Evaluating the effects of plastic film mulching patterns on cultivation of winter wheat in a dryland cropping system on the Loess Plateau, China

Plastic film mulching (PFM) can increase or stabilize crop yields worldwide when applied to agricultural planting systems, especially in arid and semi-arid areas. Although the adverse effects that are caused by residual plastic film, such as plastic pollution, are becoming a global concern, the application of PFM will not be replaced by other materials in the short-term in agriculture. It is important to understand the various PFM patterns (different mulching periods and coverage rates) that impact on soil physicochemical properties and characteristics of crop growth. Therefore, based on a field experiment that we established in 2002, we conducted consecutive field observations from 2013 to 2016 to determine the optimum PFM mulching period and coverage rate. Three mulching periods were included: (I) summer fallow period (FM), (II) growth period (GM), and (III) whole growth year (WM). Two coverage rates were included: (i) 50%, half mulching (HM), and (ii) 100%, total mulching (TM). That is, there were six different PFM treatments. No mulching (NM) over the growth years was considered the CK treatment. PFM increased canopy height and leaf area index of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the growing season by 29.5% and 19.4%, respectively. Average winter wheat grain yields of various PFM patterns were 5318.5 kg ha(-1) and 4557.7 kg ha(-1) in 2013-2014 and 2015-2016, respectively; these yields were 13.8% and 23.7% higher than NM in 2013-2014 and 2015-2016, respectively. However, the difference in the growth characteristics and grain yield of winter wheat under various PFM patterns resulted from the change in the mulching period and coverage rate. Winter wheat grain yield and biomass increased with GM and WM compared with FM and NM in normal rainfall years. PFM coverage rates improved yield significantly (P < 0.05) and influenced soil nutrient concentrations. HM maintained or increased soil organic matter (SOM) and total nitrogen concentrations, but TM decreased SOM concentration by 8.3%. Water use efficiency (WUE) and rainfall use efficiency (RUE) were improved by various PFM patterns. Furthermore, WM had the most significant impact on SOM concentrations, GM was second, and FM was minor. Considering the costs and benefits of PFM patterns, the half coverage rate of PFM during the whole year (FWH) had the best index (BI) value, and the total coverage rate of PFM during the growth period (FGT) and the half coverage rate of PFM during the growth period (FGH) had higher BI values than other PFM patterns; the values for BI for FWH, FGT, and FGH were 10.3, 8.9, and 8.5, respectively. In conclusion, ignoring the amount of PFM pollution in the environment (or use biodegradable film instead of polyethylene film), FWH was the best PFM pattern with the highest WUE and RUE in dryland rainfed agriculture. But, to decrease the amount of PFM application and pollution, FGH was more beneficial for soil health with a low coverage rate and short mulching period. FGH was the optimal pattern for PFM when applied to winter wheat on the Loess Plateau, China based on our field experiment.