000864365 001__ 864365
000864365 005__ 20210130002534.0
000864365 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.agee.2018.12.001
000864365 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0167-8809
000864365 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1873-2305
000864365 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:000468247700028
000864365 037__ $$aFZJ-2019-04160
000864365 082__ $$a640
000864365 1001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aTan, Yuechen$$b0
000864365 245__ $$aConservation farming practices in winter wheat–summer maize cropping reduce GHG emissions and maintain high yields
000864365 260__ $$aAmsterdam [u.a.]$$bElsevier$$c2019
000864365 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000864365 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000864365 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1565338461_28493
000864365 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000864365 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000864365 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000864365 520__ $$aNo-till (NT), straw incorporation (SI) and optimized N fertilization are important mitigation options for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agroecosystems. These measures may also help to maintain high crop production and are frequently recommended for use in northern China. Few studies, however, have addressed the interactive effects of these conservation and fertilization practices with respect to GHG emissions and crop yields. We report on a field experiment conducted in two consecutive dry years (2013–2015) when precipitation was much lower than the long-term average. We examined the effects of three different N fertilizer application rates, tillage practice and straw management on crop yields, GHG, area-scaled GHG (in global warming potential) and net ecosystem economic budget (NEEB) of a winter wheat-summer maize rotation system in northern China. Results showed that reducing N fertilizer significantly decreased soil N2O emissions without affecting annual crop yields. Compared with the average of all other fertilization treatments, the no-till × straw incorporation (NT × SI) practice increased both wheat and maize yields. However, in the maize season, NT also increased cumulative N2O emissions compared with conventional tillage (CT). The practices of combining N fertilization with straw management conferred an additional effect on N2O emissions when compared with single practices (i.e. fertilization or straw management). Compared with straw removal (SR) treatments, SI increased annual cumulative N2O emissions by 37% for the conventional N fertilization, but decreased them by 13% at the optimized N fertilization. Neither single practice nor integrated practices had a significant effect on cumulative CH4 uptake. The highest NEEB values were obtained in NT × SI × optimal N fertilization (OPT) and NT × SR × OPT in the 1st and 2nd cropping years, respectively. We conclude that, when considering the additional benefits of SI for improving soil fertility and C sequestration, the NT × SI × OPT practice would be a viable strategy to achieve high crop yields, while simultaneously reducing GHG emissions.
000864365 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255$$a255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction (POF3-255)$$cPOF3-255$$fPOF III$$x0
000864365 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef
000864365 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aWu, Di$$b1
000864365 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)145865$$aBol, Roland$$b2
000864365 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aWu, Wenliang$$b3
000864365 7001_ $$00000-0002-0172-7776$$aMeng, Fanqiao$$b4$$eCorresponding author
000864365 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2013743-6$$a10.1016/j.agee.2018.12.001$$gVol. 272, p. 266 - 275$$p266 - 275$$tAgriculture, ecosystems & environment$$v272$$x0167-8809$$y2019
000864365 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:864365$$pVDB:Earth_Environment$$pVDB
000864365 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)145865$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
000864365 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$$vTerrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction$$x0
000864365 9141_ $$y2019
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0420$$2StatID$$aNationallizenz
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bAGR ECOSYST ENVIRON : 2017
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0310$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bNCBI Molecular Biology Database
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0600$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEbsco Academic Search
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bASC
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0110$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1060$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1040$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bZoological Record
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews
000864365 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5
000864365 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118$$kIBG-3$$lAgrosphäre$$x0
000864365 980__ $$ajournal
000864365 980__ $$aVDB
000864365 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118
000864365 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED