Next Article in Journal
Assessing the Ecological Relevance of Organic Discharge Limits for Constructed Wetlands by Means of a Model-Based Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Bottled Water or Tap Water? A Comparative Study of Drinking Water Choices on University Campuses
Article Menu
Issue 1 (January) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Water 2018, 10(1), 62; doi:10.3390/w10010062

Crop and Irrigation Management Systems under Greenhouse Conditions

Agronomy Department of Superior School Engineering, University of Almería, Agrifood Campus of International Excellence ceiA3, Carretera Sacramento s/n, La Cañada de San Urbano, 04120 Almería, Spain
Faculty of Agriculture, Kafrelsheikh University, 33511 Kafr El-Shiekh, Egypt
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Agriculture, Trg, Dositeja Obradovica 8, 2100 Novi Sad, Serbia
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 21 November 2017 / Revised: 4 January 2018 / Accepted: 9 January 2018 / Published: 11 January 2018
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [3492 KB, uploaded 12 January 2018]   |  


Plants of Ruscus aculeatus, known as “butcher’s broom”, Maytenus senegalensis, known as “confetti tree”, and Juncus acutus, known as “spiny rush” were grown in pots with a mixture of sphagnum peat-moss and Perlite in order to determine the effect and evolution over time of three water use systems on plant growth, water saving and nutrient uptake. These were an open system (irrigated with standard nutrient solution) and two closed systems (blended-water (drainage water blended with water of low electrical conductivity (EC)) and sequential reuse of drainage (sequential-reuse) water), over a period of 8 weeks. Irrigation with blended- and sequential-reuse-water increased the biomass of all three species at the end of the experiment, compared to the open system. Overall, sequential-reuse-water treatment maximised biomass production. The application of blended- and sequential-reuse-water allowed savings of 17% of water in comparison to the open system. Regarding Cl, NO3 and H2PO4 loads, there was a removal of 5%, 32% and 32%; respectively in the blended-water treatment and 15%, 17% and 17% in the sequential-reuse water treatment compared to the open system. For the cation loads (Na+, K+, Ca2+ and Mg2+) in these water treatments there was a removal of 10%, 32%, 7% and 18% respectively in the blended-water treatment, and 17%, 22%, 17% and 18% respectively in the sequential-reuse treatment, compared to the open system. View Full-Text
Keywords: blending water; drainage water; electrical conductivity; ornamental potted plants; water-sequential reuse blending water; drainage water; electrical conductivity; ornamental potted plants; water-sequential reuse

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

García-Caparrós, P.; Llanderal, A.; El-Tarawy, A.; Maksimovic, I.; Lao, M.T. Crop and Irrigation Management Systems under Greenhouse Conditions. Water 2018, 10, 62.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top