Agricultural Research Management Information System

Home
Research Summary
Search
About Us
- ARMIS
- Brochure
Contact Us
Report
User Request
Data Input
Help
- Operation Manual
  - PDF
  - Video
- Program Area & Commodity
We have reached 37600 number of research entries at this moment.

- Logout

Research Detail

Home
Research
Detail

Performance of Alternate Wetting and Drying Furrow Irrigation for Tomato Cultivation

K. K. Sarker
SO
IWM Division, BARI

A. R. Akanda
CSO
IWM Division, BARI

D. K. Roy
SSO
IWM Division, BARI

S. K. Biswas
SSO
IWM, Division, BARI

M. A. Goffar
SSO
Horticulture Research Centre, BARI, Gazipur

Abstract/ Executive Summary:

The field experiment was conducted at Gazipur during the rabi season of 2013-2014 to assess a new irrigation method of alternate wetting and drying furrow irrigation (AWDFI) for tomato cultivation. Irrigation was applied through three ways of furrow: alternate wetting and drying furrow irrigation (AWDFI), fixed wetting and drying furrow irrigation (FWDFI) and traditional furrow irrigation (TFI). Each irrigation method was divided into two irrigation levels of 100% field capacity (FC) and 80% FC at each application. The results of the study showed that marketable yield and dry matter in AWDFI was slightly lower compared to TFI, but better than FWDFI when irrigated with 100% FC. The marketable yield was higher in AWDFI than that of FWDFI and TFI when irrigated with amounting to 80% FC. The most important result was that AWDFI saved irrigation water by 37.74% and 33.87% compared to TFI without significantly reduction in yields at the irrigation level up to 100 % and 80% FC, respectively. Field water use efficiency was higher by 34.15% and 37.41% in AWDFI system than that of TFI when irrigated with up to 100% and 80% FC, respectively. The quality of tomato was almost similar among the treatments. The benefit-cost ratio and unit production cost (Tk per kg of tomato) of the treatment AWDFI was attained similar to the treatment of TFI when irrigated with 100% FC. In AWDFI, benefit-cost ratio was viewed greater and unit production cost was attained lower compared to TFI and FWDFI, respectively when irrigated with 80% FC. However, AWDFI was a way to save water for tomato production. This new method may be feasible in drought prone areas where water is limited for irrigation, and further study is required to confirm the results.

Keywords: Water use efficiency, Quality of fruits, Tomato

Location: BARI, Gazipur

Start Date: 00-00-2013

End Date: 00-00-2014

Program Area: Crop-Soil-Water Management

Commodity: Tomato, Water management

Objectives:

, The specific objectives were taken to assess the crop performances, field water use efficiency, quality of fruits, and the cost effectiveness in response to irrigation methods.

Methodology:

The field experiment was carried out at the experimental field of irrigation and water management (IWM) Division. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Gazipur from October 2013 to April 2014. The experimental soil texture was silt clay loam having field capacity (FC) 28%. The bulk density of soil was 1.5 g/cc. The field experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design (RBD) with six treatments replicated thrice. The treatments were consisted of three irrigation methods and two irrigation level. The treatment details were as alternate wetting and drying furrows irrigation (AWDFI) which supplied full furrow irrigation up to 100% FC and deficit irrigation amounting to 80% FC, Fixed wetting and drying furrows irrigation (FWDFI) which supplied full furrow irrigation up to 100% FC and deficit irrigation amounting to 80% FC, Traditional furrows irrigation (TFI) which supplied full furrow irrigation at the level of 100% FC and deficit irrigation amounting to 80% FC. AWDFI means that one of the two neighboring furrows was alternately irrigated during consecutive watering (Fig. 1a). FWDFI means that irrigation was fixed to one of the neighboring furrows (Fig. 1b). TFI was the traditional way where all furrows were irrigated during irrigation (Fig. 1c). The irrigation frequency was every 14-17 days interval from plant establishment to before final harvest. Irrigation water was applied in the experimental plot (Fig. 2) at different intervals according to the soil water content measurement. Soil moisture content (%) on weight basis was measured by the ratio of the weight of soil water to oven dry weight of soil (Majumdar, 2004) at 14–17 days interval to a depth of 30, 45 and 60 cm. The amount of irrigation water was measured by volumetric method and applied using hose pipe. The amount was controlled up to 100% and 80% FC for irrigation to each plot. Therefore, irrigation water was not moved out of the experimental plot soil zone by gravity. Data were used to calculate soil water deficit from its field capacity and therefore watering amount. Rainfall was monitored and recorded in the study area. The agronomic measurements were taken from the plants during the experimental period from each row within the plot. Ten plants were randomly chosen to measure the yield components. The recommended fertilizer dose of fertilizer was considered for tomato production. The dose of fertilizer was same for all the treatments. Adequate plant protection measures were adopted when required. Number (no.) of marketable fruit and cull fruit, and marketable and cull yield (t/ha) were estimated from fresh weight produced by the plants harvested from the selected four rows of the each plot. Crop growth observation was taken at regular intervals for several stages. Dry mater root and shoot for each treatment was observed on 44, 60, 101 and 143 days after planting (DAP). The roots were collected using core sampler to a depth of 0-15 cm from the sampling area of 20 cm × 20 cm. The roots were cleaned and washed by clean water. The biomass of root and shoot samples except tomato fruits were dried at 60⁰C to constant weight using oven dry method. Field water use efficiency (WUE, t/ha-mm) was calculated as the ratio between marketable yield and total water use. The quality parameters like total soluble solid (TSS), vitamin C (mg/100g), ß-Carotene (µg/100g) and pulp (%) on of tomato fruits from each treatment were determined and verified among the treatments. The analysis of comparative cost effectiveness was done. The cost analysis included the operating cost of land preparation using machinery, chemicals, bamboo supporting, human labors, fertilizers, and irrigation. In this study, the benefit-cost ratio was evaluated based on the gross margin and variable cost. The unit production cost of the treatments was also calculated by the ratio of the sum of all variable input production cost per hectare to the total marketable yield per hectare. Data were statically analyzed using statistical analysis software (SPSS 11.5). All the treatment means compared in the same column for any significant differences using Duncan’s multiple range tests at significant level (P ≤ 0.05).

Source of Information: Annual Research Report, IWM Division, BARI 2013-14

Article Link (Online Journal):

Funding Source:

1.

Budget:

Total Budget (Tk.) :

Achievement/Findings:

Marketable yield in treatment TFI was found slightly higher than that of AWDFI and FWDFI when irrigated with 100% field capacity. On average, marketable yield was greater in treatment TFI than AWDFI by 4.12% at the irrigation level of 100% field capacity. AWDFI produced more marketable yield as compared to TFI by 5.23% when irrigated with 80% field capacity during the growing season. Cull fruit in TFI was found higher than AWFI and FWDFI at the same level of irrigation. In treatment TFI, cull yield was observed higher than AWDFI at the same level of irrigation. The results show that AWDFI system had the similar trend of marketable tomato yield compared to TFI. It indicates that AWDFI may take the advantage of the physiological response. AWDFI system suggests that partial furrow watering can maintained the nearly same or more yield as compared to TFI with the less amount of irrigation water. There was no significant reduction in marketable yield using AWDFI as against the TFI. In FWDFI system reduced yield that was associated with prolonged soil moisture stress of the plant when allowed to continue resulted in loss in cessation of growth. Fruit weight was also affected by irrigation water application method. Prolonged water deficit may affect the fruit size, fruit moisture and yield in FWDFI. The dry matter of the crop growth influenced by the treatments. Dry matter of the tomato plant was not significant difference (P ≤ 0.05) among the treatments during the different interval growth stages of tomato plant. The dry matter was found slightly higher in TFI than AWDFI and FWDFI at the level of 100% field capacity. On average, dry matter was obtained lower only by 3.67% in AWDFI than TFI at the irrigation level of 100% field capacity. At the deficit irrigation, when irrigation water was halved, similar differences were visualized with AWDFI. AWDFI system results were almost similar root and shoot development compared to TFI, and better than FWDFI at the same irrigation level. Alternate rewatering furrow irrigation may enhance the initiation and growth of new secondary roots. Newly developed roots may recover the sensitivity of the roots to drying soil. AWDFI system might be helped to fulfill shifting water demands through root and shoot and fruit during the entire growing season.

Based on one year observed results, marketable yield and dry matter of the crop growth were nearly similar trend in the treatment of AWDFI and TFI when irrigated up to 100% FC. Field water use efficiency was improved and higher by 34.15% and 37.41% in AWDFI system compared to TFI when irrigated up to 100% and 80% FC. The quality of tomato on TSS and vitamin-C was found better in treatment AWDFI than other treatments at the same level of irrigation. The AWDFI system has potential for efficient water use and may be applicable in drought prone areas where water is limited. However, further study is required to confirm the findings of this study, and is also needed to assess the physiological responses of plant with alternate furrow irrigation without drastically reduction in yields

Knowledge Management: Report/Proceedings