تدوین بنچ‌مارک کارآیی مصارف آب محصولات زراعی و باغی تحت استراتژی‌های مدیریتی مختلف در یک منطقه‌ی خشک

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد آبیاری و زهکشی، گروه مهندسی آب، دانشگاه زابل

2 دانشیار گروه مهندسی آب، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران

3 استادیار گروه مهندسی آب، دانشگاه زابل

چکیده

بر اساس داده­های موجود در یک بازه­ی 30 ساله، پتانسیل­های صرفه­جویی آب مصرفی در کشاورزی آبی در استان خوزستان بررسی شد. بدین منظور و بر اساس سیستم طبقه­بندی فائو، کلیه­ی محصولات زراعی و باغی به هشت گروه غلات، سبزیجات، حبوبات، دانه­های روغنی، گیاهان قندی، گیاهان غده­ای، آجیل و خشکبار و میوه­ها تقسیم شدند. سپس، سناریوهای مدیریتی مختلف از تلفیق سه تاریخ کشت به­هنگام (عرف منطقه)، زود و دیرهنگام، و سیستم­های آبیاری فارو، بارانی و قطره­ای و چهار سطح تامین نیاز آبیِ گیاه (100، 85، 70 و 55 درصد) تعریف شد. بهترین سناریو و الگوی کشت بر اساس شاخص­های کارآیی مصرف آب و بهره­وری آب آبیاری تعیین و سپس، مقادیرِ معادلِ این شاخص­ها تحت سناریوهای منتخب، به­عنوان مقادیر بنچ­مارک در نظر گرفته شد. بالاترین مقادیر کارآیی مصرف آب برای گیاهان قندی، به دلیل دارا بودن عملکرد بالا و گیاهان غده­ای، به دلیل دارا بودن نیاز آبی اندک و سبزیجات به دلیل نیاز آبی اندک و عملکرد بالا، بدست آمد. با وجود داشتن رتبه­ی پنجم از منظر کارآیی مصرف آب، غلات، به دلیل داشتن سهمی فراتر از 70 درصد در کل اراضی تحت کشت آبی، بزرگ­ترین مصرف کننده­ی آب در استان بودند. جایگزینی هر هکتار از سطوح آبی تحت کشت غلات با محصولات غده­ای، به طور متوسط 8/3 هزار مترمکعب (63 درصد) صرفه­جویی در میزان آب خالص مصرفی به وسیله­ی گیاه را به همراه خواهد داشت. تغییر سیستم آبیاری از حالت سطحی به قطره­ای در مزارع تحت کشت محصولات قندی، حبوبات و دانه­های روغنی، میزان کارآیی مصرف آب را افزایش داد، در حالی­که این جایگزینی باعث کاهش میزان تولید به ازای واحد آب مصرفی در سایر گروه­های گیاهان خواهد شد. اعمال 15 درصد تنش رطوبتی به دلیل حفظ نیاز آبی در حد مطلوب و تنها 3/8-4/1 درصد کاهش در عملکرد گیاه، تغییر اندکی در میزان کارآیی مصرف آب را منتج خواهد شد. افزایش سطح تنش به 30 درصد، منتج به حداکثر 6/5 درصد کاهش در میزان تولید به ازای واحد آب خالص مصرفی خواهد شد. صرف­نظر از نوع سیستم­ آبیاری و سطح تنش، کشت­های زودهنگام، به دلیل کاهش نیاز آبی گیاه تا 20 درصد، میزان کارآیی مصرف آب را افزایش خواهد داد. به این ترتیب، اعمال تنش ملایم رطوبتی و تعدیل تقویم کشت و هم­چنین، اولویت­بندی کشت محصولات زراعی و باغی بر اساس مقادیرِ کارآیی مصرف آب آن­ها، می­تواند به عنوان سناریوهای مدیریتی مطلوب در کاهش فشار بر منابع آب آبی استان خوزستان محسوب شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Benchmarking water use efficiencies of agricultural and horticultural crops under various management strategies in an arid region

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fahimeh Shahsavari 1
  • Fatemeh Karandish 2
  • Parviz Haghighatjou 3
1 MSc student, Water Engineering Department, University of Zabol
2 Assistant Professor, Water Engineering Department, University of Zabol., Zabol., Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Water Engineering Department, University of Zabol
چکیده [English]

Based on a 30-year available data during 1980-2010, water saving potentials consumed in the irrigated agriculture of Khuzestan province was investigated. To this end and based on FAO classification system, all agricultural and horticultural crops were divided into 8 groups of cereals, vegetables, legumes, oil crops, sugar crops, root and tubers, nuts and fruits. Then, different management scenarios were defines by combining three planting dates of on time cultivation (local date), early and late plating dates, and furrow, sprinkler and drip irrigation systems, and four levels of supplying crop water demand (100, 85, 70 and 55 percent). The best scenario and cropping pattern were determined based on water use efficiency and irrigation water productivity indices, and then, the corresponding indices under the selected scenarios were considered as the benchmark levels. The highest values of water use efficiencies were obtained for sugar crops had the highest water use efficiencies due to their high crop productivity, root and fiber due to their low water requirement, and vegetables due to their low water requirement and high yield. While taking the fifth place regarding water use efficiency, cereals were the largest fresh water consumer in the province due contributing more than 70% in total irrigated harvested lands. Substituting one hectare of irrigated lands under cereals with root and tuber productions, results in an average 3.8 thousand cub meter (63%) saving in net crop water consumption. substituting surface irrigation system with drip irrigation system led to an increase in water sue efficiency in sugar crops, legumes and oil, while such substitution caused a reduction in the amount of produced crop per unit consumed water. A 15% water stress results in a negligible change in water use efficiency due to maintaining crop water requirement at the favorable rates and reducing crop yield by only 1.4-8.3%. Increasing the water stress level up to 30% result in a maximum reduction of 5.6% in crop production per net consumed water. Regardless of the irrigation systems and water stress levels, early planting will increase water use efficiency up to 20%. Hence, a mild water stress and adjusting planting date as well as prioritizing the cultivation of agricultural and horticultural crops based on their water use efficiency could be considered as favorable management scenarios for alleviating pressure on blue water resources in Khuzestan province.        

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • AquaCrop
  • Blue water
  • Cropping calendar
  • Deficit irrigation
  • Irrigation water productivity
  • Khuzestan
  • Pressurized Irrigation systems

Ahmadzadeh,H., Morid,S., Delavar,M., Srinivasan,R. 2016. Using the SWAT model to assess the impacts of changing irrigation from surface to pressurized systems on water productivity and watersaving in the Zarrineh Rud catchment. Agricultural Water Management. 175: 15-28.

Akowuah,J.O., Mensah,L.D., Chan,C., Roskilly,A. 2015. Effects of practices of maize farmers and traders in Ghana on contamination of maize by aflatoxins: case study of Ejura-Sekyeredumase municipality. African Journal of Microbiological Research. 9: 1658–1666.

Ali,M.H., Talukder,M.S.U. 2008. Increasing water productivity in cropproduction a synthesis. Agricultural Water Management. 95.11: 1201–1213.

Allen,R.G., Clemmens,A.J., Willardson,L.S. 2005. Agro-Hydrology and Irrigation Efficiency. ICID Working Group Water and Crops.

Alva,A.K., Paramasivam,S., Obreza,T.A., Schumann,A.W. 2006. Nitrogen best management practice for citrus trees I. Fruit yield, quality, and leaf nutritional status. Scientia Horticulture. 107: 233–244.

AQUASTAT, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 2017, http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/main/index.stm.

Arnell,N. 1999. Climate change and global water resources. Global Environmental Change. 9: 31–49.

Barton,L., Colmer,T.D. 2006. Irrigation and fertilizer strategies for minimizing nitrogen leaching from turfgrass. Agricultural Water Management. 80: 160–175.

Bouwer,H. 2000. Integrated water management: emerging issues and challenges. Agricultural Water Management. 45: 217–228.

Boz,B. 2001. Validation of the Ceres-Maize Growth Model under Cukurova Region Conditions, Department of Agricultural Structures and Irrigation, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Cukurova University, MSc Thesis, 59, Adana.

Bozkurt,Y., Yazar,A., Gencel,B., Sezen,S.M. 2006. Optimum lateral spacing for drip irrigated corn in the Mediterranean Region of Turkey, Agricultural Water Management. 85: 113–120.

Daudén,A., Quilez,D. 2004. Pig slurry versus mineral fertilization on corn yield and nitrate leaching in a Mediterranean irrigated environment. European Journal of Agronomy. 21, 7–19.

De-Wrachien,D., Goli,M.B. 2015. Global warming effects on irrigation development and crop production: a world-wide view. Agricultural Sciences. 6.7: 734–747.

Doorenbos,J., Kassam,A.H. 1979. Yield Response to Water; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy.

Ehsani,M., Khaledi,H. 2003. Agricultural Water Productivity, first edit. Irrigationand Drainage National Council of Iran, Tehran, Iran.

FAO. FAOSTAT. 2017. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/

Farahani,H.J., Izzi,G., Oweis,T.Y. 2009. Parameterization and evaluation of the AquaCrop model for full and deficit irrigated cotton. Journal of Agronomy. 101: 469–476.

Gaile,Z. 2010. The role of maize harvest timing for high-quality silage production (summary). Proceedings of Latvia University Agriculture. 25: 116–128.

Geerts,S., Raes,D., Garcia, M., Miranda, R., Cusicanqui, J.A., Taboada,C., Mendoza,J., Huanca,R., Mamani,A.; Condori,O. 2009. Simulating yield response of quinoa to water availability with AquaCrop. Journal of Agronomy. 101: 499–508.

Gheysari,M., Mirlatifi,S.M., Homaee,M., Asadi,M.E., Hoogenboom,G. 2009. Nitrate Leaching in a Silage Maize Field under Different Irrigation and Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates. Agricultural Water Management. 96.6: 946-954.

Gianquinto,G., Sambo,P., Pimpini,F. 2003. The use of SPAD-502 chlorophyll meter for dynamically optimising the nitrogen supply in potato crop. Acta Horticulturae. 627: 225-230.

Greaves,G., Wang,Y. 2016. Assessment of FAO AquaCrop model for simulating maize growth and productivity under deficit irrigation in a tropical environment. Water. 8.557:1-18

Haverkort,A.J., Vos,J., Booij,R. 2003. Precision management of nitrogen and water in potato production through monitoring and modeling. In: Proceedings of the XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Potatoes, Healthy Food for Humanity: International Developments in Breeding, Production, Protection and Utilization, Toronto, Canada.

Heng,L.K., Hsiao,T., Evett,S., Howell,T., Steduto,P. 2009. Validating the FAO AquaCrop model for irrigated and water deficient field maize. Journal of Agronomy. 101: 488–498.

Hoekstra,A.Y., Mekonnen,M.M. 2012. The water footprint of humanity, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109.9: 3232–3237.

Hsiao,T.C., Heng,L., Steduto,P., Rojas-Lara,B., Raes,D., Fereres,E. 2009. AquaCrop-The FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: III. Parameterization and testing for maize. Journal of Agronomy. 101: 448–459.

Hutton,R., Holzapfel,B., Smith,J., Hutchinson,P., Barlow,K., Bond,W. 2008. Influence of irrigation and fertilizer management on the movement of water and nutrients within and below root zone of vines for sustainable grape production. Cooperative Research Center for Viticulture Report. S2.3.6.

