Effects of Irrigation Method and Water Flow Rate on Irrigation Performance, Soil Salinity, Yield, and Water Productivity of Cauliflower
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water scarcity is a major constraint for food production, particularly in arid and semi-arid environments. In this regard, selecting the best irrigation technique is crucial to overcome water scarcity and enhance water productivity (WP) with no significant yield loss. This study aimed to assess the impact of irrigation techniques of every furrow irrigation (EFI), alternate furrow irrigation (AFI), and drip irrigation (DI), as well as the flow rate, on irrigation system performance parameters, yield, water productivity of cauliflower crop and soil salinity during the two successive growing seasons of 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 under field conditions. The treatments comprised three different irrigation inflow rates: Q1 = 0.47 L/s, Q2 = 0.95 L/s, and Q3 = 1.43 L/s. For both investigated seasons, the AFI + Q3 treatment produced the best water distribution uniformity (DU) and water application efficiency (AE) of 85.10% and 72.73%, respectively, of the surface irrigation, and DI methods across the two growing seasons produced the highest DU of 95%. DI produced the highest cauliflower curd yield (18.12 Mg/fed), followed by EFI + Q3 (12.285 Mg/fed) and AFI + Q3 (11.905 Mg/fed). The maximum mean WP value of 10.6 kg/m3 was recorded with DI, followed by AFI + Q3 (6.24 kg/m3), across the two growing seasons. DI, AFI + Q3, AFI + Q2, AFI + Q1, EFI + Q3, and EFI + Q2 saved irrigation water by 32.63, 28.71, 21.22, 18.04, 10.48, and 3.18%, respectively, compared with EFI + Q1 across the two growing seasons. During both seasons, the average value using the drip irrigation system was 3.60 dS/m. Considering the annual leaching requirements of soil, climate change conditions, and fixed costs, we recommend the use of a drip irrigation system in clayey soil to produce cauliflower, followed by the use of the alternative furrow irrigation method to enable the aeration of the same soil for a lower cost.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it