• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Environmental and Resource Economics >Comparative Performance Evaluation of Alternate and Convectional Furrow Irrigation under Different Water Application Level on Cabbage Water Use Efficiency and Economic Analysis
【24h】

Comparative Performance Evaluation of Alternate and Convectional Furrow Irrigation under Different Water Application Level on Cabbage Water Use Efficiency and Economic Analysis

机译：不同施水水平下沟灌与对流灌溉对白菜水分利用效率的比较评价与经济分析。

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Suitable irrigation method with application level is essential for adaptation and adoption in the areas where water resources are limited. Therefore, a field experiment was conducted to test the performance of alternate furrow irrigation (AFI or FFI) and convectional furrow irrigation (CFI) with three water application level on crop, yield response, water use efficiency and cost benefit analysis of cabbage. The experiment had two factors, factorial design arranged in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with nine treatments of three replicate. The treatment namely three furrow Irrigation method alternative Furrow Irrigation (AFI), Fixed Furrow Irrigation (FFI) and Convectional Furrow Irrigation methods (CFI) and three application levels full (100%), three forth 75% and half 50% of full ETc (crop water requirement). The result shows CWUE, IWUE and EWP were highly significantly (P&0.01) affected by both IMs and ALs. The highest and the lowest mean crop and irrigation water use efficiency (CWUE and IWUE), and economic water productivity (EWP) were recorded by AFI and CFI irrigation. Whereas, under ALs the highest and the lowest mean CWUE, IWUE and EWP were recorded by 50% and 100% ETc Application depth. Maximum water saved resulted from AFI and FFI, with 50%, 75% and 100% ETc application depth was equally computed as 58.33%, 37.50% and 16.67% which could irrigate additional area of 0.20, 0.60 and 1.40 ha for each treatment respectively. Contrarily yield reduction was higher in FFI followed by AFI and CFI with the same ALs. NR (net return) produced per hectare was higher in CFI followed by AFI and FFI. In case of BCR, AFI with 75% and 50% ETc was higher than FFI followed and the smallest by CFI of 50% and 75% ETc deficit level. Hence yield reduction and NR incurred by alternate (AFI and FFI) were compensated from additional irrigable area by diverting the water and labour saved. Generally from over all investigation of CWUE, IWUE, EWP, NR and BCR alternative furrow irrigation method (AFI) was better than FFI and CFI for the water scarce area.
机译：在水资源有限的地区，适应和采用具有应用水平的灌溉方法对于适应和采用至关重要。因此，进行了田间试验，以三种施水水平对作物，产量响应，水分利用效率和卷心菜的成本效益分析来测试交替沟灌（AFI或FFI）和对流沟灌（CFI）的性能。实验有两个因素，以随机完整区块设计（RCBD）安排的析因设计，九个处理，三个重复。处理方式为三种沟灌法替代沟灌（AFI），固定沟灌（FFI）和对流沟灌法（CFI），三种施肥水平分别为全灌（100％），三分（75％）和半全灌（50％）（作物需水量）。结果表明，CWUE，IWUE和EWP受IM和AL均高度显着（P ＜0.01）。 AFI和CFI灌溉记录了最高和最低的平均作物和灌溉用水效率（CWUE和IWUE）以及经济水生产率（EWP）。而在ALs下，按50％和100％ETc应用深度记录了最高和最低的平均CWUE，IWUE和EWP。 AFI和FFI分别节省了50％，75％和100％的ETc施用深度，从而最大节水量分别为58.33％，37.50％和16.67％，这分别为每种处理灌溉了0.20、0.60和1.40公顷的额外面积。相反，FFI的产量降低幅度更高，其次是具有相同AL的AFI和CFI。 CFI每公顷产生的NR（净收益）较高，其次是AFI和FFI。在BCR的情况下，ETc分别为75％和50％的AFI高于FFI，其次是CFI最小的ETc赤字水平为50％和75％。因此，通过节省水和劳力，从额外的可灌溉区域中补偿了交替使用（AFI和FFI）引起的减产和NR。通常，从CWUE，IWUE，EWP，NR和BCR的所有调查来看，对于缺水地区，替代的沟灌方法（AFI）优于FFI和CFI。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号