CONSUMPTIVE USE OF WATER BY SUGARCANE

IN HAWAII

Paul C. Ekern

Technical Report No. 37

July 1970

Project Completion Report

of

EVAPOTRANSPIRATION BY SUGARCANE

OWRR Project No. A-014-HI, Grant Agreement No. 14-01-0001-1630

Principal Investigator: Paul C. Ekern

Project Period: July 1967 to September 1969

The programs and activities described herein were supported in partby funds provided by the United States Department of the Interior asauthorized under the Water Resources Act of 1964, Public Law 88-379.

ABSTRACT

Water use by sprinkler irrigated sugaroane under flat-bed culture

was measured in four 100 ft 2 by 5 ft deep hydraulioally weighed lysi­

meters at the Kunia substation of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Assooia­

tion. Nine-week-old one-eye oane transplants were set into a 5-foot

grid in Molokai Low Humio Latosol on 27 Ootober~ 1968. Water use

approaohed a 1:1 ratio with a oonventional olass A pan by late Maroh~

1969 for a 3.5 leaf area index. Average values were 0.25 in/day for

the midsummer months. The oane was ratooned on 10 May~ 1969 and water

use was reduoed to a 0.33 fraotion of pan evaporation. The oane re­

grew rapidly and water use was again equivalent to pan evaporation

by July~ 1969. Neither gypsum resistanoe blooks nor the neutron

probe gave aooeptable measurements of water withdrawal from Molokai

Low Humio Latosol. Clear day net radiation over the oanopy with a

mid-day refleotanoe of 0.21 was:

net radiation = (1- refleotanoe) sunlight -0.15 ly/min.

Consumptive use by oane or pan often equalled or exoeeded the

net radiation~ indioating strong positive adveotion of heat from the

surroundings. JJuping the early stages of oane growth~ peroolate from

heavy winter rains oontained as great as 225 ppm nitrate~ but as the

oane matured~ the peroolate had less than 1 ppm nitrate though the

oontent of other solutes suoh as ohloride~ sulfate~ and silioa remained

high.

iii

CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES v

LIST OF TABLES"..............................................•••vii

INTRODUCTI ON 1

FIELD LOCATION AND LYSIMETER DESIGN 4

Site: Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association Kunia Substation ... 4Constructi on Detail s ........................................•. 15

RESULTS ....................•....................................25

Lys imeter Cali bra ti on 25Water Use by Cane 32

Assessment of Water Status ..............................•..... 44Perco1ate Ana 1yses 53

DISCUSSION AND SUMMARy 58

BIBL IOGRAPHY 60

APPENDICES ....................................................•. 65

FIGURES

1. The ratio between water use by sugarcane and pan eva-poration at different growth stages 2

2. Scatter diagram of the relation between pan evapora­tion and percolate 1ysimeter evaporation bysugarcane 2

3. Aerial photograph of the Kunia substation, HSPA 54. Diagram of Kunia substation field I showing the

1ysimeter area 65. Roadside cut immediately adjacent to the 1ysi-

meters 8

6a. Laboratory desorption curve for disturbed sample ofMo1okai Low Humic Latoso1, 0-6 inches 9

6b. Laborato~y desorption curve for disturbed sample ofMo1okai Low Humic Latoso1, 6-12 inches 9

6c. Laboratory desorption curve for disturbed sample ofMo1okai Low Humic Latoso1, 12-18 inches 10

v

6d. Laboratory desorption curve for disturbed sample ofMo10kai Low Humic Latoso1, 18-24 inches 10

7. Laboratory calibration of Boyoucos blocks in Mo10kaisoil 11

8. Laboratory calibration of Troxler 104 probe in Mo10kaisubsoil 11

9. Laboratory calibration of P19 Nuclear Chicago probein Mo10kai and Lei1ehua soi1 13

10. Lysimeter pit during preparation of foundation 1611. Hydraulic load cells in p1ace 1812. Copper leads from load cells are encased in poly-

vinyl pipe for conveyance to edge of fie1d 1913. Styrofoam tower with insulated reservoir topped

by float recorder 2014. Three of the 1ysimeter boxes set in place on load

cells 21

15. P19 Nuclear Chicago probe in place on an access tubeand the scaler used to obtain neutron density are inoperation on the 1ysimeter 22

16. Twelve-volt sump pumo used to withdraw the perco-late 23

17. One-eye seed pieces just orior to transplantinginto field 26

18. Lysimeter area immediately after planting, 28Oc tober, 1968 27

19. Tipping bucket raingage and gasoline pump forirri ga ti on 28

20. Manometer response to successive additions ofweight on 1ysimeter IV 30

21. Daily values of water use by sugarcane duringApri 1 and May 1969 33

22. Daily evaporation values of conventional surface-levelpan compared with water use by sugarcane with fullcane canopy in April, May, July and August 1969 34

23. Cane growth just prior to harvest in early May1969 35

24. Daily values of water use by sugarcane during Julyand Augus t 1969 36

25. Monthly averages of water use by sugarcane, pan eva­poration from conventional surface-level pan andfraction sunlight used in evaporation 37

26. Net radiation as a function of (1-ref1ectance)sunlight over sugarcane on 12 r~ay 1969 39

27. Reflectance over sugarcane canopy on 1ysimeters atKunia on 24-28 April 1969 41

vi

28a.

28b.

29.

30a.

3Ob.

30e.

30d.

3l.32.

33.

34.

35.

Subsoil temperature, 1ysimeter I, January throughJuly, 1969 42

Subsoil temperature in 1ysimeter II and averagemonthly air temperature during January to July1969 43

Neutron probe measurements of volumetric waterchange in lysimeter I 46

Volumetric water content by neutron probe com­pared with resistance block measurements of soilmoisture content: lysimeter I, 9 March 1969 ........•.•... 47Volumetric water content by neutron probe com-pared with resistance block measurements of soilmoisture content: lysimeter I, 19 April 1969 ...•.....•... 48Volumetric water content by neutron probe com-pared with resistance block measurements of soilmoisture content: lysimeter II, 9 March 1969 49Volumetric water content by neutron probe com-pared with resistance block measurements of soilmoisture content: lysimeter II, 9 March 1969 .........••.• 50

Hysteresis loop for Mo10kai subsoil ...........•...•.•..... 51Resistance bloCK readings as a function of depth inlysimeter I 52

Cumulative loss of nitrate in percolate from alllysimeters during the winter of 1968-69 .......•.....•..... 54Chloride and nitrate concentrations in percolatefrom lysimeter I during the winter of 1968-69••...•..••... 55Concentration of the solution removed in the averagepercolate from all the lysimeters ..................•.•••.. 57

TABLES

1. Rainfall at field 26, Oahu Sugar Co. for the 26-yearperiod originating in 1926 .•...................•.......•.... 4

2. Class A pan evaporation at the Kunia substation, HSPA1963 through 1967 4

3. Sunlight recorded by Eppley pyrheliometer at Kuniasubstation, HSPA 1964 through 1968 7

4. Ratio probe/standard for P19 Nuclear Chicago instru­ment in Molokai soil and the corresponding volumetricand gravimetric water content and stress for surfaceand subsoi 1........................................•.....•. 14

5. Chemical analysis of 4 Molokai soils 156. Bulk densities from triplicate core samples in lysi-

meters after completion 24

vii

7. Composition of irrigation waters applied to 1ysimeters .•... 258. Uniformity of sprinkler irrigation over 1ysimeter

area 29

9. Sprinkler irrigation application rates on 1ysimetersat Kuni a...........................................•.......31

10. Reflectance over sugarcane 1ysimeters at Kunia ...•..••.••.. 3811. Net radiation as a fraction of solar radiation 4012. Contrast between neutron probe and 1ysimeter assess-

ments of water use and irrigation•......................•.. 4413. Volumetric field capacity of 1ysimeter surface soil

determined from neutron probe reading at the 9-inchdepth after irrigation or rainfall .....••..•.......•....... 45

14. Fertilization 5515. Chemical analyses of 1ysimeter surface soi1s 5616. Chemical composition of mi11ab1e cane and green

leaves harvested from 1ysimeters at the Kuniasubstation, field I, variety H 50-7209 .............•.....•. 58

APPENDICES

A. Description of Mo10kai soi1s ............................•..67B. Monthly weather reports 71C. Water use rates for individual 1ysimeters ...•.......•...... 77D. Percolate composition for individual 1ysimeters 83E. Percolate volumes for individual 1ysimeters 91

viii

INTRODUCTION

Of the total distributed water in the Hawaiian Islands for 1957,

74.5 percent was used for irrigation. On Oahu, 72.5 percent or 141,835

of the distributed 195,761 million gallons, was used for irrigation,

predominantly for sugarcane (Hawaii Water Authority, 1959).

The efficiency of furrow irrigation application in Hawaii is

only between 30 to 40 percent, in part, because of the very high infil­

tration rates of the soils (Shaw and Swezey, 1937). However, the

efficiency of sprinkler application is reputedly double this (Campbell,

1963). The future of extensive use of sprinkler irrigation in Hawaiian

sugarcane agriculture demands more precise definition of the efficiency

of sprinkler operation (Blewitt, 1961 and Baver 1963).

Consumptive use of water by mature sugarcane under furrow irri­

gation was measured by percolate lysimeters on Maui (Fig. 1) (Campbell,

et at., 1959, Robinson, et at., 1963, Chang, et at., 1967). However,

the precision and validity of the 1:1 use/pan ratio from these studies

has been seriously questioned (Fig. 2) (Ewart, 1967). Weighed lysi­

meters in Natal also gave a 1:1 ratio between sugarcane use and pan

evaporation (Thompson and Boyce, 1967). Bermuda grass sod grown at

Wahiawa, Oahu, had a 1:1 ratio but only when the sod was kept well

watered (Ekern, 1966a).

Large hydraulic lysimeters were designed in 1967 and constructed

and planted to sugarcane under flat bed culture and sprinkler irri­

gation in 1968 as a cooperative endeavor of the Water Resources Re­

search Center and the Agronomy and Soils Department of the University

of Hawaii and the Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association (HSPA) at the

HSPA Kunia substation (Ekern, 1967, 1968). These lysimeters were used

to obtain the primary measurements of the water use of sugarcane.

Other methods were explored as checks upon the moisture budget

measured by the lysimeters. The sugar industry has made extensive use

of the gypsum resistance blocks (Boyoucos blocks), hence these devices

were installed within the lysimeters to assess soil-moisture status

(Robinson, 1963a). The possible discrepancies caused by block hy­

steresis were recognized for the very porous Hawaiian soils (Tanner

and Hanks, 1952). The neutron probe was used for the measurement of

soil-moisture status within the lysimeters despite the mixed success

2

18 20IS10 12 14

MONTHS

....."...J AVERAGE OF RATIOS FROM THREE FIELD

V MAXIMUM AVERAGE RATIO IN ANY ONE FIELD

1:::& MINMUM II """""

NOTE:DATA FROM LYS/METER NO.5OMITTE.

4 S 8

CANE AGE

2

La

1.4

0L2-.-

~a: 1.0

Z

~ 0.8

"a: OSw.-W

0.4~-C/)

~ 0.2

00

FIGURE 1. THE RATIO BETWEEN WATER USE BY SUGARCANE ATDIFFERENT GROWTH STAGES AND PAN EVAPORATION(AFTER CAMPBELL? ET AL., 1959).

• 100 r 2 .. 15

~ 0 ....0

~I: 0.50

~~ 0.20III

I:III 0.10

~1- 0.00 L-...........~--I_L.-..i-.......__--II_.....-~ 0 0.10 0.20 0.50 0 ....0 0.50.J PAN EVAPoRATION UN./DAY)

~"~ 0 .•0-

FIGURE 2. SCATTER DIAGRAM OF THE RELATION BETWEEN PAN EVA­PORATION AND PERCOLATE LYSIMETER EVAPORATION BYSUGARCANE (AFTER EWART, 1967, CURVE WAS DEVEL­OPED AND REPORTED BY HSPA, IRRIGATION REPORT NO.28, TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT #2).

\

3

of past attempts (Robinson, 1963b, Shirazi, et aZ. 3 1967, Sharma, 1968,

Yoshida, 1969). The extremely high clay and iron contents of the

Molokai soil profile make the neutron-probe calibration for this soil

markedly different from the factory standard adapted for temperate la­

titude soils (Fernandez and Sherman, 1963, Holmes and Jenkinson, 1959).

The neutron probe has been used in other soils to estimate evapotrans­

piration with success (Bowman and King, 1965, van Bavel and Stirk, 1967

and McGuiness, et aZ. 3 1961). The net radiation, artd thus the poten­

tial evapotranspiration, over the Latosol and cane in subtropical lati­

tudes is uniquely great (Ekern, 1965a). Even though the cane was

transplanted, the exposed soil causes low rates of water loss during the

early stages (Ekern, 1966b). The aerodynamic features of extreme rough­

ness from the height of the mature cane canopy favor rapid evapotrans­

piration, particularly when strong positive advection of heat occurs

(Chang, 1961). However, the reflectance from the full cane canopy under

conventional planting systems is relatively high and the net radiation

correspondingly less than that for bare soil or for a standard class A

pan (Ekern 1965b, 1966a, and 1966b).

Percolate waters used to assess the water budget provided means

to measure the loss of solutes in the leachate. Nitrate accumulations

in return irrigation waters on Oahu suggest that materials move readily

through the Latosols (Mink, 1962). The large supplies of mineralizable

nitrogen in the Molokai soil (Stanford, Ayres and Doi, 1965) and the

ready movement of anions (Chao and Okazaki, 1965) support the possibi­

lity of extensive leaching occurring from the over-irrigation caused

by the low efficiency of furrow irrigation. Losses in the leachate

have been high when the soil is fallow (Magistad, 1934, Ayres and Ha­

gihara, 1963, Takahashi, 1968). The economics of nitrogen fertili­

zation as well as the pollution of ground water hinge upon percolate

amounts and quality (Stewart, et al' 3 1968, Power, 1968).

The principal objectives for this project were:

1. Measurement of consumptive use of water by sugarcane.

2. Correlation of the measured rate of use with parameters

suitable for the prediction of irrigation interval

scheduling.

3. Collection of seepage waters for the detection of the

movement of water and solutes through the soil profile.

4

FIELD LOCATION AND LYSIMETER DESIGN

Site: Hawaiian Sugar Planters· AssociationKunia Substation

Four 10 ft x 10 ft x 5 ft deep lysimeter boxes (Ekern, 1967) were

installed in field I at the Kunia substation of the HSPA (Fig. 3). This

leeward station (Hawaiian Meteorological Index No. 740.4) has an ele-

vation of 285 feet at 21 0 23' N latitude, 158 0 2.4' W longtitude (Taliaferro,

1961). The four lysimeters are adjacent to one another, with a gap of

approximately 2 inches between them so that they form a continuum of

20' x 20' square (Fig. 4). The annual rainfall for this Kunia station was

31.30 inches for 1964-1967. The rainfall at field 26 of the Oahu Sugar

Co. (Hawaiian Meteorological Index No. 640.3), which is immediately ad­

jacent to the Kunia substation, had a maximum of 46.7 inches, upper

quartile of 32.7 inches, median of 28.3 inches, lower quartile of 20.2

inches, and a minimum of 9.9 inches for the 26-year period originating in

1926. A winter rainfall maximum also occurred at this station (Table 1).

Class A pan evaporation for this site had an annual value of 70.34 inches

for 1963 through 1967, with a summer maximum (Table 2) and daily mid­

summer values of 0.25 inches. Sunlight measured by an Eppley pyrhelio­

meter averaged 480 1y/day with a June maximum (Table 3).

TABLE 1. RAINFALL AT FIELD 26, OAHU SUGAR CO. (INDEX 640.3) FORTHE 26-YEAR PERIOD ORIGINATING IN 1926 (IN INCHES) .:~

MONTH JAN. FEB. MM. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC.

MAX. 17.2 12.6 19.4 6.1 3.6 2.1 2.3 3.7 9.9 11. 8 12.5 6.7

MEDIAN 3.7 3.7 1.9 1.0 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.9 1.2 2.0 2.6

MIN. 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

x TALIAFERRO. 1959. RAINFALL OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. HAWAI I WATER AUTHORITY.

TABLE 2. CLASS A PAN EVAPORATION AT THE KUNIA SUBSTATION, HSPA(INDEX 740.4) 1963 THROUGH 1967 (IN INCHES).

t'ONTH JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. ANN.

4.41 4.62 5.19 5.59 6.55 7.73 7.74 7.50 6.79 5.78 4.49 3.97 70.34

. i

FIGURE 3. AERIAL PHOHSPA TOGRAPH OF• LYSIMETER PITST~~C~RUCNIA SUBSTATIONLED. '

5

0'

PUMP

VALVE

FLUME:2"

DSHED

0000000.0 ql <U ~~ ~"0 0 II 2

o . t:\ 0~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 3'" I:T' I" I

00·00000·00· 4

00<:)0000000000 5

00· ·0· 00000000X 6

o 0 0'><:0 0 0 . . . - . 0 0 0 011 7

000 0 000 .... 0 000 ~80000000· .. ·0000 9

o 0 0x0 0 0 0· . . . . 0 0 ~ 10

00 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 ~"00000000000- 000 12

000000·0000·00013o 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 11(.) 0 0 <:> 14

X ~ Xo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 15

o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

000000000000000 17

X SPRINKLERS (RAtNBIRD)SHADED AREA 400xIO)LYSIMETERSo =9WEEKS OLD I EYE TRAt'ooJSPLANT

DATE PLANTED: 10128-29188

SPACING: 6 FEET

AREA(NET CANEt. .131446 A.

AREA (PER STOOU:.Q00574

FIGURE 4. DIAGRAM OF KUNIA SUBSTATION FIELD I SHOWING THE LYSI­METER AREA.

7

TABLE 3. SUNLIGHT RECORDED BY EPPLEY PHYRHELIOMETER AT KUNIASUBSTATION, HSPA (INDEX 740.4) 1964 THROUGH 1968.

AVG. LY/DAY

~TH JAN. FEB. I'AR. APR-. MAY JL.NE JULY ALG. SEPT. OCT. t-,OV. DEC. A!>I'J.

MAX. 391 468 566 561 634 641 596 594 530 542 429 384 518MIN. 315 373 388 457 461 496 490 549 488 431 331 298 426

AVG. 364 432 462 509 548 577 565 567 511 463 375 349 482

SOIL. The Molokai soil at the site is residual on the upper part of a

cliff cut into Koolau basalt by a 95-foot (Yarmouth) sea stand (Ruhe,

et al., 1965, Swindale and Uehara, 1966, Juang and Uehara, 1968). The

official soil profile description indicates the well-structured nature

of the materials (Appendix A). The large boulders in the subsoil

(Fig. 5) presented a formidable barrier to the excavation for the ly­

simeters. Electrical resistivity, seismic, and direct probings failed

to reveal the precise location of these boulders within field I, and the

arbitrary site finally chosen for the pit was liberally endowed with

such boulders. The subsoil, over-excavated to remove the boulders, was

recompacted in the pit bottom to form a firm foundation for the lysi­

meters.

Desorption moisture release curves for the Molokai soil from

Kunia show the effects of the aggregation of this heavy clay soil

(Figs. 6a, b, c, and d). The curves resemble those for sand, though

the total water retained is great since the aggregates remain near

saturation until moisture stress of 100 to 200 bars (Sharma and Uehara,

1968a and Ekern, 1966b).

The response to moisture stress for the gypsum blocks determined

in the laboratory for Kunia soil material repeats the abrupt habit of

water release with stress by the Molokai soil (Fig. 7). Controlled

calibration of a Troxler 104 neutron probe in specially packed samples

of Kunia soil indicated a net soil effect equivalent to 7 or 8-percent

water (Fig. 8). The slope varied slightly from the factory standard,

only the intercept seemed changed (Shirazi, et al.,1967). Field and

laboratory calibration of a P 19 Nuclear Chicago probe in the Kunia

soil indicated a changed intercept as well as a marked departure from

FIGURE 5. ROADSIDE CUT IMv1EDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE LYSIMETERS. NOTE THE VERYLARGE BOULDERS EMBEDDED IN THE SUBSOIL.

00

.ig= I I I I I I I I I I I~I I I Ie,19201 2~4587a9~1 2~45

GRAVIMETRIC WATER CONTENT (0/0)

2012~4567a9~12~45

GRAVIMETRIC WATER CONTENT (%)

15 15

14 14

I~ I~

12 12

II ..I/)

10

I/)

II::II:: 10

« «m m

9

ZZ

9

0 a

0

l-I- a

00

:J 7:J

(J)(J) 7

W6

WII:: 8

II:: :J:J ~I- 5(J)

5

05

~~

4

~

2

FIGURE 6a. LABORATORY DESORPTION CURVE FOR DIS­TURBED SAMPLE OF MOLOKAI LOW HUMICLATOSOL, 0-6 INCHES.

FIGURE 6b. LABORATORY DESORPTION CURVE FOR DIS­TURBED SAMPLE OF ttOLOKAI LOW HUMICLATOSOL, 6-12 INCHES. \0

201234667893:)123

GRAVIMETRIC WATER CONTENT (%)

20123456789301234

GRAVIMETRIC WATER CONTENT (%)

~

0

15.- • 15

:[ I14

13

Q[ 12

II "~ 10

CD0::«10m

Z 9 Z 9

Q Ql- I-o 8 o 8

:J :JCD CD

7 7

W W0:: 0:::J 6 :J 6

l- I-CD CD

06 (5 6

~~

4

3

2

FIGURE 6c. LABORATORY DESORPTION CURVE FOR DIS­TURBED SAMPLE OF MOLOKAI LOW HUMICLATOSOL, 12-18 INCHES.

FIGURE 6d. LABORATORY DESORPTION CURVE FOR DIS­TURBED SAMPLE OF MOLOKAI LOW HUMICLATOSOL, 18-24 INCHES.

150 .. I

I• I

140~ • I•• I•I!O~

. If. I.. I• I120~ ... I.. I.

0 110 . I

a I100

Iz I

~ ICD 110

IIL I0 I-:t 10 I!!..(/) I~ IZ 70 I:) I00 eo I

~I

I

~ 50 II

.J Iw I0: 40

II

!OI- II • • • • • •• MOLOKAI 8UB8OIL

I --- MOLOI<AJ 8URP'ACE &OIL

ftJ I- I___ FACTORY CAUIlAATlON

III

10

0II 20 !O 40 50 eo 70 10 eo 100

-/_ MOISTURE BY VOLUME

12 13 14 15

10·' , I I I I I I I , I I I I , I ,

o I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IISOIL MOISTURE TENSION (BARS)

102

10'

CIl I:::E 10:z:o~

1LIUZ

~CIlu;1LI

a:: 100

az<l:CIl::>o:z:t:

FIGURE 7. LABORATORY CALIBRATION OF BOYOUCOSBLOCKS IN MOLOKAI SOIL CO" - 12").

FIGURE 8. LABORATORY CALIBRATION OF TROXLER104 PROBE IN MOLOKAI SUBSOIL(AFTER SHIRAZI, ET AL., 1967).

..........

12

the slope of the factory standard so that the response was identical

with the factory standard for intermediate moisture contents only

and was equivalent in the dry range (20 percent volumetric water) to

a +5.5 percent departure and to a -2 percent departure for moisture

contents near field capacity (40 percent volumetric water) (Fig. 9).

The empirical equation,

volumetric water percent = 27.1 ratio -5.0,

was used to construct Table 4 for the transformation of probe ratios

into volumetric water content. The very high clay and iron contents of

the Molokai soil would be responsible for a marked departure from the

relationships of the more nearly inert temperate latitude soil materials

(Table 5.) (Cotecchia, et aZ., 1968).

The aggregation of Molokai soil into apparent sand or gravel tex­

ture causes high infiltration rates and rapid drainage from the profile.

The unsaturated capillary conductivity drops abruptly with increase in

soil suction (and concommittent decrease in soil water) so that the

effective field capacity of the soil after two days of drainage from

ring infiltration studies or field determinations is 0.1 to 0.15 bars

(Ekern, 1966b, Sharma and Uehara, 1968b, and Yokoyama, 1969). Drainage

from the profile has been sufficiently complete in the 1ysimeters so that

the subsidiary tensiometer system was not used. This agrees with earlier

experiences with similar soil materials.

AUXILIARY METEOROLOGICAL PARAMETERS. HSPA maintains a meteorological

station at Kunia about 600 feet from the 1ysimeters with rainfall, temp­

erature, humidity, wind direction, and velocity as routine measurements

(Appendix B). Class A pan evaporation in a conventional installation

and in a pan elevated 5 feet above the ground are recorded daily. Sun­

light is measured by an Eppley pyrheliometer, serial no. 1339, with a

calibration of 7.22 mv/ly. Weekly radiation measurements by photo­

chemical tubes and by a WigWag are also made (Brodie, 1964). A

Monteith solarimeter, calibration: 3.32 mv/ly, has been inverted for

reflectance measurements. Two Thornthwaite miniature net radiome-

ters, serial no. 412 at 3.64 mv/1y and serial no. 413 at 3.34 mv/ly,

were used to determine the net radiation. A tipping bucket recording

raingage, model no. 595, is used on the site for rainfall measurement.

5040

•••••

- VOL.UIVIETRIC WATER 4Y•• 27.1 RATIO -5.0

- - FACTORY CALIBRATION

• MOL.Ot<AI SOIL

• LEILEHUA SOIL

/

•t:c.-ft•

//

2.0

1.9

o~~ 1.3

o 1.2.JIIIf 1.1fD" 1.0...m

f

V~ETRIO \'VATER %

FIGURE 9. LABORATORY CALIBRATION OF PI9 MJCLEAR CHICAGO PROBE IN t-()LOKAI AND LEILEHUASOIL. ....

c...l

TABLE 4. RATIO PROBE/STANDARD FOR P19 NUCLEAR CHICAGO INSTRUMENT IN MOLOKAI SOIL AND ....THE CORRESPONDING VOLUMETRIC AND GRAVIMETRIC WATER CONTENT AND STRESS FOR ~

SURFACE AND SUBSOIL (DESORPTION BRANCH).

WATER CONTENT P'OIS~E STRESS WATER CCliTENT P'OIS~ STRESS

RATIO I/OlLf'ETRIC GRAVI"ETRIC RATIO I/OlLf'ETRIC GRAVI"ETRIC, SLRFACE:: SlAlSOIl"" SLRFACE SUBSOIL , SLRFACE:: SUBSOI L:::: SURFACE SlAlSOll, ,BARS BARS

, , BARS BARS

0.50 8.55 7.77 6.11 500 1.32 30.77 27.97 21.98 0.45

0.52 9.09- 8.26 6.49 460 1. 34 31.31 28.46 22.36 0.41

0.54 9.63 8.75 6.88 430 1.36 31.86 28.96 22.76 0.36

0.56 10.18 9.25 7.27 '390 1.38 32.40 29.45 23.14 0.33

0.58 10.72 9.75 7.66 360 LitO 32.94 29.95 23.53 0.30

8.04 1.42 33.48 30.44 n.91 0.270.60 11.26 10.24 330

8.43 310 1.44 34.02 30.93 24.30 0.250.62 11.80 10.73

8.81 290 1.46 34.57 31.43 24.69 0.230.64 12.34 11. 22

0.66 11.72 9.21 260 1.48 35.11 31.92 25.08 0.2212.89

0.68 13.33 12.12 9.52 240 1.50 35.65 32.41 25.46 0.21

12.70 9.98 220 1.52 36.19 32.90 25.85 0.19 0.630.70 13.97

14.51 13.19 10.26 200 1.54 36.73 33.39 26.24 0.18 0.560.72

0.74 15.05 13.68 10.75 190 I. 56 37.28 33.89 26.63 0.17 0.49

14.18 11.14 170 1.58 37.82 34.38 27.01 0.16 0.440.76 15.60

0.78 16.14 14.67 11.53 160 1.60 38.36 34.87 27.40 0.15 0.39

16.68 15.16 11.91 145 1.62 38.90 35.36 27.79 0.14 0.350.80

15.65 12.30 135 1.64 39.44 35.85 28.17 0.135 0.330.82 17.22

17.76 16.15 12.69 125 1.66 39.99 36.35 28.56 0.13 0.300.84

18.31 16.65 13.08 120 1.68 40.53 36.85 28.95 0.125 0.2850.86

18.85 17.14 13.46 110 1.70 41.00 37.34 29.34 0.120 0.2750.88

17.63 13.85 100 1.72 41.61 37.83 29.72 0.lI5 0.2600.90 19.39

14.24 80 1.74 42.15 38.32 30.11 0.110 0.2500.92 19.93 18.12

18.61 14.62 45 I. 76 42.70 38.82 30.50 0.105 0.2400.94 20.47

19.11 15.01 33 I. 78 43.24 39.31 30.89 0.102 0.2360.96 21.02

21.56 19.60 15.'+0 25 1.80 43.78 39.80 31.27 0.100 0.2300.98

15.79 20 1.82 44.32 40.29 31.66 0.095 0.2181.00 22.10 20.09

22.64 20.58 16.17 15 1.84 44.86 40.78 32.04 0.090 0.2121.02

1.04 23.18 21.07 16.56 10 1.86 45.41 41.28 32.44 0.085 0.208

1.06 23.73 21. 57 16.95 66 1.88 45.95 41. 77 32.83 0.080 0.200

1.08 24.47 22.06 17.34 4.5 1.90 46.49 42.26 33.21 0.075 0.195

1.10 24.81 22.55 17.72 3.3 1.92 47.03 42.75 33.59 0.068 0.190

25.35 23.05 18.11 2.5 1.94 47.57 43.25 33.98 0.064 0.1841.12

1.14 25.89 n.54 18.49 2.0 1.96 48.12 43.75 34.37 0.060 0.176

1.16 26.44 24.04 18.89 1.65 1.98 48.66 44.24 34.76 0.056 0.167

2l4.t.5 19.27 1.4 - 2.00 49.20 44.73 35.14 0.052 0.1621.18 26.98

25.02 19.66 1.15 2.02 49.74 45.22 35.53 0.050 0.1551.20 27.52

20.04 0.95 2.04 50.28 45.71 35.91 0.1501.22 28.06 25.51

26.00 20.43 0.80 - 2.06 50.83 46.21 36.31 - 0.1451.24 28.60

26.50 20.82 0.70 2.08 51. 37 46.70 36.69 0.1401.26 29.15

26.97 21.19 0.60 2.10 51.91 47.19 37.08 - 0.1351.28 29.67

1.30 30.23 27.48 21. 59 0.50

)CSLRFACE SOIL CALCULATED AT 1.10 BULK DENSITY.~SU8SOIL CALCULATED AT 1.40 BULK DENSITY.

15

TABLE 5. CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF 4 MOLOKAI SOILS (AFTER FERNANDEZAND SHERMAN, 1963).

DEPTHINCHES

LOI" Si02 Ti02

MOLOKAI

P20S MnO CaO MgO Na20 K20

0-4

4-15

15-33

33-42

42-54

12.61

11.69

11.50

11.20

12.03

29.73

28.30

30.97

31.08

30.97

26.75

27.98

25.83

25.88

24.31

25.70

23.82

26.18

26.14

26.45

3.53

5.95

5.20

4.64

6.30

PAMOA

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.02

0.02

0.04 0.20

0.02 0.20

0.01 0.20

0.01 0.21

0.01 0.25

1.28 0.14 0.01

1.47 0.12 0.00

0.94 0.12 0.00

1.04 0.14 0.00

1.10 0.08 0.00

0-5

5-20

20-26

26-40

14.63

13.17

12.91

12.87

25.69

29.52

29.83

31.98

25.22

29.83

28.05

27.99

31.22

23.97

26.48

25.26

2.66

3.03

3.55

3.10

WAIPAHU

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.03 0.24

0.01 1.05

0.01 0.69

0.01 0.10

1.07 0.07

0.64 0.07

0.72 0.13

0.60 0.08

0.02

0.01

0.00

0.00

0-10

10-25

25-43

43-78

78-106

106 +

13.49

13.13

12.19

12.14

13.50

11. 32

31.03

31. 71

31.64

31.91

32.20

37.53

31.45

29.76

29.52

30.36

29.62

26.99

21.89

24.58

24.48

23.66

22.85

20.97

2.61

1.83

3.29

3.03

2.72

3.10

MAMALA

0.04

0.04

0.05

0.05

0.01

0.01

0.03

0.03

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.78 0.94 0.15 0.00

0.37 0.94 0.13 0.00

0.40 0.86 0.07 0.00

0.44 0.93 0.06 0.00

0.39 1.10 0.08 0.00

0.34 1.20 0.08 0.00

0-5

5-10

14.95

14.25

31.99

33.84

27.33

28.23

19.19

18.89

2.35

2.01

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.02

1.00

1.12

1.09

1.02

0.10

0.20

0.02

0.02

"LOSS ON IGNITION.

Construction Details

LYSIMETER INSTALLATION. The pit for the lysimeters was excavated on 15

January 1968. The sides were braced against the winter rains with

burlap bags of ready-mix concrete, placed dry so they later set into

a wall when wetted (Fig. 10). Final adjustment of the pit walls for

the 2-inch clearance about the boxes was made with poured concrete walls.

The pit bottom was thoroughly tamped with a pneumatic hammer. A

six-inch step was made so that the two mauka (mountainward) boxes were

higher than the two makai (seaward) boxes. This step was needed to

offset the I-foot drop across the 20-foot lysimeter pit caused by the 5

percent slope of the field. Concrete foundation blocks set in the

compacted soil supported railroad rails just level with the compacted

bottom. World War II landing strip grids placed across the rails and

compacted soil were overlain with 1/4-inch thick fiber-glass reinforced

FIGURE 10. LYSIMETER PIT DURING PREPARATION OF FOUNDATION. NOTE THE TEMPORARY WALLS OFSACKED CONCRETE, THE CEMENT BLOCK STEP, AW THE FOUWATION BLOCKS SUPPORTINGTHE RAILROAD RAILS.

....0\

17

polyester panels to form a smooth stable base for the hydraulic load

cells (Fig. 11). The 1/4-inch copper leads from the load cells were

brought to the eastern midpoint of the pit and carried in a trench

3 feet below the ground surface to the edge of the field where it was

connected to the open-end manometers and reservoirs used for the

pressure measurements (Fig. 12).

The manometers were mounted in a styrofoam-insulated tower 12 feet

tall. Insulated reservoirs were connected parallel to the manometers,

so that either or both devices could be used. Float recorders were

used on the reservoirs to monitor the water levels (Fig. 13).

The lysimeter boxes were set in place 1-15 June 1968 (Fig. 14).

A framework of 2 x 4's supported the aluminum neutron probe access

tubing while the lysimeters were filled. One access tube was placed

in the center of each quarter of the lysimeter boxes to coincide with

each of the cane stools and a fifth tube was put in the center of each

box. The tops of the tubes were 18 inches above the final soil level in

the lysimeters (Fig. 15). The network of perforated 3/4-inch diameter

polyvinyl drainage pipes was laid on the bottom of the box and covered

with a 4-inch layer of 5/16-inch basaltic gravel. The pipe was brought

tq the surface, connected by flexible rubber pressure hose to other

plastic pipes which extended to the edge of the field. Sump pumps,

operated by l2-volt DC current, were used to remove accumulated per­

colate (Fig. 16). The pumps are capable of developing a 10-foot lift,

and easily overcame the 7-foot lift from the lysimeter bottom to the

field edge. A 3-inch layer of sieved subsoil was placed on the gravel,

then the PORVIC tensiometers, and finally a 6-inch layer of sieved sub­

soil. The loose soil was wetted to cause settlement about the ten­

siometers and 150 gallons (equivalent to 2.4 inches) of percolate was

pumped from the perforated drainage pipes of each lysimeter.

A grid of 6 gypsum resistance blocks was placed 52 inches below

the upper rim of the boxes immediately above the level of the tensiome­

ters. Subsoil, no longer sieved, was filled and compacted with a

pneumatic hammer to bulk densities between 1.35 and 1.45 to simulate

the original dense subsoil (Table 6). These densities are sufficient

to preclude root entry and keep the root zone within the lysimeters

about the same as that in the surrounding field (Trouse and Humbert, 1961).

18

uJ

50-

Z....

", ... .,.J'

!'# ') ~

',~ ~::~ ',,-,",.;....,'.... .'

/;.':i ~,~..·i·;)

, ',;;3~(i(:~«. - ~ I " . ...,'.~".. j .. 'j. >~. . . '" 'i'" . \'..' . , .~..'. '.. .'\

/' • . i·J,.. ,":'"'.''' •

'/ t", :\ ~, . /,

' , "o(h l '."1 \:' k""" _ ;~,:.. ,,' '\.~..~ . "

I, • t'" \ "t, ""I,.

'. ",,'. ~':';"": -< (.~,' ;; , .'" ''I.~ ".>=·,1..1"' '. • f' h • ';" '\ ;,'\ ' ...... : I.' '•...; ~JI '~':-< ,;..... ":. I', "'~ ~.:..:~ J.~~' , ','" , ,~ ;' ~. •-. • '110• 'C', ~"" '~. ,,,,; -)~ ~., ••. t ~.,

" ·~·"":~~';-:/." :.~ ''::''~f_.'..,._~_~t -~~ .. '~4'.~. ,.,,;~.,L,;

<',

... ..

FIGURE 12. COPPER LEADS FRO'-1 LOAD CELLS ARE ENCASED INPOLYVINYL PIPE FOR CONVEYANCE TO EDGE OF FIELD.

.....\0

20

FIGURE 13. STYROFOAM TOWER WITH INSULATED RESERVOIRTOPPED BY FLOAT RECORDER.

FIGURE 14. THREE OF THE LYSIMETER BOXES SET IN PLACE ON LOAD CELLS. THE PERMANENT POUREDCONCRETE RETAINING WALL HAS BEEN INSTALLED. THE UPPER GALVANIZED PORTION ANDTHE SUPPORTING MEMBERS FOR THE NEUTRON PROBE ACCESS TUBES (ARROW POINTS TO ONE)ARE ALSO PICTURED.

N....

22

FIGURE 15. P19 NUCLEAR CHICAGO PROBE IN PLACE ON AN ACCESS TUBE ANDTHE SCALER USED TO OBTAIN NEUTRON DENSITY ARE IN OPERATIONON THE LYSIMETER.

23

FIGURE 16. TWELVE-VOLT SUMP PUMP USED TO WITHDRAW THE PER­COLATE.

24

TABLE 6. BULK DENSITIES FROM TRIPLICATE CORE SAMPLES INLYSIMETERS AFTER COMPLETION.

Glcc

LYSIMETER

SURFACE 3-6"

SUBSOIL 21-24"

1.120

1.325

II

1.090

1.380

III

1.050

1.480

IV

MSG

1.550

No large boulders were incorporated, but rock fragments as much as 6

inches in diameter were present in the filled subsoil. Additional sets

of blocks were emplaced and compacted within the subsoil, 6 of them 36

inches below the upper rim and 12 of them 24 inches below the lysimeter

rim. Sets of two thermistor units for measurement of subsoil tempera­

tures were placed in each box at 48, 36, and 24 inches below the rim.

The upper 18 inches of fill was loosely placed, to simulate tillage.

Within this layer, a grid of 12 blocks was placed at 18 and 12 inches

below the rim and sets of three thermistors were also placed at these

depths.

Although the undisturbed Latosol stands in a vertical face, the

wetted soil, unconsolidated, has not such strength. The horizontal

wooden ribs of the original lysimeter design had to be reinforced

with a vertical aluminum channel brace at the center of each side,

chained across the center for mutual support. excessive rains

(greater than 50 year expectancy) flooded the lysimeters in late Decem­

ber and again in early January and put extreme strain on the supports.

Future design of lysimeter boxes should include such a vertical brace

to prevent bowing between the ribs and incorporate the cross-tie for

internal support.

The gaps surrounding the boxes were covered with 10-mil black

polyethylene. This did not form a complete vapor barrier but was used

to prevent debris and rodents from getting into the pit. Rat baits

were placed within the pit during construction as a precaution. The

surrounding field was graded smoothly to the edges of the walls of the

pit.

25

IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT. Nine-week old one-eye transplants of variety

H 50-7209 grown by the HSPA method were set 28-29 October, 1968, in a

5-ft grid with flat bed culture (Fig. 17). This meant that a stool

developed in the center of each quarter of each lysimeter box. Rain­

bird sprinkler nozzles were mounted on l5-ft high supports, set on a

20 ft grid so that one sprinkler was placed at each corner of the

combined 20' x 20' lysimeter area (Fig. 18).

Water from the Oahu Sugar Company reservoir regularly supplied to

the Kunia station' was used for irrigation. This water in the early

season was surface water, later, mixed with various amounts of pumped well

water. The composition of the water changes with the varying nature of

its source (Table 7). A gasoline-powered pump was used for distribution

TABLE 7. COMPOSITION OF IRRIGATION WATERS APPLIED TO LYSlMETERS.

DATE COMPONENTS (PPM)

1969 NITRATE CHLORIDE SULFATE SILICA POTASSILM

28 JANUARY 1.05 13.5 6.5 36.5 1.6

13 FEBRUARY 3.0 43.5 18.0 37.3 4.4

26 FEBRUARY 3.0 73.0 13.2 44.0 4.4

10 MAACH 1.1 23.5 20.0 m 4.4

26 MAACH 5.9 90.0 21.5 m m

9 APRIL 5.0 113.0 28.0 m m

21 APRIL 6.2 161.0 40.0 64.0 m

12 JUNE 3.2 172.0 37.5 66.0

to the individual sprinkler heads. Pressures of 60 psi delivered

a nominal 6 to 7 inches of water to the area during a 6-hour period

(Fig. 19). Strong gusty trade winds often prevailed during the irri­

gation and application uniformity as low as 20 percent, with an

average of 61.7 percent occurred on the lysimeters (Table 8). The rates

of actual application on the lysimeters did not exceed about 1/2 in/hr.

RESULTS

Lysimeter Calibration

The calibration coefficient for the lysimeters depended upGn both

the hydraulic magnification and the recorder-leverage system. Several

different devices were explored in search of a workable compromise

I~

~,

-...

~v..J"

'"-

FIGURE 17. ONE-EYE SEED PIECES JUST PRIOR TO TRAN.SPLANTIf\G INTO FIELD.NOTE THE TRICKLE IRRIGATORS FOR EACH (ONE OF THEM 15 CIRCLED).

NC]\

FIGURE 18. LYSIMETER AREA IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLANTING, 28 OCTOBER, 1968.IRRIGATION RISERS ARE EMPLACED AT EACH CORNER (ONE OF THEM ISIt-OICATED BY ARROW).

N-...J

FIGURE 19. TI PP ING BUCKET RAI NGAGE AND GASOLI NE PUMP FOR IRRIGATION. THE CONCRETESIDEWALL OF THE IRRIGATION DITCH IM'v1EDIATELY BEHIND THE PUMP Sti0WS THEPROXIMITY OF THE WATER SUPPLY.

N00

29

TABLE 8. UNIFORMITY OF SPRINKLER IRRIGATION OVER LYSIMETER AREA.

WIf\I)S DURINGDATE GROSS APPLICATI~: FRACTION RECEIVED ON APPLICATION

(1969) (INCHES) If\I)IVIDUAL LYSIMETERS MI/HR. @30'

27 FEB. 3.47 .694, .504 11, 13, 13, 16, 15, 14

10 MAR. 5.79 .660 3, 7, 8, 6, 6, 9, 8, 10

26 MAR. 3.28 .601 8, 9, 10, 10, 9, 12, 10, 13

9 APRIL 3.73 .536 6, 8, 9, 12, 11, 12, 12, 12

21 APRIL 5.60 .245 11, 13, 13, 14, 12, 11, 13, 15

22 MAY 3.86 .614, .910, .20 4, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10

21 MAY 5.02 .474, .737, .876 M

12 JUNE 5.40 .591, .842, .857 2, 3, 2, 8, 6, 7, 8, 9

2 JULY 1.54 .974, .922, .701 9, 8, 10, 12, 10

18 JULY 3.86 .648, .518, .523 6, 8, 10, 11, 10, 10

30 JULY 4.54 .650, .500, .341 9, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 11, 11

::GROSS APPLICATION CALCULATED FOR 50 PSI AT HEAD, OR 3.22 GAL/MIN/SPRINKLER.

between rapidity of response and total daily sweep of the magnified

manometer level. A reservoir with a cross section sufficient to

accomodate a 4-in diameter float was needed to insure positive drive

of the recorder needle. Two 8" x 8" square insulated reservoirs were

tried but they required 3 hours to adjust to a sudden addition of

weight equivalent to a day's evaporation. Reservoirs as small as 3

inches in diameter, which responded within minutes, were tried but the

float would not drive the pen arm satisfactorily even with an auxilliary

tapping system. Galvanized 5" x 5" square reservoirs, with a 2-in

insulation of styrofoam, proved a reasonable compromise.

The ratio between the lysimeter bottom and the contact area on the

tubes was designed to be approximately 2.0, so that hydrostatic pressures

of only 15 feet of water (.5 bar) could be used. The lysimeters were

calibrated periodically by the addition of known weights near the center

of the boxes. With only the manometer connected, response was complete

within 5 minutes. Lysimeter II magnified 2.0l-fold and lysimeter IV,

1.98-fold. The near linearity of response indicates only minor differences

in the moments caused by weights placed slightly off center of the lysi­

meters (Fig. 20, Table 9). Calibration based on the volumes of percolate

1.2 MANOMETER ALOI'JE. DAYTIME L.OAOING

AVERAGE HYDRAULIC MAGNIFICATION::: 2.0

~

o

0:W...~h.oc

...ZW.J

~5

"w~

~~w~a

8oc(

0.8

0.4

0.4

e///

e .........,.,././

0.8

.,.,.e ........

........................

1.2 1.6

]V

~........

........

MANOMETER READING IN In. OF WATER

FIGURE 20. MANOMETER RESPONSE TO SUCCESSIVE ADDITIONS OF WEIGHT ON LYSIMETER IV.

TABLE 9. SPRINKLER IRRIGATION APPLICATION RATES ON LYSlMETERSAT KUNIA.

31

CUMULATIVE Afv'OUNTINCHES

DATE, 1969 12, JUNE 2 JULY 18 JULY 26 AUGUST

TIM: ACCUMULATED

START

1/8

1/4

3/8

1/2

5/8

3/4

7/8

1.0

1 1/8

1 1/4

1 3/8

1 1/2

1 5/8

1 3/4

1 7/8

2

2 1/8

2 1/4

2 3/8

2 1/2

2 3/4

2 3/8

AVERAGE FOR PERIOD, IN/HR

0735

0810

0830

0846

0901

0917

0933

0946

1002

1018

1038

1100

1116

1130

1147

1208

1235

1300

1330

1347

0.44

0735

0848

0856

0905

0915

0921

0930

0.78

0720

0757

0820

0830

0845

0900

0918

0940

0956

1011

1025

1048

1056

110

1127

1141

1151

1206

1215

1229

0.485

0735

0804

0834

0855

0910

0936

0953

1014

1040

1100

1118

1138

1157

1219

1239

1258

1319

1353

1420

0.333

pumped from the lysimeters gave hydraulic magnification of 1.96 for

lysimeter I, 1.98 for lysimeter III, and 2.03 for lysimeter IV.

A number of different lever ratios was used for the several float

recorders. A 1:1 ratio provided too little amplification to determine

conveniently the differences in daily-use rates. One group of instru­

ments with pen arms of 5.5 inches and levers from 1.18 inches to 3.07

inches had mechanical amplifications from 1.8 to 4.7-fold. A second

group with 7.68-in pen arms and levers from 0.79 to 4.1 inches had

mechanical magnifications from 1.86 to 9.7s-fold. The gross amplifica­

tion of the combined hydraulic and mechanical systems measured by

known weights ranged from 3.5 to 19.s-fold. Expediency dictated that

the 3.s-fold overall amplification be used most frequently since it

32

allowed a 7-day average use of 0.2 in/day to be recorded on standard

charts 5 inches wide.

Water Use by Cane

The daily water use among the individual lysimeters with full

cane canopy varied surprisingly (Appendix C, Fig. 21). The average

consumptive use from 4 April· through 4 May was four percent greater

than the standard class A pan evaporation. A plot of cane use versus

pan evaporation for daily values resembles the scatter described for

the longer periods measured by the percolate lysimeters (compare Fig.

22 and Fig. 2). However the longer term cane use for 6-month old cane

in late April and early May was nearly identical with that of the con­

ventional class A pan. The cane had a leaf area index of 3.5 with

the tips of the leaves reaching 14 feet (Fig. 23). In general, the

days during which pan exceeded the cane use were marked by wind which

continued at night so that the stored heat in the pan was more effective

for evaporation than for re-radiation.

The cane was harvested on 8 May 1969 to preclude lodging and to

bring the cane into the same growth stage as the newly planted field

upwind. The water use dropped abruptly from 0.207 in/day to 0.059

in/day, or from a ratio of 1.00 with pan to a ratio of 0.33 of pan.

The cane regrew rapidly, and within two months water use was again

nearly equivalent to pan evaporation (Fig. 24). The ratoon cane

averaged 20 tillers per stool, double that for the initial plant

crop. The initial tillering was in November while the ratoon was

tillered in May. There were variations in water use rate despite the

more numerous tillers of the ratoon growth. However the variations

of an individual lysimeter, which was about the mean of the entire

group, seemed random. As a consequence, the long-term averages such

as the monthly use rates were nearly identical for each lysimeter

despite the presence of the short-term fluctuations.

COMPARISON OF USE WITH SUNLIGHT AND PAN EVAPORATION. The average monthly

values for water use by the cane as the canopy closed equalled that for

the conventional surface-level pan but fell short of that for the pan

elevated 5 feet above the ground (Fig. 25). The fully canopied cane

AFTER HARVESTCANE / PAN 0.330

BEFORE HARVEST CANE/PAN 1.0OSMAYS

0.&>0

0.250

>-.g 0.200;--

zoF: 0.150

it~c(([ .

~ 0.100oQ.

~I&l

0.0503.5 LEAF AREA INDEX

• IRRIGATION DATES

~PAN

VARIETY: H 50-7209

~t--} CANE

1

2015100.000' I ' , I ' , , , , ,

10 15 20 25 &) 5

APRIL MAYIS8S

FIGURE 21. DAILY VALUES OF WATER USE BY SUGARCANE DURING APRI~ AND MA~

1969. PAN VALUES GIVEN WERE TAKEN FROM A CONVENTIONALSURFACE-LEVEL P.~.

toNtoN

0.35 •

0.30_• ••USE =0.093+ 0.808 PAN • •• ••

r 8 -O.S ... • •• •0.25L • •• • •• •• • •

•• •O.~/ ••

• • ,

•>- I , • •.g

..... 0.151 / •• • •Id

~

~0.10

0.05

•

VI~

0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 O.&> 035

SUGAR CANE USE "/day

FIGURE 22. DAILY EVAPORATION VALUES OF CONVENTIONAL SURFACE-LEVEL PAN COM­PARED WITH WATER USE BY SUGARCANE WITH FULL CANE CANOPY IN APRIL,MAY, JULY A~D AUGUST 1969.

FIGURE 23. CANE GROWTH JUST PRIOR TO HARVEST IN EARLY MAY 1969.

35

\/\oIt.'T1!:A USE INAIJOU8T

0.36

0.30

0.25

a:III~ 0.15~

O.IO~ WIOrER USE IN .AA.Y

LY8IMETEIlt I 0.218"LY8lMETER II 021l5"L't1IlMETER 1110.208"IY8fMETE:R IV 0.221"

""vo.O.2I8"0.05~ OOEP: ...... I&55'1lo

tlRRIGATION DATESQPAN

U--}CA>EL\"lIlMETEf' ILYSlMETER IILY81tlf11E:TEA III

LYaCTERIVAlYO.

CCIa" VAl...

0.278"0.278"0.278"

0 ..."0.-0"1l.14'1lo

~C1'

0.00' , Y , , , y , I y' , 'Y10 15 20 25 ~ 5 10 15 20 215

AUOUSTla-O

FIGURE 24. DAILY VALUES OF WATER USE BY SUGARCANE DURING JULY AND AUGUST 1969.

0.7

0.6

0.5II:l

.21ie-c:i 0.4.....i..0

0.3

i.....wen:J 0.2

0::W

~~

0.1

~~CD

...WATER USE BY SUGARCANE IN HAWAII ffi

>~I

_______ NET

RADIATION

5' PAN

CANE

.,~I'PAN

0.01 I , I I I I I I

1969.JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY. .JUNE .JLLY AUG.

FIGURE 25. MONTHLY AVERAGES OF WATER USE BY SUGARCANE, PAN EVAPORATION FROM CONVENTIONALSURFACE-LEVEL PAN AND FRACTION SUNLIGHT USED IN EVAPORATION. Vl

'I

38

used a 0.55 to 0.58 fraction of the sunlight to evaporate water in

April and July, but a 0.718 fraction in August.

COMPARISON OF USE WITH NET RADIATION. Measured short-term radiation

over the cane had the relationship:

net radiation = (1- reflectance) sunlight -0.15 lyfmin (Fig. 26).

The measured reflectance as a fraction of the sunlight recorded by an

adjacent Eppley was 0.21 for mid-day (Table 10). The early morning

TABLE 10. REFLECTANCE OVER SUGARCANE LYSIMETERS AT KUNIA.

DATE REFLECTANCE Sl..t4LIGHT REFLECTANCE COVER

1969 LY/OAY LY/DAY % Sl..t4LIGHT

APRIL25 104.55 417.9 25.3 FULL CANE CAJ'.K)pY

26 105.15 437.0 23.1 FULL CANE CAJ'.K)pY

27 115.65 481.0 24.05 FULL CANE CAJ'.K)pY

28 123.15 598.9 20.6 FULL CANE CAJ'.K)pY

29 117.90 690.5 17.0 FULL CANE CAJ'.K)pY

30 M

MAY

3 133.11 572.1 23.3 FULL CANE CN¥JPY

4 150.66 729.0 21.5 FULL CANE CN¥JPY

5 85.48 352.8 24.2 FULL CANE CANOPY

6 75.8 317.1 23.9 FULL CANE CN¥JPY

7 141. 25 648.9 21.8 FULL CANE CAJ'.K)pY

8 93.24 436.5 21.4 FULL CANE CAJ'.K)pY

9 70.08 305.2 22.9 HARVESTED, TRASH

10 99.45 .. .. ON S~FACE

11 126.36 1053.4 22.8 HARVESTED, TRASHON SURFACE

12 171. 5 709.2 24.2 HARVESTED, TRASHON S~FACE

13 117.7 472.3 24.9 HARVESTED, TRASHON SURFACE

14 131.27 529.6 24.8 HARVESTED, TRASHON S~FACE

16 53.8 592.2 9.1 BARE LATOSOL

17 56.7 :: :: BARE LATOSOL

18 51.6 1008.3 10.8 BARE LATOSOL

19 68.0 624.2 10.9 BARE LATOSOL

JULY

2 110.9 630.8 17.55 RATOON It-ri CANE

22 102.7 667.6 15.40 RATOON It-ri CANE

31 126.0 697.7 18.05 RATOONING CANE

AUGUST

1 103.5 512.2 20.2 RATOON It-ri CANE

2 112.0 568.9 19.7 RATOONING CANE

3 114.5 577.6 19.8 RATOON It-ri CANE

4 116.3 574.8 20.2 RATOON It-ri CANE

5 104.0 547.1 19.0 RATOON It-ri CANE

6 112.5 637.3 17.65 RATOONIt-ri CANE

NET RADIATION=(I-REFLECTANCE) SUNLIGHT-O.IS Iy/min.

••

1.41.2

••

1.00.8O.s0.40.2

1.10

1.00

0.90

0.80

0.70

QSO

o.SO.:~~ 040

Q30

020

OJ0 1 •-aoo

(I-REFLECTANCE) SUNLIGHT Iy/min

FIGURE 26. NET RADIATION AS A FUNCTION OF (I-REFLECTANCE) SUNLIGHT OVER SUGAR­CANE ON 12 MAY 1969. (,N

I.D

40

Lnd late afternoon sunlight values recorded by the Eppley when the sun

was low in the sky are too low, whereas the values recorded for reflec­

tance by the Monteith are probably still valid, thus the apparently

high fractional reflectances in the early morning and late afternoon

are likely spurious (Fig. 27). The 24-hour net radiation over cane

is a 0.50 fraction of the incident sunlight (Table 11). Both the pan

TABLE 11. NET RADIATION AS A FRACTION OF SOLAR RADIATION.

DATE NET RADIATION SLiNUGHT NET RADIATION/SUNLIGHT SURFACE COVER

1969APRIL LY/DAY LY/DAY RATIO

26 242.3 457.0 0.555 FULL CANE CANOPy

27 242.9 481.0 0.502 FULL CANE CANOPy

28 200.6 581. 2 0.345 FULL CANE CANOPy

29 280.3 598.9 0.468 FULL CANE CANOPy

30 359.0 690.5 0.520 FULL CANE CANOPy

MAY

1 353.4 648.6 0.545 FULL CANE CANOPY

4 414.0 729.0 0.568 FULL CANE CANOPY

7 317.5 648.9 0.490 FULL CANE CANOPY

12 353.2 709.2 0.497 CANE TRASH

16 366.8 592.2 0.608 BARE LATOSOL

17 292.0 v .. BARE LATOSOL

18 270.2 108.3 0.562 BARE LATOSOL

19 392.0 624.2 0.634 BARE LATOSOL

20 424.6 669.3 0.627 BARE LATOSOL

31 406.1 585.5 0.696 BARE LATOSOL

JUNE

3 345.3 702.8 0:492 RAroON ING CANE

4 333.6 592.4 0.561 RATOONING CANE

5 336.2 619.2 0.543 RArOON ING CANE

evaporation and cane use often equal or exceed this net radiation.

The indicated importation of advected heat is similar to that for

Bermuda grass and pan evaporation at nearby Wahiawa (Ekern, 1965b).

The temperature gradient from the subsoil was directed upward from

January until May, hence the soil served as a heat source for eva­

potranspiration during this time (Fig. 28a, b). The gradient re-

4

30

~!..

woz~o 20W...JILW0:

• •~

o 0

* *• •

SUNLIGHT

6S7.81y 24April417.9 ty 2SAprii437.01y 26Ap"i14Sl.oIy 27 AprilS81.21y 28ApriI

18171615141312II10I I II I II I I10" , I

LOCAL TIME

FIGURE 27. REFLECTANCE OVER SUGARCANE CANOPY ON LYSIMETERS AT KUNIA ON 24-28 APRIL 1969. +:­I-"

42

4.od'

~6 a.oo

U12.00

1.001212 10 ao 10 20

JAN "'E. MAR

50 10 ao 50 10JUNE ,JUl..Y

\1\ 1

i,"l'iiIi• e 45 INCH CE:PTH

o aa INCH DEPTH

• 21 INCH OEPTH

• AVERAOE CAlLYAIR TEMPERATURE

6i5"\--=22:---JL..----:!�O==---::!ao::::--....L.--:!1o::--~20::---;l;50~---:IO!::---::ao!:::--L.----:!IO==--=ao'::--;l;50~---:IO!::---::ao!:::----::50~--'!IO,JAN~. MAR APRIL MAY JUNE JULY

IBee

FIGURE 28a. SUBSOIL TEMPERATURE, LYSIMETER I, JANUARY THROUGHJULY, 1969. SOIL TEMPERATURES MEASURED 0800.

/70~ /ee~

/I

eel- I67' /

JAN FEB JULYJUNE

• 21 INCH DEPTH

o 33 NCH DEPTH

e 45 INCH DEPTH

• AVERAGE DAILY

AIR TEMPERATURE

MAY

.J2e...... •,/' /"

~////..'7

J'/7

;'/

/;'

;';'

~ .J!_ .-e"

APRILMAR

---- ...........-- ..........

9,9--_,__ ,y ...~~------&--Q 'O'-~\

e,,,

eo

76

76

79

W 73a:::J

~ 72a:wn. 71~Wt-

IL.o

TIME/Ieee

FIGURE 28b. SUBSOIL TEt1PERATURE IN LYSIMETER II AND AVERAGE MONTHLY AIR TEMPERATURE DURINGJANUARY TO JULY 1969. SOIL TEMPERATURES MEASURED 0800. ~

(;l

44

versed in May nearly coincidentally with the cane harvest and the sub­

soil became a heat sink. If the soil is presumed to have a 0.5 cal/cc

heat capacity (Ekern, 1965b), the 5.4°F shift in temperature from Jan­

uary to July represents a total heat storage of only 572 ly, equivalent

to a single day's sunlight. This amount of heat stor~ge could give little

acceleration to the winter and spring rates of water loss and would sub­

tract only slightly from the net radiation available for evapotranspira­

tion in July and August.

Assessment of Water Status

NEUTRON PROBE. Major discrepancies occur in the water budget if

the standard factory curve or a slope parallel to it is used to assess

water changes by the neutron probe. As much as 3/4 inch or 37 percent

of the removal or replenishment of 2 inches was missed if the initial

reading of the probe was taken at the 9-in depth. The effective sphere

of the probe at 9 inches extends to within 3 inches of the surface.

In order to account for the missing water, the water content of the

surface soil must be reduced to values 25 percent below that at the

6-in depth. Such withdrawal is not reasonable. Even when the probe

indications were adjusted for the proper slope, the unseen surface

layer constitutes such a large fraction of the water budget that it

cannot be ignored. This discrepancy was particularly noted when the

surface was rewetted. For example, the probe-indicated gains for ly­

simeter I were less than 50 percent of the irrigation waters applied

on 26 February, 26 March, and 9 April (Table 12). The restricted

TABLE 12. CONTRAST BETWEEN NEUTRON PROBE AND LYSIMETERESTIMATES OF SOIL WATER CHANGES IN EVAPOTRANS­PIRATION AND IRRIGATION.

ESTIMIITES OF WATER USE (IN INCHES)

PER 100 10 - 19 APRIL

LYSIM I LYSIM I I LYSIM III LYSIM IV

WATER USE 1.848 1.985 2.184 2.021

RAI!'I'ALL 0.160 0.160 0.160 0.160

PR06E ES TI MIlTE 1.645 1. 700 1. 200 0.906

0.043 DEFICIT 0.125 DEFICIT 0.824 DEFICIT 0.955 DEFICIT

IRRIGATIONS (IN INCHES)

PER 100 19 - 22 APRIL

LYSIM I LYS1M It LYSIM III LYSIM IV

IRRIGATION 1.260 1. 700 1.200 1.080

PR06E ESTIMIITE 0.888 1.390 1.095 1. 245

0.372 DEfICIT 0.310 DEFICIT 0.105 DEFICIT 0.165 EXCESS

45

depth of moisture withdrawal measured by the neutron probe indicated the

successful containment of the depth of root penetration by the compacted

subsoil (Fig. 29). The subsoil remained moist, near field capacity, with

a sharp discontinuity near the compacted subsoil. A tensiometer set in

lysimeter II with the cup at the 24-inch depth averaged 0.12 to 0.15 bar

and was never greater than 0.25 bar.

RESISTANCE BLOCK. The blocks do not respond well to the soil suction indi­

cated by the moisture content measured by the neutron probe (Figs. 30a, b,

c, and d). They apparently must perch and fail to respond to soil suction,

particularly if the expected soil-moisture suction relation is interpreted

from the desorption branch of the hysteresis loop (Fig. 31). Even inter­

preted on the sorption branch, the blocks do not respond properly unless

set directly within the active root zone of the plant (Fig. 32). When

the rates of water application by the sprinklers are well below the po­

tential intake rates of the Latosol, and not even incipient ponding occurs,

the sorption branch of the rewetting curve should prevail (Rubin, 1963

and Topp and Miller, 1966). The very low rates of unsaturated capillary

conductivity and the hysteresis of this property with water content fur­

ther strengthens the suspicion that the water content of the Latosol under

sprinkler irrigation is sorption based.

The in situ field capacity measured by the neutron probe the day

after sprinkler irrigation had a volumetric content of 34 percent (Table

13) .

TABLE 13. VOLUMETRIC FIELD CAPACITY OF LYSIMETER SURFACE SOILDETERMINED FROM NEUTRON PROBE READING AT THE 9-INCHDEPTH AFTER IRRIGATION OR RAINFALL.

LYSI/oETER II 111 IV AVERAGE EVENT

DATE1969

27 FEBRUARY RATIO 1. 36 1.47 1.47 1.42 1.43 2.411 IRRIGATIC)\/ ONWATER 31.9 35.0 35.0 33.5 33.7 26 FEBRUARY

11 W\RCH RATIO 1. 39 1. 54 1.62 1.47 1.51 3.75" IRRIGATICl'I Cl'IWATER 32.5 36.7 38.9 35.0 36.0 10 W\RCH

13 W\RCH RATIO 1. 31 1.45 1.48 1.41 1.41 0.5 TO 1.0" PERCOLATEWATER 30.5 34.3 35.1 32.2 32.2 PlWED~ 12 W\RCH

20 W\RCH RATIO 1.26 1. 32 1.44 1.40 1. 36WATER 29.7 30.8 34.0 32.9 31.9 1. 211 RAIN C)\/ 19 MAACH

27 W\RCH RATIO 1. 36 1. 50 1. 5 1 1.40 1.44 2~Oll IRRIGATICfIl ()'.IWATER 31.9 35.7 36.0 32.9 34.0 26 W\RCH

10 APRIL RATIO I. 33 1.51 I. 50 1.45 1.45 2.0" IRRIGATI(JI,I ()I,I

WATER 31.0 lG.u 35.6 34.3 34.3 9 APRIL

22 APRIL RATIO I. 36 1.48 1.47 1.47 1.45 1.25" IAAIGATIC)\/ ONWATER 31.9 35.2 35.0 35.0 34.3 21 APRIL

AVERAGE WATER 31.3 34.8 35.7 33.7 34.0

~0\

A S.B2" IRRIO.

S I.O"PUMPEO

C 1.20" RR

0 0.47" PUMPEO

E 2.0" IRRICJ.

F O.OS" PUMPEO

G 0.22"RR

..H 0.924" OEFICIT)

1 20"IRRIG.

J O.OS"RR.. I< (2.1 IS" OEFICIT)

L. O.OI"RRM I.S7"IRRIG.

N O.05"RR0 0.74"RRP O.I20"RR

Q 0.270"RR..R O.'70S" OEFICIT)

MAY

EF 0coAB

l8e8

H I J I<L.MN 0 PQR It DEJrlCIT8 INDICATE"Tl-lE .......OUNT 01" SOIL.

20 I , , , , .., .. , , .. I :~~R,.':.'i:~~~~~~;=,"IR"'T1ON10 20 ~ 10 20 ~ 10

MARCH APRIL.

60

ISO'

'/.46 L 33"

~ZIaI~

~4000:

~~:360it~IaI1d~>

215

FIGURE 29. NEUTRON PROBE MEASUREMENTS OF VOLUMETRIC WATER CHANGE IN LYSIMETER I.

ISO

A---Ii. LABORATORY CALIBRATION

• MEAN FOR DEPTH

HORIZONTAL BAR INDICATES RANGE OF

PROBE VALUES

VERTICAL BAR INDICATES RANGE OF

BLOCK VALUES

~Eo

~

ozo<{wa:~

8ill

180

110

160

160

140

130

NEUTRON PROBEDEPTH 8"

_--....,6---4 NEUTRON PROBE

It DEPTH 21"

NEUTRON PROBE/ DEPTH 15"

II

II,

I,Ii.,IIIIII

faI,

III,I,II

Ii.

"

40353025120' , I I ,

20

VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT %

FIGURE 30a. VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT BY NEUTRON PROBE COMPARED WITH RESISTANCEBLOCK MEASUREMENTS OF SOIL MOISTURE CONTENT: LYSIMETER I, 9 MARCH 1969. ~

--J

190

~00

NEUTRON PAOBEDEPTH US"

_---A--NEUTRON PROBE - - NE\1TRON PROBE

EEf"TH a:" A~ t"- EEPTH 55"

I. ',6

f'I

I,NEU'TRON PROBE

DEPTH 8"

170

l80

IIII

AII,

•a.Ec

~

oza~w0:

~o9m

160

160

140

130

,,,f',,,,

A,,,,,,A

A- --A LABORATORY CALIBRATION• MEAN FOR DEPTH

HORIZONTAL BAR INDICATES

OF PROBE VALUES

VERTICAL BAR INDICATES

OF BLOCK VAUJES

RANGE

RANGE

120' I I I ,

20 2S 30 36 40

VOUJMETRIC WATER CONTENT ~.

FIGURE 30b. VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT BY NEUTRON PROBE COMPARED WITH RESISTANCE BLOCKMEASUREMENTS OF SOIL MOISTURE CONTENT: LYSIMETER I, 19 APRIL 1969.

190...

1801-NEUTRON PROBE I NEl.JTRON PROBE

DEPTH 15" A DEPTH 21"------.....

NEUTRON PROBE

DE~

1'701-

f1c(

~ 1601-

0Z

~~ 1501-

~g.:Jm 1401-

1301-

NEUTRON PROBE

DEPTH- 9"

J.II,,

I,tIII,,,,

IA

...."..,.

/'

"JIt!I

II

II

~ - ~ LABORATORY CALIBRATION

• MEAN FOR DEPTH

HORIZONTAL BAR INDICATES RANGE OF

PROBE VALUES

VERTICAL BAR INDICATES RANGE OF

BLOCK VALUES

1201 I I I I I I25 ~ 36 40 45

VOLUMETIVE WATER (tV.)

FIGURE 30c. VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT BY NEUTRON PROBE COMPARED WITH RESISTANCE BLOCKMEASUREMENTS OF SOIL MOISTURE CONTENT: LYSIMETER II, 9 MARCH 1969. ...

ID

6- _ -A LABORATORY CALIBRATION

• MEAN FOR DEPTH

HORIZONTAL BAR INDICATES RANGE

OF PROBE VALUES

VERTICAL BAR INDICATES RANGE

OF BLOCK VALUES

NEUTRONPROBE DEPTH IS"

........"

170/

~f I

NEUTRON PROBE

1 OEPTH goo

~ I~ ISO I

I

0 IZ ~

9 II

W 160 I[[I

8 I

~ ~m 140IIII

1301-I,I,I

A120L-....=

25 30

_-----"l!.NE~PlDEPTH 21"

35 40

~N~DE~H.· I

46

VIo

VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT %

FIGURE ·30d. VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT BY NEUTRON PROBE COMPARED WITH RESIS­TANCE BLOCK MEASUREMENTS OF SOIL MOISTURE CONTENT; LYSIMETER II,9 MARCH 1969.

eo

66

I ~SUI-I< OE......eITY • 1.17

I ~ ~SPECIFIC GRAVlTV • 2.e5

l-S

ZI&JI-Z0 460ItI&J

~~

040

~9 as

50' _' , I I , , '_ .... 'A 'o. '.

TENSION eARS

FIGURE 31. HYSTERESIS LOOP FOR MOLOKAI SUBSOIL (AFTER SHARMA , 1968).lJ1....

U1N

~..

6"

1~

I/)

a.e 150o

~

oz~WII

~

§m

II()I .0 ~ Ik I;' rA. AI .1 ;I, J_FEB MAR APRIL. MAV

1989

FIGURE 32. RESIST.A.NCE BLOCK READINGS p.s A FUNCTION OF DEPTH IN LYSIMETER I.

53

The desorption volumetric water content at 0.15 bars (field capacity) for

this soil from laboratory determinations at a bulk density of 1.10 was

38.4 percent. The volumetric content at 2 bars was 25.9 percent. The

water available between 0.15 and 2 bars would be (38.4-25.9) or 12.5

percent. The probe-determined upper limit of 34.0 percent gives only

8.1 percent available. The apparent reduction in the water stored above

the 2 bar point would be (12.5-8.1)/12.5 or 35 percent. A similar re­

duction of between 30 and 50 percent in the available water has been

noted for·Wahiawa soil wetted by light rain or boom sprinklers as

opposed to soil wetted by very heavy rainfall. It is pertinent to

speculate what effect this reduction (if real) might have on cane

growth and water use as a consequence of the shortened interval necessary

between irrigations and the deeper penetration of sprinkler as opposed

to flood irrigation waters. A growing body of literature supports

the contention that the rate of wetting plays an important role in the

storage of soil water (Bresler, Kemper and Hanks, 1969).

Percolate Analyses

Prior to the installation of the lysimeters, Field I had last

been planted to sorghum. The field was fallow during the installation

of the lysimeters from late 1967 until the planting in October, 1968.

Large amounts of nitrate w~re leached by percolate in the monthsI

immediately after planting (Appendices C &D and Fig. 33). Intense!

rains caused over 20 inches of percolate during the winter months.

At times the concentration of nitrate in the percolate was well abov~

200 ppm. Periodically the nitrate concentration was reduced to 15

or 20 ppm by this winter-time excessive leaching, but rose again to

more than 100 ppm during the first several months while the cane was

still small. As the cane matured, it formed an increasingly effec­

tive nitrate sink which was able to remove even the nitrate from the

5 to 6 ppm concentration in the irrigation water so that the percolate

contained less than 1 ppm nitrate. Nitrate equivalent to 430 pounds

per acre was removed from lysimeter I by mid-January, an amount greater

than the 332 pounds per acre added in November as fertilizer (Table 14),

Fig. 34). Removal of materials in the harvested cane crop of 82.5

tons fresh weight in lysimeter I far outweighed the materials removed in

5

..~CDEi,40,0'

ort)zW~300

~.J

~020

10

LYSIMETERS

• ID II

A m. ~

480

384e~:errz

28e~

j3

le~ a

VI~

FIGURE 33. CUMULATIVE LOSS OF NITRATE IN PERCOLATE FROM ALL LYSIMETERS DURINGTHE WINTER OF 1968-69.

5S

• CI• N~

, ,20 12 19

MAR

lee9

.JAN.25 30 5 I

NOV. DEC1ge8

250

50

l2lL

o~o 150

IIIt-:J.Jo(/)100

FIGURE 34. CHLORIDE AND NITRATE CONCENTRATIONS IN PERCOLATE FROM LYSIMETERI DURING THE WINTER OF 1968-69.

TABLE 14. FERTILIZATION.

POUNDS/ACRE

DATE NITROGEN AS: AM1'ONIUM AMVONIUM PHOSPHORUS POTASSIU:1SULFATE PHOSPHATE PENTOXIDE OXIDE

25 NOVEMBER 1968 75 100

26 FEBRUARY 1969 75 100

7 JULY 1969 99 250 200

TOTALS: 249 250 400

56

leachates or added by the fertilizers (Table 15). Chemical analysis

TABLE 15. CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF MILLABLE CANE (M) AND GREENLEAVES (GL) HARVESTED FROM LYSIMETERS AT THE KUNIASUBSTATION, FIELD I, VARIETY H 50 7209 (MAY, 1969).

lAB NO. PLOT NO. H2O N P K Ca Mg Si S C1 Na% % % % % % % % % %

2747 1 M 85.0 0.44 0.078 1.07 0.04 0.021 0.478 0.146 0.61

48 1 GL 78.5 .97 .141 1.88 .27 .060 2.927 .307 .98

49 2 M 84.0 .44 .085 1.23 .05 .018 .453 .133 .63

50 2 GL 79.0 1.09 .147 1.92 .26 .051 2.721 .259 1.13

51 3 M 84.7 .42 .073 1.17 .05 .021 .464 .161 .62

52 3 GL 78.5 .94 .128 1. 86 .25 .058 2.853 .293 .99

53 4 M 84.3 .38 .071 1. 23 .05 .022 .507 .159 .64

54 4 GL 79.0 .94 .130 1. 92 .25 .054 3.069 .294 1.00

ANALYSES: M. DOl, HSPA. 10 AUGUST, 1969.

HARVEST WEIGHTS: LYSIMETER I 55 CANES AT 6~/CANE EQUIVALENT TO 82.5 TONS/AII 58 6.25 88.125

I I I 50 6.37 79.62IV 57 6.10 86.925

of soil samples taken prior to fertilization indicated a fair supply of

phosphorus and this element was not added in the November or February

fertilizations (Table 16). The 50 ppm of water soluble silica in

equilibrium with the soil though slightly greater than the 30 ppm in

the percolate, did not reach the 65 ppm in the Kunia well waters or

the May and June 1969 irrigation water.

Contrary to the great reduction in the nitrate concentration of

the percolate as the cane matured, little change occurred in the chlo­

content, which remained greater than 100 ppm, or the sulfate, which

increased to 150 ppm, or the silica content, which persisted near 30 ppm

(Fig. 35). Upon harvest of the cane in early May, the nitrate levels

increased abruptly from near zero to 10 to 15 ppm, values double the

content in the irrigation waters. The percolate induced from deliberate

over irrigation in April and May was meager and only very small total

amounts of nitrate were removed.

DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY

The first of the primary objectives, measurement of water use

by sprinkler irrigated cane, shows that cane, like other well-watered

..

OVER ALL AVGS..~• 804e CI

.-. Si

300

~ 2000.

~ l -r jl~~ -~

III

If",!~ ~\.x/

1...::J.J0CD

100

0 ' , .., I , ~ I ,

lJ1-..J

MAYAPRIL.JAN.DEC. FEB. MAR.

1ge8-1969

FIGURE 35. CONCENTRATION OF THE SOLUTION REt-'OVED IN THE AVERAGEPERCOLATE FROM ALL THE LYSIMETERS.

Nov.

58

TABLE 16. CHEMICAL ANl\LYSES OF LYSlMETER SURFACE" SOILS.

SAMPLED IN OCTOBER, 1968 PRIOR TO FERTILIZATION

SAMPLE NO. pHI PHOSPHORUS 2 SILICA3 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITy 4PPM PPM MI LLIt+lOS/CM

1 6.6 45.9 53.3 0.142 6.6 45.4 49.2 0.123 6.8 32.4 55.3 0.1184 6.6 27.6 53.3 0.095 (SUBSOIL) 6.8 2.80 12.0 0.55

SAMPLED IN JANUARY, 1969 AFTER FERTILIZATION IN t\OVEMBER 1968

LYSIM I 6.8 48.3 59.3 0.80LYSIM II 6.8 58.4 48.0 0.88LYSIM III 6.8 45.0 48.4 0.87LYSIM IV 6.8 34.0 49.1 0.78

IpH, GLASS ELECTRODE.

2PHOSPHORUS MODIFIED TRUOG EXTRACTION (AYRES, A. S. AND HAGlHARA, H. H. 1952.HAWAIIAN PLANTER'S RECORD. 54:81-99).

3WATER EXTRACTABLE SILICA, 10:1 DILUTION, 4 HOURS EXTRACTION TLME (KILMER, V. J.1965. IN METHODS OF SOIL ANALYSIS. BLACK, C. A., et al. PART 11:959-962).

4ELECTRlCAL CONDUCTIVITY SATURATED EXTRACT (BOWER, C. A. AND WILCOX, C. V. 1965.IN METHODS OF SOIL ANALYSIS. BLACK, C. A., et al. PART 11:933-951. AMERICANSOCIETY OF AGRONOMY.

grasses, evaporates water freely and approximates a free-water surface.

Water use of 0.25 in/day is an average for midsummer use at this Kunia

site. The coefficient of variability of about 10 percent among the

four lysimeters indicates a marked lack in uniformity of the cane canopy

as an evaporating surface. Strong positive advection of heat from the

unirrigated surroundings makes evaporation equivalent or greater than

the full net radiation.

Pan evaporation alone seems to fit the second of the objectives

for a suitable parameter for estimating water use. However such short­

term estimates as daily use rates determined from pan evaporation can

be quite misleading. Monitoring soil-water status with resistance

blocks is successful only when the blocks are within the active plant­

root zone. Successful utilization of the neutron probe to monitor

soil-water status requires careful in situ calibration of the probe

59

and separate knowledge of the water content of the immediate surface

soil layers. Water use from the bare Latosol or from newly planted

cane is about 1/3 that of a class A pan. The cane quickly develops

a canopy equivalent to a free water surface, such as a conventionally

exposed class A pan. Poor distribution of sprinkler irrigation does not

allow the use of the percolate for estimation of the water budget, but

does allow monitoring of solute removal under the third primary objective.

After heavy winter rains, percolate from fallow or newly planted cane

can remove in excess of 500 pounds/acre of nitrate with solute concentra­

tions as great as 200 ppm. The growing cane plant forms a most effec­

tive sink which reduces the nitrate loss to near zero. However, losses

of other solutes such as chloride, sulfate, and silica remain rela­

tively unchanged.

Sprinkler irrigation at rates less than the unusually high infil­

tration rates (1 to 2 in/hr) of these well aggregated latosols rewets

the soil on the sorption branch of the moisture-suction curve. The

extreme hysteresis of the wetting-drying curve for the Molokai soil

could make the available water stored for plants under sprinkler

irrigation substantially less than that stored under furrow irrigation

and thus increase the depth of penetration of sprinkler applied waters.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The wholehearted cooperation of the HSPA Kunia staff, particu­

larly to Mr. Robert Wiemer and Jose Bumanglag, and most directly to

Lester Nakatsuka is gratefully acknowledged. The crew which helped

in the installation and maintenance of the lysimeters especially during

my enforced rest in the hospital must also be remembered: Larry

Gordon, Gary Okimoto, Munna Sharma, Terry Huck, Innocient Abiaka, Dennis

Koyama, Muhammad N. Gazdar, Jack Atnip, Prem Prasad, Gong-Yuh Linn,

Tzo-Chuan Juang, Rashid Khalid, and Pedro Tenorio. All photographs

included in this report were taken by Larry Gordon.

60

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anonymous. 1959. Water resouraes in Hawaii. Hawaii Water AuthorityReport.

Ayres, A. S., H. H. Hagihara.nitrogen and potassiwn.56(4):255-275.

1963. A Lysimeter study of Losses ofHawaiian Sugar Planters' Record

Baver, L. D. 1963. A deaade of researah progress 1950-1959. HawaiianSugar Planters' Record. 57(1):60-67.

Blewitt, R. I. 1961. Present day irrigation in Hawaii. Journal ofSoil and Water Conservation. 16(6):270-273.

Bowman, D. H., K. M. King. 1965. Determination of evapotranspirationusing the neutron saattering method. Canadian Journal of SoilScience. 45(2):117-126.

Bresler, E., W. D. Kemper, and R. J. Hanks. 1969. InfiLtration, re­distribution and aonsequent evaporation of water from soiL asaffeated by wetting rate and hysteresis. Soil Science SocietyAmerican Proceedings. 33:832-840.

Brodie, H. W. 1964. Instrwnents for measuring so"lar radiation:researah and evaLuation by the Hawaiian sugar industry. 1928-1962.Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Record. 57(2):159-197.

Campbell, oR. B. 1963. Redistribution of surfaae fLow from highappUaation rate sprinkLers. Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Record.56(4):277-287.

Campbell, R. B., J. H. Chang, and D. C. Cox. 1960. EVapotranspira­tion in Hawaii as measured by in-fieLd Lysimeters in reLation toaLimate. Proceedings of the 10th Congress of the InternationalSociety of Sugar Cane Technologists. pp. 645-673.

Chang, J. H.Record.

1961. MiaroaUrru.te of 3ugar aane.56(3) :195-225.

Hawaiian Sugar Planters'

Chang, J. H., R. B. Campbell, H. W. Brodie, and L. D. Baver. 1967.Evapotranspiration researah at the HSPA experiment station.Proceedings of the 12th Congress of the International Societyof Sugar Cane Technologists, Puerto Rico 1965. pp. 10-25.

Chao, T. T. and E. Okazaki. 1965. The baLanae of bromide ions insoiL systems. Unpublished Pineapple Research Institute ResearchReport. 115:1-16.

Cotecchia, V., A. Inzaghi, E. Pirastu, and R. Ricchena. 1968. In­fluenae of the physiaaL and ahemiaaL properties of soiL in mea­surements of water aontent using neutron probes. Water ResourcesResearch. 4(5): 1023-1028.

61

Ekern, P. C. 1965a. The fraction of sunlight retained as net radiationin Hawaii. Journal of Geophysical Research. 70(4)785-793.

Ekern, P. C. 1965b. Disposition of net radiation by a free watersurface in Hawaii. Journal of Geophysical Research. 70(4):795-800.

Ekern, P. C. 1966a. Evapotranspiration by Bermuda grass sod rCynodondactylon L. Pers.) in Hawaii. Agronomy Journal. 58:387-390.

Ekern, P. C. 1966b. Evaporation from Low Humic Latosol in Hawaii.Journal of Applied Meteorology. 5(4):431-435.

Ekern, P. C. 1967. pilot evapotranspiration study: lysimeter design.Water Resources Research Center. University of Hawaii. TechnicalReport No. 13. 26 p.

Ekern, P. C. 1968. Consumptive use of water by sugarcane. Report ofthe 27th Annual Conference Hawaiian Sugar Cane Technologists.pp. 58-60.

Ewart, G. Y. 1967. Consumptive use and replenishment standards inirrigation. Proceedings.of the 12th Congress of the InternationalSociety of Sugar Cane Technologists, Puerto Rico 1965. pp. 34-51.

Fernandez, N. C. and G. D. Sherman. 1963. Certain morphological~

mineralogical and chemical properties of four soils of the Molokaifamily. The Philippine Agriculturalist. 47(3-4):168-182.

Holmes, J. W. and A. F. Jenkinson. 1959. Techniques for using theneutron moisture meter. Journal of Agricultural EngineeringResearch. 4:100-109.

Juang, T. C. and G. Uehara. 1968. Mica genesis in Hawaiian soils.Soil Science Society American Proceedings. 32(1):31-35.

Magistad, O. C. 1934. Lysimeter results.Research Institute Report. PRI News.

Unpublished Pineapple8:272-273.

McGuinness, J. L., F. R. Dreibelbis, and L. L. Harrold. 1961.Soil moisture measurements with the neutron method supplementweighing lysimeters. Soil Science Society American Proceedings.25(5):339-342.

Mink, J. F. 1962. Excessive irrigation and the soils and groundwater of Oahu~ Hawaii. Science. 135:672-673.

Power, J. F. 1968. What happens to fertilizer nitrogen in the soil?Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 23(1):10-12.

Robinson, F. E. 1963a. Soil moisture tension~ sugar cane stalkelongation and irrigation interval control. Agronomy Journal.55:481-484.

62

Robinson, F. E. 1963b. Results obtained with light-weight rate meterfor neutron soil-moisture measurements. Soil Science. 96(3):218-219.

Robinson, F. E., R. B. Campbell, and J. H. Chang. 1963. Assessingthe utility of pan evaporation for irrigation of sugarcane.Agronomy Journal. 55(5):444-446.

Rubin, J., R. Steinhardt, and P. Reiniger. 1964. Soil water relationsduring rainfall infiltration: II. moisture content profilesduring rains of low intensities. Soil Science Society AmericanProceedings. 28(1):1-5.

Ruhe, R. V., J. M. Williams, R. C. Schuman, and E. L. Hill. 1965.Nature of soil parent materials in Ewa-Waipahu area.. Oahu.. Hawaii.Soil Science Society American Proceedings. 29(3):282-287.

Sharma, M. L. 1968. Effect of bulk density on neutron probe calibra­tion in two Hawaiian soils. Unpublished manuscript. HSPAReport. 15 p.

Sharma, M. L. and G. Uehara. 1968a. Influence of soil structure onwater relations in Low Humic Latosols: 1. water retention.Soil Science Society American Proceedings. 32(6):765-770.

Sharma, M. L. and G. Uehara. 1968b. Influence of soil structure onwater relations in Low Humic Latosols: 2. water movement.Soil Science Society American Proceedings. 32(6):770-773.

Shaw, H. R. and,J. A. Swezey. 1937. Scientific irrigation management.Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Record. 41(3):199-279.

Shirazi, G. A., D. S. Judd, and M. Isobe. 1967. Calibration of neutronprobe for soil moisture measurements in Hawaiian soils. Unpub­lished manuscript. HSPA. 46 p.

Stanford, G., A. S. Ayres, and M. Doi. 1965. Mineralizable soil ni­trogen in relation to fertilizer needs of sugarcane in Hawaii.Soil Science. 99(2):132-137.

Stewart, B. A., F. G. Viets Jr., and G. L. Hutchinson. 1968. Agricul­tures' effect on nitrate pollution of ground water. Journal ofSoil and Water Conservation. 23(1):13-15.

SWinda1e, L. D. and G. Uehara. 1966. Ionic relationships in the pedo­genesis of Hawaiian soils. Soil Science Society American Pro­ceedings. 30(6):726-730.

Takahashi, D. T. 1968. Fate of ammonium and nitrate fertilizers inlysimeter studies with N1S

• Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Record.58(1) :1-11.

Taliaferro, W. J. 1959. Rainfall of the Hawaiian islands. HawaiiWater Authority. 394 p.

63

Tanner, C. B. and R. J. Hanks. 1952. Moisture hysteresis in gypsummoisture blocks. Soil Science Society American Proceedings.16(1):48-51.

Thompson, G. D. and J. P. Boyce. 1967. Daily measurements of poten­tial evapotranspiration from fully canopied sugarcane. Agri­cultural Meteorology. 4:267-279.

Topp, G. C. and E. E. Miller. 1966. Hysteretic moisture characteristicsand hydraulic conductivities for glass-bead media. Soil ScienceSociety American Proceedings. 30(2):156-162.

Trouse, A. C. and R. P. Humbert. 1961. Some effects of soil compactionon the development of sugar cane roots. Soil Science. 91(3):208-217.

van Bavel, C. H. M. and G. B. Stirk. 1967. Soil water measurementwith an Am2~1-Be neutron source and an application to evapori­metry. Journal of Hydrology. 5:40-46.

Yokoyama, J. S. 1969. Soil-air-water relationships in Hawaiian soils.Unpublished M. S. thesis. University of Hawaii. Department ofSoil Science. 81 p.

Yoshida, R. S. 1969. The determination of effective soil moisturestoreage by use of the neutron probe. HSPA Project Ir-ld-A.Unpublished summary report. 22 p.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A. DESCRIPTION OF MOLOKAI SOILS.

APPENDIX A. DESCRIPTION OF MOLOKAI SOILS.

69

THE ~LOKAI SERIES IS A MEMBER OF THE FINE-SILTY, HALLOYSITIC, ISOHYPERTHERMIC FAMILY OF TROPEPTIC HAPLUSTOXS. TYPICALLY, THESE SOILS.HAVE DARKREOOISH BROWN, FRIABLE A HORIZONS THAT HAVE WEAK GRAl'lJLAR STRUCTURE, DARK REDOISH BROWN B HORIZONS THAT HAVE WEAK COARSE PRISMtlTIC STRUCTURE IN THEUPPER PART AI'lJ fWERATE FINE AI'lJ VERY FINE SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE IN THE LOWER PART, AND FINE BLACK CONCRETIONS THAT EFFERVESCE WITH HYDROGENPEROX IDE THROUGHOUT.

TYPIFYING PEDON: ~LOKAI SILTY CLAY LOAM - PINEAPPLE(COLORS ARE FOR ~IST SOIL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.)

API -- 0-7" -- DARK REDOISH BROWN (2.5YR 3/4) SILTY CLAY LOAM, DARK RED (2.5YR 3/6) DRY; WEAK VERY FINE, FINE AND MEDIUM GRANULAR STRUCTURE; SLIGHTLYHARD, FRIABLE, SLIGHTLY STICKY, PLASTIC; MANY ROOTS; MtlNY INTERSTITIAL PORES; MANY VERY FINE BLACK CONCRETIONS THAT EFFERVESCE WITHHYDROGEN PEROXIDE; STRONG EFFERVESCENCE WITH HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; EXTREMELY ACID (pH 4.4); CLEAR WAVY BOUNDARY. (6 TO 7 INCHES THICK.)

AP2 -- 7-15"-- DARK REDDISH BROWN (2.5YR 3/4) SILTY CLAY LOAM, DARK RED (2.5YR 3/6) ORY; WEAK !"CDIUM AI'lJ COARSE SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE BREAKINGTO MOOERATE FINE AI'lJ VERY FINE GRANULAR STRUCTURE; SLIGHTLY HARD, FRIABLE, STICKY, PLASTIC; COM"ON ROOTS; CO"MlN VERY FINE TUBULARAI'lJ INTERSTITIAL PORES; COM"ON FINE BLACK CONCRETIONS; VIOLENT EFFERVESCENCE WITH HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; VERY STRONGLY ACID (pH 4.6);CLEAR SMOOTH BOUNOARY. (8 TO 9 INCHES THICK,)

B21 --15-35"-- DARK REDOISH BROWN (2.5YR 3/4) SILTY CLAY LOAM, RED (2.5YR 4/6) DRY; WEAK COARSE PRISMtlTIC STRUCTURE BREAKING TO WEAK COARSE SUB­ANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTU<E; SLIGHTLY HARD, FRIABLE, STICKY, PLASTIC; MANY VERY FINE ANO FINE TUBULAR PORES; FEW SHINY PATCHY FACES ONPRISMS; COM"ON FINE BLACK CONCRETIONS; STRONG EFFERVESCENCE WITH HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; SLIGHTLY ACID (pH 6.5); GRADUAL WAVY BOUNDARY.04 TO 22 INCHES THICK.)

B22 --35-64"-- DARK REDDISH BROWN (2.5YR 3/4) SILTY CLAY LOAM, RED (2.5YR 4/6) DRY; WEAK COARSE PRISMtlTIC STRUCTURE BREAKING TO STRONG VERY FINEAND FINE SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE; MOOERATELY COf'of'ACT m PLACE, SLIGHTLY H'lRD, FIRM, STICKY, PLASTIC; MANY VERY FINE AND COM"ONTUBULAR PORES; COM'lJN PATCHY PRESSURE FACES ON PEDS; COM'lJN PATCHY CLAY FILMS ON PED FACES; FEW VERY FINE BLACK CONCRETIONS; ~DERATE

EFFERVESCENCE WI TH HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; NEUTRAL REACTION (pH 6.6); GRADUAL WAVY BCYJNDARY. (27 TO 30 INCHES THICK.)

B3 --64-72"-- DARK REDOISH BROWN (5YR 3/3) CLAY LOAM, DARK REDDISH 9ROWN (5YR 3/4) DRY; ~DERATE FINE AND VERY FINE SUBANGULAR BLOCKY AND ANGULARBLOCKY STRUCTURE; SLIGHTLY HARD, FRIABLE, SLIGHTLY STICKY, PLASTIC; COM'lJN VERY FINE AND FINE TUBULAR PORES; THIN PATCHY CLAY FILMSON PEDS; RED (2.5YR 4/6) CLAY FILMS ON THE WALLS OF LARGER PORES; COM'lJN HARD EARTHY LUMPS; FEW VERY FINE BLACK CONCRETIONS; SLIGHTEFFERVESCENCE WITH HYDROGEN PEROXIDE; NEUTRAL REACTION (pH 6.6).

TYPE LOCATION: ISLAND OF ~LOKAI, MtlUI COUNTY, HAWAII; NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 39, FIELD 305, CALIFORNIA PACKING CORPORATION, KUALAPUU, ~LOKAI,

ABOUT 4.7 MILES WEST OF KAUNAKAKAI PCYST OFFICE AI'lJ 0.35 MILE NORTH OF JUNCTION OF HIGHWAYS 46 AMl 47, AND ABOUT 200 FEET WEST OFHIGHWAY 47.

RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: THE NUMBER ANO SIZE OF BLACK CONCRETIONS THAT EFFERVESCE WITH HYDROGEN PEROXIDE DECREASE WITH DEPTH. SOME WEATHERED ROCKFRAGMENTS ARE THROUGHOUT THE SOIL, BUT THEY ARE ~STLY BELOW DEPTHS OF 40 INCHES. MEAN ANNUAL SOIL TEMPERATURE IS ABOUT73°F. TEXTURES SHOWN ARE "APPARENT FIELD TEXTURES." HUE OF THE A HORIZON IS 5YR, 2.5YR OR lOR, ~IST VALUE IS 2 OR 3,~IST CI'ROMt\ IS 4 OR 5, AI'lJ ORY CHROMt\ IS 4 THROUGH 6. THE HUE OF THE B2 HORIZON IS 2.5YR OR lOR, ~IST VALUE IS 2 OR 3,DRY CI'ROMt\ IS 4 THROUGH 6 AI'lJ MOIST CHROMtI IS 3 OR 4.

COMPETING SERIES AND THEIR DIFFERENTIAE: THESE ARE THE EWA, HOLC\"IUA, KEAHUA, LAHAINA, UWALA, AI'lJ WAIKAPU SOILS. THE EWA SOILS HAVE STRONG EFFER­VESCENCE WITH HYDROGEN PEROXIDE THROUGHOUT AI'lJ LACK PRISMtlTIC STRUCTURE IN THE UPPER PART OF THE B HORIZONS.~LOMJA SOILS HAVE SILT LOAM UPPER B HORIZONS AI'lJ BURIED B HORIZONS WITHIN 40 INCHES OF THE SURFACE.KEAHUA SOILS HAVE 5YR OR YELLOWER HUE, AI'lJ THE UPPER PART OF THE B HORIZON HAS MOOERATE TO STRONG STRUCTURE.LAHAINA SOILS HAVE SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE IN THE UPPER PART OF THE B HORIZON AND NEARLY CONTINUOUSSTRESS FACES IN THE B2 HORIZON. UWALA SOILS HAVE 5YR OR YELLOWER HUE THROUGHOUT. WAIKAPU SOILS HAVEMOOERATE TO STRONG SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE IN THE UPPER PART OF THE B HORIZON AMl SLICKENSIDES IN THELOWER PART OF THE B HORIZON.

SETTING: THE MOLOKAI SOILS ARE ON NEARLY LEVEL TO fWERATELY STEEP UPLANOS AT ELEVATIONS FROM NEAR SEA LEVEL TO 1,500 FEET. THE SOILS FORMED INRESIDUUM WEATHERED FROM BASIC IGNEOUS ROCKS. !"CAN A/'oI'oIUAL RAINFALL IS 20 TO 25 INCHES. THE AVERAGE JANUARY TEMPERATURE IS ABOUT 71°F.,AVERAGE JULY TEMPERATURE ABOUT nOF., AM) !"CAN A/'oNJAL TEMPERATURE ABOUT 73°F.

PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATED SOILS: THESE ARE THE COMPETING EWA, HOL<MJA, LAHAINA, lAoIALA AI'lJ WAIKAPU SOILS.

DRAINAGE AI'lJ PERMEABILITY: WELL DRAINED. RUNOFF IS !"CDIUM. PERl"EABILITY IS MODERATE.

USE AI'lJ VEGETATION: USED FOR PINEAPPLE, PASTU<E, WILDLIFE, AI'lJ IRRIGATED SUGAR CANE. NATURAL VEGETATION IS KIAWE (PROSOPIS CHILENSIS), PITTEDBEAROGRASS (ANDROPOGON PERTUSUS), FEATHER FINGERGRASS (CHWRIS VIRGATA), LANTANA (LANTANA CAMARA), ILiMtI (SIDA FALLAX), AI\{)

BUFFELGRASS (PENNISETUM CILIARE).

DISTRIBUTION AI'lJ EXTENT: THIS SOIL IS ON THE ISLANDS OF ~LOKAI, LANAI, MtlUI, AI'lJ OAHU, OF HAWAII. THE EXTENT IS ABOUT 35,000 ACRES.

SERIES ESTABLISHED: THE ~LOKAI SERIES WAS CLASSIFIED AS LOW HUMIC LATOSOLS IN THE 1955 SOIL SURVEY OF HAWAI I

APPENDIX B. MONTHLY WEATHER REPORTS.

APPENDIX B. MONTHLY WEATHER REPORTS.

73

HSPA Kl.NIA SUB-STATION: NOVEMBER, 1968HSPA Kl.NIA SUB-STATICt'I: DECEMBER, 1968

TEMPERATURE I RAIN2

PYROH PHOTOCHEM2

EVAPORATl0N2

WIND3

TE"f'ERATURE I RAIN 2 PYROH PHOTOCHEM2 EVAPORATION 2WIND 3

DAY PAN (INCHES) CUM. DAY PAN CI NCHES) CUM.MAX MIN INCHES GRAM CAL/CH' 5 ' I' MILES MAX MIN INCHES GRAM CAL/CH' 5 ' I' MILES

86.0 67.0 .00 513.6 2744.5 .222 .206 140 I 72.5 71.0 142.6

85.5 69.0 .00 455.4 .220 .199 149 2 77 .0 68.0 1.45 168.8 .109 .074 243

85.0 68.0 .03 494.7 .160 .134 171 3 78.5 69.0 .03 337.6 1972.8 .051 .051 161

86.0 68.0 .00 467.1 .208 .18'7 147 4 79.0 67.5 .06 436.5 .129 .115 267

5 87.0 67.5 .00 493.2 3842.2 .197 .176 143 5 76.0 62.5 .00 379.8 .209 .185 302

6 86.0 65.5 .00 516.5 .211 .187 1096 79.5 61.5 .00 392.9 .132 .115 143

7 81.0 63.0 .00 417.6 .127 .108 2627 85.0 68.5 .00 497.6 .198 .180 222

8 84.0 64.0 276.58 85.5 65.5 .00 459.8 .219 .200 120

63.5 423.49 82.0 .73 .287 .245 2669 86.0 68.0 10 84.0 65.0 .00 411.8 3181.2 .134 .119 94

10 84.0 67.5 749.3 " :;11 84.0 65.5 .00 423.4 .141 .127 93

11 86.0 68.0 .02 502.0 .473 .403 435 12 84.0 66.5 .00 341.9 .141 .128 123

12 85.5 69.0 .00 382.7 3632.2 .187 .152 101 13 80.5 67.5 .00 352.1 .173 .152 238

13 85.0 70.0 .07 .272.1 .163 .146 94 14 75.0 67.0 .00 403.0 .206 .175 247

14 83.0 73.0 .49 164.4 .055 .026 113 15 79.0 65.5 .00 123.7

15 77 .5 67.5 .56 398.7 .023 .018 62 16 76.0 66.0 .12 155.7 .170 .136 243

16 84.0 66.0 .. 17 76.0 67.0 1.11 68.4 2530.6 .039 .028 62

17 82.5 66.5 .. 883.2 :: ;: 18 72.5 65.0 .28 225.5 .000 .000 66

18 86.0 65.5 .00 424.9 .491 .452 41419 77 .5 65.0 1.48 317.2 .100 .060 95

20 79.0 66.0 .88 333.2 .088 .054 9719 84.5 69.5 .04 295.4 2843.2 .096 .090 147

21 81.5 63.0 .00 314.3 .134 .130 10320 80.0 69.0 .07 438.0 .120 .108 274

22 81.0 64.0 .02 439.4 .096.101 17721 84.5 67.5 .00 483.1 .206 .184 140 23 82.0 64.0 .00 309.9 .130 .115 10822 82.5 66.0 .00 420.5 .217 .193 184 24 80.0 65.0 .00 317.2 2527.9 .089 .065 10423 84.0 69.0 .. .. " " 25 80.0 68.0 2.81 299.2 OVERFLOW OVERFLOW 239

24 84.0 68.5 746.4 .. " 26 76.0 58.0 .03 472 .9 .107 .092 243

25 84.0 68.5 T 394.3 .509 .443 527 27 76.0 59.0 .00 256.1 .163 .147 162

26 84.0 69.() .03 355.0 3426.5 .123 .102 125 28 79.0 62.5 .22 243.0 .074 .052 83

27 83.5 66.5 .00 420.5 .129 .115 119 29 75.5 60.0 .02 491.8 .066 .058 153

28 85.5 67.0 .00 321.6 .146 .133 125 30 74.0 58.5 .00 422 .0 .211 .190 216

29 81. 5 69.0 .85 213.9 .072 .060 25031 78.0 59.0 .00 407·4 2827.4 .139 .116 122

30 76.0 67.0 2.51 183.3 OVERFLOW OVERFLOW 118AVG 78.7 64.4 326.0 384.3 .111 .095 152

AVG 84.0 67.9 398.2 468.4 .160 .141 148

1Ml\XIMUM .AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES, 24 HOURS PRIOR TO PERIOD OF OBSERVATION.

2ACCUMULATION AT 0700 ON DATE OF OBSERVATION FROM NOVEMBER 3, 1968 TO Ml\RCH23, 1969 AND AT 0630 ON DATE OF OBSERVATION FROM Ml\RCH 24, 1969 TO AUGUST31, 1969.

3CUMULATIVE MILES AT 0700 ON DATE OF OBSERVATION FROM NOVEMBER 3, 1968 TOMARCH 23, 1969 AND AT 0630 ON DATE OF OBSERVATION FROM Ml\RCH 24, 1969 TOAUGUST 31, 1969...INDICATES LONGER THAN 24 HOUR PERIOD OF ACCUMULATION.

74

APPENDIX B. MONTHLY WEATHER REPORTS (CONT'D).

HSPA KLNIA SUB-STATI<>-l: J>NJAA.Y, 1969 H5PA KLNIA SUB-STATI(JII: FEBRlJQ.RY, 1969

TeoPERATLREIRAIN' PYROH PHOTOCI-£M2f:VAPfIAATlrJ'il WI 1'.03 T'EJoPERATLRE l RAIN2 PYRD< PHOTOCt£M

2EVAPORATlOO2 WIt>D'

DAY PAN C1NQ£S) c..... DAYGRAM CALIa-?

PAN CI~I-£S) c.....

