Abstract
Highlights An automated irrigation system based on a novel leachate sensor was built to schedule and deliver irrigation to a container nursery. The sensor network was designed to achieve a 0.15 leaching fraction; it maintained an actual average leaching fraction of 0.17. Water use and container effluent were reduced by 60% and 96%, respectively, without reducing crop growth. Abstract. With the aim of reducing irrigation water use, an irrigation and leachate measurement and control system was developed and evaluated to automatically schedule and actuate irrigation in a commercial nursery. Leachate and irrigation sensors were built using a tipping bucket mechanism and used to calculate the daily leaching fraction (LF) = volume leached/volume applied. For the experimental daily irrigation schedule, the previous day’s LF was used to calculate irrigation run time for the current day using a scaled multiplier, where the change in irrigation run time was proportional to the difference between the calculated LF and the target LF, 0.15. The control zone was irrigated for two hours every other day simulating the commercial nursery’s standard schedule. The irrigation control system worked as designed and correctly imposed the irrigation treatments, including correctly delaying in response to rain and actuating based on a programmed minimum runtime, when necessary. Season-long water use was 60% less for the leachate-based irrigation schedule compared to the grower’s standard irrigation schedule (p = 0.0028). The average daily LFs were 0.17 and 0.73 for the LF-based irrigation and control, respectively (p < 0.0001). Compared to the grower’s standard practice the time averaged irrigation application rate was 3.3-fold less and time averaged leaching rate was 12.1-fold less for the LF-based irrigation schedule. Substrate volumetric water content was not correlated with LF and thus was not a good predictor of leaching fraction. Growth metrics were not impacted by irrigation treatment (p = 0.1429), indicating plants received sufficient water in the LF-based irrigation system. This novel system was able to actuate and adjust irrigation run-time based on daily leaching fraction without being influenced by the lag between irrigation and leaching and had an average leaching fraction within 0.02 of the target LF. Reducing water use with this LF-based schedule has the potential to reduce agrichemical-laden nursery effluent and increase nursery irrigation capacity, i.e., their ability to expand production on the current water supply. Keywords: Container effluent, ET-based irrigation, Irrigation schedule, Leachate, Precision irrigation, Sensor-based irrigation.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
The sensor-controlled system achieved average leaching fraction 0.17 against a target of 0.15.
- Taxon
- plantsViridiplantaee1
- Outcome
- actual average leaching fractione0
- Value
- 0.17e0
- Comparator
- 0.15 leaching fractione0
Verbatim
e0“The sensor network was designed to achieve a 0.15 leaching fraction; it maintained an actual average leaching fraction of 0.17”
e1“plants received sufficient water”
Claim · model-written summary
The system delayed irrigation in response to rain and actuated at minimum runtime when needed.
- Taxon
- plantsViridiplantaee1
- Outcome
- correctly delaying in response to rain and actuating based on a programmed minimum runtimee0
- Value
- minimum runtimee0
Verbatim
e0“The irrigation control system worked as designed and correctly imposed the irrigation treatments, including correctly delaying in response to rain and actuating based on a programmed minimum runtime, when necessary”
e1“plants received sufficient water”
Claim · model-written summary
Leachate-based irrigation used 60% less water than the grower schedule.
Verbatim
e0“Season-long water use was 60% less for the leachate-based irrigation schedule compared to the grower’s standard irrigation schedule (p = 0.0028)”
e1“plants received sufficient water”
Claim · model-written summary
Average daily leaching fraction was 0.17 under LF irrigation versus 0.73 under control.
Verbatim
e0“The average daily LFs were 0.17 and 0.73 for the LF-based irrigation and control, respectively (p < 0.0001)”
e1“plants received sufficient water”
Claim · model-written summary
Average irrigation application rate was 3.3-fold less than grower practice.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to the grower’s standard practice the time averaged irrigation application rate was 3.3-fold less”
e1“plants received sufficient water”
e2“LF-based irrigation schedule”
Claim · model-written summary
Average leaching rate was 12.1-fold less than grower practice.
Verbatim
e0“time averaged leaching rate was 12.1-fold less for the LF-based irrigation schedule”
e1“grower’s standard practice”
e2“plants received sufficient water”
Claim · model-written summary
Substrate water content was not correlated with leaching fraction.
Verbatim
e0“Substrate volumetric water content was not correlated with LF and thus was not a good predictor of leaching fraction”
e1“plants received sufficient water”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation treatment did not significantly change crop growth metrics.
Verbatim
e0“Growth metrics were not impacted by irrigation treatment (p = 0.1429), indicating plants received sufficient water in the LF-based irrigation system”
e1“control zone”
e2“LF-based irrigation schedule”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation runtime adjusted from daily leaching fraction despite irrigation-to-leaching lag.
- Taxon
- plantsViridiplantaee1
- Outcome
- actuate and adjust irrigation run-time based on daily leaching fractione0
- Value
- 0.02e0
- Qualifier
- without being influenced by the lag between irrigation and leachinge0
Verbatim
e0“This novel system was able to actuate and adjust irrigation run-time based on daily leaching fraction without being influenced by the lag between irrigation and leaching and had an average leaching fraction within 0.02 of the target LF”
e1“plants received sufficient water”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · growth · Viridiplantae (plants)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Viridiplantae (plants)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.