Abstract
Artificial subsurface drainage is not an option for addressing the saline, shallow ground water conditions along the west side of the San Joaquin Valley because of the lack of drainage water disposal facilities. Thus, the salinity/drainage problem of the valley must be addressed through improved irrigation practices. One option is to use drip irrigation in the salt affected soil.
A study evaluated the response of processing tomato and cotton to drip irrigation under shallow, saline ground water at depths less than 1 m. A randomized block experiment with four irrigation treatments of different water applications was used for both crops. Measurements included crop yield and quality, soil salinity, soil water content, soil water potential, and canopy coverage. Results showed drip irrigation of processing tomato to be highly profitable under these conditions due to the yield obtained for the highest water application. Water applications for drip-irrigated tomato should be about equal to seasonal crop evapotranspiration because yield decreased as applied water decreased. No yield response of cotton to applied water occurred indicating that as applied water decreased, cotton uptake of the shallow ground water increased. While a water balance showed no field-wide leaching, salinity data clearly showed salt leaching around the drip lines.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen R. 2000. Calibration for the Watermark 200SS Soil Water Potential Sensor to fit the 7-19-96 “Calibration #3” Table from Irrometer. http://www.kimberly.uidaho.edu/water/swm/Calibration_Watermark2.htm.
Department of Water Resources. 2005. http://www.owue.water.ca.gov/agdrain/index.cfm.
Fulton A.E., Oster J.D., Hanson B.R., Phene C.J. & Goldhamer D.A. 1991. Reducing drainwater: furrow vs. subsurface drip irrigation. California Agriculture 45(2): 4–8.
Grimes D.W. & Yamada, H. 1982. Relation of cotton growth and yield to minimum leaf water potential. Crop Science 22(1): 134–139.
Hanson B.R. & Ayars J.E. 2002. Strategies for reducing subsurface drainage in irrigated agriculture through improved irrigation. Irrigation and Drainage Systems 16: 261–277.
Hanson B.R. & May D.M. 2004a. Effect of subsurface drip irrigation on processing tomato yield, water table depth, soil salinity, and profitability. Agricultural Water Management 68: 1–17.
Hanson B.R. & May D.M. 2004b. Crop evapotranspiration of processing tomato under furrow and subsurface drip irrigation. Acta Horticulturae 664: 303–307.
Hanson B.R. & May D.M. 2005. Crop coefficients for drip-irrigated processing tomatoes. Agricultural Water Management (in press).
Hanson B., Peters D. & Orloff S. 2000. Effectiveness of tensiometers and electrical resistance blocks varies with soil conditions. California Agriculture 54(3): 47–50.
Hsiao T.C. & Henderson D.W. 1985. Improvement of crop coefficients for evapotranspiration. In: California Irrigation Management Information System Final Report, June 1985.
Mass E.V. 1990. Crop Salt Tolerances. In: K. Tanji (Ed.) Agricultural Salinity Assessment and Management (pp. 262–304). ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practices No. 71.
Styles S., Oster J.D., Bernaxconi P., Fulton A. & Phene C. 1997. Demonstration of emerging technologies. In: J. Guitjens and L. Dudley (Ed.) Agroecosystems: Sources, Control and Remediation (pp. 183–206). Pacific Division, Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. San Francisco, CA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hanson, B.R., Hutmacher, R.B. & May, D.M. Drip Irrigation of Tomato and Cotton Under Shallow Saline Ground Water Conditions. Irrig Drainage Syst 20, 155–175 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10795-005-9000-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10795-005-9000-9