Journals / Toprak Su Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1

Irrigation and Economic Evaluation of Quinoa Plant Grown by Different Drip Irrigation Methods in Çukurova Region

Çukurova Bölgesinde Farklı Damla Sulama Yöntemleriyle Yetiştirilen Kinoa Bitkisinin Sulama ve Ekonomik Açıdan Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
35–42
Publication Date
2021-03-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Full irrigation treatment (FI) under surface drip irrigation method generated the highest net profit.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was carried out to determine the effect of different irrigation treatmants and economic analysis on surface and subsurface methods in quinoa under the Mediterranean climate conditions at the experimental fields of the Çukurova University during 2016 and 2017 growing seasons in Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the study, surface drip and subsurface drip methods and four irrigation strategies (Full irrigation, FI; conventional deficit irrigation, DI-50 and DI-75; and Partial Root-Zone Drying, PRD-50 of full irrigation treatments) also a rain-fed treatment (RF) were considered.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Full irrigation treatment (FI) under surface drip irrigation method generated the highest net profit.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Quinoa · Surface drip irrigation · Subsurface drip irrigation

Abstract

This study was carried out to determine the effect of different irrigation treatmants and economic analysis on surface and subsurface methods in quinoa under the Mediterranean climate conditions at the experimental fields of the Çukurova University during 2016 and 2017 growing seasons in Turkey. In the study, surface drip and subsurface drip methods and four irrigation strategies (Full irrigation, FI; conventional deficit irrigation, DI-50 and DI-75; and Partial Root-Zone Drying, PRD-50 of full irrigation treatments) also a rain-fed treatment (RF) were considered. The experimental design was split plots with four replications. There was no significant differences in yields between surface and subsurface drip irrigation methods for quinoa however, different irrigation treatments resulted significantly (P<0.01) for yields. FI, RDI, DI-75, and PRD-50 treatments resulted significantly (P<0.01) greater quinoa grain yields than DI-50 and RF. Maximum yield was obtained from the FI treatment as 2906 and 2468 kg ha-1; and the lowest yield was obtained from the rainfed treatment (RF) as 2204 and 1855 kg ha-1, in theexperimental years, respectively. Net profit ranged between 4954 to 8493 $ ha-1 in 2016 and 3270 to 5906 $ ha-1 in 2017 according to the irrigation treatments. Full irrigation treatment (FI) under surface drip irrigation method generated the highest net profit.

Özet

Bu araştırma Akdeniz iklim koşullarında yüzey ve toprakaltı sulama yöntemlerinde farklı sulama konularının Kinoa verimine etkisi ve ekonomik analizini belirlemek amacıyla 2016 ve 2017 yıllarında Çukurova Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama Bölümü Araştırma alanında yürütülmüştür.Araştırmada iki farklı sulama yöntemi (Yüzey damla (YD), Toprakaltı damla (TD)) ve altı farklı sulama konusu (Tam sulama (FI); geleneksel kısıntılı sulama (DI-75 ve DI-50); kısmi kök kuruluğu (PRD-50); planlanmış kısıntılı sulama (RDI) ve sulanmayan konu (RF)) oluşturulmuştur. Araştırma tesadüf blokları bölünmüş parseller deneme deseninde dört yinelemeli olarak incelenmiştir. Kinoa bitkisinin yüzey damla veya toprakaltı damla sulama yöntemi ile sulanmasının verimde istatistiksel olarak önemli bir fark yaratmadığı, buna karşılık sulama konularına göre verimin 0.01 önem düzeyinde farklı olduğu belirlenmiştir. FI, DI-75, PRD ve RDI konularında benzer ve yüksek verim değerleri elde edilirken, bunları DI-50 ve RF konuları izlemiştir. En yüksek verim her iki deneme yılında FI konusunda (2.906-2468 kg ha-1) alınırken, en düşük verimler ise her iki yılda da RF konusunda (2204-1855 kg ha-1) kaydedilmiştir. Net gelirler sulama konularına göre 2016 yılında 4954-8493 $ ha-1 arasında, 2017 yılında ise 3270-5906 $ ha-1 arasında değişmiştir. Ekonomik anlamda ise birim alanda en yüksek net gelir YD sulama yöntemi FI konusundan elde edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇOLAK, Y. B., YAZAR, A., GÖNEN, E. (2021). Irrigation and Economic Evaluation of Quinoa Plant Grown by Different Drip Irrigation Methods in Çukurova Region. Toprak Su Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1, 35–42. https://ajindex.com/articles/238311

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Aguilar PC, Jacopsen SE (2003). Cultivation of quinoa on the Peruvian Altiplano. Food Reviews Int., 19, 31-41.
  2. Barker R, Dawe D, Inocencio A (2003). Economics of water productivity in managing water for agriculture. In: Kijne JW, Barker R, Molden M (eds). Water productivity in agriculture: limits and opportunities for improvement. CABI Publishing, UK. 332pp. Bozkurt Çolak Y, Yazar A, Alghory A, Tekin S (2020). Evaluation of crop water stress index and leaf water potential for differentially irrigated quinoa with surface and subsurface drip systems. Irrigation Science. DOI: 10.1007/s00271-020- 00681-4.
  3. Candemir S, Kızılaslan N, Kızılaslan H, Uysal O, Aydoğan M (2017). Kahramanmaraş ilinde dane mısır ve pamuk üretiminde girdi gereksinimi ve karlılıkları açısından karşılaştırmalı analizi. Türk Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(1), 1-8.
  4. FAO (2017). http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC.
  5. Garcia M, Raes D, Jacobsen SE (2003). Evapotranspiration analysis and irrigation requirements of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) in the Bolivian highlands. Agr. Water Manage., 60, 119-134.
  6. Geerts S, Raes D, Garcia M, Condori O, Mamani J, Miranda R, Cusicanqui J, Taboada C, Yucra E, Vacher J (2008). Could deficit ırrigation be a sustainable practice for quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) in the Southern Bolivian Altiplano? Agricultural Water Management, 95(8), 909-917.
  7. Hirich A, Jelloul A, Choukr‐Allah R, Jacobsen SE (2014). Saline water irrigation of quinoa and chickpea: seedling rate, stomatal conductance and yield responses. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 200 (5), 378-389
  8. Jensen CR, Jacobsen SE, Andersen MN, Nunez N, Andersen SD, Rasmussen L, Mogensen VO (2000). Leaf gas exchange and water relation characteristics of field quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) during soil drying. European J. Agron., 13, 11-25.
  9. Kır AE, Temel S (2017). Sulu koşullarda farklı kinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotiplerinin tohum verimi ile bazı tarımsal özelliklerinin belirlenmesi. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(1), 353-361.
  10. Martinez E, San Martin R, Jorquera C, Veas E, Jara P (2009). Reintroduction of quinoa into arid Chile: cultivation of two lowland races under extremely low irrigation. J. Agron. Crop Sci., 195, 1-10.
  11. Oweis TY, Hachum AY (2003). Improving Water Productivity in the Dry Areas of West Asia and North Africa. In: Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and opportunities for improvement (Edited by: Kijne J.W., Barker, R., Molden, D.). CABI Publishing, 328