WATER SUPPLY & DEMAND DAN KRIEG CROP PHYSIOLOGIST

Similar documents
LAT IS ALL we sell in agriculture. Whether

Improving Nutrient Management through Advanced Irrigation Management

Nutrition of Horticultural Crops Measurements for Irrigation. Lincoln Zotarelli Horticultural Sciences Department University of Florida Spring 2015

Managing fertilization and irrigation for water quality protection

Drip irrigation scheduling

Michael Cahn and Barry Farrara, UC Cooperative Extension, Monterey Tom Bottoms and Tim Hartz, UC Davis

Irrigation Scheduling Using Crop Water Use Data

Irrigation Scheduling: Checkbook Method

Irrigation Scheduling: Sensors, Technical Tools, and Apps

THE PRODUCTION OF SORGHUM IN WATER- RESTRICTED CROP SYSTEMS IN THE USA

ET and Deficit Irrigation Approaches in Cotton

Estimating Irrigation Water Requirements to Optimize Crop Growth

Irrigating Agricultural Crops with Treated Municipal Wastewater: Review of a Three Year Study and New Regulations in Delaware

Drip Irrigation Efficiency. Fact or Fiction?

USING PET TO DEVELOP WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR COTTON BOB GLODT AGRI-SEARCH, INC. PLAINVIEW, TEXAS

5.5 Improving Water Use Efficiency of Irrigated Crops in the North China Plain Measurements and Modelling

LAND APPLICATION OF DAIRY MANURE

The Nutrient Value of Manure: What s it Really Worth? Brad Joern Department of Agronomy

United States Department of Agriculture. Executive Summary 8:30 AM NOVEMBER 9, 2011

Crop Water Requirement. Presented by: Felix Jaria:

CENTRAL PLATTE NATURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT NITROGEN MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATION TEST

Nitrogen Management in Cotton: West Texas, Irrigated

Fertility management in organic strawberries

2013 Cropping Strategies: Split-Pivot Systems to Reduce and Spread Immediate Water Demand

Crop Physiology Crop Water Usage and Fertilizer Uptake. Charles Stichler Professor Emeritus

daily water use Practically Heat Stress weakened

Small Acreage Irrigation Management

Irrigation Management Technologies

TheHelper, A User-Friendly Irrigation Scheduling Tool In Florida and Hawaii A. Fares 1, M. Zekri 2 and L.R. Parsons 2. Abstract

Economics of Irrigation Ending Date for Corn 1

ECONOMICS OF IRRIGATION ENDING DATE FOR CORN: USING FIELD DEMONSTRATION RESULTS

Irrigation Scheduling for Urban and Small Farms

SPRINKLERS, CROP WATER USE, AND IRRIGATION TIME KANE COUNTY

Almond Drought Management. David Doll UCCE Merced

PROFIT POTENTIAL USING SPLIT PIVOT IRRIGATION STRATEGIES IN COTTON PRODUCTION. Bob Glodt. and Layton Schur

Nutrient Management of Conservation- Till Cotton in Terminated-Wheat

SPRINKLERS, CROP WATER USE, AND IRRIGATION TIME BEAVER COUNTY

IRRIGATION CAPACITY AND PLANT POPULATION EFFECTS ON CORN PRODUCTION USING SDI

Recommendations in this nutrient management

Using Evapotranspiration Reports for Furrow Irrigation Scheduling IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT S E R I E S

Evaluation of a Drip Vs. Furrow Irrigated Cotton Production System

Sensor Strategies in Cotton. Stacia L. Davis, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Irrigation Engineering LSU AgCenter

Marketing Corn and Soybeans During the Growing Season Quarterly Zoom Marketing Meeting, June 13, 2018

LAND APPLICATION OF POULTRY MANURE

2017 Wyoming Forage Sorghum Trial Results

Efficient nitrogen fertility and irrigation management in California processing tomato production

Cover Crops and Soil Health Harvesting the Potential: Environmental Impacts of Cover Crops

Pasture Monitoring. Charles Fletcher Edgewood Dairy Purdy, Missouri

Texture Definition: relative proportions of various sizes of individual soil particles USDA classifications Sand: mm Silt:

Practical Irrigation Scheduling, Technology & Deficit Irrigation. Katherine Pope, Farm Advisor Sac, Solano & Yolo Counties

Good Agricultural Practices for Producing a High Quality Peanut Product

Lecture 19. Landfill hydrology

Monitoring soil moisture helps refine irrigation management

SMART Irrigation Controllers How smart are they?

LAND APPLICATION OF SWINE MANURE

SMART Irrigation Controllers How smart are they?

Irrigation Scheduling

Nitrogen Fertilizer Movement in Wheat Production, Yuma

DRIP AND PAIRED ROW PLANTING FOR PADDY CULTIVATION

12/28/2016. Air. Surface Water. Ground Water. Soil. 1. Calculate agronomic rate. 2. Identify optimal fields. 3. Determine when to apply

4.3 Irrigated corn best practice guide

Considerations for Nozzle Package Selection for Center Pivots

Managing Water to Increase Resiliency of Drained Agricultural Landscapes. Jane Frankenberger Agricultural & Biological Engineering Purdue University

SMART Irrigation Controllers How smart are they?

Crop Alternatives for Declining Water Resources

Irrigating Efficiently: tools, tips & techniques. Steve Castagnoli, OSU Extension Service

CHAPTER 6: Irrigation scheduling

Michael Cahn, Barry Farrara, Tim Hartz, Tom Bottoms, and Mark Bolda

Davie Kadyampakeni UF/IFAS CREC

Incorporating Annual Forages into Crop-Forage-Livestock Systems

Estimating Irrigation Water Requirements

Irrigation Strategies for Water-Short Years or Efficient Water Use

Crop Report. Stubble % incorporated into the top 10cm: 0 % Soil type: Red Kandosol (No498-Generic)

Crop Report. Report name: Graham Centre Field Site Crop Report SILO station used: Wagga Wagga AMO Rainfall records used: SILO

Crop Report. Stubble % incorporated into the top 10cm: 0 % Soil type: Red Kandosol (No498-Generic)

SPRINKLERS, CROP WATER USE, AND IRRIGATION TIME SANPETE COUNTY

Abstract. Introduction

Tissue Testing Guidelines for Nitrogen Management in Malting Barley, Maricopa, 1998

CORN AND GRAIN SORGHUM PRODUCTION WITH LIMITED IRRIGATION

Nutrient Management in Tile Drained Fields

Scientific status on nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural systems. Johan Six

!" #$ %&'(%)#*+,-.%/+'01%20+3',4%56,7808,.8!

Cost Water quantity Water Quality Field dimensions Soil type Tillage operations

4c Using WinSLAMM to Evaluate LID Practices Hands-on Workshop. Using WinSLAMM to Evaluate LID Practices

SORGHUM YIELD RESPONSE TO WATER AND IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT. Alan Schlegel Agronomist-in-Charge, Soil Management. Kansas State Research and Extension

St. Peter Wellhead Protection

Water Footprint Evaluation of Oryza sativa L.Tha Wang Pha District, Nan Province

Cotton Irrigation in Kansas

CONSUMPTIVE USE AND SUPPLEMENTAL WATER REQUIREMENTS OF CROPS GROWN IN THE EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA

PREVIOUS WORK AND PRESENT OUTLOOK:

George Paul, P. V. Vara Prasad, Scott A. Staggenborg, and Prasanna H.Gowda Kansas State University; and CPRL USDA ARS, Bushland, Texas

Natural Resources & Environmental Stewardship

Lecture 5: Transpiration

Termination of Irrigation on Corn. Jos. C. Henggeler 1 ABSTRACT

Agronomic, Economic and Environmental Benefits of Nitrogen Fertilizer Management

Electric Forward Market Report

BENEFITS FROM IMPROVING FLOOD IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY

EVALUATING WATER REQUIREMENTS OF DEVELOPING WALNUT ORCHARDS IN THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY

SPRINKLERS, CROP WATER USE, AND IRRIGATION TIME UTAH COUNTY

COMPARISON OF SDI AND SIMULATED LEPA SPRINKLER IRRIGATION FOR CORN

Transcription:

WATER SUPPLY & DEMAND DAN KRIEG CROP PHYSIOLOGIST

INCHES SOUTHERN HIGH PLAINS 10 9 8 13-14 inches during growing season 40-45 inches during growing season PREC PET 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC MONTH of YEAR

Approximately 70% of the Events are less than 0.5 Inches

IRRIGATION WATER SUPPLY ONE CUBIC FOOT OF WATER= 7.48 GALLONS ONE ACRE=43560 SQUARE FEET ONE ACRE FOOT OF WATER = 325,829 GALLONS ONE ACRE INCH= 27,152 GALLONS 1 GPMA= 1440GPAD/27152GPACIN = 0.053 AC IN DAY -1

IRRIGATION WATER SUPPLY 27,225 gallons/acre inch Gallons/Min/Acre Acre Inches/Day 1.0 0.053 2.0 0.107 3.0 0.160 4.0 0.214 5.0 0.267 6.0 0.320 7.0 0.373

IRRIGATION APPLICATION RATES 125 acre pivot VOLUME GPMA 0.5in 1.0 in 1.5 in Acre Inches/hour 3 80 hrs 160 hrs 240 hrs 0.78 4 57 hrs 113 hrs 170 hrs 1.10 5 45 hrs 90 hrs 136 hrs 1.39 6 38 hrs 75 hrs 113 hrs 1.65

SOIL WATER DATA TEXTURE FIELD CAPACITY Inches/foot PERMANENT WILTING POINT Inches/foot PLANT AVAILABLE WATER Inches/foot INITIATION OF STRESS 60% depletion of PAW INFILTRATION RATE Inches/hour PULLMAN CLAY LOAM OLTON LOAM 4.38 3.05 1.33 0.80 0.21 3.86 2.36 1.50 0.90 0.77 ACUFF LOAM 3.25 2.03 1.22 0.73 1.28 AMARILLO FINE SANDY LOAM 2.88 1.90 0.98 0.59 1.84 PATRICIA & AMARILLOL OAMY FINE SAND 2.60 1.62 0.98 0.59 5.79

POTENTIAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION MODIFIED PENMAN EQUATION ET o = c[w-r n + (1-w) f(u) (e a -e d )] ET o = potential crop evapotranspiration (mm/day) W = temperature-related weighting factor R n = net radiation in equivalent evaporation (mm/day) f(u) = wind related function (e a -e d ) = vapor pressure deficit of the air at mean air temperature c = adjustment factor to compensate for the effect of day and night weather conditions.

1-May 8-May 15-May 22-May 29-May 5-Jun 12-Jun 19-Jun 26-Jun 3-Jul 10-Jul 17-Jul 24-Jul 31-Jul 7-Aug 14-Aug 21-Aug 28-Aug 4-Sep 11-Sep 18-Sep 25-Sep INCHES/DAY 0.5 0.45 2013 DAILY PET BY LOCATION CANYON TULIA LUBBOCK LAMESA 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0

ACCUMULATED INCHES 1-May 8-May 15-May 22-May 29-May 2013 SEASONAL PET BY LOCATION 5-Jun 12-Jun 19-Jun 26-Jun 3-Jul 10-Jul 17-Jul 24-Jul 31-Jul 7-Aug 14-Aug 21-Aug 28-Aug 4-Sep 11-Sep 18-Sep 25-Sep 45 40 CANYON =37.4 Inches TULIA = 40.0 Inches LUBBOCK = 38.2 Inches LAMESA = 38.7 Inches 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

CROP COEFFICIENTS Kc = ET c /ET p Kc = crop specific, varies with stage of development amount of ground cover, and soil water availability

CROP WATER USE/PET 1.20 CROP COEFFICIENTS-COTTON 30 Inch Rows 40 Inch Rows 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 PEAK FLOWER FIRST MATURE BOLL 50%OPEN BOLLS 0.20 FIRST SQUARE FIRST FLOWER 0.00 100 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500 ACCUMULATED HEAT UNITS

15-May 22-May 29-May 5-Jun 12-Jun 19-Jun 26-Jun 3-Jul 10-Jul 17-Jul 24-Jul 31-Jul 7-Aug 14-Aug 21-Aug 28-Aug 4-Sep 11-Sep 18-Sep 25-Sep ACCUMULATED HEAT UNITS 3000 2013 COTTON WATER USE ACC HEAT UNITS DAILY CROP WATER USE 0.35 2500 0.30 0.25 2000 1500 1000 0.20 0.15 0.10 DAILY CROP WATER USE 500 0.05 0 0.00

JOE HURST DRIP COTTON 2012 COTTON YIELD = 1850 POUNDS/ACRE RAIN=5.6 INCHES IRRIGATION = 18.5 INCHES @ 4 GPM TOTAL WATER USE EFFICIENCY = 76.8 POUNDS/ACRE INCH 2013 COTTON YIELD = 1920 POUNDS/ACRE RAIN = 8.75 INCHES IRRIGATION = 14.8 INCHES @ 4 GPM TOTAL WATER USE EFFICIENCY = 81.4 POUNDS/ACRE INCH

CROP COEFFICIENT (CWU/PET) CORN & SORGHUM CROP WATER USE 1.20 CORN SORGHUM 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 DAYS AFTER PLANTING

EDDIE TEETER CORN-2013 DRIP IRRIGATED PIVOT IRRIGATED RAIN = 13 INCHES IRRIGATION = 16.9 INCHES TOTAL WATER = 29.9 INCHES GRAIN YIELD = 240.5 BU/ACRE WATER USE EFF = 8.04 BU/AC IN RAIN = 12.5 INCHES IRRIGATION = 16.0 INCHES TOTAL WATER = 28.5 INCHES GRAIN YIELD = 239.5 BU/AC WATER USE EFF = 8.4 BU/AC IN

DAILY & SEASONAL CROP WATER USE CROP MAXIMUM DAILY WATER USE VOLUME REQUIREMENT (GPMA) DURATION (Days) SEASONAL WATER USE (Inches) (Inches) COTTON 0.25 5 40 22-24 CORN 0.35 7 60 32-35 SORGHUM 0.30 6 40 28-30 WHEAT 0.25 5 75 20-22 PEANUTS 0.30 6 70 30-32

Critical Developmental Stages Corn: Two weeks prior to tasseling is the most critical period when establishing number of rows and kernels/row Tasseling & Silking, Water Stress and High Temperature desynchronize pollen shed and silk receptivity Early seed fill, Reduced supply of photosynthate results in kernel abortion Cotton: First square to first flower establishes number of harvestable fruit. First flower through fourth week of flowering establishes harvestable boll number Bolls less than 5 days old are sensitive to water and nutrient stress causing abortion Sorghum: Panicle initiation through boot and heading affects seed/head, Water Stress during early grain fill through dough stage affects seed size Peanuts: Dry surface soil at pegging affects pod number, Water Stress during Pod Fill affects kernel number and size

TWS= Total Water Supply; SI=Square Initiation; FF=First Flower; PB= Peak Bloom; M=Maturity Regression Coefficients For Yield Components and Water Supply at Various Developmental Stages Stage of Development Boll Number/Acre Lint/Boll Lint Yield/Acre TWS 0.34 0.35 0.12 SI-FF 0.58 0.65 0.73 FF-PB 0.55 0.04 0.52 PB-M -0.45-0,56-0.43

LINT YIELD (Pounds/acre) 1800 COTTON WATER USE EFFICIENCY TEXAS HIGH PLAINS 1600 1400 75-100 pounds/inch 1200 1000 800 40-50 pounds lint/inch 600 400 AVERAGE GROWING SEASON RAIN 10-12 INCHES OF IRRIGATION WATER HIGH EFFICIENCY APPLICATION 200 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 WATER SUPPLY (Inches)

BIOLOGICAL-ECONOMIC WATER USE EFFICIENCY CROP INTERCEPT SLOPE $ /INCH COTTON 4 160 SEED COTTON ~50 (65-70 Lint) CORN 10 600 ~50 SORGHUM 6 480 ~35 WHEAT 4 200 ~27 PEANUTS 6 250 ~50

Water Nutrient Interactions FERTIGATION Nitrogen-Quantity and Source NO 3 - Losses to leaching Increase Supply as Yield Potential Increases NH 4+ Prefered Source by Crops

NiTROGEN REQUIREMENTS/INCH OF IRRIGATION WATER CORN=10bu/in at 1.0-1.25 #N/bu =10-12#N/Inch SORGHUM= 8 bu/in at 0.81#N/bu =6-7#N/Inch COTTON = 65-75# Lint/in at 3-4 #N/100 # =5-7 #N/Inch PEANUTS = 250 #/in at 3-4#N/100# = 7-10#N/Inch WHEAT = 3 bu/in at 1.25#N/bu = 3-4#N/Inch

CROP PREFERENCE N SOURCE Nitrate NO 3 Predominant form of plant available Nitrogen within relatively short time after application Movement of NO 3 into plant tissues requires metabolic energy Reduction of NO 3 to NH 4 requires 8 electrons of reducing power; This is equivalent to ½ mole of glucose Ammoniacal Nitrogen NH 4 Rapidly moves into plant tissue No cost to reduce prior to incorporation into amino acid

LINT YIELD (Pounds/Acre) Cotton Response to Nitrogen Source 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 5 GPMA 0 100/0 75/25 50/50 25/75 NITROGEN SOURCE (NH 4: NO 3 Ratios) 0/100 3 GPMA 4 GPMA

GRAIN YIELD (POUNDS/ACRE) GRAIN SORGHUM RESPONSE NITROGEN SOURCE 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 5 GPMA 0 100NH4 75:25 50:50 25:75 NITROGEN SOURCE (NH 4 :NO 3 RATIO) 100NO3 4 GPMA 3 GPMA

LINT PER BOLL (g) l NITROGEN:P 2 O 5 RATIO 1.80 1.70 1.60 1.50 1.40 1.30 1.20 1.10 1.00 5-0 5-1 5-2 5-3 2 5 3 WATER SUPPLY N:P 2 O 5 RATIO

COTTON RESPONSE TO ZINC APPLICATIONS Tests conducted for 3 years (1985,1986, & 1987) at Brownfield and New Deal Texas

SUMMARY Lack of an adequate water supply throughout the life of most crop plants is the primary cause of yields being only a fraction of the genetic yield potential When the water supply is adequate, the availability of adequate essential nutrients is responsible for less than optimum growth rates and development of reproductive organs Understanding the needs and management of rate limiting nutrient supplies will greatly increase yield and quality of product within the limits of the water supply