This article is made freely available as part of this journal's Open Access: ID| AHMED ManuscriptRef.1-ajiras090616 |
Afiliation:
1. Irrigation and Drainage Engineering Department | Agricultural Engineering Research Institute | Giza | Egypt | 2. Agricultural Engineering Department | King Saud University | P.O. Box 2460 | Riyadh 11451 | |Saudi Arabia |
ResearchBib, Google Scholar, SIS database, i.f.s.i.j, Scribd, IISJ, Eurasian Scientific Journal Index (ESJI),Indianscience.in, arastirmax, Directory of Research Journals Indexing, Pak Academic Sesearch, AcademicKeays, CiteSeerX, UDL Library, CAS Abstracts, J-Gate, WorldCat, Scirus, IET Inspec Direct, and getCited
American Journal of innovative Research & Applied Sciences
Background: Smart irrigation techniques became lately an essential and vital tool for irrigation water scheduling in water-scarce dry areas to improve irrigation efficiency, producing more agricultural goods with less water input. Objective: This study was conducted to investigate the effects of two evapotranspiration based irrigation controllers (ET controllers) on agronomical characteristics and water use of irrigated tomato compared to a time-based irrigation controller under drip irrigation system. Material and methods: Experimental site was located at educational station of King Saud University on a sandy loam textured soil. Two brands of ET controllers were selected based on positive water savings results in arid climates. Two types of ET controllers were tested: Weathermatic SL1600; Hunter pro C. Each treatment was replicated three times for a total of nine blocks, which were irrigated through individual irrigation systems. Treatments were compared to each other and to a time-based schedule. Results: The results showed that ET controllers adjusted their irrigation schedules to the climatic demand and applied water less than water scheduled by a time clock controller (control treatment). Data revealed that the considerably water saving over the entire study period was obtained by Hunter (28%). Weathermatic reflected a similar trend to water savings with similar statistical results (27%) when compared to control, but it was poorer than Hunter treatment. Water productivity was significantly increased by 64% and 50%, respectively under Hunter and Weathermatic systems as compared to control. Moreover, the highest physiological parameters, was obtained from Hunter pro C followed by Weathermatic SL 1600 treatment as compared to control. Conclusion: Irrigation scheduling using surface drip and sensor-based irrigation systems demonstrated that ET controllers could achieve higher levels of water savings and water efficiency while maintaining competing yield.
Keywords: Smart controllers, water productivity, water savings, drip irrigation.
