Skip to main content
Log in

Methane Emission from Irrigated and Intensively Managed Rice Fields in Central Luzon (Philippines)

  • Published:
Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Methane (CH4) emissions were measured with an automated system in Central Luzon, the major rice producing area of the Philippines. Emission records covered nine consecutive seasons from 1994 to 1998 and showed a distinct seasonal pattern: an early flush of CH4 before transplanting, an increasing trend in emission rates reaching maximum toward grain ripening, and a second flush after water is withdrawn prior to harvesting. The local practice of crop management, which consists of continuous flooding and urea application, resulted in 79–184 mg CH4 m−2 d−1 in the dry season (DS) and 269–503 mg CH4 m−2 d−1 in the wet season (WS). The higher emission in the WS may be attributed to more labile carbon accumulation during the dry fallow period before the WS cropping as shown by higher % organic C. Incorporation of sulfate into the soil reduced CH4 emission rates. The use of ammonium sulfate as N fertilizer in place of urea resulted in a 25–36% reduction in CH4 emissions. Phosphogypsum reduced CH4 emissions by 72% when applied in combination with urea fertilizer. Midseason drainage reduced CH4 emission by 43%, which can be explained by the influx of oxygen into the soil. The practice of direct seeding instead of transplanting resulted in a 16–54% reduction in CH4 emission, but the mechanisms for the reducing effect are not clear. Addition of rice straw compost increased CH4 emission by only 23–30% as compared with the 162–250% increase in emissions with the use of fresh rice straw. Chicken manure combined with urea did not increase CH4 emission. Fresh rice straw has wider C/N (25 to 45) while rice straw compost has C/N = 6 to 10 and chicken manure has C/N = 5 to 8. Modifications in inorganic and organic fertilizer management and water regime did not adversely affect grain yield and are therefore potential mitigation options. Direct seeding has a lower yield potential than transplanting but is getting increasingly popular among farmers due to labor savings. Combined with a package of technologies, CH4 emission can best be reduced by (1) the practice of midseason drainage instead of continuous flooding, (2) the use of sulfate-containing fertilizers such as ammonium sulfate and phosphogypsum combined with urea; (3) direct seeding crop establishment; and (4) use of low C/N organic fertilizer such as chicken manure and rice straw compost.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberto MCR, Neue HU, Capati AB, Castro RU, Bernardo LM, Aduna JB & Lantin R (1996) Effect of different straw management practices on soil fertility, rice yields and the environment. In: Attanandana T, Kheoruenromne I, Pongsakul P & Vearasilp T (eds). Proceedings of the International Symposium on Maximizing Sustainable Rice Yields Through Improved Soil and Environmental Management Vol. 2; 11-17 November 1996; Khon Kaen, Thailand. pp 721–731

  • Alcordo IS & JE Rechcigl (1993) Phosphogypsum in Agriculture: A Review. Adv Agron 49:55–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Alcordo IS & Rechcigl JE (1995) Phosphogypsum and other by-product gypsums. In: Rechcigl JE (ed) Soil Amendments and Environmental QualityAgriculture and Environment Series. New York: CRC Press Inc. (Lewis Publishers) pp 365–425

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronson KF (1994) Nitrous oxide emissions from flooded rice. Abstracts Climate Change and Rice International Symposium, 14–18 March 1994, IRRI Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines

  • Bronson KF, Neue HU, Singh U & Abao EB Jr (1997a) Automated chamber measurements of methane and nitrous oxide flux in a flooded rice soil. I. Residue, nitrogen and water management. Soil Sci Soc Am J 61(3):981–987

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronson KF, Singh U & Neue HU (1997b) Automated chamber measurements of methane and nitrous oxide flux in a flooded rice soil. II. Fallow period emission. Soil Sci Soc Am J 61(3):988–993

    Google Scholar 

  • Connel WE & Patrick WH Jr (1968) Reduction in soil: Effects of redox potential and pH. Science 159:86–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connel WE & Patrick WH Jr (1969) Reduction of sulfate to sulfide in waterlogged soil. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 33:711–715

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad R & Rothfuss F (1991) Methane oxidation in the soil surface layer of a flooded rice field and the effect of ammonium. Biol Fertil Soils 12:28–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Delwiche CC & Cicerone RJ (1993) Factors affecting methane production under rice. Global Biogeochem Cycles 7:143–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Denier van der Gon HAC & Neue HU (1994) Impact of gypsum application on the methane emission from wetland rice field. Global Biogeochem Cycles 8:127–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Freney JR, Jacq VA & Baldensperger JF (1982) The significance of the biological sulfur cycle in rice production. In: Dommergues YR & Diem HC (eds). Microbiology of Tropical Soils and Plant Productivity. Martinus Nijhoff Publ, The Hague. pp 271–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Holzapfel-Pschorn A & Seiler W (1986) Methane emission during a cultivation period from an Italian rice paddy. J. Geophys Res 91(D):11803–11814

    Google Scholar 

  • Hori K, Inubushi K, Matsumoto S & Wada H (1993) Competition for hydrogen between methane formation and sulfate reduction in a paddy soil. Jpn J Soil Sci Plant Nutri 64:363–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang SH (1991) Production and emission of methane from experimental paddy soils. Agricultural Improvement Station, Taiwan Provincial Taichung District, Changhua, Taiwan R.O.C. 60 p

    Google Scholar 

  • IAEA-TECDOC-674 (1993) Manual on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture. A joint undertaking by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency. 91 p

  • Lindau CW, De Laune RD, Patrick WH Jr & Bollich PK (1990) Fertilizer effects on dinitrogen, nitrous oxide, and methane emissions from lowland rice. Soil Sci Soc Am J 54:1789–1794

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindau CW, Bollich PK, De Laune RD, Patrick WH Jr & Lau VJ (1991) Effect of urea fertilizer and environmental factors on methane emissions from a Louisiana rice field. Plant Soil 136:195–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Minami K (1994) Methane from rice production. Fert Res 37:167–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsui S, Aso S & Kumazawa K (1951) Dynamic studies on the nutrient uptake by crop plants. I. The nutrient uptake of roots as influenced by hydrogen sulfide. J Sci Soil Manure Jpn 22:324–328

    Google Scholar 

  • Neue HU (1993) Methane emission from rice fields. Bioscience 43:466–474

    Google Scholar 

  • Neue HU, Lantin RS, Wassmann R, Aduna JB, Alberto MCR & Andales JF (1994) Methane emission from rice soils of the Philippines. In Minami K, Mosier A & Sass RL (eds) CH4 and N2O: Global Emissions and Controls from Rice Fields and Other Agricultural and Industrial Sources, Tsukuba, Japan: NIAES Series 2. pp 55–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Neue HU & Sass RL (1994) Trace gas emissions from rice fields. In: Prinn RG (ed). Global Atmospheric-Biospheric Chemistry, Environmental Science Research Vol. 48. New York: Plenum Press. pp 119–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponnamperuma FN (1972) The chemistry of submerged soils. Adv Agron 24:29–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Saenjan P & Wada H (1990) Effects of salts on methane formation and sulfate reduction in submerged soil. Trans 14th Int Congr Soil Sci, Kyoto Japan, 2(II):244–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Sass, RL, Fisher FM & Harcombe PA (1991a) Mitigation of methane emissions from rice fields: Possible adverse effects of incorporated rice straw. Global Biogeochem Cycles 5:275–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Sass RL, Fischer FM, Harcombe PA & Turner FT (1991b) Methane production and emission in a Texas rice field. Global Biogeochem Cycles 4:47–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Sass RL, Fisher FM, Wang YB, Turner FT & Lund MF (1992) Methane emission from rice fields: The effect of floodwater management. Global Biogeochem Cycles 6(3):249–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Takai Y (1970) The mechanism of methane fermentation in flooded paddy soil. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 16:238–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel DD, Keltjens JT & Vander Drift C (1988) Biochemistry of methane production. In: Zehnder AJB (ed) Biology of Anaerobic Microorganisms. New York: Wiley. pp 707–770

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Z (1986) Rice based systems in subtropical China, p. 195–206. In: Juo ASR Lowe JA (eds) Wetlands and rice in Subsahara Africa. International Institute for Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria

  • Wang, ZP, De Laune RD, Lindau CW & Patrick WH Jr (1993) Methane production from anaerobic soil amended with rice straw and nitrogen fertilizers. Fert Res 33:115–1212

    Google Scholar 

  • Wassmann R, Neue HU, Lantin RS, Buendia LV & Rennenberg H (2000) Characterization of methane emissions from rice fields in Asia. 2. Comparison among field sites in five countries. Nutr Cycling Agroecosyst (this issue)

  • Yagi K & Minami K (1990) Effect of organic matter application on methane emission from some Japanese paddy fields. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 36(4):599–610

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Corton, T., Bajita, J., Grospe, F. et al. Methane Emission from Irrigated and Intensively Managed Rice Fields in Central Luzon (Philippines). Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 58, 37–53 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009826131741

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009826131741

Navigation