Published November, 2000
CORN
Determination of Crop Water Stress Index for Irrigation Timing
and Yield Estimation of Corn
Suat Irmak,* Dorota Z. Haman, and Ruhi Bastug
ABSTRACT
Corn (Zea mays L.) grown under a Mediterranean semiarid climate
requires supplemental irrigation to maximize the grain yield. Since
the cost of irrigation application has been increasing, elimination of
unnecessary irrigation applications would improve economics of corn
production. There has been much interest in the crop water stress
index (CWSI) as a potential tool for irrigation scheduling and yield
estimation. An experiment was conducted to monitor and quantify
water stress, and to develop parameters for irrigation scheduling and
grain yield of summer-grown corn as a function of CWSI under Medi-
terranean semiarid cropping conditions. Three irrigation treatments
were based on replenishing the 0.9-m deep root zone to field capacity
when the soil water level dropped to 25, 50, and 75% of available
water holding capacity (AWHC). A dryland treatment was also in-
cluded. The lower (nonstressed) and upper (stressed) baselines were
measured to calculate CWSI. An equation that can be used to calculate
the yield potential of summer-grown corn under a Mediterranean
climate was developed using the relationship between the corn grain
yield and the seasonal mean CWSI. Permitting the seasonal average
CWSI value to exceed more than 0.22 resulted in decreased corn
grain yield. The CWSI behaved as expected, dropping to near zero
following an irrigation and increasing gradually as corn plants depleted
soil water reserves. We concluded that CWSI is a useful tool to monitor
and quantify the water stress of corn under a Mediterranean climate.
E ffective use of irrigation water is rapidly becoming
an issue in Mediterranean regions and a method
for irrigation scheduling based on the CWSI has been
suggested. Because of its climatic adaptation and high
yields, irrigated corn has been grown for many years in
southern Turkey. Since 1985 irrigated corn production
in this region has expanded to 610 000 ha (Irmak, 1996).
Although corn is one of the most widely grown feed
grains produced under irrigation in this region, not
enough information is available to quantify water stress
at the different soil water conditions to estimate grain
yield and to schedule irrigations for corn based on
the CWSI.
A technique to measure plant water stress should
provide nondestructive, rapid, and reliable estimates of
plant water status. During the 1960s, infrared technol-
ogy advanced rapidly, and instruments that could be
used for agricultural purposes (to measure crop canopy
temperature) became commercially available. During
S. Irmak and D.Z. Haman, Dep. of Agric. and Bio. Eng., Univ. of
Florida, P.O. Box 110570, Gainesville, FL 32611; R. Bastug, Faculty
of Agric., Univ. of Akdeniz, Antalya, Turkey, 07070. Florida Agric.
Exp. Stn. Journal Ser. no. R-06412. Received 20 Nov. 1998. *Corre-
sponding author (aysu@grove.ufl.edu).
Published in Agron. J. 92:1221–1227 (2000).
1221
the past decades, lightweight, hand-held, portable, and
battery operated infrared thermometers (IRT) became
available. Infrared thermometers can rapidly measure
canopy temperatures over large areas. The theory of
IRT operation (Fuchs and Tanner, 1966; Fuchs et al.,
1967; Hatfield, 1990; Gardner and Shock, 1989); and
(Gardner et al., 1992a) and temperature effects in infra-
red thermometry (Jackson and Idso, 1969) have been
discussed. In the 1980s, the use of IRT become more
routine in irrigation scheduling when Idso et al. (1981a)
developed and demonstrated an empirical method for
using the crop water stress index (CWSI).
Idso et al. (1981a) observed a linear relationship be-
tween canopy minus air (Tc ⫺Ta) temperature differ-
ences and vapor pressure deficit (VPD) of the air for
well irrigated plants transpiring at potential rate during
the daylight hours. As soil moisture was depleted, the
(Tc ⫺Ta) vs. VPD relationship deviated from the linear
nonstressed baseline condition. The empirical CWSI
uses two baselines. The lower baseline represents the
maximum rate of transpiration of a well watered crop
and the upper baseline represents the Tc ⫺Ta of a canopy
with no transpiration and for which the canopy tempera-
ture does not respond to VPD. The CWSI varies from
0 to 1 with 1 representing a plant having no transpiration
loss and 0 representing a plant transpiring at the maxi-
mum rate. The CWSI has been correlated to yield
(Walker and Hatfield, 1983; Smith et al., 1985), leaf
water potential (Pinter and Reginato, 1981; O’Toole
et al., 1984; Jackson, 1991), and soil water availability
(Hatfield, 1983; Reginato and Garrot, 1987).
Since the development of the CWSI method, many
researchers have used it for irrigation management
(Pinter and Reginato, 1982; Reginato, 1983; Howell et
al., 1984; O’Toole et al., 1984; Reginato and Howe,
1985; Reginato and Garrett, 1987; Wanjura et al., 1990).
However, it is often reported that early season CWSI
values are particularly difficult to obtain because of
partial canopy covers. In the early growing season, when
plants are small, or for low plant populations, a part of
the soil surface may be viewed by the IRT when Tc
measurements are made. Hatfield et al. (1985) deter-
mined unstressed baselines of the CWSI for cotton un-
der full and incomplete ground cover and reported that
unstressed baselines for full ground cover had slopes
about twice those under partial canopy cover. They con-
Abbreviations: AWHC, available water holding capacity; CWSI, crop
water stress index; RMSE, root mean square error; SD, standard
deviation; Ta, air temperature; Tc, canopy temperature; VPD, vapor
pressure deficit.
1222 AGRONOMY JOURNAL, VOL. 92, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2000
cluded that partial canopy is a very complex system and
the CWSI is overestimated when the crop is at less than
full cover which could lead to an overapplication of
irrigation water. On the other hand, for some crops, a
single baseline has been used successfully for the entire
growing season. However, there are some serious diffi-
culties using only one baseline for the entire growing
season (Gardner et al., 1992a).
It is reported that corn is relatively tolerant to water
stress in the vegetative stage, very sensitive during the
period of tasseling, silking, and pollination, and moder-
ately sensitive during the grain-filling stage (Shanahan
and Nielsen, 1987). Heermann and Duke (1978) used
the average Tc ⫺Ta values between treatment plots and
adjoining well-watered areas to study crop water stress
under limited irrigation for corn plants irrigated by a
center-pivot irrigation system. They reported that the
average temperature difference (Tc ⫺Ta) elevation was
linearly related to irrigation and to relative dry-matter
yield. They concluded that an average Tc ⫺Ta ⬎ 1.5⬚C
was significantly correlated with grain yield reduction.
Geiser et al. (1982) compared the temperature differ-
ence (Tc ⫺Ta) method with resistance blocks and a water
balance (checkbook) method of irrigation scheduling.
They concluded that water balance and resistance block
methods required additional water applications of 39
and 18%, respectively, compared to the temperature
difference method. Gardner et al. (1981b) and Blad et
al. (1981) tested the deviation of midday canopy temper-
ature as an irrigation scheduling tool for corn plants.
They found standard deviations of 0.3⬚C in well irrigated
and 4.2⬚C in nonirrigated corn plots. They concluded
that plots that showed a standard deviation ⬎0.3⬚C re-
quired irrigation.
Gardner et al. (1981a) correlated grain yields of corn
plants with differences in canopy temperature (Tc) be-
tween stressed and well-irrigated plants grown under
different irrigation regimes. Midday differences in daily
Tc during the pollination and grain-filling stages were
effectively used to calculate grain yield with an accuracy
of ⫾10%. They also observed yield reduction when the
canopy temperature increased between the onset of tas-
seling and the end of grain-filling stages. Clawson and
Blad (1982) reported less water use (156 mm) in corn
plots for which irrigations were scheduled based on the
canopy temperature compared to a neutron probe
scheduled plot. They suggested that using canopy tem-
perature variability to initiate irrigation has the poten-
tial for significant water savings due to improved effi-
ciency in the use of available soil water.
Productivity response to water stress is different for
each crop and this response is expected to vary with the
climate. Therefore, the critical values of CWSI should
be determined for a particular crop in different climates
and soils to use it in yield prediction and irrigation
scheduling. The objectives of this experiment were to
monitor and quantify water stress, and to develop pa-
rameters to estimate irrigation timing and grain yield
of summer-grown corn as a function of CWSI under
Mediterranean semiarid cropping conditions using the
method developed by Idso et al. (1981a).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The experiment was conducted during the summer of 1995
at the Mediterranean Agricultural Research Station located
in Antalya, Turkey (36⬚ 55⬘, 34⬚ 55⬘, and altitude: 12 m). The
region has a typical Mediterranean semiarid climate with an
average annual rainfall of 1068 mm.
A single cross white corn (var. Antbey) was planted on 25
June 1995 following sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench].
Time to 50% flowering is 50 to 67 d, average growing season
is 120 to 130 d, maximum plant height is 2 to 2.3 m, cob height
is 0.95 to 1.10 m, and the variety is not drought adapted. The
experiment was designed as a randomized complete block
with three replications for each treatment. There were 180
plants in each plot (7 by 4.90 m) and plant spacing was 0.75 m
between the rows and 0.25 m within the rows. There were eight
rows in each plot; and two additional rows were maintained as
guard rows at each side of the plot. The seeds were planted
at the depth of 0.07 to 0.08 m. Plots were maintained in beds
and furrows to ensure uniform water distribution. Irrigation
water was applied with furrow irrigation and total water to
each plot was measured with a TS-324 model flow meter
(Teksan, Inc., Istanbul, Turkey).1 Gravimetric soil moisture
samples were taken in each plot at 0 to 0.30 m depth. A neutron
scattering moisture gauge (Model 4300, Troxler Electronic
Laboratories, Inc., Raleigh, NC) was used to measure soil
moisture at depths of 0.60 and 0.90 m. Aluminum access tubes
were installed in the center of each plot. The neutron probe
was calibrated at the beginning of the growing season for the
experimental field by correlating probe readings with volumet-
ric water content of soil samples (100 cm3) taken. The calibra-
tion equation for the neutron probe was WC ⫽ (CR ⫺ 0.065) /
2.42 (r 2 ⫽ 0.91, n ⫽ 15, RMSE ⫽ 0.022, WC ⫽ volumetric
water content by m3 m⫺3, and CR ⫽ count ratio).
