Optimizing Biodegradable Films with Varying Induction Periods to Enhance Rice Growth and Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Site
2.2. Experimental Design
2.3. Measurement
2.3.1. Meteorological and Soil Temperature Monitoring
2.3.2. Soil Moisture Content Measurement
2.3.3. Rice Growth Parameters, Yield, and Quality
2.3.4. Irrigation Water Use Efficiency [32]
2.3.5. Soil Carbon (C) and Nitrogen (N) Content Measurement
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results and Analysis
3.1. Changes in Soil Temperature and Moisture Content Under Plastic Mulch Coverage
3.1.1. Soil Temperature and Effective Accumulated Temperature Status
3.1.2. Soil Moisture Content
3.2. Changes in Rice Growth, Yield, Rice Quality, and Irrigation Water Use Efficiency Under Mulching Conditions
3.2.1. Plant Height and Leaf Area
3.2.2. Tillering and Dry Matter Accumulation
3.2.3. Yield, Irrigation Water Use Efficiency (IWUE) and Rice Quality
3.3. Soil Carbon (C) and Nitrogen (N) Content
4. Discussion
4.1. Effect of Film Mulching on Soil Temperature and Soil Moisture Content
4.2. Effect of Mulching on Rice Growth, Yield, IWUE, and Rice Quality
4.3. Effect of Mulching on Soil Carbon (C) and Nitrogen (N) Content
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Rosegrant, M.W.; Cline, S.A. Global Food Security: Challenges and Policies. Science 2003, 5652, 1917–1919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouman, B.A.M.; Humphreys, E.; Tuong, T.P.; Barker, R. Rice and Water. Adv. Agron. 2007, 92, 187–237. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, J.; Li, N.; Yang, X.; Sun, Z. For the protection of black soils. Nat. Food 2025, 6, 119–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.; Sun, L.; Jamshidi, A.H.; Niu, Y.; Fan, Z.; Zhang, H.; Liu, X. Assessment of the degree of degradation of sloping cropland in a typical black soil region. Land Degrad. Dev. 2022, 33, 2220–2230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Sui, Y.; Yu, Z.; Shi, Y.; Chu, H.; Jin, J.; Liu, X.; Wang, G. Soil carbon content drives the biogeographical distribution of fungal communities in the black soil zone of northeast China. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2015, 83, 29–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Deng, X.; Yue, H. Black soil conservation will boost China’s grain supply and reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the future. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2024, 106, 107482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, G.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, L.; Hu, T.; Chen, J. Effects of artificial grassland establishment on soil nutrients and carbon properties in a black-soil-type degraded grassland. Plant Soil 2010, 333, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, M.; Zhao, X.; Wang, Y.; Lv, X.; Chen, Y.; Jiao, X.; Sui, Y. Pedogenesis of typical zonal soil drives belowground bacterial communities of arable land in the Northeast China Plain. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 14555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhou, J.; Guan, D.; Zhou, B.; Zhao, B.; Ma, M.; Qin, J.; Jiang, X.; Chen, S.; Cao, F.; Shen, D.; et al. Influence of 34-years of fertilization on bacterial communities in an intensively cultivated black soil in northeast China. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2015, 90, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galloway, J.N.; Townsend, A.R.; Erisman, J.W.; Bekunda, M.; Cai, Z.; Freney, J.R.; Martinelli, L.A.; Seitzinger, S.P.; Sutton, M.A. Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: Recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science 2008, 320, 889–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rezvi, H.U.A.; Tahjib Ul Arif, M.; Azim, M.A.; Tumpa, T.A.; Tipu, M.M.H.; Najnine, F.; Dawood, M.F.A.; Skalicky, M.; Brestič, M. Rice and food security: Climate change implications and the future prospects for nutritional security. Food Energy Secur. 2023, 12, e430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, X.M.; Zhang, X.P.; Deng, W.; Fang, H.J. Black soil degradation by rainfall erosion in Jilin, China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2003, 14, 409–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eleftheriadis, A.; Lafuente, F.; Turrión, M. Effect of land use, time since deforestation and management on organic C and N in soil textural fractions. Soil Tillage Res. 2018, 183, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, X.; Chen, X.; Chen, T.; Liu, X.; Song, Y.; Tan, S.; Chen, Y.; Yan, P.; Wang, X. Effects of substituting synthetic nitrogen with organic amendments on crop yield, net greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint: A global meta-analysis. Field Crops Res. 2023, 301, 109035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.; Zhang, G.; Wang, C. How does straw-incorporation rate reduce runoff and erosion on sloping cropland of black soil region? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2023, 357, 108676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuang, X.; Liu, J.; Scanlon, B.R.; Jiao, J.J.; Jasechko, S.; Lancia, M.; Biskaborn, B.K.; Wada, Y.; Li, H.; Zeng, Z.; et al. The changing nature of groundwater in the global water cycle. Science 2024, 383, eadf0630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; Tilman, D.; Jin, Z.; Smith, P.; Barrett, C.B.; Zhu, Y.; Burney, J.; D’odorico, P.; Fantke, P.; Fargione, J.; et al. Climate change exacerbates the environmental impacts of agriculture. Science 2024, 385, eadn3747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steinmetz, Z.; Wollmann, C.; Schaefer, M.; Buchmann, C.; David, J.; Troger, J.; Munoz, K.; Fror, O.; Schaumann, G.E. Plastic mulching in agriculture. Trading short-term agronomic benefits for long-term soil degradation? Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 550, 690–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, D.; Li, H.; Wang, E.; He, W.; Hao, W.; Yan, C.; Li, Y.; Mei, X.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, Z.; et al. An overview of the use of plastic-film mulching in China to increase crop yield and water-use efficiency. Natl. Sci. Rev. 2020, 7, 1523–1526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, T.; Wu, Q.; Yuan, Y.; Zhang, X.; Sun, R.; Hao, R.; Yang, X.; Li, C.; Qin, X.; Song, F.; et al. Effects of plastic film mulching on yield, water use efficiency, and nitrogen use efficiency of different crops in China: A meta-analysis. Field Crops Res. 2024, 312, 109407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, T.; Yao, Z.; Yan, C.; Liu, Q.; Ding, X.; He, W. Maize yield reduction is more strongly related to soil moisture fluctuation than soil temperature change under biodegradable film vs plastic film mulching in a semi-arid region of northern China. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 287, 108351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hossain, M.E.; Zhang, Z.; Dong, W. Plastic Film Mulching Improved Maize Yield, Water Use Efficiency, and N Use Efficiency under Dryland Farming System in Northeast China. Plants 2022, 11, 1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gu, X.; Yin, R.; Cai, W. Residual plastic film decreases crop yield and water use efficiency through direct negative effects on soil physicochemical properties and root growth. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 946, 174204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Qi, R.; Jones, D.L.; Li, Z.; Liu, Q.; Yan, C. Behavior of microplastics and plastic film residues in the soil environment: A critical review. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 703, 134722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Campanale, C.; Galafassi, S.; Di Pippo, F.; Pojar, I.; Massarelli, C.; Uricchio, V.F. A critical review of biodegradable plastic mulch films in agriculture: Definitions, scientific background and potential impacts. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2024, 170, 117391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Touchaleaume, F.; Angellier-Coussy, H.; César, G.; Raffard, G.; Gontard, N.; Gastaldi, E. How Performance and Fate of Biodegradable Mulch Films are Impacted by Field Ageing. J. Polym. Environ. 2018, 26, 2588–2600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Li, M.; Flury, M.; Schaeffer, S.M.; Chang, Y.; Tao, Z.; Jia, Z.; Li, S.; Ding, F.; Wang, J. Agronomic performance of polyethylene and biodegradable plastic film mulches in a maize cropping system in a humid continental climate. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 786, 147460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shangguan, X.; Wang, X.; Yuan, M.; Gao, M.; Liu, Z.; Li, M.; Zong, R.; Sun, C.; Zhang, M.; Li, Q. Effects of long-term biodegradable film mulching on yield and water productivity of maize in North China Plain. Agric. Water Manag. 2024, 304, 109094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, N.; Li, X.; Aimůnek, J.; Shi, H.; Hu, Q.; Zhang, Y. Evaluating the effects of biodegradable and plastic film mulching on soil temperature in a drip-irrigated field. Soil Tillage Res. 2021, 213, 105116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, B.; Zhao, S.; Li, Y. Study on the Natural Ventilation Characteristics of a Solar Greenhouse in a High-Altitude Area. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GB/T 17891-2017; High Quality Paddy. Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2017. Available online: https://openstd.samr.gov.cn/bzgk/gb/newGbInfo?hcno=56C97D505F4880DE76E2D49C7DA0C872&refer=outter (accessed on 22 December 2025).
- Li, J.; He, Y.; Liu, J.; Wang, Y.; Guo, Y.; Lu, Y. Effects of Biodegradable Film Mulching and Water-Saving Irrigation on Soil Moisture and Temperature in Paddy Fields of the Black Soil Region. Agriculture 2025, 15, 1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, H.; Yan, C.; Liu, Q.; Ding, W.; Chen, B.; Li, Z. Effects of plastic mulching and plastic residue on agricultural production: A meta-analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 651, 484–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Huang, C.; Zhao, L.; Feng, S.; Zhao, Z.; Zhang, L. Effects of different colors of film mulch on soil temperature and rice growth in a non-flooded condition. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2023, 103, 6352–6361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; Ding, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, J.; Zhang, J.; Pan, X.; Gao, C.; Wang, Y.; He, F. Effects of tillage and mulching measures on soil moisture and temperature, photosynthetic characteristics and yield of winter wheat. Agric. Water Manag. 2018, 201, 299–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, L.; Qin, F.; Feng, J.; Huang, J. Regional climate effects of plastic film mulch over the cropland of arid and semi-arid regions in Northwest China using a regional climate model. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2020, 139, 335–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, F.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, P.; Jia, Z. Hydrothermal effects on maize productivity with different planting patterns in a rainfed farmland area. Soil Tillage Res. 2021, 205, 104794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qin, W.; Hu, C.; Oenema, O. Soil mulching significantly enhances yields and water and nitrogen use efficiencies of maize and wheat: A meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 16210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Wu, Q.; Fan, B.; Zheng, X.; Zhang, J.; Li, W.; Guo, L. Effects of mulching biodegradable films under drip irrigation on soil hydrothermal conditions and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield. Agric. Water Manag. 2019, 213, 477–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, P.; Wei, T.; Han, Q.; Ren, X.; Jia, Z. Effects of different film mulching methods on soil water productivity and maize yield in a semiarid area of China. Agric. Water Manag. 2020, 241, 106382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Ren, L.; Zhang, N.; Liu, E.; Sun, S.; Ren, X.; Jia, Z.; Wei, T.; Zhang, P. Can soil organic carbon sequestration and the carbon management index be improved by changing the film mulching methods in the semiarid region? J. Integr. Agric. 2024, 23, 1541–1556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, H.; Yan, C.; Whalen, J.K.; He, W.; Liu, H.; Cui, J.; Gong, D.; Mancl, K.; Liu, Q.; Mei, X. Biodegradable mulch films support root proliferation and yield in water-saving rice production. J. Integr. Agric. 2025, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, Y.; Ding, R.; Kang, S. Plastic mulch decreases available energy and evapotranspiration and improves yield and water use efficiency in an irrigated maize cropland. Agric. Water Manag. 2017, 179, 122–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Wu, Q.; Fan, B.; Zhang, J.; Li, W.; Zheng, X.; Lin, H.; Guo, L. Testing biodegradable films as alternatives to plastic films in enhancing cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield under mulched drip irrigation. Soil Tillage Res. 2019, 192, 196–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, L.; Han, Y.; Wang, J.; Xu, J.; Li, Y.; Sun, M.; Zhao, F.; He, C.; Sun, Y.; Wang, Y.; et al. PBAT/PLA humic acid biodegradable film applied on solar greenhouse tomato plants increased lycopene and decreased total acid contents. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 871, 162077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhao, Y.; Mao, X.; Li, S.; Huang, X.; Che, J.; Ma, C. A Review of Plastic Film Mulching on Water, Heat, Nitrogen Balance, and Crop Growth in Farmland in China. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Z.; He, W.; Chen, G.; Yan, C.; Gao, H.; Liu, Q. Dry Direct-Seeded Rice Yield and Water Use Efficiency as Affected by Biodegradable Film Mulching in the Northeastern Region of China. Agriculture 2024, 14, 170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Jia, X.; Olasupo, I.O.; Feng, Q.; Wang, L.; Lu, L.; Xu, J.; Sun, M.; Yu, X.; Han, D.; et al. Effects of biodegradable films on melon quality and substrate environment in solar greenhouse. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 829, 154527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Du, Y.; Long, C.; Deng, X.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, J.; Xu, Y.; Liu, D.; Zeng, Y. Physiological Basis of High Nighttime Temperature-Induced Chalkiness Formation during Early Grain-Filling Stage in Rice (Oryza sativa L.). Agronomy 2023, 13, 1475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ishimaru, T.; Miyazaki, M.; Shigemitsu, T.; Nakata, M.; Kuroda, M.; Kondo, M.; Masumura, T. Effect of high temperature stress during ripening on the accumulation of key storage compounds among Japanese highly palatable rice cultivars. J. Cereal Sci. 2020, 95, 103018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, W.; Yin, T.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, K.; Shen, Y.; Ding, Y.; Tang, S. Effects of High Temperature on Rice Grain Development and Quality Formation Based on Proteomics Comparative Analysis Under Field Warming. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 746180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, C.; Du, Y.; Zeng, M.; Deng, X.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, D.; Zeng, Y. Relationship between Chalkiness and the Structural and Physicochemical Properties of Rice Starch at Different Nighttime Temperatures during the Early Grain-Filling Stage. Foods 2024, 13, 1516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Patindol, J.A.; Siebenmorgen, T.J.; Wang, Y.J. Impact of environmental factors on rice starch structure: A review. Starch—Stärke 2015, 67, 42–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Ge, J.; Xu, K.; Gao, H.; Liu, G.; Wei, H.; Zhang, H. Differences in starch structure, thermal properties, and texture characteristics of rice from main stem and tiller panicles. Food Hydrocoll. 2020, 99, 105341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Li, X.; Zheng, M.; Hu, R.; Dong, J.; Zhou, L.; Liu, W.; Liu, D.; Yang, W. Genes controlling grain chalkiness in rice. Crop J. 2024, 12, 979–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, H.; Liu, Q.; Gong, D.; Liu, H.; Luo, L.; Cui, J.; Qi, H.; Ma, F.; He, W.; Mancl, K.; et al. Biodegradable film mulching reduces the climate cost of saving water without yield penalty in dryland rice production. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2023, 197, 107071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, K.; Min, W.; Flury, M.; Gunina, A.; Lv, J.; Li, Q.; Jiang, R. Impact of long-term conventional and biodegradable film mulching on microplastic abundance, soil structure and organic carbon in a cotton field. Environ. Pollut. 2024, 356, 124367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kong, M.; Huang, M.; Zhang, Z.; Long, J.; Siddique, K.H.M.; Zhang, D. Effects of plastic film mulching on soil microbial carbon metabolic activity and functional diversity at different maize growth stages in cool, semi-arid regions. Front. Microbiol. 2024, 15, 1492149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, M.; Dannenmann, M.; Lin, S.; Saiz, G.; Yan, G.; Yao, Z.; Pelster, D.E.; Tao, H.; Sippel, S.; Tao, Y.; et al. Ground cover rice production systems increase soil carbon and nitrogen stocks at regional scale. Biogeosciences 2015, 12, 4831–4840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.X.; Chang, Q.S.; Guo, Q.S. Different light-quality colored films affect growth, photosynthesis, chloroplast ultrastructure, and triterpene acid accumulation in Glechoma longituba plants. Photosynthetica 2023, 61, 264–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, Z.; Zhao, C.; Zhang, N.; Wang, J.; Li, Z.; Uwiragiye, Y.; Fallah, N.; Crowther, T.W.; Huang, Y.; Xu, Y.; et al. Degradable film mulching increases soil carbon sequestration in major Chinese dryland agroecosystems. Nat. Commun. 2025, 16, 5029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Zhu, K.; Tang, Y.; Feng, S. Rice Cultivation under Film Mulching Can Improve Soil Environment and Be Beneficial for Rice Production in China. Rice Sci. 2024, 31, 545–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, L.; Li, Y.; Zhu, J.; Zhou, Z.; Zhao, W.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, F. Long-term plastic film mulching increased maize yield and water use efficiency. Field Crops Res. 2025, 333, 110105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, J.; Liu, Z.; Lai, H.; Zhao, M.; Zhu, Q.; Zhao, C.; Yang, D.; Li, X. The impacts of soil tillage combined with plastic film management practices on soil quality, carbon footprint, and peanut yield. Eur. J. Agron. 2023, 148, 126881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duan, C.; Chen, J.; Li, J.; Feng, H.; Wu, S.; Meng, Q.; Siddique, K.H.M. Effects of organic amendments and ridge–furrow mulching system on soil properties and economic benefits of wolfberry orchards on the Tibetan Plateau. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 827, 154317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Luo, L.; Wang, Z.; Huang, M.; Hui, X.; Wang, S.; Zhao, Y.; He, H.; Zhang, X.; Diao, C.; Cao, H.; et al. Plastic film mulch increased winter wheat grain yield but reduced its protein content in dryland of northwest China. Field Crops Res. 2018, 218, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, B.S.; Le Gouis, J.; Daniel, D.; Brancourt-Hulmel, M. Optimal numbers of environments to assess slopes of joint regression for grain yield, grain protein yield and grain protein concentration under nitrogen constraint in winter wheat. Field Crops Res. 2009, 113, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]






