Paper · 2025 · Journal of Bioresource Management

Impact of Optimized Irrigation Scheduling on Wheat Growth, Yield and Water Use Efficiency under Arid Conditions

Muhammad Arshad Khan; Ashiq Saleem; Muhammad Mansoor; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Improving water use efficiency is crucial since, in Pakistan, water is the main resource that limits crop productivity. A field study was conducted using a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with four replicates at the research farm of the Arid Zone Research Centre, Dera Ismail Khan, to determine the effects of altered irrigation schedules on wheat growth, yield and water use efficiency (WUE). LI1 and LI2 (90 and 60 mm irrigation) at crown root, tillering and milking stages, LI3 (60 mm irrigation) at crown root and tillering stages and (90 mm irrigation) at milking stage, and LI4 (90 mm irrigation) at crown root stage and (60 mm irrigation) at tillering and milking stages, respectively, were the four irrigation levels used in the study. The results showed a non-significant impact of varying watering schedules on plant height, but a significant impact on growth and yield metrics was observed. The largest numbers of total tillers (634), grains per spike (49.65), grain yield (5.58 t ha-1), and WUE (25.62 kg ha-1 mm-1) were observed in the LI4 treatment. The most important stage for plants to withstand water stress is the crown root stage. Compared to earlier growth stages, it is imperative to apply irrigation water at crown root stage in arid climate to maximize productivity and WUE.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Varying irrigation schedules had no significant impact on wheat plant height.

Treatment
varying watering schedulese0
Outcome
plant heighte0
Direction
non-significant impacte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“non-significant impact of varying watering schedules on plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 773–841 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation schedules significantly affected wheat growth and yield metrics.

Outcome
growth and yield metricse0

Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a significant impact on growth and yield metrics was observed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 847–908 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LI4 had the largest total tiller count, 634.

Treatment
LI4 treatmente0
Outcome
total tillerse0
Direction
largeste0
Value
634e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The largest numbers of total tillers (634), grains per spike (49.65), grain yield (5.58 t ha-1), and WUE (25.62 kg ha-1 mm-1) were observed in the LI4 treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–1071 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LI4 had the largest grains per spike, 49.65.

Treatment
LI4 treatmente0
Outcome
grains per spikee0
Direction
largeste0
Value
49.65e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The largest numbers of total tillers (634), grains per spike (49.65), grain yield (5.58 t ha-1), and WUE (25.62 kg ha-1 mm-1) were observed in the LI4 treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–1071 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LI4 had the largest grain yield, 5.58 t ha-1.

Treatment
LI4 treatmente0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
largeste0
Value
5.58 t ha-1e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The largest numbers of total tillers (634), grains per spike (49.65), grain yield (5.58 t ha-1), and WUE (25.62 kg ha-1 mm-1) were observed in the LI4 treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–1071 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LI4 had the largest water use efficiency, 25.62 kg ha-1 mm-1.

Treatment
LI4 treatmente0
Outcome
WUEe0
Direction
largeste0
Value
25.62 kg ha-1 mm-1e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The largest numbers of total tillers (634), grains per spike (49.65), grain yield (5.58 t ha-1), and WUE (25.62 kg ha-1 mm-1) were observed in the LI4 treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–1071 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors identify the crown root stage as the most important stage for withstanding water stress.

Organ / stage
crown root stagee0
Outcome
withstand water stresse0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The most important stage for plants to withstand water stress is the crown root stage.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1072–1158 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend irrigation at the crown root stage in arid climate to maximize productivity and water use efficiency.

Treatment
apply irrigation water at crown root stagee0
Outcome
maximize productivity and WUEe0
Setting
arid climatee0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“it is imperative to apply irrigation water at crown root stage in arid climate to maximize productivity and WUE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1194–1305 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–50 · show in text ↑

irrigation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

242 papers: 177 positive, 65 negative or no effect

64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 177 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

238 papers more in this group

See all 242 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.