All Issue

2020 Vol.29, Issue 3

Original Articles

Assessment of Water Control Model for Tomato and Paprika in the Greenhouse Using the Penman-Monteith Model

Penman-Monteith을 이용한 토마토와 파프리카의 증발산 모델 평가

Siriluk Somnuek1
,
Youngsin Hong2
,
Minyoung Kim3
,
Sanggyu Lee4
,
Jeonghyun Baek2
,
Kangsu Kwak4
,
Hyondong Lee4
,
Jaesu Lee5*
솜늑 시리락1
,
홍 영신2
,
김 민영3
,
이 상규4
,
백 정현2
,
곽 강수4
,
이 현동4
,
이 재수5*
1Researcher, Renewable Energy Crop Institute, Department of Agriculture 10900, Thailand
2Researcher, Division of Smart Farm Development, Department of Agricultural Engineer, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration 54875, Korea
3Researcher, Division of Disaster Prevention Engineering, Department of Agricultural Engineer, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration 54875, Korea
4Senior Researcher, Division of Smart Farm Development, Department of Agricultural Engineer, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration 54875, Korea
5Senior Researcher, Division of Smart Farm Development, Department of Agricultural Engineer, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration 54875, Korea
1태국 농림부 신재생 에너지 작물 연구소 연구사
2국립농업과학원 농업공학부 스마트팜개발과 연구원
3국립농업과학원 농업공학부 재해예방공학과 연구사
4국립농업과학원 농업공학부 스마트팜개발과 연구관
5국립농업과학원 농업공학부 스마트팜개발과 연구사
*Corresponding author: butiman@korea.kr
31 July 2020. pp. 209-218
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

This paper investigated actual crop evapotranspiration (ETc) of tomato and paprika planted in test beds of the greenhouse. Crop water requirement (CWR) is the amount of water required to compensate ETc loss from the crop. The main objectives of the study are to assess whether the actual crop watering (ACW) was adequate CWR of tomato and paprika and which amount of ACW should be irrigated to each crop. ETc was estimated using the Penman-Monteith model (P-M) for each crop. ACW was calculated from the difference of amount of nutrient supply water and amount of nutrient drainage water. ACW and CWR of each crop were determined, compared and assessed. Results indicated CWR-tomato was around 100 to 1,200 ml/day, while CWR-paprika ranged from 100 to 500 ml/day. Comparison of ACW and CWR of each crop found that the difference of ACW and CWR are fluctuated following day of planting (DAP). However, the differences could divide into two phases, first the amount of ACWs of each crop are less than CWR in the initial phase (60 DAP) around 500 ml/day and 91 ml/day, respectively. Then, ACWs of each crop are greater than the CWR after 60 DAP until the end of cultivation approximately 400 ml/day in tomato and 178 ml/day in paprika. ETc assessment is necessary to correctly quantify crop irrigation water needs and it is an accurate short-term estimation of CWR in greenhouse for optimal irrigation scheduling. Thus, reducing ACW of tomato and paprika in the greenhouse is a recommendation. The amount of ACW of tomato should be applied from 100 to 1,200 ml/day and paprika is 100 to 500 ml/day depend on DAP.

Keywords
actual crop watering
crop evapotranspiration
crop water requirement
greenhouse
watering

ETc 손실을 보상하는데 필요한 물의 양을 작물 용수 요구량(Crop water requirement, CWR)로 정의되며, ETc 평가는 작물 필요 요구량을 정확하게 정량화하는 데 필요하며, 물 균형 계산에서 중요한 역할을 한다. 토마토와 파프리카의 실제 관수 요구량(Actual crop water, ACW)이 적절한 CWR인지 평가하였다. 토마토와 파프리카 재배에 적정한 AWC 예측 및 추정을 위하여 온실 내부 환경데이터를 Penman-Monteith을 이용하여 기준 작물 증발산(ET)을 계산한 후, 기준 증발산은 작물 상수(Kc;토마토-1.15, 파프리카-1.05)계수로 조정하였다. 토마토와 파프리카의 CWR과 ACW를 계산하여 비교 평가한 결과 ACW가 CWR을 대체할 수 있지만 파프리카의 ACW는 필요 이상으로 높게 나타났다. 또한, 토마토의 ACW는 1일 100 ~ 1,200 ml이고, 파프리카의 ACW는 1일 100 ~ 500 ml가 적절한 것으로 나타났다. 그러나, 스마트 온실에서 ETc의 정밀도를 높이려면, ETc가 CWR로 변환되고 ACW와 비교하기 위해서 클래스 A팬 설정이 필요하다. 향후 실시간으로 CWR을 측정하기 위한 시뮬레이션 프로그램 연구가 필요하다.

키워드
기준 작물 증발산
관개
관수 요구량
온실
References
1
Aiswarya, L., K. Arunadevi, R. Lalitha, and S. Vallalkannan. 2019. Estimation of actual crop evapotranspiration of green chili in semi-arid region under different atmospheric condition. International journal of current microbiology and applied sciences 8:1104-1110. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.805.127
10.20546/ ijcmas.2019.805.127
2
Albuquerque, F.S., E.F.F. Silva, J.A.C. Albuquerque Filho, and G.S. Lima. 2012. Water requirement and crop coefficient of fertigated sweet pepper. Brazilian journal of Irrigation and drainage 17:481-493.
10.15809/irriga.2012v17n4p481
3
Allen, R. G., L. S. Pereira, D. Raes, and M. Smith. 1998. Crop evaporation-guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO.
4
Baek, J. H., J. W. Heo, H. H. Kim, Y. Hong, and J. S. Lee. 2018. Research platform design for the Korea smart greenhouse based on cloud computing. Protected horticulture and plant factory 27:27-33.
10.12791/KSBEC.2018.27.1.27
5
Bakker, J. C., G. P. A. Bot, H. Challa, and N. J. van de Braak. 1995. Greenhouse Climate Control. Wageningen Pers, Wageningen, The Netherlands. 15-160.
10.3920/978-90-8686-501-7
6
Baptista, F. J., B. J. Bailey, and J. Meneses. 2005. Measuring and modelling transpiration versus evapotranspiration of a tomato crop grown on soil in a Mediterranean greenhouse. Acta horticulture 691:313-320.
10.17660/ActaHortic.2005.691.36
7
Choi, Y., M. Y. Kim, S. O'Shaughnessy, J. G. Jeon, Y. J. Kim, and W. J. Song. 2018. Comparison of artificial neural network and empirical models to determine daily reference evapotranspiration. Journal of the Korean society of agricultural engineer 60: 43-54. https://doi.org/10.5389/KSAE.201860.6.043
10.5389/ KSAE.201860.6.043
8
Chopda, A., A. P. Sahu, D. M. Das, B. Panigrahi, and S. C. Senapati. 2018. Variation in actual evapotranspiration of green chili inside and outside the rooftop greenhouse under deficit irrigation. International journal of current microbiology and applied sciences 7:4152-4159.
10.20546/ijcmas.2018.708.434
9
Costa, P. M., I. Poças, and M. Cunha 2019. Modelling evapotranspiration of soilless cut roses "Red Naomi" based on climatic and crop predictors. Horticultural science 46:107-114. https://doi.org/10.17221/147/2017-HORTSCI
10.17221/147/2017-HORTSCI
10
Fazlil llahi, W. F. 2009. Evapotranspiration models in greenhouse. Master's Thesis, Wageningen University.
11
Fernandez, M. D., S. S. Bonachela, F. Orgaz, R. Thompson, J. C. Lopez, M. R. Granados, M. Gallardo, and E. Fereres. 2010. Measurement and estimation of plastic greenhouse reference evapotranspiration in a Mediterranean climate. Irrigation science 28:497-509.
10.1007/s00271-010-0210-z
12
Harmanto, V., M. Salokhe, M. S. Babel, and H. J. Tantau. 2005. Water requirement of drip irrigated tomatoes grown in greenhouse in tropical environment. Agricultural water management 71:225-242.
10.1016/j.agwat.2004.09.003
13
Jayasekara, S. N., W. H. Na, A. B. Owababi, J. W. Lee, A. Rasheed, H. K. Kim, and H. W. Lee. 2018. Comparison of environmental conditions and insulation effect between air inflated and conventional double layer greenhouse. Protected horticulture and plant factory 27:46-53.
10.12791/KSBEC.2018.27.1.46
14
Karaca C., B. Tekelioğlu, D. Büyüktaş, and R. Baştuğ. 2017. Assessment of the equations computing reference crop evapotranspiration. Academia journal of engineering and applied sciences ICAE-IWC (Special Issue):144-161.
15
Katsoulas, N. and C. Stanghellini. 2019. Modelling crop transpiration in greenhouses: Different models for different applications. Agronomy 9:1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9070392
10.3390/ agronomy9070392
16
Kitta, E., A. Baille, N. Katsoulas, and N. Rigakis. 2014. Predicting reference evapotranspiration for screenhouse- grown crops. Agricultural water management 143:122-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.07.006
10.1016/j.agwat.2014.07.006
17
Lozano, C. S., R. Rezende, P. S. L. Freitas, T. L. Hachmann, F. A. S. Santos, and A. F. B. A. Andrean. 2017. Estimation of evapotranspiration and crop coefficient of melon cultivated in protected environment. Revista brasileira de engenharia agrícola e ambiental 21:758-762.
10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v21n11p758-762
18
Lizarraga, A., H. Boesveld, F. Huibers, and C. Robles. 2003. Evaluating irrigation scheduling of hydroponic tomato in Navarra, Spain. Irrigation and drainage 52:177-188.
10.1002/ird.86
19
Moazed, H., A. A. Ghaemi, and Rafiee, M. R. 2014. Evaluation of several reference evapotranspiration methods: a comparative study of greenhouse and outdoor condition. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology. Transactions of civil engineering 38:421-437.
20
Nikolaou, G., D. Neocleous, N. Katsoulas, and C. Kittas. 2019. Review: irrigation of greenhouse crops. Horticulture 5:1-20.
10.3390/horticulturae5010007
21
Pamungkas, A. P., K. Hatou, and T. Morimoto. 2013. Modeling the evapotranspiration inside the greenhouse systems by using matlab simulink. In IFAC Proceedings Volumes 46: 33-37. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3182/20130327-3-JP-3017.00010
10.3182/20130327- 3-JP-3017.00010
22
Papadakis, G., A. Frangoudakis, and S. Kyritsis. 1994. Experimental investigation and modelling of heat and mass transfer between a tomato crop and greenhouse environment. Journal of Agriculture engineering research 57:217-227.
10.1006/jaer.1994.1022
23
Perera, K. C., A. W. Western, B. Nawarathna, and B. George. 2015. Comparison of hourly and daily reference crop evapotranspiration equations across seasons and climate zones in Australia. Agricultural water management 148: 84-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.09.016
10.1016/j.agwat.2014.09.016
24
Pérez-Castro, A., J. A. Sánchez-Molina, M. Castilla, and J. Sánchez-Moreno. 2017. cFertigUAL: A fertigation management app for greenhouse vegetable crops. Agricultural water management 183:186-193.
10.1016/j.agwat.2016.09.013
25
Rahil, M. H. and A. Qanadillo. 2015. Effects of different irrigation regimes on yield and water use efficiency of cucumber crop. Agricultural water management 148:10-15.
10.1016/j.agwat.2014.09.005
26
Snyder, R. G. 1992. Greenhouse tomato handbook. Publication No. 1828. Mississippi State University. Cooperative extension service, USA. p. 30.
27
Sharma, H., M. K. Shukla, P. W.Bosland, and R. Steiner. 2017. Soil moisture sensor calibration, actual evapotranspiration, and crop coefficients for drip irrigated greenhouse chile peppers. Agricultural water management 179:81-91. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.07.001
10.1016/j.agwat.2016.07.001
28
Tan, C. S. 1990. Irrigation scheduling for fruit crop: low- volume drip or micro-sprinkler systems. Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs of Canada. Accessed 15 July, 2019. Retrieved from http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/ english/crops/ facts/90-069.htm#b.
29
van Iersel, M. W., M. Chappell, and J. D. Lea-cox. 2013. Sensors for improved efficiency of irrigation in greenhouse and nursery production. American society for horticultural science 23:735-746.
10.21273/HORTTECH.23.6.735
30
Villarreal-Guerrero, F., M. Kacira, E. Fitz-Rodríguez, C. Kubota, G. A. Giacomelli, R. Linker, and A. Arbel. 2012. Comparison of three evapotranspiration models for a greenhouse cooling strategy with natural ventilation and variable high-pressure fogging. Scientia Horticulture 134: 210-221.
10.1016/j.scienta.2011.10.016
31
Woo, Y. H., H. J. Kim, Y. I. Nam, I. H. Cho, and Y. S. Kwon. 2000. Predicting and measuring transpiration based on phyto monitoring of tomato in greenhouse. Protected horticulture and plant factory 41:459-463.
32
Yang, X., T. H. Short, R. D. Fox, and W. L. Bauerle. 1989. The Microclimate and transpiration of a greenhouse cucumber crop. American society of agricultural engineers 32:2143- 2150.
10.13031/2013.31276
Information
  • Publisher :The Korean Society for Bio-Environment Control
  • Publisher(Ko) :(사)한국생물환경조절학회
  • Journal Title :Protected Horticulture and Plant Factory
  • Journal Title(Ko) :시설원예ㆍ식물공장
  • Volume : 29
  • No :3
  • Pages :209-218
  • Received Date : 2019-12-05
  • Revised Date : 2020-04-13
  • Accepted Date : 2020-04-14
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.12791/KSBEC.2020.29.3.209
Journal Informaiton Journal of Bio-Environment Control Journal of Bio-Environment Control
Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • crossref crossmark
  • crossref cited-by
  • crossref funder-registry
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close