عنوان مقاله [English]
Water and nitrogen are two main factors of plant production. Water scarcity is one of the most important challenges in the production of agricultural products in arid and semi-arid regions, as in most parts of Iran. A great deal of research has been done on the interaction between water and nitrogen and has shown that irrigation and nitrogen treatments interact with the yield. So far, various models have been developed to simulate plant performance in response to different levels of water and nitrogen. The FAO organization has provided the AquaCrop model. This model simulates yield performance in response to water consumption. The effect of nitrogen deficiency on yield in the latest versions of the AquaCrop model (versions 4 and 5) is carried out using semi-quantitative method. In this method, nitrogen deficiency is assumed to be based on four parameters: 1- Normalized water productivity (WP*), 2- maximum canopy cover (CCx), 3- The Canopy growth coefficient (CGC) and 4- Canopy decline coefficient (CDC). The hypothesis of this research is that there is a relationship between the four above parameters and nitrogen fertilizer for corn, and from them, we can determine the values of four parameters for each fertilizer level and use them in the AquaCrop model. Therefore, the first goal of this study was to determine the equations between nitrogen fertilizer and the four above parameters. The second goal of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the AquaCrop model for simulating the response of corn to nitrogen fertilizer using parameters derived from the equations defined in the first part.
1-Ali, M.H., Hoque, M.R., Hassan, A. and Khair, A., 2007. Effects of deficit irrigation on yield, water productivity, and economic returns of wheat. Agricultural Water Management, 92(3), pp.151-161.
2- Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D. and Smith, M., 1998. Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. FAO, Rome.
3- Angus, J.F., 2001. Nitrogen supply and demand in Australian agriculture. Animal Production Science, 41(3), pp. 277-288.
4-Araya, A., Habtu, S., Hadgu, K.M., Kebede, A. and Dejene, T., 2010. Test of AquaCrop model in simulating biomass and yield of water deficient and irrigated barley (Hordeum vulgare). Agricultural Water Management, 97(11), pp.1838-1846.
5-Boogaard, H.L., De Wit, A.J.W., Roller, J.A. and Van Diepen, C. A., 2014. WOFOST CONTROL CENTRE 2.1; User’s guide for the WOFOST CONTROL CENTRE 2.1 and the crop growth simulation model WOFOST 7.1.7. Wageningen (Netherlands), Alterra, Wageningen University & Research Centre.
6-Eickhout, B., Bouwman, A.V. and Van Zeijts, H., 2006. The role of nitrogen in world food production and environmental sustainability. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 116(1), pp.4-14.
7-Farahani, H.J., Izzi, G. and Oweis, T.Y., 2009. Parameterization and evaluation of the AquaCrop model for full and deficit irrigated cotton. Agronomy Journal, 101(3), pp.469-476.
8- Geerts, S. and Raes, D., 2009. Deficit irrigation as an on-farm strategy to maximize crop water productivity in dry areas. Agricultural Water Management, 96(9), pp.1275-1284.
9- Geerts, S., Raes, D., Garcia, M., Condori, O., Mamani, J., Miranda, R., Cusicanqui, J., Taboada, C., Yucra, E. and Vacher, J., 2008. Could deficit irrigation be a sustainable practice for quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) in the Southern Bolivian Altiplano?. Agricultural Water Management, 95(8), pp.909-917.
10- Hsiao, T.C., Heng, L., Steduto, P., Rojas-Lara, B., Raes, D. and Fereres, E., 2009. AquaCrop—the FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: III. Parameterization and testing for maize. Agronomy Journal, 101(3), pp.448-459.
11- Igbadun, H.E., Salim, B.A., Tarimo, A.K. and H.F. Mahoo. 2008. Effects of deficit irrigation scheduling on yields and soil water balance of irrigated maize. Irrigation Science. 27(1):11-23.
12- Jones, C.A., Kiniry, J.R. and Dyke, P.T., 1986. CERES-Maize: A simulation model of maize growth and development. Texas A&M University Press.
13- Jones, J.W., Hoogenboom, G., Porter, C.H., Boote, K.J., Batchelor, W.D., Hunt, L.A., Wilkens, P.W., Singh, U., Gijsman, A.J. and Ritchie, J.T., 2003. The DSSAT cropping system model. European Journal of Agronomy, 18(3), pp.235-265.
14- Kang, S., Shi, W. and Zhang, J., 2000. An improved water-use efficiency for maize grown under regulated deficit irrigation. Field Crops Research, 67(3), pp.207-214.
15- Liu, C.W., Sung, Y., Chen, B.C. and Lai, H.Y., 2014. Effects of nitrogen fertilizers on the growth and nitrate content of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 11(4), pp.4427-4440.
16- Mousavizadeh, S.F., Honar, T. and Ahmadi, S.H., 2016. Assessment of the AquaCrop Model for simulating Canola under different irrigation managements in a semiarid area. International Journal of Plant Production, 10(4), pp.425-446.
17- Patrignani, A. and Ochsner, T.E., 2015. Canopeo: A powerful new tool for measuring fractional green canopy cover. Agronomy Journal, 107(6), pp.2312-2320.
18- Raes, D., Steduto, P., Hsiao, T.C. and Fereres, E., 2009. AquaCrop the FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: II. Main algorithms and software description. Agronomy Journal, 101(3), pp.438-447.
19- Steduto, P., Hsiao, T.C. and Fereres, E., 2007. On the conservative behavior of biomass water productivity. Irrigation Science, 25(3), pp.189-207.
20- Steduto, P., Hsiao, T.C., Raes, D. and Fereres, E., 2009. AquaCrop—The FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: I. Concepts and underlying principles. Agronomy Journal, 101(3), pp.426-437.
21 -Stöckle, C.O., Donatelli, M. and Nelson, R., 2003. CropSyst, a cropping systems simulation model. European Journal of Agronomy, 18(3), pp.289-307.
22- Van Gaelen, H., Tsegay, A., Delbecque, N., Shrestha, N., Garcia, M., Fajardo, H., Miranda, R., Vanuytrecht, E., Abrha, B., Diels, J. and Raes, D., 2015. A semi-quantitative approach for modelling crop response to soil fertility: evaluation of the AquaCrop procedure. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 153(07), pp.1218-1233.