Plastic-film mulching and urea types affect soil CO2 emissions and grain yield in spring maize on the Loess Plateau, China

Liu, Qiaofei; Chen, Yu; Li, Weiwei; Liu, Yang; Han, Jie; Wen, Xiaoxia; Liao, Yuncheng

doi:10.1038/srep28150

Cited by 27 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the biochar amendment impact on CF reported by Liu et al. (2016) is opposite to the impact of gravel mulching in our study. This is mainly due to the fact that CO 2 net exchange was not included in the CF equation in their calculation.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…However, studies on the CF are very limited, and studies on the mulched conditions throughout the wheat–maize cropping system are more scarce. Many studies have merely looked at the effect of agricultural inputs on C balance in agroecosystems without considering the effects of soil CO 2 emissions, net ecosystem exchange, or soil CH 4 and N 2 O emissions (Liu et al., 2016). Results from our study show that the application of gravel mulching plays a positive role in decreasing the CF, stemming from significant soil C sequestration and nonenhanced soil N 2 O and CH 4 emissions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Soils planted with crops emit GHGs throughout their production cycle, and the intensity of these emissions can be estimated by the GWP and the mean C footprint (CF) (Hwang et al., 2017). Many studies have calculated the net exchange of the CO 2 equivalents of CH 4 and N 2 O as a modified net GWP (Dhadli, Brar, & Black, 2016; Dubey & Lal., 2009; Liu et al., 2016). The CO 2 ‐C equivalent (CO 2 ‐C e ) emissions of crop production can be evaluated by estimating the GWP per ton of crop yield, referred to as the GHG intensity (GHGI).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint under gravel mulching on China's Loess Plateau

Wang

Zhang

et al. 2020

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gravel mulching technology has been widely verified as an effective solution to reduce evaporation and improve crop production on China's Loess Plateau, but its impacts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have not been well documented. This study examined the quantification of the overall GHG emissions via estimating global warming potential (GWP), GHG intensity (GHGI), C footprint (CF), and C intensity (CI) with varying experimental treatments. A 2-yr consecutive wheat-maize rotation field experiment was conducted through monitoring GHG emissions using a closedchamber method with four treatments: CK (control with no mulching), WCK (CK plus 50 mm irrigation), GM (CK plus gravel mulching), and WGM (WCK plus GM).Compared with the CK, gravel mulching significantly decreased soil CO 2 emissions and increased soil CH 4 uptake over both cycles, although patterns of soil N 2 O emissions were controversial. Mixed effects of gravel mulching and irrigation significantly minimized the GWP over both cycles. Compared with the CK, annual GHGI in the WCK, GM, and WGM treatments dramatically decreased by 35.1, 53.7, and 55.9%, respectively, over Cycle 1 and by 16.7, 19.6, and 37.2%, respectively, over Cycle 2. The average CFs in the WCK, GM, and WGM treatments over both cycles were 4.4, 35.0, and 58.7% lower than in the CK, respectively. Gravel mulching had no significant effect on the CI during Cycle 1 but did have a significant effect during Cycle 2. Thus, gravel mulching is a recommended practice to mitigate GHG emissions and enhance the crop productivity on the Loess Plateau of China.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint under gravel mulching on China's Loess Plateau

Wang

Zhang

et al. 2020

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Agricultural film, as one of ways for soil surface modification, has a great effect on promoting plant growth and increasing yield by changing the processes of the energy and water balance components of crop growth system1939. Agricultural film has been widely used in northern China for many years and it contributes to increase topsoil temperature for early growth, maintain soil water content, and promote grain yield and water productivity4041. Nutrient limitation affects yield potential obviously, and fertilization will improve soil nutrient and the improved soil nutrient status certainly increases water productivity42.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Irrigation water productivity is more influenced by agronomic practice factors than by climatic factors in Hexi Corridor, Northwest China

Zhang

Niu

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantifying the influence of driving factors on irrigation water productivity (IWP) is vital for efficient agricultural water use. This study analyzed contributions of agronomic practice and climatic factors to the changes of IWP, based on the data from 1981 to 2012 in Hexi Corridor, Northwest China. Cobb-Douglas production functions were developed by the partial least squares method and contribution rates of the driving factors were calculated. Results showed that IWP and its driving factors increased during the study period, with different changing patterns. IWP was significantly correlated with the agronomic practice factors, daily mean temperature and solar radiation of the crop growing period. The agronomic practice factors including irrigation, fertilization, agricultural film, and agricultural pesticide contributed 20.6%, 32.8%, 42.3% and 11.1% respectively to the increase of IWP; and the contribution rates of the climatic factors, i.e. daily mean temperature and solar radiation, are −0.9% and 0.9%. And the contributions of these factors changed in different sub-periods. It is concluded that agronomic practice factors influenced IWP much more than climatic factors. The improvement of IWP should rely on advanced water-saving technology and application of optimum (need-based) fertilizer, agricultural film and pesticide, ensuring efficient use of agronomic inputs in the study area.

show abstract

“…Soil water dynamics in fields with plastic mulching has received wide attention (Fisher, 1995;Wu et al, 2017;Ren et al, 2017;Dong et al, 2009;Zhao et al, 2012), since not only crop performance, but also environmental processes such as nitrate leaching and the emission of greenhouse gasses depend heavily on soil moisture dynamics (Qin et al, 2015;Filipovic et al, 2016;Liu et al, 2016). Measurement methods such as gravimetric soil water determination on soil samples and time domain reflectometry, and simulations have been used to obtain information on soil water dynamics and distribution (Wu et al, 2017;Ren et al, 2017;Filipovic et al, 2016;Li et al, 2015;Liu et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling soil water dynamic in rain-fed spring maize field with plastic mulching

Chen

Liu

Mei

et al. 2018

Agricultural Water Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tNumerical solution of the Richards equation with Hydrus-2D model is a low cost and fast way to get information on spatio-temporal soil water dynamics. Previous researches with Hydrus-2D have developed two different approaches to represent the rainfall infiltration in irrigated field with plastic mulching: 'BP' -an approach comprised by bare strip boundary and plastic strip boundary without consideration of film side infiltration;'BP + '-an approach comprised by bare strip and plastic strip with integrating the process of film side infiltration by increasing the rainfall infiltration amount in bare strip. Nevertheless, the performance of these approaches has not yet been evaluated in rain-fed fields. Considering much more dominant role of rainfall infiltration in rain-fed agriculture, we tested an additional approach which comprised a bare strip, plastic strip and planting hole (BPH) to take into account the effect of the rainfall canopy redistribution and film side infiltration, and we compared its performance to the two existing approaches. Results suggested BP completely failed to reproduce the soil water content (SWC) in all soil layers of plastic strip and in the deep soil layers of bare strip. BP+ overestimated the SWC in 0-20 cm of the bare strip, while the performance of BPH was acceptable in different positions. After that, we compared the soil water distribution between no-mulched field (NM) and plastic mulched field (PM) with approach BPH. Our simulation showed that the highest SWC in PM occurred near the planting hole, SWC in the center zone of plastic strip was lower, while SWC in the bare strip was lowest. PM improves the soil water availability not only in the plastic strip but also in the bare strip as compared to NM.

show abstract

Plastic-film mulching and urea types affect soil CO2 emissions and grain yield in spring maize on the Loess Plateau, China

Cited by 27 publications

References 36 publications

Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint under gravel mulching on China's Loess Plateau

Greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint under gravel mulching on China's Loess Plateau

Irrigation water productivity is more influenced by agronomic practice factors than by climatic factors in Hexi Corridor, Northwest China

Modelling soil water dynamic in rain-fed spring maize field with plastic mulching

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About