Agronomic and economic response to furrow diking tillage in irrigated and non-irrigated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)R.C. Nuti, M.C. Lamb, R.B. Sorensen and C.C. Truman Agricultural Water Management, 2009, vol. 96, issue 7, pages 1078-1084 Abstract: The Southeast U.S. receives an average of 1300 mm annual rainfall, however poor seasonal distribution of rainfall often limits production. Irrigation is used during the growing season to supplement rainfall to sustain profitable crop production. Increased water capture would improve water use efficiency and reduce irrigation requirements. Furrow diking has been proposed as a cost effective management practice that is designed to create a series of storage basins in the furrow between crop rows to catch and retain rainfall and irrigation water. Furrow diking has received much attention in arid and semi-arid regions with mixed results, yet has not been adapted for cotton production in the Southeast U.S. Our objectives were to evaluate the agronomic response and economic feasibility of producing cotton with and without furrow diking in conventional tillage over a range of irrigation rates including no irrigation. Studies were conducted at two research sites each year from 2005 to 2007. Irrigation scheduling was based on Irrigator Pro for Cotton software. The use of furrow diking in these studies periodically reduced water consumption and improved yield and net returns. In 2006 and 2007, when irrigation scheduling was based on soil water status, an average of 76 mm ha-1 of irrigation water was saved by furrow diking, producing similar cotton yield and net returns. Furrow diking improved cotton yield an average of 171 kg ha-1 and net return by $245 ha-1 over multiple irrigation rates, in 1 of 3 years. We conclude that furrow diking has the capability to reduce irrigation requirements and the costs associated with irrigation when rainfall is periodic and drought is not severe. Keywords: Irrigation; scheduling; Water; capture; Water; consumption; Best; management; practices; Conservation; tillage (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:96:y:2009:i:7:p:1078-1084 Access Statistics for this article Agricultural Water Management is edited by B.E. Clothier, W. Dierickx, J. Oster and D. Wichelns More articles in Agricultural Water Management from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
Swedish Business School at Örebro University.