Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T01:00:20.559Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A drought experiment using mobile shelters: the effect of drought on barley yield, water use and nutrient uptake

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. Day ,
B. J. Legg ,
B. K. French ,
A. E. Johnston ,
D. W. Lawlor  and
W. De C. Jeffers
W. Day
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, AL5 2JQ
B. J. Legg
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, AL5 2JQ
B. K. French
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, AL5 2JQ
A. E. Johnston
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, AL5 2JQ
D. W. Lawlor
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, AL5 2JQ
W. De C. Jeffers
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, AL5 2JQ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Automatic mobile shelters were used to keep rain off a barley crop in a drought experiment. The treatments ranged from no water during the growing season to regular weekly irrigation. This paper reports the effect of drought on the harvest yield and its components, on water use and nutrient uptake.

Drought caused large decreases in yield, and affected each component of the grain yield. The magnitude of each component varied by up to 25% between treatments, and much of the variation could be accounted for by linear regression against the mean soil water deficit in one of three periods. For the number of grains per ear, the relevant period included tillering and ear formation; for the number of ears per unit ground area, the period included stem extension and tiller death; for grain mass, the period included grain filling.

The harvest yields were linearly related to water use, with no indication of a critical period of drought sensitivity. The relation of grain yield to the maximum potential soil water deficit did show that a prolonged early drought had an exceptionally large effect on both yield and water use.

Two unsheltered irrigation experiments, also on barley, were made in the same year on a nearby site. The effects of drought on yield in these experiments were in good agreement with the effects observed on the mobile shelter site.

When fully irrigated, the small plots under the mobile shelters used water 11% faster than larger areas of crop, because of advection. The maximum depth from which water was extracted was unaffected by the drought treatment. When 50% of the available soil water had been used the uptake rate decreased, but the maximum depth of uptake continued to increase.

Measurements of crop nutrients at harvest showed that nitrogen uptake was large, because of site history, and that phosphate uptake was decreased by drought to such an extent that phosphate shortage may have limited yield.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 91 , Issue 3 , December 1978 , pp. 599 - 623
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aspinall, D., Nicholls, P. B. & May, L. H. (1964). The effects of soil moisture stress on the growth of barley. I. Vegetative development and grain yield. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 15, 729–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baver, L. D., Gardner, W. H. & Gardner, W. R. (1972). Soil Physics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Denmead, O. T. & Shaw, R. H. (1962). Availability of soil water to plants as affected by soil moisture content and meteorological conditions. Agronomy Journal 54, 385–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunham, R. J. & Nye, P. H. (1976). The influence of soil water content on the uptake of ions by roots. III. Phosphate, potassium, calcium and magnesium uptake and concentration gradients in soil. Journal of Applied Ecology 13, 967–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, B. K., Long, I. F. & Penman, H. L. (1973 a). Water use by farm crops. I. Test of the neutron meter on barley, beans and sugar beet, 1970. Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1972, Part 2, pp. 5–42.Google Scholar
French, B. K., Long, I. F. & Penman, H. L. (1973 b). Water use by farm crops. II. Spring wheat, barley, potatoes (1969); potatoes, beans, kale (1968). Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1972, Part 2, pp. 43–61.Google Scholar
French, B. K., Long, I. F. & Penman, H. L. (1973 c). Water use by farm crops. III. Bare soil, short turf and crops in rotation, 1962 to 1967, 1971. Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1972, Part 2, pp. 62–85.Google Scholar
Gallagher, J. N., Biscoe, P. V. & Scott, R. K. (1975). Barley and its environment. V. Stability of grain weight. Journal of Applied Ecology 12, 319–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, J. N., Biscoe, P. V. & Scott, R. K. (1976). Barley and its environment. VI. Growth and development in relation to yield. Journal of Applied Ecology 13, 563–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, D. R. (1975). Comparison of evaporation from barley with Penman estimates. Agricultural Meteorology 15, 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husain, I. & Aspinall, D. (1970). Water stress and apical morphogenesis in barley. Annals of Botany 34, 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanova, T. I., Spiridovskaya, S. V. & Mosma, L. V. (1972). Dependence of barley yield on fertiliser rates, soil and weather conditions (in Russian), cited in Soils and Fertilisers 35, 761.Google Scholar
Jenne, E. A., Rhoades, H. F., Yien, C. H. & Howe, O. W. (1957). Change in nutrient element accumulation by corn with depletion of soil moisture. Agronomy Journal 50, 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. R. & Moss, D. N. (1976). Effect of water stress on 14CO2 fixation and translocation in wheat during grain filling. Crop Science 16, 697–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, A. E. (1969). The plant nutrients in crops grown on Broadbalk. Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1968, Part 2, pp. 50–62.Google Scholar
Johnston, A. E., Warren, R. G. & Penny, A. (1970 a). The value of residues from long-period manuring at Rothamsted and Woburn. IV. The value to arable crops of residues accumulated from superphosphate. Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1969, Part 2, pp. 39–68.Google Scholar
Johnston, A. E., Warren, R. G. & Penny, A. (1970 b). The value of residues from long-period manuring at Rothamsted and Woburn. V. The value to arable crops of residues accumulated from potassium fertilisers. Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1969, Part 2, pp. 69–90.Google Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1968). The response of some barley varieties to irrigation and nitrogen fertiliser. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 71, 47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, E. J. M. (1970). Evapotranspiration from barley grown at different plant densities. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 75, 445–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legg, B. J., Day, W., Brown, N. J. & Smith, G. J. (1978). Small plots and automatic rain shelters: a field appraisal. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, I. F. & French, B. K. (1967). Measurement of soil moisture in the field by neutron moderation. Journal of Soil Science, 18, 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGowan, M. (1974). Depth of water extraction by roots. Isotope and Radiation Techniques in Soil Physics and Irrigation Studies, IAEA Vienna, pp. 435–445.Google Scholar
Nye, P. H. & Tinker, P. B. (1977). Solute movement in the soil-root system. Studies in Ecology 4. Oxford: Blackwells.Google Scholar
Penman, H. L. (1948). Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 193, 120–145.Google Scholar
Penman, H. L. (1971). Irrigation at Woburn. VII. Rothamsted Experimental Station Report for 1970, Part 2, pp. 147–170.Google Scholar
Rackham, O. (1972). Responses of the barley crop to soil water stress. In Crop Processes in Controlled Environments (ed. Rees, A. R., Cockshull, K. E., Hand, D. W. and Hurd, R. G.) pp. 123–138. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Richards, L. A. & Wadleigh, C. H. (1952). Soil physical conditions and plant growth. Agronomy Monographs 11.Google Scholar
Ritchie, J. T. & Burnett, E. (1971). Dryland evaporative flux in a subhumid climate: II. Plant influences. Agronomy Journal 63, 56–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, E. W. (1973). Soil Conditions and Plant Qrowth, 10th edition. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Salter, P. J. & Goode, J. E. (1967). Crop responses to water at different stages of growth. Commonwealth Bureau of Horticulture, East Mailing, Research review No. 2.Google Scholar
Skazkin, F. D. (1961). The critical period in plants as regards insufficient water supply (English translation from Russian). National Lending Library, RTS 2355 (1964).Google Scholar
Smith, L. P. (1967). Potential transpiration. Technical Bulletin, M.A.F.F., 16. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Spratt, E. D. & Gasser, J. K. R. (1970). Effect of ammonium and nitrate forms of nitrogen and restricted water supply on growth and nitrogen uptake of wheat. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 50, 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sykes, D. J. & Looms, W. E. (1967). Plant and soil factors in permanent wilting percentages and field capacity storage. Soil Science 104, 163–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viets, F. G. (1972). Water deficits and nutrient availability. In Water Deficits and Plant Growth, III (ed. Kozlowski, T. T.), pp. 217–239. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wells, S. A. & Dubetz, S. (1970). Reaction of two barley cultivars to a period of soil water stress during heading. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 50, 701–704.Google Scholar