E

S

peitbteftd

tbrSa1w“Ecaainwii

titibb

speiipawI

0h

Agricultural Water Management 120 (2013) 1– 4

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Agricultural Water Management

j ourna l ho me page: www.elsev ier .com/ locate /agwat

ditorial

oil and irrigation sustainability practices

Intensive agricultural practices combined with the increasingressure of urbanization and the changing lifestyles have strength-ned the problems of competing users over limited water resourcesn a fragile and already stressed environment. Sustainable agricul-ure is prescribed as a policy approach that maximizes economicenefits while maintaining environmental quality. It is argued thathis approach is human capital-intensive and encourages new sci-ntific developments. To attain sustainability, economic incentivesor the development and adoption of precision technologies haveo be promoted with minimal residues that cause environmentalamage (Oster and Wichelns, 2003).

Sustainability is not a physical property. It is a concept relatinghe physical artefacts of development with the socio-economic andiological environments in which they are placed. As these envi-onments can change, sustainability can change (Abernethy, 1994).earching in Scopus database the term “sustainable” in the title,bstract or keyword of scientific journals, it appears the first time in970, in the article “Maximum Sustainable Yields” by Dunkel (1970)hich regards to a population growth model. Adding the terms

soil” and “irrigation” highlights that 4 years later Holdren andhrlich (1974) published an article where it is clarified some con-epts regarding population growth, environmental deteriorationnd resource depletion. On the other hand “sustainable irrigation”ppears in Scopus database in 1990 by Vermillion and Johnson IIIn a paper titled “Turnover and irrigation service fees – Indonesia’sew policies to achieve economically sustainable irrigation,” inhich they reviewed the implications of the new economic policies

mplemented by the Indonesian Government turning over publicrrigation systems to local water users and irrigation service fees.

The number of publications containing the terms “sus-ainable” + “soil” + “irrigation,” “sustainable soil” and “sustainablerrigation” from 1990 to 2012 is showed in Figs. 1 and 2, respec-ively. A positive tendency in the number of published manuscriptss noticed with the highest value in 2011. However, only since 2005oth concepts, “sustainable soil” and “sustainable irrigation,” haveegan to increase, achieving almost 40 publications in 2011.

The concept of sustainability, when related to irrigation and/oroil, should be referred to the research of the best managementolicies (BMP) and practices allowing to reduce production inputs,specially water and fertilizers, so to preserve soil physical, chem-cal and biological qualities and to increase water use efficiencyn agriculture (Vico and Porporato, 2011). Dividing and comparingublished articles by subject area (Fig. 3) it is shown that “sustain-

ble irrigation” papers published more in Environmental Science,hile “sustainable soil” published in Agriculture & Biology Science.

n the remaining areas both topics show similar values except in

378-3774/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2013.01.001

Engineering in which “sustainable irrigation” shows a higher per-centage.

Irrigation practice, soil quality and use of fertilizers are key fac-tors to feed world population in the next decades. Within thisframework, the best management irrigation practices will play animportant role to maintain and to improve a sustainable agricul-tural development, identifying “the management and conservationof the natural resources, and the orientation of technological andinstitutional changes in such a manner as to ensure the attainmentand continued satisfaction of human needs for present and futuregenerations” (FAO, 1988).

Optimization of irrigation management, especially in arid andsemiarid regions, has to face to many challenges, mainly relatedto the limited amount of available water resources that fre-quently imposes the use of low quality water, i.e. saline–sodicand/or treated wastewater. In addition, fertilizers and contami-nants applied with irrigation water can move through the soil andreach the water table, enhancing the risk for human and animalhealth. In the next future, sustainable irrigation aiming at improv-ing crop production with minimum adverse environmental effectswill require a comprehensive approach to soil, water and cropmanagement under several restrictive scenarios. This will includeconcepts of risk and uncertainty in large scale irrigation areas asany complex natural system.

The purpose of this Agricultural Water Management volume isto report the results of researches carried out in developed anddeveloping countries and presented at the SSS 2.5 session of Euro-pean Geoscience Union (EGU) general assembly hold in Vienna in2011. It provides some examples of how irrigation can becomemore sustainable. Papers focus on the implications of the find-ings for improving the sustainability of irrigation, whether this isrelated to irrigation techniques, use of non-conventional watersresources, fertigation, crop water requirements and other aspects.A short summary of the contributions is presented below.

In arid and semi-arid areas, water scarcity and increasing com-petition for water resources are pressurizing farmers to adoptdifferent water saving techniques and strategies, which may rangefrom a simple periodic estimation of the soil water balance termsto a precise assessment of temporal and spatial distribution ofwater exchange within the soil–plant–atmosphere continuum. Theuse of reclaimed water for irrigation is progressively augmenting(Levine and Asano, 2004; Pedrero et al., 2010) because the volumeof treated wastewater is in continuous increase due to environmen-

tal concerns and the progressive implementation of the EuropeanWasteWater Directive (91/271/EEC) and, it is free-of-charge wherethe “polluter pays” policy is implemented.

2 Editorial / Agricultural Water Management 120 (2013) 1– 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

19901991

19921993

19941995

19961997

19981999

20002001

20022003

20042005

20062007

20082009

20102011

2012

# pu

blic

a�on

s

Sust ainable+Soil +Irr iga�on

Fig. 1. Number of manuscripts published on “sustainable” + “soil” + “irrigation” terms from 1990 to 2012 recognized in SCOPUS database.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

19901991

19921993

19941995

19961997

19981999

20002001

20022003

20042005

20062007

20082009

20102011

2012

Y

# pu

blic

a�on

s

Sust ainable SoilSust ainable Irr iga�on

tainab

itptti

Fig. 2. Number of manuscripts published on “sustainable soil” and “sus

In this regard, Mosse et al. (2012) analyse the soluble materialsn influent and effluent waters from different winery wastewa-er treatment plants in order to focus on key compound classesotentially harmful for environmental harm. These authors proved

hat common treatment processes generally reduce the concentra-ions of soluble species, except for phenolic compounds, resultingn resistant to aerobic degradation, which is of concern due to their

29%

13%

1%11%

38%

8% AGRICULTURE & BSCI ENCE

EARTH AND PLANE

ENERGY

ENGINEE RING

ENV IRONMENTAL

SOCI AL SCI ENCESUSTAINABLE IRRIGATION

Fig. 3. Percentage of manuscripts published on “sustainable irrigation” and “s

ear

le irrigation” terms from 1990 to 2012 recognized in SCOPUS database.

potential phytotoxicity. The paper of Arbat et al. (2012) shows anexample of a sound fertilizer application achieving an acceptablecorn yield without environmental risks. Results from 2 years of fieldexperiments, in a silty loam soil with low initial soil nitrate con-

tent under different fertilization strategies and irrigation systems,highlighted that application of 40–75 kg N/ha, combined with pigslurry at pre-planting, produced nearly maximum grain yield with

IOLOGY

TARY SCI ENCE

SCI ENCE

47%

15%

1%

4%

27%

6%

SUSTAINABLE SOIL

ustainable soil” from 1970 to 2012 classified by subject area in SCOPUS.

er Ma

mo1bt

(psewuRla

Yemoqshgcwa

efrpgpaitl

rbmdHrelcwdrTptd

fufititMwu

Editorial / Agricultural Wat

inimum N leaching, compatible with the existing EU directiven nitrate pollution. On the other side, nitrogen application over50 kg N/ha did not enhance the yield during the growing season,ut determined a significant increase of nitrate concentration inhe leached solution.

Among the water saving strategies, regulated deficit irrigationRDI) is being accepted as a solution for valuable and sustainableroductions (Geerts and Raes, 2009) allowing to save water withoutignificant negative impacts on final yield. The paper by Mounzert al. (2012) pointed out the long-term concern of this strategy,hen saline reclaimed water is used for irrigation. The paper eval-ates in particular, over a 3-year period, the consequences of usingDI on salts accumulation in the root zone of mandarin trees, under-

ining how the strategy can affect the production sustainability ofgricultural soils.

In the companion papers, Mahmoodabadi et al. (2012) andazdanpanah et al. (2012) tested the effectiveness of differ-nt amendments, i.e. cattle manure, pistachio residue, gypsum,anure + gypsum and pistachio residue + gypsum for reclamation

f calcareous saline–sodic soils. Irrigation with two different waterualities, including untreated and treated with sulphuric acid, wereupplied during 4 months. Experiments carried out on soil columnsighlighted some synergistic or antagonistic behaviour betweenypsum and organic amendments, particularly for monovalentations. Moreover, in absence of sulphuric acid, pistachio residueas found to be the best amendment to reclaim saline–sodic soils

nd to improve the availability of macronutrients.Castellanos et al. (2012a) presented the results of 3 years of field

xperiments carried out in central Spain on water melon, using dif-erent amount of nitrogen. Some environmental impact indexes,elated to the variation of nitrate concentration of fresh water, areroposed in order to provide an effective tool for determining theroundwater pollution risks associated with common agriculturalractices. Under the examined conditions, the results showed thatpplication of 160 kg/ha of available nitrogen determined the max-mum fruit yield and enhanced water use efficiency, maintaininghe impact indexes to values lower than the maximum allowableimits.

An efficient irrigation scheduling that computes irrigation waterequirements on the basis of actual evapotranspiration (ETa) haseen widely used (Brown et al., 2001). ETa values are usually deter-ined by multiplying reference ET (ETo), based on meteorological

ata, by a correction factor, known as the crop coefficient (Kc).owever, different crop managements could affect crop transpi-

ation and therefore they should be incorporated in Kc. Castellanost al. (2012b) showed that the lower is the dose of N applied, theower the melon crop water demand. This is due to a decline inrop biomass and consequently in leaf area index (LAI). ETa valuesere obtained multiplying Kc by a coefficient estimated from theifferences of the accumulated drainage or from LAI growth ratesatio, respect to the maximum N dose as usually applied in the area.he difference between ETa could achieve 42– 49 mm at vegetativeeriod. Such adjustments are crucial, considering that soil depth inhe area is only 0.60 m and that the crop water use requirementuring the cycle is quite high.

With the aim to evaluate the effects of irrigation scheduling andarmyard manure treatments on corn yield response and waterse efficiency, Abd El-Wahed and Ali (2012) carried out 2 yearseld experiments in a sandy soil under arid environmental condi-ions. Results showed that, compared to sprinkler irrigation, driprrigation maximized not only water use efficiency, expressed inerms of grain yield per unit of water volume, but also grain yield.

oreover an analysis of net profit of different amount of irrigationater and farmyard manure application is presented and discussednder environmental conditions like those investigated.

nagement 120 (2013) 1– 4 3

Considering the importance of monitoring soil water contentand its spatial variability for irrigation scheduling, Gil-Rodríguezet al. (2012) proposed the use of an innovative technique, i.e. ActiveHeat Pulse method with Fibre Optic temperature sensing (AHFO),for the accurate estimation of the soil water content distribution.The proposed methodology, tested in a big soil column irrigatedwith a buried drip emitter, allowed to obtain accurate readings ofsoil water contents and a promising observation of the shape anddimensions of the wetting bulb. The results evidenced the potentialof AHFO method to estimate the distribution of soil water contentin the field.

Rallo and Provenzano (2012), during two irrigation seasons,studied the water stress functions of table olive trees maintainedunder soil water deficit conditions. In particular, different waterstress functions proposed in the literature were assessed in orderto describe the eco-physiological response of the investigated cropto soil water status. Thresholds of soil water content and corre-sponding soil matric potential, below which actual transpirationdecreases with soil water content, were detected. Results alsoshowed that non linear models, characterized by a convex shape,better reproduce the initial phase of the transpiration reductionprocess.

The joint use of eddy covariance and sap-flow techniques, pre-sented by Cammalleri et al. (2012), can be effective to estimatethe components of actual evapotranspiration in an olive orchardcharacterized by sparse vegetation and a significant fraction ofexposed bare soil. Field experiments, carried out during 2009 and2010 irrigation seasons, allowed to assess the accuracy of decadalvalues of crop coefficients evaluated according to the “single” andthe “dual” approaches suggested by the FAO-56 procedure (Allenet al., 1998). Moreover, the temporal dynamic of a crop water stressindex, assumed as a suitable stress descriptor and determinedwith direct measurements of crop transpiration, was analysed andrelated to the soil water content in the root zone.

Moreno-Pérez and Roldán-Canas (2012) analysed irrigationwater demand and examined possible measures for modifying andrationing demand, in order to achieve an efficient water man-agement policy in the Genil-Cabra Irrigation District (Córdoba,southern Spain). Authors used three irrigation indicators: relativeirrigation supply (RIS), relative water supply (RWS), and relativerainfall supply (RRS) to study the effect of crop, irrigation method,soil texture, and plot size on irrigation management and thus,to undertake subsequent measures to improve irrigation perfor-mance. The results pointed out that RIS was the most importantindicator in the study with a mean of about 0.60. RWS values werehigher than 0.80 and less variable than RIS, showing that irrigationmanagement was adequate to meet crop water requirements.In addition, the comparison between RWS and RRS indicatorsallowed to evaluate the amount of evapotranspiration covered byrainfall.

Finally, the need of using renewable energy sources (Mathewet al., 2002) for irrigation is addressed in the paper Peillón et al.(2012). They proposed a methodology based on a daily estima-tion balance between water requirements and water availability,in order to evaluate the feasibility of a windmill irrigation system.This study considered several factors in their analysis such as three-hourly wind velocity, flow supplied by the wind-pump in functionof the elevation height and daily greenhouse evapotranspirationin function of crop planting date. An example illustrating the useof the methodology on tomato crop under greenhouse in Ciego deÁvila (Cuba) is also provided.

We hope this special issue will encourage continuing scientific

and engineering research on sustainable irrigation as we believethe research, development and innovation in this topic will help inbuilding a better world in the near future.

4 er Ma

A

ectpssAto

R

A

A

A

A

B

C

C

C

D

F

G

G

H

L

M

E-mail address: leonor.rodriguez.sinobas@upm.es(L. Rodriguez-Sinobas)

Editorial / Agricultural Wat

cknowledgements

We are grateful to all the reviewers for the time they spent tonsure the quality of the papers. We want to express our appre-iation to the Agricultural Water Management Journal office forheir patient and technical assistance in each step of the editingrocess as well as to the Journal Editors, who accepted with enthu-iasm the proposal of this special issue. This work was partiallyupported by Spanish MEC under the projects AGL-2008-00153 andGL2010-21501/AGR and by Italian PRIN 2008 under the project

itled “monitoring water and energy exchanges on vineyard andlive tree crops.”

eferences

bd El-Wahed, M.H., Ali, E.A., 2012. Effect of irrigation systems, amounts of irrigationwater and mulching on corn yield, water use efficiency and net profit. Agricul-tural Water Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.017.

bernethy, C.L., 1994. Sustainability of irrigation systems. Zeitschrift furBewässerungswirtschaft, 29, Jahrgang, Heft 2/1994, Seite 135–143.

llen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop evapotranspiration, Guidelinefor computing crop water requirements, FAO irrigation and drainage paper n.56, Rome, Italy, 326 pp.

rbat, G., Roselló, A., Domingo Olivé, F., Puig-Bargués, J., González Llinàs, E.,Duran-Ros, M., Pujol, J., Ramírez de Cartagena, F., 2012. Soil water and nitratedistribution under drip irrigated corn receiving pig slurry. Agricultural WaterManagement, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.08.001.

rown, P.W., Mancino, C.F., Young, M.H., Thompson, T.L., Wierenga, P.J., Kopec, D.M.,2001. Penman Monteith crop coefficients for use with desert turf systems. CropScience 41, 1197–1206.

ammalleri, C., Rallo, G., Agnese, C., Ciraolo, G., Minacapilli, M., Provenzano, G., 2012.Combined use of eddy covariance and sap flow techniques for partition of ETfluxes and water stress assessment in an irrigated olive orchard. AgriculturalWater Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.003.

astellanos, M.T., Tarquis, A.M., Ribas, F., Cabello, M.J., Arce, A., Cartagena,M.C., 2012a. Nitrogen fertigation: an integrated agronomic and environ-mental study. Agricultural Water Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.016.

astellanos, M.T., Cartagena, M.C., Ribas, F., Cabello, M.J., Arce, A., Tarquis,A.M., 2012b. Impact of nitrogen uptake on field water balance in fertir-rigated melon. Agricultural Water Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.020.

unkel, G.M., 1970. Maximum sustainable yields. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathe-matics 19 (2), 367–378.

AO, 1988. Aspects of FAO’s policies, programmes, budget and activities aimedat contributing to sustainable development. Document to the ninety-fourthsession of the FAO Council, Rome, November 15–25, 1988, CL 94/6.

eerts, A., Raes, D., 2009. Deficit irrigation as an on-farm strategy to maximizecrop water productivity in dry areas. Agricultural Water Management 96 (9),1257–1284.

il-Rodríguez, M., Rodríguez-Sinobas, L., Benítez-Buelga, J., Sánchez-Calvo, R., 2012.Application of active heat pulse method with fiber optic temperature sensing forestimation of wetting bulbs and water distribution in drip emitters. AgriculturalWater Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.012.

oldren, J.P., Ehrlich, P.R., 1974. Human population and the global environment.American Scientist 62 (3), 282–292.

evine, A., Asano, T., 2004. Recovering sustainable water from wastewater. Journal

of Environmental Science and Technology 1, 201–208.

ahmoodabadi, M., Yazdanpanah, N., Rodríguez Sinobas, L., Pazira, E., Neshat, A.,2012. Reclamation of calcareous saline sodic soil with different amendments(I): redistribution of soluble cations within the soil profile. Agricultural WaterManagement, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.08.018.

nagement 120 (2013) 1– 4

Mathew, S., Pandey, K.P., Anil, V., Kumar, 2002. Analysis of wind regimes for energyestimation. Renewable Energy 25, 381–399.

Moreno-Pérez, M.F., Roldán-Canas, J., 2012. Assessment of irrigation water man-agement in the Genil-Cabra (Córdoba, Spain) irrigation district using irrigationindicators. Agricultural Water Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.06.020.

Mosse, K.P., Vincent Verheyen, T., Cruickshank, A.J., Patti, A.F., Cavagnaro, T.R.,2012. Soluble organic components of winery wastewater and implica-tions for reuse. Agricultural Water Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.05.011.

Mounzer, O., Pedrero-Salcedo, F., Nortes, P.A., Bayona, J.M., Nicolás- Nicolás, E., Alar-cón, J.J., 2012. Transient soil salinity under the combined effect of reclaimedwater and regulated deficit drip irrigation of Mandarin trees. Agricultural WaterManagement, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.014.

Oster, J.D., Wichelns, D., 2003. Sustainable irrigation is necessary and achievable, butdirect costs and environmental impacts can be substantial. Irrigation Science 22,107–120.

Pedrero, F., Kalavrouziotis, I., Alarcon, J.J., Koukoulakis, P., Asano, T., 2010. Useof treated municipal wastewater in irrigated agriculture – review of somepractices in Spain and Greece. Agricultural Water Management 97 (363),1233–1241.

Peillón, M., Sánchez-Calvo, R., Tarquis, A.M., García, J.L., 2012. The use of wind pumpsfor greenhouse microirrigation: a case study for tomato in Cuba. AgriculturalWater Management, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.0xx.

Rallo, G., Provenzano, G., 2012. Modelling eco-physiological response of table olivetrees (Olea europaea L.) to soil water deficit conditions. Agricultural Water Man-agement, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.005.

Vermillion, D., Johnson III, S.H., 1990. Turnover and irrigation service fees– Indonesia’s new policies to achieve economically sustainable irrigation.Irrigation and Drainage Systems 4 (3), 231–247.

Vico, G., Porporato, A., 2011. From rainfed agriculture to stress-avoidance irrigation:II. Sustainability, crop yield, and profitability. Advances in Water Resources 34(2), 272–281.

Yazdanpanah, N., Pazira, E., Neshat, A., Mahmoodabadi, M., RodríguezSinobas, L., 2012. Reclamation of calcareous saline sodic soil with differ-ent amendments (II): impact on nitrogen, phosphorous and potassiumredistribution on microbial respiration. Agricultural Water Management,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.08.017.

Giuseppe ProvenzanoUniversità degli Studi di Palermo, Dipartimento

Scienze Agrarie e Forestali, Viale delle Scienze 12,90128 Palermo, Italy

Ana Maria TarquisCEIGRAM, ETSI Agrónomos, Universidad Politécnica

de Madrid (UPM), Ciudad Universitaria,28040 Madrid, Spain

Leonor Rodriguez-Sinobas ∗

Research Group “Hydraulics for Irrigation,” TechnicalUniversity of Madrid (UPM), Agricultural Engineering

School, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain

∗ Corresponding author.

Available online 1 February 2013