AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
View PDF
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research paper | Open Access

Effect of various crop rotations on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiency in paddy–upland systems in southeastern China

Song Chena,1( )Shaowen Liua,1Xi ZhengbMin YinaGuang ChuaChunmei XuaJinxiang YanaLiping ChenaDanying WangaXiufu Zhanga,( )
China National Rice Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang, China
Faculty of Agriculture, Life and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310029, Zhejiang, China

1 These authors contributed equally to this work.

Peer review under responsibility of Crop Science Society of China and Institute of Crop Science, CAAS.

Show Author Information

Abstract

To evaluate the effects of various rotation systems on rice grain yield and N use efficiency, a paddy–upland cropping experiment (2013–2016) was conducted in southeastern China. The experiment was designed using six different rice––winter crop rotations: rice–fallow (RF), rice–wheat (RW), rice–potato with rice straw mulch (RP), rice–green manure (Chinese milk vetch; RC–G), rice–oilseed rape (RO), and rice–green manure crop (oilseed rape with fresh straw incorporated into soil at flowering; RO–G) and three N rates, N0 (0 kg N ha−1), N1 (142.5 kg N ha−1), and N2 (202.5 kg N ha−1). Average rice yields in the RF (5.93 t ha−1) rotation were significantly lower than those in the rotations with winter crops (7.20–7.48 t ha−1) under the N0 treatment, suggesting that incorporation of straw might be more effective for increasing soil N than winter fallow. The rice yield differences among the rotations varied by year with the N input. In general, the grain yields in the RP and RO–G rotations –were respectively 11.6–28.5% and 14.80–37.19% higher than those in the RF in plots with N applied. Increasing the N rate may have tended to minimize the average yield gap between the RF and the other rotations; the yield gaps were 18.55%, 4.14%, and 0.23% in N0, N1, and N2, respectively. However, the N recovery efficiency in the RF was significantly lower than that in other rotations, except for 2015 under both N1 and N2 rates, a finding that implies a large amount of chemical N loss. No significant differences in nitrogen agronomic efficiency (NAE) and physiological efficiency (NPE) were found between the rotations with legume (RC–G) and non–legume (RO and RW) winter crops, a result that may be due partly to straw incorporation. For this reason, we concluded that the return of straw could reduce differences in N use efficiency between rotations with and without legume crops. The degree of synchrony between the crop N demand and the N supply was evaluated by comparison of nitrogen balance degree (NBD) values. The NBD values in the RP and RW were significantly lower than those in the other rotations under both N1 and N2 rates. Thus, in view of the higher grain yield in the RP compared to the RW under the N1 rate, the RP rotation might be a promising practice with comparable grain yield and greater N use efficiency under reduced N input relative to the other rotations. The primary yield components of the RF and RP were identified as number of panicles m−2 and numbers of kernels panicle−1, respectively. The NAE and NPE were positively correlated with harvest index, possibly providing a useful indicator for evaluating N use efficiency.

The Crop Journal
Pages 576-588
Cite this article:
Chen S, Liu S, Zheng X, et al. Effect of various crop rotations on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiency in paddy–upland systems in southeastern China. The Crop Journal, 2018, 6(6): 576-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2018.07.007

154

Views

2

Downloads

49

Crossref

N/A

Web of Science

47

Scopus

8

CSCD

Altmetrics

Received: 08 April 2018
Revised: 13 July 2018
Accepted: 24 July 2018
Published: 28 September 2018
© 2018 “Crop Science Society of China and Institute of Crop Science, CAAS”.
Return