Jia,X., Shao,L., Liu,P., Zhao,B., Gu,L., Dong,S.H., Bing,S.H., Zhang,J., Zhao,B. 2014. Effect of different nitrogen and irrigation treatments on yield and nitrate leaching of summer maize (Zea mays L.) under lysimeter conditions. Agricultural Water Management. 137 : 92–103.

Kaaya,A.N., Kyamuhangire,W. 2006. The effect of storage time and agroecological zone on mould incidence and aflatoxin contamination of maize from traders in Uganda. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 110:217–223.

Karandish,F., Salari,S., Darzi-Naftchali,A. 2015. Application of virtual water trade to evaluate cropping pattern in arid regions. Water Resource Management. 29.11: 4061–4074.

Karandish,F., Darzi-Naftchali,A., Asgari,A. 2016. Application of machine-learning models for diagnosing health hazard of nitrate toxicity in shallow aquifers. Paddy and Water Environment. 15.1: 201-215.

Karandish,F., Hoekstra,A.Y. 2017. Informing National Food and Water Security Policy through Water Footprint Assessment: The Case of Iran. Water. 9 .831: 1-25.

Karandish,F., Šimůnek,J. 2016. A field-modeling study for assessing temporal variations of soil-water-crop interactions under water-saving irrigation strategies. Agricultural Water Management. 178: 291-303.

Klocke,N.L., Schneekloth,J.P., Melvin,S., Clark,R.T., Payero,J.O. 2004. Field scale limited irrigation scenarios for water policy strategies. Applied Engineering in Agriculture. 20: 623-631.

Liu,C., Kroezea,C., Hoekstra,A.Y., Leenes,W.G. 2012. Past and future trends in grey water footprints of anthropogenic nitrogen and phosphorus inputs to major world rivers. Ecological Indicators. 18: 42–49.

North,G.B., Nobel,P.S. 1991. Changes in hydraulic conductivity and anatomy caused by drying and rewetting roots of Agave-Deserti (Agavaceae). American Journal of Botany.78: 906–915.

Payero,J.O., Melvin,S.R., Irmak,S., Tarkalson,D. 2006. Yield response of corn to deficit irrigation in a semiarid climate. Agricultural Water Management. 84: 101–112.

Rezaverdinejad,V., Khorsand,A., Shahidi,A. 2014. Evaluation and comparison of AquaCrop and FAO models for yield prediction of winter wheat under environmental stresses. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences. 4: 438–449.

Rodriguez,I.R., Grady,L.M. 2000. Using a chlorophyll meter to determine the chlorophyll concentration nitrogen concentration and visual quality of St. Horticultural Science. 35: 751-754.

Stone,L.R. 2003. Crop water use requirements and water use efficiencies. In: Proceedings of the 15th annual Central Plains Irrigation Conference and Exposition, Colby, Kansas. 127-133.

Todorovic,M., Albrizio,R., Zivotic,L., Abi Saab,M.T., Stöckle,C., Steduto,P. 2009. Assessment of AquaArop, CropSyst, and WOFOST models in the simulation of sunflower growth under different water regimes. Agronomy Journal. 101: 509–521.

Wei,Y.P., Chen,D.L., Hu,K.L., Willett,I.R., Langford,J. 2009. Policy incentives for reducing nitrate leaching from intensive agriculture in desert oases of Alxa, InnerMongolia, China. Agricultural Water Management. 96: 1114–1119.

Yazar,A., Gokcel,F.,Sezen,M.S. 2009. Corn yield response to partial rootzone drying and deficit irrigation strategies applied with drip system. Plant and Soil Environment. 55 .11: 494–503.

Yegbemey,R.N., Kabir,H., Awoye,O.H.R., Yabi,J.A., Paraïso,A.A. 2014. Managing the agricultural calendar as coping mechanism to climate variability: A case study of maize farming in northern Benin, West Africa. Climate Risk Management. 3: 13–23.