000153892 001__ 153892
000153892 005__ 20210129213813.0
000153892 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1007/s10021-013-9723-7
000153892 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1435-0629
000153892 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1432-9840
000153892 0247_ $$2wos$$aWOS:000332001500007
000153892 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:1894460
000153892 037__ $$aFZJ-2014-03363
000153892 082__ $$a570
000153892 1001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aZhou, Minghua$$b0$$eCorresponding Author
000153892 245__ $$aN$_{2}$O and CH$_{4}$ Emissions, and NO$_{3}$ − Leaching on a Crop-Yield Basis from a Subtropical Rain-fed Wheat–Maize Rotation in Response to Different Types of Nitrogen Fertilizer
000153892 260__ $$aNew York, NY$$bSpringer$$c2014
000153892 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1401859265_21127
000153892 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000153892 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000153892 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000153892 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000153892 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000153892 520__ $$aGuaranteeing high crop yields while reducing environmental impacts of nitrogen fertilizer use due to associated losses of N2O emissions and nitrate (NO3 −) leaching is a key challenge in the context of sustainable intensification of crop production. However, few field data sets are available that explore the effect of different forms of N management on yields as well as on N losses in the form of N2O or NO3 −. Here we report on a large-scale field lysimeter (8 × 4 m2) experiment, which was designed to determine soil CH4 and N2O emissions, NO3 − leaching losses and crop yields from a subtropical rain-fed wheat–maize rotation in the Sichuan Basin, one of the most intensively used agricultural regions in China. One control and three different fertilizer treatments with the same total rate of N application (280 kg N ha−1 y−1) were included: NF: control (no fertilizer); NPK: synthetic N fertilizer; OMNPK: synthetic N fertilizer plus pig manure; RSDNPK: synthetic N fertilizer plus crop residues. As compared to the standard NPK treatment, annual NO3 − leaching losses for OMNPK and RSDNPK treatments were decreased by 36 and 22%, respectively (P < 0.05). Similarly, crop yield-scaled NO3 − leaching for NPK treatment was higher than those for either OMNPK or RSDNPK treatments (P < 0.05). Direct N2O emissions for RSDNPK treatment were decreased as compared with NPK and OMNPK treatments (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the yield-scaled GWP (global warming potential) was lower for the treatments where either pig manure or crop residues were incorporated as compared to the standard NPK treatment (P < 0.05). Our study indicates that it is possible to reduce the negative environmental impact of NO3 − leaching and N2O emissions without compromising crop productivity. Yield-scaled NO3 − leaching, similar to the yield-scaled GWP, represents another valuable-integrated metric to address the dual goals of reducing nitrogen pollution and maintaining crop grain yield for a given agricultural system.
000153892 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF2-246$$a246 - Modelling and Monitoring Terrestrial Systems: Methods and Technologies (POF2-246)$$cPOF2-246$$fPOF II$$x0
000153892 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255$$a255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction (POF3-255)$$cPOF3-255$$fPOF III$$x1
000153892 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, juser.fz-juelich.de
000153892 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aZhu, Bo$$b1
000153892 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)142357$$aBrüggemann, Nicolas$$b2$$ufzj
000153892 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aBergmann, Jessica$$b3
000153892 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aWang, Yanqiang$$b4
000153892 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aButterbach-Bahl, Klaus$$b5
000153892 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)1478731-3$$a10.1007/s10021-013-9723-7$$gVol. 17, no. 2, p. 286 - 301$$n2$$p286 - 301$$tEcosystems$$v17$$x1435-0629$$y2014
000153892 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/153892/files/FZJ-2014-03363.pdf$$yRestricted$$zPublished final document.
000153892 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:153892$$pVDB:Earth_Environment$$pVDB
000153892 9141_ $$y2014
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0010$$2StatID$$aJCR/ISI refereed
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0110$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bThomson Reuters Master Journal List
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0420$$2StatID$$aNationallizenz
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0430$$2StatID$$aNational-Konsortium
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1040$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bZoological Record
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews
000153892 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1060$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences
000153892 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)142357$$aForschungszentrum Jülich GmbH$$b2$$kFZJ
000153892 9132_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-250$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-200$$aDE-HGF$$bMarine, Küsten- und Polare Systeme$$lTerrestrische Umwelt$$vTerrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction$$x0
000153892 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF2-246$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF2-240$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF2-200$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF2$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bErde und Umwelt$$lTerrestrische Umwelt$$vModelling and Monitoring Terrestrial Systems: Methods and Technologies$$x0
000153892 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-250$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-200$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bErde und Umwelt$$lTerrestrische Umwelt$$vTerrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction$$x1
000153892 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118$$kIBG-3$$lAgrosphäre$$x0
000153892 980__ $$ajournal
000153892 980__ $$aVDB
000153892 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118
000153892 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED