Mitigating irrigation-induced soil erosion and enhancing soil ecosystem services on sloping lands using zig-zag furrow irrigation in cotton production

Introduction: Irrigation-induced soil erosion poses a serious challenge to sustainable agriculture on sloping lands in arid and semi-arid regions. Conventional straight furrow irrigation often accelerates soil and nutrient losses and reduces water use efficiency.

Methods: Field experiments were conducted during the 2019–2021 growing seasons in the Piskent district of the Tashkent region, Uzbekistan, on meadow-sierozem soils with slope gradients of 1.5°, 2.5°, and 3.5°. A randomized complete block design was used to compare zig-zag furrow irrigation with conventional straight furrow irrigation. Measurements included flow characteristics, soil erosion, nutrient losses, irrigation water use, water use efficiency, and seed cotton yield.

Results: Zig-zag furrow irrigation significantly reduced flow velocity and soil erosion, resulting in a 4–5-fold decrease in soil loss compared to conventional furrows. Seasonal irrigation water use decreased by 15–20%, while nitrogen and phosphorus losses were reduced by 35–40%. Water use efficiency improved from 1902 m³ t⁻¹ to 1426 m³ t⁻¹, and seed cotton yield increased by 0.32–0.43 t ha⁻¹.

Discussion: The results demonstrate that modifying furrow geometry through a zig-zag configuration enhances regulating ecosystem services related to soil conservation, water regulation, and nutrient retention. This low-cost and scalable approach offers a practical solution for improving irrigation sustainability and crop productivity on erosion-prone sloping lands.

1 Introduction

Soil degradation and the decline of soil fertility represent one of the most serious global environmental challenges threatening long-term agricultural sustainability. According to recent assessments, soil conservation is increasingly recognized as a fundamental pillar for achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly regarding food security (SDG 2) and land degradation neutrality (SDG 15) (Keesstra et al., 2016). However, soil erosion by water remains the dominant form of land degradation, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions where agricultural systems are highly dependent on irrigation (Borrelli et al., 2017; FAO, 2021). Although irrigated lands account for approximately 40% of global food production, inappropriate irrigation practices often accelerate soil erosion, nutrient depletion, and ecosystem service degradation (Pimentel and Burgess, 2013; Lal, 2015).

The problem is especially acute on sloping agricultural lands, where irrigation-induced erosion can exceed natural soil formation rates by several orders of magnitude. Previous studies have established that erosion rates are typically highest at the furrow head where flow velocity and shear stress are maximal (Trout, 1996). Under such conditions, conventional straight furrow irrigation increases sediment transport, leading to substantial losses of topsoil rich in organic matter and essential nutrients (Trout et al., 1993). These processes directly undermine regulating ecosystem services, including soil conservation, nutrient cycling, and water regulation, which are critical for the resilience of agroecosystems.

In Central Asia, and particularly in Uzbekistan, a significant proportion of irrigated cropland is located in piedmont and foothill zones characterized by complex relief and varying slope gradients. In the Tashkent region, cotton cultivation on meadow-sierozem soils frequently occurs on slopes exceeding 1.5°, where traditional irrigation methods remain dominant (Isaev et al., 2020). Numerous studies have reported that under these conditions, improper irrigation regimes result in annual soil losses ranging from several to tens of tons per hectare, accompanied by substantial leaching of humus, nitrogen, and phosphorus (Nurmatov and Umirov, 2003; Mirzayev, 2018).

Although advanced irrigation technologies such as sprinkler and drip irrigation systems are effective in reducing erosion and improving water use efficiency, their widespread adoption is constrained by high installation costs, energy requirements, and maintenance demands (Chartzoulakis and Bertaki, 2015). As a result, there is a pressing need for low-cost, resource-efficient solutions that can be integrated into existing furrow irrigation systems while mitigating soil degradation processes.

One promising approach involves modifying the geometry of irrigation furrows to regulate hydraulic flow characteristics. Recent research highlights that increasing hydraulic resistance within the furrow is critical for controlling flow velocity and minimizing soil detachment (Yu et al., 2022). Similarly, zig-zag or meandering furrow irrigation alters the flow path by increasing surface roughness, thereby reducing erosive energy (Sepaskhah and Kamgar-Haghighi, 1997). Previous studies have shown that zig-zag furrows can improve water application uniformity and reduce runoff; however, their potential role in enhancing ecosystem services, particularly nutrient retention and soil fertility maintenance on sloping lands, remains insufficiently quantified.

We hypothesize that transforming conventional straight furrows into zig-zag configurations can simultaneously reduce irrigation-induced soil erosion, decrease nutrient losses, and improve water use efficiency without compromising crop productivity. From an ecosystem services perspective, this approach may strengthen regulating services (soil conservation, nutrient retention, and water regulation) while supporting provisioning services through stable or increased crop yields.

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of zig-zag furrow irrigation for cotton production on erosion-prone meadow-sierozem soils in the Tashkent region of Uzbekistan under different slope gradients (1.5°, 2.5°, and 3.5°). Specifically, we compare conventional straight furrow irrigation and zig-zag furrow irrigation in terms of soil loss, irrigation water use, nutrient (N and P) depletion, water use efficiency, and seed cotton yield.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Study area and soil–climate conditions

Field experiments were conducted during the 2019–2021 growing seasons in the Piskent district of the Tashkent region, Uzbekistan (40°58′ N, 69°21′ E) (Figure 1). The study area is located in the piedmont zone and is characterized by irrigated agricultural lands with varying slope gradients, making it highly susceptible to irrigation-induced erosion (Isaev et al., 2020; Mirzayev, 2018).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Study area and experimental design. (A) Location of the experimental site in the Piskent district, Tashkent region, Uzbekistan, highlighting erosion-prone sloping fields. (B) Schematic representation of the zig-zag furrow irrigation (ZZFI) layout designed to increase hydraulic resistance and reduce flow velocity. (C) Field view of the experimental plot with a 3.5° slope gradient.

The experimental fields were situated on meadow-sierozem soils, which are widely distributed in the foothill regions of Central Asia. These soils are classified as moderately to heavily loamy in texture and are known for their relatively low organic matter content and high erosion vulnerability under improper irrigation management (Mirzayev, 2018). The bulk density of the plough layer (0–30 cm) ranged from 1.32 to 1.35 g cm^-3, while total porosity varied between 48% and 50%.

The climate of the region is sharply continental, with hot, dry summers and precipitation concentrated mainly in winter and early spring. During the vegetation period (April–October), the mean air temperature ranges from 24 to 26 °C, and the average annual precipitation is approximately 350–400 mm (Isaev et al., 2020).

2.2 Experimental design

The experiment was arranged as a two-factor factorial design using a randomized complete block design (RCBD). The treatments consisted of the following factors: Factor A (slope gradient): (i₁) 1.5°, (i₂) 2.5°, and (i₃) 3.5°. Factor B (irrigation method): (i) Conventional Straight Furrow Irrigation (CSFI), used as the control; (ii) Zig-Zag Furrow Irrigation (ZZFI), representing the experimental treatment.

In the ZZFI treatment, the furrows were initially cut using a standard KKhU-4 cultivator mounted on a tractor to establish the primary furrow lines. Subsequently, the specific zigzag geometry was shaped manually using hoes to create artificial bends at intervals of 5–6 m along the furrow length. This manual adjustment ensured the formation of a consistent serpentine flow path to increase hydraulic resistance, following the approach proposed by Sepaskhah and Kamgar-Haghighi (1997).

Each treatment combination was replicated three times. Individual plot size was 0.10 ha, and the total experimental area covered 1.8 ha. Treatments were randomly allocated within each block to minimize spatial variability effects, in accordance with standard field experiment methodology (Dospekhov, 1985).

2.3 Crop management and fertilization practices

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L., cv. ‘Sulton’), a locally adapted variety with high fiber quality, was used as the test crop. Sowing was carried out using a row spacing of 90 cm with 10 cm intra-row spacing, resulting in a plant density of approximately 80,000–90,000 plants ha^-1.

