Abstract
Irrigation is one of the most important means of increasing olive oil production but little information exists on the responses of olive to variable water supply. Five different irrigation strategies, full irrigation, rain fed, and three deficit irrigation treatments were compared from 1996 to 1999, in Cordoba, southern Spain, to characterize the response of a mature olive ( Olea europaea L. `Picual') orchard to irrigation. Crop evapotranspiration (ET c ) varied from less than 500 mm in the rain fed to ≈900 mm under full irrigation. The deficit irrigation treatments had ET c values that ranged from 60% to 80% of full ET c depending on the year and treatment. Water relations, and oil content and trunk growth measurements allowed for the interpretation of yield responses to water deficits. In a deficit irrigation treatment that concentrated all its ET c deficit in the summer, stem water potential (Ψ x ) decreased to -7 MPa but recovered quickly in the fall, while in the treatment that applied the same ET deficit progressively, Ψ x was never below -3.8 MPa. Minimum Ψ x in the rain fed treatment reached -8 MPa. Yield (Y) responses as a function of ET c were calculated for biennial yield data, given the alternate bearing habit of the olive; the equation are: Y = -16.84 + 0.063 ET -0.035 × 10 -3 ET 2 , and Y = -2.78 + 0.011 ET - 0.006 × 10 -3 ET 2 , for fruit and oil production respectively, with responses to ET deficits being similar for sustained and regulated deficit irrigation. The yield response to a deficit treatment that was fully irrigated during the bearing year and rain fed in the nonbearing year, was less favorable than that observed in the other two deficit treatments.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Crop evapotranspiration was below 500 mm under rain fed conditions.
- Taxon
- olive
Olea europaeat0 - Treatment
- rain fede0
- Outcome
- Crop evapotranspiration (ET c )e0
- Value
- less than 500 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Crop evapotranspiration (ET c ) varied from less than 500 mm in the rain fed”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop evapotranspiration was about 900 mm with full irrigation.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Treatment
- full irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Crop evapotranspiration (ET c )e1
- Value
- ≈900 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“≈900 mm under full irrigation”
t0“Olive”
e1“Crop evapotranspiration (ET c )”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation evapotranspiration ranged from 60% to 80% of full irrigation.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation treatmentse0
- Outcome
- ET c valuese0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- 60% to 80%e0
- Qualifier
- depending on the year and treatmente0
- Comparator
- full ET ce0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The deficit irrigation treatments had ET c values that ranged from 60% to 80% of full ET c depending on the year and treatment”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer concentrated deficit lowered stem water potential to -7 MPa, then it recovered quickly in fall.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Outcome
- stem water potential (Ψ x )e0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- -7 MPae0
- Qualifier
- recovered quickly in the falle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“stem water potential (Ψ x ) decreased to -7 MPa but recovered quickly in the fall”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Progressive deficit irrigation kept stem water potential above -3.8 MPa.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Treatment
- same ET deficit progressivelye0
- Outcome
- Ψ xe0
- Direction
- never belowe0
- Value
- -3.8 MPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the treatment that applied the same ET deficit progressively, Ψ x was never below -3.8 MPa”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Minimum stem water potential reached -8 MPa under rain fed treatment.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Treatment
- rain fed treatmente0
- Outcome
- Minimum Ψ xe0
- Direction
- reachede0
- Value
- -8 MPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Minimum Ψ x in the rain fed treatment reached -8 MPa”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit yield responded to evapotranspiration according to a reported quadratic equation.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Treatment
- ETe0
- Outcome
- Ye0
- Value
- Y = -16.84 + 0.063 ET -0.035 × 10 -3 ET 2e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Y = -16.84 + 0.063 ET -0.035 × 10 -3 ET 2”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Oil yield responded to evapotranspiration according to a reported quadratic equation.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Treatment
- ETe0
- Outcome
- Ye0
- Value
- Y = -2.78 + 0.011 ET - 0.006 × 10 -3 ET 2e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Y = -2.78 + 0.011 ET - 0.006 × 10 -3 ET 2”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Sustained and regulated deficit irrigation gave similar yield responses to ET deficits.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Outcome
- responses to ET deficitse0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- sustained and regulated deficit irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“responses to ET deficits being similar for sustained and regulated deficit irrigation”
t0“Olive”
Claim · model-written summary
Full irrigation in the bearing year and rain fed treatment in the nonbearing year gave a less favorable yield response than two other deficit treatments.
- Taxon
- oliveOlea europaeat0
- Treatment
- fully irrigated during the bearing year and rain fed in the nonbearing yeare0
- Outcome
- yield responsee0
- Direction
- less favorablee0
- Comparator
- other two deficit treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield response to a deficit treatment that was fully irrigated during the bearing year and rain fed in the nonbearing year, was less favorable than that observed in the other two deficit treatments”
t0“Olive”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Olea europaea (common olive)Results differ
26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
49 papers more in this group
See all 53 papers →rainfall · yield · Olea europaea (common olive)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.