Impact of straw return combined with different fertilizations on soil organic carbon stock in upland wheat and maize croplands in China: A meta-analysis

Mahbub UI Islam , Fahui Jiang , Milton Halder , Shuai Liu , Xinhua Peng
{"title":"Impact of straw return combined with different fertilizations on soil organic carbon stock in upland wheat and maize croplands in China: A meta-analysis","authors":"Mahbub UI Islam ,&nbsp;Fahui Jiang ,&nbsp;Milton Halder ,&nbsp;Shuai Liu ,&nbsp;Xinhua Peng","doi":"10.1016/j.crope.2023.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Straw return is a vital soil amendment practice in Chinese upland soils, aiming to improve the soil organic carbon (SOC) stock. However, its impact on SOC stock depends on various fertilizer practices, leading to inconclusive results. To address this, we conducted a meta-analysis of 121 peer-reviewed publications to evaluate the effect of straw return combined with different fertilization practices including balanced NPK (BFS), unbalanced NP, NK, PK, or N fertilization (UFS), and no fertilization (NFS) in the wheat-maize cropping system. The results showed that straw return with BFS led to the highest increase in SOC stock (13.3%), followed by UFS (11.4%) and NFS (6.12%), compared to straw removal under the same fertilization conditions. BFS also significantly increased the soil C (15.9%), N (9.62%), and P (6.21%) contents, as well as the C:N (2.48%) and C:P (11.4%) ratios. In contrast, UFS resulted in higher C:N ratios (6.47%) and soil acidification, affecting the SOC stock during straw return. A structural equation model revealed that the presence of BFS positively influenced the association between SOC stock and soil stoichiometry (P ​&lt; ​0.05) compared to UFS, which was influenced by climate and initial soil properties. Additionally, the impact of BFS on SOC stock was more significant in the double cropping system (14.5%) than in the single wheat (8.32%) and single maize (10.8%) cropping systems. A lower initial SOC (&lt;6 ​g ​kg<sup>−1</sup>) also showed a greater response to BFS compared to a higher initial SOC (&gt;12 ​g ​kg<sup>−1</sup>). Based on C sequestration efficiency, implementing straw return with BFS could lead to a higher rate of increase in SOC sequestration.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100340,"journal":{"name":"Crop and Environment","volume":"2 4","pages":"Pages 233-241"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773126X23000631/pdfft?md5=cbc21adb63fc0aa814fa6a3686baed44&pid=1-s2.0-S2773126X23000631-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crop and Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773126X23000631","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Straw return is a vital soil amendment practice in Chinese upland soils, aiming to improve the soil organic carbon (SOC) stock. However, its impact on SOC stock depends on various fertilizer practices, leading to inconclusive results. To address this, we conducted a meta-analysis of 121 peer-reviewed publications to evaluate the effect of straw return combined with different fertilization practices including balanced NPK (BFS), unbalanced NP, NK, PK, or N fertilization (UFS), and no fertilization (NFS) in the wheat-maize cropping system. The results showed that straw return with BFS led to the highest increase in SOC stock (13.3%), followed by UFS (11.4%) and NFS (6.12%), compared to straw removal under the same fertilization conditions. BFS also significantly increased the soil C (15.9%), N (9.62%), and P (6.21%) contents, as well as the C:N (2.48%) and C:P (11.4%) ratios. In contrast, UFS resulted in higher C:N ratios (6.47%) and soil acidification, affecting the SOC stock during straw return. A structural equation model revealed that the presence of BFS positively influenced the association between SOC stock and soil stoichiometry (P ​< ​0.05) compared to UFS, which was influenced by climate and initial soil properties. Additionally, the impact of BFS on SOC stock was more significant in the double cropping system (14.5%) than in the single wheat (8.32%) and single maize (10.8%) cropping systems. A lower initial SOC (<6 ​g ​kg−1) also showed a greater response to BFS compared to a higher initial SOC (>12 ​g ​kg−1). Based on C sequestration efficiency, implementing straw return with BFS could lead to a higher rate of increase in SOC sequestration.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
秸秆还田与不同施肥对中国旱地小麦和玉米农田土壤有机碳储量影响的meta分析
秸秆还田是中国旱地土壤重要的土壤修复措施,其目的是提高土壤有机碳(SOC)储量。然而,其对有机碳存量的影响取决于不同的施肥方式,导致不确定的结果。为了解决这个问题,我们对121篇同行评议的出版物进行了荟萃分析,以评估秸秆还田与不同施肥措施(包括平衡氮磷钾(BFS)、不平衡NP、NK、PK或N施肥(UFS)和不施肥(NFS)在小麦-玉米种植系统中的效果。结果表明,在相同施肥条件下,秸秆还田与秸秆去除相比,土壤有机碳储量增加最多(13.3%),其次是秸秆还田(11.4%)和秸秆还田(6.12%)。BFS还显著提高了土壤C(15.9%)、N(9.62%)和P(6.21%)含量,以及C:N(2.48%)和C:P(11.4%)比值。秸秆还田导致碳氮比升高(6.47%),土壤酸化,影响了秸秆还田期间土壤有机碳储量。结构方程模型表明,BFS的存在正影响土壤有机碳储量与土壤化学计量的关系(P12 g kg-1)。从碳固存效率来看,秸秆还田采用BFS可提高固碳速率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Increasing seedling number alleviates the adverse effects of warming on grain yield and reduces greenhouse gas emission in late-season rice Foliar uniconazole application increases rice lodging resistance by altering stem morphological and anatomical traits Publisher's Note Light condition during grain-filling stage of main crop strongly influences ratooning ability of low-stubble ratoon rice A comparative assessment of polymer-coated and non-coated urea in direct-seeded rice: agronomic, economic, and environmental performance and sensitivity analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1