| Literature DB >> 31952245 |
Mohamed A M Eid1, Ali A Abdel-Salam2, Haythum M Salem2, Samira E Mahrous1, Mahmoud F Seleiman3,4, Abdullah A Alsadon3, Talaat H I Solieman3,5, Abdullah A Ibrahim3.
Abstract
Two field experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of three drip irrigation regimes (G1: 120% crop evapotranspiration (ETc), G2: 100% ETc, and G3: 80% ETc) and four nitrogen (N) source treatments (S0: non-fertilized; S1: urea, S2: ammonium nitrate, and S3: ammonium sulfate on water consumption use, water utilization efficiency, chlorophyll, yield and tubers quality of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.; cv Diamond) under a drip irrigation system during two successive winter seasons (2015/16 and 2016/17)). Nitrogen fertilization was applied at 380 kg ha-1 as standard application for potato in the investigated area. The highest tubers yield was obtained from potato grown with G1 S2 (65.8 Mg ha-1), G1 S3 (63.6 Mg ha-1), G2 S2 (64.1 Mg ha-1), and G2 S3 (62.4 Mg ha-1), while the lowest tubers yield was obtained from potato grown with G3 S0 (10.1 Mg ha-1) and G2S0 (17.4 Mg ha-1). Different treatments of N source resulted in a significant increase for water use efficiency (WUtE) compared with unfertilized treatment. For the interaction effect, the highest WUtE was obtained from potato grown with G3 S2 (18.1 kg m-3), followed by G3 S3 (17.6 kg m-3), while the lowest WUtE was obtained from plants grown with G3S0 (3.0 kg m-3). However, the highest chlorophyll content was obtained from plants grown with G1 and any N source, followed by G2S1-3, while the lowest chlorophyll content was obtained from those grown with G3S0. The highest N, S, protein, and P contents in tubers were obtained from plants grown with G3S3, G3S2, and G2S2, while the highest K content in tubers was obtained from plants grown with G1S1 and G1S2. In concussion, the integrative effects of G1 or G2 with S2 or S3 is recommended for high productivity, while the integrative effects of G3S3 and G3S2 are recommended for high quality tubers.Entities:
Keywords: WUE; drip irrigation; nitrogen source; quality; tuber yield
Year: 2020 PMID: 31952245 PMCID: PMC7020165 DOI: 10.3390/plants9010110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Main soil moisture parameters and soil bulk density of the experiments.
| Depth | Field Capacity | Wilting Point | Available Water (AW) | Bulk Density | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | cm | % | cm | % | cm | ||
| 0–15 | 35.8 | 6.50 | 18.8 | 3.41 | 17.0 | 3.10 | 1.21 |
| 15–30 | 33.4 | 5.91 | 17.3 | 3.10 | 16.1 | 2.81 | 1.18 |
| 30–45 | 31.9 | 5.98 | 15.1 | 2.83 | 16.8 | 3.15 | 1.25 |
| 45–60 | 31.7 | 7.23 | 16.8 | 3.83 | 14.9 | 3.4 | 1.52 |
Main physical and chemical properties of soil in the investigated area.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| CaCO3− (gkg−1) | 42.90 |
| Organic matter (g kg−1) | 20.50 |
| Total N (mg kg−1) | 210.00 |
| Available N (mg kg−1) | 51.00 |
| Available K (mg kg−1) | 400.00 |
| Available P (mg kg−1) | 22.30 |
| pH (1:2.5 | 7.49 |
| EC dS m−1 (paste extract) | 2.44 |
| Saturation % | 53.00 |
| Cations and anions in soil paste extract (m molc L−1) | |
| Na+ | 3.57 |
| K+ | 0.97 |
| Ca2+ | 17.05 |
| Mg2+ | 2.86 |
| CO32− | 0.00 |
| HCO3− | 5.42 |
| Cl− | 9.32 |
| SO42− | 9.71 |
| Clay (%) | 36.39 |
| Silt (%) | 22.88 |
| Fine sand (%) | 36.40 |
| Coarse sand (%) | 4.33 |
| Texture (International Texture Classification) | Light Clay |
Meteorological data of the experimental site, crop coefficient (Kc), and crop evapotranspiration (ETo) in the 2015/16 and 2016/17 seasons (the average of the two seasons).
| Month | Temperature (°C) | WS | RH | SD (h) | Precipitation | Kc | ETo | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Max.) | (Min.) | |||||||
| October | 31.7 | 18.3 | 3.7 | 55 | 11.2 | 17.5 | 0.50 | 5.87 |
| November | 26.5 | 14.2 | 3.6 | 57 | 10.4 | 25.2 | 0.78 | 4.45 |
| December | 20.8 | 10.4 | 4.1 | 64 | 10.1 | 24.7 | 1.11 | 3.32 |
| January | 17.9 | 7.8 | 3.9 | 64 | 10.3 | 10.2 | 0.67 | 2.48 |
| Mean | 24.2 | 12.6 | 3.8 | 60.0 | 10.5 | 19.4 | 0.76 | 4.03 |
WS = Wind speed; RH = Relative humidity; SD = Sunshine duration; Kc = Crop coefficient; ETo = reference crop evapotranspiration.
Average monthly and seasonal irrigation water supplied to the potato crop.
| Month | Irrigation Treatment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | G2 | G3 | |
| m3 Month−1 | m3 Month−1 | m3 Month−1 | |
| October | 988 | 823 | 659 |
| November | 1661 | 1384 | 1107 |
| December | 1773 | 1477 | 1182 |
| January | 697 | 581 | 464 |
| Total (m3 season−1) | 5119 | 4265 | 3412 |
G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation.
Figure 1Average effect of drip irrigation regime (B), and its interaction with N source (A) on water consumptive use (WCU; m3 ha−1) by potato (average of the two seasons). G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation; S0 = Unfertilized (control); S1 = Urea; S2 = Ammonium nitrate; S3 = Ammonium sulfate; and Error bars = Standard error of means (SEM).
Figure 2Average effect of drip irrigation regime (B), N source (C) and their interaction (A) on the total chlorophyll (mg g−1 FW) of potato. G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation; S0 = Unfertilized (control); S1 = Urea; S2 = Ammonium nitrate; S3 = Ammonium sulfate; and Error bars = Standard error of means (SEM). Values for the same parameter without a common letter were significantly differed (P ˃ 0.05).
Tubers and foliage yields of potato (Mg ha−1) as affected by drip irrigation regime and N source interaction.
| Irrigation Regime (G) | N Source (S) | Yield of Tubers (Mg ha−1) | Foliage Fresh Weigh (Mg ha−1) | Foliage Dry Weigh (Mg ha−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | S0 | 24.64 e | 11.82 c | 2.68 d |
| S1 | 59.04 b | 25.10ab | 5.49 c | |
| S2 | 65.79 a | 28.88 a | 8.28 a | |
| S3 | 63.60 a | 25.91 a | 7.13 b | |
| G2 | S0 | 17.42 f | 7.71 d | 1.23 e |
| S1 | 54.79 c | 22.49 ab | 5.20 c | |
| S2 | 64.11 a | 27.07 a | 6.91 b | |
| S3 | 62.40 ab | 22.43 b | 5.67 c | |
| G3 | S0 | 10.15 g | 3.52 e | 0.40 e |
| S1 | 51.64 d | 4.69 d | 0.89 e | |
| S2 | 61.57 ab | 5.48 d | 1.13 e | |
| S3 | 60.11 b | 4.84 d | 0.87 e |
G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation; S0 = Unfertilized (control); S1 = Urea; S2 = Ammonium nitrate; S3 = Ammonium sulfate; values in the same column without a common letter are significantly differed (P ˃ 0.05).
Figure 3Average effect of drip irrigation regime (A) and N source (B) on tubers and foliage yields of potato (Mg ha−1). FW = fresh weight; DW = dry weight; G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation; S0 = Unfertilized (control); S1 = Urea; S2 = Ammonium nitrate; S3 = Ammonium sulfate; values for the same parameter without a common letter are significantly differed (P ˃ 0.05).
Figure 4Average effect of drip irrigation regime (B), N source (C) and their interaction (A) on water utilization efficiency (WUtE; kg m−3) of potato. G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation; S0 = Unfertilized (control); S1 = Urea; S2 = Ammonium nitrate; S3 = Ammonium sulfate; values for the same parameter without a common letter are significantly differed (P ˃ 0.05).
Chemical composition of potato tubers as affected by drip irrigation regime and N source interaction.
| Irrigation Regime | N source | Nitrogen | Phosphorus | Potassium | Sulfur | Protein |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | S0 | 4.24 c | 2.10 ab | 28.04 b | 0.04 d | 26.50 c |
| S1 | 6.63 b | 2.76 a | 32.29 a | 1.01 c | 41.44 b | |
| S2 | 8.55 ab | 2.50 a | 32.78 a | 1.19 b | 53.44 ab | |
| S3 | 7.95 b | 2.38 ab | 24.76 bc | 1.28 b | 49.69 b | |
| G2 | S0 | 3.39 c | 1.97 b | 24.46 c | 1.04 c | 21.19 c |
| S1 | 9.60 ab | 2.21 ab | 25.22 bc | 1.10 bc | 60.00 ab | |
| S2 | 10.25 a | 2.52 a | 22.93 c | 1.27 b | 64.06 a | |
| S3 | 9.80 ab | 2.28 ab | 24.29 c | 1.41 a | 61.25 ab | |
| G3 | S0 | 2.75 c | 2.60 d | 16.87 d | 1.14 bc | 17.19 c |
| S1 | 9.03 ab | 2.42 ab | 25.66 bc | 1.25 b | 56.44 ab | |
| S2 | 10.83 a | 2.55 a | 26.65 b | 1.33 ab | 67.69 a | |
| S3 | 11.37 a | 2.50 a | 26.29 b | 1.49 a | 71.06 a |
G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation; S0 = Unfertilized (control); S1 = Urea; S2 = Ammonium nitrate; S3 = Ammonium sulfate; values in the same column without a common letter are significantly differed (P ˃ 0.05).
Main effects of drip irrigation regime and N source on chemical composition of potato tubers (g kg−1).
| Parameters | Nitrogen | Phosphorus | Potassium | Sulfur | Protein | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatments | ||||||
| Irrigation regime (G) | ||||||
| G1 | 6.84 b | 2.44 a | 29.47 a | 0.87 c | 42.75 b | |
| G2 | 8.26 a | 2.25 b | 24.23 b | 1.20 b | 51.63 a | |
| G3 | 8.50 a | 2.52 a | 23.87 c | 1.30 a | 53.13 a | |
| N source (S) | ||||||
| S0 | 3.46 c | 2.22 b | 23.12 c | 0.73 d | 21.63 c | |
| S1 | 8.42 b | 2.46 ab | 27.72 a | 1.12 c | 52.63 b | |
| S2 | 9.88 a | 2.52 a | 27.45 a | 1.27 b | 61.75 a | |
| S3 | 9.71 a | 2.39 ab | 25.11 b | 1.40 a | 60.69 a | |
G1 = 120% ETc irrigation; G2 = 100% ETc irrigation; G3 = 80% ETc irrigation; S0 = Unfertilized (control); S1 = Urea; S2 = Ammonium nitrate; S3 = Ammonium sulfate; values in the same column without a common letter are significantly differed (P ˃ 0.05).