Water Requirements for Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation of Raspberry

Water Requirements for Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation of Raspberry

Optimum
Deficit
Water Requirements for Drip and
Sprinkler Irrigation of Raspberry
David Bryla
USDA-ARS Horticultural Crops Research Unit
Corvallis, Oregon
Raspberry Production
‘Meeker’
Washington
• 2.5 ft. spacing
• Raised beds
• Arced canes
• Surface/subsurface drip (WA)
& sprinklers/guns (OR)
• Granular fertilizers/fertigation
What’s the Best Way to Irrigate
Raspberries?
How much water is
needed and how is it
best applied?
Sprinklers?
Drip?
Aurora, Oregon
Two irrigation studies were planted
STUDY 1
Cultivars
• Coho
• Meeker
STUDY 2
Irrigation methods
• Sprinklers
• Drip
Cultivars
• Cascade Delight
• Cowichan
• Meeker
• Tulameen
• Caroline
Fall fruiters
• Heritage
Irrigation levels (% of crop ET)
• 50% (deficit)
• 100% (optimum)
• 150% (excess)
Drip configurations
• Surface drip
• Subsurface drip (1 line)
• Subsurface drip (2 lines)
STUDY 1
STUDY 2
Overhead sprinkler
Subsurface drip
(1 line)
Surface drip
Subsurface drip
(2 lines)
drip
line
drip
line
wetting
front
drip
lines
wetting
front
**Applied 2.5x’s more water with
sprinklers than with drip
wetting
front
wetting
fronts
Study 1 was machine-harvested
*2006 was “baby crop” & 2007 was first year of full production
STUDY 1
Irrigation level
50% ETc (deficit)
100% ETc (optimum)
150% ETc (excess)
Berry wt. (2006-09)
(g/fruit)
Optimum
3.76 b
3.89 a
3.97 a
Deficit
Berry wt. in 2006-09 (g/fruit)
Cultivar*
Sprinkler
Subsurface drip
%Difference
Coho
Meeker
3.98 b
3.66 c
4.24 a
3.62 c
7%
-1%
9%
17%
%Difference
STUDY 1
Effects of irrigation system
& level on yield
Yield in 2007 (ton/acre)
Irrigation level
50% ETc (deficit)
100% ETc (optimum)
150% ETc (excess)
Sprinkler
5.3 b
5.2 b
5.2 b
Subsurface drip
5.3 b
6.1 a
5.8 a
%Difference
0%
18%
12%
STUDY 1
Cultivar
Irrigation
system
Irrigation
level
(%ETc)
2006*
2007
2008
2009
Total
Coho
Coho
Coho
Sprinkler
Sprinkler
Sprinkler
50
100
150
2.5 a
2.4 a
2.4 a
5.4 b-e
5.2 c-e
5.4 b-e
2.0 b
2.0 b
2.3 b
1.8 d
1.5 d
2.1 cd
11.7 ef
11.1 f
12.2 e
Coho
Coho
Coho
SDI
SDI
SDI
50
100
150
2.4 a
2.6 a
2.4 a
5.7 a-c
6.3 a
6.0 ab
2.1 b
2.3 b
2.4 b
2.3 cd
2.6 c
2.7 c
12.5 e
13.8 d
13.5 d
Meeker
Meeker
Meeker
Sprinkler
Sprinkler
Sprinkler
50
100
150
2.4 a
2.4 a
2.2 a
5.2 c-e
5.2 c-e
5.0 de
3.7 a
3.7 a
3.8 a
4.8 b
4.5 b
5.0 ab
16.1 bc
15.8 c
15.7 c
Meeker
Meeker
Meeker
SDI
SDI
SDI
50
100
150
2.3 a
2.7 a
2.3 a
4.9 e
5.9 ab
5.6 b-d
3.5 a
4.0 a
3.7 a
4.8 b
5.7 a
5.2 ab
15.5 c
17.4 a
16.8 ab
*“Baby crop” year
Yield (ton/a)
‘Coho’ was severely affected by
root rot beginning in 2008 (year 3)
STUDY 1
Root rot was most prevalent in the lower areas
where water tended to pool
STUDY 1
Root rot was also greater with sprinklers
& under-irrigation
Root rot rating
Irrigation
level
(%ETc)
Coho
Meeker
Sprinkler
SDI
Sprinkler
SDI
50
100
150
3.6 de
2.9 e
4.2 bc
3.9 cd
4.0 b-d
4.5 ab
4.9 a
4.8 a
5.0 a
4.9 a
5.0 a
5.0 a
Ratings:
1 = >50% of the plants collapsed
2 = some plant death but <50% of the plants collapsed
3 = at least half the plants were severely stunted & yellowing
4 = mild stunting and yellowing
5 = completely healthy
STUDY 1
STUDY 2
Overhead sprinkler
Subsurface drip
(1 line)
Surface drip
Subsurface drip
(2 lines)
drip
line
drip
line
wetting
front
drip
lines
wetting
front
wetting
front
wetting
fronts
**Applied the same amount of water with each method
STUDY 2
Yield (t/ha)
Cultivar
2007
2008
Cascade Delight
Cowichan
Meeker
Tulameen
6.6 a
5.6 c
5.8 bc
6.3 ab
2.7 a
2.4 a
2.2 ab
1.7 b
Fruit were hand-picked in
2007 but machineharvested in 2008
Yield (t/ha)
Drip configuration
2007
2008
Surface drip from trellis wire
Subsurface drip (1 line)
Subsurface drip (2 lines)
6.1 a
6.3 a
5.8 a
2.4 a
2.1 a
2.3 a
No difference
STUDY 2
Berry wt. (g/fruit)
