垄作直播控制灌溉对水稻产量和温室气体排放的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.04.009

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】稻田是温室气体的重要排放源之一，耕作方式和水分管理措施均能在一定程度上减少稻田温室气体排放。垄作直播方式是一种新型节本增效的水稻种植方式，探索稻田垄作直播下垄沟水分管理对水稻产量和温室气体排放的影响，为丰产减排稻作模式的创新提供理论依据和技术途径。【方法】以2019—2021年垄作直播方式下的水稻-萝卜轮作系统为研究对象，通过设置传统淹水沟灌（TFI：水分高于垄面约5 cm）、控制沟灌1（CFI1：水分低于垄面约5 cm）、控制沟灌2（CFI2：水分低于垄面约10 cm）、控制沟灌3（CFI3：水分低于垄面约15 cm）4个处理，采取密闭静态箱-气相色谱法研究水稻-萝卜生长季温室气体排放及其全球增温潜势，同时测定水稻产量、土壤还原性物质、铵态氮和硝态氮等指标，明确既能减少全球增温潜势（GWP）又能增加作物产量的最佳灌水模式。【结果】综合3年试验结果，与TFI处理相比，控制灌溉能显著降低水稻季CH₄累积排放量22.81%—78.47%，其中CFI3效果最显著；CFI2处理显著增加水稻季N₂O累积排放量20.45%—59.90%，CFI3显著降低水稻季N₂O累积排放量12.08%—68.64%，CFI1对N₂O排放量无显著影响。对于萝卜季而言，与TFI处理相比，控制灌溉能显著降低CH₄累积排放量34.87%—53.31%，其中CFI2和CFI3效果最显著；CFI1、CFI2和CFI3处理能显著增加N₂O累积排放量35.00%—120.00%。双因素方差分析结果表明，控制灌溉和控制灌溉×试验年份的交互作用对CH₄累积排放量具有极显著影响（P<0.01），控制灌溉、试验年份及控制灌溉×试验年份的交互作用对N₂O累积排放量具有极显著影响（P<0.01）。与TFI相比，控制灌溉处理能显著降低水稻季GWP 20.24%—74.87%；CFI1和CFI2处理显著增加水稻产量12.34%—33.97%，CFI3对水稻产量无显著影响；控制灌溉显著降低温室气体排放强度（GHGI）29.37%—75.92%。控制灌溉分别降低还原物质总量、活性还原物质和还原性铁含量15.00%—30.84%、53.45%—71.65%和60.47%，影响CH₄排放；同时降低铵态氮7.51%—9.87%，增加硝态氮5.81%—8.55%，影响N₂O排放。【结论】控制灌溉通过硝态氮、铵态氮以及还原性物质等土壤性质影响温室气体排放。综合温室气体减排效应和作物增产两方面，CFI1和CFI2处理效果最好。在稻田垄作直播条件下，灌水深度为传统沟灌淹水深度的2/3或者1/2是降低温室气体排放并增加水稻产量的最佳水分管理方式。

关键词: 垄作, 直播, 水分管理, 温室气体, 水稻, 萝卜

Abstract:

【Objective】Paddy fields are one of the important sources of greenhouse gas emissions, while farming practices and water management can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from field to a certain extent. Ridge cultivation and direct-seeding is a new kind of rice planting pattern that saves costs and increases economic efficiency. The impact of water management of ridge cultivation and control irrigation on grain yield and greenhouse gas emissions were explored for increasing grain yield and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, so as to provide a theoretical basis and technical approaches for the innovation of high-yield and emission-reduction. 【Method】In this study, a rice-radish rotation system under the ridge cultivation from 2019 to 2021 was conducted to use as the research object. Four treatments were set up, including traditional flooded furrow irrigation (TFI: the height of irrigation was about 5 cm above the ridge), controlled furrow irrigation 1 (CFI1: the height of irrigation was about 5 cm below the ridge), controlled furrow irrigation 2 (CFI2: the height of irrigation was about 10 cm below the ridge), and control furrow irrigation 3 (CFI3: the height of irrigation was about 15 cm below the ridge). The greenhouse gas emissions and global warming potential (GWP) of rice-radish season were investigated by airtight static box-gas chromatography, and the rice yield, soil reducing substances, ammonium nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen were measured. Finally, the optimal irrigation patterns were identified with both reducing the GWP and increasing the rice yield. 【Result】Based on the three-year experimental results, compared with TFI treatment, controlled irrigation could significantly reduce the cumulative emission of CH₄ by 22.81%-78.47% in the rice season, of which CFI3 had the most significant effect; CFI2 treatment significantly increased the cumulative emission of N₂O by 20.45%-59.90%, CFI3 significantly reduced the cumulative N₂O emissions by 12.08%-68.64%, and CFI1 had no significant effect on the cumulative N₂O emissions. For radish season, compared with TFI controlled irrigation could significantly reduce the cumulative emission of CH₄ by 34.87%-53.31%, among which CFI2 and CFI3 had the most significant effects; CFI1, CFI2 and CFI3 treatments could significantly increase the cumulative emission of N₂O by 35.00%-120.00%. The results of two-way ANOVA showed that control irrigation, the interaction of control irrigation and year had an extremely significance on the cumulative emission of CH₄ (P<0.01). The control irrigation, year, the interaction of control irrigation and year had an extremely significance on cumulative N₂O emissions (P<0.01). Compared with TFI, controlled irrigation treatment could significantly reduce GWP by 20.24%-74.87% in rice season; CFI1 and CFI2 treatments increased rice yield by 12.34%-33.97%, CFI3 treatment had no significant effect on yield. Controlling irrigation reduced GHGI by 29.37%-75.92%. Controlled irrigation affected CH₄ emissions by reducing the total amount of reducing substances, active reducing substances and reducing Fe²⁺ by 15.00%-30.84%, 53.45%-71.65% and 60.47%, respectively. It also affected N₂O emissions by reducing NH₄⁺ by 7.51%-9.87% and increasing NO₃^- by 5.81%-8.55%. 【Conclusion】Controlled irrigation affected GHG emissions through soil properties such as NO₃^-, NH₄⁺, and reducing substances. Therefore, CFI1 and CFI2 had the best effects in terms of reducing GWP and increasing rice yield. Under the conditions of ridge cultivation and direct-seeding in paddy field, the depth of irrigation with two-thirds or half of the depth of traditional furrow irrigation flooding was the best water management method to alleviate greenhouse gas emissions and increase rice production.

Key words: ridge cultivation, direct-seeding, water management, greenhouse gas, rice, radish

谢军, 尹学伟, 魏灵, 王子芳, 李清虎, 张晓春, 鲁远源, 王秋月, 高明. 垄作直播控制灌溉对水稻产量和温室气体排放的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(4): 697-710.

XIE Jun, YIN XueWei, WEI Ling, WANG ZiFang, LI QingHu, ZHANG XiaoChun, LU YuanYuan, WANG QiuYue, GAO Ming. Effects of Control Irrigation on Grain Yield and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Ridge Cultivation Direct-Seeding Paddy Field[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(4): 697-710.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.04.009

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2023/V56/I4/697

图/表 12

图1

图2

表1

图3

图4

图5

图6

表3

图7

图8

表4

表2

参考文献 44

[1]	IPCC. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK and New York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2021.
[2]	IPCC. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK and New York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
[3]	ZOU J W, HUANG Y, QIN Y M, LIU S W, SHEN Q R, PAN G X, LU Y Y, LIU Q H. Changes in fertilizer-induced direct N₂O emissions from paddy fields during rice-growing season in China between 1950s and 1990s. Global Change Biology, 2009, 15(1): 229-242. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01775.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01775.x.
[4]	WANG H, ZHANG Y, ZHANG Y J, MCDANIEL M D, SUN L, SU W, FAN X R, LIU S H, XIAO X. Water-saving irrigation is a ‘win-win’ management strategy in rice paddies - With both reduced greenhouse gas emissions and enhanced water use efficiency. Agricultural Water Management, 2020, 228: 105889. doi:10.1016/j. agwat.2019.105889. doi: 10.1016/j. agwat.2019.105889.
[5]	ZHONG C, LIU Y, XU X T, YANG B J, AAMER M, ZHANG P, HUANG G Q. Paddy-upland rotation with Chinese milk vetch incorporation reduced the global warming potential and greenhouse gas emissions intensity of double rice cropping system. Environmental Pollution, 2021, 276: 116696. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116696. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116696.
[6]	JIANG Y, LIAO P, VAN GESTEL N, SUN Y N, ZENG Y J, HUANG S, ZHANG W J, VAN GROENIGEN K J. Lime application lowers the global warming potential of a double rice cropping system. Geoderma, 2018, 325: 1-8. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.03.034. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.03.034.
[7]	LIU S W, ZHANG L, JIANG J Y, CHEN N N, YANG X M, XIONG Z Q, ZOU J W. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from rice seedling nurseries under flooding and moist irrigation regimes in Southeast China. Science of the Total Environment, 2012, 426: 166-171. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.02.003. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.02.003.
[8]	熊丽萍, 吴家梅, 纪雄辉, 彭华, 李尝君. 水旱轮作系统中土壤CH₄和N₂O排放研究进展. 农业环境科学学报, 2020, 39(4): 863-871. doi:10.11654/jaes.2020-0101. doi: 10.11654/jaes.2020-0101.
	XIONG L P, WU J M, JI X H, PENG H, LI C J. A review on soil CH₄ and N₂O emissions from paddy-upland rotation systems. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2020, 39(4): 863-871. doi:10.11654/jaes.2020-0101. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11654/jaes.2020-0101.
[9]	CAI Z C, TSURUTA H, GAO M, XU H, WEI C F. Options for mitigating methane emission from a permanently flooded rice field. Global Change Biology, 2003, 9(1): 37-45. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2486. 2003.00562.x. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00562.x.
[10]	郑华斌, 姚林, 刘建霞, 贺慧, 陈阳, 黄璜. 种植方式对水稻产量及根系性状的影响. 作物学报, 2014, 40(4): 667-677. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.00667. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.00667.
	ZHENG H B, YAO L, LIU J X, HE H, CHEN Y, HUANG H. Effect of ridge & terraced cultivation on rice yield and root trait. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2014, 40(4): 667-677. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.00667. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006. 2014.00667.
[11]	DELLA LUNGA D, BRYE K R, SLAYDEN J M, HENRY C G, WOOD L S. Relationships among soil factors and greenhouse gas emissions from furrow-irrigated Rice in the mid-southern, USA. Geoderma Regional, 2021, 24: e00365. doi:10.1016/j.geodrs.2021.e00365. doi: 10.1016/j.geodrs.2021.e00365.
[12]	CHEN L M, YI Y H, WANG W X, ZENG Y J, TAN X M, WU Z M, CHEN X F, PAN X H, SHI Q H, ZENG Y H. Innovative furrow ridging fertilization under a mechanical direct seeding system improves the grain yield and lodging resistance of early indica rice in South China. Field Crops Research, 2021, 270: 108184. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108184. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108184.
[13]	高明. 稻田长期垄作免耕下土壤肥力及环境效应的研究[D]. 重庆: 西南农业大学, 2001.
	GAO M. Research on soil fertility and environmental effects under long-term ridge and no-tillage rice field[D]. Chongqing: Southwest Agricultural University, 2001. (in Chinese)
[14]	WANG Z Q, GU D J, BEEBOUT S S, ZHANG H, LIU L J, YANG J C, ZHANG J H. Effect of irrigation regime on grain yield, water productivity, and methane emissions in dry direct-seeded rice grown in raised beds with wheat straw incorporation. The Crop Journal, 2018, 6(5): 495-508. doi:10.1016/j.cj.2018.05.004. doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2018.05.004.
[15]	XU Y Y, WANG Y X, MA X C, LIU X, ZHANG P, CAI T, JIA Z K. Ridge-furrow mulching system and supplementary irrigation can reduce the greenhouse gas emission intensity. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 717: 137262. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137262. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137262.
[16]	SETYANTO P, PRAMONO A, ADRIANY T A, SUSILAWATI H L, TOKIDA T, PADRE A T, MINAMIKAWA K. Alternate wetting and drying reduces methane emission from a rice paddy in Central Java, Indonesia without yield loss. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 2018, 64(1): 23-30. doi:10.1080/00380768.2017.1409600. doi: 10.1080/00380768.2017.1409600.
[17]	MANEEPITAK S, ULLAH H, DATTA A, SHRESTHA R P, SHRESTHA S, KACHENCHART B. Effects of water and rice straw management practices on water savings and greenhouse gas emissions from a double-rice paddy field in the Central Plain of Thailand. European Journal of Agronomy, 2019, 107: 18-29. doi:10.1016/j.eja.2019.04.002. doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2019.04.002.
[18]	OO A Z, SUDO S, INUBUSHI K, MANO M, YAMAMOTO A, ONO K, OSAWA T, HAYASHIDA S, PATRA P K, TERAO Y, ELAYAKUMAR P, VANITHA K, UMAMAGESWARI C, JOTHIMANI P, RAVI V. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from conventional and modified rice cultivation systems in South India. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2018, 252: 148-158. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2017.10.014. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2017.10.014.
[19]	PANDEY A, MAI V T, VU D Q, BUI T P L, MAI T L A, JENSEN L S, DE NEERGAARD A. Organic matter and water management strategies to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions from rice paddies in Vietnam. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2014, 196: 137-146. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2014.06.010. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2014.06.010.
[20]	HOU H J, YANG S H, WANG F T, LI D, XU J Z. Controlled irrigation mitigates the annual integrative global warming potential of methane and nitrous oxide from the rice-winter wheat rotation systems in Southeast China. Ecological Engineering, 2016, 86: 239-246. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.11.022. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.11.022.
[21]	YANG S H, PENG S Z, XU J Z, LUO Y F, LI D X. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from paddy field as affected by water-saving irrigation. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 2012, 53/54: 30-37. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2011.08.020. doi: 10.1016/j.pce.2011.08.020.
[22]	HOU H J, PENG S Z, XU J Z, YANG S H, MAO Z. Seasonal variations of CH₄ and N₂O emissions in response to water management of paddy fields located in Southeast China. Chemosphere, 2012, 89(7): 884-892. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.04.066. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.04.066.
[23]	CARRIJO D R, LUNDY M E, LINQUIST B A. Rice yields and water use under alternate wetting and drying irrigation: a meta-analysis. Field Crops Research, 2017, 203: 173-180. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.002. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.002.
[24]	BROOKS S A, ANDERS M M, YEATER K M. Effect of furrow irrigation on the severity of false smut in susceptible rice varieties. Plant Disease, 2010, 94(5): 570-574. doi:10.1094/pdis-94-5-0570. doi: 10.1094/PDIS-94-5-0570 pmid: 30754472
[25]	FENG Z Y, QIN T, DU X Z, SHENG F, LI C F. Effects of irrigation regime and rice variety on greenhouse gas emissions and grain yields from paddy fields in central China. Agricultural Water Management, 2021, 250: 106830. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2021.106830. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2021.106830.
[26]	LAGOMARSINO A, AGNELLI A E, LINQUIST B, ADVIENTO- BORBE M A, AGNELLI A, GAVINA G, RAVAGLIA S, FERRARA R M. Alternate wetting and drying of rice reduced CH₄ emissions but triggered N₂O peaks in a clayey soil of central Italy. Pedosphere, 2016, 26(4): 533-548. doi:10.1016/S1002-0160(15)60063-7. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(15)60063-7.
[27]	LIANG K M, ZHONG X H, HUANG N R, LAMPAYAN R M, PAN J F, TIAN K, LIU Y Z. Grain yield, water productivity and CH₄ emission of irrigated rice in response to water management in South China. Agricultural Water Management, 2016, 163: 319-331. doi:10. 1016/j.agwat.2015.10.015. doi: 10. 1016/j.agwat.2015.10.015.
[28]	XU Y, ZHAN M, CAO C G, TIAN S Y, GE J Z, LI S Y, WANG M Y, YUAN G Y. Improved water management to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in no-till rapeseed-rice rotations in Central China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2016, 221: 87-98. doi:10. 1016/j.agee.2016.01.021. doi: 10. 1016/j.agee.2016.01.021.
[29]	申丽娟. 侯光炯学术思想:历史、哲学与表达[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2014.
	SHEN L J. Research on history, philosophy and expression of Hou Kuangchun's academic thought[D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2014. (in Chinese)
[30]	岳以翛. 西南地区山地农业机械化的发展现状及对策研究: 以重庆地区为例[D]. 重庆: 重庆三峡学院, 2018.
	YUE Y X. Research on the development status and countermeasures of mountain agricultural mechanization in Southwest China. Chongqing: Chongqing Three Gorges University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[31]	许轲, 唐磊, 张洪程, 郭保卫, 霍中洋, 戴其根, 魏海燕, 韦还和. 不同机械直播方式对水稻分蘖特性及产量的影响. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(13): 43-52. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2014.13.006. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2014.13.006.
	XU K, TANG L, ZHANG H C, GUO B W, HUO Z Y, DAI Q G, WEI H Y, WEI H H. Effect of different mechanical direct seeding methods on tiller characteristics and yield of rice. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014, 30(13): 43-52. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2014.13.006. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2014.13.006.
[32]	张岳芳, 陈留根, 张传胜, 杨洪建, 盛婧, 朱普平, 郑建初. 水稻机械化播栽对稻田甲烷和氧化亚氮排放的影响. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(14): 232-241. doi:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.14.032. doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.14.032.
	ZHANG Y F, CHEN L G, ZHANG C S, YANG H J, SHENG J, ZHU P P, ZHENG J C. Influence of rice mechanical planting methods on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from paddy field. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2015, 31(14): 232-241. doi:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.14.032. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.14.032.
[33]	LI H, GUO H Q, HELBIG M, DAI S Q, ZHANG M S, ZHAO M, PENG C H, XIAO X M, ZHAO B. Does direct-seeded rice decrease ecosystem-scale methane emissions? —A case study from a rice paddy in southeast China. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2019, 272/273: 118-127. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.04.005. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.04.005.
[34]	刘杰, 罗尊长, 肖小平, 余崇祥, 洪曦, 孙耿, 唐海明. 不同栽培和灌溉方式对冷浸稻田还原性物质及水稻生长的影响. 作物研究, 2014, 28(5): 451-454. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5280.2014.05.01. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5280.2014.05.01.
	LIU J, LUO Z C, XIAO X P, YU C X, HONG X, SUN G, TANG H M. Effects of different tillage and irrigation modes on reducing substances and rice growth of cold spring paddy soil. Crop Research, 2014, 28(5): 451-454. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-5280.2014.05.01. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5280.2014.05.01.
[35]	秦川. 稻田垄作免耕提高土壤氮素肥力的作用机制研究[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2021.
	QIN C. Study on the mechanism of improving soil nitrogen fertility by combination ridge with no-tillage in paddy field[D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2021. (in Chinese)
[36]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析. 3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
	BAO S D. Soil and Agricultural Chemistry Analysis. 3rd ed. Beijing: Chinese Agriculture Press, 2000. (in Chinese)
[37]	张自常, 李鸿伟, 陈婷婷, 王学明, 王志琴, 杨建昌. 畦沟灌溉和干湿交替灌溉对水稻产量与品质的影响. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(24): 4988-4998. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.24.003. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.24.003.
	ZHANG Z C, LI H W, CHEN T T, WANG X M, WANG Z Q, YANG J C. Effect of furrow irrigation and alternate wetting and drying irrigation on grain yield and quality of rice. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2011, 44(24): 4988-4998. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.24.003. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.24.003.
[38]	王永明, 徐永记, 纪洋, 冯彦房. 节水灌溉和控释肥施用耦合措施对单季稻田CH₄和N₂O排放的影响. 环境科学, 2021, 42(12): 6025-6037. doi:10.13227/j.hjkx.202103275. doi: 10.13227/j.hjkx.202103275.
	WANG Y M, XU Y J, JI Y, FENG Y F. Coupling effects of water-saving irrigation and controlled-release fertilizer (CRF) application on CH₄ and N₂O emission in single cropping paddy field. Environmental Science, 2021, 42(12): 6025-6037. doi:10.13227/j.hjkx.202103275. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13227/j. hjkx.
[39]	黄容, 高明, 黎嘉成, 徐国鑫, 王富华, 李娇, 陈仕奇. 有机物料等氮量施用对紫色土氮形态及温室气体排放的影响. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(21): 4087-4101. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.21.008. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.21.008.
	HUANG R, GAO M, LI J C, XU G X, WANG F H, LI J, CHEN S Q. Effects of combined application of various organic materials and chemical fertilizer on soil nitrogen formation and greenhouse gas emission under equal nitrogen rates from purple soil. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(21): 4087-4101. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.21.008. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.21.008.
[40]	王蕾, 董彦宏, 王连峰. 不同水分含量下黑土氧化亚氮排放差异. 大连交通大学学报, 2021, 42(5): 84-88. doi:10.13291/j.cnki.djdxac.2021.05.016. doi: 10.13291/j.cnki.djdxac.2021.05.016.
	WANG L, DONG Y H, WANG L F. Difference of nitrous oxide emission in black soil under different water content. Journal of Dalian Jiaotong University, 2021, 42(5): 84-88. doi:10.13291/j.cnki.djdxac.2021.05.016. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13291/j.cnki.djdxac.2021.05.016.
[41]	向伟, 王雷, 刘天奇, 李诗豪, 翟中兵, 李成芳. 生物炭与无机氮配施对稻田温室气体排放及氮肥利用率的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(22): 4634-4645. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.22.010. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.22.010.
	XIANG W, WANG L, LIU T Q, LI S H, ZHAI Z B, LI C F. Effects of biochar plus inorganic nitrogen on the greenhouse gas and nitrogen use efficiency from rice fields. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(22): 4634-4645. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.22.010. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.22.010.
[42]	李健陵, 李玉娥, 周守华, 苏荣瑞, 万运帆, 王斌, 蔡威威, 郭晨, 秦晓波. 节水灌溉、树脂包膜尿素和脲酶/硝化抑制剂对双季稻温室气体减排的协同作用. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(20): 3958-3967. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.20.010. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.20.010.
	LI J L, LI Y E, ZHOU S H, SU R R, WAN Y F, WANG B, CAI W W, GUO C, QIN X B. Synergistic effects of water-saving irrigation, polymer-coated nitrogen fertilizer and urease/nitrification inhibitor on mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from the double rice cropping system. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(20): 3958-3967. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.20.010. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.20.010.
[43]	ISLAM S M M, GAIHRE Y K, ISLAM M R, AKTER M, AL MAHMUD A, SINGH U, SANDER B O. Effects of water management on greenhouse gas emissions from farmers' rice fields in Bangladesh. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 734: 139382. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139382. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139382.
[44]	MEIJIDE A, GRUENING C, GODED I, SEUFERT G, CESCATTI A. Water management reduces greenhouse gas emissions in a Mediterranean rice paddy field. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2017, 238: 168-178. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2016.08.017. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2016.08.017.

作物类型 Crop type	2019-2020		2020-2021		2021-2022
作物类型 Crop type	播种期 Sowing date	收获期 Harvest date	播种期 Sowing date	收获期 Harvest date	播种期 Sowing date	收获期 Harvest date
水稻 Rice	2019.05.14	2019.09.16	2020.05.09	2020.09.20	2021.05.06	2021.09.07
萝卜 Radish	2019.10.15	2020.02.02	2020.10.11	2021.01.22	/	/

温室气体Greenhouse gas	因素Factor	df	F	P
CH₄	控制灌溉Control irrigation	4	547.71	<0.01
	年份 Year	2	2.66	>0.05
	控制灌溉×年份Control irrigation×Year	8	35.11	<0.01
N₂O	控制灌溉 Control irrigation	4	195.40	<0.01
	年份 Year	2	36.26	<0.01
	控制灌溉×年份Control irrigation×Year	8	15.47	<0.01

灌水处理 Irrigation treatment	硝态氮 NO₃^--N (mg·kg^-1)	铵态氮 NH₄⁺-N (mg·kg^-1)	还原物质总量 Total reducing substance (cmol·kg^-1)	活性还原物质 Active reducing substance (cmol·kg^-1)	还原性铁 Reducing Fe (cmol·kg^-1)	还原性锰 Reducing Mn (cmol·kg^-1)
TFI	50.01±3.88b	19.45±0.31a	10.41±1.39a	2.75±0.42a	0.86±0.28a	0.42±0.08a
CFI1	55.31±2.55ab	17.82±1.12b	8.85±0.24b	2.67±0.32a	0.84±0.29a	0.38±0.08a
CFI2	60.47±3.02a	17.53±1.05b	9.14±0.58ab	1.28±0.29b	0.62±0.14a	0.34±0.05a
CFI3	62.37±1.31a	17.99±1.09b	7.20±1.02b	0.78±0.32b	0.34±0.02b	0.31±0.06a

年份 Year	灌水处理 Irrigation treatment	CH₄ (kg·hm^-2)	N₂O (kg·hm^-2)	全球增温潜势 GWP (kg CO₂eq·hm^-2)
2019	TFI	404.73±20.21a	2.27±0.07b	10794.71±601.11a
	CFI1	245.80±9.10b	2.07±0.10b	6791.66±257.30b
	CFI2	188.83±5.12c	3.25±0.13a	5689.34±168.99c
	CFI3	179.27±5.68c	1.33±0.06c	4878.09±159.88d
2020	TFI	430.57±25.24a	2.07±0.07b	11381.11±651.86a
	CFI1	312.73±10.64b	2.09±0.06b	8441.07±283.88b
	CFI2	165.85±2.38c	3.31±0.08a	5132.63±83.34c
	CFI3	92.72±2.28d	1.82±0.05c	2860.36±71.90d
2021	TFI	280.81±9.16a	2.64±0.15b	7806.97±273.70a
	CFI1	216.77±11.46b	2.71±0.14b	6226.83±328.22b
	CFI2	159.73±3.62c	3.18±0.12a	4940.89±126.26c
	CFI3	151.00±4.29c	1.62±0.12c	4257.76±143.01d