Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: A eld experiment was conducted on winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) during 20132014 and
Received 1 January 2016 20142015 to study the root distribution prole and soil water dynamics under the main currently
Received in revised form used irrigation methods in the North China Plain (NCP). The WinRHIZO system and the HYDRUS-1D
14 December 2016
model were used to identify a promising irrigation schedule. In this two-factor experiment, three irri-
Accepted 16 December 2016
gation methods, i.e., sprinkler irrigation (SI), surface drip irrigation (SDI) and surface ooding (SF), were
scheduled to irrigate the crop as soon as the soil water content decreased to 70%, 60% and 50% of the
Keywords:
eld capacity. The results showed that both the irrigation method and irrigation schedule inuenced
Soil water dynamics
Root morphology
root development, the prole root distribution pattern and the prole root water uptake (RWU). The soil
Root growth surface temperature uctuated very rapidly depending on the irrigation method and scheduling system
Irrigation management used, whereas prole soil temperature uctuations became more consistent with depth. The RWU was
Soil temperature higher in the upper soil layer (060 cm) for all irrigation methods for frequently irrigated treatments, and
the maximum was observed in SDI compared to SI and SF due to the higher root length density (RLD) in
the top soil under SDI. On the other hand, the RWU was higher in SF at a deep soil prole below 60 cm,
where it had a higher RLD compared to that of SI and SDI. SDI at 60% of FC not only improved water
uptake but also resulted in better water productivity and produced the highest grain yield (9.53 t/ha).
The simulated RWU and soil water dynamics presented in this paper will be helpful to improve winter
wheat production in the NCP and can be used as a reference for further research on water management
practices.
2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.
1. Introduction productivity of winter wheat is the current basic need for NCP
farmers. This can be achieved by proper soil water management
Sustainable management of the regional groundwater in North practices. Selecting water management practices without knowing
China, where more than 70% of fresh water is used in agriculture, is the soil water dynamics and water uptake by the crop makes it
a major challenge (Du et al., 2015). This is why severe groundwater nearly impossible to support an efcient winter wheat production
level decreases (0.53 m/year) were found by Currell et al. (2012) system that includes root development (Ritchie, 1981; Samson and
throughout the North China plain (NCP) in the last three to four Sinclair, 1994). Less attention has been paid to studies of root mor-
decades. Liu et al. (2002) and Sun et al. (2006) stated that winter phology because roots occur beneath the soil surface and require
precipitation ranges from 50 mm in dry to 150 mm in wet years tedious measurements (Ephrath et al., 1999; McMichael and Taylor,
in areas where the water requirement for winter wheat produc- 1987). Roots are anchors and function as entry points for the uptake
tion is estimated to be 300450 mm. Thus, maximizing the water of water and mineral nutrients for crops. Roots also serve as sen-
sors of water stress and have many synthetic functions of shoot
cells (Kramer and Boyer, 1995). Thus, a better understanding of root
morphological growth and root water uptake (RWU) patterns in the
Corresponding author at: Farmland Irrigation Research Institute, Chinese soil prole is very important for successful crop growth and max-
Academy o Agricultural Sciences, No. 380 Hongli Road, Xinxiang, Henan 453003, imum grain production (Coelho and Or, 1999; Roose and Fowler,
PR China. 2004; Samson and Sinclair, 1994). Zuo et al. (2004) collected wheat
E-mail address: duanaiwang@aliyun.com (A. Duan).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.12.015
0378-3774/ 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.
140 S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150
root length density (RLD) information from several studies and con- These authors found that root uptake in the upper zone of the soil
cluded that RLD is an important parameter to model water and prole increased with increases in irrigation frequency. An experi-
nutrient movement in the vadose zone as well as to study soil- ment performed by Camposeo and Rubino (2003) on autumn sown
root-shoot-atmosphere interactions. Carvalho and Foulkes (2013) sugar beet clearly illustrated that the applied irrigation frequen-
also concluded that the RLD (cm/cm3 ) is the most suitable param- cies signicantly affected RWU. These authors concluded that the
eter to describe water uptake by plant roots compared with other root length density along the soil prole decreased more than 76%
root traits. Thin roots have a relatively high specic root length by decreasing the irrigation frequency. Above and below ground
(SRL) or length: dry weight ratio, whereas the ne root system biomass is more severely limited by water stress than by nutrient
functions as the principal pathway for water and nutrient absorp- stress (Fabio et al., 1995), whereas root initiation decreases with
tion (Eissenstat, 1992). This author further concluded that water increasing depth (Torreano and Morris, 1998) if adequate water
and nutrient uptake increases are more likely to occur with greater can be accessed by the surface roots. Although there are numer-
root length than root mass and provided evidence that a higher SRL ous fractional studies on the effect of irrigation method (Lv et al.,
tended to lead to greater plasticity in root growth and a greater 2010) or irrigation frequency (Li et al., 2010; Shao et al., 2009; Xue
physiological capacity but shorter root longevity and less myc- et al., 2003) on root growth or water uptake, a combined approach
orrhizal dependency. Various techniques have been developed to of irrigation method and scheduling system with water manage-
monitor root dynamics under eld conditions where excavation ment practices applied to an entire farmers eld to understand the
techniques, including soil cores, have long been considered to pro- overall soil water dynamics and their inuencing parameters has
vide the most reliable estimates of root morphology (Samson and not been attempted.
Sinclair, 1994). Thus, the objectives of this eld-based winter wheat experiment
Many researchers have correlated root growth and water uptake with a promoting irrigation method and feasible irrigation schedule
under different soil moisture regimes (Carvalho and Foulkes, 2013; were to (i) measure the root morphological growth, (ii) study the
Coelho and Or, 1999). The amount of soil water absorbed by plant effects of soil moisture and temperature and (iii) estimate soil water
roots not only depends on the physical characteristics of the soil but dynamics in the root zone under surface drip irrigation (SDI), sprin-
also has a greater inuence on prole root growth features (Yang kler irrigation (SI) and surface ooding (SF), with irrigation at 50%,
et al., 2006). Non-irrigated plants have thicker roots, fewer roots 60% and 70% of FC. The results of this study will provide references
near the soil surface, and more roots at deeper depths (Rowse, for further research and the farmers of the NCP to design a practi-
1974). The RWU is distributed over the root zone according to cal and environmentally friendly irrigation system by selecting an
the spatial root distribution and is controlled by climatic demand, appropriate irrigation method with a proper irrigation schedule.
the spatial distribution of soil water availability and root density
unek
(Albasha et al., 2015; Sim and Hopmans, 2009). Li et al. (2014)
2. Materials and methods
concluded that the RWU rate of maize increased after rainfall or irri-
gation. Xue et al. (2003) found that winter wheat roots continued
2.1. Experimental site
to grow up to a depth of 2 m until the booting stage and concluded
that the RWU rate decreased as available soil water decreased. The
Field research was conducted at the experimental station of
root sampling results presented by Zhang et al. (2004) showed that
the Farmland Irrigation Research Institute (FIRI) of the Chinese
winter wheat has a prole root system with an average maximum
Academy of Agricultural Science (CAAS), located in Qiliying, Xinxi-
rooting depth of 2 m, and most of the root system is concentrated
ang City of Henan Province in North China (35 08 N, 113 45 E and
in the upper 40 cm of soil, which is why the roots in the top layer
81 m altitude). The experimental site has underground pipelines
of soil play an important role in soil water uptake. Kmoch et al.
connected to pumps with pressure regulators to supply ground
(1957) mentioned that the root development of winter wheat was
water as source of irrigation water at a desired pressure head and
inuenced by soil moisture. These authors found that a dense net-
a weather station is located in very close proximity to the experi-
work of roots developed in the soil when the soil moisture tension
mental plots. The seasonal precipitation from mid-October to early
was above 15 atmospheres, and they observed roots at a depth of 13
June ranges from 60 to 200 mm, with seasonal water consumption
feet under favorable moisture conditions. Maximum root growth in
of approximately 450500 mm (Sun et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2002)
the subsoil signicantly improved the soil water supply to the crop
and a mean seasonal air temperature that varies between 10 and
by shifting root growth downward during the growing period due
12 C.
to water depletion in the surface soil (Torreano and Morris, 1998).
On the other hand, soil temperature affects the growth, initiation,
branching, orientation, direction of growth, and root turnover of 2.2. Soil specication, tillage and harvesting
root system components (Kaspar and Bland, 1992). These authors
showed that as the temperature increases, roots grow faster and The soil characteristics, such as the physical and hydraulic
reach a maximum growth rate at approximately 30 C for maize and parameters, were investigated before the irrigation treatments
pecans, above which the rate begins to decrease. The soil tempera- started and are presented in Table 1 for different root zone
ture prole distribution is greatly affected by the irrigation method depths. The average contents of the available soil nutrients, i.e.,
and undoubtedly inuences root water uptake directly or indirectly nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), and potassium (K), at the experi-
(Lv et al., 2013a). mental site were 40.20, 11.90, and 100.51 mg kg1 , respectively.
Coelho and Or (1999) emphasized that for irrigation schedul- The pH and electrical conductivity (EC) of the soil were 8.51 and
ing, it is necessary to consider the effect of the RWU rate on soil 257.6 s cm1 , respectively, whereas the soil organic matter con-
water dynamics. Li et al. (2010) compared three irrigation sched- tent was 1.64 g kg1 .
ules applied during the jointing, heading and milking stages of Seed beds were prepared by plowing to a depth of 20 cm using
winter wheat and concluded that single irrigation event applied a tractor drawn rotary cultivator; larger soil clods were smoothed
during the jointing stage caused an increase in root length den- using a harrow to ensure a completely at bed. The equal amount
sity in a >30 cm deep soil prole compared to 2 or 3 irrigation of basal fertilizer dose was N: 120 kg ha1 (50% of total N), applied
events during other growth stages. Lv et al. (2010) concluded that as ammonium nitrate, P: 90 kg ha1 , applied as calcium super-
the irrigation method inuences winter wheat root development phosphate, and K: 30 kg ha1 , applied as potassium sulfate in all
and the water uptake prole, even for the same irrigation schedule. treatments (Gao et al., 2014). The remaining 50% of N (120 kg ha1 ),
S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150 141
Table 1
Soil specications (physical and hydraulic) of experiment eld.
Soil Depth Particle Size Distribution Texture B.D. FC r s (1/cm) n Ks Initial (cm3 /cm3 )
(cm) (g/cm3 ) (cm3 /cm3 ) (cm3 /cm3 ) (cm3 /cm3 ) (cm/day)
020 3.80 43.14 53.06 Sandy Loam 1.56 0.3408 0.0302 0.4087 0.016 1.4629 55.85 0.132 0.143
2040 6.61 45.43 47.96 Loam 1.58 0.3076 0.0362 0.4033 0.011 1.5089 39.79 0.142 0.141
4060 6.06 48.33 45.61 Sandy Loam 1.54 0.3269 0.0358 0.4086 0.009 1.5402 43.98 0.204 0.194
6080 4.55 47.49 47.96 Sandy Loam 1.42 0.2831 0.0325 0.412 0.011 1.5161 52.57 0.246 0.271
80100 1.57 16.95 81.48 loamy Sand 1.45 0.2937 0.0340 0.3931 0.047 1.8359 131.2 0.235 0.300
Average 4.52 40.27 55.21 Sandy Loam 1.51 0.3104 0.0313 0.403 0.019 1.4435 51.81 0.1918 0.2098
Note: abbreviations B.D. stand for bulk density; FC for eld capacity; s and r for saturated and residual water content; is SWC at the rst day of simulation; and n for
coefcients in van Genuchten-Mualem equation; and Ks for saturated hydraulic conductivity.
was applied as ammonium nitrate by hand broadcasting in the Each main plot contained 3 sub-plots of 10 m 15 m separated
sprinkler irrigation and surface ooding treatments, immediately by a 1 m border on each side. The basic parameters of the sprin-
before the rst irrigation event, whereas it was dissolved in water klers used in the sprinkler irrigation treatments included a working
and used as a top dressing during the rst irrigation event in the pressure of 0.20.25 MPa, coefcient of uniformity (CU) of approx-
drip irrigation treatment. The high-yielding winter wheat (Triticum imately 90%, and sprinklers mounted on120 cm high risers to cover
aestivum L.) cultivar Aikang 58 was sown at 180 kg ha1 (ensuring a 5 m radius. In each sprinkler irrigated sub-plot, at each of the
350400 plants m2 at full germination), with 20 cm row spacing, four corners, sprinklers sprinkled at 90 (Q = 0.22 m3 /h), with 6
on the 20th of October 2013 and the 18th of October 2014, using a sprinklers sprinkling at 180 (Q = 0.3 m3 /h) at the outer edge and 2
tractor drawn seed-cum-fertilizer drill; the crops were harvested sprinklers sprinkling at 360 (Q = 0.55 m3 /h) in the interior. Surface
on the 31st of May 2014 and the 6th of June 2015, respectively. drip laterals working at a pressure of 0.10.15 MPa were placed at
A harvest sample (1 m2 ) was randomly collected from each treat- 40 cm, i.e., between two alternate rows with emitters (Q = 2.2 L/h)
ment. Grain and straw were separated manually by rubbing and spaced 20 cm apart within each lateral. Surface ooding was carried
cleaning the grains, which were sun dried to a 12% (wet basis) out using PVC pipes ( 2.5 ) with 2 nos. outlets ( 6 ; Q = 8 m3 /h)
moisture level (Gao et al., 2014; Jin et al., 2009). facing upward and xed at 2/3rd and 1/3rd of the length of the
sub-plots designed for the surface ooding treatments.
2.3. Experimental design
2.4. Sampling and measurements
Farmers in North China generally irrigate winter wheat in early
or late spring after winter dormancy depending on the soil moisture The daily weather data, such as the atmospheric temperature
conditions (Gao et al., 2014; Shao et al., 2011). Considering this (maximum and minimum), sunshine hours, wind speed, relative
typical schedule, the experiments were designed to be conducted humidity, and precipitation, were collected every day at 8:00
from the turn-green stage (mid March) to harvest (end of May or AM from the automatic weather station located in close proxim-
early June) for the 20132014 and 20142015 cropping seasons. ity to the experimental area. The soil water content (SWC) was
Two factorial treatments were arranged in a split-plot design. determined weekly using TRIME (Time domain reectometry with
The main plots included three irrigation schedules (i.e., irrigation Intelligent Micro Elements, IMKO, Ettlingen, Germany) tube access
was applied as soon as the soil water content decreased to 50%, 60% probes placed at with 20 cm deep intervals in the soil layer up
or 70% of eld capacity) considered as one factor, and the sub-plots to a depth of 100 cm. The SWC of the top 020 cm soil layer was
included three irrigation methods, i.e., sprinkler irrigation (SI), sur- determined using a gravimetric method. Some additional SWC
face drip irrigation (SDI), and surface ooding (SF). The treatment measurements were carried out before and after irrigation and dur-
designs were coded as follows:
ing heavy rainfall. The intermediate daily SWC was estimated using were collected from the sieve using tissue forceps and were placed
the following equations: into transparent plastic cups with water for scanning (Guan et al.,
2015). Root samples were collected twice in 20132014 and 4 times
i The FAO-56 procedure was followed to calculate the daily actual in 20142015 at different stages of crop growth. To simulate root
crop evapotranspiration (Allen et al., 1998). water uptake, 15 plant sample measurements were carried out
once a week to determine the plant height, number of tillers per
ETc = Kc ET0 (1) meter, and leaf area index in each treatment as described by Gao
et al. (2010).
where Kc is the crop coefcient, and ET0 is the reference evapotran-
WinRHIZO Reg. 2007d (Regent Instrument Inc.) software was
spiration.
used to analyze the root morphology, including the root length,
average root diameter, surface area of roots and projected area of
ii The crop coefcient (Kc ) relationship developed by Gao et al.
roots based on a scanned image of clean washed roots obtained
(2009) was used to determine the daily crop coefcient through-
using an EPSON PREFECTIONTM V700 Photo Flatbed Scanner-6400
out the experimental period.
dpi x 9600 dpi (Guan et al., 2015). The root length density (RLD) was
iii Daily ET0 was calculated according to the Penman-Monteith
calculated from the obtained root length divided by the sample core
equation as recommended by Allen et al. (1998) using the daily
volume (375.013 cm3 ). After the morphological measurement, the
weather data collected at the experimental site.
root samples were dried at 70 C for 48 h (Ktterer et al., 1993).
iv The daily soil water content for each individual treatment was
An electronic weighing balance (accuracy of 4 decimal points) was
calculated based on a soil water balance equation used by Hillel
used to measure the root biomass.
(1998).
2.5. Estimation of root water uptake and irrigation efciencies
S = P + I + U Dw R ETc (2)
where S is the change in soil water storage in the 0100 cm soil The HYDRUS-1D software package for simulating the one-
prole, P is precipitation, I is the irrigated water depth, U is the dimensional movement of water in variable-saturated media,
upward capillary rise from the soil prole below 100 cm, Dw is the developed by Sim unek
et al. (2013), was used as a tool to simu-
downward drainage beneath the 100 cm soil prole, R is the sur- late the root water uptake (RWU) and soil water dynamics of the
face runoff, and ETc is the crop evapotranspiration calculated from vadose zone. The effects of the lateral movement of water ow
Eq. (1). No runoff (R) occurred, even from the surface ooding treat- were ignored. Then, the one dimensional vertical ow in Richards
ment, because of the appropriate bund height around the sub-plots; equation supplemented with the sink term S (z, t) expressed
therefore, the relevant term was neglected when calculating S. as the volume of water removed from a unit volume of soil per
The upward and downward movements of water were estimated unit time due to plant water uptake was used to determine the
using Darcys law (Gao et al., 2010; Kar et al., 2007). RWU without compensation as suggested by Feddes et al. (1978).
The rst irrigation event for all treatments was carried out on Here, the threshold values of h1 , h2 , h3 and h4 for the root water
the same date when the wheat turned green (Gao et al., 2014; uptake- water stress response function were taken as 0, 1, 500,
Zhang et al., 2002), whereas the successive irrigation schedules 16000 cm, respectively, as suggested by Wesseling et al. (1991).
were determined on the basis of the soil water content according to The initial and boundary conditions are given as follows:
the treatment design explained above. Precise water meters were The HYDRUS-1D code was used to simulate RWU from the date
connected to each individual subplot. During each irrigation event, of the rst irrigation event until the time of harvest (i.e., the num-
the amount of water for the sprinkler and drip irrigation were set ber of time-variable boundary records for 81 days in both years).
to 30 mm, whereas 60 mm was used for surface ooding (Li et al., Three types of soil materials were identied in ve root zones,
2010). The irrigation schedule and total amount of irrigation water each with a depth of 20 cm deepening from the surface through
for individual treatments in both cropping seasons are presented the 1 m soil prole (presented in Table 1), and were used in the
in Table 2. simulation. The maximum number of iterations and water content
The soil temperatures in each treatment were measured contin- tolerance was retained the same as the default values, i.e., 11 and
uously throughout the experimental period by installing a precise 0.001, respectively, which was recommended in the software. The
thermal resistor sensor connected to a data logger. The thermal van Genuchten (1980) hydraulic model was preferred with no hys-
resistor sensors were buried in the soil at depths of 0, 5, 10, 15, 20 teresis, in which Atmospheric BC with Surface Layer was adopted
and 40 cm. The time interval for the data logger (TingmData Center as an upper boundary condition, and Free Drainage was consid-
V6.0, China) to record the temperature was maintained at 30 min. ered for the lower boundary condition with the In Water Content
The data logger battery was replaced every month to prevent any as the initial condition. A maximum ponding depth of 10 cm was
data from being lost. Before installing the resistor and data logger in assumed at the surface.
the experimental plots, calibrations were performed for the electric Water productivity (WP) is dened as the ratio of the crop yield
current, and the temperature was adjusted in a thermostatic water to the water consumed to produce that yield, i.e. evapotranspira-
bath. tion, and irrigation water productivity (IWP) is the increased crop
To study the morphology of the root system in the soil prole, yield produced per unit amount of irrigation water applied (Ali
each 10 cm of a soil core was collected as a sample from the soil et al., 2007; Li et al., 2017) as shown below:
surface down to a 100 cm depth using a soil auger with an internal Y
diameter of 6.91 cm and an outer diameter of 7 cm. The samples WP = 1000 (3)
ET
were collected from the center of the rows as well as from the
Y Yrf
middle section of two adjacent rows of each treatment (Lv et al., IWP = (4)
2010). The core samples were carefully transferred from the auger I
to a net mesh bag and kept in the water until all of the soil clods where, WP or IWP is measured in kg m3 ; ET is evapotranspiration
detached from the roots. The soil was ushed using garden hoses (mm); and I is the total irrigation amount (m3 /m2 ); Y is the grain
at low pressure, and all of the clean roots were transferred into a yield (kg/m2 ) in the irrigated plots, and Yrf the average yield (kg/m2 )
sieve (0.25 mm2 mesh size) suspended in a trough that was par- of three non-irrigated (rain fed) sample plots in close proximity
tially lled with water. The live wheat roots (white or pale brown) to the treatment plots; these sample plots were subjected to the
S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150 143
Table 2
Irrigation scheduling and total irrigation amount for all the treatments in 2013-14 and 2014-15 crop season.
Year Irrigation S1 S2 S3 D1 D2 D3 F1 F2 F3
2015 Schedule 2015/3/18; 3/18; 3/26; 3/18; 3/20; 3/18; 4/23; 3/18; 3/27; 3/18; 3/20; 3/18; 4/17 3/18; 4/16; 3/18;3/23;
4/17; 5/15 4/16; 4/29; 3/24; 4/16; 5/15 4/17; 4/28; 3/27; 4/14; 5/19 4/20; 5/20
5/21 4/28; 5/13; 5/20 4/24; 5/15
5/21
Amount (mm) 90 150 210 90 150 180 120 180 240
2014 Schedule 2014/3/13; 3/13;3/21; 3/13; 3/15; 3/13; 3/25; 3/13; 3/19; 3/13; 3/15; 3/13; 4/7; 3/13;3/28; 3/13;3/17;
3/28; 4/4; 3/28; 4/4; 3/21; 3/28; 4/1; 4/28 4/1; 4/7; 3/20; 3/28; 5/6 4/9; 5/15 4/1; 4/29;
4/28 4/22; 5/4 4/4; 4/22; 4/29; 5/16 4/4; 4/28; 5/15
5/4; 5/16 5/16
Amount (mm) 120 180 240 120 180 210 180 240 300
1
RMSE
(IT), the SWC was higher in a deep prole, following the order
OI = 1 +E (8) F3 > S3 > D3, whereas the SWC in the upper layers was higher in D3,
2 Cmax Cmin
i.e. D3 > F3 > S3. The SWC below 50 cm in 50% IT was much lower,
n 2 i.e., 0.110.16, 0.120.17 and 0.130.18 cm3 /cm3 in SF, SDI and SI,
CO,i CS,i
IA = 1
i=1 respectively. The prole water distribution for 60% IT was similar
n 2 (9)
|CS,i C O | + |CO,i C O | for all irrigation methods and was uniformly distributed to a depth
i=1
of 80 cm. Below 80 cm, the soil water content was consistently
where, Cs is the simulated value, Co is the observed value, C S is lower for all irrigation treatments.
the mean of the simulated data, C O is the mean of the observed
data, Cmax is the maximum observed value, Cmin is the minimum 3.3. Soil temperature
observed value for the soil water content and n is the total number
of observations used in the evaluation. E is the efciency coefcient The irrigation method and scheduling signicantly affected the
and represents an improvement over the coefcient of determina- surface soil temperature. A maximum surface soil temperature uc-
tion (R2 ). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for Two Factorial analysis tuation difference of 4.3 C was found between S1 and S3 when
in Microsoft Excel was used to determine the statistical signicance irrigation scheduling was compared, and the greatest temperature
of the treatments at a 5% signicance level ( = 0.05). uctuation that occurred was a difference of 3.7 C between SF and
SDI for the 50% and 60% irrigation methods, respectively (Fig. 3ac).
3. Results In the deeper soil prole, the temperature variation was negligible
for both the irrigation method and irrigation schedule (Fig. 3d).
3.1. Climatic conditions The maximum surface temperature was the highest in S1 (27.3 C)
and the lowest in F3 (24.2 C). The temperature in SF was lower
The total amount of rainfall (Table 7) was less (107.7 mm) in compared to that of SDI, which agrees with the result presented
2014 than in 2015 (137.9 mm), whereas the average atmospheric by Evett et al. (1995). The maximum and minimum temperature
temperature was higher in 2014. Thus, the 2014 winter wheat sea- uctuations in the surface soil were ranked as SDI > SI > SF for the
son was relatively drier than the 2015 season. These factors were irrigation method and 50% > 60% > 70% for the irrigation frequency.
found to play a major role in controlling the irrigation schedule The optimum range of surface temperature uctuation in D1 was
and total amount of irrigation water applied (Table 2), even for the 6.2 C higher than in S3. In the deeper soil prole (40 cm deep),
same scheduling level and the same irrigation method in the two the range in temperature variation was less than 1.3 C, with the
corresponding seasons. The precipitation and mean daily atmo- highest temperature uctuation in S1 and the lowest in F3.
spheric temperature during the experimental period, recorded at and Fig. 1
144 S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150
Fig. 3. Surface soil temperature in (a) sprinkler irrigation (S), (b) surface drip irrigation (D), (c) surface ooding (F) treatments, irrigating at 50% (1), 60% (2) and 70% (3) of FC
and (d) temperature at 40 cm depth for all treatments in 2015 season.
S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150 145
Table 3
Root length density (cm/cm3 ) in 2014 and 2015 measured at different soil depths and at different date (crop stage).
2014 020 cm 4/30 21.36 0.19d 24.63 0.07c 27.73 0.93b 17.20 0.43e 25.41 1.93c 32.96 0.21a 16.05 0.90e 20.26 0.13d 25.12 0.17c
5/30 10.52 0.37f 15.46 0.09c 16.52 0.49b 12.15 0.92e 16.50 1.08b 22.31 0.73a 7.65 0.25g 14.27 0.34d 16.74 0.20b
2160 cm 4/30 3.71 0.08d 3.89 0.79 cd 3.84 0.09 cd 4.45 0.32bc 5.06 0.54b 8.44 0.08a 2.84 0.10e 3.93 0.02 cd 5.07 0.43b
5/30 3.19 0.04d 3.66 0.42c 3.74 0.17c 3.55 0.23 cd 4.64 0.31b 7.37 0.10a 1.71 0.19e 3.68 0.17c 4.66 0.12b
61100 cm 4/30 4.98 0.59b 2.19 0.11d 0.91 0.18e 1.19 0.12e 3.65 0.03c 0.67 0.34e 7.93 0.55a 2.25 0.03d 2.31 0.43d
5/30 3.62 0.20b 1.81 0.11d 0.75 0.25e 0.81 0.01e 2.67 0.02c 0.51 0.23e 6.31 0.32a 1.83 0.05d 1.69 0.04d
Letters indicate statistical signicance at = 0.05 level within the same row with a, b, c and so on showing the statistical difference from the highest to the lowest and the
values are the means of three replication.
Table 4
Root morphology at owering stage in 2014 and 2015.
Year Parameters S1 S2 S3 D1 D2 D3 F1 F2 F3
2015 Total Projected area (m2 /m3 ) 12.8 0.26f 15.6 0.36d 17.3 0.53c 12.8 0.11f 16.6 0.40c 21.0 0.05a 12.9 0.68f 13.9 0.26e 18.3 0.63b
Total Surface area (m2 /m3 ) 40.1 1.02g 49.0 1.14e 54.5 1.40c 40.1 0.48g 52.3 0.86d 65.9 0.18a 40.5 1.01g 43.8 0.40f 57.5 0.95b
Average Diameter (mm) 0.24 0.004c 0.28 0.01ab 0.28 0.01ab 0.29 0.01ab 0.26 0.01bc 0.29 0.01b 0.30 0.003a 0.27 0.23b 0.27 0.01b
2014 Total Projected area (m2 /m3 ) 10.8 0.66d 11.6 0.91d 12.2 1.33 cd 8.08 1.11e 15.2 0.59b 17.0 1.0a 7.6 0.37e 11.3 0.35d 13.1 0.45c
Total Surface area (m2 /m3 ) 34.0 0.93g 36.6 1.16b 38.4 1.46g 25.4 1.19ef 47.9 0.87e 53.4 1.07f 23.9 0.41c 35.5 0.65a 41.1 0.60d
Average Diameter (mm) 0.23 0.01ab 0.21 0.03b 0.21 0.01b 0.23 0.01b 0.26 0.01a 0.23 0.00b 0.218 0.01b 0.23 0.01b 0.23 0.01ab
Letters indicate statistical signicance at = 0.05 level within the same row with a, b, c and so on showing the statistical difference from the highest to the lowest and the
values are the means of three replication.
Table 5
Dry root biomass (g/m2 ) at owering stage in 2014 and 2015 at different soil prole.
2014 020 234.9 0.63e 235.4 0.47e 304.4 1.57b 174.3 0.71g 281.2 2.1c 315.7 0.88a 154.8 0.75h 226.1 0.40f 263.7 0.26d
2060 17.69 0.07g 18.58 0.98f 18.4 0.11fg 25.47 0.39d 28.26 0.49c 32.57 0.13a 11.03 0.18h 21.29 0.06e 31.01 0.50b
60100 17.80 0.63b 7.36 0.09f 5.20 0.40g 5.42 0.16g 15.70 0.08c 3.22 0.36h 39.64 0.77a 8.36 0.04e 13.25 0.33d
Letters indicate statistical signicance at = 0.05 level within the same row with a, b, c and so on showing the statistical difference from the highest to the lowest and the
values are the means of three replication.
Table 6
Statistical parameters computed to evaluate accuracy in simulation for 2014 and 2015.
2015 Coefcient of determination (R2 ) 0.99 0.75 0.65 0.94 0.77 0.64 0.83 0.76 0.64
Root mean square error (RMSE) 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.07
Overall index of model performance (OI) 0.98 0.77 0.63 0.91 0.81 0.7 0.79 0.79 0.71
Index of agreement (IA) 0.99 0.92 0.89 0.98 0.93 0.88 0.92 0.93 0.88
2014 Coefcient of determination (R2 ) 0.77 0.98 0.89 0.92 0.8 0.77 0.64 0.81 0.51
Root mean square error (RMSE) 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06
Overall index of model performance (OI) 0.71 0.96 0.75 0.66 0.81 0.82 0.72 0.79 0.60
Index of agreement (IA) 0.80 0.99 0.85 0.69 0.92 0.93 0.85 0.91 0.82
Table 7
Soil water balance in the root zone for crop season 2014 and 2015.
Year Parameters S1 S2 S3 D1 D2 D3 F1 F2 F3
2015 Total Rainfall (R), mm 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138
Total Irrigation (I), mm 90 150 210 90 150 180 120 180 240
Change in Soil Water Storage (S), mm 30 11 16 38 22 11 42 17 9
Drainage (D), mm 5 8 25 9 10 19 14 37 49
Evapotranspiration (ETc ), mm 263 291 307 275 300 310 286 298 319
Actual Root Water Uptake (TA ), mm 190 226 256 210 248 265 238 256 288
2014 Total Rainfall (R), mm 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108
Total Irrigation (I), mm 120 180 240 120 180 210 180 240 300
Change in Soil Water Storage (S), mm 41 21 10 30 22 10 16 1 5
Drainage (D), mm 9 28 36 4 19 29 30 46 62
Evapotranspiration (ETc ), mm 259 281 302 254 291 299 273 303 341
Actual Root Water Uptake (TA ), mm 166 197 227 164 209 225 190 228 282
146 S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150
3.4. Root morphology different irrigation methods was similar to the results reported by
Bai and Li (2003). The pattern for biomass in 2014 differed slightly
The root morphology parameters (length, projected area, sur- from that observed in 2015 for the corresponding depths because
face area, and diameter) determined using the WinRHIZO software of different weather conditions (especially rainfall) and soil tem-
and dry root biomass is presented in the following sections. The perature variations during the different growing seasons.
detailed root length density (RLD) data for the 020, 2060, and
60100 cm soil depth, measured on different dates during both 3.5. Data verication
cropping seasons (Table 3), revealed that maximum root growth
occurred during the owering stage. In 2015, the D3 treatment The simulated soil water content obtained from the HYDRUS
resulted in denser roots (35.76 cm/cm3 ) in the early stage, followed model run was evaluated against the actual measured soil water
by F3 (31.52 cm/cm3 ) and S3 (30.94 cm/cm3 ) and reached a maxi- content obtained in the eld by computing R2 , RMSE, OI and IA for
mum RLD of 44.12 cm/cm3 at owering, which was followed by the each treatment; the data are presented in Table 6 for both cropping
same treatments, i.e., F3 (40.57 cm/cm3 ) and S3 (40.24 cm/cm3 ). seasons. Evaluating the simulated SWC on the basis of the index
The root length density (RLD) distributions at owering are shown of agreement (IA) conrmed that the overall performance of the
in Table 3 (April 30th and May 6th in 2014 and 2015 respectively). simulated results was accurate. The IA value ranged from 0.88 to
The SDI also enhanced the growth rate in the upper soil prole com- 0.99 in 2015 and from 0.8 to 0.99 in 2014, showing that the mea-
pared with SF and SI, but lower RLD was measured below 60 cm. sured and simulated SWC were matching and hence the simulated
After the booting stage, the highest root growth rate was observed output from HYDRUS was sufciently accurate. Similarly, a lower
in the SI and SF treatments, but did not compete with the total RLD RMSE (0.01 0.04) and values closer to 1 for R2 and OI in treatments
produced by SDI for different schedules in top soil. These results that were irrigated at 50% and 60% of FC showed good agreement
are similar to those presented by Yao (2005) and Yang et al. (2006). between the simulated and observed SWC. However, the values of
The RLD below 60 cm was the highest in F1 (11.22 cm/cm3 ) and fol- these parameters (RMSE, R2 and OI) for the treatments that were
lowed the order SF > SI > SDI and 50% > 60% > 70% for the irrigation irrigated to 70% of FC showed a relatively lower agreement, which
schedules except for SDI at 60% (D2, 8.67 cm/cm3 ), which resulted occurred because of excessive SWC. Excessive moisture on the sur-
in greater RLD than F2 (7.76 cm/cm3 ) and S2 (7.62 cm/cm3 ). The face in the 70% treatments resulted in higher ET and drainage, which
prole RLD pattern at the owering stage in 2014 was quite similar caused rapid depletion of soil water and hence reduced the accuracy
to that in 2015 (Table 3) for a particular soil prole; however the of the measurements.