Cultivar
2007
2008
Cascade Delight
Cowichan
Meeker
Tulameen
5.48 a
4.07 c
3.56 d
4.68 b
3.37 a
3.14 b
2.65 c
3.19 b
Fruit size was
affected by drip
placement
Berry wt. (g/fruit)
Drip configuration
2007
2008
Surface drip from trellis wire
Subsurface drip (1 line)
Subsurface drip (2 lines)
4.58 a
4.36 b
4.40 b
3.12 a
3.10 a
3.03 a
The cultivar trial was also affected by root rot, but
root rot was not related to irrigation treatment
SUMMARY
STUDY 1
Overhead sprinkler
Subsurface drip
(1 line)
drip
line
Yield
Increased yield by
up to 18% over
sprinklers
Fruit size
Increased fruit
weight by 7% over
sprinklers – but
only in ‘Coho’
Root rot
STUDY 2
Root rot was higher with sprinklers and
lower rates of water application
Fruit rot
Fruit rot was higher with sprinklers
than with drip
Water use
Maximum
production at
100% ETc
Surface drip
Subsurface drip
(2 lines)
drip
line
drip
lines
Yield was similar to other
drip treatments
Produced larger
fruit on average
than other drip
configurations
Root & fruit rot were not
affected by drip placement
Conclusions
Drip is better than sprinklers (even in
heavy soil)
•
•
•
•
Much lower water requirements
Higher yield
Larger berries
Less fruit & root rot
Placement of the drip lines is flexible
Fertigation?
6-year-old
plants
Sprinklers or
1 line of drip
80 lb/acre N
Granular fertilizer vs. fertigation
1) Granular fertilizer (split application)
2) Fertigation (bi-weekly, April-July)
3) Granular fertilizer (spring) & fertigation
(summer)
N fertilizer
Granular
CAN-27*
CaNO3
No fertilizer
Liquid
CAN-17
AN 20-0-0
UAN-32
Aurora, OR - 2011
Meeker
3.5
3.0
Normal
range
Leaf N (%)
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
Granular
Sprinkler
*Leaves were sampled Aug. 3, 2011
Drip
7
2
U
AN
-3
C
AN
-1
20
-0
-0
2
7
U
AN
-3
-0
-0
20
C
AN
-1
Fertigation
AN
Granular
AN
liz
er
rt i
7
fe
3
N
o
C
AN
-2
C
aN
O
liz
er
rt i
7
fe
N
o
C
AN
-2
C
aN
O
3
0.0
Granular (CAN-27)
+ Fertigation
7/13/11
Sprinkler
CaNO3
Sprinkler
CAN-27
Sprinkler
No fertilizer
Drip
CAN-17
Aurora, OR - 2011
Nitrogen management effects on fruit production in ‘Meeker’ red
raspberry.
Irrigation
method
Fertilizer
source1
Fertilizer
placement
Yield
(ton/acre)
Fruit size
(g/berry)
Sprinkler
CAN-27 (gr.)
Banded
4.8 b
3.1 b
Drip
CAN-27 (gr.)
Banded
6.5 a
3.4 a
Drip
CAN-17 (liq.)
Fertigation
6.7 a
3.5 a
Drip
CAN-27 (gr.) +
CAN-17 (liq.)
Banded +
fertigation
6.2 a
3.3 ab
1Each
treatment was fertilized with a total of 80 lb/acre N.
Hand-harvested
Aurora, OR - 2012
Meeker
8
Yield (ton/acre)
6
4
2
Granular
Sprinklers
Machine-harvested
Granular
Fertigation
Drip
20
-0
-0
CA
N17
UA
N32
AN
20
-0
-0
CA
N17
UA
N32
AN
3
CA
N27
No
fe
rt i
liz
er
Ca
NO
Ca
NO
3
CA
N27
No
fe
rt i
liz
er
0
Granular (CAN-27) +
Fertigation
Conclusion & Recommendations
Fertigation: Same as or worse than
granular fertilizers
• Use granular fertilizers or a combination of
granular fertilizers (spring) + fertigation
(summer)
• Avoid fertigation with fertilizers containing
high levels of NO3-N
What’s next?
What about organic (humic) acids?
+ Organic acids
- Organic acids
Root
236 g
Root
349 g
Blueberry
Treatments
Location: Mt. Vernon
Co-PI: Lisa DeVetter
+ Organic acids
Meeker
Malahat
- Organic acids
Meeker
Malahat
+ Organic acids
- Organic acids
Meeker
Malahat
17 days after
transplanting
+ Organic acids
- Organic acids
Meeker
1 month after
transplanting
225
Average biomass of 'Meeker' raspberries with or without
organic acid soil amendments, 2014
200
175
Biomass (g)
150
125
100
75
50
25
0
Root
Leaf
Cane
Tissue Type
Treated
+ Organic
acids
Untreated
- Organic
acids
End of first
growing
season
Acknowledgements

Collaborators: Bernadine Strik, Diane Kaufman, Lisa
DeVetter

Technical Support: Amber Shireman, Ruth Hamlyn, OSU
students

Financial Support: Oregon Raspberry & Blackberry
Commission, Northwest Center for Small Fruit Research