IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

Research articleerd

The Application of Deficit Water and Fertilizer upon Yieldand Water Footprint in Baby CornRATGON SUEBKAM
Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand

VIDHAYA TRELO-GES*
Facuty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
Email: vidtre@kku.ac.th
SUPASIT KONYAI
Faculty of Enginerring, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
Received 15 December 2014

Accepted 31 May 2015(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract Baby corn (Zea mays L.) is one of the most significant and lucrative agricultural
products grown in Thailand. Thailand, the largest exporter of baby corn in the world, has
an average export income of 33 million dollars each year. However, Thai farmers income
levels were lower for baby corn cultivation whereas a result of an increase in production
factors. The objective of this study is to assess the appropriate water usage and fertilizer
application on clay loam soil, in order to create higher yields of baby corn production. The
experiment involved split-plot in randomize complete block design with threereplications. Treatments consisted of three main plots of variable irrigation supply 1) 40%
allowable depletion content (ADC), 2) 60% ADC, and 3) 80% ADC. Each plot acted incombination with four sub plots: 1) control, 2) 94-31-31 kg/ha (N-P2O5-K2O), 3) 47-1616, and 4) 47-47-47 kg/ha. The results found 40% ADC irrigation the most favorable toincrease pod weight and water usage efficiency. The findings also proved this method tohave the least amount of reduction in green, blue, and total water footprint amounts. Past
fertilizer applications found that 94-31-31 kg/ha fertilizer enhanced pod weight andlength, as well as corn height, and water usage in both amount and efficiency. The
fertilizer 47-47-47 kg/ha resulted in decrease of green, blue, and total water footprint
amount compared with other sub plots. A 40% ADC irrigation combination with 94-31-31
kg/ha yielded the highest pod weight and water usage efficiency compared with all othertreatments. Moreover, the water footprint demonstrated the least amount of decrease ingreen, blue, and total water footprints compared with other treatments.
Keywords baby corn production, water depletion, water footprint, fertilizer utilization.

INTRODUCTION
Baby corn (Zea mays L.) is one of the most significant and lucrative agricultural products grownin Thailand. Thailand, the largest exporter of baby corn in the world, has an average export valueof 33 million dollars each year (98% of which is frozen baby corn). The majority areas of baby
corn plantation on 4 provinces such as Supanburi, Kanchanaburi, Nakhon-Phatom and PhathumThani in central region of Thailand were approximately 75% of all baby corn plantation areas.
However, Thai farmers income levels were lower for baby corn cultivation whereas a result of anincrease in production factors. While the average yield of baby corn per hectare was relatively
low (7,500 to 9,375 kg/ha). Thai farmers struggled to increase production to more profitablelevels (12,500 to 15,625 kg/ha). The demand of larger yields, under a reduced budget, required
farmers to seek optimal irrigation and fertilization applications for baby corn production(Agriculture Economic Bureau, 2010). The relationship between crop yield and water andfertilizer usage, has been a major focus of agricultural research (Howell, 1990).
Ⓒ ISERD

159

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

The ‘water footprint’ was introduced as an assessed indicator of water usage in plant
production by Kongboon and Sampattagul (2012). Their study of the water footprints forsugarcane and cassava in northern of Thailand found that the water footprint in cassava (509L/kg) was greater than that of the sugarcane (202 L/kg), as a result of different climates andcultivation areas. The Department of Agriculture (2005) reported that baby corn assimilated
macro nutrients, in the order of nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus. The optimal soil propertiesof baby corn were found to be loam, sandy loam, and clay loam soil texture class sufficient
aeration, organic matter of at least 1.5%, and available P of more than 10 mg/kg, andexchangeable K of more than 40 mg/kg. Research of the interaction and effects of plant irrigation
requirements and fertilizer applications in baby corn production has become essential.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to determine the optimum water usage and fertilizer application
on clay loam soil for baby corn production.
METHODOLOGY
Climate and Location of Experimental Areas
This study was conducted in 2011 and 2012 on a farm in Phathum Thani province, in the central
region of Thailand. The experimental field is located in Alluvial Plain (altitude 4 m, 14o11/ Northand 100o53/ East) where the climate is moist and tropical. The hot season, February to May; andthe rainy season, June to October; are expressed in Fig. 1 (Thai Meteorological Department,2010).

