Performance of Spring and Summer-Sown Maize under Different Irrigation Strategies in Pakistan

: Pakistan is facing severe water shortages, so using the available water efﬁciently is essential for maximizing crop production. This can be achieved through efﬁcient irrigation practices. Field studies were carried out to determine the dynamics of soil water and the efﬁciency of water utilization for maize grown under ﬁve irrigation techniques (ﬂood-irrigated ﬂatbed, furrow-irrigated ridge, furrow-irrigated raised bed, furrow-irrigated raised bed with plastic mulch, and sprinkler-irrigated ﬂatbed). Spring and summer maize was grown for two years. The Irrigation Management System (IManSys) was used to estimate the irrigation requirements, evapotranspiration, and other water balance components for this study’s different experimental treatments based on site-speciﬁc crop, soil, and weather parameters. The results showed that the ﬂood irrigation ﬂatbed (FIF) treatment produced the highest evapotranspiration, leaf area index ( LAI) , and biomass yield compared to other treatments. However, this treatment did not produce the highest grain yield and had the lowest water use efﬁciency ( WUE) and irrigation water use efﬁciency ( WUE i ) compared to the furrow-irrigated raised-bed treatment. The furrow-irrigated raised bed with plastic mulch (FIRBM) treatment improved grain yield, WUE , WUE i , and harvest index compared to the ﬂood irrigation ﬂatbed (FIF) treatment. The results showed a strong correlation between measured and estimated net irrigation requirements and evapotranspiration, with high r 2 values (0.93, 0.99, 0.98, and 0.98) for the spring- and summer-sown maize. It was concluded that the FIRBM treatments improved the grain yield, WUE , and WUEi , which ultimately enhanced sustainable crop production. The growing of summer-sown maize in Pakistan has the potential for sustainable maize production under the semiarid and arid climate.


Introduction
In recent decades, increasing water shortages have begun threatening food security for millions of people because more than 80% of freshwater is used by agriculture [1]. According to the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), one-third of developing Pakistan. The second objective is to evaluate the performance of IMaySys in estimating the irrigation requirements, evapotranspiration, and the rest of the water budget components of this study using site-specific weather conditions of Pakistan.

Experimental Site and Setup
The field experiment was conducted at the experimental farm of the Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan (latitude, 31 • 26 N and 73 • 06 E, 184 m ASL) during the spring and summer growing seasons of 2011 and 2012. The study area's climate is semi-subtropical, arid, with more than 70% of the annual rainfall occurring from June to September. An automated weather station was installed about 500 m away from the experimental field. Reference evapotranspiration (ET 0 ) was calculated using the Penman-Monteith equation from meteorological variables ( Figure 1). crop yield, evapotranspiration, and soil water dynamics within and below the root zone in Pakistan. The second objective is to evaluate the performance of IMaySys in estimating the irrigation requirements, evapotranspiration, and the rest of the water budget components of this study using site-specific weather conditions of Pakistan.

Experimental Site and Setup
The field experiment was conducted at the experimental farm of the Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan (latitude, 31°26′ N and 73°06′ E, 184 m ASL) during the spring and summer growing seasons of 2011 and 2012. The study area's climate is semi-subtropical, arid, with more than 70% of the annual rainfall occurring from June to September. An automated weather station was installed about 500 m away from the experimental field. Reference evapotranspiration (ET0) was calculated using the Penman-Monteith equation from meteorological variables (Figure 1). The experimental site's soil type is well-drained Hafizabad loam, mixed, semiactive, isohyperthermic Typic Calciargids ( Table 1). The three composite soil samples were collected from each soil layer and then analyzed for soil texture [24], soil organic matter [25], and water retention curves [26]. The soil bulk density was also determined using the core method [27] for each major soil layer at three randomly selected locations. At the same time, the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kfs) was also measured at three randomly selected sites using the Guelph permeameter method (Model 2800 KI) [27].  The experimental site's soil type is well-drained Hafizabad loam, mixed, semiactive, isohyperthermic Typic Calciargids ( Table 1). The three composite soil samples were collected from each soil layer and then analyzed for soil texture [24], soil organic matter [25], and water retention curves [26]. The soil bulk density was also determined using the core method [27] for each major soil layer at three randomly selected locations. At the same time, the saturated hydraulic conductivity (K fs ) was also measured at three randomly selected sites using the Guelph permeameter method (Model 2800 KI) [27]. B.D = soil bulk density, θ s = saturated water content, θ FC = water content at field capacity, θ PWP = water content at the permanent wilting point, θ AWC = available water content, K fs = field-saturated hydraulic conductivity, SOC = soil organic carbon, n = 3.

Experimental Treatments
The experimental design was a randomized complete block design with four replications, with irrigation techniques as the main treatments. Plot sizes were 4 m 2 each, separated by a 1 m crop-free buffer strip. The local high-yielding maize hybrid (DK 919) was planted. The spring sowing time was on 27 February, 2011, and 25 February, 2012. However, the summer sowing was on 27 July, 2011, and 29 July, 2012. The seeding rate was 25 kg ha −1 , with a 65 cm row spacing and a 22.5 cm plant to plant distance. Fields were irrigated uniformly (101.6 mm) before sowing to ensure optimum germination. Urea was applied at a rate of 250 kg N ha −1 in two splits. Phosphorous and potassium were applied at sowing at 150 kg ha −1 of single super phosphate and 105 kg ha −1 of potassium sulfate. The spring-sown maize was harvested on 29 May, 2011, and 27 May, 2012, whereas the summer-sown maize was harvested on 5 November, 2011, and 7 November, 2012.
The individual experimental treatments consisted of five different irrigation techniques (i.e., flood-irrigated flatbed (FIF), furrow-irrigated ridge (FIR), furrow-irrigated raised bed (FIRB), furrow-irrigated raised bed with plastic mulch (FIRBM), and sprinkler-irrigated flat sowing (SIF)). Readily available water (RAW) was maintained at adequate levels in all irrigation techniques so that there were no water stresses in either growing season.

Plant Measurements
From a harvested area of 1 m 2 at the center of each plot, the total aboveground biomass and grain yield were recorded. The ratio of grain yield to total biomass was calculated as the harvest index. A digital leaf area meter (YMG-A/YMG-B) was used to calculate the leaf area (LA) from the three randomly selected leaves (top, middle, and bottom leaves) from three randomly selected plants per replication per treatment. After the LA meter calibration, the Leaf Area Index (LAI) was calculated by dividing the total leaf area by the land area. However, in the absence of the leaf area meter, LA was calculated using the following formula [28]: where L is the leaf length (m), W (m) is the greatest leaf width, and A is a factor, which has a value of 0.75 for maize. Leaf area index was measured 7, 15, 30, 60, 75, and 90 days after sowing (DAS) and at harvest.

Soil Water Content and Actual Evapotranspiration
Based on weekly measured water content readings, the amount of irrigation water needed to sustain the soil water status at RAW (mm) was determined and applied when required. Readily available water (RAW) was determined according to the formula below: where the "threshold value for readily available water" (TAW) for maize (p = 0.55) was taken from the FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 33 and adjusted using the following formula [29]: where p adj is the adjusted fraction of the total available water depleted from the root zone before any moisture stress, and ET c is the crop evapotranspiration in mm/day. The soil water content in the top 100 cm of the soil profile was measured weekly using the Time Domain Reflectometry (Triaxial Cables Manufacturer MODEL 6050X3) form at the following soil profile sections: 0-20, 20-40, 40-60, 60-100 cm depth. The soil water content monitoring sensor was calibrated before starting the experiment using gravimetric reference samples from the corresponding depths [30]. Water contents at field capacity and a permanent wilting point (Table 1) were determined for each depth with a pressure plate apparatus at pressures of −33 and −1500 kPa, respectively [30]. Based on soil water measurements, actual evapotranspiration was calculated using the water balance equation: where ET a is actual evapotranspiration (mm), I (mm) is irrigation, P (mm) is rainfall, and ∆S (mm) is the change in the root zone water storage. Drainage was assumed to be negligible because irrigation amounts were adequately delivered to replace depleted water based on measured soil water contents in the root zone and the optimum water-holding capacity of the soil.

Water Use Efficiency and Irrigation Water Use Efficiency
The water use efficiency (WUE) is defined as follows [31]: where WUE (kg ha −1 mm −1 ) is the water use efficiency for grain yield (kg ha −1 ), GY is the grain yield (kg ha −1 ), and ET a (mm) is the actual evapotranspiration. Irrigation water use efficiency (WUE i ) is calculated as follows: where I (mm) is the applied irrigation depth.

IManSys Model Simulation
The Irrigation Management System (IManSys) software was used to calculate irrigation requirements for maize, based on the site-specific data [32]. IManSys solves the following water balance equation: where STO is the change in the soil water storage (mm), RAIN is rainfall (mm), NIR is the net irrigation requirement (mm), DRAIN is the drainage below the root zone (mm), RUNOFF is surface runoff (mm), the CANOPY INTERCEPTION is the rainfall interception by the crop (mm), and ET a is the actual evapotranspiration (mm). Equation (7) is rearranged, and then the gross irrigation requirements are calculated as follows: where f is the irrigation system efficiency accounting for irrigation losses (f < 1). The input data for IManSys are meteorological data (rainfall, maximum and minimum air temperatures, wind speed, and solar radiation), crop data (the initial and maximum crop root zone depths, and the initial, mid-season, and end-season crop coefficients), and the soil water-holding capacity for each soil layer. The output data include net irrigation requirement (NIR), effective rainfall, potential evapotranspiration (ET 0 ), actual evapotranspiration (ET a ), and runoff. More details about IManSys can be found in [32]. The model uses the measured gross rainfall to determine net rainfall/effective rainfall based on the crop's LAI and plant height.

Model Performance
IManSys model was calibrated for the net irrigation requirement (NIR) and ET a using a data set of the 1st year of all treatments for both seasons. Soil physical and hydraulic parameters (Table 1), climatic data, rooting depth of crop, and LAI were used for calibration to achieve a goodness of fit between predicted and observed values of the water balance component. The model was then validated with the data of the second year of all treatments for both seasons. Model efficiency was calculated using the Nash and Sutcliffe method [33]: Here an EF value of 1 indicates that the model predicted and observed values are an exact match, and an EF value of 0 indicates that the mean of observed data would be a similarly accurate prediction of observed data as the model predicted values. EF value from −∞ to 0 occurred when observed means were a better predictor than the model.

Statistical Analysis
The collected data were subjected to normality and homogeneity tests and statistically analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) techniques according to the randomized complete block design (RCBD) for both field trials. The mean values were compared using the LSD (a least-significant difference) test at p ≤ 0.05 [34]. The software package STATISTIX 8.1 [35] was used for the statistical analysis.

Soil Water Dynamics
The water content in the top 20 cm (0-20 cm) showed clear differences between different treatments (Figures 2 and 3) in both growing seasons. In contrast, the water contents in lower layers showed insignificant variations due to more upward movement and negligible drainage. The water content in the upper 20 cm soil layer was highest in the FIRBM treatment than the other treatments during both growing seasons. The extent of measured water contents was as follows: FIRBM > FIRB > FIR > FIF > SIF. Both evaporation and transpiration affected the upper 20 cm soil layer. A high proportion of root water absorption normally occurs in the near-surface layers due to higher root densities near the plant base [36]. Earlier researchers reported that the plastic mulch conserved more water than other mulch materials [37]. Similarly, the highest soil water storage and low evaporation were recorded for the plastic mulch with furrow irrigation [38].

Seasonal Water Balance among Different Irrigation Practices
The highest (420-410.5 mm) and lowest (340-290.5 mm) NIR amounts were recorded for the FIF and SIF treatments during the spring and summer growing seasons ( Table 2). The highest seasonal evapotranspiration (475-407.5 mm) was recorded for the FIF treatment, whereas the lowest seasonal evapotranspiration (390.2-280 mm) was recorded for the SIF treatment during the spring and summer growing seasons ( Table 2). There is a reasonable correlation between seasonal water evapotranspiration and the amount of net irrigation requirement (NIR) (Figure 4). However, the ETa of the spring season was slightly higher than that of the summer season across all treatments. This might be attributed to differences in climatic conditions, changes in soil water storage, and a total growing season irrigation depth. Table 2. Comparison of measured and simulated water balance components NIR (net amount of irrigation (irrigation (I) + rainfall (RF))), ETa (actual evapotranspiration), and ΔS (change in soil water storage within the root zone) during the spring and summer seasons.

Seasonal Water Balance among Different Irrigation Practices
The highest (420-410.5 mm) and lowest (340-290.5 mm) NIR amounts were recorded for the FIF and SIF treatments during the spring and summer growing seasons ( Table 2). The highest seasonal evapotranspiration (475-407.5 mm) was recorded for the FIF treatment, whereas the lowest seasonal evapotranspiration (390.2-280 mm) was recorded for the SIF treatment during the spring and summer growing seasons ( Table 2). There is a reasonable correlation between seasonal water evapotranspiration and the amount of net irrigation requirement (NIR) (Figure 4). However, the ETa of the spring season was slightly higher than that of the summer season across all treatments. This might be attributed to differences in climatic conditions, changes in soil water storage, and a total growing season irrigation depth. Table 2. Comparison of measured and simulated water balance components NIR (net amount of irrigation (irrigation (I) + rainfall (RF))), ETa (actual evapotranspiration), and ΔS (change in soil water storage within the root zone) during the spring and summer seasons.

Seasonal Water Balance among Different Irrigation Practices
The highest (420-410.5 mm) and lowest (340-290.5 mm) NIR amounts were recorded for the FIF and SIF treatments during the spring and summer growing seasons ( Table 2). The highest seasonal evapotranspiration (475-407.5 mm) was recorded for the FIF treatment, whereas the lowest seasonal evapotranspiration (390.2-280 mm) was recorded for the SIF treatment during the spring and summer growing seasons (Table 2). There is a reasonable correlation between seasonal water evapotranspiration and the amount of net irrigation requirement (NIR) (Figure 4). However, the ET a of the spring season was slightly higher than that of the summer season across all treatments. This might be attributed to differences in climatic conditions, changes in soil water storage, and a total growing season irrigation depth. Table 2. Comparison of measured and simulated water balance components NIR (net amount of irrigation (irrigation (I) + rainfall (RF))), ET a (actual evapotranspiration), and ∆S (change in soil water storage within the root zone) during the spring and summer seasons.  treatments impacted the crop's evapotranspiration during the growing season. Maximum soil water storage values were recorded for the furrow-irrigated raised bed with plastic mulch treatment (FIRBM) during the summer growing season. A plastic film may reduce surface water evaporation and improve soil temperatures and increase yield [39,40]. Additionally, its cost is lower than that of gravel and sand, and its operation is more straightforward. Consequently, the plastic-mulching technique is widely adopted.

Crop Growth and Yield
Crop growth and yield varied among different irrigation treatments and growing seasons (Table 3). Grain yield was the highest in the furrow-irrigated raised bed with plastic mulch (FIRBM) treatment. An increase in grain yield by 11.5 and 8.9% for the FIRB with plastic mulch was observed over FIF during the two growing seasons. This increase was likely due to higher water use efficiencies in this treatment during the two growing seasons. This treatment reduces evaporation from the soil surface due to the minimum soil exposure to direct sunlight. An increase in yield was likely due to reduced drainage from furrows and enhanced lateral water movement. These results concur with those reported by [41]. The key contributing factors of mulch in increasing grain yield include improved soil physical and chemical properties and enhanced soil biological activity [42]. Our results agree with [43], who reported that furrow irrigation significantly increased the grain yield of maize. The raised-bed treatment saved water and increased yield in the wheatmaize rotation compared to the flood-irrigated flat field [37].  The extent of water depletion followed the following order FIF > SIF > FIR > FIRB > FIRBM during the spring growing season. Soil water storage depletion variations across treatments impacted the crop's evapotranspiration during the growing season. Maximum soil water storage values were recorded for the furrow-irrigated raised bed with plastic mulch treatment (FIRBM) during the summer growing season. A plastic film may reduce surface water evaporation and improve soil temperatures and increase yield [39,40]. Additionally, its cost is lower than that of gravel and sand, and its operation is more straightforward. Consequently, the plastic-mulching technique is widely adopted.

Crop Growth and Yield
Crop growth and yield varied among different irrigation treatments and growing seasons (Table 3). Grain yield was the highest in the furrow-irrigated raised bed with plastic mulch (FIRBM) treatment. An increase in grain yield by 11.5 and 8.9% for the FIRB with plastic mulch was observed over FIF during the two growing seasons. This increase was likely due to higher water use efficiencies in this treatment during the two growing seasons. This treatment reduces evaporation from the soil surface due to the minimum soil exposure to direct sunlight. An increase in yield was likely due to reduced drainage from furrows and enhanced lateral water movement. These results concur with those reported by [41]. The key contributing factors of mulch in increasing grain yield include improved soil physical and chemical properties and enhanced soil biological activity [42]. Our results agree with [43], who reported that furrow irrigation significantly increased the grain yield of maize. The raised-bed treatment saved water and increased yield in the wheat-maize rotation compared to the flood-irrigated flat field [37]. The biomass (grain + straw) under different irrigation practices varied between 13.1 and 14.2 Mg ha −1 in spring and between 14.3 and 16.1 Mg ha −1 in summer. The higher biomass in the flood irrigation treatment (Table 3) was achieved due to higher vegetative growth as a result of higher water applications. The plant height and vegetative growth increased with higher water applications, which ultimately increased the biomass. Our results agree with [17,37], who reported that the plastic film enhanced crop yield by 21-92%. Similar to our observations, Sun et al. [39] studied the relationship between irrigation and yield and concluded that increased irrigation increased ET c and soil evaporation and, consequently, the biomass. However, excessive irrigation was not cost effective and decreased the grain yield [41]. The highest harvest index for the FIRBM treatment was likely due to the higher total dry matter and higher grain yield in this treatment. The polythene mulch resulted in a better microenvironment and better retention of soil moisture, ultimately leading to a higher grain yield and harvest index (HI). Similar results were obtained by [42], who reported that raised-bed planting enhanced the harvest index significantly due to lessened weed infestation and lodging. The highest harvest index in the FIRBM treatment could be due to the better germination rate, higher total dry matter accumulation, and grain yield. The lowest harvest index for flood irrigation was likely due to higher plant height and biomass. These findings are validated by another researcher's observations, who also recorded the maximum HI for the raised-bed treatment [40].
The leaf area index (LAI) is influenced by different irrigation practices and growing seasons ( Figure 5) (Figure 5b). The high LAI under flood irrigation may be due to the ample water availability in the root zone. These results concur with the results reported by [44]. The biomass (grain + straw) under different irrigation practices varied between 13.1 and 14.2 Mg ha −1 in spring and between 14.3 and 16.1 Mg ha −1 in summer. The higher biomass in the flood irrigation treatment (Table 3) was achieved due to higher vegetative growth as a result of higher water applications. The plant height and vegetative growth increased with higher water applications, which ultimately increased the biomass. Our results agree with [17,37], who reported that the plastic film enhanced crop yield by 21-92%. Similar to our observations, Sun et al. [39] studied the relationship between irrigation and yield and concluded that increased irrigation increased ETc and soil evaporation and, consequently, the biomass. However, excessive irrigation was not cost effective and decreased the grain yield [41]. The highest harvest index for the FIRBM treatment was likely due to the higher total dry matter and higher grain yield in this treatment. The polythene mulch resulted in a better microenvironment and better retention of soil moisture, ultimately leading to a higher grain yield and harvest index (HI). Similar results were obtained by [42], who reported that raised-bed planting enhanced the harvest index significantly due to lessened weed infestation and lodging. The highest harvest index in the FIRBM treatment could be due to the better germination rate, higher total dry matter accumulation, and grain yield. The lowest harvest index for flood irrigation was likely due to higher plant height and biomass. These findings are validated by another researcher's observations, who also recorded the maximum HI for the raised-bed treatment [40].
The leaf area index (LAI) is influenced by different irrigation practices and growing seasons ( Figure 5) after 45, 60, 75, and 90 days of sowing. Crop grown under the floodirrigated flat sowing treatment during the spring season had a significantly higher leaf area index (i.e., 2.08, 3.94, 4.40, and 4.04 at 45, 60, 75, and 90 DAS, respectively). The lowest LAI values were obtained for the sprinkler-irrigated flatbed treatment (1.75, 2.97, 3.74, and 3.40 at 45, 60, 75, and 90 DAS, respectively). A similar trend was observed during the summer season (Figure 5b). The high LAI under flood irrigation may be due to the ample water availability in the root zone. These results concur with the results reported by [44].

Water Use Efficiency (WUE) and Irrigation Water Use Efficiency (WUE i )
The average WUE varied between 11.9 and 15.2 and 14.8 and 21.1 kg ha −1 mm −1 during the spring and summer growing seasons (Table 4), respectively. The water use efficiency was highest for the FIRBM treatment and lowest for the FIF treatment during both growing seasons. However, it was statistically similar to SIF, which has an additional cost of the sprinkler system and is more expensive than plastic mulch in Pakistan. In general, WUE values decreased with increasing amounts of irrigation water. Reference [45] reported values of WUE of 5.90-7.45 kg m −3 from their experiments with maize in the same region of Pakistan. Similarly, [36] reported WUEs of 1.96-1.99 kg grain m −3 for maize with the FIRB irrigation practice. One scientist also found that bed planting resulted in 34% water savings and 32 and 19% higher yields for maize and wheat crops, respectively [12]. The WUE i in the summer season was higher in all treatments than WUEi in the spring season (Table 4). This could be attributed to water use from the soil water storage due to higher temperatures, higher wind speeds, and lower relative humidity levels in April and May. The maximum mean WUEi was observed for the FIRBM treatment (17.2 kg ha −1 mm −1 ), while the minimum WUE i was observed for the FIF treatment (12.1 kg ha −1 mm −1 ) during spring. The WUE i recorded for all treatments is ranked from high to low: FIRBM > SIF > FIRB > FIR > FIF. During the summer season, the water use efficiency was more significant than the irrigation water use efficiency due to the ample supply of water and rainfall ( Table 4). The maximum mean WUE I was observed for the FIRBM treatment (20.2 kg ha −1 mm −1 ), and the minimum WUE I for the FIF treatment (14.7 kg ha −1 mm −1 ). Plastic mulch significantly enhanced WUE due to reduced evaporation water loss and an increase in transpiration. Similar results are noted by [46,47] under arid to semiarid conditions. Similarly, Reference [36] found that WUE i generally increased with a decline in irrigation quantity.

Performance of the IManSys Model
There is a strong linear correlation between measured and estimated ETa for both growing seasons ( Figure 6). IManSys-simulated ETa values fitted measured values well, with correlation coefficients of 0.99 in both spring and summer seasons. Similarly, there were also linear relationships between measured and estimated NIR values (Figure 7).

Conclusions
Most of Pakistan is arid to semiarid and faces water scarcity. A limited supply of irrigation water makes agricultural production in this region more expensive. Therefore, the development of water-saving agricultural practices is required to cope with water shortages during different growth stages of the maize crop in Pakistan. It was concluded from the results of this study that in Pakistan, the sowing of summer maize is more profitable compared to spring-sown maize. Experimental results also showed that different irrigation techniques have significantly affected the water use efficiency, the irrigation water use efficiency, the soil water balance, and crop yield. The best results were obtained for the furrow-irrigated raised bed covered with plastic mulch treatment. Results further showed that this treatment also produced an increase in soil water storage. Our findings further clarified that the Irrigation Management System Software could be an effective tool for irrigation scheduling for successful crop production in Pakistan's semiarid regions. We recommend to the farmers of this region to use this software for irrigation scheduling.

Conclusions
Most of Pakistan is arid to semiarid and faces water scarcity. A limited supply of irrigation water makes agricultural production in this region more expensive. Therefore, the development of water-saving agricultural practices is required to cope with water shortages during different growth stages of the maize crop in Pakistan. It was concluded from the results of this study that in Pakistan, the sowing of summer maize is more profitable compared to spring-sown maize. Experimental results also showed that different irrigation techniques have significantly affected the water use efficiency, the irrigation water use efficiency, the soil water balance, and crop yield. The best results were obtained for the furrow-irrigated raised bed covered with plastic mulch treatment. Results further showed that this treatment also produced an increase in soil water storage. Our findings further clarified that the Irrigation Management System Software could be an effective tool for irrigation scheduling for successful crop production in Pakistan's semiarid regions. We recommend to the farmers of this region to use this software for irrigation scheduling.

Conclusions
Most of Pakistan is arid to semiarid and faces water scarcity. A limited supply of irrigation water makes agricultural production in this region more expensive. Therefore, the development of water-saving agricultural practices is required to cope with water shortages during different growth stages of the maize crop in Pakistan. It was concluded from the results of this study that in Pakistan, the sowing of summer maize is more profitable compared to spring-sown maize. Experimental results also showed that different irrigation techniques have significantly affected the water use efficiency, the irrigation water use efficiency, the soil water balance, and crop yield. The best results were obtained for the furrow-irrigated raised bed covered with plastic mulch treatment. Results further showed that this treatment also produced an increase in soil water storage. Our findings further clarified that the Irrigation Management System Software could be an effective tool for irrigation scheduling for successful crop production in Pakistan's semiarid regions. We recommend to the farmers of this region to use this software for irrigation scheduling.