EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

A comparison of furrow, surface drip, and subsurface drip irrigation on lettuce yield and applied water



A comparison of furrow, surface drip, and subsurface drip irrigation on lettuce yield and applied water



Agricultural Water Management 33(2-3): 139-157



Furrow, surface drip, and subsurface drip irrigation methods were compared on a farm in the Salinas Valley of California. The overall performance showed similar lettuce yields for the furrow and subsurface drip methods, but a smaller yield for the surface drip method. Applied water of the drip methods ranged between 43 and 74% of that of the furrow method. Spatial variability of plant mass along transects in each plot showed different patterns of variability between the furrow and the drip transects. Variability in the plant mass of the furrow transect appeared unrelated to variability in both soil texture and soil water content. Variability in plant mass appeared related to the variability in emitter discharge rates along the drip lateral. Less variability in plant mass and yield occurred for the drip plots than for the furrow plot.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 002736196

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.1016/s0378-3774(96)01289-9



Related references

Comparison of lettuce diseases and yield under subsurface drip and furrow irrigation. Phytopathology 87(8): 877-883, 1997

Lettuce yield (Lactuca sativa L.) under different water rates applied through surface and subsurface drip irrigation systems. IRRIGA 7(1): 35-41, 2002

Subsurface drip irrigation affects trunk diameter fluctuations in lemon trees, in comparison with surface drip irrigation. Agricultural Water Management 165: 11-21, 2016

Comparison of water use and yields of acala and pima cottons for subsurface drip vs. furrow irrigation. Proceedings Beltwide Cotton Conferences: 40-541, 1993

Root distribution of mature Thompson Seedless grapevines under aboveground drip, subsurface drip, and furrow irrigation. Hortscience 31(4): 662, 1996

The Effect of Drip Line Placement on Soil Water Dynamics in the Case of Surface and Subsurface Drip Irrigation. Irrigation and Drainage 61(5), 2012

Fruit yield and water use efficiency of eggplant (Solanum melongema L.) as influenced by different quantities of nitrogen and water applied through drip and furrow irrigation. Scientia Horticulturae 112(2): 142-148, 2007

Growth and production of young peach trees irrigated by furrow, microjet, surface drip, or subsurface drip systems. HortScience 38(6): 1112-1116, 2003

Comparison of Tape Drip Irrigation and Furrow Irrigation Systems on Base of Water Use Efficiency and Yield of Potato in West of Iran. 2013

Effect of irrigation amounts applied with subsurface drip irrigation on corn evapotranspiration, yield, water use efficiency, and dry matter production in a semiarid climate. Agricultural Water Management 95(8): 0-908, 2008

Performance of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) under surface drip, sub surface drip (Biwall) and furrow methods of irrigation. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 172(4): 237-241, 1994

Cotton irrigation using subsurface drip: growth, cutout and yield depend on amount of water applied. 1998 Proceedings Beltwide Cotton Conferences, San Diego, California, USA, 5-9 January 1998 Volume 1: 417-421, 1998

Soil water variability under subsurface drip and furrow irrigation. Irrigation science 17(4): 151-155, 1997

Lettuce water use and nitrogen leaching under drip and furrow irrigation systems. ASAE Annual International Meeting, Orlando, Florida, USA, 12-16 July, 1998: 41 pp., 1998

A comparison of onion production under sprinkler, subsurface drip, and furrow irrigation. Hortscience 30(4): 839, 1995