Mineral fertilizers were applied uniformly across all treatments at recommended rates: 200 kg N ha^-1, 140 kg P₂O₅ ha^-1, and 100 kg K₂O ha^-1 (Table 1). Phosphorus and potassium fertilizers were applied with 70% as a basal dressing prior to sowing and 30% during the flowering stage. Nitrogen was split into three applications: 20% at sowing, 30% at the squaring stage, and 50% during flowering, following regional agronomic recommendations (Isaev et al., 2020).

Table 1

Table 1. Seasonal irrigation water use and savings under different irrigation methods and slope gradients.

2.4 Data collection and statistical analysis

Irrigation water discharge was measured at the head of the furrows using a Chippoletti trapezoidal weir with a measurement accuracy of ±2%. Soil moisture content was determined before and after each irrigation event using the gravimetric method by drying soil samples at 105 °C to constant weight.

To quantify soil erosion, runoff samples (1 L) were collected from the tail end of the furrows during each irrigation event. The samples were filtered and dried to measure the suspended sediment concentration. Total soil loss was calculated based on runoff volume and sediment concentration.

Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA to determine the effects of slope and irrigation method on soil erosion, water use, and crop yield. The means were compared using Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) test at a significance level of p < 0.05. All statistical computations were conducted using the SPSS software package.

2.5 Measurement of irrigation parameters and soil erosion

Irrigation water discharge was measured at the inlet and outlet of each furrow using Cipolletti trapezoidal weirs with a measurement accuracy of ±2%. In both irrigation treatments (CSFI and ZZFI), water was applied at a consistent inflow rate ranging from 0.10 to 0.20 L s^-1 per furrow to prevent overflow while ensuring water advance to the tail end.

Soil erosion caused by irrigation was quantified by collecting runoff samples at the downstream end of the furrows. During each irrigation event, 1 L water samples were collected at hourly intervals and transported to the laboratory. Suspended sediments were determined by the evaporation and gravimetric method (drying at 105 °C). The total soil loss (M, t ha^-1) was calculated based on runoff discharge, sediment concentration, and irrigation duration, following established procedures described by Trout et al. (1993) and Mirzayev (2018) (Equation 1):

$\begin{array}{ll}M={\displaystyle {\sum }_{i=1}^n{Q}_i\times C_i\times t_i}& (1)\end{array}$

2.6 Statistical analysis

All experimental data were analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to evaluate the main effects of slope gradient (Factor A) and irrigation method (Factor B), as well as their interaction. Statistical processing was performed using GenStat and Microsoft Excel software packages.

Differences between treatment means were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05. Post-hoc comparisons were conducted using Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD_0.05) test, in accordance with the methodological guidelines for field experiments by Dospekhov (1985). In the results section, significant differences are indicated by different letters (a, b, c) above the bars in figures and tables.

3 Results

3.1 Hydraulic characteristics of irrigation flow

Field measurements revealed a strong dependence of irrigation flow behavior on both slope gradient and furrow configuration. Under Conventional Straight Furrow Irrigation (CSFI), an increase in slope steepness led to a marked rise in flow velocity along the furrow length. Notably, at the steepest slope gradient of 3.5°, measured flow velocities exceeded the critical non-erosive threshold (V > 0.12 m s^-1), resulting in unstable flow conditions and intensive sediment transport.

In contrast, the Zig-Zag Furrow Irrigation (ZZFI) treatment significantly altered hydraulic conditions across all slope gradients. The introduction of periodic bends along the furrow increased hydraulic resistance (roughness), which effectively reduced the kinetic energy of the flow. Hydraulic analysis indicated that flow intensity (Reynolds number) in zig-zag furrows was 1.4–1.6 times lower than in straight furrows (p< 0.05), leading to reduced turbulence and more stable flow conditions. These findings are consistent with the hydraulic mechanisms described by Trout et al. (1993) and Sepaskhah and Kamgar-Haghighi (1997).

3.2 Seasonal irrigation water use and water savings

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed statistically significant differences in seasonal irrigation water use between irrigation methods and slope gradients (p< 0.05) (Table 1). Under CSFI, total irrigation water input increased significantly with slope steepness, reflecting higher runoff losses and reduced infiltration efficiency. Seasonal water application ranged from 4,850 m³ ha^-1 at a 1.5° slope to 5,420 m³ ha^-1 at a 3.5° slope.

The application of ZZFI resulted in a consistent and significant reduction in seasonal irrigation water requirements across all tested slopes. Compared with CSFI, water use under ZZFI decreased by 640 m³ ha^-1 (13.2%) at a 1.5° slope, 695 m³ ha^-1 (13.6%) at a 2.5° slope, and 740 m³ ha^-1 (13.7%) at a 3.5° slope. On average, ZZFI reduced irrigation water use by approximately 15–20% relative to the control treatment, demonstrating high water-saving potential in sloping landscapes.

3.3 Changes in soil chemical properties

Nutrient dynamics were significantly influenced by the interaction between slope gradient and irrigation method (p< 0.05) (Table 2). Across all slope gradients, CSFI plots exhibited a substantial decline in soil organic matter and nutrient contents by the end of the growing season, primarily due to erosion-induced nutrient leaching. For instance, at a slope of 1.5°, total nitrogen content in the 0–30 cm soil layer decreased significantly from an initial value of 0.070% to 0.054% under CSFI.

Table 2

Table 2. Changes in soil chemical properties (0–30 cm layer) at the end of the growing season.

In contrast, soils managed under ZZFI showed significantly smaller reductions in nutrient content (p< 0.05). At the same slope gradient (1.5°), total nitrogen declined only to 0.066%, representing a significantly better nutrient retention compared with the control. Similar patterns were observed for soil organic matter (humus), total phosphorus, and available phosphorus across the 2.5° and 3.5° slopes (Table 2). Crucially, at the steepest slope (3.5°), where erosion risk was highest, ZZFI plots maintained significantly higher end-of-season values for humus, nitrogen, and phosphorus fractions, confirming the method’s effectiveness in preserving soil fertility.

3.4 Soil erosion intensity

Soil erosion intensity showed a strong positive correlation with slope gradient under conventional irrigation practices (p< 0.05) (Table 3). Under CSFI, measured soil loss values increased sharply from 4.2 t ha^-1 at a 1.5° slope to 12.6 t ha^-1 at a 3.5° slope (Figure 2). This non-linear increase confirms that on steeper slopes (>2.5°), the kinetic energy of the flow in straight furrows exceeds the soil’s resistance to detachment, leading to severe degradation.

Table 3

Table 3. Effect of irrigation method and slope gradient on soil erosion, seed cotton yield, and water use efficiency.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Effect of slope gradient on irrigation-induced soil erosion under conventional straight furrow irrigation (CSFI) and zig-zag furrow irrigation (ZZFI). Soil loss increases sharply with slope under CSFI, whereas ZZFI maintains erosion rates within acceptable limits even at higher gradients.

The implementation of ZZFI resulted in a drastic and statistically significant reduction in soil loss across all slope gradients (p< 0.01). Soil erosion under ZZFI was limited to 0.8 t ha^-1 at a 1.5° slope, 1.8 t ha^-1 at a 2.5° slope, and 3.5 t ha^-1 at a 3.5° slope. Consequently, ZZFI reduced total soil loss by approximately 4–5 times compared to the control treatment. This substantial mitigation is attributed to the reduced flow velocity and increased sediment deposition within the furrow channel, as observed in the hydraulic analysis.

3.5 Cotton yield and water use efficiency

Seed cotton yield was consistently and significantly higher under ZZFI compared to CSFI across all slope gradients (Figure 3). Under conventional irrigation (CSFI), crop productivity exhibited a strong negative correlation with slope steepness, decreasing from 3.45 t ha^-1 at a 1.5° slope to 2.85 t ha^-1 at a 3.5° slope due to soil degradation. In contrast, ZZFI plots maintained significantly higher yield levels (p< 0.05).

Figure 3

Figure 3. Comparison of seed cotton yield under Conventional Straight Furrow Irrigation (CSFI) and Zig-Zag Furrow Irrigation (ZZFI) across different slope gradients. Bars with different letters indicate significant differences at p< 0.05.

On average, ZZFI increased seed cotton yield by 0.32–0.43 t ha^-1 compared with CSFI. Water Use Efficiency (WUE) followed a similar trend. Under CSFI, WUE deteriorated with increasing slope, reaching 1902 m³ t^-1 at a 3.5° slope. The application of ZZFI significantly improved WUE across all slopes (p< 0.05), highlighting the method’s capability to produce more crop per drop of water (Table 3).

4 Discussion

4.1 Hydraulic flow regulation as a mechanism for erosion control

The results of this study clearly demonstrate that irrigation-induced soil erosion on sloping lands is primarily governed by hydraulic flow velocity rather than irrigation volume alone. Under conventional straight furrow irrigation (CSFI), increasing slope steepness resulted in a rapid acceleration of flow velocity, exceeding the critical threshold for soil particle detachment and transport. This finding is consistent with classical hydraulic studies, which indicate that once flow velocity surpasses a critical limit, shear stress increases disproportionately, leading to severe erosion (Trout et al., 1993; Trout, 1996).

By contrast, the zig-zag furrow irrigation (ZZFI) system fundamentally altered flow hydraulics by increasing the effective flow path length and surface roughness. This modification reduced flow velocity and turbulence intensity, as reflected by the lower Reynolds numbers observed in the zig-zag furrows. These results align with recent findings by Yu et al. (2022), who demonstrated that increasing channel obstruction and roughness significantly alters flow characteristics and reduces velocity. Similarly, Fernández-Gómez et al. (2004) emphasized that controlling inflow rates and channel geometry is critical for minimizing soil detachment on sloping terrains.

Importantly, our findings extend previous work (Sepaskhah and Kamgar-Haghighi, 1997) by demonstrating that hydraulic regulation through furrow geometry remains effective even at slope gradients as steep as 3.5°, where conventional systems typically fail. This suggests that ZZFI offers a robust erosion-control mechanism suitable for erosion-prone irrigated landscapes.

4.2 Soil erosion reduction and nutrient retention

The substantial reduction in soil loss observed under ZZFI has direct implications for soil fertility preservation. It is well established that irrigation erosion selectively removes the finest and most fertile soil fractions, which are enriched in organic matter, nitrogen, and phosphorus (Keesstra et al., 2016; Pimentel and Burgess, 2013). In the present study, conventional irrigation resulted in pronounced declines in humus and total nitrogen contents, particularly on steeper slopes.

In contrast, zig-zag irrigation markedly reduced nutrient depletion, with nitrogen and phosphorus losses being 3–4 times lower than those recorded under CSFI. These results align with earlier regional studies reporting severe nutrient export from sloping irrigated fields under improper water management (Nurmatov and Umirov, 2003; Mirzayev, 2018). However, our study provides quantitative evidence that modifying furrow geometry alone—without altering fertilizer inputs—can significantly improve nutrient retention.

This finding is particularly relevant for meadow-sierozem soils, which are inherently low in organic matter and highly vulnerable to degradation. The ability of ZZFI to preserve soil chemical integrity underscores its role as an effective soil conservation strategy in arid irrigated systems.

4.3 Study limitations and future directions

Despite the demonstrated benefits, the widespread adoption of Zig-Zag Furrow Irrigation faces certain challenges. The primary limitation is the labor intensity required to form zigzag patterns manually in the absence of specialized machinery, as noted in the methodology. Furthermore, the mechanization of inter-row cultivation (weeding and fertilizing) is more complex in zigzag furrows compared to straight furrows.

Future research should focus on developing tractor-mounted implements capable of forming zigzag geometries automatically to reduce labor costs and enhance feasibility for large-scale farming. Additionally, long-term studies are needed to evaluate the cumulative effects of ZZFI on soil structural stability and salinization risks over multiple cropping cycles.

4.4 Water use efficiency and resource-saving potential

Water scarcity is intensifying under global climate change, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions where irrigation dominates agricultural water use (FAO, 2021). In this context, improving water use efficiency (WUE) without compromising crop yield is a key challenge. The present study demonstrates that ZZFI substantially reduces seasonal irrigation water requirements while simultaneously increasing cotton yield.

The observed 15–20% reduction in water use under ZZFI can be attributed to lower runoff losses and enhanced infiltration resulting from reduced flow velocity and increased wetted perimeter. Similar water-saving effects have been reported for alternative furrow irrigation strategies, such as surge flow, in the Fergana Valley (Horst et al., 2007). However, many of these approaches require additional infrastructure or operational complexity.

In contrast, ZZFI achieves water savings through a simple structural modification of existing furrows. The simultaneous increase in yield and reduction in water input resulted in a significant improvement in water use efficiency, illustrating the practical applicability of the “more crop per drop” principle in sloping irrigated fields.

4.5 Implications for ecosystem services and sustainable agriculture

From an ecosystem services perspective, the results indicate that zig-zag furrow irrigation enhances regulating ecosystem services while supporting provisioning services (Figure 4). Reduced soil erosion and nutrient losses directly strengthen soil conservation, nutrient cycling, and water regulation functions, which are essential for long-term agroecosystem resilience (Lal, 2015; Keesstra et al., 2016).

Figure 4

Figure 4. Integrated assessment of ecosystem service performance under conventional straight furrow irrigation (CSFI) and zig-zag furrow irrigation (ZZFI). The zig-zag method demonstrates superior performance in soil conservation, water saving, nutrient retention, and cotton yield.

At the same time, higher and more stable cotton yields under ZZFI demonstrate that improved regulating services do not come at the expense of agricultural productivity. Instead, the zig-zag approach reconciles the often-conflicting goals of environmental protection and crop production. This balance is particularly critical for Central Asian irrigated systems, where soil degradation and water scarcity pose simultaneous challenges (Isaev et al., 2020).

By integrating erosion control, nutrient retention, and water efficiency into a single low-cost practice, ZZFI aligns closely with the principles of conservation agriculture and sustainable land management.

4.6 Practical and regional significance

The practical relevance of zig-zag furrow irrigation lies in its simplicity and adaptability. Unlike drip or sprinkler systems, which require substantial capital investment and energy inputs (Chartzoulakis and Bertaki, 2015), ZZFI can be implemented using existing irrigation infrastructure with minimal additional cost.

Because large areas of irrigated land in Uzbekistan and other parts of Central Asia are on sloping terrain, adopting ZZFI could significantly reduce soil degradation and improve water productivity on a regional scale. This technology is ideal for small and medium-sized farms where financial and technical limitations restrict access to sophisticated irrigation systems.

5 Conclusion

This study demonstrates that irrigation-induced soil erosion on sloping lands can be effectively mitigated through hydraulic regulation of furrow geometry. Based on three years of field experiments conducted on erosion-prone meadow-sierozem soils in the Tashkent region, the following conclusions are drawn:

● Erosion Control: Conventional straight furrow irrigation on slopes exceeding 1.5° leads to a sharp increase in flow velocity, resulting in substantial soil loss (up to 12.6 t ha^-1) and depletion of organic matter. Transforming straight furrows into zig-zag configurations significantly reduced flow velocity and erosion intensity. Across slope gradients of 1.5°–3.5°, zig-zag furrow irrigation reduced soil loss by approximately 4–5 times compared with conventional irrigation (p< 0.05).

● Water Conservation: Zig-zag furrow irrigation decreased seasonal irrigation water use by 15–20%. This reduction in water input, combined with higher yields, significantly improved Water Use Efficiency (WUE), reducing water consumption per ton of cotton from 1902 m³ t^-1 (Control) to 1426 m³ t^-1 (Zig-Zag) at the steepest slope.

● Nutrient Retention: Reduced erosion under zig-zag irrigation resulted in markedly lower nitrogen and phosphorus losses. This confirms that the method effectively supports regulating ecosystem services by preserving soil chemical fertility without additional fertilizer inputs.

● Crop Productivity: Despite lower water inputs, seed cotton yield increased by an average of 0.32–0.43 t ha^-1 (approx. 10–15%) under zig-zag irrigation compared to the control. This indicates that soil and water conservation benefits were achieved without compromising agricultural productivity.

Overall Recommendation: Zig-zag furrow irrigation represents a low-cost and environmentally sustainable practice for sloping irrigated lands. While the method requires higher labor input for manual furrow formation compared to straight furrows, its substantial benefits in terms of erosion control, water saving, and yield enhancement make it a viable adaptation strategy. Widespread adoption of this technology offers a practical pathway for strengthening agroecosystem resilience and promoting sustainable agriculture in arid regions like Central Asia.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author contributions

ST: Writing – review & editing, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Project administration. AI: Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Investigation. YA: Investigation, Data curation, Writing – review & editing. AD: Writing – review & editing, Software, Investigation, Validation. AB: Investigation, Data curation, Writing – review & editing. MS: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Resources. SI: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Writing – original draft. AK: Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing, Investigation. SZ: Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Visualization. MT: Investigation, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Data curation. JN: Investigation, Writing – review & editing, Data curation. EM: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Software. KB: Validation, Writing – review & editing, Investigation.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was not received for this work and/or its publication.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the staff of the experimental farms and laboratories involved in this study for their technical assistance during field experiments and data collection. The authors are also grateful to colleagues who provided valuable comments and suggestions that helped improve the quality of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. Generative AI tools were used solely to improve the language, clarity, and academic style of the manuscript. The scientific content, data analysis, and conclusions were developed by the authors.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Borrelli P., Robinson D. A., Fleischer L. R., Lugato E., Ballabio C., Alewell C., et al. (2017). An assessment of the global impact of land use change on soil erosion by water. Nat. Commun. 8, 1–13. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02142-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chartzoulakis K. and Bertaki M. (2015). Sustainable water management in agriculture under climate change. Agric. Agric. Sci. Proc. 4, 88–98. doi: 10.1016/j.aaspro.2015.03.011

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dospekhov B. A. (1985). Methodology of Field Experiments (Moscow: Agropromizdat).

Google Scholar

FAO (2021). The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture – Systems at breaking point (Rome: FAO). doi: 10.4060/cb9910en

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Fernández-Gómez R., Mateos L., and Giráldez J. V. (2004). Furrow irrigation erosion and management. Irrigation Sci. 23, 123–131. doi: 10.1007/s00271-004-0100-3

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Horst M. G., Shamutalov S. S., Pereira L. S., and Gonçalves J. M. (2007). Field assessment of the water saving potential with furrow irrigation in Fergana, Central Asia. Agric. Water Manage. 87, 115–127. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2006.06.014

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Isaev S., Rakhmonov R., Tadjiev S., Goziev G., and Khasanov S. (2020). “Efficiency of irrigation water discharged to furrows in combating irrigation erosion,” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1st International Conference on Energetics, Civil and Agricultural Engineering. (Bristol: IOP Publishing), Vol. 614. 012147. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/614/1/012147

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Keesstra S. D., Bouma J., Wallinga J., Tittonell P., Smith P., Cerdà A., et al. (2016). The significance of soils and soil science towards realization of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Soil 2, 111–128. doi: 10.5194/soil-2-111-2016

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lal R. (2015). Restoring soil quality to mitigate soil degradation. Sustainability 7, 5875–5895. doi: 10.3390/su7055875

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mirzayev K. (2018). Irrigation erosion of soils and measures to combat it in Uzbekistan (Tashkent: Fan).

Google Scholar

Nurmatov S. and Umirov Z. (2003). “Effects of applied factors on the yield of cotton varieties Bukhoro-102, Yulduz, and Gulsara,” in Proceedings of the International Atomic Energy Agency Scientific Conference, (Tashkent: International Atomic Energy Agency), pp. 114–116.

Google Scholar

Pimentel D. and Burgess M. (2013). Soil erosion threatens food production. Agriculture 3, 443–463. doi: 10.3390/agriculture3030443

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sepaskhah A. R. and Kamgar-Haghighi A. A. (1997). Water application uniformity of zigzag furrow irrigation. Agric. Water Manage. 32, 169–180. doi: 10.1016/S0378-3774(96)01276-8

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Trout T. J. (1996). Furrow irrigation erosion and sedimentation: On-field distribution. Trans. ASAE 39, 1717–1723. doi: 10.13031/2013.27689

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Trout T., Member, ASCE, and Neibling W. (1993). Erosion and sedimentation processes on irrigated fields. J. Irrigation Drainage Eng. 119, 947–963. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1993)119:6(947

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Yu J., Liu K., Li A., Yang M., Gao X., Zhao X., et al. (2022). The effect of plug height and inflow rate on water flow characteristics in furrow irrigation. Agronomy 12, 2225. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12092225

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar