Skip to main content
Log in

Response of cotton water stress indicators to soil salinity

  • Published:
Irrigation Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

A field study was conducted on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. c.v. Acala SJ-2) to investigate the effects of soil salinity on the responses of stress indices derived from canopy temperature, leaf diffusion resistance and leaf water potential. The four salinity treatments used in this study were obtained by mixtures of aqueduct and well water to provide mean soil water electrical conductivities of 17, 27, 32 and 38 dS/m in the upper 0.6 m of soil profile. The study was conducted on a sandy loam saline-alkali soil in the lower San Joaquin Valley of California on 30 July 1981, when the soil profile was adequately irrigated to remove any interference of soil matric potential on the stress measurements. Measurements of canopy temperature, leaf water potential and leaf diffusion resistance were made hourly throughout the day.

Crop water stress index (CWSI) estimates derived from canopy temperature measurements in the least saline treatment had values similar to those found for cotton grown under minimum salinity profiles. Throughout the course of the day the treatments affected CWSI values with the maximum differences occurring in mid-afternoon. Salinity induced differences were also evident in the leaf diffusion resistance and leaf water potential measurements. Vapor pressure deficit was found to indicate the evaporative demand at which cotton could maintain potential water use for the various soil salinity levels studied. At vapor pressure deficits greater than 5 kPa, cotton would appear “stressed” at in situ soil water electrical conductivities exceeding 15 dS/m. The CWSI was as sensitive to osmotic stress as other, more traditional plant measures, provided a broader spatial resolution and appeared to be a practical tool for assessing osmotic stress occurring within irrigated cotton fields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Clawson KL, Blad BL (1982) Infrared thermometry for scheduling irrigation of corn. Agron J 74:311

    Google Scholar 

  • Denmead OT, Shaw RH (1962) Availability of soil water to plants as affected by soil moisture content and meteorological conditions. Agron J 54:385

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrler WL (1973) Cotton leaf temperatures as related to soil water depletion and meteorological factors. Agron J 65:404

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield JL (1983) The utilization of thermal infrared radiation measurement inputs from grain sorghum crops as a method of assessing their irrigation requirements. Irrig Sci 3:259

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiler EA, Howell TA (1983) Irrigation options to avoid critical stress. Chapter 11. In: Limitations to Efficient Water Use in Crop Production, ASA, pp 479–497

  • Hiler EA, Howell TA, Lewis RB, Boos RP (1974) Irrigation timing by the stress day index method. Trans ASAE 17:393

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiler EA, Clark RN (1971) Stress day index to characterize effects of water stress on crop yields. Trans ASAE 14:757

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman GJ, Ayers RS, Doering EJ, McNeal BL (1980) Salinity in irrigated agriculture. Chapter 5 in: Jensen ME (ed) Design and Operation of Farm Irrigation Systems. ASAE Monogr pp 145–185

  • Howell TA, Hatfield JL, Yamada H, Davis KR (1983) Evaluation of cotton canopy temperature to detect crop water stress. Trans ASAE (in press)

  • Idso SB, Reginato RJ, Farah SM (1982) Soil and atmosphere induced plant water stress as inferred from foliage temperatures. Water Resour Res 18:1143

    Google Scholar 

  • Idso SB, Jackson RD, Pinter PJ, Jr., Reginato RJ, Hatfield JL (1981 a) Normalizing the stressdegree-day concept for environmental variability. Agric Meteorol 24:45

    Google Scholar 

  • Idso SB, Reginato RJ, Reicosky DC, Hatfield JL (1981 b) Determining soil-induced plant water potential depressions in alfalfa by means of infrared thermometry. Agron J 73:826

    Google Scholar 

  • Idso SB, Jackson RD, Reginato RJ (1977) Remote sensing of crop yields. Science 196:19

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson RD (1982) Canopy temperatures and crop water stress. In: Hillel D (ed), Advances in Irrigation. Academic Press, New York. Vol. 1, pp 43–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson RD, Idso SB, Reginato RJ, Pinter, PJ Jr. (1981) Canopy temperature as a crop water stress indicator. Water Resour Res 17:1133

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinter PS, Jr., Reginato RJ (1981) Thermal infrared techniques for assessing plant water stress. Proc ASAE Irrigation Scheduling Conference pp 1–9

  • Reginato RJ (1983) Field quantification of crop water stress. Trans ASAE 26:772–775, 781

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades JD (1982) Use of saline drainage water for irrigation, a field test in the Westside Project, Kern County, California. US Salinity Laboratory. p 83

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades JD, Corwin DL, Hoffman GJ (1981) Scheduling and controlling irrigations from measurements of soil electrical conductivity. Proc ASAE Irrigation Scheduling Conference pp 106–115

  • Rhoades JD, Rawlins SL, Phene CJ (1980) Irrigation of cotton with saline drainage water. Proc ASCE Irrigation and Drainage Conference p 22

  • Stegman EC, Schiele LH, Bauer A (1976) Plant water stress criteria for irrigation scheduling. Trans ASAE 19:850

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Bavel CHM (1966) Potential evaporation: The combination concept and its experimental verification. Water Resour Res 5:380

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Howell, T.A., Hatfield, J.L., Rhoades, J.D. et al. Response of cotton water stress indicators to soil salinity. Irrig Sci 5, 25–36 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00275035

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00275035

Keywords

Navigation