Paper · 2002 · Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering /Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering

EFFECT OF IRRIGATION· SYSTEM AND WATER STRESS ON SUGAR BEET YIELD AND WATER SAVING

M.I. Meleha

10
claims
19
verbatim quotes
3
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Two field experiments were carried out at Agriculture Secondary School Farm in Kafr EI Sheikh Governorate, in the two successive seasons, 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, to study the effect of two irrigation systems, i.e. furrow and bed systems and three water stress levels (50, 65 and 80% depletion of available soil moisture content) on sugar beet yield, water saving and water use efficiency .A split plot design with four replicates' was used in this study. The obtained data showed that, Irrigation system not affected the sugar beet root yield, while the water stress treatments have highly significant effect. Also the same trend was obtained on sucrose percentage .The highest values of water applied were recorded with the furrow irrigation system and 50% depletion of available soil moisture content. While the lowest value was recorded with bed irrigation system and 80% depletion of available soil moisture content. The average values of water saving were 20.04 and 34.99% under bed irrigation system treatment and 80% depletion of available soil moisture content respectively: The averaqes seasonal water consumptive use of sugar beet plant were 2044.35 and 1.173.36 m3J fed. under furrow and bed irrigation systems, respectively. On the other hand, these values were 2216.55,1952 and 1558.05 m3/fed. under water stress of 50,65 and 80% depletion of available soil moisture content. Treatments of bed irrigation system and water stress of 80% depletion of available soil moisture content achieved the ,highest value of water use efficiency. Data of soil moisture extraction revealed that sugar beet.plant roots under moisted soil condition extracted a large amount of water from the surface s6illayer (30 cm depth) and a little amount of water from' deep soil layer (45-60cni), while the plant roots penetrated soil profile and tend to extend for more depth under dried soil conditions to obtain its need of water from deeper layer. Modified Penman equation can be used with the value of 0.78 for crop coefficient to calculate the evapotranspiration of sugar beet plant grown in the North Nile Delta.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation system did not affect sugar beet root yield.

Treatment
Irrigation systeme0
Outcome
sugar beet root yielde0
Direction
not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Irrigation system not affected the sugar beet root yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 487–543 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water stress treatments had a highly significant effect on sugar beet root yield.

Treatment
water stress treatmentse0
Outcome
effecte0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“water stress treatments have highly significant effect”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 555–609 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Furrow irrigation and 50% depletion had the highest water applied.

Outcome
water appliede0
Direction
higheste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest values of water applied were recorded with the furrow irrigation system and 50% depletion of available soil moisture content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–804 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bed irrigation and 80% depletion had the lowest water applied.

Outcome
lowest valuee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the lowest value was recorded with bed irrigation system and 80% depletion of available soil moisture content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 811–921 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bed irrigation saved 20.04% water.

Outcome
water savinge0
Value
20.04e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“water saving were 20.04 and 34.99% under bed irrigation system treatment and 80% depletion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 944–1034 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

80% depletion saved 34.99% water.

Outcome
water savinge0
Value
34.99%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“water saving were 20.04 and 34.99% under bed irrigation system treatment and 80% depletion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 944–1034 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bed irrigation and 80% depletion attained the highest water use efficiency.

Outcome
water use efficiencye0
Direction
higheste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Treatments of bed irrigation system and water stress of 80% depletion of available soil moisture content achieved the ,highest value of water use efficiency.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1390–1547 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under moist conditions roots extracted more water from surface than deep soil.

Outcome
extracted a large amount of water from the surface s6illayere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“sugar beet.plant roots under moisted soil condition extracted a large amount of water from the surface s6illayer (30 cm depth) and a little amount of water from' deep soil layer (45-60cni)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1595–1783 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under dry soil conditions roots extended deeper for water.

Outcome
extend for more depthe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the plant roots penetrated soil profile and tend to extend for more depth under dried soil conditions to obtain its need of water from deeper layer.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1791–1939 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Modified Penman equation with crop coefficient 0.78 can calculate sugar beet evapotranspiration.

Outcome
evapotranspiratione0
Value
0.78e0
Setting
North Nile Deltae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Modified Penman equation can be used with the value of 0.78 for crop coefficient to calculate the evapotranspiration of sugar beet plant grown in the North Nile Delta.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1940–2107 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGAR BEET”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–59 · show in text ↑

irrigation · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results differ

113 papers: 79 positive, 34 negative or no effect

33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 79 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

109 papers more in this group

See all 113 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.