Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 23, pp 22744–22753 | Cite as

Integrated rice-duck farming decreases global warming potential and increases net ecosystem economic budget in central China

  • Feng Sheng
  • Cou-gui CaoEmail author
  • Cheng-fang LiEmail author
Research Article


Over the past decades, many attempts have been made to assess the effects of integrated rice-duck farming on greenhouse gas emissions, use efficient of energy, soil fertility, and economic significance. However, very few studies have been focused on the effects of the farming on net ecosystem economic budget (NEEB). Here, a 2-year field experiment was conducted to comprehensively investigate the effects of ducks raised in paddy fields on CH4 and N2O emissions, global warming potential (GWP), rice grain yield, and NEEB in central China. The experiment included two treatments: integrated rice-duck farming (RD) and conventional rice farming (R). The introduction of ducks into the paddy fields markedly increased the rice grain yield due to enhanced tiller number and root bleeding rate. RD treatment significantly elevated the N2O emissions (p < 0.05) but decreased CH4 emissions (p < 0.05) during rice growing seasons compared with R treatment. Analysis of GWP based on CH4 and N2O emissions showed that compared with R treatment, RD treatment significantly decreased the GWP by 28.1 and 28.0% and reduced the greenhouse gas intensity by 30.6 and 29.8% in 2009 and 2010, respectively. In addition, RD treatment increased NEEB by 40.8 and 39.7% respectively in 2009 and 2010 relative to R treatment. Taken together, our results suggest that the integrated rice-duck farming system is an effective strategy to optimize the economic and environmental benefits of paddy fields in central China.


CH4 Global warming potential Greenhouse gas intensity Integrated rice-duck farming N2



We sincerely thank Dr. Philippe Garrigues, the Editor, and anonymous referees for their constructive suggestions and critical comments on the original manuscript.

Funding information

This work is funded by the National Key Research and Development Project of China (2017YFD0301403), Natural Science Foundation of China (31471454, 31671637, 31670447), and Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province (2016CFA017).

Supplementary material

11356_2018_2380_MOESM1_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Table S1 (DOCX 13 kb)
11356_2018_2380_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (26 kb)
ESM 1 (XLSX 25 kb)


  1. Barnard R, Leadley PW, Hungate BA (2005) Global change, nitrification, and denitrification: a review. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 19:GB1007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bollmann A, Conrad R (1998) Influence of O2 availability on NO and N2O release by nitrification and denitrification in soils. Glob Chang Biol 4:387–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Booth MS, Stark JM, Rastetter E (2005) Controls on nitrogen cycling in terrestrial cultivation systems: a synthetic analysis of literature data. Ecol Monogr 75:139–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cui PY, Fan FL, Yin C, Song AL, Huang PR, Tang YL, Zhu P, Peng C, Li TQ, Wakelin SA (2016) Long-term organic and inorganic fertilization alters temperature sensitivity of potential N2O emissions and associated microbes. Soil Biol Biochem 93:131–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Das S, Adhya TK (2014) Effect of combine application of organic manure and inorganic fertilizer on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from a tropical flooded soil planted to rice. Geoderma 213:185–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hossain ST, Sugimoto H, Ahmed GJU, Islam MR (2005) Effect of integrated rice-duck farming on rice yield, farm productivity, and rice-provisioning ability of farmers. Asian J Agric Dev 2:79–86Google Scholar
  7. Huang T, Gao B, Christie P, Ju X (2013) Net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity in a double-cropping cereal rotation as affected by nitrogen and straw management. Biogeosciences 10:7897–7911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huang Y, Wang H, Huang H, Feng ZW, Yang ZH, Luo YC (2005) Characteristics of methane emission from wetland rice–duck complex ecosystem. Agric Ecosyst Environ 105:181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. IPCC (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Khalil K, Mary B, Renault P (2004) Nitrous oxide production by nitrification and denitrification in soil aggregates as affected by O2 concentration. Soil Biol Biochem 36:687–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Le Mer J, Roger P (2001) Production oxidation, emission and consumption of methane by soils: a review. Eur J Soil Biol 37:25–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Li B, Fan CH, Zhang H, Chen ZZ, Sun LY, Xiong ZQ (2015) Combined effects of nitrogen fertilization and biochar on the net global warming potential, greenhouse gas intensity and net ecosystem economic budget in intensive vegetable agriculture in southeastern China. Atmos Environ 100:10–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li CF, Cao CG, Pang SG, Huang F, Dai GZ, Wang JP, Zhan M, Yuan WL (2008a) Dynamics of soil microbial biomass N and soil enzymes activities in rice-duck, rice-fish ecosystems. Acta Ecol Sin 28:3905–3912 (In Chinese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li CF, Cao CG, Wang JP, Zhan M, Yuan WL, Shahrear A (2008b) Nitrogen losses from integrated rice–duck and rice–fish ecosystems in southern China. Plant Soil 307:207–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li CF, Cao CG, Wang JP, Zhan M, Yuan WL, Shahrear A (2009) Nitrous oxide emissions from wetland rice–duck cultivation systems in southern China. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 56:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li CF, Zhang ZS, Guo LJ, Cai ML, Cao CG (2013) Emissions of CH4 and CO2 from double rice cropping systems under varying tillage and seeding methods. Atmos Environ 80:438–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu L, Greaver TL (2009) A review of nitrogen enrichment effects on three biogenic GHGs: the CO2 sink may be largely offset by stimulated N2O and CH4 emission. Ecol Lett 12:1103–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu G, Yu H, Ma J, Xu H, Wu Q, Yang J, Zhuang Y (2015) Effects of straw incorporation along with microbial inoculant on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from rice fields. Sci Total Environ 518-519:209–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Malla G, Bhatia A, Pathak H, Prasad S, Jain N, Singh J (2005) Mitigating nitrous oxide and methane emissions from soil in rice–wheat system of the Indo-Gangetic plain with nitrification and urease inhibitors. Chemosphere 58:141–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Morita S, Abe J (2002) Diurnal and phenological changes of bleeding rate in lowland rice plants. Jpn J Crop Sci 71:383–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mosier AR, Halvorson AD, Reule CA, Liu XJJ (2006) Net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity in irrigated cropping systems in northeastern Colorado. J Environ Qual 35:1584–1598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Noguchi A, Kageyama M, Shinmachi F, Schmidhalter U, Hasegawa I (2005) Potential for using plantxylem sap to evaluate inorganic nutrient availability in soil - I. Influence of inorganic nutrients present in therhizosphere on those in the xylem sap of Luffa cylindrica Roem. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 51:333-341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Qin Y, Liu S, Guo Y, Liu Q, Zou J (2010) Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from organic and conventional rice cropping systems in Southeast China. Biol Fertil Soils 46:825–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sang YK, Gutierrez J, Kim PJ (2012) Considering winter cover crop selection as green manure to control methane emission during rice cultivation in paddy soil. Agric Ecosyst Environ 161:130–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shan J, Yan XY (2013) Effects of crop residue returning on nitrous oxide emissions in agricultural soils. Atmos Environ 71:170–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Singh S, Kumar S, Jain MC (1997) Methane emission from two Indian soils planted with different rice cultivars. Biol Fertil Soils 25:285–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sun H, Zhou S, Fu Z, Chen G, Zou G, Song X (2016) A two-year field measurement of methane and nitrous oxide fluxes from rice paddies under contrasting climate conditions. Sci Rep 6:28255. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Teng Q, Hu XF, Cheng C, Luo Z, Luo F, Xue Y, Jiang Y, Mu Z, Liu L, Yang M (2016) Ecological effects of rice-duck integrated farming on soil fertility and weed and pest control. J Soils Sediments 16:2395–2407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang H, Huang H, Yang ZH, Liao XL (2003) Integrated benefits of rice-duck complex ecosystem. J Eco Rural Environ 19:23–26 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  31. Wang JP, Cao CG, Jin H, Liu FH (2006) Effects of rice-duck farming on aquatic community in rice fields. Sci Agric Sin 39:2001–2008 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  32. Wang QS, Huang PS, Zhen RH, Jing LM, Tang HB, Zhang CM (2004) Effect of rice-duck mutualism on nutrition ecology of paddy field and rice quality. Chin J Appl Ecol 15:639–645 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  33. Wang Y (2000) Studies on ecological benefits of planting and breeding model in rice fields. Acta Ecol Sin 20:311–316 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  34. Watanabe I, Hashimoto T, Shimoyama A (1997) Methaneoxidizing activities and methanotrophic populations associated with wetland rice plants. Biol Fertil Soils 24:261–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Xu G, Liu X, Wang Q, Yu X, Hang Y (2017) Integrated rice-duck farming mitigates the global warming potential in rice season. Sci Total Environ 575:58–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yang J, Zhang J (2010) Crop management techniques to enhance harvest index in rice. J Exp Bot 61:3177–3189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yu SM, Ouyang YN, Zhang QY, Peng G, Xu DH, Jin WY (2005) Effects of rice-duck farming system on Oryza sativa growth and its yield. Chin J Appl Ecol 1252-1256(In Chinese):16Google Scholar
  38. Yuan WL, Cao CG, Wang JP, Zhan M, Li CF, Xie NN (2008) Nitrous oxide emission from rice-duck complex ecosystem and the evaluation of its economic significance. Acta Ecol Sin 28(7):3060–3066 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  39. Zhang JE, Ouyang Y, Huang ZX (2008) Characterization of nitrous oxide emission from a rice-duck farming system in south China. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 54:167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhang JE, Quan GM, Zhao B, Liang LM, Qin Z (2016a) Rice-duck co-culture in China and its ecological relationships and functions. In: Luo SM, Gliessman SR (eds) Agroecology in China: Science, Practice, and Sustainable Management. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, pp 111–138Google Scholar
  41. Zhang ZS, Guo LJ, Liu TQ, Li CF, Cao CG (2015) Effects of tillage practices and straw returning methods on greenhouse gas emissions and net ecosystem economic budget in rice-wheat cropping systems in central China. Atmos Environ 122:636–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang ZS, Chen J, Liu TQ, Cao CG, Li CF (2016b) Effects of nitrogen fertilizer sources and tillage practices on greenhouse gas emissions in paddy fields of central China. Atmos Environ 122:274–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zheng H, Huang H, Chen C, Fu Z, Xu H, Tan S, She W, Liao X, Tang J (2017) Traditional symbiotic farming technology in China promotes the sustainability of a flooded rice production system. Sustain Sci 12:155–161. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zheng XH, Wang MX, Wang YS, Shen RX, Li J (1998) Comparison of manual and automatic methods for measurement of methane emission from rice paddy fields. Adv Atmos Sci 15:569–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MOA Key Laboratory of Crop Ecophysiology and Farming System in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River/College of Plant Science and TechnologyHuazhong Agricultural UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Green Transformation of Bio-ResourcesThe College of Life Sciences, Hubei UniversityWuhanChina
  3. 3.Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Grain IndustryYangtze UniversityJingzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations