ارزیابی چرخه حیات تولید گندم آبی تحت اثر مقادیر و تقسیط نیتروژن در منطقه بوشهر
محورهای موضوعی :
اکوفیزیولوژی گیاهان زراعی
مرتضی سیاوشی
1
(
عضو هیأت علمی، بخش علوم کشاورزی، دانشگاه پیام‌نور، تهران، ایران
)
سلمان دستان
2
(
پژوهشگر پسادکتری، پژوهشگاه بیوتکنولوژی کشاورزی ایران، کرج، ایران
)
تاریخ دریافت : 1397/11/27
تاریخ پذیرش : 1398/07/07
تاریخ انتشار : 1398/09/20
کلید واژه:
انتشار فلزات سنگین,
پتانسیل گرمایش جهانی,
تقاضای اکسرژی تجمعی,
ردپای بوم‌شناختی و یوتریفیکاسیون,
چکیده مقاله :
ارزیابی چرخه حیات یک روش مناسب برای بررسی اثرات محیط‌زیستی یک محصول در کل چرخه تولید آن است. در این پژوهش اثر مقادیر و تقسیط نیتروژن در چرخه حیات تولید گندم آبی در استان بوشهر طی سال زراعی 97-1396 مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفت. این پژوهش به صورت کرت‌های خرد شده در قالب طرح پایه بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با چهار تکرار اجرا شد. کود نیتروژن در چهار سطح 70، 140، 210 و 280 کیلوگرم در هکتار از منبع اوره به‌عنوان عامل اصلی و تقسیط مصرف آن در مراحل کاشت، شروع پنجه‌دهی، شروع ساقه‌دهی و آبستنی به‌عنوان عامل فرعی در نظر گرفته شدند. نتایج نشان داد که با افزایش مصرف نیتروژن، شاخص‌های رده اثر تقاضای انرژی تجمعی، تقاضای اکسرژی تجمعی، اسیدی شدن، یوتریفیکاسیون و بدبویی هوا کاهش یافتند. میانگین ردپای بوم‌شناختی برابر 87/1125 متر مربع در سال بوده که بالاترین اثر متعلق به انتشار CO2 بود. میانگین پتانسیل گرمایش جهانی طی دوره 20 و 500 ساله برابر 401 و 384 کیلوگرم معادل CO2 بود. با افزایش مصرف نیتروژن، تمامی آلاینده‌های انتشار یافته به آب و هوا کاهش یافتند. با مقایسه گروهی بین مقادیر نیتروژن در سطوح تقسیط می‌توان بیان کرد علت اصلی تغییرات میزان آلاینده‌ها، بالاتر بودن مقدار خروجی (عملکرد) در مقابل ورودی‌ها بود. در واقع، تقسیط نیتروژن در چهار مرحله تعیین کننده رشدی، منجر به حداکثر استفاده گیاه شده که نتیجه آن نیز افزایش عملکرد و کاهش انتشار آلاینده‌ها در واحد سطح بود. همچنین، کاهش انتشار آلاینده‌ها با افزایش مقدار نیتروزن می‌تواند به‌دلیل افزایش عملکرد باشد.
چکیده انگلیسی:
Life cycle assessment is an appropriate method to study the environmental impacts of producing a crop plant throughout its production cycle. This research was conducted with the aim of evaluating the life cycle of irrigated wheat production under nitrogen amounts and splitting in Bushehr province during 2017-18The as split plots based on a randomized complete blocks design with four replications. Four nitrogen rates including 70, 140, 210 and 280 kg urea ha-1 was considered as main plots and three nitrogen splitting in basal, beginning of tillering, stem elongation and booting stages was chosen as sub plot.The results demonstrated that with increase of nitrogen application an amount of cumulative energy demand, cumulative energy demand, acidification, eutrophiction and malodorous air were decreased. The average amount of ecological footprint was 1125.87 m2 per year which CO2 emissions had shown the highest effect on the ecological footprint. The average amount of global warming potential (GWP) was 20a and GWP 500a were 400.53 and 384.30 kg CO2 eq, respectively. All pollutants released into the air and the water experienced a decreasing trend with increasing nitrogen rate. By group comparing between different levels of nitrogen at splitting levels, it can be stated that the main cause of variations in the amount of pollutants was the higher output (yield) compared to inputs. Indeed, nitrogen application in four developmental stages has resulted in maximum plant use, resulting in increased yield and emission reduction per unit area. Therefore, reducing the emission of pollutants by increasing nitrogen consumption can be due to yield increasing.
منابع و مأخذ:
· Bare, J. 2011. TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy. pp. 1-10.
· Bare, J.C., N.A. Norris, D.W. Pennington, and T. Mc Kone. 2003. TRACI: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 6: 49-78.
· Brentrup, F., J. Kusters, H. Kuhlmann, and J. Lammel. 2004a. Environmental impact assessment of agricultural production systems using the life cycle assessment methodology: I. Theoretical concept of a LCA method tailored a crop production. European Journal of Agronomy. 20(3): 247-264.
· Brentrup, F., J. Kusters, J. Lammel, P. Barraclough, and H. Kuhlmann. 2004b. Environmental impact assessment of agricultural production systems using the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology: II. The application to N fertilizer use in winter wheat production systems. European Journal of Agronomy. 20(3): 265-279.
· Canakci, M., M. Topakci, I. Akinci, and A. Ozmerzi. 2005. Energy use pattern of some field crops and vegetable production: case study for Antalya region, Turkey. Energy Conversion and Management. 46: 655-666.
· Cassman, K.G., A. Dobermann, D.T. Walters, and Y. Yang. 2003. Meeting cereal demand while protecting natural resources and improving environmental quality. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 28: 315-358.
· Charles, R., O. Jolliet, G. Gaillard, and D. Pellet. 2006. Environmental analysis of intensity level in wheat crop production using life cycle assessment. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 113(1/4): 216-225.
· Dastan, S., A. Soltani, G. Noormohamadi, and H. Madani. 2015a. CO2 emission and global warming potential (GWP) of energy consumption in paddy field production systems. Journal of Agroecology. 6(4): 823-835. (In Persian)
· Dastan, S., A. Soltani, G. Noormohamadi, and H. Madani. 2016b. Estimation of the carbon footprint and global warming potential in rice production systems. Journal of Environmental Sciences. 14(1): 19-22. (In Persian).
· Dastan, S., B. Ghareyazie, A. Soltani, and M. Omidi. 2016a. The life cycle assessment (LCA) of rice in conventional, intensive and conservation systems. 2nd International and 14th National Iranian Crop Science Congress. Aug. 30-Sep. 1. University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran. (In Persian)
· Dastan, S., B. Ghareyazie, E. Mortazavi, M. Mohsenpour, and S. Abdollahi. 2017. The environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of transgenic and non-transgenic rice cultivars. 2nd International and 10th National Biotechnology Congress of Islamic Republic of Iran. Aug. 29-31. Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Karaj, Iran. (In Persian)
· Dastan, S., G. Noormohamadi, H. Madani, and A. Soltani. 2015b. Analysis of energy indices in rice production systems in the Neka region. Journal of Environmental Sciences. 13(1): 53-66. (In Persian).
· Dubey, A., and R. Lal. 2009. Carbon footprint and sustainability of agriculture production systems in Panjab, India, and Ohio, USA. Journal of Crop Improvement. 23: 332-350.
· Engstrom, R., A. Wadeskog, and G. Finnveden. 2009. Environmental assessment of Swedish agriculture. Ecological Economics. 60: 550-563.
· Hillier, J., C. Hawes, G. Squire, A. Hilton, and S. Wale. 2009. The carbon footprint of food crop production. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 7: 107-118.
· IPCC. 2007. Intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC). Climate change. Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. In: Parry, M.L., O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden, and C.E. Hanson, editors. Contribution of Working Group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 976 p.
· Iriarte, A., J. Rieradevall, and J. Gabarrell. 2010. Life cycle assessment of sunflower and rapeseed as energy crops under Chilean condition. Journal of Cleaner Production. 18: 336-345.
· Koga, N. 2008. An energy balance under a conventional crop rotation system in northern Japan: Perspectives on fuel ethanol production from sugar beet. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 125: 101-110.
· Lal, R. 2004. Carbon emissions from farm operations. Environment International. 30: 981-990.
· Malmuti, M., J.S. West, J. Watts, P. Gladders, and B.D.L. Fitt. 2009. Controlling crop disease contributes to both food security and climate change mitigation. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability. 7(3): 189-202.
· Maraseni, T.N., G. Cockfield, and A. Apan. 2007. A comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from inputs into farm enterprises in Southeast Queensland, Australia. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A. 42: 11-19.
· Meisterling, K., C. Samaras, and V. Schweizer. 2009. Decisions to reduce greenhouse gases from agriculture and product transport: LCA case study of organic and conventional wheat. Journal of Cleaner Production. 17: 222-230.
· Mirhaji, H., M. Khojastehpour, and M.H. Abbaspour-Fard. 2013. Environmental impact study of wheat productionin in Marvdasht area of Iran. Journal of Naural Environment. 66(2): 223-232.
· Nemecek, T., and T. Kagi. 2007. Life cycle inventories of Swiss and European agricultural production systems. Final report Eco invent V2.0 NO. 15a. Agroscope Reckenholz- Taenikon Research Station ARTM, Swiss centre for life cycle inventories, Zurich and Dubendorf, CH.
· Pathak, H., and R. Wassmann. 2007. Introducing greenhouse gas mitigation as a development objective in rice-based agriculture: I. Generation of technical coefficients. Agricultral Systems. 94: 807-825.
· Paustian, K., B. Babcock, C. Kling, and J. Hatfield. 2004. Agricultural mitigation of greenhouse gases: science and policy options. Council on Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST) report. R 141: 120 p.
· Rebitzer, G., T. Ekvall, R. Frischknecht, D. Hunkeler, G. Norris, T. Rydberg, W. Schmidt, S. Suh, B. P. Weidema, and D. W. Pennington. 2004. Life cycle assessment. Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications. Environment International. 30: 701-720.
· Robertson, G.P., E.A. Paul, and R.R. Harwood. 2000. Greenhouse gases in intensive agriculture: contributions of individual gases to the radiative forcing of the atmosphere. Science. 289: 1922-1925.
· Roy, P., D. Nei, T. Orikasa, Q. Xu, H. Okadome, N. Nakamura, and T. Shiina. 2009. A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. Journal of Food Engineering. 90: 1-10.
· SimaPro. 2011. Software and database manual. Pré Consultants BV, Amersfoort, the Netherlands.
· Smith, P., D. Martino, Z. Cai, D. Gwary, H. Janzen, P. Kumar, B. Mc Carl, S. Ogle, F. O’Mara, C. Rice, B. Scholes, O. Sirotenko, M. Howden, T. Mc Allister, G. Pan, V. Romanenkov, U. Schneider, S. Towprayoon, M. Wattenbach, and J. Smith. 2008. Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B B. 363: 789-813.
· Soltani, A., M.H. Rajabi, E. Zeinali, and E. Soltani. 2013. Energy inputs and greenhouse gases emissions in wheat production in Gorgan, Iran. Energy. 50: 54-61.
· Steen Jensen, E., M.B. Peoples, R.M. Boddey, P.M. Greshoff, H. Hauggaard-Neilsen, B.J.R. Alves, and M.J. Morrison. 2011. Legumes for mitigation of climate change and the provision of feedstock for biofuels and biorefineries. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 32(2): 329-364.
· Tzilivakis, J., D.J. Warner, M. May, K.A. Lewis, and K. Jaggard. 2005. An assessment of the energy inputs and greenhouse gas emissions in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) production in the UK. Agricultural Systems. 85: 101-119.
· van Groenigen, J.W., G.L. Velthof, O. Oenema, K.J. van Groenigen, and C. van Kessel. 2010. Towards an agronomic assessment of N2O emissions: a case study for arable crops. European Journal of Soil Science. 61: 903-913.
· Wang, M., W. Wu, W. Liu, and Y. Bao. 2007. Life cycle assessment of the winter wheat-summer maize production system on the North China plain. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. 14(4): 400-407.
· West, T.O., and W.M. Post. 2002. Soil organic carbon sequestration rates by tillage and crop rotation: a global data analysis. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 66: 1930-1946.
· Wood, S., and A. Cowie. 2004. A review of greenhouse gas emission factors for fertilizer production. Research and Development Division, State Forests of New South Wales. Cooperative Research Center for Greenhouse Accounting. The original study was: T.O. West and G. Marland. A Synthesis of Carbon Sequestration, Carbon Emissions and Net Carbon Flux in Agriculture: Comparing Tillage Practices in the United States. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 91(1-3): 217-232.
_||_
