1 / 31

W. Lee Ellenburg Graduate Research Assistant Earth System Science Center UAHuntsviile

Modeling The Impact of Irrigation on Nutrient Export from Agricultural Fields in the Southeastern United States. W. Lee Ellenburg Graduate Research Assistant Earth System Science Center UAHuntsviile. 2013 Alabama Water Resources Conference. Introduction.

nardo
Download Presentation

W. Lee Ellenburg Graduate Research Assistant Earth System Science Center UAHuntsviile

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Modeling The Impact of Irrigation on Nutrient Export from Agricultural Fields in the Southeastern United States W. Lee Ellenburg Graduate Research Assistant Earth System Science Center UAHuntsviile 2013 Alabama Water Resources Conference

  2. Introduction • Agricultural runoff has the potential tocontribute to a litany of water quality problems • Excessive Nutrients • Storm Runoff • Inter-storm Periods

  3. Does Irrigation Impact Nutrient Runoff? • Irrigation increases soil moisture and thus runoff and leaching • Irrigated crops are more efficient than rain-fed crops in up-taking nutrients/sequestering biomass. • Droughts are known to substantially increase the nitrogen left in the soil [Nafziger, 2013; USDA NRCS, 2012]

  4. In The News Iowa copes with nitrate surge in drinking water • Summer 2012 - Drought plagues the Midwest • Fertilizer in the fields goes unused • Spring, 2013 - Wettest spring in 141 years • Sharp increase in nutrient runoff and leaching

  5. Does Irrigation Impact Nutrient Runoff? • Nutrient export and cycling kinetics is closely related to soil moisture via “hydraulic flushing” [Hornbergeret al. (1994)] • Soil moisture content, temperature and organic carbon content are the dominant factors in the nutrient cycling process

  6. All that… to say this • This project explored the differences of the nitrogen cycle dynamics (i.e. nitrogen movement) in irrigated and rain-fed fields using a physically based distributed hydrologic model coupled with a sophisticated nutrient cycling and plant uptake model (DSSAT).

  7. Background • Many models have been developed tosimulate agricultural runoff • ARS Models • CREAMS, EPIC, SWAT, etc. • Hydrologic-Ecosystem Models • PnET-BGC, SPARROW, LASCAM, etc. • More commonly, field studies have been employed

  8. Agricultural Model • DSSAT • Decision Support System For Agro-technology Transfer • Experimental inputs: • Planting dates • Irrigation thresholds • Fertilization schedules • Climate data • Soil Data • Used to simulate: • nitrogen cycle • plant uptake

  9. Nutrient Transport • Kinematic wave approximation: • Surface • Subsurface • Nitrogen Concentrations

  10. Study Area • Corn (Zea mays L.) • Silty Clay Loam (NRCS) • Bulk Density • 1.29-1.2 • Porosity (Sat.) • .521-.485 • Lower Limit • .172-.332 • Drained Upper Limit • .346-.483

  11. Experimental Set-up • Split Plot Design • 4 Replications 2010; 5 Replications 2011; All Irrigated

  12. Irrigation Applications 2010

  13. Irrigation Applications 2011

  14. Model Calibration - 2010 Assuming Unequal Variances: Observed Mean = 146.5 Simulated Mean = 157.7 P-value = .105

  15. Model Calibration - 2010 Variance in the observed replications: 18195 kg/ha (289.3)

  16. Model Validation - 2009 Observed Mean = 8375 kg/ha (133.2) Simulated Mean = 8288 kg/ha (131.8) Assuming Unequal Variances: P-value = .460

  17. Model Validation - 2011 Observed Mean = 4.38 mg/l Simulated Mean = 4.34 mg/l Observed Variance = 7.57 mg/l Simulated Variance = 50.89 mg/l RMSE = 164% ** In terms of the processes being modeled, the overwhelming source of nitrogen loss from the field is the plant uptake which accounts for about 90% of the losses in this study (compared to de-nitrification and volitization).

  18. Results

  19. Surface Runoff

  20. Surface Nitrate Export 2010 2011

  21. Results and Discussion – Treatment 10 (280-0)Comparing 2011 with 2010 N

  22. Surface Nitrate Export

  23. Surface Nitrate Export

  24. Trt 1

  25. Trt 11

  26. Results and Discussion – Subsurface Treatment 6-2011 (56-112)

  27. Lateral Subsurface Nitrate Export Growing Season 2010 2011

  28. Lateral Subsurface Nitrate Export Fallow Season 2010 2011

  29. Total Lateral Nitrate Export

  30. Conclusions • Surface Runoff • Early season frontal systems have major impact on surface nitrate runoff. Irrigation benefits by allowing the nitrate to move beyond the surface layer. • Runoff can be mitigated with flexible application schedules.

  31. Conclusions • Subsurface Lateral Leaching • Irrigation has minimal effect on lateral leaching of N during the growing season. • Irrigation decreases the residual (fallow/post season) nitrate in the soil column decreasing the lateral and vertical leaching • Irrigation provides the vertical movement and aerobic conditions for nitrogen to be consumed by the plant.

More Related