当前位置: X-MOL 学术J. Agric. Sci. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Yield and water productivity response of quinoa to various deficit irrigation regimes applied with surface and subsurface drip systems
The Journal of Agricultural Science ( IF 1.7 ) Pub Date : 2021-04-20 , DOI: 10.1017/s0021859621000265
Y. Bozkurt Çolak , A. Yazar , A. Alghory , S. Tekin

This study evaluated the yield and water productiivty response of quinoa to regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), partial root-zone drying (PRD) and conventional deficit irrigation (DI) and full irrigation (FI) using surface (SD) and subsurface drip (SSD) systems in 2016 and 2017 in the eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey. The treatments consisted of RDI, PRD50, DI50, DI75 and FI. A rainfed treatment (RF) was also included in the study. The experimental design was split plots with four replications. DI75 and DI50 received 75 and 50% of FI, respectively. PRD50 received 50% of FI, but from alternative laterals. RDI received 50% of FI during vegetative stage until flowering, and then received 100% of water requirement. The results showed that quinoa under SD used slightly more water than SSD due to reduced surface evaporation. RDI resulted in water saving of 23 and 21% for SD and SSD, respectively, compared to FI; and RDI produced statistically similar grain yields to FI. DI75 treatment resulted in water savings of 16% for both drip methods in the first year and 10 and 25% for SD and SSD systems, respectively, in the second year. PRD50 produced greater yield than DI50 eventhough they received the same amount of irrigation water. RF and PRD50 treatments resulted in significantly greater water productivity (WP) values than other treatments. There was no significant difference between SD and SSD regarding the grain and dry matter yields and WP values. Thus, RDI and DI75 appear to be good alternatives to FI for sustainable quinoa production in the Mediterranean region.

中文翻译:

藜麦对采用地表和地下滴灌系统的各种亏缺灌溉制度的产量和水分生产率响应

本研究评估了藜麦对调节亏缺灌溉 (RDI)、部分根区干燥 (PRD) 和常规亏缺灌溉 (DI) 和充分灌溉 (FI) 使用地表 (标清) 和地下滴水 (固态硬盘) 2016 年和 2017 年在土耳其东地中海地区的系统。治疗包括 RDI、PRD50, DI50, DI75和FI。该研究还包括雨养处理(RF)。实验设计是具有四个重复的裂区。DI75和 DI50分别获得 75% 和 50% 的 FI。珠三角50获得了 50% 的 FI,但来自其他支路。RDI在营养阶段至开花期间接受50%的FI,然后接受100%的需水量。结果表明,藜麦在标清用水略多于固态硬盘由于减少了表面蒸发。RDI 可节水 23% 和 21%标清固态硬盘,分别与 FI 相比;和 RDI 产生的粮食产量在统计上与 FI 相似。DI75第一年两种滴灌方法的水处理分别节约了 16% 和 10% 和 25%标清固态硬盘系统,分别在第二年。珠三角50产生比 DI 更高的产量50尽管他们获得了相同数量的灌溉水。射频和珠三角50与其他处理相比,处理导致显着更高的水生产力(WP)值。之间没有显着差异标清固态硬盘关于谷物和干物质产量和 WP 值。因此,RDI 和 DI75似乎是地中海地区可持续藜麦生产的 FI 的良好替代品。
更新日期:2021-04-20
down
wechat
bug