水制度和肥料磷源对水稻温室气体排放的影响

IF 1.3 Q3 AGRONOMY
Diego Della Lunga, Kris R. Brye, Trenton L. Roberts, Jonathan Brye, Michelle Evans-White, Daniel J. Lessner, Christopher G. Henry
{"title":"水制度和肥料磷源对水稻温室气体排放的影响","authors":"Diego Della Lunga,&nbsp;Kris R. Brye,&nbsp;Trenton L. Roberts,&nbsp;Jonathan Brye,&nbsp;Michelle Evans-White,&nbsp;Daniel J. Lessner,&nbsp;Christopher G. Henry","doi":"10.1002/agg2.20482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from rice (<i>Oryza sativa</i>) systems have been correlated to water management practice, but to date, no study has directly evaluated three main GHGs (i.e., methane [CH<sub>4</sub>], nitrous oxide [N<sub>2</sub>O], and carbon dioxide [CO<sub>2</sub>]) under flood- and furrow-irrigated conditions at the same time as affected by various fertilizer-phosphorus (P) sources, in particular the reportedly slow-release struvite-P source. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of water regime (flooded and furrow-irrigated) and fertilizer-P source (diammonium phosphate, chemically precipitated struvite, electrochemically precipitated struvite [ECST], triple superphosphate, and an unamended control) on GHG emissions and two- and three-gas global warming potentials (GWP* and GWP, respectively) in the greenhouse. Methane emissions were 10 times greater (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) under flooded (29.4 kg CH<sub>4</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) than under furrow-irrigated conditions (2.9 kg CH<sub>4</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>), and four times lower (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) with ECST (3.4 kg CH<sub>4</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) than other fertilizer-P sources, while CO<sub>2</sub> emissions were three times greater (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) under furrow-irrigated (23,428 kg CO<sub>2</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) than under flooded (8290 kg CO<sub>2</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) conditions. The GWP* under furrow-irrigated conditions was almost 40% lower (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) than under flooded conditions. Although N<sub>2</sub>O emissions were unaffected by fertilizer-P source, the N<sub>2</sub>O contribution to GWP* was more than 80% under furrow-irrigated conditions. Flood- and furrow-irrigated water regimes require diversified approaches in GHG mitigation, where the best management for ECST needs to be more fully evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":7567,"journal":{"name":"Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/agg2.20482","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Water regime and fertilizer-phosphorus source effects on greenhouse gas emissions from rice\",\"authors\":\"Diego Della Lunga,&nbsp;Kris R. Brye,&nbsp;Trenton L. Roberts,&nbsp;Jonathan Brye,&nbsp;Michelle Evans-White,&nbsp;Daniel J. Lessner,&nbsp;Christopher G. Henry\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/agg2.20482\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from rice (<i>Oryza sativa</i>) systems have been correlated to water management practice, but to date, no study has directly evaluated three main GHGs (i.e., methane [CH<sub>4</sub>], nitrous oxide [N<sub>2</sub>O], and carbon dioxide [CO<sub>2</sub>]) under flood- and furrow-irrigated conditions at the same time as affected by various fertilizer-phosphorus (P) sources, in particular the reportedly slow-release struvite-P source. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of water regime (flooded and furrow-irrigated) and fertilizer-P source (diammonium phosphate, chemically precipitated struvite, electrochemically precipitated struvite [ECST], triple superphosphate, and an unamended control) on GHG emissions and two- and three-gas global warming potentials (GWP* and GWP, respectively) in the greenhouse. Methane emissions were 10 times greater (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) under flooded (29.4 kg CH<sub>4</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) than under furrow-irrigated conditions (2.9 kg CH<sub>4</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>), and four times lower (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) with ECST (3.4 kg CH<sub>4</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) than other fertilizer-P sources, while CO<sub>2</sub> emissions were three times greater (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) under furrow-irrigated (23,428 kg CO<sub>2</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) than under flooded (8290 kg CO<sub>2</sub> ha<sup>−1</sup> season<sup>−1</sup>) conditions. The GWP* under furrow-irrigated conditions was almost 40% lower (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) than under flooded conditions. Although N<sub>2</sub>O emissions were unaffected by fertilizer-P source, the N<sub>2</sub>O contribution to GWP* was more than 80% under furrow-irrigated conditions. Flood- and furrow-irrigated water regimes require diversified approaches in GHG mitigation, where the best management for ECST needs to be more fully evaluated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7567,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/agg2.20482\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/agg2.20482\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/agg2.20482","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

水稻(Oryza sativa)系统的温室气体(GHG)排放与水管理实践相关,但迄今为止,还没有研究直接评估过在水淹和沟灌条件下,三种主要温室气体(即甲烷[CH4]、氧化亚氮[N2O]和二氧化碳[CO2])同时受到各种磷肥源(尤其是据报道的缓释硬质合金磷肥源)的影响。因此,本研究的目的是评估水系(漫灌和沟灌)和肥料磷源(磷酸二铵、化学沉淀的石灰岩、电化学沉淀的石灰岩 [ECST]、三过磷酸钙和未添加添加剂的对照组)对温室中温室气体排放以及两种和三种气体全球升温潜能值(分别为 GWP* 和 GWP)的影响。大水漫灌条件下的甲烷排放量(29.4 kg CH4 ha-1 season-1)是沟灌条件下(2.9 kg CH4 ha-1 season-1)的 10 倍(p < 0.05),而 ECST 条件下的甲烷排放量(3.沟灌条件下的二氧化碳排放量(23,428 千克二氧化碳/公顷-1 季-1)是漫灌条件下(8290 千克二氧化碳/公顷-1 季-1)的三倍(p < 0.05)。沟灌条件下的全球升温潜能值*比淹没条件下低近 40% (p < 0.05)。虽然 N2O 排放量不受化肥-磷来源的影响,但在沟灌条件下,N2O 对 GWP* 的贡献率超过 80%。洪水灌溉和沟渠灌溉水制要求在温室气体减排方面采取多样化的方法,对 ECST 的最佳管理需要进行更全面的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Water regime and fertilizer-phosphorus source effects on greenhouse gas emissions from rice

Water regime and fertilizer-phosphorus source effects on greenhouse gas emissions from rice

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from rice (Oryza sativa) systems have been correlated to water management practice, but to date, no study has directly evaluated three main GHGs (i.e., methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [N2O], and carbon dioxide [CO2]) under flood- and furrow-irrigated conditions at the same time as affected by various fertilizer-phosphorus (P) sources, in particular the reportedly slow-release struvite-P source. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of water regime (flooded and furrow-irrigated) and fertilizer-P source (diammonium phosphate, chemically precipitated struvite, electrochemically precipitated struvite [ECST], triple superphosphate, and an unamended control) on GHG emissions and two- and three-gas global warming potentials (GWP* and GWP, respectively) in the greenhouse. Methane emissions were 10 times greater (p < 0.05) under flooded (29.4 kg CH4 ha−1 season−1) than under furrow-irrigated conditions (2.9 kg CH4 ha−1 season−1), and four times lower (p < 0.05) with ECST (3.4 kg CH4 ha−1 season−1) than other fertilizer-P sources, while CO2 emissions were three times greater (p < 0.05) under furrow-irrigated (23,428 kg CO2 ha−1 season−1) than under flooded (8290 kg CO2 ha−1 season−1) conditions. The GWP* under furrow-irrigated conditions was almost 40% lower (p < 0.05) than under flooded conditions. Although N2O emissions were unaffected by fertilizer-P source, the N2O contribution to GWP* was more than 80% under furrow-irrigated conditions. Flood- and furrow-irrigated water regimes require diversified approaches in GHG mitigation, where the best management for ECST needs to be more fully evaluated.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment
Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信