52
Tantawy et al. (2007) indicated that saving 20% of the applied water to maize grown
in clay soil under surface irrigation resulted in 7% yield losses. Ouda et al. (2007)
reported that applying deficit irrigation to maize, where 10% saving in the applied
irrigation water resulted in 6% yield losses in clay soil under surface irrigation.
Ouda et al. (2008b) simulated the effect of saving 20% of the applied irrigation
water to maize grown under surface irrigation in clay soil. Their results indicated
that 6% yield losses can occur. In another experiment, Ouda et al. (2006) simulated
the effect of saving 20% of the applied water to maize grown in clay soil under
surface irrigation using Yield-Stress model (Ouda 2006) and they found that maize
yield was reduced by only 5%.
3.8.2.2 Soybean
Deficit irrigation effects on soybean were also studied. El-Sherif and Ali (2015)
indicated that the soybean grown in silty clay soil under surface irrigation was
reduced by 13%, when irrigation water was reduced by 10%. In a field experiment
conducted in clay soil for soybean under surface irrigation, 10% saving in the
applied irrigation water to it resulted in 3% yield reduction (Ouda et al. 2008c).
Ouda et al. (2007) reported that applying deficit irrigation to soybean, where 10%
saving in the applied irrigation water resulted in 8% yield losses in clay soil under
surface irrigation. In a simulation study done by Ouda et al. (2010e) on the effect of
deficit irrigation applied to soybean grown in clay soil under surface irrigation using
Yield-Stress model (Ouda 2006), they indicated that saving 15% of the applied
resulted in 5% reduction in the yield. Ouda et al. (2007) simulated the effect of deficit irrigation on soybean grown in silty clay soil under surface irrigation using
Yield-Stress model (Ouda 2006). Their results indicated that saving 10% of the
applied resulted in 4% reduction in the yield.
3.8.2.3 Other Summer Crops
– Tomato: Application of 80% of full irrigation to tomato grown in clay loam soil
under subsurface drip system resulted in 15% yield losses (Abdelhady et al.
2017). Shalaby et al. (2014) indicated that saving 25% of the applied irrigation
water to tomato grown under drip system in calcareous soil resulted in 9% yield
losses. Additionally, Kamal and El-Shazly (2013) reported that 7% losses in
tomato yield grown under drip system in calcareous soil occurred when 75% of
full irrigation was applied.
– Peanut: Application of deficit irrigation to peanut grown under drip and sprinkler systems in sandy soil resulted in 20% saving in the applied water under both
systems and 11 and 12% yield losses (El-Habbasha et al. 2015).
– Sesame: Elshamly et al. (2013) indicated that application of deficit irrigation to
sesame grown in sandy soil under sprinkler system, where 14% of the applied
water was saved, resulted in only 5% yield losses. Application of five irrigations
A. E.-H. Zohry and S. Ouda
Tantawy et al. (2007) indicated that saving 20% of the applied water to maize grown
in clay soil under surface irrigation resulted in 7% yield losses. Ouda et al. (2007)
reported that applying deficit irrigation to maize, where 10% saving in the applied
irrigation water resulted in 6% yield losses in clay soil under surface irrigation.
Ouda et al. (2008b) simulated the effect of saving 20% of the applied irrigation
water to maize grown under surface irrigation in clay soil. Their results indicated
that 6% yield losses can occur. In another experiment, Ouda et al. (2006) simulated
the effect of saving 20% of the applied water to maize grown in clay soil under
surface irrigation using Yield-Stress model (Ouda 2006) and they found that maize
yield was reduced by only 5%.
3.8.2.2 Soybean
Deficit irrigation effects on soybean were also studied. El-Sherif and Ali (2015)
indicated that the soybean grown in silty clay soil under surface irrigation was
reduced by 13%, when irrigation water was reduced by 10%. In a field experiment
conducted in clay soil for soybean under surface irrigation, 10% saving in the
applied irrigation water to it resulted in 3% yield reduction (Ouda et al. 2008c).
Ouda et al. (2007) reported that applying deficit irrigation to soybean, where 10%
saving in the applied irrigation water resulted in 8% yield losses in clay soil under
surface irrigation. In a simulation study done by Ouda et al. (2010e) on the effect of
deficit irrigation applied to soybean grown in clay soil under surface irrigation using
Yield-Stress model (Ouda 2006), they indicated that saving 15% of the applied
resulted in 5% reduction in the yield. Ouda et al. (2007) simulated the effect of deficit irrigation on soybean grown in silty clay soil under surface irrigation using
Yield-Stress model (Ouda 2006). Their results indicated that saving 10% of the
applied resulted in 4% reduction in the yield.
3.8.2.3 Other Summer Crops
– Tomato: Application of 80% of full irrigation to tomato grown in clay loam soil
under subsurface drip system resulted in 15% yield losses (Abdelhady et al.
2017). Shalaby et al. (2014) indicated that saving 25% of the applied irrigation
water to tomato grown under drip system in calcareous soil resulted in 9% yield
losses. Additionally, Kamal and El-Shazly (2013) reported that 7% losses in
tomato yield grown under drip system in calcareous soil occurred when 75% of
full irrigation was applied.
– Peanut: Application of deficit irrigation to peanut grown under drip and sprinkler systems in sandy soil resulted in 20% saving in the applied water under both
systems and 11 and 12% yield losses (El-Habbasha et al. 2015).
– Sesame: Elshamly et al. (2013) indicated that application of deficit irrigation to
sesame grown in sandy soil under sprinkler system, where 14% of the applied
water was saved, resulted in only 5% yield losses. Application of five irrigations
A. E.-H. Zohry and S. Ouda