Abstract
The North China Plain (NCP) is one of the most important grain production regions in China. However, it currently experiences water shortage, severe nonpoint source pollution, and low water and N use efficiencies (WUE and NUE). To explore sustainable agricultural development in this region, a field experiment with different cropping systems was conducted in suburban Beijing. These cropping systems included a winter wheat and summer maize rotation system for one year (WM), three harvests (winter wheat-summer maize-spring maize) in two years (HT), and continuous spring maize monoculture (CS). Novel ways were explored to improve WUE and NUE and to reduce N loss via the alternative cropping system based on the simulation results of a soil-crop system model. Results showed that the annual average yields were ranked as follows: WM > HT > CS. The N leaching of WM was much larger than that of HT and CS. WUE and NUE were ranked as follows: WM < HT < CS. Comprehensive evaluation indices based on agronomic and environmental effects indicated that CS or HT have significant potential for approaches characterized by water-saving, fertilizer-saving, high-WUE, and high-NUE properties. Once spring maize yield reached an ideal level HT and CS became a high-yield, water-saving, and fertilizer-saving cropping systems. Therefore, this method would be beneficial to sustainable agricultural development in the NCP.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Annual average yields were ranked WM > HT > CS.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“These cropping systems included a winter wheat and summer maize rotation system for one year (WM), three harvests (winter wheat-summer maize-spring maize) in two years (HT), and continuous spring maize monoculture (CS)”
e2“Results showed that the annual average yields were ranked as follows: WM > HT > CS”
Claim · model-written summary
N leaching of the winter wheat and summer maize rotation was much larger than that of HT and CS.
- Treatment
- winter wheat and summer maize rotation systeme1
- Outcome
- N leachinge3
- Direction
- much largere3
- Comparator
- that of HT and CSe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“These cropping systems included a winter wheat and summer maize rotation system for one year (WM), three harvests (winter wheat-summer maize-spring maize) in two years (HT), and continuous spring maize monoculture (CS)”
e3“The N leaching of WM was much larger than that of HT and CS”
Claim · model-written summary
WUE and NUE were ranked WM < HT < CS.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“These cropping systems included a winter wheat and summer maize rotation system for one year (WM), three harvests (winter wheat-summer maize-spring maize) in two years (HT), and continuous spring maize monoculture (CS)”
e4“WUE and NUE were ranked as follows: WM < HT < CS”
Claim · model-written summary
CS or HT have significant potential for water-saving, fertilizer-saving, high-WUE and high-NUE approaches.
- Outcome
- water-saving, fertilizer-saving, high-WUE, and high-NUE propertiese5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“These cropping systems included a winter wheat and summer maize rotation system for one year (WM), three harvests (winter wheat-summer maize-spring maize) in two years (HT), and continuous spring maize monoculture (CS)”
e5“Comprehensive evaluation indices based on agronomic and environmental effects indicated that CS or HT have significant potential for approaches characterized by water-saving, fertilizer-saving, high-WUE, and high-NUE properties”
Claim · model-written summary
Once spring maize yield reached an ideal level, HT and CS became high-yield, water-saving and fertilizer-saving systems.
- Treatment
- Once spring maize yield reached an ideal levele6
- Outcome
- high-yield, water-saving, and fertilizer-saving cropping systemse6
- Direction
- becamee6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“Once spring maize yield reached an ideal level HT and CS became a high-yield, water-saving, and fertilizer-saving cropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend the alternative cropping system method for sustainable agricultural development in the NCP.
- Outcome
- sustainable agricultural developmente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“These cropping systems included a winter wheat and summer maize rotation system for one year (WM), three harvests (winter wheat-summer maize-spring maize) in two years (HT), and continuous spring maize monoculture (CS)”
e7“Therefore, this method would be beneficial to sustainable agricultural development in the NCP”
The same questions in other papers
Triticum aestivum · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
cultivation system · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →rotation · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.