Comparison of water-saving potential of fallow and crop change with high water-use winter-wheat – summer-maize rotation

Yanmin Yang; Yonghui Yang; Shumin Han; Huilong Li; Lu Wang; Qingtao Ma; Lexin Ma; Linna Wang; Zhenjun Hou; Li Chen; De Li Liu

Agricultural Water Management (Nov 2023)

Comparison of water-saving potential of fallow and crop change with high water-use winter-wheat – summer-maize rotation

Yanmin Yang,
Yonghui Yang,
Shumin Han,
Huilong Li,
Lu Wang,
Qingtao Ma,
Lexin Ma,
Linna Wang,
Zhenjun Hou,
Li Chen,
De Li Liu

Affiliations

Yanmin Yang: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
Yonghui Yang: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China; Correspondence to: Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Huaizhong Road 286, Shijiazhuang City 050021, Hebei Province, China.
Shumin Han: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
Huilong Li: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
Lu Wang: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
Qingtao Ma: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
Lexin Ma: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
Linna Wang: Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Hebei Laboratory of Agricultural Water-Saving, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050021, China
Zhenjun Hou: Baoding Irrigation Experimental Station, Baoding 071000, China
Li Chen: Baoding Irrigation Experimental Station, Baoding 071000, China
De Li Liu: NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, PMB, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650, Australia

Journal volume & issue: Vol. 289
p. 108543

Abstract

Read online

A land fallow system (LFS) designed to adjust the winter-wheat  summer-maize cropping system to fallow  summer-maize was introduced in Hebei Province to alleviate groundwater depletion in the region. However, some of the water saved was lost through evaporation from bare soil and transpiration by weeds. So far, no measurement has been done in the region to address this non-productive water loss, thereby limiting the water-saving potential of the introduced LFS. Furthermore, the reduction in crop production under the summer-maize – fallow system threatens food security. The objective of this study was to determine which practice is effective to keep soil water during fallow and the exact water-saving potential of different cropping system in the region. Firstly, field experiments were conducted under various soil surface management systems — including plastic mulching (PM), straw mulching (SM), shallow tillage (ST) and weed control (WC). The effects of saving water, controlling weeds and managing nutrients were analyzed under the various surface soil management methods. The results showed that compared with the control (no soil surface management, CK), 177, 64.7, 71.0 and 25.0 mm of water was saved respectively under PM, SM, WC and ST surface soil management methods in 2019–2020. The effect of weed control decreased in the order of PM > WC > SM > ST. While PM significantly increased soil nutrient in all the treatments, the others showed slight but insignificant increases. Secondly, the precise water-use of each of the cropping systems was determined using large lysimeters. The analysis showed that compared with the wheat-maize system, 60–100 mm of water was saved under alternating wheat-soybean, wheat-millet, mung bean – fresh edible maize, spring sweet potato cropping systems. The results were key for technical guide in developing future cultivation adjustment policies.

Published in Agricultural Water Management

ISSN: 1873-2283 (Online)
Publisher: Elsevier
Country of publisher: Netherlands
LCC subjects: Agriculture: Agriculture (General); Social Sciences: Industries. Land use. Labor: Special industries and trades: Agricultural industries
Website: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/agricultural-water-management

About the journal

Abstract

Keywords