Effect of Irrigation Management (System Type and Water Stress) on Yield and Physiological Indices of Grapes (Case Study:Naghang Region)

آب و خاک

Article 3, Volume 32, Issue 6 - Serial Number 62, January 2019, Pages 1069-1080   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jsw.v32i6.67733

Authors

Fatemeh Fattahi-Naghani¹; Mahdi Ghobadinia^{* 2}; abdolrahman mohammadkhani; Mohamad reza Nori Emamzadeie³

¹Shahrekord Un.

²Shahrekord

³shahrekord

Abstract

Introduction: Change and decrease in atmospheric precipitation in recent years as well as increase in population and further demand for agriculture in the arid and semi-arid regions (such as Naghan) has led to a significant decrease in surface and groundwater resources. Therefore, achieving optimal utilization of water in agriculture, new irrigation systems has been considered to gain the most crop yield with less amount of water consumption. Also cultivated area can be expanded by these systems, containing lands with irregular topography, due to the high water distribution uniformity. Besides developing irrigation system, irrigation management is an important tool for increasing crop productivity. Researchers have shown that applying deficit irrigation (DI) under drip system, has led to improve the quality of grape yield, decrease water consumption and increase water efficiency. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of irrigation system and water stress on water consumption, yield and physiological indices of grapes.
Materials and Methods: The study field was located in Naghan, Chaharmahal & Bakhtiari Province, Iran. Experiences were done during summer 2016, in a completely randomized block design, with four replications in a grapevine garden The treatments included: CTRL, Furrow irrigation as common method in the area (control), surface irrigation with 100% water requirement (SI100), surface irrigation with 60% water requirement(SI60), drip irrigation with 100% water requirement(DI100) and drip irrigation with 60% water requirement (DI100).At the beginning of the experiences, 20 vine trees were selected with average of 60 years old. The field was divided into blocks, and the treatments were applied, randomly. Then the blocks were set up for the surface and drip irrigation. As the next step, required water was collected in a reservoir to obtain constant and reliable amount of water. In the control treatment, irrigation schedule of the gardeners (custom of the region) were considered in which irrigation event was at the beginning of the season. Also, drip and surface irrigation treatments were according to the soil water deficit. At the end of the experiment, water use efficiency, product performance, RWC, number of cubes per cluster, the weight of the cube in the cluster, cluster length, the number of main branches of the cluster and also qualitative properties such as soluble solids (Brix), total acid and pH of grape juice were measured.
Results and Discussion: According to the results of qualitative traits, the amount of applied water significantly affected the grapes pH in the level of 5%. The lowest grapes pH was due to the control treatment and the highest to the surface irrigation 60%. Also, measuring total soluble solids (TSS) in grape indicated significant difference in 1% level which revealed that deficit and drip irrigation increased sugar in grapes and therefore quality of the crop. The results of quantitative traits showed the number of cubes in treatments had a significant difference at a probability level of 1%. Number of cubes in surface irrigation treatment 100% (SI100) had the highest value, while the quality of the crop was lower. The treatments differed significantly in weight of 100 cubes and the drip irrigation treatment 100% (DI100) did not have a significant difference with control treatment, while deficit irrigation resulted in reducing the crop weight. Relative water content of leaves (RWC) had the highest amount in the control treatment, while low water stress reduced this index. Wet and dry yields were highest in the control treatments (CTRL); while, the lowest amount was due to the low irrigation treatments of DI60 and SI60 with 19% and 34% reduction, respectively for the wet and dry yield. Drip irrigation with 100% water requirement (DI00) was not significantly different from the control treatment in most of the quality parameters, cluster and yield characteristics but had less water consumption and higher water use efficiency.
Conclusions: Regarding the conditions of the region and the reduction of water resources, an accurate and efficient plan for irrigation is needed. So, the common method of irrigating in the region was assessed, as well as new methods of applying drip system and deficit irrigation. The results of this study indicate that drip irrigation system with 100% water requirement has no significant difference with the conventional irrigation method in the region, on quality and quantity of the gape yield. However, applying the drip system reduced the water consumption by 40%, and increased efficiency. Hence, drip irrigation system is suggested to be replaced by the traditional system.

Keywords

pH; RWC; Total acid; Water use efficiency; yield

References

1. Bertamini M., Zulini L., Muthuchelian K., and Nedunchezhian n. 2006. Effect of water deficit on photosynthetic and other physiological responses in grapevine (vitis venifera L. cv. Riesling) plants. photosynthetical, 44: 151-154.

2. Bravdo B. A., and Hepner Y. 1987. Irrigation management and fertigation to optimize grape composition and vine performance. acta Hort, 206:49-67.

3. Chaves M. M., Santos T. P., Souza C. R., Ortun M. F., Rodrigues M. L., Lopes C. M., Maroco J. P., and Pereira J. S. 2007. Deficit irrigation in grapevine improves water-use efficiency while controlling vigour and production quality. Annual Applied Biology, 150: 237–252.

4. Chiltivaichelan R., Shikhamang S. D., and Chudhu K. L. 1987. Effects of preharvest irrigation cut off on bunch size, ripening and quality of Anab Shahi grape. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 44 (2): 9-13.

5. Colapietra M. 1989. prodnctivity response of grapes to different seasonal irrigation rates, irrigazine-e-drenaggio, 36: 179-182.

6. Davarinejad G.H., Shirbani S., and Zarei M. 2015. Effects of deficient irrigation on some of the morpho-physiological characteristics of four fig cultivars. Journal of Horticulture Science, 29(4):501-517. . (in Persian with English abstract)

7. Di Vaio C., Cirillo C., Boselli M., and Masi E. 2001. Dry matter accumulation and partitioning of Cabernet Sauvignon pot-grown vines under different water regimes. Advanced in Horticulture Science, 15:25-30.

8. Dolati‌baneh H., and Norjoo A. 2011. Effect of deficit irrigation on quantitative and quality traits of fruit and water productivity of three grapevine cultivars. Journal of Seed and Plant Production , 27( 4). (in Persian with English abstract).

9. Du T. S., Kang S. Z., Zhang J. H., Li F. S., and Yan B. U. 2008. Water use efficiency and fruit quality of table grape under alternate partial root-zone drip irrigation. Agricultural Water Management, 95:659– 668.

10. Esteban M. A., Villanueva M. J., and J. R. Lissarrague. 1999. Effect of irrigation on changes in berry composition of Tempranillo during maturation, sugars, organic acids, and mineral elements. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 50:418-434.

11. Esteban M. A., Villanueva M. J., and J. R. Lissarrague. 2001. Effect of irrigation on changes in the anthocyanin composition of the skin of cv. Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.) grape berries during ripening. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 81:409-420.

12. Farshi A. A., Kheyrabi g., Siadat H., Mirlatifi M., Darbandi S., Salamat A., Entesari M. R., and Sadat‌mirei M. H. 2003. Irrigation Water Management in Field. Iranian National Committee of Irrigation and Drainage, Tehran, Issue Number 76.

13. Ghaderi N., Talaei A., Ebadi A., and Lesani. H. 2010. Effect of drought stress and irrigation on some physiological characteristics of three grape Sahani, Farkhi and Bidaneh White Blades. Iranian Journal of Horticulture, 41(2). 179-188. (in Persian with English abstract).

14. Ghanbari Z. S., and Moosavi S. G. 2016. Grain Yield of Maize Influenced by Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and Zinc under Water Deficit Stress. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 26(3):21-41.

15. Golberg D., Gornat B., and Rimon D. 1976. Drip Irrigation Principles, Design and Agricultural Practices. Drip Irrig. Scientific Pub., Kfar Shmaryahu, Israel.

16. Goodwin I., and Jerie P. 1992. Regulated deficit irrigation: from concept to practice. Australian and New Zealand Wine Industry Journal, 7(4):258-261.

17. Godarzi K. 2007. Relationship of nutritional balance index(NBI) with yield and quality indices of grapes. Journal of Seeds and Plant , 23(1):75-85. (in Persian with English abstract).

18. Haman D. Z. 1985. Principles of Trickle Irrigation, Agric. Eng. Ext. Rep. 85-15. Univ. of Florida, Gainesville. Fla.

19. Javadi T., and arzani K. 2003. Study of proline accumulation and leaf water relations in 9 asian pear genotype (Pyrus serotine Rehd) under different irrigation regimes. Journal of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources, 10(3): 87-97. (in Persian with English abstract).

20. Jindal P. C., Dhawan S. S., and Chauhan K. S. 1982. Effect of girdling alone and in combination with boric acid on berry set, drop, yield and quality of grapes (Vitis vinifera L.) cultivar Gold. Journal of Haryana Agricultural University Research, 4:663-666.

21. Jones H. G., and Cortlett J. E. 1992. Current topics in drought physiology.The Journal of Agricultural Science, . 119: 291-296.

22. Joleini M. 2006. Investigation on the effect of drip irrigation methods and different levels of water on yield and water use efficiency of grape. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 7 (28): 69-78. (in Persian with English abstract).

23. Kochaki A., and Nasiri-Mahallati M. 1992. Crops Ecology. ACECR Publication, 389 pages.

24. Mohebi M. 2010. Necessity of evaluation of agricultural utilization systems in accordance with the designs of the development of pressure-sensitive irrigation networks in the country, Third Conference on Sustainable Development of Pressure Irrigation Methods, Engineering and Engineering Research Institute, Feb. 27, Karaj, 10 pages. (in Persian).

25. Nadal M., and Arola L. 1995. Effects of limited irrigation on the composition of must and wine of cabernet sauvignon under semi-arid conditions. Vitis, 34: 151-154.

26. Nikanfar R., and Rezaei R. 2015. Responses of old grapevines to switch irrigation system from surface to drip or babbler , Iranian Journal of Horticultural Science and Technology, 16 (2): 161-170. (in Persian with English abstract).

27. Rabiei V., Talaei A. R., Peterlonger A., Ebadi A., and Ahmadi A. 2003. Effect of late season deficit irrigation on fruit composition in grape (Vitis vinifera L.) cv. Merlot. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science, 34(4): 961-968. (in Persian with English abstract).

28. Rezaei T., Gholami M., Ershadi A., and Mossadeghi M. R. 2007. Effect of water stress on growth and physiological characteristics of five grapevine cultivars (vitis venifera L.). Journal of Agricultural Research,number 7(4):199-210.(in Persian with English abstract).

29. Torknejad A., Aghaeisarfarze M., Jafari H., Shirvani A. R., Roeintan R., and Shahbazi Kh. 2008. Technical and economic evaluation of drip (tape) irrigation method on wheat compared to surface irrigation in water limited areas. Journal of Research and Development in Agriculture and Horticulture. 72. 36-44. (in Persian with English abstract).

30. Zabihi H. R., and Azarpajouh E., 2004. Grape response to different soil moisture regimes. Journal of Soil and Water Science, 18 (1):71-79. (in Persian with English abstract).