27 nov16 water_and_fertilizer_management_using_micro_irrigation

Water and Fertilizer Managementg
Using Micro Irrigation
PROF. K.N.TIWARI
Agricultural and Food Engineering Department
Indian Institute of Technology KharagpurIndian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
India

 Geographical area 329 M ha and 56% area is under agriculture
 Net Cultivated area is 172 M ha Net Cultivated area is 172 M ha.
 Net Irrigated area is 70 M ha
 Estimated potential for MI is 69.5 M hap
 Primary sources of irrigation : Surface Water (River, Lake, Ponds etc.)
Ground Water (open well, tube wells, bore wells)
7%
Annual Water Demand by Various Sectors
4%
5% 7%
Source: MoA & Task Force Report on MI
84%
irrigation domestic industry energy

Potential: Drip: 27.8 M ha Sprinkler: 42.5 M ha
Status in India as on (31.03.2015)
Drip Irrigation: 3.37 M haDrip Irrigation: 3.37 M ha
Sprinkler Irrigation: 4.38 M ha
By converting 1 lakh land area under micro irrigation
Total water saving - 347 M m3/yrg y
Fertilizer saving - Rs. 105 crores
Saving of 271 lakh kWH of energy per year worth Rs.7
crores by pumping less water
PFDC, AgFE Department, IIT Kharagpur 3
Source: NCPAH, Min. of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Govt. of India

IRRIGATION
Methods Of Irrigation
Traditional/ Surface Irrigation Micro Irrigationg
Flood/Basin Furrow Border Strip
g
Drip Sprinklerp p

Government initiatives for promotion of MI
1985 NCPA constituted
1986-90 PDCs created
VIII Plan Rs. 250 Crores (2.5 Bn)
IX Plan Rs. 375 Crores (3.75 Bn)
2001 NCPAH reconstituted
2004 National Task Force constituted
2005 onwards Micro irrigation scheme & National
Horticulture Mission
2009 N ti l i i Mi i i ti2009 National mission on Micro irrigation
2012-13 NMMI budget Rs. 1500 Crores (15 Bn)
2014 15 PMKSY b d t R 2000 C (20 B )2014-15 PMKSY budget Rs.2000 Crores (20 Bn)
Prof. K.N.Tiwari, AgFE Deptt., IIT
Kharagpur

Micro irrigation potential, M ha
SCOPE AND STATUS OF
MICROIRRIGATION IN INDIA
Drip Sprinkler Total
Cereals ‐ 27.6 27.6
Pulses ‐ 7.6 7.6
c o g o po e ,
Oil seeds 3.8 1.1 4.9
Cotton 7.0 1.8 8.8
Vegetables 3.6 2.4 6.0
S i 1 4 1 0 2 4Spices 1.4 1.0 2.4
Flowers ‐ 1.0 1.0
Sugarcane 4.3 ‐ 4.3
Fruits 3.9 ‐ 3.9
Plantation 3.0 ‐ 3.0
Total 27.0 42.5 69.5

Micro Irrigation
Drip Irrigation Sprinkler IrrigationDrip Irrigation p g
Point Source Line Source
Thin-walled drip
tape Thick-walled drip
Mini Impact
Micro Sprinkler
Emitters Micro tube
tape Thick walled drip
tape
Micro jets &
Micro Sprayersp y
Foggers
Misters

MICRO IRRIGATION
Micro-irrigation: “an irrigation methodMicro irrigation: an irrigation method
that applies water slowly to roots of
plants, by depositing water either on the
soil surface or directly to the root zone,
th h t k f l ithrough a network of valves, pipes,
tubing, emitters.”
Simcha Blass
Overhead laterals Surface palced laterals Sub surface placed laterals Annular space placedPhoto : PFDC, IIT Kharagpur

