Effects of Different Irrigation Levels on Sugar Beet and Potential Use of Crop Water Stress Index in Irrigation Scheduling

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
H. A. Irik 1
E. Kaymaz 2
H. Neslihan Samutoglu 2
O. Fikret GURKAN 3
A. Unlukara 1
1 Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Erciyes, Kayseri, Türkiye.
2 Department of Research and Development, Kayseri Sugar Beet Factory, Kayseri, Türkiye.
3 Department of Research and Development, Kayseri Sugar Beet Factory, Kayseri, Türkiye
10.22034/JAST.26.5.1143
Abstract
With the increasing world population, global warming, and climate change, water scarcity significantly limits water use in crop production. Therefore, timely and accurate determination of water stress is very important for the correct and effective management of existing water resources and minimizing harmful effects on crop production. Two years of experiments were conducted in the water-limited region in Türkiye to investigate the possible use of the Crop Water Stress Index (CWSI) as a remote sensing technology in sugar beet irrigation scheduling. Four different Irrigation levels (I50: 50% deficit, I75: 25% deficit, I100: full irrigation, and I125: 25% excess irrigation) were applied to sugar beet by drip irrigation system. The amount of applied irrigation water and crop evapotranspiration varied between 238-540 and 350-580 mm in 2021, and between 324-807 and 502-829 mm in 2022. In both years, the highest beed yields were obtained from I100 treatments (83 and 130 t ha-1) and the lowest from I50 treatments (66.7 and 67.4 t ha-1). Water Productivity (WP) and Irrigation Water Productivity (IWP) in both years decreased significantly by excessive irrigation. CWSI values ranged between 0.16-0.98 in 2021 and between 0.02-0.71 in 2022. CWSI was significantly related to yield and Leaf Area Index (LAI). According to the results, CWSI could be used successfully in sugar beet irrigation scheduling and yield estimation.

Keywords

Subjects

1. Abu-Shahba, M.S., Mansour, M.M., Mohamed, H.I. and Mahmoud, R.S. 2021. Comparative Cultivation and Biochemical Analysis of Iceberg Lettuce Grown in Sand Soil and Hydroponics With or Without Microbubbles and Macrobubbles. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr., 21:389–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-020-00368-x
2. Aladenola, O. and Madramootoo, C. 2012. Effect of Different Water Application On Yield and Water Use Of Bell Pepper Under Greenhouse Conditions. Northeast Agricultural and Biological Engineering Conference Canadian Society for Bioengineering, 15-18.
3. Al-Jamal, M. S., Ball, S. and Sammis, T. W. 2001. Comparison of Sprinkler, Trickle And Furrow Irrigation Efficiencies For Onion Production. Agric. Water Manag., 46: 253-266.
4. Atzberger, C. 2013. Advances in Remote Sensing of Agriculture: Context Description, Existing Operational Monitoring Systems and Major İnformation Needs. Remote Sens., 5(2), 949-981.
5. Bahmani, O., Sabziparvar, A.A. and Khosravi, R. 2017. Evaluation of Yield, Quality and Crop Water Stress Index of Sugar Beet Under Different Irrigation Regimes. Water Science and Technology: Water Supp., 17 (2): 571–578. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2016.163
6. Colak, Y.B. and Yazar, A. 2017. Evaluation of Crop Water Stress İndex on Royal Table Grape Variety Under Partial Root Drying and Conventional Deficit İrrigation Regimes in The Mediterranean Region. Sci. Hortic., 224: 384–394.
7. Comas, L.H., Trout, T.J., DeJonge, K.C., Zhang, H. and Gleason, S.M. 2019. Water Productivity Under Strategic Growth Stage-Based Deficit İrrigation in Maize. Agric. Water Manag., 212: 433–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.07.015.
7. Cosic, M., Stricevic, R., Djurovic, N., Lipovac, A., Bogdan, I. and Pavlovic, M. 2018. Effects of Irrigation Regime and Application of Kaolin on Canopy Temperatures of Sweet Pepper and Tomato. Sci. Hortic. (Amst.), 238: 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2018.04.035.
8. El-All, A. and Makhlouf, B.S.I. 2017. Response of Sugar Beet to Continuous Deficit Irrigation and Foliar Application of Some Micronutrients Under Sandy Soil Conditions. J. Soil Sci. Agric. Eng., 8(12):749-760.
9. Fabeiro C., Martín De, F., Olalla, S., López, R. and Domínguez, A. 2003. Production and Quality of The Sugar Beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) Cultivated Under Controlled Deficit Irrigation Conditions in A Semi-Arid Climate. Agric. Water Manag., 62: 215–227.
10. Fucs, M. and Tanner, C.B. 1966. Infrared Thermometry of Vegetation. Agron. J., 58:597-601.
11. Gencel B. 2009. Estımatıng Amount of Irrıgatıon Water to Apply Using Crop Water Stress Index on Second Crop Maize. Cukurova University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences. Deparment of Agricultural Structures and Irrigation Ph.D. Thesis.
