Center pivot irrigation capacity effects on maize yield and profitability in the Texas High Plains

Alfonso Domínguez, Robert C. Schwartz, José J. Pardo, Bridget Guerrero, Jourdan M. Bell, Paul D. Colaizzi and R. Louis Baumhardt

Agricultural Water Management, 2022, vol. 261, issue C

Abstract: In the Texas High Plains (THP), groundwater resources for irrigation are declining because of aquifer depletion and reduced well yield. Inability to meet peak water demands of maize under constrained irrigation capacities decreases yield and profitability. The MOPECO crop model, calibrated for the THP, was adapted to simulate maize water use and yield under center pivot irrigation to evaluate water allocation strategies under limited irrigation. Simulations were carried out over a range of irrigation capacities (3 – 12 mm d-1 for a 50.9 ha area), initial soil water contents, and application depths with irrigation allocated to a fraction (0.5 – 1.0) of the pivot area. Fractional water allocations were achieved by withholding irrigation from circular sectors or from outer spans with unirrigated fractions in fallow or planted to dryland cotton. These strategies were evaluated for growing seasons characterized by typical meteorological years with average (TMY1), average to above average (TMY2), and below average (TMY3) precipitation. Preseason irrigation had little to no influence on grain yield at irrigation capacities ≥ 5 mm d-1. At irrigation capacities ≤6 mm d-1 under TMY1, marginally greater yields 50.9 ha-1 were simulated when a fraction was irrigated. For irrigation capacities ≤8 mm d-1 under TMY1, reducing the irrigated area was the most prudent option to optimize net returns. As irrigation capacities increased from 4 to 8 mm d-1, the irrigated fraction that maximized net returns increased from 0.5 to 0.9. Concentrating water generated greater net returns because of greater irrigation water productivities and lower seed and fertilizer costs. Compared with fallow, planting cotton in the unirrigated portion increased net returns except in years with a seasonal drought (TMY3). Because greater irrigation volume did not always increase net returns, there is an opportunity to both increase profitability and conserve water by irrigating a fraction of the area.

Keywords: Limited irrigation; MOPECO; Sprinkler irrigation; Typical meteorological year; Water productivity; Zea mays L (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377421006120
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:261:y:2022:i:c:s0378377421006120

DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107335

Access Statistics for this article

Agricultural Water Management is currently edited by B.E. Clothier, W. Dierickx, J. Oster and D. Wichelns

More articles in Agricultural Water Management from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().