Abstract
Water resources worldwide are limited, especially in desert areas like Saudi Arabia. Therefore, the rational and sustainable management of irrigation water supply is an imperative requirement. This research aimed to assess how different irrigation systems, such as partial root-zone drying (PRD) and regulated deficit irrigation (RDI), would affect the growth of cucumber crops. The study specifically focused on comparing the impact of these irrigation techniques when implemented with surface (S) and subsurface (SB) drip irrigation methods. The research was conducted in both controlled environments and open-field settings in central Saudi Arabia. Additionally, the study aimed to promote the adoption of RDI and PRD irrigation systems among Saudi farmers as a means to conserve essential irrigation water resources. The treatments consisted of two groups: the drip irrigation group with a single line (RDI), which includes full irrigation and deficit irrigation, and the group with the (PRD) for the root zone with two lines with the same irrigation ratios as the first group. The productivity of the RDI-S regular drip irrigation treatment was considered 100 % as the control on which the results of all treatments are measured. The results showed that in terms of irrigation technique, the PRD-SB technique had the highest productivity during the winter season in a greenhouse, with an average of 13.8 kg m−2 for all irrigation levels, while the RDI-SB technique had the highest productivity during the summer season, with an average of 16.1 kg m−2. Regarding irrigation level results, the study showed that an irrigation level of 100 % is the highest yield in all irrigation techniques, with a general average of 14.9 kg m−2 for all irrigation techniques during the winter season and 16.4 kg m−2 during the summer. The study showed that irrigation with the PRD-SB system was the most productive in the open field at all irrigation levels, with an average of 7.3 kg m−2. It could be concluded that using PRD and RDI systems for indoor and outdoor cucumber production can save irrigation water in arid regions.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 6
Claim · model-written summary
PRD-SB had the highest winter greenhouse productivity, averaging 13.8 kg m−2.
- Taxon
- cucumber
Cucumis sativust0 - Treatment
- PRD-SB techniquee0
- Outcome
- productivitye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 13.8 kg m−2e0
- Setting
- greenhousee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the PRD-SB technique had the highest productivity during the winter season in a greenhouse, with an average of 13.8 kg m−2 for all irrigation levels”
t0“cucumber”
Claim · model-written summary
RDI-SB had the highest summer productivity, averaging 16.1 kg m−2.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativust0
- Treatment
- RDI-SB techniquee0
- Outcome
- productivitye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 16.1 kg m−2e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the RDI-SB technique had the highest productivity during the summer season, with an average of 16.1 kg m−2”
t0“cucumber”
Claim · model-written summary
Full irrigation had the highest winter yield, averaging 14.9 kg m−2.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativust0
- Treatment
- irrigation level of 100 %e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 14.9 kg m−2e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“an irrigation level of 100 % is the highest yield in all irrigation techniques, with a general average of 14.9 kg m−2 for all irrigation techniques during the winter season”
t0“cucumber”
Claim · model-written summary
Full irrigation had the highest summer yield, averaging 16.4 kg m−2.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativust0
- Treatment
- irrigation level of 100 %e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 16.4 kg m−2e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“an irrigation level of 100 % is the highest yield in all irrigation techniques, with a general average of 14.9 kg m−2 for all irrigation techniques during the winter season and 16.4 kg m−2 during the summer”
t0“cucumber”
Claim · model-written summary
PRD-SB produced the highest open-field productivity, averaging 7.3 kg m−2.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativust0
- Treatment
- PRD-SB systeme0
- Outcome
- most productivee0
- Direction
- most productivee0
- Value
- 7.3 kg m−2e0
- Setting
- open fielde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“irrigation with the PRD-SB system was the most productive in the open field at all irrigation levels, with an average of 7.3 kg m−2”
t0“cucumber”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude PRD and RDI can save irrigation water in arid cucumber production.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse0
- Outcome
- using PRD and RDI systems for indoor and outdoor cucumber production can save irrigation water in arid regionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“using PRD and RDI systems for indoor and outdoor cucumber production can save irrigation water in arid regions”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
67 papers more in this group
See all 71 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.