Journal ofAgricultural Engineering Vol.

44(1): January-March, 2007

Microirrigation for Onion Cultivation in a
Canal CommandArea
Satyendra Kumar, Ashwani Kumar and Rajbir Singh
3
ABSTRACT
Two-year field studies were carried out to determine the impact of an irrigation system comprising a secondary
reservoir and pressurized (microsprinkler and drip) irrigation method in a canal irrigated area. It was hypothesized
that such a system with appropriate irrigation schedule would facilitate vegetable cultivation, which requires
frequent watering. The experimental crop was onion, which was irrigated through microsprinkler and drip
irrigation method at irrigation schedules of 0.60; 0.80; 1.00 and 1.20 of pan evaporation (Ep). Results of the
study revealed that using this system, onion production was more profitable as compared to existing irrigation
practice. Between the two, microsprinkler had a better economics than drip. This conclusion is, however,
dependent upon market price ofonion, as with price Rs. 1.50lkg or lower, the system may become unprofitable.
Due to increasing demand for water from non-agricultural
sector, a rapid decline of available irrigation water has
been observed in many parts of the world (Hiller and
Howell, 1983). In India, the ever growing population
and occurrence of frequent drought are putting immense
pressure on availability of good quality water for
agriculture. Water for irrigation is becoming both scarce
and expensive, particularly in arid and semi arid parts
comprising more than 50 per cent geographical area of
the country. The problem is aggravated when ground
water is saline and not fit for irrigation use.
farming in arid and semi arid region is completely
dependent on canal irrigation.
Canal irrigation projects are designed for gravity flow
over the irrigated area and it results in large conveyance
and application losses of water. Micro irrigation witl
reduce these losses and will increase the irrigable area
from the same water resource. Micro irrigation (drip
and microsprinkler) coupled with appropriate irrigation
scheduling have been found in terms of water
and nutrient saving and higher productivity of the crops
(Srivastva et aI., 1994; Fakuda and Teshome, 1998). For
adoption of having a secondary reservoir
is a prerequisite to ensure adequate water supply in
accordance to a developed schedule. These features of
adequacy and timeliness of water availability are usually
wanting in the canal irrigated areas due to various reasons.
Secondary reservoirs are storage structures (ponds)
located in irrigated areas that allow farmers to store a
part of canal water and use it judiciously with water
saving technology. At certain times during lean period or
in rainy season when water is not needed for irrigation,
it can be stored in the secondary reservoir and used
effectively during critical periods.
Considering the potential of water saving, the
Government of India has been offering financial
assistance (subsidy) for installation of microirrigation
systems for horticultural and vegetable crops. But, the
farmers of canal irrigated areas are reluctant to adopt
secondary reservoir concept because: (I) they are not
sure about the role and use of secondary reservoir and
microirrigation in sustainable agriculture in a canal
irrigatedarea and (2) large investment for the construction
of secondary reservoir and for the installation of
microirrigation systems. The present study was
undertaken with the objective to assess the role of
secondary reservoir on the adoption ofmodern irrigation
techniques i.e. microsprinkler and drip irrigation systems.
Economic feasibility of secondary reservoir in adoption
of microirrigation systems is also studied. For this study
onion crop was taken.
MATERIALSAND METHODS
Study Area
The study was conducted at the research farm of Central
Institute of Post Harvest Engineering and Technology,
Abohar (Punjab) for two consecutive- seasons. It is
1& 3 are Scientist (SS) and Incharge, AICRP in APA, CIPHEr. Abohar and lDirector, Water Technology Centre for Eastern Region,
Bhubaneshwar-751023. ICorresponding author: email-sky72@rediffmail.com
January-March, 2007
located between 30 09' N latitude and 74 13' E longitude
of 185.6 m above MSL. It is situated 30 km from Sri
Ganganagar district of Rajsthan and falls under IGNP
canal command.
Soil and Climate
The soil of experimental site was sandy loam with 8.28
pH. The initial bulk density of soil for 0-0.15 and 0.15-
0.30m depth was 1.55 and 1.57 g/cm
3
, respectively. The
soil moisture content in 0-30 cm soil layer was 11.49%
and 3.94%at field capacity (-0.03 MPa) and wilting point
(-1.5 MPa), respectively. The plant available soil moisture
was 118 mm/m. The climate of experimental site was
semi-arid with extremely hot summers and cold winters.
The minimum and maximum temperature, humidity and
wind speed during the crop growing period varied from
5 - 48C, 19 - 96% and 1.0 - 3.6 mIs, respectively and
the pan evaporation rate varied from 0.5 - 12.0 mm/day.
Irrigation Techniques and Schedule
Micro-jet typemicrosprinklers (discharge 64.8 Iph) and
drip-in type drip irrigation systems (discharge 2.2 Iph)
were used in this study. In order to asses the impact of
secondary reservoir and microirrigation, crop response
to microirrigation and traditional irrigation methods was
compared at four irrigation levels viz. 0.60; 0.80; 1.00
and 1.20 of pan evaporation (Ep). Irrigation was
scheduled at the previous day pan evaporimeter readings.
In microsprinkler and drip irrigation systems,
recommended nutrients were.applied through fertigation,
while in traditional irrigation, broadcast application of
nutrient was done according to the recommendation of
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana (Anon, 2001).
The area of each plot for each treatment combination
was 6m x 6m. A buffer zone spacing of 1.0 m was
provided between the each plot.
Microirrigation for Onion Cultivation in a Canal Command Area
Development of Secondary Reservoir and
Installation of Modern Irrigation Techniques
A dug out secondary reservoir (pond) was constructed
at the research site and it was lined with LDPE film
(agrifilm). The size, capacity and cost involved for
different irrigation schedules (requirements) were
different and details are given in Table I.
The microirrigation system was installed in a square flat
field with the source of water at one corner. The whole
area was divided into 3 sections and the laterals were
laid on both sides of the sub-main passing through the
center of each section. The spacing between two
microsprinklers was 3m. In drip irrigated area, drip
laterals with in-line emitters were placed at 1.0 mspacing
and emitters were fixed at 0.50 m spacing. Details about
the capital requirement for installation ofmicroirrigati on
systems are given in Table 2.
Economic Evaluation
Economic evaluation for growing onion under different
irrigation methods and schedules was done assuming
the useful life of secondary reservoir, motor and sand
filter, and other irrigation systems components as ] 5, 20
and 8 years, respectively. The annual fixed cost for
secondary reservoir and new irrigation techniques was
calculated using capital recovery factor CRF (James and
Lee, 197]).
CRF={i(l+i)n}/{(1+i)n -I}
where CRF = capital recovery factor, i = interest rate
(fraction); n = useful life of the component (years).
Annual fixed cost/ha was estimated as CRF x fixed cost!
ha.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Secondary reservoir is integrated part of new irrigation
Table 1. Capital requirements for different capacity secondary reservoir
Irrigation levels Reservoir capacity, m
3
Capital cost,Rs
0.6Ep 902 70,968
0.8 Ep ],201 94,540
1.0 Ep 1502 1,18,235
1.2 Ep 1803 1,41,890
34
Annual fixed cost,Rs
8,906
11,865
14,839
17,807
Satyendra Kumar, Ashwani Kumar and Rajbir Singh
Table 2. Capital requirements for modern irrigation techniques
JAE : 44(1)
Item Rs !Unit Drip irrigation
I
Microsprinkler irrigation
Quantity Total cost, Rs Quantity Total cost, Rs
Field size l02x 98 m
90 mm main \ submain pipe 69.70/m 379m 26,416.30 379m 26,416.30
line
Inline drip lateral, 16 mm 9.65/m 9996m 96,461.40
Lateral pipe, 16 mm 6.35/m 4445 m 28,225.75
Microsprinkler with stand 18.55 1111 20,609.05
Lateral line connectors, 16 2.05 590 1,209.50 198 405.90
mm
Barbed Tee, 16 mm 3.05 1111 33,88'.55
End plug, 16 mm 1.65 590 973.50 198 326.70
Elbow, 90 mm 44.50 1 44.50 1 44.50
Tee, 90 mm 49.50 2 99.00 2 99.00
Gate valve, 90 mm 531.00 3 1593.00 3 1593.00
Flush valve, 90 mm 82.00 3 246.00 3 246.00
Sand filter, 24 m
3
ihr 23,250.00 1 23,250.00 1 23,250.00
Screen filter 4250.00 1 4,250.00 . 1 4,250.00
Fertigation unit (Venture) 2288.00 1 2,288.00 1 2,288.00
Pressure gauge 120.00 3 360.00 3 360.00
Trenching 2.70/m 379m 1,023.30 379m 1,023.30
Motor, 5 hp 10990 1 10,990.00 1 10,990.00
Total 1,69,209.50 1,23,521.05
techniques in canal irrigated area. Since, they contributed
together towards profitable agriculture in canal irrigated
area, the role of secondary reservoir was assessed in the
term of impact of new irrigation techniques on crop
performance.
Yield and Economics
In general, onion yield increased with the increase in
irrigation schedule from 0.60 to 1.20 Ep irrespective of
irrigation method (Table 3). Yields differed significantly
for each incremental step in irrigation schedule. The
variation in onion yield at different irrigation schedules
was by the variation in size and weight of
bulbs. Ollala et al. (2004) reported smaller sized bulbs
and yield reduction due to water stress. Yields of
microsprinkler and drip irrigated onion were at par but
were significantly higher than the yield under traditional
irrigation method. Microsprinkler and drip provided a
better microclimate to shallow rooted onion that helped
converting the photosynthate to economic parts. Hanson
et aI., (1997) mentioned that the higher yield with frequent
water application under microirrigation was due to
continuously maintaining higher water potential. Reduced
fluctuation in soil moisture in the root zone under
microirrigation helps in enhancing the lattice yields.
Economic return of onion increased considerably with
the increase in irrigation schedule from 0.60 to 1.00 Ep
in microsprinkler, 0.60 to 0.80 Ep in drip irrigation and
. 0.60 to 1.20 Ep in traditional irrigation system due to
significant increase in onion yield (Table 3). According
to study results, onion production with microsprinkler
and drip irrigation methods were profitable than traditional
irrigation method. Microsprinkler was found to be the
most appropriate irrigation technique to maximize the
profit from per unit cropped area by storing canal water
in secondary reservoir. Better economics of onion under
microsprinkler irrigation system may be associated with
lesser investment on installation of irrigation system and
remarkably higher bulb yield compared to other irrigation
techniques. In drip system, due to higher initial
investment, the net return was lower than microsprinkler
but higher than traditional irrigation method. In the present
study, traditional irrigation also had ensured water supply
from secondary reservoir, but in actual condition, there
is uncertainty in canal water availability, which may lead
to water stress and yield reduction.
Water Production Function
The relationships between onion yield and irrigation water
applied were quadratic under each irrigation method
35
January-March, 2007 Microirrigation for Onion Cultivation in a Canal Command Area
Table 3. Yield and economics ofonion cultivation under different methods and schedules of irrigation (Pooled data
oftwo years)
Irrigation
technique
Microsprinkler
Drip
Traditional
Irrigation Yield, Production Gross return, Net return,
schedule tlha cost, Rs/ha Rs/ha
Rs/ha
0.6Ep 19.2 45,681 65,856 20,175
0.8 Ep 28.3 47,308 97,069 49,761
1.0 Ep 33.4 49,012 1,14,562 65,550
1.2 Ep 34.9 50,569 1,19,707 69,138
0.6 Ep 22.7 51,914 77,861 25,947
0.8 Ep 29.2 53,474 1,00,156 46,682
1.0 Ep 32.1 55,152 1,10,103 54,951
1.2 Ep 34 56,814 1,16,620 59,806
0.6 Ep 11.7 32,090 40,131 8,041
0.8 Ep 15.6 32,586 53,508 20,922
1.0 Ep 19.9 33,215 68,257 35,042
1.2 Ep 23.2 33,598 79,576 45,978
Ep =Pan evaporation
Table 4. Onion yields under different irrigation techniques
Irrigation technique
Microsprinkler
Drip
Traditional
Regression Equations
Y(w) =-0.0006w
2
+0.4726 w-61.21
Y (w) =-0.0005 w
2
+0.4599w-68.70
Y (w)=-O.0002 w
2
+0.2367w-35.666
RZ
0.7872
0.8488
0.9531
Standard Error,
tlha
2.40
3.17
1.76
(Table 4) with onion yield increasing at a decreasing rate
with increase in irrigation amount. Howell et al. (1997)
had argued that poor yield at higher water application
might be due to poor soil aeration at higher soil moisture
level. Notable differences existed among irrigation
systems to achieve potential yield. Regression models
predicted the need of 394, 460 and 592 mm irrigation
water to attain maximum yield potential when irrigated
with microsprinkler, drip and traditional irrigation
systems, respectively. They also revealed that the
maximum production level under microirrigation could
not be reached with traditional irrigation despite of un-
restricted water supply. Microirrigation provides small
quantity of water and nutrients but more frequently,
which enhance the nutrient availability of plants leading
to better growth and higher yield (Hartz and Hochmuth,
1996). In traditional irrigation, fertilizer is applied as basal
dose, which is always vulnerable to leaching, and as a
result crop suffers often from inadequate supply of N
and sometime P. Higher yield potential with limited water
in microirrigation favours its use coupled with secondary
reservoir in canal command areas. These equations can
be used by the producers to project long-term yields for
a given irrigation water and to select the suitable irrigation
technique for canal irrigated area.
Sensitivity Analysis
Sensitivity analysis was done to determine how the results
would be affected by change in market price and
irrigation schedule. At a market price greater than Rs.
1.50 per kg of onion, microsprinkler irrigation system is
projected to be more profitable than traditional irrigation
across the range of 0.60 - 1.20 Ep of irrigation, while
drip irrigation was found to be economically viable for
36
Irrigation level
Satyendra Kumar, Ashwani Kumar and Rajbir Singh
50
'"
.e
40
vi

0
30
0
9
20 "--------:------------'
Irrigation level
o:l
50
8 40
o
i 30'
:S
20
e
()
s 10
......
o
Q)
f 0
10 -'------------------'

Legend for onion rate (Rs.lkg):

1 - 1.00; 2 - 1.50; 3 - 2.00; 4 - 3.00; 5 - 4.00
Fig 1. Economic advantage ofdrip and microsprinkler
irrigation over traditional irrigation for onion
the market price of more than Rs. 2/kg only (Fig. 1).
The net return advantage increased with the increase in
irrigation schedule and reached to the maximum at 1.00
and 0.80 Ep in microsprinkler and drip irrigation system,
respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Secondary reservoir coupled with microsprinkler and
drip irrigation methods and used with an appropriate
JAE : 44(1)
irrigation schedule were found profitable for onion
cultivation at a market price of more than Rs. 1.50/kg
and Rs. 2.00Ikg, respectively for microsprinkler and drip
irrigation methods. The main benefits of secondary
reservoir were assured water supply, covering larger
area under the two methods of irrigation and facilitating
crop diversification. These enable fetching higher profit
from available limited canal water supply. The present
study clearly indicated that shifting from traditional to
microsprinkler and drip irrigation methods supplemented
by a secondary reservoir in canal irrigated area would
be profitable.
REFERENCES
Anon. 200 I. Package of practices for vegetable
production. Punjab Agric. Univ., Ludhiana, India.
Fakuda Y; Teshome T. 1998. Effect of drip and furrow
irrigation and plant spacing on yield of tomato at Dire
Dawa, Ethiopia. Agric. Water Mgt., 35,201- 207.
Hanson B R; Schwanki L J; Schulbach K F;
Pettygove G S. 1997. A Comparison of furrow, surface
drip and subsurface drip irrigation on lettuce yield and
applied water. Agric Water Mgt., 33,139-157.
Hartz T K; Hochmuth G J. 1996. Fertility management
of drip-irrigated vegetables. Hort. Techno\., 6, 168-171.
Hiler F A; Howell T A. 1983. In: Limitation to Efficient:
Water Use in Crop Production, HM Taylor, WR Jordan,
. TR Sinclair (Eds.). Am. Soc. Agron. Inc.
Howell T A; Scheider A D; Evett S R. 1997. Sub
Surface and Surface microirrigation of corn- Southern
Plains. Trans. ASAE, 40, 139-157,814.
James L D; Lee R R.1971. Economics of water
resources planning, Mcgraw Hill, New Delhi.
Olalla F M; Dominguez-Padilla A; Lopez R. 2004.
Production and quality of onion crop (Allium cepa L.)
cultivates in semi acid climate. Agric. Water Mgt., 68,
77-89.
Srivastava P K; Parikh M M; Swami N G; Raman
S. 1994. Effect of irrigation and mulching on tomato
yield. Agric. Water Mgt., 25, 179-184.
37