Field plot experiments were conducted on clay soil (47%
clay, 36% silt, and 17% sand) that received a 68 mm irrigation
before planting. Four soil samples from each depth (0–120 cm
with 30 cm increments) at five different locations were taken
from the experimental field in order to determine the soil
properties (Table 1). Soil particle size analysis and bulk density
(Black et al., 1965) were determined for each soil depth. Field
capacity (FC) and permanent wilting point (PWP) were also
determined for each soil depth at 33 and 1500 kPa soil water
tension using the pressure chamber method. Porosity, f, of
each soil depth was calculated using the relationship f ⫽ [1 ⫺
(␳b / ␳s)] * 100 (␳b ⫽ bulk density, g cm⫺3, and ␳s ⫽ density of
solids, 2.65 g cm⫺3). Plots were fertilized with 400 kg ha⫺1
of NH4NO3 (ammonium nitrate) before planting. Irrigation
treatments were established to refill a 0.9 m depth rooting
zone when soil water had depleted to given percentages of
the available water holding capacity (AWHC) in this rooting
zone. Treatments designated S1, S2, and S3 were irrigated when
soil water dropped to 75, 50, and 25% of AWHC, respectively.
In addition, 45 mm irrigation was applied to the irrigation
treatments only (S1, S2, and S3) on 20 July. A fourth treatment,
S4, was not irrigated after planting. Table 2 shows the irrigation
dates and total amount of water applied (mm) to the experi-
mental plots. The total amount of applied water ranged from
68 to 441 mm.
Canopy temperatures (⬚C) were measured using a Model
210 Ag Multimeter (Everest Interscience Inc., Fullerton, CA)
portable hand-held infrared thermometer. The instrument has
a field of view of 15⬚ (can be adjusted to 4⬚), a sensing window
1
The mention of trade names or commercial products is solely for
the information of the reader and does not constitute an endorsement
or recommendation for use.
 IRMAK ET AL.: DETERMINATION OF CROP WATER STRESS INDEX 1223

Table 1. Soil physical properties at Antalya, Turkey, including porosity, field capacity (FC), and permanent wilting point (PWP).
Particle-size fractions
Soil depth Bulk density Porosity Sand Silt Clay Soil texture FC† PWP‡
cm g cm⫺3 % Kg Kg⫺1 m3 m⫺3
0–30 1.35 48.9 0.17 0.36 0.47 C 0.364 0.257
30–60 1.40 47.1 0.15 0.49 0.36 SiCL 0.344 0.203
60–90 1.41 46.7 0.19 0.46 0.35 SiCL 0.325 0.212
90–120 1.42 46.4 0.17 0.47 0.36 SiCL 0.361 0.225
120–150 1.54 41.8 0.16 0.48 0.36 SiCL 0.345 0.224
†,‡ Field capacity at 33 kPa, and permanent wilting point at 1500 kPa soil water tension, respectively.

of 10.5 to 12.5 ␮m, and a resolution of 0.1⬚C. The instrument The lower (nonstressed) and upper (stressed) base-
was calibrated using a method described by Blad and Rosen- lines (Fig. 1) were measured for corn and the CWSI
berg (1976). In each measurement the infrared thermometer values were calculated using this diagram as the relative
was held above the plant canopy at an angle of 15⬚ below the value between upper and lower baselines relating the
horizontal so that plant parts, but no soil were viewed. Canopy
difference between canopy (Tc) and air (Ta) tempera-
temperature (Tc) measurements were taken at each plot start-
ing from the early pollination stage when the ground cover tures (⬚C) to vapor pressure deficit (VPD, kPa) as out-
was 100% and the corn plant height was approximately 1.2 m lined by Idso et al. (1981a). To develop the lower (non-
(27 July) and continued until 11 September. In each measure- stressed) baseline in Fig.1, the leaf temperatures and
ment, five canopy temperature measurements were taken vapor pressure deficits were selected as a subset of Tc
from the east and five readings from the west, and then aver- data obtained on clear days when the treatments were
aged. At each measurement time, dry and wet-bulb tempera- assumed to be nonstressed. The measurements were
tures were taken above the canopy surface using an Assman taken from the treatment S2 (although irrigated at 50%
psychrometer (Qualimetrics Inc., Sacramento, CA) to deter- of available water holding capacity, treatment S2 re-
mine air temperature (Ta) and vapor pressure deficit (VPD). ceived the most water, had the highest yield, and was
Grain yields, adjusted to 15.5% dry mass grain moisture,
the least stressed), at 1200 h and 1300 h assuming that
were determined from subplots hand harvested and hand
shelled from each plot on 25 October. Four rows from the the VPD was at maximum for the day. This is the time
middle of the each plot were selected for harvest to avoid of the day when water stress is likely to be the highest
any edge effects. Harvest rows were 6.60 m in length. Yield and when the need for irrigation using CWSI should be
response to treatments was analyzed by analysis of vari- determined. Then, the differences between Tc and Ta
ance(ANOVA). When ANOVA identified treatment effects, were linearly correlated with VPD (Fig. 1). The resulting
Duncans Multiple Range Test (DMRT) was used to identify baseline was described by the linear equation Tc ⫺Ta ⫽
which treatments differed at the 5% significance level. 1.39 ⫺ 0.86VPD (r 2 ⫽ 0.92, n ⫽ 28, RMSE ⫽ 0.415,
P ⬍ 0.01, SD ⫽ 1.33), where Tc ⫺Ta is in ⬚C and VPD
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION is in kPa. Idso (1982) reported the following relationship
between Tc ⫺Ta and VPD for corn in Arizona:Tc ⫺Ta ⫽
The weekly summary of the weather data measured
3.11 ⫺ 1.97 VPD for sunlit and no tassels conditions.
daily at the weather station located nearby the experi-
The intercept was higher and the slope was lower than
mental site is given in the Table 3. No rain occurred
during the growing season. Table 3. Weekly summary of the 1995 weather data measured
daily during the experiment at Antalya, Turkey†‡.
Table 2. Irrigation amount (mm) applied for different treatments Relative Wind
during the 1995 growing season for ‘Antbey’ corn grown at Month Week Temperature humidity Irradiance speed
Antalya, Turkey.
ⴗC % MJ m⫺2 d⫺1 m s⫺1
Treatments‡ June 1 23.5 77.7 25.9 1.6
2 24.8 63.7 25.4 2.2
Date S1 S2 S3 S4 3 26.5 66.7 25.5 2.3
mm 4 27.0 52.6 28.3 3.0
July 1 29.1 45.6 26.9 3.6
28 July 43 – – – 2 26.0 60.3 24.2 2.7
03 August – 82 – – 3 29.6 47.1 25.7 3.3
08 August 43 – 117 – 4 29.1 48.1 26.4 3.1
21 August 41 81 – – August 1 27.8 72.3 24.0 1.9
31 August 43 – – – 2 30.0 43.4 25.4 3.1
01 September – – 117 – 3 26.8 73.7 22.9 2.0
05 September – 83 – – 4 27.4 60.9 22.4 2.8
07 September 41 – – – September 1 24.9 71.7 21.7 2.1
18 September – 82 – – 2 24.7 63.0 21.9 2.2
22 September 41 – – – 3 24.9 56.1 20.3 3.2
Season total† 365 441 347 68 4 22.5 68.9 17.0 2.7
October 1 19.0 48.0 19.0 3.5
† This amount also includes 68 mm of water from preplant irrigation for 2 19.3 44.9 18.0 3.1
all the treatments. On 20 July, irrigation treatments (S1, S2, and S3) 3 19.3 52.3 16.7 2.6
received additional 45 mm of irrigation water. No rain occurred during 4 17.4 68.0 12.5 2.4
the growing season.
‡ Treatments S1, S2, and S3 were irrigated when soil water dropped to 75, † No rain occurred during the growing season.
50, and 25% of available water holding capacity, respectively. S4 was ‡ Weekly average values were calculated from daily average values for
not irrigated after the 68 mm preplant irrigation. each weather parameter.
1224 AGRONOMY JOURNAL, VOL. 92, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2000
Fig. 1. Relationships between canopy temperature minus air tempera-
ture (Tc⫺Ta) and vapor pressure deficit (VPD) of summer-grown
corn at Atalya, Turkey. A is the point which was used as an example
of how CWSI value is calculated. B and C represent the upper
and lower limits for point A, respectively. BC is the vertical distance
between upper and lower baselines, AC is the vertical distance
between point A and lower baseline, and the CWSI is the crop
water stress index.
in this study. However, the climate, soil type, and plant
variety might have caused differences in the intercept
and slope of the baseline of this study. The linear rela-
tionship between Tc ⫺Ta and VPD was also found for
corn (Tc ⫺Ta ⫽ 2.14 ⫺ 1.97 VPD) by Steele et al. (1994).
Development of the lower baseline at a single location
is often limited by the VPD range that occurs, thereby
limiting the baseline transportability to other locations
(Gardner et al., 1992b). In our experiment, the lower
baseline was developed for a relatively wide range of
VPD (1.1–5.7 kPa). Gardner and Shock (1989) sug-
gested that a VPD range of 1 to 6 kPa is necessary to
define a baseline that could be used in other locations
to determine CWSI.
Fig. 2. The seasonal trend of the crop water stress index (CWSI). Treatments S1, S2, and S3 were irrigated when soil water dropped to 75, 50,
and 25% of available water holding capacity, respectively. On 20 July, irrigation treatments (S1, S2, and S3) received additional 45 mm of
irrigation water. Treatment S4 was not irrigated after the 68 mm preplant irrigation. Arrows along the upper axis represent irrigation events.
The upper baseline in Fig. 1 represents Tc ⫺Ta for
plants that are severely stressed. The crop canopy tem-
perature measurements obtained from nonirrigated
plots, S4, were used to create the upper baseline. For
this purpose, temperature (Tc and Ta) measurements
were taken on selected days at 1200 and 1300 h from
nonirrigated plots during 3 August through 12 Septem-
ber except for a few days when measurements were not
possible due to the cloud cover. Then the average values
of canopy temperature obtained from these plots were
computed and subtracted from the average air tempera-
ture values and graphed against vapor pressure deficit.
The Tc ⫺Ta values for upper baseline varied from 4 to
5.1⬚C. To create the upper baseline the average of Tc ⫺Ta
values was computed (⫹4.6⬚C, n ⫽ 19, SD ⫽ 0.33) and
the baseline was drawn parallel to VPD from this point.
Accordingly, the upper baseline, which represents the
Tc ⫺Ta of corn when transpiration has ceased, was as-
sumed to be relatively constant at about ⫹4.6⬚C.
As an example of how CWSI was calculated for a
given day, consider point A in Fig. 1. The point A has
a Tc ⫺Ta value of 2.3⬚C at a VPD value of 2.2 kPa. From
the definition of Idso et al. (1981b), the CWSI is the
ratio of the vertical distance between the measured
Tc ⫺Ta and the lower baseline to the distance between
the lower and upper baselines at the same VPD. The
distance between the point A and the lower baseline is
3.1⬚C, and the distance between the upper and lower
baselines at 2.2 kPa is 5.5⬚C. Thus, the CWSI is 3.1/
5.5 ⫽ 0.56.
When calculated CWSI values were graphed against
time for each irrigation treatment (S1, S2, and S3), syn-
chronous patterns with irrigation events were observed
(Fig. 2). The CWSI values in irrigated plots generally
dropped very close to zero following each irrigation
application, then increased steadily to a maximum value
 IRMAK ET AL.: DETERMINATION OF CROP WATER STRESS INDEX 1225

Fig. 3. Water held (mm) in the 0.9 m crop root zone for four treat-
ments over the period of the experiment. Treatments S1, S2, and
S3 were irrigated when soil water dropped to 75, 50, and 25% of
available water holding capacity, respectively. On 20 July, irrigation
treatments (S1, S2, and S3) received additional 45 mm of irrigation
water. Treatment S4 was not irrigated after the 68 mm preplant irri-
gation.
just prior to the next irrigation application as the soil
water in the crop root zone was depleted. The average
CWSI values were observed before irrigation times as
0.39, and 0.54 for S1, and S3 plots, respectively. The mean
CWSI value measured before irrigations for treatment
S2 was 0.27 and corresponds with the highest grain yield
of corn in this experiment. Gardner et al. (1992b) re-
ported that corn, wheat, and cotton plants are tolerant
to a CWSI rise of 0.2 to 0.3 between irrigations without
significant economic yield reduction. However, it should
be noted that due to some experimental difficulties, the
CWSI values were determined a few days (2–3 d) before
irrigation applications rather than at the irrigation times
for treatments S1 and S2. For the maximum stressed
(nonirrigated) plot, S4, the CWSI continuously increased
as the soil water depleted by the plants and the CWSI
reached a maximum value (1.0) approximately 52 d after
the planting (Fig. 2).
Figure 3 shows the soil water contents (mm) in the
0.9 m crop root zone for the four treatments across
the period of the experiment. Although the irrigation
applications for treatment S1 were more frequent than
for treatment S2, it received less water in each irrigation
and in total compared with treatment S2 (Table 2). Since
treatment S1 was irrigated when soil water dropped to
75% of available water holding capacity, less irrigation
water was necessary in each irrigation to refill the 0.90 m
Fig. 4. Grain yield (Y, kg m⫺2) as a linear function of irrigation water
(IR, mm) for summer-grown corn at Antalya, Turkey.
soil profile to the field capacity. There was a statistically
significant relationship between irrigation water applied
(IR, mm) and corn grain yield (Y, kg m⫺2) described
by the linear equation Y ⫽ 0.0014 IR ⫺ 0.0242 (r 2 ⫽
0.99; n ⫽ 12, RMSE ⫽ 0.029, P ⬍ 0.01) (Fig. 4). In Fig.
4, there is no yield vs. irrigation water data between the
range of 68 and 347 mm because there was no other
irrigation treatment between S4 (nonirrigated) and S3
(irrigated when soil water dropped to 25% of AWHC).
Yields were significantly different among treatments
(Table 4). The maximum grain yield (6058 kg ha⫺1) was
obtained from treatment 2, S2, (seasonal mean CWSI ⫽
0.22), which was irrigated when soil water dropped to
50% of AWHC remaining in the top 0.9 m of soil.
Doorenbos and Kasam (1979) indicated that the maxi-
mum grain yield for corn was usually obtained when
the corn plants were irrigated at 55% of available wa-
ter capacity.
Significant differences were found for seasonal mean
CWSI among the treatments (Table 4). In Table 4, we
compared the seasonal mean CWSI values obtained
from three replications for each treatment during the
growing season. Since the canopy temperature measure-
ments were taken at the different days in each treatment,
we cannot compare individual CWSI values among the
treatments for the growing season. The seasonal mean
CWSI values were related with the corn grain yield in
Fig. 5 by polynomial solution. Our results showed that
corn yield decreases as the CWSI increases. This rela-
tionship can be described by the equation Y ⫽
⫺4.38CWSI2 ⫹ 1.58CWSI ⫹ 0.46 (r 2 ⫽ 0.98, n ⫽ 12,

Table 4. Seasonal mean crop water stress index (CWSI), mean CWSI before irrigations, and total yield (kg ha⫺1) for different irrigation
treatments for ‘Antbey’ corn grown at Antalya, Turkey.
Total irrigation Seasonal mean Mean CWSI before
Treatments† water applied CWSI*‡ irrigations§ Total yield*
mm kg ha⫺1
S1 365 0.276 (0.031)b 0.39 5333 (99)c
S2 441 0.189 (0.024)a 0.27 6058 (64)d
S3 347 0.360 (0.010)c 0.54 4570 (185)b
S4 68 0.525 (0.011)d – 740 (158)a
* Significant at the 0.05 probability level as indicated by Duncan’s multiple range test.
† Treatments S1, S2, and S3 were irrigated when soil water dropped to 75, 50, and 25% of available water holding capacity, respectively. On 20 July,
treatments S1, S2, and S3 received 45 mm of irrigation water. S4 was not irrigated after the 68 mm preplant irrigation.
‡ The seasonal mean CWSI observed from mean of the three replications for each treatment from 27 July until 14 d following the last irrigation.
§ Means of CWSI obtained from three replications for each treatment. Values in parentheses indicate standard deviations (SD).
1226 AGRONOMY JOURNAL, VOL. 92, NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2000
Fig. 5. Corn grain yield (Y, kg m⫺2) as a polynomial function of the
seasonal mean crop water stress index, CWSI, (X).
RMSE ⫽ 0.027, P ⬍ 0.01). Reginato (1983) and Howell
et al. (1984) found linear relationships between yield
and average CWSI for cotton. A linear relationship was
also found by Idso et al. (1981c) and Abdul-Jabbar et
al. (1985) for alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), and by Tu-
baileh et al. (1986) for spring barley (Hordeum vul-
gare L.).
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A field experiment was conducted to relate CWSI
values to the amount of irrigation applied and to the
yield of summer-grown corn. The CWSI technique of-
fers some important advantages for quantifying plant
stress between irrigations. The method is neither de-
structive nor disruptive to the crop, and is sensitive to
water stress. It has been shown (Pinter and Reginato,
1982; Pinter et al., 1983; Keener and Kircher, 1983; Niel-
sen and Gardner, 1987; Calle et al., 1990) that the tech-
nique can be used for timing of irrigations and predicting
yield. This is important in semiarid cropping regions
where water application costs mean that maximum prof-
its are not usually related to the highest yields and elimi-
nation of unnecessary irrigation makes crop production
more economical.
The upper (stressed) and lower (nonstressed) base-
lines were calculated to quantify and monitor crop water
stress for summer-grown corn in a Mediterranean cli-
mate. The lower baseline was described by the linear
equation Tc ⫺Ta ⫽ 1.39 ⫺ 0.86VPD (r 2 ⫽ 0.92, n ⫽ 28,
RMSE ⫽ 0.415, P ⬍ 0.01, SD ⫽ 1.33), where Tc ⫺Ta is
in ⬚C and VPD is in kPa. The seasonal mean CWSI was
related to grain yield (Y, kg m⫺2) of corn, with yield
decreasing as CWSI increased. The second order poly-
nomial equation Y ⫽ ⫺4.38CWSI2 ⫹ 1.58CWSI ⫹ 0.46
(r 2 ⫽ 0.98, n ⫽ 12, RMSE ⫽ 0.027, P ⬍ 0.01) can be
used to predict the yield potential of summer-grown
corn under a Mediterranean climate. Predicting yield
response to crop water stress is important in developing
strategies and decision-making for use by farmers and
their advisors, and researchers for irrigation manage-
ment under limited water conditions. The equation
which was developed in this experiment to predict the
corn grain yield as a function of CWSI can be a useful
tool to reach such goals. This information can also be an
important component of irrigation management models.
Results showed that CWSI is an efficient technique
to monitor and quantify the water stress for corn under
a Mediterranean climate. The seasonal mean CWSI for
treatment, S2, (irrigated at 50% of AWHC) was 0.22.
Results indicated that permitting the seasonal mean
CWSI value to exceed more than 0.22 would result in
decreased corn grain yield. The mean CWSI value be-
fore the irrigation times for this treatment was 0.27. This
CWSI value was consistent with the highest yield for
summer-grown corn in our study. However, we cannot
conclude that this CWSI value should be used for timing
of irrigations for corn since we did not test scheduling
irrigations using CWSI. In addition, since the canopy
temperatures were measured 2 to 3 d before the irriga-
tion applications, it would not be appropriate to make
this judgement. Further studies are needed to reach
such a conclusion. Long term (2–3 yr) experiments with
different irrigation treatments should be conducted to
establish and to test a critical value of CWSI at which
a farmer should irrigate corn in a Mediterranean cli-
mate. In addition, we suggest that monitoring the CWSI
on a daily basis would be more appropriate to establish
CWSI for timing irrigations. In this case, the CWSI
can be used to quantify the extent of crop water stress
encountered prior to an irrigation application.
REFERENCES
Abdul-Jabbar, A.S., D.G. Lugg, T.W. Sammis, and L.W. Gay. 1985.
Relationship between crop water stress index and alfalfa yield and
evapotranspiration. Trans. ASAE 28:454–461.
Black, C.A., D.D. Evans, J.L. White, L.E. Ensminger, and F.E. Clark.
(ed.). 1965. Methods of soil analysis. Part I. Agron. Monogr. 9.
ASA, Madison, WI.
Blad, B.L., B.R. Gardner, D.G. Watts, and N.J. Rosenberg. 1981.
Remote sensing of crop moisture status. Remote Sens. Q. 3:4–20.
Blad, B.L., and N.J. Rosenberg. 1976. Measurement of crop tempera-
ture by leaf thermocouple, infrared thermometry and remotely
sensed thermal imagery. Agron. J. 68:635–641.
Calle, J.L., H.L. Manges, and P. Barnes. 1990. Scheduling irrigation
of corn with infrared thermometry. ASAE Paper 90-2004. ASAE,
St. Joseph, MI.
Clawson, K.L., and B.L. Blad. 1982. Infrared thermometry for schedul-
ing irrigation of corn. Agron. J. 74:311–316.
Doorenbos, J., and A.H. Kassam. 1979. Yield response to water. FAO
Irrig. and Drain. Paper No. 33.
Fuchs, M., E.T. Kanemasu., J.P. Kerr, and C.B. Tanner. 1967. Effect of
viewing angle on canopy temperature measurements with infrared
thermometers. Agron. J. 59:494–496.
Fuchs, M., and C.B. Tanner. 1966. Infrared thermometry of vegetation.
Agron. J. 58:597–601.
Gardner, B.R., B.L. Blad, R.E. Maurer, and D.G. Watts. 1981a. Rela-
tionship between crop temperature and the physiological and phe-
nological development of differentially irrigated corn. Agron. J.
73:743–747.
Gardner, B.R., B.L. Blad, and D.G. Watts. 1981b. Plant and air tem-
peratures in differentially irrigated corn. Agric. Meteorol. 25:
207–217.
Gardner, B.R., D.C. Nielsen, and C.C. Shock. 1992a. Infrared ther-
mometry and the crop water stress index. I. History, theory, and
baselines. J. Prod. Agric. 5:462–466.
Gardner, B.R., D.C. Nielsen, and C.C. Shock. 1992b. Infrared ther-
mometry and the crop water stress index. II. Sampling procedures
and interpretation. J. Prod. Agric. 5:466–475.
Gardner, B.R., and C.C. Shock. 1989. Interpreting the crop water
stress index. ASAE Paper 89-2642. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
 IRMAK ET AL.: DETERMINATION OF CROP WATER STRESS INDEX
Geiser, K.M., D.C. Slack, E.R. Allred, and K.W. Stange. 1982. Irriga-
tion scheduling using crop canopy-air temperature difference.
Trans. ASAE 25:689–694.
Hatfield, J.L. 1983. The utilization of thermal infrared radiation mea-
surements from grain sorghum as a method of assessing their irriga-
tion requirements. Irrig. Sci. 3:259–268.
Hatfield, J.L., D.F. Wanjura, and G.L. Barker. 1985. Canopy tempera-
ture response to water stress under partial canopy. Trans. ASAE
28:1607–1611.
Hatfield, J.L. 1990. Measuring plant stress with an infrared thermome-
ter. Hort Science 25:1535–1538.
Heermann, D.F., and H.R. Duke. 1978. Evaluation of crop water
stress under limited irrigation. ASAE Paper 78-2556. ASAE, St.
Joseph, MI.
Howell, T.A., J.L. Hatfield, H. Yamada, and K.R. Davis. 1984. Evalua-
tion of cotton canopy temperature to detect crop water stress.
Trans. ASAE 27:84–88.
Idso, S.B. 1982. Non-water-stressed baselines: A key to measuring
and interpreting plant water stress. Agric. Meteorol. 27:59–70.
Idso, S.B., R.D. Jackson, P.J. Pinter, Jr., R.J. Reginato, and J.L. Hat-
field. 1981a. Normalizing the stress-degree-day parameter for envi-
ronmental variability. Agric. Meteorol. 24:45–55.
Idso, S.B., R.J. Reginato, R.D. Jackson, and P.J. Pinter, Jr. 1981b.
Measuring yield-reducing plant water potential depressions in
wheat by infrared thermometry. Irrig. Sci. 2:205–212.
Idso, S.B., R.J. Reginato, D.C. Reicosky, and J.L. Hatfield. 1981c.
Determining soil-induced plant water potential depressions in al-
falfa by means of infrared thermometry. Agron. J. 73:826–830.
Irmak, S. 1996. The possibility of using soil water potential and crop
water stress index values to monitor water stress and to determine
the irrigation time of maize (Zea mays L.). M.E. thesis. Univ. of
Akdeniz, Faculty of Agric. Eng., Antalya, Turkey.
Jackson, R.D., and S.B. Idso. 1969. Ambient temperature effect in
infrared thermometry. Agron. J. 61:324–325.
Jackson, S.H. 1991. Relationship between normalized leaf water po-
tential and crop water stress index values for acala cotton. Agric.
Water Manage. 20:109–118.
Keener, M.E., and P.L. Kircher. 1983. The use of canopy temperature
as an indicator of drought stress in humid regions. Agric. Mete-
orol. 28:339–349.
Nielsen, D.C., and B.R. Gardner. 1987. Scheduling irrigations for corn
1227
with the crop water stress index (CWSI). Appl. Agric. Res. 2:
295–300.
O’Toole, J.C., N.C. Turner, O.P. Namuco, M. Dingkukn, and K.A.
Gomez. 1984. Comparison of some crop water stress measurement
methods. Crop Sci. 24:1121–1128.
Pinter, P.J., Jr., K.E. Fry, G. Guinn, and J.R. Mauney. 1983. Infrared
thermometry: A remote sensing technique for predicting yield in
water-stressed cotton. Agric. Water Manage. 6:385–395.
Pinter, P.J., Jr., and R.J. Reginato. 1981. Thermal infrared techniques
for assessing plant water stress. p. 1–9. In Irrigation Scheduling for
Water and Energy Conservation in the 80s. Proc. Am. Soc. Agric.
Eng. Irrig. Scheduling Conf., Chicago, IL. 14–15 Dec. 1981. ASAE,
St. Joseph, MI.
Pinter, P.J., Jr., and R.J. Reginato. 1982. A thermal infrared technique
for monitoring cotton water stress and scheduling irrigation. Trans.
ASAE 25:1651–1655.
Reginato, R.J. 1983. Field quantification of crop water stress. Trans.
ASAE 26:772–775.
Reginato, R.J., and D.J. Garrot, Jr. 1987. Irrigation scheduling with
the crop water stress index. p. 7–10. In Western Cotton Production
Conf. Summary Proc., Phoenix, AZ. 18–20 August, 1987. Cotton
Growers Assoc., Memphis, TN.
Reginato, R.J., and J. Howe. 1985. Irrigation scheduling using crop
indicators. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 3:125–133.
Shanahan, J.F., and D.C. Nielsen. 1987. Influence of growth retardants
(Anti-Gibberellins) on corn vegetative growth, water use, and grain
yield under different levels of water stress. Agron. J. 79:103–109.
Smith, R.G.C., H.D. Barrs, J.L. Stainer, and M. Stapper. 1985. Rela-
tionship between wheat yield and foliage temperature: Theory and
its application to infrared measurements. Agric. For. Meteorol.
36:129–143.
Steele, D.D., E.C. Stegman, and B.L. Gregor. 1994. Field comparison
of irrigation scheduling methods for corn. Trans. ASAE 37:
1197–1203.
Tubaileh, A.S., J.W. Sammis, and D.G. Lugg. 1986. Utilization of
thermal infrared thermometry for detection of water stress in spring
barley. Agric. Water Manage. 12:75–85.
Walker, G.K., and J.L. Hatfield. 1983. Stress measurement using fo-
liage temperature. Agron. J. 75:623–629.
Wanjura, D.F., J.L. Hatfield, and D.R. Upchurch. 1990. Crop water
stress index relationship with crop productivity. Irrig. Sci. 11:93–99.