Book Ruth S, Frankenberger Jane, Christianson Laura E, Prasad Laxmi R, Yuan Yongping
Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, USA.
Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA.
J Nat Resour Agric Ecosyst. 2024;2(3):129-137. doi: 10.13031/jnrae.15804.
Although significant governmental investment has been provided to implement agricultural conservation practices (ACPs) for water quality improvement, eutrophication and hypoxia persist in coastal and fresh waters. A better understanding of the comparative effectiveness of ACPs is needed to improve environmental outcomes with the funding available. The objectives of this overview article are to (1) compare the performance and cost effectiveness among all the ACPs reviewed in both the first and second editions of the Special Collection and (2) present critical perspectives for researchers, policymakers, and funding entities seeking to improve water quality. The ten ACPs reviewed encompassed a range of goals, strategies, and landscape placement and varied widely in performance for their reduction of sediment, nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) and their cost-effectiveness. Three ACPs included performance measures for all three constituents: sediment, N, and P, whereas others focused only on N (nine ACPs) and/or P (six ACPs). The four ACPs that are considered "water management" practices: drainage water management, denitrifying bioreactor, saturated buffer, and constructed wetland were all effective in mitigating the effects of nutrients in subsurface drainage water and showed average nitrate-N load reductions of 40%-46%. In contrast, few practices were found effective in reducing dissolved P (DP) loss from agricultural fields. Four ACPs (residue and tillage management, conservation crop rotation, drainage water management, and nutrient management) demonstrated possible net economic benefits, while perspectives were provided for prioritizing financial assistance for other ACPs. Monitoring recommendations developed during the literature reviews highlighted the need for more long-term field-scale monitoring to better reflect multi-year climatic variability.
尽管政府已投入大量资金实施农业保护措施（ACPs）以改善水质，但沿海和淡水水体中的富营养化和缺氧问题依然存在。为了利用现有资金改善环境状况，需要更好地了解农业保护措施的相对有效性。本文综述的目的是：（1）比较《特刊》第一版和第二版中所综述的所有农业保护措施的性能和成本效益；（2）为致力于改善水质的研究人员、政策制定者和资助机构提供批判性观点。所综述的10种农业保护措施涵盖了一系列目标、策略和景观布局，在减少沉积物、氮（N）和磷（P）以及成本效益方面的表现差异很大。三种农业保护措施包含了对沉积物、氮和磷这三种成分的性能指标，而其他措施仅关注氮（9种农业保护措施）和/或磷（6种农业保护措施）。被视为“水管理”措施的四种农业保护措施：排水管理、反硝化生物反应器、饱和缓冲带和人工湿地，在减轻地下排水水中养分的影响方面均有效，平均硝酸盐 - 氮负荷降低了40% - 46%。相比之下，很少有措施能有效减少农田中溶解态磷（DP）的流失。四种农业保护措施（残茬和耕作管理、保护性作物轮作、排水管理和养分管理）显示出可能的净经济效益，同时也为其他农业保护措施的财政援助优先级提供了观点。文献综述期间制定的监测建议强调，需要进行更多长期的田间尺度监测，以更好地反映多年的气候变异性。
