Irrigation scheduling of fruit trees - ARIMnet2 · Irrigation scheduling of fruit trees Amos Naor...

Preview:

Citation preview

Irrigation scheduling of fruit trees

Amos Naor

• Water stress assessment

• The interaction of crop-load with irrigation

Soil water stress indicators

Soil water potential - Tensiometer

Soil water potential - Tensiometer

The tensiometer exchanges water

with the soil-water until their water

potentials are equal. Ceramic cup Ceramic cup

The tensiometer is a pipe filled with

water that has ceramic (porous)

cup in the bottom.

Soil water content

All the modern measurement techniques

of water content are based on electrical

properties

Capacitance.

Dialectric constant.

Resistance.

Plant water stress indicators

Plant-based water stress indicators

Water potential (pressure chamber, psychrometry).

Relative water content.

Tissue size changes (dendrometers).

Stomatal conductance

Porometry

IR thermometry / Thermal imaging

Acoustic emission

Sap flow

Plant-based water stress indicators

Water potential (pressure chamber, psychrometry).

Relative water content.

Tissue size changes (dendrometers).

Stomatal conductance

Porometry

IR thermometry / Thermal imaging

Acoustic emission

Sap flow

Direct measurement of the water

potential

Pressurized

nitrogen Pressure

chamber (Scolander et al., 1965)

Leaf water potential Stem water potential

Trunk diameter changes

100.0

100.1

100.2

100.3

100.4

0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00

Trunk

diameter

changes

hour

Various commercial water stress probes

Thermal imaging

The energy from the sun is directed mainly to:

Heating the canopy.

Vaporizing water (transpiration)

Stressed plants close their stomata and reduce

transpiration thus more energy from the sun is

shifted to heat the canopy.

Stress plants are warmer than non-stressed plants

Thermal imaging: (Moeller et al., 2007)

Low irrigation rate

High irrigation rate

High irrigation rate

Relationships between CWSI and

stomatal conductance (Moeller et al., 2007)

CWSI

.2 .4 .6 .8

Sto

ma

tal co

nd

uctu

nce

(m

mo

le/m

2/s

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

r2=0.85

CWSI = (TCanopy – Twet) / (Tdry – Twet)

Relationships between CWSI and

stomatal conductance (Moeller et al., 2007)

CWSI

.2 .4 .6 .8

Sto

ma

tal co

nd

uctu

nce

(m

mo

le/m

2/s

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

r2=0.85

CWSI = (TCanopy – Twet) / (Tdry – Twet)

•Optimal meteorological

conditions.

•Good reference temperatures.

•High spatial resolution

Reducing spatial resolution

Crane

Airplane

Satellite

Pixel size and average

temperature

Current accuracy of CWSI assessment is limited

Summary of water stress indicators for

irrigation scheduling

• Point Vs. spatial measurements

• Setting thresholds (calibration)

Detection of irrigation malfunctions:

grapevines

not irrigated

currently

Thermal imagery allowed the

recognition of subsurface water

flow from the nectarines

currently

irrigated

not irrigated

currently

Vineyard, Upper Galilee, summer 2005

Alchanatis and Cohen

Leakage detection

23

Alchanatis et al

Almonds

Cotton, Northern Israel, Megido, July, 2008

Clogging in drippers

Cohen and Alchanatis

Irrigation malfunction detection in olives (Alchanatis et al)

Date suspected

points (area) Visible leaks

No visible leaks

Olives – Gshur

24/6 5.4% 8% 92%

26/8 8.2% 11% 89%

Crop load and irrigation

Crop load and water consumption (Lenz, 1986)

Apple trees were grown in

containers.

Trees with and without fruits

were compared.

Transpiration and leaf area

were measured.

Stomatal aperture is higher in

the presence of fruit.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

No fruit Fruit

Tra

ns

pir

ati

on

(l/p

lan

t)

Leaf area per tree

Transpiration

0

1

2

3

4

5

No fruit Fruit

Le

af

are

a (

m2)

Crop load and stem water potential

Pan evaporation coeff.

.4 .6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4

-2.6

-2.4

-2.2

-2.0

-1.8

-1.6

-1.4

-1.2

-1.0

a ab

b

c

a a

b

b

a

a

b

b

654 664

1217

Frut/tree

Nectarine

Number of fruits and stem water potential

Fruit per tree

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

-3.0

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-.5

0.0

Crop load and stem water potential

1L 1M 1H 3L 3M 3H 7L 7M 7HA

vera

ge m

idday s

tem

wate

r pote

ntial

up t

o h

arv

es (

MP

a)

-3.0

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

Ortal

Matityahu

Apple

Crop load and stem

water potential

-4.0

-3.5

-3.0

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

Low irr Med irr High irr

Ste

m w

ate

r p

ote

nti

al

(MP

a)

Low load High load

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Low irr Med irr High irrS

tom

ata

l co

nd

ucta

nce (

mm

ole

/m2/s

)

Low load High load

Crop load and Stomatal

conductance

Olive Olive

Crop load and water relations in olive

R2 = 0.96

R2 = 0.92

R2 = 0.32

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0

Stem water potential (MPa)

Sto

ma

tal c

ind

uc

tan

ce

(mm

ole

/m2

/s)

Med. load 14:00

Low load 10:00

High load 10:00

S

tom

ata

l co

nd

ucta

nce

(mm

ole

/m2

/s)

Crop load and water relations in apple

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0

Midday stem water potential (MPa)

High crop load

Low crop load

Poly. (Low crop

load)Poly. (High crop

load)

Naschitz et al, unpublished

Assim

ilation r

ate

mole

/m2/s

)

Stem water potential and apple fruit weight

R2 = 0.92

R2 = 0.94

0

50

100

150

200

250

-3.0 -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0

)MPa( פוטנציאל מים בגזע

ם(ר)ג

ע צמו

מי

רפ

ל ק

שמ

אורטל Matityahuמתיתיהו

F

ruit w

eig

ht

(g)

Ortal

Midday SWP (MPa)

Low and Med.

crop load

High crop load

R2=0.97

0

20

40

60

80

100

-3.0 -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0

)MPa( פוטנציאל מים בגזע

מ"מ

70מ-

ל דו

גרי

פז

חוא

אורטל מתיתיהו

Stem water potential and the yield of large fruit

Matityahu

F

ruit >

70 m

m (

%)

Ortal

Midday SWP (MPa)

Low and Med.

crop load

High crop load

Crop load and thresholds for irrigation (Naschitz et al, unpub.)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5

Fru

it w

eig

ht

(g)

Midday stem water potential (Mpa)

100 Fruit/tree

300 fruit/tree

600 fruit/tree

>1000 fruit/tree

25 t/ha

58 t/ha

93 t/ha

Irrigation levels:

1 mm/day

3 mm/day

7 mm/day

Optimal irrigation:

25 t/ha - ~2.5 mm/day

58 t/ha - ~4.5 mm/day

93 t/ha - ~7 mm/day

Optimal threshold:

25 t/ha - ~-1.4MPa

58 t/ha - ~-1.2MPa

93 t/ha - ~-0.8MPa

Summary of crop load and irrigation

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

No fruit Fruit

Tra

ns

pir

ati

on

(l/p

lan

t)

Summary of water stress indicators for

irrigation scheduling

• Point Vs. spatial measurements

• Setting thresholds (calibration)

Summary of irrigation malfunction

detection

Thanks

Recommended