 1615–1621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tan, K.H. 1996. Soil sampling preparation and analysis. New York: Marcel Dicker, Inc.Google Scholar
  49. Todorovic, M., R. Albrizio, L. Zivotic, M.-T.A. Saab, C. Stöckle, and P. Steduto. 2009. Assessment of AquaArop, CropSyst, and WOFOST models in the simulation of sunflower growth under different water regimes. Agronomy Journal 101: 509–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Toumi, J., S. Er-Raki, J. Ezzahar, S. Khabba, L. Jarlan, and A. Chehbouni. 2016. Performance assessment of AquaCrop model for estimating evapotranspiration, soil water content and grain yield of winter wheat in Tensift Al Haouz (Morocco): Application to irrigation management. Agricultural Water Mangement 163: 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. UN 2017. Facts and figures. Waste water the untapped resources. The United Nations world water development report.Google Scholar
  52. Xu, J., C. Li, H. Liu, P. Zhou, Z. Tao, P. Wang, Q. Meng, and M. Zhou. 2015. The effects of plastic film mulching on maize growth and water use in dry and rainy years in Northeast China. PLoS ONE 10 (5): e0125781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Walker, W.R. 1989. Guidelines for designing and evaluating surface irrigation systems. FAO irrigation and drainage paper 45.Google Scholar
  54. Willmott, C.J. 1982. Some comments on the evaluation of model performance. Bulletin of American Meteorological Society 63: 1309–1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yang, Y.-M., X.-J. Liu, W.-Q. Li, and C.-Z. Li. 2006. Effect of different mulch materials on winter wheat production in desalinized soil in Heilonggang region of North China. Journal of Zhejiang University Science B 7 (11): 858–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zacharias, S., C.D. Heatwole, and C.W. Coakley. 1996. Robust quantitative techniques for validating pesticide transport models. Transactions of American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 39: 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Sugar Research & Promotion 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abdul Malik
    • 1
    Email author
  • Abdul Sattar Shakir
    • 2
  • Muhammad Jamal Khan
    • 3
  • Muhammad Ajmal
    • 1
  • Muhammad Shahzad Khattak
    • 1
  • Taj Ali Khan
    • 1
  • Zia Ul Haq
    • 1
  • Mahmood Alam Khan
    • 1
  • Naeem Ijaz
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural EngineeringUniversity of Engineering and TechnologyPeshawarPakistan
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Engineering and TechnologyLahorePakistan
  3. 3.Department of Water ManagementThe University of AgriculturePeshawarPakistan
  4. 4.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Engineering and TechnologyTaxilaPakistan

Personalised recommendations