Effects of a ridge-furrow micro-field rainwater-harvesting system on potato yield in a semi-arid region

被引:79
作者
Hu, Qi [1 ,2 ]
Pan, Feifei [2 ]
Pan, Xuebiao [1 ,3 ]
Zhang, Dan [1 ]
Yang, Ning [1 ,3 ]
Pan, Zhihua [1 ,3 ]
Zhao, Peiyi [3 ]
Tuo, Debaa [3 ]
机构
[1] China Agr Univ, Coll Resources & Environm Sci, Beijing 100193, Peoples R China
[2] Univ N Texas, Dept Geog, Denton, TX 76203 USA
[3] Minist Agr, Wuchuan Sci Observing & Expt Stn Agroenviron, Wuchuan 011700, Inner Mongolia, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Ridge-furrow rainwater-harvesting system; Soil temperature; Soil moisture; Crop yield; Water use efficiency; WATER-USE EFFICIENCY; SOIL-WATER; MAIZE; PRECIPITATION; GROWTH;
D O I
10.1016/j.fcr.2014.06.005
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
To evaluate the effects of mulching and ridge and furrow widths on soil temperature and moisture, crop growth and yield, and water use efficiency (WUE), a series of field experiments were conducted in a potato field in Inner Mongolia, China. In 2009 and 2010, four treatments (flat plot without mulching (CK), plastic film mulched ridge (MR), MRF (plastic film mulched ridge and furrow (MRF), and non-mulched (NM0.5)) were conducted on the same widths of ridge (0.5 m) and furrow (0.5 m), and two additional non-mulching treatments (1.0 m ridge and furrow width (NM1.0), and 1.5 m ridge and furrow width (NM1.5)) were tested in 2011 and 2012. The results indicated that mulching practices increased topsoil temperature compared to non-mulching treatments at the emergence stage. Compared to CK, the soil water storage in furrows was increased by 10.2 mm on average in 2009 for the MRF treatment, 8.1 mm and 15.1 mm in 2011, and 14.0 mm and 21.2 mm in 2012 for NM1.0 and NM1.5, respectively, and plant leaf area index and dry biomass values during the potato growth stage were also increased. The MR treatment produced greater effects on crop productivity than NM0.5, and increased total yield and marketable yield by 21.4% and 36.3% compared to CK in 2010. Of three non-mulching treatments (i.e., NM0.5, NM1.0, and NM1.5), the NM1.0 treatment produced the highest total yield and marketable yield; compared to CK, the WUE, total yield, and marketable yield were increased by 12.7%, 8.2%, and 52.0% in 2011, and 23.4%, 16.4%, and 81.0% in 2012, respectively. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:92 / 101
页数:10
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]   Rainfall harvesting using sand ditches in Jordan [J].
Abu-Zreig, M ;
Attom, M ;
Hamasha, N .
AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2000, 46 (02) :183-192
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1999, WATER HARVESTING SUP
[3]  
[莫非 Mo Fei], 2013, [农业工程学报, Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering], V29, P1
[4]   EFFECT OF VARIATIONS IN SOIL PROPERTIES AND PRECIPITATION ON MICROCATCHMENT WATER-BALANCE [J].
BENASHER, J ;
WARRICK, AW .
AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 1987, 12 (03) :177-194
[5]   A LINEAR-REGRESSION MODEL COMBINED WITH A SOIL-WATER BALANCE MODEL TO DESIGN MICRO-CATCHMENTS FOR WATER HARVESTING IN ARID ZONES [J].
BOERS, TM ;
DEGRAAF, M ;
FEDDES, RA ;
BENASHER, J .
AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 1986, 11 (3-4) :187-206
[6]   RAINWATER-HARVESTING AGRICULTURE FOR FOOD-PRODUCTION IN ARID ZONES - THE CHALLENGE OF THE AFRICAN FAMINE [J].
BRUINS, HJ ;
EVENARI, M ;
NESSLER, U .
APPLIED GEOGRAPHY, 1986, 6 (01) :13-32
[7]   The effects of mulching on maize growth, yield and water use in a semi-arid region [J].
Bu, Ling-duo ;
Liu, Jian-liang ;
Zhu, Lin ;
Luo, Sha-sha ;
Chen, Xin-ping ;
Li, Shi-qing ;
Hill, Robert Lee ;
Zhao, Ying .
AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2013, 123 :71-78
[8]   The effect of mulching and tillage on the water and temperature regimes of a loess soil: Experimental findings and modeling [J].
Dahiya, Rita ;
Ingwersen, Joachim ;
Streck, Thilo .
SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH, 2007, 96 (1-2) :52-63
[9]   RUNOFF FARMING IN DESERT .I. EXPERIMENTAL LAYOUT [J].
EVENARI, M ;
SHANAN, L ;
TADMOR, NH .
AGRONOMY JOURNAL, 1968, 60 (01) :29-+
[10]   WATER HARVESTING BY WAX-TREATED SOIL SURFACES - PROGRESS, PROBLEMS, AND POTENTIAL [J].
FINK, DH ;
FRASIER, GW ;
COOLEY, KR .
AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 1980, 3 (02) :125-134