The Experts below are selected from a list of 22530 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
K N Tiwari - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of drip irrigation on yield of cabbage brassica oleracea l var capitata under Mulch and non Mulch conditions
Agricultural Water Management, 2003Co-Authors: K N Tiwari, Ajai SinghAbstract:The experiments were conducted on the lateritic sandy loam soils of Kharagpur, West Bengal, India during middle of September?January for 3 years (1997?2000) to evaluate the economic feasibility of growing cabbage crop under drip irrigation with Mulches. Actual evapotranspiration for cabbage crop was estimated by using the modified Penman method and net daily irrigation requirement was estimated after subtracting effective rainfall. Estimated irrigation requirement was supplied by a 4 l h-1 emitter for four plants with the drip irrigation system being operated from 70 to 101 min per day during the crop season. The average seasonal water requirement of crop was estimated to be 400 mm. The yields of the cabbage under 25 m thick black plastic Mulch (PM) were studied using three levels of drip irrigation which applied 100% (VD), 80% (0.8VD) and 60% (0.6VD) of the estimated irrigation requirement. The yield response under two organic Mulches, rice husk with drip (VDH) and paddy straw with drip (VDS) were also studied. For comparison, furrow irrigated (VF) treatments were used and the study revealed 62.44% higher yield in case of drip (VD) as compared to furrow irrigation. Even higher yields were obtained for drip irrigation with PM (VD+PM), 111.72 t ha-1 as compared to 106.68 t ha-1 for (VD). The treatments VDH and VDS showed, respectively, 2.05 and 1.18% higher yield when compared with drip (VD) alone. The net seasonal income was estimated to be highest as US$ 4333 in case of treatment VD+PM. The highest benefit?cost ratio of 8.17 was obtained for furrow irrigation (VF) followed by 6.99 for drip (VD). The net profit per mm of water used was obtained to be highest (US$ 16.51) in case of drip irrigation (0.6VD) followed by US$ 16.32 under the treatment 0.6VD+PM. The highest yield per unit quantity of water used was 427.04 kg ha-1 mm-1 for the treatment 0.6VD+PM. The study reveals that drip irrigation has a definite role in increasing the productivity of cabbage. Author Keywords: Drip irrigation; Cabbage; Plastic Mulch; Rice husk; Paddy straw; Benefit?cost analysis
-
response of okra abelmoschus esculentus l moench to drip irrigation under Mulch and non Mulch conditions
Agricultural Water Management, 1998Co-Authors: K N Tiwari, P K Mal, R M Singh, A ChattopadhyayAbstract:Abstract Field experiments were conducted on the lateritic sandy loam soils of Kharagpur, West Bengal, India during spring–summer (February–May) seasons for 3 years (1995–1997) to evaluate the economic feasibility of drip irrigation in combination with different types of Mulches for an okra crop. Actual evapotranspiration for okra crop was estimated using modified Penman method. The net irrigation volume (V) was determined after deducting the effective rainfall. The net average seasonal water requirement of crop was estimated to be 665 mm. The effect of three irrigation levels viz. VD, 0.8 VD and 0.6 VD with drip in conjunction with black plastic Mulch were studied on biometric and yield response. Effect of two organic Mulches (rice husk and rice straw) were also studied with drip irrigation. The results of furrow irrigation either alone or in conjunction with black plastic Mulch conditions were compared with drip irrigation in terms of growth and yield of the crop. The study indicated that 100% irrigation requirement met through drip irrigation along with black plastic Mulch (VD+PM) gave the highest yield (14.51 t ha−1 ) with 72% increase in yield as compared to furrow irrigation. The net seasonal income, benefit–cost ratio and the yield per unit depth of water used, were found to be highest for drip irrigation with black plastic Mulch (VD+PM), drip irrigation alone (VD) and drip irrigation with black plastic Mulch (0.6 VD+PM), respectively.
Zhaohui Wang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Straw Mulch as an alternative to plastic film Mulch: Positive evidence from dryland wheat production on the Loess Plateau
Science of the Total Environment, 2019Co-Authors: Hubing Zhao, Xiuwen Chen, Jifei Liu, Zhaohui WangAbstract:A large body of research has emphasized how plastic Mulching can benefit crop yields in dryland areas. However, this practice's pollution of the soil, air and environment has only recently attracted attention. We conducted a five-year field experiment with winter wheat as a test crop to evaluate whether plastic Mulching can be replaced with straw Mulching in dryland areas of the Loess Plateau in China. The obtained results showed that straw Mulching (SM) resulted in similar grain yields that were comparable with plastic Mulching. More specifically, ridge-furrow plastic Mulching plus furrow seeding (RM + FS), whole field plastic Mulching (PM) and SM treatments resulted in average yields of 5950, 6447 and 6246 kg ha −1 , respectively. No soil water storage difference was observed at harvest, but SM retained more water during summer fallow and then stored more water prior to seeding, 26 mm and 27 mm higher that of PM, and 44 mm and 46 mm higher that of RM + FS, respectively. None of the three treatments caused soil nitrate-N leaching. Furthermore, because straw is a potential source of slow-releasing N, the SM 0–200 cm soil profile contained significantly more nitrate-N than the corresponding RM + FS and PM soil profiles. The SM treatment decreased greenhouse gas emissions intensity (GHGI) by 47% and 40% and increased economic return by 13% and 27% when compared to the PM and RM + FS treatments, respectively. Therefore, an optimized SM system is a viable alternative for increasing crop yields in dryland wheat production that avoids the negative impacts of the increasingly popular plastic Mulching approach.
-
plastic Mulch tradeoffs between productivity and greenhouse gas emissions
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018Co-Authors: Zhaohui Wang, Sukhdev S MalhiAbstract:One of humanity's contemporary challenges is continuously satisfying the need for global food and environmental security. Numerous individual reports have emphasized the importance of soil surface plastic Mulch (PM) as an auxiliary means of increasing crop yields, but a comprehensive assessment of yields and environmental benefits on a national scale has not been performed. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare PM and no-Mulch (NM) cropping patterns in China, the largest plastic film consumer in the world. Overall, PM positively influenced crop yields, particularly in semi-arid regions with medium and high nitrogen (N) input. The mean yield increased by 18% for wheat and 27% for maize; these changes were explained by the capacity of PM to increase water use efficiency (17% for wheat and 30% for maize). Notably, PM always increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the mean yield-scaled GHG emissions increased by 32% for wheat and 10% for maize on a countrywide scale. In detail, compared to NM, PM resulted in a 2–113% increase in yield-scaled GHG emissions, which was lower in semi-arid regions with medium and high N inputs. For PM systems, yield-scaled GHG emissions in medium N input decreased by 19–31% compared to high N input. Importantly, the yield-scaled GHG emissions in maize was always lower than in wheat. In future, in order to achieve global food and environmental security, it may be advisable to adopt PM in semi-arid regions with medium N input, especially for maize production, based on managing the tradeoffs among yield increase, yield-scaled GHG emissions, and increase in yield-scaled GHG emissions.
-
effect of plastic sheet Mulch wheat straw Mulch and maize growth on water loss by evaporation in dryland areas of china
Agricultural Water Management, 2013Co-Authors: Zhaohui Wang, Yajun Gao, Xiaohong TianAbstract:A field experiment was conducted in a dry sub-humid area to study the effect of plastic sheet Mulch and wheat straw Mulch on water loss by evaporation (E) under fallow and cropped conditions and water use by transpiration (T) under cropped conditions. Results showed that during the entire spring maize (Zea mays L.) growing period with 305.1mm water of precipitation and irrigation from April 22 to August 28, fallow plots Mulched with wheat straw conserved 106.9mm water in the 0–200cm soil layer with a fallow efficiency of 35% while those Mulched with plastic sheets conserved 140.6mm water with a fallow efficiency of 46.1%. Although plastic film and wheat straw Mulch significantly reduced water loss by E compared to non-Mulch that had typically a fallow efficiency of 10–15%, water loss by E was still serious, with the largest water losses occurring during the hottest part of summer (July and August). During this period, it was difficult to reduce E, even when Mulch was properly applied. In contrast, water losses due to E were much lower when maize plants were grown on the plots. In this case, maize plants continuously took up water from soil, leading to a reduction in the amount of soil water available for E. The large canopy shaded the soil surface and reduced water loss by evaporation. Only 20mm, or 6.3% water was estimated lost by evaporation for maize grown on plots covered with plastic Mulch. We developed a regression equation between shoot dry matter and transpiration amounts from plastic sheet Mulched plots to estimate water loss by E in non-Mulched and wheat straw Mulched plots. Results showed that non-Mulched plots lost 30.2% and wheat straw Mulched plots lost 24.5% of the water received during the maize-growing season to E.
Markus Flury - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Biodegradable Plastic Mulch Films for Sustainable Specialty Crop Production
Polymers for Agri-Food Applications, 2019Co-Authors: Douglas G. Hayes, Sreejata Bandopadhyay, Marie E. English, Marife B. Anunciado, Shuresh Ghimire, Carol A. Miles, Sean M Schaeffer, Jennifer M Debruyn, Markus Flury, Henry Y. SintimAbstract:Plastic Mulch films are employed in the production of vegetables and other specialty crops worldwide due to the benefits they provide, such as reduction of weeds and water loss by evaporation, and control of soil temperature. The benefits can lead to better product quality and yield, and to a more efficient utilization of agricultural inputs such as water. Unfortunately, polyethylene (PE), the most commonly employed constituent of plastic Mulches, is poorly biodegradable, thereby requiring the Mulch’s’ expensive and laborious retrieval after harvest. The opportunities for recycling and landfilling of PE Mulches are not readily available or are impractical. Residual PE fragments are readily dispersed in soil-related ecosystems and watersheds, where they can harm micro- and macro-organisms. Biodegradable plastic Mulches (BDMs) have been developed to address the disposal-related deficiencies. Although the purchase costs of BDMs are over two-fold higher than PE Mulches, BDMs are inexpensively plowed into the soil after harvest. Despite the environmental benefits of replacing PE plastic Mulches with BDMs, and potential savings of labor costs at harvest, the long-term impact of multiyear BDM employment on soil health and specialty crop productivity is still a concern. This chapter provides a review of BDMs in specialty crop production, including commonly employed polymeric constituents. The authors’ recent interdisciplinary research on the long-term impacts of BDMs on specialty crop production and soil fertility will also be discussed.
-
Interaction of Lumbricus terrestris with macroscopic polyethylene and biodegradable plastic Mulch
Science of the Total Environment, 2018Co-Authors: Liang Zhang, Henry Y. Sintim, Marife B. Anunciado, Andy I. Bary, LARRY CLIFTON WADSWORTH, Douglas G. Hayes, Markus FluryAbstract:Polyethylene Mulch films used in agriculture are a major source of plastic pollution in soils. Biodegradable plastics have been introduced as alternative to commonly-used polyethylene. Here we studied the interaction of earthworms (Lumbricus terrestris) with polyethylene and biodegradable plastic Mulches. The objective was to assess whether earthworms would select between different types of Mulches when foraging for food, and whether they drag macroscopic plastic Mulch into the soil. Laboratory experiments were carried out with earthworms in Petri dishes and mesocosms. The treatments were standard polyethylene Mulch, four biodegradable plastic Mulches (PLA/PHA [polylactic acid/polyhydroxy alkanoate], Organix, BioAgri, Naturecycle), a biodegradable paper Mulch (WeedGuardPlus), and poplar litter, which served as control. Four and three replicates for the Petri dish and mesocosm experiments were used, respectively. Macroscopic plastic and paper Mulch pieces (1.5 cm × 1.5 cm and 2 cm × 2 cm) were collected from an agricultural field after a growing season, after being buried in the soil for 6 and 12 months, and after being composted for 2 weeks. We found that earthworms did not ingest polyethylene. Field-weathered biodegradable plastic Mulches were not ingested either, however, after soil burial and composting, some biodegradable plastics were eaten and could not be recovered from soil any longer. Earthworms, when foraging for food, dragged plastic Mulch, including polyethylene and biodegradable plastic, and poplar leaves into their burrows. The burial of macroscopic plastic Mulch underground led to a redistribution of plastics in the soil profile, and likely enhances the degradation of biodegradable Mulches in soil, but also can lead to leaching of plastic fragments by macropore flow.
A Chattopadhyay - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
response of okra abelmoschus esculentus l moench to drip irrigation under Mulch and non Mulch conditions
Agricultural Water Management, 1998Co-Authors: K N Tiwari, P K Mal, R M Singh, A ChattopadhyayAbstract:Abstract Field experiments were conducted on the lateritic sandy loam soils of Kharagpur, West Bengal, India during spring–summer (February–May) seasons for 3 years (1995–1997) to evaluate the economic feasibility of drip irrigation in combination with different types of Mulches for an okra crop. Actual evapotranspiration for okra crop was estimated using modified Penman method. The net irrigation volume (V) was determined after deducting the effective rainfall. The net average seasonal water requirement of crop was estimated to be 665 mm. The effect of three irrigation levels viz. VD, 0.8 VD and 0.6 VD with drip in conjunction with black plastic Mulch were studied on biometric and yield response. Effect of two organic Mulches (rice husk and rice straw) were also studied with drip irrigation. The results of furrow irrigation either alone or in conjunction with black plastic Mulch conditions were compared with drip irrigation in terms of growth and yield of the crop. The study indicated that 100% irrigation requirement met through drip irrigation along with black plastic Mulch (VD+PM) gave the highest yield (14.51 t ha−1 ) with 72% increase in yield as compared to furrow irrigation. The net seasonal income, benefit–cost ratio and the yield per unit depth of water used, were found to be highest for drip irrigation with black plastic Mulch (VD+PM), drip irrigation alone (VD) and drip irrigation with black plastic Mulch (0.6 VD+PM), respectively.
Ajai Singh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of drip irrigation on yield of cabbage brassica oleracea l var capitata under Mulch and non Mulch conditions
Agricultural Water Management, 2003Co-Authors: K N Tiwari, Ajai SinghAbstract:The experiments were conducted on the lateritic sandy loam soils of Kharagpur, West Bengal, India during middle of September?January for 3 years (1997?2000) to evaluate the economic feasibility of growing cabbage crop under drip irrigation with Mulches. Actual evapotranspiration for cabbage crop was estimated by using the modified Penman method and net daily irrigation requirement was estimated after subtracting effective rainfall. Estimated irrigation requirement was supplied by a 4 l h-1 emitter for four plants with the drip irrigation system being operated from 70 to 101 min per day during the crop season. The average seasonal water requirement of crop was estimated to be 400 mm. The yields of the cabbage under 25 m thick black plastic Mulch (PM) were studied using three levels of drip irrigation which applied 100% (VD), 80% (0.8VD) and 60% (0.6VD) of the estimated irrigation requirement. The yield response under two organic Mulches, rice husk with drip (VDH) and paddy straw with drip (VDS) were also studied. For comparison, furrow irrigated (VF) treatments were used and the study revealed 62.44% higher yield in case of drip (VD) as compared to furrow irrigation. Even higher yields were obtained for drip irrigation with PM (VD+PM), 111.72 t ha-1 as compared to 106.68 t ha-1 for (VD). The treatments VDH and VDS showed, respectively, 2.05 and 1.18% higher yield when compared with drip (VD) alone. The net seasonal income was estimated to be highest as US$ 4333 in case of treatment VD+PM. The highest benefit?cost ratio of 8.17 was obtained for furrow irrigation (VF) followed by 6.99 for drip (VD). The net profit per mm of water used was obtained to be highest (US$ 16.51) in case of drip irrigation (0.6VD) followed by US$ 16.32 under the treatment 0.6VD+PM. The highest yield per unit quantity of water used was 427.04 kg ha-1 mm-1 for the treatment 0.6VD+PM. The study reveals that drip irrigation has a definite role in increasing the productivity of cabbage. Author Keywords: Drip irrigation; Cabbage; Plastic Mulch; Rice husk; Paddy straw; Benefit?cost analysis
