Crop yield response to water - Cra
Crop yield response to water - Cra Crop yield response to water - Cra
e saved, but this causes a reduction in growers' gross revenues (Table 2). A more sensibleapproach would be to use a combination of deficit irrigation during Stage I and postharvest, incombination with a slight reduction during the first part of Stage II fruit growth (Table 2). Thelatter strategy would reduce the annual water use by 33 percent (from 600 mm to 400 mm)and probably would have less negative impact on fruit growth than an RDI-SII strategy.Table 2Suggested RDI strategies for different available water supply scenarios from 600 to 400 mmwhen potential ET c is 600 mm. Weather data corresponds to Ebro valley Northeast Spain andK c corresponds to those presented in Table 1.PotentialET cWaterreq.RDI-SI (560 mm)RDI-SII(400 mm)Irri. rate (mm)(%)RDI-Postharvest(460 mm)Irri. rate (mm)(%)RDI-Combined(400 mm)Irri. rate (mm)(%)Date (mm) (mm) Irri. rate(%)(mm)March 15-30 9 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 10Apr. 1-15 13 14 100 14 100 14 100 14 100 14Apr. 16-30 15 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 10May 1-15 28 17 40 7 100 17 100 17 40 7May 16-31 37 28 40 11 100 28 100 28 40 11June 1-15 56 62 100 62 50 31 100 62 80 49June 16-30 71 79 100 79 50 39 100 79 80 63July 1-15 72 74 100 74 50 37 100 74 80 59July 16-31 77 84 100 84 50 42 100 84 100 84Aug. 1-15 67 73 100 73 50 37 100 73 100 73Aug 16-31 65 71 100 71 100 71 10 7 10 7Sept. 1-15 36 39 100 39 100 39 10 4 10 4Sept. 16-30 27 30 100 30 100 30 10 3 10 3Oct. 1-15 16 1 100 1 100 1 10 0 10 0Oct. 16-31 9 0 100 0 100 0 10 0 10 0Nov. 1-15 5 0 100 0 100 0 10 0 10 0Total 602 591 - 564 - 405 - 464 - 395pear 387
REFERENCESAllen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D. & Smith, M. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration: Guidelines for computing crop waterrequirements. Irrigation and & Drainage Paper 56. Rome, FAO.Asin, L., Alegre, S. & Montserrat, R. 2007. Effect of paclobutrazol, prohexadione-Ca, deficit irrigation, summerpruning and root pruning on shoot growth, yield, and return bloom, in a 'Blanquilla' pear orchard. ScientiaHorticulturae, 113:142-148.Bain, J.M. 1961. Some morphological, anatomical, and physiological changes in the pear fruit (Pyrus communis var.Williams Bon Chrétien) during development and following harvest. Australian Journal Botany, 9(2):99-123.Behboudian, M.H., Lawes, G.S. & Griffiths, K.M. 1994. The influence of water deficit on water relations, photosynthesisand fruit growth in Asian pear (Pyrus serotina Rehd). Scientia Horticulturae, 60:89-99.Buwalda, J.G. & Lenz, E. 1995. Water use by European pear trees growing in drainage lysimeters. Journal ofHorticultural Science, 70:531-540.Caspari, H.W., Behboudian, M.H., Chalmers, D.J. & Renquist, A.R. 1993. Pattern of seasonal water use of asian pearsdetermined by lysimeters and the heat pulse technique. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science,118(5):562-569.Caspari, H.W., Behboudian, M.H. & Chalmers, D.J. 1994. Water use, growth and fruit yield of ‘Hossui’ asian pearunder deficit irrigation. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 119:383-388.Caspari, H.W., Behboudian, M.H. & Chalmers, D.J. 1994. Water use, growth and fruit yield of ‘Hossui’ asian pearunder deficit irrigation. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 119:383-388.Chalmers, D.J., Andrews, P.K., Harris, K.M., Cameron, E.A., & Caspari, H.W. 1992. Performance of drainage lysimetersfor the evaluation of water use by Asian pears. Horticultural Science, 27: 263-265.Elkins, R.B., Van den End, B. & Beutel, J. 2007. Vegetative growth and development. In: Mitcham, E.J. & Elkins, R.B.,eds. Pear Production and Handling Manual. University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication3483. 199 pp.FAO. 2011. FAOSTAT online database, available at link http://faostat.fao.org/. Accessed on December 2011.Forshey, C.G. & Elfving, D.C., 1989. The relationship between vegetative growth and fruiting in apple trees.Horticultural Reviews, 11:229-288.Girona, J., del Campo, J., Mata, M., Lopez, G. & Marsal, J. 2010. A comparative study of apple and pear tree waterconsumption measured with two weighing lysimeters. Irrigation Science. Online publication DOI 10.1007/s00271-010-02175-5.Marsal, J. & Girona, J. 1997. Effects of water stress cycles on turgor maintenance process in pear leaves (Pyruscommunis L.). Tree Physiology, 17:327-333.Marsal, J., Rapoport, H.F., Manrique, T. & Girona, J. 2000. Pear fruit growth under regulated deficit irrigation incontainer-grown trees. Scientia Horticulturae, 85: 243-259.Marsal, J., Mata, M., Arbones, A., Rufat, J. & Girona, J. 2002a. Regulated deficit irrigation and rectification ofirrigation scheduling in young pear trees: an evaluation based on vegetative and productive response. EuropeanJournal of Agronomy, 17: 111-122.Marsal, J., Mata, M., Arbonès, A., Rufat, J. & J. Girona. 2002b. Water stress limits for vegetative and reproductivegrowth of ‘Barlett’ pears. Acta Hortaculturae, 596:659-663.Marsal, J., Arbones, A., Mata, M., del Campo, J., Girona, J. & Lopez, G. 2008. Factors involved in alleviating waterstress by partial crop removal in pear trees. Tree Physiology, 28:1375-1382.Marsal, J., Behboudian, M.H., Mata, M., del Campo, J., Basile, B., Girona, J. & Lopez, G. 2010. Fruit thinning in‘Conference’ pear grown under deficit irrigation to optimize yield and to improve tree water status. Journal ofHorticultural Science & Biotechnology, 85:125-130.Mitchell, P.D., Van Den Ende, B., Jerie, P.H. & Chalmers, D.J. 1989. Responses of 'Barlett' pear irrigation to witholdingirrigation, regulated deficit irrigation and tree spacing. Journal of the American Society for HorticulturalScience,109:604-606.Naor, A., Peres, M., Greenblat, Y., Doron, Y., Gal, Y. & Stern, R.A. 2000. Irrigation and crop load interactions inrelation to pear yield and fruit-size distribution. Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 75:555-561.Naor A., 2001. Irrigation and crop load influence fruit size and water relations in field-grown ‘Spadona’ pear. Journalof the American Society for Horticultural Science, 126:252-255.Naor, A., Stern, R., Flaishman, M., Gal, Y. & Peres, M. 2006. Effects of postharvest water stress on autumnal bloom andsubsequent-season productivity in midseason ‘Spadona’ pear. Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 81:365-370.O’Connell, M. & Goodwin, I. 2007. Water stress and reduced fruit size in micro-irrigated pear trees under deficitpartial rootzone drying. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 58:670-679.388crop yield response to water
- Page 346 and 347: Apples tend to have a biennial bear
- Page 348 and 349: water stress and thus highly respon
- Page 351 and 352: indicate that deficit irrigation ad
- Page 353 and 354: Figure 7Effect of midday light inte
- Page 355 and 356: Figure 10Response of marketable fru
- Page 357: Failla, O., Zocchi, Z., Treccani, C
- Page 360 and 361: Figure 1 Production trends for plum
- Page 362 and 363: soil water. In young orchards, post
- Page 364 and 365: Figure 3 Relationships between rela
- Page 366: ReferencesAllen, R.G., Pereira, L.S
- Page 369 and 370: Figure 1 Production trends for almo
- Page 371 and 372: FIGURE 2The three stages of almond
- Page 373 and 374: Figure 3Differences in the cultivar
- Page 375 and 376: Indicators of tree water statusTo p
- Page 377 and 378: nuts are rapidly expanding and late
- Page 379 and 380: ReferencesAyars, J.E., Johnson, R.
- Page 381 and 382: Table 2 (Continued)Year TreatmentWa
- Page 383: Table 3 (continued)Potential900 mmA
- Page 386 and 387: Figure 1 Production trends for pear
- Page 388 and 389: (Elkins et al., 2007). The appearan
- Page 390 and 391: out in Spain under more common grow
- Page 392 and 393: Figure 4Relationships between the p
- Page 394 and 395: Data in Figure 5 suggest that there
- Page 398: pear 389
- Page 401 and 402: Figure 1 Production trends for peac
- Page 403 and 404: Figure 2bEvolution of vegetative (s
- Page 405 and 406: The postharvest period is important
- Page 407 and 408: the midday stem-water potential in
- Page 409 and 410: PHOTOPeach leaf appearance under th
- Page 411 and 412: FIGURE 5Relation between the crop c
- Page 413 and 414: In applying RDI strategies an impor
- Page 415: peach 407
- Page 418 and 419: Figure 1 Production trends of walnu
- Page 420: 1 100 mm, a team in California appl
- Page 423 and 424: Figure 1 Production trends for pist
- Page 425 and 426: There are two types of shoot growth
- Page 427 and 428: FIGURE 3Time course development of
- Page 429 and 430: Stage III was the most stress sensi
- Page 431: (see Chapter 4), as in other specie
- Page 434 and 435: Table 2 Suggested RDI strategies fo
- Page 437 and 438: Lead AuthorSCristos Xiloyannis(Univ
- Page 439 and 440: is completed within 20 days; therea
- Page 441 and 442: or peach. However, because fruit is
- Page 443 and 444: to a midday value varying between -
e saved, but this causes a reduction in growers' gross revenues (Table 2). A more sensibleapproach would be <strong>to</strong> use a combination of deficit irrigation during Stage I and postharvest, incombination with a slight reduction during the first part of Stage II fruit growth (Table 2). Thelatter strategy would reduce the annual <strong>water</strong> use by 33 percent (from 600 mm <strong>to</strong> 400 mm)and probably would have less negative impact on fruit growth than an RDI-SII strategy.Table 2Suggested RDI strategies for different available <strong>water</strong> supply scenarios from 600 <strong>to</strong> 400 mmwhen potential ET c is 600 mm. Weather data corresponds <strong>to</strong> Ebro valley Northeast Spain andK c corresponds <strong>to</strong> those presented in Table 1.PotentialET cWaterreq.RDI-SI (560 mm)RDI-SII(400 mm)Irri. rate (mm)(%)RDI-Postharvest(460 mm)Irri. rate (mm)(%)RDI-Combined(400 mm)Irri. rate (mm)(%)Date (mm) (mm) Irri. rate(%)(mm)March 15-30 9 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 10Apr. 1-15 13 14 100 14 100 14 100 14 100 14Apr. 16-30 15 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 10May 1-15 28 17 40 7 100 17 100 17 40 7May 16-31 37 28 40 11 100 28 100 28 40 11June 1-15 56 62 100 62 50 31 100 62 80 49June 16-30 71 79 100 79 50 39 100 79 80 63July 1-15 72 74 100 74 50 37 100 74 80 59July 16-31 77 84 100 84 50 42 100 84 100 84Aug. 1-15 67 73 100 73 50 37 100 73 100 73Aug 16-31 65 71 100 71 100 71 10 7 10 7Sept. 1-15 36 39 100 39 100 39 10 4 10 4Sept. 16-30 27 30 100 30 100 30 10 3 10 3Oct. 1-15 16 1 100 1 100 1 10 0 10 0Oct. 16-31 9 0 100 0 100 0 10 0 10 0Nov. 1-15 5 0 100 0 100 0 10 0 10 0Total 602 591 - 564 - 405 - 464 - 395pear 387
Change language