Research AchievementsResearch Achievements –– MI ApplicationsMI Applications
 MI in Mango orchard
 Integration of MI with rainwaterIntegration of MI with rainwater
harvesting
 Automated MI systemy
 MI in Greenhouse crops
Photos – PFDC, IIT KharagpurPhotos PFDC, IIT Kharagpur
Communication
port
Communication
lines from sensors
Interfacing
unit
Personal
Computer
Irrigation
pump
From water
source
Solenoid
valve
Communication
line to solenoid
valvesvalves
Sensor

Water requirement of different horticultural crops and their response due to drip
irrigation
Crop Water requirement Yield incrementCrop Water requirement
(Litres/ Plant/ day)
Yield increment
due to drip (%)
Mango 16.6 - 47.39 128.00
Guava 11.93 - 34.53 164.00
Banana 4.0-18.6 39.08
Pineapple 1.56 - 5.48 22.81pp
Sapota 16.30 - 36.77 96.70
Litchi 9.30 – 33.21 41.00
Cashew nut 8 20 29 77 46 00Cashew nut 8.20 – 29.77 46.00
Turmeric 0.08 – 0.46 85.10
Cabbage 1.17-1.66 62.44
Cauliflower 0.74-1.35 22.30
Tomato 0.89-2.31 44.10
Okra 0 60 1 90 54 92
10
Okra 0.60-1.90 54.92
Brinjal 0.77-3.39 25.58
Source : PFDC, IIT Kharagpur

FERTIGATION
FERTIGATIONFERTIGATION IS THE APPLICATION OF PLANT NUTRIENTS
THROUGH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM
Chemical FertilizersChemical Fertilizers
THROUGH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM
Chemical FertilizersChemical Fertilizers
Dissolved inDissolved in
Irrigation SystemIrrigation Systemg yg y
Th l t t i WATERWATER
K
PThe plant roots receive WATERWATER
+ FERTILIZER NUTRIENTS+ FERTILIZER NUTRIENTS at the
same time and location
N
P
1 December 2016PFDC, AgFE Department, IIT Kharagpur
11

WHY FERTIGATION
When pressurized irrigation systems are used, fertigation
is not OPTIONAL but ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY
What happens if fertilizers are applied separately from the water?
In drip irrigation only 30% of the soil is wetted by the drippersIn drip irrigation, only ~30% of the soil is wetted by the drippers
Fertilization efficiency decreases because the nutrients will not be
The benefits of irrigation will not be expressed
dissolved in the dry zones where the soil is not wetted
The benefits of irrigation will not be expressed
Therefore, correctly fertigation is the only method
1 December 2016
PFDC, AgFE Department, IIT Kharagpur12
to apply fertilizers to irrigated crops

Nitrogenous Fertilizers
F tili N t t ( % ) S l bilit ( /lit )Fertilizer N content ( % ) Solubility (g/liter)
Ammonium sulphate 21 750
Urea 46 1100
Ammonium nitrate 34 1920
Calcium nitrate 15.5 1290
Potassic Fertilizers
Fertilizer K content ( % ) Solubility (g/liter)
P t i l h t 50 110Potassium sulphate 50 110
Potassium chloride 60 340
1 December 2016PFDC, AgFE Department, IIT Kharagpur13
Potassium nitrate 44 133

Phosphoric Fertilizers
 P+C =C l i h h t (i l bl ) P+Ca=Calcium phosphate (insoluble)
 Single super Phosphate
 P+Ammonium+Magnesium=Magnesium ammonium P+Ammonium+Magnesium=Magnesium ammonium
phosphate(Insoluble)
 P+Iron=Iron phosphate (insoluble)P Iron Iron phosphate (insoluble)
 Even good P sources like poly phosphates gets
precipitated if Ca+Mgin water is >50 ppm and
Bicarbonate>150ppm. If Bicarbonate content is
<100ppm, the Ca+ Mg content can go upto 75ppm

Micronutrient Fertilizers
Fertilizer content ( % ) Solubility (g/liter)
Solubor 20 B 220
Copper sulphate 25 Cu 320
Iron sulphate 20 Fe 160
Magnesium
sulphate
10 710
A i 54 430Ammonium
molybdate
54 430
Zinc sulphate 36 965
Manganese sulphate 27 1050

FERTIGATION METHODSFERTIGATION METHODS
Fertilizer Tank (ByFertilizer Tank (By--Pass System)Pass System) Venturi InjectorVenturi Injector Fertigation pumpFertigation pumpFertilizer Tank (ByFertilizer Tank (By--Pass System)Pass System) Venturi InjectorVenturi Injector Fertigation pumpFertigation pump

Response of Fertigation on Banana
Crop / Variety : Banana Grand NaineCrop / Variety : Banana, Grand Naine
Treatment: 8 Replication: 3 Design: RBD; No. of Plants per Treatment: 15
Yield Response of BananaYield Response of Banana
Treatment Yield t ha-1
FC RC
T 62 66 47 50
Treatments
T1 62.66 47.50
T2 54.28 45.80
T3 64.49 50.07
T 50 26 42 13
T1– RDF + PM
T2 – RDF
T3 – 0.8 RDF + PM
T4 – 0.8 RDF
T4 50.26 42.13
T5 38.30 40.67
T6 35.12 40.90
T 28 16 39 83
T5– 0.6 RDF + PM
T6 – 0.6 RDF
T7 – 0.4 RDF + PM
T8 – 0.4 RDF
T7 28.16 39.83
T8 24.47 38.57
CD(0.05) 9.27 6.73
18
• Maximum yield : 64.49 t/ha for first crop & 50.07 t/ha for ratoon crop in T3 (0.8 RDF + PM)
• Daily WR: WRInitial 3.13 L/d, WRPeak 12.26 L/d Total WR: 1236 mm with drip irrigation alone 1115 mm for drip irrigation with
plastic mulch; Fertilizer : (160:48:240 N:P205:K20 g plant-1)
• B.C. ratio : 2.56 - T3 (0.8 RDF + PM); 1.07 – for conventional method; Pay back period : 1 years (0.8 RDF + PM)

Crop / variety : Guava/ Allahabad Safeda
Response of Fertigation on Guava
Treatment: 6; Replication: 3; Design : RBD; No. of Plants per Treatment: 4
Treatments : T1 – RDF, T2 – 0.80 RDF, T3 – 0.60 RDF, T4 – 0.40 RDF, T5 – FCM & T6 – FC
Yield Response of GuavaYield Response of Guava
Treatment Average fruit
weight (g)
Average no. of
fruits/plant
yield
(t/ha)
T1 134 33 439 33 32 37T1 134.33 439.33 32.37
T2 147.67 456.67 35.66
T3 152.00 382.00 31.25
T4 138 67 303 33 27 86T4 138.67 303.33 27.86
T5 119.33 324.67 25.30
T6 116.67 261.33 22.44
CD(0.05) 18.09 21.64 4.9
• Daily WR: Min - 13.5 L D-1 in winter and Max–26.82 L D-1 in summer season
• Total WR: 1126 mm; Fertilizer : Water soluble fertilizer 290:384:290 g/plant N:P2O5:K2O (80 % of RDF)
• Maximum yield : 35.66 t/ha in T2 (0.8 RDF + PM) where (State avg. 12.8 t/ha)
19
• B.C. ratio : 2.78 – T2 (0.8 RDF + PM); 1.58 – for conventional method
• Pay back period : 3+1 years (0.8 RDF + PM)

Response of Fertigation on Dutch roses under greenhouse and open fieldResponse of Fertigation on Dutch roses under greenhouse and open field
conditions.
Crop : Dutch Rose (Var First Red Gold Strike) No of treatments : 10Crop : Dutch Rose (Var. First Red, Gold Strike)
Crop geometry: 50 cm x 30 cm (RR x PP)
No. of treatments : 10
No. of replications : 3
Experimental design: Strip Plot
Treatments :
T (F V ) 140% RDF i h Fi R d d h
Recommended Dose of Fertilizer (RDF) : 30:60:25 g NPK/plant/year
T1 (F1V1): 140% RDF with First Red under greenhouse
T2 (F1V2): 140% RDF with Gold Strike under greenhouse
T4 (F2V2): 120% RDF with Gold Strike under greenhouse4 ( 2 2) g
T5 (F3V1): 100% RDF with First Red under greenhouse (Control)
T6 (F3V2): 100% RDF with Gold Strike under greenhouse (Control)
T (F V ) 80% RDF ith G ld St ik d hT8 (F4V2): 80% RDF with Gold Strike under greenhouse
T9 (Conventional): 100% RDF with First Red in open field
T10 (Conventional): 100% RDF with Gold Strike in open field

Response of fertigation on Dutch rosesResponse of fertigation on Dutch roses
30
60
70
meter
Height (cm) Shoot length (cm) Flower diameter (cm)
No. of shoots/plant No. of flowers/plant No. of petals/flower
 Maximum yield (301.2
flowers per m2) under T4
(120 % RDF + Gold strike)
,NOF,
15
20
25
30
40
50
60
ngth, Flower diam
(cm)
 Greater Fertilizer use
efficiency (205.7 No. of
flowers/ kg fertilizer used/
NOS,
NOP
0
5
10
0
10
20
1 2 3 4 6 8 9 10
Height, Shoot len
flowers/ kg fertilizer used/
year)under T4 (120 % RDF
+ Gold strike)
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10
Treatments

Fertigation Studies for Vegetable crops
Researchers Research FindingsResearchers Research Findings
Malik and Kumar, 1996 • Peas on a sandy loam soil in Himachal Pradesh.
• Drip irrigation level of 75 per cent pan evaporation with 25 kg N ha-1 fertigation best
for maximizing the water use efficiency and yields of peas.
Dalvi et al., 1999 • Tomato on sandy loam soil., y
• The study revealed that drip fertigation at 96% of RDF resulted in higher yield of
tomato.
Patel and Rajput, 2002 • Okra at IARI New Delhi
• 40% saving of fertilizer may be achieved, if applied through fertigation without
affecting the okra yields.
Singandhupe et al., 2003 • Tomato crop clay loam soils of Rahuri (Maharashtra).
• Application of nitrogen through the drip irrigation in ten equal splits at 8-days interval
saved 20-40% nitrogen as compared to the furrow irrigation when nitrogen was
li d i t l litapplied in two equal splits.
• The maximum tomato fruit yield of 35.2 t ha-1 was recorded for 120 kg N ha-1 through
drip.
• Total nitrogen uptake in drip irrigation was 8-11% higher than that of furrow irrigation.
Romic et al 2003 • Bell pepper (Capsicum annuum L ) in the Vrana Valley (Mediterranean region ofRomic et al., 2003 • Bell pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) in the Vrana Valley (Mediterranean region of
Croatia).
• Nitrate –N leaching from the root zone of bell pepper control without mulch, with
black polyethylene (PE) mulch and with biodegradable cellulose mulch.
• The highest quantities of nitrogen were leached in without mulch (26 kg ha-1)
22
e g est qua t t es o t oge we e eac ed w t out u c ( 6 g a )
treatment following by the treatment with cellulose mulch (18 kg ha-1) and the lowest
nitrogen leaching (10 kg ha-1) in the treatment with black PE mulch.

Continued…
Patel and Rajput, 2006 • Determined the suitable fertigation interval for Onion.
• The highest yield was recorded in daily fertigation, followed by alternate day fertigation,
while the lowest yield was obtained in monthly fertigation frequency.
Tolga et. al., 2010 • Broccoli in clay soil of Turkey.
• The effect of four nitrogen levels (0 kg ha-1, 150 kg ha-1, 200 kg ha-1 and 250 kg ha-1) was
compared with each treatment.
• Broccoli yield and head weight and the maximum Broccoli yield was obtained from the
treatment 150 kg ha-1 N application.
B d t l 2011 Diff t N t (200 d 300 k N h 1) d f f ti ti f i (1 2 7 d 14Badr et al, 2011 • Different N rates (200 and 300 kg N ha-1) and four fertigation frequencies (1, 2, 7, and 14
days) on potato crop grown in sandy soils of Egypt.
• Total potato yield and yield components were responsive to increase N rate and to decrease
fertigation frequency.
• Highest potato yield of 67 75 t ha-1 was recorded in weekly drip fertigation compared to daily• Highest potato yield of 67.75 t ha was recorded in weekly drip fertigation compared to daily
fertigation (65.13 t ha-1) and fertigation once in three days (63.29 t ha-1).
Zhang et al., 2011 • Cucumber fruit, in the solar greenhouse in Southwest China.
• Three nitrogen fertilization levels (N1, 300 kg ha-1; N2, 450 kg ha-1; and N3, 600 kg ha-1).
• NUE significantly decreased with the increase in dose of N application.g y pp
• The quality of cucumber fruit decreased with the improvement nitrogen fertilization.
Krishnamoorthy, 2011 • Turmeric was carried out in clay loamy soils of Coimbatore.
• The leaf N and K concentrations were higher with the fertigation treatments irrespective of
the stages compared to fertilizer application in the soil.
23
• Fertigation using water soluble fertilizers registered higher concentration of leaf NPK than
solid fertilizers.

Fertigation Studies for Field crops
Researchers Research Findings
Aujla et al, 2005 • Cotton crop in sandy clay loam texture soils of Syria.
• Increased in cotton yield to 2144 from 1624 kg ha-1 (an increase of 32 per cent)
when N applied through drip irrigation system, compared to manual
fertilization.
Gurusamy et. al.,
2011
• Sugarcane crop in red loam soils of Madurai, Tamil Nadu.
• 100 per cent RDF (275:62.5:112.5 kg NPK ha-1) as WSF registered higher cane
and sugar yield but it was comparable with 75 per cent RDF as WSF.g y p p
• Surface irrigation with soil application of fertilizers recorded lower cane and
sugar yield when compared with fertigation treatments.
Kumar et. al., 2011 • Hybrid rice in red loam soils of Madurai, Tamil Nadu.
• Drip fertigation of 100 % RD of P and K (50 % P and K as basal remaining• Drip fertigation of 100 % RD of P and K (50 % P and K as basal, remaining
NPK as WSF) enhanced the growth parameters, yield attributes and yield of
hybrid rice.
24

Fertigation Studies for Fruit crops
Agarwal et al., 2004 • Pomegranate cultivated in sandy loam soils of Ranchi
• The economic yield of 52.5 q ha-1 and highest benefit cost ratio of 3.21 under 80 per cent of
fertigation with water soluble fertilizers.
Ravi et. al., 2007 • Arecanut at Vittal, Karnataka.
• Fertigation of 75% NPK at 10 days frequency registered maximum yield (4017 kg ha-1).
• The yield increase with 75% NPK fertigated at 10 days interval was 100% over control
1(2008 kg ha-1).
Rao and Subramanyam,
2009
• Pomegranate was conducted in Shallow red soils of Anantpur district of Andhra Pradesh.
50% d d d (250 / l ) f i f i h i l h d i ld i2009 • 50% recommended dose (250 g /plant) of nitrogen at fortnight intervals enhanced yield in
pomegranate/tree under low rain fall zone.
• It also saved 50 % nitrogen fertilizers cost and labour cost.
Ashokraja, 2011 • Muscat Grapes on clay loam soils of Coimbatore.
• Greater response for enhanced fertilizer dose with Muscat grapes for maximum production.
• Maximum Muscat grape fruit yield (27.5 tons/ha) was possible with WSF at 125% dose.
Liang-zhi et. al., 2011 • Sweet orange（Citrus sinensis Osbeck）in calcareous purple soil in Zhongxian County of
China.China.
• Fertigation frequencies（4 times/year，10 times/year，16 times/year).
• The fertigation treatments showed significant effects on increasing fruit yield with 29.4%–
36.5% more cumulative yield than the control (10 times/year)，
• They recommended citrus growing in calcareous purple soil should be fertigated 4 times a
25
year with drip system.

Continued…Continued…
Krishnamoorthy and
Rajamani, 2013
• Cocoa on silty loam soils of Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.
• Fertigation with 125% RDF (125:50:175 plant year-1) as water soluble fertilizers through drip
increased all vegetative parameters like trunk girth increment, Canopy spread increment, leaf
fresh weight and yield of Cocoa.
Husameldin et al., 2013 • Banana main crops cv. Grand Naine (Musa AAA) in clay loam soils of Rahuri (Maharashtra).
• 80 per cent of the recommended fertigation dose (160:32:192 N:P:K g plant-1 year-1)
performed well in respect of growth parameters and shortened the total crop duration.
• Hence, fertigation with 80 per cent of the recommended dose was found to be optimum and
i leconomical.
Upreti , 2013 • Guava crop under drip fertigation and plastic mulc at PFDC, IIT Kharagpur.
• The highest yield, plant height, plant girth, canopy diameter, FUE and net income were
obtained for 80 % of soluble fertilizers applied through with plastic mulch treatment as
compared to other treatment.
Sharma and Mursaleen,
2014
• Guava on silty loam soils of Udaipur, Rajasthan.
• 100% (60:30:30 NPK g/plant/year) water soluble fertilizers gave maximum plant height (2.07
m), canopy volume (1.24 m3), girth of primary branches (2.48 cm), leaf area (66.08 cm2),
f i di 6 69 ( l ) d 5 97 ( i l) f i i h (182 17 ) i ld/ lfruit diameter 6.69 cm (polar) and 5.97 cm (equatorial), fruit weight (182.17 g), yield/plant
(6.59 kg) compare other doses of fertilizers.
Dinesh and Ahmed,
2014
• Almond (Prunus dulcis) on silty loam soils of Srinagar.
• The results indicated that the maximum tree height (3.56 m), nut weight (2.73 g), nut yield
(5 98 kg/tree; 6 64 t/ha) and leaf nutrient content (2 38% N; 0 17% P; 1 41% K) were
26
(5.98 kg/tree; 6.64 t/ha), and leaf nutrient content (2.38% N; 0.17% P; 1.41% K) were
recorded in 75% RDF (247:33:341 NPK) through fertigation.

Adoption of DripWater guzzling crop, rice
Widely spaced Orchards
Widely spaced fruit cropsWidely spaced fruit crops
Closely spaced cereals, wheat
Close spaced row crops Row crops (Vegetables)
Prof. K.N.Tiwari, AgFE Deptt., IIT Kharagpur

Conclusions
 Micro Irrigation (MI) has great potential in saving water, fertilizers and
energy.
 There is a significant increased in the area under micro irrigation in last few
years and it is likely to increase more area due to implementation of “Per
Drop More Crop under PMKSY scheme of Govt. of India.p p
 PFDC IIT Kharagpur has conducted experiments on various crops using
micro irrigation and established water requirement of various cropsmicro irrigation and established water requirement of various crops.
 When MI system is used , fertigation is not optional but absolutely necessary.
 Fertiliser requièrent of Banana, Guava, Dutch Rose crops has been
experimentally established by PFDC IIT Kharagpur which can be
implemented for simmilar agro-climatic conditions.
28

Recommendations
 Studies on dynamics of soil-water-plant-nutrients under point
source and line source drip emitters need to be conducted
experimentally and suitable solute transport models should be
developed .
 Design of fertigation system for different crops under different
soil and agro-climatic conditions.g
 Automation of Ferti-irrigation system.
 Inclusion of Micro electronics in Academic Curriculum of UG-
Agricultural Engineering programmeAgricultural Engineering programme.
29

30

27 nov16 water_and_fertilizer_management_using_micro_irrigation

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to 27 nov16 water_and_fertilizer_management_using_micro_irrigation

More from IWRS Society

Recently uploaded

27 nov16 water_and_fertilizer_management_using_micro_irrigation