pillow irrigation is the advance stage of the drip irrigation and furrow irrigation where the weed control can be done without any expenditure and mechanical work

1. 11
Welcome…..........

2. “Effectiveness of pillow irrigation in water use efficiency
and crop yield”
Course Teacher
Dr. Nimichandrappa
Guided By
Dr. B. S. Polisegowdar
Presented By
Sweta
ID NO. PG14AEG6117
M. Tech (Soil and Water conservation engineering)
College of agricultural engineering,
University of agricultural sciences Raichur.

3. DirectoryDirectory
33

4. PREFACEPREFACE
Rapid increase in the population and demand on food have led us to
produce more food this off course, has led us to use water more
efficiently and economically.
Irrigation is a major important factor as compared to other factors
like tillage, seed and pest management.
Water is basic resource for sustainable agriculture.
Improved water management methods are all ways on demand.
44

5. Surface irrigation is the most commonly used method as over 95% of
irrigation is done by surface irrigation but in recent years there is
rapid increase in the pressurized irrigation and with mulch
application.
Researchers have developed many irrigation method as alter furrow
and surge flow to improve the irrigation efficiency.
Same way the water pillow irrigation is one of the latest and best
method of irrigation to increase the water use efficiency.
55

6. Water pillow irrigationWater pillow irrigation
66
 Drip irrigation, the use of mulching provides many
advantages, (Tiwari et al., 2003; Antony and 2004;
Ramakrishna et al., 2006).
 The water pillow (WP) is a new irrigation method that
combines drip irrigation and mulch, offers a number of unique
opportunities to save water .(Sinan, G., 2006).
water pillow
++ ==
Water pillow

7. HistoryHistory
 Over 40 yrs back the flex tanks and fuel bladder are used to
store the liquids.
 Ist
fileld study was conducted in 2003 & 2004 growing season
at the university of Harren, Agricultural Research station
sanliurfa, Turkey.
77

8. Crop suitabilityCrop suitability
 Water pillow irrigation is applied ideally and economically at the
green houses and flat areas.
 Crops suitable- Soyabean(edamame;Glycine max.),
Pepper(capsicum annuum L.), Eggplant, Cotton(malvaceae) and
Maize(zeamays).

9. componentscomponents
1. Laterals1. Laterals
2. A portable polyethylene plastic pipe with 0.30mm in thick.2. A portable polyethylene plastic pipe with 0.30mm in thick.
Diameter of the pipe should almost cover the row spacing.Diameter of the pipe should almost cover the row spacing.
Plastic pipe should be usable for 2 years.Plastic pipe should be usable for 2 years.

10. ConstructionsConstructions
 Plastic pipe hole is pierced along the bottom with hole ~ 1mm.
 The design and interspacing of the holes depends on the soil
infiltration capacity, soil type and crops.
 After filling the water both the ends are blocked by tying rope.

11. Preparation of land before irrigation….Preparation of land before irrigation….
Before irrigation land should be levelled, soil surface must beBefore irrigation land should be levelled, soil surface must be
cleared of sharp material like crop residuals and stones, this maycleared of sharp material like crop residuals and stones, this may
helps to achieve uniform water distribution in the soil.helps to achieve uniform water distribution in the soil.
Plastic pipe is laid out in the row from sowing to harvest it acts asPlastic pipe is laid out in the row from sowing to harvest it acts as
mulch.mulch.
Black plastic is usually used to reduce the evaporation loss orBlack plastic is usually used to reduce the evaporation loss or
erosion from the soil surface and controls the weed.erosion from the soil surface and controls the weed.
1111

12. Working…. Of water pillow irrigation….Working…. Of water pillow irrigation….
For irrigation operation water is delivered to each plastic pipe
through laterals.
It need not need any external system of energy as compared to
pressurized irrigation system.
Water trickles from the plastic pipe with gravity and then infiltrates
in to the soil as it does in drip irrigation system.
 Filling
Filing time is short.
Ex- a plastic pipe 0.40m in dia.
Is filled up fully in 14min.
With a 15ls-1
 Trickling
Trickling time is long.
Ex- whole event is could be
completed in 24hrs. Generally
with speed of 0.001ls-1
2 Phases irrigation

13. Maize irrigation with the water pillow (WP) method.

14. A view of water escaping through holes in the pipe
onto the soil surface.

15. AdvantagesAdvantages
Soil particles cannot be transformed by water.
Water drains out from the holes with 0.001ls-1
at max. discharge.
Soil slope and type is not so important.
Soil erosion prevented at maximum degree, when the plastic pipe is
filled up with the water.
Surface runoff prevented and deep percolation is reduced
Weed growth can be controlled.
Handa, (1991) reported that black polyethylene film gave effective
weed control by cutting down solar radiation.
The amount applied irrigation water could be calculated and
controlled easily.

