Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Yield, quality and crop water stress index relationships for decit-irrigated
soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] in sub-humid climatic conditions
Burak Nazmi Candogan a, , Mehmet Sincik b , Hakan Buyukcangaz a , Cigdem Demirtas a ,
Abdurrahim Tanju Goksoy b , Senih Yazgan a
a
b
Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Uludag University, 16059 Campus of Grkle, Bursa, Turkey
Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Uludag University, 16059 Campus of Grkle, Bursa, Turkey
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 26 January 2012
Accepted 27 November 2012
Available online 9 January 2013
Keywords:
Crop water stress index
Irrigation scheduling
Soybean
Seed yield
Quality
Water use efciency
a b s t r a c t
Field experiments were conducted for 2 years to evaluate the use of the crop water stress index (CWSI)
for irrigation scheduling of soybeans under a sub-humid climate of Bursa, Turkey. Additionally, statistical
relationships between CWSI and seed yield, quality parameters, crop evapotranspiration (ETc ) and water
use efciency (WUE) were investigated. Irrigations were scheduled based on the replenishment of 100
(T100 ), 75 (T75 ), 50 (T50 ), 25 (T25 ), and 0% (T0 ) of soil water depletion from a soil depth of 90 cm using
a 7-day irrigation interval. To compute CWSI, lower (nonstressed) and upper (stressed) baselines were
developed based on the canopy temperature (Tc ) measurements of fully irrigated and rain-fed treatments,
respectively. According to results, CWSI could be used to determine the irrigation time of soybean for
sub-humid climate and 0.22 could be offered as a threshold value. Statistically signicant relationships
were determined between CWSI and seed yield, protein yield, oil yield, ETc and WUE. The polynomial
relationship between WUE and CWSI demonstrated that highest WUE could be obtained under CWSI
close to 0.6. Consequently, an irrigation schedule that considers water stress could be employed when
the cost of water is high and/or water is scarce. However, because of the yield reduction, all economic
aspects of water limited irrigation scheduling should be considered before making this decision. We
conclude that the CWSI could be used to evaluate crop water stress and improve irrigation scheduling
for soybeans under sub-humid climatic conditions.
2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Water stress is a major factor limiting soybean production in
the semi-arid and sub-humid regions of the world. In these regions,
the frequency and amount of rainfall during the growing season are
often quite variable. Under non-irrigated conditions in humid areas,
variability in seasonal rainfall leads to year-to-year variability in
the uptake of water and nutrients, and in the growth, development
and yield of the crop (Scott et al., 1986). Under semi-arid and subhumid climate conditions, well-scheduled irrigation is necessary to
increase seed yield and ensure stability in yields.
Irrigation scheduling methods are generally based on measurement of soil water content or meteorological parameters for
114
(1)
h 0.3
3
(2)
115
Table 1
Mean air temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, solar radiation and total monthly rainfall during 20052006 and long-term measurements (19752003) at Bursa.
Year
Month
Air temperature ( C)
Wind speeda (m s1 )
Rainfall (mm)
2005
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
13.7
17.6
21.2
24.7
25.1
20.1
13.2
60
68
58
62
63
68
72
1.8
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.2
13.1
18.3
23.7
22.4
19.3
14.8
9.7
56
23
21
55
4
16
37
2006
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
12.1
16.6
21.5
23.8
26.4
19.9
16.7
74
61
64
52
50
65
77
1.9
1.8
1.7
2.3
2.0
1.5
1.3
16.9
22.2
23.2
24.2
20.1
14.3
9.9
20
9
43
2
3
91
25
Long-term average
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
12.9
17.6
22.3
24.5
24.1
20.1
15.3
68
65
58
57
60
65
72
2.0
1.9
2.0
2.2
2.1
1.7
1.5
14.0
17.6
20.0
19.8
17.8
14.5
9.7
70
47
33
20
15
35
72
(3)
116
Table 2
The seed yield, total amount of irrigation water, and seasonal crop evapotranspiration (ETc ) for soybeans in 2005 and 2006.
Year
Treatment
Rainfalla (mm)
2005
T100
T75
T50
T25
T0
3.93
3.42
3.23
3.01
2.16
554
416
277
139
0
156
802
687
576
480
394
2006
T100
T75
T50
T25
T0
3.59
3.23
2.94
2.45
1.98
679
513
347
181
15
150
841
702
590
462
351
Fig. 1. The relationship between seed yield (Y) and seasonal crop evapotranspiration
(ETc ). R2 : determination coefcient; ** Signicant at the 1% probability level (P < 0.01).
117
Table 3
Seed yield, quality components, water use efciency (WUE), seasonal mean CWSI, and mean CWSI before soybean irrigations in 2005 and 2006.
Year
Treatment
Seed yield
(t ha1 )
Protein
content (%)
Oil content
(%)
Protein yield
(t ha1 )
Oil yield
(t ha1 )
WUE (kg m3 )
Mean CWSI
Mean CWSI
before irrigation
2005
T100
T75
T50
T25
T0
LSD0.05
F-test
3.93 aa
3.42 b
3.23 bc
3.01 c
2.16 d
0.3479
31.3 c
32.1 bc
32.8 abc
33.7 ab
35.0 a
2.343
19.4 a
18.7 ab
17.5 bc
17.3 bc
16.5 c
1.596
1.23 a
1.10 ab
1.06 b
1.01 b
0.76 c
0.1570
0.77 a
0.64 b
0.56 c
0.52 c
0.36 d
0.06066
**
**
0.49
0.50
0.56
0.63
0.55
0.18
0.25
0.34
0.54
0.92
0.23
0.33
0.42
0.61
0.43
0.46
0.50
0.53
0.56
0.15
0.21
0.35
0.59
1.04
0.20
0.30
0.44
0.68
2006
a
*
**
T100
T75
T50
T25
T0
LSD0.05
F-test
**
3.59 a
3.23 ab
2.94 b
2.45 c
1.98 d
0.4397
30.7 b
32.0 ab
32.3 a
33.1 a
33.2 a
1.599
20.5 a
19.5 ab
19.1 b
18.9 b
18.9 b
1.054
1.10 a
1.03 ab
0.95 bc
0.81 c
0.66 d
0.1456
0.73 a
0.63 b
0.56 b
0.46 c
0.37 d
0.08935
**
**
**
The values marked with the same letter are statistically homogeneous in the LSD test.
Signicant at the 5% probability level (P < 0.05).
Signicant at the 1% probability level (P < 0.01).
Fig. 2. The relationship between protein yield (PY) and seasonal crop evapotranspiration (ETc ). R2 : determination coefcient; ** Signicant at the 1% probability level
(P < 0.01).
Fig. 3. The relationship between oil yield (OY) and seasonal crop evapotranspiration
(ETc ). R2 : determination coefcient; ** Signicant at the 1% probability level (P < 0.01).
118
Fig. 4. The relationship between water use efciency (WUE) and seasonal crop
evapotranspiration (ETc ). R2 : determination coefcient; ** Signicant at the 1% probability level (P < 0.01).
Fig. 5. The canopyair temperature differential (Tc Ta ) versus the air vapor pressure decit (VPD) for non-water stressed and maximally stressed soybeans. R2 :
determination coefcient; ** Signicant at the 1% probability level (P < 0.01).
Fig. 6. Variations of the crop water stress index (CWSI) for each irrigation treatment
during the (a) 2005 and (b) 2006 experiments.
119
Fig. 7. The relationships between seed yield (Y), crop evapotranspiration (ETc ), protein yield (PY), oil yield (OY), water use efciency (WUE) and seasonal mean crop water
stress index (CWSI). R2 : determination coefcient; ** Signicant at the 1% probability level (P < 0.01).
mean CWSI exceeds 0.17, then the soybean seed, protein and oil
yields would decrease. Nielsen (1990) used four threshold values
of CWSI (i.e., CWSI = 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5) to initiate irrigations and
determined that the threshold CWSI value of 0.2 resulted in the
highest seed yield of drip-irrigated soybean in Akron, CO, USA. This
value was close to the mean CWSI of approximately 0.22 before
irrigation that was obtained in our study.
