1 / 18

Vincent Pelletier vincent.pelletier.8@ulaval

Jacques Gallichand Jean Caron. Vincent Pelletier vincent.pelletier.8@ulaval.ca. Effect of Soil Water Tension Threshold for Irrigation on Cranberry Yield, Yield Components and Water Productivity August 27 th 2013 NACREW Québec. 1 . Introduction.

maxwell-dickerson
Download Presentation

Vincent Pelletier vincent.pelletier.8@ulaval

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Jacques Gallichand Jean Caron Vincent Pelletier vincent.pelletier.8@ulaval.ca Effect of Soil Water Tension Threshold for Irrigation on Cranberry Yield, Yield Components and Water Productivity August 27th 2013 NACREW Québec

  2. 1.Introduction

  3. Soil Water Tension (Or Soil water Potential) 10 cm h = 40 cm SWT = 4 kPa φm = -4 kPa 40 cm 4 kPa Water Table

  4. Yield VS Soil Water Tension

  5. 2. Objective

  6. Objective This study was conducted to determine the optimum soil water tension for starting irrigation that would optimize water productivity without decreasing yield and yield components (Water productivity was calculated as the yield per unit depth of rainfall and irrigation)

  7. 3.Methodology

  8. Experimental Setup • 3 sites in Québec • 1 site in Wisconsin

  9. Retention Curve Irrigation Thresholds Wet (5.5 kPa) Control (6.0 - 6.5 kPa) Dry (7.0 – 10.0 kPa)

  10. Measurements • Soil water tension (Tensiometer) • Rainfall (Weather Station) • Irrigation water (Flow meter) • Yield : 2474 samples (929 cm2) • Yield components : 132 samples (929 cm2) • Water Productivity (Yield / (Rainfall+Irrigation)) • Statistical analysis to determine the best threshold

  11. 4.Results

  12. Yield • In 2011  No difference between treatment • In 2012  No difference between 5.5 to 8.5 kPa Significant reduction of 11 % in the driest treatment (10.0 kPa) Average yield: 33690 lbs/acre

  13. Yield components • In 2011 : No significant difference • In 2012 - Significant differences : • - 21 % of marketable berries at 10.0 kPa • - 14 % of berries / upright at 8.5 kPa • - 9 % less fruit set at 8.5 kPa • - 7 % of berry weight at 8.0 kPa • No difference between 5.5 and <8.0 kPa

  14. Water Productivity • 2011-2012 : Significantly greater in Dry treatments • Wet (5.5 kPa) : 54 – 186 % more irrigation water • Dry (7.0–10.0 kPa) : 21 – 93 % less irrigation water

  15. Hydraulic Conductivity vs Soil Water Tension Good capillaryrise Optimum yields Water savings Energysavings Water stress affectedyields and yield components Maximum ET rate

  16. 5.Conclusion

  17. Conclusion • In fine sand, Dry treatments, with irrigation thresholds ranging from 7.0 to 7.5 kPa, improved significantly the water productivity without decreasing yield and yield components • Current research • (2013-2015) • The capillary rise is sufficient to meet the plant needs when the water table is controlled at an optimal level

  18. Thank You !!! CannebergesBieler Nature Canneberge Transport Gaston Nadeau Salzwedel Cranberry FermeOnésimePouliot

More Related