Long-Term Water Conservation Technology that Doubles Production and Preserves Groundwater

Alvin Smucker, Andrey Guber, Zouheir Massri and Kurt ThelenDepartment of Plant, Soil Microbial Sciences

Michigan State University,

Subsurface Water Retention Technology

SWRTIs a drought resilient soil water and nutrient conservationtechnology sustaining agricultural production of greater grain, cellulosic biomass and vegetables with less water

and fewer nutrients on sandy soils really needed?

Agriculture Irrigation and Precision Technologies to Reduce Water Use

Greensboro, NC; July 27, 2015

Supported by the NRCS/CIG/USDA Project Number 69-3A75-13-93.

Focal Perspectives:

Introduction

Soil Water Retention Technology: SWRT

Results for sustainable production on sands.

Mechanisms associated with yield increases

Identifying optimal components of soil water/crop/weather.

Retaining water at the root level of crops has been a major focus in precision irrigation system from

technological, socio-economic, and environmental perspectives.

Historical Improvements in Agriculture Production

Gen

etic

Res

ista

nce

to A

biot

ic a

nd B

iotic

Str

esse

s

Soil Water and Nutrient Balance for

Best Plant Production

Fertilization and Pest Controland

Best Management Practices

Plant Breeding and

Plant Bioengineering

Soil D

rainage, NP

K, N

o Till, , Cover C

rops, Microbes

Four Opportunities for Production Agriculture

1. Food production needs to increase by 70% to feed a projected global population of 9.6 billion by 2050.

Will require 60% more irrigation water at current WUE.

2. Corn plants experience between 27 and 45 drought periods annually. Death of 1,540 tertiary maize roots per m3/d, then regrow following rainfall or irrigation.15.4 million roots lost per hectare per crop.

3. Most plants growing on well-drained soils, absorb 40% to 50% of rainfall and irrigation water. Due to extremely negative water potential. < -65 to -100 hPa

4. Surface water available for irrigation agriculture in the USA has decreased ~20% during last 30 years.

Volumetric soil water content storage in sands increases as the SWRT water saving membranes are

installed closer, to the root zone.

--

-

-

-

--

-

-

--

-

--

3.6 L/h/m2SWRTMembrane

Although contrasting textural layers within sand profiles retard gravitational soil water drainage, strategically positioned polymermembranes reduce infiltration to ~0 when irrigated with precision.

0 20 40 60 100 Soil depth – cm

Infi

ltra

tio

n r

ate

– m

l/se

c/cm

2 360 L/h/m2 natural sand

1.5 to 3.0 milPE membranes

50 cm

35 cm

2:1aspectratio

Polymer films were engineered into contoured linear-low density polyethylene (PE) SWRT membranes strategically installed below plant root zone with space available for unlimited root growth AND drainage during excess rainfall.

- 50 to -70 hPa

SDI

Capillary rise aboveMembrane 32 cm

2:1 aspectratio

40 cm

55 cm

1.5 to 3.0 milpolyethylenemembrane

Vol. H2O content

24%

9%

21%

17%

14%

6%

Soil Surface

General distribution of VWC in root zone above SWRT membranesinstalled at soil depths controlled by soil texture, capillary rise,

soil water retention graphics and measured in the field.

24%

21%

12%

17%

5%

Continuesacross thefield

Continuesacross the

field

HYDRUS-2D example of soil water distribution after irrigation of sand soil profile modified by SWRT membranes with aspect ratios: 2:1 (a) after 11 days, 3:1 (b) after 6 days and 5:1 (c) after 4 days.

SWRT membranes are shown as white U-shaped troughs.

VWC

Water retention within and above SWRT membranes to near soil by membranes having 3 different width to depth aspect ratios:

2:1 3:1 5:1 353 cm3 cm-1 236 cm3 cm-1 141 cm3 cm-1

18%21%24%26%28%

Sat. = 35.4%

21%24%26%

28%

16%

18%21%24%26%28%

(b) (c)(a)

SWRT membranes with aspect ratios of 2:1 provide best soil water contents for optimal water conservation and crop production.

Excavated water and nutrient saving membrane, 30 cm wide x 15 cm deep, installed at soil depth of 35 cm from base to soil surface.

15 cmdeep

30 cm wide

12

Water lost by deep drainage

SWRT membranes double soil water holding capacity in cornroot zone, saving 1,012.7 million liters of irrigation water per

hectare during each 110 day corn cropping season.Ro

ot Z

one

Soi

l w

ater

Con

tent

%

ControlNo membranes

SWRT membranes

13

Promotion of irrigated corn growth and yield by SWRT water and nutrient saving membranes (left side) and

no SWRT membranes (right side). June 29, 2012 in East Lansing, Michigan

Non

- dro

ught

str

esse

d co

rn P

lot

Drought stressed corn plot of

17.1 Mt/ha of grain 9.7 Mt/ha of grain

Results for corn production during past 3 years:

38 cm row Non-irrigated control, no membrane

38 cm row Non-irrigated SWRT membrane 2014

15" Row Non Irrigated 15" Row Irrigated0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00 169 (9)*325(9)*

Corn grain yields on 38 cm rowswith SWRT Membranes - 2014

MT

pe

r h

ec

tare

An additional 24 cm irrigation increased corn grain production 58% (308 Kg maize grain per cm water) when grown on SWRT

membranes improved water retention of sand soils. n=5

Non-Irrigated Irrigatedon

TreatmentMT per hectare

Percentageincrease

Control 5.2 (5.4)* 0SWRT

Membranes 17.4 (2.6)* 235%

* Denotes standard error.

Three - year average corn grain production onSWRT membranes rainfed plus irrigation at

Sand Hill Farm, East Lansing, MI. 2012 - 2014.

Mechanisms associated with SWRT membrane promotion of plant growth and grain yields:

SWRT improved irrigation WUE for corn: 278%.

That is more crop per drop of water!

Four Opportunities for Production Agriculture

1. Food production needs to increase by 70% to feed a projected global population of 9.6 billion by 2050.

Will require 60% more irrigation water at current WUE.

2. Corn plants experience between 27 and 45 drought periods annually. Death of 1,540 tertiary maize roots per m3/d, then regrow following rainfall or irrigation.15.4 million roots lost per hectare per crop.

3. Most plants growing on well-drained soils, absorb 40% to 50% of rainfall and irrigation water. Due to extremely negative water potential. < -65 to -100 hPa

4. Surface water available for irrigation agriculture in the USA is decreasing during last 30 years.

Growth and death (1,540 roots per m3/d ) of tertiaryroots for maize in sand soil from the onset of droughtduring 32 days of severe water deficits during V10

vegetative stage. (Smucker and Aiken, 1992).

-65 hPa

100 cm 80 cm50 cm

Soil water potential - MPa

Soil Depth:

20

Corn roots remain healthy along surface

of SWRT membraneat crop maturity.

Greater water retention in the root zone of cornby SWRT subsurface membranes

increases shoot to root ratios by 131% (2.31-fold)

Per

Single PlantBiomass

gm.

Treatments

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

A

B

C

B

Control SWRT Membranes

20122013

ETO

H M

g/H

aOptimal soil water contents in plant root zone promotedcorn biomass with higher conversion rates to ethanol.

Sustainable FoodProduction on Sands

Health and Environmental Protection of Groundwater

Maximum Cellulosic Biomass

Production on Sands

SWRT

Doubles production with half the

irrigation water

Produces more biomass of renewable cellulosic biofuels

Does drought tolerance reduceproduction potential of irrigated maize?

Reduces greenhouse gas production

Minimizes groundwater contamination 16S Ribosomal profiles with soil depth in SWRT and control sands.

EMO/HYDRUS models (Current research)

Reduces surface erosion of soil P (Year around soil cover

Saves 40% more N and K in plant root zone

Greater soil carbonsequestration

Subsurface Water Retention Technology is a new option for increasing yield, maximizing rainwater retention, conserving

irrigation water resources and reducing salinity and groundwater contamination in humid, arid and semi-arid regions globally.

Incorporating multiple soil plant and atmosphere conditions and responses to SWRT into anEvolutionary – Multi-objectiveOptimization (EMO) model coupled with HYDRUS 3D.

Future water conservation in the USA and globally

362 variables@ 103 objectives

Identify primary components of soil water - plant - weather.

1. Can we improve the Ecosystem Services of agriculturewith new technology during changing climates?

2. Does drought tolerance reduce production when soil water is optimized by irrigation or new biotechnologies?

3. Optimum budgets for long and short term technologies?

4. Prioritization of reasons for increasing grain and biomass?

5. How can we best optimize sustainability?

Collaborative Team - Work Programs are Essential among:

Plant genetic bioengineers Hydropedologic engineers Soil scientists Agronomists National and global policy makers

before long-term sustainable maximum food production can be achieved with the least amount of water when irrigated with optimal precision.

Email: smucker@msu.edu

Vadose Zone Journal. 2015. 2004-11-0166-ORA.R1-PDF0001Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 2014. Vol.(5):154-160 DOI 10.2489/jswc.69

Additional websites: SWRT Webinar: https://connect.msu.edu/p7x01brb8a9/

Website search: SWRT Smucker

Thank You

July 27, 2013, East Lansing, Michigan

MSU, SWRT Solutions©

Maximum Initial SWRT Market Potential for U.S. Corn & Soybeans Based on Available Sandy Soils

5-Yr Avg. U.S. % Initial Initial SWRTCrop Ac/Planted (000) SWRT Acres Acres (000)

Corn 89,885 15.0% 13,483

Soybeans 76,564 15.0% 11,485

Total 166,449 24,967

Corn & Bean Gross RevenueAcres (000) per Acre Market (000)

Market 24,967 $2,000 $49,934,700

28

Economics

New SWRTProfit (000)

$8,909 *

$5,076**

* SWRT increases profits by $661 per acre of corn.** SWRT increases profits by $424 per acre of soybeans.

$13,985,633

TreatmentPeppers

Kg/aCucumbers

Kg/a

Control 7,689 (450)* 10,710 (2674)

SWRT Membranes 10,336 (440) 15,800 (1518)

SWRT Increase 28% 44%

*Values in parentheses are standard errors of the means.

29

MSU SWRT enhancement of vegetable production of irrigated cucumbers and peppers on a

Spinks Sand at SWMREC, 2012. N=4