Fig 1. Weather data of 30 years (1980) to (2010) in Pathum Thani province of Thailand
Treatments and Data Collected
Soil samples were collected on the farmer’s field at depths of 0-60 cm (Rangsit soil series, Veryfine, mixed, semiactive, acid, isohyperthermic Sulfic Endoaquepts). Soil texture classes were clay
loam to clay (sand 27 - 40%, silt 25 - 28%, and clay 35 - 45%), soil bulk density 1.99 to 1.33
g/cm-3, hydraulic conductivity 0.002 to 0.02 cm/hr-1, and available water depth of 9.67 to 10.77
mm. Chemical properties of soil samples were pH 3.87 to 4.19, organic matter 1.60 to 2.42,available P 3.4 to 70.1 mg/kg, exchangeable K 270.7 to 349.0 mg/kg, and exchangeable Ca 634.2
to 1,542.0 mg/kg. The experiment was designed split in RCBD with three replications.
Treatments consisted of three main plots: 1) 40% allowable depletion content (ADC), 2) 60%
ADC, and 3) 80% ADC. Irrigation treatments were provided through a trickle irrigation system oftape lines; which were spaced to emit 20 cm at the rate of 2 L/hour, in combination with four subⒸ ISERD160

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1plots: 1) control, 2) 94-31-31 kg/ha (N-P2O5-K2O), 3) 47-16-16, and 4) 47-47-47 kg/ha. In thisstudy, the SG-17 hybrid variety of baby corn was used as the crop material. Each plot consisted ofeight rows, ten meters in length. The rows were spaced 50 cm apart, with 50 cm spacing between
plants in each row. The seeds were grown between 2 April to 31 May 2011 in the first year; andbetween 10 February to 9 April 2012 in second year. Baby corn pods were collected from each of
the six rows and six plants, from the center of each plot. The data of this experiment wereanalyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the means compared by Duncan’s multiple
rank tests (DMRT), using MSTAT-C statistical software (Cochran and Cox., 1957).
Calculating Plants Water Usage
The amount of irrigation supply was determined by the Penman-Monteith equation, and reference
evapotranspiration in the treatments was computed using Eq. (1).

(1)
Where ETo is the reference evapotranspiration (mm/d),∆ slope vapor pressure curve(kPa/oC), Rn net radiation at the crop surface (MJ/m2/d), G soil heat flux density (MJ/m2/d), T
mean daily air temperature at 2 m height (oC), psychrometric constant (kPa/oC), U2 wind speed
at 2 m height (m/s), and es-ea saturation vapor presser deficit (kPa). Actual evapotranspiration wascalculated by following Eq. (2), (Allen et al., 1998).
(2)
ETc adj is actual evapotranspiration (mm/d), Ks water stress coefficient either non soil waterstress Ks = 1 or soil water limiting Ks < 1 and Kc crop coefficient; crop coefficient in the initial
growth stage 0.65, mid-season growth stage 1.22, and at the end of late growth stage 0.61.
Evaluations followed protocol according to the (Irrigation Research Bureau, 2010).
Computing the Water Footprint
Water footprints consist of three components: green, blue, and grey water. The green water
footprint, consisting of rainwater, evaporated during crop growth. The blue water footprint refers
to surface and ground water usage in plant areas, which also evaporates during crop growth. The
grey water footprint is the volume of freshwater for dilution, in which waste water becomes thedrinking water quality standard. The computation of green and blue components of crop waterusage (CWU) was calculated by summation of the daily evapotranspiration and irrigation supply;
by following Eqs. (3) and (4), (Hoekstra et al., 2011).
(3)

(4)
3

CWU is crop water usage (m /ha), ET green daily evapotranspiration (mm/d), ET blue irrigation
amount (mm/d); lgp denotes the length of growing period (in days), and 10 is the value used toconvert units from (mm) into (m3/ha). Calculations of green and blue water footprints within eachperiod are determined by Eqs. (5) and (6), (Hoekstra et al., 2011).
(5)Ⓒ ISERD

161

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1(6)Where WF proc is the water footprint (m3/ton or L/kg), and Y is the economic yield (ton/ha).
The grey water footprint is calculated by following Eq. (7)(7)
Where α is leaching–run off fraction of nitrogen fertilizer assumed 10%, AR performchemical fertilizer application (kg/ha), Cmax is the maximum acceptable concentration of nitrate
found (drinking water quality standard is 50 mg/l), and Cnat the natural concentration for pollutant
nitrate from cultivation. The total water footprint of the crop growing process is the sum of green,
blue, and grey water footprints, demonstrated in Eq.(8), (Kongboon and Sampattagul, 2012).
(8)
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Yield Components
This results were achieved when 40% allowable depletion content (ADC) increased corn height,
pod weight, pod length, and water use efficiency to 188.75 cm, 7.75 ton/ha, 9.61 cm, and 3.26kg/m3, respectively. Production of 60% ADC measured 180.61 cm, 7.54 ton/ha, 7.54 cm, and3.19 kg/m3. A yield of 184.37 cm, 6.81 ton/ha, 923 cm, and 2.54 kg/m3 was produced of 80%ADC. Enhancement of the 80% ADC's finest pods showed no significant difference whencompared with both the 40% ADC and 60% ADC.
Aydinsakir et al., (2013) reported that sweet corn production, affected by deficit water,
reduced corn height, pod diameter, pods length, and seed weight/1,000 seeds. The pod amount,however, was not reduced. Past applications of fertilizer, applied at 94-31-31 kg/ha (N-P2O5-K2O),
yielded the highest corn height, pod weight, pod length, amount of pods, and amount and water
use efficiency (192.61cm, 8.82 ton/ha, 9.57 cm, 146,234 pods/ha, and 3.59 kg/m3 , respectively).
In comparison, the fertilizer application of 47-47-47 kg/ha yielded 188.82 cm, 8.62 ton/ha, 9.64cm, 141,111 pods/ha, and 3.50 kg/m3.The application of 47-16-16 kg/ha yielded 179.20 cm, 6.98
ton/ha, 9.34 cm, 123,889 pods/ha, and 2.84 kg/m3. Lastly, the control treatment yielded 177.67cm, 5.03 ton/ha, 9.19 cm, 95,679 pods/ha, 2.06 kg/m3, and 2.16 kg/m3 and was considered notsignificant. Cela et al., (2011) studied 0, 50, 100, 150, 200 and 300 kg N/ha application on sweetcorn production in a semi-arid climate in Spain which found that 100 kg N/ha provided thegreatest increase in sweet corn production. The interaction of the main plot combined with subplots having 40% ADC was associated with 94-31-31 kg/ha fertilizer, which had the greatest
affect upon pot weight and water efficiency. The exception was corn height, pod length, and pod
amount, which proved to be insignificant.
Water Footprint
This study found that the 40% ADC showed the least reduction of green, blue, grey, and total
water footprint amounts (490, 340, 16 and 845 L/kg), 60 % ADC yielded 606, 423, 23 and 1,051
L/kg-1; and 80 % ADC at 809, 482, 22, and 1,313 L/kg, respectively. This result correspondedwith Jeswani and Azapagic, (2011) who reported that total water footprint within sweet corn
production, in each region of the world; ranged from 354 to 2,434 L/kg. In sub plots factors, inwhich the green, blue, and total water footprints were reduced the most using 47-47-47 kg/ha
obtained results of 444, 303 and 763 L/kg.

Ⓒ ISERD

162

Sub plots(N-P2O5-K2O kg ha-1)Ⓒ ISERD

163

187.80a190.93a183.35a192.91a188.75Ans
173.27a192.18a175.35a181.65a180.61A
171.93a194.73a178.91a
191.89a184.37A
177.67B*
192.61A
179.20B
188.82AB
ns
4.56
5.68

Corn height(cm)

Podsweight(ton ha-1)
5.78a
9.40a
7.36a
8.45a
7.75Ans
5.41a
8.86a
7.06a
8.82a
7.54A
3.91a
8.21a
6.53a
8.60a
6.81A
5.03B**
8.82A
6.98A
8.62A
ns
17.53
10.60

Pods
length
(cm)
9.20a
9.57a
9.60a
10.07a9.61Ans
9.33a
9.87a
9.27a
9.40a
9.47A
9.03a
9.27a
9.17a
9.47a
9.23A
9.19Ans
9.57A
9.34A
9.64A
ns
4.96
4.00
103,899cd
147,777a
125,740b
126,852b
126,065Ans
97,963de
142,037ab
119,630bc
139,074ab
124,675A
85,185e148,889a
126,297b
157,407a
129,445A
95,679B**
146,234A
123,889A
141,111A*15.388.00

Pods amount(pods ha-1)

Water use
efficiency(kg m-3)
2.45a
3.96a
3.10a
3.54a
3.26Ans
2.27a
3.77a
2.99a
3.73a
3.19A
1.45a
3.06a
2.43a
3.22a
2.54A
2.06B**
3.59A
2.84A
3.50A
ns
17.69
10.46

Green water
footprint(L kg-1)
721b362b
490b
386b
490B*
657b
565b
661b
541b
606B
1,547a
529b
757b
404b
809A
975A**
485B
636AB
444B
**
24.13
30.14

Blue water
footprint(L kg-1)
487b256b
342b
276b
340B*
479b
385b
454b
372b
423A895a322b
451b
259b
482A
621A**
321B
416AB
303B
**
21.36
25.56

Grey waterfootprint(L kg-1)
3e27b18bcd
14cde
16Ans
7de
41a24bc
20bc
23A
4e39a28b15cde
22A
5C**
36A
23AB
16BC
*
27.02
31.55

Caution: ns = non significant )P>0.05(, * = significant at )P < 0.05(, ** = significant at )P <0.01( and Different letters indicated significant different by DMRTControl
94-31-31
40 % ADC
47-16-16
47-47-47
Mean
Control
94-31-31
60 % ADC
47-16-16
47-47-47
Mean
Control
94-31-31
80 % ADC
47-16-16
47-47-47
MeanControl
Mean
94-31-31
sub plots
47-16-16
47-47-47
Interaction main plots x sub plots% CV (main plots)% CV (main plots x sub plots)

Main plots

Table 1 Showed yield and water footprint of Baby corn production
Total waterfootprint(L kg-1)
1,211b
644b
850b
676b
845B*
1,143b991b
1,139b933b
1,051B
2,447a890b1,237b679b1,313A
1,600A**
842B
1,075B
763B
**
22.86
28.17

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2015) 6-1

The proved less than the mixture of 94-31-31 kg/ha, which had results of 485, 321, and 842
L/kg; as well as the 47-16-16 kg/ha mixture, with 636, 416, and 1,075 L/kg. Another control
treatment found 975, 621 and 1,600 L/kg to be significant. Whereas, the control treatment which
held the lowest grey water footprint at 5 L/kg, less than 47-47-47 kg/ha was the 16 L/kg together
with 47-16-16 kg/ha, the 23 L/kg and the 94-31-31 kg/ha at 36 L/kg, which were very significant.
The interaction of both the irrigation and fertilizer applications, found 40% ADC combined with
94-31-31 kg/ha fertilizer, to produce the greatest decrease in green, blue, and total water
footprints with the exception of the grey water footprint.
CONCLUSION
Results indicate that 40% ADC irrigation application yielded the highest corn height, pod weight,
and water use efficiency; as well as producing the greatest decrease in green, blue, and total water
footprints (compared with both the 60% and 80% ADCs). Past fertilizer applications found 9431-31 kg/ha enhanced corn height; pod weight, length, and amount as well as water usage
efficiency. In contrast, 47-47-47 kg/ha offered the least reduction of green, blue, and total water
footprint content compared with other sub plots. The association of 40% ADC with the 94-31-31
kg/ha-1 application is recommended for farmers, in the parameters of pod weight, and water usage(including footprint contents) in both clay loam and clay soil. However, economic factors
involving profit and budget for unit costs are not considered here.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was funded by the Graduate School of Khon Kaen University Fund. Additional
thanks to the Department of Agriculture support laboratory room, for samples analyzed in thisproject.
REFERENCES
Agriculture Economic Bureau. 2010. The effective for baby corn production. Ministry of Agriculture andCo-operation. 68 p.
Allen, R.G., Perreira, L.S., Raes, D. and Smith, M. 1998. Guidelines for computing crop water requirement.
FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper. 300 p.
Aydinsakir K., Erdal, S., Buyuktas, D., Bastug, R. and Toker, R. 2013. The influence of regular deficit
irrigation application in water use, yield and quality components of two corns (Zea mays L.)
Agriculture Water Management, 128, 65-71.
Cela S., Santiveri, F. and Lloveras, J. 2011. Optimum nitrogen fertilizer rates for second-years corn
succeeding alfalfa under irrigation. Field Crops Research, 123, 109-116.
Cochran, W. and Cox, G. 1957. Experiment Design. Wiley. New York. USA.
Department of Agriculture. 2005. The recommend of economic agronomy fertilizer application. Ministry ofAgriculture and Co-operative. 122 p.
Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. 2011. The water footprint
assessment manual. Earthscan. 204 p.
Howell, T. 1990. Relationship between crop production and transpiration, evapotranspiration and irrigation.
Irrigation of Agriculture Crops. Agronomy Monograph, 30, 391-434.
Irrigation Research Bureau. 2010. The 40 types of crop coefficient. royal irrigation department. 40 p.
Jeswani H.K .and Azapagic, A. 2011. Water footprint: methodologies and a case study for assessing theimpacts of water use. Journal of Cleaner Production,.19, 1288-1299.
Kongboon, R. and Sampattagul, S. 2012. The water footprint of sugarcane and cassava in northern Thailand.
Social and Behavioral Science, 40, 451-460.
Thai Meterological Department. 2010. Climate statistic. Thai Meteorological Department. Bangkok,Thailand.

Ⓒ ISERD164