Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ain Shams Engineering Journal

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

Civil Engineering

Assessment of irrigation management practices using FAO-CROPWAT 8,

case studies: Tina Plain and East South El-Kantara, Sinai, Egypt
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr a,⇑, Ehab Mostafa Fattouh b
a
Civil Engineering Department, Higher Institute for Engineering and Technology, New Damietta, Ministry of Higher Education, Egypt
b
Irrigation and Hydraulics Department, Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The present study aims to assess current irrigation management practices in two totally different soil
Received 6 April 2020 types and climatic conditions case studies at Tina Plain (AER1) and East South El-Kantara (AER2),
Revised 16 September 2020 Egypt. Net irrigation water requirements (NIWR) for eight crops were computed using the FAO-
Accepted 22 September 2020
CROPWAT8 model. The results showed increasing in NIWR of about 25% for cultivating crops in AER2
Available online xxxx
compared to AER1. The current free crop pattern indicated 22.5% potential water savings compared to
available water resources under surface irrigation efficiency of 40% in AER1 (clay soil) and 60% for surface,
Keywords:
drip, and sprinkler irrigation in AER2 (sandy soil). Different crop pattern scenarios were tested and their
Crop evapotranspiration
CROPWAT 8 model
income optimization was computed. Suggested scenarios showed Greenbeans and Sugarbeet crops had
Crop water requirements the maximum income (44% water saving). Whereas, Berseem clover and Cotton had minimum income
Egypt and can cause 24% water shortage. Improving irrigation efficiency and cultivating Greenbeans and
Irrigation scheduling Sugarbeet are recommended.
Ó 2020 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams Uni-
versity. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction ment strategies are important issues [22]. Climatic conditions such
as evapotranspiration and uneven rainfall distribution patterns,
At present, water scarcity and salinity are major threats to agri- soil fertility and soil characteristics have a significant influence
cultural productivity in many world’s areas. With continued rapid on the crop water requirement and consequently land productivi-
population growth, and growing reliance on irrigated agriculture to ties as reported by [31,1]. Crop simulation models such as FASSET,
sustain food security, enhanced irrigation and drainage manage- CROPWAT 8, DSSAT and WOFORST are predicting tools which help
decision makers to manage effective water resources planning,
provide accurate information on crop water requirements, and
Abbreviations: AERs, Agro-ecological regions; AEUs, Agro-ecological units; CMRI, compute irrigation water requirement as a function of soil type,
Egyptian Channel Maintenance Research Institute; CWR, Crop water requirement;
crop, and climatic conditions [3,16]. Crop water requirement sim-
ETc, Crop evapotranspiration; ETo, Reference evapotranspiration; FAO, Food and
Agriculture Organization, GIWR, Gross irrigation water requirement; Kc, Crop ulation models compute effective rainfall, reference evapotranspi-
coefficient; MALR, Egyptian Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation; MWRI, ration (ETo), crop evapotranspiration (ETc), net irrigation water
Egyptian Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, NIWR, Net irrigation water requirement (NIWR), gross irrigation water requirement (GIWR),
requirements; NSDP, The North Sinai Development Project; RAM, The readily
irrigation scheduling and crop growth. Rainfall, evapotranspira-
available moisture; TAM, Total available moisture; USDA, United States Department
of Agriculture.
tion, relative humidity, temperature, sunshine hours, wind speed
⇑ Corresponding author at: Street Number 3, ELKelany Building, Port Foud, Port and soil characteristics play an important role on the crop water
Said 42511, Egypt. requirement for the agro-ecological regions. ETo is a parameter
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M.E. Gabr), ihab_mostafa@eng. combining water lost from the soil surface and the plant surface
asu.edu.eg (E.M. Fattouh).
simultaneously, which is essential in computing crop water con-
Peer review under responsibility of Ain Shams University.
sumption and irrigation water requirements. Several methods are
used for evapotranspiration calculation such as mass transfer-
based methods, radiation-based methods and temperature-based
methods, etc. [2,4]. The Penman–Monteith method [27] is proved
Production and hosting by Elsevier
as one of the most reliable and comprehensive methods for

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.09.017
2090-4479/Ó 2020 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article as: Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh, Assessment of irrigation management practices using FAO-CROPWAT 8, case
studies: Tina Plain and East South El-Kantara, Sinai, Egypt, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.09.017
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

