Adaptability of Shallow Subsurface Drip

RESEARCH ARTICLE
Adaptability of shallow subsurface drip

irrigation of alfalfa in an arid desert area of
Northern Xinjiang
Shufang Wang1, Xiyun Jiao1*, Weihua Guo1, Jian Lu2, Yungang Bai3, Liping Wang4
1 College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing, China, 2 Science
and Technology Promotion Centre, Ministry of Water Resources, P.R.C, Beijing, China, 3 Xinjiang Institute of
Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Ürümqi, China, 4 College of water conservancy, Yunnan
Agricultural University, Kunming, China
a1111111111 * xyjiao@hhu.edu.cn
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111 Abstract
a1111111111
A suitable irrigation method adopted to arid desert conditions, including a special soil struc-
ture and specialized plants, has been continuously studied and improved. A field study was
conducted in the Awei irrigation area of Aletai in Xinjiang in 2015 and 2016 to investigate the
OPEN ACCESS applicability of shallow subsurface drip irrigation (SSDI) in an arid desert area. A completely
randomized block design with three replications and three treatments for drip tape subsur-
Citation: Wang S, Jiao X, Guo W, Lu J, Bai Y,
Wang L (2018) Adaptability of shallow subsurface face depths at 5, 10, 20 cm was established. The results indicated that the vertical distribu-
drip irrigation of alfalfa in an arid desert area of tion of the soil moisture of subsurface drip irrigation (SDI, buried depth at 20 cm) was mainly
Northern Xinjiang. PLoS ONE 13(4): e0195965. concentrated at 0–60 cm, while SSDI (buried depth at 5 and 10 cm) was concentrated at
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965
0–30 cm. However, the roots distributions were concentrated at 0–30 cm for SDI and SSDI.
Editor: Ricardo Aroca, Estacion Experimental del The chlorophyll content and water consumption intensity for alfalfa first increased and then
Zaidin, SPAIN
decreased in arid desert conditions. The dry yield and water use efficiency (WUE) of SSDI
Received: May 19, 2017 (buried depth at 10 cm) were higher than those of SDI. The SSDI was practical in arid desert
Accepted: April 3, 2018 conditions and the recommended buried depth was 10 cm.
Published: April 13, 2018
Copyright: © 2018 Wang et al. This is an open

access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which Introduction
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original Alfalfa is one of the most important cultivated forage species worldwide. The United States is
author and source are credited. the world’s largest producer of alfalfa, with an annual value of about one billion dollars [1]. In
Mexico, area planted to this specie totals 338,000 ha [2]. In addition, Alfalfa is largely cultivated
Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are
within the paper and its Supporting Information in Argentina, Canada, Russia, France, and Italy [3]. In Aletai in northwest China, it is one of
files. the five most-common pastorals, and farmers are trying to plant alfalfa in a large arid desert to
mitigate the shortage of available forage. Production agriculture in the arid desert predomi-
Funding: This research was supported by a grant
from Science & Technology Program of Xinjiang
nantly depends on irrigation. It is well known that alfalfa is a large water user [4]. The seasonal
(No.201431107) to XJ. The funder had no role in crop water requirements for alfalfa is higher compared to those of other drought crops. How-
study design, data collection and analysis, decision ever, its growth and yield are limited by the shortage of water resources and primitive irriga-
to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. tion methods in arid desert areas.
Competing interests: The authors have declared Subsurface drip irrigation (SDI), which has expanded largely in arid areas in recent years, is
that no competing interests exist. a method for reducing the amount of water used to irrigate crops below the soil surface
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 1 / 13

Adaptability of SSDI of alfalfa in an arid desert area of Northern Xinjiang
through the use of emitters with discharge rates that are generally in the same range as those of
drip irrigation, and SDI appears to have great potential. Generally, the crop yields with SDI
were higher than other irrigation methods, such as border irrigation, sprinkler irrigation and
surface drip irrigation. Furthermore, SDI requires less water in many cases [5]. The volume of
water applied in the SDI treatments used for alfalfa was smaller with respect to amount applied
through flood irrigation or sprinklers. However, soil reached its best hydric condition and
there was more dry matter [6, 7]. Many previous studies have shown that the fresh and dry
yields of alfalfa decreased as the water supply was decreased, whereas the water use efficiency
(WUE) increased [8, 9].
A proper SDI, with the optimum lateral depth and lateral space, could enhance crop yields
and improve WUEs. Evaluating the effect of lateral distance on crop growth and yield was
reported in many previous studies [10, 11]. The appropriate depth is determined by factors
such as the soil physical properties, water use, and crop roots. Crop yields were significantly
different between different depths. Patel et al. and Santos et al. had reported on the effects of
the depth of placement of drip laterals on the yield of potatoes and onions. The depth of place-
ment of drip laterals greatly influenced the shape and dimensions of the wetted area [12–14].
The recommended optimum lateral depth and lateral space are 40 cm and 100–150 cm, respec-
tively, for alfalfa yield [7]. Kandelous et al. provided a framework and evaluated the drip-line
depth (20–70 cm) and distance (40–300 cm) [1]. These studies demonstrate that opportunities
exist to improve the performance of subsurface drip irrigation systems by adjusting system
design to account for differences in depth of placement of drip laterals. However, in previous
researches, the lateral depth studied was all almost more than 10 cm [15–17].
Keeping soil moisture content at field-capacity in the root zone tends to maximize crop
yield. However, this is challenging in sandy soils with a shallow water table and low water hold-
ing capacity [18]. Depth of drip tape depends upon soil type and crop [19]. On some soils of
silty clay loam, sandy loam soil and clay sandy loam texture, SDI of alfalfa had been studied
mainly at North America [1, 2, 20]. Because of the high gravelly/sandy soil content and strong
evaporation of the desert area of Xinjiang, where almost no crops can be planted before, shal-
low subsurface drip irrigation (SSDI, drip lateral depth is less than 10 cm below the soil sur-
face) is being studied for widely application recently for alfalfa planting. Due to lateral depth of
no more than 10 cm, SSDI has advantages of a low installation cost, convenient maintenance
and renewal, and there is also no influence of mechanical operation for the drip tapes com-
pared with SDI. Research on the effects of SSDI has been conducted for potatoes and other
crops [21]. However, there has almost no study of using SSDI for alfalfa in an arid desert area,
especially focus on suitable lateral depth.
The objectives of this study based on field experiments were: (1) To compare SSDI (5, 10
cm) with SDI (20 cm) with respect to the growth, yield and WUE of alfalfa; (2) to determine
the reasonable lateral depth of SSDI for alfalfa production and to make a recommendation for
alfalfa planting in arid desert conditions.
Materials and methods

Field experiments were conducted at the Awei experimental station in the county of Qinghe,
Aletai city, Xinjiang. The Awei experimental station was a subordinate agency of Water
Conservancy Bureau of Qinghe. The study was carried out by Xinjiang Institute of Water
Resources and Hydropower Research and Hohai University, it was supported by Science &
Technology Department of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. Therefore, no specific per-
missions were required for our activities. We confirmed that the field studies did not involve
endangered or protected species.

Experimental location
Field experiments were conducted at the Awei experimental station in the county of Qinghe,
Aletai area, Xinjiang. The latitude is 46˚250 30@ N and longitude is 90˚04’01@E. The climate of
the region can be described as a north temperate continental arid climate with a long, cold
winter and cool summer. The extreme minimum temperature is -53.0˚C, and the maximum
temperature is 36.5˚C. The annual average temperature is 0˚C. The long-term annual evapora-
tion is 1495 mm and precipitation is only 161 mm. The region enjoys only 103 days above
freezing. Frosts are common between September and May. The field site soils in this area can
be characterized as having a gravelly soil texture with a gravel content that is 22–30% in the
0–30 cm layers, 42–48% in the 30–60 cm layers, and more than 65% below the 60 cm layers
(Table 1). The soil composition was determined at the State Key Laboratory of hydrology-
water resource and hydraulic engineering. The region has a low organic matter content, and
the field capacity is 13.3%. The total effective precipitation, which was equal or greater than 5
mm, was 79 mm and 90 mm during the experimental period in 2015 and 2016, respectively.
Installation of subsurface drip irrigation

The water source for irrigation was pumped from the Qing River in May to September annu-
ally, and a seasonal low water level of the river occurred during the remaining months. Internal
inlaying drip irrigation tapes made of polyethylene (PE) from Xinjiang Karez Irrigation Tech-
nology Limited were used in this experiment. The on-line emitter flow rate was 3.2 L/h, and
the spacing was 30 cm. Drip tapes were laid out connected with a main single PE pipe (Diame-
ter 40mm) with separate opening valves for each subplot. The irrigation quota was controlled
by a ball valve in each experimental plot.
Treatments
Three lateral depths were investigated in the current study, including 5 cm below the soil sur-
face and 10 cm below the soil surface in SSDI compared to 20 cm below the soil surface in SDI.
The lateral space was 60 cm in all treatments. Drip tapes were buried manually by famers
employed. A randomized complete block experimental design with three treatments and three
replications was employed. The area for each replication was 72 m2 (30 m long and 2.4 m
wide).
Cultural practices
The alfalfa (Medicago sativa L. cv. Algonquin) was sown in 30 cm spaced rows and 15 cm apart
from the drip lines using a seeding rate of 52.5kg ha-1 on 15 August 2012. The K and P
Table 1. Soil physical properties the experimental zone.

Soil depth, cm Physical characteristics Dry bulk density, g.cm-3
Gravel, % Sand, % Lime, % Clay, %
0~10 22.43 35.98 31.70 9.89 1.65
10~20 28.16 34.44 27.50 9.90 1.78
20~30 27.82 38.28 24.55 9.35 1.77
30~40 42.56 29.49 19.42 8.53 1.82
40~50 48.63 27.61 17.75 6.01 1.84
50~60 48.02 28.81 18.02 5.15 1.88
Note: Gravel>65% at a soil depth below 60 cm.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965.t001

fertilization were injected twice into the irrigation system for a total 20 kgha-1 ratio of each
nutrient per cut, and the N fertilization was 10 kgha-1.
The irrigation dates for alfalfa in the experiment according to the irrigation regimen are
provided in Table 2. The frequency of irrigation was approximately 10 days in the annual irri-
gation regime schedule, and each cut had 6 irrigation times for a total of 12 times. Each irriga-
tion quota was 37.5 mm.
Alfalfa was harvested 2 times during the flowering period throughout the year in the experi-
mental field depending on the soil quality, short frost-free period and slow rate of temperature
increase; alfalfa was cut to a residual height of 10 cm. Cut 1 occurred on July 20 and July 8, and
cut 2 occurred on September 21 and September 10 in 2015 and 2016, respectively. The wet
yield was assessed by randomly selected samples, which had an area of 5.4 m2 (6 m long and
0.9 m wide) from each plot. The dry yield was obtained manually by collecting two 0.45 m
length and 0.45 m width samples from each plot, which were dried in an oven for approxi-
mately 48 h at 75˚C or until they reached a constant weight.
Soil moisture monitoring

The volumetric soil water content of every layer, including the 0–10, 10–20, 20–30, 30–40, 40–
60, and 60–100 cm depth ranges, were measured by PR2 (Soil Moisture Profile Probe 2) every
2–5 days in each plot. There were three PR2 probes at three horizontal distances from the drip
taps (0, 0.15 and 0.3 m).
Fine roots (<2 mm diameter) were divided into living roots and dead roots by identifying
the color and morphology. The color of the living roots is white, and the dead roots are wrin-
kled, easy to break, and have a darker or brown color. Roots were excavated by soil coring
method (10 cm diameter) at flowering stage of every cut. Samples were collected in increments
of 10 cm from the surface up to 60 cm depth, while in the horizontal direction from the drip-
line of 0, 10, 20, and 30 cm. The soil samples were washed over a sieve under running tap
water to remove soil from the roots; then, fine roots were dried at 65˚C in an oven until a con-
stant weight was reached.
The chlorophyll content of alfalfa was measured by a SPAD-502PLUS portable chlorophyll
meter (KONICAMINOLTA, Japan), which was used on 5 plants that were randomly selected
from each plot.
Crop water use calculation

The soil water use was calculated using the water balance model equation from the soil water
profiles measured from:
Xn
ETj ¼ 10 Hi ðyij yijþ1 Þ þ M þ P þ K C ð1Þ
i¼1
where ETj is the soil water depletion of stage j (mm); Hi is the thickness of the soil layer (cm);
θij and θij+1 are the soil water content of layer i in stages j and j+1, respectively; M is water
Table 2. Irrigation time of alfalfa.

Year Cuts 1 2 3 4 5 6
2015 1 May 26 June 5 June 15 June 25 July 5 July 15
2015 2 July 22 August 1 August 11 August 21 August 31 September 10
2016 1 May 15 May 24 June 3 June 13 June 23 July 3
2016 2 July 10 July 20 August 1 August 11 August 21 September 1

applied for irrigation (mm); and P is precipitation (mm); and the daily precipitation values
were obtained from the weather station located at the Awei experimental station. K is ground-
water recharging (mm), which was considered to be zero, while the located groundwater depth
was lower than 3 m. C is drainage (mm), which was calculated as C = (PZMC j+1-PZMCj) [4],
where PZMCj and PZMC j+1 are the soil water content of the percolation zone (60–100 cm)
and C is set to zero if PZMC j+1<PZMCj. When the groundwater table was lower than 3 m
below the ground surface, the capillary increase in the groundwater was negligible. The runoff
was also ignored because there usually is no runoff in the North China Plain.
The data were statistically analysed with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and treat-
ments means were compared using LSD test at P = 0.05. All analyses were carried out using
IBM SPSS Statistics 22.
Results and discussion

Soil water content variety and root distribution in each layer
The increment of the soil water content that was highest in the layer of SSDI and SDI was
observed in the 0–60 cm layer, especially in the 0–30 cm layer the day after irrigation (Fig 1).
The vertical wetting range of SSDI only reached 40 cm underground, while SDI reached 60 cm
underground. The variation of soil moisture expressed by the coefficient of variation (Cv: stan-
dard deviation divided by mean) was divided into 4 levels during the growth period, which
were the change layer (Cv >30%), active layer (Cv: 20%~30%), sub active layer (Cv: 10%~20%)
and stable layer (Cv <10%) [22]. The 0–20 cm layer was active, 20–30 cm layer was sub active,
Fig 1. Increment of water content in different soil layers the day after irrigation.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965.g001

Fig 2. Coefficient of variation of water content in different soil layers (It was stable layer in 60–100cm).
and other layers were stable (Fig 2), primarily because of the influence of the soil texture on
the soil water content [23]. The distribution of the soil water content changed due to the spe-
cial soil properties of the arid desert the day after irrigation, during which the vertical wet
depths of SSDI and SDI reached up to 40 cm and 60 cm underground, respectively, which led
us to conclude that the soil infiltrability enhanced as the soil layer increased. In addition, the
variability of the soil water content in the 0–10 cm layer was highest for all of the treatments,
and the surface evaporation was one of the main factors of variability in the soil water content,
although gravel soils can reduce evaporation [24].
The factors that affect the biomass of alfalfa roots include the soil layer, soil properties, irri-
gation, groundwater level and other factors [25]. The distribution of the fine root weight den-
sity for the 5 cm and 10 cm depth treatments for SSDI were mainly concentrated in the 0–20
cm and 0–30 cm soil layers, respectively. However, the distribution for SDI was mainly con-
centrated in the 0–30 cm soil layer. The fine root content was less than 3% for all of the treat-
ments (Figs 3 and 4). This outcome was mainly due to soil obstacles (sticky, compacted and
barren). The thinner the depth of the soil layer, the more severe the soil obstacle, which led to
a shallower root depth [26]. The rock fragment content of the soil layer within 0–30 cm in the
arid desert was much smaller than the soil layer below 30 cm, in which the dry bulk density
was greater. Therefore, the root depth of the soil was shallow, and the fine root depth was con-
centrated in the 0–30 cm soil layer for all of the treatments, which was similar to a study on
gravel and extreme phosphorus-deficient plots Fox and Lipps [27]. These results indicated that
the higher rock fragment content and bulk density of the arid desert area were not conducive

Fig 3. Distribution of root weight density in different soil layers at flowering stage.
to the growth, penetration and distribution of alfalfa roots, which could affect the water
absorption of roots and crop growth.
The influence of the buried depth of the drip tape on the root distribution should be consid-
ered in the design of the SDI system [1], and the distribution range of roots for the 5 cm treat-
ments for SSDI was narrower compared to that of other treatments, which showed that the
buried depth of drip tape, in addition to the soil texture and structure, had an effect on the
root distribution and growth. The root biomass was the largest in the 0–20cm layer, where the
drip tape was buried, and this result also indicated that if the root encounters an area with high
moisture, it grows and branches because of the hydrotropism of plants [28].
Plants absorb moisture (and other nutrients dissolved in water) from soil, mainly through
roots, to meet the needs of their physiological activities, such as growth and metabolism. How-
ever, the water absorption process is divided into active water suction and passive water suc-
tion. Tall plants absorb water through physical passive water absorption when transpiration is
strong, and young plants or tall plants with strongly suppressed transpiration absorb water
through physiological active water suction in most cases [29]. Passive water absorption replen-
ishes the loss of moisture caused by transpiration and was the main factor in the growth period
due to the strong evaporation in the arid desert area. The greater the soil moisture distribution
in the soil layer, the greater the root distribution, leading to an accelerated change in soil mois-
ture [30], which is more conducive to transpiration and the formation of dry matter. There-
fore, according to the previous analysis, the change in soil moisture and root distribution of
layers in SSDI showed better adaptability to each other.

Fig 4. Root weight density ratio in different soil layers at flowering stage of alfalfa.
Chlorophyll and water consumption intensity in the growth stage

Because of the similar growth of the two cuts, growth and water consumption of alfalfa were
studied along with those of second crops. According to the investigation of the plants, the
growth stages of the second alfalfa crop were divided into four stages: before the branching
stage for approximately 13 days, the branching stage for approximately 23 days, the bud stage
for approximately 15 days, and the flowering stage for approximately 11 days.
The relative chlorophyll content can be expressed by the value of soil and plant analyzer
development (SPAD) [31]. The trend of SPAD for all of the treatments generally increased
steadily until the prime bud stage, during which it achieved its maximum value and then
decreased gradually (Fig 5). The SPAD value of the 10 cm treatment of SSDI was slightly
higher compared to that of other treatments in general. Chlorophyll is an important pigment
that is related to photosynthesis and plays an important role in the absorption, transfer and
transformation of light. Chlorophyll can convert light energy into the energy needed for plant
growth and development, so the level of chlorophyll also reflects the growth of plants. Previous
studies showed that the yield is increased and growth is better when chlorophyll is higher
under the same conditions [32]. Therefore, the yield of the 10 cm treatment for SSDI was
higher due to the greater amount of chlorophyll in alfalfa.
The trend of water consumption intensity of alfalfa, which was expressed as ET divided by
days in stages j and j+1, generally described as a process that increased at first and then
decreased for all treatments during the fertility period. Water consumption was influenced to
some extent by the burial depth of the drip tape for every stage (Table 3). Before the branching
stage, the water consumption intensity was small, and as a result, transpiration was weak when

Fig 5. SPAD value of alfalfa during one fertility period.

alfalfa grew slowly during that period. Water consumption mainly came from the surface soil
evaporation, the treatments were significantly different between the three treatments. In the
branching stage, the water consumption intensity was highest and alfalfa grew vigorously,
which required a substantial amount of water for photosynthesis to synthesize dry matter.
Water consumption mainly came from the surface soil evaporation and transpiration. The
three treatments were significantly different for each other. The water consumption intensity
was also high for reproductive growth and nutrition growth at the bud stage and then de-
creased at the flowering stage when alfalfa grew slowly due to reproductive growth. Water
consumption intensity of treatments were also different during the two period stages. The
deeper drip type placement depths caused the reduction of evapotranspiration values [33].
Generally, the trend of water consumption of alfalfa during the fertility period in an arid desert
region was similar compared to other regions in which water consumption has been studied
[34, 35].
Table 3. Water consumption intensity under different treatments during one fertility period.
Buried depth Water consumption intensity(mm/d)
(cm) Before branching stage Branching stage Bug stage Flowering stage Mean value
5 3.43a 5.43a 4.27a 2.46a 4.21a
10 3.53a 5.20b 4.34a 2.26b 4.11a
20 3.25b 4.87c 4.10b 2.34b 3.89b
Note
abc value with the same letter are not different(LSD’s test at P = 0.05)

The mean value of water consumption of SSDI was maximal for all the treatments, which
was 4.21 mm/d at 5 cm depth. There was no significantly different compared to the treatment
at 10 cm depth for SSDI, which was 4.11 mm/d. The mean value of water consumption of SDI
treatment was the smallest at 3.89 mm/d. Generally, the water consumption was mainly come
from the evapotranspiration (i.e., surface soil evaporation and transpiration). Additionally, the
soil moisture was high in the surface layers of 5 cm depth treatment, which lead to more evap-
oration because of the XinJiang weather. While, as previously was mentioned, the deeper drip
type placement depths caused the reduction of evapotranspiration values [33]. Therefore, the
treatment of 5 cm lateral depth consumed most water and the treatment of 20 cm lateral depth
consumed least water (Table 3). The above information shows that more water was consumed
for SSDI compared to SDI. This result was because the moisture in the 0–10 cm soil layer of
SSDI was higher, which led to intense evaporation.
Yield and water use efficiency

Due to almost the same weather, irrigation system, total water applied and field management,
Table 4 presents the mean value of dry yield and WUE of the two experimental years under
SSDI and SDI. The results indicate that the highest total dry yields were 12740 kg/hm2, which
was obtained at 10 cm depth for SSDI. The total dry yields were not significantly different
from those of the 5 cm depth for SSDI and 20 cm depth for SDI, but they were both signifi-
cantly lower compared to the 10 cm depth for SSDI. Generally, the depth of the drip tape
in the arid desert had an effect on the yield, which was somewhat similar to the report of
Kazumba et al., who studied the alfalfa yield at 20 cm and 40 cm depths for SDI at a site that
was located a few km southeast of the city of Beer-Sheva, Israel [7]. However, Alam et al. found
that the depth of placement had little effect on yield when the site was located south of Garden
City, Kansas [15].
The WUE of alfalfa in an arid desert region for all treatments was in the range of 2.20–2.53
kg/m3 (Table 4), which was slightly larger compared to results from other studies, which
reported values between 1.13 and 2.35 kg/m3 [2, 6, 8, 9]. One of the reasons for this discrep-
ancy might be due to the high gravel content of the soil alleviating evaporation, although evap-
oration is strong in arid desert regions. Additionally, the temperature gap between day and
night was quite large and was favorable to the formation of dry matter even when using the
same amount of water. The results indicate that the highest WUE was 2.51 kg/m3, which was
obtained from the 10 cm depth for SSDI. The lowest WUE occurred at the 5 cm depth for
SSDI that was significantly different to the other, which mainly occurred because the soil evap-
oration was intense when the soil moisture was high in the surface layers.
Because of the absorption and utilization of moisture, growth of root was affected by lateral
depth, also the migration and distribution of soil moisture was affected by lateral depth [36,
37], and the dry yield and WUE were different for the treatments. It can be deduced that SSDI
Table 4. Mean value of dry yield and water use efficiency of the two experimental years.
Buried depth(cm) Total yield(kg/hm2) Water use efficient(kg/m3)
Cut 1 Cut 2 Total
5 5935a 5630a 11565a 2.24a
10 6690b 6050b 12740b 2.51b
20 6030a 5520a 11550a 2.40b
Note
abc value with the same letter are not different(LSD’s test at P = 0.05)

was suitable for alfalfa in the arid desert of Xinjiang according to above results in 2015 and
2016. Additionally, compared to many studies in other regions with more than 10 cm lateral
depth was recommended, a 10 cm depth for SSDI is recommended in arid deserts, due to the
high dry yield and WUE, as well as lower cost of drip taps with shallower buried and easier
renewed compared with SDI. The results were depended on the special soil characteristics of
arid deserts and special climate conditions in Xinjian. However, the results can provide very
useful information to other regions with arid desert.
Conclusion
Due to the special soil characteristics of arid deserts, the depth of drip taps of SDI had an effect
on the vertical distribution of soil moisture and fine roots. The vertical distribution of soil
moisture was mainly concentrated in the 0–60 cm layer, while SSDI was concentrated in the
0–30 cm layer the day after irrigation. The root distribution was concentrated in the 0–30 cm
layer for all treatments. The variability of soil moisture during the experimental period and
root distribution showed some mutual adaptability to each other.
The chlorophyll content of Alfalfa first increased and then decreased in the arid desert.
SSDI had a higher chlorophyll content, better growth and greater water consumption intensity
than SDI. The dry yield and WUE of alfalfa at the 10 cm depth for SSDI was higher than SDI
with same irrigation scheduling, although at 5 cm depth for SSDI was not significantly differ-
ent from SDI. According to the above research, SSDI was practical in the arid desert.
The results from this study have potentially very important implications for decision mak-
ers and alfalfa producers in arid desert regions. In the arid desert, a 10 cm depth for SSDI is
recommended. Additionally, the high dry yield and WUE as well as cost of SDI layout labor,
maintenance service and renewed labor were higher than those of SSDI, which occurred
because of the deeper drip tapes and high gravel content of the soil and made the drip tapes
harder to install. The results were depended on the special soil characteristics of arid deserts
and special climate conditions in Xinjian. Further work needs to take more treatments consid-
ered other factors such as lateral space and irrigation quota in SSDI treatment for alfalfa
planting.
Supporting information
S1 Fig. Awei experimental station and experimental plots.
(TIF)
S1 Table. The growth stages of alfalfa in 2015 and 2016.
(PDF)
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge Dr. Mohamed Khaled Salahou for critically reading the
manuscript.
Author Contributions
Data curation: Jian Lu.
Investigation: Yungang Bai.
Methodology: Shufang Wang, Xiyun Jiao.
Software: Liping Wang.

Supervision: Xiyun Jiao.

Writing – original draft: Shufang Wang, Xiyun Jiao.
Writing – review & editing: Shufang Wang, Xiyun Jiao, Weihua Guo.
References
1. Kandelous MM, Kamai T, Vrugt JA, Šimůnek J, Hanson B, Hopmans JW. Evaluation of subsurface drip
irrigation design and management parameters for alfalfa. Agricultural Water Management. 2012; 109
(9): 81–93.
2. Montemayor Trejo JA, Aguirre Aguiluz HW, Olague Ramı́rez J, López AR, Rivera González M, Pre-
ciado Rangel P, et al. Water use in alfalfa (medicago sativa) with subsurface drip irrigation. Revista
Mexicana De Ciencias Pecuarias. 2010; 1(2): 145–156.
3. Han QF, Jia ZK, Wang JP. The analysis of current situation and development prospect of alfalfa industry
at home and abroad. Acta Agrestia Sinica1. 2005; 22(3): 22–25.
4. Attram Jeremiah, Acharya SN Woods SA, Smith Elwin, Thomas JE. Yield and net return from alfalfa cul-
tivars under irrigation in southe. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 2016; 96(2): 165–175.
5. Camp CR. Subsurface drip irrigation: a review. Transactions of the Asae, 1998; 41(5): 1353–1367.
6. Godoy AC, Pérez GA, Torres ECA, Hermosillo LJ, Reyes J. Water use, forage production and water
relations in alfalfa with subsurface drip irrigation. Agrociencia. 2003; 37(2): 107–115.
7. Kazumba S, Gillerman L, Demalach Y, Oron G. Sustainable domestic effluent reuse via subsurface drip
irrigation (SDI): alfalfa as a perennial model crop. Water Science & Technology A Journal of the Interna-
tional Association on Water Pollution Research. 2010; 61(61): 625–632.
8. Lamm FR, Harmoney KR, Aboukheira AA, Johnson SK. Alfalfa production with subsurface drip irriga-
tion in the central great plains. Transactions of the Asabe. 2012; 55(4): 1203–1212.
9. Ismail SM, Almarshadi MH. Maximizing productivity and water use efficiency of alfalfa under precise
subsurface drip irrigation in arid regions. Irrigation & Drainage. 2013; 62(1): 57–66.
10. Ayars JE, Schoneman RA, Dale F, Meso B, Shouse P. Managing subsurface drip irrigation in the pres-
ence of shallow ground water. Agricultural Water Management. 2001; 47(3):243–264.
11. Finger L, Wang QJ, Malano H, Chen D, Morris M. Productivity and water use of grazed subsurface drip
irrigated perennial pasture in Australia. Irrigation Science. 2015; 33(2):141–152.
12. Patel N, Rajput TBS. Effect of drip tape placement depth and irrigation level on yield of potato. Agricul-
tural Water Management. 2007; 88(1–3): 209–223.
13. Patel N, Rajput TBS. Dynamics and modeling of soil water under subsurface drip irrigated onion. Agri-
cultural Water Management. 2008; 95(12): 1335–1349.
14. Santos LNS, Goncalves IZ, Barbosa EAA, Tuta NF, Feitosa DRC, Pires RCM, et al. Subsurface irrigation
quality at two depths of placement of drip tapes. Vii Congreso Iberico De Agroingenieria Y Ciencias Horti-
colas: Innovar Y Producir Para El Futuro. Innovating and Producing for the Future. 2014;1134–1138
15. Alam M, Trooien TP, Dumler TJ, Rogers DH. Using subsurface drip irrigation for alfalfa. Journal of the
American water resources association. 2002; 38(6): 1715–1721.
16. Pablo RG, O’Neill MK, Mccaslin BD, Remmenga MD, Keenan JG, Onken BM. Evaluation of Corn Grain
Yield and Water Use Efficiency Using Subsurface Drip Irrigation. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture.
2007; 30(1): 153–172.
17. Charlesworth PB, Muirhead W A. Crop establishment using subsurface drip irrigation: a comparison of
point and area sources. Irrigation Science. 2003; 22(3–4): 171–176.
18. Reyes-Cabrera J, Zotarelli L, Dukes MD, Rowland DL, Sargent SA. Soil moisture distribution under drip
irrigation and seepage for potato production. Agricultural Water Management. 2016; 169: 183–192.
19. Hussain K, Majeed A, Nawaz K, Afghan S, Ali K Lin F, Zafar Z, et al. Comparative study of subsurface
drip irrigation and flood irrigation systems for quality and yield of sugarcane. African Journal of Agricul-
tural Research. 2010; 5(22): 3026–3034.
20. Ayars JE, Phene CJ, Hutmacher RB, Davis KR, Schoneman RA, Vail SS, et al. “Subsurface drip irriga-
tion of row crops: a review of 15 years of research at the Water Management Research Laboratory”.
Agricultural water management. 1999; 42(1): 1–27.
21. Wang JD, Zhang YQ, Gong SH, Xu D, Zhao YF. Study on application effects of shallow subsurface drip
irrigation mode under mulch. Journal of irrigation and drainage. 2015; 34(11): 1–5.
22. Chen H. Review on hillslope soil water movement and transformation mechanism on the loess plateau.
Advances in Water Science. 2003; 14(4): 513–520.

23. Ren LD, Huang MB. Fine root distributions and water consumption of alfalfa grown in layered soils with
different layer thicknesses. Soil Research. 2016; 54(6): 730–738.
24. Kosmas CS, Danalatos NG, Moustakas N, Tsatiris B, Kallianou C, Yassoglou N. The impact of parent
material and landscape position on drought and biomass production of wheat under semi-arid condi-
tions. Soil Technology. 1994; 6(4): 337–349.
25. Li Y, Sun HR, Ding N, Liu ZB, Shao GW, Shen Y. Alfalfa (Medicago sat iva L.) Root Biomass. Acta
Agrestia Sinica1. 2011; 9(5): 872–879.
26. Sun HR, Wu RX, Li PH, Shao S, Qi LL, Han JG. Rooting Depth of Alfalfa. Acta Agrestia Sinica1. 2008;
16(3): 3–3.
27. Fox RL, Lipps RC. Subirrigation and plant nutrition I. Alfalfa root distribution and soil properties. Soil Sci-
ence Society of America Journal. 1955; 19(4): 468–473.
28. Lu WH, Ren AT, Yang JJ, Yu L, Ma CH, Zhang QB. Soil water and salt movement and spatial distribu-
tion of fine alfalfa roots under drip irrigation. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engi-
neering. 2014; 30(23): 128–137.
29. Lei ZD, Yang SX, Xie SC. Soil hydrodynamics. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press; 1992.
30. Rasse DP, Smucker AJM, Santos D. Alfalfa root and shoot mulching effects on soil hydraulic properties
and aggregation. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 2000; 64(2): 725–731.
31. Peng S, Garcı́a FV, Laza RC, Cassman KG. Adjustment for specific leaf weight improves chlorophyll
meter’s estimate of rice leaf nitrogen concentration. Agronomy Journal. 1993; 85(5): 987–990.
32. Estill K, Delaney RH, Smith WK, Ditterline RL. Water relations and productivity of alfalfa leaf chlorophyll
variants. Crop science. 1991; 31(5): 1229–1233.
33. Bozkurt Sefer, Gulsum Sayilikan Mansuroglu. Responses of unheated greenhouse grown green bean
to buried drip tape placement depth and watering levels. Agricultural Water Management. 2018;
(197):1–8.
34. Borza I, Domuţa C, ŞAndor M, Domuţa C, Brejea R, Jude E. The irrigation influence on water use effi-
ciency in alfalfa 2nd year, Oradea 2010–2013. Analele Universităţii din Oradea, Fascicula Protecţia
Mediului. 2014;(23): 25–30.
35. Guo ZG. Forage Yield and water use efficiency of alfalfa applied with silicon under water deficit condi-
tions. Philippine Agriculturalentist. 2014; 96(4): 370–376.
36. Camp CR. Lamm FR, Evans RG, Phene CJ. “Subsurface drip irrigation-past, present, and future”,
National irrigation symposium. Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Symposium, Phoenix, Arizona, USA,
November 14–16, 2000. American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 2000; 363–372.
37. Ayars J E, Fulton A, Taylor B. “Subsurface drip irrigation in California-Here to stay?”. Agricultural Water
Management. 2015; 157: 39–47.

© 2018 Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms
and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the
License.

Adaptability of Shallow Subsurface Drip

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Adaptability of Shallow Subsurface Drip

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Adaptability of shallow subsurface drip

Copyright: © 2018 Wang et al. This is an open

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 1 / 13

Materials and methods

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 2 / 13

Installation of subsurface drip irrigation

Table 1. Soil physical properties the experimental zone.

Note: Gravel>65% at a soil depth below 60 cm.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 3 / 13

Soil moisture monitoring

Crop water use calculation

Table 2. Irrigation time of alfalfa.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 4 / 13

Results and discussion

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 5 / 13

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 6 / 13

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 7 / 13

Chlorophyll and water consumption intensity in the growth stage

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 8 / 13

Fig 5. SPAD value of alfalfa during one fertility period.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 9 / 13

Yield and water use efficiency

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 10 / 13

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 11 / 13

Supervision: Xiyun Jiao.

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 12 / 13

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195965 April 13, 2018 13 / 13

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen