Effects of rice and wheat straw ditch-buried returning on soil physical properties of wheat field

Junsong, 吴俊松 Wu; Jian, 刘建 Liu; Xiaofei, 刘晓菲 Liu; Haishui, 杨海水 Yang; Xiaohua, 王小华 Wang; Mingmin, 许明敏 Xu; Yafeng, 魏亚凤 Wei; Xinmin, 卞新民 Bian

doi:10.5846/stxb201409071766

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, maize straw return increased the number and diversity of soil microorganisms, which could affect the living environment of pathogens and pests in soil [51]. However, when the straw is returned to the field excessively or in an unstandardized way, some dangers inhibit crop emergence and reduce crop yield due to increased pests and disease infestation [52]. Rotary tillers are mostly used to plough topsoil in the northeast plain area, and the tillage depth is generally less than 15 cm.…”

Section: Standardization Of Direct Straw-return Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Available Straw Nutrient Resources and Substitution of Chemical Fertilizers with Straw Returned Directly to the Field in China

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Returning straw to the field is the most significant straw utilization technique for China’s green development. It can provide nutrients for crop growth and improve soil organic matter content. However, there are no standard parameters for measuring the nutrient content of straw directly returned to the field. In addition, the nutrient content of straw in the field is disregarded and the least researched. Therefore, to address these issues, the current research examines the main nutrient composition of straw returned directly to fields and the potential substitution of straw for chemical fertilizers. This study used the latest data on the crop straw-to-grain ratio and straw’s direct return to the field from the Database of Agricultural Crops Straws Resources in China (DACSRC) as the basis for a detailed estimation of the amount of crop straw nutrient resources and straw’s direct return to the field. The straw nutrient resources were measured based on straw yield and the nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P2O5), and potassium (K2O) contents. The results reveal that the maximum amount of straw returned directly to the fields in China was 517 teragram (Tg), while 128 Tg (25%) of the total was not collected but left on the field. The North China region had an enormous amount of direct straw return at 176 Tg (34%), while South China had the least amount at 26 Tg (5%). The amounts of seasonally available N, P2O5, and K2O from straw directly returned to fields are 2 Tg, 1 Tg, and 7 Tg, respectively. In addition, the amount of available straw nutrient resources returned to the field per hectare (ha) was 78 kg. The quantity of straw-originating seasonally available nutrients corresponds to 23% of the chemical fertilizers applied, which can substitute 10% N, 9% P2O5, and 58% K2O. The study provides critical insights on effective ways to improve straw fertilization through an increased rate of straw returned directly to fields and releasing seasonal nutrients.

show abstract

Section: Standardization Of Direct Straw-return Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Available Straw Nutrient Resources and Substitution of Chemical Fertilizers with Straw Returned Directly to the Field in China

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Deep‐injection of straw increased SOC, DOC, and MBC in subsoil (Figure 2c,f,i). There are three possible explanations for this: (i) abounding straw residues in DI‐SI replenished various C pool and the high hydrolase (BG, BX, CE) and oxidase (PHO, PEO) activity in subsoil (Figure 5) promoted the conversion of straw into soil organic matter; (ii) the subsoil had lower soil temperature than topsoil, which promotes microbial anabolism (SOC and MBC accumulation) rather than ineffective metabolism such as overflow respiration (Wen et al, 2019); and (iii) subsoil disturbance directly improved the ventilation and permeability, promoting the accumulation of SOC (Wu et al, 2016). Furthermore, deep‐injection of straw increased both MBC and MBN (Figure 2i,k) which could counteract soil nutrient losses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The bacterial communities of the different modules showed various relationships with soil properties (Figure 7). Bacterial taxa of the C-& than ineffective metabolism such as overflow respiration (Wen et al, 2019); and (iii) subsoil disturbance directly improved the ventilation and permeability, promoting the accumulation of SOC (Wu et al, 2016). Furthermore, deep-injection of straw increased both MBC and MBN (Figure 2i,k) which could counteract soil nutrient losses.…”

Section: The Relationship Between Soil Properties With Bacterial Comm...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The incorporation of straw into the subsoil increases C, N, and P enzyme activities and nutrient supply by enriching distinctive functional microorganisms

Zhao

Ling

et al. 2022

Land Degrad Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incorporation of crop residues into agricultural soils is a common practice that can improve soil quality. However, the impact of different straw incorporation techniques on soil bacteria and their functions is still not well understood, especially across soil depths. Here, we investigated the impact of three maize straw management methods (straw removal, straw incorporation into topsoil, and deep‐injected straw incorporation into subsoil) on soil bacterial communities and how they were linked to extracellular enzymes and soil properties. Deep‐injected straw incorporation strongly promoted enzyme activities: C‐cycling enzymes increased by 111–532 nmol g−1 hr−1, N‐cycling enzymes by 229–708 nmol g−1 hr−1, and P‐cycling enzymes by 142–216 nmol g−1 hr−1 compared to straw removal and straw incorporation into topsoil. In addition, deep‐injected straw incorporation considerably increased soil organic carbon (SOC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and total nitrogen (TN) compared to the other straw management methods (249–253% for SOC, 303–370% for DOC, and 178–196% for TN). However, in topsoil, only minimal effects of straw management practices on bacterial communities, enzymes activities, and soil properties were found. Deep‐injected straw incorporation favoured copiotrophic bacteria which resulted in a reduction of 41% in Shannon index. Bacteria associated with carbon and nitrogen cycling were mainly Actinobacteria, which were positively correlated with TN, SOC, and DOC. Acidobacteria were the dominant species in P‐cycling module and were positively associated with SOC, DOC, and available phosphorus. Overall, injection of straw into subsoil alters bacterial communities and functioning, and increases soil nutrients and soil organic C in subsoil.

show abstract

“…The negative aspects of mulching the soil with straw include the possibility to increase pests and diseases infestation in main crops [25,33,34]. Shao et al [32] stated that incorrect direct straw-returning practices may have negative effects for crop health and the number of pests and may also reduce the crop germination rate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced Tillage, Application of Straw and Effective Microorganisms as Factors of Sustainable Agrotechnology in Winter Wheat Monoculture

Kotwica,

Gałęzewski,

Wilczewski

et al. 2024

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aspect of the sustainable development of agrocenoses, the proper management of plant residues remaining after harvesting, the appropriate selection of tillage and maintaining high microbiological activity of soil are particularly important. Therefore, a four-year two-factor experiment with winter wheat monoculture was conducted. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of 18 cultivation technologies variants on weed infestation and yield structure of winter wheat grown in a 4-year monoculture. Six methods of tillage and management of residues after harvesting forecrops (first factor) and the use of microbiological preparations (second factor) were tested. The experiment showed that simplified tillage (elimination of plowing) had an adverse effect on the weed infestation of the field and most of the tested plant characteristics, including the yield. In terms of yield, the best solution was to leave the forecrop straw mulch on the field surface until plowing was carried out before sowing, regardless of the use of microbiological preparations. The application of preparations containing effective microorganisms brought beneficial effects only when the shredded straw of the forecrop was mixed with the soil using a grubber.

show abstract

Effects of rice and wheat straw ditch-buried returning on soil physical properties of wheat field

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Analysis of the Available Straw Nutrient Resources and Substitution of Chemical Fertilizers with Straw Returned Directly to the Field in China

Analysis of the Available Straw Nutrient Resources and Substitution of Chemical Fertilizers with Straw Returned Directly to the Field in China

The incorporation of straw into the subsoil increases C, N, and P enzyme activities and nutrient supply by enriching distinctive functional microorganisms

Reduced Tillage, Application of Straw and Effective Microorganisms as Factors of Sustainable Agrotechnology in Winter Wheat Monoculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About