estimation of evapotranspiration and crop water requirements, shortage due to the conveyance losses. Irrigation water manage-
and it is widely used as [5]. CROPWAT 8 model and its meteorolog- ment in AER1 and AER2 faces many challenges such as; the Egypt’s
ical parameter module CLIMWAT 2 developed by FAO [9] is not shortage of water resources as mentioned before, and the free crop
used as a crop growth model, but for assessing crop water use in pattern selected by the farmers and stakeholders. Where, crop pat-
planning and management. The model computes reference evapo- tern distribution in the irrigation network is planted randomly in
transpiration based on Penman Monteith method for monthly cli- some regions. Consequently, cultivated crops as Tomato and Cot-
mate and rainfall data, crop parameters, and soil data [9]. ton that have high NIWR especially in the summer season (season
Currently, Egypt is suffering from water shortage where eighty per- of high irrigation water demands) cause water shortage in these
cent of the water consumption in Egypt is dedicated to agricultural regions. The aims of this research are: (i) to assess the current irri-
use, which is subjected to dramatic decrease due to climatic gation management practices in AER1 and AER2 under the free
changes and increasing demand in the other sectors [22,23]. The crop pattern selected by the farmers, Egypt water scarcity condi-
productivity of the crops in Egypt is nearly higher than the interna- tions, and the formal allocated irrigation water (1130 million m3
tional average [6]. On the other hand, the water shortage and bad year
1) by MWRI, and (ii) to help farmers and stakeholder to
soil characteristics result in low crop productivity [17]. The Great choose crop pattern with maximum income which eases water
Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, which currently under construction constraints and satisfies food and fiber requirements in the AER1
on the Blue Nile in Ethiopia will have negative consequences on and AER2 and apply accurate irrigation scheduling.
the downstream countries’ water resources, especially Egypt. The To achieve these objectives: (i) the crop data were collected in
main problem of this dam presents at the filling time of its reser- AER1 and AER2 regarding the first and last date of planting; the
voir, which will reduce the share of Nile River water of Egypt and first and last day of harvest; applied irrigation practices (field irri-
cause adverse effect on the water resources management and gation method, irrigation frequencies and interval and irrigation
Egypt’s water security [30,32]. Such consequences include changes application depths); length of plant growth stages; and rooting
in surface water levels (mean water depths in Nile and canals), as depth, (ii) the previous studies about soil characteristics were col-
they will decreased in a range from 0.40 m to 0.75 m when the dis- lected regarding initial soil moisture depletion and available soil
charge will decrease from 90% to 80% of the maximum outflow moisture, maximum infiltration rate, etc. (iii) climatic data of
[32]. In addition, agriculture lands in Delta will decrease by FAO [9] were utilized for long-term monthly average for 15 years
23.03% and in Upper Egypt will decrease by 29.47% [32]. Therefore, covering different periods from (1971 to 2000). As the minimum
assessment of the irrigation management practices is a top priority and maximum temperature, mean relative humidity, wind speed,
by the Egyptian Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation sunshine hours, and rainfall for Port Said meteorological station
(MWRI), focusing on optimization of the crop pattern and improv- adjacent AER1 and Ismailia meteorological station adjacent to
ing irrigation efficiency [18,29]. AER2 were used to compute ETo using Penman–Monteith method
Several studies were carried out in Egypt to estimate ETo and [27], (iv) FAO-CROPWAT 8 model and its attached meteorological
modelling NIWR aiming to promote improved agricultural water parameters CLIMWAT 2 model were utilized to compute ETo,
management under water shortage conditions. As, Noreldin et al. ETc, NIWR, GIWR, and irrigation interval for the major cultivated
[25] established agro-climatic zones in the old agricultural lands crops (Berseem clover, Barley, Greenbeans, Wheat, Tomatoes, Cot-
of Egypt in the Nile Delta and Valley using weather data from ton, Sugarbeet, and Maize), and (v) in the light of Egypt water scar-
1985 to 2014. Water requirements for major crops were computed city conditions, different water balance scenarios for the crop
in the light of Egypt’s water scarcity [26]. Combating adverse cli- patterns in AER1 and AER2 were presented.
matic effects on maize crop was analyzed by [24]. Controlling the Whereas, the crop patterns that meet minimum and maximum
cultivation of crops with high water consumption, such as rice NIWR relative to available allocated water resources (71.43 m3
was studied by [20] under current climate or climate change. They ha
1 day
1) were studied. In addition, the total income for each
reported that in all Egyptian governorates, write productivity val- crop pattern under optimum conditions (maximum crop yields
ues for rice grown on wide furrows were higher than their value and minimum gross irrigation water requirement) was computed
under the traditional method. and the crop pattern which has the maximum total income and
The North Sinai Development Project (NSDP) in Egypt aiming to satisfies food and fiber requirements in AER1 and AER2 was
reclaim and cultivate 168,000 ha (400 thousand feddans) is consid- selected.
ered one of the mega projects based on reused drainage water
according to (MWRI) [21]. The first stage of the project includes
the agro-ecological regions (AERs) in the Tina Plain (AER1) and 2. Materials and methods
the East South EL-Kantara (AER2). AER1 and AER2 (total area of
43,360 ha) are subjected to semi-arid climate conditions. AER1 2.1. Study area
and AER2 are new reclaimed land cultivated since 2000. The irriga-
tion water sources in NSDP are the Nile freshwater (conveyed from Study area is located in the North East of Egypt at latitudes 30°
Nile Damietta branch) and the reused agriculture drainage from and 31° and at longitudes 32° and 33° as shown in Fig. 1. It is
Bahr-Hados and El-Serw drains. The mixing ratio of the fresh water reclaimed as a part of 168,000 ha under the North Sinai develop-
to the drainage water is 1:1 to achieve maximum water salinity of ment Project (NSDP). The Ministry of Water Resources and Irriga-
1000 mg L
1 [8,11]. The designed total annual water resources to tion (MWRI) classified the agro-ecological regions (AERs) and the
irrigate 168,000 ha are 4.38 Billion m3, as the allocated formal irri- agro-ecological units (AEUs) in the district according to the land
gation water per ha is 71.43 m3 day
1. The irrigation network was slope, soil classification, soil depth, temperature, rainfall, growing
designed based on this value [7,8,21]. Several studies were carried period length, etc. into two agro-ecological regions, and eleven
out in the NSDP regarding irrigation water quality [12], soil salinity agro-ecological units. The Tina Plain (AER1) comprises two AEUs:
and drainage problems [11,13,15,28]. Consequence of sand dune AEU 1: North of Tina plain, and AEU 2: South of Tina plain. The East
encroachment towards the irrigation and drainage networks in South EL-Kantara (AER2) comprises nine AEUs: AEU 3: Abd Raboo
the NSDP was studied by [14]. He reported that the measured sand Hamada, AEU 4: Kamal Huosen, AEU 5: Maden Kaseem, AEU 6:
deposition as the ratio of the designed cross-section ranged Saleh Soliman, AEU 7: Gharieb Attwaa, AEU 8: Mostafa ELHawey,
between 1.67% and 3.69% for EL-Sheikh Gaber canal (the main irri- AEU 9: Ahmed Dawoud, AEU 10: Ahmed ELMagraby, and AEU
gation feeder for the NSDP), which can cause an irrigation water 11: Abou ELErok [8,14]. Table 1 summarizes the cultivated area
2
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

AER 1

AER 2

Fig. 1. Study area: Tina Plain (AER1) and East South EL-Kantara regions (AER2).

Table 1
Area and soil classification in AEUs, [7,8,14].

Agro-ecological regions (AERs) Agro-ecological units (AEUs) Area (ha) Soil type
AER1 (Tina Plain) AEU 1: North of Tina plain 8500 Heavy Clay
AEU 2: South of Tina plain 8500 Heavy Clay
AER2 (East South ELKantara) AEU 3: Abd Raboo Hamada 2650 Silty Sand
AEU 4: Kamal Huosen 1550 Silty Sand
AEU 5: Maden Kaseem 4800 Silty Sand
AEU 6: Saleh Soliman 2650 Silty Sand
AEU 7: Gharieb Attwaa 2380 Medium Sand
AEU 8: Mostafa ELHawey 1620 Medium Sand
AEU 9: Ahmed Dawoud 6350 Medium Sand
AEU 10: Ahmed ELMagraby 2860 Medium Sand
AEU 11: Abou ELErok 1500 Medium Sand
Total 43,360

and soil classification for the studied AEUs. The Water Resources, ETc, NIWR, GIWR and irrigation scheduling, using crop, soil, rain-
Irrigation and Infrastructures Sector at the North Sinai, MWRI, fall, and climate data. CROPWAT 8 contains general data for
Egypt operates and maintains the irrigation and drainage networks numerous crop structures, soil properties, and local climate param-
in the district since 2000. The topography in the AER1 is a plain eters that support the computation of scheme water supply for dif-
ground surface. Soil is classified as clay (Tina plain region is an ferent crop patterns under irrigated and rain-fed conditions and
extension of the Nile Delta before the excavation of the Suez improve irrigation schedules. Four types of data are necessary for
Canal), and applied irrigation system is surface irrigation using the CROPWAT 8 model, namely: climate data, crop data, soil
[7,11,14]. On the other hand, the topography in AER2 is sand ter- data and rainfall data.
rain with large differences in elevations and steep slopes, the soil
classified as silty sand in AEU 3, AEU 4, AEU 5, and AEU 6; and 2.2.1. Climate and rainfall data
sandy in AEU 7, AEU 8, AEU 9, AEU 10 and AEU 11. In addition, sur- In this study, climatic data of FAO [9] for long-term monthly
face, sprinkler, and drip irrigation systems are applied in AER2 average for 15 years covering different periods from 1971 to
[7,13,15]. The surface drainage networks were implemented at 2000 were used in CLIMWAT 2 [9]. It is a climatic database to be
the same time with irrigation facilities for AER1 and AER2 used in accordance with the CROPWAT 8 computer software which
[13,15]. Cultivated crops in the district are Barely, Greenbeans, allows the estimation of crop water needs, irrigation water supply,
Wheat, Cotton, Sugarbeet, Maize, Tomato, Pepper, Onion, Eggplant, and irrigation scheduling for different crops for a number of cli-
Zucchini, Potato, Cabbage, and Garlic [8]. mate stations worldwide. These climatic data were in terms of
minimum and maximum temperature (oC), mean relative humid-
2.2. CROPWAT 8 model input data ity (%), wind speed (km h
1), sunshine hours (h), rainfall (mm)
for Port Said meteorological station adjacent AER1 and Ismailia
CROPWAT 8 is a decision-support computer program developed meteorological station adjacent to AER2 to compute ETo using Pen-
by the FAO. It depends on a number of equations to estimate ETo, man–Monteith method [27]. The climatic data for the period from
3
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

(1971–2000) are compared with Noreldin et al. [25], which shows mate conditions. Minimum temperature ranged from 11.1 °C
a very small difference. Noreldin et al. [25] gathered the daily cli- recorded in January to 24.2 °C recorded in August in AER1, while,
mate data for 17 Egyptian Governorates from (1985–2014) to in AER2 ranged from 7.6 °C recorded in January to 21.5 °C recorded
develop Agro-climatic zoning in Egypt. The comparisons are for in August as shown in Fig. 3. Minimum temperature is ideal for the
the average monthly climatic data parameters (minimum and growth of the study crops, [25,26]. Maximum temperature ranged
maximum temperature (oC), mean relative humidity (%), wind from 17.4 °C in January to 30.3 °C in August in AER1, whereas, in
speed (km/h), sunshine hours (h), rainfall (mm)) between the AER2 it ranged from 19.2 °C in January to 35.7 °C in July as shown
Damietta and El-Sharkia stations and Port Said (AER1) and Ismailia in Fig. 4. Annual rainfall were 83 mm and 37 mm in AER1 and
stations (AER2) respectively. Where: (i) Damietta station has alti- AER2, respectively, while the effective rainfall were 81.4 mm and
tude of (5.00) m, latitude of 31.25° N, and longitude of 31.49° E, 36.7 mm in AER1 and AER2, respectively. June, July and August
and it is far from Port Said station (AER1) station by nearly are the driest months (Fig. 5), therefore, AER1 and AER2 are consid-
35 km, which has altitude of (6.00) m, latitude of 31.28° N, and lon- ered as semi-arid regions. The runoff influence can be neglected,
gitude of 32.23° E, and (ii) El-Sharkia station has altitude of (13) m, due to the small amount of rainfall. On the other hand, [33] proved
latitude of 30.35° N, and longitude of 31.30° E, it is far from Ismailia that excess effective rain has a negative impact on crop growth.
station (AER2) station by nearly 40 km, which has altitude of (12) The average wind speeds were 513 km d
1 and 226 km d
1 in
m, latitude of 30.78° N, and longitude of 31° E. Consequently, the AER1 and AER2, respectively. The average sunshine hours were
CROPWAT 8 model recalled the climatic data of Port Said and 8.3 and 8.4 in AER1 and AER2, respectively. The average sun radi-
Ismailia stations for climatic data of the period from (1971– ation values were 16.8 (MJ m
2 d
1) and 18.9 (MJ m
2 d
1) in AER1
2000) to calculate the ETo as shown in Tables 2 and 3. Fig. 2 shows and AER2, respectively which were ideal for the crop growth in the
that in AER1, the relative humidity is ranged from 73% recorded in district.
September to 79% recorded in May, while in AER2 it ranged from
37% in May to 62% in December. The high average relative humid- 2.2.2. Crop pattern data
ity value for AER1 is due to the extension of the Mediterranean Sea The data for the eight main crops Berseem clover, Barley, Green-
climatic conditions to it, whereas, AER2 expresses continental cli- beans, Wheat, Tomatoes, Cotton, Sugarbeet and Maize grown in

Table 2
CROPWAT 8 model climatic data rainfall and ETo of Port Said Station, Egypt.

Station: Port Said Country: Egypt

Altitude: (6.00) m Latitude: 31.28° N Longitude: 32.23° E
Month Min. Temp. (°C) Max. Temp. (°C) R. H. (%) Wind Speed (km d
1) Sunshine Hours (h) Radiation (MJ m
2 d
1) ETo (mm d
1) Rainfall (mm d
1)
Jan. 11.1 17.4 79 458 6.3 11.5 2.16 0.58
Feb. 11.7 17.9 74 579 6.7 13.9 2.90 0.39
Mar. 13.4 19.4 75 596 7.4 17.5 3.35 0.33
Apr. 16.3 22.5 74 510 8.3 21.1 4.19 0.17
May 18.8 25.1 79 579 9.1 23.4 4.57 0.13
Jun. 22.1 28.2 79 518 10.5 25.8 5.36 0.0
Jul. 23.7 30.0 77 518 10.2 25.1 5.86 0.0
Aug. 24.2 30.3 77 467 10.1 24.0 5.62 0.0
Sep. 23.3 28.8 73 493 9.4 20.8 5.31 0.1
Oct. 21.3 26.7 78 510 8.5 16.8 3.99 0.26
Nov. 17.5 23.0 79 493 7.2 12.8 2.91 0.22
Dec. 12.8 19.4 76 432 5.7 10.2 2.38 0.52
Average 18.0 24.1 77 513 8.3 18.6 4.05 –

Min. Temp., minimum temperature; Max. Temp., maximum temperature; R. H., relative humidity; and ETo, reference crop evapotranspiration.

Table 3
CROPWAT 8 model climatic data rainfalls and ETo of Ismailia Station, Egypt.

Station: Ismailia Country: Egypt

Altitude: (13) m Latitude: 30.6° N Longitude: 32.25° E
Month Min. Temp. (°C) Max. Temp. (°C) R. Hum. (%) Wind Speed (km d
1) Sunshine Hours (h) Radiation (MJ m
2 d
1) ETo (mm d
1) Rainfall (mm d
1)
Jan. 7.6 19.2 53 207 6.2 11.6 2.65 0.23
Feb. 8.3 20.9 50 251 6.9 14.4 3.48 0.2
Mar. 10.3 23.3 45 285 7.6 17.9 4.65 0.23
Apr. 14.1 28.6 38 277 8.5 21.4 6.26 0.07
May 16.4 31.8 37 259 9.4 23.9 7.09 0.07
Jun. 19.5 34.8 39 277 10.7 26.1 8.03 0.0
Jul. 21.3 35.7 40 242 10.4 25.5 7.75 0.0
Aug. 21.5 35.3 43 216 10.1 24.0 7.04 0.0
Sep. 19.7 33.1 48 199 9.4 21.1 5.82 0.0
Oct. 16.6 30.0 53 190 8.4 16.9 4.46 0.07
Nov. 12.7 25.4 59 138 7.3 13.1 2.82 0.2
Dec. 8.9 20.9 62 173 6.1 10.8 2.31 0.17
Average 14.7 28.3 47 226 8.4 18.9 5.20 –

Min. Temp., minimum temperature; Max. Temp., maximum temperature; R. H., relative humidity; and ETo, reference crop evapotranspiration.

4
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 2. Relative humidity variation in AER 1 and AER 2.

40
35
Min. Temp. (oC)

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
February

December
March
April

June
July

October
January

May

August

November
September

Month
(AER 2) (AER 1)

Fig. 3. Minimum temperature variation in AER1 and AER2.

Fig. 4. Maximum temperature variation in AER1 and AER2.

AER1 and AER2 was collected from the Department of agriculture

in the Water Resources, Irrigation and Infrastructures Sector, North
Sinai and the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation
(MALR). These data are for the cultivated area, crop pattern, pro-
vided fertilizers, agriculture land levelling equipment’s, etc. In
addition to the field visits and interviews with the farmers and
stakeholders. Such crop details are planting and harvesting dates;
applied irrigation practices (field irrigation method, irrigation fre-
quencies and interval and irrigation application depths); length
of plant growth stages; and rooting depth. As well as, the current
annual crop area in the AER1 and AER2, also the planting and har-
vesting dates were taken based on the agricultural guide in Egypt
by the (MALR) website, [8,25] as shown in Table 4. The applied irri-
gation system in AER1 is surface irrigation, while in AER2 is sur-
face, sprinkler and drip irrigation systems. The irrigation
efficiencies in AER1 and AER2 were 40% and 60% respectively),
and the formal water allocated is 71.43 m3 ha
1day
1 [7,8]. These
efficiencies are not evaluated in this study, their values were Fig. 5. Rainfall variation in AER1 and AER2.

assumed to obtain GIWR, where the surface irrigation is applied

in AER1 which is a new land area and needs additional water for
the leaching requirement. On the other hand, in AER2: 60% is sur- 2.2.3. Soil data
face irrigation and 40% is modern irrigation, in addition to the The soil in AER1 is classified as heavy clay soil, while in AER2 is
water for the leaching requirement. Crop coefficient (Kc) curves classified as silty sand in AEU 3, AEU 4, AEU 5, and AEU 6 and sandy
of variation of the seasonal/annual for the studied crops were in AEU 7, AEU 8, AEU 9, AEU 10 and AEU 11 (Table 1). Hence, in the
taken according to [4]. Values of Kc for the initial, mid and late model, FAO soil files that match the soil in AER1 and AER2 were
growth stages of seasonal crops were used. found. In AER1, the soil is heavy clay of total available moisture
5
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 4
Current crop area, planting, and harvest dates in AER1 and AER2, DRI [7].

Season Crop Planting Date Harvest Date Crop Area (ha)

AER1 AER2
Winter Berseem clover 1 Oct. 13 May 5774 8952
Barley 1 Oct. 28 Jan 1283 1990
Greenbeans 1 Oct. 29 Dec. 642 995
Wheat 1Nov. 10 Mar. 8019 12,434
Tomato 15 Nov. 8 Apr. 1283 1989
Total 17,000 26,360

Summer Tomato 1 Jun. 23 Oct. 1789 2775

Cotton 1 May 11 Nov. 895 1387
Sugarbeet 1 Aug. 7 Jan. 8947 13,874
Maize 20 Apr. 22 Aug. 5368 8324
Total 17,000 26,360

(TAM) equals 200 mm m
1. Maximum infiltration rate is to determine the crop evapotranspiration (mm dec
1) according to
40 mm day
1, and maximum rooting depth is depending on the Eq. (1), and effective rain (mm dec
1).
plant inherited features for example: 1000 mm in case of Sugar-
beet. Initial soil moisture depletion as %TAM is zero and initial 2.5. Net irrigation water requirement (NIWR)
available soil moisture is 200 mm m
1. In AER2, the soil is light
(sandy soil) of TAM equals 60 mm m
1. Maximum infiltration rate NIWR refers to the water that must be supplied via the irriga-
is 40 mm day
1 and maximum rooting depth is 1400 mm. in case tion system to ensure that the crop receives its full water require-
of Cotton. Initial soil moisture depletion as %TAM is zero, and initial ments. If the irrigation water is the only source of water supply for
available soil moisture is 60 mm m
1 [13,25]. CROPWAT 8 has the the plant, the irrigation requirement must be greater than the
flexibility to account losses due to surface runoff, capillary, perco- requirement for crop water to ensure the efficiency of the irriga-
lation, etc. by selecting one of five options for effective rainfall: (i) tion system. If the crop derives some of its water from other
calculation method, (ii) fixed percentage 80% (The performance sources (rainfall, deep seepage, etc.), so the demand for the irriga-
would be approximately 80% for most rainfall values below tion water will be slightly less than the demand for the crop water.
100 mm month
1), (iii) empirical formula, (iv) dependable rain, Therefore, NIWR is calculated as,
(v) United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil conserva-
tion service. In this study, the USDA soil conservation service effec- NIWR ¼ CWR
Effective rains ð2Þ
tive rain method was applied [9]. The CROPWAT 8 model can calculate the daily water balance of
the root zone and the root zone depletion at the end of the day as
2.3. Reference evapotranspiration (ETo) reported by [4] and the CROPWAT 8 manual [9].

ETo is characterized as the simultaneous occurrence of two sep-

2.6. Irrigation scheduling
arate processes, water evaporation directly from the surface of the
soil or from free water surfaces, and transpiration from plants [4].
Irrigation schedules determine the optimum amount of water
The Windows CROPWAT 8 software uses the FAO Penman–Mon-
to irrigate and the accurate time for watering.
teith [27] equation to calculate the ETo based on the measured
If the CWR and NIWR were computed the next step is to plan
weather data as reported in the CROPWAT 8 manual [9].
the irrigation schedules for the region. In planning an irrigation
schedule, three criteria must be considered: the daily requirements
2.4. Crop water requirement (CWR)
of crop water, the soil (in particular its total available moisture,
keeping capacity), and the effective depth of the root zone. The
CWR is defined as the water depth in (mm) required to compen-
CROPWAT 8 model calculates CWR and NIWR to develop the irriga-
sate the water consumed through evapotranspiration (ETc) for a
tion schedules for different agro-ecological units (AEUs) and the
disease-free crop growing in large fields under a certain environ-
water supply plans [15].
ment and good soil conditions which meet the fertility and soil
water, and to achieve the maximum production yield. CWR is the
sum of ETc throughout the growing season. Estimation of crop
evapotranspiration (ETc) is carried out from reference evapotran-
spiration (ETo) with the help of Eq. (1) as reported by [29].
ETc ¼ Kc  ETo ð1Þ
where Kc is the crop coefficient. It denotes the integration of the
effects of four major qualities that distinguish the crop from refer-
ence grass, and it covers albedo (reflectance) of the crop and soil
surface, canopy resistance, crop height and evaporation from the
soil. Due to the ETc differences during the growing stages, the Kc
for the crop will vary over the developing period, which comprises
four distinct stages as initial stage, crop development stage, mid-
season stage, and late season stage. CWR value (mm dec
1) depends
on the crop growth stages in decade (dec), crop coefficient that used Fig. 6. Reference evapotranspiration variation (ETo) in AER1 and AER2.

6
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

3. Results and discussion in June. In addition, the average ETo values in AER1 and AER2 are
4.05 mm day
1 and 5.2 mm day
1 respectively as shown in
3.1. Reference evapotranspiration (ETo) Fig. 6. High temperature, low relative humidity, more daylight
hours, and more radiation levels are the factors behind the higher
The computed ETo values show a range from 2.16 mm day
1 in ETo levels in AER2 as opposed to AER1 in the summer season. The
January to 5.86 mm day
1 in July for AER1. While in AER2, the ETo computed ETo levels by the CROPWAT 8 model are in accordance
values ranged from 2.31 mm day
1 in December to 8.03 mm day
1 with [25,26].

Table 5
CWR and NIWR for the major crops in AER 1 and AER 2.

Crop Planting date Harvest date Critical Rooting Crop growth periods (days) AER 1 AER 2
(DRI-2011) (DRI-2011) depl. depth (cm)
Initial Crop Mid- Late Total CWR Eff. rain NIWR CWR Eff. rain NIWR
fraction
Stage Dev. Season season (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
Berseem c. 1 Oct. 13 May 0.55 120 10 30 150 35 225 613 77 536 737 35 702
Barley 1 Oct. 28 Jan 0.55 110 15 25 50 30 120 284 48 236 287 20 267
Greenbean 1 Oct. 29 Dec. 0.6 70 20 30 30 10 90 225 30 195 224 13 211
Wheat 1Nov. 10 Mar. 0.55 120 30 30 40 30 130 255 55 200 290 27 263
Tomato 15 Nov. 8 Apr. 0.3 100 30 40 45 30 145 392 60 332 477 29 448
1 Jun. 23 Oct. 0.3 100 30 40 45 30 145 721 9 711 886 2 884
Cotton 1 May 11 Nov. 0.5 100 25 35 50 50 160 901 9 884 1113 4 1107
Sugarbeet 1 Aug. 7 Jan. 0.65 140 30 50 60 55 195 546 17 506 576 16 560
Maize 20 Apr. 22 Aug. 0.55 100 20 35 40 30 125 582 6 576 812 2 810

CWR, crop water requirement; NIWR, net irrigation water requirement; Berseem c., Berseem clover; Critical depl. fraction, critical depletion fraction; Crop Dev., Crop
Development; and Eff. rain, Effective rain.

Fig. 7. Crop water requirement of different crops in AER1 and AER2.

Fig. 8. Net irrigation water requirement (NIWR) for different crops in AER1 and AER2.

7
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 9. Irrigation schedules for Wheat in AER1 and AER2.

Fig. 10. Irrigation schedules for Tomato in AER1 and AER2.

8
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

requirement (GIWR) million m3.

9000 1200
8000
1000

Gross irrigation water

Cultivated area (ha)

7000
6000 800
5000
600
4000
3000 400
2000
200
1000
0 0
AEU1 AEU2 AEU3 AEU4 AEU5 AEU6 AEU7 AEU8 AEU9 AEU10 AEU11
Agro-ecological units AEUs AER 2

Greenbeans Sugarbeet Cumulative GIWR Allocated water

B.

Fig. 11. Crop patterns scenarios in AER1 and AER2.

3.2. Crop water requirement (CWR) 1113 mm for Cotton, 721 mm to 886 mm for Tomato, 546 mm
to 576 mm for Sugarbeet, and 582 mm to 812 mm for Maize.
Table 5 and Fig. 7 show the computed CWR for the major crops The results showed that CWR values were higher during the dry
in AER1 and AER2. The variations in CWR in the winter season season than the rainy season which reflected the crops grown in
crops for AER1 and AER2 ranged from 613 mm to 737 mm for Ber- the dry season needs more water than those grown during the
seem clover, 284 mm to 287 mm for Barely, 224 mm to 225 mm for rainy season [10]. It can be inferred from Fig. 7 that there are dif-
Greenbeans, 255 mm to 290 mm for Wheat, and 392 mm to ferences of about 25% increase in CWR in AER2 compared to
477 mm for Tomato (Fig. 7). In addition, the CWR for AER1 and AER1, accordingly, it is essential to select the suitable crop pattern
AER2 for the summer season crops ranged from 901 mm to in each region to save water and minimize losses.
9
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

9000 1400

requirement (million m3)

Gross irrigation water
8000 Formal allocated water limit 1200
Cultivated area (ha)
7000
1000
6000
5000 800

4000 600
3000
400
2000
200
1000
0 0
AEU1 AEU2 AEU3 AEU4 AEU5 AEU6 AEU7 AEU8 AEU9 AEU10 AEU11

Agro-ecological units AEUs

Berseem clover Cotton Cumulative GIWR Allocated water

C.

9000 1400

Gross irrigation water requirement

8000 Formal allocated water limit 1200
Cultivated area (ha)

7000

(GIWR) million m3)

1000
6000
5000 800

4000 600
3000
400
2000
200
1000
0 0
AEU1 AEU2 AEU3 AEU4 AEU5 AEU6 AEU7 AEU8 AEU9 AEU10 AEU11

Agro-ecological units (AEUs)

Wheat Maize Cumulative GIWR Allocated water

D.

Fig. 11 (continued)

3.3. Net irrigation water requirement (NIWR) the summer crops: Tomato, Cotton, Sugarbeet, and Maize are
711 mm, 884 mm, 506 mm, and 576 mm respectively (Fig. 8).
Table 5 and Fig. 8 show the computed NIWR for the major crops Whereas, the computed NIWR for the winter season crops in the
in AER1 and AER2. The results show an increase in crops NIWR of AER2 are 702 mm, 267 mm, 211 mm, 263 mm, and 448 mm for
25% in AER2 compared to AER1. The computed NIWR in AER1 for Berseem clover, Barely, Greenbeans, Wheat, and Tomato respec-
the winter season crops: Berseem clover, Barely, Greenbeans, tively. In addition, the computed NIWR in AER2 for the summer
Wheat, and Tomato are 536 mm, 237 mm, 195 mm, 200 mm, crops Tomato, Cotton, Sugarbeet, and Maize are 884 mm,
and 332 mm respectively. In addition, the computed NIWR for 1107 mm, 560 mm and 810 mm respectively. The NIWR values
10
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

for the cultivated winter crops in AER1 and AER2 are less than Whereas, in the AER2 (sandy soil), Wheat needs six irrigations:
NIWR values for the cultivated summer crops due to the effective the first irrigation was 31.3 mm on 11th December and the last irri-
rainfall in winter [24]. On the other hand, CWR for the cultivated gation time is 53.9 mm 2nd of March shown in Fig. 9B. The total
summer crops increases due to high temperature, low relative available moisture (TAM) developed in two phases: a phase of fill-
humidity, more daylight hours, and more sun radiation levels. ing, when reserves reach 240 mm and 72 mm on 1st of January for
AER1 and AER2 respectively, and a phase of constant stabilizing
3.4. Irrigation scheduling from this date to the end of the cycle (Fig. 9). The readily available
moisture (RAM) showed a phase of filling when reserves reach
Figs. 9 and 10 show the field crop irrigation schedules for Wheat 135 mm and 40 mm until the 1st of January in AER1 and AER2
and Tomato cultivated in the AER1 (clay soil) and AER2 (sandy respectively, then remained constant phase until the 8th of Febru-
soil). The results show considerable differences in irrigation sched- ary, and a phase of increasing when reserves reached to 190 mm,
ules, as Wheat planted in the winter season on the 1st of November 58 mm until the end of the cycle. The matter of the irrigation
needs to be irrigated once in the growing season distributed as scheduling is depending on the daily requirements of crop water,
134.1 mm on the 4th of February in AER1 (clay soil) (Fig. 9A). the soil characteristics (in particular its total available moisture

Fig. 11 (continued)

Table 6
Crop pattern water balance for the current major crops in AER1 and AER2.

Season Crop AER1 AER2

Area NIWR Total NIWR Irr. GIWR Formal Water Area NIWR Total NIWR Irr. GIWR Formal Water
(ha) (mm) million (m3) Eff. million million (m3) (ha) (mm) million (m3) Eff. million million (m3)
(%) (m3) (%) (m3)
Winter Berseem c. 5774 536 30.95 40 77.37 75.3 8952 702 62.8 60 104.7 116.7
Barley 1283 236 3.03 40 7.57 16.7 1990 267 5.3 60 8.9 25.9
Geenbeans 642 195 1.25 40 3.13 8.4 995 211 2.1 60 3.5 13.0
Wheat 8018 200 16.04 40 40.09 104.5 12,434 263 32.7 60 54.5 162.1
Tomato 1283 332 4.26 40 10.65 16.7 1989 448 8.9 60 14.9 25.9
Summer Tomato 1789 711 12.72 40 31.80 23.3 2775 884 24.5 60 40.9 36.2
Cotton 896 884 7.92 40 19.80 11.7 1387 1107 15.4 60 25.6 18.1
Sugarbeet 8947 506 45.27 40 113.18 116.6 13,874 560 77.7 60 129.5 180.9
Maize 5368 576 30.92 40 77.30 70.0 8324 810 67.4 60 112.4 108.5
Total 380.9 443.2 494.8 687.2
Total GIWR for (AER1) + (AER2) 875.7
Total Formal Water 1130.4
Saved Water Ratio 22.5%

Berseem c., Berseem clover; NIWR, net irrigation water requirement; Irr. Eff., irrigation efficiency; and GIWR, Gross irrigation water requirement.

11
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

or water, keeping capacity), and the effective depth of the root. m3 [7,8]. This GIWR is assigned for irrigation and leaching require-
Tomato planted in AER1 on 1st of June, needs eleven irrigations ments, especially in AER1 [28]. Fig. 11 shows the five crop patterns
in its growing season: the first irrigation was 21.3 mm on 7th June water balance scenarios in AER1 and AER2 based on the current
and the last irrigation was 94.9 mm 12th of October (Fig. 10A). irrigation efficiencies of 40% and 60% in AER1 and AER2 respec-
While, Tomato planted in AER2 on 1st of June, needs forty-four irri- tively. The results showed: (i) the water balance computations
gations in its growing season: the first irrigation time is 9.3 mm on for first scenario (current crop pattern) for the eight crops were
2nd June and the last irrigation time 31.6 mm 20th of October summarized in Table 6. This scenario indicates 22.5% water savings
(Fig. 10B). In AER1, the RAM and TAM increase to 80 mm and compared to the formal allocated irrigation water (Fig. 11A) and
200 mm on 9th of August, respectively. Then, the TAM is constant Table 6. Therefore, the allocated water was higher than the con-
until the end of the crop growing cycle, while the RAM is constant sumption by 22.5% to satisfy land leaching requirements at the
until 23th of September then increases to 100 mm by the end of the beginning of the land reclamation since 1998. Nowadays, after
season (Fig. 10A). While in AER2, the RAM and TAM increase to more than 20 years of land reclamation and cultivation of the
23 mm and 60 mm on 9th August, respectively. Then, the TAM is NSDP, the project land was reclaimed and improved. Currently,
constant until the end of the crop growing cycle, while the RAM under Egypt water scarcity conditions [30,32], this saved water
is constant until 23th of September then increases to 30 mm by (the difference between crop GIWR and the formal allocated irriga-
the end of the season (Fig. 10). tion water by the MWRI) will not be available. Therefore, cultivat-
ing of crops that need low GIWR is an urgent necessity to be
3.5. Water resources, crop patterns and irrigation efficiencies scenarios applied as, (ii) the second scenario was for crop pattern (Green-
beans and Sugarbeet) which had the minimum GIWR, it saved
As mentioned before, surface water resources are used for irri- 44% of the formal allocated irrigation water (Fig. 11B). (iii) On
gation in AER1 and AER2. The annual designed GIWR (formal allo- the other hand, the third scenario was for crop pattern (Berseem
cated irrigation water) for all AEUs (43,360 ha) was 1130 million clover and Cotton). This indicated the maximum GIWR as, 24%

Table 7
Crop pattern water balance income optimization scenarios.

Crop pattern scenario Cultivated crops Irrigation Efficiency (%) Sale price of Annual save/ Income for saved/shortage Total
the crop yields shortage water water as Wheat and maize income
(Billion LE) (million m3) cultivated area in AER2 in (Billion
(ha) (Billion LE) LE)
First crop pattern scenario Berseem clover, Barley, 40% in AER1 and 60% in 4.134 254.25 1.718 5.852
(current) Greenbeans, Wheat, AER2
Tomatoes, Cotton,
Sugarbeet, and Maize
Second crop pattern scenario Greenbeans and 40% in AER1 and 60% in 4.646 497.2 3.359 8.005
Sugarbeet AER2
Third crop pattern scenario Berseem clover and 40% in AER1 and 60% in 5.177
271.2
1.832 3.345
Cotton AER2
Fourth crop pattern scenario Wheat and Sugarbeet 40% in AER1 and 60% in 3.1404 328.83 2.222 5.362
AER2
Fifth crop pattern scenario Berseem clover, Barley, 60% in AER1 and 80% in 4.134 503.98 3.405 7.539
Greenbeans, Wheat, AER2
Tomatoes, Cotton,
Sugarbeet, and Maize

6 600
Total incime (milliard LE)

Water savings/shortages

500
(million m3 year-1)

5 400
4 300
200
3 100
0
2 -100
1 -200
-300
0 -400
First scenario: Second scenario: Third scenario: Fourth scenario: Fifth scenario:
Berseem clover , Greenbeans and Berseem clover Wheat and Berseem clover,
Barley, Sugarbeet and Cotton Sugarbeet Barley,
Greenbeans, Greenbeans,
Wheat, Tomatoes, Wheat, Tomatoes,
Cotton, Sugarbeet, Cotton, Sugarbeet,
and Maize Corp pattern scenarios and Maize

Fig. 12. Assessment of the income optimization for crop pattern scenarios.

12
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

shortage compared to formal allocated irrigation water (Fig. 11C), parameters CLIMWAT 2 model. The results showed an increase of
(iv) the fourth scenario was for the crop pattern (Wheat and Maize) 25% in (NIWR) for the cultivated crops in AER2 compared to
as strategic crops, according to the instructions of the Egyptian AER1. As these areas have different soil characteristics and weather
government [6,8,21]. In this case the water balance showed conditions. The annual designed GIWR (formal allocated irrigation
29.1% water savings (Fig. 11D), and (v) finally the fifth scenario water) for all AEUs (43,360 ha) was 1130 million m3. Using crop
was for current crop pattern, but the irrigation efficiency in AER1 NIWR and the current irrigation efficiencies of 40% and 60% in
is increased from 40% to 60% and in AER2 is increased from 60% AER1 and AER2 respectively, five crop patterns scenarios have been
to 80%, this scenario indicated 44.6% water savings (Fig. 11E). carried out in the light of the available water resources. The total
Therefore, the total income for each crop pattern under optimum income for each crop pattern under optimum conditions (maxi-
conditions (maximum crop yields and minimum gross irrigation mum crop yields and minimum gross irrigation water require-
water requirement) was computed and the crop pattern which ment) was computed. The results showed that (i) the best crop
has the maximum total income and satisfies food and fiber require- pattern that achieves maximum total income (8.005 Billion LE)
ments in AER1 and AER2 was selected. was for the second scenario (Greenbeans and Sugarbeet). It saved
44% of the annual formal allocated irrigation water, (ii) Whereas,
the worst crop pattern which had the minimum total income
3.6. Assessing income optimization of the five crop pattern scenarios
(3.345 Billion LE) was the third scenario (Berseem clover and Cot-
ton), its GIWR was 24% above the annual formal allocated irriga-
Table 7 summarizes the computations of crop pattern water
tion water, (iii) The total income for the first crop pattern
balance for five scenarios and each total income under optimum
scenario (current case) was 5.852 Billion LE and its water saving
conditions (maximum crop yields and minimum gross irrigation
was 22.5%, (iv) the total income of the fourth crop pattern (Wheat
water requirement). The maximum total income (best water bal-
and Maize) scenario was 5.362 Billion LE, its water saving was
ance scenario) was selected, which eases water constraints, and
29.1%, and finally (v) The total income for the fifth crop pattern sce-
satisfies food and fiber requirements in AER1 and AER2. The
nario which depends on improving the irrigation efficiencies for
income per ha for the crops yield, Berseem clover, Barley, Green-
the current crop pattern from 40% to 60% in AER1 and from 60%
beans, Wheat, Tomatoes, Cotton, Sugarbeet, and Maize are 95240
to 80% in AER2 was 7.539 Billion LE and its water saving was
LE, 17143 LE, 83333 LE, 29570 LE, 85715 LE, 24160 LE, 23810 LE,
44.6%. This study helps the farmers and stakeholders for selecting
and 42857 LE, respectively [6] (Table 7). Where, the income per
the crop pattern of maximum income and applying the accurate
ha for each crop yield was computed based on the average crop
irrigation schedules. It is recommended to cultivate Greenbean,
yield per hectare in ton for the last five years according to [6] mul-
Wheat, and Sugarbeet, and to improve irrigation efficiency by
tiplied by the current income of crop per ton.
changing traditional irrigation system to modern one.
The areas of the cultivated crops for the current crop pattern
scenario are given in Table 4 and for the other scenarios are given
in Table 1. The income of the annual water savings/shortage for Declaration of Competing Interest
each crop pattern scenario was computed, as this water can culti-
vate a new area (sandy soil) adjacent to AER2 to the east direction. The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
In this new area, Wheat in winter and Maize in summer are recom- cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
mended to cultivate as strategic crops in Egypt. In addition, mod- to influence the work reported in this paper.
ern irrigation systems (sprinkler and drip irrigation) will be used
to irrigate these crops (Wheat and Maize), where the irrigation effi- Acknowledgements
ciency is 80% according to [19], he reported the values for the irri-
gation efficiency of 75% and 90% for sprinkler and drip irrigation, The authors are grateful for the technical and logistical support
respectively. Fig. 12 shows the assessment of the income optimiza- provided by the Sector of Water Resources, Irrigation and Infras-
tion for all crop pattern scenarios. The results showed the total tructures, North Sinai, Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation
income for the first crop pattern scenario (current status free crop (MWRI), Egypt, and the Egyptian Channel Maintenance Research
pattern) was 5.852 Billion LE. The best crop pattern which gave the Institute (CMRI), National, (MWRI).
maximum total income (8.005 Billion LE) was the second scenario
(Greenbeans and Sugarbeet). Whereas, the worst crop pattern that References
had the minimum total income (3.345 Billion LE) was the third sce-
nario (Berseem clover and Cotton). The total income of the fourth [1] Abdelmeguid M. Key features of the Egypt’s water and agricultural resources.
crop pattern scenario (Wheat and Maize) as strategic crops was In: Abdelazim N, Editor. Conventional water resources and agriculture in
Egypt, Hdb Env Chem, vol. 74, 2019. p.39–97. Springer International
5.362 Billion LE. Finally, the total income for the fifth crop pattern Publishing.
scenario based on improving the irrigation efficiencies for the cur- [2] Adarsh S, Sulaiman Sanah KK, Murshida PN. Scale dependent prediction of
rent crop pattern from 40% to 60% in AER1 and from 60% to 80% in reference evapotranspiration based on Multi-Variate Empirical mode
decomposition. Ain Shams Eng J 2018(9):1839–48.
AER2 was 7.539 Billion LE.
[3] Allard W, Hendrik B, Davide F, Sander J, Rob K, Iwan S, et al. 25 Years of the
WOFOST cropping systems model. Agric Syst 2019;168:154–67.
[4] Allen R, Pereira L, Raes D, Smith M. Crop evapotranspiration guidelines for
4. Conclusions computing crop water requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56.
FAO, Rome; 1998.
[5] Ayushi T, Pyasi S, Galkate R. Estimation of evapotranspiration using CROPWAT
Under Egypt water scarcity conditions, an attempt has been 8.0 Model for Shipra River basin in Madhya Pradesh, India. Int J Curr Microbial
made to assess the irrigation management practices in agro- App Sci 2018(7):1248–59.
ecological regions; Tina Plain (AER1; clay soil) and East South El- [6] CAPMAS. [in Arabic]; 2020. [Internet Website]. http://www.campas.gov.eg/.
[7] Channel Maintenance Research Institute (CMRI), Assessing of the irrigation
Kantara (AER2; sandy soil), north Sinai. The Net irrigation water
and drainage network maintenance for North Sinai Development Project
requirements (NIWR), gross irrigation water requirement (GIWR), (Report No. 8, El-Kanater El- Khairia, Egypt, DC: National Water Research
and irrigation interval for the various crops for the eight major Center, Ministry of water Resources and Irrigation (MWRI); 2011. [in Arabic].
crops; Berseem clover, Barley, Greenbeans, Wheat, Tomatoes, Cot- [8] Drainage Research Institute (DRI) Study of drainage problems in the East,
South EL-Kantara region for North Sinai Development Project. Report No. 6. El-
ton, Sugabeet, and Maize cultivated in AER1 and AER2 were com- Kanater El- Khairia, Egypt, DC: National Water Research Center Ministry of
puted using FAO-CROPWAT 8 model and the meteorological water Resources and Irrigation (MWRI); 2011. [in Arabic].

13
Mohamed Elsayed Gabr and Ehab Mostafa Fattouh Ain Shams Engineering Journal xxx (xxxx) xxx

[9] FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), CROPWAT software; 2020. http:// [30] Aziz Sherien Abdel, náková Martina Zele, Mésároš Peter, Purcz Pavol, Abd-
www.fao.org/land-water/databases-and-software/cropwat/en/. Elhamid Hany. Assessing the potential impacts of the grand Ethiopian
[10] FAO. Handbook on climate information for farming communities–What Renaissance Dam on water resources and soil salinity in the Nile Delta,
farmers need and what is available. Rome. Italy; 2019. Egypt. Sustainability 2019;11:7050.
[11] Gabr M. Drainage management problems evaluation: case study Baloza and [31] Tellioglu K. Agricultural policies, trade and sustainable development in
EL-Farama Drains, North Sinai, Egypt. J Water Resour Protect 2019;11:675–89. Egypt. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development
[12] Gabr M, EL-Zahar M. Study of the quality of irrigation water in South-East El- (ICTSD) and Rome: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO);
Kantara canal, North Sinai, Egypt. Int J Environ Sci Develop 2018;9:142–6. 2017.
[13] Gabr M. Evaluation of irrigation water, drainage water, soil salinity, and [32] El-Nashar Walaa Y, Elyamany Ahmed H. Managing risks of the Grand Ethiopian
groundwater for sustainable cultivation. J Irrigat Drain Syst Eng 2018(7). Renaissance Dam on Egypt. Ain Shams Eng J 2018;9:2383–8.
[14] Gabr M. Magnitude and characteristics of sand dunes encroachment towards [33] Yan L, Kaiyu G, Gary D, Evan D, Bin P. Excessive rainfall leads to maize yield
El-Sheikh Gaber channel, North Sinai. Int Water Technol J 2018;9:77–8. loss of a comparable magnitude to extreme drought in the United States. Glob
[15] Gabr M. Study of lowlands drainage problems, case study Kamal El-Den Change Biol 2019;25:2325–37.
Hessen reclaimed area, North Sinai, Egypt. J Water Resour Protect
2018;10:857–69.
[16] Halimi A, Ashebir HT. Application of CROPWAT model for estimation of
irrigation scheduling of Tomato in changing climate of Eastern Europe: the Mohamed Elsayed Gabr is an assistant professor at the
case study of Godollo, Hungary. Int J Agric Environ Sci 2019;6:1–11. Civil Engineering Department, Higher Institute for
[17] Hamdy S, Dawn T. Grains production prospects and long run food security in Engineering and Technology, New Damietta, Ministry of
Egypt. Sustainability 2019;11(16):4457. Higher Education, Egypt. He awarded his PhD in 2003 in
[18] Hosni H, El-gafy IK, Ibrahim AH, Abowarda AS. Maximizing the economic value Civil Engineering (irrigation and hydraulics) from Fac-
of irrigation water and achieving self-sufficiency of main crops. Ain Shams Eng ulty of Engineering, Suez Canal University, Egypt. He
J 2014;5:1005–17. published many researches in the field of irrigation
[19] Howell TA. Irrigation efficiency. In: Encyclopedia of water science. New water quality, wetlands, hydrology, irrigation and drai-
York: Marcel Dekker; 2003. p. 467–72. nage networks, and water resources management. In
[20] Mahmoud MA, Ouda S, El-Hafez S. High water-consuming crops under control: addition, during 1994 to 2015, he supervised on the
case of rice crop. In: Major crops and water scarcity in Egypt. SpringerBriefs in construction of the irrigation and drainage networks
Water Science and Technology; 2016. Springer, Cham.
and their related hydraulic structures in North Sinai
[21] Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation (MWRI), Water for future-national
Development Project to reclaim and cultivate of 168 thousand hectares which was
water plan for Egypt-2017. Planning Sector, MWRI, Arab Republic of Egypt;
implemented by the Egyptian Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation.
2005.
[22] Mohie E, Ahmed M. Water management in Egypt for facing the future
challenges. J Adv Res 2016;7:403–12.
[23] Molle F. Egypt. In: Molle F, Sanchis-Ibor C, Avellà-Reus L, Eds. Irrigation in the Ehab Mostafa Fattouh is an Associated Professor at the
mediterranean. Global issues in water policy 2019;22. Springer, Cham; 2019. Irrigation and Hydraulics Department, Faculty of Engi-
[24] Noreldin T, Ouda S, Taha A. Combating adverse consequences of climate neering, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. He pub-
change on maize crop. In: Major crops and water scarcity in Egypt. lished many researches in the fields of hydraulics,
SpringerBriefs in Water Science and Technology. Springer, Cham.; 2016b. hydrology, Irrigation, and water resources investiga-
[25] Noreldin T, Ouda S, Amer A. Agro-climatic zoning in Egypt to improve tions. In addition, he is teaching undergraduate and
irrigation water management. J Water Land Develop 2016;31:113–7. postgraduate students and supervised many Master and
[26] Ouda S., El-Latif K.A., Khalil F., Water Requirements for Major Crops. In: Major Doctoral thesis in the irrigation, hydraulics, and
Crops and Water Scarcity in Egypt. SpringerBriefs in Water Science and hydrology in Ain Shams University.
Technology 2016. Springer, Cham.
[27] Penman HL. Evaporation. An introductory survey. Neth J Agric Sci
1956;4:9–29.
[28] Sallam GAH, Nasralla MR, Ragab MA. Water use efficiency for leaching saline-
sodic clayey soils: case study of El-Tina Plain area of Egypt, In: Developments
in soil salinity assessment and reclamation; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-94-007-5684-7_6.
[29] Sara O, Mohamed E, Rawya M. Optimization of the cropping pattern in Egypt.
Alexandria Eng J 2017;56:557–66.

14