Preface

We are delighted to present this edited volume, *Irrigation Systems and Applications*, which brings together a diverse array of perspectives on the crucial intersection of irrigation technology and agricultural practices. As the editors of this comprehensive work, we find great pleasure in introducing the readers to a wealth of knowledge encapsulated in the following eight chapters, each contributing significantly to our understanding of irrigation systems and their wide-ranging applications.

This edited book is organized into two distinct sections, each containing four chapters that collectively provide a holistic view of the current state and future prospects of irrigation in agriculture. Section I, "Irrigation Systems", opens with Chapter 1, exploring the implementation of a hybrid energy-powered smart irrigation system tailored for smallholder farmers. The subsequent chapters delve into the evolution of sustainable rice production (Chapter 2), the utilization of hydroponics for enhanced agricultural productivity (Chapter 3), and the intricacies of advanced micro irrigation techniques (Chapter 4).

Transitioning to Section II, "Irrigation Applications", Chapter 5 investigates the monitoring of irrigated lands in the Hissar Valley of the Republic of Tajikistan. Chapter 6 explores the role of smallholder irrigation in climate mitigation and the improvement of cacao performance in the rainforest tropics. The volume continues with Chapter 7, which focuses on revolutionizing rice farming to maximize yield with minimal water, addressing the imperative of sustaining a hungry planet. Finally, Chapter 8 delves into the application of geospatial techniques in agricultural resource management.

This collection serves as a vital resource for researchers, students, and professionals seeking a nuanced understanding of the challenges and opportunities associated with irrigation systems and their applications. The contributors bring forth their expertise to illuminate various facets of smart farming, sustainable practices, and innovative technologies that have the potential to reshape agricultural landscapes globally.

As the editors, we express our gratitude to the esteemed authors who have shared their insights, making this edited book a valuable contribution to the field. We believe that the diverse perspectives presented in these chapters will inspire further research and innovation in the domain of irrigation, ultimately contributing to the sustainable growth of agricultural practices worldwide.

We hope this volume sparks curiosity and fosters a deeper appreciation for the intricate relationship between irrigation systems and their applications, setting the stage for future advancements in agricultural practices.

#### **Dr. Muhammad Sultan and Dr. Fiaz Ahmad**

Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan

#### **Dr. Muhammad Imran**

Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Section 1 Irrigation Systems

#### **Chapter 1**

## Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site and Crop Selection

*Muhammad Aleem, Muhammad Sultan, Muhammad Imran, Zafar A. Khan, Hadeed Ashraf, Hafiz M. Asfahan and Fiaz Ahmad*

#### **Abstract**

In the context of food-energy-water nexus and uncertainties in climate change, hybrid energy powered smart irrigation system (HEPSIS) is an emerging solution for optimizing both energy and water to boost crop yield. In Pakistan, most of the farmers especially smallholder farmers are currently relying on conventional irrigation practices which result in high water consumptions, high energy consumptions (by means of pumping), low crop yields, and net profit. Prior to design/development, installation, and testing of the HEPSIS, it is essential to know a suitable site and potential food/cash crops which will be irrigated. In this regard, the study aims to select installation site and potential crops. Site suitability is explored for Sindh province from viewpoints of Indus Basin Irrigation System mapping, groundwater table depth/ quality mapping, land use land cover, and soil classifications. Furthermore, crop selection analyses are performed by means of a screening matrix approach based on stars to identify two potential food and cash crops. As per the results, Badin, Ghotki, Khairpur, Sanghar, Shikarpur, Larkana, and Thatta are selected as some suitable sites for the proposed HEPSIS. Additionally, wheat and rice are selected as potential food crops whereas cotton and sugarcane are selected as potential cash crops.

**Keywords:** food-energy-water nexus, smart irrigation, site suitability, crops selection, food/cash crops, Sindh

#### **1. Introduction**

#### **1.1 Background**

The agriculture sector plays an essential role in the economy of Pakistan as it contributes about 22.7% of the gross domestic product (GDP) as well as food security. However, the contribution of the agriculture sector to the country's GDP has been

steadily decreasing from 30.4% to 22.7% since 1980 to 2022 [1] because of climateinduced desertification. On the other hand, water scarcity and food demand are increasing corresponding to an increase in the population of the country [2–4]. Currently, Pakistan is ranked 12th among the most vulnerable countries where agriculture and water resource sectors are significantly influenced by climate change (CC) and it is projected that underdeveloped countries like Pakistan will experience more severe effects on these sectors in upcoming decades [5–7]. In these perspectives, climatesmart adaptation strategies are necessary for sustainability in the agriculture sector in terms of food security [8]. **Figure 1** shows CC's impact on the agriculture sector and climate-smart adaptation strategies. Among various subsectors of agriculture, the crop sector is an important subsector that contributes about 4.41% to the GDP of the country and ensures food security for a rapidly growing population [1, 10]. The

#### *Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

country's crop sector is primarily dependent on irrigation i.e., artificial application of water to the soil to meet crop water requirements (CWR) that vary with geography, types of crops, and their growing stages [11–13]. About 90% of freshwater is used by irrigation practices for meeting the CWR. This excessive amount of freshwater consumption exerts huge pressure on freshwater reserves. Additionally, irrigation practices consume a significant portion of energy by means of pumping which results in the emission of greenhouse gases [14]. **Figure 2** shows the volume of water utilized for irrigation via pumping, amount of energy consumed for pumping irrigation water, irrigation energy footprint, and irrigation carbon footprint for major crops in Pakistan. Therefore, a trade-off between energy utilization and supply of irrigation water is essential for sustainable agriculture.

Indus Basin Irrigation System (IBIS) is the largest component and source of irrigation. However, irrigation system in Pakistan is facing major challenges like depleting water reserves, canal water losses, inappropriate water management practices, and lack of access to modern techniques, thereby reducing crop yields [7, 15, 16]. Different kinds of irrigation systems like sprinklers and drips are being employed worldwide. However, farmers across a major portion of the country employed warabandi system (using canal water) to apply irrigation without knowing the actual CWR. Furthermore, conventional irrigation systems are constrained by salinity, water logging, and low application efficiency [17, 18]. In this regard, renewable energy-operated smart irrigation systems can address the aforesaid dilemma [19]. The smart irrigation system

#### **Figure 2.**

*Pakistan's map shows (a) volume of water utilized for irrigation via pumping, (b) amount of energy consumed for pumping irrigation water, (c) irrigation energy footprint, and (d) irrigation carbon footprint for major crops, reproduced here from [14].*

#### *Irrigation Systems and Applications*

can apply water based on the actual CWR corresponds to growth stages, thereby optimizing water utilization and enhancing crop yield.

#### **1.2 Hybrid energy powered smart irrigation system**

Hybrid energy powered smart irrigation system (HEPSIS) involves integration of renewable energy sources (solar/wind), sensor technology, artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and internet of thing (IoT) based decision support systems (DSS) as well as mobile app (act as user interface) for controlling and monitoring mechanisms remotely in order to optimize energy and water use in irrigation [20–22]. **Figure 3** shows a working scheme of the HEPSIS. The solar/winds energy ensures a consistent and environment-friendly power supply which can be utilized to operate controllers and pumps for the distribution of irrigation water. The sensors help in collecting real-time data of climatic parameters including temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, wind speed, sunshine hours, solar intensity, and soil moisture levels which depend on the CWR [23]. The AI, ML, and IoT-based DSS receives collected data from the sensors and performs data processing to make decision about irrigation scheduling (when and how much to irrigate) [22, 24]. **Figure 4** provides a conceptual scheme of IoT in the smart irrigation system. In the end, the mobile app provides user-friendly interface to farmers remotely for monitoring and controlling irrigation practices and to make decisions accordingly.

The remote accessibility saves time and resources and overcomes the need for manual labour by increasing operational efficiency. Furthermore, integration of the HEPSIS with weather forecasting systems helps in boosting the effectiveness. By incorporating real-time climatic and soil moisture data, the HEPSIS can adapt

**Figure 3.** *Working scheme of HEPSIS, reproduced here from [9].*

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

**Figure 4.** *Conceptual scheme of internet of things (IoT) for the smart irrigation system [25].*

irrigation scheduling based on predicted temperature, and precipitation changes, thereby optimizing water utilization and reducing dependency on manual adjustments [26, 27]. Some benefits of the smart irrigation system for rice crops over conventional systems are presented in **Figure 5**. By minimizing water usage, farmers


#### **Figure 5.**

*Comparison between smart irrigation systems and conventional irrigation systems [28].*

can reduce their overall operational costs, improve energy efficiency, and mitigate environmental impacts, such as water pollution and soil erosion.

In these perspectives, the authors are planning to design, develop, and test HEPSIS for smallholder farmers in Sindh province under the project number: 10039507 funded by Innovate UK. For execution of the project, it is essential to explore suitable sites for installing and testing the system. Additionally, potential food and cash crops need to be explored that will be irrigated with the proposed smart irrigation system. Therefore, the study aims to explore suitable installation sites and crop selection analyses. The site suitability analysis is explored from viewpoints of IBIS mapping, groundwater table/depth, land use land cover (LULC) classification, and soil classification which are available in the literature [29–32]. For crops selection, seven significant factors for each studied food and cash crop are considered which are listed as (i) cultivated area (thousand acres), (ii) irrigation requirements (mm/season), (iii) water cost (Rs/acre), (iv) net production (thousand tonnes), (v) average yield (kg/acre), (vi) production cost (Rs/acre), and (vii) net profit (Rs/acre). In order to select two potential food and cash crops screening matrix i.e., qualitative methodology based on stars is employed.

#### **2. Materials and methods**

**Figure 6** shows a flow chart presenting a summary of the research methodology executed in this study. The methodology comprises of two processes namely: site suitability and crops selection. The extensive details of each process are given in the following subsections.

#### **2.1 Study area**

In this study, Sindh province is selected as a study area, ranked second in agricultural production in Pakistan. Among a total area of 140, 914 km<sup>2</sup> , about 51.9% of the province is characterized as a rural area and 48.1% as an urban area.

A total number of districts is thirty as shown in **Figure 7**. According to Köppen climate classification, Sindh experiences a subtropical desert climate, thereby evaporation is higher as compared to other provinces in Pakistan. Mean annual rainfall varied between 100 to 200 mm specifically in the Lower Indus Plain [29]. It is located at an elevation of 24.59 m (80.68 ft) above sea level and in the southern part of the IBIS. The IBIS network enters Sindh at Guddu barrage and four canals namely: Begari, Desert pat feeder, Ghotki, and Rainee offtake. The Guddu barrage meets the agricultural water or irrigation demands of Jacobabad, Kashmore, Qamber Shahdadkot, Shikarpur, and Sukkur districts of Sindh and the Naseerabad district of Balochistan through its four canals.

#### **2.2 Site suitability analysis**

Referring to **Figure 6a**, site suitability analysis involves four steps namely: (1) IBIS mapping, (2) groundwater depth and quality, (3) land use land cover classification (LULC), and (4) soil classification. Each step for Sindh province was performed in literature. Therefore, the present study utilizes data of the IBIS mapping [29], groundwater depth [30], groundwater quality [30], LULC classification [31], and soil classification [32] from the cited literature for exploring suitable installation sites.

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

#### **Figure 6.**

*A flow chart representing the summary of research methodology executed in this study (a) site suitability, and (b) crops selection.*

#### **2.3 Crops selection**

Referring to **Figure 6b**, crops selection involves two steps namely: (1) data collection, and (2) screening matrix. Eight kinds of food and cash crops are selected in order to identify two potential food and cash crops. The food crops include wheat, rice, maize, moong, jowar, gram, onion, and tomato while the cash crops include cotton, sugarcane, rapeseed, chilies, sesame, potato, mango, and potato. Data of seven significant factors that are listed as (i) cultivated area (thousand acres), (ii) irrigation requirements (mm/season), (iii) water cost (Rs/acre), (iv) net production (thousand tonnes), (v) average yield (kg/acre), (vi) production cost (Rs/acre), and (vii) net profit (Rs/acre) are collected for each studied food and cash crop at national and provincial level specifically for Sindh. The data of each significant parameter excluding irrigation requirements for

#### **Figure 7.**

*Location and districts of the study area [33].*

**Figure 8.**

*Normalized score range and corresponding stars rating.*

the studied crops is collected from the agricultural marketing information service [34]. The irrigation requirements data for each food and cash crop is obtained from food and agriculture organization (FAO).

Screening matrix methodology is a systematic approach used to estimate and compare various options based on specific criteria. The screening matrix involves assigning star ratings to each parameter in order to compute its suitability in accordance with the specified criteria. The star ratings serve to evaluate how well each option aligns with the defined criteria. A higher star rating indicates a stronger performance or better alignment with the desired criteria. In the context of selecting two potential food and cash crops, stars are assigned to each selected crop based on the normalized score obtained by the relative weightage of the significant factors. The weightage to each significant factor of selected crops is provided using a normalized scoring method as given by Eq. (1). The star ratings corresponding to normalized scores are provided in **Figure 8**.

$$Normalizedscore = \frac{(Original\ Value - Minimumvalue)}{(Maximum\ value - Minimumvalue)}\tag{1}$$

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

#### **3. Results and discussion**

#### **3.1 Site suitability analysis**

#### *3.1.1 IBIS*

IBIS is considered as largest irrigation system throughout the globe, covering a total area of 17.2 million hectares with a length of 2900 km [35]. According to the World Bank Report, the Indus River basin is inhabited by over 300 million people across Afghanistan, China, India, and Pakistan. About half of the basin lies in Pakistan which covers approximately two-thirds of the land and 87% of the country's population [36]. The IBIS plays a significant role in meeting country's irrigation requirements and up to 96% of country's renewable water resources [36]. The river flows through the Himalayas at 18,000 ft to the Sindh plains and ultimately falls into the Arabian Sea. The basin experiences a mean annual flow of 176 billion m<sup>3</sup> . About 90% of the flow is utilized for meeting irrigation requirements via canals passing through three

**Figure 9.** *IBIS with main cities, reservoirs, link canals, and barrages [29].*

barrages namely: Sukkur, Guddu, and Kotri as shown in **Figure 9**. Additionally, the IBIS includes 3 major reservoirs, 12 inter-river link canals, 44 irrigation canals i.e., canal commands (14 in Sindh), 2 headworks, 2 siphons, and 16 barrages. Mostly, groundwater is utilized for the irrigation instead of canal water in regions with a lack of access to the canal water and the amount of surface water availability is insufficient [35].

#### *3.1.2 Groundwater depth and quality*

Groundwater depth and quality analyses for Sindh province were performed by the Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources (PCRWR) [30]. The results are presented in **Figure 10**. According to PCRWR data, groundwater table depth lies between 0.2 m to 16.0 m. A major portion of Sindh's area specifically along Indus River has groundwater depth ranging from 1.6 to 3.0 m. Shallow groundwater table depth i.e., <5 m requires relatively less pumping cost and is most suitable for crop growth. It is observable that Badin, Ghotki, Khairpur, Sanghar, Shikarpur, Larkana, and Thatta lie in the range of the shallow groundwater table depth. On the other hand, most of Sindh's area has electrical conductivity (EC) greater than 4.0 dS/m. However, water having less EC is most suitable for crop growth. It is observable that the EC of water is relatively less at Badin, Ghotki, Khairpur, Sanghar, Shikarpur, Larkana, and Thatta as compared to other cities.

#### *3.1.3 Land use land cover classification*

Land use land cover (LULC) classification is a significant parameter that offers comprehensive information regarding the utilization of landscape. The LULC

#### *Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

classification helps in environmental monitoring allowing to identify the areas vulnerable to degradation and support in resource managements. In general, the LULC classification provides a baseline for estimating past and future changes [37]. The LULC classification was performed by Bashir et al., [31] using unsupervised classification in ArcGIS software that plays a significant role in creating LULC classifications, providing valuable information for agriculture, urban planning, environmental management, natural resource assessment, and site suitability analysis [31]. The LULC classification map is presented in **Figure 11**. It can be observed that Badin, Ghotki, Khairpur, Sanghar, Shikarpur, Larkana, and Thatta mostly lie in cropped areas/agricultural land.

#### *3.1.4 Soil classification*

Soil classification provides critical insights for appropriate cultivation practices and crops selection to improve overall yield. Ulain et al., [32] performed the soil classification for Pakistan and results are presented in **Figure 12** [32]. It is observable that, the cultivated/agricultural land of Sindh mostly experiences sandy loam, clay loam, and sandy clay loam soil. Both sandy and clay loam soils are preferable for the cultivation of food and cash crops. As per the results of the soil classification, Badin, Khairpur, Sanghar, Shikarpur, Larkana, Thatta Noshahro Feroz, Dadu, and Larkana are the most promising areas for cultivation.

**Figure 12.** *Soil texture classification map for Pakistan, reproduced here from [32].*

#### **3.2 Crops selection**

#### *3.2.1 Food crops*

Wheat, rice, maize, moong, jowar, gram, onion, and tomato are commonly cultivated food crops in Pakistan. **Figure 13** shows temporal variations of cultivated area for studied food crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022. The colour gradient shows temporal variations in the cultivated area for each studied food crop. In the last 32 years, the cultivated area for wheat and rice significantly changed with respect to time for Pakistan and Sindh as compared to other studied food crops. The maximum cultivated area of about 22,182 thousand acres was recorded by wheat for Pakistan and 2,920 thousand acres for Sindh during the period of 2021–2022. It is observable that wheat and rice are extensively growing crops in the country. Other food crops in Pakistan and Sindh show relatively less cultivated area trends e.g., moong, jowar, onion, and tomato.

**Figure 14** shows temporal variations of net production for studied food crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022. It can be noticed that the net production trends for wheat, and rice varied significantly in Pakistan and Sindh with respect to time. During 2021–22, maximum production by wheat was recorded of 26,393.65 thousand tonnes and 3,759.75 thousand tonnes for Pakistan and Sindh, respectively.

The maximum net production of 9,322.67 thousand tonnes was recorded by rice for Pakistan and 2,861.38 thousand tonnes for Sindh. As per Pakistan's economic survey, both wheat and rice crops contributed 1.8% and 0.5% to overall GDP during 2021–22 [1].

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

**Figure 13.**

*Temporal variations of cultivated area for studied food crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022, data is obtained from [38].*

**Figure 15** shows temporal variations of the average yield for studied food crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022. In the case of food crops (wheat and rice), the maximum average yield was recorded of 1,190 kg/acre and 1,287.6 kg/acre for Pakistan and Sindh, respectively for the period of 2021–22. Similarly, the

#### *Irrigation Systems and Applications*

#### **Figure 14.**

*Temporal variations of net production for studied food crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022, data is obtained from [38].*

maximum average yield of 1,066.4 kg/acre and 1,530.4 kg/acre was recorded by rice crop for Pakistan and Sindh, respectively. On the other hand, among studied food crops maximum average yield was observed at 5,954 kg/acre and 5,285.2 by onion for both Pakistan and Sindh, respectively. Despite the high cultivated area of wheat and rice, the average yield is less as compared to developed countries because of inappropriate irrigation practices, utilization of farm machinery, and other associated operations.

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

**Figure 15.**

*Temporal variations of average yield for studied food crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022, data is obtained from [38].*

Data of significant parameters for each studied food crops for the period of 2021–2022 is utilized for assigning normalized scores. The normalized scores are utilized for developing screening matrix at both country and provincial levels. **Table 1** displayed cultivated area, net production, and average yield for each studied food crop used for developing screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh for the period of


#### **Table 1.**

*Cultivated area, net production, and average yield for each studied food crop used for developing screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 2021–2022 [38].*

2021–2022. **Table 2** shows case data of irrigation requirements, water cost, production cost, and net profit of each studied food crop used for developing a screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh. It is worth mentioning that the data of irrigation requirements, water cost, production cost, and net profit of each studied food crops


#### **Table 2.**

*Irrigation requirements, water cost, production cost, and net profit of each studied food crop used for developing screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 2021–2022 [38].*

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

are used for Punjab province as per availability. Therefore, the data is used as a reference for developing a screening matrix for both Pakistan and Sindh province.

Normalized scores are computed based on each parameter and stars are assigned corresponding to these scores. **Figure 16** shows normalized score cards with cumulative stars obtained by each studied food crop for Pakistan and Sindh. Maximum stars obtained by the studied food and cash crops are selected as potential food crops. Among studied food crops, wheat and tomato crops secured maximum stars in case of Pakistan whereas wheat and rice crops secured maximum stars in case of Sindh. Therefore, wheat and rice crops are selected as potential food crops for Sindh province.


**Figure 16.**

*Normalized score cards from viewpoints of significant factors of each studied food crop with cumulative stars for Pakistan and Sindh.*

#### *3.2.2 Cash crops*

Cotton, sugarcane, rapeseed, chilies, sesame, potato, mango, and dates are commonly cultivated cash crops in Pakistan. **Figure 17** shows temporal variations of cultivated area for studied cash crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022. In the last 32 years, the cultivated area for cotton and sugarcane crops significantly changed with time for Pakistan and Sindh as compared to other studied cash crops.

Among studied cash crops, a maximum cultivated area of about 4,786.44 thousand acres and 1,467.56 thousand acres was recorded by cotton crops for Pakistan and

#### **Figure 17.**

*Temporal variations of cultivated area for studied cash crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022, data is obtained from [38].*

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

Sindh, respectively. Similarly, a maximum cultivated area of 3,114.31 thousand acres and 729.58 thousand acres was recorded by sugarcane crops in both Pakistan and Sindh. It is observable that cotton and sugarcane crops are extensively growing cash crops in Pakistan.

**Figure 18** shows temporal variations of net production for studied cash crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022. It can be noticed that the net production trends for cotton, and sugarcane crops varied significantly in Pakistan and Sindh with respect to time.

#### **Figure 18.**

*Temporal variations of net production for studied cash crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022, data is obtained from [38].*

During 2021–22, maximum net production of 8,328.81 thousand tonnes and 2,998.41 thousand tonnes by cotton for Pakistan and Sindh, respectively. Likewise, the maximum net production of 88,650.59 thousand tonnes, and 19,460.72 thousand tonnes was observed by sugarcane crops for Pakistan and Sindh, respectively. During 2021–2022, both cotton and sugarcane crops contributed 0.6% and 0.8% to overall GDP of the country as reported by Pakistan Economic Survey [1].

**Figure 19.**

*Temporal variations of average yield for studied cash crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022, data is obtained from [38].*

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

**Figures 15, 16** and **19** shows temporal variations of the average yield for studied cash crops in Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 1991–2022. In case of cash crops (cotton and sugarcane), the maximum average yield was recorded of 1,740 kg/acre and 1241.2 kg/acre by cotton crop for Pakistan and Sindh, respectively. The maximum average yield was recorded of 28,465.6 kg/acre and 26,673.6 kg/acre by sugarcane crops for both Pakistan and Sindh, respectively. Despite the high cultivated area of cotton and sugarcane in Pakistan and Sindh, the average yield is relatively less as compared to other developed countries because of inappropriate irrigation practices, utilization of farm machinery and other associated operations.

**Table 3** displays cultivated area, net production, and average yield for each studied cash crop used for developing screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 2021–2022. **Table 4** shows case data of irrigation requirements, water cost, production cost, and net profit of each studied cash crop used for developing screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh. **Figure 20** shows normalized score cards with cumulative stars obtained by each studied cash crop. Among studied cash crops, cotton and sugarcane crops secured maximum stars at both the country and provincial level. Therefore, cotton and sugarcane crops are selected as potential cash crops for Sindh province.


#### **Table 3.**

*Cultivated area, net production, and average yield for each studied cash crop used for developing screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 2021–2022 [38].*


#### **Table 4.**

*Irrigation requirements, water cost, production cost, and net profit of each studied cash crop used for developing screening matrix in case of Pakistan and Sindh for the period of 2021–2022 [38].*


#### **Figure 20.**

*Normalized score cards from viewpoints of significant factors of each studied cash crop with cumulative stars for Pakistan and Sindh.*

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

#### **4. Conclusion**

IBIS is the primary source for meeting irrigation requirements of Pakistan specifically for Sindh. However, irrigation practices in Pakistan are constrained by poor irrigation scheduling or inappropriate estimation of actual crop water requirements corresponds to crop's growth and development stages resulting in high water consumption and lower crop yields. Furthermore, extensive pumping for irrigation consumes a significant amount of primary energy as well as fresh water. In this regard, hybrid energy powered smart irrigation system (HEPSIS) is an emerging solution for increasing crop yield by optimizing both energy and water. However, site suitability and crops selection analyses are essential before design/development, installation, and testing of the smart irrigation system. Therefore, the study aims to explore suitable installation site and crops for Sindh province. Site suitability analyses involves IBIS mapping, groundwater table depth/quality mapping, land use land cover, and soil classifications. For crops selection, eight kinds of food and cash crops are investigated by using a qualitative methodology based on stars i.e., screening matrix approach by considering potential parameters including cultivated area, irrigation requirements water cost, net production, average yield, production cost, and net profit. Normalized scoring method is utilized for assigning stars to each studied food and cash crop based on their potential parameters. According to results, Badin, Ghotki, Khairpur, Sanghar, Shikarpur, Larkana, and Thatta are selected as some suitable sites for the HEPSIS. Additionally, among studied crops, wheat and rice are selected as potential food crops while cotton and sugarcane are selected as potential cash crops which will be irrigated with smart irrigation system.

#### **Acknowledgements**

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Innovate UK's Energy Catalyst programme (Ayrton Funding provided by the Foreign, Commonwealth Development Office through their Transforming Energy Access Programme) and UK aid for the support and funding provided for the research project titled 'Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers' (Project number: 10039507). This financial support from Innovate UK's Energy Catalyst programme has played a pivotal role in facilitating the successful execution of our research as well as for the completion of this book.

#### **Conflict of interest**

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

*Irrigation Systems and Applications*

#### **Author details**

Muhammad Aleem1†, Muhammad Sultan<sup>1</sup> \*†, Muhammad Imran2†, Zafar A. Khan<sup>3</sup> , Hadeed Ashraf<sup>1</sup> , Hafiz M. Asfahan<sup>1</sup> and Fiaz Ahmad<sup>1</sup>

1 Department of Agricultural Engineering, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan

2 Department of Mechanical, Biomedical and Design Engineering, College of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom

3 Department of Electrical Engineering, Mirpur University of Science and Technology, Mirpur A.K., Pakistan

\*Address all correspondence to: muhammadsultan@bzu.edu.pk

† These authors contributed equally.

© 2024 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

#### **References**

[1] Finance Division Government of Pakistan. Pakistan Economic Survey 2021–2022. Islamabad, Pakistan: Ministry of Finance; 2022

[2] Aleem M, Sultan M, Farooq M, Riaz F, Yakout SM, Ahamed MS, et al. Evaluating the emerging adsorbents for water production potential and thermodynamic limits of adsorption-based atmospheric water harvesting systems. International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer. 2023;**145**:106863. DOI: 10.1016/ j.icheatmasstransfer.2023.106863

[3] Wasti TZ, Sultan M, Aleem M, Sajjad U, Farooq M, Raza HMU, et al. An overview of solid and liquid materials for adsorption-based atmospheric water harvesting. Advanced Mechanical Engineering. 2022;**14**: 16878132221082768. DOI: 10.1177/ 16878132221082768

[4] Aleem M, Sultan M, Mahmood MH, Miyazaki T. In: Sultan M, Miyazaki T, editors. Desiccant Dehumidification Cooling System for Poultry Houses in Multan (Pakistan) BT - Energy-Efficient Systems for Agricultural Applications. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2022. pp. 19-42

[5] Syed A, Raza T, Bhatti TT, Eash NS. Climate impacts on the agricultural sector of pakistan: Risks and solutions. Environmental Challenges. 2022;**6**: 100433. DOI: 10.1016/j. envc.2021.100433

[6] Mujtaba A, Nabi G, Masood M, Iqbal M, Asfahan HM, Sultan M, et al. Impact of cropping pattern and climatic parameters in lower Chenab Canal System—Case study from Punjab Pakistan. Agriculture. 2022;**12**:708

[7] Ismail M, Ahmed E, Peng G, Xu R, Sultan M, Khan FU, et al. Evaluating the impact of climate change on the stream flow in Soan River Basin (Pakistan). Water. 2022;**14**. DOI: 10.3390/w14223695

[8] Ahamed MS, Sultan M, Shamshiri RR, Rahman MM, Aleem M, Balasundram SK. Present status and challenges of fodder production in controlled environments: A review. Smart Agricultural Technology*.* 2023;**3**: 100080. DOI: 10.1016/j.atech.2022. 100080

[9] Ali A, Hussain T, Tantashutikun N, Hussain N, Cocetta G. Application of smart techniques, internet of things and data mining for resource use efficient and sustainable crop production. Agriculture. 2023;**13**. DOI: 10.3390/ agriculture13020397

[10] Hussain G, Aleem M, Sultan M, Sajjad U, Ibrahim SM, Shamshiri RR, et al. Evaluating evaporative cooling assisted solid desiccant dehumidification system for agricultural storage application. Sustainability. 2022;**14**. DOI: 10.3390/su14031479

[11] Aziz M, Khan M, Anjum N, Sultan M, Shamshiri RR, Ibrahim SM, et al. Scientific irrigation scheduling for sustainable production in olive groves. Agriculture*.* 2022;**12**. DOI: 10.3390/ agriculture12040564

[12] Solangi GS, Shah SA, Alharbi RS, Panhwar S, Keerio HA, Kim T-W, et al. Investigation of irrigation water requirements for major crops using CROPWAT model based on climate data. Water. 2022;**14**:2578. DOI: 10.3390/ w14162578

[13] Asfahan HM, Sultan M, Ahmad F, Majeed F, Ahamed MS, Aziz M, et al. . In: Sultan M, Ahmad F, editors. Agrovoltaic and Smart Irrigation:

Pakistan Perspective. London, UK, Rijeka: IntechOpen; 2022

[14] Siyal AW, Gerbens-Leenes PW. The water–energy nexus in irrigated agriculture in South Asia: Critical hotspots of irrigation water use, related energy application, and greenhouse gas emissions for wheat, rice, sugarcane, and cotton in Pakistan. Water. 2022;**4**. DOI: 10.3389/frwa.2022.941722

[15] Tagar A, Chandio FA, Mari IA, Wagan B. Comparative study of drip and furrow irrigation methods at farmer-s field in Umarkot. International Journal of Agricultural and Biosystem Engineering. 2012;**6**:788-792

[16] Mahmood A, Oweis T, Ashraf M, Majid A, Aftab M, Aadal NK, et al. Performance of improved practices in farmers' fields under rainfed and supplemental irrigation systems in a semi-arid area of Pakistan. Agricultural Water Management. 2015;**155**:1-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2015.03.006

[17] Aziz M, Rizvi SA, Iqbal MA, Syed S, Ashraf M, Anwer S, et al. A sustainable irrigation system for small landholdings of Rainfed Punjab, Pakistan. Sustainability. 2021;**13**:11178

[18] Razzaq A, Rehman A, Qureshi AH, Javed I, Saqib R, Iqbal MN. An economic analysis of high efficiency irrigation systems in Punjab, Pakistan. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture. 2018;**34**:818-826

[19] Cáceres G, Millán P, Pereira M, Lozano D. Smart farm irrigation: Model predictive control for economic optimal irrigation in agriculture. Agronomy. 2021;**11**. DOI: 10.3390/ agronomy11091810

[20] Pereira GP, Chaari MZ, Daroge F. IoT-enabled smart drip irrigation system using ESP32. IoT. 2023;**4**:221-243

[21] Obaideen K, Yousef BAA, AlMallahi MN, Tan YC, Mahmoud M, Jaber H, et al. An overview of smart irrigation systems using IoT. Energy Nexus. 2022;**7**:100124. DOI: 10.1016/ j.nexus.2022.100124

[22] Hassan ES. Energy-efficient resource allocation algorithm for CR-WSN-based smart irrigation system under realistic scenarios. Agriculture. 2023;**13**. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture13061149

[23] Sami M, Khan SQ, Khurram M, Farooq MU, Anjum R, Aziz S, et al. A deep learning-based sensor modeling for smart irrigation system. Agronomy. 2022;**12**. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy120 10212

[24] Ahmad U, Alvino A, Marino S. Solar fertigation: A sustainable and smart IoTbased irrigation and fertilization system for efficient water and nutrient management. Agronomy. 2022;**12**. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy12051012

[25] Campos GS, Rocha AR, Gondim R, Coelho da Silva TL, Gomes DG. Green: An Internet-of-Things framework for smart irrigation. Sensors. 2020;**20**. DOI: 10.3390/s20010190

[26] Vallejo-Gómez D, Osorio M, Hincapié CA. Smart irrigation systems in agriculture: A systematic review. Agronomy. 2023;**13**. DOI: 10.3390/ agronomy13020342

[27] Bwambale E, Abagale FK, Anornu GK. Smart irrigation monitoring and control strategies for improving water use efficiency in precision agriculture: A review. Agricultural Water Management. 2022;**260**:107324. DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107324

[28] Mallareddy M, Thirumalaikumar R, Balasubramanian P, Naseeruddin R, Nithya N, Mariadoss A, et al.

*Hybrid Energy Powered Smart Irrigation System for Smallholder Farmers: Installation Site… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114144*

Maximizing water use efficiency in rice farming: A comprehensive review of innovative irrigation management technologies. Water. 2023;**15**. DOI: 10.3390/w15101802

[29] Van Steenbergen F, Basharat M, Lashari BK. Key challenges and opportunities for conjunctive management of surface and groundwater in mega-irrigation systems: Lower Indus, Pakistan. Resources. 2015; **4**:831-856

[30] Iqbal N, Ashraf M, Imran M, Salam HA, Hasan FU, Khan AD. Groundwater Investigations and Mapping in the Lower Indus Plain. Islamabad: Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources; 2020

[31] Bashir B, Cao C, Naeem S, Zamani Joharestani M, Bo X, Afzal H, et al. Spatio-temporal vegetation dynamic and persistence under climatic and anthropogenic factors. Remote Sensors. 2020;**12**. DOI: 10.3390/rs12162612

[32] Ulain Q, Ali SM, Shah AA, Iqbal KM, Ullah W, Tariq MA. Identification of soil erosion-based degraded land areas by employing a geographic information system: A case study of Pakistan for 1990–2020. Sustainability. 2022;**14**. DOI: 10.3390/su141911888

[33] Ahmad MI, Oxley L, Ma H. What makes farmers exit farming: A case study of Sindh Province, Pakistan. Sustainability. 2020;**12**. DOI: 10.3390/ su12083160

[34] Directorate of Agriculture (Economics & Marketing), L. Agriculture Marketing Information Service (AMIS). Available from: http://a mis.pk/

[35] Muzammil M, Zahid A, Breuer L. Water resources management strategies for irrigated agriculture in the Indus Basin of Pakistan. Water. 2020;**12**. DOI: 10.3390/w12051429

[36] Lytton L, Ali A, Garthwaite B, Punthakey JF, Saeed B. Groundwater in Pakistan's Indus Basin: Present and future Prospects. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2021

[37] Arulbalaji P, Padmalal D, Sreelash K. GIS and AHP techniques based delineation of groundwater potential zones: A case study from Southern Western Ghats, India. Scientific Reports. 2019;**9**:2082. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019- 38567-x

[38] Directorate of Agriculture (Economics & Marketing), L. (Punjab) Agriculture Marketing Information Service (AMIS). Available from: http:// www.amis.pk/

### **Chapter 2**

## The Evolution of Sustainable Rice Production along the Lower Mississippi River (USA) with the Increasing Spector of Climate Change

*Michael Aide*

#### **Abstract**

It is incumbent to assess the status of U.S. rice production and its agronomic practices and then predict if the status is sustainable with climate change. Climate change expectations include a strong likelihood of higher temperatures and some uncertainty in precipitation. Technological solutions appear to be revolving around (i) rice breeding to improve cultivar heat tolerance, especially for high nighttime temperatures, and (ii) altering irrigation regimes to conserve groundwater. Of concern are the potential of protracted droughts in the Sacramento Valley of California, salinization along the gulf coast and aquifer depletion across portions of the mid-South. The objectives of this manuscript include: (i) evaluate existing US Mid-South rice irrigation strategies, (ii) assess the yield potential and seed quality of emerging water-conserving irrigation regimes, (iii) assess the influence of rice irrigation regimes on aquifer overdraft, and (iv) assess the influence of increased temperatures on rice growth and development. Alternate wetting and drying irrigation and furrow irrigation are attractive irrigation regimes to reduce aquifer depletion. Yield trials show mixed results, with yield differences associated with soil type, timing and frequency of irrigations, nitrogen fertilization, and variety selection. Producer acceptance of furrow irrigation is rapidly developing, even in rice producing regions that have not experienced aquifer overdraft.

**Keywords:** *Oryza sativa*, aquifers, water conservation, wetting and drying irrigation, furrow irrigation

#### **1. Introduction**

Four regions in the United States support rice (*Oryza sativa* L) production: (i) Arkansas Grand Prairie, (ii) the Mississippi Delta along the lower Mississippi River, (iii) the eastern Texas and southwest Louisiana Gulf Coast, and (iv) the Sacramento Valley in California. Each of these regions specializes in rice production using unique production methods and specific rice types. Rice types are referred to by the ratio of grain length to grain width as long grain, medium grain, and short grain rice. California produces primarily medium grain rice and constitutes approximately 20% of the US rice harvest. The lower Mississippi River valley and the Gulf Coast producing areas primarily produce long-grain rice, with some new interest in medium grain rice. Short grain rice is a minor entity.

The Mid-South rice producing region is located along the Mississippi River in Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The state of Arkansas typically grows most of the U.S. long-grain crop; however, increasing quantities of medium-grain rice are currently cultured. All U.S. rice is produced in irrigated fields that are experiencing increasing instances of spikelet sterility because of high nighttime temperatures, delayed planting because of changing rainfall patterns, aquifer depletion, and surface water scarcity, all of which results in altered plant physiology, nutrient uptake, and net photosynthesis.

In this manuscript, the mid-South region along the Mississippi River will be emphasized. The objectives of this manuscript include: (i) evaluate existing US Mid-South rice irrigation strategies (delayed flood), (ii) assess the yield potential and seed quality of emerging water-conserving irrigation regimes compared to traditional rice production systems, (iii) assess the ability of alternate wetting and drying irrigation and furrow irrigation on limiting aquifer overdraft, and (iv) assess the influence of increased temperatures on rice growth and development.

#### **2. Rice production in the Mid-South USA**

Most of the rice production in Mississippi, Arkansas and Missouri is in the lower Mississippi River embayment and presents itself as a fluvial landscape. Texas and Louisiana's rice production is mainly located on the coastal plain and smaller coastal floodplains. The east-central Arkansas Grand Prairie Region is also a major rice producing region. From a global perspective, rice production in the U.S. is not a dominant crop; however, rice production does contribute to the global export capacity. U.S. rice production centers around 1.1 million ha with an average recent annual yield near 8300 kg ha−1 (**Table 1**). Prior to milling, annual Mid-South rice production


*Source: Data from https://www.nass.usda.gov (USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service) [1]; CWT is centum weight or 100 lb. or 50.8 kg.*

#### **Table 1.**

*Leading rice producing U.S. States in 2022.*

*The Evolution of Sustainable Rice Production along the Lower Mississippi River (USA)… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112385*


#### **Table 2.**

*U.S. rice production over time for long/medium grain (million cwt).*

#### **Figure 1.**

*The average, minimum and maximum temperature by month at Memphis TN. Source: Data from National Weather Service [2] at https://www.weather.gov/media/meg/August2017ClimateSummary.pdf.*

#### **Figure 2.**

*The mean rainfall amounts by month at Memphis TN. Source: Data from National Weather Service [2] at https://www.weather.gov/media/meg/August2017ClimateSummary.pdf.*

is approximately 7251 million kg. Rice production fluctuates over time, a feature attributed to market considerations (**Table 2**).

The temperature and rainfall observations are for Memphis, TN., given that this city is relatively equidistant from the northern and southern reaches of the Mid-South rice belt. The mean maximum temperature occurs in mid-July and averages 28°C (82°F) (**Figure 1**). The mean annual temperature is 17.5°C (63°F). The mean maximum precipitation occurs in April and averages 15 cm (6 inches). The driest month is September with 7.5 cm (3 inches). The mean annual total rainfall is near 140 cm (55 inches) (**Figure 2**). Considerable variation may occur, frequently attributed to tropical cyclones [2].

#### **3. Typical rice growing practices in the Mid-South USA**

Abundant radiant energy (17–28 MJ m−2 for July clear skies), land-graded soils that limit water percolation, plentiful groundwater for irrigation permit profitable rice production. Mid-South rice production is characterized as drill-seeded and delayed flood with ponding initiated at the 4th or 5th leaf stage. During dry periods, fields are "flushed" with a temporary and shallow flood to promote seed germination and herbicide activation.

Two common nitrogen fertilization programs include: (i) a two-way or threeway split with approximately 65–75% of the total nitrogen applied at flood, with the remainder applied in one or two airplane applications starting at internode elongation, or (ii) all nitrogen applied preflood. Recently furrow irrigated rice producers have been experimenting with additional nitrogen applications prior to internode elongation [3]. Urea (46-0-0) and ammonium sulfate (21-0-0) 24% S are commonly used nitrogen fertilizers. Rice-soybean (*Glycine max* (L.) Merr.) and continuous rice are common rotations. In Louisiana and Texas, producers frequently employ a ratoon rice crop, given their longer growing season. Field draining and soil drying provides for mechanical harvest. On-farm rice storage is a common practice.

Recently, rice producers have adopted furrow irrigation on graded-land [3]. In furrow irrigated rice, groundwater is conveyed in flexible plastic tubing and applied as side inlet water. Producer advantages of furrow irrigation include: (i) water conservation, (ii) reduced levee construction, (iii) lower production costs, and (iv) smaller arsenic concentration in rice. Current producer disadvantages of furrow irrigation include: (i) greater emphasis on weed management, (ii) nitrogen losses attributed to nitrificationdenitrification, (iii) lack of crop insurance, (iv) less predictable yield potential, (v) need for disease resistance in plant materials, and (vi) producer education [4].

#### **4. Defining greenhouse gases, global warming potential and carbon dioxide equivalent**

Greenhouse gases are trace atmospheric gases that absorb outgoing long wavelength electromagnetic radiation, thus increasing the atmospheric temperature. Water vapor is a greenhouse gas; however, water vapor is treated separately from other greenhouse gases. Global warming potential is an estimate of the energy absorbed from a unit mass of a specific gas compared to carbon dioxide's energy absorption. Generally, the amount of energy absorbed is estimated for a 100-year time frame. Global warming potential values for methane vary from 25 to 36, with an atmosphere residence of 10 years [5–7]. Nitrous oxide has global warming potential

*The Evolution of Sustainable Rice Production along the Lower Mississippi River (USA)… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112385*

values ranging from 265 to 298, with an atmosphere residence time of more than 100 years. Carbon dioxide accounts for approximately 75% of the global greenhouse gas emissions, an attribute primarily associated with fossil fuel combustion, deforestation, and biomass decomposition. Carbon dioxide concentrations during the Industrial Revolution were approximately 280 ppm, current CO2 concentrations are greater than 395 ppm CO2 [7].

#### **5. Influence of temperature increases on rice growth and development**

The specter of increasing temperature associated with climate change may impact rice production [8]. The prevalent modern view is that high temperature-induced spikelet sterility is a serious concern. Many studies have focused on high nighttime temperatures as more critical than high daytime temperatures. In a review, Wichelns [9] predicted that increased minimum and maximum daily temperatures and changes in the timing, intensity, and duration of rainfall will occur and increased temperatures may intensify the likelihood of spikelet sterility. High temperature impacts on pollen viability and spikelet sterility are more prominent in indica cultivars than japonica cultivars [6]. Ali et al. [10] noted that rice plants are particularly sensitive to high temperature stress during microspore and megaspore formation and that increased spikelet sterility will reduce yield. Rice yield losses because of applied heat stress were greatest from panicle exertion to anthesis; however, there were significant genotype and heat stress interaction differences. Thus, rice breeding efforts to provide heat tolerant cultivars is warranted.

#### **6. Influence of irrigation on rice yield and quality**

Ye et al. [11] asserted that long-duration varieties better tolerated the impact of climate change. In California. Lui et al. [12] completed a soil fertility study involving nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and silicon with contrasting high daytime temperatures. High day time temperatures decreased grain yield and decreased the transference of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium to panicles. Under conditions of high day time temperatures, silicon fertilization improved grain yield and the nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium translocation to panicles.

Climate change may support CO2 enrichment and yield advancement; however, grain quality may be negatively affected. In Arkansas, Esquerra et al. [13] tested rice varieties at (i) flag leaf collar and (ii) initial elongation of grain on the panicle for two elevated nighttime temperatures. The control temperature was 23°C and a high night-time temperature was 28°C. Spikelet fertility and yield were reduced for some varieties for high nighttime temperatures imposed at flag leaf collar.

Based on a compelling review, Horie [6] reiterated that given an increase in the CO2 atmosphere content that the literature results include: (i) under optimum nitrogen availability rice biomass increased 24% between 24 and 31°C, (ii) panicle weight reductions at temperatures greater than 29°C were attributed to spikelet sterility, (iii) leaf area index was consistent regardless of temperature and the increased biomass was attributed to enhance photosynthesis, (iv) water use efficiency was improved because of the increase of biomass and photosynthesis, (v) panicle yield increased because of improved tillering, (vi) indica genotypes showed higher yield responses to enhanced atmosphere CO2 than Japonica genotypes, and (vii) spikelet sterility was attributed to pollination failure.

Arnell et al. [14] investigated global and regional impacts because of increased temperatures arising from increased major heat wave frequencies, hydrological droughts, reduction in crop growth durations, increased river flooding, and others. Xie et al. [15] estimated crop yields and planted acreages along the Lower Mississippi River and inferred that US Mid-South rice yields would slightly decrease; however, planted acreages were estimated to increase because of land expansion to rice at the expense of corn (*Zea mays* L).

#### **7. Sustainability of ground water resources**

In Missouri, as in other rice producing states, groundwater resources substantially augment rainfall for rice and other row crops. The Mississippi River Valley Alluvial Aquifer in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Missouri is the major ground water resource for rice irrigation. In general, the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial Aquifer is typically an unconfined aquifer in Missouri, whereas the aquifer varies from an unconfined to confined aquifer in Arkansas [16]. Aquifer recharge is by rainfall and base flow from the Mississippi River, other rivers and streams, drainage ditches, and surface water bodies. Critical Ground-Water Areas are aquifers where water declines of 0.3 m (1 ft) occur for a minimum of five consecutive years. The Grand Prairie Region of Arkansas, composed primarily of Jefferson, Arkansas, Lonoke, and Prairie Counties, has been certified as a critical ground-water area, which predisposes producers to more detailed extension services to protect water resources. In Louisiana, excessive groundwater withdrawal from the Coastal Lowland Aquifer system is also a concern.

The Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer is largely composed the sands and gravels (valley train), which are overlain by sandy to clayey alluvium. The confining unit, where present, is typically composed of silty and clayey alluvium in floodplains, backswamp, and meanderbelt sediments. In Missouri the confining unit is approximately 6–9 m (20–30 ft), whereas the confining unit in west-central Mississippi may be greater than 30 m (100 ft) and in the Grand Prairie Region of east-central Arkansas is greater than 18 m (60 ft). The Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer is incised by multiple rivers, including the Mississippi River, White River, Cache River, St. Francois, and St. Charles River. Natural aquifer recharge may occur by (i) rainfall, (ii) upward flow from deeper aquifers, and stream aquifer flow (base flow) [16, 17].

There is growing concern that ground water withdrawal rates exceed recharge rates, leading to declining water tables or deeper equipotential surfaces [18]. Currently in Arkansas significant cones of depression exist in the Grand Prairie region and west of Crowley's Ridge [18]. In Missouri, Arkansas, and Mississippi the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer water level data strongly indicates that groundwater utilization is exceeding replenishment rates, indicating the water utilization rates are not sustainable. Water level declines are especially apparent in regions where water utilization rates are correspondingly high, especially in the Grand Prairie and Cache River areas. There is some correlation between the intensity of the groundwater drawdowns and their distance from major water streams and rivers, especially the Mississippi, Arkansas, and White Rivers.

The underlying Mississippi Embayment Aquifer has an extensive areal extent, ranging from Missouri to the coastal lowland aquifers. The hydraulic conductivity is substantial, ranging from 61 to 75 m d−1 (200 to 245 ft. d−1) in eastern Arkansas and northeastern Louisiana to more than 75 m (245 ft. d−1) is southeastern Missouri. *The Evolution of Sustainable Rice Production along the Lower Mississippi River (USA)… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112385*

The underlying Mississippi Embayment Aquifer is partitioned into the Claiborne and Wilcox aquifers and the deeper McNary-Nacatoch aquifer [16, 17].

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has established a series of observation wells across the USA [https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/datatools] (verified April 2023) [19]. Selecting one observation well from Missouri illustrates regional differences in aquifer overdraft potential (**Figure 3**). Located in Qulin, Missouri, the observation well shows that the water table drawdowns only exist during the irrigation season, after which the water table levels return to their pre-irrigation levels. Rainfall and base flow return consistently refurbishes the aquifer (**Figure 4**).

**Table 3** provides examples of 16 US Geological Survey monitoring wells from Missouri, Arkansas, and Mississippi. In Missouri, every monitoring well indicates recharge every year, whereas Arkansas demonstrates some wells having consistent annual recharges and other wells exhibiting decades-long declines.

Water level declines in the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial Aquifer are attributed largely to withdrawals for rice (*Oryza sativa* L.) irrigation [20]. For Arkansas the 2020 estimate of groundwater application in agriculture was 25,380,820 m3 d−1 (5583 Mgal d−1) from the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer and the deeper Sparta aquifer. The withdraw from the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial aquifer was 23,148,690 m3 d−1 (5092 Mgal d−1). The sustainable yield is estimated as 15,338,508 m3 d−1 (3374 Mgal d−1) [17]. For a considerable time-frame, the Big Sunflower River and lower Yazoo River have drained the alluvial aquifer [17]. Massey et al. [21] noted that the US mid-South region contains four million ha irrigated croplands. When averaged across all years and irrigation methods, irrigation rates were 9200 m3 ha−1 for rice, substantially greater than for corn (*Zea mays*), soybean (*Glycine max*), and cotton (*Gossypium hirsutum*).

#### **Figure 3.**

*Depth to water table (meters) from United States geological survey well in Qulin, Missouri. Data from USGS. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/monitoring-location/363551090152801/#parameterCode=72019&period=P7D.*

#### **Figure 4.**

*Mean monthly depth to water table (meters) for Qulin, Missouri. Data from USGS. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/ monitoring-location/363551090152801/#parameterCode=72019&period=P7D.*


#### **Table 3.**

*Examples of Groundwater depths and assessment of aquifer recharge.*

#### **8. Climate change prospects for the Mid-South USA and technology-based mitigation strategies**

It is likely that the US Mid-South region will witness (i) greater likelihood of inland water flooding because of increasing rainstorm intensities, especially in fall and winter, (ii) drought risk, and (iii) greater frequency of daytime temperatures exceeding 35°C (95°F). These forecasts imply that (i) flood-induced delayed spring plantings may be more frequent, (ii) increased irrigation and greater likelihood of aquifer overdraft, (iii) need for high-temperature tolerant cultivars, (iv) amplified insect, disease and weed pressures imply the creation of improved integrated pest management approaches, and (v) augmented producer-oriented education programs promote emerging technology and farmgate acceptance [22].

Reviewing the literature, Walthall et al. [22] noted that wheat (*Triticum aestivum*), soybeans (*Glycine max*) and rice are likely to experience 12–15% yield reductions upon transition from atmospheric CO2 concentrations from 370 ppm to 550 ppm. Walthall et al. also presented evidence suggesting that temperatures increase of 1–2°C are expected. Aggregate affects of climate change include: (i) soil behavior, (ii) soil erosion, (iii) wind and humidity changes, (iv) insect and disease incidents, (v) weed growth characteristics, and (vi) invasive organisms.

One important and potentially transformational climate change mitigation practice focuses on irrigation water efficiency. The introduction of (i) multiple-inlet irrigation, (ii) tailwater recovery, (iii) surge pumps permit uniform depth of soil water infiltration. Recently alternate wetting-drying and furrow irrigation strategies have the potential to reduce field runoff, employ smaller amounts of water and maintain high rice yields [23].

#### **9. Intermittent flood or alternate wetting and drying**

Intermittent flood or alternate wetting and drying was initially developed at the International Rice Research Institute (Philippines), where at a minimum of three weeks after the initial flood the flood is permitted to recede to the point where the soil surface is either wet or dry, then reflooding occurs [24]. Flood should be present at panicle initiation, anthesis, and grain fill. The reflood scenarios are influenced by growth stage, irrigation capacity, and risk tolerance. Advantages of alternate wetting and drying include greater capacity for rainfall capture, reduced methane emission, reduced arsenic accumulation, and potential likelihood of groundwater conservation [24].

Atwill et al. [25] compared conventional flood, multiple side inlet with and without alternating wetting and drying. Multiple side inlet with alternating wetting and drying required 39% water applications and rough rice yield was not significantly different across irrigation regimes. Irrigation water use efficiency was 59% greater for alternate wetting and drying. Where groundwater levels were reasonably deep, the net production returns were more positive because of the reduced costs of water pumping. In southeastern China, Yang et al. [26] compared controlled irrigation and traditional flood irrigation. A decrease of 46% irrigation water usage did not influence rice yield but did improve water use efficiency. In Arkansas, Chlapecka et al. [27] compared furrow irrigation and alternate wetting and drying rice systems, demonstrating that (i) the alternate wetting and drying system favored water conservation and (ii) rice yields were comparable, supporting a greater water use efficiency. In Missouri, multiple years of furrow-irrigation of rice shows promise in maintaining

yields; however, substantial issues remain in securing a consistent (i) nitrogen fertilization regime, (ii) weed management program, and (iii) irrigation timing protocol [4, 28, 29]. In a greenhouse project, Lunga et al. [30] documented that the above ground biomass was greatest for the flood system.

The International Rice Research Institute listed potential advantages for alternate wetting and drying [24]. With continuing research, some of the alternate wetting and drying advantages included: (i) potential for cultivars with improved characteristics for aerobic production, (ii) improved ecosystem services, human health, and environmental protection, (iii) improved soil fertility, weed management, and integrated pest management practices, and (iv) reduced soil sodium accumulation because of elevated sodium adsorption ratios.

In India, Shekhar et al. [31] conducted alternate wetting and drying field research involving three levels of soil moisture depletion with sub-treatments involving nitrogen management. Yields for conventional irrigation with alternate wetting and drying imposing only mild stress were statistically equivalent. Alternate wetting and drying imposing severe moisture stress resulted in a 9% rice yield reduction. The nitrogen use efficiency was similar for conventional irrigation and mild stress alternate wetting and drying. Atwill et al. [25] performed field research in Louisiana and Mississippi comparing conventional irrigation and alternate wetting and drying and documented that rice grain yield for six cultivars was statistically equivalent.

Carrijo et al. [32] conducted a meta-analysis to identify soil properties and land management that favored successful alternate wetting and drying and estimate the water conservation potential and differences in rice yield. The conventional flood and mild stress alternate wetting and drying irrigation regimes showed similar rice yields and the mild stress irrigation regimes demonstrated small water usages. Carrijo et al. [33] imposed three alternate wetting and drying irrigation treatments having increasing water severity between full canopy cover and 50% heading. The experimental data suggests that the availability of soil water in the 25–35 cm soil rooting depth was critical for maintaining rice yields.

#### **10. Furrow irrigated rice**

In Arkansas, Frizzell et al. [34] compared twelve cultivars in a furrow irrigation trial, where rice yields were evaluated at the side-inlet portion of the field with the bottom portion of the field where tailwater accumulated. Rice yields and headrice yields were greater in the bottom portion of the field, especially for the hybrids. In Arkansas, Henry and Clark [35] evaluated furrow irrigated rice having six different irrigation timings, that is, continuous, 3, 5, 7, 10 and 14 days. The continuous water timing had the highest yield and the poorest water use efficiency, whereas the 14-day irrigation frequency had the lowest yield and the highest water use efficiency. Irrigation having a 40% allowable depletion was considered the threshold for yield penalties.

In a two-year field study in Missouri, Aide and Goldschmidt [4] compared 12 and 17 varieties for their yield and arsenic uptake because of furrow irrigation or delayed flood irrigation. The plots were 450 m long and divided into three sections based on the distance from the side-inlet water application. The tail water accumulation portion of the field and for the delayed flood irrigation exhibited the greatest yields and the highest arsenic levels in straw, rough rice, and milled rice. The plot portion

adjacent to the side-inlet irrigation exhibited the lowest yields and the smallest arsenic levels. Similar results were documented for the same experimental design in subsequent years [28, 29].

#### **11. Projections of needed rice research to address climate change and unsustainable water use**

With the threat of climate change, the mid-South rice region is anticipating greater temperatures and uncertainty in precipitation. Additionally, the irrigation water application rates is challenging aquifer sustainability. These two issues collectively influence rice production and quality. With nighttime temperatures approaching 29°C (84°F) the likelihood of spikelet sterility becomes an increasing threat to production. Cultivars do show a range of heat stress, thus favorable results of dedicated rice breeding programs are quite possible. Aquifer overdraft is recognized on a regional basis, which reduces the long-term sustainability of rice production. Producer adoption of either furrow irrigated rice or alternate wetting and drying irrigation has substantial potential to reduce aquifer overdraft. Thus, two technological solutions may mitigate the deleterious influence of climate change. Other water conserving solutions include: (i) surface water capture, (ii) tailwater recovery, and (iii) development of constructed wetlands.

#### **12. Conclusion**

The specter of climate change is real and the effects on rice production will certainly develop. Conversely, advances in technology may reduce rice yields and impair quality degradation; however, substantial refinement of these technologies must be implemented before there is widespread commercialization. The development of rice plant genetics to improve high temperature tolerant cultivars and the continuing development and producer adoption of water conserving irrigation regimes are critical to mitigating the influence of climate change. Other agronomic concepts are potentially viable; however, they will not be sufficient without improved cultivars and innovative irrigation practices. Furrow irrigation is becoming more accepted and considerable rice acreage is actively using this irrigation regime. Research that supports consistent yields and rice quality will increase producer implementation and subsequently will support aquifer sustainability.

#### **Conflicts of interest**

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

*Irrigation Systems and Applications*

### **Author details**

Michael Aide Department of Agriculture, Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau, MO, USA

\*Address all correspondence to: mtaide@semo.edu

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*The Evolution of Sustainable Rice Production along the Lower Mississippi River (USA)… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112385*

#### **References**

[1] United States Department Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service. Available from: https:// www.nass.usda.gov [Accessed: April 2023]

[2] National Weather Service. Available from: https://www.weather.gov/media/ meg/August2017ClimateSummary.pdf [Accessed: April 2023]

[3] Nalley LL, Linquist B, Kovacs KF, Anders MM. The economic viability of alternate wetting and drying irrigation in Arkansas rice production. Agronomy Journal. 2015;**107**:579-587

[4] Aide MT, Goldschmidt N. Comparison of delayed flood and furrow irrigation involving rice for nutrient and arsenic uptake. International Journal of Applied Agricultural Research. 2017;**12**:129- 136. Available from: https://www. ripublication.com/ijaar.htm

[5] Simmonds MB, Anders M, Adviento-Borbe MA, van Kessel C, McClung A, Linquist BA. Seasonal methane and nitrous oxide emissions of several rice cultivars in direct-seeded systems. Journal of Environmental Quality. 2015;**44**:103-114

[6] Horie T. Global warming and rice production in Asia: Modeling, impact prediction and adaptation. Proceedings of the Japan Academy Series B: Physical and Biological Sciences. 2019;**95**(6):211- 245. DOI: 10.2183/pjab.95.016

[7] Conrad R. The global methane cycle: Recent advances in understanding the microbial processes involved. Environmental Microbiology Reports. 2009;**1**:285-292. DOI: 10.1111/j.1758-2229.2009.00038x

[8] Krishnan P, Ramakrishnan B, Reddy KR, Reddy VR. High-temperature effects on rice growth, yield, and grain quality. Advances in Agronomy. 2011;**111**:87-206

[9] Wichelns D. Managing water and soils to achieve adaptation and reduce methane emissions and arsenic contamination in Asian rice production. Water. 2016;**8**:141-170. DOI: 10.3390/ w8040141

[10] Ali MA, Hoque A, Kim PJ. Mitigating global warming potentials of methane and nitrous oxide gases from rice paddies under different irrigation regimes. Ambio. 2013;**42**:357-368. DOI: 10.1007/ s13280-012-0349-3

[11] Ye T, Zong S, Kleidon A, Yuan W, Wang Y, Shi P. Impacts of climate warming, cultivar shifts, and phenological dates on rice growth period length in China after correction for seasonal shift effects. Climate Change. 2019;**155**:127- 143. DOI: 10.1007/s10584-019-02450-s

[12] Liu Q, Ma H, Sun Z, Lin X, Zhou X. Translocation efficiencies and allocation of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in rice as affected by silicon fertilizer under high daytime temperature. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2019;**205**:188-201. DOI: 10.1111/jac.12313

[13] Esguerra MQ, Hemphill CC, Counce PA. Differential response of arkansas rice varieties on high nighttime temperature (HNT) treatments at different reproductive stages. In: KAK M, Scott B, Hardke B, editors. BR Wells Arkansas Rice Research Studies 2019. Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Series 667. Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Arkansas ystem, Division of Agriculture; 2019

[14] Arnell NW, Lowe JA, Challinor AJ, Osborn TJ. Global and regional impacts of climate change at different levels of global temperature increase. Climate Change. 2019;**155**:377-391. DOI: 10.1007/ s10584-019-02464-z

[15] Xie L, Lewis SM, Auffhammer M, Berck P. Heat in the heartland: Crop yield and coverage response to climate change along the Mississippi River. Environmental Resource Economics. 2019;**73**:485-513. DOI: 10.1007/ s10640-018-0271-7

[16] United States Geological Survey. Ground Water Atlas of the United States. 2016. Available from: https://pubs.usgs. gov/ha/ha730/gwa.html [Accessed: May 2023]

[17] Arkansas Department of Agriculture. 2022 Arkansas Groundwater Protection and Management Report. 10421 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR: Arkansas Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Division; 2022

[18] Reba ML, Massey JH, Adviento-Borbe MA, Leslie D, Yaeger MA, Anders M, et al. Aquifer depletion in the lower Mississippi River basin: Challengers and solutions. Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education. 2017;**162**:128-139

[19] United States Geologic Survey. Available from: https://www.usgs.gov/ mission-areas/water-resources/data-tools [Accessed: April 2023]

[20] Atwill RL, Krutz LJ, Bond JA, Golden BR, Spencer GD, Bryant CJ, et al. Alternate wetting and drying reduces aquifer withdrawal in Mississippi rice production systems. Agronomy Journal. 2020;**112**:5115-5124. DOI: 10.1002/ agj2.20447

[21] Massey JH, Mark SC, Epting JW, Shane PR, Kelly DB, Bowling TH, et al. Long-term measurements of agronomic crop irrigation made in the Mississippi delta portion of the lower Mississippi River valley. Irrigation Science. 2017;**35**:297-313

[22] Walthall CL, Hatfield J, Backlund P, Lengnick L, Marshall E, Walsh M, et al. Climate Change and Agriculture in the United States: Effects and Adaptation. Washington, DC: USDA Technical Bulletin 1935; 2012. 186 p. Available from: https://www.usda.gov/sites/ default/files/documents/CC%20and%20 Agriculture%20Report%20(02-04-2013) b.pdf

[23] Aide MT. Rice production with restricted water usage: A global perspective. Egyptian Journal of Agronomy. 2019;**41**:197-206. DOI: 10.21608/agro.2019.15729.1174

[24] Allen JM, Sander BO. The Diverse Benefits of Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD). Los Banos, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute; 2019. Available from: www.ccafs.cgiar.org

[25] Atwill RL, Krutz LJ, Bond JA, Reddy KR, Gore J, Walker TW, et al. Water management strategies and their effects on rice grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 2018;**73**:257-264. DOI: 10.2489/jswc.73.3.257

[26] Yang S, Liu X, Liu X, Xu J. Effect of water management on soil respiration and NEE of paddy fields in Southeast China. Paddy and Water Environment. 2017;**15**:787-796. DOI: 10.1007/ s10333-017-0591-1

[27] Chlapecka JL, Hardke JT, Roberts TL, Frizzell DL, Castaneda-Gonzalez E, Clayton T, et al. Allowable water deficit when utilizing alternative rice irrigation strategies. In: KAK M, Scott B, Hardke B, editors. BR Wells Arkansas Rice Research

*The Evolution of Sustainable Rice Production along the Lower Mississippi River (USA)… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112385*

Studies, Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Series. Vol. 667. Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Arkansas System, Division of Agriculture; 2019

[28] Aide MT. Comparison of delayed flood and furrow irrigation regimes in rice to reduce arsenic accumulation. International Journal of Applied Agricultural Research. 2018;**13**:1- 8. Available from: https://www. ripublication.com/ijaar.htm

[29] Aide MT. Furrow irrigated rice evaluation: Nutrient and arsenic uptake and partitioning. International Journal of Applied Agricultural Research. 2019;**14**:15-21. ISSN 0973-2683

[30] Lunga D, Brye KR, Slayden JM, Lebeau SG, Roberts TL, Norman RL. Water management effects on trace gas emissions under greenhouse conditions from direct-seeded hybrid rice in a siltloam soil. In: KAK M, Scott B, Hardke B, editors. BR Wells Arkansas Rice Research Studies, Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Series. Vol. 667. Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Arkansas System, Division of Agriculture; 2019

[31] Shekhar S, Mailapalli DR, Raghuwanshi NS. Effect of alternate wetting and drying irrigation practice on rice growth and yield: A lysimeter study. ACS Agricultural Science & Technology. 2022;**2**(5):919-931. DOI: 10.1021/ acsagscitech.1c00239

[32] Carrijo DR, Lundy ME, Linquist BA. Rice yields and water use under alternate wetting and drying irrigation: A meta-analysis. Field Crops Research. 2016;**203**:173-180. DOI: 10.1016/j. fcr.2016.12.002

[33] Carrijo DR, Akbar N, Reis AFB, Li C, Gaudin ACM, Parikh SJ, et al. Impacts of

variable soil drying in alternate wetting and drying rice systems on yields, grain arsenic concentration and soil moisture dynamics. Field Crops Research. 2018;**222**:101-110. DOI: 10.1016/j. fcr.2018.02.026

[34] Frizzell DL, Hardke JT, Amos LR, Castaneda-Gonzalez E, Clayton TL. Performance of twelve rice cultivars in a furrow-irrigated rice (FIR) system. In: Hardke J, Sha X, Bateman N, editors. B.R. Wells Arkansas Rice Research Studies. Arkansas Agriculture Research Series, University Arkansas; 2021. p. 231

[35] Henry CG, Clark T. Evaluating irrigation timing, depletion, water-use, and efficiencies in furrow-irrigated rice. In: Hardke J, Sha X, Bateman N, editors. B.R. Wells Arkansas Rice Research Studies. Arkansas Agriculture Research Series, University Arkansas; 2021. p. 244

#### **Chapter 3**

## Enhanced Agricultural Productivity Using Hydroponics Technique: A Smart Farming System

*Suman Dutta, Bishal Mukherjee and Ashutosh Sawarkar*

#### **Abstract**

Hydroponic farming is one potential solution to the lack of arable land diminishing the capacity of agriculture. The hydroponic method of crop production has proved successful for precision farming in growing both flowers and vegetables. It requires fewer energy requirements than traditional agriculture because it employs fertilizer solutions under heavily controlled environmental conditions in limited areas. Hydroponic systems can be used as a treatment method for partially treated wastewater or reclaimed water before its discharge into the environment since plants have the ability to absorb nutrients, toxic metals, and emerging contaminants. Farmers engaged in hydroponic farming benefit from a wide range of significant advantages by enhancing their income through introducing quality products for a sustainable community. The newly created technology also arrived at the perfect time because traditional farming practices do not work with diminishing water levels. Plants may now be grown in any greenhouse or nursery, regardless of the season, as long as the necessary infrastructure is in place.

**Keywords:** hydroponics, precision agriculture, greenhouse facility, enhanced farm income, soil less cultivation

#### **1. Introduction**

Environmentally friendly soilless agricultural production methods control inputs like water, pesticides, and fertilizers to produce farm output. Furthermore, soilless agriculture makes the best use of available energy. It offers significantly cleaner and hygienic products than soil-based agriculture [1]. The technology required to use soilless agricultural techniques has rapidly improved, expanded, and gained a lot of significance in recent years. This technology is relevant to farming methods that use minimal water and little land while allowing total control over all agricultural variables. A number of things affect traditional farming [1]. A number of elements, including soil nutrients, climatic circumstances, and inappropriate soil structures for cultivation, may have a negative effect on conventional agriculture.

Additionally, soil-borne pathogens and pests can dramatically lower overall productivity. Consequently, the use of agricultural methods in a controlled environment has become increasingly important recently. The most significant kind is "soilless agriculture," which has gained popularity as a result of changing climatic conditions and dwindling agricultural land [2]. Approximately 12% of the earth's surface (1.5 billion hectares) is used for agriculture [3]. According to the FAO's 2030/2050 forecast assessment, the amount of arable land per person in developing countries, wealthy countries, and the entire world would decrease annually. Although both the world population and food consumption are expanding, the average quantity of arable land per person is decreasing yearly [3]. This suggests that some countries may face food crises in the future. Additionally, the amount of arable land is decreasing daily due to climate change and the misuse of agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes [3]. Nations have looked for a variety of solutions to deal with the population expansion that threatens food security. The solution currently requires international agricultural investment and soilless farming methods. The depletion and contamination of freshwater resources are additional key problems in agriculture, in addition to the decreasing area of arable land.

One of the well-liked methods of indoor soilless farming is hydroponics, which uses less fertilizer and offers greater protection against pests and adverse weather conditions [4]. High-value crops can be grown hydroponically better than low-value field crops [5]. In open fields and naturally ventilated poly buildings at farming systems, a variety of cool-season vegetables were assessed utilizing vegetative and yield metrics [6]. Using conventional agronomical approaches, the yield of a crop is significantly impacted by climatic changes, pests, and diseases, which results in low-quality output. Using the hydroponic technique, mineral fertilizer solutions dissolved in water act as a solvent to enhance plant uptake of soil nutrients. The hydroponics techniques are divided into groups based on the availability, positioning, and method of administering nutrient solutions to plant roots [6]. It has been discovered that crops produced in hydroponic systems produce more continually throughout the year and need less time to grow than crops cultivated in conventional systems. The growing medium in hydroponics directs water and nutrients while enabling ample oxygen to reach the plant's roots. Different types of hydroponic systems work well with varied growing materials [7]. Despite the absence of soil-borne pests and diseases, soilless growth techniques like hydroponic systems have some risks, most notably the existence of waterborne pathogens [8]. These risks negatively affect hydroponic recirculating systems where bacteria can build up over time. The issues with hydroponics also originate from the requirement for financial outlays and technical expertise to use the control systems. Rufi-Salis et al. [9] explore the many hydroponic fertilizer usage reduction strategies in order to stop nutrient discharge into the environment. Closed systems that use water efficiently and preserve space have quickly become vital under these circumstances when health problems and access to wholesome food are significant difficulties. Even those with no interest in farming have recognized the value of organic farming and attempted to develop its products.

#### **2. Different hydroponic cultivation techniques**

Contrary to conventional farming, hydroponics does not use soil to grow food. This method involves growing plants on artificial or natural substrates so that the roots may easily draw nutrients from a prepared nutrient solution (**Figure 1**).

*Enhanced Agricultural Productivity Using Hydroponics Technique: A Smart Farming System DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112780*

**Figure 1.**

*Interconnection of hydroponic with precision agriculture and internet of things to meet global food demand.*

The implementation of various hydroponic farming techniques varies depending on the type of plant, regional climate, and financial constraints, among other things [10]. In Floating Root System or Deep Water Culture (DWC) system, plant is held above the water line by polystyrene, cork bark, or wood, among other materials, with only the root submerged in the nutrient solution. In drip irrigation, a controlled flow of fertilizer solution is injected straight into the plant roots. At regular intervals, the solution is administered, and in closed systems, any remaining solution is disposed of in the storage tank [10]. In aeroponics, a sprinkler system periodically sprays nutrients onto the plants, which have roots that hang down in the air. The key benefit of this method is that it does not need an airing system because oxygen is carried in the fertilizer solution that is sprayed and is the best method for growing tubers and roots. Nutrient film techniques (NFT) are similar to those in a floating root system, but instead of being entirely submerged in the nutrient solution, they are instead suspended in a liquid stream that is passing via a pipe system [10]. NFT needs more energy and components to function, even though it uses less nutritional solution than the floating root system. The flow of nutritional solution can be continuous or irregular, and the excess solution returns to the storage tank via gravity. In the Ebb and Flow method, a tray with plants in it receives regular fills of nutrient-rich water blasted up from a reservoir below. The technology employs gravity to recycle the water by returning it to the reservoir [10]. In contrast, the aquaponics method takes advantage of the symbiotic relationship between plants and animals to create a productive system where fish waste meets the nutritional needs of the plants. A healthy microecosystem is created when fish tank water is recycled through the uptake of nutrients and the microbial nitrification and denitrification processes [10].

#### **3. Essential tools required for indoor hydroponic system**

Ten essential tools that indoor hydroponic gardeners should keep are a pH meter (to measure the acidic or basic nature of water), nutrient test kit (to measure different nutrients in the water), TDS meter (to measure dissolved solids, salt, minerals, and other concentrates in the water), timer (to track the watering time and lighting plants), thermometer (to keep track of the temperature in the grow room), hygrometer (helps you keep track of the humidity in the grow room), watering can or hose (to water plants regularly), scissor or trimmer (required for plant growth as it helps the plant focus its energy on producing more leaves, flowers, and fruits), measuring cups (used to measure the nutrients adding to the water), and grow room glasses (to protect your eyes from the bright grow lights and avoid any eye damage). The test equipment for automation kits used in soilless agricultural systems is expensive. As a result, the control kit acquired as part of the project will be quick and simple to use, enabling its widespread adoption due to its low cost and simplicity. A control kit was created using an Arduino microcontroller, four distinct sensors, add-on tools, and project coordinator-written software [1]. Although many industries use these controller cards now, their utilization in agriculture is not as high as it could be. Furthermore, such technology can regulate the temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, electrical conductivity, and pH of the solution in systems that use the soilless farming method [1].

#### **4. Nutrient solution used in hydroponics**

With the exception of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, all necessary nutrients are delivered to the plant through the nutrient solution in hydroponics. With the exception of iron, which is given as an iron chelate to increase its availability, inorganic fertilizers are utilized as suppliers of nutrients. Although some inorganic acids are also employed, the majority of fertilizers used in hydroponics to generate nutrient solutions are highly soluble inorganic salts [11]. Depending on the crop and plant stage, the nutrient solution makeup varies. In hydroponics, soluble fertilizers including ammonium nitrate, calcium nitrate, phosphoric acid, and nitric acid are employed [11]. Although these formulations are sold commercially in liquid or solid form, the salt, mineral, and fertilizer mixture can also be made from scratch. It is crucial to note that different formulations are needed for different growth stages of plants. For instance, during the vegetative state, a plant grows foliage until it is ready to flower or ripen its roots, at which point the plant needs a nutrient solution high in phosphorus to develop strong roots. Finally, the plant needs nutritional solutions with high concentrations of K and low amounts of N during fruit ripening. According to the N-P-K concentration stated in weight percent, solutions that are commercially available codify the macronutrient contents as a three-digit sequence. Leaching the solution before adding it to the hydroponic system enables the addition of organic nutrients like compost, a mixture of vegetable waste, urine, manure, and dead animal parts. This kind of tea can potentially replace the conventional inorganic fertilizers used in hydroponics. However, adding such components to the formulation runs the risk of introducing unwanted parasites or bacteria, therefore it must be thoroughly examined before being added to the hydroponic system. If you want the solution to persist as long as possible, the pH, electrical conductivity, and water level must be adjusted as soon as feasible. In order to prevent variations in the nutrient solution, the

*Enhanced Agricultural Productivity Using Hydroponics Technique: A Smart Farming System DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112780*

volume level in the storage tank must be constant, replenishing the water received by the plants and lost through evapotranspiration. It was generally recommended to switch the tank solution every two to 3 weeks, depending on the crop, to provide the tank with a thorough cleaning and disinfection [12].

#### **4.1 pH in hydroponics nutrient solutions**

The pH of a nutrient solution, which is measured on a scale of 1–14 to indicate a solution acidity or alkalinity, is a crucial chemical characteristic. Water has a pH of 7, indicating that it is neither basic nor acidic at normal temperature. If the pH is more than 7, the solution is basic; otherwise, it is acidic. The majority of publications concur that the pH of the nutrient solution must be between 5 and 7, as nutrients stay soluble in this range [13]. The solubility of Fe and H2PO4 diminishes, causing Ca and Mg precipitates as well as other chemical interactions between the components of the nutritional solution, which prevents the absorption of iron, boron, copper, zinc, or manganese if pH is more than 7. However, the adsorption of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, and molybdenum is prevented if pH is lower than 5. Hazardous contamination may occasionally be caused by the supply of some micronutrients, such as manganese [14].

#### **4.2 Electrical conductivity of the solution**

An estimation of the total ion concentration in a solution is electrical conductivity or EC. Low EC values in this situation point to a lack of nutrients in the form of ions, while high values could produce salt stress in the plant [15]. As a result, EC should be kept within a target range because it has a substantial impact on crop quality and growth [16]. Additionally, since this measure does not specifically indicate the concentration of each element in the nutrient solution, it is crucial to give fertilizers in concentrations that the plants can absorb after measuring EC.

#### **4.3 Nutrient solutions sterilization**

Hydroponic systems require an aseptic environment to effectively generate high-quality products, but it is challenging to maintain sterility in the area around plant roots [17]. The most noticeable sign of a damaged plant is leaf withering, which is brought on by the fungus Fusarium and Verticillium. The roots of the plant are also threatened by other parasite species including Pythium and Phytophthora. Unfortunately, using fungicides in hydroponics without endangering consumer health is not possible [18]. From a sustainability perspective, recirculating the nutrient solution lessens the quantity of water consumed and waste that must be disposed of, but it is not always practical to design systems that balance resource consumption, energy use, and cost. Given the advantages and disadvantages of each option individually, combining the hydroponic infection prevention techniques may be the best course of action to address the fertilizer solution sepsis problem.

#### **5. Digital twin in smart agriculture**

One effective soilless method is hydroponics, which has benefits including reduced water use, improved output, and the absence of chemical weed or pest control

solutions. It is essential to use the most cutting-edge technologies available to increase hydroponics efficiency. IoT applications for smart hydroponics greenhouse farming are shown instrumental [19]. The primary benefit of a DT is that the virtual unit can forecast how its physical twin will function, thereby foreseeing potential problems and optimizing the entire system. Increasing output, reducing waste, protecting natural resources, and maintaining quality and other production standards are a few examples of this. Hydroponic and soil-based farms may respond differently to many environmental factors [20]. Predictive analysis and quick control are required in the hydroponics farming method for problems including nutrient solution management, pathogen management, weed management, and environment management. Among these, the dietary approach stands out as a crucial factor in determining high-quality production. The productivity and yield of the hydroponic farm are directly impacted by nutrient intake and pH control [21]. The availability of nutrients for plant uptake may be constrained by a higher pH value due to the presence of insoluble and inaccessible ions. The pressure that the ions of the nutritional solution exert on it can be measured using electrical conductivity (EC). The ideal EC for each crop varies based on the environment [22, 23]. Higher EC values translate into higher osmotic pressure, whereas lower EC values could be detrimental to the health and productivity of plants. However, it is not advisable to consistently apply nutritious solutions. According to studies, highly concentrated nutrient solutions encourage excessive nutrient consumption, which may have harmful effects [24]. Growers may benefit from an accurate predictive model on the right amount of nutrients to add for a certain crop at a specific time in order to reduce the negative effects of nutrient overuse. The capacity of hydroponic farms to adjust multiple parameters like pH, EC, and temperature can only be used with the aid of more accurate and predictive models. High nutrient solution temperature in hydroponics can cause a number of problems, including the plant refusing to absorb nutrients through the roots and finally going into survival mode [25]. This is similar to how EC and pH can affect the plant. Higher water temperatures in the fertilizer solution are also conducive to microorganisms rapidly proliferating. These may also develop in the root zone, which may cause several plant diseases [26]. Even the frigid temperatures of nutrient solutions are not ideal for plant growth. Throughout the course of a plant's life, the root zone should be a comfortable environment [6].

Digital twins (DT) encompass a variety of technologies, including artificial intelligence, augmented reality, the Internet of Things, communication technologies, embedded technologies, big data, processing techniques, data security, and cloud computing, among others [27]. DT can be characterized as an adaptive model of a living or non-living physical system that aims to construct, monitor, and enhance the performance of its actual counterpart and give end users a more realistic experience [28]. The lifecycle of a real machine, for example, can be applied to DT at any point in time. DT can be applied to the design of the product, to enhance the physical model, and to perform preventative maintenance. Despite the fact that DT technology actively participates in the development and marketing of several manufacturing and aviation. With the use of meteorological information, the DT idea can be used to improve the forecasting of nutrient solution temperature [29]. A predictive model for the temperature of the nutrient solution can be created by utilizing DT to determine the relationship between nutrient solution temperature and meteorological parameters. Farmers can utilize DTs to predict how well such cooling devices would function when they are used in a hydroponics farm without actually installing the actual units. It assists the farmers in developing a practical first plan for their farm and evaluating the performance impacts of adding new resources, including fans and heaters.

*Enhanced Agricultural Productivity Using Hydroponics Technique: A Smart Farming System DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112780*

#### **6. IoT-based hydroponics system**

The application of modern information and communication technologies (ICTs) in agriculture is the foundation of the high-tech, expensive "smart farming" system. In IoT-based smart farming, a system is developed for sensor-assisted crop field monitoring and irrigation system automation [30]. Two businesses, ATLAS Scientific and Libelium Waspmote, offer electronic sensors and microcontroller-based systems for detecting environmental factors and water quality [31]. According to the surveys, many scientific articles have examples of these solutions [32, 33]. It is essential to use other important ICTs, such as big data [34], blockchain [35], and neural networks [36], which have been successfully employed in other scenarios like these to produce precise and efficient agriculture. Examples of IoT applications in agriculture include open-field farming and greenhouse cultivation [37, 38]. The most often observed metrics are temperature and humidity [37, 38], however other elements including light [39] and crop-specific traits [37] are also regularly noted. Several studies monitored variables such as soil moisture, temperature, humidity, and light in order to automate the irrigation system [39, 40]. The iPONICS system makes an effort to take advantage of some of the technologies mentioned above in order to offer a simplified, inexpensive, yet creative hydroponic solution that can be used by even hobby-type hydroponic systems [31]. The design and execution of a cutting-edge, low-cost IoT-based hydroponics monitoring and control system were demonstrated in many circumstances [31]. The system is made up in particular of a specialized wireless sensor network for controlling the watering process and monitoring the crucial hydroponics parameters. It offers the customer a simple web-based application to keep tabs on their crops while also alerting them with the proper alarms and warnings. This makes it much easier to observe numerous hydroponic greenhouses with little effort and without having to take any action. The proposed system specifically aims at hydroponic cultivation, in contrast to the systems covered previously. Using Arduino, Raspberry Pi 3, and TensorFlow, a prototype for the growth of a tomato plant was created [30]. Machine-to-machine connection and autonomous, intelligent control of the hydroponic system is made possible by the use of IoT. The system as it was designed is complex enough to give the necessary control action for the hydroponic environment based on the numerous acquired input parameters [30].

#### **7. Small and medium-scale food production using hydroponic**

Small firms have sprung up as a result of indoor production, boosting regional economies. The profitability of an indoor urban vertical farming (IUVF)-based company to that of a greenhouse was compared [41]. Due to the greenhouse's high maintenance costs, the results demonstrate that IUVF is more profitable on a smallto medium-sized scale than it is in the greenhouse. In order to set up a hydroponics farm, it is important to take into account the cost of various pieces of equipment, such as heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC), fans, irrigation systems, control systems, railways, and lighting. The adoption of hydroponics as a farming technique is significantly hampered by the enormous initial cost of the system [42]. Thus, it is crucial to create new, better goods and services to aid the hydroponic system. Such technologies must be scaleable to meet growers' needs, not just for large-scale operations but also for medium- and small-scale ones, taking into account the limited amount of space that may be used for farming. Hydroponics is essential for the

establishment and might make a substantial contribution to achieving sustainable development goal 11 (SDG 11). However, it requires the creation and uptake of the right technology. A framework that integrates heterogeneous devices on various computing layers to monitor and optimize the production process was designed to describe some technologies suitable for indoor farming [43]. In addition, they created the AgroRobot, an aeroponics-based robot for growing microgreens. Additionally, a number of project accessories, like culture trays, are created utilizing 3D printing technology. Hydroponics industry applications of Agriculture 4.0 are already well underway. A graphical user interface for indoor hydroponic production of leafy species, for instance, was created by the open-source Mycodo Environmental Regulation System [10].

#### **8. Interlink between agriculture 4.0 and hydroponics**

Hydroponics fits well into the framework of Agriculture 4.0 as large corporations increasingly use developments in indoor vertical farming, artificial intelligence, and plant biology to create a wide range of products [44, 45]. Hydroponics has secured a key position in the development of future food production systems, supported by cutting-edge, creative technology and a strong scientific foundation to ensure high output. Hydroponics may be very helpful in achieving SDG 11 which includes sustainability and resiliency of urban areas. The challenge is to adapt these technical developments to medium- and small-scale businesses that are prevalent in urban and peri-urban populations. Due to technological breakthroughs in electronics, which have led to the adoption of equipment, temperature and moisture sensors, aerial imaging, and GPS, modern farms. Precision irrigation, pest control, plant disease identification, and production management were all made possible by the integration of ideas such as artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, and big data into autonomous food production systems. This revolution, dubbed "Agriculture 4.0," promises to seamlessly combine agricultural practices with cutting-edge technology, such as sensors, gadgets, machinery, and information technology. Until ideas like eco-agriculture [46], agro photovoltaics [47], and precision agriculture [48] are included in global farming practices and culture, Agriculture 4.0 has not yet been widely accepted. In order to achieve it, agriculture and technology will need to create a common ground for both farmers and technologists. The first step is to understand the best uses of technology and demand innovations that address the true needs of the food supply and value chains in order to meet producer expectations for highly improved products, services, and processes to support sustainable and effective food production in urban and periurban settlements. Aerial and satellite photography, robots, temperature and moisture sensors, GPS technology, and other sophisticated technologies are just a few of the ones that are being used more and more to enhance the entire food value chain and make businesses safer, more efficient, and more environmentally friendly [49].

#### **9. Conclusion**

Agriculture is a key component of the Indian economy. As a result of rising food demand, rising labour costs, unfavorable environmental conditions, and dwindling agricultural land, indoor farming techniques like hydroponics and aeroponics are becoming more and more popular. Hence, there is no mention of soil-based on the

*Enhanced Agricultural Productivity Using Hydroponics Technique: A Smart Farming System DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112780*

conventional manner of growing plants. That indicates that plants can develop if certain conditions are met. In this context, the concept of hydroponic farming is introduced in the farming system. In this method, mineral fertilizer solutions in water serve as a solvent, allowing plants to absorb nutrients from the soil more effectively. A variety of flowers, vegetables, and herbs can be grown with hydroponics. Due to the advancement of IoT, farmers may now automate hydroponic culture. Monitoring of water level, pH, temperature, velocity, and light intensity can be done with the help of IoT. For instance, the water tends to freeze in some areas throughout the winter, which could entirely obstruct the agricultural process. The water temperature sensors on the hydroponics farm can identify the temperature loss and alert the farmer as necessary. Expanding the research area, and study period, and investigating alternative methods of a more cost-effective hydroponic farming system, farmers allow to innovate in the farming system at a lower cost to produce high-quality crops.

#### **Acknowledgements**

We express our gratitude to the editor and reviewers for their valuable feedback on the manuscript.

#### **Conflict of interest**

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **Contribution of the authors**

Writing of the manuscript: SD and BM; Correction of the manuscript: AS and SD.

#### **Author details**

Suman Dutta1 , Bishal Mukherjee2 and Ashutosh Sawarkar1 \*

1 Division of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Ramakrishna Mission Vivekananda Educational and Research Institute, West Bengal, India

2 School of Agriculture and Allied Science, The Neotia University, West Bengal, India

\*Address all correspondence to: annu.sawarkar@gmail.com

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

### **References**

[1] Yegul U. Development of an embedded software and control kit to be used in soilless agriculture production systems. Sensors. 2023;**23**(7):3706

[2] Hossain SMM, Imsabai W, Thongket T. Growth and quality of hydroponically grown lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) using used nutrient solution from coconut-coir dust and hydroton substrate. Advances in Environmental Biology. 2016;**10**(4):67-80

[3] World Food and Agriculture, Statistical Yearbook. 2023. Available from: http://www.fao.org/documents/ card/en/c/ca6463en

[4] Jones Jr JB. Hydroponics: A Practical Guide for the Soilless Grower. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2004

[5] Sharma N, Acharya S, Kumar K, Singh N, Chaurasia OP. Hydroponics as an advanced technique for vegetable production: An overview. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 2018;**17**(4):364-371

[6] Verdouw C, Tekinerdogan B, Beulens A, Wolfert S. Digital twins in smart farming. Agricultural Systems. 2021;**189**:103046

[7] Rubio-Asensio JS, Parra M, Intrigliolo DS. Open field hydroponics in fruit crops: Developments and challenges. In: Fruit Crops. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2020. pp. 419-430

[8] Wootton-Beard P. Growing Without Soil: An Overview of Hydroponics. Farming Connect. Penglais, United Kingdom. 2019

[9] Rufi-Salis M, Calvo MJ, Petit-Boix A, Villalba G, Gabarrell X. Exploring

nutrient recovery from hydroponics in urban agriculture: An environmental assessment. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2020;**155**:104683

[10] Velazquez-Gonzalez RS, Garcia-Garcia AL, Ventura-Zapata E, Barceinas-Sanchez JDO, Sosa-Savedra JC. A review on hydroponics and the technologies associated for medium-and small-scale operations. Agriculture. 2022;**12**(5):646

[11] Gianquinto G, Munoz P, Pardossi A, Ramazzotti S, Savvas D. Soil fertility and plant nutrition. In: Good Agricultural Practices for Greenhouse Vegetable Crops. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization; 2013. p. 205

[12] Sardare MD, Admane SV. A review on plant without soil-hydroponics. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology. 2013;**2**(3):299-304

[13] Lu N, Shimamura S. Protocols, issues and potential improvements of current cultivation systems. In: Smart Plant Factory: The Next Generation Indoor Vertical Farms. Singapore: Springer; 2018. pp. 31-49

[14] Jackson K, Meetei TT. Influence of soil pH on nutrient availability: A review. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research. 2018;**5**:708-713

[15] Savvas D, Gruda N. Application of soilless culture technologies in the modern greenhouse industry—A review. European Journal of Horticultural Science. 2018;**83**(5):280-293

[16] Sonneveld C, Voogt W, Sonneveld C, Voogt W. Nutrient solutions for soilless cultures. In: Plant Nutrition of

*Enhanced Agricultural Productivity Using Hydroponics Technique: A Smart Farming System DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112780*

Greenhouse Crops. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009. pp. 257-275

[17] Raviv M, Krasnovsky A, Medina S, Reuveni R. Assessment of various control strategies for recirculation of greenhouse effluents under semi-arid conditions. The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology. 1998;**73**(4):485-491

[18] Passam H. Hydroponic Production of Vegetables and Ornamentals. Athens: Embryo publications; 2002. pp. 15-23

[19] Saraswathi D, Manibharathy P, Gokulnath R, Sureshkumar E, Karthikeyan K. Automation of hydroponics green house farming using IoT. In: IEEE International Conference on System, Computation, Automation and Networking (ICSCA). Pondicherry, India: IEEE; 2018. pp. 1-4

[20] Tavakkoli E, Rengasamy P, McDonald GK. The response of barley to salinity stress differs between hydroponic and soil systems. Functional Plant Biology. 2010;**37**(7):621-633

[21] Phutthisathian A, Pantasen N, Maneerat N. Ontology-based nutrient solution control system for hydroponics. In: 2011 First International Conference on Instrumentation, Measurement, Computer, Communication and Control. Beijing, China: IEEE; 2011. pp. 258-261

[22] Sonneveld C, Voogt W, Sonneveld C, Voogt W. Nutrient management in substrate systems. In: Plant Nutrition of Greenhouse Crops. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009. pp. 277-312

[23] Ferentinos KP, Albright LD. Predictive neural network modeling of pH and electrical conductivity in deep– trough hydroponics. Transactions of the ASAE. 2002;**45**(6):2007

[24] Samarakoon UC, Weerasinghe PA, Weerakkody WAP. Effect of electrical conductivity [EC] of the nutrient solution on nutrient uptake, growth and yield of leaf lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) in stationary culture. Tropical Agricultural Research. 2006;**18**:13

[25] Ropokis A, Ntatsi G, Kittas C, Katsoulas N, Savvas D. Effects of temperature and grafting on yield, nutrient uptake, and water use efficiency of a hydroponic sweet pepper crop. Agronomy. 2019;**9**(2):110

[26] Al-Rawahy MS, Al-Rawahy SA, Al-Mulla YA, Nadaf SK. Influence of nutrient solution temperature on its oxygen level and growth, yield and quality of hydroponic cucumber. Journal of Agricultural Science. 2019;**11**(3):75-92

[27] Qi Q, Tao F, Hu T, Anwer N, Liu A, Wei Y, et al. Enabling technologies and tools for digital twin. Journal of Manufacturing Systems. 2021;**58**:3-21

[28] Barricelli BR, Casiraghi E, Fogli D. A survey on digital twin: Definitions, characteristics, applications, and design implications. IEEE Access. 2019;**7**:167653-167671

[29] Rasheed A, San O, Kvamsdal T. Digital twin: Values, challenges and enablers from a modeling perspective. Ieee Access. 2020;**8**:21980-22012

[30] Mehra M, Saxena S, Sankaranarayanan S, Tom RJ, Veeramanikandan M. IoT based hydroponics system using deep neural networks. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 2018;**155**:473-486

[31] Tatas K, Al-Zoubi A, Christofides N, Zannettis C, Chrysostomou M, Panteli S, et al. Reliable IoT-based monitoring and control of hydroponic systems. Technologies. 2022;**10**(1):26

[32] Tzounis A, Katsoulas N, Bartzanas T, Kittas C. Internet of things in agriculture, recent advances and future challenges. Biosystems Engineering. 2017;**164**:31-48

[33] Tzounis A, Katsoulas N, Bartzanas T, Kittas C. Internet of things in agriculture, recent advances and future challenges. Biosystems Engineering. 2017;**164**:31-48

[34] Wang J, Yang Y, Wang T, Sherratt RS, Zhang J. Big data service architecture: A survey. Journal of Internet Technology. 2020;**21**(2):393-405

[35] Wang J, Chen W, Wang L, Sherratt RS, Alfarraj O, Tolba A. Data secure storage mechanism of sensor networks based on blockchain. Computers, Materials & Continua. 2020;**65**(3):2365-2384

[36] Zhang J, Yang K, Xiang L, Luo Y, Xiong B, Tang Q. A self-adaptive regression-based multivariate data compression scheme with error bound in wireless sensor networks. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks. 2013;**9**(3):913497

[37] Liao MS, Chen SF, Chou CY, Chen HY, Yeh SH, Chang YC, et al. On precisely relating the growth of Phalaenopsis leaves to greenhouse environmental factors by using an IoT-based monitoring system. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 2017;**136**:125-139

[38] Codeluppi G, Cilfone A, Davoli L, Ferrari G. LoRaFarM: A LoRaWAN-based smart farming modular IoT architecture. Sensors. 2020;**20**(7):2028

[39] Rajalakshmi P, Mahalakshmi SD. IOT based crop-field monitoring

and irrigation automation. In: 2016 10th International Conference on Intelligent Systems and Control (ISCO). Coimbatore, India: IEEE; 2016. pp. 1-6

[40] Trilles S, Torres-Sospedra J, Belmonte O, Zarazaga-Soria FJ, Gonzalez-Perez A, Huerta J. Development of an open sensorized platform in a smart agriculture context: A vineyard support system for monitoring mildew disease. Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems. 2020;**28**:100309

[41] Avgoustaki DD, Xydis G. Indoor vertical farming in the urban nexus context: Business growth and resource savings. Sustainability. 2020;**12**(5):1965

[42] Caputo S. History, techniques and technologies of soil-less cultivation. In: Small Scale Soil-less Urban Agriculture in Europe. Cham: Springer; 2022. pp. 45-86

[43] Gnauer C, Pichler H, Schmittner C, Tauber M, Christl K, Knapitsch J, et al. A recommendation for suitable technologies for an indoor farming framework. e & i Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik. 2020;**137**:370-374

[44] Hati AJ, Singh RR. Smart indoor farms: Leveraging technological advancements to power a sustainable agricultural revolution. AgriEngineering. 2021;**3**(4):728-767

[45] Dutta S, Singh AK, Mondal BP, Paul D, Patra K. Digital inclusion of the farming sector using drone technology. In: Human-Robot Interaction - Perspectives and Applications. London, United Kingdom: IntechOpen; 2023

[46] Keating BA, Carberry PS, Bindraban PS, Asseng S, Meinke H, Dixon J. Eco-efficient agriculture: Concepts, challenges, and opportunities. Crop Science. 2010;**50**:S-109

*Enhanced Agricultural Productivity Using Hydroponics Technique: A Smart Farming System DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112780*

[47] Weselek A, Ehmann A, Zikeli S, Lewandowski I, Schindele S, Hogy P. Agrophotovoltaic systems: Applications, challenges, and opportunities. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2019;**39**:1-20

[48] Pathak HS, Brown P, Best T. A systematic literature review of the factors affecting the precision agriculture adoption process. Precision Agriculture. 2019;**20**:1292-1316

[49] Araujo SO, Peres RS, Barata J, Lidon F, Ramalho JC. Characterising the agriculture 4.0 landscape—emerging trends, challenges and opportunities. Agronomy. 2021;**11**(4):667

#### **Chapter 4**

### Advanced Micro Irrigation Techniques

*Pavan Kumar Reddy Yerasi, V. Siva Jyothi, K. Madhusudhan Reddy, B. Sahadeva Reddy and C. Nagamani*

#### **Abstract**

Problem statement: Indian agriculture's food basket has grown like a giant elephant with the advent of the green revolution, and later on, the micro irrigation task force came into existence in India. With the growing population, food requirement has to shoot up. Hence, productivity should be increased. With the advent of micro irrigation techniques, the area under irrigation increased enormously, and the footprint of the crop yields reached a pinnacle, ranging from horticultural to field crops, *etc*. Objectives: Micro irrigation techniques are trekking towards doubling the farm income by increasing productivity, *i.e*., doubling the farmer's income, and increasing water use efficiency in a bi-directional mode as resource enhancement and judicious use of resources on the other. Traditional micro irrigation methods cost more for farm installation, which is a big financial task that hinders adoption and leaves farmers looking for government policy support. There is a dire need to address this issue; alternate, best, and most effective systems must be facilitated for the farmer at an affordable price. In this context, rain port irrigation and laser irrigation *viz*., are innovative, highly efficient conveyance systems with higher water use efficiency and are available in an affordable price range for small and marginal farmers to bring more area under micro irrigation to achieve more harvest in a wide range of crops. Critical numerical findings: These systems have an edge-cutting advantage over the existing micro irrigation systems (sprinkler and drip) in terms of cost, ease of operation, water use efficiency, *etc*. Furthermore, they can be adopted for a wide range of crops, like both agriculture and horticulture, and other micro irrigation systems with single-man handling operations. This type of system has advantages over other micro irrigation systems in terms of increasing the harvestable basket, water use efficiency, and water conservation. Conclusion: The laser irrigation and rain port irrigations are alternate to drip and sprinkler irrigations, respectively. They could be used in a wide range of crops with precise water delivery system, easy to handle, one farmer can irrigate the entire field, unlike in sprinkler irrigation where carrying and installation require 2–3 man labourers. The droplet size and the pressure with which it exerts on ground are less compared to sprinkler irrigation leads creating lower bulk density and high porosity, causing better root growth and nodule formation in groundnut. The availability of nutrients is higher in laser spray irrigation followed by rain port mini sprinkler system and sprinkler irrigation.

**Keywords:** micro irrigation, laser spray, laser drip, rain port irrigation, water use efficiency

#### **1. Introduction**

Micro irrigation was an untapped potential during the early twentieth century in the Indian agriculture scenario. The productivity of rainfed crops is always dictated by the quantity and pattern of rainfall received during the crop season. A farmer's livelihood is invariably linked with rain, particularly in drought-prone arid districts of Andhra Pradesh [1]. In the present scenario, the irrigation of the crops has changed to feed the root, not the crop, and in the future, the definition may change in a new direction [2]. However, a National Task Force Committee, appointed by the Government of India in 2003, has recommended that 69 million ha of the area be suitable for micro irrigation in India. A target of 14 million ha has been suggested for the Eleventh Five-Year Plan [3]. Initially, irrigation was done through flooding from 1950 to 2000, then it moved to micro irrigations such as drip and sprinkler, which ruled over a period of two decades, *viz*., 2006 to 2020. Now, the concept of irrigation has become more precise with the advanced methods of irrigation such as rain port irrigation (micro jet sprinkler), laser irrigation, and so on [2]. Precision farming practices, along with plasticulture technologies such as micro irrigation techniques, have proven to be a driving force for the enhancement of farmers' income through increased productivity and optimum utilization of various inputs.

With the advent of the task force on micro irrigation and government incentives, the area under micro irrigation has increased enormously in India, especially in a few other states like Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, etc. In districts like Ananthapuramu of Andhra Pradesh, the harvested water can be given as supplemental irrigation to the crops to enhance yields. However, in the recent past, many studies have revealed that drip and sprinkler irrigation deepened the water table depth in a few parts of Maharashtra and southern states due to the free power supply and automated irrigation switching systems. Hence, an alternate method of micro irrigation must be addressed to sustain micro irrigation in the long run. The best alternate method of micro irrigation is laser irrigation, to drip and sprinkler irrigation methods. Micro irrigation technologies (MI) are being expanded horizontally in vast stretches across the length and breadth of the country, covering 3.56 million ha of the area under micro irrigation in the sampled 13 states [4]. The micro irrigation techniques expanded vertically from orchards to ornamental crops too. These technologies are promoted primarily as: (1) a means to save water in irrigated agriculture; (2) a strategy to increase income and reduce poverty; and (3) to enhance the food and nutritional security of rural households. Despite the reported significant economic advantages and the concerted support of the government and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the current area under micro irrigation is expanding on a large scale, but the water use efficiency has not improved much across the country. Still, there is a dire need to develop advanced micro irrigation systems with higher water use efficiency.

Different advanced micro irrigation systems are to be discussed here under with ease of operation and improved water use efficiency.

#### **2. Journey of Indian irrigation concept**

The Vedas first reported about irrigation in mythology, and the earliest mentions of irrigation were found in the Rig Veda. It has mentions of "kupa" and "avata" wells from where the water is drawn by "varatra" (rope strap) and "chakra" (wheel) pulling "kosa" (pails) of water. Later on, a few of the experts quoted in the 1980s said about nurturing the soil with nutrients and water to harvest more.

### **3. Sprinkler irrigation**

Sprinkler irrigation is a method of applying irrigation water that is similar to rainfall. Water is distributed through a system of pipes, usually by pumping. It is then sprayed into the air and irrigated across the entire soil surface through spray heads so that it breaks up into small water drops that fall to the ground. Sprinklers provide an efficient coverage for small to large areas and are suitable for use on all types of properties. It is also adaptable to nearly all irrigable soils since sprinklers are available in a wide range of discharge capacities.

#### **3.1 Practical layout and applicability of the sprinkler for groundnut crop as example**


**Figure 1.** *Laser spray irrigation system at the ARS Research farm, Ananthapuramu.*


#### **3.2 SWOT in Sprinkler irrigation**


#### See **Table 1**.

#### **Table 1.**

*Strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats of drip irrigation system.*

### **4. Drip irrigation**

Drip irrigation is a type of micro irrigation system that has the potential to save water and nutrients by allowing water to drip slowly to the roots of plants, either from above the soil surface or buried from below the surface. The goal of the said irrigation is to place water directly into the root zone and minimize evaporation. Two important things need to be known before the application of drip irrigation are how much water is to be applied and how much time is required to discharge the desired quantity of water.

#### **4.1 SWOT in drip irrigation**

See **Table 2**.

### **5. Laser drip irrigation**

Laser drip irrigation, also known as precision or targeted irrigation, is an advanced technique of punching holes on the pipe by laser technology at definite intervals for


#### **Table 2.**

*Strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats of drip irrigation system.*

the discharge of minute droplets to the plant roots. It involves the use of lasers to precisely deliver water directly to the plant roots, thus minimizing water wastage and ensuring efficient water use. Laser irrigation is an innovative alternative to drip irrigation.

Laser irrigation can significantly reduce water consumption by delivering water only where it is needed, unlike sprinkler irrigation, thus conserving water resources. The precise and uniform water distribution eliminates overwatering or underwatering issues. It requires less energy compared to sprinkler systems because it does not rely on pumping large volumes of water. Laser irrigation targets the plant roots, minimizing water availability to weed seeds and reducing weed growth.

#### **5.1 Specifications of laser drip irrigation system**

The available length for laser drip irrigation is 54 m, the available diameters are 16 and 20 mm, and the available thicknesses are 5, 8, and 0.4 mm. It can work at ultralow pressure, *i.e*., 0.1–0.2 kg cm�<sup>2</sup> . The laser hole discharge is 4 liters per hour (lph), and the spacing between the laser holes is 40 cm. Row-to-row lateral drip spacing is 1.2 m (approximately 4 feet). The depth of application per hour is 8.33 mm. The time required for running 1 acre through laser drip is 36 min. In a laser drip system, there are no drippers; hence, there is less chance of clogging (**Table 3**).

#### **5.2 Durability and cost of laser irrigation material**

#### *5.2.1 Suitability of the crops*

It is suitable for wide-spaced crops to narrow-spaced crops, *i.e.,* groundnut, greengram, blackgram, maize, cotton, soybeans, vegetable crops, horticulture crops, etc.

Laser drip irrigation offers several advantages over traditional drip irrigation methods. Here are some key points:

1.Very fine droplets and precise water delivery to the root zone.


#### **Table 3.**

*Comparison of laser drip versus traditional drip irrigation system.*


#### **6. Laser spray irrigation**

It is a revolutionary new irrigation system that is an alternative to sprinkler irrigation. Later pipes are punched with minute holes for the discharge of water in the form of sprays, which simulate light rainfall during the operation and run at low pressure. Micro-sprinkling hose irrigation has the unique advantage of reducing labour and input costs. The irrigation system uses low pressure to deliver water to micro-spray emitters through water pipes and tapes and adopts grouped multiple holes to emit water to soils, which markedly saves electricity costs in irrigation [5].

#### **6.1 Specifications of laser spray system**

The laser spray system consists of lateral laser pipes and subline from the main line of water discharge. The available lateral diameters of the laser line are 32 and 40 mm and it has a roll size of 100 m length. The wall thickness of the lateral line is 0.3 mm. The discharge of each lateral line is 172–175 lph per metre length. The wetting diameter of each laser punch is 12 m; however, the best results can be obtained at a 10 m distance with 100% overlapping. It can drizzle up to 5–6 feet (1.5–1.8 m) height depending on the operating pressure. The droplet size is minute to very minute and the pressure it exerts on the ground is less (0.5–1.0 kg cm�<sup>2</sup> ) compared to the


**Table 4.**

*Comparison of laser spray versus traditional sprinkler irrigation system.*

sprinkler irrigation droplet size. Hence, the bulk density and porosity of the soil are not changed during crop season (**Table 4**).

#### **6.2 Durability and cost of laser spray material**

Laser spray accessories are very cheap (approximately 16,000–20,000 INR acre<sup>1</sup> ) compared to drip and sprinkler irrigation, can be affordable by every farmer, and have a life span of 3–5 years depending on the usage and maintenance of the farmer.

#### **6.3 Suitability of the crops**

Laser irrigation can be adopted for a wide range of crops, from leafy vegetables to onions, because it enhances the humidity and alters the microclimate for better yields in the summer. In the hilly terrains of the Western Ghats, *viz*., Ooty and Munnar areas, temperatures reach a little higher and require cool climates and higher humidity. In that context, laser spray lowers air temperatures by altering the microclimate. Laser irrigation is suitable for a wide range of field crops, *viz*., cereals, pulses, and oilseed crops. Sprinkler irrigation may affect flowering, pollination, fruit set, etc., in certain crops and may be replaced with laser irrigation. Even for horticultural crops and greenhouses, it can be useful. As the droplet size is finer and discharge is just like drizzle, it infiltrates to more depth compared to sprinkler irrigation. The bulk density of soils under this system of irrigation will be less when compared with sprinkler irrigation, facilitating for easy penetration of pegs into soil.

Micro-spraying irrigation has great advantages in realizing the high efficiency and water saving of pipe irrigation systems. In recent years, the micro-spraying irrigation system has been widely adopted in cereal crops such as wheat and maize (**Figures 2**–**5**) [5].

#### **6.4 Feasibility for adoption**


**Figure 2.** *Laser pipe with punched laser holes.*


*Advanced Micro Irrigation Techniques DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112509*

**Figure 4.** *Laser spray pipe fitting to subline with saddle fitting.*


11.Can be utilized in all stages of the crop including flower and pod development stages also as the water jet does not force much.

#### **6.5 Shortfall in adoption**


#### **6.6 SWOT in laser irrigation**

#### See **Table 5**.


#### **Table 5.**

*Strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats of laser spray irrigation system.*

### **7. Rain port Irrigation system**

A rain port system is an advanced version of sprinkler irrigation with a discharge rate of 800 liters per hour and uniformity of 90–95%. It is made with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or HDPE at a low cost. Rain port sprinkler systems are mini-irrigation systems, *i.e*., laterals and sprinklers can be easily shifted from one place to another. Reinstallation of the system is also easy and consumes less time and labour. Depending on the pressure and recharge capacity of a bore well, the laterals are spaced at a distance of 6–10 m.

It overcomes all the limitations of conventional sprinkler irrigation systems and yet meets the high standards of effective irrigation principles such as

1.High distribution uniformity.


In a rain port irrigation system, flexible polyethylene tubes are used as laterals, and high-performance, low-weight plastic sprinklers are connected to these tubes using easily detachable connectors. Sprinklers are fixed on mild steel (MS) raiser rods or bamboo sticks can also be used to reduce the cost of raiser rods.

#### **7.1 Specifications of rain port system**


Compared to the sprinkler system (10 m), the throwing radius is a little bit lower, *i.e.,* 9 m in the rain port system. The discharge rate of each rain port came down to one third of the sprinkler discharge to increase the water use efficiency and also to operate even under low water availability. The operational pressure for the rain port system is 1.5 kg cm<sup>2</sup> , which is 0.5 kg cm2 lower than that of the normal rain port sprinkler system. Though the discharge is lower than the sprinkler irrigation system, the depth of application is 8 mm per hour compared to the sprinkler, *i.e*., 10 mm per hour. In the rain port system, the distance between the laterals is 9 m, whereas in the sprinkler irrigation system, the spacing between the laterals is 10 m.

Rain port is more efficient with water saving up to 33% across the cropping season in different crops including dry seeded rice when compared with surface irrigation techniques.


#### **Table 6.**

*Difference between the rain port and sprinkler irrigation system.*

#### **7.2 Suitability of crops**

Rain port irrigation system can be suitable for the wide range of crops, *i.e.* groundnut, greengram, blackgram, bengalgram, and sesamum to green forage crops, etc., where sprinkler irrigation is suitable except at flowering.

#### **7.3 Feasibility for adaption**


#### **7.4 Shortfall in adoption**


#### **7.5 SWOT in rain port irrigation**

See **Table 7**. See (**Figures 6**–**10**).


#### **Table 7.**

*Strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats of laser spray irrigation system.*

**Figure 7.** *Flash cap.*

**Figure 8.** *High-density polyethylene (HDPE) 32 mm lateral with mini sprinkler raisers.*

**Figure 9.** *Rain port irrigation system in groundnut.*

### **8. Conclusion**

Laser irrigation is in an infant stage in India. It can be studied in depth for a wide range of crops. The area under laser irrigation may be increased by the policy decision imparted to the existing micro irrigation methods, *viz*., drip and sprinkler irrigation.

**Figure 10.** *Rain port irrigation system in sesamum.*

Furthermore, it is high time to adopt better micro irrigation techniques, such as laser irrigation, for a wide range of crops to upgrade the farmer's economic status by increasing productivity. The rain port irrigation system has the advantages over the sprinkler system by way of ease of operation, field shifting, higher water use efficiency, lower discharge rates, and lower cost. It is the best system to be promoted in the future.

*Irrigation Systems and Applications*

#### **Author details**

Pavan Kumar Reddy Yerasi<sup>1</sup> \*, V. Siva Jyothi<sup>2</sup> , K. Madhusudhan Reddy<sup>3</sup> , B. Sahadeva Reddy<sup>1</sup> and C. Nagamani<sup>4</sup>

1 ANGRAU-Agricultural Research Station, Ananthapuramu, Andhra Pradesh, India

2 ANGRAU-Agricultural Research Station, Reddipalli, Andhra Pradesh, India

3 ANGRAU- Regional Agricultural Research Station, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India

4 ANGRAU- S.V. Agricultural College, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India

\*Address all correspondence to: y.pavankumarreddy@angrau.ac.in

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*Advanced Micro Irrigation Techniques DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112509*

#### **References**

[1] Reddy PK, Sahadeva Reddy B, Malleswara Reddy A, Radha Kumari C, Reddy BR. Irrigation management in Pigeonpea under rainfed Alfisols. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2020;**9**(6):136-139

[2] Reddy PK, Sahadeva Reddy B, Siva Jyothi V, Ashok Kumar K, Malleswara Reddy A. Irrigation methods to cropspast, present and future. Indian Farmer. 2021;**8**(03):247-252

[3] Yella Reddy K, Satyanarayana TV. Micro-Irrigation Pays Rich Dividends-Experiences of Andhra Pradesh, India. Thailand: Royal Irrigation Department; 2016

[4] Chandrasekaran M and Suresh Kumar D. Micro Irrigation: Economics and Outreach in Tamil Nadu. 2012

[5] Wang S, Ji P, Qiu X, Yang H, Wang Y, Zhu H, et al. Effect of border width and Micro-sprinkling hose irrigation on soil moisture distribution and irrigation quality for wheat crops. Applied Sciences. 2022;**12**:10954

Section 2
