This study evaluated the agronomic performance and water productivity of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd. cv. INIA 433) under three irrigation regimes in the central highlands of Peru: optimal irrigation (Ks = 1.00), moderate deficit (Ks = 0.66), and severe deficit (Ks = 0.49). The experiment combined constant water table lysimeters and field plots, integrating crop coefficient estimation, water balance analysis, and multispectral monitoring (NDVI, NDRE, SRWI) using UAV imagery and ground spectroradiometry. Moderate water stress (Ks = 0.66) significantly improved reproductive performance, producing approximately 8,000 grains per plant compared with ~3,900 grains per plant under optimal irrigation. Grain protein content increased from 4.8% to 6.0%, while evapotranspiration decreased by 37% (from 374.5 to 234.4 mm), markedly improving water use efficiency. In contrast, optimal irrigation promoted maximum vegetative growth (plant height ~110 cm; NDVI 0.7–0.8) but lower reproductive output, whereas severe stress (Ks = 0.49) reduced yield to 4,400 grains per plant and accelerated senescence. Multispectral indices effectively distinguished water stress levels: NDVI reflected canopy vigor, NDRE detected chlorophyll variation, and SRWI captured plant water status. The results demonstrate that regulated deficit irrigation enhances water productivity and grain quality in quinoa. Maintaining Ks values around 0.65–0.70 appears to optimize yield and resource use efficiency in water-limited Andean agroecosystems.
Moderate deficit irrigation improves agronomic performance of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) compared to full irrigation in the central highlands of Peru
Authors
- Esthefany Gavino Estación Experimental Agraria Santa Ana, Dirección De Servicios Estratégicos Agrarios, Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agraria (INIA), Carretera Saños Grande – Hualahoyo Km 8 Santa Ana, Huancayo, Junín 12006, Peru.
- Dennis Ccopi Estación Experimental Agraria Santa Ana, Dirección De Servicios Estratégicos Agrarios, Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agraria (INIA), Carretera Saños Grande – Hualahoyo Km 8 Santa Ana, Huancayo, Junín 12006, Peru.
- Edilson Requena-Rojas Estación Experimental Agraria Santa Ana, Dirección De Servicios Estratégicos Agrarios, Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agraria (INIA), Carretera Saños Grande – Hualahoyo Km 8 Santa Ana, Huancayo, Junín 12006, Peru.
- Jose Contreras Laboratorio de nutrición animal y evaluation de alimentos (LUNEA), Escuela Profesional de Zootecnia, Universidad Nacional de Huancavelica, Huancavelica 09001, Perú.
- Richard Solórzano-Acosta Dirección De Servicios Estratégicos Agrarios, Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agraria (INIA), Av. La Molina N° 1981, Lima, 15024, and Facultad de Ciencias Ambientales, Universidad Científica del Sur (UCSUR), Lima 15024, Peru.
- S. D. Betega Servicio Nacional de Meteorología e Hidrología del Perú (SENAMHI), Dirección Zonal 11 – Junín, Jirón Tres de Marzo s/n, cuadra 3, Concepción, Junín, Perú.
- Raúl M. Yaranga Andean Ecosystem Research Group, Facultad de Zootecnia, Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Av. Mariscal Castilla 3089, Huancayo, Junin 12002, Peru.
- Samuel Pizarro Estación Experimental Agraria Santa Ana, Dirección De Servicios Estratégicos Agrarios, Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agraria (INIA), Carretera Saños Grande – Hualahoyo Km 8 Santa Ana, Huancayo, Junín 12006, Peru.