reverse order was observed when comparing RLD at 020 cm and
60100 cm for both seasons. 3.6. Soil water balance
The average diameter of the roots sampled during owering
at a 1 m depth (Table 4) was the highest in D2 (0.255 mm) fol- 3.6.1. Root water uptake (RWU)
lowed by S1 (0.232 mm) in 2014 versus F1 (0.303 mm) followed The daily RWU simulated by HYDRUS-1D (version 4.17) is
by D1 (0.287 mm) in 2015. The lowest diameter was found in S2 shown in Fig. 4 (a, b, and c) for 2015. The daily simulation graph
(0.210 mm) and S1 (0.241 mm) for the corresponding years. The is not shown for 2014, but the total RWU from re-greening to har-
results were not similar between the two years and did not follow vest is presented in Table 7 for both years. The simulation results
any xed order for either season. However, a thicker diameter was showed that the daily RWU reached approximately 69 mm/d at
associated with the low frequency irrigation treatment, and a thin- the end of March to mid-April and during early to mid-May (Fig. 4).
ner diameter was observed in the treatments with high amounts Synchronizing the daily uptake with the rainfall pattern (Fig. 1)
of applied water. The highest values for the total root surface area and irrigation scheduling (Table 2) showed that the RWU cor-
(SA) were measured in the D3 treatment, i.e., 53.4 and 65.9 m2 /m3 respondingly increased with increased soil water availability at
the 2014 and 2015 cropping seasons, respectively, and the lowest grain lling. Similar results were found by Li et al. (2014) and Xue
values were 23.9 and 40.1 m2 /m3 , measured in F1 and D1, respec- et al. (2003), who reported higher RWU after rainfall or irrigation
tively (Table 4). A similar pattern was observed for the root length and at the grain-lling stage of maize. Statistical analysis showed
density. The same order was observed for the projected area (PA) that the method used to apply the irrigation water signicantly
and the root surface area. (=0.05) affected the total RWU from re-greening to harvest; the
The dry root biomass in the soil prole was measured in both differences were highly signicant (=0.01) for different irrigation
seasons at 10 cm intervals up to 100 cm. The biomass was cate- schedules. The total uptake in both years was higher for the 70%
gorized into three zones, i.e., depths of 020 cm, 2060 cm and treatment schedule and decreased with less frequent amounts of
60100 cm, as shown in Table 5. The highest root biomasses, irrigation (Table 7). The simulation showed that F3 used 60 mm and
491.7 g/m2 and 315.7 g/m2 , were measured during the owering 90 mm more irrigation water to increase the RWU by 22.6 mm and
stage in D3 (020 cm) in 2015 and 2014, respectively, followed by 57.1 mm, respectively, compared with D3, and F3 needed 30 mm
F3 (465.3 g/m2 ) in 2015 and S3 (304.4 g/m2 ) in 2014. The lowest and 60 mm more irrigation to increase the RWU by 31.5 mm and
root biomasses observed were 252.3 g/m2 and 154.8 g/m2 in the F1 54.8 mm compared to S3 in 2015 and 2014, respectively. This result
treatment in 2015 and 2014, respectively. Signicant differences in shows that when winter wheat was irrigated at a high frequency,
the dry root biomass were observed between the treatments under more efcient utilization of the applied irrigation water occurred
different irrigation schedules ( = 0.01) and irrigation methods in the SDI system than in SI and SF because SDI had a higher RLD in
( = 0.05) when evaluating the three rooting zones, i.e., 020 cm, the top soil. Since the SDI system reduced the wetting of the sur-
2060 cm and 60100 cm, separately. In 2015, the dry mass pattern face soil, considerable amount of irrigation water could be saved
in the top 60 cm decreased with decreasing irrigation frequency for from surface soil evaporation, which could signicantly reduce
all irrigation methods, lead by SDI followed by SI, except at 70% non-benecial water consumption. A total of 30 mm and 60 mm
where SF exceeded SI. Compared with the top 60 cm, the reverse more irrigation water was used in the F1 treatment in 2015 and
order was observed for the root biomass pattern at the 60100 cm 2014, respectively, to increase RWU by 28.04 mm and 26.7 mm,
soil depth, which was very similar to the pattern observed for RLD compared to D1, and to increase the RWU by 47.4 mm and 24.8 mm
(Table 3) at respective depths during the owering stage. The pat- in 2015 and 2014, respectively, compared to S1. These results indi-
tern observed for the different irrigation schedule agreed with the cate that the RWU was enhanced by RLD under surface ooding.
results presented by Ktterer et al. (1993), and the pattern for the Additionally, the results suggest that the irrigation schedule and
S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150 147
Fig. 5. Prole root water uptake (RWU) distribution in (a) 2014 and (b) 2015 for all
irrigation treatments.
occurred in the deep soil prole where the RLD distribution plays if the soil conditions are similar to those observed in this study, a
an important role in contributing to RWU (Lv et al., 2010; Zhang surface drip irrigation system scheduled to irrigate at 60% of eld
et al., 2009). capacity (with 30 mm of water per irrigation event) will not only
The main uptake zone established in the top 20 cm of the soil maintain the highest WP with a high RWU but will also improve
prole was because of higher RLD in this region. The higher water the irrigation water productivity and produce higher grain yield.
uptake from 20 to 60 cm soil prole compared with 60100 cm
resulted from the high available soil water content. This result
Acknowledgements
showed that the availability of water for crop water use was the
main factor responsible for optimum RWU. The prole RWU in
We are grateful for the nancial support from the China Agri-
the irrigation treatments with different water application methods
cultural Research System (CARS-3-1-30), the Special Fund for Agro-
converged as the depth increased (Fig. 5). This outcome indicated
Scientic Research in the Public Interest (201203077, 201501017),
that the prole water uptake was reduced even in treatments that
the Chinese National Natural Science Fund (51309227), and the
were frequently irrigated and that received more irrigation water.
Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Program (ASTIP),
However, the uptake was higher if there were dense roots in the
Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences.
deep soil prole, which were found in treatments with less frequent
irrigation.
References
4.5. Evaluation of irrigation water productivity
unek,
Sim J., Hopmans, J.W., 2009. Modeling compensated root water and nutrient
uptake. Ecol. Modell. 220, 505521.
The irrigation water productivity decreased with increasing irri- Simunek,
J., Sejna, M., Saito, H., Sakai, M., van Genuchten, M.T., 2013. The
gation amount because the grain yield did not increase linearly HYDRUS-1D Software Package for Simulating the Movement of Water, Heat,
and Multiple Solutes in Variably Saturated Media, Version 4.17, HYDRUS
(Li et al., 1995), whereas ET was found to increase linearly with
Software Series 3. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of
increasing amounts of irrigation. Irrigating winter wheat to 50%, California Riverside, Riverside, California, USA, pp. 342.
