Effects of Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns on Alfalfa Yield, Quality, Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency, and Economic Benefits in the Yellow River Irrigation Region of Gansu Province, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Description of the Experimental Site
2.2. Experimental Design and Field Management
2.3. Indicators and Methods for Measurement
2.3.1. Plant Height and Stem Diameter
2.3.2. Leaf: Stem Ratio
2.3.3. Yield and Quality
- (1)
- Yield (kg·ha−1): Each time the alfalfa was cut, 1 m2 (1 × 1 m2) quadrats with uniform growth were selected in each plot and cut 5 cm above the ground. They were baked to constant weight at 75 °C after 0.5 h of fixation at 105 °C. After cooling, the dry weight was used to calculate the hay yield.
- (2)
- Quality: To determine the quality index, the dried sample was crushed for sieving (0.4 mm). The crude protein content (CP) [18] was determined using an automatic Kjeldahl apparatus (KjeltecTM8400), and the acid detergent fiber (ADF) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) [23] contents were determined using a semi-automatic fiber analyzer (F800) based on the Van Soest method. The average value of three cuts was used to determine alfalfa quality.
2.3.4. Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency
- (1)
- Soil moisture content: In the center of each plot, a 150 cm long time-domain reflectometry (time-domain reflectometry, TDR) probe tube was arranged between the alfalfa rows (Figure 1). Every 3–5 days, the PICO-BT TDR instrument (IMKO, Germany) was used to measure the moisture content of the 0–120 cm soil layer (at 20 cm intervals). Additional measurements were taken before and after irrigation and after precipitation, and the drying method was used on a regular basis for verification.
- (2)
- Evapotranspiration (ET, mm): The water balance method was used for calculating ET.
- (3)
- WUE (kg·ha−1·mm−1)
- (4)
- IWUE (kg·ha−1·mm−1)
- (5)
- PUE (kg·ha−1·mm−1)
- (6)
- PFPN (kg·kg−1)
- (7)
- ANUE (kg·kg−1)
2.3.5. EB
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Effects of Planting Patterns and Nitrogen Levels on Alfalfa Growth
3.1.1. Plant Height
3.1.2. Stem Diameter
3.1.3. Leaf:Stem Ratio
3.2. Effects of Planting Pattern and Nitrogen Level on Alfalfa Yield and Quality
3.2.1. Yield
3.2.2. Quality
3.3. Effects of Planting Pattern and Nitrogen Level on the Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Alfalfa
3.4. Effects of Planting Pattern and Nitrogen Level on the EB of Alfalfa
4. Discussion
4.1. Proper Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns to Promote Alfalfa Growth
4.2. Proper Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns to Promote Alfalfa Yield and Quality
4.3. Proper Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns to Promote the Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Alfalfa
5. Conclusions
- (1)
- The growth of alfalfa could be greatly accelerated by the use of ridge culture with film mulching (RM) compared to conventional flat cropping (FP). Under the same planting pattern, the plant height, stem diameter, and leaf:stem ratio of alfalfa all first increased and then decreased as the nitrogen application rate increased. Moreover, the RMN2 treatment group had the highest plant height, stem diameter, and leaf:stem ratio, which were 6.7~37.5%, 4.6~39.0%, and 1.4~24.1% higher than other treatments, respectively.
- (2)
- The yield and quality of alfalfa could be improved by the RM pattern in concert with a proper nitrogen application rate. When compared to other treatments, the RMN2 treatment increased the yield, CP content, and RFV of alfalfa by 5.9~84.9%, 4.9~28.6%, and 19.6~49.3%, respectively, while ADF and NDF contents decreased by 14.0~27.6% and 13.0~26.1%, respectively.
- (3)
- The RM pattern had a better performance than the FP pattern in terms of WUE, IWUE, PUE, PFPN, ANUE, and EB. As the nitrogen application level increased, PFPN decreased, while the other five indexes first increased and then decreased, with the maximum under the N2 condition.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- McDonald, I.; Baral, R.; Min, D. Effects of alfalfa and alfalfa-grass mixtures with nitrogen fertilization on dry matter yield and forage nutritive value. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 2021, 63, 305–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Osterholz, W.R.; Renz, M.J.; Jokela, W.E.; Grabber, J.H. Interseeded alfalfa reduces soil and nutrient runoff losses during and after corn silage production. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2019, 74, 85–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, Y.J.; Han, C.L.; Kong, M.; Shi, X.Y.; Zdruli, P.; Li, F.M. Plastic film mulch promotes high alfalfa production with phosphorus-saving and low risk of soil nitrogen loss. Field Crop. Res. 2018, 229, 44–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, X.; Fang, C.; Yuan, Z.; Li, F.; Sardans, J.; Penuelas, J. Long-term alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) establishment could alleviate phosphorus limitation induced by nitrogen deposition in the carbonate soil. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 324, 116346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Djaman, K.; Neill, M.; Lauriault, L.; Marsalis, M.; Koudahe, K.; Darapuneni, M.K. The dynamics of forage yield of different fall dormancy rating alfalfa cultivars in a semiarid climate. Agric. Res. 2021, 10, 378–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W. Countermeasures for the development of alfalfa planting industry in China. J. Beijing Univ. Agric. 2022, 37, 117–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, X.; Feng, Y.; Li, H.; Zheng, H.; Wang, J.; Tong, C. Effects of subsurface drip irrigation on water consumption and yields of alfalfa under different water and fertilizer conditions. J. Sens. 2021, 2021, 6617437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.A.; Yong, G.K.; Iftekhar, A.; Liu, G.S.; Hyoshin, L.; Joo, L.J.; Byung, H.L. Proteome analysis of alfalfa roots in response to water deficit stress. J. Integr. Agric. 2015, 15, 1275–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daryanto, S.; Wang, L.; Jacinthe, P.A. Can ridge-furrow plastic mulching replace irrigation in dryland wheat and maize cropping systems? Agric. Water Manag. 2017, 190, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nuti, R.C.; Lamb, M.C.; Sorensen, R.B.; Truman, C.C. Agronomic and economic response to furrow diking tillage in irrigated and non-irrigated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Agric. Water Manag. 2009, 96, 1078–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kader, M.A.; Senge, M.; Mojid, M.A.; Ito, K. Recent advances in mulching materials and methods for modifying soil environment. Soil Tillage Res. 2017, 168, 155–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Araya, A.; Stroosnijder, L. Effects of tied ridges and mulch on barley (Hordeum vulgare) rainwater use efficiency and production in Northern Ethiopia. Agric. Water Manag. 2010, 97, 841–847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farah, A.H.; Al-Ghobari, H.M.; El-Abedin, T.Z.K.; Alrasasimah, M.S.; El-Shafei, A.A. Impact of partial root drying and soil mulching on squash yield and water use efficiency in arid. Agronomy 2021, 11, 706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, Y.Y.; Jing, Y.Y.; Xu, C.L.; Yu, X.J. Effects of film-mulching planting on soil water, temperature, nutrients and alfalfa overwintering in alpine area. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2021, 29, 1843–1852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Song, X.; Li, F.; Hu, G.; Liu, Q.; Zhang, E.; Wang, H.; Davies, R. Optimum ridge-furrow ratio and suitable ridge-mulching material for Alfalfa production in rainwater harvesting in semi-arid regions of China. Field Crop. Res. 2015, 180, 186–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ma, L.X.; Xin, X.Y.; Sun, Z.Y.; Nian, L. Effects of different planting methods on growth of alfalfa in alpine region. Grassl. Turf. 2018, 38, 67–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tandel, B.B.; Pankhaniya, R.M.; Thanki, J.D.; Bavalgave, V.G.; Parmar, S.K. Yield and economics of lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) as influenced by cutting management and nitrogen levels. Farming Manag. 2017, 2, 122–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.X.; Liu, X.J.; Hao, F.; Fan, J.J.; Feng, B.Z.; Qi, P. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus regulation on alfalfa nitrogen accumulation and the nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients of soil. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2016, 24, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.J.; Liu, Y.N.; Kuai, J.L.; Qi, M.X.; Zhang, X.L. Effects of different N levels on productivity and quality of alfalfa varieties. Acta Agrestia Sinica. 2013, 21, 702–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.L.; Zhao, J.W.; Liu, X.S.; Li, S.Y.; Ma, C.H.; Wang, X.Z.; Zhang, Q.B. Effect of nitrogen application on photosynthetic daily variation, leaf morphology and dry matter yield of alfalfa at the early flowering growth stage. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2022, 31, 63–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, S.X.; Wang, S.; Gao, Z.L.; Wang, D.W. Impact of N application on the yield of alfalfa, N accumulation and nitrogen use efficiency. Acta Agric. Boreali-Sin. 2014, 29, 220–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, D.D.; Wang, Y.R.; Han, Y.H. Effects of irrigation frequency and fertilizer rate on alfalfa seed yields in the Yellow River irrigated region. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2016, 25, 154–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, M.; Wang, Z.; Mu, L.; Xu, R.; Yang, H. Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on alfalfa performance under two irrigation systems in the inland arid area of midwestern China. Agric. Water Manag. 2021, 248, 106764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, W.; Zhang, Y.H.; Li, P.; Wang, X.J.; Zhang, P.; He, Y.; Kang, X.Y. Effects of water and nitrogen supply under drip irrigation on the production performance rate and water and nitrogen use efficiency of alfalfa. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2019, 28, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, M.; Li, Y.; Fang, H.; Chen, P. Biodegradable mulching film with an optimum degradation rate improves soil environment and enhances maize growth. Agric. Water Manag. 2019, 216, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, H.; Li, Y.; Gu, X.; Yu, M.; Chen, P.; Li, Y.; Liu, F. Optimizing the impact of film mulching pattern and nitrogen application rate on maize production, gaseous N emissions, and utilization of water and nitrogen in northwest China. Agric. Water Manag. 2022, 261, 107350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, X.; Cai, H.; Chen, P.; Li, Y.; Fang, H.; Li, Y. Ridge-furrow film mulching improves water and nitrogen use efficiencies under reduced irrigation and nitrogen applications in wheat field. Field Crop. Res. 2021, 270, 108214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Y.; Mao, X.; Shukla, M.K.; Li, S. Modeling soil water–heat dynamic changes in seed-maize fields under film mulching and deficit irrigation conditions. Water 2020, 12, 1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jing, Y.Y.; Xu, C.L.; Jin, L.; Yu, X.J. Effects of planting methods on the above-and below-ground growth characters of the alfalfa in the second year in alpine semiarid area. Chin. J. Grassl. 2018, 40, 56–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Li, Y.; Gu, X.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, X. Compensation effects of ridge and furrow mulching on growth and yield of late-sown summer maize. Agric. Res. Arid. Areas 2022, 40, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, J.; Fan, J.; Zhou, M.; Zhang, F.; Liao, Z.; Lai, Z.; Yan, S.; Guo, J.; Li, Z.; Xiang, Y. Ridge-furrow plastic film mulching enhances grain yield and yield stability of rainfed maize by improving resources capture and use efficiency in a semi-humid drought-prone region. Agric. Water Manag. 2022, 269, 107654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.Z.; Wu, F.; Zhang, Z.M.; Shi, S.L.; Bai, X.M. Effects of film mulching on agronomic characters and nutritional value of alfalfa in northwest desert irrigation region. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2018, 26, 748–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Zhao, Y.; Hao, F. Development of nitrogen efficiency screening system in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and analysis of alfalfa nitrogen efficiency types. PeerJ 2022, 10, e13343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, M.; Li, Y.; Li, H.; Xu, Y.; Zhou, C.; Zhang, T. Effects of nitrogen application rates on root growth and nitrogen use of summer maize. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2016, 47, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, F.; Gu, L.; Liu, Y.; Ren, Z.; Shi, Y.; Xu, Z.; Zhou, G.; Lu, H.; Wang, X.; Zhang, W.; et al. Interaction effects of plant density and nitrogen rate on the growth and physiological traits of alfalfa in saline alkali soils. Pratacultural Sci. 2021, 38, 1570–1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hassan, M.; Arezoo, M.R.; Saeid, G.; Alireza, T. Harvest time and cultivar effects on growth, physiological traits, yield and quality of alfalfa in saline condition. Int. J. Plant Prod. 2020, 14, 453–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, X.C.; Ma, P.C.; Ma, J.; Duan, Z.; Han, Y.Y.; Zhang, J.Y. Study on the effect of mulching furrow and fertilization of alfalfa in semi-arid areas of Loess Plateau. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2021, 29, 2098–2106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, M.; Ma, Y.; Kang, Y.; Jia, Q.; Qi, G.; Wang, J.; Yang, C.; Yu, J. Optimized farmland mulching improves alfalfa yield and water use efficiency based on meta-analysis and regression analysis. Agric. Water Manag. 2022, 267, 107617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kou, J.T.; Shi, S.L.; Cai, Z.S. Effects of ridge and furrow rainfall harvesting on growth characteristics and quality of Medicago sativa in dryland. Sci. Agric. Sin. 2010, 43, 5028–5036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, M.H.; Ma, Y.L.; Kang, Y.X.; Jia, Q.; Qi, G.P.; Wang, J.H. Effects of nitrogen application on alfalfa yield and quality in China-A Metaanalysis. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2022, 31, 36–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, H.; Wang, Q.; Shi, S.L.; Zhang, E.H.; Wang, T.T.; Liu, Q.L.; Liu, C.W.; Yu, H.L. Effect of irrigation and nitrogen supply levels on hay yield and water use efficiency and soil total nitrogen of Medicago sativa. Grassl. Turf. 2012, 32, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wen, Y.; Zhang, J.; Feng, M.; Guo, Z.G. Effects of irrigation and nitrogen fertilizer on alfalfa quality. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2018, 27, 76–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, X.Y.; Wang, S.X.; Shi, W.; Chang, S.H.; Jia, Q.M.; Hou, F.J. Effects of using methods and nitrogen application on agronomic characters, yield and quality of bromus inermis in Loess Plateau. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2022, 30, 3119–3131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, K.; Liu, B.; Xie, Y.; Li, T.; Zhang, Q.; Li, S.; Dou, L.; Liu, Y.; Ji, M.; Jiang, L. Effects of nitrogen reduction and film mulching on wheat yield composition and utilization efficiency of water and fertilizer in the Loess Plateau. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2020, 34, 198–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.; Bian, S.F.; Liu, Z.M.; Wang, L.C.; Wang, Y.J.; Xu, W.H.; Zhou, Y. Drip irrigation incorporating water conservation measures: Effects on soil water–nitrogen utilization, root traits and grain production of spring maize in semi-arid areas. J. Integr. Agric. 2021, 20, 3127–3142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mak, M.E.; Zhang, D.; Zhou, X.; Zhao, X.; Wang, X.; Zhao, W.; Wang, Q.; Ahiakpa, J.K. Effect of co-application of ridge-furrow rainwater harvesting and mulching on fodder yield, quality, and soil desiccation in alfalfa (Medicago sativa) production. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2022, 22, 2587–2602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, X.; Jia, Z.; Chen, X. Effect of micro-catchment rainwater harvesting on water and nutrient use efficiency in farmland under different simulated rainfall conditions. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2010, 26, 75–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamran, M.; Yan, Z.; Jia, Q.; Chang, S.; Ahmad, I.; Ghani, M.U.; Hou, F. Irrigation and nitrogen fertilization influence on alfalfa yield, nutritive value, and resource use efficiency in an arid environment. Field Crop. Res. 2022, 284, 108587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, M.; Yu, C.; Lin, L.; Wu, D.; Song, R.; Liu, H. Effects of water and nitrogen fertilizer on biomass distribution and water use efficiency of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) in Hexi Corridor. Chin. J. Eco-Agric. 2016, 24, 1623–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, L.; Wang, L.L.; Luo, Z.Z.; Li, L.L.; Niu, Y.N.; Cai, L.Q.; Xie, J.H. Meta-analysis of alfalfa yield and WUE response to growing ages in China. Acta Prataculturae Sin. 2020, 29, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Treatments | Planting Pattern | Nitrogen Level (kg·ha−1) |
---|---|---|
FPN0 | Conventional flat planting (FP) | 0 (N0) |
FPN1 | 80 (N1) | |
FPN2 | 160 (N2) | |
FPN3 | 240 (N3) | |
RMN0 | Ridge culture with film mulching (RM) | 0 (N0) |
RMN1 | 80 (N1) | |
RMN2 | 160 (N2) | |
RMN3 | 240 (N3) |
Factors | Plant Height | Stem Diameter | Leaf:Stem Ratio | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First Cut | Second Cut | Third Cut | First Cut | Second Cut | Third Cut | First Cut | Second Cut | Third Cut | |
Planting pattern (P) | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** |
Nitrogen level (N) | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** |
P × N | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
Factors | First Cut | Second Cut | Third Cut | Yearly Yield |
---|---|---|---|---|
Planting pattern (P) | ** | ** | ** | ** |
Nitrogen level (N) | ** | ** | ** | ** |
P × N | ns | ns | ns | ** |
Planting Pattern (P) | Nitrogen Level (N) | Crude Protein Content (CP, %) | Acid Detergent Fiber Content (ADF, %) | Neutral Detergent Fiber Content (NDF, %) | Relative Feeding Value (RFV) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conventional flat planting (FP) | N0 | 18.2 ± 0.4 c | 31.5 ± 0.8 a | 47.1 ± 0.7 a | 127.3 ± 0.5 e |
N1 | 19.8 ± 0.6 bc | 29.2 ± 0.7 abc | 45.4 ± 0.4 b | 135.7 ± 1.5 d | |
N2 | 21.7 ± 0.8 ab | 27.3 ± 1.0 bc | 42.5 ± 1.2 c | 148.2 ± 4.5 c | |
N3 | 20.5 ± 0.9 bc | 28.6 ± 1.0 abc | 45.0 ± 0.7 b | 137.6 ± 0.6 d | |
Ridge culture with film mulching (RM) | N0 | 20.7 ± 1.1 bc | 29.7 ± 1.7 ab | 42.3 ± 0.9 c | 144.8 ± 1.7 c |
N1 | 21.4 ± 1.4 ab | 27.0 ± 2.6 bc | 40.3 ± 1.1 d | 156.5 ± 2.9 b | |
N2 | 23.4 ± 2.6 a | 22.8 ± 3.0 d | 34.8 ± 0.6 e | 190.1 ± 3.1 a | |
N3 | 22.3 ± 1.9 ab | 26.5 ± 0.5 c | 40.0 ± 0.5 d | 158.9 ± 1.0 b | |
P | ** | ** | ** | ** | |
N | * | ** | ** | ** | |
P × N | ns | ns | * | ** |
Planting Pattern (P) | Nitrogen Level (N) | WUE (kg·ha−1·mm−1) | IWUE (kg·ha−1·mm−1) | PUE (kg·ha−1·mm−1) | PFPN (kg·kg−1) | ANUE (kg·kg−1) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conventional flat planting (FP) | N0 | 18.2 ± 0.7 g | 33.3 ± 1.3 h | 61.4 ± 2.4 h | - | - |
N1 | 20.6 ± 0.5 f | 38.0 ± 0.8 g | 70.1 ± 1.5 g | 175.0 ± 3.9 b | 21.7 ± 9.8 ab | |
N2 | 22.4 ± 0.2 e | 42.9 ± 0.4 e | 79.0 ± 0.7 e | 98.6 ± 0.8 d | 22.0 ± 3.7 ab | |
N3 | 21.6 ± 0.8 e | 40.7 ± 1.5 f | 75.0 ± 2.7 f | 62.4 ± 2.2 f | 11.4 ± 3.9 b | |
Ridge culture with film mulching (RM) | N0 | 26.6 ± 0.4 d | 47.8 ± 0.7 d | 88.1 ± 1.4 d | - | - |
N1 | 29.8 ± 0.5 c | 54.5 ± 0.9 c | 100.4 ± 1.7 c | 250.7 ± 4.2 a | 30.8 ± 7.4 a | |
N2 | 32.8 ± 0.4 a | 61.6 ± 0.7 a | 113.5 ± 1.3 a | 141.7 ± 1.6 c | 31.7 ± 2.8 a | |
N3 | 31.3 ± 0.1 b | 58.1 ± 0.3 b | 107.1 ± 0.5 b | 89.1 ± 0.4 e | 15.8 ± 1.4 b | |
P | ** | ** | ** | ** | * | |
N | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | |
P × N | * | ** | ** | ** | ns |
Factors | FP | RM | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N0 | N1 | N2 | N3 | N0 | N1 | N2 | N3 | ||
Total revenue (Yuan·ha−1) | 30,644 | 34,993 | 39,455 | 37,457 | 43,983 | 50,144 | 56,670 | 53,489 | |
Input cost (Yuan·ha−1) | Seed | 530 | 530 | 530 | 530 | 530 | 530 | 530 | 530 |
Urea | 0 | 480 | 960 | 1440 | 0 | 480 | 960 | 1440 | |
Superphosphate | 120 | 120 | 120 | 120 | 120 | 120 | 120 | 120 | |
Muriate of potash | 382.5 | 382.5 | 382.5 | 382.5 | 382.5 | 382.5 | 382.5 | 382.5 | |
Rotary tillage | 1500 | 1500 | 1500 | 1500 | 1500 | 1500 | 1500 | 1500 | |
Insecticide | 850 | 850 | 850 | 850 | 850 | 850 | 850 | 850 | |
Mulching film | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 641 | 641 | 641 | 641 | |
Total input cost | 3382.5 | 3862.5 | 4342.5 | 4822.5 | 4023.5 | 4503.5 | 4983.5 | 5463.5 | |
Labor cost (Yuan·ha−1) | Weeding | 1350 | 1350 | 1350 | 1350 | 900 | 900 | 900 | 900 |
Mulching and residue removal | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 730 | 730 | 730 | 730 | |
Other (planting, fertilization, etc.) | 1130 | 1130 | 1130 | 1130 | 1130 | 1130 | 1130 | 1130 | |
Total labor cost | 2480 | 2480 | 2480 | 2480 | 2760 | 2760 | 2760 | 2760 | |
Net revenue (Yuan·ha−1) | 24,782 g | 28,651 f | 32,632 e | 30,155 f | 37,200 d | 42,880 c | 48,927 a | 45,265 b |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lv, Y.; Wang, J.; Yin, M.; Kang, Y.; Ma, Y.; Jia, Q.; Qi, G.; Jiang, Y.; Lu, Q.; Chen, X. Effects of Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns on Alfalfa Yield, Quality, Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency, and Economic Benefits in the Yellow River Irrigation Region of Gansu Province, China. Water 2023, 15, 251. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15020251
Lv Y, Wang J, Yin M, Kang Y, Ma Y, Jia Q, Qi G, Jiang Y, Lu Q, Chen X. Effects of Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns on Alfalfa Yield, Quality, Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency, and Economic Benefits in the Yellow River Irrigation Region of Gansu Province, China. Water. 2023; 15(2):251. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15020251
Chicago/Turabian StyleLv, Yaru, Jinghai Wang, Minhua Yin, Yanxia Kang, Yanlin Ma, Qiong Jia, Guangping Qi, Yuanbo Jiang, Qiang Lu, and Xiaolong Chen. 2023. "Effects of Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns on Alfalfa Yield, Quality, Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency, and Economic Benefits in the Yellow River Irrigation Region of Gansu Province, China" Water 15, no. 2: 251. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15020251
APA StyleLv, Y., Wang, J., Yin, M., Kang, Y., Ma, Y., Jia, Q., Qi, G., Jiang, Y., Lu, Q., & Chen, X. (2023). Effects of Planting and Nitrogen Application Patterns on Alfalfa Yield, Quality, Water–Nitrogen Use Efficiency, and Economic Benefits in the Yellow River Irrigation Region of Gansu Province, China. Water, 15(2), 251. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15020251