Agronomic and economic evaluation of irrigation strategies on cotton lint yield in Australia
Davide Cammarano A F G , José Payero B , Bruno Basso A C D , Paul Wilkens E and Peter Grace A DA Institute for Sustainable Resources, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia.
B The University of Queensland, Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation (QAAFI), 203 Tor St, Toowoomba, Qld 4350, Australia.
C Department of Crop, Forest and Environmental Sciences, University of Basilicata, Viale Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy.
D Dept. of Geological Sciences and W.K. Kellogg Biological Station, Michigan State University, 307 Natural Science Bldg, 288 Farm Lane, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA.
E International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC), PO Box 2040, Muscle Shoals, AL 35662, USA.
F Department of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
G Corresponding author. Email: davide.cammarano@ufl.edu
Crop and Pasture Science 63(7) 647-655 https://doi.org/10.1071/CP12024
Submitted: 19 January 2012 Accepted: 14 August 2012 Published: 18 October 2012
Abstract
Cotton is one of the most important irrigated crops in subtropical Australia. In recent years, cotton production has been severely affected by the worst drought in recorded history, with the 2007–08 growing season recording the lowest average cotton yield in 30 years. The use of a crop simulation model to simulate the long-term temporal distribution of cotton yields under different levels of irrigation and the marginal value for each unit of water applied is important in determining the economic feasibility of current irrigation practices. The objectives of this study were to: (i) evaluate the CROPGRO-Cotton simulation model for studying crop growth under deficit irrigation scenarios across ten locations in New South Wales (NSW) and Queensland (Qld); (ii) evaluate agronomic and economic responses to water inputs across the ten locations; and (iii) determine the economically optimal irrigation level. The CROPGRO-Cotton simulation model was evaluated using 2 years of experimental data collected at Kingsthorpe, Qld The model was further evaluated using data from nine locations between northern NSW and southern Qld. Long-term simulations were based on the prevalent furrow-irrigation practice of refilling the soil profile when the plant-available soil water content is <50%. The model closely estimated lint yield for all locations evaluated. Our results showed that the amounts of water needed to maximise profit and maximise yield are different, which has economic and environmental implications. Irrigation needed to maximise profits varied with both agronomic and economic factors, which can be quite variable with season and location. Therefore, better tools and information that consider the agronomic and economic implications of irrigation decisions need to be developed and made available to growers.
References
Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Science (2010) Australian Crop Report: December 2010. ABARES, Canberra.Bange MP, Milroy SP, Thongbai P (2004) Growth and yield of cotton in response to waterlogging. Field Crops Research 88, 129–142.
| Growth and yield of cotton in response to waterlogging.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Basso B, Ritchie JT, Pierce FJ, Braga RP, Jones JW (2001) Spatial validation of crop models for precision agriculture. Agricultural Systems 68, 97–112.
| Spatial validation of crop models for precision agriculture.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Basso B, Bertocco M, Sartori L, Martin EC (2007) Analyzing the effects of climate variability on spatial pattern of yield in a maize–wheat–soybean rotation. European Journal of Agronomy 26, 82–91.
| Analyzing the effects of climate variability on spatial pattern of yield in a maize–wheat–soybean rotation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Boote KJ (1999) Concepts for calibrating crop growth models. In ‘DSSAT v3. Volume 4’. (Eds G Hoogenboom, PW Wilkens, GY Tsuji) pp. 179–199. (University of Hawaii: Honolulu, HI)
Boote KJ, Jones JW, Hoogenboom G, Pickering NB (1998) The CROPGRO model for grain legumes. In ‘Understanding options for agricultural production’. (Eds GY Tsuji et al.) pp. 99–128. (Kluwer Academic: Boston)
Constable GA, Hearn AB (1981) Irrigation of crops in a subhumid climate. VI. Effects of irrigation and nitrogen fertliser on growth, yield and quality of cotton. Irrigation Science 2, 17–28.
Cotton Research and Development Corporation (2010) ‘Australian cotton production manual.’ (CRDC Publications: Narrabri, NSW)
Cotton Seed Distributors (2010) ‘2010 Variety trials results.’ (Cotton Seed Distributors: Wee Waa, NSW) www.csd.net.au
Debertin DL (2012) ‘Agricultural production economics.’ 2nd edn (Macmillan Publishing Company: New York)
English M (1990) Deficit irrigation I: Analytical framework. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering 116, 399–412.
| Deficit irrigation I: Analytical framework.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Grace PR, Antle J, Stephen O, Keith P, Basso B (2010) Soil carbon sequestration rates and associated economic costs for farming systems of south-eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Soil Research 48, 720–729.
| Soil carbon sequestration rates and associated economic costs for farming systems of south-eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hoogenboom G, Jones JW, Wilkens PW, Porter CH, Boote KJ, Hunt LA, Singh U, Lizaso JL, White JW, Uryasev O, Royce FS, Ogoshi R, Gijsman AJ, Tsuji GY (2010) ‘Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) Version 4.5.’ [CD-ROM] (University of Hawaii: Honolulu, HI)
Isbell RF (1996) ‘The Australian Soil Classification.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)
Pandey RK, Maranville JW, Chetima MM (2000) Deficit irrigation and nitrogen effects on maize in a Sahelian environment II. Shoot growth, nitrogen uptake and water extraction. Agricultural Water Management 46, 15–27.
| Deficit irrigation and nitrogen effects on maize in a Sahelian environment II. Shoot growth, nitrogen uptake and water extraction.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Payero JO, Tarkalson DD, Irmak S, Davison D, Petersen JL (2009) Effects of timing of a deficit-irrigation allocation on corn evapotranspiration, yield, water use efficiency and dry mass. Agricultural Water Management 96, 1387–1397.
| Effects of timing of a deficit-irrigation allocation on corn evapotranspiration, yield, water use efficiency and dry mass.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Power B, Rodriguez D, deVoil P, Harris G, Payero J (2011) A multi-field bio-economic model of irrigated grain–cotton farming systems. Field Crops Research 124, 171–179.
| A multi-field bio-economic model of irrigated grain–cotton farming systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Richards QD, Bange MP, Johnston SB (2008) HydroLOGIC: An irrigation management system for Australian cotton. Agricultural Systems 98, 40–49.
| HydroLOGIC: An irrigation management system for Australian cotton.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ritchie JT (1972) Model for predicting evaporation from a row crop with incomplete cover. Water Resources Research 8, 1204–1213.
| Model for predicting evaporation from a row crop with incomplete cover.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ritchie JT, Basso B (2008) Water use efficiency is not constant when crop water supply is adequate or fixed: The role of agronomic management. European Journal of Agronomy 28, 273–281.
| Water use efficiency is not constant when crop water supply is adequate or fixed: The role of agronomic management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Smith RJ, Raine SR, Minkevich J (2005) Irrigation application efficiency and deep drainage potential under surface irrigated cotton. Agricultural Water Management 71, 117–130.
| Irrigation application efficiency and deep drainage potential under surface irrigated cotton.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tennakoon SB, Milroy SP (2003) Crop water use efficiency on irrigated cotton farms in Australia. Agricultural Water Management 61, 179–194.
| Crop water use efficiency on irrigated cotton farms in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Watson S, Hudson D, Segarra E (2004) Economic vs. Biological goals in technology adoption. In ‘Beltwide Cotton Conferences Proceedings, Cotton Economics and Marketing Conference’. (National Cotton Council: Memphis, TN) Available at: www.cotton.org/beltwide/
Yeates SJ, Constable GA, McCumstie T (2010) Irrigated cotton in the tropical dry season. I: Yield, its components and crop development. Field Crops Research 116, 278–289.
| Irrigated cotton in the tropical dry season. I: Yield, its components and crop development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zhang H, Oweis T (1999) Water-yield relations and optimal irrigation scheduling of wheat in the Mediterranean region. Agricultural Water Management 38, 195–211.
| Water-yield relations and optimal irrigation scheduling of wheat in the Mediterranean region.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