| Rice Phenological Stages | Treatments | Effective Soil Accumulated Temperature (℃) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2024 | ||||||
| Day | Night | Summation | Day | Night | Summation | ||
| Regreening stage | CK | 175.9 c | 100.8 c | 276.7 c | 119.7 b | 90.4 c | 210.1 c |
| PE | 237.4 ab | 167.5 a | 404.9 a | 170.1 a | 122.6 ab | 292.7 ab | |
| BF45 | 227.5 ab | 153.3 ab | 380.8 ab | 168.4 a | 117.6 ab | 286.0 ab | |
| BF60 | 211.5 b | 142.7 b | 354.2 b | 162.3 a | 114.5 b | 276.8 b | |
| BF80 | 223.2 ab | 157.4 ab | 380.6 ab | 173.7 a | 134.6 ab | 308.3 ab | |
| Tillering stage | CK | 638.1 c | 474.9 c | 1113.0 c | 587.5 b | 521.4 b | 1108.9 d |
| PE | 754.0 a | 605.1 a | 1359.2 a | 736.1 a | 636.1 a | 1372.2 ab | |
| BF45 | 676.7 bc | 538.8 ab | 1215.5 ab | 663.3 a | 580.8 ab | 1244.2 c | |
| BF60 | 676.7 bc | 526.8 b | 1203.5 b | 680.7 a | 601.4 ab | 1282.1 abc | |
| BF80 | 717.1 ab | 568.5 ab | 1285.6 ab | 673.2 a | 587.7 ab | 1260.9 bc | |
| Jointing–booting stage | CK | 403.7 a | 355.3 a | 758.9 a | 421.9 ab | 391.5 ab | 813.4 ab |
| PE | 367.0 ab | 346.9 ab | 714.0 b | 418.2 abc | 386.2 ab | 804.4 b | |
| BF45 | 373.8 ab | 348.4 ab | 722.2 ab | 410.4 bc | 384.3 ab | 794.7 b | |
| BF60 | 369.0 ab | 345.6 ab | 714.6 b | 413.5 bc | 388.3 ab | 801.8 b | |
| BF80 | 359.7 b | 338.4 b | 698.1 b | 401.5 c | 383.2 b | 784.7 b | |
| Heading–flowering stage | CK | 185.2 a | 163.5 a | 348.7 a | 178.3 ab | 163.8 ab | 342.1 ab |
| PE | 160.6 b | 154.4 bc | 315.1 c | 173.0 b | 160.2 b | 333.2 b | |
| BF45 | 172.8 ab | 158.6 ab | 331.4 ab | 173.2 b | 160.9 b | 334.1 b | |
| BF60 | 169.1 ab | 156.8 abc | 325.9 bc | 174.9 ab | 161.7 b | 336.5 b | |
| BF80 | 161.8 b | 151.6 c | 313.4 c | 170.2 b | 160.0 b | 330.1 b | |
| Ripening stage | CK | 447.4 a | 358.6 ab | 806 a | 395.4 ab | 341.3 ab | 736.7 ab |
| PE | 413.5 ab | 371.9 a | 785.4 ab | 385.1 abc | 343 ab | 728.1 abc | |
| BF45 | 395.4 abc | 335 ab | 730.4 abc | 357.7 bc | 318.3 b | 676.0 bc | |
| BF60 | 386.7 abc | 328.5 ab | 715.2 bc | 356.4 bc | 315.4 b | 671.8 bc | |
| BF80 | 370.4 bc | 323.6 b | 694.1 c | 358.0 bc | 322.8 ab | 680.8 bc | |
| Years | Treatments | Leaf Area Index (m2/m2) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tillering Stage | Jointing–Booting Stage | Heading-Flowering Stage | Ripening Stage | ||
| 2023 | CK | 1.31 ± 0.25 b | 1.99 ± 0.36 c | 2.89 ± 0.27 c | 1.59 ± 0.67 c |
| PE | 3.26 ± 0.37 a | 5.92 ± 0.4 a | 6.71 ± 0.35 a | 4.04 ± 0.44 a | |
| BF45 | 2.80 ± 0.13 a | 4.63 ± 0.29 b | 5.06 ± 0.32 b | 2.85 ± 0.52 b | |
| BF60 | 2.76 ± 0.18 a | 4.87 ± 0.19 b | 5.55 ± 0.31 b | 3.38 ± 0.38 ab | |
| BF80 | 3.11 ± 0.16 a | 5.13 ± 0.24 b | 5.94 ± 0.31 b | 3.42 ± 0.50 ab | |
| 2024 | CK | 1.60 ± 0.13 c | 3.15 ± 0.59 c | 3.92 ± 0.44 c | 2.24 ± 0.20 c |
| PE | 2.89 ± 0.23 a | 5.03 ± 0.44 a | 5.90 ± 0.40 a | 3.53 ± 0.31 a | |
| BF45 | 2.38 ± 0.18 b | 4.73 ± 0.38 ab | 5.11 ± 0.40 b | 3.01 ± 0.20 b | |
| BF60 | 2.27 ± 0.23 b | 4.65 ± 0.32 ab | 4.96 ± 0.08 b | 2.89 ± 0.28 b | |
| BF80 | 2.45 ± 0.32 b | 4.89 ± 0.26 ab | 5.18 ± 0.20 b | 3.07 ± 0.21 b | |
| Years | Treatments | Productive Panicles (×104/hm2) | Grains Per Panicle | Grain Filling Percentage (%) | 1000-Grain Weight (g) | Yield (kg/hm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | CK | 264.8 ± 18.1 c | 85.7 ± 3.3 b | 94.8 ± 1.7 b | 26.2 ± 0.4 a | 5485.2 ± 284.1 c |
| BN | 461.6 ± 18.8 a | 100.2 ± 5.1 a | 92.8 ± 1.2 ab | 24.9 ± 1.1 a | 9691.4 ± 915.2 a | |
| BF45 | 357.9 ± 19.0 b | 98.8 ± 4.2 a | 93.2 ± 1.8 ab | 26.0 ± 0.2 a | 8449.8 ± 601.8 b | |
| BF60 | 406.5 ± 45.3 ab | 98.1 ± 9.1 a | 93.1 ± 1.3 ab | 25.7 ± 0.9 a | 8827.2 ± 650.4 ab | |
| BF80 | 438.0 ± 26.8 a | 100.5 ± 8.4 a | 92.8 ± 1.5 ab | 25.2 ± 0.7 a | 9475.4 ± 910.5 ab | |
| 2024 | CK | 231.0 ± 30.8 c | 89.3 ± 6.7 b | 93.2 ± 1.7 a | 26.7 ± 1.2 a | 6893.3 ± 333.2 c |
| BN | 400.3 ± 50.7 a | 103.4 ± 3.8 a | 91.7 ± 1.5 a | 25.9 ± 0.8 a | 9030.7 ± 750.8 a | |
| BF45 | 335.6 ± 24.3 ab | 98.3 ± 5.7 ab | 91.8 ± 1.6 a | 26.0 ± 0.5 a | 8760.1 ± 398.4 ab | |
| BF60 | 328.7 ± 36.1 ab | 97.3 ± 7 ab | 92.0 ± 2.3 a | 26.3 ± 1.3 a | 8604.3 ± 414.3 ab | |
| BF80 | 338.9 ± 16.9 ab | 100.8 ± 3.1 ab | 91.6 ± 1.4 a | 26.2 ± 0.9 a | 8847.7 ± 377.6 ab |
| Treatments | 2023 | 2024 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yield (kg/hm2) | Irrigation Amount (mm) | IWUE (kg/hm2/mm) | Yield (kg/hm2) | Irrigation Amount (mm) | IWUE (kg/hm2/mm) | |
| CK | 5485.2 ± 284.1 c | 680 | 8.1 ± 0.4 c | 6893.3 ± 333.2 b | 665 | 10.4 ± 0.5 c |
| PE | 9691.4 ± 915.2 a | 535 | 18.1 ± 1.7 a | 9030.7 ± 750.8 a | 497 | 18.2 ± 1.5 a |
| BF45 | 8449.8 ± 601.8 b | 594 | 14.2 ± 1.0 b | 8760.1 ± 398.4 a | 547 | 16.0 ± 0.7 b |
| BF60 | 8827.2 ± 650.4 ab | 589 | 15.0 ± 1.1 b | 8604.3 ± 414.3 a | 560 | 15.4 ± 0.7 b |
| BF80 | 9475.4 ± 910.5 ab | 580 | 16.3 ± 1.6 ab | 8847.7 ± 377.6 a | 544 | 16.3 ± 0.7 ab |
| Years | Treatments | Milling Quality | Appearance Quality | Nutritional Quality | Eating Quality | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milled Rice Rate (%) | Head Rice Rate (%) | Chalky Grain Percentage (%) | Chalkiness Degree (%) | Protein Content (%) | Starch Content (%) | Amylose Content (%) | Sensory Evaluation Score | ||
| 2023 | CK | 77.4 ± 0.4 a | 65.4 ± 2.2 a | 0.71 ± 0.11 a | 1.08 ± 0.42 a | 7.3 ± 0.2 a | 79.1 ± 0.2 a | 18.5 ± 0.3 a | 71.8 ± 1.4 a |
| PE | 77.5 ± 0.2 a | 66.0 ± 3.1 a | 0.45 ± 0.20 ab | 0.68 ± 0.09 a | 7.2 ± 0.1 a | 79.2 ± 0.5 a | 18.4 ± 0.3 a | 72.7 ± 1.6 a | |
| BF45 | 77.5 ± 0.3 a | 66.4 ± 2.1 a | 0.39 ± 0.03 ab | 0.73 ± 0.26 a | 7.2 ± 0.1 a | 79.3 ± 0.4 a | 18.3 ± 0.2 a | 71.0 ± 2.4 a | |
| BF60 | 77.1 ± 0.5 a | 66.4 ± 1.0 a | 0.35 ± 0.03 b | 0.84 ± 0.13 a | 7.1 ± 0.1 a | 79.5 ± 0.3 a | 18.5 ± 0.1 a | 73.4 ± 3.3 a | |
| BF80 | 77.7 ± 0.7 a | 67.4 ± 2.1 a | 0.65 ± 0.10 ab | 0.88 ± 0.17 a | 7.2 ± 0.2 a | 79.3 ± 0.5 a | 18.4 ± 0.6 a | 73.2 ± 4.3 a | |
| 2024 | CK | 75.4 ± 0.5 a | 65.8 ± 0.5 a | 1.12 ± 0.24 a | 2.06 ± 0.47 a | 6.9 ± 0.1 a | 80.0 ± 0.6 b | 17.4 ± 0.3 a | 68.3 ± 1.8 a |
| PE | 76.3 ± 0.7 a | 65.9 ± 0.5 a | 0.61 ± 0.4 b | 1.76 ± 0.42 a | 7.0 ± 0.1 a | 80.2 ± 0.2 ab | 17.4 ± 0.6 a | 70.7 ± 0.8 a | |
| BF45 | 76.9 ± 0.2 a | 66.3 ± 0.9 a | 0.75 ± 0.31 ab | 2.04 ± 0.64 a | 7.0 ± 0.1 a | 80.4 ± 0.2 ab | 17.5 ± 0.6 a | 71.8 ± 4.6 a | |
| BF60 | 75.7 ± 1.8 a | 65.8 ± 1.5 a | 0.69 ± 0.27 ab | 1.52 ± 0.35 a | 6.9 ± 0.1 a | 80.6 ± 0.2 a | 17.4 ± 0.2 a | 68.7 ± 4.1 a | |
| BF80 | 76.9 ± 0.6 a | 66.2 ± 1.0 a | 1.02 ± 0.36 ab | 2.0 ± 0.57 a | 7.1 ± 0.2 a | 80.3 ± 0.4 ab | 17.8 ± 0.6 a | 71.0 ± 3.8 a | |
| Years | Treatments | Org-N (g/kg) | SOC (g/kg) | TN (g/kg) | TC (g/kg) | C/N |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | CK | 1.4 ± 0.03 a | 15.4 ± 0.20 a | 1.6 ± 0.02 a | 18.6 ± 0.06 a | 11.9 ± 0.16 a |
| PE | 1.4 ± 0.03 a | 15.7 ± 0.26 a | 1.5 ± 0.04 a | 18.3 ± 0.70 a | 12.0 ± 0.14 a | |
| BF45 | 1.4 ± 0.05 a | 16.1 ± 0.56 a | 1.5 ± 0.06 a | 18.8 ± 0.35 a | 12.2 ± 0.29 a | |
| BF60 | 1.4 ± 0.03 a | 16.1 ± 0.53 a | 1.6 ± 0.03 a | 18.7 ± 0.33 a | 12.0 ± 0.07 a | |
| BF80 | 1.5 ± 0.03 a | 16.2 ± 0.26 a | 1.6 ± 0.02 a | 18.4 ± 0.19 a | 11.7 ± 0.15 a | |
| 2024 | CK | 1.4 ± 0.03 a | 16.3 ± 0.21 a | 1.5 ± 0.02 a | 17.3 ± 0.17 a | 11.2 ± 0.12 a |
| PE | 1.4 ± 0.03 a | 16.1 ± 0.18 a | 1.5 ± 0.02 a | 16.7 ± 1.16 a | 11.3 ± 0.78 a | |
| BF45 | 1.4 ± 0.05 a | 16.2 ± 0.58 a | 1.5 ± 0.05 a | 16.8 ± 0.35 a | 11.6 ± 0.54 a | |
| BF60 | 1.4 ± 0.03 a | 16.1 ± 0.19 a | 1.4 ± 0.03 a | 17.0 ± 0.47 a | 11.8 ± 0.16 a | |
| BF80 | 1.4 ± 0.04 a | 16.1 ± 0.62 a | 1.4 ± 0.04 a | 17.0 ± 0.28 a | 11.8 ± 0.49 a |
| Years | Treatments | Org-N (g/kg) | SOC (g/kg) | TN (g/kg) | TC (g/kg) | C/N |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | CK | 2.7 ± 0.08 a | 29.7 ± 0.26 a | 3.1 ± 0.05 ab | 36.8 ± 0.31 a | 12.0 ± 0.28 a |
| PE | 2.7 ± 0.15 a | 30.4 ± 0.32 a | 2.9 ± 0.11 ab | 35.6 ± 1.76 abc | 12.1 ± 0.16 a | |
| BF45 | 2.7 ± 0.11 a | 30.6 ± 0.89 a | 3.0 ± 0.13 ac | 36.1 ± 1.05 ab | 12.1 ± 0.27 a | |
| BF60 | 2.7 ± 0.03 a | 30.7 ± 0.52 a | 3.0 ± 0.03 abc | 36.5 ± 0.81 a | 12.0 ± 0.20 a | |
| BF80 | 2.8 ± 0.02 a | 31.3 ± 0.74 a | 3.1 ± 0.04 a | 36.7 ± 0.56 a | 11.8 ± 0.16 a | |
| 2024 | CK | 2.6 ± 0.10 a | 29.5 ± 1.36 a | 3.0 ± 0.02 abc | 17.3 ± 0.17 a | 11.2 ± 0.12 a |
| PE | 2.6 ± 0.02 a | 31.5 ± 1.89 a | 2.9 ± 0.05 bcd | 16.7 ± 1.16 a | 11.3 ± 0.78 a | |
| BF45 | 2.6 ± 0.10 a | 30.8 ± 1.02 a | 2.8 ± 0.11 d | 16.8 ± 0.35 a | 11.6 ± 0.54 a | |
| BF60 | 2.7 ± 0.09 a | 31.3 ± 0.94 a | 2.9 ± 0.12 cd | 17.0 ± 0.47 a | 11.8 ± 0.16 a | |
| BF80 | 2.7 ± 1.31 a | 31.7 ± 2.22 a | 2.9 ± 0.22 cd | 17.0 ± 0.28 a | 11.8 ± 0.49 a |
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. |
© 2026 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.
Share and Cite
Zhang, Y.; Li, X.; Zhu, K.; Feng, S.; Dou, C.; Chen, X.; Huang, Y.; Wang, B.; Sun, Y.; Wang, F.; et al. Optimizing Biodegradable Films with Varying Induction Periods to Enhance Rice Growth and Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics. Plants 2026, 15, 358. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants15030358
Zhang Y, Li X, Zhu K, Feng S, Dou C, Chen X, Huang Y, Wang B, Sun Y, Wang F, et al. Optimizing Biodegradable Films with Varying Induction Periods to Enhance Rice Growth and Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics. Plants. 2026; 15(3):358. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants15030358
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhang, Youliang, Xiaoming Li, Kaican Zhu, Shaoyuan Feng, Chaoying Dou, Xiaoping Chen, Yan Huang, Bai Wang, Yanling Sun, Fengxin Wang, and et al. 2026. "Optimizing Biodegradable Films with Varying Induction Periods to Enhance Rice Growth and Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics" Plants 15, no. 3: 358. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants15030358
APA StyleZhang, Y., Li, X., Zhu, K., Feng, S., Dou, C., Chen, X., Huang, Y., Wang, B., Sun, Y., Wang, F., Geng, X., & Wei, H. (2026). Optimizing Biodegradable Films with Varying Induction Periods to Enhance Rice Growth and Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics. Plants, 15(3), 358. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants15030358