60% and 70% of FC using SDI increased the IWP by 33.9%, 28.1% Albasha, R., Mailhol, J.-C., Cheviron, B., 2015. Compensatory uptake functions in
and 40.8% compared to SF, whereas SI increased the IWP by 37.4%, empirical macroscopic root water uptake models experimental and
numerical analysis. Agric. Water Manage. 155, 2239.
22.4% and 16.6%, respectively, compared to SF under the same irri- Ali, M.H., Hoque, M.R., Hassan, A.A., Khair, A., 2007. Effects of decit irrigation on
gation schedule. A quadratic relationship (Y = 0.00011 I2 + 0.04 yield, water productivity, and economic returns of wheat. Agric. Water
Manage. 92, 151161.
(Y) and total irri-
I + 5.564) was established by plotting grain yield
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration:
gation amount (I). Maximizing the function Y = 0 obtained for Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. United Nations FAO
I
grain yield indicated that 180 mm of irrigation water (approx- Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56.
imately 314 mm, including rainfall) is the optimal requirement Bai, W.-M., Li, L.-H., 2003. Effect of irrigation methods and quota on root water
uptake and biomass of alfalfa in the Wulanbuhe sandy region of China. Agric.
to produce the highest yield. Liu et al. (2011) also calculated Water Manage. 62, 139148.
185 mm and 186 mm of irrigation water in the rst and second Camposeo, S., Rubino, P., 2003. Effect of irrigation frequency on root water uptake
seasons, respectively of their study to obtain maximum grain yield in sugar beet. Plant Soil 253, 301309.
Carvalho, P., Foulkes, M.J., 2013. Roots root and Uptake of Water and Nutrients
under a sprinkler irrigation system. Similarly, a quadratic function
roots uptake of water and nutrients. In: Christou, P., Savin, R., Costa-Pierce, B.,
(WP = 0.000018 I2 + 0.5563 I + 0.348) was found by plotting WP Misztal, I., Whitelaw, C.B. (Eds.), Sustainable Food Production. Springer, New
(equation 3) versus total irrigation amount (I). The maximum WP York, pp. 13901404.
Coelho, E., Or, D., 1999. Root distribution and water uptake patterns of corn under
was estimated based on an irrigation amount of 154 mm (approxi- surface and subsurface drip irrigation. Plant Soil 206, 123136.
(WP)
mately 292 mm, including rainfall) when maximizing =0 Currell, M.J., Han, D., Chen, Z., Cartwright, I., 2012. Sustainability of groundwater
I usage in northern China: dependence on palaeowaters and effects on water
the relationship obtained for WP. The irrigation amounts for the quality, quantity and ecosystem health. Hydrol. Processes 26, 40504066.
D2 and S2 treatments were measured to be 150 mm (Table 7). Du, T., Kang, S., Zhang, J., Davies, W.J., 2015. Decit irrigation and sustainable
water-resource strategies in agriculture for Chinas food security. J. Exp. Bot.
This suggests that the irrigation amounts applied in these treat- 66, 22532269.
ments were sufcient to achieve maximum WP; in fact, the WP in Eissenstat, D.M., 1992. Costs and benets of constructing roots of small diameter. J.
D2 (2.08 kg/m3 ) was slightly higher than that in S2 (2.05 kg/m3 ) Plant Nutr. 15, 763782.
Ephrath, J.E., Silberbush, M., Berliner, P.R., 1999. Calibration of minirhizotron
because of the higher grain yield in D2 (Fig. 6). This result shows
readings against root length density data obtained from soil cores. Plant Soil
that using SDI as soon as the soil water content reaches 60% of the 209, 201208.
eld capacity produced the maximum grain yield and highest WP Evett, S.R., Howell, T.A., Schneider, A.D., 1995. Energy and water balances for
surface and subsurface drip irrigated corn. Fifth International Microirrigation
and also improved the IWP.
Congress.
Fabio, A., Madeira, M., Steen, E., Ktterer, T., Ribeiro, C., Arajo, C., 1995.
5. Conclusion Development of root biomass in an Eucalyptus globulus plantation under
different water and nutrient regimes. Plant Soil 168169, 215223.
Feddes, R.A., Kowalik, P.J., Zaradny, H., 1978. Simulation of Field Water Use and
We concluded that the soil water content, root growth and Crop Yield. Pudoc, Wageningen.
soil temperature, which varied according to the water application Gao, Y., Duan, A., Sun, J., Li, F., Liu, Z., Liu, H., Liu, Z., 2009. Crop coefcient and
water-use efciency of winter wheat/spring maize strip intercropping. Field
methods and irrigation scheduling, play an important role in root Crop. Res. 111, 6573.
water uptake (RWU) and can affect the overall soil water dynam- Gao, Y., Duan, A., Qiu, X., Liu, Z., Sun, J., Zhang, J., Wang, H., 2010. Distribution of
ics of winter wheat cultivation. It is very important to understand roots and root length density in a maize/soybean strip intercropping system.
Agric. Water Manage. 98, 199212.
how to irrigate, how much to irrigate and when to irrigate winter
Gao, Y., Yang, L., Shen, X., Li, X., Sun, J., Duan, A., Wu, L., 2014. Winter wheat with
wheat depending on the weather conditions to optimize the RWU. subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) Crop coefcients, water-use estimates, and
Approximately 90% of total water uptake occurs in the 060 cm soil effects of SDI on grain yield and water use efciency. Agric. Water Manage.
146, 110.
prole, where most of the roots exist. The wide differences in water
Guan, D., Zhang, Y., Al-Kaisi, M.M., Wang, Q., Zhang, M., Li, Z., 2015. Tillage
uptake rates in the top soil between the low and high irrigation practices effect on root distribution and water use efciency of winter wheat
treatments became narrower in the deeper soil prole. Thus, we under rain-fed condition in the North China Plain. Soil Tillage Res. 146 (Part B),
concluded that applying more irrigation water than can be stored 286295.
Han, M., Zhao, C., Feng, G., Yan, Y., Sheng, Y., 2015. Evaluating the effects of mulch
in the top 60 cm of the soil prole will result in inefcient utilization and irrigation amount on soil water distribution and root zone water balance
of this water by winter wheat. Irrespective of the weather pattern, using HYDRUS-2D. Water 7, 2622.
150 S.K. Jha et al. / Agricultural Water Management 182 (2017) 139150
Hillel, D., 1998. Environmental Soil Physics: Fundamentals, Applications, and Ritchie, J.T., 1981. Water dynamics in the soil-plant-atmosphere system. Plant Soil
Environmental Considerations. Academic press. 58, 8196.
Jin, H., Qingjie, W., Hongwen, L., Lijin, L., Huanwen, G., 2009. Effect of alternative Roose, T., Fowler, A.C., 2004. A model for water uptake by plant roots. J. Theor. Biol.
tillage and residue cover on yield and water use efciency in annual double 228, 155171.
cropping system in North China Plain. Soil Tillage Res. 104, 198205. Rowse, H.R., 1974. The effect of irrigation on the length, weight, and diameter of
Ktterer, T., Hansson, A.-C., Andrn, O., 1993. Wheat root biomass and nitrogen lettuce roots. Plant Soil 40, 381391.
dynamicseffects of daily irrigation and fertilization. Plant Soil 151, 2130. Samson, B., Sinclair, T., 1994. Soil core and minirhizotron comparison for the
Kar, G., Kumar, A., Martha, M., 2007. Water use efciency and crop coefcients of determination of root length density. Plant Soil 161, 225232.
dry season oilseed crops. Agric. Water Manage. 87, 7382. Shao, L., Zhang, X., Chen, S., Sun, H., Wang, Z., 2009. Effects of irrigation frequency
Kaspar, T.C., Bland, W.L., 1992. Soil temperature and root growth. Soil Sci. 154, under limited irrigation on root water uptake, yield and water use efciency of
290299. winter wheat. Irrig. Drain. 58, 393405.
Kmoch, H.G., Ramig, R.E., Fox, R.L., Koehler, F.E., 1957. Root development of winter Shao, L.W., Zhang, X.Y., Sun, H.Y., Chen, S.Y., Wang, Y.M., 2011. Yield and water use
wheat as inuenced by soil moisture and nitrogen fertilization. Agron. J. 49, response of winter wheat to winter irrigation in the North China Plain. J. Soil
2026. Water Conserv. 66, 104113.
Kramer, P.J., Boyer, J.S., 1995. Water Relations of Plants and Soils. Academic press. Sun, H.-Y., Liu, C.-M., Zhang, X.-Y., Shen, Y.-J., Zhang, Y.-Q., 2006. Effects of
Legates, D.R., McCabe, G.J., 1999. Evaluating the use of goodness-of-t Measures in irrigation on water balance, yield and WUE of winter wheat in the North China
hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resour. Res. 35, Plain. Agric. Water Manage. 85, 211218.
233241. Torreano, S.J., Morris, L.A., 1998. Loblolly pine root growth and distribution under
Li, F., Zhao, S., Duan, S., 1995. The strategy for limited irrigation of spring wheat in water stress. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 62, 818827.
semiarid Loess Plateau, China. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol 6, 259264. Vincent, C.D., Gregory, P.J., 1989. Effects of temperature on the development and
Li, Q., Dong, B., Qiao, Y., Liu, M., Zhang, J., 2010. Root growth, available soil water, growth of winter wheat roots. Plant Soil 119, 99110.
and water-use efciency of winter wheat under different irrigation regimes Wang, X., Huang, G., Yang, J., Huang, Q., Liu, H., Yu, L., 2015. An assessment of
applied at different growth stages in North China. Agric. Water Manage. 97, irrigation practices: sprinkler irrigation of winter wheat in the North China
16761682. Plain. Agric. Water Manage. 159, 197208.
Li, C.X., Zhou, X.G., Sun, J.S., Wang, H.Z., Gao, Y., 2014. Dynamics of root water Wesseling, J., Elbers, J., Kabat, P., Van den Broek, B., 1991. SWATRE: Instructions for
uptake and water use efciency under alternate partial root-zone irrigation. Input. Internal Note. Winand Staring Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Desalin. Water Treat. 52, 28052810. Xue, Q., Zhu, Z., Musick, J.T., Stewart, B.A., Dusek, D.A., 2003. Root growth and
Li, X., Tong, L., Niu, J., Kang, S., Du, T., Li, S., Ding, R., 2017. Spatio-temporal water uptake in winter wheat under decit irrigation. Plant Soil 257, 151161.
distribution of irrigation water productivity and its driving factors for cereal Yang, G.-y., Luo, Y.-p., Li, B.-g., Liu, X.-y., 2006. The response of winter wheat root to
crops in Hexi Corridor, Northwest China. Agric. Water Manage. 179, 5563. the period and the after-effect of soil water stress. Agric. Sci. China 5, 284290.
Liu, C., Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., 2002. Determination of daily evaporation and Yao, S., in Chinese with English abstract 2005. Effect of Sprinkler Irrigation on
evapotranspiration of winter wheat and maize by large-scale weighing Water Physiology, Photosynthesis, Crop Growth and Water Use Efciency of
lysimeter and micro-lysimeter. Agric. For. Meteorol. 111, 109120. Winter Wheat. Ph. D Thesis of Graduate University of Chinese Academy of
Liu, H., Yu, L., Luo, Y., Wang, X., Huang, G., 2011. Responses of winter wheat Sciences. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
(Triticum aestivum L.) evapotranspiration and yield to sprinkler irrigation Yu, L.-p., Huang, G.-h., Liu, H.-j., Wang, X.-p., Wang, M.-q., 2009. Experimental
regimes. Agric. Water Manage. 98, 483492. investigation of soil evaporation and evapotranspiration of winter wheat
Lu, C., Fan, L., 2013. Winter wheat yield potentials and yield gaps in the North under sprinkler irrigation. Agric. Sci. China 8, 13601368.
China Plain. Field Crop. Res. 143, 98105. Zhang, H., Wang, X., You, M., Liu, C., 1999. Water-yield relations and water-use
Lv, G., Kang, Y., Li, L., Wan, S., 2010. Effect of irrigation methods on root efciency of winter wheat in the North China Plain. Irrig. Sci. 19, 3745.
development and prole soil water uptake in winter wheat. Irrig. Sci. 28, Zhang, X., Pei, D., Li, Z., Li, J., Wang, Y., 2002. Management of Supplemental
387398. Irrigation of Winter Wheat for Maximum Prot, Decit Irrigation Practices.
Lv, G., Hu, W., Kang, Y., Liu, B., Li, L., Song, J., 2013a. Root water uptake model Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, pp. 5765.
considering soil temperature. J. Hydrol. Eng. 18, 394400. Zhang, X., Pei, D., Chen, S., 2004. Root growth and soil water utilization of winter
Lv, L., Yao, Y., Zhang, L., Dong, Z., Jia, X., Liang, S., Ji, J., 2013b. Winter wheat grain wheat in the North China Plain. Hydrol. Processes 18, 22752287.
yield and its components in the North China Plain: irrigation management Zhang, X., Chen, S., Sun, H., Wang, Y., Shao, L., 2009. Root size: distribution and soil
cultivation, and climate. Chil. J. Agric. Res. 73, 233242. water depletion as affected by cultivars and environmental factors. Field Crops
Mattar, M.A., Alamoud, A.I., 2015. Articial neural networks for estimating the Res. 114, 7583.
hydraulic performance of labyrinth-channel emitters. Comput. Electron. Agric. Zuo, Q., Jie, F., Zhang, R., Meng, L., 2004. A generalized function of wheats root
114, 189201. length density distributions. Vadose Zone J. 3, 271277.
McMichael, B., Taylor, H., 1987. Applications and limitations of rhizotrons and van Genuchten, M.T., 1980. A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic
minirhizotrons. Minirhizotron Observation Tubes: Methods and Applications conductivity of unsaturated soils1. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44, 892898.
for Measuring Rhizosphere Dynamics. In. HM Taylor, H.M. (Ed.), 113.
Rawlins, S.L., Raats, P.A.C., 1975. Prospects for high-frequency irrigation. Science
188, 604610.