4.7 Article

Lignocellulose mulch increases the economic benefit of Chinese chestnut by suppressing weed and ameliorating soil properties

Journal

SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE
Volume 291, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2021.110576

Keywords

Chinese chestnut; Lignocellulose mulch; Weed suppression; Soil diversity; Economic benefit

Categories

Funding

  1. Project of Beijing Municipal Commission of Education [KZ201911417049]
  2. Key Research and Development Program of Hebei Province [20322501D, 19226509D]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By using lignocellulose mulch, soil properties can be improved, weed growth and diseases can be suppressed, and the yield and quality of Chinese chestnuts can be increased, showing a significant cost-benefit advantage.
The yield of Chinese chestnut relies on multiple factors including soil, fertilizer, irrigation, and pest management. Hence, it is necessary to develop a simple and cost-effective strategy that can simultaneously modulate the above factors. Mulch films can largely influence the aforementioned factors. In this work, a grinding machine was used to fragment branches, chestnut shell, and involucres into 3-10 cm pieces, and the resulting lignocellulose mulch was applied to cover the soil surrounding Chinese chestnut trees. A field trial found that lignocellulose mulch ameliorated soil properties by increasing soil moisture and soil carbon. Moreover, lignocellulose mulch suppressed weed growth and inhibited chestnut blight, and eventually improved the quality and yield of chestnuts. Cost-benefit analysis showed that the mulch increased profit by 42% in three years compared with the control group. It is concluded that lignocellulose mulch is a viable alternative to plastic mulch, especially for perennial woody plants such as chestnut trees. This work provides an alternative strategy for the management of chestnut and other perennial trees.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available