Effect of Percolation on the Water Use Efficiency of Paddy Crop
Attention in this study is focussed on the evaluation of the effect of percolation on Water Use Efficiency computation. In addition, total water use, amount of water supplied, total water requirement at various stages of crop growth and Water Use Efficiency were also determined. Some findings on...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English English |
| Published: |
1992
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/9874/1/FK_1992_1_A.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Attention in this study is focussed on the evaluation of
the effect of percolation on Water Use Efficiency computation.
In addition, total water use, amount of water supplied, total
water requirement at various stages of crop growth and Water
Use Efficiency were also determined. Some findings on the
factors affecting percolation were also done. Field and
Laboratory experiments were conducted through two consecutive
seasons. The results obtained in the wet season were 742 mm of
water was needed for ET, while water needed for S&P was
different between the plots. In the upstream plot S&P was
267.31mm, in the intermediate plot it was -105.36mm, and in
the downstream plot it was -328.73mm. The irrigation water supplied was 576.51 mm to the upstream plot, the intermediate
plot recorded was 602.01 mm and the downstream plot was 487.58
mm. The precipitation was 515 mm. During the dry season,
Evapotranspiration was 670 mm, while S&P was higher than in the
wet season. The upstream plot recorded 306.81 mm, the
intermediate plot was 108.6 mm and the dowstream plot was
-104.53 mm. Irrigation water required during this season was
higher. It was 987.81 mm, 864.27 mm and 735.95 mm, respectively
for the upstream, intermediate and downstream plots, while
precipitation was 151 mm . Water use Efficiency was calculated
by a modified equation which is (ET + SW + We) / (IR + RF).
The WUE in dry season ranged from 70X to 90X and in the wet
season was 70X to 95X. These results are high when a comparison
is made with values of WUE using Wickham's formula. |
|---|