Evaluation of AquaCrop Model for different Harvesting time of Alfalfa in Ardestan

آب و خاک

Article 4, Volume 31, Issue 3 - Serial Number 53, July 2018, Pages 738-753   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jsw.v31i3.60933

Authors

Farshid Ramezani^* ; Abbass Kaviani; Hadi Ramezani Etedali

Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin

Abstract

Introduction: AquaCrop model was developed to simulate crop response to water consumption and irrigation management. The model is easy to use, works with limited input, and has acceptable accuracy. In this study, the data of an alfalfa field (as a perennial fodder plant) in the Iranian city of Ardestan was used to calibarate and validate the performance of AquaCrop model to simulate the crop productivity in relation to water supply and irrigation management.
Materials and Methods: The data of Fajr-e Esfahan Company farms of Ardestan County were used for calibration and validation of the AquaCrop model, simulating the alfalfa performance in different harvests and over different years. The farms are 1004 m above sea level and located in 33°2' to 33°30' North and 55°20' to 55°22' East. The farm under investigation included ten plots of alfalfa field, with an area of 280 hectares. The data of two plots were used for calibration and, two others used for validation.
Considering that alfalfa is a perennial plant, the data regarding the first harvest was defined as sowing, and transplanting was used to refer to the next harvests. Considering the physiological changes of plants over a year and during different harvests, the numerical value of different parameters, including primary vegetation, maximum vegetation, the depth of primary root development, the maximum depth of primary root development, crop coefficient, germination date, flowering, vegetation senescence, and physiological maturity, were defined for the model. The CRM, NRMSE, R2, and EF indices were used for verification of the calibration results. The CRM index determines the overestimation or underestimation of the model. The EF index is variable between 1 and 0, where 1 indicates optimal performance of the model. If all estimated and measured values were equal, the value of CRM and NRMSE would be zero, and EF would be one.
Results and Discussion:After calibration, validation was performed to examine the performance of the model. Hence, the actual performance rate for different harvests and the results of simulations were compared. Lower NRMSE value is indicative of high accuracy of the model in estimation of the performance. The value of CRM was mostly positive, showing the underestimation of the model in most of the simulations. The maximum performance happened during the first harvest year. The annual harvest decreased with an average rate of 1.2, compared to former years. The evaporation and transpiration rate was calculated by the model and the results were compared with potential evapotranspiration (FAO Penman-Monteith) and National Document of Irrigation (NET WAT). The reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0) had the highest value, and was calculated through FAO Penman-Monteith equation. The numerical value of potential crop evapotranspiration (ETc), which is the result of multiplication of crop coefficient by reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0), was greater than the results of the model, i.e. the estimated actual evapotranspiration. The discrepancy between them is the result of stress coefficient (ET0×Kc×Ks), which the model takes into account in estimation of actual plant water requirement. Evapotranspiration refers to two factors, namely the water lost by transpiration from plants and by evaporation from the soil. The plant transpiration and green cover are considered to be the generating part; AquaCrop is able to examine and improve transpiration efficiency through managerial statements. The values of transpiration from plants and evaporation from the soil for alfalfa were differentiated from the values estimated by the model. The productivity of evaporation, transpiration, and evapotranspiration were calculated by the model. The difference in the productivity values of the plots during different years was the result of difference in chemical composition, harvest index, and transpiration rate.
Conclusion:The AquaCrop model performed well in simulation of crop performance compared to actual annual, and even monthly, performance, and its results were very close to the actual performance. The model is sensitive to temperature changes, and it is suggested to use the Growing Degree Days (GDD) instead of Calendar Days section. . The Version 5 of AquaCrop model can, in addition to moisture stress, include salinity stress in calculations; this is evident in the variation of actual evaporation and transpiration values estimated by the model. In this study, the annual evaporation and transpiration rate was predicted by the model. The higher rate of evaporation can lead to a 27 to 44 percent decrease in the efficiency of evapotranspiration (Y ET-1), compared to transpiration efficiency (Y T-1).

Keywords

Validation; FAO Penman-Monteith; Calibration; NRMSE

References

1- Abedinpour M., Sarangi A., Rajput T.B.S., Singh M.H., Pathak H., and Ahmad T. 2012. Performance evaluation of AquaCrop model for maize crop in a semi-arid environment. Agricultural Water Management, 110: 55-66.

2- Afsharmanesh GH., Heidari-Sharifabad H., Mazaheri D., Noormohammadi GH., and Madani. H. 2008. The effects of water deficit stress on hay alfalfa (Medicago sativa) yield and water use efficiency cultivars. 78: 132-140.(in Persian with English abstract)

3- Allen R.G., L.S. Pereira Raes D., and Smith M. 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration–Guidelines forcomputing crop water requirements, FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, FAO, 1998, ISBN92-5-104219-5

4- Allen R.G., Pereira L.S., Raes D., and Smith M. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration: guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper no, 56:134-153.

5- Alizadeh H., Nazari B., ParsiNejhad M., and Ramezani Etedali H. 2010., Evaluation AquaCrop model in deficit irrigation management wheat and barley in Karaj., Irrigation and Drainage., 4: 283-273.(in Persian with English abstract)

6- Andarziana B., Bannayanb M., Steduto P., Mazraeha H., Barati M.E., Barati M.A., and Rahnama A. 2011. Validation and testing of the AquaCrop model under full and deficit irrigated wheat production. Agricultural Water Management., 100: 1-8.

7- Araya A., Habtu S., Hadgu K.M., Kebede A., and Dejene T. 2010. Test of AquaCrop model in simulating biomass and yield of water deficient and irrigated barley. Agricultural Water Management., 97: 1838-1846.

8- Babazade H., Saraee Tabrizi M. 2012. Aquacrop model evaluation under deficit irrigation management Soybean.WATER AND SOIL AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, 2:329-339 (in Persian with English abstract)

9- Bazane M., Sadredini A.A., Nazemi A., and DalirHasannia R. 2015. The impact of optimizing the arrangement and spacing of sprinkler uniformity coefficient fixed sprinkler irrigation system. Water in Agricultural Research., 29:537-546.(in Persian with English abstract)

10- Droogers P., and Kite G. 2001. Simulation modeling at different scales to evaluated the productivity of water. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 12: 877-880.

11- Droogers P. 2000, Estimating actual evapotranspiration using a detailed agro hydrological model, Journal of Hydrology, 229:50-58.

12- Ebrahimi M., Vardinejhad V., and MajnooniHaris A. 2015. Maize growth under different water and nitrogen management simulation model AquaCrop. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research., 46:207-220.(in Persian with English abstract)

13- Farahani H.J., Izzi G., Steduto P., and Oweis T.Y. 2009. Parameterization and evaluation of AquaCrop for full and deficit irrigated cotton. Agronomy Journal., 101:469–476.

14- Garcia-Vila M., Fereres E., Mateos L., and Steduto P. 2009. Deficit irrigation optimization of cotton with AquaCrop. Agronomy Journal. 101:477– 487.

15- Geerts S., Raes D., Garcia M., Miranda R. 2009. Simulating Yield Response of Quinoa to Water Availability With Aguacrop.Agronomy Journal.,101:499-508

16- Hasanli M., Afrasiab P., and Ebrahimian H. 2015. AquaCrop and SALTMED assessment models for estimating corn yield and soil salinity. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research., 46:487-898.(in Persian with English abstract)

17- Heng L.K., Evett S.R., Howell T.A., and Hsiao T.C. 2009. Calibration and testing of FAO AquaCrop model for maize in several locations. Agronomy Journal. 101: 488–498.

18- Heydari N. 2011. Determination and evaluation of water use efficiency of crops under agricultural management in the country. Journal of Water Management and Irrigation., 2:43-57.(in Persian with English abstract)

19- Heydari N., and Haghayehgimohgadam S.A. 2000. Irrigation water use efficiency of major products across the country .gzarsh provided to the Department of Agriculture Ministry of Agriculture. Research Institute of Agricultural Engineering. Karaj.(in Persian)

20- Hsiao T.C., Heng L.K., Steduto P., Raes D., and Fereres F. 2009. AquaCrop Model parameterization and testing for maize. Agronomy Journal. 101:448–459.

21- KHalili N., Davari K., Alizade A., Kafi M., and Ansari H. 2014. Simulation of Yield of Dryland Wheat by using AquaCrop Case Study Dryland Agricultural Research Station Sisab, North Khorasan. . Journal of Water and Soil., 28:930-939.(in Persian with English abstract)

22- Keating B.A., Carberry P.S., Hammer G.L., Probert M.E., Robertson M.J., Holzworth D., Huth N.I., Hargreaves J.N.G., Meinke H., Hochman Z., McLean G., Verburg K., Snow V., Dimes J.P., Silburn M., Wang E., Brown S., Bristow K.L., Asseng S., Chapman S., McCown R.L., Freebairn D.M., Smith C.J. 2003. An overview of APSIM, a model designed for farming systems simulation. European Journal of Agronomy,18:267-288.

23- Khorsand A., Verdinezhad V., and Shahidi A. 2014. Evaluation Aquacrop model for simulation wheat yield, moisture and salinity of soil profiles under water and salinity stress, Journal of water and irrigation management., 4: 89-104. (in Farsi).

24- Kumar P., Sarangi A., Singh D.K., and Parihar S.S. 2014. Evaluation of AquaCrop model in predicting wheat yield and water productivity under irrigated saline regimes. Irrigation and Drainage. 63:474–487.

25- Liu H.F., Genard M., Guichard S., and Bertin N. 2007. Model assisted analysis of tomato fruit growth in relation to carbon and water fluxes, Journal of Experimental Botany. 58:7-3580.

26- Mkhabela M.S., and Bullock P.R. 2012. Performance of the FAO AquaCrop model for wheat grain yield and soil moisture simulation in Western Canada. Agricultural Water Management. 110:16– 24.

27- Mohamadi M.,GHahreman B., Davari K., Ansari H., and Shahidi A.S. 2014. Validation AquaCrop model to simulate yield and water use efficiency of winter wheat under drought and salinity stresses at the same time. Journal of Water and Soil.,29:67-84.(in Persian with English abstract)

28- Montazar A., and Kosari H. 2007.Water productivity analysis of some irrigated crops in Iran. Proceeding of the international conference of water saving in Mediterranean agriculture and future needs. Valenzano (Italy). Series B., 56: 109-120.

29- Pourmaroof E., Faryabi A., and GHamarnia H. 2010. Evaluation of Sprinkler irrigation systems fixed Dehgolan Plain Kurdistan.,Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources Water and soil sciences., 54:1-16.(in Persian with English abstract)

30- Raes D., Steduto P., Hsiao T.C., and Fereres E. 2009. AquaCrop-The FAO crop model for predicting yield response to water: II. Main algorithms and soft ware description. Agron. J., 101: 438-447.

31- Rahimi KHoob H., Sotoodenia A., and Masah Bovani A.R. 2014. AquaCrop model calibration and validation for maize Qazvin region. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage., 8:108-115.(in Persian with English abstract)

32- Ramezani Etedali H., Liaqat A., Parsinejhad M., and Tavakoli A. 2016. AquaCrop in irrigation management model calibration and verification of important cereals, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage., 3:389-397.(in Persian with English abstract)

33- Ramezani Etedali H. 2012. Development of an Optimization Model for Water Allocation in Irrigated and Rainfed Lands to increase Economical Productivity. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Tehran, Iran.

34- Salemi H., Mohd Soom M.A., Lee T.S., and Mousavi S.F., Ganji A., and KamilYusoff M. 2011. Application of AquaCrop model in deficit irrigation management of Winter wheat in arid region. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 610: 2204-2215.

35- Steduto P., Hsiao T.C., Raes D., and Fereres E. 2009. AquaCrop-The FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: I. Concepts and underlying principles. Agron0my Journal, 101: 426–437.

36- Shariati M.,R. 1997. Review reference evapotranspiration plant alfalfa as lysimeter., Soil and Water Research Institute.

37- Ziaee TH., Babazade H.V., and Kave F. 2014. CERES-Maize model performance review and AquaCrop the components of soil water balance and maize yield. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research.,45:435-445.(in Persian with English abstract)