Soil Physical Stresses Beyond the Dynamic Least Limiting Water Range Determine Crop Yields in Wheat-Maize System in a Vertisol

Yuekai Wang,Zhongbin Zhang,Zichun Guo,Yue Zhang,Ping Zhang,Xun Xiao,Fengmin Li,Xinhua Peng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2024.109396
IF: 5.8
2024-01-01
Field Crops Research
Abstract:Context or problem: Least limiting water range (LLWR) serves as a valuable indicator for assessing the coupled multiple physical constraints for crop growth, like soil available water, soil aeration and soil strength. However, the LLWR exhibited high sensitivity to soil physical properties, such as soil moisture (theta(v)) and soil bulk density (rho(b)), revealing complicated dynamics in the tilled Vertisols with high shrink-swelling capacity. The impact of soil physical stresses on crops resulting from soil theta(v) beyond the LLWR limits also remains unclear. Objective or research question: The objectives were to characterize the dynamics of LLWR under different tillage practices in the field, and to quantify the associated soil physical stresses on crops throughout their growing seasons. Methods: A five-year field experiment, consisting of three tillage treatments: no tillage (NT), rotary tillage (RT), and deep ploughing (DP), was conducted in a Vertisol under a wheat-maize rotation system. The dynamics of soil theta(v) were continuously monitored, and the dynamics of soil p(b) and LLWR were determined by using the established rho(b) predicting equations and the pedotransfer functions of LLWR. A new indicator, soil physical stress percentage (PSP), which quantifies the time percentage of soil theta(v) falling outside the four limits of LLWR (theta(FC), theta(WP), theta(AFP)=10% , theta(PR)=3 MPa1), was proposed to determine the specific soil physical stresses on wheat and maize yield. Results: The dynamics of LLWR were well predicted combining the long-term monitored theta(v) and p(b) dynamics over 2017-2022 (R-2 0.741; RMSE 0.084 cm(3) cm(-3)). The LLWR in the 0-10 cm layer was limited by water holding capacity (theta(FC) and theta(WP)) in the RT and DP treatment, showing larger values than that in the NT treatment (limited by theta(AFP)=10% and theta(WP)). In the 10-20 cm layer, LLWR was unavailable in the compacted NT and RT treatments due to the high soil p(b), whereas DP treatment exhibited a larger LLWR with risks of soil aeration and strength stresses (theta(AFP)=10% and theta(PR)=3 MPa ). Soil theta(v) fluctuated within and outside the LLWR, indicating varying soil physical stress over the seasons. In the rainless dry wheat season, wheat yield was significantly limited by soil strength stress (SSP, theta(v)< theta(PR=3 MPa)) during the emergence to anthesis stages (r(ssp) = - 0.614 ** similar to - 0.826 **) . While in the wet and rainy maize season, maize yield was negatively correlated with soil aeration stress (ASP; theta(v) > theta(AFP)=10% ; r(ASP) = - 0.579 ** similar to - 0.631 ** ) from jointing to grouting stages. Considering the coupled dynamics in soil O v and limits of LLWR, the proper soil physical condition that generates no physical stress on crops was to keep the p b below 1.55-1.62 g cm(-3) and the theta(v) ranging in 0.269-0.388 cm(3) cm(-3). Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that the PSP, especially the sub-indicators ASP and SSP, represented as a superior indicator compared to the magnitude of LLWR for assessing the impact of soil physical stress on crop growth in the Vertisol. The wheat was restricted by soil drought and strength stress before anthesis, while the maize was susceptible to soil aeration stress during the jointing to grouting stage.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?