The importance of the fallow period for N2O and CH4 fluxes and nitrate leaching in a Mediterranean irrigated agroecosystem

European Journal of Soil Science - Tập 61 Số 5 - Trang 710-720 - 2010
Laura Sánchez-Martı́n1, Alberto Sanz-Cobeña1, Ana Meijide1, Miguel Quemada1, Antonio Vallejo1
1Department Agricultural Chemistry and Analysis, E. T. S. I. Agronomos, Technical University of Madrid, Spain

Tóm tắt

The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern of nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4) fluxes, and leaching losses of nitrate (NO3) and dissolved organic C (DOC), during a fallow–onion crop–fallow cycle in a Mediterranean area. The importance of the fallow (intercrop) period and the type of fertilizer were also evaluated. Goat and chicken manure (M) from an organic farm, digested pig slurry (DPS) and urea (U) were applied at a rate of 110 kg N ha−1 and compared with a zero N treatment (Control). The crop period contributed more than each fallow period to the total N2O emission (ranging from 70 to 85% of the total emission, depending on the treatment). The variability of rainfall during fallow periods affected N2O emissions, with the highest fluxes observed in the second fallow, which was the wetter. Negative net fluxes of N2O (0 to −0.4 mg N2O‐N m−2 day−1) were mainly observed during the irrigation period and in fallow periods. The type of fertilizer had no effect on N2O fluxes, but influenced the CH4 oxidation. The largest CH4 emission was from the manure treatment (2.4 mg CH4‐C m−2 day−1) during the irrigation period. The lowest NO3 but highest DOC leaching rates were measured during the second fallow period from the manure treated plots (0.2 kg NO3‐N ha−1 and 3.9 kg C ha−1), which also had the highest drainage. The use of OM, therefore, seems to be a suitable method to reduce the environmental impacts associated with N leaching as well as increase the potential to denitrify NO3 in groundwater.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Allen R.G., 1998, Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements

10.1007/s11104-006-9064-9

10.1016/S0168-6496(03)00304-0

10.1021/es00036a007

Burt R.(ed.)2004.Soil Survey Laboratory Methods Manual. Soil Survey Investigations Report No 42 Version 4.0 USDA Washington DC.

10.1029/93JD01020

Danielson R.E., 1986, Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1 – Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 443

Davidson E.A., 1991, Microbial Production and Consumption of Greenhouse Gases: Methane, Nitrous Oxides and Halomethanes, 219

10.1007/s003740000313

Dick J., 2001, The effect of rainfall on NO and N2O emissions from Uganda agroforest soils, Phyton Annales Rei Botanicae, 41, 73

Diez J.A., 2000, Integrated fertilizer and irrigation management to reduce nitrate leaching in Central Spain, Journal of Environmental Quality, 48, 49

10.1016/S0038-0717(96)00152-6

Duxbury J.M., 1994, The significance of agricultural sources of greenhouse gases, Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 38, 151

Granli T., 1994, Nitrous oxide from agriculture, Norwegian Journal of Agriculture Science, 12, 1

10.1007/BF00335823

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2006, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

10.1016/0038-0717(94)90315-8

10.1016/j.jconhyd.2004.01.005

10.1016/S1164-5563(01)01067-6

10.1016/S1352-2310(97)00265-3

Manugistics, 2000, Statgraphic Plus Version 5.1.

10.1016/j.agee.2006.11.020

10.1016/j.agee.2009.03.005

10.1023/A:1009740530221

10.1007/s003740050233

10.2136/sssaj2006.0261

Papen H., 2001, N2O and CH4‐fluxes from soils of a N‐limited and N‐fertilised spruce forest ecosystem of the temperate zone, Journal of Applied Botany & Food Quality, 75, 159

10.2136/sssaj1997.03615995006100060006x

10.1023/A:1004519913339

10.1016/S0016-7061(98)00099-8

10.1038/292235a0

10.1007/s003740050293

10.1007/s11104-009-9987-z

10.1016/S0038-0717(97)00059-X

10.1016/S1465-9972(00)00016-7

Soil Survey Staff, 1992, Keys to Soil Taxonomy

10.1038/341314a0

10.1007/s11104-004-5754-3

10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.04.040

10.1007/s11104-004-0630-8

10.1016/j.agee.2005.07.009

10.1016/S0038-0717(98)00165-5