modelling water dynamics in coffee systems: parameterization of a mechanistic model over two...
Post on 17-Dec-2015
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Modelling water dynamics in coffee systems:Parameterization of a mechanistic model over two production cycles in Costa Rica.
Pablo Siles, Patrice Cannavo, Julie Sansoulet, Jean-Michel Harmand and Philippe Vaast
CATIE (Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñensa), Turrialba, Costa Rica
CIRAD (Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement), Montpellier, France
Introduction
Water is key issue in the coffee regions of Central America:
– at plot level, complementarity /competition between coffee and various shade tree species
– at landscape level, coffee located in mountainous areas (erosion) and rainy zones providing water for communities downstream.
– Study with Inga (up to 6 species), predominant genus used in CA (70% shaded coffee)
Material and Methods
• Trial established at CICAFE, Central valley of Costa Rica, Date : 1997
• Optimal ecological conditions• High altitude (~1200 m), temperate (~22°C)• high rainfall (>3000 mm), 3 dry Months• slope < 5%
• Monoculture Coffee (MC): • Coffea arabica density : 5000 plants ha-1
• Agroforestry System (AFS)• Inga densiflora density : 277 trees ha-1
• Shade 40-55%
• Intensive fertilization regime:
Monitoring of water fluxes during 2 years
GR = I + E + T + Rn + ΔS + D
InterceptionI. densiflora
Coffee
Runoff
Transpiration
Soil evaporation
Gross Rainfall
Soil water stock
Drainage
Interception
I = GR - (Stemflow +Throughfall)
Transpiration : Sap flow (coffee & tree) Runoff
Soil water content Stemflow: Inga and coffee
Influence of shade trees on throughfall
Reduction in throughfall in AFS by 14.4% in 2004 and 7.6% in 2005
Gross rainfall (mmd-1)
0 10 20 30 40 50
Th
rou
ghfa
ll (m
m d-1)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
AFSMC
Gross rainfall (mmd-1)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
2004 2005
MC AFS MC AFS
LAI Coffee 4.71 4.64 4.60 3.80
LAI I. densiflora - 1.32 - 1.22
Influence of shade trees on stemflow
• Higher stemflow in AFS (41%) could be explained by differences in architecture of coffee plants (40 cm taller, longer branches) in spite of lower coffee LAI
• Low contribution of tree stemflow to the system (1% of rainfall)
Gross rainfall (mm d-1)
0 10 20 30 40
Co
ffe
e S
tem
flo
w (
mm
d-1)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
AFSMC
Gross rainfall (mm d-1)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Tre
e S
tem
flo
w (
mm
d-1)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Influence of trees on rainfall interception
SystemTotal rainfall Throughfall Stemflow Interception
(mm) (mm) (%) (mm) (%) (mm) (%)
2004
AFS 1426 1038 72.8 167* 11.7 221 15.5
MC 1426 1214 85.1 84* 6.0 126 8.9
2005
AFS 1725 1324 76.8 204 11.8 196 11.4
MC 1725 1434 83.2 124 7.2 167 9.6
74% higher in AFS
18% higher in AFS
AFS MC
Throughfall* 77% 83%
Tree Stemflow 1% -
Coffee Stemflow 10.5% 7%
Interception 11.5% 10%
Transpiration 34% 25%
Runoff 3% 8%
Drainage (>200 m) 50.5% 57%
Order of magnitude of various components for 2005
I. densiflora
Coffee
Runoff
Transpiration
Soil evaporation
GrossRainfall
Soil water stock
Drainage
Interception
Adaptation of Model “HYDRUS”
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
So
il w
ater
co
nten
t (cm
3 cm
-3)
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
Soi
l wat
er
cont
ent
(cm
3 cm
-3)
Comparison of simulated (solid line) and observed (circles) soil volumetric water contents in the 0-30 and 60-90 cm soil layers in AFS with allocation of water uptake in the various soil layers according to root density
0-30 cm soil layer in AFS 60-90 cm soil layer in AFS
-5
15
35
55
75
95
115W
ater
flux
(m
m d
-1)
200 cm
Water drainage (in mm d-1) at 200 cm soil depth in AFS
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4/24/2004 6/3/2004 7/13/2004 8/22/2004 10/1/2004 11/10/2004
date
Rai
nfal
l, dr
aina
ge (
mm
)0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
RE
T, r
unof
f (m
m)
Rainfalldrainage 200 cmRETRunoff
Cumulative values in AF system over wet season
Conclusion
• Shade trees modify the coffee architecture resulting in increased coffee stemflow and a lower throughfall
• Runoff was decreased in AFS due to coffee architecture and litter cover, hence less soil erosion and better water quality
• Lower runoff offsets higher interception in AFS, hence a higher infiltration in AFS
• Higher transpiration in AFS slightly lowers drainage in AFS
• The soil water content simulated adequately by the Hydrus model (one the first time this model is used in agroforestry)
• Sound basis to estimate the amount of water drainage and hence nutrient leaching (nitrate)
• No OVERGENERALIZATION, present AFS with only one tree species (Inga), Andosol (fast infiltration) and high rainfall regime (>2500 mm).
• The challenges are to use this approach 1) in more complex systems and 2) in conditions of lower precipitation and different soils (currently underway in India) and 3) upscaling.
top related