מחקרים ותובנות מהערבה מחקרים ותובנות מהערבה הדרומיתהדרומית

אורי שני – מו"פ ערבה דרומיתאורי שני – מו"פ ערבה דרומית

יום עיון בנושא מים מותפלים לחקלאות בערבה – היבטים אגרונומיים ויישומייםיום עיון בנושא מים מותפלים לחקלאות בערבה – היבטים אגרונומיים ויישומיים 07/10/200807/10/2008מרכז ספיר, מרכז ספיר,

Grapevine

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Rel

ativ

e y

ield

(Y

/Yp)

0.0

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2

measured Yr

modelled Tr

Onion

0 2 4 6 8

Pepper

0 2 4 6 80.0

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2

Tomato

Irrigation water EC (dSm-1)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Tomato

Relative irrigation (I Tp-1)

0.0 .3 .6 .9 1.2 1.5 1.8

Rel

ativ

e yi

eld

Yr

0.0

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2Sunflower

.3 .6 .9 1.2 1.5 1.8

measured lysimeter Yr

measured field Yr modelled Tr

Maas and Hoffman 1977; Maas 1990) van Genuchten (1983)

1

1

50

min ,

( )

1

wp root

s

I s r rs

S

rP

T I T b

I TK

T

I TEC I

K

EC I T

TY

T

D I T

Melon

Relative Irrigation (I Tp-1)

0.0 .5 1.0 1.5

Re

lati

ve y

ield

(Y

r)

0.0

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2

EC 1.2 EC 3 EC 6 EC 9

Pepper

0.0 .5 1.0 1.5 2.0

EC 1 EC 3 EC 5.5

Pepper

Salt load (kg ha-1 day-1)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Rel

ativ

e yi

eld

0.0

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

EC 1EC 3EC 5.5

Common Name

Botanical Name (b)Threshold dS/m (c)

Slope % per dS/m

Rating (d)

Artichoke Cynara scolymus -- -- MT*

Asparagus Asparagus officinalis 4.1 2.0 T

Bean Phaseolus vulgaris 1.0 19.0 S

Bean, mung Vigna radiata 1.8 20.7 S

Beet, red (h) Beta Vulgaris 4.0 9.0 MT

Broccoli Brassica oleracea botrytis 2.8 9.2 MS

Brussel Sprouts

B. oleracea gemmifera -- -- MS*

Cabbage B. oleracea capitata 1.8 9.7 MS

Carrot Daucus carota 1.0 14.0 S

Cauliflower Brassica oleracea botrytis -- -- MS*

Celery Apium graveolens 1.8 6.2 MS

Corn, sweet Zea mays 1.7 12.0 MS

Cucumber Cucumis sativus 2.5 13.0 MS

EggplantSolanum Melongena esculentum

1.1 6.9 MS

KaleBrassica oleracea acephala

-- -- MS*

Kohlrabi B. oleracea gongylode -- -- MS*

Lettuce Lactuca sativa 1.3 13.0 MS

Muskmelon Cucumis Melo -- -- MS

Okra Abelmoschus esculentus -- -- S

Onion Allium Cepa 1.2 16.0 S

Parsnip Pastinaca sativa -- -- S*

Pea Pisum sativum -- -- S*

Pepper Capsicum annuum 1.5 14.0 MS

Potato Solanum tuberosum 1.7 12.0 MS

Pumpkin Cucurbita Pepo Pepo -- -- MS*

Radish Raphanus sativus 1.2 13.0 MS

Spinach Spinacia oleracea 2.0 7.6 MS

Squash, scallop

Cucurbita Pepo Melopepo 3.2 16.0 MS

Squash, zucchini

C. Pepo Melopepo 4.7 9.4 MT

Strawberry Fragaria sp. 1 33 S

Sweet potato Ipomoea Batatas 1.5 11 MS

TomatoLycopersicon Lycopersicum

2.5 9.9 MS

1

1

50

min ,

( )

1

wp root

s

I s r rs

S

rP

T I T b

I TK

T

I TEC I

K

EC I T

TY

T

D I T

Parameters in the model may be categorized as management (I and ECI), biological (EC50, ρ and root) or physical (Tp, b, KS, , r and S ).

Model Description

Under steady state conditions water and salt balances are reduced to:

I D T

ID

ECEC I

D

where I is irrigation and rainfall total, D is drainage and T transpiration

assuming no surface evaporation or lateral flow. EC is the electrical conductivity

of the solution.

Subscripts I and D represent irrigation and drainage respectively.

v

0.00

0.020.040.06

0.080.100.12

0.140.16

0.18

Dr

(cm

)

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

Time (hours)

0 200 400 600

ET

(cm

)

0.00

0.020.040.06

0.080.100.12

0.140.160.18

EC

dS

m-1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Arava sandy loam (Russo and Bakker 1987)

Relative irrigation (I/Tp)

0.0 .5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Re

lati

ve y

ield

0.0

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

EC 0.5EC 1.8EC 3.6 EC 6.7

Millville silt loam(Hanks et al 1978)

0.0 .5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

EC 0.3EC 2EC 4EC 6

Date palm

Irrigation water boron (mgL-1)

0 10 20 30 40

Rel

ativ

e yi

eld

(Y

r)

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2

EC 0.8 EC 4 EC 8 EC 12

Tomato

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

EC 1 EC 3 EC 6 EC 9

Tomato boron salinity

Irrigation water B (mg L-1)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

.10

.11

.12

.13

.14

.15

.16

.17

.18

EC 1 EC 3 EC 6 EC 9

Tomato boron salinity

Irrigation water B (mg L-1)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Dra

ina

ge

(m

m)

0

2

4

6

8

10

EC 1 EC 3 EC 6 EC 9

Date boron salinity

Irrigation water B (mg L-1)

0 10 20 30 40 50

.15

.16

.17

.18

.19

.20

.21

.22

.23

EC 0.8 EC 4 EC 8 EC 12

Tomato boron salinity

Irrigation water B (mg L-1)

0 10 20 30 40 50

Dra

ina

ge

(m

m)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

EC 0.8 EC 4 EC 8 EC 12

Data Sets• Tomato (Ben-Gal and Shani 2002, 2003)

– salinity water boron combinations. Lysimeters and field

• Sunflower (Ben-Gal and Shani, 2000)

– Water. Lysimeters and field.

• Grapevine (Shani and Ben-Gal, 2004 in review)

– Salinity. Lysimeters and field.

• Onion (Ben-Gal and Shani, 2004)

– Salinity. Lysimeters and field.

• Pepper (Ben-Gal and Shani, 2002)

– salinity water. lysimeters

• Melon (Shani and Dudley, 2002)

– salinity, water. field

• Corn (Hanks et al 1978, Russo and Bakker 1987)

– salinity, water. field

• Date palm (Tripler, Ben-Gal and Shani, 2004)

– salinity, boron. lysimeters

EC 11

EC 1

DANIELLA 14/05/98

Additive and Compensative approach

Salinity increase

Bel

l pep

per

פתרון משולב להשפעת מים ומלח על יבול וסביבה

Normalized Irrigation (I.ETp-1)

.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Rel

ativ

e M

elon

Dry

Mat

ter

Yie

ld

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2EC:1.2 EC:3.0 EC:6.0 EC:9.0

Melon water and salt levels

Normalized Irrigation (I.ETp-1)

.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Rel

ativ

e C

orn

Dry

Mat

ter

Yie

ld

.2

.4

.6

.8

1.0

1.2

EC:1.2 EC:3.3 EC:6.3 EC:8.3 EC:10.3

Corn water and salt levels

Boron in irrigation water (mol m-3)

0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5

Re

lativ

e y

ield

(Y

/Y ma

x)

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

EC 1

EC 3

EC 6

EC 9

Tomatoes B and salt level

Relative Irrigation I Tp-1

הנחות

) ניתן לאפיין את כל בית השרשים על ידי ערך אפקטיבי 1של תכולת רטיבות או מליחות. נובע מיכולת ה"פיצוי" של

שורשים לתנאים משתנים.

) כאשר ההשקיה מסודרת וקבועה ועל פי קריטריונים 2 או לנקז מתקיים מצב של תנאים יציביםTpברורים ביחס ל