Abstract
Regarding the scarcity of water resources in Iran, management of planting dates and irrigation is necessary for wheat production. The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan. Field experiments were carried out during two consecutive seasons' autumn and winter in the crop year of 2016-2017 in a clay loam soil. The results showed that planting date significantly affected wheat yield and water productivity (P < 0.01). Yield in PD1 was 11.5% higher than PD2, while water productivity in PD1 was 9.0% lower than PD2. Supplementary irrigation in clustering period had a significant effect on wheat grain yield. Comparison of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) calculated by FAO-Penman-Monteith method with that of applied irrigation water showed that the later in TPD1 and TPD2 treatments were, respectively, 40.0 and 19.9% more than the ETc. In traditional irrigation management (T), lack of coordinations between the supplied water and the timely water requirement based on ETc led to high water losses due to deep percolation and runoff. Supplementary irrigation regime on both planting dates significantly increased yield, with no positive effect on water productivity. We concluded that due to supply-oriented water management in the east of Isfahan, farmers use irrigation water more than what is needed for wheat yield production leading to less yield and much low water productivity than the potentials realizable in the region.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Planting date significantly affected wheat yield and water productivity
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume1 - Treatment
- planting datee1
- Outcome
- wheat yield and water productivitye1
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The results showed that planting date significantly affected wheat yield and water productivity (P < 0.01)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield was 11.5% higher in PD1 than in PD2 in the east of Isfahan
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- PD1e2
- Outcome
- Yielde2
- Direction
- highere2
- Value
- 11.5%e2
- Comparator
- PD2e2
- Setting
- east of Isfahane0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan”
e2“Yield in PD1 was 11.5% higher than PD2, while water productivity in PD1 was 9.0% lower than PD2”
Claim · model-written summary
Water productivity was 9.0% lower in PD1 than in PD2 in the east of Isfahan
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- PD1e2
- Outcome
- water productivitye2
- Direction
- lowere2
- Value
- 9.0%e2
- Comparator
- PD2e2
- Setting
- east of Isfahane0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan”
e2“Yield in PD1 was 11.5% higher than PD2, while water productivity in PD1 was 9.0% lower than PD2”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplementary irrigation in the clustering period significantly affected wheat grain yield
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume3
- Treatment
- Supplementary irrigation in clustering periode3
- Outcome
- wheat grain yielde3
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Supplementary irrigation in clustering period had a significant effect on wheat grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Applied irrigation water exceeded ETc by 40.0% in the TPD1 treatment
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- TPD1e4
- Outcome
- applied irrigation watere4
- Direction
- moree4
- Value
- 40.0e4
- Comparator
- crop evapotranspiration (ETc)e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan”
e4“Comparison of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) calculated by FAO-Penman-Monteith method with that of applied irrigation water showed that the later in TPD1 and TPD2 treatments were, respectively, 40.0 and 19.9% more than the ETc”
Claim · model-written summary
Applied irrigation water exceeded ETc by 19.9% in the TPD2 treatment
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- TPD2e4
- Outcome
- applied irrigation watere4
- Direction
- moree4
- Value
- 19.9%e4
- Comparator
- crop evapotranspiration (ETc)e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan”
e4“Comparison of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) calculated by FAO-Penman-Monteith method with that of applied irrigation water showed that the later in TPD1 and TPD2 treatments were, respectively, 40.0 and 19.9% more than the ETc”
Claim · model-written summary
Traditional irrigation management led to high water losses by deep percolation and runoff in wheat
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- traditional irrigation management (T)e5
- Outcome
- water losses due to deep percolation and runoffe5
- Direction
- highe5
- Qualifier
- lack of coordinations between the supplied water and the timely water requirement based on ETce5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan”
e5“In traditional irrigation management (T), lack of coordinations between the supplied water and the timely water requirement based on ETc led to high water losses due to deep percolation and runoff”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplementary irrigation significantly increased wheat yield on both planting dates
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Supplementary irrigation regimee6
- Outcome
- yielde6
- Direction
- increasede6
- Qualifier
- on both planting datese6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan”
e6“Supplementary irrigation regime on both planting dates significantly increased yield, with no positive effect on water productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplementary irrigation had no positive effect on wheat water productivity on both planting dates
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Supplementary irrigation regimee6
- Outcome
- water productivitye6
- Direction
- no positive effecte6
- Qualifier
- on both planting datese6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The goal of this study was to determine the effect of two planting dates of November (PD1) and February (PD2) and two irrigation regimes: traditional (T) and supplementary (W) on wheat yield and irrigation water productivity in the east of Isfahan”
e6“Supplementary irrigation regime on both planting dates significantly increased yield, with no positive effect on water productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Supply-oriented water management in the east of Isfahan led to over-application of irrigation water, less wheat yield and lower water productivity
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume7
- Treatment
- supply-oriented water managemente7
- Outcome
- less yield and much low water productivitye7
- Setting
- east of Isfahane7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“We concluded that due to supply-oriented water management in the east of Isfahan, farmers use irrigation water more than what is needed for wheat yield production leading to less yield and much low water productivity than the potentials realizable in the region”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 253 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
299 papers more in this group
See all 303 papers →irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
985 papers more in this group
See all 989 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.