12. Golgul I., Kirnak, H. and İrik, H.A. 2023. Yield Components and Crop Water Stress Index (CWSI) of Mung Bean Grown Under Deficit Irrigations. Gesunde Pflanzen., 75:271-281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-022-00698-z.
13. Guerrero, A., De Neve, S. and Mouazen, A.M. 2021. Data Fusion Approach for Map-Based Variable-Rate Nitrogen Fertilization in Barley and Wheat. Soil Tillage Res., 205: 104789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104789.
14. Han, M., Zhang, H., Dejonge, K.C., Comas, L.H. and Gleason, S. 2018. Comparison of Three Crop Water Stress Index Models With Sap Flow Measurements in Maize. Agric. Water Manag., 203:366-375.
15. Hassanli, A.M., Ahmadirad, S. and Beecham, S. 2010. Evaluation of The Influence of Irrigation Methods and Water Quality on Sugar Beet Yield and Water Use Efficiency. Agric. Water Manag. 97: 357–362.
16. Howell, T.A., Cuenca R.H. and Solomon, K.H. 1990. Crop Yield Response: Management of Farm Irrigation Systems, pp.93-122.
17. Howell, T.A. 2001. Enhancing Water Use Efficiency in Irrigated Agriculture. Agron. J., 93(1):281-289.
18. Icumsa 2007. International Commission for Uniform Methods of Sugar Analysis.
19. Idso, S.B., Jackson, R.D., Pinter, R.D., Reginato, R.J. and Hatfield, J.L. 1981. Normalizing the Stres-Degree-Day Parameter For Environmental Variability. Agric. Meteorol., 24: 45-55.
20. James L.G. 1993. Principles of Farm Irrigation System Design. Florida: Krieger publishing company.
21. Kanemasu, E.T., Steiner, J.L., Biere, A.W., Woman, F.O. and Stone, J.F. 1983. Irrigation in the Great Plains. Agric. Water Manag., 7:157-178.
22. Lesk, C., Rowhani, P. and Ramankutty, N. 2016. Influence of Extreme Weather Disasters on Global Crop Production. Nature 529: 84–87. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16467
23. Keller, J. and Bliesner, R.D. 1990. Sprinkle and Trickle Irrigation. Chapman and Hall,115 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, pp. 10003.
24. King, B.A., Shellie, K.C., Tarkalson, D.D., Levin, A.D., Sharma, V. and Bjorneberg, D.L. 2020. Data-Driven Models for Canopy Temperature-Based Irrigation Scheduling. Trans. ASABE., 63 (5): 1579–1592. https://doi.org/10.13031/TRANS.13901.
25. Kirnak, H, Irik, H.A. and Unlukara, A. 2019. Potential use of crop water stress index (CWSI) in irrigation scheduling of drip-irrigated seed pumpkin plants with different irrigation levels. Sci. Hortic. (Amst.)., 256:108608.
26. Kiymaz, S. and Ertek, A. 2015. Yield and Quality of Sugar Beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) at Different Water and Nitrogen Levels Under The Climatic Conditions of Kırsehir, Turkey. Agric. Water Manag., 158(1):156-165.
27. Kiziloglu, F.M., Şahin, U., Angın, İ. and Anapalı, Ö. 2006. The Effect of Deficit Irrigation on Water – Yield Relationship of Sugar Beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) 115 Under Cool Season and Semi-Arid Climatic Conditions. Int. Sugar Journal., 108(1):90-94.
28. Köksal, E.S. 2006. Determination of The Effects of Different Irrigation Level on Sugarbeet Yield, Quality and Physiology Using Infrared Thermometer and Spectroradiometer. Ankara University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences. Deparment of Agricultural Structures and Irrigation Ph.D. Thesis.
29. Köksal, E.S. and Yıldırım Y.E. 2011. Using Crop Water Stress Index for Determination of Sugar Beet Irrigation Time. Anadolu J. Agr. Sci., 26: 57–62.
30. Köksal E.S., Gungor, Y. and Yildirim Y.E. 2011. Spectral Reflectance Characteristics of Sugar Beet Under Different Levels of Irrigation Water and Relationships Between Growth Parameters and Spectral Indexes. Irrig. Drain., 60: 187–195.
31. Kovar, M. and Cerny, I. 2016. Evaluation of Water Regime in Sugar Beet Plants By Infrared Thermography. Listy Cukrovarnicke a Reparske 132: 54–59.
32. Lobell, D.B., Schlenker, W.S. and Costa-Roberts, J. 2011. Climate Trends Andglobal Crop Production Since 1980. Science 333: 616–620.
33. Lipovac, A., Bezdan, A., Morevcevic, D., Djurovic, N., Cosic, M., Benka, P. and Stricevic, R. 2022. Correlation Between Ground Measurements and UAV Sensed Vegetation Indices for Yiled Prediction of Common Bean Grown Under Different Irrigation Treatments and Sowing Periods. Water., 14(22):3786. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14223786
34. Mahmoodi, R., Maralian, H. and Aghabarati, A. 2008. Effects of Limited Irrigation on Root Yield and Quality of Sugar Beet (Beta Vulgaris L.). Afr. J. Biotechnol., 2(1):4475– 4478.
35. Masri, M.I., Ramadan, B., El-Shafai, A. and El-Kady, M. 2015. Effect of Water Stress and Fertilization on Yield and Quality of Sugar Beet Under Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation Systems In Sandy Soil. Int. J. Agric. Sci. 5: 414–425.
36. SAS Institute Inc. 1999. SAS/GRAPH Software: Reference, version 8. Cary. NC: SAS Institute Inc.
37. Ortiz, J.N., De Juan, J.A., Tarjuelo, J.M. 2010. Analysis of Water Aplication Uniformity From A Center Pivot and Its Effect on Sugar Beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) Yield. Biosyst. Eng., 105: 367-379.
38. Sezen, S. M., Yazar, A., Daşgan, Y., Yucel, S., Akyıldız, A., Tekin, S. and Akhoundnejad, Y. 2014. Evaluation of Crop Water Stress Index (CWSI) for Red Pepper With Drip and Furrow Irrigation Under Varying Irrigation Regimes. Agric. Water Manag., 143:59-70.
39. Stricevic, R., Srdjevic, Z., Lipovac, A., Prodanovic, S., Petrovic-Obradovic, O., Cosic M. and Djurovic, N. 2020. Synergy of Experts and Farmers Responses in Climate-Change Adaption Planning İn Serbia. Ecol. Indic. 116:106481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106481.
40. Surendran, U., Chandran, C. and Joseph, E. J. 2017. Hydroponic Cultivation of Mentha Spicata and Comparison of Biochemical and Antioxidant Activities With Soil-Grown Plants. Acta Physiol. Plant., 39(1): 1-14.
41. Süheri S., Topak, R. and Yavuz, D. 2007. The Effects of Different Irrigation Regimes on Yield and Water Use Efficiency of Sugar Beet. Selcuk J. Agr. Food Sci., 21: 37–45.
42. Tarkalson, D.D., King, B.A. and Bjorneberg, D.L. 2018. Yield Production Functions of Irrigated Sugarbeet in An Arid Climate. Agric. Water Manag., 200: 1–9.
43. Topak, R., Süheri, S. and Acar, B. 2011. Effect of Different Drip Irrigation Regimes on Sugar Beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) Yield, Quality and Water Use Efficiency in Middle Anatolian, Turkey. Irrig. Sci., 29: 79–89.
44. Topak, R., Acar, B., Uyanöz, R. and Ceyhan, E. 2016. Performance of Partial Root Zone Drip Irrigation for Sugar Beet Production in A Semi-Arid Area. Agric. Water Manag., 176:180-190.
45. Unlukara, A. 2019. Effects of Depth-Dependent Irrigation Regimes and Organomineral Fertilizers on Water Useand Quality Attributes of Sugar Beet. Turk. J. Agric. For., 43:5. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1903-56.
46. Yavuz, D., Rashid, B. and Seymen, M. 2023. The Influence of NaCl Salinity on Evapotranspiration, Yield Traits, Antioxidant Status, and Mineral Composition of Lettuce Grown Under Deficit Irrigation. Sci. Hortic. (Amst.)., 310:111776.
47. Yazar, A., Howell, T.A., Dusek, D.A. and Copeland, K.S. 1999. Evaluation of Crop Water Stress Index for Lepa Irrigated Corn. Irrig. Sci., 18: 171–180.
48. Yetik, A.K. and Candoğan B.N. 2022. Optimisation of Irrigation Strategy in Sugar Beet Farming Based on Yield, Quality and Water Productivity. Plant Soil Environ., 68: 358–365
49. Yetik A.K. and Candoğan B.N. 2023. Chlorophyll Response to Water Stress and the Potential of Using Crop Water Stress Index in Sugar Beet Farming. Sugar Tech., 25(1):57-68.
50. Wang, N., Clevers, Jan.G.P.W., Wieneke, S., Bartholomeus, H. and Kooistra L. 2022. Potential of UAV-Based Sun-Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence to Detect Water Stress in Sugar Beet. Agric. For. Meteorol., 323: 109033.
51. Ward, A.D. and Elliot, W.J. 1995. Environmental Hydrology. CRC Press, 462, USA
52. William, S.B. and Mack H.J. 1989. The Possible Use of The Crop Water Stress Index as An Indicator of Evapotranspiration Deficits and Yield Reduıctions in Sweet Corn. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci., 114:542-546.
53. Zhang, H., Ma, L., Douglas-Mankin, K.R., Han, M. and Trout, T.J. 2021. Modeling Maize Production Under Growth Stage-Based Deficit İrrigation Management With RZWQM2. Agric. Water Manag., 248: 106767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.106767
Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology
Volume 26, Issue 5
September and October 2024
Pages 1143-1159