Available online at www. sciencedirect.comJournal of Integrative Agriculture。ScienceDirect2014, 13(11): 2378-2388November 2014RESEARCH ARTICLEEffects of Tillage Practices on Water Consumption, Water Use Efficiencyand Grain Yield in Wheat FieldZHENG Cheng-yan'2, YU Zhen-wen', SHI Yu', CUI Shi-ming , WANG Dong', ZHANG Yong-lil andZHAO Jun-ye''Key Laboratory of Crop Ecophysiology and Farming Systerm, Ministry of Agriculture/Shandong Agriculural University, Tai'an 271018,P.R.China2 Key Laboratory of Crop Physiology and Ecology, Ministry of Agriculture/Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of AgriculturalSciences, Beijing 100081, P.R.China3 Key Laboratory of Digital Agricultural Early- Warming Technology, Ministry of Aricuture/Instiute of Agricultural Information, ChineseAcademy of Agricultural Sciences, Bejing 100081, P.R. ChinaAbstractWater shortage is a serious issue threatening the sustainable development of agriculture in the North China Plain, with the winterwheat (Triticum aestivum L.) as its largest water-consuming crop. The effects of tllage practices on the water consumption andwater use efficiency (WUE) of wheat under high-yield conditions using supplemental irigation based on testing soil moisturedynamic change were examined in this study. This experiment was conducted from 2007 to 2010, with five tllage practicetreatments, namely, strip rotary tllage (SR), strip rotary tllage after subsoiling (SRS), rotary tllge (R), rotary tllage aftersubsoiling (RS), and plowing tllage (P). The results showed that in the SRS and RS treatments the total water and soil waterconsumptions were 11.81, 25.18% and 12.16, 14.75% higher than those in SR and R treatments, respectively. The lowest ratioof rrigation consumption to total water consumption in the SRS treatment was 18.53 and 21.88% for the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 growing seasons, respectively. However, the highest percentage of water consumption was found in the SRS treatment fromanthesis to maturity. No significant difference was found between the WUE of the flag leaf at the later flling stage in the SRSand RS treatments, but the flag leaf WUE at these stages were higher than those of other treatments. The SRS and RS treatmentsexhibited the highest grain yield (9 573.76 and 9507 49 kg hat for 3-yr average) with no significant difference between the twotreatments, followed by P, R and SR treatments. But the SRS treatment had the highest WUE. Thus, the 1-yr subsoiling tllage,plus 2 yr of strip rotary planting operation may be an eficient measure to increase wheat yield and WUE.Key words: winter wheat, tllage practice, water consumption characteristics, yield, water use efficiency, supplemental irigationcrops in this region are winter wheat and summer maize,and the winter wheat-summer maize double-croppingINTRODUCTIONsystem is adopted predominantly (Li et al. 2007). TheNorth China Plain produces approximately one-fifth ofThe North China Plain, with an area of approximatelythe total state grain yield (Han H et al.2008; Han S M350 000 km?, is one of the most important centres of et al. 2008). The rainfall in this region is highly variableagricultural production in China. The widely cultivatedbecause of the infuence of the monsoon climate. TheReceived 9 September, 2013 Accepted 20 February.2014中國(guó)煤化工Correspondence SHI Yu, Tel: +86- 538-8241484, E-mail: shiyu@ sdau.edu.cnYHCNM HG◎2014, CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd.doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(13)60733-9Effects of Tllage Practices on Water Consumption, Water Use Eficiency and Grain Yield in Wheat Field2379mean annual precipitation is 550 to 650 mm, a majority et al. 2005). Guzha et al. (2004) and Taa et al. (2004),of which occurs from June to September. Therefore,however, observed that wheat yields from no tillage andwater resource deficiency is one of the major problems minimum tllage were lower than those from traditionalin winter wheat production (Xiong et al.2010).tllage. Thus, before conservation tllage practices becomeIn the major crop production regions in China, some widely adopted in any particular region, their suitabiltyconventional soil management practices amplified theshould be locally assessed. In these experiments, thesoil, water and nutrient losses, and degraded soils with efects of tllge practice on water consumption and waterlow organic matter content and fragile physical structure use eficiency (WUE) under high-yield conditions were(Fabrizi et al.2005; He et al.2007; Su etal.2007; de examined using supplemental irigation based on theVita et al. 2007). In particular, the conventional tllagevariations in the testing soil moisture. A scientific basisfor wheat results in more compact soil, and a hardpan isfor the suitable tllage practice was provided to conserveusually developed underneath the plough layer, hinderingwater and attain high-yield cultivation of wheat in anair and water movements, and consequently inhibitingenvironment similar to the conditions prevailing in thisroot growth and reducing crop yield (Huang et al. 2012).experiment.Agricultural conservation technologies maintain soilRESULTSand water, increase soil moisture content and improvesoil quality and crop yields, which are beneficial to thesustainable development of agricultural production Precipitation conditions(Balwinder- Singh et al.2011; Pikul et al. 2003; Roscoeand Buurman 2003; Holland 2004; Riley et al. 2005).The mean annual precipitation for the past 60 yr (1951Compared withconventional ilage, several rserhers to 2010) and the dstribution of monthly precipitationhave found that subsoiling can decrease the effect of soilduring the study period from 2007 to 2010 are shown incompaction on crop growth (Evans et al. 1996; JenningsFig. 1. Precipitation during the winter wheat growingetal. 2012) as well as increase rooting depth and the season amounted to 228.0 mm in 2007-2008, 140.6 mmamount of water available to the crop (Lampurlanes et al.in 2008-2009 and 163.2 mm in 2009-2010 growing2001; Mohanty et al.2007). Additinally, no tlge and seasons, accounting for 30.2, 18.5 and 23.5% of the .subsoiling tllge with mulch consistently caused highermean annual precipitation, respectively. Furthermore,chlorophyll pigment contents and net photosyntheticprecipitation distribution varied from season to season,rates in the ftag leaf(Liet al.2006). Hence, conservation e.g, higher amounts of precipitation were recorded intillages may improve soil water storage capacity and cropApril, May and June during the 2007-2008 growingyields, among other economic benefits (Pikul and Aaseperiod than the same months during the 2008 2009 and1999; Li and Gong 2002; Gicheru et al. 2004; Fabrizzi 2009-2010 growing periods.400 11 2007.7-2008.6; 208.7-2009.6063208.. 2009.7-2010.6- * Long-time (60-yr) avg.，24C168(Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov, Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.Month中國(guó)煤化工Fig. 1 Mean annual precipitation during the 60yr (1951-2010) and distribution of monthly precipitMHCNMHGIlI oil ulug 2007-2010.◎2014. CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd.2380ZHENG Cheng yan et al.Total water consumption and its resourcethose in the SR and R treatments (P<0.05), respectively.These results indicated that the subsoil treatment mayTotal water consumption, soil water consumption andimprove the absorption of water in the wheat field fromanthesis to maturity stages. The water consumptions fromthe ratio of the soil water consumption to total waterseedling to jointing stages and from jointing to anthesisconsumption were 14.7-35.6% higher in the strip rotarystages in SRS treatment were lower than that in the RStillage after subsoiling (SRS) and rotary tllage afterand P treatments (P<0.05). However, the percentagesubsoiling (RS) treatments compared with those in theof water consumption to total water consumption fromstrip rotary tllage (SR) and rotary tllage (R) treatmentsanthesis to maturity stage in the SRS treatment was higher(P<0.05) (Table 1). This result indicates that subsoilthan those in the RS and P treatments (P<0.05) (Fig. 2).treatment could increase soil water consumption. DuringThe SRS treatment apparently increased the absorptionthe 2008-2009 and 2009 2010 growing seasons, totalcapacity of soil water during the flling stage, which maywater consumption in the SRS and plowing tllage (P)be beneficial to grain flling. The water consumptionstreatments was lower than that in the RS treatmentfrom seedling to jointing stages and from anthesis to(P<0.05). Soil water consumption and its ratio to thematurity stages in the SR treatment were lower than thosewater consumption were averagely 18.5 mm and 3.5%in the R and P treatments.higher in the SRS treatment than those in the P treatment(P<0.05), respectively. Thus, SRS was apparentlySoil water storage in 0-200 cm soil layersbeneficial in enhancing soil water availbility for wheat.The total water consumption, irigation and soil waterconsumption in SR and R treatments were lower thanthose in the P treatment.in the two experimental seasons (Fig. 3). Soil waterstorage was depleted within the wheat growing season,Water consumption at the different growingwith low values at maturity and remarkable difference insoil water storage between sowing and maturity. Duringstages .the two seasons, soil water storage was similar for alltreatments from sowing to jointing stages. After theThe percentages of water consumption to the total waterjointing stage, differences between treatments appeared,consumption from the seedling to the jointing stage in with the highest soil water storage of 558.0 and 536.1the SRS and RS treatments were lower than those in themm under the SR and R treatments, and the lowest valueSR and R treatments, respectively (P<0.05). However, of 535.2 and 502.4 mm under SRS and RS treatments,the water consumption and the water consumptionrespectively. The soil water storages at the maturitypercentage from anthesis to maturity stages were 0.2- stage under the SR and R treatments were 8.9 and 12.0%42.8% and 0.1-13.7% higher in the SRS and RS thanhigher than those under SRS and RS in the 2008 -2009Table 1 ffcts of diferent tllage practices on water consumption amount and the ratio of different water resources on water consumptionamountTotal water consumptionPrecipitationIrrigationSoil water consumptionYearTreatment'amount (mm)Amount (mm)Ratio(%)2008-2009sR402.03+5.40d40.6034.97+0.47a81.22+2.49c20.20+0.35c 180.21+2.91c 44.83+0.12cRS449.52+5.54b140.6031.28+0.39c83.32+2.60c18.53+0.35d 225.60+2.95a 50.19+0.04a476. 48+6.76a29.51+0.40d 116.56+3.00a24.46+0.28a 219.32+3.76a 46.03+0.14 b424.13.50c33.10+0.20 b93.08+1.13b21.91+0.09b 191.13+2.37c 4.99+0.19c446.39+6.49 b31.50.46C 10827722.87+0.29b 203.71+3.72b 45.63+0.17b2009-2010381.08+3.96e163.2042.83+0.45 a85.28+1.52c22.38+0.17c 132.60+2.444 34.79+0.29e439.11+8.33 b37.1740.7d96.08+1.05 b21.88+0.18c 179.83+7.28a 40.950.88466.03+7.27a35.02+0.55e 1.673.80a25.24+0.42a 185.16+3.47a 39.74+0.12b406.73+6.54d40.13+0.6b97.21+2.12b23.90+0.14b 146.32+4.42c35.97+0.51d427.20+4.77c38.20+0.43 c99.28+1.62 b38.56+0.31c"SR, strip rotary tlage; SRS, strip rotary tlage after subsoilig: RS, rotary tlage after subsoiling; R, rotary tll;中國(guó)煤化工-Values are the meanststand eror.. Values flowed by a dferet lter are sgifeantly dfenet within the reatmeYHCNMHGbelow.◎2014, CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by EIsevier Ltd.Efects of Tllage Pratices on Water Consumnption, Water Use Eficiency and Grain Yield in Wheat Field2381口SR8 SRS日RS0RQPA，2008 20092009-2010官150后15自10010PTJJTAATMTJJT。D50012008-20092009- 201040-;40130JFig. 2 Water consumption amount (A and B) and its percentage to total water consumption amount (C and D) under strip rotary tllage (SR),strip rotary tllage after subsoiling (SRS), rotary tllage after subsoiling (RS), rotary tllage (R), and plowing tllage (P) treatments at differentgrowth stages in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 growing seasons. Bars show SE of mean (n=3). The same as below. PTJ, planting to jointing;JTA, jointing to anthesis; ATM, anthesis to maturity.I SR日SRS3PA 7501B 7501008-200900 |50- |00- |300501 |150Sowing Prewintering JointingAnthesisMaturityAnthesis MaturityFig. 3 Changes in soil water storage (0- 200 cm) under dfferent ilalge practices in two wheat growing seasons: 2008- 2009 (A) and 2009- 2010(B).growing season, respectively, and 9.0 and 7.4% higherPhotosynthetic rate, transpiration rate andin the 2009-2010 growing season, respectively. This WUE of flag leafvariation may be attributable to the relatively high soilwater consumption during the wheat growing stages(Table 1). Difference was also found among the SR,R The photosynthetin p2d“1rtes of flag中國(guó)煤化工2and P treatments during the study period.leaf graduallyHCN M H Ging stage.◎2014. CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd.2382ZHENG Cheng yan et al.The photosynthetic rate of the flag leaf had significant in contrast to the higher transpiration rates in the RS, SRS,differences among treatments (Fig. 4-A and B), i.e, RSP, and R treatments than that at the SR treatment at the lateand SRS>P>R>SR, at the middle and late grain flling stages grain flling stage (P<0.05). During the 2008- 2009 growing(P<0.05). During the 2008- 2009 growing season, the leafseason, the leaf transpiration rate at the middle grain fllingphotosynthetic rates at the early grain flling stage in the stage in SRS treatment was10.6 and 10.7% lower thanSRS, RS and P treatments were higher than those in the those in the RS and P treatments. However, no significantR and SR treatments, but no significant differences weredifferences were found in the 2009- 2010 growing seasonfound in the 2009-2010 growing season (P<0.05). The (P<0.05). This result ilustrates that the SRS treatmenttranspiration rate of flag leaf also significantly differed amongwas favourable in decreasing the evapotranspiration at thethe treatments (Fig. 4-C and D). The transpiration rates early flling stage and in maintaining high photosyntheticduring the RS, P and R treatments were higher than those ofability during late flling stage. .the SRS and SR treatments at the early grain flling stage,WUE of fag leaf significantly differed among口sR日SRSORS0RSPA 28]2008- 2009B28 ]2009 20101+ |MFSFSC 1212008-2009 .D 1212009-20103PSE;12008-2009號(hào)盲2+|EFSLFSFig. 4 Winter wheat photosynthetic rate (A and B), transpiration rate (C and D) and water use afcrianey 15 and口sf Aor lanf after anthesisunder different tllage practices in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 growing seasons. EFS, early flli中國(guó)煤化工ge; LFS, latefllig stage.IY HCNM HG◎2014, CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by EIsevier Ltd.ffts of Tllage Practices on Water Consumption, Water Use Eficiency and Grain Yield in Wheat Field2383treatments, with the following order: SRS>SR>RS，Table 2 Grain yield, yield water use eficiency and irigation beneftP and R at the early grain flling stage; and RS andunder different tllage practicesWater useIrrigationSRS>P>R>SR at the late grain flling stage (P<0.05). .YearTreatmentefficieneybenefit(kg ha')(kg ha-l mm') (kg ha' mm')At the middle grain flling stage, the values of the WUE2007-2008SR 7608.45+132.20c 17.89+0.22c 16.88+0.50cof flag leaf in the SRS and RS treatments were 14.7,RS 9409.01+166.82a 20.74+0.34a 20.47+0.38 b19.0% and 14.6, 7.9% higher than those in the SR and RRS 919.65+11.94a 21.02+0.19a 22.10+0.24aR 8538.93+179.31b 19.02+0.26b 17.16+036ctreatments during the 2008 2009 and 2009-2010 growing8578.20+94.34b 18.920.13b6 19.03+0.40 bseasons, respectively (P<0.05) (Figs. 4-E and F). This 2008 2009SR 7397.48+134.90d 18.40+0.09d 1.1811.18.SRSresult ilustrates that subsoiling practice favourably9613.86+71.43a21.39+0.10a 26.38+26.38 aRS 9541 03+137.23a 20.02+0.21b 21.87+21.87binfuences the maintenance of high WUE of flag leaf at8 197.58+61.63c19.30+0.01c 12.74+12.74 dthe grain flling stage.8885.03+107.12b 19.90+0.05b 17.44+17.44c2009-2010SR 7507.38+80.00d19.70+0.01d 12.79+12.79 eRS 9698.42+66.97a22.09+0.27a 25.93+25.93 a2s 9786 80+102.53 a21.00+0.11b 21.39+21.39bGrain yield and WUE20.31+0.01c 14.41+14.41 d8930.95+124.30b_ 20.91+0.06b 17.68+17.68cAs shown in Table 2, higher grain yield, irrigation benefitand WUE were obtained in the SRS and RS treatments WUE (Panda et al. 2003; Sun et al.2006). Su et al.than those in the SR and R treatments in the three(2007) and Balwinder-Singh et al. (201 1) showed that,wheat growing seasons (P<0.05). Compared with SRS compared with conventional tllage, the minimumtreatment, P treatment decreased gain yield and WUEtillage and no tllage improved the use efficiency of soilby 8.1 and 7.0% on average. There were no significantwater and maintained better soil water storage duringdifference in the grain yield and WUE between SRS andthe growth stages of wheat. The present experimentsRS treatments during the 2007-2008 growing seasonsshowed that the total water consumption increased(P<0.05). During the 2008 to 2010 growing seasons,after subsoiling. The ratio of soil water consumptionSRS treatment resulted in the highest WUE and irigationto total water consumption, and the percentage ofbenefit, and no significant differences were observed inwater consumption to total water consumption fromthe grain yield between SRS and RS treatments (P<0.05).anthesis to maturity stages in the SRS and RS treatmentsWith the synthetic consideration of grain yield, WUEwere higher than those in the SR and R treatments.and rrigation benefit, SRS treatment was recommendedTherefore, subsoiling can improve the soil water andas the optimum tllage practice under conditions similarwater consumption during the filling stage and decreaseto this experimental site representative of a typical wheatsoil water storage at anthesis and maturity, resulting inplanting area in the North China Plain. Aditionally, theenhanced grain flling (Fig. 3).grain yield, WUE and irigation benefit in the SR andWUE of fag leaf integrated various variables thatR treatments were lower than those in the P treatment,affect plant water consumption and drought resistanceparticularly the SR treatment which showed the lowestthroughout the growing period (Kirkham et al. 1991).levels for the above parameters (P<0.05).Li et al. (2006) showed that chlorophyll pigmentcontents and net photosynthetic rates of the flag leaf withDISCUSSIONconservation tllage, such as no tllage and subsoilingtillage, were significantly higher than those of theTotal water consumption is composed of three parts,conventional tllage. By contrast, Jiang et al. (2006)namely, precipitation, rrigation and soil water supply. found that the net photosynthetic rate of conventionalThe key problem of agricultural practices that exercisetillage is higher than those of the other two types ofwater conservation is the improvement in the use the minimum tillage. The results showed that theeficiency of precipitation and irrigation (Deng e1 al.photosynthetic rate, transpiration rate and WUE of flag2006). Limited irrigation or water deficit is conducive leaf at the later fl中國(guó)煤化工vere higherto reducing water consumption, which can improvethan the others, wYHC N M H Grease grain◎2014. CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd.2384ZHENG Cheng yan et al.yield and WUE (Table 2). R and SR treatments had include SR treatment for 3 yr after subsoiling treatment,lower values of WUE of flag leaf than the P treatment.completing rotary cultivation of sowing row, baseFor numerous important grain producing regions fertiliser application, seeding and forming border-check,(defined here as >75 000 km2) worldwide, includingsimultaneous to the 2BLMFS-8-4-3 multifunctional directthe North China Plain, increasing agricultural WUEseeder in stubble, which might reduce the operationis necessary (Mo et al. 2005). Several soil and cropprocedure of the conservative tillage practice. Thismanagement practices can affect crop yields and WUE.tillage practice could be applied in this region, but theFuentes et al. (2003) and Ghuman and Sur (2001)accumulated effect of subsoiling needs further studies.showed that conservation tllge management practiceshelp conserve soil moisture and improve grain yieldCONCLUSIONcompared with conventional tllage in the annual croppingregion. By contrast, no tllage minimised soil disturbanceand mechanical compaction, decelerated microbialIn this study, SRS has positive effects on water usedecomposition of organic matter (Chen et al. 2009)efficiency and grain yield in winter wheat. The possibleand significantly decreased grain yield (Sharma et al.mechanism is that SRS was apparently beneficial in2011). Lampurlanes et al. (2002) found no differenceenhancing soil water availability for wheat, particularlyamong ilage systems in volumetric water content and increased the absorption capacity of soil water duringWUE, showing no remarkable variation year-to-year.the flling stage. Moreover, the SRS treatment wasFurthermore, WUE of no tllage was 24.1% lower thanfavorable for decreasing the evapotranspiration at thethat of conventional tllage in wet years, but was onlyearly flling stage and maintaining high photosynthetic3.2% lower during the dry years (Singh et al.1998). ability during late fling stage. Thus, the 1-yr suboilingThus, before conservation tillage practices becometllage, plus 2 yI of strip rotary planting operation (SRS)widely adopted in any particular region, the suitabilitymay be an efficient measure to increase wheat yield andof this system should be locally assessed. Recent studiesWUE simultaneously.have demonstrated that the soils become compact withhigh bulk density after many years of traditional tllagesMATERIAL .S AND METHODS(i.e., rotary or plowing tillage), which can adverselyaffect root growth, uptake of water and nutrients andExperiment site descriptioncrop yield (Nidal and Abu 2003; Williams et al. 2006).Subsoiling was accomplished by using a subsoiler at asoil depth ranging from 30 to 40 cm and could break theThe field experiments were conducted using the Jimai 22bottom of ploughed stratum, which result in decreasingwheat cultivar in Shiwang Village (35.41°N, 116.41°E),Y anzhou, Shandong Province, China, during the 2007 tothe bulk density and improving the permeability of soil2010 growing seasons. The cropping pattern of this area waswater (Joseph and Kristian 2003), increasing the depth the winter wheat-sunmer maize double -copping systemof root distribution (Wagger 1992), and improving thewith rotary tllage practice for wheat and noilage practicesoil water content by storing more rainfall (Hu et al.for maize, which is typical in the North China Plain. The201 1). Subsequently, subsoiling can take advantage oflight loam soil in this village, with a pH value of 7.6 and aproportion of 29.6% clay, 37.3% silt and 33.1% sand, hassoil moisture and nutrient by excellent crop root systems,been intensively cultivated for many centuries. Soil organicminimize the threat presented by drought and lead tomatter, total nitrogen, available nitrogen, available phosphorusan increase in crop yield and water use efficiency (He and available potassium at 0-20 cm depth were 14.1 g kg',et al.2007; Mohanty et al. 2007; Tao et al.2013). This10.0g kg', 103.1 mg kgr', 23.3 mg kg' and 121.6 mg kg',experiment was conducted during 2007 to 2010 wheatrespectively.growing seasons in North China Plain. The resultsindicated that the grain yield, WUE, and rrigation benefitExperimental designin SRS and RS treatments, of which subsoiling occurred中國(guó)煤化工in the first year, was also higher than those in the SR andRThe experiment vpat growingtreatments (Table 2). Therefore, the suitable practice mayseason from 2007 toMYHC N M H Greatments,◎2014, CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by EIsevier Ltd.ffts of Tllage Practices on Water Consumption, Water Use Eficiency and Grain Yield in Wheat Field2385namely, strip rotary tllage (SR), strip rotary tllage after γ is the bulk density (g cm:3) of soil layer that will be irigated,subsoiling (SRS), rotary tillage (R), rotary tllage after β is the planned soil water content (%), and β is the contentsubsoiling (RS), and plowing tllage (P). The operation measured in the field by weight (%). Irrigation was appliedthrough gated pipes and measured with propeller-type metersSimilar treatments were set in the same experimental plot from (Shan et al. 2004).2007 to 2010, except that SRS and RS treatments were noWe measured the soil moisture content in 0- 140 cm soillonger subsoiling during the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 wheat layer after supplemental irrigation. During the three growinggrowing seasons. This paper analysed the results of the threewheat growing seasons from 2007 to 2010 to investigate the to the designed contents with acceptable errors (hereinaftereffects of the 1-yr subsoiling on grain yield and WUE.termed as regulative errors). For example, the regulativeIrigation was applied before sowing, and then at jointingerrors in the five treatments ranged from 0.11 to 2.21%, 0.29and anthesis stages. Prior to irrigation, the soil water contentto 2.27% and 0.16 to 2.33% during the sowing, jointing andwas measured to calculate the amount of irrigation water using anthesis stages, respectively (Table 4).the eq. (1). And this amount of irigation water can ensureOnly one wheat cultivar (Triticum aesivum L.), Jimai 22,that the average soil water content in the upper 140 cm soilwas used in the three growing years. The preceding crop waslayer was close to 85, 75 and 75% of field water capacity，corn (Zea mays L.). The field was prepared in a randomisedrespectively:block design with three replicates. The plot (240 m?) was 60mIrrigation water amount (mm)=10xγxHx(B-B)(1long and 4 m wide, and separated from each other by a 2-mWhere, H is the depth of soil layer (cm) that will be irigated,zone. The sowing dates were 8 October, 2007, 8 October,Table 3 Operation procedure of the five tllage practicesTillage practiceOperation procedureSRRetuming maize straw to the field- +Completing rotary cultivation of sowing row (working depth was approximately 15 cm), base frilizer application,seeding, and forming border-check simultaneous to the 2BLMFS-8-4-3 multifunctional direct seeder in stubble (the row spacing of 2BLMFS-8-4-3multifunctional direct seeder in stubble was designed to be (18+32) cm, in which the sowing row spacing was 18 cm, so that the area of rotary cultivationcovered 36% of the border check's total area)Retuming maize straw to the field- + Subsoiling once with the ZS- 180 vibration subsoiler (working depth was approximately 35 cm)- +Completingrotary cultivation of sowing row (working depth was about 15 cm), base fertilizer application, seeding and forming border-check simultaneous to the2BLMFS- 8-4-3 mulifunctional direct seeder in stubbleRetuming maize straw to the feld-→Base frilizer spreading- +Rotary cutivaing two timnes (working depth was apropximately 15 cm)-→Harrowing twoRReturning maize straw to the field- + Base fertilizer spreading- + Subsoiling once with the ZS- 180 vibration subsoiler (working depth was approximately35 cm)- + Rotary cultivating two times (working depth was approximately 15 cm)- +Harrowing two times- >Forming the border check- > Seeding withcommon seederPRetuming maize straw to the field- +Base frtilizer spreading- +Mouldboard plowing once (working depth was approximacely 25 cm)- + Rotary cultivatingtwo times (working depth was about 15 cm)→Harrowing two times-→Forming the border-check- +Seeding with common seederTable 4 Irigation amounts and relative soil moisture contents in different treatments""Jointing2Anthesis2)YearTreatment DRMC(%) RMC(%) RE(%)I (mmiDRMC(%) RMC(%) RE(%) I (mm) DRMC (%) RMC(%) RE(%) I (mm)....84.23 0.910.008226./874.38SRS84.26 0.8774.21.0644.067573.885.32 -0.3874.0332.2774.75 0.3384.51 0.5874.77 0.312008-200984.02 1.1530.1474.54 -0.6124.8375.2284.61 0.4621.7474.47 -0.7129.8174.05-1.27 31.7785.09 -0.1117.9074.03. - | .2948.9176.3785.75 -0.8930.9575.97 1.3024.0074.33-0.89 38.1384.17 0.9711.2874.26 -0.9849.884.05-1.26 40.922009-20108586.00 -1.1876.70 2.2734.084.10-1.20 51.2086.88 -2.2175.22 0.2941.8773.9-1.43 54.2185.83 -0.9874.33 -0.8947.0673.53-1.96 70.21s585.22 -0.250.C75.88 1.1737.8175.0.859.4085.460.01576..011.050.168.23'"Relative soil moisture contents were the averages at 0-140 cm soil layer.中國(guó)煤化工”DRWC, dsigned rlative moisture content; RMC. rlaive moisture content; RE, rgulaive eror; I. irigain am”means that relative moisture content exceeds designed relative moisture content.HCNMHG .◎2014. CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd.2386ZHENG Cheng yan et al.2008 and 9 October, 2009, the jointing dates were 3 April level was calculated as following equation (Zhang et al.2000): :2008, 4 April 2009 and 16 April 2010, the anthesis dates wereWUE,=PT,(6)1 May 2008, 30 April 2009 and 9 May 2010, and the maturityWhere, WUE (umol CO, mmol-+ H,O) is the WUE of adates were 7 June 2008, 10 June 2009 and 17 June 2010,single flag leaf, P。is the net photosynthetic rate (umnolCO2 m2respectively. Seedling density was controlled to 180 plants s l) and T. is the transpiration rate of the leaf (mmol H,Om2s).m2 at 4-leaf stage. Every year, the same quantity of chemicalfertilier (105 kg ha:! N, 150 kg ha:' P2O, 150 kg ha' K,0)Statistical analysiswas applied before planting and another 135 kg ha! N wasadded at jointing stage. Other field management practicescomplied with the local practice in high- yield production.All data were analyzed using Excel 2003 and the statisticalpackage SPSS 11.5. Means were tested by least significantdifference (LSD). Differences were considered signifcant atSampling method and measurementthe level of P<0.05.Soil moisture content Soils from 0 to 200 cm deep wereAcknowledgementscollected using a drill, and were divided into 10 samples withevery 20 cm depth. Each soil layer sample was dried in anWe are grateful to the supports from the National Naturalaluminium box before determination of moisture content.Science Foundation of China (31 171498 and 31401 334) andEach plot has three random locations where moisture contentthe Project of Technology System in Modern Wheat Industry,was measured, and the mean soil moisture content was used asMinistry of Agriculture, China (CARS-3-1-19).the final value for that plot. During the growing season, soilmoisture content, measured before sowing, and at the jointing,Referencesanthesis and maturity stages, is calculated as:Balwinder- Singh, Humphreys E, Eberbach P L, KatupitiyaSoil moisture content (% )=(Fresh weight of soil sample-DryA, Yadvinder- Singh, Kukal S S. 201 1. Growth, yield andweight of soil sample)/Dry weightx100water productivity of zero till wheat as affected by riceField water consumption The calculation was based on thestraw mulch and irigation schedule. Field Crops Research,variations in the soil moisture content (Liu et al. 2004), i.e.:ET,2=102yH0-02)+M+P.+KChenHQ,HouRX,GongYS,LiHW,FanMS,KuzyakovWhere, ET2 is the water consumption (mm) during a phase,Y. 2009. Effects of 11 years of conservation tllage on soili is the number of soil layer, γ; is the dry bulk density of theorganic matter fractions in wheat monoculture in Loessith soil layer (g cm:), and H is the thickness of the ith soilPlateau of China. Soil and Tillage Research, 106, 85-94.layer (cm). 0. and 0, are the soil moisture contents of the ithDeng X P, Shan L, Zhang H P, Turner N C.2006. Improvingsoil layer at the start and end of the phase, respectively, M isagricultural water use efficiency in arid and semiarid areasthe amount of irrigation in the phase (mm), P。is the availableof China. Agricultural Water Management, 80, 23-40.precipitation (mm), and K is the supplemental amount fromEvans S D, Lindstrom M J, Voorhees W B, Moncrief J F,groundwater in the phase (mm). When the groundwater is .Nelson G A.1996. Effect of subsoiling and subsequentbelow 2.5 m from the surface, the K value can be negligible.tllage on soil bulk density, soil moisture, and corn yield.In this study, K was set to“0" because the groundwater levelSoil and Tillage Research, 38, 35-46.was below 5 m from the surface.Fabrizzi K P, Garcia F O, CostabJ L, Picone L I. 2005. SoilWUE and irrigation benefit Total WUE was calculatedwater dynamics, physical properties and corn and wheatusing the following formula (Hussain and Al-Jaloud 1995;responses to reduced and no-illage systems in the southernNeal et al. 2011):Pampas of Argentina. Soil and Tllage Research, 81, 57-69.WUE=Y/ET(4) Fuentes P J, Flury M, Huggins R D, Bezdicek D F. 2003. SoilIrrigation benefit was determined as (Wang et al.1999):water and nitrogen dynamics in dryland cropping systemsIB=OY/Iof Washing State, USA. Soil and Tillage Research, 71,Where, Y is the grain yield (kg ha l), 0Y is the grain yield33-47.increment after irrigation (kg ha'), ET is the field waterconsumption during the growing season (mm), and I is theeffects on soil properties and yields of rainfed maize andactual amount of irrigation (mm).wheat in a subhumid subtropical climate. Soil and TillagePhotosynthetic characteristics and WUE at single leaf levelResearch, 58, 1-10.(WUE) The photosynthetic characteristics of the flag leafGicheru P, Gachene C, Mbuvi J, Mare E.2004. Effects of soilwere measured using a CIRAS-2 photosynthesis system (PPmanagement practices and tillage systems on surface soilSystem, UK) from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. (under natural light) at thewater conservation andcrnsformatinn nn a candy loam inanthesis day, 10 d after anthesis (DAA) and 20 DAA. Ten flagsemi-arid Keny中國(guó)煤化工5, 173-184.leaves were used for each treatment. The WUE at single leafGuzhaA C.2004.EYHC N M H Gliet,srface◎2014, CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd.Effects of Tllage Practices on Water Consumption, Water Use Eficiency and Grain Yield in Wheat Field387depression storage and soil water storage. Soil and Tillage207-220.Research, 76, 105-114.LiQQ, Chen Y H, LiuM Y, ZhouX B, Dong BD, YuSIan H, Li ZJ, Ning T Y, Zhang X, Shan Y, Bai J. 2008.L.2007. Effect of irrigation to winter wheat on the soilRadiation use efficiency and yield of winter wheatmoisture, evapotranspiration, and water use efficiency ofunder deficit irrigation in North China. Plant Soil andsummer maize in North China. Transactions of the ASABE,Environment, 54, 313-319.50, 2073-2079.HanSM, Yang Y H,Lei Y P, TangC Y, JuanaP M.2008. Li X Y, Gong J D.2002. Effects of different ridge: furrowSeasonal groundwater storage anomaly and vadose zoneratios and supplemental irrigation on crop production inridge and furrow rainfall harvesting system with mulches.piedmont region of Taihang Mountain, North China Plain.Agriculture Water Management, 54, 243-254.Hydrology Research, 39, 479-495.Li YJ, WuJZ, Huang M, Yao Y Q, ZhangCJ, Cai DX, Jin K.HeJ,LiHW,WangXY,McHughAD,LiWY,GaoHW,2006. Effects of dfferent tlage systems on photosynthesisKuhn N J. 2007. The adoption of annual subsoiling ascharacteristics of flag leaf and water use efficiency in winterconservation tllage in dryland maize and wheat cultivationwheat. Transactions of the CSAE, 22, 44-48. (in Chinese)in northerm China. Soil and Tillage Research, 94, 493-502. LiuZJ,LiBP,Li Y H, Cui Y L.2004. Research on the waterHolland J M. 2004. The environmental consequences ofuse eficiency and optimal irigation schedule of the winteradopting conservation tllage in Europe: Reviewing thewheat. Transactions of the CSAE, 20, 58 63. (in Chinese)evidence. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment,Mohanty M, Bandyopadhyay K K, Painuli D K, Ghosh103, 1-25.P K, Misra A K, Hati K M.2007. Water transmissionHuH Y,LiZJ, Ning T Y, Wang Y, Tian S Z, Zhong Wcharacteristics of a Vertisol and water use efficiency ofZhang Z Z.2011. Effects of subsoiling and urea types onrainfed soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) under subsoilingwater use efficiency of different maize cultivars. Scientiaand manuring. Soil and Tllage Research, 93, 420-428.Agricultura Sinica, 44, 1963- 1972. (in Chinese)Mo X, LiuS, LinZ, Xu Y, Xiang Y, McVicar T R.2005.HuangG B, Chai Q, FengF x, Yu AZ.201Prediction of crop yield, water consumption and waterdifferent tllage systems on soil properties, root growth,use efficiency with a SVAT-crop growth model usinggrain yield, and water use efficiency of winter wheatremotely sensed data on the North China Plain. Ecological(Triticum aestivum L.) in arid Northwest China. JournalModelling, 183, 301-322.of Integrative Agriculture, 11, 1286- 1296.Neal J S, Fulkerson W J, Sutton B G. 2011. Differences in1995. Effect of irigation andwater-use efficiency among perennial forages used bynitrogen on water use efficiency of wheat in Saudi Arabia.the dairy industry under optimum and deficit irigation.Agriculture Water Management, 27, 143-153.Irrigation Science, 29, 213-232.Jennings T N, Smith J E, Cromack K, Sulzman E W, McKayNidal H, Abu H.2003. Compaction and subsoiling effects onD, Caldwell B A, Beldin S I. 2012. Impact of postirecorn growth and soil bulk density. Soil Science Society oflogging on soil bacterial and fungal communities andAmerica Journal, 4, 1213-1219.soil biogeochemistry in a mixed-conifer forest in centralPanda R K, Behera S K, Kashyap P S. 2003. EffectiveOregon. Plant and Soil, 350, 393-411.management of irigation water for wheat under stressedJiang X D, Wang Y, HouL T,LiZJ, Wang X, Guo乙H.conditions. Agriculture Water Management, 63, 37-56.2006. Effects of minimum tllage and no- tllage systemsPikul J L, Aase J K. 1999. Wheat response and residual soilon photosynthetic characteristics at late growth stages ofproperties following subsoiling of a sandy loam in easternwinter wheat. Transactions of the CSAE, 22, 66-69. (inMontana. Soil and Tillage Research, 51, 61-70.Chinese)Pikul J L, Kristian J S.2003. Water infiltration and storageJosephJL P, KristianJ A. 2003. Water infiltration and storageaffected by subsoiling and subsequent tlage. Soil Scienceaffected by subsoiling and subsequent tllage. Soil ScienceSociety of America Journal, 3, 859-866.Riley H C F, Bleken M A, Abrahamsen S, Bergjord A K,Kirkham M B, He H, Bolger T P, Lawlor D J, Kanemasu EBakken A K. 2005. Effects of alternative tllage systemsT.1991. Leaf photosynthesis and water use of big blueon soil quality and yield of spring cereals on silty clay loamstem under elevated carbon dioxide. Crop Science, 31,and sandy loam soils in the cool, wet climate of central1589- 1594.Norway. Soil and Tillage Research, 80, 79-93.Lampurlanes J, Angas P, Cantero-Martinez C. 2001. Root Roscoe R, Buurman P. 2003. Tillage effects on soil organicgrowth, soil water content and yield of barley undermatter in density fractions of a Cerrado Oxisol. Soil anddifferent tillage systems on two soils in semiaridTillage Research, 70, 107-119.conditions. Field Crops Research, 69, 27-40.Shan L, Kang S Z, WuP T.2004. Water Saving AgricultureLampurlanes J, Angas P, Cantero-Martinez C.2002. Tillagein China. China Agriculture Press, China. pp. 229-230.effects on water storage during fallow, and on barley root(in Chinese)growth and yield in two contrasting soils of the semi-arid Sharma P, Abrol \中國(guó)煤化工f ilage andSegarra region in Spain. Soil and Tillage Research, 65,mulch managerYHC N M H Gequirement◎2014. CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Ltd.2388ZHENG Cheng -yan et al.and crop performance in maize-wheat rotation in rainfedPlain. Journal of Integrative Agriculure, 12, 2179-2188.subhumid inceptisols, India. European Journal of de Vita P. Paolo E D, Fecondo G, Fonzo N D, Pisante M.2007.Agronomy, 34, 46-51.Notillage and conventional tllage effects on durum wheatSingh B, Chanasyk D s, Mcgill W B.1998. Soil water regimeyield, grain quality and soil moisture content in southernunder barley with long- term tllage-residue systerms. SoilItaly. Soil and Tillage Research, 92, 69-78.and Tillage Research, 45, 59-74.Wagger M G.1992. Corn grain yield and nitrogen utilizationSuZY,ZhangJS,WuWL,CaiDX,LuJJ,JiangGH,in relation to subsoiling and nitrogen rate on Paleudults.Huang J, Gao J, Hartmann R, Gabriels D. 2007. EffectsAgronomy Journal, 84, 888-892.of conservation tllage practices on winter wheat water-Wang JS, Xu ZK, YaoJW.1999.9 Analysis of food throughputuse eficiency and crop yield on the Loess Plateau, China.per unit water use. Advances in Water Science, 10, 429-Agriculture Water Management, 87, 307-314.434. (in Chinese)SunHY,LiuCM,ZhangXY,ShenYJ,ZhangYQ.2006.Williams J D, Wuest S B, Schilinger B F, Gollany H T.Effects of irmigation on water balance, yield and WUE of2006. Rotary subsoiling newly planted winter wheat fieldswinter wheat in the North China Plain. Agriculture Waterto improve infiltration in frozen soil. Soil and TillageManagement, 85, 211-218.Research, 86, 141-151.Taa A, Tanner D, Bennie A T P. 2004. Effects of stubble Xiong W, Holman I, Lin E, Conway D, Jiang J, Xu Y, Limanagement, tllage and cropping sequence on wheatY.2010. Climate change, water availability and futureproduction in the south-eastern highlands of Ethiopia. Soilcereal production in China. Agriculture, Ecosystems andand Tllage Research, 76, 69-82.Environment, 135, 58-69.Tao z Q, Sui P, ChenYQ,LiC, NieZJ, YuanSF, ShiJT,Gao W S. 2013. Subsoiling and ridge tllage alleviate thechromosome controlling genetic of water use efficiency ofhigh temperature stress in spring maize in the North ChinaTriticum. Acta Genetica Sinica, 27, 240-246. (in Chinese)(Managing editor WANG Ning)中國(guó)煤化工MHCNM HG◎2014, CAAS. All rights reserved. Published by EIsevier Ltd.