Li Rui-Ping, Luo Yang, Sui Peng-Xiang, Zheng Hong-Bing, Ming Bo, Li Shao-Kun, Wang Hao, Zheng Jin-Yu
Institute of Agricultural Resource and Environment, Jilin Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Key Laboratory of Crop Ecophysiology and Farming System in Northeast China, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Changchun 130033, China.
College of Agro-nomy, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010019, China.
Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao. 2023 Oct;34(10):2693-2702. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202310.014.
Clarifying the effect of different maize straw returning methods on soil temperature is crucial for optimizing the management of farmland straw and the efficient utilization of heat resources in the black soil region of Northeast China. To investigate the impacts of straw returning methods on soil temperature, we conducted a field experiment with four treatments during 2018 and 2020, including plough tillage with straw returning (PTSR), rotary tillage with straw returning (RTSR), no-tillage with straw returning (NTSR), and a control treatment of conventional ridge tillage without straw returning (CT). We measured soil temperature and water content at the 5 cm, 15 cm and 30 cm soil layer, and the straw coverage rate during the 3-year maize growth period. We further analyzed the differences of soil temperature in different soil layer under different treatments, accumulated soil temperature and growing degree-days (GDD) above 10 ℃, daily dynamics of soil temperature, the production efficiency of air accumulated temperature among different treatments, and explored factors causing the difference of soil temperature and the production efficiency of air accumulated temperature. Our results showed that different treatments mainly affected soil temperature from the sowing to emergence stage (S-VE) of maize. The daily average soil temperature showed a trend of CT>PTSR>RTSR>NTSR. The differences of soil temperature under different treatments showed a decreasing trend as growth process advanced and soil depth increased. Compared with the CT treatment, soil temperature at 5 cm depth was decreased by 0.86, 1.84 and 3.50 ℃ for PTSR, RTSR, and NTSR treatments, respectively. NTSR significantly reduced the accumulated temperature of ≥10 ℃ in different soil layers and GDD. The accumulated temperature ≥ 10 ℃ at the 5, 15, and 30 cm soil layers decreased by 216.2, 222.7, and 165.1 ℃·d, and the GDD decreased by 201.9, 138.7 and 123.9 ℃·d, respectively. In addition, production efficiency of air accumulated temperature decreased by 9.7% to 15.6% for NTSR. Conclusively, PTSR and RTSR had significant impacts on topsoil temperature during the maize growing period from sowing to emergence, but did not affect the accumulated soil temperature and the production efficiency of air accumulated temperature. However, NTSR significantly reduced topsoil temperature and production efficiency of air accumulated temperature.
阐明不同玉米秸秆还田方式对土壤温度的影响，对于优化农田秸秆管理以及东北地区黑土区热量资源的高效利用至关重要。为了研究秸秆还田方式对土壤温度的影响，我们在2018年至2020年期间进行了一项田间试验，设置了四种处理，包括翻耕秸秆还田（PTSR）、旋耕秸秆还田（RTSR）、免耕秸秆还田（NTSR），以及传统垄作不秸秆还田的对照处理（CT）。我们测量了3年玉米生长期间5厘米、15厘米和30厘米土层的土壤温度和含水量，以及秸秆覆盖率。我们进一步分析了不同处理下不同土层的土壤温度差异、≥10℃的积温和生长度日（GDD）、土壤温度的日动态、不同处理间空气积温的生产效率，并探究了导致土壤温度和空气积温生产效率差异的因素。我们的结果表明，不同处理主要影响玉米从播种到出苗阶段（S-VE）的土壤温度。日平均土壤温度呈现CT>PTSR>RTSR>NTSR的趋势。不同处理下的土壤温度差异随着生长进程推进和土层深度增加而呈下降趋势。与CT处理相比，PTSR、RTSR和NTSR处理在5厘米深度的土壤温度分别降低了0.86℃、1.84℃和3.50℃。NTSR显著降低了不同土层≥10℃的积温和GDD。5厘米、15厘米和30厘米土层≥10℃的积温分别降低了216.2℃·d、222.7℃·d和165.1℃·d，GDD分别降低了201.9℃·d、138.7℃·d和123.9℃·d。此外，NTSR的空气积温生产效率降低了9.7%至15.6%。总之，PTSR和RTSR对玉米从播种到出苗的生长期间表土温度有显著影响，但不影响土壤积温和空气积温的生产效率。然而，NTSR显著降低了表土温度和空气积温的生产效率。
