Is soil respiration of a chernozem under shallow cultivation similar to moldboard plowing or no-tillage?

IF 6.1 1区 农林科学 Q1 SOIL SCIENCE
Márton Dencső , Ágota Horel , Zsófia Bakacsi , Márta Birkás , Tünde Takács , Anna Füzy , Tibor Szili-Kovács , István Balla , Eszter Tóth
{"title":"Is soil respiration of a chernozem under shallow cultivation similar to moldboard plowing or no-tillage?","authors":"Márton Dencső ,&nbsp;Ágota Horel ,&nbsp;Zsófia Bakacsi ,&nbsp;Márta Birkás ,&nbsp;Tünde Takács ,&nbsp;Anna Füzy ,&nbsp;Tibor Szili-Kovács ,&nbsp;István Balla ,&nbsp;Eszter Tóth","doi":"10.1016/j.still.2025.106644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Herein, we report a 6–year–long investigation on the CO<sub>2</sub> emission (soil respiration) of a chernozem soil under conventional moldboard plowing (MP) and two conservation tillage techniques, namely shallow cultivation (SC) and no-tillage (NT). This study aims to compare soil respiration data among SC, and MP or NT treatments and investigate the underlying processes influencing the magnitude of soil-derived emissions. CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes were measured using static and dynamic chamber methods in seven replicates weekly during and biweekly to monthly outside growing seasons. We investigated postharvest yield and root biomass, post-tillage mulch thickness, soil water content (SWC) and temperature (Ts) via a monitoring system and portable instruments, soil chemical parameters via wet chemical analyses, and community-level physiological profiles of the soil microbial community using the MicroResp™ technique. The 6-year average soil respiration under SC (0.093 mgCO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>−2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>) was the same as the mean emission in NT. Both of these conservation treatments showed significantly elevated CO<sub>2</sub> emissions compared with the mean soil respiration under conventional MP (0.081 mgCO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>−2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>). We found that vegetation biomass via root respiration and denser straw residue cover could be major factors of higher CO<sub>2</sub> emission under SC. Additionally, the higher soil respiration in SC compared with MP could result from the high soil organic carbon (SOC) content. Similarly, elevated soil respiration in NT can occur because of the highest mean SOC and SWC as well as the densest straw residue layer among the three treatments. MicroResp™ measurements revealed differences in the substrate use efficiency of the microbial community under the three treatments, therefore suggesting that the treatment effect on CO<sub>2</sub> emission is caused by differences in microbial communities. Following crop production and soil respiration together, the CO<sub>2</sub> emission to yield ratio was the lowest under SC, similar to MP, and highest under NT treatment. The CO<sub>2</sub> emissions of the treatments exhibited variability over the years. Therefore, longer experimental time is essential to find more established conclusions of different tillage techniques.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49503,"journal":{"name":"Soil & Tillage Research","volume":"253 ","pages":"Article 106644"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soil & Tillage Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198725001989","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Herein, we report a 6–year–long investigation on the CO2 emission (soil respiration) of a chernozem soil under conventional moldboard plowing (MP) and two conservation tillage techniques, namely shallow cultivation (SC) and no-tillage (NT). This study aims to compare soil respiration data among SC, and MP or NT treatments and investigate the underlying processes influencing the magnitude of soil-derived emissions. CO2 fluxes were measured using static and dynamic chamber methods in seven replicates weekly during and biweekly to monthly outside growing seasons. We investigated postharvest yield and root biomass, post-tillage mulch thickness, soil water content (SWC) and temperature (Ts) via a monitoring system and portable instruments, soil chemical parameters via wet chemical analyses, and community-level physiological profiles of the soil microbial community using the MicroResp™ technique. The 6-year average soil respiration under SC (0.093 mgCO2 m−2 s−1) was the same as the mean emission in NT. Both of these conservation treatments showed significantly elevated CO2 emissions compared with the mean soil respiration under conventional MP (0.081 mgCO2 m−2 s−1). We found that vegetation biomass via root respiration and denser straw residue cover could be major factors of higher CO2 emission under SC. Additionally, the higher soil respiration in SC compared with MP could result from the high soil organic carbon (SOC) content. Similarly, elevated soil respiration in NT can occur because of the highest mean SOC and SWC as well as the densest straw residue layer among the three treatments. MicroResp™ measurements revealed differences in the substrate use efficiency of the microbial community under the three treatments, therefore suggesting that the treatment effect on CO2 emission is caused by differences in microbial communities. Following crop production and soil respiration together, the CO2 emission to yield ratio was the lowest under SC, similar to MP, and highest under NT treatment. The CO2 emissions of the treatments exhibited variability over the years. Therefore, longer experimental time is essential to find more established conclusions of different tillage techniques.
浅耕黑钙土的土壤呼吸作用与犁地或免耕相似吗?
本文研究了黑钙土在常规耕作(MP)和浅耕(SC)和免耕(NT)两种保护性耕作技术下6年的CO2排放(土壤呼吸)。本研究旨在比较SC、MP或NT处理之间的土壤呼吸数据,并研究影响土壤源排放量级的潜在过程。采用静室法和动态室法测定CO2通量,在生长季节外每周和每两周至每月进行7次重复。我们通过监测系统和便携式仪器研究了采后产量和根系生物量、耕后覆盖厚度、土壤含水量(SWC)和温度(Ts),通过湿化学分析研究了土壤化学参数,并使用MicroResp™技术研究了土壤微生物群落的群落水平生理特征。土壤呼吸的6年平均值(0.093 mgCO2 m−2 s−1)与土壤呼吸的平均值(0.081 mgCO2 m−2 s−1)相同,与传统土壤呼吸的平均值(0.081 mgCO2 m−2 s−1)相比,这两种保护处理的CO2排放量均显著增加。研究发现,土壤呼吸作用下的植被生物量和秸秆覆盖密度可能是土壤CO2排放量增加的主要因素,土壤呼吸作用的增加可能与土壤有机碳(SOC)含量的增加有关。同样,北坡土壤呼吸增加的原因是3个处理中平均土壤有机碳和SWC最高,秸秆残层密度最大。MicroResp™测量结果显示,三种处理下微生物群落的底物利用效率存在差异,因此表明处理对CO2排放的影响是由微生物群落的差异引起的。在作物生产和土壤呼吸共同作用下,SC处理的CO2排放量与产量之比最低,与MP处理相似,NT处理最高。不同处理的二氧化碳排放量在不同年份表现出变化性。因此,需要更长的试验时间,才能对不同的耕作技术得出更确定的结论。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Soil & Tillage Research
Soil & Tillage Research 农林科学-土壤科学
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
266
审稿时长
5 months
期刊介绍: Soil & Tillage Research examines the physical, chemical and biological changes in the soil caused by tillage and field traffic. Manuscripts will be considered on aspects of soil science, physics, technology, mechanization and applied engineering for a sustainable balance among productivity, environmental quality and profitability. The following are examples of suitable topics within the scope of the journal of Soil and Tillage Research: The agricultural and biosystems engineering associated with tillage (including no-tillage, reduced-tillage and direct drilling), irrigation and drainage, crops and crop rotations, fertilization, rehabilitation of mine spoils and processes used to modify soils. Soil change effects on establishment and yield of crops, growth of plants and roots, structure and erosion of soil, cycling of carbon and nutrients, greenhouse gas emissions, leaching, runoff and other processes that affect environmental quality. Characterization or modeling of tillage and field traffic responses, soil, climate, or topographic effects, soil deformation processes, tillage tools, traction devices, energy requirements, economics, surface and subsurface water quality effects, tillage effects on weed, pest and disease control, and their interactions.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信