4.4 Article

Nitrogen balances and nitrogen-use efficiency of different organic and conventional farming systems

期刊

NUTRIENT CYCLING IN AGROECOSYSTEMS
卷 105, 期 1, 页码 1-23

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10705-016-9770-5

关键词

Nitrogen balance; Nitrogen-use efficiency; Organic farming; Conventional farming; Agroforestry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nitrogen (N) is the most important yield-limiting factor in agricultural systems, however, N application can lead to emissions and environmental problems such as global warming (N2O) and groundwater contamination (NO3 (-)). This study analyses the N balance, nitrogen-use efficiency, and N loss potential of conventional farming systems (arable farming, improved arable farming, and agroforestry) and organic farming systems (mixed farming, arable farming, and agroforestry) based on long-term field experiments in southern Germany. The effects of the conversion of farm structure and N management are identified. The conventional farming systems in this study were high N-input and high N-output systems. The conventional arable farming system had the lowest nitrogen-use efficiency and the highest N surplus. An optimised N management and the use of high-yielding crop varieties improved its nitrogen-use efficiency. The establishment of conventional agroforestry resulted in the reduction of N input, N output and N surplus, while maintaining high yields. The organic mixed farming system is characterised by a relatively high N input and N output, the accumulation of soil organic nitrogen, the highest nitrogen-use efficiency, and the lowest N surplus of all analysed systems. These good results can be attributed to the intensive farm N cycle between soil-plant-animal. The shift from organic mixed farming to organic arable farming system extensified the N cycle, reduced N input, crop yield and N output. The change from organic arable farming to organic agroforestry reduced the N input, increased the biomass yield, and remained the N surplus within an optimal range.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据