Water use efficiency and canopy temperature response of soybean subjected to deficit irrigation

Authors

  • Ailson Maciel de Almeida University of São Paulo/USP-ESALQ, Biosystems Engineering Department, C.P. 09, 13418-900 Piracicaba, SP
  • Rubens Duarte Coelho University of São Paulo/USP-ESALQ, Biosystems Engineering Department, C.P. 09, 13418-900 Piracicaba, SP
  • Timóteo Herculino da Silva Barros University of São Paulo/USP-CENA, Center of Nuclear Energy in Agriculture, 13416-000 Piracicaba, SP
  • Carlos Quiloango-Chimarro University of São Paulo/USP-ESALQ, Biosystems Engineering Department, C.P. 09, 13418-900 Piracicaba, SP
  • Angelo Tiago Azevedo University of São Paulo/USP-ESALQ, Biosystems Engineering Department, C.P. 09, 13418-900 Piracicaba, SP
  • Jéfferson de Oliveira Costa Minas Gerais Agricultural Research Agency/EPAMIG, Experimental Field of Gorutuba, 39525-000 Nova Porteirinha, MG

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36253/ijam-2445

Keywords:

Glycine max L., water deficit strategies, canopy temperature, morphological responses

Abstract

Deficit irrigation is a key strategy for improving water use efficiency (WUE) under irrigated conditions. However, there is a lack of information regarding the optimal water replacement that have minimal negative effects on soybean productivity. The objective of this study was to determine the water replacement levels associated with insignificant grain yield (GY) losses in soybean crops. A rain shelter experiment was conducted using a randomized complete block design with six replicates. Eight irrigation replacement levels, L120, L100, L90, L80, L70, L60, L50, and L40, were applied, where L100 was the reference treatment that kept soil moisture content along the soil profile under field capacity conditions and all other replacement levels were a fraction of this reference level. Grain yield ranged from 2.2 Mg ha-1 in L40 to 4.4 Mg ha-1 in L100, with a significant GY reduction in irrigation levels below 70%. The average crop water stress index (CWSI) ranged between 0.26 at L120 and 0.66 at L40 irrigation levels. WUE varied significantly only for the extreme irrigation levels studied, with the greatest value at the L40 irrigation level (1.2 kg m-3) and the lowest value at the L120 irrigation level (0.65 kg m-3), whereas for the intermediate irrigation levels from 50 to 100%, the WUE was equal to approximately 1.1 kg m-3. The relationship between CWSI and GY (R2 = 0.85) suggested that the maximum GY occurred at a CWSI of 0.34. In addition, the relationship between CWSI and WUE (R2 = 0.73) showed that as evapotranspiration decreased, crop temperature increased. In conclusion, the implementation of a continuous water deficit in soybeans is feasible for farmers in water-scarce areas, but the minimum value of area productivity must be considered, even though WUE increases under more intensive values of water deficit.

References

Amani, I., Fischer, R.A., Reynolds, M.P. 1996. Canopy Temperature Depression Association with Yield of Irrigated Spring Wheat Cultivars in a Hot Climate. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science: 176, 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.1996.tb00454.x

Anda, A., Simon, B., Soós, G., Kucserka, T. 2019. Crop-water relation and production of two soybean varieties under different water supplies. Theoretical and Applied Climatology: 137, 1515–1528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-018-2660-9

Anda, A., Soós, G., Menyhárt, L., Kucserka, T., Simon, B. 2020. Yield features of two soybean varieties under different water supplies and field conditions. Field Crops Research: 245, 107673. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FCR.2019.107673

Banerjee, K., Krishnan, P., Das, B. 2020. Thermal imaging and multivariate techniques for characterizing and screening wheat genotypes under water stress condition. Ecological Indicators 119: 106829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106829

Battisti, R., Sentelhas, P.C., Pascoalino, J.A.L., Sako, H., de Sá Dantas, J.P., Moraes, M.F. 2018. Soybean yield gap in the areas of yield contest in Brazil. International Journal of Plant Production: 12, 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42106-018-0016-0

Battisti, R., Sentelhas, P.C. 2019. Characterizing Brazilian soybean-growing regions by water deficit patterns. Field Crops Research: 240, 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FCR.2019.06.007

Bian, J., Zhang, Z., Chen, J., Chen, H., Cui, C., Li, X., Chen, S., Fu, Q. 2019. Simplified evaluation of cotton water stress using high resolution unmanned aerial vehicle thermal imagery. Remote Sensing: 11, 267–284. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11030267

Biju, S., Fuentes, S., Gupta, D. 2018. The use of infrared thermal imaging as a non-destructive screening tool for identifying drought-tolerant lentil genotypes. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry: 127, 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2018.03.005

Blum, A. 2009. Effective use of water (EUW) and not water-use efficiency (WUE) is the target of crop yield improvement under drought stress. Field Crops Research: 112, 119–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FCR.2009.03.009

Candogan, B.N., Sincik, M., Buyukcangaz, H., Demirtas, C., Goksoy, A.T., Yazgan, S. 2013. Yield, quality and crop water stress index relationships for deficit-irrigated soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] in sub-humid climatic conditions. Agricultural Water Management 118, 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.11.021

Conab, Companhia Nacional de Abastecimento. 2023. Acompanhamento da safra brasileira: grãos. Brasília: CONAB. Available in: . Accessed on: March 1, 2023.

Costa, J.O., Coelho, R.D., Barros, T.H.S., Fraga Júnior, E.F., Fernandes, A.L.T. 2020. Canopy thermal response to water deficit of coffee plants under drip irrigation. Irrigation and Drainage: 69, 472–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/IRD.2429

Costa, J.O., Coelho, R.D., Barros, T.H.S., Fraga Júnior, E.F., Fernandes, A.L.T. 2018. Physiological responses of coffee tree under different irrigation levels. Engenharia Agricola: 38, 648–656. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4430-Eng.Agric.v38n5p648-656/2018

Craparo, A.C.W., Steppe, K., Van Asten, P.J.A., Läderach, P., Jassogne, L.T.P., Grab, S.W. 2017. Application of thermography for monitoring stomatal conductance of Coffea arabica under different shading systems. Science of the Total Environment: 609, 755–763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.158

DeJonge, K.C., Taghvaeian, S., Trout, T.J., Comas, L.H. 2015. Comparison of canopy temperature-based water stress indices for maize. Agricultural Water Management: 156, 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.03.023

Demirtaş, Ç., Yazgan, S., Candogan, B.N., Sincik, M., Büyükcangaz, H., Göksoy, A.T. 2010. Quality and yield response of soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill) to drought stress in sub-humid environment. African Journal of Biotechnology: 9, 6873–6881. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajb.v9i41

Dogan, E., Kirnak, H., Copur, O. 2007. Effect of seasonal water stress on soybean and site specific evaluation of CROPGRO-Soybean model under semi-arid climatic conditions. Agricultural Water Management: 90, 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2007.02.003

Dong, S., Jiang, Y., Dong, Y., Wang, L., Wang, W., Ma, Z., Yan, C., Ma, C., Liu, L. 2019. A study on soybean responses to drought stress and rehydration. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences: 26, 2006–2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2019.08.005

Fernandes, R.D.M., de Melo, D.M., Elli, E.F., Battisti, R. 2022. Climate change impacts on rainfed and irrigated soybean yield in Brazil’s new agricultural frontier. Theoretical and Applied Climatology: 147, 803-816. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-021-03865-w

Flexas, J., Medrano, H. 2002. Drought‐inhibition of photosynthesis in C3 plants: stomatal and non‐stomatal limitations revisited. Annals of Botany: 89, 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcf027

França, A.C.F., Coelho, R.D., da Silva Gundim, A., de Oliveira Costa, J., Quiloango-Chimarro, C.A. 2024. Effects of different irrigation scheduling methods on physiology, yield, and irrigation water productivity of soybean varieties. Agricultural Water Management: 293, 108709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2024.108709

Frederick, J.R., Woolley, J.T., Hesketh, J.D., Peters, D.B. 1991. Seed yield and agronomic traits of old and modern soybean cultivars under irrigation and soil water-deficit. Field Crops Research: 27, 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4290(91)90023-O

Gajić, B., Kresović, B., Tapanarova, A., Životić, L., Todorović, M. 2018. Effect of irrigation regime on yield, harvest index and water productivity of soybean grown under different precipitation conditions in a temperate environment. Agricultural Water Management: 210, 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AGWAT.2018.08.002

Gava, R., Frizzone, J.A., Snyder, R.L., de Almeida, B.M., de Freitas, P.S.L., Rezende, R. 2016. Strategies of deficit water management in irrigation of soybean crop. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia de Biossistemas: 10, 305–315. https://doi.org/10.18011/bioeng2016v10n3p305-315

Geerts, S., Raes, D. 2009. Deficit irrigation as an on-farm strategy to maximize crop water productivity in dry areas. Agricultural Water Management: 96, 1275–1284. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AGWAT.2009.04.009

Irmak, S., Specht, J.E., Odhiambo, L.O., Rees, J.M., Cassman, K.G. 2014. Soybean yield, evapotranspiration, water productivity, and soil water extraction response to subsurface drip irrigation and fertigation. Transactions of the ASABE: 57, 729–748. https://doi.org/10.13031/trans.57.10085

Kang, J., Hao, X., Zhou, H., Ding, R. 2021. An integrated strategy for improving water use efficiency by understanding physiological mechanisms of crops responding to water deficit: Present and prospect. Agricultural Water Management: 255, 107008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107008

Khorsandi, A., Hemmat, A., Mireei, S.A., Amirfattahi, R., Ehsanzadeh, P. 2018. Plant temperature-based indices using infrared thermography for detecting water status in sesame under greenhouse conditions. Agricultural Water Management: 204, 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.04.012

Khorsand, A., Rezaverdinejad, V., Asgarzadeh, H., Majnooni-Heris, A., Rahimi, A., Besharat, S., Sadraddini, A.A. 2021. Linking plant and soil indices for water stress management in black gram. Scientific Reports: 11, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-79516-3

Kirnak, H., Irik, H.A., Unlukara, A. 2019. Potential use of crop water stress index (CWSI) in irrigation scheduling of drip-irrigated seed pumpkin plants with different irrigation levels. Scientia Horticulturae: 256, 108608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2019.108608

Kocar, M.M., Josipović, M., Sudarić, A., Plavšić, H., Beraković, I., Atilgan, A., Marković, M. 2022. Environment-and genotype-dependent irrigation effect on soybean grain yield and grain quality. Applied Sciences: 13, 111. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13010111

Kullberg, E.G., DeJonge, K.C., Chávez, J.L. 2017. Evaluation of thermal remote sensing indices to estimate crop evapotranspiration coefficients. Agricultural Water Management: 179, 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.07.007

Jackson, R.D., Kustas, W.P., Choudhury, B.J. 1988. A reexamination of the crop water stress index. Irrigation Science: 9, 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00296705

Jamshidi, S., Zand-Parsa, S., Niyogi, D. 2021. Assessing crop water stress index of citrus using in-situ measurements, landsat, and sentinel-2 data. International Journal of Remote Sensing: 42, 1893-1916. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2020.1846224

Li, Q., Chen, Y., Sun, S., Zhu, M., Xue, J., Gao, Z., Tang, Y. 2022. Research on crop irrigation schedules under deficit irrigation—a meta-analysis. Water Resources Management: 36, 4799-4817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-022-03278-y

Meron, M., Sprintsin, M., Tsipris, J., Alchanatis, V., Cohen, Y. 2013. Foliage temperature extraction from thermal imagery for crop water stress determination. Precision Agriculture: 14, 467–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-013-9310-0

Mekonnen, M., Hoekstra, A.Y., Neale, C.M.U., Ray, C., Yang, H.S. 2020. Water productivity benchmarks: The case of maize and soybean in Nebraska. Agricultural Water Management: 234, 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106122

Morales-Santos, A., Nolz, R. 2023. Assessment of canopy temperature-based water stress indices for irrigated and rainfed soybeans under subhumid conditions. Agricultural Water Management: 279, 108214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108214

Petrie, P.R., Wang, Y., Liu, S., Lam, S., Whitty, M.A., Skewes, M.A. 2019. The accuracy and utility of a low cost thermal camera and smartphone-based system to assess grapevine water status. Biosystems Engineering 179, 126–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOSYSTEMSENG.2019.01.002

Quiloango-Chimarro, C.A., Coelho, R.D., Heinemann, A.B., Arrieta, R.G., da Silva Gundim, A., França, A.C.F. 2022. Physiology, yield, and water use efficiency of drip-irrigated upland rice cultivars subjected to water stress at and after flowering. Experimental Agriculture: 58. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479722000205

Ohashi, Y., Nakayama, N., Saneoka, H., Mohapatra, P.K., Fujita, K. 2009. Differences in the responses of stem diameter and pod thickness to drought stress during the grain filling stage in soybean plants. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum: 31, 271–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-008-0229-4

Rosadi, R.A.B., Afandi, S.M., Ito, K., Adomako, J.T. 2005. Critical water content and water stress coefficient of soybean (Glycine max [L.] Merr.) under deficit irrigation. Paddy and Water Environment: 3, 219–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-005-0017-3

Rosales-Serna, R., Kohashi-Shibata, J., Acosta-Gallegos, J.A., Trejo-López, C., Ortiz-Cereceres, J., Kelly, J.D. 2004. Biomass distribution, maturity acceleration and yield in drought-stressed common bean cultivars. Field Crops Research: 85, 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(03)00161-8

Sentelhas, P.C., Battisti, R., Câmara, G.M.S., Farias, J.R.B., Hampf, A.C., Nendel, C. 2015. The soybean yield gap in Brazil - Magnitude, causes and possible solutions for sustainable production. The Journal of Agricultural Science: 153, 1394–1411. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859615000313

Setiyono, T.D., Weiss, A., Specht, J., Bastidas, A.M., Cassman, K.G., Dobermann, A. 2007. Understanding and modeling the effect of temperature and daylength on soybean phenology under high-yield conditions. Field Crops Research: 100, 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.07.011

Silva, V.P.R., Silva, R.A., Maciel, G.F., Braga, C.C., Silva Júnior, J.L.C., Souza, E.P., Almeida, R.S.R., Silva, M.T., Holanda, R.M. 2017. Calibration and validation of the AquaCrop model for the soybean crop grown under different levels of irrigation in the Motopiba region, Brazil. Ciência Rural: 48, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20161118

Singh, A. 2014. Conjunctive use of water resources for sustainable irrigated agriculture. Journal of Hydrology: 519, 1688–1697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.09.049

Singh, J., Ge, Y., Heeren, D.M., Walter-Shea, E., Neale, C.M.U., Irmak, S., Woldt, W.E., Bai, G., Bhatti, S., Maguire, M.S. 2021. Inter-relationships between water depletion and temperature differential in row crop canopies in a sub-humid climate. Agricultural Water Management: 256, 107061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107061

Vale, R.L., Netto, A.M., Xavier, B.T.L., Barreto, M.L.P., Silva, J.P.S. 2019. Assessment of the gray water footprint of the pesticide mixture in a soil cultivated with sugarcane in the northern area of the State of Pernambuco, Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production: 234, 925–932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.282

van Genuchten, M.T. 1980. A Closed-form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal: 44, 892–898. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x

Wijewardana, C., Reddy, K.R., Alsajri, F.A., Irby, J.T., Krutz, J., Golden, B. 2018. Quantifying soil moisture deficit effects on soybean yield and yield component distribution patterns. Irrigation Science: 36, 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-018-0580-1

Yang, X., Wang, B., Chen, L., Li, P., Cao, C. 2019. The different influences of drought stress at the flowering stage on rice physiological traits, grain yield, and quality. Scientific Reports: 9, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40161-0

Zahra, N., Hafeez, M.B., Kausar, A., Al Zeidi, M., Asekova, S., Siddique, K.H., Farooq, M. 2023. Plant photosynthetic responses under drought stress: Effects and management. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science: 209, 651–672. https://doi.org/10.1111/jac.12652

Zia, S., Romano, G., Spreer, W., Sanchez, C., Cairns, J., Araus, J.L., Müller, J. 2013. Infrared thermal imaging as a rapid tool for identifying water-stress tolerant maize genotypes of different phenology. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science: 199, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2012.00537.x

Downloads

Published

2024-08-26

How to Cite

de Almeida, A. M., Coelho, R. D., da Silva Barros, T. H., Quiloango-Chimarro, C., Azevedo, A. T., & de Oliveira Costa, J. (2024). Water use efficiency and canopy temperature response of soybean subjected to deficit irrigation. Italian Journal of Agrometeorology, (1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.36253/ijam-2445

Issue

No. 1 (2024)

Section

RESEARCH ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Ailson Maciel de Almeida, Rubens Duarte Coelho, Timóteo Herculino da Silva Barros, Carlos Quiloango-Chimarro, Angelo Tiago Azevedo, Jéfferson de Oliveira Costa

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Licence and copyright agreement for IJAM

(revised October 2020)

The following licence and copyright agreement is valid for any article published by IJAM.

Author’s certification

By submitting the manuscript, the authors certify the following:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been published before (except in the form of an abstract or proceedings-type publication – including discussion papers – or as part of a published lecture or thesis); it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; and its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work was carried out.
  • They have secured the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following licence and copyright agreement:

Copyright

  • The copyright of any article is retained by the author(s). More information on the transfer of copyright can be found below.
  • Authors grant our journals a licence to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.
  • Authors grant any third party the right to use the article freely under the stipulation that the original authors are given credit and the appropriate citation details are mentioned.
  • The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License

Anyone is free to share — to copy, distribute, and transmit the work to remix — to adapt the work under the following conditions:

  • Attribution — The original authors must be given credit.
  • For any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the licence terms of this work are.
  • Any of these conditions can be waived if the copyright holders give permission.
  • Nothing in this licence impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights. The full legal code of this licence.

 

Most read articles by the same author(s)