| Cost\|benefit analysis of irrigation quota and irrigation layout under water and fertilizer integration cultivation for wine grapes |
|
View Fulltext View/Add Comment Download reader |
| |
| DOI：10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2023.05.08 |
| Key Words: wine grape integration of water and fertilizer irrigation rate irrigation method cost\|benefit analysis |
| Author Name | Affiliation | | CHEN Juan | Institute of Economic Crops and Malting Barley Material, Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China | | MA Zhongming | Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China | | NIU Xiaoxia | Institute of Economic Crops and Malting Barley Material, Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China | | BIAN Jinxia | Institute of Economic Crops and Malting Barley Material, Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070, China | | Wang Ping | Lanzhou Agricultural Science technology Research and Extension Center, Lanzhou, Gansu 730000, China |
|
| Hits: 390 |
| Download times: 398 |
| Abstract: |
| The overall aim of this study was to identify the optimum irrigation methods and irrigation rates to simultaneously improve the growth, fruit yield, quality and economic benefit of wine grape. A three\|year (2019—2021) field experiment in the Hexi Corridor of Gansu Province was used to assess the effects of irrigation methods and irrigation rates on growth, yield, fruit quality and economic benefit in wine grape under fertilization management. The experiment followed a completely randomized split\|plot design with three irrigation amounts of 1 800 m3·hm-2(WL), 2 700 m3·hm-2(WM), and 3 600 m3·hm-2 (WH) as the main\|plot treatments, and three irrigation methods of one pipeline per vine row (C-S), two pipelines per vine row (C-D) and partial root\|zone drying (PRD) as the sub\|plot treatments. The results showed that, the irrigation rate had a remarkable effect on the pruning amount, yield, fruit quality and variable cost of wine grape. The WL treatment produced the best fruit quality, the content of soluble solid, polyphenol and anthocyanin were 27.37 °Brix, 30.69 mg·g-1 and 6.74 mg·g-1, respectively. The WM treatment produced the highest yield (10 163.2 kg·hm-2), and the WH treatment produced maximum pruning amount of grape (1.53 kg·plant-1). The irrigation method had an insignificant effect on the pruning amount, yield and fruit quality. Compared with C-S treatments, C-D and PRD treatments both increased the fixed cost of the vineyard by 481 Yuan·hm-2. Compared with other treatments, the C-S (WM) treatment increased Net Margin/Investment and Net Margin/Cost by 0.94%~10.27%, 0.6%~36.57%, respectively，while C-S(WM) treatment decreased production cost by 0.01~0.57 Yuan·kg-1. At break\|even point, the yield and price of grape under the C-S(WM) treatment decreased by 176.90~3 818.07 kg·hm-2, 0.02~0.6 Yuan·kg-1, respectively. The threshold price of water indicated that only the C-S (WM) treatment remains net profit was more than 7500 Yuan·hm-2 with higher water prices of up to 0.67 Yuan·m-3. The comprehensive consideration of growth, yield, quality and cost\|benefit indicated that one pipeline per vine row and 2 700 m3·hm-2 (C-S (WM)) treatment, C-S (WM) increased extra berry quality and yield of wine grape. The C-S (WM) was more economically profitable (lower installation cost and production cost), net profit was more than 7 500 Yuan·hm-2, which was economically viable and achieved high returns. |
|
|
|