基于能量效率与碳效率的长江中游不同水旱轮作系统可持续性分析

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.32052

Abstract

Abstract:

Upland-paddy rotations play a vital role in the middle Yangtze River region of China. It is crucial to rationally evaluate the environmental and economic benefits of different crop rotation patterns for sustainable crop production. This study investigated three upland-paddy rotations: maize-rice (MR), rapeseed-rice (RR), and wheat-rice (WR), to assess crop yields, energy efficiency, and carbon efficiency under two treatments: straw return (S+) and straw clearance (S-). The results revealed that the MR rotation had a significant increase in yield, with 22.25% and 14.81% higher yields compared to RR and WR, respectively. Incorporating straw return led to a significant improvement in crop yield for MR, RR, and WR, with increases of 7.12%, 6.54%, and 6.43%, respectively. Furthermore, the MR pattern exhibited significantly higher radiation energy utilization efficiency (RUE) and output/input ratio (O/I) compared to RR and WR, with significantly lower energy consumption intensity (EI). Straw return improved RUE for MR and WR, increased EI for RR and WR, and decreased O/I across all patterns. Additionally, carbon production efficiency and carbon ecological efficiency were significantly higher for MR compared to RR and WR. Straw return significantly improved efficiencies in all patterns. Moreover, the carbon footprint (CF) of MR was significantly lower than that of RR and WR, and straw return also reduced CF significantly in all patterns. Overall, the study results demonstrate that the MR rotation has higher crop yield, energy efficiency, carbon efficiency, and lower CF. Additionally, straw return can increase crop yield, improve energy efficiency and carbon efficiency, and reduce CF in all patterns. In conclusion, the maize-rice rotation with straw return can be considered a sustainable and beneficial technique for rice production in the middle Yangtze River region.

Key words: upland-paddy rotation, straw return, energy efficiency, carbon efficiency, carbon footprint

YANG Bo-Wen, LIANG Xiu-Ren, QIN Ming-Guang, CAO Ying-Jian, XIONG Hang, ZHAN Ming. Sustainability analysis of different upland-paddy rotation systems in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River based on energy efficiency and carbon efficiency[J].Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(11): 2801-2817.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig. 1

Table S1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Grain yield and crop fixed energy values under different upland crop-rice rotation systems"

轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	产量Grain yield (t hm^-2)			作物固定能值Values of crop fixed energy (GJ hm^-2)
轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	旱作物 Upland crops	水稻 Rice	周年 Annual	旱作物 Upland crops	水稻 Rice	周年 Annual
2019
MR	S-	8.86±0.44 b	6.95±0.38 f	15.81±0.82 cd	233.26±17.81 a	144.30±11.71 e	377.57±18.44 bc
MR	S+	8.79±0.12 b	8.08±0.55 e	16.87±0.59 ab	225.46±13.11 a	165.93±0.70 d	391.39±13.60 ab
RR	S-	2.74±0 f	9.54±0.44 bc	12.28±0.44 j	115.63±19.80 d	195.15±9.77 b	310.78±18.60 fg
RR	S+	2.69±0.24 f	10.52±0.47 a	13.22±0.24 i	121.21±23.77 d	202.17±7.40 ab	323.39±23.14 ef
WR	S-	4.81±0.26 cd	8.84±0.18 d	13.65±0.20 hi	116.22±4.88 d	175.82±5.06 cd	292.05±0.20 g
WR	S+	4.78±0.32 cd	9.84±0.32 b	14.62±0.64 efg	116.61±1.78 d	199.86±1.42 ab	316.47±2.81 f
2020
MR	S-	8.65±0.37 b	7.59±0.08 e	16.24±0.31 bc	193.61±4.32 b	167.67±1.65 d	361.29±4.70 cd
MR	S+	9.50±0.10 a	7.95±0.06 e	17.45±0.16 a	219.37±2.33 a	180.08±1.84 c	399.45±3.61 a
RR	S-	4.48±0.22 de	9.52±0.36 bc	14.00±0.56 gh	148.86±8.67 c	195.57±4.17 b	344.43±12.77 de
RR	S+	4.25±0.44 e	10.52±0.41 a	14.77±0.72 ef	145.25±13.01 c	208.36±3.80 a	353.61±10.54 d
WR	S-	5.16±0.36 c	9.20±0.32 cd	14.36±0.58 fg	118.64±7.78 d	175.98±5.38 cd	294.61±13.16 g
WR	S+	4.71±0.15 cde	10.47±0.14 a	15.17±0.17 de	111.48±4.55 d	194.58±5.84 b	306.06±1.93 fg
平均Mean
MR	S-	8.76±0.40 B	7.27±0.23 E	16.02±0.56 B	213.44±11.06 A	155.99±6.68 D	369.43±11.57 B
MR	S+	9.14±0.11 A	8.02±0.30 D	17.16±0.38 A	222.42±7.72 A	173.00±1.27 C	395.42±8.60 A
RR	S-	3.61±0.11 D	9.53±0.40 B	13.14±0.31 E	132.25±14.24 B	195.36±6.97 B	327.61±15.68 C
RR	S+	3.47±0.34 D	10.52±0.44 A	14.00±0.31 D	133.23±18.39 B	205.27±5.60 A	338.50±16.84 C
WR	S-	4.99±0.31 C	9.02±0.25 C	14.00±0.20 D	117.43±6.33 C	175.90±5.22 C	293.33±6.68 E
WR	S+	4.74±0.24 C	10.15±0.23 A	14.90±0.40 C	114.05±3.16 C	197.22±3.63 B	311.26±2.37 D
方差分析ANOVA
年份Year (Y)		53.51^**	5.30^ns	54.10^**	0.13^ns	16.37^**	3.53^ns
轮作模式 Rotation pattern (R)		1242.10^**	188.68^**	204.24^**	236.93^**	168.59^**	121.14^**
秸秆处理 Straw management (S)		0^ns	80.59^**	58.48^**	0.29^ns	100.15^**	18.57^**
Y×R		27.69^**	1.87^ns	7.99^**	13.22^**	15.67^**	7.99^**
Y×S		0.35^ns	0.58^ns	0.05^ns	0.47^ns	0.85^ns	0.10^ns
R×S		4.42^*	1.13^ns	0.48^ns	0.78^ns	4.28^*	1.06^ns
Y×R×S		5.02^*	2.14^ns	0.17^ns	2.90^ns	1.96^ns	1.74^ns

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

References 60

[1]	李淑娅, 田少阳, 袁国印, 葛均筑, 徐莹, 王梦影, 曹凑贵, 翟中兵, 凌霄霞, 展茗, 赵明. 长江中游不同玉稻种植模式产量及资源利用效率的比较研究. 作物学报, 2015, 41: 1537-1547. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2015.01537
	Li S Y, Tian S Y, Yuan G Y, Ge J Z, Xu Y, Wang M Y, Cao C G, Zhai Z B, Ling X X, Zhan M, Zhao M. Comparison of yield and resource utilization efficiency among different maize and rice cropping systems in middle reaches of Yangtze River. Acta Agron Sin, 2015, 41: 1537-1547 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[2]	王良, 刘元元, 钱欣, 张慧, 代红翠, 刘开昌, 高英波, 方志军, 刘树堂, 李宗新. 单季麦秸还田促进小麦-玉米周年碳效率和经济效益协同提高. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55: 350-364. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.02.010
	Wang L, Liu Y Y, Qian X, Zhang H, Dai H C, Liu K C, Gao Y B, Fang Z J, Liu S T, Li Z X. The single season wheat straw returning to promote the synergistic improvement of carbon efficiency and economic benefit in wheat-maize double cropping system. Sci Agric Sin, 2022, 55: 350-364 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[3]	陆宏芳, 蓝盛芳, 陈飞鹏, 彭少麟. 农业生态系统能量分析. 应用生态学报, 2004, 15: 159-162.
	Lu H F, Lan S F, Chen F P, Peng S L. Advances in energy analysis of agro-ecosystems. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2004, 15: 159-162 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[4]	刘巽浩, 徐文修, 李增嘉, 褚庆全, 杨晓琳, 陈阜. 农田生态系统碳足迹法:误区、改进与应用: 兼析中国集约农作碳效率(续). 中国农业资源与区划, 2014, 35(1): 1-7.
	Liu X H, Xu W X, Li Z J, Chu Q Q, Yang X L, Chen F. The missteps, improvement and application of carbon footprint methodology in farmland ecosystems with the case study of analysing the carbon efficiency of china's intelligent farming (continued). Chin J Agric Resour Region Plann, 2014, 35(1): 1-7 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[5]	史磊刚, 范士超, 孔凡磊, 陈阜. 华北平原主要作物生产的碳效率研究初报. 作物学报, 2011, 37: 1485-1490. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2011.01485
	Shi L G, Fan S C, Kong F L, Chen F. Preliminary study on the carbon efficiency of main crops production in North China Plain. Acta Agron Sin, 2011, 37: 1485-1490 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[6]	Yadav G S, Das A, Lal R, Babu S, Meena R S, Saha P, Singh R, Datta M. Energy budget and carbon footprint in a no-till and mulch based rice-mustard cropping system. J Clean Prod, 2018, 191: 144-157.
[7]	高旺盛, 陈源泉, 王小龙, 黄坚雄. 中国种植业碳中和技术路径探讨与对策建议. 农业现代化研究, 2022, 43: 941-947.
	Gao W S, Chen Y Q, Wang X L, Huang J X. Discussion of the technical path and the countermeasures on the carbon neutralization of crop planting sector in China. Res Agric Modern, 2022, 43: 941-947 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[8]	王小彬, 王燕, 代快, 武雪萍, 赵全胜, 张丁辰, 冯宗会, 蔡典雄. 旱地农田不同耕作系统的能量/碳平衡. 生态学报, 2011, 31: 4638-4652.
	Wang X B, Wang Y, Dai K, Wu X P, Zhao Q S, Zhang D C, Feng Z H, Cai D X. Coupled energy and carbon balance analysis under dryland tillage systems. Acta Ecol Sin, 2011, 31: 4638-4652 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[9]	Li C, Li S. Energy budget and carbon footprint in a wheat and maize system under ridge furrow strategy in dry semi humid areas. Sci Rep, 2021, 11: 9367. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-88717-3 pmid: 33931679
[10]	冯倩倩, 韩惠芳, 张亚运, 许菁, 曹亚倩, 王少博, 宁堂原, 李增嘉. 耕作方式对麦-玉轮作农田固碳、保水性能及产量的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24: 869-879.
	Feng Q Q, Han H F, Zhang Y Y, Xu J, Cao Y Q, Wang S B, Ning T Y, Li Z J. Effects of tillage methods on soil carbon sequestration and water holding capacity and yield in wheat-maize rotation. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2018, 24: 869-879 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[11]	赵雅雯, 王金洲, 王士超, 武红亮, 黄绍敏, 卢昌艾. 潮土区小麦、玉米残体对土壤有机碳的贡献——基于改进的RothC模型. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49: 4160-4168. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.21.010
	Zhao Y W, Wang J Z, Wang S C, Wu H L, Huang S M, Lu C A. Contributions of wheat and corn residues to soil organic carbon under fluvo-aquic soil area: based on the modified RothC Model. Sci Agric Sin, 2016, 49: 4160-4168 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[12]	严圣吉, 邓艾兴, 尚子吟, 唐志伟, 陈长青, 张俊, 张卫建. 我国作物生产碳排放特征及助力碳中和的减排固碳途径. 作物学报, 2022, 48: 930-941. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.12073
	Yan S J, Deng A X, Shang Z Y, Tang Z W, Chen C Q, Zhang J, Zhang W J. Characteristics of carbon emission and approaches of carbon mitigation and sequestration for carbon neutrality in China’s crop production. Acta Agron Sin, 2022, 48: 930-941 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[13]	Chen Z, Xu C, Ji L, Feng J, Li F, Zhou X, Fang F. Effects of multi-cropping system on temporal and spatial distribution of carbon and nitrogen footprint of major crops in China. Glob Ecol Conserv, 2020, 22: e00895.
[14]	Jiang Z, Lin J, Liu Y, Mo C, Yang J. Double paddy rice conversion to maize-paddy rice reduces carbon footprint and enhances net carbon sink. J Clean Prod, 2020, 258: 120643-120643.
[15]	Zhou Y, Liu K, Harrison M T, Fahad S, Gong S, Zhu B, Liu Z. Shifting Rice cropping systems mitigates ecological footprints and enhances grain yield in central China. Front Plant Sci, 2022, 13: 895402.
[16]	Sun X, Che Y, Xiao Y. Increased N fertilizer input enhances CH₄ and N₂O emissions from soil amended with low amount of milk vetch residues. Paddy Water Environ, 2019, 17: 597-604. doi: 10.1007/s10333-018-00689-9
[17]	Esengun K, Gündüz O, Erdal G. Input-output energy analysis in dry apricot production of Turkey. Energ Convers Manag, 2007, 48: 592-598.
[18]	Helsel Z R. Energy and alternatives for fertilizer and pesticide use. Energy World Agric, 1992, 6: 177-201.
[19]	Yaldiz O, Ozturk H H, Zeren Y, Bascetincelik A. Energy use in field crops of Turkey. International Congress of Agricultural Machinery and Energy; 12-14 October 1993, Kusadası-Turkey in Turkish.
[20]	Pathak B S, Bining A S. Energy use pattern and potential for energy saving in rice-wheat cultivation. Energy Agric, 1985, 4: 271-278.
[21]	Singh H, Mishra D, Nahar N M. Energy use pattern in production agriculture of a typical village in Arid Zone India: Part I. Energ Convers Manag, 2002, 43: 2275-2286.
[22]	Ozkan B, Kurklu A, Akcaoz H. An input-output energy analysis in greenhouse vegetable production: a case study for Antalya region of Turkey. Biomass Bioenerg, 2004, 26: 89-95.
[23]	Jankowski K J, Budzyński W S, Kijewski Ł. An analysis of energy efficiency in the production of oilseed crops of the family brassicaceae in poland. Energy, 2015, 81: 674-681.
[24]	Kimura M, Murase J, Lu Y. Carbon cycling in rice field ecosystems in the context of input, decomposition and translocation of organic materials and the fates of their end products (CO₂ and CH₄). Soil Biol Biochem, 2004, 36: 1399-1416.
[25]	刘晓伟, 鲁剑巍, 李小坤, 卜容燕, 刘波, 次旦. 直播冬油菜干物质积累及氮磷钾养分的吸收利用. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44: 4823-4832. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.23.008
	Liu X W, Lu J W, Li X K, Bu R Y, Liu B, Ci D. Dry matter accumulation and N, P, K absorption and utilization in direct seeding winter oilseed. Sci Agric Sin, 2011, 44: 4823-4832 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[26]	Gregory P. Roots, rhizosphere and soil: the route to a better understanding of soil science. Eur J Soil Sci, 2006, 57: 2-12.
[27]	CLCD. https://ghgprotocol.org/Third-Party-Databases/CLCD.
[28]	杨士弘. 城市绿化树木碳氧平衡效应研究. 城市环境与城市生态, 1996, 9(1): 37-39.
	Yang S H. Carbon and oxygen balance effects of urban greening trees. Urban Environ Urban Ecol, 1996, 9(1): 37-39 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[29]	Weiser C, Fuß R, Kage H, Flessa H. Do farmers in germany exploit the potential yield and nitrogen benefits from preceding oilseed rape in winter wheat cultivation. Arch Agron Soil Sci, 2018, 64: 25-37.
[30]	张顺涛, 鲁剑巍, 丛日环, 任涛, 李小坤, 廖世鹏, 张跃强, 郭世伟, 周明华, 黄益国, 程辉. 油菜轮作对后茬作物产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53: 2852-2858. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.14.009
	Zhang S T, Lu J W, Cong R H, Ren T, Li X K, Liao S P, Zhang Y Q, Guo S W, Zhou M H, Huang Y G, Cheng H. Effect of rapeseed rotation on the yield of next-stubble crops. Sci Agric Sin, 2020, 53: 2852-2858 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.14.009
[31]	岳骞, 吴思远, 张岳芳, 盛婧, 郭智, 陈丹艳, 汪超, 徐向瑞, 王鑫, 宗焦. 不同水旱轮作模式全生命周期温室效应及经济效益评价. 农业环境科学学报, 2022, 41: 1825-1835.
	Yue Q, Wu S Y, Zhang Y F, Sheng J, Guo Z, Chen D Y, Wang C, Xu X R, Wang X, Zong J. Life cycle assessment on greenhouse effects and economic benefits for different paddy rice-upland rotation systems. J Agro-Environ Sci, 2022, 41: 1825-1835 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[32]	王子芳, 高明, 秦建成, 慈恩. 稻田长期水旱轮作对土壤肥力的影响研究. 西南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2003, 25: 514-517.
	Wang Z F, Gao M, Qin J C, Ci E. Effect of long-term “paddy- land” rotation on soil fertility in paddy fields. J Southwest Agric Univ (Nat Sci), 2003, 25: 514-517 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[33]	Seong T Y, Young J K, In H J, Tae K H, Je B Y, Min H Y, Young S C, Hang W K. Growth and yield of pearl millet, sorghum, millet and rice in Yunnan. Korean Soc Crop Sci, 2015.
[34]	Timsina J, Jat M L, Majumdar K. Rice-maize systems of South Asia: current status, future prospects and research priorities for nutrient management. Plant Soil, 2010, 335: 65-82.
[35]	Timsina J, Kumar Singh V, Majumdar K. Potassium management in rice-maize systems in South Asia. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci, 2013, 176: 317-330.
[36]	李淑娅. 长江中游不同玉稻种植模式产量形成及资源利用效率比较研究. 华中农业大学硕士学位论文, 湖北武汉, 2015.
	Li S Y. Comparative Studies on Yield Formation and Resource Use Efficiency of Different Maize and Rice Cropping Systems in Middle Reaches of Yangtze River. MS Thesis of Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, Hubei, China, 2015 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[37]	Qin M, Wang Y, Zhan M, Sun M, Cao C, Liu T. Preceding crops changed greenhouse gases emission and carbon neutrality under maize-rice and double rice cropping systems. Arch Agron Soil Sci, 2023, 69: 1801-1816.
[38]	Qi G, Kang Y, Yin M, Ma Y, Bai Y, Wang J. Yield responses of wheat to crop residue returning in China: a meta-analysis. Crop Sci, 2019, 59: 2185-2200.
[39]	张丹, 付斌, 胡万里, 翟丽梅, 刘宏斌, 陈安强, 盖霞普, 张亦涛, 刘剑, 王洪媛. 秸秆还田提高水稻-油菜轮作土壤固氮能力及作物产量. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(9): 133-140.
	Zhang D, Fu B, Hu W L, Zhai L M, Liu H B, Chen A Q, Gai X P, Zhang Y T, Liu J, Wang H Y. Increasing soil nitrogen fixation capacity and crop yield of rice-rape rotation by straw returning. Trans CSAE, 2017, 33(9): 133-140 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[40]	Li Z, Shen Y, Zhang W, Zhang H, Liu L, Wang Z, Gu J, Yang J. Effects of long-term straw returning on rice yield and soil properties and bacterial community in a rice-wheat rotation system. Field Crops Res, 2023, 291: 108800.
[41]	Zhang M, Song D, Pu X, Dang P, Qin X, Siddique K H. Effect of different straw returning measures on resource use efficiency and spring maize yield under a plastic film mulch system. Eur J Agron, 2022, 134: 126461.
[42]	刘晖, 吴红艳, 冯建, 王智学, 胡琴琴, 于淼. 秸秆还田量对半干旱区褐土团聚体稳定性及有机碳组分的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2024, 52(1): 219-225.
	Liu H, Wu H Y, Feng J, Wang Z X, Hu Q Q, Yu M. Effects of straw return on the stability of brown soil aggregates and organic carbon fraction in semi-arid areas. Jiangsu Agric Sci, 2024, 52(1): 219-225 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[43]	程洪岐, 张金绵, 阎新珍, 张金琢, 李文中, 谢彪. 影响小麦全苗的因素分析及预防措施. 作物杂志, 2006, (6): 40-41.
	Cheng H Q, Zhang J M, Yan X Z, Zhang J Z, Li W W, Xie B. Analysis of factors affecting wheat seedling integrity and preventive measures. Crops, 2006, (6): 40-41 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[44]	潘越, 李思宇, 高捷, 沈炘垭, 刘立军. 秸秆及其还田方式对不同轮作模式下稻田土壤性质的影响. 作物杂志, 2024, (2): 1-8.
	Pan Y, Li S Y, Gao J, Shen X Y, Liu L J. Effects of straw and its returning methods on soil properties in paddy fields under different rotation patterns. Crops, 2024, (2): 1-8 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[45]	赵桂慎, 王一超, 唐晓伟, 李彩恋, 吴文良. 基于能值生态足迹法的集约化农田生态系统可持续性评价. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(18): 159-167.
	Zhao G S, Wang Y C, Tang X W, Li C L, Wu W L. Evaluation of sustainability for intensive farmland ecosystem based on energy ecological footprint. Trans CSAE, 2014, 30(18): 159-167 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[46]	徐宁, 黄国勤. 稻田复种轮作系统能流物流特征研究. 中国生态农业学报, 2014, 22: 1491-1497.
	Xu N, Huang G Q. Characteristics of energy: nutrient flow of multiple cropping rotation systems in paddy field. Chin J Eco- Agric, 2014, 22: 1491-1497 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[47]	蒋碧, 吴发启, 吴喜慧, 李明, 佟小刚. 关中平原农田生态系统不同秸秆还田模式的能流分析. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20: 1388-1393.
	Jiang B, Wu F Q, Wu X H, Li M, Tong X G. Energy flow analysis of straw-return agricultural modes in the Central Shaanxi Plain. Chin J Eco-Agric, 2012, 20: 1388-1393 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[48]	涂昊泽, 林杉, 王军, 胡荣桂, 肖恒斌, 邬磊. 秸秆添加对长期施肥旱地红壤N₂O和CO₂排放的影响. 环境科学, 2024, 45: 3716-3724.
	Tu H Z, Lin S, Wang J, Hu R G, Xiao H B, Wu L. Effects of straw addition on N₂O and CO₂ emissions from long-term fertilised dryland red soil. J Environ Sci, 2024, 45: 3716-3724 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[49]	蒙世协, 刘春岩, 郑循华, 梁旺国, 胡荣桂. 小麦秸秆还田量对晋南地区裸地土壤: 大气间甲烷、二氧化碳、氧化亚氮和一氧化氮交换的影响. 气候与环境研究, 2012, 17: 504-514.
	Meng S X, Liu C Y, Zheng X H, Liang W G, Hu R G. Effects of the applied amount of wheat straw on methane, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and nitric oxide fluxes of a bare soil in South Shanxi. Clim Environ Res, 2012, 17: 504-514 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[50]	伍玉鹏, 刘田, 彭其安, Shaaban M, 胡荣桂. 氮肥配施下不同C/N作物残渣还田对红壤温室气体排放的影响. 农业环境科学学报, 2014, 33: 2053-2062.
	Wu Y P, Liu T, Peng Q A, Muhammad S, Hu R G. Greenhouse gas emissions in red soil as influenced by different C/N residues under nitrogen applications. J Agro-Environ Sci, 2014, 33: 2053-2062 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[51]	朱利群, 王春杰, 杨曼君, 李静, 陈利根. 施肥对长江中下游稻田温室气体排放的影响: 基于Meta分析. 资源科学, 2017, 39(1): 105-115. doi: 10.18402/resci.2017.01.11
	Zhu L Q, Wang C J, Yang M J, Li J, Chen L G. Effects of fertilization on greenhouse gas emissions in paddy fields in the Middle and Lower Reaches of Yangtze River: based on meta-analysis. Resour Sci, 2017, 39(1): 105-115 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[52]	李双双, 陈晨, 段鹏鹏, 许欣, 熊正琴. 生物质炭对酸性菜地土壤N₂O排放及相关功能基因丰度的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24: 414-423.
	Li S S, Chen C, Duan P P, Xu X, Xiong Z Q. Effects of biochar application on N₂O emissions and abundance of nitrogen related functional genes in an acidic vegetable soil. J Plant Nutr Fert, 2018, 24: 414-423 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[53]	郭家宏, 范熠, 张西美. 温度对不同生态系统土壤甲烷氧化过程和甲烷氧化细菌的影响. 中国农业气象, 2022, 43: 427-439.
	Guo J H, Fan Y, Zhang X M. Effect of temperature on soil methane oxidation and methanotrophs in different ecosystems. Chin J Agrometeorol, 2022, 43: 427-439 (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6362.2022.06.001
[54]	刘少文, 殷敏, 褚光, 徐春梅, 王丹英, 章秀福, 陈松. 长江中下游稻区不同水旱轮作模式和氮肥水平对稻田CH₄排放的影响. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52: 2484-2499. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.14.008
	Liu S W, Yin M, Chu G, Xu C M, Wang D Y, Zhang X F, Chen S. Effects of various paddy-upland crop rotations and nitrogen fertilizer levels on CH₄ emission in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River. Sci Agric Sin, 2019, 52: 2484-2499 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[55]	谢立勇, 许婧, 郭李萍, 徐玉秀, 孙雪, 赵洪亮, 郭飞, 赵迅. 水肥管理对稻田CH₄排放及其全球增温潜势影响的评估. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25: 958-967.
	Xie L Y, Xu J, Guo L P, Xu Y X, Sun X, Zhao H L, Guo F, Zhao X. Impact of water/fertilizer management on methane emission in paddy fields and on global warming potential. Chin J Eco-Agric, 2017, 25: 958-967 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[56]	李昕, 孙文娟, 黄耀, 于凌飞. 中国小麦和玉米农田N₂O减排措施及潜力. 气候变化研究进展, 2017, 13(3): 273-283.
	Li X, Sun W J, Huang Y, Yu L F. Options and potentials to mitigate N₂O emissions from wheat and maize fields in China. Clim Change Res, 2017, 13(3): 273-283 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[57]	包明. 不同栽培模式旱地麦田土壤N₂O和CO₂排放特征及影响因素研究. 西北农林科技大学硕士学位论文, 陕西杨凌, 2018.
	Bao M. Characteristics and Influencing Factors of CO₂ and N₂O Emissions From Dryland Wheat Fields with Different Cultivation Patterns. MS Thesis of Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, China, 2018 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[58]	张广斌, 马二登, 张晓艳, 马静, 徐华, 蔡祖聪. 冬季秸秆还田和土地管理对水稻生长期CH₄排放的影响. 农业环境科学学报, 2009, 28: 2501-2505.
	Zhang G B, Ma E D, Zhang X Y, Ma J, Xu H, Cai Z C. Effects of rice straw incorporation and land management in winter on methane emission during rice growing season. J Agro-Environ Sci, 2009, 28: 2501-2505 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[59]	何巧玲, 杨刚, 邹兰, 张荣萍, 马鹏, 白银萍, 黄晶. 油菜秸秆不同还田方式下水稻碳足迹分析. 西南农业学报, 2022, 35: 1673-1679.
	He Q L, Yang G, Zou L, Zhang R P, Ma P, Bai Y P, Huang J. Carbon footprints of rice under different managements of rapeseed straw. Southwest China J Agric Sci, 2022, 35: 1673-1679 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[60]	姜振辉, 杨旭, 刘益珍, 林景东, 吴杨潇影, 杨京平. 春玉米晚稻与早稻晚稻种植模式碳足迹比较. 生态学报, 2019, 39: 8091-8099.
	Jiang Z H, Yang X, Liu Y Z, Lin J D, Wu Y X Y, Yang J P. Comparison of carbon footprint between spring maize late rice and early rice late rice cropping system. Acta Ecol Sin, 2019, 39: 8091-8099 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	作物季 Crop season	投入Input
轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	作物季 Crop season	N (kg hm^-2)	P₂O₅ (kg hm^-2)	K₂O (kg hm^-2)	种子 Seeds (kg hm^-2)	除草剂 Herbicides (kg hm^-2)	杀虫剂 Pesticides (kg hm^-2)	杀菌剂Fungicide (kg hm^-2)	灌溉耗电 Irrigation electricity (MJ hm^-2)	柴油 Diesel (kg hm^-2)	人工 Labor (d 人^-1 hm^-2)
MR	S-	旱作物季 Upland crops season	300.0	112.5	142.5	37.5	1.5	1.5	1.3	0	104.2	52.5
	S-	水稻季 rice season	180.0	105.0	90.0	37.5	0	1.0	0.7	1612.8	87.5	112.5
	S+	旱作物季 Upland crops season	300.0	75.0	67.5	37.5	1.5	1.5	1.3	0	175.5	45.0
	S+	水稻季 rice season	180.0	67.5	52.5	37.5	0	1.0	0.7	1612.8	158.8	105.0
RR	S-	旱作物季 Upland crops season	210.0	72.0	72.0	12.0	1.2	0.9	0.6	0	87.5	60.0
	S-	水稻季 rice season	210.0	97.5	93.0	30.0	0.9	1.0	0.7	2016.0	87.5	127.5
	S+	旱作物季 Upland crops season	210.0	54.0	31.5	12.0	1.2	0.9	0.6	0.0	158.8	52.5
	S+	水稻季 rice season	210.0	86.3	52.5	30.0	0.9	1.0	0.7	2016.0	158.8	120.0
WR	S-	旱作物季 Upland crops season	210.0	72.0	72.0	210.0	0	1.0	0.8	0	87.5	60.0
	S-	水稻季 rice season	210.0	97.5	93.0	30.0	0.9	1.0	0.7	2016.0	87.5	127.5
	S+	旱作物季 Upland crops season	210.0	54.0	31.5	210.0	0	1.0	0.8	0.0	158.8	53.5
	S+	水稻季 rice season	210.0	86.3	52.5	30.0	0.9	1.0	0.7	2016.0	158.8	127.5

项目 Item	能量系数 Energy factor	数据来源 Data source
投入项 Inputs
1. 肥料 Fertilizers
氮肥 Nitrogen fertilizer (N)	66.14 MJ kg^-1	[17]
磷肥 Phosphatic fertilizer (P₂O₅)	12.44 MJ kg^-1	[17]
钾肥 potash fertilizer (K₂O)	11.15 MJ kg^-1	[17]
2. 农药 Pesticides
除草剂 Herbicides	238.00 MJ kg^-1	[18]
杀虫剂 Pesticides	101.20 MJ kg^-1	[19]
杀菌剂 Fungicide	216.00 MJ kg^-1	[20]
3. 柴油 Diesel	56.31 MJ L^-1	[21]
4. 灌溉耗电 Irrigation electricity	12.00 MJ kWh^-1	[21]
5. 种子 Seed
玉米/小麦/水稻 Maize/wheat/rice	14.70 MJ kg^-1	[22]
油菜 Rapeseed	27.17 MJ kg^-1	[23]
6. 人工 Labor	1.96 MJ h^-1	[19]
产出项 Outputs
1. 籽粒 Grain
玉米/小麦/水稻 Maize/wheat/rice	14.70 MJ kg^-1	[22]
油菜 Rapeseed	27.17 MJ kg^-1	[23]
2. 秸秆 Straw
玉米/小麦/水稻Maize/wheat/rice	12.50 MJ kg^-1	[22]
油菜 Rapeseed	18.60 MJ kg^-1	[23]

项目 Item	排放系数 Emission factor	数据来源 Data source
1. 肥料 Fertilizers
氮肥 Nitrogen fertilizer (N)	1.53 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
磷肥 Phosphatic fertilizer (P₂O₅)	1.63 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
钾肥 potash fertilizer (K₂O)	0.66 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
2. 农药Pesticides		[27]
除草剂 Herbicides	10.20 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
杀虫剂 Pesticides	16.60 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
杀菌剂 Fungicide	10.60 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
3. 柴油Diesel	0.89 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
4. 灌溉耗电Irrigation electricity	1.23 kg CO₂-eq KWh^-1	[27]
5. 种子Seed	0.58 kg CO₂-eq kg^-1	[27]
6. 人工Labor	3.37 kg CO₂-eq d^-1	[28]

轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	太阳辐射能 Solar energy (GJ hm^-2)	辅助能投入Auxiliary energy input (GJ hm^-2)
轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	太阳辐射能 Solar energy (GJ hm^-2)	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	种子 Seeds	除草剂 Herbicides	杀虫剂 Pesticides	杀菌剂 Fungicide	灌溉耗电 Irrigation electricity	柴油 Diesel	人工 Labor	总计 Total
MR	S-	49,110	31.75	2.71	2.59	1.10	0.36	0.25	0.43	1.6	10.79	7.76	59.34
MR	S+	49,110	31.75	1.77	1.34	1.10	0.36	0.25	0.43	1.6	18.82	7.06	64.48
RR	S-	49,110	27.78	2.11	1.84	1.14	0.50	0.19	0.28	2.0	9.85	8.82	54.51
RR	S+	49,110	27.78	1.75	0.94	1.14	0.50	0.19	0.28	2.0	17.88	8.11	60.57
WR	S-	49,110	27.78	2.11	1.84	3.53	0.21	0.20	0.32	2.0	9.85	8.82	56.66
WR	S+	49,110	27.78	1.75	0.94	3.53	0.21	0.20	0.32	2.0	17.88	8.51	63.12

轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	籽粒产出能值Energy output by grain (GJ hm^-2)			光能利用率 Radiation use efficiency (%)	耗能强度 Energy intensity (GJ t^-1 grain)	产投比 Grain energy output/input (GJ GJ^-1)
轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	旱作物 Upland crops	水稻 Rice	周年 Annual	光能利用率 Radiation use efficiency (%)	耗能强度 Energy intensity (GJ t^-1 grain)	产投比 Grain energy output/input (GJ GJ^-1)
MR	S-	110.69±5.08 a	91.89±1.98 f	202.59±3.01 b	0.77±0.02 b	3.71±0.13 d	3.41±0.05 a
MR	S+	115.59±0.13 a	101.35±3.41 e	216.95±3.50 a	0.81±0.01 a	3.76±0.06 d	3.36±0.05 a
RR	S-	45.62±1.37 c	120.52±2.74 c	166.14±2.76 e	0.67±0.03 c	4.15±0.08 bc	3.05±0.05 bc
RR	S+	43.93±3.82 c	133.01±0.46 a	176.94±1.16 d	0.69±0.03 c	4.33±0.03 a	2.92±0.02 d
WR	S-	63.03±3.24 b	114.00±3.18 d	177.03±2.39 d	0.60±0.01 e	4.05±0.05 c	3.12±0.04 b
WR	S+	59.97±1.35 b	128.38±2.39 b	188.34±1.04 c	0.63±0 d	4.24±0.07 ab	2.98±0.02 c
方差分析ANOVA
R		864.12^**	567.93^**	349.74^**	98.03^**	72.25^**	160.74^**
S		0^ns	242.86^**	100.31^**	10.80^**	14.82^**	28.67^**
R×S		3.08^ns	3.39^ns	0.84^ns	0.30^ns	1.48^ns	2.07^ns

Sustainability analysis of different upland-paddy rotation systems in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River based on energy efficiency and carbon efficiency

RichHTML430

PDF

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 60

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	N₂O (kg hm^-2)				CH₄ (kg hm^-2)				CO₂ (t hm^-2)
轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	休闲期 Fallow season	旱作物季 Upland crop season	水稻季 Rice season	周年 Annual	休闲期 Fallow season	旱作物季 Upland crop season	水稻季 Rice season	周年 Annual	休闲期 Fallow season	旱作物季 Upland crop season	水稻季 Rice season	周年 Annual
MR	S−	4.23±0.11 a	16.76±0.63 b	3.76±0.01 c	24.75±0.56 a	11.06±0.33 a	11.86±0.60 d	52.95±2.70 e	75.87±2.74 e	5.93±0.13 a	17.92±0.23 f	5.61±0.16 e	29.46±0.10 e
MR	S+	2.95±0.20 b	15.67±0.30 b	1.99±0.14 d	20.6±0.57 b	9.61±1.04 b	14.31±0.52 c	292.91±4.11 a	316.83±3.70 a	5.92±0.17 a	21.59±0.80 e	8.60±0.06 d	36.11±0.07 d
RR	S−	—	19.59±2.50 a	5.86±0.39 a	25.45±2.44 a	—	12.88±0.89 cd	155.54±16.58 d	168.42±17.37 d	—	26.57±0.87 c	14.624±0.19 c	41.20±0.96 c
RR	S+	—	10.63±0.58 d	5.46±0.10 ab	16.09±0.50 c	—	18.19±1.27 a	241.98±23.26 b	260.17±22.19 b	—	30.24±0.42 b	17.15±0.24 a	47.38±0.22 b
WR	S−	—	13.45±0.47 c	5.57±0.27 ab	19.02±0.42 b	—	16.1±0.49 b	194.68±4.91 c	210.78±5.36 c	—	24.76±0.61 d	15.79±0.33 b	40.54±0.48 c
WR	S+	—	10.63±0.25 d	5.27±0.22 b	15.9±0.19 c	—	19.59±1.57 a	249.56±16.97 b	269.15±15.41 b	—	32.49±0.79 a	16.93±0.25 a	49.42±0.99 a
方差分析ANOVA
R		—	22.81^**	281.07^**	35.25^**	—	35.77^**	18.92^**	15.93^**	—	351.50^**	3327.66^**	560.89^**
S		—	67.50^**	60.14^**	116.59^**	—	66.46^**	378.54^**	422.48^**	—	259.83^**	452.16^**	469.70^**
R×S		—	20.91^**	20.15^**	14.19^**	—	3.31^ns	76.58^**	78.33^**	—	18.93^**	28.04^**	6.19^*

轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	碳固定 Carbon fixation (t CO₂ hm^-2)		碳排放 Carbon emission (t CO₂-eq hm^-2)					碳效率 Carbon efficiency (kg kg^-1)		碳足迹 Carbon footprint (kg CO₂eq kg^-1grain)
		籽粒碳 Grain C	作物碳 Crop C	直接排放Direct emissio^ns			间接排放 Indirect emissio^ns	总计 Total	碳生产效率 Carbon produce efficiency	碳生态效率 Carbon ecological efficiency
		籽粒碳 Grain C	作物碳 Crop C	N₂O	CH₄	[ΔCE(CO₂)]	间接排放 Indirect emissio^ns	总计 Total	碳生产效率 Carbon produce efficiency	碳生态效率 Carbon ecological efficiency
MR	S−	23.04±0.43 b	55.79±0.96 b	7.37±0.17 a	2.58±0.09 e	5.11±0.31 c	2.26	17.32±0.25 c	1.33±0.04 b	3.22±0.10 b	1.08±0.05 e
MR	S+	24.77±0.23 a	61.65±0.62 a	6.14±0.18 b	10.77±0.15 a	-11.02±0.99 e	2.14	8.03±0.66 d	3.1±0.25 a	7.71±0.64 a	0.47±0.03 f
RR	S−	18.06±0.59 e	53.59±2.00 bc	7.59±0.73 a	5.73±0.59 d	17.83±0.19 a	2.11	33.26±0.64 a	0.54±0.01 d	1.61±0.06 d	2.53±0.10 a
RR	S+	19.25±0.96 d	55.35±1.91 b	4.79±0.15 c	8.85±0.75 b	2.57±1.33 d	2.09	18.3±1.90 c	1.06±0.15 c	3.05±0.41 b	1.31±0.14 d
WR	S−	20.36±0.54 c	52.37±2.13 c	5.67±0.12 b	7.17±0.18 c	17.19±1.19 a	2.22	32.24±1.31 a	0.63±0.04 d	1.63±0.13 d	2.3±0.09 b
WR	S+	21.18±0.54 c	53.88±0.80 bc	4.74±0.06 c	9.15±0.52 b	7.59±0.77 b	2.22	23.7±1.22 b	0.89±0.03 c	2.28±0.10 c	1.59±0 c
方差分析ANOVA
R		120.31^**	21.74^**	35.25^**	150.93^**	506.41^**	—	319.22^**	270.91^**	215.00^**	386.41^**
S		19.97^**	17.66^**	116.57^**	422.47^**	1029.36^**	—	417.95^**	214.57^**	208.44^**	322.90^**
R×S		0.89^ns	3.79^ns	14.19^**	78.33^**	23.12^**	—	14.36^**	64.21^**	59.40^**	90.46^**

[1]	ZHU Rong-Yu, ZHAO Meng-Jie, YAO Yun-Feng, LI Yan-Hong, LI Xiang-Dong, LIU Zhao-Xin. Effects of straw returning methods and sowing depth on soil physical properties and emergence characteristics of summer peanut [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(8): 2106-2121.
[2]	HU Ming-Ming, DING Feng, PENG Zhi-Yun, XIANG Kai-Hong, LI Yu, ZHANG Yu-Jie, YANG Zhi-Yuan, SUN Yong-Jian, MA Jun. Effects of straw returning to field combined with water and N management on rice yield formation and N uptake and utilization under diversified cropping patterns [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(5): 1236-1252.
[3]	LIU Cheng-Min, MEN Ya-Qi, QIN Du-Lin, YAN Xiao-Yu, ZHANG Le, MENG Hao, SU Xun-Ya, SUN Xue-Zhen, SONG Xian-Liang, MAO Li-Li. Effects of nitrogen application rate on cotton yield and nitrogen utilization under long-term straw return to the field [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2024, 50(4): 1043-1052.
[4]	LI Rong, MIAN You-Ming, HOU Xian-Qing, LI Pei-Fu, WANG Xi-Na. Effects of straw returning with nitrogen application on soil properties, water and nitrogen use efficiency of maize [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2023, 49(10): 2820-2832.
[5]	WANG Lyu, CUI Yue-Zhen, WU Yu-Hong, HAO Xing-Shun, ZHANG Chun-Hui, WANG Jun-Yi, LIU Yi-Xin, LI Xiao-Gang, QIN Yu-Hang. Effects of rice stalks mulching combined with green manure (Astragalus smicus L.) incorporated into soil and reducing nitrogen fertilizer rate on rice yield and soil fertility [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(4): 952-961.
[6]	YAN Yu-Ting, SONG Qiu-Lai, YAN Chao, LIU Shuang, ZHANG Yu-Hui, TIAN Jing-Fen, DENG Yu-Xuan, MA Chun-Mei. Nitrogen accumulation and nitrogen substitution effect of maize under straw returning with continuous cropping [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(4): 962-974.
[7]	WANG Yu-Long, YU Ai-Zhong, LYU Han-Qiang, WANG Qi-Ming, SU Xiang-Xiang, CHAI Qiang. Effects of wheat straw returning and tillage practices on corn yield in oasis irrigation area [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(10): 2671-2679.
[8]	LIU Lei, LIAO Ping, SHAO Hua, LIU Jin-Song, YANG Xing-Lian, WANG Jing, WANG Hai-Yuan, ZHANG Jun, ZENG Yong-Jun, HUANG Shan. Interactive effects of liming and straw return on apparent soil potassium balance in a double rice cropping system [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(1): 226-237.
[9]	WU Yu-Hong,HAO Xing-Shun,TIAN Xiao-Hong,CHEN Hao,ZHANG Chun-Hui,CUI Yue-Zhen,QIN Yu-Hang. Effect of straw returning combined with NPK fertilization on soil carbon sequestration and economic benefits under rice-wheat rotation in Hanzhong basin [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2020, 46(02): 259-268.
[10]	Hao-Yu LI,Zhao-Liang MENG,Dang-Wei PANG,Jin CHEN,Yong-Kun HOU,Hai-Xing CUI,Min JIN,Zhen-Lin WANG,Yong LI. Effect of annual straw return model on soil carbon sequestration and crop yields in winter wheat-summer maize rotation farmland [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2019, 45(6): 893-903.
[11]	BAI Wei, ZHANG Li-Zhen, PANG Huan-Cheng, SUN Zhan-Xiang, NIU Shi-Wei, CAI Qian,AN Jing-Wen. Effects of Straw Returning Combined with Nitrogen Fertilizer on Photosynthetic Performance and Yield of Spring Maize in Northeast China [J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2017, 43(12): 1845-1855.
[12]	CHEN Meng-Yun, LI Xiao-Feng, CHENG Jin-Qiu, REN Hong-Ru, LIANG Jian, ZHANG Hong-Cheng,HUO Zhong-Yang. Effects of Total Straw Returning and Nitrogen Application Regime on Grain Yield and Quality in Mechanical Transplanting Japonica* Rice with Good Taste Quality [J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2017, 43(12): 1802-1816.
[13]	CHEN Jin,PANG Dang-Wei,HAN Ming-Ming,YIN Yan-Ping,ZHENG Meng-Jing,LUO Yong-Li,WANG Zhen-Lin,LI Yong. Effects of Tillage Patterns on Soil Biological Activity, Availability of Soil Nutrients and Grain Yield of Winter Wheat [J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2017, 43(08): 1245-1253.
[14]	LI Xiao-Feng,CHENG Jin-Qiu,LIANG Jian,CHEN Meng-Yun,REN Hong-Ru,ZHANG Hong-Cheng,HUO Zhong-Yang*,DAI Qi-Gen,XU Ke,WEI Hai-Yan,GUO Bao-Wei. Effects of Total Straw Returning and Nitrogen Application on Grain Yield and Nitrogen Absorption and Utilization of Machine Transplanted Japonica Rice [J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2017, 43(06): 912-924.
[15]	LIU Yan-Hui,WANG Shuang-Lei,LI Jin-Pu,QIN Du-Lin,ZHANG Mei-Ling,NIE Jun-Jun,MAO Li-Li,SONG Xian-Liang,SUN Xue-Zhen. Effects of Cotton Straw Returning on Soil Available Nutrients and Microbial Characteristics [J]. Acta Agron Sin, 2016, 42(07): 1037-1046.

轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	C投入 Carbon input (kg CO₂-eq hm^-2)
轮作模式 Rotation pattern	秸秆管理 Straw management	N	P₂O₅	K₂O	种子Seeds	除草剂Herbicides	杀虫剂Pesticides	杀菌剂Fungicide	灌溉耗电 Irrigation electricity	柴油 Diesel	人工 Labor	总计 Total
MR	S-	734.40	354.53	153.45	43.50	15.30	41.50	21.20	165.31	170.61	556.05	2255.85
	S+	734.40	232.28	79.20	43.50	15.30	41.50	21.20	165.31	297.53	505.50	2135.71
RR	S-	642.60	276.29	108.90	24.36	21.42	31.54	13.78	206.64	155.75	631.88	2113.15
	S+	642.60	228.69	55.44	24.36	21.42	31.54	13.78	206.64	282.66	581.33	2088.46
WR	S-	642.60	276.29	108.90	139.20	9.18	33.20	15.90	206.64	155.75	631.88	2219.53
	S+	642.60	228.69	55.44	139.20	9.18	33.20	15.90	206.64	282.66	609.97	2223.48