Fig. 7 shows a summary of the comparison statistics between
the mean CWSI values and soybean seed yield, seasonal ETc , protein yield, oil yield and WUE. All relationships were signicant
at the 0.01 probability level. To dene the highest coefcient of
determination, linear, logarithmic, polynomial, power and exponential regression analyses were conducted. As a result, the
highest determination coefcients were calculated for the exponential relationship between seed yield and mean CWSI (R2 = 0.92,
RMSE = 0.19), the power relationship between ETc and mean CWSI
120
4. Conclusion
This study has demonstrated that the CWSI calculation methodology is suitable for irrigation scheduling of soybean in a sub-humid
climate and that CWSI values are sensitive to soybean yield and
quality components. Yields would be reduced if the seasonal average CWSI values were greater than 0.17, and an average CWSI of
approximately 0.22 before irrigation would produce the maximum
yield. Therefore, a CWSI value of 0.22 or smaller could be taken
as a threshold value to start irrigation for soybeans grown under
the conditions described in this study and when using the drip
irrigation method. The relationships between seasonal mean CWSI
and soybean seed yield, seasonal ETc , protein yield, oil yield and
WUE were highly signicant. Thus, the regression equations for
the relationships between seasonal mean CWSI and soybean seed
yield, protein yield and oil yield can be used by soybean managers
to achieve higher soybean yields and to predict seed yield, protein
yield and oil yield by evaluating the level of CWSI as an indicator
under sub-humid conditions.
Consequently, an irrigation schedule that considers water stress
could be employed when the cost of water is high and/or water is
scarce. Under this type of irrigation management strategy higher
WUE could be obtained. However, because of the yield reduction, all economic aspects of water limited irrigation scheduling
should be considered before making this decision. ETc , yield and
CWSI related ndings of this study could be useful for either
deciding the irrigation scheduling strategy or implementing this
plan based on CWSI, especially for sub-humid climate conditions.
Acknowledgments
This research is funded by The Scientic Research Projects Unit
of Uludag University (Project No. 2004/66; Project Leader: Prof.
Dr. Senih YAZGAN). The authors are indebted to American Journal
Experts (AJE) and Project Management Centre of Uludag University
for editing the English of this manuscript. Many thanks to Assoc.
Prof. Dr. Eyp Selim KKSAL from Ondokuz Mays University in
Samsun, Turkey for criticism of the manuscript.
References
Abduljabbar, A.S., Lugg, D.G., Sammis, T.W., Gay, L.W., 1985. Relationships between
crop water-stress index and alfalfa yield and evapotranspiration. Transactions
of the ASAE 28, 454461.
Alderfasi, A.A., Nielsen, D.C., 2001. Use of crop water stress index for monitoring
water status and scheduling irrigation in wheat. Agricultural Water Management 47, 6975.
Al-Kayssi, A.W., Shihab, R.M., Mustafa, S.H., 2011. Impact of soil water stress on
Nigellone oil content of black cumin seeds grown in calcareous-gypsifereous
soils. Agricultural Water Management 100, 4657.
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration, FAO
Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, Rome, p. 299.
Alves, I., Pereira, L.S., 2000. Non-water-stressed baselines for irrigation scheduling
with infrared thermometers: a new approach. Irrigation Science 19, 101106.
Anon, 2003. Meteorological Station, 19752003. Bursa, Turkey.
ASCEEWRI, 2005. The ASCE Standardized reference evapotranspiration equation. ASCEEWRI Standardization of Reference Evapotranspiration Task Comm.
Report, available at <http://www.kimberly.uidaho.edu/water/asceewri/>.
Ashley, D.A., Ethridge, W.J., 1978. Irrigation effects on vegetative and reproductive development of three soybeans cultivars. Agronomy Journal 70,
467471.
Bellaloui, N., Mengistu, A., 2008. Seed composition is inuenced by irrigation regimes
and cultivar differences in soybean. Irrigation Science 26, 261268.
Bos, M.G., 1980. Irrigation efciencies at crop production level. International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, Bulletin 29, 1825.
Burriro, U.A., Samoon, H.A., Oad, F.C., Jamro, G.H., 2002. Crop coefcient (Kc ) and
water use efciency (WUE) of soybean as affected by soil moisture stress and
fertility levels. Pakistan Journal of Applied Science 2, 10961098.
Calpten, J.A., 1986. Genetic variability for agronomic traits in population containing
Glycine soja germplasm. Crop Science 26, 681686.
Crcova, J., Maddoni, G.A., Ghersa, C.M., 1998. Crop water stress index of three maize
hybrids grown in soils with different quality. Field Crops Research 55, 165174.
De Costa, W.A., Shanmugathasan, K.N., 2002. Physiology of yield determination of
soybean under different irrigation regimes in the sub-humid zone of Sri Lanka.
Field Crops Research 75, 2335.
Dogan, E., Kirnak, H., Copur, O., 2007. Effect of seasonal water stress on soybean and
site specic evaluation of CROPGRO-Soybean model under semi-arid climatic
conditions. Agricultural Water Management 90, 5662.
Eck, H.V., Mathers, A.C., Musick, J.T., 1987. Plant water stress at various growth stages
and growth and yield of soybeans. Field Crops Research 17, 116.
Emekli, Y., Bastug, R., Buyuktas, D., Emekli, N.Y., 2007. Evaluation of a crop water
stress index for irrigation scheduling of bermudagrass. Agricultural Water Management 90, 205212.
Erdem, Y., Arin, L., Erdem, T., Polat, S., Deveci, M., Okursoy, H., Gltas, H.T., 2010. Crop
water stress index for assessing irrigation scheduling of drip irrigated broccoli
(Brassica oleracea L. var. italica). Agricultural Water Management 98, 148156.
Evett, S.R., Howell, T.A., Schneider, A.D., Upchurch, D.R., Wanjura, D.F., 2000. Automatic drip irrigation of corn and soybean. In: Evans, R.G., Benham, B.L., Trooien,
T.P. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th Decennial National Irrigation Symposium.
November 1416, Phoenix, AZ, pp. 401408 (Reviewed proceedings).
Foroud, N., Mundel, H.H., Saindon, G., Entz, T., 1993. Effect of level and timing of
moisture stress on soybean yield components. Irrigation Science 13, 149155.
Gardner, B.R., Shock, C.C., 1989. Interpreting the crop water stress index. ASAE Paper
89-2642. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
Gontia, N.K., Tiwari, K.N., 2008. Development of crop water stress index of wheat
crop for scheduling irrigation using infrared thermometry. Agricultural Water
Management 95, 11441152.
Hattendorf, M.J., Carlson, R.E., Halim, R.A., Buxton, D.R., 1988. Crop water stress index
and yield of water-decit-stressed alfalfa. Agronomy Journal 80, 871875.
Howell, T.A., 2001. Enhancing water use efciency in irrigated agriculture. Agronomy Journal 93, 281289.
Idso, S.B., Jackson, R.D., Pinter, P.J., Reginato, R.J., Hateld, J.L., 1981. Normalizing the
stress-degree-day parameter for environmental variability. Agricultural Meteorology 23, 4555.
Idso, S.B., 1982. Non-water-stressed baselines, A key to measuring and interpreting
plant water-stress. Agricultural Meteorology 27, 5970.
Irmak, S., Haman, Z.H., Bastug, R., 2000. Determination of crop water stress index for
irrigation timing and yield estimation of corn. Agronomy Journal 92, 12211227.
Ivanov, P., 1974. Biochemical differentiation of sunower varieties as a result of
breeding. In: Proc. The 6th Int. Sunower Conf., July 2224, Bucharest, Romania,
pp. 225229.
121
Piper, E.L., Boote, K.J., 1999. Temperature and cultivar effects on soybean seed oil
and protein concentrations. Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society 76,
12331242.
Pomeranz, Y., Clifton, E., 1994. Food Analysis Theory and Practice, 3rd ed. Kluwer
Academic Publisher, San Diego.
Qiu, G.Y., 1996. A new method for estimation of evapotranspiration. Doctoral dissertation, the United Graduate School of Agriculture Science, Tottori University,
Japan.
Qiu, G.Y., Momii, K., Yano, T., 1996a. Estimation of plant transpiration by imitation
leaf temperature, I. Theoretical consideration and eld verication. Transactions
of the JSIDRE 64, 401410.
Qiu, G.Y., Yano, T., Momii, K., 1996b. Estimation of plant transpiration by imitation
leaf temperature. II. Application of imitation leaf temperature for detection of
crop water stress. Transactions of the JSIDRE 64, 767773.
Rosadi, R.A.B., Afandi, M.S., Senge, M., Ito, K., Adomako, J.T., 2005. Critical water
content and water stress coefcient of soybean (Glycine max [L.] Merr.) under
decit irrigation. Paddy and Water Environment 3, 219223.
Schoner, C.S., Fehr, W.R., 1979. Utilization of plant introduction in soybean breeding
population. Crop Science 11, 185188.
Scott, H.D., Ferguson, J.A., Sojka, R.E., Batchelor, J.T., 1986. Response of Lee 74 Soybean
to Irrigation in Arkansas. In: Arkansas Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 886, Univ. of Arkansas
Agric. Exp. Stn., Fayetteville, AR.
Specht, J.E., Elmore, R.W., Eisenhauer, D.E., Klocke, N.W., 1989. Growth stage
scheduling criteria for sprinkler-irrigated soybeans. Irrigation Science 10,
99111.
Specht, J.E., Chase, K., Macrander, M., Graef, G.L., Chung, J., Markwell, J.P., Orf, H.H.,
Lark, K.G., 2001. Soybean response to water: a QTL analysis of drought tolerance.
Crop Science 41, 493509.
Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H., 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, 2nd ed.
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Sweeney, D.W., Long, J.H., Kirkham, M.B., 2003. A single irrigation to improve early
maturing soybean yield and quality. Soil Science Society of America Journal 67,
235240.
Simsek, M., Tonkaz, T., Kacra, M., Cmlekcioglu, N., Dogan, Z., 2005. The effects of
different irrigation regimes on cucumber (Cucumbis sativus L.) yield and yield
characteristics under open eld conditions. Agricultural Water Management 73,
173191.
Testi, L., Goldhamer, D.A., Iniesta, F., Salinas, M., 2008. Crop water stress index
is a sensitive water stress indicator in pistachio trees. Irrigation Science 26,
395405.
Xiaobing, L., Herbert, S.J., Jin, J., Zhang, Q., Wang, G., 2004. Responses of photosynthetic rates and yield/quality of main crops to irrigation and manure application
in the black soil area of Northeast China. Plant Soil 261, 5560.
Xu, X.B., Zhang, X.T., 1995. Density and fertilizer doses in relation to soybean yield.
Tillage Culture 2, 1819.
Yazar, A., Howell, T.A., Dusek, D.A., Copeland, K.S., 1999. Evaluation of
crop water stres index for LEPA irrigated corn. Irrigation Science 18,
171180.
Yuan, G., Luo Yi Sun, X., Tang, D., 2004. Evaluation of a crop water stress index for
detecting water stress in winter wheat in the North China Plain. Agricultural
Water Management 64, 2940.
Zhang, M., Kang, M.S., Reese, P.F., Bhardwaj, H.L., 2005. Soybean cultivar evaluation
via GGE biplot analysis. Journal of New Seeds 7, 3750.