Salt leaching with alternate surface and subsurface drip irrigation enhance cotton yield, water use efficiency, desalination rate, desalination efficiency and economic benefit

被引:0
|
作者
He, Zijian [1 ]
Cao, Hongxia [1 ]
Hu, Qingyang [1 ]
Qi, Chen [1 ]
Li, Zhijun [1 ]
机构
[1] Northwest A&F Univ, Key Lab Agr Soil & Water Engn Arid Semiarid Areas, Minist Educ, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Saline alkali cotton field; Irrigation method; Leaching level; Water-salt management; Optimized irrigation practices; SOIL-MOISTURE DISTRIBUTION; INCREASES STAND ESTABLISHMENT; GOSSYPIUM-HIRSUTUM L; LINT YIELD; DEFICIT IRRIGATION; NORTHERN XINJIANG; SALINITY; ACCUMULATION; FIELD; SIMULATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109804
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Context: Xinjiang's pivotal cotton industry requires improved irrigation management for sustainable production due to water inefficiency and salt accumulation, while alternate surface and subsurface drip irrigation with mulch (ADI) and salt leaching serve as promising solutions. Objective: Therefore, this study assessed the effects of ADI and salt leaching on soil water, salinity, desalination, cotton yield, water use efficiency (WUE) and economic benefits to identify the optimal strategy. Methods: A field experiment in 2020-2021 used two irrigation methods (ADI; DI: surface drip irrigation with mulch) and four leaching levels (0, 120, 240 and 360 mm). Leaching water was applied in three equal portions during the seedling and budding stages (DI) and flowering stage (subsurface drip irrigation). Results: As leaching levels increased, yield, desalination rate and economic benefits improved, while WUE and desalination efficiency initially increased, then decreased for both irrigation methods. Compared to DI, ADI had worse soil water conditions within the film, but this was mitigated with higher leaching levels. Notably, ADI improved soil salinity conditions, effectively offsetting yield reductions caused by water stress. Compared to DI, ADI boosted cotton yield and WUE by 3.1 %-26.5 %, desalination rate and efficiency by 24.1 %114.5 %. Despite higher inputs, ADI outperformed DI economically in high salinity soils, with better salt control promoting higher yields. Conclusions: Overall, TOPSIS evaluation showed ADI offered superior benefits over DI. ADI with 252-336 mm leaching water (0.8 g center dot L-1) was identified as optimal (>= 95 % peak performance), balancing desalination, cotton yield, WUE and economic benefits. Significance: This recommendation strongly advocates for the positive impact of ADI in promoting sustainable development in saline agriculture.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Effect of soil water management and different sowing dates on maize yield and water use efficiency under drip irrigation system
    Feyzbakhsh, Mohammad Taghi
    Kamkar, Behnam
    Mokhtarpour, Hassan
    Asadi, Mohammad Esmaeil
    ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE, 2015, 61 (11) : 1581 - 1592
  • [42] Coupling effects of water and fertilizer on yield, water and fertilizer use efficiency of drip-fertigated cotton in northern Xinjiang, China
    Wang, Haidong
    Wu, Lifeng
    Cheng, Minghui
    Fan, Junliang
    Zhang, Fucang
    Zou, Yufeng
    Chau, Henry Wai
    Gao, Zhijian
    Wang, Xiukang
    FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2018, 219 : 169 - 179
  • [43] Optimizing water use efficiency and economic return of super high yield spring maize under drip irrigation and plastic mulching in arid areas of China
    Zhang, Guoqiang
    Liu, Chaowei
    Xiao, Chunhua
    Xie, Ruizhi
    Ming, Bo
    Hou, Peng
    Liu, Guangzhou
    Xu, Wenjuan
    Shen, Dongping
    Wang, Keru
    Li, Shaokun
    FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2017, 211 : 137 - 146
  • [44] Effect of Different ET-Based Irrigation Scheduling on Grain Yield and Water Use Efficiency of Drip Irrigated Maize
    Simic, Dejan
    Pejic, Borivoj
    Bekavac, Goran
    Mackic, Ksenija
    Vojnov, Bojan
    Bajic, Ivana
    Sikora, Vladimir
    AGRICULTURE-BASEL, 2023, 13 (10):
  • [45] Effects of water stress on processing tomatoes yield, quality and water use efficiency with plastic mulched drip irrigation in sandy soil of the Hetao Irrigation District
    Zhang, Huimeng
    Xiong, Yunwu
    Huang, Guanhua
    Xu, Xu
    Huang, Quanzhong
    AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2017, 179 : 205 - 214
  • [46] EFFECT OF IRRIGATION AMOUNTS APPLIED WITH DRIP IRRIGATION ON MAIZE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION, YIELD, WATER USE EFFICIENCY, AND NET RETURN IN A SUB-HUMID CLIMATE
    Kuscu, Hayrettin
    Karasu, Abdullah
    Oz, Mehmet
    Demir, Ali Osman
    Turgut, Ilhan
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF FIELD CROPS, 2013, 18 (01) : 13 - 19
  • [47] Responses of yield, water use efficiency and quality of short-season cotton to irrigation management: interactive effects of irrigation methods and deficit irrigation
    Hao Liu
    Yang Gao
    Jingsheng Sun
    Xiaolei Wu
    Shiva Kumar Jha
    Hao Zhang
    Xuewen Gong
    Yong Li
    Irrigation Science, 2017, 35 : 125 - 139
  • [48] Partial Root Zone Drying Irrigation Improves Water Use Efficiency but Compromise the Yield and Quality of Cotton Crop
    Iqbal, Rashid
    Raza, Muhammad Aown Sammar
    Rashid, Muhammad Adil
    Toleikiene, Monika
    Ayaz, Muhammad
    Mustafa, Farhan
    Ahmed, Muhammad Zeshan
    Hyder, Sajjad
    Rahman, Muhammad Habib-Ur
    Ahmad, Salman
    Aslam, Muhammad Usman
    Haider, Imran
    COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS, 2021, 52 (13) : 1558 - 1573
  • [49] Optimization of water and fertilizer management improves yield, water, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium uptake and use efficiency of cotton under drip fertigation
    Wang, Haidong
    Wu, Lifeng
    Wang, Xiukang
    Zhang, Shaohui
    Cheng, Minghui
    Feng, Hao
    Fan, Junliang
    Zhang, Fucang
    Xiang, Youzhen
    AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2021, 245
  • [50] Response of yield, quality, water and nitrogen use efficiency of tomato to different levels of water and nitrogen under drip irrigation in Northwestern China
    Du Ya-dan
    Cao Hong-xia
    Liu Shi-quan
    Gu Xiao-bo
    Cao Yu-xin
    JOURNAL OF INTEGRATIVE AGRICULTURE, 2017, 16 (05) : 1153 - 1161