Welcome to Acta Prataculturae Sinica ! Today is Share:

Acta Prataculturae Sinica ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 150-160.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2023138

Previous Articles    

Effects of straw return on farmland weed abundance and diversity: A meta-analysis

Yao SU1(), Su-mei YE1, Meng-xing LU1, Yue MA2, Yu-bao WANG1, Shan-shan WANG3, Ru-shan CHAI1, Xin-xin YE1, Zhen ZHANG1, Chao MA1()   

  1. 1.Anhui Province Green Phosphorus Fertilizer Intelligent Manufacturing and Efficient Utilization Engineering Research Center,Anhui Provincial Key Laboratory of Farmland Ecological Conservation and Pollution Prevention,College of Resources and Environment,Anhui Agricultural University,Hefei 230036,China
    2.Feixi County Yandian Township Plant Protection Service Professional Cooperative,Hefei 231232,China
    3.Anhui Wensheng Bioengineering Co. ,Ltd. ,Fuyang 236000,China
  • Received:2023-04-26 Revised:2023-07-03 Online:2024-03-20 Published:2023-12-27
  • Contact: Chao MA

Abstract:

This research involved a meta-analysis of studies on the effects of straw return to farmland on weed control. In this analysis comprehensively assess the role of straw return to farmland in order to develop recommendations to improve the efficiency of straw utilization. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis involving 426 comparisons of weed abundance and diversity collected from 41 articles on this topic published between 2000 and 2022. The objectives of this study were to assess the effects of straw return on the weed abundance and diversity in agroecosystems of China, as well as the variation of these effects for different crop types, amounts of straw returned, soil textures, climate regimes or other variables. It was found that: 1) Straw return significantly reduced the abundance and diversity of weeds in farmland compared with no straw return, with the suppression effects of -42.4% and -8.5%, respectively. 2) The weed suppression effect of straw return varied under different conditions. Crop species was the key factor affecting the suppression effect of straw return on weed abundance. Returning straw to rice (Oryza sativa), maize (Zea mays) or rape (Brassica napus) fields significantly reduced weed abundance, with suppression effects of -62.3%, -34.6% and -56.9%, respectively. However, the suppression effect (-7.1%) was not significant when straw was returned to wheat (Triticum aestivum) fields. The amount of straw returned was the key factor influencing the suppression effect of straw return on weed diversity. A regression analysis showed that the suppression effect on weed diversity increased significantly as the amount of straw returned was increased (R2=0.021, P<0.05). Overall the analysis shows that straw return effectively suppresses weed occurrence and infestation in cropland, but the suppression effect on weed abundance and diversity differs. In conclusion, in the subtropical monsoon climate zone, returning straw to rice fields at a rate>7000 kg·ha-1 has the best suppression effect on weed abundance, while in the temperate monsoon climate zone, returning the same amount of straw to rape fields can better suppress weed diversity.

Key words: straw return, weed abundance, weed diversity, influence factors, meta-analysis