Abstract
Single crop coefficient-based crop water estimation challenges watermelon irrigation agriculture in Arba Minch, Ethiopia. This study aimed to estimate the adjusted dual crop coefficient of watermelon under deficit irrigation with straw mulching, alongside validating the AquaCrop model for watermelon cultivation improvement. This experimental research followed a randomized complete block design with four treatments: full irrigation (T1), full irrigation with straw mulching (T2), 50% deficit irrigation (T3), and 50% deficit irrigation with straw mulching (T4). Average actual total water consumption of watermelon was 419.2 mm (T1), 338.4 mm (T2), 227.8 mm (T3), and 187.8 mm (T4), respectively. The straw mulching with full irrigation level (T2) of the present study reduced water consumption of watermelon by 20.1% compared with control treatment. Additionally, mulching decreased total water use by 17% under a 50% deficit compared with nonmulched treatment (T3). The average adjusted dual crop coefficient of watermelon varied from 0.17 (T4) to 0.42 (T1), 0.31 (T4) to 0.75 (T1), 0.41 (T4) to 1.04 (T1), and 0.34 (T4) to 0.84 (T1) in initial, development, mid, and late stages of watermelon growth, respectively. The average coefficient of variation for the dual crop coefficient was 9.45% (initial stage), 3.90% (development stage), 3.66% (mid-stage), and 4.72% (late stage), highlighting the variability within each growth stage. The AquaCrop model was evaluated for simulating evaporation, transpiration, and evapotranspiration, yielding a mean root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.6 mm. Similarly, evaporation, basal crop coefficient, and dual crop coefficient simulations also exhibited a mean RMSE of 1.6. The model demonstrated favorable performance with average R2 and Nash–Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency (NSE) values of 0.84 and 0.74, respectively. This study demonstrates that combining modified dual crop coefficients with deficit irrigation and straw mulching can reduce watermelon water consumption in Arba Minch. The AquaCrop model, validated with high accuracy, offers a reliable tool to predict the dual crop coefficient of watermelon-irrigated agriculture with or without mulching field management practices.
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Watermelon water consumption was 419.2 mm with full irrigation.
- Taxon
- watermelon
Citrullus lanatust0 - Treatment
- T1e0
- Outcome
- total water consumptione0
- Value
- 419.2 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average actual total water consumption of watermelon was 419.2 mm (T1), 338.4 mm (T2), 227.8 mm (T3), and 187.8 mm (T4), respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Watermelon water consumption was 338.4 mm with full irrigation and straw mulching.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- T2e0
- Outcome
- total water consumptione0
- Value
- 338.4 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average actual total water consumption of watermelon was 419.2 mm (T1), 338.4 mm (T2), 227.8 mm (T3), and 187.8 mm (T4), respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Watermelon water consumption was 227.8 mm with 50% deficit irrigation.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- T3e0
- Outcome
- total water consumptione0
- Value
- 227.8 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average actual total water consumption of watermelon was 419.2 mm (T1), 338.4 mm (T2), 227.8 mm (T3), and 187.8 mm (T4), respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Watermelon water consumption was 187.8 mm with 50% deficit irrigation and mulching.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- T4e0
- Outcome
- total water consumptione0
- Value
- 187.8 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average actual total water consumption of watermelon was 419.2 mm (T1), 338.4 mm (T2), 227.8 mm (T3), and 187.8 mm (T4), respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw mulching with full irrigation reduced watermelon water consumption by 20.1% relative to control.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- straw mulching with full irrigation level (T2)e0
- Outcome
- water consumptione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 20.1%e0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The straw mulching with full irrigation level (T2) of the present study reduced water consumption of watermelon by 20.1% compared with control treatment.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching under 50% deficit irrigation reduced total water use by 17% relative to nonmulched treatment.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- mulchinge0
- Outcome
- total water usee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 17%e0
- Comparator
- nonmulched treatment (T3)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Additionally, mulching decreased total water use by 17% under a 50% deficit compared with nonmulched treatment (T3).”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Initial-stage adjusted dual crop coefficients ranged from 0.17 under T4 to 0.42 under T1.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- adjusted dual crop coefficiente0
- Value
- 0.17e0
- Qualifier
- initiale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average adjusted dual crop coefficient of watermelon varied from 0.17 (T4) to 0.42 (T1), 0.31 (T4) to 0.75 (T1), 0.41 (T4) to 1.04 (T1), and 0.34 (T4) to 0.84 (T1) in initial, development, mid, and late stages of watermelon growth, respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Development-stage adjusted dual crop coefficients ranged from 0.31 under T4 to 0.75 under T1.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- adjusted dual crop coefficiente0
- Value
- 0.31e0
- Qualifier
- developmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average adjusted dual crop coefficient of watermelon varied from 0.17 (T4) to 0.42 (T1), 0.31 (T4) to 0.75 (T1), 0.41 (T4) to 1.04 (T1), and 0.34 (T4) to 0.84 (T1) in initial, development, mid, and late stages of watermelon growth, respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Mid-stage adjusted dual crop coefficients ranged from 0.41 under T4 to 1.04 under T1.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- adjusted dual crop coefficiente0
- Value
- 0.41e0
- Qualifier
- mide0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average adjusted dual crop coefficient of watermelon varied from 0.17 (T4) to 0.42 (T1), 0.31 (T4) to 0.75 (T1), 0.41 (T4) to 1.04 (T1), and 0.34 (T4) to 0.84 (T1) in initial, development, mid, and late stages of watermelon growth, respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Late-stage adjusted dual crop coefficients ranged from 0.34 under T4 to 0.84 under T1.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- adjusted dual crop coefficiente0
- Value
- 0.34e0
- Qualifier
- latee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average adjusted dual crop coefficient of watermelon varied from 0.17 (T4) to 0.42 (T1), 0.31 (T4) to 0.75 (T1), 0.41 (T4) to 1.04 (T1), and 0.34 (T4) to 0.84 (T1) in initial, development, mid, and late stages of watermelon growth, respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
The adjusted dual crop coefficient varied 9.45% at the initial stage.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- coefficient of variatione0
- Value
- 9.45%e0
- Qualifier
- initial stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average coefficient of variation for the dual crop coefficient was 9.45% (initial stage), 3.90% (development stage), 3.66% (mid-stage), and 4.72% (late stage), highlighting the variability within each growth stage.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
The adjusted dual crop coefficient varied 3.90% at the development stage.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- coefficient of variatione0
- Value
- 3.90%e0
- Qualifier
- development stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average coefficient of variation for the dual crop coefficient was 9.45% (initial stage), 3.90% (development stage), 3.66% (mid-stage), and 4.72% (late stage), highlighting the variability within each growth stage.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
The adjusted dual crop coefficient varied 3.66% at the mid-stage.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- coefficient of variatione0
- Value
- 3.66%e0
- Qualifier
- mid-stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average coefficient of variation for the dual crop coefficient was 9.45% (initial stage), 3.90% (development stage), 3.66% (mid-stage), and 4.72% (late stage), highlighting the variability within each growth stage.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
The adjusted dual crop coefficient varied 4.72% at the late stage.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- coefficient of variatione0
- Value
- 4.72%e0
- Qualifier
- late stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average coefficient of variation for the dual crop coefficient was 9.45% (initial stage), 3.90% (development stage), 3.66% (mid-stage), and 4.72% (late stage), highlighting the variability within each growth stage.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
AquaCrop simulation of evaporation, transpiration and evapotranspiration had mean RMSE of 1.6 mm.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- evaporation, transpiration, and evapotranspiratione0
- Value
- 1.6 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The AquaCrop model was evaluated for simulating evaporation, transpiration, and evapotranspiration, yielding a mean root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.6 mm.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
AquaCrop evaporation and crop coefficient simulations had mean RMSE of 1.6.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- evaporation, basal crop coefficient, and dual crop coefficiente0
- Value
- 1.6e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, evaporation, basal crop coefficient, and dual crop coefficient simulations also exhibited a mean RMSE of 1.6.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
AquaCrop performance had average R2 of 0.84.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- R2e0
- Value
- 0.84e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The model demonstrated favorable performance with average R2 and Nash–Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency (NSE) values of 0.84 and 0.74, respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
AquaCrop performance had average Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency of 0.74.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Outcome
- Nash–Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency (NSE)e0
- Value
- 0.74e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The model demonstrated favorable performance with average R2 and Nash–Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency (NSE) values of 0.84 and 0.74, respectively.”
t0“Watermelon”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: water · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →mulching · physiology: water · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- 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.