4.7 Article

Effects of different irrigation regimes on yield and water use efficiency of cucumber crop

期刊

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT
卷 148, 期 -, 页码 10-15

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.09.005

关键词

Cucumber; Greenhouse; Evapotranspiration; Tensiometer; Dry matter

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study was conducted to investigate the effects of four irrigation regimes on yield, growth parameters and water use efficiency of cucumber crop under greenhouse cultivation. A field experiment was carried out at the experimental farm of Palestine Technical University Kadoorie, located at Tulkarm, Palestine. Cucumber seedlings were planted on 14 February 2012 in greenhouse at a rate of 1500 seedlings per 1000 square meters. Four irrigation regimes were examined during the growing period as follows: farmer irrigation (FI), tensiometer based irrigation (TI), irrigation at full ETc data (ETc), and irrigation at 70% of ETc (70% ETc). Plant data were collected during the growing period for evaluating the total yield, plant height, number of harvested fruits per plant, weight of harvested fruits per plant, dry matter of above and under ground parts. The results indicated that the 70% ETc treatment obtained the highest crop yield followed by ETc, FI, and TI treatments, respectively. On average, cucumber yield under 70% ETc treatment was 24%, 6% and 4% higher than that under TI, PI and ETc treatments, respectively. At the end of harvesting stage plant height, above-ground dry matter obtained by 70% ETc treatment was higher than the other treatments. The smallest plant height and dry matter was obtained under TI treatment. Results also indicated that, when using scheduled irrigation methods large amount of water were saved and found to be 139, 104 and 26 mm for TI, 70% ETc and ETc treatments, respectively, compared to FI treatment. The highest water use efficiency (WUE) was obtained under 70% ETc treatment followed by ETc, TI and Fl treatments, respectively. (C)2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据