The effects of nitrogen fertilizer deep placement on the ammonia volatilization from paddy fields in the Taihu Lake region of China
-
摘要: NH3挥发是稻田氮素损失的重要途径之一, 基于基肥期尿素氮肥深施、追肥期用缓释肥替代尿素和配施脲酶抑制剂对太湖地区水稻生长季NH3挥发影响少有报道。为此, 本研究共设置了7个原位试验处理: 1)空白处理, 不施氮肥(CK); 2)当地常规氮肥表施处理, 施氮量300 kg∙hm−2 (SN300); 3)减氮10%, 氮肥表施处理, 施氮量为270 kg∙hm−2 (SN270); 4)减氮10%+基肥氮深施+追肥表施尿素处理(DN270); 5)减氮10%+基肥氮深施+追肥表施尿素+脲酶抑制剂(DN270+UI); 6)减氮10%+基肥氮深施+追肥表施缓释肥(DN270+SR); 7)减氮10%+基肥深施+追肥表施缓释肥+脲酶抑制剂(DN270+SR+UI)。与常规尿素表施SN300处理NH3累积排放量相比, 采用基肥深施可降低78.2%~85.2%的基肥期NH3排放量, 基肥减氮深施且追肥期配施脲酶抑制剂(DN270+UI处理)可降低30.4%的分蘖肥期NH3排放量和25.3%的穗肥期NH3排放量, 基肥减氮深施且水稻追肥期用缓释肥替代尿素(DN270+SR处理)可降低36.4%的分蘖肥期NH3排放量和28.1%的穗肥期NH3排放量。整个水稻生长季NH3累积排放量大小为SN300>SN270>DN270>DN270+UI>DN270+SR>DN270+SR+UI, 其中DN270+SR+UI处理下NH3排放量最小, 与SN300处理相比, 可显著降低50.9%的NH3累积排放量(P<0.05)。除CK外, 各处理间水稻产量差异不显著, 单位水稻产量NH3排放强度以DN270+SR+UI处理下最小, 与SN300处理相比, 可显著降低52.5%单位水稻产量氨排放强度(P<0.05)。综合考虑经济生态环境效益, 在南方典型稻田中采用基肥期尿素深施可有效地降低氨挥发量, 是一种值得推广的稻田氨减排模式, 在追肥期用缓释肥替代尿素同时配施脲酶抑制剂可进一步提高NH3减排效果。Abstract: .Ammonia (NH3) volatilization is an important nitrogen (N) loss pathway in paddy fields. However, the effects of N fertilizer deep placement, slow-release N fertilizers, and urea inhibitors on NH3 volatilization reduction during the entire rice-growing season remain uncertain. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a field experiment with seven treatments: (1) no N application, (2) local broadcasting application of urea at a rate of 300 kg(N)∙hm−2 (SN300), (3) 10% reduction of N from SN300 (SN270), (4) deep placement of basal urea together with the broadcasting of topdressing of urea at tiller and panicle stages of rice, at a total a rate of 270 kg(N)∙hm−2 (DN270), (5) application of urea inhibitor for DN270 (DN270+UI), (6) 10% nitrogen reduction, deep application of basal urea together with the surface application of slow-release N fertilizer (DN270+SR), and (7) application of urease inhibitors for DN270+SR (DN270+SR+UI). Compared with the SN300 treatment, deep placement of basal N fertilizer reduced the cumulative NH3 emissions by 78.2%−85.2% in the basal fertilization period. The combined application of the urease inhibitors in the rice topdressing periods (DN270+UI treatment) reduced the NH3 emissions by 30.4% at the tillering stage and 25.3% at the panicle stage in comparison with the SN300 treatment. Replacing urea with a slow-release N fertilizer (DN270+SR treatment) in the rice topdressing periods reduced NH3 volatilization by 36.4% at the tillering stage and 28.1% at the panicle stage. The cumulative NH3 volatilization changed in the following order: SN300 > SN270 > DN270 > DN270+UI > DN270+SR > DN270+SR+UI. Compared to the local treatment (SN300), DN270+SR+UI significantly reduced NH3 volatilization by 50.9%. There was no significant difference in rice yield among the N fertilizer treatments. NH3 emission intensity per unit rice yield was lowest for the DN270+SR+UI treatment, 52.5% lower than the SN300 treatment. Overall, simultaneous N fertilizer deep placement with slow-release N and urease inhibitors produced more grains with lower environmental costs associated with NH3 emissions. This represents a promising and sustainable management strategy for paddy fields in the Taihu Lake region of China.
-
图 2 不同施肥处理下水稻生长季氨挥发通量
图中黑色箭头为施肥日期。CK、SN300、SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理措施见表1。
Figure 2. Dynamics of NH3 volatilization fluxes during the rice growing seasons of 2020 under different fertilization treatments
The down arrow indicates the N application event. The treatments of CK, SN300, SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI were shown in the table 1.
图 3 不同施肥处理下水稻NH3排放系数(A)和单位水稻产量NH3排放强度(B)
CK、SN300、SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理措施见表1; 不同小写字母表示不同处理间差异达 P<0.05显著水平。
Figure 3. NH3 emission factors (A) and yield-scale NH3 emission intensities (B) of rice under different fertilization treatments
The treatments of CK, SN300, SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI are shown in the table 1. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences at P<0.05 level among treatments.
图 4 不同施肥处理下水稻生长期间田面水pH和NH4+-N、NO3−-N、可溶性有机碳浓度动态变化
图中CK、SN300、SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理措施见表1。黑色箭头为施肥日期。
Figure 4. Dynamics of pH and concentrations of NH4+-N, NO3−-N, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) of surfact water of paddy field in different sampling days under different fertilization treatments
The treatments of CK, SN300, SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI are shown in the table 1. The down arrow indicates the N application event.
表 1 不同处理水稻生长期氮肥类型和施肥量
Table 1. Types and rate of nitrogen fertilizer application during rice growing season
处理
Treatment肥料类型和施肥量 Fertilizer type and rate [kg(N)∙hm−2] 基肥
Basal fertilization分蘖肥
Tillering topdressing穗肥
Heading topdressing不施氮肥 Control (CK) — — — 当地常规氮肥表施
Local conventional nitrogen fertilizer broadcasting application (SN300)尿素
Urea 180 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素
Urea 60 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素
Urea 60 kg(N)∙hm−2减氮10%+氮肥表施
10% nitrogen reduction and nitrogen fertilizer broadcasting application (SN270)尿素
Urea 162 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素
Urea 54 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素
Urea 54 kg(N)∙hm−2减氮10%+基肥氮深施+氮肥追肥表施
10% nitrogen reduction + basal nitrogen fertilizer deep placement + nitrogen fertilizer broadcasting of topdressing at tiller and heading stages (DN270)尿素
Urea 162 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素
Urea 54 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素
Urea 54 kg(N)∙hm−2减氮10%+基肥氮深施+氮肥追肥表施+脲酶抑制剂
10% nitrogen reduction + basal nitrogen fertilizer deep placement + nitrogen fertilizer broadcasting of topdressing at tiller and heading stages with urease inhibitor (DN270+UI)尿素
Urea 162 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素+ n-丁基硫代磷酰三胺
Urea + NBPT 54 kg(N)∙hm−2尿素+ n-丁基硫代磷酰三胺
Urea + NBPT 54 kg(N)∙hm−2减氮10%+基肥氮深施+追肥表施缓释肥
10% nitrogen reduction + basal nitrogen fertilizer deep placemen + slow-release nitrogen fertilizer broadcasting of topdressing at tiller and heading stages (DN270+SR)尿素
Urea 162 kg(N)∙hm−2缓释尿素
Slow-release urea
54 kg(N)·hm−2缓释尿素
Slow-release urea
54 kg(N)·hm−2减氮10%+基肥氮深施+追肥表施缓释肥+脲酶抑制剂
10% nitrogen reduction + basal fertilizer urea deep placement + slow-release nitrogen fertilizer broadcasting of topdressing at tiller and heading stages with urease inhibitor (DN270+SR+UI)尿素
Urea 162 kg(N)∙hm−2缓释尿素+ n-丁基硫代磷酰三胺
Slow-release urea + NBPT
54 kg(N)·hm−2缓释尿素+ n-丁硫代磷酰三胺
Slow-release urea + NBPT
54 kg(N)·hm−2表 2 不同施肥处理下水稻收获期表层土壤(0~20 cm)理化性质
Table 2. Physical and chemical properties of the topsoil (0−20 cm) under different fertilization treatments at rice harvest in 2020
处理
TreatmentpH (H2O) 有机碳
Soil organic carbon (g∙kg−1)全氮
Total nitrogen (g∙kg−1)碳氮比
C/N铵态氮
NH4+-N (mg∙kg−1)硝态氮
NO3−-N (mg∙kg−1)可溶性有机碳
