Abstract
The aim of the study was to determine the effect of alternate irrigation method and deficit irrigation on radiation use efficiency and forage quality of foxtail millet (Setaria italica) under a double cropping system after barley (Hordeum vulgar). Conventional furrow irrigation (M1) and alternate furrow irrigation (M2) methods and different deficit irrigation levels including 100, 85, 70 and 55% of crop water requirement (V1, V2, V3 and V4) were tested in a field experiment on the west of Tehran, Iran for 2 years (2008 and 2009). Results showed that alternate furrow irrigation with 85% of crop water requirement (M2V2) had the highest Absorption Ratio of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PARAR) and Cumulative Absorption of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PARCA) in 2008 (P < 0.05). In 2009, M1V2 and M1V3 had higher PARAR than M2V1 (P < 0.05). Result difference in two years was probably due to that year 1 was drier than year 2 and the crop received more water in year 2 than year 1. Under 55% of crop water requirement, Leaf Area Index (LAI) and Radiation Use Efficiency (RUE) of conventional furrow irrigation method were reduced, while LAI and RUE of alternate furrow irrigation method were maintained. Alternate furrow irrigation had higher percentage of dry matter digestibility than conventional furrow irrigation. 55% of crop water requirement with alternate furrow irrigation resulted in increasing percentage of water soluble carbohydrates and decreasing crude protein percentage. The results indicate that alternate furrow irrigation should be a major consideration in crop production of arid and semiarid region.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Alternate furrow irrigation at 85% crop water requirement had the highest PAR absorption ratio and cumulative PAR absorption in 2008.
- Taxon
- Foxtail Millet
Setaria italicat0 - Treatment
- alternate furrow irrigation with 85% of crop water requiremente0
- Outcome
- Absorption Ratio of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PARAR) and Cumulative Absorption of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PARCA)e0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Qualifier
- in 2008e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“alternate furrow irrigation with 85% of crop water requirement (M2V2) had the highest Absorption Ratio of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PARAR) and Cumulative Absorption of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PARCA) in 2008 (P < 0.05)”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2009 M1V2 had higher PAR absorption ratio than M2V1.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Treatment
- M1V2e0
- Outcome
- PARARe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- In 2009e0
- Comparator
- M2V1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2009, M1V2 and M1V3 had higher PARAR than M2V1 (P < 0.05)”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2009 M1V3 had higher PAR absorption ratio than M2V1.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Treatment
- M1V3e0
- Outcome
- PARARe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- In 2009e0
- Comparator
- M2V1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2009, M1V2 and M1V3 had higher PARAR than M2V1 (P < 0.05)”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
At 55% crop water requirement conventional furrow irrigation reduced leaf area index and radiation use efficiency.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Treatment
- conventional furrow irrigation methode0
- Outcome
- Leaf Area Index (LAI) and Radiation Use Efficiency (RUE)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- 55% of crop water requiremente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under 55% of crop water requirement, Leaf Area Index (LAI) and Radiation Use Efficiency (RUE) of conventional furrow irrigation method were reduced”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
At 55% crop water requirement alternate furrow irrigation maintained leaf area index and radiation use efficiency.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Treatment
- alternate furrow irrigation methode0
- Outcome
- LAI and RUEe0
- Direction
- maintainede0
- Qualifier
- 55% of crop water requiremente0
- Comparator
- conventional furrow irrigation methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under 55% of crop water requirement, Leaf Area Index (LAI) and Radiation Use Efficiency (RUE) of conventional furrow irrigation method were reduced, while LAI and RUE of alternate furrow irrigation method were maintained”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
Alternate furrow irrigation produced higher dry matter digestibility than conventional irrigation.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Treatment
- Alternate furrow irrigatione0
- Outcome
- percentage of dry matter digestibilitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- conventional furrow irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alternate furrow irrigation had higher percentage of dry matter digestibility than conventional furrow irrigation”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
Alternate furrow irrigation at 55% crop water requirement increased water soluble carbohydrates.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Treatment
- 55% of crop water requirement with alternate furrow irrigatione0
- Outcome
- percentage of water soluble carbohydratese0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“55% of crop water requirement with alternate furrow irrigation resulted in increasing percentage of water soluble carbohydrates and decreasing crude protein percentage”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
Alternate furrow irrigation at 55% crop water requirement decreased crude protein percentage.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Treatment
- 55% of crop water requirement with alternate furrow irrigatione0
- Outcome
- crude protein percentagee0
- Direction
- decreasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“55% of crop water requirement with alternate furrow irrigation resulted in increasing percentage of water soluble carbohydrates and decreasing crude protein percentage”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend considering alternate furrow irrigation in arid and semiarid crop production.
- Taxon
- Foxtail MilletSetaria italicat0
- Outcome
- alternate furrow irrigation should be a major consideratione0
- Setting
- arid and semiarid regione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“alternate furrow irrigation should be a major consideration in crop production of arid and semiarid region”
t0“Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica)”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: grain · Setaria italica (foxtail millet)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
irrigation · quality: protein · Setaria italica (foxtail millet)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
irrigation · growth · Setaria italica (foxtail millet)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →irrigation · quality: sugar starch · Setaria italica (foxtail millet)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.