Paper · 2006 · Applied Engineering in Agriculture

COMPARISON OF SITE-SPECIFIC AND CONVENTIONAL UNIFORM IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT FOR POTATOES

B. A. King; J. C. Stark; R. W. Wall

7
claims
18
verbatim quotes
73
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Site-Specific Irrigation Management (SSIM) can be defined as irrigation management (depth, timing) based oncrop need to defined sub-areas of a field referred to as management zones. Implementation of SSIM will require additionalirrigation system hardware, labor, and information on soil and/or plant water status in each management zone. Costsassociated with these additional requirements will need to be offset by increased receipts from improved crop yield and qualityin order for the technology to be adopted by producers. The potential for SSIM to increase crop yield, quality, and economicreturn has not been evaluated in field studies. Crops such as potatoes, for which yield and quality are highly sensitive to soilwater availability, are most likely to show an economic benefit from site-specific irrigation management. A two-year fieldstudy was conducted to evaluate the potential for SSIM to increase yield and quality of potatoes relative to ConventionalUniform Irrigation Management (CUIM). Near real-time soil water content was used to schedule irrigations under bothirrigation management treatments. Field average water application was nearly the same for the irrigation managementtreatments, 503 mm (19.8 in.) in 2001 and 445 mm (17.5 in.) in 2002. In both study years, tuber yield distributions trended4% greater under site-specific irrigation management but were not significantly different (p < 0.05). Total tuber yield perunit of water applied from irrigation and precipitation was 4% greater in 2001 and 6% greater in 2002 under SSIM. Basedon a local tuber quality adjusted potato processing contract price structure, the trend in gross income averaged across thefield site was $159/ha ($65/acre) greater with SSIM. This increase in gross income is likely about half the actual cost ofcommercial site-specific irrigation technology. The required 3- to 5-year crop rotation for potato disease management meansthat the site-specific irrigation system needs to be mobile or an economic benefit must also be realized from other crops inthe rotation. The economic benefit of SSIM needs to be increased or realized for other crops in the rotation for it to be aneconomically viable technology in potato production systems in Idaho.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Field-average irrigation water application was nearly the same under both treatments in both years.

Taxon
POTATOESSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment
irrigation managementtreatmentse0
Outcome
Field average water applicatione0
Direction
nearly the samee0
Value
503 mm (19.8 in.) in 2001 and 445 mm (17.5 in.) in 2002e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“POTATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–87 · show in text ↑
e0

“Field average water application was nearly the same for the irrigation managementtreatments, 503 mm (19.8 in.) in 2001 and 445 mm (17.5 in.) in 2002”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1114–1262 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tuber yield trended 4% greater under site-specific irrigation in both years without a significant difference.

Taxon
POTATOESSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment
site-specific irrigation managemente0
Outcome
tuber yield distributionse0
Direction
greatere0
Value
4%e0
Comparator
CUIMe1

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“POTATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–87 · show in text ↑
e0

“In both study years, tuber yield distributions trended4% greater under site-specific irrigation management but were not significantly different (p < 0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1264–1418 · show in text ↑
e1

“ConventionalUniform Irrigation Management (CUIM)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 953–1001 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total tuber yield per unit water was 4% greater under SSIM in 2001.

Taxon
POTATOESSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment
SSIMe0
Outcome
Total tuber yield perunit of water applied from irrigation and precipitatione0
Direction
greatere0
Value
4%e0
Qualifier
in 2001e0
Comparator
CUIMe1

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“POTATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–87 · show in text ↑
e0

“Total tuber yield perunit of water applied from irrigation and precipitation was 4% greater in 2001 and 6% greater in 2002 under SSIM”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1420–1553 · show in text ↑
e1

“ConventionalUniform Irrigation Management (CUIM)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 953–1001 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total tuber yield per unit water was 6% greater under SSIM in 2002.

Taxon
POTATOESSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment
SSIMe0
Outcome
Total tuber yield perunit of water applied from irrigation and precipitatione0
Direction
greatere0
Value
6%e0
Qualifier
in 2002e0
Comparator
CUIMe1

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“POTATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–87 · show in text ↑
e0

“Total tuber yield perunit of water applied from irrigation and precipitation was 4% greater in 2001 and 6% greater in 2002 under SSIM”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1420–1553 · show in text ↑
e1

“ConventionalUniform Irrigation Management (CUIM)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 953–1001 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gross income trended $159/ha greater under SSIM.

Taxon
POTATOESSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment
SSIMe0
Outcome
gross incomee0
Direction
greatere0
Value
$159/ha ($65/acre)e0
Comparator
CUIMe1

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“POTATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–87 · show in text ↑
e0

“the trend in gross income averaged across thefield site was $159/ha ($65/acre) greater with SSIM”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1638–1734 · show in text ↑
e1

“ConventionalUniform Irrigation Management (CUIM)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 953–1001 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The income increase was estimated at about half the cost of commercial SSIM technology.

Taxon
POTATOESSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment
site-specific irrigation technologye0
Outcome
increase in gross incomee0
Qualifier
likely about half the actual coste0

Not reportedDirection

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“POTATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–87 · show in text ↑
e0

“This increase in gross income is likely about half the actual cost ofcommercial site-specific irrigation technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1736–1851 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Economic viability of SSIM requires larger benefits or benefits in rotational crops.

Taxon
POTATOESSolanum tuberosumt0
Outcome
economic benefit of SSIM needs to be increased or realized for other crops in the rotatione0
Setting
Idahoe0

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“POTATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–87 · show in text ↑
e0

“The economic benefit of SSIM needs to be increased or realized for other crops in the rotation for it to be aneconomically viable technology in potato production systems in Idaho”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2066–2244 · show in text ↑

irrigation · yield · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Results differ

92 papers: 75 positive, 17 negative or no effect

74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

88 papers more in this group

See all 92 papers →

climate site · yield · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results

25 papers: 16 positive, 9 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

21 papers more in this group

See all 25 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.