Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Rivera, L., (2015). Rendimiento del cultivo de camote INIA 320 aplicando el riego por goteo convencional e intermitente [Tesis, Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12996/1842
Rivera, L., Rendimiento del cultivo de camote INIA 320 aplicando el riego por goteo convencional e intermitente [Tesis]. : Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina; 2015. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12996/1842
@misc{renati/245795,
title = "Rendimiento del cultivo de camote INIA 320 aplicando el riego por goteo convencional e intermitente",
author = "Rivera Serna, Liz Greca",
publisher = "Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina",
year = "2015"
}
Title: Rendimiento del cultivo de camote INIA 320 aplicando el riego por goteo convencional e intermitente
Authors(s): Rivera Serna, Liz Greca
Advisor(s): Sánchez Delgado, Miguel Angel
Keywords: Ipomoea batatas; Riego por goteo; Rendimiento de cultivos; Contenido de agua en el suelo; Análisis cuantitativo; Balance hídrico del suelo; Perú; Camote Inia 320; Riego por goteo intermitente
Issue Date: 2015
Institution: Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina
Abstract: La presente investigación tuvo como finalidad comparar el rendimiento del cultivo de camote INIA 320 al aplicar un riego por goteo convencional e intermitente utilizando cintas de riego. El trabajo de campo se realizó en la parcela demostrativa del Departamento de Recursos Hfdricos (DRH) de la Facultad de Ingeniería Agrícola, en la Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, durante los meses de febrero a julio del2015. El área experimental tuvo un área de 248m2. Se trabajó con dos tratamientos y en ambos se utilizó el sistema de riego por goteo, satisfaciendo una lámina de riego al 100% de la necesidad hfdrica del cultivo. Ambos tratamientos tuvieron la misma cantidad de área y la cantidad de plantas también fue la misma, se trabajó con un disefio completamente al azar con dos tratamientos y cada uno con seis repeticiones. De acuerdo a los resultados obtenidos, se concluye que para ambos tratamientos la cantidad de agua empleada fue de 3,040.45 m3 Ha“1 valor que representa un 60% de la cantidad empleada por los productores que trabajan con riego por gravedad. El rendimiento de la cosecha fue de 62.75 Tn Ha•1 para el riego por goteo intermitente y 57.16 Tn Ha“1 para el riego por goteo convencional, ambos resultados fueron favorables para el experimento ya que el rendimiento promedio nacional para el camote INIA 320, se encuentra alrededor de las 40 Tn Ha“1, teniendo en cuenta que los productores trabajan con riego por gravedad. Otro punto importante analizado al trabajar con el sistema de riego por goteo intermitente, fue que los bulbos de hwnedad, en este tratamiento, tienen una mejor distribución del agua en el suelo, esto se puede verificar al ver la curva del porcentaje de humedad en el suelo, donde se aprecia que en el riego intermitente el porcentaje de humedad es 6% mayor respecto al tratamiento de riego por goteo convencional.
This research aimed to compare the performance of INIA 320 sweetpotato by applying a conventional and intermittent irrigation using drip irrigation tape. Fieldwork was conducted in a demostration paree! of Water Resources Department (HRD), inside the Faculty of Agricultura! Engineering at the University National Agraria La Molina, between the months ofFebruary ~o July 2015. The experimental field had an area of 248 m2. -1 worked with two treatments and both used a drip irrigation system, the irrigation depth satisfied 100% of the crop water needs. Both treatments had the same amount of area and the same number of plants, 1 worked with a completely randomized design with two treatments and each one with six repetitions. According to the results, It concludes that the amount ofwater used was 3,040.45 m3 Ha-1 for both treatments, value that represents 600/o of the amount used by producers who work with gravity irrigation. The harvest performance was 62.75 Tn Ha“1 for intermittent drip irrigation and 57.16 Tn Ha“1 for conventional drip irrigation, both results were favorable for the experiment, as the national average for INIA 320 sweetpotato, performance is around 40 Tn Ha-1 and producers work with gravity irrigation. Another important issue analyzed. when working with intermittent drip irrigation system, was that humidity bulbs, in this treatment, it had a better distribution of water in the soil, this can be verified when we see the humidity curve on the ground, where we see that in the intermittent irrigation treatment the percentage of moisture is 6% higher compared to the drip irrigation conventional treatment.
This research aimed to compare the performance of INIA 320 sweetpotato by applying a conventional and intermittent irrigation using drip irrigation tape. Fieldwork was conducted in a demostration paree! of Water Resources Department (HRD), inside the Faculty of Agricultura! Engineering at the University National Agraria La Molina, between the months ofFebruary ~o July 2015. The experimental field had an area of 248 m2. -1 worked with two treatments and both used a drip irrigation system, the irrigation depth satisfied 100% of the crop water needs. Both treatments had the same amount of area and the same number of plants, 1 worked with a completely randomized design with two treatments and each one with six repetitions. According to the results, It concludes that the amount ofwater used was 3,040.45 m3 Ha-1 for both treatments, value that represents 600/o of the amount used by producers who work with gravity irrigation. The harvest performance was 62.75 Tn Ha“1 for intermittent drip irrigation and 57.16 Tn Ha“1 for conventional drip irrigation, both results were favorable for the experiment, as the national average for INIA 320 sweetpotato, performance is around 40 Tn Ha-1 and producers work with gravity irrigation. Another important issue analyzed. when working with intermittent drip irrigation system, was that humidity bulbs, in this treatment, it had a better distribution of water in the soil, this can be verified when we see the humidity curve on the ground, where we see that in the intermittent irrigation treatment the percentage of moisture is 6% higher compared to the drip irrigation conventional treatment.
Link to repository: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12996/1842
Note: Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina. Facultad de Ingeniería Agrícola. Departamento Académico de Recursos Hídricos
Discipline: Recursos Hídricos
Grade or title grantor: Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina. Facultad de Ingeniería Agrícola
Grade or title: Ingeniero Agrícola
Register date: 26-Aug-2016
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License