Nitrogen (N) leaching candegradeboth surface and groundwater
resources, resulting in eutrophication and non-potable water
supplies (OECD, 1982; Smith, 1998; Barton and Colmer, 2006).
Groundwater pollution by nitrate (NO3) has been attributed to
excessiveNfertilizer application (Weil et al., 1990; Kessebalou et al.,
1996; Moreno et al., 1996; Asadi et al., 2002; Jalali, 2005) in many
parts of the world under a broad spectrum of climatic conditions:
humid, semi-aridandarid. Inhumid regions,heavy rainfall cancause
NO3 pollution whereas in arid and semi-arid regions (Jalali, 2005)
excess irrigation can be the cause. Management and control of NO3
leaching are difficult because NO3 losses are often intermittent, and
linked with seasonal land management, irrigation practices and
fertilizer applications and/or irregular events, such as rain (Carpenter
et al., 1998; Barton and Colmer, 2006). A high NO3 concentration
in the root zone is one of the major concerns in extensively irrigated
areas,where excesswater needs to be applied to control salinity that
results in deep percolation, one of the sources of water to recharged
groundwater aquifers beneath irrigated lands (Klocke et al., 1993;
Watts, 1997). Applying N at a rate less than optimal (Schroder et al.,
1998) and/or using a variable deficit irrigation scheduling regime
(Sexton et al., 1996) can reduce NO3 leaching.
NO3 leaching has been studied under different irrigation and
fertilizer management regimes for semi-arid and arid climates
(Klocke et al., 1999; Tamini and Mermoud, 2002; Darwish et al.,
2003; Rajput and Patel, 2006) and humid climates (Rasse et al.,
1999; Asadi et al., 2002). Soil NO3 concentration and subsurface
drainage water generated by irrigation are two important factors
that control NO3 leaching (Tamini and Mermoud, 2002). NO3 leaching was reported to be higher from farms irrigated by
sprinkler irrigation systems as compared to drip irrigation,
resulting in a larger amount of nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N) remaining
in the root zone under drip irrigation (Darwish et al., 2003). Under
sprinkler irrigation, evaporation losses were higher due to a more
frequent water application, and NO3 leaching was smaller as
compared to flood irrigation (Mack et al., 2005). Frequency of
fertigation with NO3 can affect NO3 leaching: it was higher at a
monthly fertigation frequency than at a weekly frequency (Rajput
and Patel, 2006). NO3 leaching is also affected by both the timing
and amount of rainfall and irrigation scheduling (Klocke et al.,
1993, 1996). When the results of nitrate leaching reported by
various researchers are compared, it is crucial to pay attention to
the findings of Zotarelli et al. (2007) reporting that the amount of
NO3 leaching measured by various methods could be different due
to the procedures adopted.
Nitrogen (N) leaching candegradeboth surface and groundwaterresources, resulting in eutrophication and non-potable watersupplies (OECD, 1982; Smith, 1998; Barton and Colmer, 2006).Groundwater pollution by nitrate (NO3) has been attributed toexcessiveNfertilizer application (Weil et al., 1990; Kessebalou et al.,1996; Moreno et al., 1996; Asadi et al., 2002; Jalali, 2005) in manyparts of the world under a broad spectrum of climatic conditions:humid, semi-aridandarid. Inhumid regions,heavy rainfall cancauseNO3 pollution whereas in arid and semi-arid regions (Jalali, 2005)excess irrigation can be the cause. Management and control of NO3leaching are difficult because NO3 losses are often intermittent, andlinked with seasonal land management, irrigation practices andfertilizer applications and/or irregular events, such as rain (Carpenteret al., 1998; Barton and Colmer, 2006). A high NO3 concentrationin the root zone is one of the major concerns in extensively irrigatedareas,where excesswater needs to be applied to control salinity thatresults in deep percolation, one of the sources of water to rechargedgroundwater aquifers beneath irrigated lands (Klocke et al., 1993;Watts, 1997). Applying N at a rate less than optimal (Schroder et al.,1998) and/or using a variable deficit irrigation scheduling regime(Sexton et al., 1996) can reduce NO3 leaching.NO3 leaching has been studied under different irrigation andfertilizer management regimes for semi-arid and arid climates(Klocke et al., 1999; Tamini and Mermoud, 2002; Darwish et al.,2003; Rajput and Patel, 2006) and humid climates (Rasse et al.,1999; Asadi et al., 2002). Soil NO3 concentration and subsurfacedrainage water generated by irrigation are two important factorsthat control NO3 leaching (Tamini and Mermoud, 2002). NO3 leaching was reported to be higher from farms irrigated bysprinkler irrigation systems as compared to drip irrigation,resulting in a larger amount of nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N) remainingin the root zone under drip irrigation (Darwish et al., 2003). Undersprinkler irrigation, evaporation losses were higher due to a morefrequent water application, and NO3 leaching was smaller ascompared to flood irrigation (Mack et al., 2005). Frequency offertigation with NO3 can affect NO3 leaching: it was higher at amonthly fertigation frequency than at a weekly frequency (Rajputand Patel, 2006). NO3 leaching is also affected by both the timingand amount of rainfall and irrigation scheduling (Klocke et al.,1993, 1996). When the results of nitrate leaching reported byvarious researchers are compared, it is crucial to pay attention tothe findings of Zotarelli et al. (2007) reporting that the amount ofNO3 leaching measured by various methods could be different dueto the procedures adopted.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
