Advertisement

Effect of moisture gradient on rice yields and greenhouse gas emissions from rice paddies

  • Xianxian Zhang
  • Huifeng Sun
  • Junli Wang
  • Jining Zhang
  • Guolan Liu
  • Sheng ZhouEmail author
Research Article
  • 15 Downloads

Abstract

Fluxes of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from two rice varieties, Huayou 14 and Hanyou 8, were monitored using closed chamber/gas chromatography method. Huayou 14 is a commonly grown variety of rice whereas Hanyou 8 is a water-saving and drought-resistant rice (WDR) variety. Low soil volumetric water content (VWC) existed in the treatments on the slope (W5 < W4 < W3 < W2). On the slope, rice yields of Hanyou 8 decreased by 12–39%, and Huayou 14 by 11–46% as compared to the plots on the flat. The total compatible solutes in Hanyou 8 had a greater variational range than Huayou 14. Compared to W1, CH4 emissions from W2–W5 decreased by 58–86% in Hanyou 8 and 38–86% in Huayou 14, whereas those of N2O increased by 26–121% in Hanyou 8 and 49–189% in Huayou 14 across both two seasons, which was mainly because the VWC varied in W2–W5 treatment. Under the treatments in the slope (W2, W3, W4, and W5), the global warming potential (GWP) was dominated by N2O emissions, which accounted for 69–90% of the GWP. Hanyou 8 had greater tolerance for water stress than Huayou 14 did, as evident from the smaller reductions in rice yield and greater variational range of total compatible solutes content. Water stress could reduce CH4 emissions but decrease N2O emissions for both rice varieties. This results suggest that planting WDR varieties under water shortage irrigation (such as W4, W5) will be able to maintain rice yields and reduce the GWP with less water.

Keywords

Moisture gradient WDR vs paddy rice variety Osmotic adjustment CH4 and N2O emissions 

Notes

Funding information

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41375157) and the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (No. 2013BAD11B02).

References

  1. Bates LS, Waldren RP, Teare ID (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 39:205–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bi J et al (2019) Effects of irrigation amount on yield and water use efficiency of water-saving and drought-resistance rice (WDR). Acta Agric Shanghai 35:7–10Google Scholar
  3. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carrijo DR, Lundy ME, Linquist BA (2017) Rice yields and water use under alternate wetting and drying irrigation: a meta-analysis. Field Crop Res 203:173–180.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Centritto M, Lauteri M, Monteverdi MC, Serraj R (2009) Leaf gas exchange, carbon isotope discrimination, and grain yield in contrasting rice genotypes subjected to water deficits during the reproductive stage. J Exp Bot 60:2325–2339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chu G, Chen T, Wang Z, Yang J, Zhang J (2014) Morphological and physiological traits of roots and their relationships with water productivity in water-saving and drought-resistant rice (Reprinted from Field Crops Research, vol 162, pg 108-119, 2014). Field Crop Res 165:36–48.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2014.06.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ekanayake I, Datta SD, Steponkus P (1989) Spikelet sterility and flowering response of rice to water stress at anthesis. Ann Bot 63:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fageria N (2007) Yield physiology of rice. J Plant Nutr 30:843–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FAO (2017) FAOSTAT Data. Available at: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data. Accessed 11 Sept 2019
  10. Frenken K, Gillet V (2012) Irrigation water requirement and water withdrawal by country. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  11. Frolking S, Li C, Braswell R, Fuglestvedt J (2004) Short- and long- term greenhouse gas and radiative forcing impacts of changing water management in Asian rice paddies. Glob Chang Biol 10:1180–1196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hou A, Chen G, Wang Z, Van Cleemput O, Patrick W (2000) Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from a rice field in relation to soil redox and microbiological processes. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:2180–2186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hou H, Peng S, Xu J, Yang S, Mao Z (2012) Seasonal variations of CH4 and N2O emissions in response to water management of paddy fields located in Southeast China. Chemosphere 89:884–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang Y, Carrijo D, Huang S, Chen J, Balaine N, Zhang W, van Groenigen KJ, Linquist B (2019) Water management to mitigate the global warming potential of rice systems: a global meta-analysis. Field Crop Res 234:47–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2019.02.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson-Beebout SE, Angeles OR, Alberto MCR, Buresh RJ (2009) Simultaneous minimization of nitrous oxide and methane emission from rice paddy soils is improbable due to redox potential changes with depth in a greenhouse experiment without plants. Geoderma 149:45–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.11.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kavi Kishor P, Hong Z, Miao G-H, Hu C-A, Verma DPS (1995) Overexpression of Δ1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate synthetase increases proline production and confers osmotolerance in transgenic plants. Plant Physiol 108:1387–1394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Korres NE, Norsworthy JK, Burgos NR, Oosterhuis DM (2017) Temperature and drought impacts on rice production: an agronomic perspective regarding short- and long-term adaptation measures. Water Resour Rural Dev 9:12–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Le Mer J, Roger P (2001) Production, oxidation, emission and consumption of methane by soils: a review. Eur J Soil Biol 37:25–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li C (2007) Quantifying greenhouse gas emissions from soils: scientific basis and modeling approach. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 53:344–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li CS, Qiu J, Frolking S, Xiao X, Salas W, Moore B III, Boles S, Huang Y, Sass R (2002) Reduced methane emissions from large-scale changes in water management of China’s rice paddies during 1980-2000. Geophys Res Lett 29:33-1–33-4.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2002gl015370 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li HS, Sun Q, Zhao SJ, Zhang WH (2004) Plant physiology biochemistry principle and experimental technique. Higher Education Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  22. Luo L (2010) Breeding for water-saving and drought-resistance rice (WDR) in China. J Exp Bot 61(13):3509-3517.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erq185
  23. Ma X, Feng F, Wei H, Mei H, Xu K, Chen S, Li T, Liang X, Liu H, Luo L (2016) Genome-wide association study for plant height and grain yield in rice under contrasting moisture regimes. Front Plant Sci 7.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01801
  24. Mosier AR, Halvorson AD, Reule CA, Liu XJ (2006) Net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity in irrigated cropping systems in northeastern Colorado. J Environ Qual 35:1584–1598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mostajeran A, Rahimi-Eichi V (2009) Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars and accumulation of proline and soluble sugars in sheath and blades of their different ages leaves. Am Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci 5:264–272Google Scholar
  26. Pathak H, Sankhyan S, Dubey DS, Bhatia A, Jain N (2013) Dry direct-seeding of rice for mitigating greenhouse gas emission: field experimentation and simulation. Paddy Water Environ 11:593–601.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-012-0352-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peyron M, Bertora C, Pelissetti S, Said-Pullicino D, Celi L, Miniotti E, Romani M, Sacco D (2016) Greenhouse gas emissions as affected by different water management practices in temperate rice paddies. Agric Ecosyst Environ 232:17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sha Z, Chen X, Zhao Z, Shi C, Yuan Y, Cao L (2018) Effect of fertilizer management on dry matter accumulation, yield and fertilizer use efficiency of rice cultivar ‘Huayou-14. Chin J Eco-Agric 26:815–823Google Scholar
  29. Shao G, Cui J, Lu B, Brian BJ, Ding J, She D (2015) Impacts of controlled irrigation and drainage on the yield and physiological attributes of rice. Agric Water Manag 149:156–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Siddiqui ZS, Khan MA (2011) The role of enzyme amylase in two germinating seed morphs of Halopyrum mucronatum (L.) Stapf. in saline and non-saline environment. Acta Physiol Plant 33:1185–1197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Siddiqui ZS, Cho JI, Kwon TR, Ahn BO, Lee KS, Jeong MJ, Ryu TH, Lee SK, Park SC, Park SH (2014) Physiological mechanism of drought tolerance in transgenic rice plants expressing Capsicum annuum methionine sulfoxide reductase B2 (CaMsrB 2) gene. Acta Physiol Plant 36(5):1143–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sriphirom P, Chidthaisong A, Towprayoon S (2019) Effect of alternate wetting and drying water management on rice cultivation with low emissions and low water used during wet and dry season. J Clean Prod 223:980–988.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.212 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sun H, Zhou S, Chen G, Fu Z, Liu G, Song X (2015) Effects of rice cultivars on CH4 and N2O emissions from. Rice Fields J Agro-Environ Sci:1595–1602Google Scholar
  34. Sun H, Zhou S, Song X, Fu Z, Chen G, Zhang J (2016) CH4 Emission in response to water-saving and drought-resistance rice (WDR) and common rice varieties under different irrigation managements. Water Air Soil Pollut 227(2):47.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-015-2741-7
  35. Tuong TP, BAM B, Mortimer M (2005) More rice, less water. Plant Prod Sci 8:231–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vendruscolo ECG, Schuster I, Pileggi M, Scapim CA, Molinari HBC, Marur CJ, Vieira LGE (2007) Stress-induced synthesis of proline confers tolerance to water deficit in transgenic wheat. J Plant Physiol 164:1367–1376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wassmann R, Neue H, Lantin R, Makarim K, Chareonsilp N, Buendia L, Rennenberg H (2000) Characterization of methane emissions from rice fields in Asia. II. Differences among irrigated, rainfed, and deepwater rice. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 58:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Weller S, Janz B, Jörg L, Kraus D, Racela HSU, Wassmann R, Butterbach-Bahl K, Kiese R (2016) Greenhouse gas emissions and global warming potential of traditional and diversified tropical rice rotation systems. Glob Chang Biol 22:432–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Xia H, Luo Z, Xiong J, Ma X, Lou Q, Wei H, Qiu J, Yang H, Liu G, Fan L, Chen L, Luo L (2019) Bi-directional selection in upland rice leads to its adaptive differentiation from lowland rice in drought resistance and productivity. Mol Plant 12:170–184.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molp.2018.12.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Xu Y, Ge J, Tian S, Li S, Nguy-Robertson AL, Zhan M, Cao C (2015) Effects of water-saving irrigation practices and drought resistant rice variety on greenhouse gas emissions from a no-till paddy in the central lowlands of China. Sci Total Environ 505:1043–1052.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.10.073 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yan X, Yagi K, Akiyama H, Akimoto H (2005) Statistical analysis of the major variables controlling methane emission from rice fields. Glob Chang Biol 11:1131–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yang J, Zhang J, Wang Z, Zhu Q, Wang W (2001) Hormonal changes in the grains of rice subjected to water stress during grain filling. Plant Physiol 127:315–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yildiz-Aktas L, Dagnon S, Gurel A, Gesheva E, Edreva A (2009) Drought tolerance in cotton: involvement of non-enzymatic ROS-scavenging compounds. J Agron Crop Sci 195:247–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yokoi S, Bressan RA, Hasegawa PM (2002) Salt stress tolerance of plants. JIRCAS Work Rep 23:25–33Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xianxian Zhang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Huifeng Sun
    • 1
    • 2
  • Junli Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jining Zhang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Guolan Liu
    • 3
  • Sheng Zhou
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Eco-Environmental Protection Research InstituteShanghai Academy of Agricultural SciencesShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Low-carbon Agriculture (SERCLA)Shanghai Academy of Agricultural SciencesShanghaiChina
  3. 3.Shanghai Agrobiological Gene CenterShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations