Agronomy Journal Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 1 May 1982
Published in Agron J 74:551-555 (1982)
© 1982 American Society of Agronomy
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Horton, R.
Right arrow Articles by Wierenga, P. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Horton, R.
Right arrow Articles by Wierenga, P. J.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Horton, R.
Right arrow Articles by Wierenga, P. J.

Physiological Response of Chile Pepper to Trickle Irrigation1

R. Horton, F. Beese and P. J. Wierenga2

The present field studies were conducted to examine the response of chile pepper (Capsicum annuum L., var. New Mexico No. 6-4) during one irrigation cycle, to different deficit trickle irrigation treatments.

After applying four different water rates for 46 days, detailed measurements were made, over a 3-day period between two irrigations, of the water content, the soil-water pressure potential, the osmotic potential of the soil solution, the leaf water potential, and the stomatal resistance. Crop evapotranspiration was estimated from water balance measurements, and hourly potential evaporation, ET0, was calculated using meteorological information.

There were four water treatments, consisting of a control treatment and three treatments receiving 80, 120 and 140% of the water applied to the control. There were considerable differences in water transpired from the different treatments, but only slight differences in plant water potentials and stomatal resistances. At any time the differences in plant water potential and stomatal resistances were less than 2 bars and 1 sec/cm, respectively. Chile appeared to adapt to the soil water supply by controlling its size. The plants in the dryer irrigation treatments displayed less leaf area, fewer leaves per plant and less aboveground dry mass production. Because of the large differences in plant size associated with relatively small differences in measurements of the plant water status of chile, it appears inadvisable to depend upon pressure chamber, or diffusion porometer measurements for irrigation scheduling of trickle irrigated chile.

Key Words: Leaf pressure potential • Stomatal resistance • Plant water status • Soil water potential • Potential evaporation • Evapotranspiration • Irrigation management • Capsicum annuum


1 This study was supported in part with funds from the New Mexico Interstate Streams Commission through the New Mexico Water Resources Institute and from the German Research Foundation. Journal article 820, Agric. Exp. Stn., New Mexico State Univ., Las Cruces, NM 88003.

2 Research assistant, Dep. of Agronomy; soil scientist, Univ. of Goettingen; and professor, Dep. of Agronomy.

Received for publication February 9, 1981.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1982 by the American Society of Agronomy.