Subsurface drainage in the Upper Midwest is of importance to agricultural production. However, proper
management of these systems through in-field management, drainage management, or edge of field practices is needed to
limit negative environmental impacts particularly from nitrate-nitrogen leaching losses. One management practice being
considered is drainage management where the outflow of subsurface drainage is managed to conserve water and
decrease the overall outflow of subsurface drainage. To understand how and when drainage management may be utilized
in the upper Midwest it is important to review long-term drainage data to understand the timing, duration, and volumes of
subsurface drainage in these climates. An on-going drainage study from north-central Iowa allows for reviewing fifteen
years of subsurface drainage which encompasses a range of climatic conditions. This information has been reviewed with
the objective of understanding the timing, duration, and drainage volumes considering temporal drainage flow patterns. In
particular, the monthly and seasonal flow patterns have been investigated using this long-term drainage record. On this
site with a relatively narrow drain spacing of 7.6 m, drainage volume was approximately 40% of the precipitation. The time
period from April through June had approximately 50% of the average annual precipitation and approximately 70% of the
average annual drainage. In addition, the percent of annual drainage occurring after August 1 was only approximately 7%.
The timing of subsurface flow in these areas specifically during the spring coincides with time of planting, crop germination,
and early crop development has implications when considering drainage management practices and the effectiveness of
these practices to limit flow and therefore nitrate-nitrogen leaching losses. To minimize outflow of drainage water, these
drainage management systems would need to allow for adequate flexibility to ensure crop production while effectively
managing subsurface drainage flow to potentially minimize the outflow of water.
[1]
R. Evans,et al.
Effects of Agricultural Water Table Management on Drainage Water Quality
,
1989
.
[2]
R. Wayne Skaggs,et al.
Controlled versus Conventional Drainage Effects on Water Quality
,
1995
.
[3]
T. J. Logan,et al.
Nutrient content of tile drainage from cropland in the North Central Region.
,
1980
.
[4]
Thomas S. Colvin,et al.
Ridge, Moldboard, Chisel, and No‐Till Effects on Tile Water Quality beneath Two Cropping Systems
,
1997
.
[5]
R. W. Skaggs,et al.
Drainage Control to Diminish Nitrate Loss from Agricultural Fields 1
,
1979
.
[6]
R. W. Skaggs,et al.
A water management model for shallow water table soils
,
1978
.
[7]
Effect of Tile Depth on Nitrate Transport from Tile Drainage Systems
,
2002
.
[8]
R. H. Fox,et al.
Corn–Soybean Rotation Effects on Nitrate Leaching
,
2003
.
[9]
Richard A C Cooke,et al.
Illinois drainage water management demonstration project
,
2004
.
[10]
R. Kanwar,et al.
Nitrate and Water Present in and Flowing from Root‐Zone Soil
,
1996
.
[11]
N. Fausey.
Comparison of Free Drainage, Controlled Drainage, and Subirrigation Water Management Practices in an Ohio Lakebed Soil
,
2004
.
[12]
W. W. Nelson,et al.
Nitrate losses through subsurface tile drainage in Conservation Reserve Program, alfalfa, and row crop systems
,
1997
.
[13]
R. W. Skaggs,et al.
Effects of subsurface drain depth on nitrogen losses from drained lands
,
2003
.
[14]
Quay Dortch,et al.
Nutrient changes in the Mississippi River and system responses on the adjacent continental shelf
,
1996
.