Document Type : Research papers
Authors
1 Environmental Studies and Researches Institute, Sadat City University, Sadat, Egypt
2 Soil Salinity Department, Alexandria Soil, Water and Environment Research Institute, Agriculture Research Center, Giza, Egypt
Abstract
Keywords
Main Subjects
INTRODUCTION
The newly reclaimed lands suffers from increasing rise in temperature and climate impacts on the water, and as a result, the small changes of climate increase the number of individuals at risk of hunger, due to the largely reclaimed desert areas (FAO, 2001).Thus, increases of extreme climate events will lead to a reduction in crop yields on average the effects of climate change (Fischer et al., 2003).The increase in surface temperature lead to a decrease in water dissolved oxygen content, patterns blending or mixing between water quality, the ability to self-purification and an increase in the proliferation of algae, a phenomenon of eutrophication (Hassanien and Medany, 2007; Hegazy et al., 2008), it is also known that the increase in evapotranspiration leads to reduce water availability, salinization of water resources and low groundwater levels (Tarjuelo et al., 2000).An increase in evapotranspiration as a result of higher air temperatures prolong the growing season and increase the use of irrigation water and soil salinization (FAO, 1985). The high temperature leads to a decrease in groundwater levels in the interior, which affects the way of irrigation area (Fischer et al., 2007). The high temperature climate change lead to the low level of water availability of groundwater, add that overexploitation in water stored in the aquifers, including increase in water supply costs for any use as a result of the need to pump water from deeper and more distant levels (Hafi et al., 2009: Shah, 2009).The global warming will lead to several risks including the decline in the quantity and quality of water in many arid and semi-arid areas (El-Marsafawy, 2008).Between 1960 -1990 temperature rose from 3-3.5 ° C and is expected by 2050 to increase by another 2 ° C (Coolay and Gleick, 2011; Coolay et al., 2009) There is a connection between climate change and economic growth recommends the development of irrigation systems in the case of climate change (UNFCC, 2007) Water storage, changing irrigation methods and water requirements need huge investments, so we must raise the efficiency of irrigation methods used in a water shortage (Abdelrazek, 2007; Hoffman et al., 1990).Choose the appropriate method of irrigation, Development of irrigation methods and crop suitability need to integrated water management include climate change to increase the efficiency of irrigation (FAO, 2008). The objective of this research is to evaluate irrigation methods through Cantaloupe yield (economic crop), under conditions of climate change.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
I- LOCATION AND CLIMATIC:
El-Khatatba area in Menofya province is a desert region constitutes the western boundary of the Nile Delta encountered 15 Km away from the Rossetta branch of the River Nile. El-Khatatba located at latitude 30o 52/ 66// and Longitude 30o 38/ 11//. Rise above sea level between 20 meters to 50 meters. It falls within the northeast territory of Sadat City and Wadi El Natrun (located 25 Km southwest) as shown in Fig. 1. The climate of the study area falls within arid and semi-arid zones with average temperatures, average humidity and evaporation (Table 1).
|
Fig (1). Location map of the study area
Table (1). Average climate during the year’s cantaloupe crop cultivation
|
Years |
||||
Climate |
Unite |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
Maximum emperature |
C0 |
13.0 |
18.5 |
20.2 |
23.1 |
Minimum Temperature |
C0 |
11 |
10 |
15 |
14 |
Relative Humidity |
% |
60 |
70 |
66 |
65 |
Wind speed |
Km/day |
95 |
85 |
196 |
105 |
ETo |
mm/day |
1.99 |
2.32 |
4.12 |
6.50 |
Source: Nobaria station
II- SOIL SAMPLING:
Soil samples from the surface layer were collected from 4 locations irrigated with 4 irrigation methods represented by 3 replicate in El-Khatatba area. The soil samples were analyzed according to the following methods:
1- Soil bulk density using core sampler, as described by (Richards, 1954).
2- Soil hydraulic conductivity (K cm/ hr) using the constant head test for disturbed coarse textured soils as described by (Baruah and Barthakur,
1997).
3- Mechanical analysis using the pipette method, as cited by (FAO, 1970)
Sodium hexametaphosphate and sodium carbonate were used as dispersing agent. Soil texture was determined using the texture triangle diagram, (Soil Survey Staff, 1998).
4- Electrical conductivity (EC dS/m) of the saturated soil extracts using a conductometer (Jackson, 1958).
5- Soil reaction (pH) of the saturated soil paste was determined using Beckman’s pH meter (Jackson, 1958).
6- Total carbonate content was estimated volumetrically by Collin’s calcimeter (Williams, 1948).
7- Total gypsum was determined by precipitation with acetone (Richards, 1954).
8- Organic matter was determined following Walkley and Black method (Jackson, 1958) the obtained data were presented in Table 2.
Table (2). Soil analysis of the study area under various irrigation methods
|
Irrigation Methods |
||||
Parameter |
Units |
Flood |
Drip |
Sprinkler |
Pivot |
Bulk density |
Mg/m3 |
1.24 |
1.21 |
1.65 |
1.84 |
Kh |
cm/ hour |
6.31 |
2.24 |
1.52 |
6.1 |
Sand |
% |
92.25 |
91.35 |
92.26 |
93 |
Silt |
% |
3.39 |
4.38 |
4.41 |
3.92 |
Clay |
% |
4.36 |
4.27 |
3.33 |
4.35 |
Textural class |
----- |
Sandy |
Sandy |
Sandy |
Sandy |
ECe |
dS/m |
3.9 |
4.1 |
5.2 |
4.5 |
pH |
----- |
7.75 |
7.78 |
7.8 |
7.9 |
CaCO3 |
% |
47 |
29 |
42 |
2 |
Gypsum |
% |
15 |
3 |
24 |
27.2 |
O.M |
% |
0.66 |
0.67 |
0.51 |
0.49 |
III- WATER SAMPLES:
Water samples were taken from the sourcs of irrigation represented by three water wells in the region and three replicates per well and stored in clean glass bottles (WPCF, 1998) for the analysis of the major contents of water.
The water samples were analyzed according to the following methods:
1- pH determined using Beckman’s pH meter (Jackson, 1958).
2- Electrical conductivity (EC dS/m) using conductometer (Jackson, 1958).
3- Soluble cation were determined as follows: calcium and magnesium were determined titrimetrically, using the versenate method; sodium and potassium, using flame photometer (Page et al., 1982).
4-Soluble anions were determined as follows:
Soluble carbonate and bicarbonate by acid titration, chloride by titration with standard silver nitrate and sulfate by EDTA method as described by (Jackson, 1973).
SAR (Sodium Adsobtion Ratio) was calculated as:
Where Na+, Ca++ and Mg++ refer to their concentrations in meq/l (Donahue et al., 1990). The obtained results of water samples analyzed were found in Table 3.
Table (3). Mean composition of wells water used for irrigation
Characteristics |
||||||||||
|
|
|
Cation (meq/L) |
Anion (meq/L) |
SAR |
|||||
|
EC(well water) |
pH |
Na+ |
K+ |
Ca+2 |
Mg+2 |
HCO-3 |
Cl- |
SO4--2 |
|
Well no.1 |
(254 mg/l) (0.41dS/m) |
7.2 |
2.3 |
0.2 |
2.2 |
2.1 |
0.6 |
3.8 |
2.4 |
1.27 |
Well no.2 |
(249 mg/l) (0.39 dS/m) |
7.5 |
2.4 |
0.2 |
2.3 |
2.3 |
1.8 |
3.9 |
1.5 |
1.29 |
Well no.3 |
(246 (mg/l) (0.38 dS/m) |
7.3 |
2.8 |
0.2 |
3.2 |
2.7 |
2.2 |
2.5 |
4.2 |
1.32 |
IV- CANTALOUPE YIELD
1- Cantaloupe yield calculation:
The data collected from Foreign trade data warehouse-Egypt, Control over exports and imports body-Egypt.
Yield (tons) calculated *Total Area X yield feddan
Ex: 340 X 7.4=2516 tons in each area
2- Plant roots length:
Plant roots length is measured by using roots meter (GI- 203 ROOTMETER CID, Inc. USA)
Table (4). Ranges of maximum effective rooting depth (Zr), and soil water depletion fraction for stress (p), of Cantaloupe crops (FAO, 2012)
Crop |
Maximum Root Depth1, Zr (m) |
Depletion Fraction2 (for ET mm/day) p |
c. Vegetables – Cucumber Family (Cucurbitaceae) |
||
Cantaloupe |
0.9-1.5 |
0.45 |
Source: (Natural Resources Management and Environment Department) (FAO, 2012)
1-The larger values for (Zr) are for soils having no significant layering or other characteristics that can restrict rooting depth. The smaller values for Zr may be used for irrigation scheduling and the larger values for modeling soil water stress or for rainfed conditions.
2-The values for p apply for ETc ≈ 5 mm/day. The value for p can be adjusted for different ETc according to p = p table 3 + 0.04 (5 – ETc) Where p is expressed as a fraction and ETc as mm/day
3-How we can available water (Sa) and net irrigation dose (d) calculated?
Irrigation takes place when the permissible percentage (p) of available water (Sa) is depleted from the root depth, i.e. to replenish the depleted water. Therefore: Net depth of irrigation dose is calculated as:
(d) (mm) = (Sa x p) D
Where Sa is the available water in millimeters per meter, p is the permissible depletion (fraction) and D is the root depth (m). Example: Where
Sa = 99 mm/m, p = 0.5, D = 0.4 m,
The net irrigation dose (d) in millimeters to replenish the moisture deficit is:
d = 99 x 0.5 x 0.4 = 19.8 mm.
V-Statistical analysis:
All obtained data of soil, plant and water were statistically analyzed. The data were analyzed using statistical software SYSTAT- 12. One-way analysis of variance was carried out to compare the means of different treatments and least significant differences at P < 0.05 were obtained using Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) (Duncan, 1955).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 5 shows that the cultivated area with cantaloupe in the El-Khatatba area in decline, especially at the year 2015, area cultivated cantaloupe crop in the El-Khatatba decrease. We found the last significant difference between the cultivated areas the height significant in 2015. The areas per year are 2012 (1290), 2013 (1444), 2014 (1410), 2015 (1262) feddan. The cause of low cantaloupe area is to stop the export to overseas. In 2015 drip irrigated area increased compared with another method (716 feddan) Because of the lack of water in the region Figure (2).
Table (5). Soil that use different methods of irrigation for cantaloupe crop area in the years from 2012 to 2015
Irrigation Methods |
Years / Area (feddan)* |
Change between 2012-2015 (feddan) |
|||
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
||
Flood |
340 (%26) |
294 (%20) |
282 (%20) |
255 (%20) |
-85 |
Drip |
630 (%49) |
798 (%55) |
791(%56) |
716 (%57) |
+86 |
Sprinkler |
120 (%9) |
179 (%12) |
187 (%13) |
182 (%14) |
-62 |
Pivot |
200 (%16) |
173 (%12) |
150 (%11) |
109 (%9) |
-91 |
L.S.D |
1.8 |
2.4 |
3.2 |
3.4 |
|
Total Area |
1290 |
1444 |
1410 |
1262 |
-28 |
* hectare = 2.381 feddan
Foreign trade data warehouse-Egypt, Control over exports and imports body-Egypt
As it can be seen in Figure 2 the proportion of drip irrigation Area (Cantaloupe crop percentage) increased in the four years where the yield increased under drip irrigation conditions from 2012 to 2015 (9.3, 10.8, 11.9, 12.5 tons / feddan), respectively as shown in (Table 6)
Figure (2). Irrigation methods for irrigated Cantaloupe crop Area Percentage (feddan) grown in El-Khatatba during 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
Table (6).Cantaloupe yield// feddan production (tons) under different methods of irrigation
Irrigation Methods |
Years / Yield (tons) |
Change between 2012-2015 Ton/ feddan* * |
|||
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
||
Flood |
7.4* |
8.4 |
7.3 |
8.2 |
0.8 |
Drip*** |
9.3 |
10.8 |
11.9 |
12.5 |
3.2 |
Sprinkler |
9.1 |
9.3 |
9.4 |
9.4 |
0.3 |
Pivot |
7.2 |
7.8 |
8.3 |
8.3 |
1.1 |
L.S.D |
1.5 |
1.7 |
1.8 |
1.8 |
|
*The price of a kilogram of Cantaloupe from 0.75 to 1.0 Egyptian pound
* * hectare = 2.381 feddan
*** During 2015, drip irrigation system/ feddan (type of drive unit) cost 1300 Egyptian pound compared to the cost of sprinkle irrigation system/ feddan (type of drive unit) cost 2400 Egyptian pound and pivot system/ feddan (type of drive unit) cost 3000 Egyptian pound are higher in the same year
Whenever cantaloupe production decreased in the cultivated area is generally under different irrigation conditions of 136 565 tones from those of previous years as in Table 7.
This is because the low productivity of cantaloupe crop during the four years due to a low efficiency of the irrigation process, where the ability of surface irrigation efficiency 40-50%, increased salinity of about 20% and 5% alkaline Khatatba soil (Saloman, 1984).
Table (7). Total Cantaloupe yield under different methods of irrigation
Irrigation Methods |
Years /Total Yield (tons) |
Change between 2012-2015 (Ton) |
|||
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
||
Flood |
2516* |
2469.6 |
2058.6 |
2091.0 |
-425 |
Drip |
5859 |
8618.4 |
9412.9 |
8950.0 |
3091 |
Sprinkler |
1092 |
1664.7 |
1757.8 |
1710.8 |
618.8 |
Pivot |
1440 |
1349.4 |
1245.0 |
904.70 |
-535.3 |
Total Yield |
10907 |
14102.1 |
14474 |
13656 |
2749 |
*Total Area X yield feddan Ex 340 X 7.4=2516 tons in each area
Foreign trade data warehouse-Egypt, Control over exports and imports body-Egypt
(Al-Saied, 1998)
Table (8) shows the results of climate change, the amount of evapotranspiration in the region and shows the temperature and wind speed, it explains the overall decline in the productivity of the areas planted cantaloupe under irrigation condition and the farmers prefer to drip irrigation the same result reached to (Rötter and van de Geijn 1999) Fig 3
Table (8). Relationship between Cantaloupe yield percentage and climate change
Cantaloupe yield percentage and clime change * |
||||
Years |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
ETo (mm/day) |
1.99 |
2.32 |
4.12 |
9.50 |
T (Co) Maximum |
13.0 |
18.5 |
20.2 |
23.1 |
Wind speed (Km/day) |
95 |
85 |
196 |
105 |
EC (dS/m) Mg/L |
3.9 3496 |
4.1 3624 |
5.2 3326 |
4.5 2888 |
Flood |
*23 % |
18 % |
14 % |
15 % |
Drip |
54 % |
61 % |
65 % |
66 % |
Sprinkler |
10 % |
13 % |
12 % |
12 % |
Pivot |
13 % |
8 % |
9 % |
7 % |
Total Yield |
10907 |
14102.1 |
14474.3 |
13656.5 |
*Ex: % = Yield of Cantaloupe in 2012 / Total Yield in 2012 …..etc.
Table (8).Shows the Cantaloupe plant is susceptible to injury from salt toxicity (3496, 3624, 3326, and 2888 mg/l). Chloride, sodium and boron are absorbed by the roots and transported to the leaves where they accumulate in harmful amounts; they resulted in leaf burn and leaf necrosis.
Moreover, direct contact during sprinkling of water drops with high chloride content over than 10 meq/l high toxic especially during sprinkling irrigation method (FAO, 1985)) may cause leaf burn in high evaporation conditions under deferent irrigation methods (Abou-Hadid, 2003).
Wind plays an important role in the evapotranspiration process. Strong winds enhance turbulence, removing the water vapour from the plant Cantaloupe more quickly and mixing it into the surrounding drier air.
As shown in Table 8, wind speed values were (95, 85,196,105 Km/day) for the years 2012 to 2015 respectively. In sub- humid and arid climates, wind can also transport sensible heat from dry surroundings into wet fields. While wind primarily responds to atmospheric pressure differences, local turbulence can be strongly influenced by topographic features.
Hence abrupt elevation changes and equivalent effects such as wind barriers can cause increased local turbulence and increased evapotranspiration, (Figure, 3).
Figure (3). Cantaloupe yield percentage under climatic change
Table (9) shows that the length plant root of cantaloupe irrigated by drip irrigation equal 1.7 meters root depth and in the case of sprinkler irrigation equal 0.65 meters so the sprinkler irrigation efficiency was between 60% - 70% vegetative growth in plant cantaloupe under drip irrigation conditions and yield the highest show significant differences in productivity and a clear comparison between drip irrigation systems and other irrigation, Figure (5). The same result was reached by (Al-Harbi et al., 2008)
Table (9). Ranges of maximum effective rooting depth with irrigation methods in El-Khatatba
Irrigation Methods |
Cantaloupe |
|||
Maximum Root Depth (m) |
ETo mm/day |
WR (mm) |
WUE ( kg m-3) |
|
Flood |
0.85 |
1.99 |
350 |
13.2 |
Drip |
1.70 |
2.32 |
250 |
19.2 |
Sprinkler |
0.65 |
4.12 |
200 |
11.9 |
Pivot |
0.55 |
6.50 |
300 |
18.7 |
L.S.D |
0.018 |
0.5 |
26.5 |
1.7 |
WUE= Water use efficiency, WR= water requirements, ETo =evapotranspiration
From this study, it is clear that there is a very clear difference between crop water requirements and irrigation or production system water requirements. Crop water requirements refer to the actual water needs for evapotranspiration (ET) which are related to soil type and plant growth, and primarily depend on crop development and climatic factors which are closely related to climatic demands.Irrigation requirements (production system water requirements) are primarily determined by crop water requirement, but also depend on the characteristics of the irrigation system management practices, and the soil characteristics in the irrigated area (Figure 4).
The amount of water used by a particular crop depends on a number of factors, including crop growth stage and environmental conditions (temperature, wind, relative humidity). The speed at which soil moisture is depleted depends on crop use and the soil type (sand, clay, etc.). Applying adequate amounts of moisture requires a basic understanding of soils and the general water use of the crop. Moisture stress/excess can influence crop yield and survivability (over-wintering) (FAO, 2012).
We recommended use some form of mulch (plastic, organic (straw, bark, shavings). Applying the water either directly to the plants (through a drip system) or using a lower pressure applicator (versus sprinkler application).
apply water in the early morning or evening when temperatures are lower (to reduce evaporative losses) provide adequate nutrients to ensure healthy, deep-rooted plants which maximize water use within the soil profile.
Figure (5) shows the Correlation matrix between maximum effective rooting depths and evapotranspiration ETo under different irrigation methods in El-Khatatba. So, Limited water resources in the arid and semi-arid regions, and rapid growth rate of population as well as global warming were the major factors that drew the attention towards the way for drip irrigation systems (Abou-Hadid and Medany, 1994).
Figure (4). Depletion factor for different levels of crop evapotranspiration
(Martin and Gilley, 1993)
Drip irrigation method suitable for most agricultural crop. The use of this method of irrigation leads to the provision amounts of irrigation water, up to (40%) compared to the traditional ways (FAO, 1998). This method also suitable for all types of soil, However the size of the circle in moisturizing soft soil textures is greater than in the rough textures land It also does not hinder service operations during plant growth. Up water-use efficiency in which more than 90 % is difficult to reach using other methods.
Figure (5). Correlation matrix between maximum effective rooting depthswith Irrigation Methods in El-Khatatba
Agricultural soil-use practices in general exert a major influence on groundwater recharge quality (Haman and Smajstria 2010). Drip irrigation in El-Khatatba area is agricultural policy and manages successful in the face of water shortages climate change and environmental injustice in the new reclaimed soils.The new reclaimed soils need innovative thinking as engineering design as example so that each crops the appropriate perforation or nozzles, the crop needs of rated water or required irrigation. So, in particular, they can increase yields and improve crop quality while at the same time reducing fertilizer, water, and in some cases, energy costs, resulting in higher profits. Additionally, efficiency can improve the reliability of existing supplies and reduce vulnerability to drought and other water-supply constraints.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Land cultivated with Cantaloupe crop under different irrigation methods, where the cultivated area has decreased under flood irrigation conditions it has also increased under drip irrigation conditions, whenever the amount of cantaloupe crop increased tonnage under the climate variation of temperature conditions, evapotranspiration, wind speed and increase soil salinity. Also, the length of the roots of the Cantaloupe plant was the best we could under the condition of drip irrigation. It is recommended to use drip irrigation system where achieved through productivity in El-Khatatba area.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to express great thanks to the Soil, Water and Environment Research Institute and Institute of Environment Studies Research – Sadat City University, Egypt.