DOC (mg∙kg−1)CK 6.27±0.17a 22.75±2.25a 2.58±0.09a 8.79±0.55a 1.19±0.50a 2.22±0.40ab 439.0±246.9a SN300 6.26±0.02a 22.75±0.83a 2.53±0.23a 9.03±0.51a 1.33±0.78a 3.19±1.60b 374.5±180.3a SN270 6.18±0.03a 23.71±1.24a 2.63±0.09a 9.02±0.40a 1.51±0.75a 2.13±0.19ab 360.7±81.6a DN270 6.28±0.25a 22.24±1.11a 2.59±0.07a 8.60±0.39a 1.14±0.58a 1.97±0.48ab 301.9±5.3a DN270+UI 6.23±0.12a 23.74±1.66a 2.61±0.06a 9.11±0.58a 0.84±0.23a 2.17±0.34ab 277.4±35.1a DN270+SR 6.33±0.35a 23.01±2.87a 2.62±0.16a 8.77±0.60a 1.30±0.98a 1.56±0.53a 299.2±25.5a DN270+SR+UI 6.33±0.15a 24.93±2.33a 2.75±0.13a 9.06±0.48a 1.34±0.50a 1.28±0.15a 307.2±21.0a 表中同列数据不同小写字母表示同一年份不同处理间差异达P<0.05显著水平。CK、SN300、SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理措施见表1。Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences at P<0.05 level among treatments. The treatments of CK, SN300, SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI are shown in the table 1. 表 3 不同施肥处理下水稻产量、氮肥利用率和NH3挥发通量
Table 3. Grain yields, nitrogen use efficiency and NH3 volatilization fluxes of rice under different fertilization treatments
处理 Treatment CK SN300 SN270 DN270 DN270+UI DN270+SR DN270+SR+UI 产量 Yield (t∙hm−2) 8.1±1.0a 10.4±0.1b 10.7±0.9b 10.3±0.8b 10.0±0.5b 10.4±0.5b 10.7±0.5b 作物籽粒吸氮量 Rice grain N uptake [kg(N)∙hm−2] 63.5±8.1a 96.4±0.9b 100.1±6.8b 107.1±4.7bc 114.4±0.4c 131.0±7.8dc 118.2±12.4c 氮素农学利用率 N agronomic use efficiency (kg∙kg−1) — 7.59±0.43a 9.62±3.47a 8.38±3.12a 7.08±2.03a 8.73±1.79a 9.55±1.78a 籽粒氮吸收利用率
Grain N use efficiency (%)— 11.0±0.3a 13.6±2.5a 16.2±1.7ab 18.9±0.1b 25.0±2.9bc 20.3±4.6b 氨挥发通量
Ammonia volatilization flux
[kg(N)∙hm−2∙d−1]0.066±0.007a 0.780±0.009e 0.619±0.015d 0.479±0.018c 0.467±0.037c 0.434±0.033bc 0.382±0.060b 表中同列数据不同小写字母表示同一年份不同处理间差异达P<0.05显著水平。CK、SN300、SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理措施见表1。Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences at P<0.05 level among treatments. The treatments of CK, SN300, SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI are shown in the table 1. 表 4 不同施肥处理下水稻不同施肥期NH3累积排放量及减排率
Table 4. Cumulative NH3 emissions and reduction rates in different fertilizer application periods of rice under different fertilization treatments
处理
Treatment基肥
Basal fertilization分蘖肥
Tillering topdressing穗肥
Heading topdressing水稻生长季
Rice growing seasonNH3累积
损失量
Cumulative NH3
emission
[kg(N)∙hm−2]NH3
减排率1)
Reduction rate of
NH3 emission (%)NH3累积
损失量
Cumulative NH3 emission
[kg(N)∙hm−2]NH3
减排率
Reduction rate of NH3 emission (%)NH3累积
损失量
Cumulative NH3 emission
[kg(N)∙hm−2]NH3
减排率
Reduction rate of NH3 emission (%)NH3累积
损失量
Cumulative NH3 emission
[kg(N)∙hm−2]NH3
减排率
Reduction rate of NH3 emission (%)CK 1.79±0.31a — 2.82±0.58a — 4.24±0.22a — 8.85±0.90a — SN300 23.82±1.18d — 41.88±5.87d — 39.54±6.74d — 105.24±1.20e — SN270 19.88±2.14c 16.5 31.85±5.34c 23.9 31.88±3.69c 19.4 83.61±2.03d 20.6 DN270 5.20±0.86b 78.2 30.04±2.21c 28.3 29.47±0.62bc 25.5 64.71±2.48c 38.5 DN270+UI 4.35±0.80b 81.7 29.15±4.52c 30.4 29.55±1.96bc 25.3 63.05±5.02c 40.1 DN270+SR 3.53±0.39b 85.2 26.62±2.79bc 36.4 28.43±1.91bc 28.1 58.57±4.51cb 44.3 DN270+SR+
UI4.36±1.30b 81.7 22.32±4.13b 46.7 24.96±5.22b 36.9 51.63±8.10b 50.9 1)不同施肥期SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理NH3减排率为与SN300处理相比较的结果。表中同列数据不同小写字母表示不同处理间差异达P<0.05显著水平。CK、SN300、SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理措施见表1。The reduction rate of NH3 emission of SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI in different fertilization periods is compared with that of SN300. Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences at P<0.05 level among treatments. The treatments of CK, SN300, SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI were shown in the table 1. 表 5 不同施肥处理下水稻生长期间NH3排放通量与田面水NO3−-N、NH4+-N、pH和可溶性有机碳(DOC)相关性分析
Table 5. Correlations between NH3 flux from rice paddy fields and pH and concentraions of NO3−-N, NH4+-N, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) of surface water in rice growing season under different fertilization treatments
处理 Treatment 样本数
Sample numberNH4+-N NO3−-N pH DOC CK 60 0.246 –0.074 –0.098 0.105 SN300 60 0.812** 0.012 0.294** 0.654** SN270 60 0.842** 0.110 0.434** 0.625** DN270 60 0.759** 0.018 0.446** 0.565** DN270+UI 60 0.646** 0.006 0.445** 0.694** DN270+SR 60 0.514** –0.082 0.285* 0.642** DN270+SR+UI 60 0.389** –0.044 0.345** 0.641** All 420 0.737** 0.077 0.367** 0.636** **和*分别表示在P<0.01和P<0.05水平显著相关。CK、SN300、SN270、DN270、DN270+UI、DN270+SR和DN270+SR+UI处理措施见表1。** and * indicate significant correlation at P<0.01 and P<0.05 levels, respectively. The treatments of CK, SN300, SN270, DN270, DN270+UI, DN270+SR and DN270+SR+UI are shown in the table 1. -
[1] KANG Y N, LIU M X, SONG Y, et al. High-resolution ammonia emissions inventories in China from 1980 to 2012[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2016, 16(4): 2043−2058 doi: 10.5194/acp-16-2043-2016 [2] 王书伟, 廖千家骅, 胡玉婷, 等. 我国NH3-N排放量及空间分布变化初步研究[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2009, 28(3): 619−626 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1672-2043.2009.03.037WANG S W, LIAO Q J H, HU Y T, et al. A preliminary inventory of NH3-N emission and its temporal and spatial distribution of China[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2009, 28(3): 619−626 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1672-2043.2009.03.037 [3] PENG S B, TANG Q Y, ZOU Y B. Current status and challenges of rice production in China[J]. Plant Production Science, 2009, 12(1): 3−8 doi: 10.1626/pps.12.3 [4] FILLERY I R P, VLEK P L G. Reappraisal of the significance of ammonia volatilization as an N loss mechanism in flooded rice fields[M]//DETTA S K, PATRICK W H. Nitrogen Economy of Flooded Rice Soils. Developments in Plant and Soil Sciences. Dordreche: Springer Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1986: DOI: 10.1007/978-94-009-4428-2_4. [5] WANG S W, SHAN J, XIA Y Q, et al. Different effects of biochar and a nitrification inhibitor application on paddy soil denitrification: a field experiment over two consecutive rice-growing seasons[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 593/594: 347−356 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.159 [6] ZHAO X, XIE Y X, XIONG Z Q, et al. Nitrogen fate and environmental consequence in paddy soil under rice-wheat rotation in the Taihu Lake Region, China[J]. Plant and Soil, 2009, 319(1/2): 225−234 [7] JU X T, XING G X, CHEN X P, et al. Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems[J]. PNAS, 2009, 106(9): 3041−3046 doi: 10.1073/pnas.0813417106 [8] 王书伟, 颜晓元, 单军, 等. 利用膜进样质谱法测定不同氮肥用量下反硝化氮素损失[J]. 土壤, 2018, 50(4): 664−673WANG S W, YAN X Y, SHAN J, et al. Quantitative determination of N loss through denitrification under different N fertilizer application rates by membrane inlet mass spectrometry(MIMS)[J]. Soils, 2018, 50(4): 664−673 [9] BEHERA S N, SHARMA M, ANEJA V P, et al. Ammonia in the atmosphere: a review on emission sources, atmospheric chemistry and deposition on terrestrial bodies[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2013, 20(11): 8092−8131 doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-2051-9 [10] FANG M, CHAN C K, YAO X H. Managing air quality in a rapidly developing nation: China[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2009, 43(1): 79−86 doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.064 [11] WANG G H, ZHANG R Y, GOMEZ M E, et al. Persistent sulfate formation from London Fog to Chinese haze[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113(48): 13630−13635 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1616540113 [12] WU Y Y, GU B J, ERISMAN J W, et al. PM2.5 pollution is substantially affected by ammonia emissions in China[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2016, 218: 86−94 doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2016.08.027 [13] LIU T Q, FAN D J, ZHANG X X, et al. Deep placement of nitrogen fertilizers reduces ammonia volatilization and increases nitrogen utilization efficiency in no-tillage paddy fields in central China[J]. Field Crops Research, 2015, 184: 80−90 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.09.011 [14] YANG Y, LI N, NI X Y, et al. Combining deep flooding and slow-release urea to reduce ammonia emission from rice fields[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 244: 118745 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118745 [15] YAO Y L, ZHANG M, TIAN Y H, et al. Urea deep placement for minimizing NH3 loss in an intensive rice cropping system[J]. Field Crops Research, 2018, 218: 254−266 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.03.013 [16] 侯朋福, 薛利祥, 俞映倞, 等. 缓控释肥侧深施对稻田氨挥发排放的控制效果[J]. 环境科学, 2017, 38(12): 5326−5332HOU P F, XUE L X, YU Y L, et al. Control effect of side deep fertilization with slow-release fertilizer on ammonia volatilization from paddy fields[J]. Environmental Science, 2017, 38(12): 5326−5332 [17] 彭玉净, 田玉华, 尹斌. 添加脲酶抑制剂NBPT对麦秆还田稻田氨挥发的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2012, 20(1): 19−23 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1011.2012.00019PENG Y J, TIAN Y H, YIN B. Effects of NBPT urease inhibitor on ammonia volatilization in paddy fields with wheat straw application[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2012, 20(1): 19−23 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1011.2012.00019 [18] 周平遥, 张震, 王华, 等. 不同深施肥方式对稻田氨挥发及水稻产量的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2020, 39(11): 2683−2691 doi: 10.11654/jaes.2020-0441ZHOU P Y, ZHANG Z, WANG H, et al. Effects of deep fertilization methods on ammonia volatilization and rice yield in paddy fields[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2020, 39(11): 2683−2691 doi: 10.11654/jaes.2020-0441 [19] 邓美华, 尹斌, 张绍林, 等. 不同施氮量和施氮方式对稻田氨挥发损失的影响[J]. 土壤, 2006, 38(3): 263−269 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0253-9829.2006.03.005DENG M H, YIN B, ZHANG S L, et al. Effects of rate and method of N application on ammonia volatilization in paddy fields[J]. Soils, 2006, 38(3): 263−269 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0253-9829.2006.03.005 [20] CHEN A Q, LEI B K, HU W L, et al. Characteristics of ammonia volatilization on rice grown under different nitrogen application rates and its quantitative predictions in Erhai Lake Watershed, China[J]. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2015, 101(1): 139−152 doi: 10.1007/s10705-014-9660-7 [21] LI P F, LU J W, WANG Y, et al. Nitrogen losses, use efficiency, and productivity of early rice under controlled-release urea[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2018, 251: 78−87 [22] TIAN G M, CAO J L, CAI Z C et al. Ammonia volatilization from winter wheat field top dressed with urea[J]. Pedosphere, 1998, 8(4): 331−336 [23] ZHAO M, TIAN Y H, MA Y C, et al. Mitigating gaseous nitrogen emissions intensity from a Chinese rice cropping system through an improved management practice aimed to close the yield gap[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2015, 203: 36−45 [24] 赵淼, 田玉华, 张敏, 等. 改善农学管理措施减少太湖稻麦轮作NH3和NO排放[J]. 土壤, 2015, 47(5): 836−841ZHAO M, TIAN Y H, ZHANG M, et al. Improving agronomic practices to reduce ammonia and nitric oxide emissions from rice-wheat rotation field in Tai Lake Region, China[J]. Soils, 2015, 47(5): 836−841 [25] 田光明, 蔡祖聪, 曹金留, 等. 镇江丘陵区稻田化肥氮的氨挥发及其影响因素[J]. 土壤学报, 2001, 38(3): 324−332 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0564-3929.2001.03.012TIAN G M, CAI Z C, CAO J L, et al. Ammonia volatilization from paddy field and its affecting factors in Zhenjiang hilly region[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2001, 38(3): 324−332 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0564-3929.2001.03.012 [26] 胡安永, 孙星, 刘勤, 等. 太湖地区不同轮作方式对稻田氨挥发和水稻产量的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2013, 27(6): 275−279 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-2242.2013.06.053HU A Y, SUN X, LIU Q, et al. Influence of different rotations on ammonia volatilization and rice yields of paddy fields in Taihu Lake Region[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2013, 27(6): 275−279 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-2242.2013.06.053 [27] MOHANTY S K, SINGH U, BALASUBRAMANIAN V, et al. Nitrogen deep-placement technologies for productivity, profitability, and environmental quality of rainfed lowland rice systems[J]. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 1998, 53(1): 43−57 doi: 10.1023/A:1009731922431 [28] XU J Z, LIAO L X, TAN J Y, et al. Ammonia volatilization in gemmiparous and early seedling stages from direct seeding rice fields with different nitrogen management strategies: a pots experiment[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2013, 126: 169−176 doi: 10.1016/j.still.2012.07.005 [29] HUDA A, GAIHRE Y K, ISLAM M R, et al. Floodwater ammonium, nitrogen use efficiency and rice yields with fertilizer deep placement and alternate wetting and drying under triple rice cropping systems[J]. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2016, 104(1): 53−66 doi: 10.1007/s10705-015-9758-6 [30] FILLERY I R P, SIMPSON J R, DE DATTA S K. Influence of field environment and fertilizer management on ammonia loss from flooded rice[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1984, 48(4): 914−920 doi: 10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800040043x [31] GUO C, REN T, LI P F, et al. Producing more grain yield of rice with less ammonia volatilization and greenhouse gases emission using slow/controlled-release urea[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2019, 26(3): 2569−2579 doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-3792-2 [32] HUANG S, LV W, BLOSZIES S, et al. Effects of fertilizer management practices on yield-scaled ammonia emissions from croplands in China: a meta-analysis[J]. Field Crops Research, 2016, 192: 118−125 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.04.023 [33] 胡瞒瞒, 董文旭, 王文岩, 等. 华北平原氮肥周年深施对冬小麦-夏玉米轮作体系土壤氨挥发的影响[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2020, 28(12): 1880−1889HU M M, DONG W X, WANG W Y, et al. The effects of deep application of nitrogen fertilization on ammonia volatilization in a winter wheat/summer maize rotation system in the North China Plain[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2020, 28(12): 1880−1889 [34] ZHANG X M, WU Y Y, LIU X J, et al. Ammonia emissions may be substantially underestimated in China[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2017, 51(21): 12089−12096 [35] TI C P, XIA L L, CHANG S X, et al. Potential for mitigating global agricultural ammonia emission: a meta-analysis[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2019, 245: 141−148 doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.10.124 [36] STOKSTAD E. Ammonia pollution from farming may exact hefty health costs[J]. Science, 2014, 343(6168): 238 doi: 10.1126/science.343.6168.238 [37] XIA L L, LAM S K, CHEN D L, et al. Can knowledge-based N management produce more staple grain with lower greenhouse gas emission and reactive nitrogen pollution? A meta-analysis[J]. Global Change Biology, 2017, 23(5): 1917−1925 doi: 10.1111/gcb.13455 [38] ROCHETTE P, ANGERS D A, CHANTIGNY M H, et al. Ammonia volatilization and nitrogen retention: how deep to incorporate urea?[J]. Journal of Environmental Quality, 2013, 42(6): 1635−1642 doi: 10.2134/jeq2013.05.0192