Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial analysis of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) canopy responses to irrigation in a moderately humid area

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Irrigation Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Accurate irrigation scheduling is important to ensure maximum yield and optimal water use in irrigated cotton. This study hypothesizes that cotton water stress in relatively humid areas can be detected from crop stress indices derived from canopy reflectance or temperature. Field experiments were conducted in the 2003 and 2004 crop seasons with three irrigation treatments and multiple cultivars to study cotton response to water stress. The experiment plots were monitored for soil water potential (SWP), canopy reflectance and canopy temperature. Four crop stress indices namely normalized difference vegetative index (NDVI), green NDVI (GNDVI), stress time (ST) index and crop water stress index (CWSI) were evaluated for their ability to indicate water stress. These indices were analyzed with classic mixed regression models and spatial regression models for split-plot design. Rainfall was plentiful in both seasons, providing conditions representative of irrigated agriculture in relatively wet regions. Under such wet weather conditions, excessive irrigation decreased lint yield, indicating the necessity for accurate irrigation scheduling. The four crop stress indices showed significant responses to irrigation treatments and strong correlation to SWP at shallow (0.2 m) depth. Spatial regression models were able to accurately explain the effect of irrigation treatment, while classic split-plot ANOVA models were confounded by collinearity in data across space and time. The results also verified that extreme humidity can mask canopy temperature differences with respect to ambient temperature, adding errors to canopy temperature-based stress indicators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the University of Arkansas or US Department of Agriculture.

References

  • AASS (2003) Arkansas County Estimates 2000–2001. Arkansas agricultural statistics service, Little Rock

  • Al-Faraj A, Meyer GE, Shade GR, Horst GL (2000) Dynamic analysis of moisture stress in tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) using canopy temperature, irradiation and vapor deficit. Trans ASAE 43:101–109

    Google Scholar 

  • ANRC (2006) Arkansas ground water protection and management report for 2005. Arkansas natural resources commission, Little Rock

  • Barnes E, Clarke T, Colaizzi P, Haberland J, Kostrzewski M, Riley E, Moran M, Waller P, Choi C, Thompson T, Richards S, Lascano R, Li H (2000a) Coincident detection of crop water stress, nitrogen status, and canopy density using ground-based multispectral data. In: Robert PC, Rust RH, Larson WE (eds) Proceedings of the 5th international conference on precision agriculture and other resource management. ASA–CSSA–SSSA, Madison

  • Barnes EM, Pinter PJ, Kimball BA, Hunsaker DJ, Wall GW, LaMorte RL (2000b) Precision irrigation management using modeling and remote sensing approaches. In: Evans RG, Benhan BL, Trooien TP (eds) In: Proceedings of the 4th decennial national irrigation symposium. ASAE, St Joseph, pp 332–337

  • Ben-Asher J, Phene CJ, Kinarti A (1992) Canopy temperature to assess daily evapotranspiration and management of high-frequency drip irrigation system. Agric Water Manag 22:379–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahoon J, Ferguson J, Edwards D, Tacker P, (1990) A microcomputer-based irrigation scheduler for the humid mid-south region. Appl Eng Agric 6:289–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Ling PP, Kacira M (2002) Let plants say what they need: plant-response-based portable water stress monitoring system for greenhouse plant production. In: Evcim U, Bilgen H, Degirmencioglu A, Demir V, Yalcin H, Ozden K (eds) Proceedings of the 8th international congress on mechanization and energy in agriculture, Kuşadası, 15–17 October 2002, pp 297–303

  • Christides BG, Harrison GT (1955) Cotton growing problems. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark TR (1997) An empirical approach for detecting crop water stress using multi-spectral airborne sensors. Proc Hort Tech 7:9–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Danforth DM, O’Leary PF (1998) COTMAN expert system version 5.0. Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, Fayetteville

    Google Scholar 

  • De-Lorenzi F, Stanghellini C, Pitacco A (1993) Water shortage sensing through infrared canopy temperature: timely detection is imperative. Acta-horticulture 335:373–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Evett SR, Howell TA, Schneider AD, Upchurch DR, Wanjura DF (2000) Automatic drip irrigation of corn and soybean. In: Evans RG, Benhan BL, Trooien TP (eds) In: Proceedings of the 4th decennial national irrigation symposium. ASAE, St Joseph, pp 401–408

  • Fotheringham AS, Brunsdon C, Charlton ME (2002) Geographically weighed regression-the analysis of spatially varying relationships. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Freiwald DA (2005) Ground-water models of the alluvial and sparta aquifers: management tools for a sustainable resource. US Geological Survey & Arkansas Water Science Center, Little Rock

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Dugo MP, Moran MS, Mateos L, Bryant L (2006) Canopy temperature variability as an indicator of crop water stress severity. Irrig Sci 24:233–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idso SB (1982) Non-water-stressed baselines: a key to measuring and interpreting plant water stress. Agric Meteorol 27:59–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idso SB, Jackson RD, Pinter Jr PJ, Reginato RJ, Hatfield JL (1981) Normalizing the stress-degree parameter for environmental variability. Agric Meteorol 24:45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inoue Y, Moran MS (1997) A simplified method for remote sensing of daily canopy transpiration-a case study with direct measurements of canopy transpiration in soybean canopies. Inter J Rem Sen 18:139–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson RD, Idso SB, Reginato RJ, Pinter Jr PJ (1981) Canopy temperature as a crop water stress indicator. Water Resour Res 17:1133–1138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kacira M, Ling PP, Short TH (2002) Establishing crop water stress index (CWSI) threshold values for early, non-contact detection of plant water stress. Trans ASAE 45:775–780

    Google Scholar 

  • Labedzki L (1996) Estimating water stress and irrigation demand of agricultural crops using ground-based remote sensing. Wiadomosci-Instytutu-Melioracji-i-Uzytkow-Zielonych 19:21–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Maas SJ, Fitzgerald GJ, DeTar WR, Pinter PJ Jr (1999) Detection of water stress in cotton using multispectral remote sensing. In: Proceedings of the beltwide cotton producers research conference, Orlando, 3–7 January 1999, pp 584–585

  • Reginato RJ (1983) Field quantification of crop water stress. Trans ASAE 26:772–775

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler EJ, Camp CR, Evans DE, Millen JA (2002) Corn canopy temperatures measured with a moving infrared thermometer array. Trans ASAE 45:581–591

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS (2003) SAS Version 9.1 Users Manual. SAS Institute Inc., Cary

  • Stroup WW, Baenziger PS, Mulitze DK (1994) Removing spatial variation from wheat yield trials: a comparison of methods. Crop Sci 34:62–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teague TG, Vories E, Tugwell NP, Danforth DM (1999) Methods for assessing the impact of irrigation on cotton crop development and boll shed. In: Proceedings of the beltwide cotton producers research conference, Orlando 3–7 January 1999, pp 534–536

  • USDA-NRCS (2005) Soil survey geographic (SSURGO) database for Mississippi County, Arkansas. USDA-NRCS, Fort Worth, Texas

  • Wanjura DF, Upchurch DR (2000) Canopy temperature characterizations of corn and cotton water stress. Trans ASAE 43:867–875

    Google Scholar 

  • Wanjura DF, Upchurch DR (2002) Water status response of corn and cotton to altered irrigation. Irrig Sci 21:45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanjura DF, Upchurch DR, Mahan JR (2004) Establishing differential irrigation levels using temperature-time thresholds. Appl Eng Agric 20:201–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Wanjura DF, Upchurch DR, Mahan JR (2006) Behavior of temperature-based water stress indicators in BIOTIC-controlled irrigation. Irrig Sci 24:223–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman DL, Harville DA (1991) A random field approach to the analysis of field plot experiments and other spatial experiments. Biometrics 47:223–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

Funding for the studies was provided by Cotton Incorporated. The authors thank Bob Glover, Shawn Lancaster and Ashish Mishra for their assistance in conducting field experiments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biological and Agricultural Engineering Department, University of Arkansas, 203 Engineering Hall, Fayetteville, AR, 72701, USA

    Sreekala G. Bajwa

  2. USDA-ARS Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit, Delta Center, 147 State Hwy T, Box 160, Portageville, MO, 63873, USA

    Earl D. Vories

Authors
  1. Sreekala G. Bajwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Earl D. Vories
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sreekala G. Bajwa.

Additional information

Communicated by A. Kassam.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bajwa, S.G., Vories, E.D. Spatial analysis of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) canopy responses to irrigation in a moderately humid area. Irrig Sci 25, 429–441 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-006-0058-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-006-0058-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation