Abstract
Abstract This research aimed at investigating the impact of irrigation systems, a deficit irrigation strategy and organic mulching using rice straw on maize water productivity in Egypt's arid conditions. The field experiment included 16 treatments over 2 seasons, 2015 and 2016. Irrigation systems were a drip irrigation system (DIS) and a furrow irrigation system (FIS), while the irrigation strategies were 100% full irrigation (FI), 75% FI, 50% FI and partial root drying (PRD). Organic mulching using rice straw (OMRS) was also investigated. The experimental results indicated that there was a positive impact of applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulching on the yield (12.6 t ha ‐1 for 2015 and 12 t ha ‐1 for 2016) and on the water productivity of maize (4.81 kg m ‐3 for 2015 and 4.58 kg m ‐3 for 2016), but under the control treatment (FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulching) yield was 7.22 t ha ‐1 for 2015 and 7.34 t ha ‐1 for 2016 and water productivity of maize was 0.64 kg m ‐3 for 2015 and 0.62 kg m ‐3 for 2016. The SALTMED model simulated reasonably well the soil moisture and salinity distribution as well as maize dry matter, yield and water productivity for all treatments, with R 2 of 0.998, 0.997 and 0.996, respectively. The results support the use of a PRD strategy by a drip irrigation system accompanied by an organic mulch of rice straw instead of the commonly used furrow irrigation. The PRD would save more fresh water, achieve higher yields and water productivity. In addition, mulching would reduce evaporation losses, retain soil moisture and increase organic matter content. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
PRD drip irrigation with mulch raised maize yield to 12.6 t ha ‐1 in 2015 versus 7.22 t ha ‐1 in the control.
- Treatment
- applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulchinge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- positive impacte0
- Value
- 12.6 t ha ‐1e0
- Qualifier
- 7.22 t ha ‐1e1
- Comparator
- FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulchinge1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“positive impact of applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulching on the yield (12.6 t ha ‐1 for 2015 and 12 t ha ‐1 for 2016)”
e1“under the control treatment (FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulching) yield was 7.22 t ha ‐1 for 2015 and 7.34 t ha ‐1 for 2016”
t0“maize water productivity in Egypt's arid conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
The same treatment raised maize yield to 12 t ha ‐1 in 2016 versus 7.34 t ha ‐1 in the control.
- Treatment
- applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulchinge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- positive impacte0
- Value
- 12 t ha ‐1e0
- Qualifier
- 7.34 t ha ‐1e1
- Comparator
- FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulchinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“positive impact of applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulching on the yield (12.6 t ha ‐1 for 2015 and 12 t ha ‐1 for 2016)”
e1“under the control treatment (FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulching) yield was 7.22 t ha ‐1 for 2015 and 7.34 t ha ‐1 for 2016”
t0“maize water productivity in Egypt's arid conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
The treatment raised maize water productivity to 4.81 kg m ‐3 in 2015 versus 0.64 kg m ‐3 in the control.
- Treatment
- applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulchinge0
- Outcome
- water productivity of maizee1
- Direction
- positive impacte0
- Value
- 4.81 kg m ‐3e1
- Qualifier
- 0.64 kg m ‐3e3
- Comparator
- FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulchinge2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“positive impact of applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulching”
e1“on the water productivity of maize (4.81 kg m ‐3 for 2015 and 4.58 kg m ‐3 for 2016)”
e2“under the control treatment (FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulching)”
e3“water productivity of maize was 0.64 kg m ‐3 for 2015 and 0.62 kg m ‐3 for 2016”
Claim · model-written summary
The treatment raised maize water productivity to 4.58 kg m ‐3 in 2016 versus 0.62 kg m ‐3 in the control.
- Treatment
- applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulchinge0
- Outcome
- water productivity of maizee1
- Direction
- positive impacte0
- Value
- 4.58 kg m ‐3e1
- Qualifier
- 0.62 kg m ‐3e3
- Comparator
- FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulchinge2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“positive impact of applying a PRD strategy by drip irrigation in the presence of organic mulching”
e1“on the water productivity of maize (4.81 kg m ‐3 for 2015 and 4.58 kg m ‐3 for 2016)”
e2“under the control treatment (FIS with 100% full irrigation and without organic mulching)”
e3“water productivity of maize was 0.64 kg m ‐3 for 2015 and 0.62 kg m ‐3 for 2016”
Claim · model-written summary
SALTMED simulated soil moisture, salinity, maize dry matter, yield and water productivity reasonably well.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The SALTMED model simulated reasonably well the soil moisture and salinity distribution as well as maize dry matter, yield and water productivity for all treatments, with R 2 of 0.998, 0.997 and 0.996, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend PRD drip irrigation with rice straw mulch instead of furrow irrigation.
- Outcome
- use of a PRD strategy by a drip irrigation system accompanied by an organic mulch of rice strawe0
- Comparator
- commonly used furrow irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results support the use of a PRD strategy by a drip irrigation system accompanied by an organic mulch of rice straw instead of the commonly used furrow irrigation”
t0“maize water productivity in Egypt's arid conditions”
The same questions in other papers
processing · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →processing · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
50 papers more in this group
See all 54 papers →mulching · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
107 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
283 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
320 papers more in this group
See all 324 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 papers →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
790 papers in the same direction as this paper · 209 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.