Coupling Effects of Water-saving Irrigation and Controlled-release Fertilizer (CRF) Application on CH4 and N2O Emission in Single Cropping Paddy Field

被引：0

作者：

Wang Y.-M. ^{[1
]}

Xu Y.-J. ^{[1
]}

Ji Y. ^{[1
]}

Feng Y.-F. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] School of Applied Meteorology, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing

[2] Key Laboratory of Argo-Environment in Downstream of Yangtze Plain, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Institute of Agricultural Resources and Environment, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanjing

来源：

Ji, Yang (jiyang@nuist.edu.cn) | 1600年 / Science Press卷 / 42期

关键词：

CH[!sub]4[!/sub; Controlled-release fertilizer; N[!sub]2[!/sub]O; Paddy field; Rice yield; Water-saving irrigation;

D O I：

10.13227/j.hjkx.202103275

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

By the method of static closed chamber-gas chromatography (GC), a two-year greenhouse experiment was launched using an intact soil core of single cropping rice in East China to explore the synergistic effects of water-saving irrigation and controlled-release fertilizer (CRF) application on CH4 and N2O emissions during rice growth, with the aim of establishing water and fertilization management regimes with effects on yield promotion and greenhouse gas mitigation. Nine treatments included three different types of nitrogen fertilizer application (no nitrogen [CK], urea [Urea], and controlled release fertilizer [CRF]) and three different types of irrigation management (continuous flooding [CF], intermittent irrigation [II], and controlled irrigation [CI]). The two-year results showed that two of the water-saving irrigation management types (II and CI) significantly affected CH4 and N2O emissions from paddy soil and their global warming potential (GWP) and greenhouse gas intensity (GHGI). Compared with CF, II and CI both increased the N2O emission and decreased CH4 emissions, resulting in the reduction of GWP and GHGI by 28.9%-71.4% and 14.3%-70.4%, respectively (P<0.05). Compared to II, CI had better CH4 emission mitigation potential, with reductions of 57.7%-91.8%; however, there was no significant difference in N2O emissions. Finally, the mitigation of the CI method on GWP and GHGI was slightly better than that of the II method by 2.0%-56.2%. Compared with CK, N application significantly promoted N2O emission by 18.4%-2547.8% (P<0.05) in two years, in which N2O emissions were slightly higher by 32.7%-78.6% in CRF than those in Urea treatments; however, no significant difference was found (P>0.05). The response of total CH4 emissions to N application varied with different water management practices. In general, no significant differences were found in CH4 emissions, GWP, or GHGI in the paddy soil between CRF and Urea application. Correlation analysis showed that in 2018, N2O emission fluxes of the Urea treatment of the CF model and the Urea and CRF treatment of the II model were all significantly positively correlated with NH4+-N concentration in floodwater (P<0.01). By contrast, in 2019, a negative correlation was found in the CK and CRF treatments of the CI model (P<0.05). N2O emission fluxes of the CK and CRF treatments of the CI model in 2018 were significantly positively correlated with NO3--N concentration in floodwater (P<0.01). Water-saving irrigation and N application both had significant effects on rice yield. Compared with that of the CF method, the rice yield showed a decreasing trend by 14.7%-37.7% under the two water-saving irrigation modes (II and CI). Compared with that of the Urea treatment, CRF application increased rice yield by 2.5%-7.4%; however, no significant difference was found (P>0.05). Considering the GWP, GHGI, and rice yield results, the coupling effect of water-saving irrigation and CRF application on the GWP mitigation and yield promotion in paddy fields requires further investigation. © 2021, Science Press. All right reserved.

引用

页码：6025 / 6037

页数：12

共 42 条

[1]

Zhang Y M, Hu C S, Zhang J B, Et al., Research advances on source/sink intensities and greenhouse effects of CO2, CH4 and N2O in agricultural soils, Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 19, 4, pp. 966-975, (2011)

[2]

Wuebbles D J, Hayhoe K., Atmospheric methane and global change, Earth-Science Reviews, 57, 3-4, pp. 177-210, (2002)

[3]

Zou J W, Huang Y, Zheng X H, Et al., Quantifying direct N2O emissions in paddy fields during rice growing season in mainland China: dependence on water regime, Atmospheric Environment, 41, 37, pp. 8030-8042, (2007)

[4]

Mao X Y, Wang W M, Guo X P, Et al., Effects of different water-saving irrigation modes on physiological growth and yield formation of rice, Water Saving Irrigation, 1, pp. 25-28, (2020)

[5]

Xu G W, Jiang M M, Lu D K, Et al., Optimum combination of irrigation and nitrogen supply form achieving high photosynthetic and nitrogen utilization efficiency, Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 26, 7, pp. 1239-1250, (2020)

[6]

Li Y S, Chen J W, Yuan S, Et al., Research progress on effect of water-saving irrigation on yield and roots of rice, Crop Research, 34, 2, pp. 176-182, (2020)

[7]

Yan X, Du L, Shi S, Et al., Nitrous oxide emission from wetland rice soil as affected by the application of controlled-availability fertilizers and mid-season aeration, Biology and Fertility of Soils, 32, 1, pp. 60-66, (2000)

[8]

Peng S Z, Li D X, Xu J Z, Et al., Effect of water-saving irrigation on the law of CH4 emission from paddy field, Environmental Science, 28, 1, pp. 9-13, (2007)

[9]

Tyagi L, Kumari B, Singh S N., Water management-a tool for methane mitigation from irrigated paddy fields, Science of the Total Environment, 408, 5, pp. 1085-1090, (2010)

[10]

Lagomarsino A, Agnelli A E, Linquist B, Et al., Alternate wetting and drying of rice reduced CH4 emissions but triggered N2O peaks in a clayey soil of central Italy, Pedosphere, 26, 4, pp. 533-548, (2016)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →