All about Irrigation

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Surface Irrigation

1.2 Sprinkler Irrigation
1.3 Drip Irrigation
1.4 Functioning of Irrigation Systems
An adequate water supply is important for plant growth. When rainfall

is not sufficient, the plants must receive additional water from
irrigation. Various methods can be used to supply irrigation water to
the plants. Each method has its advantages and disadvantages. These
should be taken into account when choosing the method which is best
suited to the local circumstances.
A simple irrigation method is to bring water from the source of supply,

e.g. a well, to each plant with a bucket or a watering can.
This can be a very time-consuming method and involves very heavy

work. However, it can be used successfully to irrigate very small plots
of land, such as vegetable gardens, that are close to the water source.
More sophisticated methods of water application are used when larger

areas require irrigation. There are three commonly used methods:
surface irrigation, sprinkler irrigation and drip irrigation.
Surface Irrigation :- Basin Irrigation
Furrow Irrigation
Border Irrigation
Sprinkler Irrigation
Drip Irrigation
1.1 Surface Irrigation
Surface irrigation is the application of water by gravity flow to the
surface of the field. Either the entire field is flooded (basin irrigation)
or the water is fed into small channels (furrows) or strips of land
(borders).
BASIN IRRIGATION
Basins are flat areas of land, surrounded by low bunds (see section
2.2.2). The bunds prevent the water from flowing to the adjacent fields.
Basin irrigation is commonly used for rice grown on flat lands or in
terraces on hillsides (see Figure 2a). Trees can also be grown in
basins, where one tree is usually located in the middle of a small basin
(Figure 2b). In general, the basin method is suitable for crops that are
unaffected by standing in water for long periods (e.g. 12-24 hours).
FURROW IRRIGATION
Furrows are small channels, which carry water down the land slope
between the crop rows. Water infiltrates into the soil as it moves along
the slope. The crop is usually grown on the ridges between the furrows
(see Figure 3). This method is suitable for all row crops and for crops
that cannot stand in water for long periods (e.g. 12-24 hours).
Irrigation water flows from the field channel into the furrows by
opening up the bank of the channel, or by means of siphons or spiles
(see Annex 1).
BORDER IRRIGATION
Borders are long, sloping strips of land separated by bunds. They are
sometimes called border strips.
Irrigation water can be fed to the border in several ways: opening up

the channel bank, using small outlets or gates or by means of siphons
or spiles. A sheet of water flows down the slope of the border, guided
by the bunds on either side. (see Figure 4).
1.2 Sprinkler Irrigation

Sprinkler irrigation is similar to natural rainfall. Water is pumped
through a pipe system and then sprayed onto the crops through
rotating sprinkler heads.
1.3 Drip Irrigation

With drip irrigation, water is conveyed under pressure through a pipe
system to the fields, where it drips slowly onto the soil through
emitters or drippers which are located close to the plants. Only the
immediate root zone of each plant is wetted. Therefore this can be a
very efficient method of irrigation (Figure 6). Drip irrigation is
sometimes called trickle irrigation.
1.4 Functioning of Irrigation Systems

Whatever irrigation method is being chosen, its purpose is always to
attain a better crop and a higher yield. Therefore proper design,
construction and irrigation practice are of utmost importance.
Maintenance, the after-care of the system to keep it functioning as
well as possible, is often neglected. This always results in a lower
irrigation efficiency (see also Volume 4), and thus less benefit from the
irrigation system.
It is recommended to give canals, structures and methods a regular

check-up and to repair damage immediately. Maintenance of canals
and structures is dealt with in the Volumes concerning these subjects;
maintenance of surface methods is discussed in the appropriate
sections (2.5, 3.6, 4.4). Maintenance of sprinkler and drip systems is
usually described in handbooks supplied by the manufacturers of the
systems.
FURROW IRRIGATION
1 When to Use Furrow Irrigation
2 Furrow Layout
3 Furrow Construction
4 Irrigating Furrows
5 Planting Techniques
6 Maintenance of Furrows
Furrows are small, parallel channels, made to carry water in order to

irrigate the crop. The crop is usually grown on the ridges between the
furrows (Figures 23 and 24).
Figure 23 Furrow irrigation
When to Use Furrow Irrigation

1.1 Suitable crops
1.2 Suitable slopes
1.3 Suitable soils
Furrow irrigation is suitable for a wide range of soil types, crops and
land slopes, as indicated below. Under which circumstances to choose
furrow irrigation is further discussed in Chapter 7.
1.1 Suitable crops
Furrow irrigation is suitable for many crops, especially row crops.

Crops that would be damaged if water covered their stem or crown
should be irrigated by furrows.
Figure 24 Top view and cross-section of furrows and ridges
Furrow irrigation is also suited to the growing of tree crops. In the

early stages of tree planting, one furrow alongside the tree row may be
sufficient but as the trees develop then two or more furrows can be
constructed to provide sufficient water. Sometimes a special zig-zag
system is used to improve the spread of water (Figure 25).
Corrugation irrigation, frequently mentioned in literature, is a special

type of furrow irrigation, used for broadcast crops. Corrugations are
small hills pressed into the soil surface. The application of this method
is limited and is not included in this manual.
In summary, the following crops can be Irrigated by furrow irrigation:

- row crops such as maize, sunflower, sugarcane, soybean;
- crops that would be damaged by inundation, such as tomatoes,
vegetables, potatoes, beans;
- fruit trees such as citrus, grape;
- broadcast crops (corrugation method) such as wheat.
Figure 25 Zig-zag furrows - A: Zig-zag furrows used for irrigating trees

on land with a moderate slope (0.5-1.5%)
Figure 25 Zig-zag furrows - B: Another zig-zag pattern for furrow

irrigation on fairly flat slopes (under 0.5%)
1.2 Suitable slopes
Uniform flat or gentle slopes are preferred for furrow irrigation. These
should not exceed 0.5%. Usually a gentle furrow slope is provided up
to 0.05% to assist drainage following irrigation or excessive rainfall
with high intensity.
On undulating land furrows should follow the land contours (see Figure
26). However, this can be a difficult operation requiring very careful
setting out of the contours before cutting the furrows (see section 3.3
Furrow Construction).
1.3 Suitable soils

Furrows can be used on most soil types. However, as with all surface
irrigation methods, very coarse sands are not recommended as
percolation losses can be high. Soils that crust easily are especially
suited to furrow irrigation because the water does not flow over the
ridge, and so the soil in which the plants grow remains friable.
2. Furrow Layout
2.1 Furrow length
2.2 Furrow shape
2.3 Furrow spacing
This section deals with the shape, length and spacing of furrows.
Generally, the shape, length and spacing are determined by the natural
circumstances, i.e. slope, soil type and available stream size.
However, other factors may influence the design of a furrow system,
such as the irrigation depth, farming practice and the field length.
2.1 Furrow length
Furrows must be on consonance with the slope, the soil type, the
stream size, the irrigation depth, the cultivation practice and the field
length. The impact of these factors on the furrow length is discussed
below.
Slope
Although furrows can be longer when the land slope is steeper, the
maximum recommended furrow slope is 0.5% to avoid soil erosion.
Furrows can also be level and are thus very similar to long narrow
basins. However a minimum grade of 0.05% is recommended so that
effective drainage can occur following irrigation or excessive rainfall.
If the land slope is steeper than 0.5% then furrows can be set at an
angle to the main slope or even along the contour to keep furrow
slopes within the recommended limits. Furrows can be set in this way
when the main land slope does not exceed 3%. Beyond this there is a
major risk of soil erosion following a breach in the furrow system. On
steep land, terraces can also be constructed (see Basin Irrigation) and
furrows cultivated along the terraces.
Soil type
In sandy soils water infiltrates rapidly. Furrows should be short (less
than 110 a), so that water will reach the downstream end without
excessive percolation losses.
In clay soils, the infiltration rate is much lower than in sandy soils.
Furrows can be much longer on clayey than on sandy soils. The
determination of the infiltration rate is explained in Annex 2.
Stream size
Normally stream sizes up to 0.5 l/sec will provide an adequate

irrigation provided the furrows are not too long. When larger stream
sizes are available, water will move rapidly down the furrows and so
generally furrows can be longer. The maximum stream size that will
not cause erosion will obviously depend on the furrow slope; in any
case, it is advised not to use stream sizes larger than 3.0 l/sec (see
Table 3).
Irrigation depth
Applying larger irrigation depths usually means that furrows can be

longer as there is more time available for water to flow down the
furrows and infiltrate.
Cultivation practice
When the farming is mechanized, furrows should be made as long as

possible to facilitate the work. Short furrows require a lot of attention
as the flow must be changed frequently from one furrow to the next.
However, short furrows can usually be irrigated more efficiently than
long ones as it is much easier to keep the percolation losses low.
Field length
It may be more practical to make the furrow length equal to the length
of the field, instead of the ideal length, when this would result In a
small piece of land left over (Figure 27). Equally the length of field may
be much less than the maximum furrow length. This is not usually a
problem and furrow lengths are made to fit the field boundaries.
Figure 27 Field length and furrow length

Table 3 gives some practical values of maximum furrow lengths under
small-scale irrigation conditions. The values shown in Table 3 are
lower than those generally given in irrigation handbooks. These higher
values are appropriate under larger scale, fully mechanized conditions.
Table 3 PRACTICAL VALUES OF MAXIMUM FURROW LENGTHS (m)

DEPENDING ON SLOPE, SOIL TYPE, STREAM SIZE AND NET
IRRIGATION DEPTH
Clay Loam Sand

Furrow slope Maximum stream size (l/s) per Net irrigation depth
(%) furrow (mm)
50 75 50 75 50 75
0.0 3.0 100 150 60 90 30 45
0.1 3.0 120 170 90 125 45 60
0.2 2.5 130 180 110 150 60 95
0.3 2.0 150 200 130 170 75 110
0.5 1.2 150 200 130 170 75 110
Important:
This table only provides approximate Information relating furrow slope,
soil type, stream size and irrigation depth to furrow lengths. This
should only be used as a guide as the data are based primarily on field
experience and not on any scientific relationships. Maximum values of
furrow length are given for reasonably efficient irrigation. However,
furrow lengths can be even shorter than those given in the table and in
general this will help to improve irrigation efficiency. Only by Installing
a furrow system, following the guidelines, and then evaluating its
performance can an appropriate system be developed for a given
locality.
2.2 Furrow shape
The shape of furrows is influenced by the soil type and the stream
size.
Soil type
In sandy soils, water moves faster vertically than sideways (= lateral).

Narrow, deep V-shaped furrows are desirable to reduce the soil area
through which water percolates (Figure 28). However, sandy soils are
less stable, and tend to collapse, which may reduce the irrigation
efficiency.
In clay soils, there is much more lateral movement of water and the
infiltration rate is much less than for sandy soils. Thus a wide, shallow
furrow is desirable to obtain a large wetted area (Figure 29) to
encourage infiltration.
Figure 28 A deep, narrow furrow on a sandy soil

Figure 29 A wide, shallow furrow on a clay soil
Stream size
In general, the larger the stream size the larger the furrow must be to
contain the flow.
2.3 Furrow spacing
The spacing of furrows is influenced by the soil type and the

cultivation practice.
Soil type
As a rule, for sandy soils the spacing should be between 30 and 60 cm,
i.e. 30 cm for coarse sand and 60 cm for fine sand.
On clay soils, the spacing between two adjacent furrows should be 75-
150 cm. On clay soils, double-ridged furrows - sometimes called beds -
can also be used. Their advantage is that more plant rows are possible
on each ridge, facilitating manual weeding. The ridge can be slightly
rounded at the top to drain off water that would otherwise tend to
pond on the ridge surface during heavy rainfall (Figure 30).
Figure 30 A double-ridged furrow

Cultivation practice
In mechanized farming a compromise is required between the

machinery available to cut furrows and the ideal spacings for crops.
Mechanical equipment will result in less work if a standard width
between the furrows is maintained, even when the crops grown
normally require a different planting distance. This way the spacing of
the tool attachment does not need to be changed when the equipment
is moved from one crop to another. However, care is needed to ensure
that the standard spacings provide adequate lateral wetting on all soil
types.
3 Furrow Construction
The most common way to construct furrows is with a ridger. Figure 31
shows animal- and hand-drawn ridgers.
Figure 31 Ridger plough: (a) wooden body, animal-drawn
Figure 31 Ridger plough: (b) iron type, animal-drawn
Figure 31 Ridger plough: (c) hand-drawn version

CONSTRUCTION OF FURROWS ON FLAT OR MILDLY SLOPING LAND
The following steps are taken to construct furrows: setting out;

forming one (or more) ridge(s); forming one (or more) parallel ridge(s).
Step 1
A straight line is set out in the field along the proposed line of furrows.
This can be done by setting up ranging poles or marking a line on the
ground with chalk powder or small mounds of earth. An experienced
ploughman should be able to plough along the line by aligning the
poles or earth mounds by eye (Figure 32).
Figure 32 Markers are put along a straight line
Step 2
The ridger is moved along the line. The resulting furrow should be
straight. If not, the area should be ploughed again and the procedure
repeated.
Step 3
About every five (5) metres, a new straight line should be set out.
If a ridger-drawbar connected with a tractor is used, four furrows can

be drawn simultaneously. On the track back the left ridger is put in the
last furrow track to make sure the new furrows arc parallel to the
previous ones (Figure 33). Also here it should be checked that straight
lines are followed: for every track a centre line is set out (see Figure
33).
Attention: It should always be kept in mind that a new straight line has
to be set out before a new furrow track is made.
Figure 33 A ridger-drawbar behind a tractor makes four ridges
simultaneously
CONSTRUCTION OF FURROWS ON SLOPING OR UNDULATING LAND
Special care is needed to construct furrows along the contour on

sloping or undulating land. The following steps are taken to construct
furrows along the contour:
Step 1
A guide furrow must first be set out along the upper edge of the field
close to the farm channel using a levelling device to locate the
contour line. Further guide furrows are set out every 5 metres on
undulating ground and every 10 metres on uniformly sloping land
(Figure 34).
Figure 34 Making guide furrows
Step 2
Working from each guide furrow, furrows are made to halfway along
the next guide furrow (Figure 35).
Figure 35 Making furrows
4 Irrigating Furrows
4.1 Wetting patterns
Water is supplied to each furrow from the field canal, using siphons or
spiles (see Annex 1). Sometimes, instead of the field canal with
siphons or spiles, a gated pipe is used (Figure 36).
Figure 36 Gated pipe
Depending on the available flow in the farm channel, several furrows

can be irrigated at the same time.
When there is a water shortage, it is possible to limit the amount of

irrigation water applied by using 'alternate furrow irrigation'. This
involves irrigating alternate furrows rather than every furrow. Figure
37 is an example of this procedure. Instead of irrigating every furrow
after 10 days, furrows 1, 3, 5, etc. are irrigated after 5 days and
furrows 2, 4 and 6, etc. are irrigated after 10 days. Thus the crop
receives some water every 5 days instead of a large amount every 10
days. Small amounts applied frequently in this way are usually better
for the crop than large amounts applied after longer intervals of time.
Figure 37 Alternate furrow irrigation
Runoff at the ends of furrows can be a problem on sloping land. This

can be as much as 30 percent of the inflow, even under good
conditions. Therefore a shallow drain should always be made at the
end of the field, to remove excess water. When no drain is made,
plants may be damaged by waterlogging. Light vegetation allowed to
grown in the drain can prevent erosion. Excessive runoff can be
prevented by reducing the inflow once the irrigation water has reached
the end of the furrows. This is called cut-back irrigation. It may also be
possible to reuse runoff water further down the farm.
4.1 Wetting patterns
In order to obtain a uniformly wetted rootzone, furrows should be

properly spaced, have a uniform slope and the irrigation water should
be applied rapidly.
As the root zone in the ridge must be wetted from the furrows, the
downward movement of water in the soil is less important than the
lateral (or sideways) water movement. Both lateral and downward
movement of water depends on soil type as can be seen in Figure 38.
Figure 38 Different wetting patterns in furrows, depending on the soil

type (A - SAND)
type (B - LOAM)

type (C - CLAY)
Ideal wetting pattern
In an ideal situation adjacent wetting patterns overlap each other, and

there is an upward movement of water (capillary rise) that wets the
entire ridge (see Figure 39), thus supplying the root zone with water.
Figure 39 Ideal wetting pattern
To obtain a uniform water distribution along the furrow length, it is

very important to have a uniform slope and a large enough stream size
so that water advances rapidly down the furrow. In this way large
percolation losses at the head of the furrow can be avoided. The
quarter time rule is used to determine the time required for water to
travel from the farm channel to the end of the furrow, in order to
minimize precolation losses. The quarter time rule is further discussed
in Annex 3.
Poor wetting patterns
Poor wetting patterns can be caused by:
- unfavourable natural conditions, e.g. a compacted layer, different soil

types, uneven slope;
- poor layout, e.g. a furrow spacing too wide;
- poor management: supplying a stream size that is too large or too

small, stopping the Inflow too soon.
i. Unfavourable natural conditions
Compacted soil layers or different soil types have the same effect on
furrow irrigation as they have on basin irrigation - see section 2.4.1.
The solution to the problem is also similar.
An uneven slope can result in uneven wetting along the furrow. Water
flows fast down the steep slopes and slowly down the flatter slopes.
This affects the time available for infiltration and results in poor water
distribution. The problem can be overcome by regrading the land to a
uniform slope.
ii. Poor layout
If the furrow spacing is too wide (Figure 40) then the root zone will not
be adequately wetted. The spacing of furrows needs careful selection
to ensure adequate wetting of the entire root zone (Figure 40).
Figure 40 The spacing between two adjacent furrows is too wide

iii. Poor management
A stream size that is too small (Figure 41) will result in inadequate
wetting of the ridges. Even if the plants are located at the sides of the
ridge, not enough water will be available. A small stream size will also
result in poor water distribution along the length of the furrow. The
advance will be slow and too much water will be lost through deep
percolation at the head of the furrow.
Figure 41 Stream size is too small to wet the ridge

If the stream size is too large on flat slopes, overtopping of the ridge
may occur (Figure 42). On steeper slopes with too large a stream size,
erosion of the bed and sides of the furrow may take place (Figure 42).
Figure 42 Stream size too large causing overtopping or erosion
A common management fault is to stop the inflow too soon. This is

usually done to reduce runoff, but it results in a poor water distribution
and the plants in particular at the end of the furrow do not get enough
water. If the Inflow of irrigation water is not stopped soon enough, the
runoff is excessive and plants at the end of the furrow may drown
when an adequate drainage system to evacuate excess water is not
provided (see also Annex 3).
5 Planting Techniques
The location of plants In a furrow system is not fixed but depends on
the natural circumstances. A few examples will be mentioned.
- In areas with heavy rainfall, the plants should stand on top of the
ridge in order to prevent damage as a result of waterlogging (Figure
43).
- If water is scarce, the plants may he put in the furrow itself, to

benefit more from the limited water (Figure 44).
- As salts tend to accumulate in the highest point, a crop on saline

soils should be planted away from the top of the ridge. Usually it is
planted in two rows at the sides (Figure 45). However, it is important
to make sure there is no danger of waterlogging.
- For winter and early spring crops in colder areas, the seeds may be
planted on the sunny side of the ridge (Figure 46). In hotter areas,
seeds may be planted on the shady side of the ridge, to protect them
from the sun.
Figure 43 Protection against waterlogging
Figure 44 Protection against water scarcity

Figure 45 Protection against accumulation of salt
Figure 46 Winter and early spring crops: seeds planted on the sunny
side of the ridge
6 Maintenance of Furrows
After construction the furrow system should be maintained regularly;
during irrigation it should be checked if water reaches the downstream
end of all furrows. There should be no dry spots or places where water
stays ponding. Overtopping of ridges should not occur. The field
channels and drains should be kept free from weeds.
DRIP IRRIGATION
6.1 When to Use Drip Irrigation
6.2 Drip System Layout
6.3 Operating Drip Systems
6.1 When to Use Drip Irrigation
6.1.1 Suitable crops

6.1.2 Suitable slopes
6.1.3 Suitable soils
6.1.4 Suitable irrigation water
Drip irrigation is sometimes called trickle irrigation and involves

dripping water onto the soil at very low rates (2-20 litres/hour) from a
system of small diameter plastic pipes fitted with outlets called
emitters or drippers. Water is applied close to plants so that only part
of the soil in which the roots grow is wetted (Figure 60), unlike surface
and sprinkler irrigation, which involves wetting the whole soil profile.
With drip irrigation water, applications are more frequent (usually
every 1-3 days) than with other methods and this provides a very
favourable high moisture level in the soil in which plants can flourish.
6.1.1 Suitable crops

Drip irrigation is most suitable for row crops (vegetables, soft fruit),
tree and vine crops where one or more emitters can be provided for
each plant. Generally only high value crops are considered because of
the high capital costs of installing a drip system.
6.1.2 Suitable slopes
Drip irrigation is adaptable to any farmable slope. Normally the crop
would be planted along contour lines and the water supply pipes
(laterals) would be laid along the contour also. This is done to
minimize changes in emitter discharge as a result of land elevation
changes.
6.1.3 Suitable soils
Drip irrigation is suitable for most soils. On clay soils water must be
applied slowly to avoid surface water ponding and runoff. On sandy
soils higher emitter discharge rates will be needed to ensure adequate
lateral wetting of the soil.
6.1.4 Suitable irrigation water
One of the main problems with drip irrigation is blockage of the
emitters. All emitters have very small waterways ranging from 0.2-2.0
mm in diameter and these can become blocked if the water is not
clean. Thus it is essential for irrigation water to be free of sediments.
If this is not so then filtration of the irrigation water will be needed.
Blockage may also occur if the water contains algae, fertilizer
deposits and dissolved chemicals which precipitate such as calcium
and iron. Filtration may remove some of the materials but the problem
may be complex to solve and requires an experienced engineer or
consultation with the equipment dealer.
Drip irrigation is particularly suitable for water of poor quality (saline
water). Dripping water to individual plants also means that the method
can be very efficient in water use. For this reason it is most suitable
when water is scarce.
6.2 Drip System Layout
A typical drip irrigation system is shown in Figure 61 and consists of
the following components:
Pump unit
Control head
Main and submain lines
Laterals
Emitters or drippers.
The pump unit takes water from the source and provides the right
pressure for delivery into the pipe system.
The control head consists of valves to control the discharge and
pressure In the entire system. It may also have filters to clear the
water. Common types of filter include screen filters and graded sand
filters which remove fine material suspended in the water. Some
control head units contain a fertilizer or nutrient tank. These slowly
add a measured dose of fertilizer into the water during irrigation. This
is one of the major advantages of drip irrigation over other methods.
Mainlines, submains and laterals supply water from the control head
into the fields. They are usually made from PVC or polyethylene hose
and should be buried below ground because they easily degrade when
exposed to direct solar radiation. Lateral pipes are usually 13-32 mm
diameter.
Emitters or drippers are devices used to control the discharge of water
from the lateral to the plants. They are usually spaced more than 1
metre apart with one or more emitters used for a single plant such as
a tree. For row crops more closely spaced emitters may be used to
wet a strip of soil. Many different emitter designs have been produced
in recent years. The basis of design is to produce an emitter which will
provide a specified constant discharge which does not vary much with
pressure changes, and does not block easily. Various types of emitters
are shown in Figure 61 and Figure 62. Figure 63 gives an example of
sublateral loops.
6.3 Operating Drip Systems
6.3.1 Wetting patterns
A drip system is usually permanent. When remaining In place during

more than one season, a system is considered permanent. Thus it can
easily be automated. This is very useful when labour is scarce or
expensive to hire. However, automation requires specialist skills and
so this approach is unsuitable if such skills are not available.
Water can be applied frequently (every day if required) with drip
irrigation and this provides very favourable conditions for crop growth.
However, if crops are used to being watered each day they may only
develop shallow roots and If the system breaks down, the crop may
begin to suffer very quickly.
6.3.1 Wetting patterns
Unlike surface and sprinkler irrigation, drip irrigation only wets part of
the soil root zone. This may be as, low as 30% of the volume of soil
wetted by the other methods. The wetting patterns which develop
from dripping water onto the soil depend on discharge and soil type.
Figure 64 shows the effect of changes in discharge on two different
soil types, namely sand and clay.
Figure 64 Wetting patterns for sand and clay soils with high and low
discharge rates (SAND)
Figure 64 Wetting patterns for sand and clay soils with high and low
discharge rates (CLAY)
Although only part of the root zone is wetted it is still important to
meet the full water needs of the crop. It is sometimes thought that drip
irrigation saves water by reducing the amount used by the crop. This is
not true. Crop water use is not changed by the method of applying
water. Crops just require the right amount for good growth.
The water savings that can be made using drip irrigation are the
reductions in deep percolation, in surface runoff and in evaporation
from the soil. These savings, it must be remembered, depend as much
on the user of the equipment as on the equipment itself.
Drip irrigation is not a substitute for other proven methods of
irrigation. It is just another way of applying water. It is best suited to
areas where water quality is marginal, land is steeply sloping or
undulating and of poor quality, where water or labour are expensive, or
where high value crops require frequent water applications.
CHOOSING AN IRRIGATION METHOD
7.1 Surface, Sprinkler or Drip Irrigation
7.2 Basin, Furrow or Border Irrigation
To choose an irrigation method, the farmer must know the advantages

and disadvantages of the various methods. He or she must know which
method suits the local conditions best. Unfortunately, in many cases
there is no single best solution: all methods have their advantages and
disadvantages. Testing of the various methods - under the prevailing
local conditions - provides the best basis for a sound choice of
irrigation method. This chapter gives some very broad guidance and
indicates several important criteria in the selection of a suitable
irrigation method.
7.1 Surface, Sprinkler or Drip Irrigation
The suitability of the various irrigation methods, i.e. surface, sprinkler
or drip irrigation, depends mainly on the following factors:
- natural conditions
- type of crop
- type of technology
- previous experience with irrigation
- required labour inputs
- costs and benefits.
NATURAL CONDITIONS
The natural conditions such as soil type, slope, climate, water quality
and availability, have the following impact on the choice of an
irrigation method:
Soil type: Sandy soils have a low water storage capacity and a high
infiltration rate. They therefore need frequent but small
irrigation applications, in particular when the sandy soil is
also shallow. Under these circumstances, sprinkler or drip
irrigation are more suitable than surface irrigation. On loam
or clay soils all three irrigation methods can be used, but
surface irrigation is more commonly found. Clay soils with
low infiltration rates are ideally suited to surface irrigation.
When a variety of different soil types is found within one
irrigation scheme, sprinkler or drip irrigation are
recommended as they will ensure a more even water
distribution.
Slope: Sprinkler or drip irrigation are preferred above surface
irrigation on steeper or unevenly sloping lands as they
require little or no land levelling. An exception is rice grown
on terraces on sloping lands.
Climate: Strong wind can disturb the spraying of water from
sprinklers. Under very windy conditions, drip or surface
irrigation methods are preferred. In areas of supplementary
irrigation, sprinkler or drip irrigation may be more suitable
than surface irrigation because of their flexibility and
adaptability to varying irrigation demands on the farm.
Water Water application efficiency (see Annex 4, step 8) is
availabilit generally higher with sprinkler and drip irrigation than
y: surface irrigation and so these methods are preferred when
water is in short supply. However, it must be remembered
that efficiency is just as much a function of the irrigator as
the method used.
Water Surface irrigation is preferred if the irrigation water
quality: contains much sediment. The sediments may clog the drip
or sprinkler irrigation systems.
If the irrigation water contains dissolved salts, drip
irrigation is particularly suitable, as less water is applied to
the soil than with surface methods.
Sprinkler systems are more efficient that surface irrigation
methods in leaching out salts.
TYPE OF CROP
Surface irrigation can be used for all types of crops. Sprinkler and drip
irrigation, because of their high capital investment per hectare, are
mostly used for high value cash crops, such as vegetables and fruit
trees. They are seldom used for the lower value staple crops.
Drip irrigation is suited to irrigating individual plants or trees or row
crops such as vegetables and sugarcane. It is not suitable for close
growing crops (e.g. rice).
TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY
The type of technology affects the choice of irrigation method. In
general, drip and sprinkler irrigation are technically more complicated
methods. The purchase of equipment requires high capital investment
per hectare. To maintain the equipment a high level of 'know-how' has
to be available,. Also, a regular supply of fuel and spare parts must be
maintained which - together with the purchase of equipment - may
require foreign currency.
Surface irrigation systems - in particular small-scale schemes - usually
require less sophisticated equipment for both construction and
maintenance (unless pumps are used). The equipment needed is often
easier to maintain and less dependent on the availability of foreign
currency.
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH IRRIGATION
The choice of an irrigation method also depends on the irrigation
tradition within the region or country. Introducing a previously
unknown method may lead to unexpected complications. It is not
certain that the farmers will accept the new method. The servicing of
the equipment may be problematic and the costs may be high
compared to the benefits.
Often it will be easier to improve the traditional irrigation method than
to introduce a totally new method.
REQUIRED LABOUR INPUTS
Surface irrigation often requires a much higher labour input - for
construction, operation and maintenance - than sprinkler or drip
irrigation (Figure 65). Surface irrigation requires accurate land
levelling, regular maintenance and a high level of farmers' organization
to operate the system. Sprinkler and drip irrigation require little land
levelling; system operation and maintenance are less labour-intensive.
COSTS AND BENEFITS
Before choosing an irrigation method, an estimate must be made of
the costs and benefits of the available options. On the cost side not
only the construction and installation, but also the operation and
maintenance (per hectare) should be taken into account. These costs
should then be compared with the expected benefits (yields). It is
obvious that farmers will only be interested in implementing a certain
method if they consider this economically attractive. Cost/benefit
analysis is, however, beyond the scope of this manual.
In conclusion: surface irrigation is by far the most widespread
irrigation method. It is normally used when conditions are favourable:
mild and regular slopes, soil type with medium to low infiltration rate,
and a sufficient supply of surface or groundwater. In the case of steep
or irregular slopes, soils with a very high infiltration rate or scarcity of
water, sprinkler and drip irrigation may be more appropriate. When
introducing sprinkler and drip irrigation it must be ensured that the
equipment can be maintained.
7.2 Basin, Furrow or Border Irrigation
This section discusses some of the important factors which should be
taken into account when determining which surface irrigation method
is most suitable: basin, furrow or border irrigation. Again, it is not
possible to give specific guidelines leading to a single best solution;
each option has its advantages and disadvantages.
Factors to be taken into account include:
- natural circumstances (slope, soil type)
- type of crop
- required depth of irrigation application
- level of technology
- previous experience with irrigation
- required labour inputs.
NATURAL CIRCUMSTANCES
Flat lands, with a slope of 0.1% or less, are best suited for basin
irrigation: little land levelling will be required. If the slope is more than
1%, terraces can be constructed. However, the amount of land
levelling can be considerable.
Furrow irrigation can be used on flat land (short, near horizontal
furrows), and on mildly sloping land with a slope of maximum 0.5%. On
steeper sloping land, contour furrows can be used up to a maximum
land slope of 3%. A minimum slope of 0.05% is recommended to assist
drainage.
Border irrigation can be used on sloping land up to 2% on sandy soil
and 5% on clay soil. A minimum slope of 0.05% is recommended to
ensure adequate drainage.
Surface irrigation may be difficult to use on irregular slopes as
considerable land levelling may be required to achieve the required
land gradients.
All soil types, except coarse sand with an infiltration rate of more than
30 mm/hour, can be used for surface irrigation. If the infiltration rate is
higher than 30 mm/hour, sprinkler or drip irrigation should be used.
TYPE of CROP
Paddy rice is always grown in basins. Many other crops can also be
grown in basins: e.g. maize, sorghum, trees, etc. Those crops that
cannot stand a very wet soil for more than 12-24 hours should not be
grown in basins.
Furrow irrigation is best used for irrigating row crops such as maize,
vegetables and trees.
Border irrigation is particularly suitable for close growing crops such
as alfalfa, but border irrigation can also be used for row crops and
trees.
REQUIRED DEPTH OF IRRIGATION APPLICATION
When the irrigation schedule has been determined (see Volume 4) it is
known how much water (in mm) has to be given per irrigation
application. It must be checked that this amount can indeed be given,
with the irrigation method under consideration.
Field experience has shown that most water can be applied per
irrigation application when using basin irrigation, less with border
irrigation and least with furrow irrigation. In practice, in small-scale
irrigation projects, usually 40-70 mm of water are applied in basin
irrigation, 30-60 mm in border irrigation and 20-50 mm in furrow
irrigation. (In large-scale irrigation projects, the amounts of water
applied may be much higher.)
This means that if only little water is to be applied per application, e.g.
on sandy soils and a shallow rooting crop, furrow irrigation would be
most appropriate. (However, none of the surface irrigation methods
can be used if the sand is very coarse, i.e. if the infiltration rate is
more than 30 mm/hour.)
If, on the other hand, a large amount of irrigation water is to be applied
per application, e.g. on a clay soil and with a deep rooting crop, border
or basin irrigation would be more appropriate.
The above considerations have been summarized in Table 5. The net
irrigation application values used are only a rough guide. They result
from a combination of soil type and rooting depth. For example: if the
soil is sandy and the rooting depth of the crop is medium, it is
estimated that the net depth of each irrigation application will be in
the order of 35 mm. The last column indicates which irrigation method
is most suitable. In this case medium furrows or short borders.
The sizes of the furrows, borders and basins have been discussed in
the previous chapters. The approximate rooting depths of the most
Important field crops are given in Volume 4.
LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY
Basin irrigation is the simplest of the surface irrigation methods.
Especially if the basins are small, they can be constructed by hand or
animal traction. Their operation and maintenance is simple (see Figure
66).
Furrow irrigation - with the possible exception of short, level furrows -
requires accurate field grading. This is often done by machines. The
maintenance - ploughing and furrowing - is also often done by
machines. This requires skill, organization and frequently the use of
foreign currency for fuel, equipment and spare parts.
Table 5 SELECTION OF AN IRRIGATION METHOD BASED ON THE

DEPTH OF THE NET IRRIGATION APPLICATION
Soil Rooting depth Net irrigation depth per
Irrigation method
type of the crop application (mm)
Sand shallow 20-30 short furrows
medium furrows, short
medium 30-40
borders
long furrows, medium
deep 40-50
borders, small basins
Loam medium furrows, short
shallow 30-40
borders
long furrows, medium
medium 40-50
long borders, medium
deep 50-60
basins
Clay long furrows, medium
shallow 40-50
long borders, medium
medium 50-60
basins
deep 60-70 large basins
Short, level furrows - also called furrow basins - can, like basins, be
constructed and maintained by hand.
Borders require the highest level of sophistication. They are
constructed and maintained by machines. The grading needs to be
accurate. Machine operation requires a high level of skill, organization
and usually foreign currency.
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH IRRIGATION
If there is no tradition in irrigation, the most simple irrigation method
to introduce is basin irrigation. The smaller the basins, the easier their
construction, operation and maintenance.
If irrigation is used traditionally, it is usually simpler to improve the
traditional irrigation method than it is to introduce a previously
unknown method.
REQUIRED LABOUR INPUTS
The required labour inputs for construction and maintenance depend
heavily on the extent to which machinery is used.
In general it can be stated that to operate the system, basin irrigation
requires the least labour and the least skill. For the operation of furrow
and border irrigation systems more labour is required combined with
more skill.
Quarter time rule and irrigation time

QUARTER TIME RULE
In surface irrigation water is supplied to the field from the supply
channel. From the side of the supply channel the water flows to the
opposite side of the field; this is called the advance of the water front.
When the water supply is stopped, the water on the field gradually
infiltrates into the soil and moves away from the field channel; this is
called the recession of the water front.
Ideally the advance of the water front should be the same as the
recession; this would result in a uniform infiltration of water over the
entire field. Usually, however, the advance and recession are not the
same: the advance is often slower than the recession. The result is
that the side of the field near the supply channel receives more water
than the opposite side of the field. This is especially true if the water
supply to the field is too small.
When for example on a sandy soil a small stream size is applied to a
large field, it will take a long time before the water reaches the far end
of the field; the water infiltrates rapidly into the sandy soil. The side of
the field near the supply channel receives too much water and the
opposite side of the field receives too little water.
When the stream size is increased, the distribution of the water will
improve. The water, of course, infiltrates at the same rate, but the
water front will reach the opposite side of the field sooner. So also this
side will receive a fair share of the water, albeit always less than the
side near the supply channel.
In order to choose an appropriate stream size, the following "rule of

thumb" called quarter time rule is used. The quarter time rule says
that the stream size should be large enough for the water to reach the
end of the field (furrow irrigation) or for the water to cover the entire
field (basin irrigation) in a quarter of the time needed to fill the root
zone with sufficient water (the contact time). The contact time is the
time needed to infiltrate the required amount of water. The contact
time can be determined from the infiltration curve, as explained in
Annex 2.
Example:
In this example the infiltration curve of Annex 2 is used (Figure 76).
Suppose it has been determined that 70 mm of water has to be
supplied to a basin. From Figure 76 it can be observed that to Infiltrate
70 mm would take approximately 74 minutes. This means that when
applying the quarter time rule, the basin must be covered with water in
74/4 - 18 to 19 minutes. So the stream size must be chosen in such a
way that indeed the field is covered with water within some 18 or 19
minutes. If it takes longer, the distribution of water in the root zone is
poor. If it is for some reason not possible to Increase the stream size
and it takes longer than 18 or 19 minutes to cover the field, then it will
be necessary to reduce the size of the basin such that it is possible to
cover the field within 18 or 19 minutes.
IRRIGATION TIME
The irrigation time (in minutes or hours) is the time needed to supply
the required irrigation depth (in mm). The irrigation time depends on:
the stream size (l/sec), the required irrigation depth (mm) and the size
of the field to be Irrigated (ha). The following formula is used to
determine the irrigation time:
Example:
If for example the required irrigation depth is 50 mm, the available
stream size is 20 l/sec and the size of the field is 75 x 50 m, the
irrigation time is calculated as follows:
Step Determine the field size in hectares.
1:
The size is 75 m x 50 m = 3 750 m2 = 3750/10 000 = 0.375
ha
Step Determine the irrigation time
2:
Irrigation time (hours) = 2.6 hours = 156 minutes

Applying the quarter time rule it would mean that the water has to
reach the end of the furrow or cover the basin in 156/4 39 minutes. If it
takes longer the stream size per furrow or basin has to be increased or
the furrow length or basin size reduced.
Evaluation of Irrigation Performance

This section describes how to determine the performance of
basin/furrow irrigation. It is assumed that the net irrigation water need
of the crop is known (i.e. the net irrigation depth). This is compared
with what happens during the actual irrigation practice. The field
application efficiency thus obtained is a good measure for the
evaluation of the performance.
Equipment needed
- Measuring tape (30 m)
- Infiltrometer
- Wooden posts or lathes
- Stopwatch or clock
- Data sheet
Method
Step Identify a typical basin or furrow, which can be considered
1: representative of the local situation in terms of size, soil type
and crop. Measure the basin size or furrow length with the tape.
Record the site data on the data sheet:
Example:
Date of test: 4 Basin size: 24 (m) x 15 (m) - 360 (m2)
December 1987
Crop: Groundnuts Required net irrigation depth: 45 mm
Step2: Place wooden posts at 5 to 10 m intervals as shown in Figure
81. Record position of the posts on the data sheet (column 2).
Step Carry out several infiltration tests (see Annex 3) and make an
3: (average) infiltration curve. In this example, the curve of Annex
3 (Figure 76) is used.
Step Now the irrigation starts. Use the same stream size and the
4: same irrigation time as the irrigator normally uses. Record the
time it takes for the water front to reach each wooden post (1
to 6). This is called the advance time: column 3.
Step Record the time it takes the water to infiltrate at each wooden
5: post (1 to 6). This is called recession time: column 4.
Step Calculate the contact time at each of the wooden posts. The
6: contact time is the difference between the advance and
recession time: column 5.
Step Calculate at each of the wooden posts the amount of water
7: applied, using the infiltration curve: in this case Figure 76:
column 6. All data are recorded on the data sheet as indicated
in the example below.
Step Determine the field application efficiency.
8:
The field application efficiency is the fraction of the applied

water that is used by the crop. Provided there are no runoff
losses, the field application efficiency (%) is the required
irrigation depth (mm), divided by the average applied irrigation
depth (mm), multiplied by 100%.
Or:
The average irrigation depth applied (column 6) is:

(65 + 63 + 61 + 60 + 56 + 46):6 = 59 mm
The required net irrigation depth is 45 mm.
Thus the field application efficiency (%) = 45/59 x 100% = 76%
It means that the (average) deep percolation losses are 59 - 45
= 14 mm. This is shown in Figure 82.
EFFECT OF DEFICIT IRRIGATION AND FURROW IRRIGATION
TECHNIQUES ON
ONION WATER PRODUCTIVITY AND YIELD
Abstract: Deficit irrigation is important to increase the efficiency in

view of limited water resources for agriculture. It is essential to find
the most sensitive stage of crop and influence of deficit irrigation on
crop yield. Deficit irrigation improves water productivity and irrigation
management practices resulting in water saving. A field experiment
was carried out at Mehoni Agricultural Research Center, Raya Valley
of Ethiopia, during 2016/17 season with the objectives determine the
combined effect of deficit irrigation and furrow irrigation techniques
on onion yield and water productivity. five level of irrigation water
amount percentage based on evapo-transpiration
of the crop (ETc) (100%ETc, 85%ETc, 70% ETc, 55% ETc and 40%ETc)
and three types of furrow irrigation water application techniques
(alternate furrow, fixed furrow and conventional furrow) were tested in
randomized completely block design (RCBD) with three replications.
The combined result of deficit irrigation furrow irrigation techniques
indicated that there were a significant (P<0.05) variation among
treatments for plant height, bulb height, bulb diameter, bulb yield, and
water productivity. Accordingly, the highest bulb yield was obtained at
100% ETc with conventional furrow method. In terms of water
productivity, 40% ETc deficit irrigation level application with
alternative furrow irrigation and fixed furrow irrigation gave the
highest water productivity which significantly superior to all other
treatments. On the other hand, the minimum water productivity was
recorded from conventional furrow with 100% ETc (full irrigation).
1. INTRODUCTION
Onion (Allium cepa L.) is one of the most important vegetable and field
crops grown and used throughout the world and is grown under a wide
range of climates from temperate to tropical. Soil water tension
significantly affects both the bulb yield and the yield components. In
this respect, Sorensen et al. (2002) reported that drought stress during
the final growth stage forced the onions to mature, reducing the yield.
Deficit irrigation (DI) is an optimization strategy in which irrigation is

applied during drought sensitive growth stages of a crop. Outside
these periods, irrigation is limited or even unnecessary if rainfall
provides a minimum supply of water. Water restriction is limited to
drought-tolerant phenological stages, often the vegetative stages and
the late ripening period. Total irrigation application is therefore not
proportional to irrigation requirements throughout the crop cycle.
While this inevitably results in plant drought stress and consequently
in production loss, DI maximizes irrigation water productivity, which is
the main limiting factor (English M, 1990). In other words, DI aims at
stabilizing yields and at obtaining maximum crop water productivity
rather than maximum yields Zhang H and Oweis T, 1999).
Water is an essential resource to sustain life. It is a principal factor in

agricultural production: proper development of every plant needs an
optimum water supply that meets its physiological needs (Mannocchi
and Mecarelli, 1994).
Ethiopia is the second most populous country in sub-Saharan Africa

and third on the continent with a population of about 100 million.
Agriculture is the main stay of 80% of the Ethiopian people. Agriculture
also accounts for 40% of the GDP of Ethiopia (IWMI, 2010). However,
most Ethiopian farmers depend on low productivity rain-fed small
holder agriculture, even though rainfall is very erratic, and drought
occurs very frequently. In Ethiopia, almost all food crops come from
rain-fed agriculture with the irrigation sub sector accounting for only
about 3% (FAO, 2005). This indicates that the water potential of the
country is untouched, developing and utilizing efficiently this natural
resource will rise the country to be food self sufficient within a short
period of time.
Irrigation enhances crop production and household income which in
turn improves the livelihood of the rural people as water and food
security are closely related (FAO, 2003). Hence, irrigated agriculture is
the main concern of the food security strategy of the Ethiopian
Government, that is expansion of small scale irrigation and less
dependent
on rain-fed agriculture is taken as a means to increase food production
and self-sufficiency of the rapidly increasing population of the country
(GTP, 2010). Therefore, access to irrigation water is the most
determinant factor affecting the food self-sufficiency at household
level and national food supply. In areas where the amount and
distribution of rainfall is not sufficient to sustain crop growth and
development, an alternative approach set by the Ethiopian
Government is to make use of the rivers, underground water and micro
dams for irrigation in order to maintain crop growth so as to enhance
crop production (MoA, 2010).
Furrow irrigation water application system is the most popular surface

irrigation, as it requires a smaller initial investment compared to other
types of irrigation water application systems. This type of irrigation
method is the most widely used in Ethiopia in almost all large and
small irrigation schemes FAO (2002). It usually causes excessive deep
percolation at the upper part of the furrow, insufficient irrigation at the
lower part and considerable runoff, resulting in low application
efficiencies and distribution uniformities. Therefore, proper furrow
irrigation practices have to be devised to minimize water application
and irrigation costs and to save water at the same time maintaining
higher crop yields.
In the semi-arid areas of Ethiopia, water is the most limiting factor for
crop production. In these areas where the amount and distribution of
rainfall is not sufficient to sustain crop growth and development, an
alternative approach is to make use of the rivers and underground
water for irrigation. Satisfying crop water requirements, although it
maximizes production from the land unit, does not necessarily
maximize the return per unit volume of water Oweis et al. (1998).
Therefore, in an effort to improving water productivity, there is an
increasing interest in therefore, the objective of the study was to
determine the combined effect of deficit irrigation and three furrow
irrigation techniques on onion yield and water productivity.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Description of the experimental site
A field experiment was carried out under Mehoni Agricultural Research

Center during the season of 2016/17. It is situated at an altitude of
1578 meter above sea level (m.a.s.l). The area is characterized by
bimodal rainfall pattern with a short rainy season (belg) and (kirmet), a
long term average rainfall of 300 -500mm, and its average minimum
and maximum annual temperature is 18 0C and 32 0C, respectively.
Geographically the experimental site is located between 12° 51'50''

North Latitude and 39° 68'08'' East Longitude. The soil textural class
of the experimental area is clay with pH of 7.1-8.1 (MehARC, 2015).
2.2. Climatic Characteristics
The average climatic data (Maximum and minimum temperature,

relative humidity, wind speed, and sun shine hours) on monthly basis
of the study area were collected from the near meteorological station.
The potential evapotranspiration ETo was estimated using CROPWAT
software version 8.
Table 1: Physical characteristics of soil at the experimental site

Soil texture:- Clay
Bulk density (g/cm3):- 1.1
Field capacity (%):- 45.47
Permanent wilting point (%):- 28.47
Total water holding capacity (mm):- 170.02
2.3. Experimental Layout and Design
The experiment was laid out in a Randomized Complete Block Design

(RCBD) with three replicates. The treatments consisted of fourteen
deficit levels with furrow irrigation techniques, viz., AFI with 85% ETc
(15% deficit ), AFI with 70% ETc (30% deficit t), AFI with 55% ETc
(45% deficit ), AFI with 40 % ETc (60% deficit ), CFI with 85% ETc (15%
deficit ), CFI with 70% ETc (30% deficit ), CFI with 55% ETc (45%
deficit , CFI with 40 % ETc (60% deficit ) and FFI with 85% ETc (15%
deficit ), FFI with 70% ETc (30% deficit ), FFI with 55% ETc (45%
deficit ), FFI with 40 % ETc (60% deficit ) and a control treatment of
100% ETc (no deficit ) with three furrow irrigation techniques (Table
1).
Control irrigation implies the amount of irrigation water applied in
accordance with the computed crop water requirement with the aid of
CROPWAT program. The treatments were replicated three times
resulting in a total of 45 plots.
Table 2: Treatment used in the experiment

Treatment Combinations
T1 Convectional furrow irrigated at 100%
ETc
ETc
ETc
ETc
ETc
T6 Alternative furrow irrigated at 100%
ETc
ETc
ETc
ETc
ETc
T11 Fixed furrow irrigated at 100% ETc
2.4. Statistical analysis

The collected data were analyzed using SAS 9.1 statistical software
Mean separation was carried out using least significance difference
(LSD) test at 5% probability level.
Analyses of variances for the data recorded were conducted using SAS
9.1 statistical software carried out using least significance difference
(LSD) test at 5% probability level used for mean separation and the
analysis of variance indicated the presence of significant treatment
differences.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3. 1. Crop water and Irrigation Demand
The reference evapotraspiration (ETo) value of the site ranged

between 3.9 mm/day in January to 4.8 mm/day in March, with an
average of 4.3 mm/day for the whole growth period. Based on this
output, the seasonal irrigation requirement was found to be 362.45 mm
(Table 3). This amount was needed for full irrigation level treatments.
Accordingly, the 85, 70, 55, and 40% of irrigation level with the furrow
irrigation techniques of CFI were applied 308.1, 253.7, 199.4 and
145mm , with AFI 210.8, 183.7, 156.6, 129.4 and 102.2mm, and with FFI
210.8, 183.7, 156.6, 129.4 and 102.2mm, respectively. This amount of
seasonal ETc for AFI and FFI the effective rainfall with 29.65 mm
added that obtained the three furrows which does not irrigate at that
time due to the rainfall. Crop water requirement (ETc) values were low
at the beginning of the growing season, increased gradually to attain a
maximum during March and April and subsequently decreased (Table
8). This result indicates that, the maximum amount of water was
applied around bulb formation of the onion. This was also confirmed by
Boyhan et al. (2001), that peak use of water generally occurs during
the latter stages of bulb enlargement especially during periods of
warm weather.
Table 3: Crop and irrigation water requirement onion in the

study area
Date ETo mm/period Crop Kc ETc mm/period Total Rain mm/period Effective rain mm/period IRn
mm/period IRg mm/period
13-Jau 23.4 0.5 11.7 11.7 16.71
19- Jau 22.62 0.5 11.31 11.31
16.16
25-Jau 24.3 0.5 12.15 12.15
17.36
31-Jau 23.7 0.5 11.85 11.85
16.93
6-Feb 25.62 0.56 14.3472 14.3472 20.50
13-Feb 27.93 0.67 18.7131 12 3.9 14.8131
21.16
20-Feb 29.96 0.78 23.3688 36.5 18.8 4.5688 6.53
27-Feb 30.38 0.92 27.9496 17.3 7 20.9496 29.93
6-Mar 30.17 1.05 31.6785 31.6785 45.26
13-Mar 34.16 1.05 35.868 35.868
51.24
20-Mar 32.34 1.05 33.957 33.957
48.51
27.Mar 31.01 1.05 32.5605 32 16
16.5605 23.66
Apr-3 33.11 1.05 34.7655 34.7655 49.67
Apr-10 32.27 1.02 32.9154 32.9154 47.02
Apri-17 31.08 0.94 29.2152 28 13.6 15.6152
22.31
Total 432.05 362.45 125.8 59.3 303.05 432.93
3.2. Effect of parameters to onion in response of deficit Irrigation
Statistical analysis has shown a highly significant (P<0.01) difference

for days to maturity, plant number, bulb height, marketable bulb yield
and water productivity under different treatments. However, no
significant deference was observed for average bulb weight.
3.2.1. Days to maturity
Different deficit levels with furrow irrigation techniques has a

significant influence (p<0.05) on days to maturity. Significantly longer
106.7 and 105 days to maturity were recorded at 100% and 85% of
irrigation level with convectional furrow irrigation techniques
respectively (Table 4).
On the other hand, significantly lower 96.3 days to maturity were

recorded in plots where fixed furrow irrigation combined with 40%
irrigation depth was used.
This result is in agreement with that of Brewster (1994) who reported
that treatments that lacked supplemental irrigation water advanced
bulb maturity of onion. Similarly, the findings of Solomon (2004) and
Ahmed et al. (2008) also showed significant decrease in the number of
days to flowering of haricot and faba beans under water stress. This
could be due to the fact that plants under stress tend to complete
their life cycle, which enables them escape from the unfavorable
conditions by ending lifecycle few days earlier than those under
normal or high soil moisture conditions, thereby ensuring perpetuation
of the species (Al-Suhaibani, 2009).
3.2.2. Plant height
Plant height of onion was highly significantly (P ≤ 0.01) affected by the

combined effects of furrow irrigation techniques and deficit irrigation.
Significantly higher plant height of 48.6 cm and 46.5 was recorded for
100%ETc (full irrigation) of irrigation depth of
water applied with convectional furrow irrigation technique and 100%
of alternative furrow irrigation techniques respectively. While CFI with
85% ETc, CFI with 70% ETc and AFI with 85% ETc irrigation water
levels got 45.5 cm, 43.7 cm, and 42.7 cm plant heights respectively.
AFI with 40%ETc and FFI with 40% ETc of irrigation depth of water
applied recorded the lowest plant height of 40.8 cm and 38.9 cm
respectively.
Plant height is a good indicator for determining the water stress. This
finding is in agreement with the finding of Aklilu (2009) and Takele
(2009) who reported that the plant height of pepper decreased with
decreased irrigation levels and also increase with the irrigation level.
Wien (1997) indicated that plant height had a linear correlation with
the availability of soil moisture. The present result was also in
agreement with the work of Al -Moshileh (2007) who reported that with
increasing soil water supply, plant growth parameters (plant height)
were significantly increased.
3.2.3. Leaf length
Significant differences (P < 0.05) on leaf length were also observed by

the combined effect of deficit irrigation and furrow techniques. The
higher leaf length were recorded by 100% ETc of irrigation level with
convectional furrow irrigation, followed by CFI with 85% ETc and CFI
with 70% ETc with the value of 36.4 and 36 cm respectively
(Table 4). Significantly shortest leaf length of 30.1 cm and 31cm were
recorded in plots where fixed furrow irrigation techniques with 40%
ETc and 55% ETc used. In general, leaf length increased with
increasing irrigation depth, as the plant does not experience moisture
stress at any growth and development.
This result is supported by observations of Kumar et al. (2007) and

Bagali (2012) who reported longer leaves at 100% crop water
requirement compared to treatments of deficit irrigation. Water deficit
leads to retarded plant growth as it results in closure of stomata and
interfere with photosynthesis ability and nutrient uptake of plants and
consequently, reducing cell division and growth and thus resulting in
stunting of leaves. During water deficit, stomata close to conserve
water, limiting carbon dioxide availability and decrease in
photosynthesis. This means that carbon assimilation is reduced and
therefore the rate of leaf growth is reduced. It has been demonstrated
that the decrease
in available water under moisture stress first affects leaf expansion
and then stomata conductance and gas exchange (Sadras and Milory,
1996). Similarly, Smith (2011) quoted that the rate of transpiration,
photosynthesis and growth are lowered by even mild water stresses.
3.2.4. Number of leaf per plant
Higher number of leaf per plant was recorded of 10.4 was recorded at
100% ETc (full irrigation) with convectional furrow irrigation followed
by CFI with 85% ETc and AFI with 100 ETc with the value of 9.95 and
8.9 respectively. There were no significances difference between AFI
with 70% ETc, AFI 55% ETc, FFI with 100% ETc and FFI
with 85% ETc of irrigation level. The lower number of leaf per plant
was observed at FFI with 40% and FFI with 55% ETc irrigation level
with the value of 6.9 and 7.9 leaves per plant respectively.
This result seems closely related to that of Biswas et al. (2003), who
reported that onion bulbs of irrigated treatments gave highest leaves
number per plant than the non-irrigated one, whereas onion grown
without supplemental irrigation gave lower number of leaves. This
indicated that when plants respond to water stress by closing their
stomata to slow down water loss by transpiration, gas exchange
within the leaf is limited, consequently, photosynthesis and growth
was slow down (Curah and Proctor, 1990). The obtained result was
also in agreement with the findings of Wien (1997)
who found that leaf number had a linear correlation with the
availability of soil moisture.
3.2.5. Bulb height

The ANOVA result showed highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) difference due
to the combined effect of furrow techniques technique and deficit
irrigation (Table4 4) .
The higher bulb height of 55.4mm, 55.33 mm, 53.7 mm, was recorded
by CFI when it was applied with 100%, AFI with 100% ETc, and CFI
with 85% ETc irrigation level respectively. The CFI at full irrigation
(100%) was given 7.74 mm greater than it produced in plots which
received 85% and 13.47 mm greater which received 40% irrigation
level of FFI. On the other hand, Alternative Furrow Irrigation produced
bulb height of 53.37 mm in plots which received of 100% of irrigation
water applied, 10.98 mm and 11.37 mm greater than it produced in
treatments which received AFI of 40%, and FFI 40% of irrigation water
applied respectively (Table 4). The short bulb heights of onion were
recorded from AFI and FFI with 40% ETc of deficit irrigation level.
The result indicated that the 40% irrigation depth might have reduced
transpiration and photosynthesis and assimilate available for growth
of the crop, which thus caused to produce small bulbs. This result is in
line with that of Olalla et al. (2004) who observed smaller sized bulbs
in mild water-stressed onion plants. Similarly, Neeraja et al. (1999)
reported that higher level of irrigation 1.2 IW: CPE resulted in
maximum bulb length.
Table 4: Main effects of deficit irrigation and furrow irrigation

techniques on Maturity day, Plant height (cm), Leaf length (cm),
Number of leaf and Bulb height (mm) of onion
Treatment MD PH (cm) LL NL
BH (mm)
Convectional furrow irrigated at 100% ETc 106.7a 48.6a 39.5a 10.4a
55.4a
Convectional furrow irrigated at 85% ETc 105a 45.5abc 36.4ab 9.95ab
53.7b
Convectional furrow irrigated at 70% ETc 103b 43.9bcde 36ab 9.2abc
53.01b
Convectional furrow irrigated at 55% ETc 102.33bc 41.6defg 33.75bc 8.87abcd
48.7d
Convectional furrow irrigated at 40% ETc 100de 40.3fg 31.8bc 8.2bcd
46.6de
Alternative furrow irrigated at 100% ETc 102b 46.5a 36ab 8.9abc
55.3b
Alternative furrow irrigated at 85% ETc 101cd 42.7cdef 35.7ab 8.4abcd
47.7de
Alternative furrow irrigated at 70% ETc 98.3ef 41.3efg 32.7bc 8.2bcd
45.1ef
Alternative furrow irrigated at 55% ETc 98fg 40.7efg 32.7bc 8.16bcd
43.4g
Alternative furrow irrigated at 40% ETc 97ef 40.01fg 31.5 bc 8.16bcd
42i
Fixed furrow irrigated at 100% ETc 101.3bcd 44.8bcd 34.5abc 8.5abcd
50.3c
Fixed furrow irrigated at 85% ETc 97.6fg 42.3cdef 32.4bc 8.2bcd
47.6de
Fixed furrow irrigated at 70% ETc 97.3fg 42.4efg 32.37bc 8.4bcd
45.6ef
Fixed furrow irrigated at 55% ETc 97.3fg 40.6fg 31bc 7.9cd
42.4hi
Fixed furrow irrigated at 40% ETc 96.3g 38.9g 30.1c 6.9d
41.7i
LSD(0.05) 1.77 3.3 5.07 1.9
1.17
CV (%) 3.5 4.6 8.9 1.3 3.7
Means with the same letter (s) are not significantly different at P ≤
0.05; NS= not significantly different from each other at P < 0.05; LSD=
least significant difference;
CV = Coefficient of variation.
3.2.6. Bulb Diameter
The analysis of variance for the furrow irrigation techniques and

deficit irrigation has shown significant difference on bulb diameter.
As shown in Table 5, the largest bulb diameter was recorded (62.1
mm) when 100% ETc (full irrigation) amount of irrigation water applied
with convectional furrow irrigation and followed by 85% and 70% of
CFI. There were no significant differences between 100% ETc of AFI,
85% ETc of CFI and 70% ETc of CFI. On the other hand, the smallest
bulb diameter (44.5 mm) was recorded from irrigation level treated
fixed furrow irrigation with 40% ETc of deficit irrigation depth.
The result might be because of the reason that high irrigation levels
increased photosynthetic area of the plant (height of plants and
number of leaves), which increased the amount of assimilate
partitioned to the bulbs and increased bulb diameter. This result is
closely related to that of Kumara et al. (2007) who observed that
irrigation at 1.20 Ep produced higher mean bulb size, which decreased
with the decrease in amount of irrigation. In the same way, Abdulaziz
(2003) and Biswas et al. (2003) indicated that bulb diameter of onions
were increased at higher levels of irrigation. Similarly, Olalla et al.
(2004) reported that plots which received the greatest volumes of
water yielded harvests with higher percentages of large-size bulbs
whereas water shortages led to higher percentages of small-size
bulbs. This indicates that transpiration, photosynthesis and growth
rates were lowered by water stress as stressed plant produces smaller
sized bulbs.
3.2.7. Marketable Bulb Yield
The statistical analysis revealed that there was significant difference

of onion bulb yield among the different deficit irrigation treatments (p
< 0.05).
The highest marketable bulb yield of 26.8 tone/ha was obtained at the
0% deficit irrigation level (100% ETc) with convectional furrow
irrigation technique and followed by 100% ETc of alternative furrow
irrigation and 85% ETc of convectional furrow irrigation with the value
of 23.71 tone/ha and 23.64 tone /ha respectively. The lowest mean bulb
yield of onion was recorded from fixed furrow irrigation with 40% ETc
of deficit irrigation (14.32 tone/ha).
The yield reductions were increased as deficit irrigation levels

increased from 100% ETc to 40% ETc of deficit irrigation. In this study
the bulb yield response to fixed furrow irrigation and alternate furrow
irrigation was higher at 100% than at 85% of irrigation water applied.
Yet, CFI showed significantly higher yield at 100% of irrigation level. It
showed that Conventional Furrow Irrigation system gave more yield
with irrigation water amount of 100%, and AFI with 100% ETc gave
optimum yield..
Furthermore AFI and FFI all showed a substantial decrease in bulb

yield (7.51% and 15.5%, respectively). Sepaskhah and Ghasemi (2008),
reported that small amount of applied water reduced yield in every
other furrow irrigation (AFI and FFI) as compared to CFI due to water
stress, when the same irrigation frequency was applied which
supported the result of this research. The present result agreed with
the general principle that the response of crop to full irrigation is
generally higher under irrigated conditions than none irrigated one.
The increment in marketable bulb yield due to application of irrigation
water could be attributed to the increment in vegetative growth and
increased production, which is associated with increment in leaf area
index, bulb diameter and average bulb weight (Neeraja et al., 1999).
Similarly, Shoke et al. (1998) and Shoke et al. (2000) indicated that the
bulb and dry matter production of onion is highly dependent on
appropriate water supply. Similar results were also reported by Kloss
et al. (2012) who showed that dealing with improvement of water
productivity is closely related to the irrigation practice of
regulated deficit irrigation and has a direct effect on yield i.e., if the
amount of water applied decreases intentionally the crop yield will
drop.
3.2.8. Unmarketable Bulb Yield
Significantly higher unmarketable onion bulb yield was recorded when

fixed furrow irrigation technique with 40% ETc water applied (2.08
tone/ha) and followed by Alternative furrow irrigation techniques, while
the lowest unmarketable bulb yield of 1.54 tone/ha and 1.67 tone/ha
were observed when AFI with 100% ETc and CFI with 100% ETc
irrigation depth applied respectively (Table 5).
The result revealed that, yield of very small bulbs increased with
deficit irrigation. Stressed onion plants may bulb too early, produce
small-sized bulbs and bulb splits and, thus, produce high amount of
unmarketable yield (Kebede, 2003).This could be due to low rate of
transpiration caused by stomata closer under moisture stress
condition which brought about reduced photosynthesis and poor bulb
growth and developments. Corresponding to this, Martin et al. (2004),
Olalla et al. (2004) and Zayton (2007) reported that plots which
received the lowest volumes of water during the development and
ripening stages produced higher percentage of small size bulbs. From
present result, increasing water deficit had a positive relationship with
the production of high yield of under size bulbs.
3.2.9. Total Bulb Yield
The total bulb yield which is the sum of unmarketable and marketable
bulb yield was showed a significance effect (P<0.05) by the
treatments. Higher total onion bulb yield was recorded when
convectional furrow irrigation system with 100% ETc irrigation
depth (full irrigation) applied that gave 28.48 tone/ha and followed by
CFI with 85% ETc and AFI with 100% ETc of deficit irrigation.
On the other hand, the lowest total bulb yield of 16.4 tone/ha was
recorded when fixed furrow irrigation system was applied with 40%
ETc of deficit irrigation (Table 5).
The increment in onion total bulb yield might be attributed to large

size of onion bulb due to application of high level of irrigation. This is
because that it encourages cell elongation, above ground vegetative
growth and imparts dark green colour of leaves,
which is important for more assimilate production and partition that
favours onion bulb growth (Brady, 1985). The increased total bulb yield
by applying full (no deficit) irrigation could have better performance on
vegetative growth like plant height, number of leaves and leaf length
which increase photosynthetic capacity of the plant, which in turn can
improve bulb weight and contribute to increment in total bulb yield .
As the irrigation level increased from 40% ETc to 100% ETc, the total
bulb yield increased. This result was also in agreement with the
findings of Ferreira et al, (2002).
3.3. Effects of Irrigation Level and Furrow Irrigation Techniques on

Water productivity
Deficit irrigation with furrow irrigation techniques had highly
significant influence on water use efficiency of onion (P≤ 0.01)
3.3.1. Water Productivity
The analysis of variance shows that irrigation furrow techniques with

deficit irrigation influenced water productivity. WP values ranged from
9.1 kg m-3 for fixed furrow irrigation with 40% ETc deficit irrigation
level to 4.43 kg m-3 for convectional furrow irrigation with 100% ETc
(full irrigation) . The highest WP was recorded from alternate and fixed
furrow irrigation with 40% ETc of deficit irrigation with the value of 9.1
and 8.6 kg m.-3 (Table 5). The lowest water productivity of onion was
recorded from the 100% ETc of convectional furrow irrigation.
Alternative furrow irrigation technique with 100% ETc deficit irrigation
was 28% superior to convectional furrow irrigation with 100% ETc (full
irrigation). The results of this research are in agreement with
Gençoglan and Yazar (1999), who reported that WUE values decreased
with increasing irrigation level. In line with this result, Samson and
Tilahun (2007) reported that deficit irrigations increased the water use
efficiency of onion. Similarly, Shock et al., (1998), Fabeiro et al. (2003),
Kebede (2003), Kirnak et al. (2005) and Sarkar et al. (2008) reported
that irrigation water use efficiency was higher at lower levels of
available soil moisture.
3.3.2. Comparison of onion bulb yield with water productivity
As shown in figure below, if insufficient water is applied during the

crop cycle the crop was not fully develop resulting in low yield and
high water productivity. And crop yield and water productivity can be
increased if a considerable amount of water is added. Also, as the type
of furrow irrigation and deficit irrigation depth differ, the yield and
water production also varies. Conventional furrow irrigation with 100%
ETc (full irrigation) was gave highest yield and low water production
following alternate furrow irrigation of 100% ETc with equivalent yield
of CFI and higher water productivity and fixed furrow irrigation with
lower yield and high water productivity . As seen from figure below,
the yield and water applied in three furrow irrigation treatments is
leaner that means as the amount of water increased the yield
increases. Alternate furrow irrigation gives optimum yield and water
production.
As shown in the table below, as the amount of water applied increased

over conventional irrigation the yield also increased, but high water
productivity of water were gained in Fixed and Alternate furrow
irrigation and alternative furrow irrigation techniques . Clearly, water
productivity depends on total applied water.
4. CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, in the study areas water is a limiting factor, it is

possible to get equivalent bulb yield of onion when applied alternative
furrow irrigation technique with 100% ETc of irrigation depth.
Alternative furrow irrigation can save a substantial amount of water
and labour without highly reduction of onion yield in the study area.
This also demonstrates that crop water use efficiency will be
increased by using AFI which may result in substantial benefits, under
limited water condition, labour saving and improved flexibility in farm
irrigation management are also expected to be achieved using AFI.
This result should be of significant value in this area to irrigate
additional land.
Development of Optimum Irrigation Regime for Onion

Production at Arba Minch, Southern Ethiopia
Abstract
This research was conducted aiming at development of optimum
irrigation regime for onion (Allium cepa L.) production. A field
experiment was conducted at Arba Minch area district, Southern
Ethiopia during 2017 dry cropping season. The experimental
treatments consisted four irrigation levels (100, 75, 50 and 25% ETc)
and three irrigation intervals (3, 5 and 7 days). The experiment was
laid out according to randomized complete block design in factorial
arrangement with three replications.
Results of the analysis revealed that the interaction effects of

irrigation levels and irrigation intervals showed highly (P<0.01)
significant difference on number of leaves per plant and significant
(P<0.05) difference on plant height, neck diameter and total bulb yield.
The highest total bulb yield 34000 kgha-1 was obtained under control
treatment which was statistically non significantly different with
treatment combination of 100% ETc and 5 days interval. This study
shows that shorter interval with higher level of irrigation had the
better performance on all studied parameters, while the most stressed
had low performance on all studied parameters. Therefore, application
of 100% ETc at 5 days interval was economically productive when
adopted by onion farmers in the study area when water was non
limiting factor. However, 75% ET at 5 days interval can be an option in
the study area when water was limiting factor.
1. Introduction
The ever increasing world population and the demand for additional
water supply by industrial, municipal, and agricultural sectors exert a
lot of pressure on renewable water resources forcing the agricultural
sector to use the available irrigation water efficiently to produce more
food to meet the increasing demand (Andarzian et al., 2011). Irrigation
scheduling is the process involved in deciding on the right time and
the right amount of water a crop needs in order to maximize yield,
quality and minimize water and nutrient leaching (Carr and Knox, 2011;
Sammis et al., 2012).Irrigation scheduling involves making a decision
on how much and when to apply water. Onion (Allium cepa L.) is one of
the most important vegetables in the world. In Ethiopia, onion is
produced in many parts of the country by small farmers, private
growers and state enterprise (Lemma and Shimelis, 2003).
The crop is produced both under rainfed in the “Meher” season and
under irrigation in the off season. In the many area of the country the
off season crop (under irrigation) constitutes much of the area under
onion production (Nigussie, 2015). Onion is among the major vegetable
crops grown in the study area under irrigation. But it’s productivity, is
below national level due to, improper irrigation timing and amount.
Flood irrigation is the major water application technique across
smallholders’ irrigation farmers in the study area to grow vegetable.
However, the limited irrigation water availability along with unwise
use of the available resource limits the area allotted for onion
production. Therefore, it is desirable to utilize the scarce water
resource using an appropriate water saving technology. As a result,
this study was conducted to develop optimum irrigation regime for
onion production in the study area.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1 Description of the Study Area
The field experiment was conducted at farmers’ field at Shele Mela

kebele in Arba Minch zuria woreda, Ethiopia during January to April,
2017. The area is located 500 km south of Addis Ababa at 6 004’ N and
37036’ E at an altitude of 1,285m asl. The area experiences a bimodal
type of rainfall with the first and second rainfall during April to May
and September to October, respectively. The mean annual temperature
is 28 oC with a mean annual maximum and minimum temperature of 37
oC and 16 oC, respectively. The mean annual rainfall is about 800 mm.
2.2 Description of the Experimental Materials
Onion variety called adama red, which was well adapted and widely
cultivated in the study area was used as a test crop for the
experiment. It has deep red colour, circular shaped bulb and its yield
potential is 35t ha-1 Full irrigation (100%ETc) with 3 days irrigation
interval was used as standard check.
2.3 Experimental Treatments
The treatments consisted of a factorial combination of four irrigation

levels (100, 75, 50 and 25% ETc) and three levels of irrigation intervals
(3, 5 and 7 days). There were a total of 12 treatment combinations.
Each four levels of irrigation water were applied throughout the crop
growth stages with respective irrigation intervals.
Table 1. Treatment combinations of the amount of irrigation water and

irrigation intervals throughout the growing season of onion
2.4 Experimental Procedure
Seeds were sawn on November 15, 2017 at 10cm distance between

rows, lightly covered with soil and mulched with grass (until seedlings
are emerged 2-5 cm from the soil). Seedlings were managed for 45
days and then after transplanted, when they reached 12-15 cm height
stage, to the main experimental plots on January 1, 2017 and
one day before transplanting the seedlings were irrigated for safe
uplifting. During transplanting only healthy, vigorous and uniform
seedlings grown at the center of seedbeds were transplanted and gap
filling was done within a week after transplanting.
The experimental field was plowed three times using oxen. It was
prepared again by human labor to break the clods, Plots were leveled
and furrows and ridges were prepared at a spacing of 40 cm using
hand tools. The experiment was conducted under furrow irrigation
method.NPS and Urea was applied at the recommended rate of 100
kg/ha NPS at time of planting and 100 kg Urea with split application 50
kg at time of planting and 50 kg six weeks after planting. Irrigation
applied up to March 24, 2017 then after it was discontinued 15 days
before harvest which helps in reducing the rotting during storage.
All other cultural practices were followed as per the requirement of
onion crop. Prior to the application of treatments equal amount of
irrigation was applied one times for all experimental plots to favor
uniform establishment of the seedlings.
2.5 Crop Water Requirement
The crop evapotranspiration (ETc) was estimated using reference

evapotranspiration (ETo). The reference evapotranspiration (ETo) was
estimated using climatic data such as; maximum and minimum
temperature; relative humidity; sunshine hours and wind speed at 75%
probability data obtained from Arba Minch University Metrological
Station for the period 1971 to 2015, according to FAO Penman-
Monteith method through the
CROPWAT program. Then, ETc of onion was obtained by multiplying
ETo with crop coefficient (Kc). The crop coefficient values were
adopted from the FAO (2010), and using FAO crop coefficients for
onions (0.7 for initial, 1.05 for mid, and 0.75 for end season) as
suggested by Allen et al. (1998).
3. Results and Discussion
Results of the field experiment revealed that the interaction effect of

irrigation levels and irrigation intervals on plant height, neck diameter
and total bulb yield of onion plant were (P<0.05) significantly
difference. However, leave number per plant of onion plant was highly
(P<0.01) significantly difference.
3.1 Plant height
The longest plants (48 cm) were obtained from the treatment
combination of 100% ETc with 3 days interval which was not
significantly different with treatment combination of 100% ETc and 5
days irrigation interval. The shortest plants (27 cm) were recorded
from the treatment combination of 25% ETc and 7 days irrigation
interval is presented in Table 1.
The reason for the better performance of this growth parameter due to
the shorter interval with higher level of irrigation may be attributed to
optimum soil water- air- balance around plant root zone. The result of
the current study is in agreement with the result of Bagali et al. (2012)
reported that scheduling of drip irrigation onion at shorter interval with
higher level of irrigation recorded significantly higher plant height. The
finding of this study is also in line with the result of Metwally (2011)
reported that the higher water supply resulted in higher plant height.
This result is in contradicted to Enchalew et al. (2016) reported that
plant height was not affected by the level of deficit irrigation.
3.2 Number of leaves per plant
The mean number of leaves per plant was highly significant (P<0.01)
difference by irrigation levels and irrigation intervals, and their
interaction. The highest number of leaves per plant (11) was obtained
from the treatment combination of 100% ETc and 3 days irrigation
interval which was statistically at par with treatment combination of
100% ETc and 5 days irrigation interval. The lowest number of leaves
per plant (3.6) was
recorded from the treatment combination of 25% ETc and 7 days
irrigation interval.
The increase in number of leaves per plant at higher irrigation level

and shorter irrigation interval was obviously due to maintenance of
soil moisture regime in the root zone closer to field capacity. When
moisture in the root zone is closer to field capacity, the nutrient
availability is high and the plant does not experience moisture stress
at any stage of growth and development.
This finding is also in line with Youssef and Taha (2016) reported
vegetative growth parameters of onion crop including plant height,
number of leaves per plant were significantly decreased by increasing
soil moisture stress. The result of the current study is in agreement
with the result of Bagali et al. (2012) reported that scheduling of drip
irrigation onion at shorter interval with higher level of irrigation
recorded significantly higher number of leaves. This finding is also in
line with Metwally (2011) and Enchalew (2016).
3.3 Neck diameter
The mean neck diameter was highly (P<0.01) significant difference by

the effect of irrigation levels and irrigation intervals, and their
interaction effect (P<0.05). Neck girth is one of the important growth
parameters which indicate vigor of the plant. The highest neck
diameter (2.5 cm) was obtained from the treatment combination of
100% ETc and 3 days irrigation interval which is statistically at par
with treatment combination of 100% ETc and 5 days irrigation interval.
The lowest mean neck diameter (1 cm) was recorded from the
treatment combination of 25% ETc and 7 days irrigation interval (Table
1).
Increased neck diameter of onion by 3 days and 5 days interval with
100% ETc of irrigation may be due to the better performance of growth
parameters like plant height and number of leaves. The result of the
current study is in agreement with the result of Bagali et al. (2012)
reported that scheduling of drip irrigation onion at shorter interval with
higher level of irrigation recorded significantly highest neck diameter.
The growth
characteristics yield and yield components of onion generally
improved with the increased in total water applied during growing
period (Abdul Qados and Hozayn, 2010).
3.4 Total bulb yield
The mean total bulb yield was highly (P<0.01) significant difference on
the irrigation levels and irrigation intervals, and significant (P<0.05)
difference on their interaction effect. The highest total bulb yield
(34000 kg ha-1) was obtained from the combined application of 100%
ETc and 3 days interval which was statistically at par with combined
effect of 100% ETc and 5 days irrigation interval. The lowest value
(6500 kgha-1) was recorded from the treatment combination of 25%
ETc and 7 days irrigation interval
(Table 1).
The result of the current study is in agreement with the result of Rop
et al. (2016) who reported that yield decreased with increasing water
stress significantly. Also, Bagali et al. (2012) reported that scheduling
of drip irrigation onion at shorter interval with higher level of irrigation
recorded significantly higher bulb yield.
Table 1. Interaction effect of irrigation levels and irrigation intervals

on Plant height (cm), leave number per plant, neck diameter (cm) and
total bulb yield of onion
3.5 Yield Reduction, Water Saved, Calculated Yield and Extra Land
from Saved Water
The highest total bulb yield 34000 kgha-1 was obtained under
treatment combination of 100% ETc and 3 days interval which was
statistically non significantly different with treatment combination of
100% ETc and 5 days interval. The treatment combination of 75% ETc
and 3 days irrigation interval consumed 25% less water as compared
to treatment combination of 100% ETc and 3 days irrigation interval ;
this leads 10.3% (3500 kgha-1) yield reduction. If the saved water is
used to produce onion at the same irrigation regime, it will produce
bulb yield 9417 kgha-1 this exceeds the loss of onion bulbs occurred
due to deficit irrigation by 5917 kgha-1. There were non-significant
different between treatment combination of 75% ETc with 3 days and
75% ETc with 5 days interval. In addition to that equal amount of
water was saved. This implies that it can bring the same area of land
in to production.
4. Conclusions
75% ET at 5 days interval can be an option in the study area when

water was limiting factor. However, application of 100% ETc at 5 days
interval was economically productive when adopted by onion farmers
in the study area when water was non limiting factor.
Evaluation of Furrow Irrigation Systems on Onion

Yield and Water Use Efficiency in Melokoza Woreda,
Southern Ethioipia
Abstract
This experiment was conducted for the last two years to evaluate the
effect of furrow irrigation systems on onion yield and water use
efficiency in Melokoza woreda. Specifically to evaluate the effect of
alternative, fixed and farmer practice irrigation system and identify the
furrow irrigation type which allow achieving optimum onion yield and
water use efficiency. The experiment had four level of treatments
(alternative, fixed farmer practice and 50% of alternative irrigation
system) and which were arranged in RCBD with four replications.
Different data were collected and analyzed using SAS software in
probability of 5% confidence level. The experiment result shown that
alternative furrow irrigation system has highest yield and water use
efficiency. The total yield obtained from alternative furrow irrigation
was 25.4 t/ha and the minimum yield obtained from 50% of ETc with
alternative furrow irrigation, which was 17.8 t/ha. The water use
efficiency of alternative furrow irrigation was 3.3 kg/m 3 and fixed
furrow irrigation had relatively highest water use efficiency than
farmer practice, which were 2.6 kg/m 3. The lowest water use
efficiency was obtained from farmers practice. From this experiment
the result of alternative furrow irrigation is better in yield and water
use efficiency in areas where there is water scarcity and laborer
expensiveness.
Introduction
Background and Justification
Much of an increase in the irrigated area had come because of the
expansion of small-scale irrigation in the country. Yet, the existing
irrigation development in Ethiopia, as compared to the resources the
country has, is negligible [1]. Southern Peoples, Nations and
Nationalities Regional State has exuberant resource endowment with
respect to the natural resources for irrigated farming that accounts an
estimated irrigable area of
700,000 hectare of land constituting about 19% of the estimated total
irrigable area of the country, that is 3.7 million hectare [2]. This
indicates the existing irrigation development in SNNPRS, as compared
to the resources potential that the region has, is not significant.
Recently conducted survey results on identification of major

production constraints in different agro-ecology of the region, pointed
out that lack of improved small scale irrigation technologies, less
irrigation water management practices and inadequate research
supports are a major problem for efficient irrigation water use and
agricultural production improvement.
Irrigation water management implies the application of suitable water

to crops in right amount at the right time. Salient features of any
improved method of irrigation is the controlled application of the
required amount of water at desired time, which leads to minimization
of range of variation of the moisture content in the root zone, thus
reducing stress on the plants [3,4].
In the semi-arid areas of Ethiopia, water is the most limiting factor for
crop production. In these areas where the amount and distribution of
rainfall is not sufficient to sustain crop growth and development, an
alternative approach is to make use of the rivers and underground
water for irrigation. Satisfying crop water requirements, although it
maximizes production from the land unit, does not necessarily
maximize the return per unit volume of water [5,6]. Therefore, in an
effort to improving water productivity, there is an increasing interest
in therefore, the study is planned to evaluate the performance of types
of furrow irrigation systems in tomato crop. Considering the scarcity of
irrigation water in the Melokoza woreda and the sensitivity of onion to
moisture stress, again it aimed at determining the water use efficiency
of onion and evaluating the three furrow irrigation performance during
which the crop (onion) and to identify furrow water application system
which allow achieving optimum onion yield [7,8].
Materials and Methods

Description of the Study Area
This experiment was conducted in Melokoza woreda, salaysh mender
one (1) kebelle. The study site is located at an altitude 900m,
longitude 036°28’07’’N and latitude 06025’03’. Melakoza woreda
located 661 km from Addis Ababa, 348 km from Arbaminch. The
district has three agro ecologies Dega (21.73%) weyna, Dega (52.43%)
and Kola (25.84%). The soil of the district is mainly clay-loam (50%),
sand-loam (35%) and clay (15%). The district has two rain-seasons,
‘Mehri’ season (from July to Oct) and ‘Belg’ season (from last week of
Jan to April). The maximum rainfall is 600 mm, minimum 400 mm and
average annual rainfall 500 mm. The maximum temperature is 27.5°C
and minimum temperature is 15.1°C. The Woreda total land coverage is
168,180.93 ha, annual crops 47103.897 ha, perennial crops 31884.093
ha, grazing land 6885 ha, natural forest 33687.15 ha, constitutional
land 33087.15 ha, private land 1044.02 ha, other reserved land
180548.19 ha, totally 78987.99 ha and cultivable land for farther
14015.95 ha.
Potentialities that have been seen by agricultural sectors were: High
water sources, Wide irrigation farm lands, Accessible farm land, Smart
climatic condition, Huge forest coverage etc.
Experimental Design and Treatments Arrangement

The experiment was laid out in randomized complete bock design with
four treatments and four replications. The treatments were alternate
furrow irrigation (AFI), fixed furrow irrigation (FFI), 50% of alternative
furrow and conventional furrow irrigation (CFI) were applied. All
cultural practices were done in accordance to the recommendation
made for the area. The experimental field was divided into 16 plots
and each plot size was 4 m by 4 m dimension. Space between plots
been 1 m and between replication 1.5 m. Space between rows 40 cm
and 10 cm between the plants was used. The experimental plot was
pre-irrigated one day before transplanting or seedling. Before the
commencement of treatment, two to three common light irrigations
was supplied to all plots at two to three days interval to ensure better
plant establishment.
Climate Data
Meteorological parameters like maximum and minimum air
temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, sunshine hours, and
rainfall was collected from climWat (Table 1). Reference
evapotranspiration (ETo): It was calculated by FAO reduced Penman-
Monteith method [9]. Reference evapotranspiration of the growing
season per four days (irrigation interval) was presented in the Table 1.
It was used to calculate crop water requirement for the day of the
interval. The reference evapotranspiration was increasing
from June to January and as well as august to December. This was
due to temperature increment.
Crop Data
Maximum effective root zone depth (RZD) of tomato ranges between
0.3-0.6 m and has allowable soil water depletion fraction (P) of 0.25
[10]. Onion average Kc (crop coefficient) would be taken after
adjustments have been made for initial, mid and late season stage to
be 0.7, 1.05 and 0.95, respectively. Yield data like economical yield,
unmarketable yield and total yield was measured in the field.
Soil Data
Soil physical and chemical properties like textural class, bulk density,
field capacity, permanent wilting point and infiltration rate, acidity
organic electric conductivity, organic matter and organic carbon
content of the soil was measured in laboratory.
Crop Water Determination

Crop water requirement refers to the amount of water that needs to be
supplied, while crop evapotranspiration refers to the amount of water
that is lost through evapotranspiration [11]. For the determination of
crop water requirement, the effect of climate on crop water
requirement, which is the reference crop evapotranspiration
(ETo) and the effect of crop characteristics (Kc) are important [12].
The long term and daily climate data like maximum and minimum air
temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, sunshine hours, and
rainfall data of the study area were collected to determine reference
evapotranspiration, crop data like crop coefficient, growing season
and development stage, effective root depth, critical depletion factor
of onion and maximum infiltration rate and total available water of the
soil was determined to calculate crop water requirement using
cropwat model.
ETc = ETo ∗ Kc Where, ETc = Crop Evapotranspiration, Kc = Crop

Coefficient,
ETo = Reference Evapotranspiration.
The time required to deliver the desired depth of water into each
furrow will be calculated using the equation: * *
t = d* l *w/6*Q
Where:
d = gross depth of water applied (cm);
t = application time (min);
l = furrow length in (m);
w = furrow spacing in (m) and
Q = flow rate (discharge) (l/s).
The amount of irrigation water to be applied at each irrigation

application was measured using Parshall flume.
Data Collection
Climate like maximum and minimum air temperature, relative humidity,
wind speed, sunshine hours and rainfall data was collected to
calculate crop water requirement. Soil moisture was determined
gravimetrically. Amount of applied water per each irrigation event was
measured using calibrated pareshall flume. During harvesting plant
height, bulb weight, and bulb diameter were measured from the net
harvested area of each plot.
Statistical Analysis
Water balance and crop water use were estimated using volumetric
calculations, based on the initial soil samples. Auger to collect the soil
sample and oven dry were used for soil moisture measurement.
Agronomic water use efficiency was calculated as the lint yield (kg)
per unit irrigation (m 3). All data were analyzed using SAS 9.0 at
probability
level of 5% using fisher unprotected test.
Result and Discussion
Physical and Chemical Properties of Soil

In order to characterize soils of the study site, soil physical and
chemical parameters were measured in the field and laboratory. The
laboratory results of the average soil physical and chemical properties
of the experimental site were presented in table below. The result of
the soil analysis from the experimental site showed that the average
composition of sand, silt and clay percentages were 17%, 23% and
60%, respectively. Thus, according to the USDA soil textural
classification, the percent particle size determination for experimental
site revealed that the soil texture could be classified as clay soil. The
top soil surface had bulk density of 1.23 gm/c m 3 ). In general, the
average soil bulk density (1.23 g/c m3) is below the critical threshold
level (1.4 g/c m 3)
and was suitable for crop root growth. Average moisture content at
field capacity of the experimental site soils were 27% and at
permanent wilting point had 15% through one meter soil depth. Soil pH
was found to be at the optimum value (6.4) for onion and other crops.
The value of EC (1.14 ds) was lower considering the standard rates in
literature
[13]. Generally, according to USDA soil classification, a soil with
electrical conductivity of less than 2.0 dS/m at 25°C and pH less than
8.5 are classified as normal soil. Therefore, the soils of the study area
are normal soils. The weighted average organic matter content of the
soil was about 7.085%. The infiltration capacity was measured by
using double ring inflitrometer and the recorded constant value was 6
mm/
hours (Table 2).
Crop Water Requirement
The water requirement of onion crop for the specific site was
calculated by using input data of climate and crop characteristics,
thus based on the treatment set up and crop water requirement, the
following amount of net irrigation was estimated and applied for each
treatments. The amount of water applied for fixed, alternative and 50%
of alternative and farmer practice were, 4786.3, 4786.3, 2393.2 and
5982.9 m 3 respectively. Table 3 shows in contrasts to farmer practice
the amount of water saved from fixed, alternative and 50% of
alternative is 1196.6 m 3 , 1196.6 m3, 3589.7 m3 respectively.
Onion Response to Furrow Irrigation System
In this experiment bulb yield was measured by harvesting onion yield

on each plot distinctively and weighing them separately. The
responses of unmarketable yield to different furrow irrigation system
were insignificant in the first year. In this year highest mean plant
height of 50.75 cm was observed at famer practice and the lowest
mean of plant height was observed at 50% of alternative furrow. Again
in this year the highest bulb diameter, 6.075 cm was observed in
alternative furrow system and the lowest 5.325 cm from farmer
practice.
In 2009 the highest single bulb weight (gm) was observed from fixed
irrigation system and the lowest was from alternative furrow system.
As the table shows the highest value of most important parameter
economic yield of 27.86 ton/ha was observed from alternative furrow
system, this is due to application of irrigation water alternatively by
increasing the portion of wetting front and the lowest of 20.14 ton/ha
was observed from farmer practice. From the first year result the
highest water use efficiency (3.35 kgm-3 ha-1) was observed from
alternative and the lowest (1.475 kgm -3
ha-1) from farmers practice.
In the second year (2010), single bulb weight, economic yield, total
yield and water use efficiency have showed significant difference
among the treatments. But plant height, bulb diameter and
unmarketable yield has shown non significance in this year. As
reported by Yemane, (2017), Unmarketable bulb yield of onion was not
significantly affected (P ≤ 0.05) by interaction of effect of furrow
irrigation techniques and irrigation level. In this year the highest
economic yield of (15.52 ton/ha) was obtained from alternative furrow
irrigation system and the lowest (6.54 ton/ha) was from 50% of
alternative furrow system. The highest total yield (29.071 ton/ha) was
observed in alternative furrow system and the lowest (21.35 ton/ha)
from farmer practice. Alternative furrow system has showed the
highest water use efficiency in contrasts to other
treatments, i.e. 2.742 kgm -3 ha-1, 3.243 kgm-3 ha-1, 2.733 kgm-3 ha-1,
2.377kgm-3 ha-1, fixed furrow irrigation, alternative furrow irrigation,
50% of alternative furrow irrigation system and farmer practice
respectively.
The combined result showed that application of irrigation water by

different furrow systems significantly affect single bulb weight,
economic yield, total yield and water use efficiency. In this
studyalternate furrow system saved irrigation water and increases
water use efficiency. Alternate furrow irrigation system may supply
water in a manner that greatly reduces the amount of surface wetted
leading to less evapotranspiration and less deep percolation [14].
Generally in all parameters alternative furrow system with full

irrigation application has shown the good mean results in contrasts to
other treatments under normal irrigation water quality. This result
shows the same trend as Abd El-Halim [15] reported Shifting irrigation
practice from conventional irrigation (EFI) to alternate furrow
increased corn yield to 8.9% (0.5 ton/ha) by approximately 8.9% and it
is recommended to be practice by the farmers in the study area as
well as areas with the same agro ecological patterns (Table 4a-4c).
Conclusion and Recommendation

Conclusion
Alternate-furrow irrigation with appropriate irrigation intervals with
four day interval can be used as an efficient method for onion
production in arid areas like Melkoza Woreda. From this experiment it
could be concluded that the alternative furrow irrigation treatment
controlled stress irrigation without the risk reduced economic yield
and total yield of yield of onion increase production and productivity of
the society. Moreover, it increased the water use efficiency and saved
irrigation water. Besides it also saves the energy and time for farmers
to irrigate the whole land in turn it saves the cost for water of
irrigation.
Recommendation
Therefore, it is recommended that using alternative furrow irrigation
system in areas where there is water scarcity as well as labor
expensiveness is the best options to increase the production of onion
and other vegetables. Further research work is needed to give the
appropriate irrigation interval with alternative furrow irrigation system.
Effects of Furrow Dimensions on Water Productivity and Yield of Onion at Small

Scale Irrigation Ilu Gelan District West Shoa Ethiopia
This study was conducted at the Ilu Gelan district Western Shewa zone of Oromia
Regional State to evaluate the impacts of furrow dimensions on yield and water
productivity of onion. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block
design with three treatments replicated four times. The experimental treatments
including farmer practice or T1 (farmer practice with top width of 23 cm, bottom
width of 13 cm and depth of 11 cm without determined flow rate), T2 (Furrow with
top width of
45 cm, bottom width of 20 cm and depth of 12 cm with determined flow rate) and T3
(Furrow with top width of 35 cm, bottom width of 14 cm and depth of 10 cm with
determined flow rate) having a plot size of 8 m × 5 m with spacing of 0.5 m × 1 m
between plots and replications respectively. The highest application efficiency of
(75.87%) was recorded under treatment T2 and the lowest application efficiency
of (56.17%) was recorded from T1 that is, farmer practice when compared with other
treatments. The highest distribution uniformity of (89%) was recorded from
treatment T2 and lowest (81%) was from treatment T1. In terms of water
productivity and yield of onion the highest values of 5.2 kg/m3 and 1952 kg/ha were
recorded from T2 respectively. Similarly, lowest values 3.11 kg/m3 and 15088 kg/ha
were obtained from T1 respectively. There were significance differences in plant
height among all treatments at significance level of 5%. The highest (41.525 cm) was
recorded from T2 and the lowest (39.275 cm) was obtained from T1. Further research
covering all soil types is recommended to be more inclusive.
INTRODUCTION
The sources of water for crop production are rainfall and irrigation water. The two
types of agriculture seen from the perspective of water management are rain fed and
irrigation agriculture which both helps to present sufficient water in the root zone for
germination, evapotranspiration and nutrient observation (Dupriez and De Leener,
2002).
In Ethiopia irrigation is used as complementary with rain fed during dry season. One
of the irrigation methods in agriculture is furrow irrigation. This technique has been
used for a variety of crops. Improving small scale farmers need to consider efficient
utilization of irrigation water (Shuhuai et al., 2012). Agronomic practices have a
profound effect on farm water management practices. A number of factors such as
nature of cultivar, plant density, sowing time, and nutrient and water management
are involved in affecting profitable yield Masoud and Ghodratolah (2010) In the study
area, farmers furrow dimensions by using animal power and local material prepared
for plow. However, this material is made of different dimensions for
using it at different points of the furrow length. The irrigation water diversion to the
field is being done without considering design of furrow dimension. The release of
high flow rate overtops the furrow section and takes off the soil resources as surface
runoff which in turn reduces the nutrient of the soil. This phenomenon occurs if the
furrow dimensions do not suite the incoming flow rate depending on the soil type of
the area. The problem leads to erosion and frequent need of furrow construction. In
other hand, application of very low flow rate results in deep percolation at furrow
head while,
other part of the furrow become under irrigated.
Consequently, these practices are known to produce greater chance of water

logging, tail water losses, salinity hazards, high yield loss and lower economical
profit (Walker, 2003). Problems of irrigation water management leads to shortage of
water and competitions among different agricultural and non- agricultural demands.
The need of suitable water resource management is, therefore, serious concern for
enhanced water use among different sectors. Proper use of furrow widths, depth,
and length is one of the practices in irrigated agriculture to maximize irrigation
efficiencies and enhanced crop yield as well as the water use efficiency. In addition,
it can enable the users to conserve soil and water resources. This study will provide
indicative information on the response of irrigation performance indicators, yield and
water use efficiency of onion due to the proper furrow dimensions. In west Shoa zone
of Oromia Regional state, onion is often produced by furrow irrigating under the
limited water available for irrigation and onion crop is the most common irrigated
horticultural crop in the district.
Farmers growing onion crop in this area have not been practicing furrow
management practices. Hence furrow management practice that can improve
irrigation water
productivity of small scale onion producing farmers is important in the area. This
study investigated the effect of different furrow dimensions on irrigation water
productivity
and yield and yield components.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experimental Site Description

A field experiment was carried out in 2017/2018, at Jato Derke which is
administratively located in Ilu Gelan district of West Shoa Zone in the Oromia
Regional State (Figure 1). This site is considered a representative site for the
midland irrigation schemes of West Shoa Zone of Oromia Regional State. It is located
at 08°59’51’’N latitude and 37°19’49’’E with an altitude of 1812 m above sea level.
The minimum and maximum monthly averagetemperatures are 13.8 and 28.1°C,
respectively. The average
rainfall is around 1351 mm and this site has limited irrigation water that cover a
large hectares of farmland in which onion is the dominant crop grown in the
command area followed by different horticultural crops.
Experimental Design and Management

The experiment was laid out in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with four
replications. There were three levels of furrow dimensions with incoming flow rate
measurement and this has a total of three treatments. The plot size was 8 m × 5 m
and the distance between replication and plots were 2 and 1 m respectively.
The plots in each replication were represented randomly for each treatment. The
experimental field was fertilized UREA (46 Kg N ha-1) and DAP (92 kg P2O5 ha-1),
(Melkasa Agricultural Research Center, 2000). The DAP was applied at basal but
UREA was applied both during planting and three weeks after plating (1/3rd at basal
and 2/3rd three weeks after planting). The experimental plot was ploughed three
times before planting and managed carefully from weeds to minimize water and
nutrient competition with crop.
The variety of experimental crop was Bombay red onion variety and transplanted
with spacing of 40 cm and 20 cm spacing between rows and plants, respectively
(Table 1).
Furrow dimensions were made based on farmers dimensions. Most of the farmers in
Ethiopia are make furrows using traditional ways of furrow making. In traditional
furrow making furrows were made by local material pulled by oxen power. Furrow
size made by this method is considered as farmers furrow dimension (top width of 23
cm, bottom width of 13 cm and depth of 11 cm). Other treatments were made based
on the farmers furrow dimension that is, by taking above and below farmer’s
dimension. Furrows of T2
and T3 were closed end and the applied water was slowly infiltrated into the root
zone. But un-designed or farmer practice was an open ended and the water was lost
as surface runoff at the end of furrow length.
Crop Water Requirement and Irrigation Requirement

Crop water requirements (CWR) encompass the total amount of water used in
evapotranspiration. Irrigation requirements (IR) refer to the water that must be
supplied through the irrigation system to ensure that the crop receives its full crop
water requirements.
CROPWAT Version 8.0 is a computer program that can calculate CWR and IR based
on climatic and crop data.
Irrigation Performance Indicators
Water Application Efficiency

Water application efficiency is a measurement of how effective the irrigation system
is in storing water in the crop root zone. It is expressed as the percentage of the
total volume of water delivered to the field that is stored in the root zone to meet
crop evapotranspiration (ET) needs.
Ea =Ws/Wf ×100 (1)
Where, Ea = water application efficiency, %
Ws = water stored in crop root zone, cm
Wf = water delivered at the head end of the furrows, cm.
Water Distribution Efficiency

Water distribution efficiency is defined as the percentage of difference from unity of
the ratio between the average numerical deviations from the average depth stored
during the irrigation. It was determined using the following formula:
Ed 1- y d 1 (2)
Where, Ed=Water distribution efficiency, %
d=Average depth of water stored in root zone along the furrow after irrigation, cm
y=Average numerical deviation from d, cm
Crop Water Productivity (CWP)
CWP is defined as the relationship between the amounts of crop produced or the
economic value of the produce and the volume of water associated with crop
production (Playa´n and Mateos, 2006). There are three dimensions of water
productivity: physical
productivity, expressed in kg per unit of water consumed; combined physical and
economic productivity expressed in terms of net income returns from unit of water
consumed, and economic productivity expressed in terms of net income returns from
a given amount of water consumed against the opportunity cost of using the same
amount of water (Kumar et al., 2005). The CWP considered in this study is physical
productivity defined as: Mass of produce (kg) per volume of water supplied (m3)
expressed as in Equation 3 (Playa´n and Mateos, 2006): (3)
Where, CWP = Crop water productivity, (kg/ m3),
Y= Yield of the crop, (kg/ha)
WR= Water requirement of the crop, (m3/ha).
Yield and Yield Components
Stand count
Plants that successfully established in the central rows were counted at harvest and
expressed as percentage.
Plant height (cm)
This was measured from the ground to the tip of the leaves from 10 randomly
selected plants at maturity.
Marketable Bulb Yield (t ha-1)
This referred to the weight of healthy and marketable bulbs that range from 20 to
160 g in weight. Bulbs below 20 g in weight were considered too small to be
marketed whereas those above 160 g were considered oversized according to
Lemma and Aklilu (2003). This parameter was determined from the net plot at final
harvest and expressed as t ha-1.
Characterization of the Soil of the Study Site
About 0-60 cm depth of disturbed (composite) and undisturbed soil samples were
collected from different points by using soil auger and core sampler respectively for
the analysis of physical and chemical properties. The composite sample (after being
well mixed in a bucket) of about 2 kg of the mixed sub samples (composite sample)
was properly bagged, labeled and transported to the laboratory for analysis of soil
chemical properties. The soil pH was measured potentiometrically with a digital pH
meter in the
supernatant suspension of 1:2.5 soils to water ratio. The soil electrical conductivity
measurement was done using a conductivity meter at 25°C using its standard
procedures. Field capacity (FC) and permanent wilting Point (PWP) of sampled soil
were determined using pressure plate apparatus at 1/3 and 15 bar, respectively. The
soil texture was measured from samples collected at different depths using
hydrometer method. The textural class of the soil profile was determined using USDA
textural triangle.
Soil Sample Collected from the Study Site was analyzed for some chemical
properties such contents of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Organic matter, and soil pH and
as well as exchangeable cations.
Data Analysis
The collected data were arranged and organized for the suitability of statistical
analysis and finally analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed using statistix.8
software.
Least Significant Difference
(LSD) at 5% level significance was used to make mean separation among

treatments.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Physical and Chemical Soil Parameters

Laboratory analysis of particle size distribution indicated that the soil is clay in
textural class throughout the soil depth with an average particle size distribution of
34%
sand, 21% silt and 45% clay whereas the average gravimetric moisture content at
field capacity and permanent wilting point were 33.02 and 24.8%, respectively. The
value of bulk densities (1.303 gcm-3) were obtained by considering the average of
the 0-40 cm
depth. This value is in the recommended range for crop production. The average
total available water was found to be 106.8 mm/m. The pH in H2O under this study
area
is ranged in optimum value as suggested by Jones (2003) (Table 2). An electric
conductivity of 0.035 ms/cm was recorded which is at lower limit of saline soils,
hence
the soil samples are non-saline soils (Table 2). Plants growing in this area do not
have the problem of absorbing water because of the lower osmotic effect of
dissolved
salt contents.
The total nitrogen of study area as suggested by Tekalign (1991) rated as high
percent which is suitable for plant growth (Table 2). Since the plant obtains
phosphorus (P) from the soil solution through its roots or root symbiosis, available P
is composed of solution P plus P that enters the solution during the period used to
define availability. As per the rating suggested by Jones (2003) the available P of soil
of experimental field of the
studied area was qualified as low (Table 2). As per the ratings recommended by
Hazelton and Murphy (2007), the CEC value of the agricultural land of the present
study area is in high value range. The high CEC value recorded may be attributed to
the
fact that soils which recorded high CEC accumulate high percent OC and has greater
capacity to hold cations thereby resulted in greater potential fertility in the soil
(Table 2). The value of available Ca and Mg were below the optimum range whereas
that of K was within the recommended optimum range as suggested by Takuya et al.
(2013) (Table 2). The organic matter was rated as medium which is suitable for crop
growth (Table 2).
Irrigation efficiencies and distribution efficiency Table 3 shows the irrigation
efficiency and distribution efficiency.
Irrigation Efficiencies
Results of analysis of variance revealed significant difference for some of the

characters among treatments. Significant variation in water application efficiency
was observed between treatment two (T2) and other treatments at 5% level of
significance. The lowest
application efficiency (56.17%) was gained from treatment one (T1) and the highest
application efficiency (75.87%) was recorded treatment two (T2). Highest water
distribution efficiency (90.5%) was also recorded from treatment two (T2) as well as
the lowest water distribution efficiency (81%) was from treatment one (T1) as
showed in Table 3. The results indicated that water application efficiency and
distribution uniformity were highly affected by dimensions of furrow and as well as
flow rate. As furrow dimension are managed based on flow rate, water application
efficiency and distribution uniformity can be increased. As indicated in Table 3,
water application efficiencies showed significant differences among all treatments
from which treatment T2 was highest (75.87%) and followed by treatment T3 which
amounted 69.44%. But treatment T1 revealed lowest (56.17%) water application
efficiency among others due to
mismanagement of irrigation water. Significant differences in irrigation water
distribution efficiencies were also observed between treatment T1 and the rest
treatments at p 0.05 which ranged from 81% (T1) to 90.5% (T2). However, no
significant variation recorded between treatments T2 and T3. There were significant
differences among all treatments in water productivity.
Yield and Yield Components
Analysis of variance showed that, there were significant differences among the
means of plant height and grain yield (Table 3). There were significant differences
between treatments T2 and other two treatments in plant height. However no
significant variation was recorded between treatments T1 and T3. Plant height
ranged from 39.28 to 41.53 cm under T1 and T2 respectively. Significant difference
was obtained among all means of treatments under grain yield. The highest grain
yield (19520 kg/ha) was gained from T2 when compared with the lowest (15088
kg/ha) observed in T1. This was due to
blockage of designed furrow at the end of its length and the required crop water
requirement was satisfied. In the end blocked furrow, the water only infiltrates to the
crop root zone and runoff is reduced. This increases appropriate utilization of
delivered irrigation water such as irrigation efficiencies, water productivity and crop
yield.
About 13000 to 16000 kg/ha has been produced under local farmers’ experience.
Similarly, previous research findings reported by Guesh (2015) found a closer result
for the same crop. There were no significant differences in percentage of stand
count of onion among all treatments as shown in Table 4.
Water Productivity
As statistical analysis showed, there were significant differences in productivity

among all treatments. As indicated in Table 4 the highest water productivity (5.20
kg/m3) was resulted from treatment two (T2) and the lowest (3.11 kg/m3) was
obtained from treatment one (T1). Similar result was found by (Kang et al., 2000) on
water productivity of furrow irrigation system.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
As the study showed, treatment two (T2) revealed superiority in water application
efficiency over other treatments. The highest water distribution efficiencies also
recorded in treatment two (T2) as compared to the rest treatments. Moreover
treatment two (T2) indicated better advantage in water productivity over other
treatments. Yield and growth related parameters of farmer practice were found to be
the lowest as compared to treatment two (T2) and treatment three (T3). Generally
treatment two (T2); Furrow with top width of 45 cm, bottom width of 20 cm and
depth of 12 cm indicated
better performance in both efficiencies and water productivity as well as yield and
growth related parameters. Hence this dimension is recommended for furrow
irrigation applied on clay soil texture like in that of the study area.

All about Irrigation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

All about Irrigation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Surface Irrigation

An adequate water supply is important for plant growth. When rainfall

A simple irrigation method is to bring water from the source of supply,

This can be a very time-consuming method and involves very heavy

More sophisticated methods of water application are used when larger

Surface Irrigation :- Basin Irrigation

Irrigation water can be fed to the border in several ways: opening up

1.2 Sprinkler Irrigation

1.3 Drip Irrigation

1.4 Functioning of Irrigation Systems

It is recommended to give canals, structures and methods a regular

Furrows are small, parallel channels, made to carry water in order to

Figure 23 Furrow irrigation

When to Use Furrow Irrigation

1.1 Suitable crops

Furrow irrigation is suitable for many crops, especially row crops.

Figure 24 Top view and cross-section of furrows and ridges

Furrow irrigation is also suited to the growing of tree crops. In the

Corrugation irrigation, frequently mentioned in literature, is a special

In summary, the following crops can be Irrigated by furrow irrigation:

Figure 25 Zig-zag furrows - A: Zig-zag furrows used for irrigating trees

Figure 25 Zig-zag furrows - B: Another zig-zag pattern for furrow

1.3 Suitable soils

2.1 Furrow length

Normally stream sizes up to 0.5 l/sec will provide an adequate

Applying larger irrigation depths usually means that furrows can be

When the farming is mechanized, furrows should be made as long as

Figure 27 Field length and furrow length

Table 3 PRACTICAL VALUES OF MAXIMUM FURROW LENGTHS (m)

Clay Loam Sand

2.2 Furrow shape

In sandy soils, water moves faster vertically than sideways (= lateral).

Figure 28 A deep, narrow furrow on a sandy soil

2.3 Furrow spacing

The spacing of furrows is influenced by the soil type and the

Figure 30 A double-ridged furrow

In mechanized farming a compromise is required between the

Figure 31 Ridger plough: (a) wooden body, animal-drawn

Figure 31 Ridger plough: (b) iron type, animal-drawn

Figure 31 Ridger plough: (c) hand-drawn version

The following steps are taken to construct furrows: setting out;

Figure 32 Markers are put along a straight line

If a ridger-drawbar connected with a tractor is used, four furrows can

CONSTRUCTION OF FURROWS ON SLOPING OR UNDULATING LAND

Special care is needed to construct furrows along the contour on

Figure 34 Making guide furrows

Figure 35 Making furrows

Figure 36 Gated pipe

Depending on the available flow in the farm channel, several furrows

When there is a water shortage, it is possible to limit the amount of

Figure 37 Alternate furrow irrigation

Runoff at the ends of furrows can be a problem on sloping land. This

4.1 Wetting patterns

In order to obtain a uniformly wetted rootzone, furrows should be

Figure 38 Different wetting patterns in furrows, depending on the soil

Figure 38 Different wetting patterns in furrows, depending on the soil

In an ideal situation adjacent wetting patterns overlap each other, and

Figure 39 Ideal wetting pattern

To obtain a uniform water distribution along the furrow length, it is

Poor wetting patterns

Poor wetting patterns can be caused by:

- unfavourable natural conditions, e.g. a compacted layer, different soil

- poor layout, e.g. a furrow spacing too wide;