
中国水稻科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (4): 531-547.DOI: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2026.250115
王超瑞, 张男, 汝艳, 严语, 孟庆好, 温雅, 张瑛, 肖治林, 张耗*(
)
收稿日期:2025-01-19
修回日期:2025-06-30
出版日期:2026-07-10
发布日期:2026-07-15
通讯作者:
*email: haozhang@yzu.edu.cn基金资助:
WANG Chaorui, ZHANG Nan, RU Yan, YAN Yu, MENG Qinghao, WEN Ya, ZHANG Ying, XIAO Zhilin, ZHANG Hao*(
)
Received:2025-01-19
Revised:2025-06-30
Online:2026-07-10
Published:2026-07-15
摘要:
【目的】研究不同灌溉和秸秆还田组合方式对水稻产量及温室气体排放的影响,为稻田高产和温室气体减排提供理论依据和实践指导。【方法】以甬优2640和南粳5718为供试品种,设置常规水层灌溉(CI)、干湿交替灌溉(AWD)2种灌溉方式和秸秆不还田(S0)、秸秆生物炭(SC)、秸秆堆腐还田配施秸秆生物炭(SS)3种秸秆还田方式,分析其对水稻产量、干物质积累量、光合速率、光合势、根系活力以及全生育期甲烷和氧化亚氮排放通量等的影响。【结果】(1)与CI+S0相比,AWD+SC与AWD+SS分别显著增产8.30%~13.90%和18.55%~22.58%。从产量构成因素分析,SC和SS较S0处理提高了有效穗数和每穗粒数,并且AWD处理显著提高了每穗粒数、结实率和千粒重。(2)产量的提高主要得益于地下部和地上部干物质积累量、叶片净光合速率、光合势、茎鞘NSC转运和根系氧化力的显著增加。(3)SC显著降低稻田甲烷和氧化亚氮排放,而SS则增加了排放,但经AWD处理后甲烷排放显著减少从而降低稻田全球增温潜势和温室气体排放强度。【结论】干湿交替灌溉技术配合秸秆还田技术(AWD+SC/SS)能显著提高水稻光合物质的积累与转运,改善地下部根系生长,实现水稻产量提高和稻田温室气体排放减少的双重目标。
王超瑞, 张男, 汝艳, 严语, 孟庆好, 温雅, 张瑛, 肖治林, 张耗. 干湿交替灌溉与秸秆还田方式对水稻产量及温室气体排放的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 531-547.
WANG Chaorui, ZHANG Nan, RU Yan, YAN Yu, MENG Qinghao, WEN Ya, ZHANG Ying, XIAO Zhilin, ZHANG Hao. Effects of Alternate Wetting and Moderate Soil Drying Irrigation and Straw Returning Methods on Rice Yield and Greenhouse Gas Emissions[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2026, 40(4): 531-547.
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 穗数 Number of panicles (×104/hm2) | 每穗粒数 Spikelets per panicle | 结实率 Filled grain rate(%) | 千粒重 1000-grain weight (g) | 产量 Grain yield (t/hm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | ||||||
| CI+S0 | 182.50 cd | 292.14 d | 82.29 c | 25.42 e | 11.15 c | |
| CI+SC | 185.00 bc | 294.11 cd | 82.75 bc | 25.55 d | 11.50 c | |
| CI+SS | 190.00 a | 302.52 bc | 83.30 b | 25.77 c | 12.34 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 178.75 d | 305.26 ab | 84.51 a | 26.57 b | 12.26 b | |
| AWD+SC | 181.25 cd | 306.63 ab | 84.48 a | 26.65 b | 12.52 b | |
| AWD+SS | 187.50 ab | 311.54 a | 85.04 a | 26.81 a | 13.32 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 226.25 bc | 139.43 c | 90.62 b | 28.57 b | 8.17 d |
| CI+SC | 230.00 ab | 141.49 bc | 90.72 b | 28.63 b | 8.45 cd | |
| CI+SS | 233.75 a | 146.22 bc | 91.10 b | 28.84 ab | 8.99 bc | |
| AWD+S0 | 221.25 c | 147.78 abc | 92.75 a | 29.04 ab | 8.82 bcd | |
| AWD+SC | 227.50 abc | 148.85 ab | 92.92 a | 29.11 ab | 9.15 ab | |
| AWD+SS | 230.00 ab | 155.24 a | 93.33 a | 29.31 a | 9.77 a | |
| 2024 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | ||||||
| CI+S0 | 182.50 bc | 289.45 d | 80.38 b | 23.68 b | 10.05 c | |
| CI+SC | 186.25 b | 290.56 d | 80.86 b | 23.72 b | 10.36 c | |
| CI+SS | 192.50 a | 297.42 c | 81.27 b | 23.85 b | 11.10 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 177.50 c | 301.75 bc | 83.88 a | 24.96 ab | 11.21 b | |
| AWD+SC | 180.00 c | 303.58 b | 84.02 a | 25.04 a | 11.50 b | |
| AWD+SS | 187.50 ab | 307.72 a | 84.77 a | 25.21 a | 12.33 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 232.50 ab | 137.65 c | 86.98 b | 27.81 c | 7.75 d |
| CI+SC | 237.50 a | 140.03 bc | 86.97 b | 27.89 bc | 8.07 cd | |
| CI+SS | 241.25 a | 145.57 b | 87.46 b | 28.02 bc | 8.60 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 224.50 b | 146.08 b | 89.36 a | 28.13 b | 8.25 bc | |
| AWD+SC | 226.50 b | 147.65 b | 89.58 a | 28.85 a | 8.64 b | |
| AWD+SS | 236.25 a | 152.38 a | 89.92 a | 29.06 a | 9.43 a | |
| 方差分析Analysis of variance | ||||||
| 年份Year(Y) | 25.37* | 8.90* | 730.32** | 1641.67** | 210.58** | |
| 品种Variety(V) | 7399.56** | 31639.49** | 6418.84** | 13245.22** | 3245.50** | |
| 灌溉方式Irrigation regime(I) | 87.72** | 128.284** | 806.72** | 1011.35** | 292.36** | |
| 秸秆还田Straw returning(S) | 97.35** | 26.542** | 21.43** | 44.92** | 135.44** | |
| Y×V | 20.45** | ns | 177.53** | 334.23** | ns | |
| Y×I | ns | ns | 26.39** | 21.19** | ns | |
| Y×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| V×I | ns | ns | ns | 110.79** | ns | |
| V×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| Y×V×I | ns | ns | 11.40* | ns | ns | |
| Y×V×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| Y×I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| V×I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| Y×V×I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
表1 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式对水稻产量及其构成因素的影响
Table 1. Effects of different irrigation and straw returning methods on rice yield and its components
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 穗数 Number of panicles (×104/hm2) | 每穗粒数 Spikelets per panicle | 结实率 Filled grain rate(%) | 千粒重 1000-grain weight (g) | 产量 Grain yield (t/hm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | ||||||
| CI+S0 | 182.50 cd | 292.14 d | 82.29 c | 25.42 e | 11.15 c | |
| CI+SC | 185.00 bc | 294.11 cd | 82.75 bc | 25.55 d | 11.50 c | |
| CI+SS | 190.00 a | 302.52 bc | 83.30 b | 25.77 c | 12.34 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 178.75 d | 305.26 ab | 84.51 a | 26.57 b | 12.26 b | |
| AWD+SC | 181.25 cd | 306.63 ab | 84.48 a | 26.65 b | 12.52 b | |
| AWD+SS | 187.50 ab | 311.54 a | 85.04 a | 26.81 a | 13.32 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 226.25 bc | 139.43 c | 90.62 b | 28.57 b | 8.17 d |
| CI+SC | 230.00 ab | 141.49 bc | 90.72 b | 28.63 b | 8.45 cd | |
| CI+SS | 233.75 a | 146.22 bc | 91.10 b | 28.84 ab | 8.99 bc | |
| AWD+S0 | 221.25 c | 147.78 abc | 92.75 a | 29.04 ab | 8.82 bcd | |
| AWD+SC | 227.50 abc | 148.85 ab | 92.92 a | 29.11 ab | 9.15 ab | |
| AWD+SS | 230.00 ab | 155.24 a | 93.33 a | 29.31 a | 9.77 a | |
| 2024 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | ||||||
| CI+S0 | 182.50 bc | 289.45 d | 80.38 b | 23.68 b | 10.05 c | |
| CI+SC | 186.25 b | 290.56 d | 80.86 b | 23.72 b | 10.36 c | |
| CI+SS | 192.50 a | 297.42 c | 81.27 b | 23.85 b | 11.10 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 177.50 c | 301.75 bc | 83.88 a | 24.96 ab | 11.21 b | |
| AWD+SC | 180.00 c | 303.58 b | 84.02 a | 25.04 a | 11.50 b | |
| AWD+SS | 187.50 ab | 307.72 a | 84.77 a | 25.21 a | 12.33 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 232.50 ab | 137.65 c | 86.98 b | 27.81 c | 7.75 d |
| CI+SC | 237.50 a | 140.03 bc | 86.97 b | 27.89 bc | 8.07 cd | |
| CI+SS | 241.25 a | 145.57 b | 87.46 b | 28.02 bc | 8.60 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 224.50 b | 146.08 b | 89.36 a | 28.13 b | 8.25 bc | |
| AWD+SC | 226.50 b | 147.65 b | 89.58 a | 28.85 a | 8.64 b | |
| AWD+SS | 236.25 a | 152.38 a | 89.92 a | 29.06 a | 9.43 a | |
| 方差分析Analysis of variance | ||||||
| 年份Year(Y) | 25.37* | 8.90* | 730.32** | 1641.67** | 210.58** | |
| 品种Variety(V) | 7399.56** | 31639.49** | 6418.84** | 13245.22** | 3245.50** | |
| 灌溉方式Irrigation regime(I) | 87.72** | 128.284** | 806.72** | 1011.35** | 292.36** | |
| 秸秆还田Straw returning(S) | 97.35** | 26.542** | 21.43** | 44.92** | 135.44** | |
| Y×V | 20.45** | ns | 177.53** | 334.23** | ns | |
| Y×I | ns | ns | 26.39** | 21.19** | ns | |
| Y×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| V×I | ns | ns | ns | 110.79** | ns | |
| V×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| Y×V×I | ns | ns | 11.40* | ns | ns | |
| Y×V×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| Y×I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| V×I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| Y×V×I×S | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | |
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 分蘖中期 Mid tillering | 穗分化始期 Panicle initiation | 抽穗期 Heading | 成熟期 Maturity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 18.09 d | 20.01 e | 22.22 e | 8.31 b |
| CI+SC | 18.69 d | 21.74 d | 22.68 e | 8.39 b | |
| CI+SS | 19.25 c | 23.26 d | 23.74 d | 8.91 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 21.40 b | 24.01 c | 25.72 c | 10.07 a | |
| AWD+SC | 21.46 b | 25.05 b | 26.13 b | 10.43 a | |
| AWD+SS | 22.55 a | 26.89 a | 26.93 a | 10.61 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 16.53 e | 18.13 f | 21.06 e | 6.49 b |
| CI+SC | 17.75 d | 19.94 e | 21.52 e | 6.86 b | |
| CI+SS | 18.83 c | 20.68 d | 22.13 d | 6.98 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 20.15 b | 21.41 c | 23.32 c | 8.35 a | |
| AWD+SC | 20.53 b | 22.64 b | 24.26 b | 8.64 a | |
| AWD+SS | 20.94 a | 23.01 a | 25.43 a | 8.83 a | |
| 2024 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 19.11 d | 21.31 e | 22.43 d | 7.26 d |
| CI+SC | 19.87 d | 21.67 de | 22.85 cd | 7.45 d | |
| CI+SS | 20.44 c | 22.44 d | 23.36 c | 8.35 c | |
| AWD+S0 | 22.59 b | 24.62 c | 25.83 b | 9.34 b | |
| AWD+SC | 23.17 ab | 25.15 b | 26.43 ab | 9.64 b | |
| AWD+SS | 23.34 a | 26.38 a | 27.02 a | 10.59 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 17.48 c | 20.65 c | 21.58 e | 6.22 d |
| CI+SC | 18.14 c | 20.84 c | 21.76 e | 6.74 d | |
| CI+SS | 18.87 b | 20.76 c | 22.94 d | 7.58 c | |
| AWD+S0 | 21.34 a | 21.07 b | 23.83 c | 8.21 b | |
| AWD+SC | 22.06 ab | 21.63 b | 24.16 bc | 8.51 b | |
| AWD+SS | 22.49 a | 22.42 a | 24.67 a | 9.42 a |
表2 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式对水稻主要生育时期的净光合速率的影响
Table 2. Effects of irrigation and straw returning modes on net photosynthetic rate in main growth stage of rice [mol/(m2·s)]
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 分蘖中期 Mid tillering | 穗分化始期 Panicle initiation | 抽穗期 Heading | 成熟期 Maturity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 18.09 d | 20.01 e | 22.22 e | 8.31 b |
| CI+SC | 18.69 d | 21.74 d | 22.68 e | 8.39 b | |
| CI+SS | 19.25 c | 23.26 d | 23.74 d | 8.91 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 21.40 b | 24.01 c | 25.72 c | 10.07 a | |
| AWD+SC | 21.46 b | 25.05 b | 26.13 b | 10.43 a | |
| AWD+SS | 22.55 a | 26.89 a | 26.93 a | 10.61 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 16.53 e | 18.13 f | 21.06 e | 6.49 b |
| CI+SC | 17.75 d | 19.94 e | 21.52 e | 6.86 b | |
| CI+SS | 18.83 c | 20.68 d | 22.13 d | 6.98 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 20.15 b | 21.41 c | 23.32 c | 8.35 a | |
| AWD+SC | 20.53 b | 22.64 b | 24.26 b | 8.64 a | |
| AWD+SS | 20.94 a | 23.01 a | 25.43 a | 8.83 a | |
| 2024 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 19.11 d | 21.31 e | 22.43 d | 7.26 d |
| CI+SC | 19.87 d | 21.67 de | 22.85 cd | 7.45 d | |
| CI+SS | 20.44 c | 22.44 d | 23.36 c | 8.35 c | |
| AWD+S0 | 22.59 b | 24.62 c | 25.83 b | 9.34 b | |
| AWD+SC | 23.17 ab | 25.15 b | 26.43 ab | 9.64 b | |
| AWD+SS | 23.34 a | 26.38 a | 27.02 a | 10.59 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 17.48 c | 20.65 c | 21.58 e | 6.22 d |
| CI+SC | 18.14 c | 20.84 c | 21.76 e | 6.74 d | |
| CI+SS | 18.87 b | 20.76 c | 22.94 d | 7.58 c | |
| AWD+S0 | 21.34 a | 21.07 b | 23.83 c | 8.21 b | |
| AWD+SC | 22.06 ab | 21.63 b | 24.16 bc | 8.51 b | |
| AWD+SS | 22.49 a | 22.42 a | 24.67 a | 9.42 a |
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 抽穗期NSC量 NSC at heading (t/hm2) | 成熟期NSC量 NSC at maturity (t/hm2) | NSC转运量 NSC translocation amount(t/hm2) | NSC转运率 NSC translocation rate(%) | NSC对产量贡献率 Contribution of NSC translocation to grain yield(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | ||||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 1.98 c | 1.12 b | 0.86 d | 43.43 d | 8.44 d |
| CI+SC | 2.06 c | 1.14 b | 0.92 d | 44.66 d | 8.66 d | |
| CI+SS | 2.34 b | 1.28 a | 1.06 c | 45.30 c | 9.27 c | |
| AWD+S0 | 2.36 b | 1.01 c | 1.35 b | 57.20 b | 12.14 b | |
| AWD+SC | 2.41 ab | 1.02 c | 1.39 b | 57.68 b | 12.05 b | |
| AWD+SS | 2.74 a | 1.13 b | 1.61 a | 58.76 a | 13.16 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 1.56 d | 0.99 b | 0.57 d | 36.54 d | 7.74 d |
| CI+SC | 1.62 d | 1.02 b | 0.60 cd | 37.04 d | 8.02 d | |
| CI+SS | 1.82 c | 1.11 a | 0.71 c | 39.01 c | 8.93 cd | |
| AWD+S0 | 1.98 bc | 0.95 b | 1.03 b | 52.02 b | 12.83 b | |
| AWD+SC | 2.06 ab | 0.98 b | 1.08 b | 52.43 b | 13.15 ab | |
| AWD+SS | 2.26 a | 1.02 b | 1.24 a | 54.87 a | 13.81 a | |
| 2024 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | ||||||
| CI+S0 | 2.18 c | 1.21 b | 1.06 d | 48.58 b | 10.77 b | |
| CI+SC | 2.23 c | 1.24 b | 1.11 d | 49.60 b | 11.17 b | |
| CI+SS | 2.38 b | 1.38 a | 1.10 d | 46.05 b | 10.51 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 2.36 b | 1.01 c | 1.35 c | 57.20 a | 12.34 a | |
| AWD+SC | 2.41 b | 1.02 c | 1.39 b c | 57.68 a | 12.50 a | |
| AWD+SS | 2.69 a | 1.15 bc | 1.54 a | 57.25 a | 13.29 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 2.26 d | 1.23 c | 1.03 b | 45.56 b | 13.97 b |
| CI+SC | 2.32 cd | 1.23 c | 1.09 b | 46.98 b | 14.48 b | |
| CI+SS | 2.51 b | 1.51 a | 1.17 b | 46.61 b | 14.43 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 2.59 b | 1.18 c | 1.41 a | 54.44 a | 17.54 a | |
| AWD+SC | 2.64 b | 1.20 c | 1.44 a | 54.52 a | 17.44 a | |
| AWD+SS | 2.81 a | 1.30 b | 1.51 a | 53.74 a | 17.81 a |
表3 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式对水稻NSC积累和转运的影响
Table 3. Effects of different irrigation and straw returning methods on NSC accumulation and transport in rice
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 抽穗期NSC量 NSC at heading (t/hm2) | 成熟期NSC量 NSC at maturity (t/hm2) | NSC转运量 NSC translocation amount(t/hm2) | NSC转运率 NSC translocation rate(%) | NSC对产量贡献率 Contribution of NSC translocation to grain yield(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | ||||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 1.98 c | 1.12 b | 0.86 d | 43.43 d | 8.44 d |
| CI+SC | 2.06 c | 1.14 b | 0.92 d | 44.66 d | 8.66 d | |
| CI+SS | 2.34 b | 1.28 a | 1.06 c | 45.30 c | 9.27 c | |
| AWD+S0 | 2.36 b | 1.01 c | 1.35 b | 57.20 b | 12.14 b | |
| AWD+SC | 2.41 ab | 1.02 c | 1.39 b | 57.68 b | 12.05 b | |
| AWD+SS | 2.74 a | 1.13 b | 1.61 a | 58.76 a | 13.16 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 1.56 d | 0.99 b | 0.57 d | 36.54 d | 7.74 d |
| CI+SC | 1.62 d | 1.02 b | 0.60 cd | 37.04 d | 8.02 d | |
| CI+SS | 1.82 c | 1.11 a | 0.71 c | 39.01 c | 8.93 cd | |
| AWD+S0 | 1.98 bc | 0.95 b | 1.03 b | 52.02 b | 12.83 b | |
| AWD+SC | 2.06 ab | 0.98 b | 1.08 b | 52.43 b | 13.15 ab | |
| AWD+SS | 2.26 a | 1.02 b | 1.24 a | 54.87 a | 13.81 a | |
| 2024 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | ||||||
| CI+S0 | 2.18 c | 1.21 b | 1.06 d | 48.58 b | 10.77 b | |
| CI+SC | 2.23 c | 1.24 b | 1.11 d | 49.60 b | 11.17 b | |
| CI+SS | 2.38 b | 1.38 a | 1.10 d | 46.05 b | 10.51 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 2.36 b | 1.01 c | 1.35 c | 57.20 a | 12.34 a | |
| AWD+SC | 2.41 b | 1.02 c | 1.39 b c | 57.68 a | 12.50 a | |
| AWD+SS | 2.69 a | 1.15 bc | 1.54 a | 57.25 a | 13.29 a | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 2.26 d | 1.23 c | 1.03 b | 45.56 b | 13.97 b |
| CI+SC | 2.32 cd | 1.23 c | 1.09 b | 46.98 b | 14.48 b | |
| CI+SS | 2.51 b | 1.51 a | 1.17 b | 46.61 b | 14.43 b | |
| AWD+S0 | 2.59 b | 1.18 c | 1.41 a | 54.44 a | 17.54 a | |
| AWD+SC | 2.64 b | 1.20 c | 1.44 a | 54.52 a | 17.44 a | |
| AWD+SS | 2.81 a | 1.30 b | 1.51 a | 53.74 a | 17.81 a |
图3 灌溉方式和秸秆还田方式对光合势的影响 图中误差棒表示标准误,不同小写字母表示各处理间差异显著(P<0.05,Duncan)。下同。
Fig. 3. Effects of irrigation and straw returning methods on photosynthetic potential Error bars in the figure represent standard error, and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among treatments (P < 0.05, Duncan). The same below.
图4 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式对水稻主要生育时期的干物质积累量
Fig. 4. Effects of irrigation and straw returning methods on dry matter accumulation during main growth stages of rice MT, Mid-tillering; PI, Panicle initiation; HD, Heading; MA, Maturity. The same below.
图5 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式对水稻主要生育时期的根干质量和根冠比的影响
Fig. 5. Effects of irrigation and straw returning methods on root dry weight and root shoot ratio in main growth stage of rice
图6 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式对水稻主要生育期的水稻根系氧化力的影响
Fig. 6. Effects of irrigation and straw returning methods on root oxidative activity of rice roots in main growth stages
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 甲烷排放量 CH4 emission (kg/hm2) | 氧化亚氮排放量 N2O emission (g/hm2) | 全球增温潜势 Global warming potential(kg/hm2) | 温室气体强度 Greenhouse gas intensity(kg/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 341.63 b | 26.38 e | 9231.21 b | 0.91 b |
| CI+SC | 253.70 c | 20.55 f | 6855.51 c | 0.65 c | |
| CI+SS | 494.83 a | 31.37 d | 13368.97 a | 1.17 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 164.47 d | 61.97 b | 4457.61 d | 0.40 d | |
| AWD+SC | 136.06 d | 45.97 c | 3686.17 d | 0.32 d | |
| AWD+SS | 278.44 c | 83.09 a | 7540.56 e | 0.62 c | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 492.53 b | 19.59 d e | 13303.66 b | 1.81 a |
| CI+SC | 407.49 c | 15.82 e | 11006.55 c | 1.47 b | |
| CI+SS | 584.97 a | 28.00 d | 15801.83 a | 1.99 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 267.71 e | 61.64 b | 7245.00 e | 0.92 d | |
| AWD+SC | 199.72 f | 52.87 c | 5406.87 f | 0.66 e | |
| AWD+SS | 355.43 d | 80.86 a | 9078.68 d | 1.01 d | |
| 2024 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 209.07 c | 16.84 d | 5649.38 b | 0.56 a |
| CI+SC | 172.05 d | 15.70 d | 4649.71 c | 0.45 b | |
| CI+SS | 243.78 a | 20.40 c | 6587.76 a | 0.59 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 105.95 e | 36.97 b | 2870.62 d | 0.26 c | |
| AWD+SC | 78.06 f | 33.18 b | 2116.68 e | 0.18 d | |
| AWD+SS | 198.24 b | 43.76 a | 5364.55 b | 0.44 b | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 204.93 b | 21.86 c | 5539.08 b | 0.72 b |
| CI+SC | 154.23 d | 19.79 c | 4169.61 d | 0.52 c | |
| CI+SS | 253.02 a | 23.93 c | 6838.07 a | 0.80 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 86.67 e | 47.82 a b | 2353.18 e | 0.29 d | |
| AWD+SC | 67.78 f | 43.97 b | 1842.06 f | 0.21 e | |
| AWD+SS | 180.55 c | 53.88 a | 4889.56 c | 0.52 c | |
| 方差分析Analysis of variance | |||||
| 年份Year(Y) | 4494.78** | 526.798** | 4508.40** | 2777.53** | |
| 品种Variety(V) | 339.675** | 29.14** | 340.63** | 1499.71** | |
| 灌溉方式Irrigation regime(I) | 3322.83** | 3449.78** | 3312.84** | 3012.75** | |
| 秸秆还田Straw returning(S) | 1044.08** | 263.31** | 1047.99** | 511.77** | |
| Y×V | 524.73** | 73.71** | 524.65** | 764.267** | |
| Y×I | 508.38** | 258.03** | 507.55** | 363.38** | |
| Y×S | 74.09** | 67.49** | 74.52** | 27.77** | |
| V×I | 52.29** | 26.00** | 52.21** | 201.44** | |
| V×S | 7.60* | ns | 7.62* | 9.42* | |
| I×S | 11.01** | 46.72** | 10.98** | 15.17** | |
| Y×V×I | 11.01** | ns | 19.297** | 63.65*** | |
| Y×V×S | 12.29** | ns | 12.30** | ns | |
| Y×I×S | 39.61** | 13.43** | 39.57** | 22.11** | |
| Y×V×I×S | 7.41* | ns | 7.41* | ns | |
表4 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式对全球增温潜势和温室气体强度的影响
Table 4. Effects of irrigation and straw returning methods on global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity
| 年度与品种 Year and variety | 处理 Treatment | 甲烷排放量 CH4 emission (kg/hm2) | 氧化亚氮排放量 N2O emission (g/hm2) | 全球增温潜势 Global warming potential(kg/hm2) | 温室气体强度 Greenhouse gas intensity(kg/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 341.63 b | 26.38 e | 9231.21 b | 0.91 b |
| CI+SC | 253.70 c | 20.55 f | 6855.51 c | 0.65 c | |
| CI+SS | 494.83 a | 31.37 d | 13368.97 a | 1.17 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 164.47 d | 61.97 b | 4457.61 d | 0.40 d | |
| AWD+SC | 136.06 d | 45.97 c | 3686.17 d | 0.32 d | |
| AWD+SS | 278.44 c | 83.09 a | 7540.56 e | 0.62 c | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 492.53 b | 19.59 d e | 13303.66 b | 1.81 a |
| CI+SC | 407.49 c | 15.82 e | 11006.55 c | 1.47 b | |
| CI+SS | 584.97 a | 28.00 d | 15801.83 a | 1.99 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 267.71 e | 61.64 b | 7245.00 e | 0.92 d | |
| AWD+SC | 199.72 f | 52.87 c | 5406.87 f | 0.66 e | |
| AWD+SS | 355.43 d | 80.86 a | 9078.68 d | 1.01 d | |
| 2024 | |||||
| 甬优2640 Yongyou 2640 | CI+S0 | 209.07 c | 16.84 d | 5649.38 b | 0.56 a |
| CI+SC | 172.05 d | 15.70 d | 4649.71 c | 0.45 b | |
| CI+SS | 243.78 a | 20.40 c | 6587.76 a | 0.59 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 105.95 e | 36.97 b | 2870.62 d | 0.26 c | |
| AWD+SC | 78.06 f | 33.18 b | 2116.68 e | 0.18 d | |
| AWD+SS | 198.24 b | 43.76 a | 5364.55 b | 0.44 b | |
| 南粳5718 Nanjing 5718 | CI+S0 | 204.93 b | 21.86 c | 5539.08 b | 0.72 b |
| CI+SC | 154.23 d | 19.79 c | 4169.61 d | 0.52 c | |
| CI+SS | 253.02 a | 23.93 c | 6838.07 a | 0.80 a | |
| AWD+S0 | 86.67 e | 47.82 a b | 2353.18 e | 0.29 d | |
| AWD+SC | 67.78 f | 43.97 b | 1842.06 f | 0.21 e | |
| AWD+SS | 180.55 c | 53.88 a | 4889.56 c | 0.52 c | |
| 方差分析Analysis of variance | |||||
| 年份Year(Y) | 4494.78** | 526.798** | 4508.40** | 2777.53** | |
| 品种Variety(V) | 339.675** | 29.14** | 340.63** | 1499.71** | |
| 灌溉方式Irrigation regime(I) | 3322.83** | 3449.78** | 3312.84** | 3012.75** | |
| 秸秆还田Straw returning(S) | 1044.08** | 263.31** | 1047.99** | 511.77** | |
| Y×V | 524.73** | 73.71** | 524.65** | 764.267** | |
| Y×I | 508.38** | 258.03** | 507.55** | 363.38** | |
| Y×S | 74.09** | 67.49** | 74.52** | 27.77** | |
| V×I | 52.29** | 26.00** | 52.21** | 201.44** | |
| V×S | 7.60* | ns | 7.62* | 9.42* | |
| I×S | 11.01** | 46.72** | 10.98** | 15.17** | |
| Y×V×I | 11.01** | ns | 19.297** | 63.65*** | |
| Y×V×S | 12.29** | ns | 12.30** | ns | |
| Y×I×S | 39.61** | 13.43** | 39.57** | 22.11** | |
| Y×V×I×S | 7.41* | ns | 7.41* | ns | |
图8 不同灌溉和秸秆还田方式下主要农艺生理性状与产量和温室气体的相关分析 Yield: 产量; PTP: 茎蘖成穗率; Pn: 净光合速率; NPR: 光合势; DMA: 地上部干物质积累量; NSCT: 非结构性碳水化合物转运量; RW: 根干质量; R/S: 根冠比; ROA: 根系氧化力; CH4: 甲烷累计排放量; N2O: 氧化亚氮累计排放量; GWP: 全球增温潜势; GHGI: 温室气体强度。*、**分别表示在5%、1%水平上相关性显著。
Fig. 8. Correlation analysis of major agronomic and physiological traits with yield and greenhouse gas emission under different irrigation and straw returning methods PTP, Productive tiller percentage; Pn, Net photosynthetic rate; NPR, Photosynthetic potential; DMA, Above-ground dry matter accumulation; NSCT, Non-structural carbohydrate transfer volume; RW, Root dry weight; R/S, Root to shoot ratio; ROA, Root oxidation power; CH4, Methane cumulative emissions; N2O, Nitrous oxide cumulative emissions; GWP, Global warming potential; GHGI, Greenhouse gas intensity. *, ** indicate significant correlation at the 5% and 1% levels, respectively.
| [1] | Zhu X, Ji Y, Huang Q, Shen W, Wei Z, Ma J, Zhang G, Xu H. Temporal variation of methanogenic pathways in rice fields under three different cropping systems[J]. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2024, 60(6): 743-756. |
| [2] | Li R C, Tian Y G, Wang F, Sun Y F, Lin B J, Dang Y P, Zhao X, Zhang H L, Xu Z Y. Optimizing the rate of straw returning to balance trade-offs between carbon emission budget and rice yield in China[J]. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2024, 47: 166-177. |
| [3] | Li Y, Shao X, Sheng Z, Guan W, Xiao M. Water conservation and nitrogen loading reduction effects with controlled and mid-gathering irrigation in a paddy field[J]. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 2016, 25(3): 1085-1091. |
| [4] | 顾希, 刘昆, 高捷, 刘立军. 节水灌溉技术及其对水稻产量影响的研究进展[J]. 杂交水稻, 2022, 37(2): 7-13. |
| Gu X, Liu K, Gao J, Liu L J. Research advances of water-saving irrigation methods and their influences on rice yield[J]. Hybrid Rice, 2022, 37(2): 7-13. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [5] | Maneepitak S, Ullah H, Paothong K, Kachenchart B, Datta A, Shrestha R P. Effect of water and rice straw management practices on yield and water productivity of irrigated lowland rice in the Central Plain of Thailand[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2019, 211: 89-97. |
| [6] | Zhang Y, Wang W, Li S, Zhu K, Hua X, Harrison M T, Liu K, Yang J, Liu L, Chen Y. Integrated management approaches enabling sustainable rice production under alternate wetting and drying irrigation[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2023, 281: 108265. |
| [7] | Carrijo D R, Lundy M E, Linquist B A. Rice yields and water use under alternate wetting and drying irrigation: A meta-analysis[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017, 203: 173-180. |
| [8] | Gao R, Zhuo L, Duan Y, Yan C, Yue Z, Zhao Z, Wu P. Effects of alternate wetting and drying irrigation on yield, water-saving, and emission reduction in rice fields: A global meta-analysis[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2024, 353: 110075. |
| [9] | Wei Q, Xu J, Sun L, Wang H, Lv Y, Li Y, Hameed F. Effects of straw returning on rice growth and yield under water-saving irrigation[J]. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 2019, 79(1): 66-74. |
| [10] | Shao J, Gao C, Afi Seglah P, Xie J, Zhao L, Bi Y, Wang Y. Analysis of the available straw nutrient resources and substitution of chemical fertilizers with straw returned directly to the field in China[J]. Agriculture, 2023, 13(6): 1187. |
| [11] | 秦子元, 张忠学, 郑和祥, 赵文博, 刘祥. 秸秆还田下灌溉模式对水稻产量及水氮利用的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024(9): 191-199. |
| Qin Z Y, Zhang Z X, Zheng H X, Zhao W B, Liu X. Effects of irrigation modes under straw returning to field on rice yield and water and nitrogen utilization[J]. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China, 2024(9): 191-199. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [12] | Liu C, Lu M, Cui J, Li B, Fang C. Effects of straw carbon input on carbon dynamics in agricultural soils: A meta-analysis[J]. Global Change Biology, 2014, 20(5): 1366-1381. |
| [13] | Jin P H, Chen Z, Wang H, Lü R J, Hu T L, Zhou R, Zhang J G, Lin X W, Liu Q, Xie Z B. 12-year continuous biochar application: Mitigating reactive nitrogen loss in paddy fields but without rice yield enhancement[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2024, 375: 109223. |
| [14] | Shaghaleh H, Zhu Y, Shi X, Alhaj H Y, Ma C. Co-effects of nitrogen fertilizer and straw-decomposing microbial inoculant on decomposition and transformation of field composted wheat straw[J]. Life, 2023, 13(10): 1993. |
| [15] | Li H, Liu Y, Jiao X, Li J, Liu K, Wu T, Zhang Z, Luo D. Response of soil nutrients retention and rice growth to biochar in straw returning paddy fields[J]. Chemosphere, 2023, 312(1): 137244. |
| [16] | 于宗波, 杨恒山, 萨如拉, 李媛媛, 罗方, 郭晓旭. 不同质地土壤玉米秸秆还田配施腐熟剂效应的研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(4): 234-240. |
| Yu Z B, Yang H S, Sa R L, Li Y Y, Luo F, Guo X X. Effect of maize straw returning combined with maturation agent in different texture soils[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 33(4): 234-240. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [17] | 肖治林, 王琛, 张瑛, 景文疆, 张伟杨, 顾骏飞, 刘立军, 王志琴, 杨建昌, 张耗. 控释氮肥施用策略对稻茬小麦产量和氮肥吸收利用的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2024, 44(4): 472-484. |
| Xiao Z L, Wang C, Zhang Y, Jing W J, Zhang W Y, Gu J F, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Yang J C, Zhang H. Effect of controlled-released nitrogen fertilizer application strategy on yield and nitrogen uptake and utilization of wheat following rice stubble[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2024, 44(4): 472-484. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [18] | 顾汉柱, 王琛, 吴昊, 张瑛, 肖治林, 景文疆, 张耗. 减氮方式对不同穗型粳稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物研究, 2023, 37(5): 448-460. |
| Gu H Z, Wang C, Wu H, Zhang Y, Xiao Z L, Jing W J, Zhang H. Effects of nitrogen reduction on yield and quality of Japonica rice with different panicle type[J]. Crop Research, 2023, 37(5): 448-460. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [19] | 张耗, 余超, 陈可伟, 孔祥胜, 刘海浪, 陈俊义, 顾骏飞, 刘立军, 王志琴, 杨建昌. 直播方式对水稻生理性状和产量的影响及其成本分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(13): 58-64. |
| Zhang H, Yu C, Chen K W, Kong X S, Liu H L, Chen J Y, Gu J F, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Yang J C. Effect of direct-seeding methods on physiological characteristics and grain yield of rice and its cost analysis[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2017, 33(13): 58-64. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [20] | 景文疆, 顾汉柱, 张小祥, 吴昊, 张伟杨, 顾骏飞, 刘立军, 王志琴, 杨建昌, 张耗. 中籼水稻品种改良过程中米质和根系特征对灌溉方式的响应[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2022, 36(5): 505-519. |
| Jing W J, Gu H Z, Zhang X X, Wu H, Zhang W Y, Gu J F, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Yang J C, Zhang H. Response of grain quality and root characteristics to irrigation methods during mid-season indica rice varieties improvement[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2022, 36(5): 505-519. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [21] | 邓亚萍. 水稻耐低磷的机理与栽培调控技术[D]. 扬州: 扬州大学, 2022. |
| Deng Y P. Mechanism in tolerance to low phosphorus and cultivation regulation techniques of rice[D]. Yangzhou: Yangzhou University, 2022. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [22] | 马义虎, 顾道健, 刘立军, 王志琴, 张耗, 杨建昌. 玉米秸秆源有机肥对水稻产量与温室气体排放的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2013, 27(5): 520-528. |
| Ma Y H, Gu D J, Liu L J, Wang Z Q, Zhang H, Yang J C. Effects of the organic fertilizers made from maize straw on grain yield of rice and emission of greenhouse gases from paddy fields[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2013, 27(5): 520-528. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [23] | IPCC. Climate change 2023: Synthesis report[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023. |
| [24] | Zhu K, Zhou T, Li Z, Zhang W, Wang Z, Gu J, Yang J. Controlled irrigation can mitigate the greenhouse effects of rice paddy fields with long-term straw return and stimulate microbial necromass carbon accumulation[J]. Field Crops Research, 2024, 317: 109571. |
| [25] | Dai W, Bao Z, Meng J, Chen T, Zhang W, Chen Y, Lin L, Su X, Jiang X. Biochar incorporation increases grain yield, net ecosystem CO2 exchange, and decreases CH4 emissions in an alternate wetting and drying paddy ecosystem[J]. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 2024, 34: 103577. |
| [26] | Bo Y, Wang X, van Groenigen K J, Linquist B A, Müller C, Li T, Yang J, Jägermeyr J, Qin Y, Zhou F. Improved alternate wetting and drying irrigation increases global water productivity[J]. Nature Food, 2024, 5(12): 1005-1013. |
| [27] | Huang M, Yang L, Qin H, Jiang L, Zou Y. Quantifying the effect of biochar amendment on soil quality and crop productivity in Chinese rice paddies[J]. Field Crops Research, 2013, 154: 172-177. |
| [28] | Liu Y, Li J, Jiao X, Li H, Hu T, Jiang H, Mahmoud A. Effects of biochar on water quality and rice productivity under straw returning condition in a rice-wheat rotation region[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 819: 152063. |
| [29] | Sun H, Zhang H, Xiao H, Shi W, Müller K, Van Zwieten L, Wang H. Wheat straw biochar application increases ammonia volatilization from an urban compacted soil giving a short-term reduction in fertilizer nitrogen use efficiency[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2019, 19(4): 1624-1631. |
| [30] | 苏扬, 商小兰, 钱忠明, 吴林根, 黄佳琦, 庄海峰, 赵宇飞, 党洪阳, 徐立军. 腐熟剂与生物炭协同强化秸秆还田对土壤质量和水稻生长的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(5): 1139-1148. |
| Su Y, Shang X L, Qian Z M, Wu L G, Huang J Q, Zhuang H F, Zhao Y F, Dang H Y, Xu L J. Effects of synergistic enhancement of straw returning to the field with decomposition agent and biochar on soil quality and rice growth[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(5): 1139-1148. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [31] | Wang Z, Zhang W, Beebout S S, Zhang H, Liu L, Yang J, Zhang J. Grain yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies of rice as influenced by irrigation regimes and their interaction with nitrogen rates[J]. Field Crops Research, 2016, 193: 54-69. |
| [32] | Zhang W, Yu J, Xu Y, Wang Z, Liu L, Zhang H, Gu J, Zhang J, Yang J. Alternate wetting and drying irrigation combined with the proportion of polymer-coated urea and conventional urea rates increases grain yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies in rice[J]. Field Crops Research, 2021, 268: 108165. |
| [33] | Zhang H, Jing W, Zhao B, Wang W, Xu Y, Zhang W, Gu J, Liu L, Wang Z, Yang J. Alternative fertilizer and irrigation practices improve rice yield and resource use efficiency by regulating source-sink relationships[J]. Field Crops Research, 2021, 265: 108124. |
| [34] | 杨颖. 不同籼稻品种的农艺生理特征对干湿交替灌溉的响应[D]. 扬州: 扬州大学, 2022. |
| Yang Y. Response of agronomic and physiological characteristics of different indica rice varieties to alternating dry and wet irrigation[D]. Yangzhou: Yangzhou University, 2022. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [35] | 褚光, 展明飞, 朱宽宇, 王志琴, 杨建昌. 干湿交替灌溉对水稻产量与水分利用效率的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2016, 42(7): 1026-1036. |
| Chu G, Zhan M F, Zhu K Y, Wang Z Q, Yang J C. Effects of alternating dry and wet irrigation on rice yield and water use efficiency[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2016, 42(7): 1026-1036. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [36] | 徐国伟, 赵喜辉, 江孟孟, 陆大克, 陈明灿. 轻度干湿交替灌溉协调水稻根冠生长、提高产量及氮肥利用效率[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(8): 1388-1396. |
| Xu G W, Zhao X H, Jiang M M, Lu D K, Chen M C. Mild dry and wet alternating irrigation harmonizes root shoot growth, improves yield and nitrogen use efficiency of rice[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 2021, 27(8): 1388-1396. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [37] | Ma Y, Liu D L, Schwenke G, Yang B. The global warming potential of straw-return can be reduced by application of straw-decomposing microbial inoculants and biochar in rice-wheat production systems[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2019, 252: 835-845. |
| [38] | Zulfiqar F, Wei X, Shaukat N, Chen J, Raza A, Younis A, Nafees M, Abideen Z, Zaid A, Latif N, Naveed M, Siddique K H M. Effects of biochar and biochar-compost mix on growth, performance and physiological responses of potted Alpinia zerumbet[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 13(20): 11226. |
| [39] | Lehmann J, Rillig M C, Thies J, Masiello C A, Hockaday W C, Crowley D. Biochar effects on soil biota: A review[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2011, 43(9): 1812-1836. |
| [40] | 张伟明, 修立群, 吴迪, 孙媛媛, 顾闻琦, 张鈜贵, 孟军, 陈温福. 生物炭的结构及其理化特性研究回顾与展望[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(1): 1-18. |
| Zhang W M, Xiu L Q, Wu D, Sun Y Y, Gu W Q, Zhang H G, Meng J, Chen W F. Review of biochar structure and physicochemical properties[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2021, 47(1): 1-18. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [41] | 颜永毫, 王丹丹, 郑纪勇. 生物炭对土壤N2O和CH4排放影响的研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2013, 29(8): 140-146. |
| Yan Y H, Wang D D, Zheng J Y. Advances in effects of biochar on the soil N2O and CH4 emissions[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2013, 29(8): 140-146. (in Chinese) | |
| [42] | 蔡炜, 秦缘, 陈浩田, 林晨语, 杨建昌, 张伟阳. 干湿交替灌溉和生物质炭施用对稻田碳汇与甲烷排放的影响及其机理研究进展[J]. 中国稻米, 2024, 30(6): 7-14. |
| Cai W, Qin Y, Chen H T, Lin C Y, Yang J C, Zhang W Y. Research advances in the mechanism underlying alternating wet and dry irrigation and biochar affect carbon sequestration and methane emissions in paddy field[J]. China Rice, 2024, 30(6): 7-14. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [43] | 张瑛, 顾嘉怡, 张旻昊, 刘彬彬, 王琛, 张耗. 水稻根系特征与稻田甲烷排放的关系研究进展[J]. 杂交水稻, 2024, 39(6): 1-8. |
| Zhang Y, Gu J Y, Zhang M H, Liu B B, Wang C, Zhang H. Research progress on the relationship between rice root characteristics and methane emission from paddy fields[J]. Hybrid Rice, 2024, 39(6): 1-8. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [44] | 王静, 丁树文, 程益涵, 万水霞, 吴萍萍, 廖斌. 化肥减量配施生物炭和秸秆对砂姜黑土区水稻产量、养分吸收和土壤碳的影响[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2024, 43(5): 116-125. |
| Wang J, Ding S W, Cheng Y H, Wan S X, Wu P P, Liao B. Effects of reducing chemical fertilizers combined with applying biochar and straw on yield of rice and nutrient absorption and carbon in soil in lime concretion black soil areas[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University, 2024, 43(5): 116-125. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [45] | Zhang K, Zhang Z, Sui Y. The application years of biochar affect CH4 emission by negatively methanogens and increased rice yield[J]. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 2025, 38: 104099. |
| [46] | 汪勇, 吕茹洁, 黎星, 胡水秀, 商庆银. 生物炭与氮肥施用对双季稻田温室气体排放的影响[J]. 中国稻米, 2021, 27(1): 20-26. |
| Wang Y, Lü R J, Li X, Hu S X, Shang Q Y. Effects of biochar and nitrogen incorporation on greenhouse gas emissions in double rice-cropping system[J]. China Rice, 2021, 27(1): 20-26. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [47] | Zhao X, Li R C, Liu W X, Liu W S, Xue Y H, Sun R H, Wei Y X, Chen Z, Lal R, Dang Y P, Xu Z Y, Zhang H L. Estimation of crop residue production and its contribution to carbon neutrality in China[J]. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2024, 203: 107450. |
| [48] | Liu G, Yu H, Ma J, Xu H, Wu Q, Yang J, Zhuang Y. Effects of straw incorporation along with microbial inoculant on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from rice fields[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2015, 518/519: 209-216. |
| [49] | Lin Y, Ding W, Liu D, He T, Yoo G, Yuan J, Chen Z, Fan J. Wheat straw-derived biochar amendment stimulated N2O emissions from rice paddy soils by regulating the AmoA genes of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2017, 113: 89-98. |
| [50] | Verhoeven E, Decock C, Barthel M, Bertora C, Sacco D, Romani M, Sleutel S, Six J. Nitrification and coupled nitrification-denitrification at shallow depths are responsible for early season N2O emissions under alternate wetting and drying management in an Italian rice paddy system[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018, 120: 58-69. |
| [51] | van den Heuvel R N, Bakker S E, Jetten M S M, Hefting M M. Decreased N2O reduction by low soil pH causes high N2O emissions in a riparian ecosystem[J]. Geobiology, 2011, 9(3): 294-300. |
| [52] | 马煜春, 周伟, 刘翠英, 孙丽英, 杨波, 郑向群. 秸秆腐熟剂对秸秆还田稻田CH4和N2O排放的影响[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2017, 33(2): 159-165. |
| Ma Y C, Zhou W, Liu C Y, Sun L Y, Yang B, Zheng X Q. Effects of straw decomposing inoculants on methane and nitrous oxide emissions in paddy fields incorporated with straw[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2017, 33(2): 159-165. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
| [53] | Nan Q, Xin L, Qin Y, Waqas M, Wu W X. Exploring long-term effects of biochar on mitigating methane emissions from paddy soil: A review[J]. Biochar, 2021, 3(2): 125-134. |
| [54] | Nan Q, Wang C, Wang H, Yi Q, Wu W. Mitigation methane emission via annual biochar amendment paralyzed with rice straw from the same paddy field[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 2020, 746(1): 141351. |
| [55] | Nan Q, Speth D R, Qin Y, Chi W, Milucka J, Gu B, Wu W. Biochar application using recycled annual self straw reduces long-term greenhouse gas emissions from paddy fields with economic benefits[J]. Nature Food, 2025, 6(5): 456-465. |
| [56] | Liu C, Chen T, Zhang F, Han H W, Yi B J, Chi D C. Soil carbon sequestration increment and carbon-negative emissions in alternate wetting and drying paddy ecosystems through biochar incorporation[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2024, 300: 108908. |
| [57] | Gross A, Bromm T, Polifka S, Fischer D, Glaser B. Long-term biochar and soil organic carbon stability - Evidence from field experiments in Germany[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 954: 176340. |
| [58] | Qin Z, Huang Y, Zhuang Q. Soil organic carbon sequestration potential of cropland in China[J]. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2013, 27(3): 711-722. |
| [59] | Nazir M J, Li G, Nazir M M, Zulfiqar F, Siddique K H M, Iqbal B, Du D. Harnessing soil carbon sequestration to address climate change challenges in agriculture[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2024, 237: 105959. |
| [60] | Rasul M, Cho J, Shin H S, Hur J. Biochar-induced priming effects in soil via modifying the status of soil organic matter and microflora: A review[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 805: 150304. |
| [61] | Xu Y, He L, Chen J, Lyu H, Wang Y, Yang L, Yang S, Liu Y. Long-term successive biochar amendments alter the composition and α-diversity of bacterial community of paddy soil in rice-wheat rotation[J]. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2022, 10: 921766. |
| [62] | Chen Y, Du Z, Weng Z H, Sun K, Zhang Y, Liu Q, Yang Y, Li Y, Wang Z, Luo Y, Gao B, Chen B, Pan Z, Van Zwieten L. Formation of soil organic carbon pool is regulated by the structure of dissolved organic matter and microbial carbon pump efficacy: A decadal study comparing different carbon management strategies[J]. Global Change Biology, 2023, 29(18): 5445-5459. |
| [1] | 陈春晓, 付琳丽, 张微, 卜庆云, 田晓杰. 水稻MAPK家族基因功能研究进展[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 425-435. |
| [2] | 付瑶, 李娜, 徐静茹, 覃奕琰, 程笑然, 孙浩峰, 张琪, 崔志波, 杨新宇, 赵明辉. OsST2调控水稻苗期耐盐性的功能研究[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 436-446. |
| [3] | 邱一洁, 齐飞扬, 杜何为, 黄敏, 李曼菲. 水稻叶脉基因OsLVD1的鉴定及功能分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 447-459. |
| [4] | 朱骏, 杨延铭, 杨仲南. 水稻光温敏核不育系的诱变创制[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 460-468. |
| [5] | 廖萍, 刘若彤, 孟轶, 翁文安, 都晗萌, 李骏, 高辉, 张洪程. 一次性基施控释掺混肥对水稻产量和倒伏性状的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 469-475. |
| [6] | 陈川燕, 宋志文, 李玉祥, 郝全有, 朱岚. Fe-Mg纳米颗粒引发对盐胁迫下水稻种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 476-486. |
| [7] | 钟晓媛, 王众, 陈雷, 张晓丽, 黄严, 朱德峰, 王亚梁, 覃勇, 高国庆, 张隆葵, 唐茂艳, 梁天锋. 精准条播育秧对广西机插水稻栽插质量、干物质生产及产量的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 487-501. |
| [8] | 赵春芳, 罗磊, 赵庆勇, 庄丽华, 管菊, 陈涛, 朱镇, 张亚东, 王才林. 节水灌溉对优良食味粳稻产量形成及根系形态的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 519-530. |
| [9] | 梁晋雄, 冯严艺, 肖茂华, 王法安, 沈成, 胥文翔, 孟为国. 面向田间路径控制的轮式拖拉机辅助转向系统设计与验证[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 548-559. |
| [10] | 刘庆, 顾清, 朱怡航, 娄卫东, 黄福灯, 朱英, 张小斌. 基于稻穗检测与机器学习的水稻始穗期预测[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(4): 560-568. |
| [11] | 刘地斌, 陈雄飞, 方鹏, 余佳佳, 肖丽萍, 刘木华, 曾博涵, 陈晨晨. 粉状有机物料同步覆盖水稻直播机设计与试验[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(3): 414-424. |
| [12] | 贾梅杰, 陈浩田, 钟笑涵, 王伟露, 张伟杨. 植物根鞘的建成机制与功能及其在水稻生产中的应用[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(3): 292-301. |
| [13] | 易浩昆, 罗堰木, 黄敏, 杜何为, 李曼菲. 水稻侧根发育突变体lrp1鉴定及表达分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(3): 302-311. |
| [14] | 王洋洋, 杨传铭, 张喜娟, 杨贤莉, 王立志, 崔士泽, 许鑫凯, 李红宇, 姜树坤. 水稻苗期耐冷性Meta-QTL分析及候选基因预测[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(3): 312-326. |
| [15] | 许扬, 王芳权, 李文奇, 陶亚军, 范方军, 陈智慧, 蒋彦婕, 朱建平, 李霞, 杨杰. 水稻黄叶转绿突变体818-6-8的目标基因定位与转录组分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2026, 40(3): 327-340. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||