Abstract
Given the limited water resources, maximizing water productivity and feed quality in arid and semi-arid environments, particularly in sandy soils with low water-holding capacity, is a significant challenge for maintaining livestock productivity. A study was conducted for two successive winter seasons (2022/2023 and 2023/2024) in the Al-Farafra Oasis, New Valley Governorate, Egypt, to evaluate the impacts of irrigation techniques (IT) and soil amendment rates (AR) on the performance of winter alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). This study compares two irrigation management strategies, smart irrigation technique (SIT) and manual irrigation technique (MIT), under two irrigation systems: sprinkler irrigation (SI) and leaky pipe irrigation (LPI). Four soil amendment rates were used: T1 (0 t fed-1clay, 0 kg fed-1 humic acid, 0 t fed-1 biochar), T2 (5 t fed-1, 10 kg fed-1, 3 t fed- 1), T3 (10 t fed-1, 20 kg fed-1, 5 t fed-1), and T4 (15 t fed-1, 30 kg fed-1, 7 t fed-1). The combination of SIT, LPI, and highest AR T4 was significantly greater in forage quality, marketable yield (MY), water use efficiency (WUE), and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) than all other treatments. The highest values of MY were (22.96 and 23.11 t ha-1), WUE (3.04 and 3.09 kg m-3), and IWUE (2.75 and 2.79 kg m-3) were found during the first and second respective seasons at SIT and T4 under LPI treatment. In contrast, the lowest performance was recorded at MIT and T1 under SI treatment. The water consumption (WC) and irrigation water application (IR) were also reduced by up to 30 and 20%, respectively, under the best treatment. In conclusion, the combination of smart irrigation practices, efficient ways to deliver water, and amending soils in a purposefully efficacious manner is a sustainable method to improve water productivity, mitigate water losses, and improve alfalfa forage quality. Treatment T3 provided similar results to T4 at lower costs and with fewer amendment inputs. This work demonstrates a useful method to optimize water usage in agricultural practices, including in arid parts of the world like Egypt, to sustain agriculture, support farmers, and improve food security in the future.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
SIT, LPI, and T4 significantly improved forage quality against other treatments.
- Taxon
- alfalfa
Medicago sativat0 - Treatment
- combination of SIT, LPI, and highest AR T4e0
- Outcome
- forage qualitye0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- all other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of SIT, LPI, and highest AR T4 was significantly greater in forage quality, marketable yield (MY), water use efficiency (WUE), and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) than all other treatments”
t0“alfalfa crop”
Claim · model-written summary
SIT, LPI, and T4 significantly improved marketable yield, reaching 22.96 and 23.11 t ha-1 across the two seasons.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- SIT and T4 under LPI treatmente0
- Outcome
- MYe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 22.96 and 23.11 t ha-1e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest values of MY were (22.96 and 23.11 t ha-1), WUE (3.04 and 3.09 kg m-3), and IWUE (2.75 and 2.79 kg m-3) were found during the first and second respective seasons at SIT and T4 under LPI treatment”
t0“alfalfa crop”
Claim · model-written summary
SIT, LPI, and T4 gave WUE of 3.04 and 3.09 kg m-3 across the two seasons.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- SIT and T4 under LPI treatmente0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 3.04 and 3.09 kg m-3e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest values of MY were (22.96 and 23.11 t ha-1), WUE (3.04 and 3.09 kg m-3), and IWUE (2.75 and 2.79 kg m-3) were found during the first and second respective seasons at SIT and T4 under LPI treatment”
t0“alfalfa crop”
Claim · model-written summary
SIT, LPI, and T4 gave IWUE of 2.75 and 2.79 kg m-3 across the two seasons.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- SIT and T4 under LPI treatmente0
- Outcome
- IWUEe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.75 and 2.79 kg m-3e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest values of MY were (22.96 and 23.11 t ha-1), WUE (3.04 and 3.09 kg m-3), and IWUE (2.75 and 2.79 kg m-3) were found during the first and second respective seasons at SIT and T4 under LPI treatment”
t0“alfalfa crop”
Claim · model-written summary
The best treatment reduced water consumption by up to 30%.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- best treatmente0
- Outcome
- water consumption (WC)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 30e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water consumption (WC) and irrigation water application (IR) were also reduced by up to 30 and 20%, respectively, under the best treatment”
t0“alfalfa crop”
Claim · model-written summary
The best treatment reduced irrigation water application by up to 20%.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- best treatmente0
- Outcome
- irrigation water application (IR)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 20%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water consumption (WC) and irrigation water application (IR) were also reduced by up to 30 and 20%, respectively, under the best treatment”
t0“alfalfa crop”
Claim · model-written summary
T3 performed similarly to T4 with lower costs and fewer amendment inputs.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Treatment T3e0
- Outcome
- similar resultse0
- Direction
- similare0
- Qualifier
- lower costs and with fewer amendment inputse0
- Comparator
- T4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatment T3 provided similar results to T4 at lower costs and with fewer amendment inputs”
t0“alfalfa crop”
The same questions in other papers
other · quality: grain · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
irrigation · quality: grain · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 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.