IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v301y2024ics0378377424002701.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evapotranspiration, water use efficiency, and yield for film mulched maize under different nitrogen-fertilization rates and climate conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Fang, Heng
  • Li, Yuannong
  • Gu, Xiaobo
  • Du, Yadan
  • Chen, Pengpeng
  • Hu, Hongxiang

Abstract

The biodegradable film, as an ideal substitute for plastic film, has broad application prospects. However, it is uncertain in maize actual evapotranspiration (ETac) components, yield, and water use efficiency (WUE) of biodegradable and plastic films during the different rainfall seasons. Therefore, a 4-year field trial with three mulching patterns (FNM: flat planting with non-mulching, RPM: ridge-furrow with plastic film mulching, and RBM: ridge-furrow with biodegradable film mulching) and two N-fertilization levels (0 and 180 kg N ha–1) was conducted. The results showed that the machine-learning models could accurately estimate maize ETac and its partitioning, and the random forest and artificial neural networks models had the highest accuracy and the least input variables after optimization. Compared to FNM, RBM and RPM increased Et by 10.8 mm, 14.0 mm in the dry season, 9.1 mm, 11.2 mm in the normal season, and 4.0 mm, 7.5 mm in the wet season, respectively, but decreased Es by 75.8 mm, 82.7 mm in the dry season, 48.6 mm, 56.7 mm in the normal season, 67.1 mm, and 74.9 mm in the wet season, respectively. Therefore, RBM and RPM decreased ETac by 65.0 mm, 68.8 mm in the dry season, 39.5 mm, 45.6 mm in the normal season, and 53.1 mm, 67.5 mm in the wet season, respectively, compared to FNM. Nitrogen application had a similar effect on Es and Et but only increased ETac by 13.3 mm in the dry season, 2 mm in the normal season, and 4.3 mm in the wet season, respectively, compared to N0. Furthermore, RBM and RPM under different nitrogen-fertilizations increased maize yield by 4.0 %, 3.6 % in the dry season, 3.0 %, 3.3 % in the normal season, and 5.3 %, 5.9 % in the wet season, respectively, also increased maize WUE by 23.3 %, 24.1 % in the dry season, 12.9 %, 15.0 % in the normal season, and 21.1 %, 23.4 % in the wet season, respectively, compared to FNM. This study proved that RPM could be replaced by RBM under 180 kg N ha–1 in the different rainfall seasons in terms of reducing ETac, increasing maize yield, and improving WUE. The optimized machine learning models in this study also provided a low-cost method for computing regional maize ETac.

Suggested Citation

  • Fang, Heng & Li, Yuannong & Gu, Xiaobo & Du, Yadan & Chen, Pengpeng & Hu, Hongxiang, 2024. "Evapotranspiration, water use efficiency, and yield for film mulched maize under different nitrogen-fertilization rates and climate conditions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:301:y:2024:i:c:s0378377424002701
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2024.108935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377424002701
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2024.108935?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:301:y:2024:i:c:s0378377424002701. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.