| 南方双季稻区生物质炭还田模式生态效益评价 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 陈春兰,侯海军,秦红灵,王聪,沈健林,魏文学.南方双季稻区生物质炭还田模式生态效益评价[J].农业环境科学学报,2016,33(1):80-91. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 陈春兰 侯海军 秦红灵 王聪 沈健林 魏文学 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 中国科学院亚热带农业生态研究所亚热带农业生态过程重点实验室, 湖南长沙 410125;中国科学院桃源农业生态试验站, 湖南常德 415700,中国科学院亚热带农业生态研究所亚热带农业生态过程重点实验室, 湖南长沙 410125;中国科学院桃源农业生态试验站, 湖南常德 415700,中国科学院亚热带农业生态研究所亚热带农业生态过程重点实验室, 湖南长沙 410125;中国科学院桃源农业生态试验站, 湖南常德 415700,中国科学院亚热带农业生态研究所亚热带农业生态过程重点实验室, 湖南长沙 410125;中国科学院桃源农业生态试验站, 湖南常德 415700,中国科学院亚热带农业生态研究所亚热带农业生态过程重点实验室, 湖南长沙 410125;中国科学院桃源农业生态试验站, 湖南常德 415700,中国科学院亚热带农业生态研究所亚热带农业生态过程重点实验室, 湖南长沙 410125;中国科学院桃源农业生态试验站, 湖南常德 415700 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 国家科技支撑项目(2012BAD14B03);国家"973"计划项目(2012CB417106);国家自然科学基金面上项目(41271280);湖南省自然科学基金(13JJ3126) |
| |
| 摘 要： | 应用生态经济系统能值分析理论与方法,引入环境污染指数和能值反馈率2个新的指标,分析了无秸秆还田(CK,即常规施肥处理)、低量秸秆还田(LS)、高量秸秆还田(HS)、低量秸秆源生物质炭施用(LC)和高量秸秆源生物质炭施用(HC)5种秸秆还田模式的能值效益,从农业可持续发展水平来评价南方双季稻区最佳管理模式。结果表明:秸秆还田显著增加了农田温室气体能值产出,LS、HS处理分别是CK处理的1.94倍和2.92倍,分别减少了8.13%和10.80%的水稻生物量能值产出。秸秆源生物质炭还田温室气体能值产出与常规施肥处理(CK)差别不大,但明显低于秸秆直接还田,减少了49.10%~59.36%。秸秆源生物质炭还田增加了水稻生物量能值产出,比常规施肥处理(CK)增加了4.32%~10.49%,比秸秆直接还田增加了16.96%~20.27%。5种秸秆还田模式,能值产投比早稻季依次为:LC> HC> CK> HS> LS,晚稻季依次为:HC> LC> CK> LS> HS。综合评价双季稻生态系统可持续发展水平,早稻和晚稻季节HC均高于其他模式。因此,从能值效益角度,高量秸秆源生物质炭还田是该区域双季稻生产中最优的秸秆还田模式,可以大力推广。
|
| 关 键 词： | 秸秆还田 生物质炭 能值 可持续发展水平 双季稻田 |
| 收稿时间： | 2015/7/23 0:00:00 |
Emergy Evaluation of a Double Rice System with Biochar-returning in South China |
| |
| CHEN Chun-lan,HOU Hai-jun,QIN Hong-ling,WANG Cong,SHEN Jian-lin and WEI Wen-xue.Emergy Evaluation of a Double Rice System with Biochar-returning in South China[J].Journal of Agro-Environment Science( J. Agro-Environ. Sci.),2016,33(1):80-91. |
| |
| Authors: | CHEN Chun-lan HOU Hai-jun QIN Hong-ling WANG Cong SHEN Jian-lin and WEI Wen-xue |
| |
| Institution: | Key Laboratory of Agro-ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410125, China;Taoyuan Station of Agro-ecology Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changde 415700, China,Key Laboratory of Agro-ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410125, China;Taoyuan Station of Agro-ecology Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changde 415700, China,Key Laboratory of Agro-ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410125, China;Taoyuan Station of Agro-ecology Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changde 415700, China,Key Laboratory of Agro-ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410125, China;Taoyuan Station of Agro-ecology Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changde 415700, China,Key Laboratory of Agro-ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410125, China;Taoyuan Station of Agro-ecology Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changde 415700, China and Key Laboratory of Agro-ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410125, China;Taoyuan Station of Agro-ecology Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changde 415700, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Emergy theory and method, including two new indices(environmental pollution index and emergy feedback rate), were used to evaluate the best fertilization management practice in double rice ecosystem. The emergy efficiency of five straw returning models as conventional fertilization without straw(CK), low amount of straw at 3 t·hm-2 (LS), high amount of straw at 6 t·hm-2 (HS), low amount of biochar at 24 t·hm-2 (LC) and high amount biochar at 48 t·hm-2 (HC) were analyzed. The results showed that straw treatments significantly increased the emergy outputs of greenhouse gases, but reduced the emergy outputs of rice biomass. For LS and HS treatments, emergy outputs of greenhouse gases were 1.94 times and 2.92 times than that of CK treatment, while emergy outputs of rice biomass decreased 8.13% and 10.80%, respectively. However, biochar treatments obviously reduced emergy outputs of greenhouse gases compared with straw treatments. The emergy outputs of greenhouse gases of LC and HC treatments decreased about 49.10%~59.36% compared with that of straw treatments. Moreover, the emergy output of rice biomass in LC and HC treatments increased 10.49% and 4.32% than that of CK treatment, and increased 20.27% and 16.96% than that of straw treatments. In early rice season, the emergy input-output ratio of five straw returning models was in the order of LC> HC> CK> HS> LS, and in late rice season, the order was HC> LC> CK> LS> HS. The sustainable development levels of double rice ecosystem in HC treatment were highest in both early and late rice seasons. Therefore, the model of high amount of biochar at 48 t·hm-2 was the best fertilization management practice in the region. |
| |
| Keywords: | straw returned biochar emergy sustainable development level double paddy field |
|
| 点击此处可从《农业环境科学学报》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《农业环境科学学报》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
