新型肥料与灌溉模式对双季稻碳足迹的影响

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202508.011

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为了揭示双季稻生产体系产量及碳足迹对新型肥料与灌溉模式的响应规律,本研究采用FAO-CROPWAT 8.0模型与田间试验(2020—2021年)相结合的方法,研究了树脂包衣尿素(CRU)、碧晶尿素(CP)、EM菌剂(EM)3种新型肥料(以常规施肥为对照)和常规灌溉(W₁)、浅水灌溉(W₂)2种灌溉模式及其互作对早稻和晚稻产量、温室气体排放及碳足迹的影响。结果表明:与常规施肥(CK)相比,2020年CRU、CP和EM 3种新型肥料早稻和晚稻平均增产14.2%和17.1%,2021年平均增产36.7%和23.1%;W₁与W₂间水稻产量差异不显著。新型肥料施用减少了双季稻体系温室气体排放,不同肥料在早、晚稻上的减排效果存在一定差异。与CK相比,CRU处理的早稻CH₄排放、全球增温潜势(GWP)和温室气体排放强度(GHGI)分别降低22.2%、22.9%和39.3%;CP处理的晚稻CH₄排放、GWP、GHGI分别降低20.7%、19.3%和33.5%;EM处理的早稻N₂O排放和GHGI分别降低了14.7%和6.2%。浅水灌溉显著减少温室气体排放,与W₁处理相比,W₂处理早稻的CH₄排放、N₂O排放、GWP和GHGI分别降低21.9%、42.0%、24.7%和25.9%,晚稻分别降低23.4%、33.6%、24.0%和23.7%。新型肥料和灌溉模式对碳足迹的影响存在显著的交互作用,与W₁模式下CK相比,新型肥料和W₂互作下早稻、晚稻季碳足迹平均值分别显著降低35.9%、22.0%。综上,施用新型肥料可以显著提高双季稻产量,优化灌溉模式可以减少温室气体排放。浅水灌溉模式下选择合适的新型肥料可以起到增产、减排、降低碳足迹的效果,实现清洁生产,促进双季稻种植的可持续发展。

关键词: 水稻, 新型肥料, 灌溉模式, 温室气体, 碳足迹

Abstract: To elucidate the responses of yield and carbon footprint of double-season rice production systems to new-type fertilizers and irrigation regimes, we investigated the effects of three new-type fertilizers, viz, controlled-release urea (CRU), nitrapyrin-treated urea (CP), and effective microorganisms (EM) (conventional fertilizer as control), and two irrigation regimes, conventional flooding (W₁) and shallow water irrigation (W₂), on yield, greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint of early- and late-season rice by the FAO-CROPWAT 8.0 modeling in combination with field experiments (2020-2021). The results showed that compared to the conventional fertilizer (CK), three new-type fertilizers increased rice yield. The average yield increases for early and late rice under the three fertilizer treatments were 14.2% and 17.1% in 2020, and were 36.7% and 23.1% in 2021. There was no difference in rice yield between W₁ and W₂. Application of new-type fertilizers reduced greenhouse gas emission in the double-season rice system, and the mitigation effect varied between early and late rice seasons. Compared to CK, CH₄ emissions, global warming potential (GWP), and greenhouse gas intensity (GHGI) under CRU treatment were decreased by 22.2%, 22.9%, and 39.3% in early rice season, that under CP treatment were decreased by 20.7%, 19.3%, and 33.5% in late rice seasons. N₂O emission and GHGI under EM treatment were decreased by 14.7% and 6.2% in early rice seasons. Shallow water irrigation significantly reduced greenhouse gas emission. Compared to the W₁ treatment, CH₄ emission, N₂O emission, GWP, and GHGI under the W₂ treatment were decreased by 21.9%, 42.0%, 24.7%, and 25.9% in early rice season, by 23.4%, 33.6%, 24.0%, and 23.7% in late rice season, respectively. There was a significant interaction effect between new-type fertilizers and irrigation regimes on carbon footprint. Compared to the CK treatment under the W₁ irrigation, the interaction of new-type fertilizers and W₂ irrigation significantly decreased the average value of carbon footprint in early and late rice seasons by 35.9% and 22.0%, respectively. In conclusion, the application of new-type fertilizers significantly increased the yield of double-season rice, while optimizing irrigation regime reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The implementation of appropriate new-type fertilizers under the shallow water irrigation could increase yield and decrease greenhouse gas emissions and the carbon footprint, which would promote clean production and contribute to the sustainable development of double-season rice systems.

Key words: rice, new-type fertilizer, irrigation regime, greenhouse gas, carbon footprint

王彬, 郭晨, 吴朋浩, 鲁剑巍, 任涛, 李小坤. 新型肥料与灌溉模式对双季稻碳足迹的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(8): 2388-2398.

WANG Bin, GUO Chen, WU Penghao, LU Jianwei, REN Tao, LI Xiaokun. Effects of new-type fertilizers and irrigation regimes on carbon footprint of double-season rice system[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2025, 36(8): 2388-2398.

参考文献

[1] Kaur M, Dheri G, Brar A, et al. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions in rice fields influenced with duration of cultivars and irrigation regimes. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2024, 365: 108923
[2] IPCC. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis: Working Group Ⅰ Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2021
[3] 夏龙龙, 颜晓元. 中国粮食作物生命周期生产过程温室气体排放的研究进展及展望. 农业环境科学学报, 2020, 39(4): 665-672
[4] Shen Y, Linquist BA, Wilson LT, et al. Sustainable intensification for a larger global rice bowl. Nature Communications, 2021, 12: 7163
[5] Liu YL, Ge TD, Jan KGV, et al. Rice paddy soils are a quantitatively important carbon store according to a glo-bal synthesis. Communications Earth & Environment, 2021, 2: 154
[6] Ivanovich CC, Sun TY, Gordon DR, et al. Future warming from global food consumption. Nature Climate Change, 2023, 13: 297-302
[7] 林志敏, 李洲, 翁佩莹, 等. 再生稻田温室气体排放特征及碳足迹. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1340-1351
[8] Abdo AI, Tian MZ, Shi ZJ, et al. Carbon footprint of global rice production and consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024, 474: 143560
[9] Jiang ZH, Zhong YM, Yang JP, et al. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer rates on carbon footprint and ecosystem service of carbon sequestration in rice production. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 670: 210-217
[10] Jin Z, Harrison TM, Liu K, et al. Dry direct-seeded rice-wheat rotation system: Lower water and carbon footprint and higher carbon production efficiency and net ecosystem economic benefits. Field Crops Research, 2024, 309: 109323
[11] Liu LH, Lian ZM, Ouyang W, et al. Potential of optimizing irrigation and fertilization management for sustainable rice production in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2023, 432: 139738
[12] Xiao C, Zhang FC, Li Y, et al. Optimizing drip irrigation and nitrogen fertilization regimes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase net ecosystem carbon budget and reduce carbon footprint in saline cotton fields. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2024, 366: 108912
[13] Dong D, Li J, Ying SS, et al. Mitigation of methane emission in a rice paddy field amended with biochar-based slow-release fertilizer. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 792: 148460
[14] Lan CJ, Zou JN, Li JY, et al. Slow-release fertilizer deep placement increased rice yield and reduced the ecological and environmental impact in Southeast China: A life-cycle perspective. Field Crops Research, 2024, 306: 109224
[15] Priya E, Sarkar S, Maji KP. A review on slow-release fertilizer: Nutrient release mechanism and agricultural sustainability. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2024, 12: 113211
[16] 刘杰云, 邱虎森, 张文正, 等. 节水灌溉对农田土壤温室气体排放的影响. 灌溉排水学报, 2019, 38(6): 1-7
[17] 秦子元, 张忠学, 郑和祥, 等. 秸秆还田下灌溉模式对水稻产量及水氮利用的影响. 中国土壤与肥料, 2024(9): 191-199
[18] Liu ZH, Yang P, Wu WB, et al. Spatiotemporal changes of cropping structure in China during 1980-2011. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018, 28: 1659-1671
[19] Yao XC, Zhang ZY, Li KX, et al. Optimizing water and nitrogen management to balance greenhouse gas emissions and yield in Chinese rice paddies. Field Crops Research, 2024, 319: 109621
[20] Zhang HW, Liang Q, Peng ZP, et al. Response of greenhouse gases emissions and yields to irrigation and straw practices in wheat-maize cropping system. Agricultural Water Management, 2023, 282: 108281
[21] Liao B, Cai TC, Wu X, et al. A combination of organic fertilizers partially substitution with alternate wet and dry irrigation could further reduce greenhouse gases emission in rice field. Journal of Environmental Management, 2023, 344: 118372
[22] 杭玉浩, 王强盛, 许国春, 等. 水分管理和秸秆还田对稻麦轮作系统温室气体排放的综合效应. 生态环境学报, 2017, 26(11): 1844-1855
[23] 董艳芳, 黄景, 李伏生, 等. 不同灌溉模式和施氮处理下稻田CH₄和N₂O排放. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2017, 23(3): 578-588
[24] van der Laan M, Jarmain C, Bastidas-Obando E, et al. Are water footprints accurate enough to be useful? A case study for maize (Zea mays L). Agricultural Water Management, 2019, 213: 512-520
[25] Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, et al. Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirement-FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1998: 152-223
[26] Mehmet Y, Kaleli A, Çorapsiz MF. Machine learning based dynamic super twisting sliding mode controller for increase speed and accuracy of MPPT using real-time data under PSCs. Renewable Energy, 2023, 219: 119470
[27] Xue JF, Liu SL, Chen ZD, et al. Assessment of carbon sustainability under different tillage systems in a double rice cropping system in Southern China. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2014, 19: 1581-1592
[28] 刘巽浩, 徐文修, 李增嘉, 等. 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. 中国农业资源与区划, 2013, 34(6): 1-11
[29] Yadav GS, Lal R, Meena RS, et al. Energy budgeting for designing sustainable and environmentally clean/safer cropping systems for rainfed rice fallow lands in India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 158: 29-37
[30] Yuttitham M, Gheewala HS, Chidthaisong A. Carbon footprint of sugar produced from sugarcane in eastern Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2011, 19: 2119-2127
[31] Guo J, Song ZF, Zhu YJ, et al. The characteristics of yield-scaled methane emission from paddy field in recent 35-year in China: A meta-analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 161: 1044-1050
[32] 赵彪, 冯旭, 贺付蒙, 等. EM富硒酵母菌剂的制备及其在水稻富硒生产中的应用. 河南农业科学, 2023, 52(8): 26-35
[33] Wang C, Amon B, Schulz K, et al. Factors that influence nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural soils as well as their representation in simulation models: A review. Agronomy, 2021, 11: 770
[34] 田光明, 何云峰, 李勇先. 水肥管理对稻田土壤甲烷和氧化亚氮排放的影响. 土壤与环境, 2002, 11(3): 294-298
[35] 王义祥, 高凌飞, 叶菁, 等. 菌渣垫料堆肥过程碳素物质转化规律. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(增刊2): 292-296
[36] Khaliq A, Abbasi MK, Hussain T. Effects of integrated use of organic and inorganic nutrient sources with effective microorganisms (EM) on seed cotton yield in Pakistan. Bioresource Technology, 2006, 97: 967-972