نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 گروه علوم و مهندسی آب، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جهرم، صندوق پستی 74135-111، جهرم، ایران.
2 دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد رشته آبیاری و زهکشی، گروه علوم و مهندسی آب، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جهرم، صندوق پستی 74135-111، جهرم، ایران.
3 عضو هیئت علمی، بخش تحقیقات فنی مهندسی و کشاورزی، مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی خوزستان
4 استادیار گروه علوم و مهندسی آب، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جهرم، صندوق پستی 74135-111، جهرم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The effect of five different management methods of border irrigation on improving irrigation efficiency and increasing the quantity and quality of alfalfa production was investigated. Five plots under alfalfa cultivation namely A, B, C, D and E were respectively irrigated by open-end traditional border irrigation (as a control), cut-back (flow reduction) in open-end and closed-end borders, open-end border surge with 5 and 3 pulses. The average reduction of applied water in treatments B, C, D, and E compared to the control method (A) was 99, 73, 151, and 11 cubic meters of water per hectare, respectively. Applying methods B, C, D, and E also led to an increase in the speed of the advance front by 20%, 16%, 24%, and 12.5%, respectively. This improved water distribution uniformity along the borders and reduced runoff losses. The percentage of surface runoff in management methods E, D, C, B, and A was determined as 31, 27, 0, 14, and 18, respectively, and the percentage of deep percolation losses in these methods was 27, 32, 35, 14.27, and 14.68. The irrigation efficiency in methods E, D, C, B, and A was calculated as 45%, 55%, 67%, 71%, and 73%, respectively. The use of 3-pulse surge, 5-pulse surge, cut-back with closed-end, and cut-back with open-end were more effective in water saving and increasing the irrigation efficiency compared to the traditional irrigation method. Furthermore, the efficiency of Surface and WinSrfr models were compared in the estimation of water use efficiency and the hydraulic simulation of the examined management methods. The percentage of error for the average values of water use efficiency calculated by Surface and WinSrfr models compared to those measured in the field was 1.6 and 0.21, respectively, indicating the higher accuracy of the WinSrfr model in this studied condition.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)