""" "IN INCHES GRAM CAL/CM25' l' MILES """ "IN INCHES 5' I' MILES

I 78.0 63.0 .00 241.4 .138 .IlS 76 78.5 65.0 .156

2 78.0 68.0 1.52 101.9 .042 .015 209 76.5 66.5 560.2 .156

3 76.0 66.0 9.13 138.2 OVERflOW OVERFLaw 109 71t.O 67.5 1.79 3%.3 OVERFLO'lfII OVERFLCW 485

4 73.0 63.0 1.59 11.t2.6 .070 .053 52 76.0 61.5 .00 494.7 2403.4 .18lt .168 218

5 12.5 61t.a .37 321.6 .014 .013 116 5 78.0 63.0 .00 293.9 .179 .155 179

6 76.5 61.0 .08 378.3 .096 .082 132 6 79.0 65.5 .00 472.9 .106 .084 131

7 77.0 60.0 .00 181.7 1870.0 .122 .095 106 7 83.0 63.0 .00 lit'." .168 .151 122

8 75.0 62.0 .47 lIO.6 .012 .002 63 8 81.5 64.0

9 72.5 65.0 1.68 125.1 OVERFLCM OVERFlOoi 52 9 81.5 69.0 705.7

10 71.0 59.0 .35 ItSl.lt .007. .005 81 10 82.0 65.5 .00 248.9 .326 .304 290

11 78.0 60.0 11 81.0 65.5 .00 328.8 27%.8 .091 .079 110

12 80.5 60.8 800.' 12 80.0 67.0 .00 456.9 .105 .091 96

13 76.5 61.5 .01 245.9 .377 .328 261 13 S.... O 64.0 .00 388.5 .163 .lltS 132

14 75.0 61.5 .09 438.0 2126.3 .046 .036 84 14 82.0 65.5 .06 472.9 .116 . . 115 262

15 77.5 58.5 .00 408.9 .155 .139 95 15 77.0 64.0

16 74.5 58.0 .03 480.1 .098 .094 151 16 72.5 64.0 745.0

17 73.5 ~6.0 .00 415.8 .179 .167 127 17 n.o 66.5 ".00 266.3 .606 .538 791

18 72.0 ".0 18 14.0 65.5 .00 379.8 2181.8 .141 .113 226

19 76.0 58.0 1008.' 19 77.0 66.0 .00 330.3 .137 .121 184

20 72.0 51.0 .02 462.7 .lt97 .lt39 528 20 19.0 68.0 .00 nO.3 .188 .169 227

21 75.0 54.5 .08 459.8 3531.2 .182 .161 175 21 77·5 68.0 .00 373.9 .232 .184 354

22 13.0 55.0 .00 1t1fO.9 .161t .1ltO 124 22 76.5 68.0

23 72.5 51t.O .00 501t.9 .137 .115 190 23 15.5 67.0 983.6

24 13.0 53.5 .00 Itllt.3 .173 .162 191 24 78.5 63.5 .01 471.4 .682 .573 923

25 75.0 52.0 .00 25 77.0 61.5 .00 381.2 2784.9 .166 .llt3 220

26 75.5 H.O .00 1047.6 26 73.5 62.5 .03 375.1t .112 .098 208

27 14.5 53.5 .00 3.23.0 .552 .484 502 27 14.0 65.5 .00 541.3 .217 .180 29028 14.0 57.5 .00 410.3 3591.8 .111 .092 158 28 76.0 58.5 .00 595.1 .219 .234 263

29 15.5 61.& .00 212.5 .16l.t .139 169

30 73.5 66.0 .00 387.0 .099 .072 218 AVO 77.8 65.0 388.9 387.5 .168 .1% 20431 77.0 68.0 .00 381.2 .182 .156 241

AVO 15.0 59.3 361.4 397:1 .111 .100 136

HSPA KLNIA SLe-STATlCN: MARC><, 1969 HSPA KlNIA StAJ-STATICN: APRIL, 1969

TEJoPERAT\.RE 1 RAIN 2 PYRD< PHOTOCHE.M2

EVAPORATlCN 2 WIN>3 TEI'f'ERATlREI RAIN2 PYRD< PHOTOOiEH2 EVAPORATICN2 WIt.c3

DAY PAN (INCHES) c..... DAY PN< (INCHES) c.....

""" "IN INCHES GRAM CAL/CM2 5' I' HILES """ MIN INO£S GRAM CAL/00115' I' HILES

78.0 63.5 .00 I 18.5 65.5 .17 384.1 H50.8 .144 .118 197

78.5 63.0 .00 1132.0 2 16.0 65.0 .00 385.6 .180 .161 224

79.0 65.0 .00 536.9 .683 .593 660 3 74.5 63.5 .00 474.3 .177 .152 198

80.0 63.0 .00 600.9 H60.3 .212 .193 192 4 76.0 62.0

5 79.0 61.0 .00 532.5 .224 .197 198 5 76.0 59.5

6 81.0 61.5 .00 531.1 .200 .178 180 6 78.0 61.0 1641.2

7 78.0 61.5 .00 561.6 .193 .175 236 7 16.0 60.0 632.9 .853 .777 906

8 80.5 64.0 .00 8 78.0 61.0 .00 566.0 3440.5 .282 .251 241

9 80.5 63.0 .00 1178.6 9 77.0 60.0 558.7 .249 .209 215

10 19.0 60.0 .00 500.5 .722 .653 570 10 78.0 63.5 .00 273.6 .216 .198 178

11 82.0 58.0 .00 550.0 3968.8 .180 .162 148 11 15.5 65.0 .02 %3.8 .on .064 149

12 82.0 58.5 .00 468.5 .185 .167 134 12 78.0 66.0

13 82.5 59.5 .00 616.9 .151 .141 139 13 78.5 65.5 10"6.1

14 86.0 60.5 .00 304.1 .228 .205 177 14 80.0 66:0 .08 583.6 .718 .645 735

15 79.0 64.0 15 82.0 63.5 .00 555.8 3509.6 .232 .210 202

16 80.5 64.5 621.3 16 80.5 67.5 .00 647.5 .252 .229 214

17 73.5 65.0 1.10 323.0 .216 .199 436 17 80.5 68.5 .00 587.8 .Hl .296 2%

18 76.5 65.0 .13 576.2 2838.8 .102 .086 167 18 81.0 66.0 .01 554." .28" .243 239

19 79.0 63.0 .00 539.8 .221 .20" 187 19 80.0 65.5

20 79.0 67.0 .00 497.6 .270 .241 224 20 79.5 64.5 1193.1

21 81.0 61.0 .00 487.4 .285 .2"5 259 21 78.5 63.5 .03 510.7 .704 .614 792

22 79.5 60.5 .00 22 78.0 65.5 .00 596.6 3876.5 .244 .215 277

23 81.0 60.5 .00 985.0 23 78.0 60.5 .00 603.8 .262 .227 243

24 80.0 6".0 .00 382.7 .533 .%2 509 24 80.5 60.5 .00 667.8 .2lt9 .23" 192

25 15.5 63.0 .00 5itl.3 3778.6 .162 .145 245 25 83.0 61t.5 .00 417 .9 .244 .225 130

26 76.0 59.5 .00 500.5 .206 .191 227 26 8it.0 63.5

27 76.5 60.0 .00 590.7 .199 .184 197 27 81.0 63.5 918.1

28 77.5 57.0 .00 "90.3 .228 .212 19628 82.0 61t.O .00 581 .. 2 .5ltl .489 %0

29 75.0 58.5 29 82.5 65.0 .00 598.9 3724.2 .217 .200 171

30 75.5 60.0 695.530 82.0 64.0 .00 690.5 .204 .180 200

31 76.0 65.0 .03 470.0 .420 .357 525..~VG 79.1 63.8 529.4 H8.3 .222 .198 214

AVO 78.9 61.9 490.8 500.2 .188 .167 187-

APPENDIX B.

HSPA K\.J'IIIA SUB-STATION: Mll.Y I 1969

MONTHLY WEATHER REPORTS (CONT'D).

HSPA KLNIA SUB-STATI()\l: JI..I'.E, 1969

7S

DAYTEMPERATURE I

"'AX MIN INCHES

PYROH Pt'K>TQO-lEM2

EVAPOAATIalPAN (lflOiES)

GRAM CAL!~2 5' 1 •

WIK:J3

C'-"'.MilES

DAYTEfoPERATURE 1

r-'AX MIN INCHES

PYR{)-f PHOTOCHEH2 EVAPORATI()'II2PAN (INCHES)

GRJI,M CAl/CM2 5' I'

81.0 61.0

81.0 63.5

79.0 66.0

80.0 61t.O

82.0 62.5

82.0 62.5

80.0 62.0

83.5 59.5

82.0 61.0

10 78.0 61.5

11 80.5 62.5

12 83.0 63.0

13 86.5 62.5

lit 85.0 66.5

15 82.0 65.0

16 80.5 63.0

17 78.0 05.0

18 82.0 62.0

19 81.0 61.5

20 84.0 62.0

21 84.0 61.5

22 83.0 flit. a23 85.0 67.0

24 82.5 65.0

25 ,83.5 67.5

26 82.0 65.0

27 84.0 66.0

28 85.0 66.0

29 83.0 67.0

]0 85.0 67.0

31 84.5 65.0

.00

.68

.00

.00

.10

.37

.00

.00

.10

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.07

.00

·.00

.00

.13

648.6 3559.2

610.8

572.1

719.0

352.8

317.1 4152.3

61+8.9

1+36.5

305.2

lOB.lt

709.2

1+71.3 3412.3

529.6

632.9

592.2

1008.3

621+.2

669.3 3825.3

498.2

554.1t

S96.6

1037.4

474.3

388.5 4055.'"

347.7

545.6

395.8

S83.S

.278 .264

.264 .242

.229 .191

.229 .191

.576 .549

.063 .O:H

.051 .037

.226 .219

.151t .141

.378 .333

.280 .251

.152 .170

.240 .220

.272 .254

.660 .602

.HO .218

.236 .224

.160 .146

.247 .245

.815 .7lt8

.237 .216

.183 .166

.146 .137

.408 .393

212

213

213

213

'00

109

100

138

108

3"201

166

186

227

'70

137

138

117

176

S80

ISS

106

82

209

I 84.5 65.0

2 84.0 62.0

3 83.0 66.0

4 83.0 67.0

5 85.0 63.0

6 86.0 62.5

7 84.5 63.5

8 81t.5 63.5

9 85.5 64.0

10 85.0 65.5

11 79.0 66.5

12 81.5 62.5

13 79.0 63.0

lit 85.0 65.0

IS 86.0 68.0

16 85.0 65.0

17 85.5 66.5

18 87.0 66.5

1'9 86.0 69.0

20 86.0 66.0

21 86.0 65.0

22 86.5 69.0

H 84.0 66.0

24 86.0 67.0

25 83.0 65.5

26 86.0 67.5

27 8S.0 66.s

28 85.0 67.5

29 84.0 67.0

30 85.5 72.0

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.06

.10

.00

.00

.00

.01

.00

.00

T

.00

.00

.06

.00

.11

.00

.00

.00

552.2

512.0

702.8 3615.1

592.1t

619.2

517.0

938.7

570.6

404.9 4043.8

522.1

431.7

528.8

652.6

488.6

SH.7

600.6 3560.5

656.0

560.5

485.3

473.6

S90.6

547.2

316.3 4078.6

592.1t

584.0

568.9

597.3

555.6

S77.3

.441 .429

.225 .199

.28li .255

.263 .255

.251

.Hl

.619 .555

.232 .217

.llli .109

.219 .196

.163 .153

.190 .187

.406 .383

.233 .222

.260 .239

.270 .253

.242 .227

.222 .201

.H7 .353

.253 .237

.105 .087

.2lt2 .230

.196 .172

.223 .216

.498 .468

209

283

17S

169

177

129

353

142

200

163

116

110

2S3

119

ISO

179

149

140

281

lSI

123

167

162

16'

36'

AVG 82.3 63.8 526.9 550.1 .209 .193 ISSAVG 84.5 65.8 542.4 551.3 .217 .202 147

HSPA KLNIA SU6-STATI~: JULY, 1969 HSPA K~IA Sl.6-STATlCJ'.l: AlXiUST, 1969

TEMPERATURE 1DAY

Mo;X MIN INCHES

PYROi Pt-«>TootEM2

EVAPOlATlcrlPAN (INOiES)

GRAM CAL/CM2 5' I'

TEt-'l'fRATLRE IDAY

MAX MIN

RAIN2

PYRCH PHOTOCHEP'12

EVAPORATlCJ'.l22 PAN (INCHES)

INCHES GR.A.M CAL/CM 5 I I'

WI/lD3C'-"'.MILES

I 85.0 71.0

2 84.5 67.0

3 83.5 65.5

It 85.0 66.0

5 85.0 66.0

6 84.5 68.0

7 86.0 71.0

8 85.5 7l.0

9 85.0 68.0

10 84.0 69.0

1.1 85.0 67.5

12 86.0 72.5

13 85.0 73.0

lli 86.0 71.0

15 84.5 69.0

16 85.5 69.0

17 83.0 68.0

18 83.5 66.0

19 85.0 69.0

20 83.0 72.0

21 85.0 69.5

22 85.5 68;5

23 85.0 68.0

24 86.0 67.0

25 85.0 66.5

26 87.0 69.0

27 87.0 66.5

28 88.0 67.5

29 88.0 67.0

30 86.5 68.0

31 86.0 69.0

.00

.00

.03

.03

.08

.01

.00

.00

.00

.01

.04

.02

.01

.00

.11

.00

.01

.00

.00

.03

.01

.09

.00

.00

.00

510.4

630.8

650.9

650.9

650.9

1932.6

401.6

609.0

587.3

368.1

523.7

547.2

570.6

602.li

627.4

446.8

532.1

503.7

488.6

635.8

625.8

667.6

659.3

406.6

S77.3

341.3

493.6

492.0

632.5

630.8

697.7

3926.9 .293 .274

.25li .226

.249 .231

l.080 1.010

1t258.1 .201t .188

.)45 .304

.262 .240

.186 .171

.312 .277

.670 .578

3825.7 .270 .240

.318 .290

.156 .151

.233 .207

.164 .148

.542 .502

3977.1t .316 .291

.318 .298

.313 .282

.163 .148

.273 .262

.270 .247

3771.3 .200 .184

.300 .268

.285 .261

20S

187

179

704

173

235

179

162

268

515

2S7

239

193

176

140

443

22'

20'

188

142

152

190

134

19'

191

86.0 68.0

85.0 67.5

85.5 67.0

86.0 68.0

86.0 67.5

87.0 67.0

86.0 68.5

87.5 67.0

86.0 66.0

10 87.5 66.5

II 86.0 70.5

12 86.5 69.0

13 86.0 68.0

14 85.0 69.0

15 84.0 70.0

1& 86.0 69.0

17 87.0 69.5

18 86.0 67.5

19 86.0 66.0

20 85.0 65.5

21 85.0 67.0

22 85.5 65.5

23 87.0 66.0

24 86.5 66.5

25 85.0 68.0

26 85.5 69.0

27 86.0 67.0

28 87.0 68.5

29 86.0 67.5

30 85.0 67.0

31 81t.0 68.0

.00

.02

.03

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.04

.00

.04

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

.02

.00

.00

.00

.00

512.2

568.9

577 .6

57li.8

51+7.1 li5)li.l

637.3

6li8.9

1+07.4

61li.0

576.2

602.4

663.5 4004.4

611.1

542.7

506.5

li97.6

568.9

708.6

628.7 liOS9.9

526.7

570.4

696.9

659.3

609.6

496.2

6li3.1

519.4 li207.1

SSl.3

612.6

574.7

587.8

.338 .310

.282 .2S2

.&36 .571+

.325 .292

.300 .281

.298 .261

.300 .276

.189 .169

.547 .488

.3liO .306

.307 .267

.290 .264

.288 .234

.278 .238

.li8) .45li

.322 .297

.270 .255

.21+3 .227

.281 .235

.374 .346

.593 .535

.267 .231

.25) .228

.230 .207

.305 .280

.301 .210

.250 .229

210

203

399

203

199

179

IS7

119

3'8

218

222

231

21S

167

35'

188

177

166

165

181

'06

240

18Q

162

201

202

192

AVG 85.3 68.6 561.1 56S.3 .257 .235 189 AVG 85.9 67.6 582.8 596.5 .287 .258 190

APPENDIX C. WATER USE RATES FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS.

APPENDIX C. WATER USE RATES FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS.

JANUARY, 1969FEBRUARY, 1969

WATER USE 1/1000" \vATER USE 1/1000"

DATE I II III IV AVG. DATE I II II! IV AVG..m m 094 m 094 1m m 100 094 m 097

2m m m 034 m 034 2 m m m m

3 m m m m m 3 m m m m

4 m m m m m 4 100 085 m 093

5 m m 051 m 051 5 120 155 m 138

6 m m m m m 6 090 076 m 083

7 m m m m m 7 160 136 m 148

8 m m m m m 8 095 127 m III

9 m m m m m 9 105 m m 105

10 m m m m m 10 100 102 m 101

11 m m m m m 11 060 076 m 068

12 m m m m m 12 m m m m

13 m 070 059 m 065 13 230 221 m 226

14 m 170 m m 170 14 m m i40 140

15 m m m m m 15 090 m 170 130

Hi m 140 102 m 121 Hi 080 m 130 105

17 m 140 123 m 132 17 110 m 110 110

18 m m 170 m 170 18 070 m m 070

19 m 100 059 m 078 19 110 m 130 120

20 m 190 157 m 174 20 080 m 095 088

21 m 100 059 m 078 21 110 m 150 130

22 m 110 118 m 114 22 190 m 220 205

23 m 210 179 m 195 23 120 m 140 130

24 m 150 102 m 126 24 190 m 190 190

25 m 150 085 m 122 25 130 m 170 150

25 m 150 102 m 126 25 m m m m

27 m 130 102 m 116 27 m m m m

28 m 070 068 m 069 28 110 m 150 130

29 m m m m m

30 m 040 034AVG. 128/22m 037

31 119/9 .....:Jm 130 102 m 115 \0

150/12

AVG. m 129/15 096/19 m 109/20 124.7/23

APPENDIX C. WATER USE RATES FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS (CONT'D).

M6.RCH, 1969 APRIL, 1969000

WATER USE 1/1,000" WATER USE 1/1000"

DATE I I! II! IV AVG. DATE I II III IV AVG.

m 120 m 140 130 1 107 m m m 107

2 130 m 160 145 2 :~ 100 m m 100

3 130 m 145 138 3 302 110 m m 206

4 145 150 148 4 207 m 228 m 218

5 190 150 170 5 187 160 240 m 196

6 185 160 173 6 176 170 240 m 195

7 .. 190 190 7 214 250 252 m 239

8 .. 145 145 8 258 096 m m 177

9 .. 190 190 9 m 096 m m 096

10 620 290 290 10 m m m m m

11 .. m .. 11 m m m m m

12 230 145 230 12 165 163 204 163 174

13 m m m 13 181 201 276 m 219

14 m 200 200 14 148 137 204 m 163

15 m 075 075 15 165 182 216 m 188

16 m 070 070 16 231 234 228 208 225

17 m m m 17 236 260 276 312 271

18 m m m 18 220 299 252 228 250

19 m 090 090 19 172 221 240 252 221

20 m 150 150 20 231 319 228 300 270

21 m m m 21 147 182 168 276 193

22 150 165 158 22 078 181 m .. 135

23 140 142 141 23 m m m .. m

24 160 190 175 24 203 208 276 432 229

25 140 150 145 25 220 214 204 240 220

26 170 190 180 26 187 195 216 m 199

27 m m m 27 176 169 240 208 198

28 m m m 28 154 156 216 208 184

29 090 m 090 29 220 208 204 252 221

30 090 m 090 30 255 260 180 180 219

31 070 m 070

AVG. 138/20 156/21 143/25 AVG. 198/26 195/25 228/21 217/15 196/27

APPENDIX C. WATER USE RATES FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS (CONT'D).

MAY, 1969 JUNE, 1969

WATER USE 1/1000" WATER USE 1/1000"

DATE 1 II III IV AVG. DATE I II III IV AVG.

1 236 286 276 300 275 1 m 110 096 168 124

2 m m 276 300 288 2 m m 036 132 084

3 m 110 240 192 181 3 m m m m m

4 220 234 .. 252 235 4 m m m m m

5 209 260 .. 276 248 5 m m m m m

6 m 104 684 108 106 6 m m m m m

7 m m 048 m 048 7 m m 084 m 084

8 148 201 300 276 231 8 m 102 084 096 094

9 115 084 084 084 092 9 m m 121 084 103

10 038 149 024 024 059 10 m m 072 m 072

11 049 065 024 m 046 11 m m 048 m 048

12 055 072 048 m 058 12 m m m m m

13 049 032 060 m 047 13 m m m m m14 011 097 012 m 040 14 m m m m m15 m m m m m 15 m m m m m16 055 m 096 m 076 16 m m m m m17 044 052 096 m 064 17 m 117 264 m 191

18 039 065 060 096 065 18 m m 180 m 180

19 039 058 060 084 060 19 280 238 144 m 221

20 027 052 060 060 050 20 224 m 204 m 214

21 m m 072 156 114 21 224 177 120 m 17422 m m m m m 22 132 084 144 m 120

23 m m m m m 23 192 162 120 m 15824 165 208 204 264 210 24 208 162 238 m 20325 115 084 144 180 131 25 m 062 m m 06226 228 m m 108 168 26 m m m m m27 m m 108 084 096 27 m m m m m28 m m m 048 048 28 m m m m m29 m m m 036 036 29 250 m m m 25030 m m m 072 072 30 190 m m m 19031 126 m 084 144 118 00

~

AVG. 104/19 123/18 128/24 150/21 116.5/28 AVG. 213/8 135/9 130/15 120/4 143/18

APPENDIX C. WATER USE RATES FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIM~TERS (CONT'D).00

JULY, 1969 AlX;U5T, 1969 N

. ,

WATER USE 1/1000" WATER USE 1/1000'"

DATE I II III IV AVG. DATE I II III IV AVG.

1 m m m m m 1 238 286 117 m .214

2 330 m m m 330 2 255 m 234 m 245

3 153 m 176 m 165 3 323 325 312 383 336

4 238 311 332 m 294 4 289 312 293 293 297

5 263 256 195 m 238 5 323 344 293 320 320

6 246 214 176 m 212 6 289 279 312 297 294

7 195 m 127 m 161 7 272 267 332 285 289

8 m m m m m 8 323 312 312 320 317

9 272 227 176 284 240 9 204 175 351 222 238

10 221 214 176 258 217 10 306 279 293 347 306

11 187 175 254 240 214 11 246 208 371 267 273

12 204 m m 213 209 12 m m 293 285 289

13 255 227 283 249 254 13 IRRIGATED IRRIGATED m m m

14 212 194 215 204 206 14 136 241 117 m 165

15 212 194 156 142 176 15 272 260 234 249 254

16 238 227 156 .. 207 16 255 253 234 240 246

17 161 143 293 435 199 17 255 279 254 258 262

18 246 240 234 222 236 18 340 325 312 320 324

19 m m m m m 19 306 247 312 303 292

20 093 162 088 151 124 20 280 247 273 257 264

21 246 318 254 266 271 21 340 272 234 287 284

22 272 240 273 275 265 22 323 312 m 347 327

23 272 m 283 284 280 23 238 357 312 347 31424 238 m 293 266 266 24 255 8m 283 329 28925 170 220 215 226 208 25 m m m m m

26 204 220 176 222 206 26 ·m m m m

27 068 045 056 053 056 27 112 m m m 11228 178 181 098 169 157 28 m m m 184 18429 229 240 176 226 218 29 350 m m 168 25930 306 272 293 266 284 30 350 m m 128 23931 m m m m m 31 126 m m 232 179

AVG. 219/27 215/21 206/25 221/21 218/27 AVG. 269/26 279/20 276/22 278/24 265/28

APPENDIX D. PERCOLATE COMPOSITION FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS.

APPENDIX D. PERCOLATE COMPOSITION FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS (CONT'D).

pH NO, Cl so, K SiOz HCO, PO", (aCO,000\

pH NO, Cl so, K SiOz HeOl PO .. (aCO,OECEMlER 4, 1968

NOVEMBER 25, 1968

NOVEMBER 26, 1968

44.5 159

44.5 162

44.5 163

OECEMlER 5, 1968

86

84

96

88

23.5 102

25.6 84

23.0 100

27.5 124

27.0 130

49.5 170

44.5 128

22.5

22.5

25.5

23.5

3.0

3.2

3.2

3.8

4.0

4.1

4.1

3.0

3.3

4.0

4.0

120

101

132

146

146

146

132

116

132

132

146

OECEMBER 18, 1968

227

230

229

245

227

236

235

238

242

229

233

17

24

52

10

24

7

30

170

116

52

167

7.0

7.85

7.3

6.8

6.8

6.7

6.9

6.75

7.1

6.8

6.8

IV

II

III

III

III

344

344

346

372

368

364

338

348

352

352

320

322

320

0.16

0.16

0.16

0.04

0.04

0.04

0.01

0.06

0.06

0.06

0.08

0.12

0.10

122

132

134

112

113

114

109

94

96

96

42

44

44

39

40

40

4242

42

44

3.0

3.1

3.1

4.0

4.0

4.2

3.5

3.5

3.5

3.5

2.9

3.3

3.3

146

146

146

132

132

132

132

146

132

116

II6

132

116

228

233

235

234

231

228

232

231

231

231

230

231

233

244

182

228

173

179

242

165

156

161

220

205

200

189

7.30

7.15

7.15

7.30

7.30

7.10

7.30

7.25

7.05

7.50

7.40

7.40

7.20

II

III

OECEI1lER 2, 1968

OECEMBER 19, 1968

IV 7.30

7.15

7.15

244

182

228

234

231

228

146

146

146

4.0

4.0

4.2

44.5 159

44.5 162

44.5 163

0.16

0.16

0.16

372

368

364IV 7.05

7.05

138

131

227

225

130

130

4.0

3.9

52.5 182

51.5 180

OECEMBER 3, 1968

OECetlER 23, 1968

DECetlER 24, 1968

IV

II "I

II I "I

2

3

4

IV Xl

7.4

7.2

7 2

7.15

7.2

7.05

7.1

7.1

7.1

7.1

7.1

6.9

7.1

7.05

7.0

7.1

7.0

7.0

6.9

202

220

202

224

165

274

189

185

226

220

209

218

179

147

161

172

157

173

162

242

236

237

237

224

226

224

224

239

237

237

235

237

228

241

236

229

229

229

100

lOS

110

110

130

125

125

129

105

105

105

105

120

125

115

125

115

125

115

3.7

3.6

3.5

3.7

3.7

3.9

3.9

4.0

3.8

3.5

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.0

2.9

2.8

3.0

3."1

46.5 104

51.0 106

46.5 102

43.0 98

54.5 142

52.0 136

46.5 130

46.5 128

~.5 88

~.5 ~

~.5 86

~.O ~

~.O 88

43.0 108

43.0 106

43.0 104

40.5 96

52.0 122

46.0 124

0.06

0.06

0.08

0.24

0.48

0.20

0.24

0.04

0.04

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.06

0.03

0.06

0.06

0.03

0.10

0.11

360

360

350

350

360

348

348

340

II

III

IV

II

III

7.35

7.1

7.1

7.1

7.0

7.05

7.0

6.85

7.05.

7.0

7.15

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.9

6.9

6.8

148

ISO

134

166

162

120

156

198

134

148

134

197

158

162

192

157

139

230

232

233

223

222

251

247

247

243

243

250

253

247

241

253

230

233

115

120

101

120

120

120

115

120

129

130

125

132

132

132

253

132

146

3.6

3.7

3.3

3.1

3.3

2.8

2.9

4.2

3.8

3.8

3.7

3.8

4.3

3.1

3.2

2.8

3.1

44.5 132

44.5 130

44.0 120

45.3 104

45.6 104

39.5 116

41.0 124

39.5 124

49.5 162

48.0 156

42.5 110

25.5 110

24.5 110

27.0 110

100

22.0 100

29.0 112

APPENDIX D. PERCOLATE COMPOSITION FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS (CONT'D).

pH 'fJ, C1 50, Si02 Heo , PO .. CaCO] pH NO, C1 so, K SiOz HC03 PO,. CaCa,

IV &.8

&.9

1&2

153

220

218

14&

14&

3.8 3&.0 14&

2.8 34.0 144 JANUARy 4, 1969

O€CEIilER 27, 19&8

JANJ'\RY 3, 19&9

DECEMBER 2&, 19&8

170 2.7 24

14& 2.8 21

1% 2.7 18.5

1.7 2.05 1.0

00-...I

20.5

20.5

23.75 ­

23.75 -

21

21

23

23

20.0

20.0

20

2.0

27.5

27.5

29.5

29.5

29.5

29.5

36.0

31.5

21.5

17.0

20.0

18.5

18.0

17.5

29.5

31.5

28.1

2.4

2 ••

2.6

3.7

2.6

1.9

2.6

2.1

2 ••

2 ••

2.11

3.0

145

140

1.0 2.7

175 2.7

135 2.4

130.0 2.5

1.0 2.9

130 2.0

130.0 2.8 33.0

176

170

165

1.6

162

117.5 2••

11•• 0 2.5

lIO.O 2.5

132 2.6

137.5 2.0

95.0 2.5

105.0 2.6

114.0 1.8

103.5 2.0

107.0 2.7

104.0 2.8

JPNJAAY 6,1969

JPNJAAY 8, 1969

JPNJAA~ 7, 1969

165

175

235

230

172

145

155

155

160

152

154

174

164

17. 162

166 176

170 176

22.6 162

166

232

162

1.6

156

160

235

234

1%

153

174

165

70

50

50

8

65

12

55

98

66

68

113

116

75

78

95

122

58

106

100

104

113

113

113

132

132

98

125

6.8

6.8

7.2

7.3

6.8

7.4

6.8

6.8

6.7

6.7

6.8

6.7

7.1

6.8

6.7

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.5

6.7

6.7

6.8

6.9

6.7

6.8

6.1

7.5

6.8

6.7

6.9

IV

IV

R

IV

Il

II

Il

VI

III

III

III

I

II

III

8&

8&

80

80

82

80

80.0

102

9&

10&

110

110

24

25

38

38

35

25

25

25

27.5

2.4 33.5 10&

3.4 35.0 10&

2.8 31.5 100

2.4 4&.5 12&

2.8 45.0 12&

2.1 41.0 124

2.1

2.1

2.8

2.& 39.5

2.2 41.0

3.0 37.0

2.& 22.5 142

2.9 24.5 9&

3.& 27.5 114

3.& 25.0 114

3.5

3.8

3.1

3.1

3.0

3.&

2.7 25

2.2 23

2.1 15

2.1 14

2.2 22

2.2 20.25

2.0 14.5

2.1 14

14&

14&

14&

14&

14&

14&

14&

14&

115

120

120

115

101

120

120

120

115

14&

14&

125

115

120

1&2

1&2

1&2

14&

170

1&2

1&2

170

223

221

223

232

22&

231

255

253

25&

25&

257

24&

24&

245

219

247

229

244

245

244

232

219

230

21&

174

1&4

19&

199

175

171

1&9

150

14&

1.0

42

33

151

138

30

2&2

55

141

102

240

211

295

229

244

207

2&1

3&

88

2&1

207

1&9

189

244

229

128

128

87

11&

113

100

105

82

82

1.&

7.&

7.&

7.1

7.0

&.95

&.95

&.95

7.35

7.1

7.&

7.0

7.1

7.1

7.0

7.7

&.9

&.8

&.7

&.8

&.95

&.85

&.9

&.9

&.8

&.8

&.8

&.7

&.8

&.85

&.7

&.7

&.7&.8

7.5

II

IV

IV

II

II

IV

III

III

III

~~'l-~1I·__.........""........ ........ _

APPENDIX D. PERCOLATE COMPOSITION FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS' (CONT'D).0000

pH NO, C1 so, K SiO. HCO, PO, CaCO, pH t-ll, CI 50, K Si02 HCO, PO, CaCO)

-- MARCH 10, 1969"JANUARy 10, 1969

IRRI- I 7.2 1.2 22 100 3.77.1 50 162 147.5 2.3 29.5 - - - GATlON

II 1 6.9 40 230 140.0 2.4 30.5 - - - 2 7.1 1.0 25 20.0 J..I

III 1 7.1 0 142 150.0 1.8 27.5 - - - MARCH 11, 1969

IV 1 7.1 0 143 157.5 2.6 32.5 - - -III 1 7.5 4.0 152 160 2.2

R 1 5.5 1.2 3 1.27 0.0 1.0 - - - ? 7.5 4.6 150 145 2.0

7.8 12.4 138 145 1.8

J_Y 11, 1969 4 7.6 16.0 138 170 1.8

8.2 15 170 152.5 2.3 28.5 - - - >'ARCH 12, 1969

II 1 7.5 107 224 137.5 2.5 29.5 - - - 150 180 2.2I I 7.5 0.0

III 1 7.5 50 137 180.0 1.7 27.5 - - - 2 7.5 0.0 142 185 2.2

3 7.5 0.0 206 180 2.3IV 1 7.2 36 170 155.0 2.7 31.5 - - -

MARCH 19, 1969J_Y 14, 1969

7.2 0.0 140 1607.1 24 190 152.5 2.5 34.0 - - - 2 7.1 0.0 112 145

II 1 7.7 86 250 152.5 2.4 34.0 - - - 3 7.1 0.0 118 140

III 1 6.9 50 165 140.0 1.9 31. 5 - II I 7.1 29.0 208 140- -2 8.2 36.0 202 145

IV 1 7.1 82 190 142.5 2.7 35.0 - - -III 1 7.2 11.4 132 145

7.1 78 190 153.5 3.0 36.0 - - - 6.6 124 1357.2

8.3 19.0 134 125JANUARy 17, 1969

6.0RR 7.1

II 1 6.9 - 226 152.5 2.5 36.0>'ARCH 20, 1969

IV 1 7.1 - 154 145.0 2.7 39.0 - - -II I 7.1 32.4 206 140

JANUARy 28, 1969 III 1 7.1 11.4 12~ 135

2 7.0 4.0 132 1301mg 1 7.4 1.3 134 6.5 1.6 31.5 - - -

7.3 0.8 186 1.6 34.0 - IV 1 7.2 0.0 154 120- - -7.4 2.8 158 130

FEBRUARY 13, 1969 Hl\RCH 26, 1969

IRRI- 1 7.5 3.0 44 18.0 4.4 37;0 - - - IRRI- 1 7.6 5.7 84 22GATlON GATlON

2 7.4 3.0 43 - - 37.5 - - - 2 7.5 6.0 96 21

FEBRUARY 26, 1969 MARCH 27, 1969

IRRI- 1 7.3 3.0 73 13.2 4.4 44.0 - - - I 1 7.2 0.6 126 125

GAllON

7.4 3.0 73 - - 44.0

------ 4------ - --- -

APPEt-VIX D. PERCOLATE COMPOSITION FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS (CONT'D).

pH N0 3 C1 SO.. K Si0 2 HC03 PO .. CaC03

II 1 7.1 2 188 155

2 7.2 19.0 202 155

III 1 7.1 2 112 125

2 7.0 19 114 130

3 7.1 19 120 123

IV 1 7.1 2 154 160

2 7.2 2 208 123

APRIL 9, 1969

IRRI- 1 7.8 5.0 112/114 29GATION

2 8.1 5.0 118/112 27

APRIL 10, 1969

II 1 7.2 0.0 182 150

2 7.0 2.0 192 150

I I I 1 6.9 1.5 116 135

2 6.9 0.0 124 130

IV 1 7.2 0.0 158 140

APRIL 21, 1969

IRRI- 1 7.9 32GATION

2 7.8 31

APRIL 23, 1969

III 1 7.0 140

THE METHODS OF ANALYSES USED BY THE WATER QUALI TY LABORATORY AREBASED ON:

RAINWATER, F. H. & THATCHER, LL. 1960.METHODS FOR COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES.USGS WATER SUPPLY PAPER 1454. 301 PP.

AND STANDARD METHODS FOR THE EXAMINATION OF WATER ANDWASTE WATER INCLUDII\k; BOTTOM SEDIMENTS AND SLUDGES. AMERICANPUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION INC., 1790 BROADWAY, NEW YORK.12TH ED. 1965.

89

APPENDIX E. PERCOLATE VOLUM::S FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIt-ETERS.

APPENDIX E. PERCOLATE VOLUMES FOR INDIVIDUAL LYSIMETERS.

93

DATE LYSIM VOLU'E OF PERCOLATE DATE LYSIM VOLU'E OF PERCOLATELITERS LITERS

25 tf:N. I 190 III 190

II 133 IV 133

26 rfJV. III 133 30 DEC. 57

IV 152 II 11'+

2 DEC. 361III 11'+

IV 228IV 76

3.DEC. I 30'+3 JAN. 1102

II 228II 380

III 3'+2I!I 1131

IV 190IV 361

'+ DEC. 152'+ JAN. 30'+

III 209I! 228

II! 2665 DEC. 76 IV 190

I! 228

III 956 JAN. I 228

IV 133I! 266

I!I 1526 DEC. 19 IV 11'+

II 76

IV 157 JAN. I 228

II 1909 DEC. 11 III 228

II 57 IV 152III 95

8 JAN. I 15218 DEC. I 11'+ II 152

III 133 III 152

19 DEC. IV 190 IV 11'+

23 DEC. I 2'+7 10 JAN. 228

II 152 II 190

III 228 III 228

IV 76 IV ll'+

2'+ DEC. I 209 11 JAN. I 190

I! 190 II 152

III 192 III 209

IV 152 IV 152

26 DEC. I 380 1'+ JAN. 11'+

II 285 II 152

III 361 III 11'+

IV 2'+7 IV 11'+

27 DEC. I 190 17 JAN. II 95

II 152 IV '+8