16. Contd…Contd…
Choi and Chung (1997), Park et al. (1996) have resulted that WP
irrigation plots have higher temperature than FI.
Evaporation losses can be prevented mainly by the use of mulch
Number of irrigation is reduced.
Irrigation operation is quite easy and does not require extensive
labour as compared to surface irrigation.
Liquid fertilizer and plant growth regulators can be applied as like
pressurized irrigation system.
There is no need of any external energy because water trickles from
the pipe by the force of gravity.

17. Disadvantages
Sloppy surfaces causes uneven water distribution
but this problem is solved by using a chain like plastic pipe with
shorter row lengths so that the end pressure in the tubing system can
be maintained.
Using mechanical devices could be difficult during the growing
season.
This negative situation can be solved by leaving one row empty and
other is full with wp, so that area between the rows from each side is
quite enough for cultural practices.

18. Pillow irrigation with leaving one row empty….Pillow irrigation with leaving one row empty….

19. Effectiveness of water pillow irrigation method on yield and water use
efficiency on hot pepper (Capsicum annuum L.)
By
Nuray, C., Sinan, G., Murat, D.,
Scientia Horticulturae 120 (2009)Scientia Horticulturae 120 (2009)
Volume 120 pg.no. 325–329325–329 Year 2009
Case study -I
1919

20. Introduction
In modern agriculture, irrigation should be practiced optimallyIn modern agriculture, irrigation should be practiced optimally
by modern irrigation methods for a sustainable agriculture,by modern irrigation methods for a sustainable agriculture,
especially where water resources are limited.especially where water resources are limited.
Ironically, Many researches stated that drip irrigationIronically, Many researches stated that drip irrigation
accompanying with black plastic mulches have many beneficialaccompanying with black plastic mulches have many beneficial
effects such as conserving the soil moisture, suppressing weedeffects such as conserving the soil moisture, suppressing weed
growth, moderating soil temperature, and increasing yields.growth, moderating soil temperature, and increasing yields.
Water pillow (WP) is a novel irrigation method, combines dripWater pillow (WP) is a novel irrigation method, combines drip
irrigation and mulching, and can be used to irrigate crops grownirrigation and mulching, and can be used to irrigate crops grown
in rows.in rows.
2020

21. Irrigation of pepper plant with pillow irrigation

22. Material and MethodologyMaterial and Methodology
 Experiment was conducted - 2004 and 2005.
 Area - Agricultural Faculty, in a semi-arid zone, Sanliurfa, Turkey.
 Station - latitude of 370
08’Nand, a longitude of 380
46’E
 Mean sea level - 464 m above.
 The long-term average annual precipitation- 424 mm
 Temperature- 28 0
C
 Relative humidity - 40%,
 Texture- clay loam textured, deep
 Average field capacity- 32%
 permanent wilting point,- 22.3%,
 dry bulk density- 1.38 g cm3
 pH - 7.3,
 pH of water -7
 EC - 0.31 dS m-1

23.  Experimental design- completely randomized block (CRD)
 Irrigation method- water pillow (WP), Furrow irrigation (FI).
 In the WP method, there were three irrigation intervals, 7 days
(WP7), 9 days (WP9), and 11 days (WP11).
 FI was made every 5-day interval practice; this was due to the
climatic conditions such as low humidity, high temperature and
wind speed, which led to more frequent irrigation schedule in this
semi-arid area.
2323

24. WP experimental sub-plotWP experimental sub-plot

25. Trickling of the water from micro holes in to the soil

26.  ET = I ± ΔSW
 where IWUE is irrigation water use efficiency (kg ha-1
mm-1
),
 WUE is water use efficiency (kg ha-1
mm-1
),
 Y is fresh green yield (kg ha-1
)
 I is total amount of applied irrigation water (mm),
 and ET is total evapotranspiration (mm).
 Δ SW is the soil water content changes
I
Y
IWUE =
ET
Y
WUE =

27. Result and discussionsResult and discussions
Year Treatment Irrigation
interval
Applied
irrigation(mm)
ET
(mm)
Yield(tha-1
)
2004 FI 5 1879 1947 35.2
WP7 7 1232 1262 41.6
WP9 9 942 1017 38.5
WP11 11 797 887 34.1
2005 FI 5 1539 1640 30.2
WP7 7 1089 1136 30.4
WP9 9 870 938 29.5
WP11 11 725 810 28.5
Yield

28. Soil temperatureSoil temperature
 Soil temperature tended to increase by the black plastic pipe used in
this study due to its mulch effect.
 The mean soil temperatures at 30 cm depth for the FI, WP7, WP9,
and WP11 treatments in 2004 were 28.8, 29.1, 29.2 and 29.20
C,
respectively.
 The mean soil temperature difference between FI and WP treatments
was 1.9 in 2004.

29.  Niu et al. (1998) showed that soil water and temperature of the soil
is increased due to the use of mulch.
 Hu et al. (1995) recorded earlier seedling emergence, enhanced crop
growth and nodule development in groundnut.
2929

30. water use efficiency (WUE) and irrigation water use efficiency
(IWUE)
Year Treatment Irrigation
interval
Applied
irrigation(mm)
WUE
(kg ha-1
mm-1
)
IWUE
(kg ha-1
mm-1
)
2004 FI 5 1879 18.0 18.5
WP7 7 1232 33.0 33.7
WP9 9 942 37.8 40.8
WP11 11 797 38.4 42.8
2005 FI 5 1539 18.4 19.6
WP7 7 1089 26.7 27.9
WP9 9 870 31.4 33.9
WP11 11 725 35.2 39.3

31. Economic analysisEconomic analysis
No. Cost economics FI WP7 WP9 WP11
1 Water used (mm) 1718 1160 906 761
2 Yield (t ha-1
) 32.7 36 34 31.3
3 Profit (US$) 2471 2500 2070 1533
4 Net profit per mm of water used (US$) 1.44 2.15 2.28 2.01
5 Yield per mm of water used (t ha-1
mm-1
) 19 31 37.5 41.1

32. ConclusionConclusion
 Study showed that WP irrigation method has more advantages in
yield and higher WUE than that of FI method.
 WP11 treatment is a way to save water up to 125% in comparison
to FI method.
 In addition, the mulch effect of WP method prevents growing
weeds; therefore, use of herbicides would also be lessened.
 Among other management strategies in optimizing the
environmental conditions for plant growth, further studies on the
performance of WP method with different crops, soils and climatic
conditions would be carried out to evaluate the more beneficial sides
of this method such as the control of disease spread and salinity.
3232

33. Water pillow irrigation compared to furrow irrigation for
Soybean production in a semi-arid area
By
Boydak, E., Sinan, G., Okant, M., Dikilita, M.,Boydak, E., Sinan, G., Okant, M., Dikilita, M.,
Agricultural water managementAgricultural water management
Vol. 19 69 6 Pg. No.- 8 7 – 9 28 7 – 9 2 November (2009)
Case study -II

34. Introduction
Irrigation efficiency is becoming increasingly important in arid and
semi-arid regions with limited water resources.
Therefore, it is necessary to adopt specialized and efficient methods
of irrigation, such as drip irrigation, and water pillow irrigation in
order to achieve the twin objectives of higher productivity and
optimum use of water.

35. Material and MethodologyMaterial and Methodology
 Experiment was conducted - 2003 and 2006.
 Area- Agricultural Faculty, in a semi-arid zone, Sanliurfa, Turkey.
 station - latitude of 370
08’Nand, a longitude of 380
46’E
 Mean sea level - 464 m above.
 The long-term average annual precipitation- 390 mm
 Temperature- 28 0
C
 Relative humidity - 40%,
 Texture- clay loam textured
 Average field capacity- 32%
 permanent wilting point,- 22.3%,
 dry bulk density- 1.4 g cm-3
 pH - 7.3,
 pH of water -7
 EC - 0.31 dS m-1 3535

36.  The experimental design was a completely randomized block
design with three replicates.
 Each plot was 10m long and 2.8mwide (four rows per plot) and had
a total area of 28m2
at sowing
 There was a 2m space between each plot in order to minimize water
movement among treatments.
 There were four irrigation treatments: one FI treatment and three
WP irrigation treatments (WP1.0, WP0.75 and WP0.50).
 In the FI and WP1.0 treatments, which were designated as full
irrigation, root zone soil water content was increased to field
capacity at each irrigation.
 The remaining two irrigation treatments, WP0.75 and WP0.5, were
essentially deficit irrigation treatments, which received 75 and 50%
of the water applied in the WP1.0 treatment, respectively.

37. WP experimental sub-plotWP experimental sub-plot

38. A view of soybean irrigation with the WP method

39. ET =P+ I – D - R ± ΔS
 P is the precipitation, I is the applied irrigation water, D
 is the drainage, R is the runoff, and ΔS is the change in soil
water content in that interval.
 where IWUE is irrigation water use efficiency (kg ha-1
mm-1
),
 WUE is water use efficiency (kg ha-1
mm-1
)
3939
I
Y
IWUE =
ET
Y
WUE =

40. Result and discussionsResult and discussions
Year Treatment Applied
irrigation(mm)
ET(mm) Yield(tha-1
)
2003 FI 1173 1261 2030
WP1 853 921 2260
WP0.75 669 727 2050
WP0.50 485 513 1345
2006 FI 1150 1229 2050
WP1 848 904 2280
WP0.75 668 713 2070
WP0.50 487 522 1380
Yield

41. Irrigation water use efficiencyIrrigation water use efficiency
Year Treatment IWUE
(kg ha1mm1)
WUE
(kg ha1 mm1)
2003 FI 1.73 1.60
WP1 2.65 2.45
WP0.75 3.06 2.82
WP0.50 2.77 2.62
2006 FI 1.78 1.67
WP1 2.69 2.52
WP0.75 3.10 2.90
WP0.50 2.83 2.64

42. TemperatureTemperature
 The mean soil temperature at a depth of 20 cm ranged from 33.1 to
30.50
C in the WP treatments, whereas it changed significantly from
31.9 to 29.70
C in the FI treatment .
 The mean soil temperature difference between FI and WP treatments
was 1.40
C in 2003 and 2.00
C in 2006.

43. ConclusionConclusion
 WP irrigation method had significant effects on the growth and yield
of soybean.
 WP irrigation at a suitable level is preferred over the FI method, as
it saves water and maximizes yield with the same volume of water.
Considering the IWUE and WUE, WP0.75 treatment is
recommended.
 The WP system is economical to use and operate compared to the FI
and drip irrigation method by restricting weed growth.

44. Overall conclusionOverall conclusion
 The world now faces very serious global warming, and therefore, it
is very necessary to take the step towards efficient irrigation
methods.
 In modern agriculture, irrigation should be practiced optimally by
modern irrigation methods like sustainable agriculture, specially
where water resources are limited. Ironically, in semi-arid climatic
regions.
 Therefore it is very necessary to adopt special and efficient method
of irrigation such as water pillow irrigation.
 WP irrigation is more advantages over the furrow and drip
irrigation where enhances seedling emergence, reduces soil
evaporation, increases water uptake, WUE and topsoil temperature.
4444

45. ReferencesReferences
 Antony, E. and Singandhupe, R. B., 2004, Impact of drip and surface irrigation on growth,
yield and WUE of capsicum (Capsicum annum L.). Agric. Water Manage., 65: 121–
132.
 Boydak, E., Sinan, G., Okant, M. and Dikilita, M., 2009, Water pillow irrigation compared to
furrow irrigation for soybean production in a semi-arid area. Agric. Water Manage., 96:
87-92.
 Choi, B.H. and Chung, K.Y., 1997, Effect of polythene-mulching on flowering and yield of
groundnut in Korea. Int. Arachis Newslett., 17: 49–51.
 Hanada, T., 1991, The effect of mulching and row covers on vegetable production. Extension
Bulletin, ASPAC., 33: 22-22.
 Hu, W., Duan, S. and Sui, Q., 1995, High yield technology for groundnut. Int. Arachis
Newslett., 15: 1–22.
 Mustafa, O. and Sinan, G., 2010, Evaluation of CERES-maize simulation model results with
measured data using water pillow irrigation under semi-arid climatic conditions.
African Journal of Agricultural Research., 5(8): 606-613.
 Niu, J. Y., Gan, Y. T., Zhang, J. W. and Yang, Q. F., 1998, Postanthesis dry matter
accumulation and distribution in spring wheat mulched with plastic film. Crop Sci., 38:
1562–1568. 4545

46.  Nuray, C., Sinan, G. and Murat, D., 2009, Effectiveness of water pillow irrigation method on
yield and water use efficiency on hot pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Scientia
Horticulturae., 120: 325–329.
 Sinan, G., 2006, Water pillow: a new irrigation method. J. Appl. Sci., 6 (2): 315–317.
 Tiwari, K. N., Singh, A. and Mal, P. K., 2003, Effect of drip irrigation on yield of cabbage
(Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata) under mulch and non-mulch conditions. Agric.
Water Manage., 58: 19–28.
 Ramakrishna, A., Tam, H. M., Wani, S. P. and Long, T. D., 2006, Effects of mulch on soil
temperature, moisture, weed infestation and yield of groundnut in northern Vietnam.
Field Crop Res., 95: 115–125.

47. 4747
…..Discussions……

48. 4848
…..Thank you…..