Plant and Soil

, Volume 387, Issue 1–2, pp 251–264 | Cite as

Contribution of greenhouse gas emissions during cropping and fallow seasons on total global warming potential in mono-rice paddy soils

  • Md. Mozammel Haque
  • Sang Yoon Kim
  • Muhammad Aslam Ali
  • Pil Joo KimEmail author
Regular Article


Background and aims

Temperate rice paddy fields are generally flooded for less than 100 days a year during the rice cropping season and are kept under dried soil conditions during the fallow season of over 200 days. The impacts of rice paddy soil on the global warming potential (GWP) are generally analysed during rice cultivation, without consideration of the fallow season, using only methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) fluxes. To compare the impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during the flooded rice cultivation and the dried fallow seasons on the annual GWP in a mono-rice cultivation system, the emission fluxes of CH4, N2O and carbon dioxide (CO2) were evaluated under two different fertilization systems (NPK and NPK + Cover crop) for two consecutive years.


In the NPK + Cover crop treatment, a mixture of barley and hairy vetch were cultivated as a winter cover crop without fertilization during the fallow season. The total above-ground biomass (36 Mg fresh weight ha−1, moisture content 68.9 %, C/N ratio 20.6) was incorporated as a green manure one week before rice transplanting. The same levels of chemical fertilisers were applied for rice cultivation in the NPK and NPK + Cover crop treatments. The emission rates of CH4, CO2, and N2O gases were simultaneously monitored once a week using the closed-chamber method. However, because the CO2 fluxes included only soil respiration and excluded soil C sequestration through cover cropping and its recycling of biomass, the net ecosystem C budget (NECB), which is defined as the difference between total organic C input and output, was estimated to ascertain pure CO2 emission fluxes. Finally, the net global warming potential (GWP), which was calculated as CO2 equivalents by multiplying the seasonal CH4, CO2, and N2O fluxes by 25, 1, and 298, respectively, was compared between the two treatments and the two seasons.


In the NPK treatment, the annual net GWP value was 10.7–11.7 Mg CO2 eq. ha−1, in which approximately 56–62 % was affected by the seasonal net GWP value during the fallow season. Cover crop cultivation during the fallow season and its biomass addition as a green manure for rice cultivation significantly increased the total net GWP value to 28.2–31.5 Mg ha−1, in which approximately 73–76 % was weighted by the seasonal net GWP value during rice cultivation. Carbon dioxide was the most influential GHG on increasing the growth scale of total net GWP during the dried fallow season, but CH4 most strongly influenced the annual net GWP scale during the rice cropping season, irrespective of soil management conditions. The contribution of CH4 to the annual net GWP value significantly increased as a result of cover crops biomass addition from 34–39 % in the NPK treatment to 88–91 % in the NPK + Cover crop treatment.


The dried fallow season contributed to approximately 30–60 % of the annual net GWP scale through GHG emissions. Therefore, proper soil management strategies should be developed to decrease GHG emissions during the fallow season in mono-rice paddy fields.


Cover crop Rice Fallow season Paddy soil Greenhouse gases Global warming potential 



This work was carried out with the support of “Cooperative Research Program for Agriculture Science & Technology Development (Project title: Reduction of Nutrient Balance in Double Cropping System Using green manure, Project No. PJ906961042014 )” Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea. Md. Mozammel Haque was supported by scholarships from the BK21+ program of Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development, Korea.

Supplementary material

11104_2014_2287_MOESM1_ESM.docx (12 kb)
Supplementary table 1 (DOCX 12 kb)


  1. Ali MA, Lee CH, Lee YB, Kim PJ (2009) Silicate fertilization in no-tillage rice farming for mitigation of methane emission and increasing rice productivity. Agric Ecosyst Environ 132:16–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allison LE (1965) Organic carbon. In: Black CA (ed) Methods of soil analysis Part II. Am. Soc. Agron. Inc. Publ, Madison, pp 1367–1376Google Scholar
  3. Bodelier PLE, Frenzel P (1999) Contribution of methanotrophic and nitrifying bacteria to CH4 and NH4 + oxidation in the rhizosphere of rice plants as determined by new methods of discrimination. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:1826–1833PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bronson KF, Mosier AR (1994) Suppression of methane oxidation in aerobic soil by nitrogen fertilizers, nitrification inhibitors, and urease inhibitors. Biol Fert Soils 17:263–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burkart S, Manderscheid R, Weigel HJ (2007) Design and performance of a portable gas exchange chamber system for CO2− and H2O-flux measurements in crop canopies. Environ Exp Bot 61:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chapin FS, Woodwell G, Randerson J, Rastetter EB, Lovett G, Baldocchi D, Clark D, Harmon M, Schimel DS, Valentini R (2006) Reconciling carbon-cycle concepts, terminology, and methods. Ecosyst 9:1041–1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ciais P, Wattenbach M, Vuichard N, Smith P, Piao SL, Don A, Luyssaert S, Janssens I, Bondeau A, Dechow R (2010) The European carbon balance. Part 2: croplands. Global Change Biol 16:1409–1428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ding W, Cai Y, Cai Z, Zheng X (2006) Diel pattern of soil respiration in Namended soil under maize cultivation. Atmos Environ 40:3294–3305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fazli P, Man HC, Shah UKM, Idris A (2013) Characteristics of Methanogens and Methanotrophs in Rice Fields: A Review. As Pac J Mol Biol Biotechnol 21:3–17Google Scholar
  10. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2012) FAOSTAT. FAO, Rome, Available at Google Scholar
  11. Flessa H, Beese F (1995) Effects of sugarbeet residues on soil redox potential and nitrous oxide emission. Soil Sci Soc Am J 59:1044–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gilbert B, Frenzel P (1998) Rice roots and CH4 oxidation: the activity of bacteria, their distribution and the microenvironment. Soil Biol Biochem 30:1903–1916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gomes J, Bayer C, de Souza CF, de Cassia PM, Zanata JA, Vieira FCB, Six J (2009) Soil nitrous oxide emissions in a long-term cover crops-based rotations under subtropical climate. Soil Till Res 106:36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Granli T, Bockman OC (1994) Nitrous oxide from agriculture. Norw J Agric Sci Suppl 12:7–128Google Scholar
  15. Grosso SJD, Parton WJ, Mosier AR, Ojima DS, Potter CS et al (2000) General CH4 oxidation model and comparisons of CH4 Oxidation in natural and managed systems. Global Biogeochem Cycles 14:999–1019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haque MM, Kim SY, Pramanik P, Kim GY, Kim PJ (2013) Optimum application level of winter cover crop biomass as green manure under considering methane emission and rice productivity in paddy soil. Biol Fertil Soils 49:487–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Iqbal J, Ronggui H, Lijun D, Lan L, Shan L, Tao C, Leilei R (2008) Differences in soil CO2 flux between different land use types in mid-subtropical China. Soil Biol Biochem 40:2324–2333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jeon WT, Choi BS, Abd EL-Azeem SAM, Yong SO (2011) Effect of different seeding methods on green manure biomass, soil properties and rice yield in rice based cropping systems. Afr. J Biotechnol 10:2024–2031Google Scholar
  19. Jia JX, Ma YC, Xiong ZQ (2012) Net ecosystem carbon budget, net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity in intensive vegetable ecosystems in China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 150:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim SY, Lee CH, Gutierrez J, Kim PJ (2013) Contribution of winter cover crop amendments on global warming potential in rice paddy soil during cultivation. Plant Soil 366:273–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kim GY, Gutierrez J, Jeong HC, Lee JS, Haque MM, Kim PJ (2014) Effect of intermittent drainage on methane and nitrous oxide emissions under different fertilization in a temperate paddy soil during rice cultivation. J Korean Soc Appl Biol Chem 57:229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kimura M, Murase J, Lu Y (2004) Carbon cycling in rice field ecosystems in the context of input, decomposition and translocation of organic materials and the fates of their end products (CO2 and CH4). Soil Biol Biochem 36:1399–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. KMA (Korean Metrological Administration). (2013). Monthly Weather Report. Available at
  24. Lemke RL, Izaurralde RC, Nyborg M, Solberg ED (1999) Tillage and N source influence soil-emitted nitrous oxide in the Alberta Parkland region. Can J Soil Sci 79:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lou Y, Li Z, Zhang T, Liang Y (2004) CO2 emissions from subtropical arable soils of china. Soil Biol Biochem 36:1835–1842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lu F, Wang X, Han B, Ouyang Z, Duan X, Zheng H, Miao H (2009) Soil carbon sequestrations by nitrogen fertilizer application, straw return and no-tillage in China’s cropland. Global Change Biol 15:281–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ma YC, Kong XW, Yang B, Zhang XL, Yan XY, Yang JC, Xiong ZQ (2013) Net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity of annual rice-wheat rotations with integrated soil crop system management. Agric. Ecosyst Environ 164:209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Naser HM, Nagata O, Tamura S (2007) Methane emissions from five paddy fields with different amounts of rice straw application in Central Hokkaido. Japan Soil Sci Plant Nutr 53:95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Neue HU, Roger PA (1993) Rice agriculture; factors affecting emissions. In: Khalil MAK (ed) atmospheric methane: Sources sinks and role in global change. Springer, Berlin, pp 254–298Google Scholar
  30. Nguyen NV, Ferrero A (2012) Meeting the challenges of global rice production. Paddy Water Environ 4:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pan GX, Li LQ, Wu L, Zhang XH (2004) Storage and sequestration potential of topsoil organic carbon in China’s paddy soils. Global Change Biol 10:79–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pramanik P, Kim PJ (2012) Quantitative determination of 2-mercaptoethanesulphonate as biomarker for methanogens in soil by high performance liquidchromatography using UV detector. Soil Biol Biochem 55:140–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pramanik P, Haque MM, Kim SY, Kim PJ (2014) C and N accumulations in soil aggregates determine nitrous oxide emissions from cover crop treated rice paddy soils during fallow season. Scien Total Environ 490:622–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rath AK, Swain B, Ramakrishnan B, Panda D, Adhya TK, Rao VR, Sethunathan N (1999) Influence of fertilizer management and water regime on methane emission from rice fields. Agric Ecosyst Environ 76:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. RDA (Rural Development Administration, Korea) (1988) Methods of soil chemical analysis. National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, SuwonGoogle Scholar
  36. RDA (Rural Development Administration, Korea) (1995) Standard investigation methods for agriculture experiment, SuwonGoogle Scholar
  37. RDA (Rural Development Administration, Korea) (1999) Fertilization standard of crop plants. National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, SuwonGoogle Scholar
  38. Rolston DE (1986) Gas flux. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis part 1. Agron Monogr 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison, pp 1103–1119Google Scholar
  39. Saito M, Miyata A, Nagai H, Yamada T (2005) Seasonal variation of carbon dioxide exchange in rice paddy field in Japan. Agric Forest Meteorol 135:93–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. SAS Institute (2003) System for Windows Release 9.1. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  41. Shang QY, Yang XX, Gao C, Wu PP, Liu JJ, Xu Y, Shen QR, Zou JW, Guo SW (2010) Net annual global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity in Chinese double rice-cropping systems: a 3-year field measurement in long-term fertilizer experiments. Global Change Biol 17:2196–2210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Singh S, Singh JS, Kashyap AK (1999) Methane flux from irrigated rice fields in relation to crop growth and Nfertilization. Soil Biol Biochem 31:1219–1228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith P, Lanigan G, Kutsch WL, Buchmann N, Eugster W, Aubinet M, Ceschia E, Béziat P, Yeluripati JB, Osborne B, Moors EJ, Brut A, Wattenbach M, Saunders M, Jones M (2010) Measurements necessary for assessing the net ecosystem carbon budget of croplands. Agric Ecosyst Environ 139:302–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. USEPA (2006) Global anthropogenic non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions: 1990–2002. Office of Atmospheric Programs, USEPA, Washington, DC. Available at: Scholar
  45. Xiao Y, Xie G, Lu G, Ding X, Lu Y (2005) The value of gas exchange as a service by rice paddies in suburban Shanghai, PR China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 109:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Xiong Z, Zing G, Tsuruta H, Shen G, Shi S, Su L (2002) Field study on nitrous oxide emissions from upland cropping systems in China. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 48:539–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhang HL, Bai XL, Xue JF, Chen ZD, TangHM CF (2013) Emissions of CH4 and N2O under different tillage systems from double-cropped paddy fields in southern china. PLoS One 8:e65277PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zheng XH, Xie BH, Liu C, Zhou Z, Yao ZS, Wang Y, Yang L, Zhu J, Huang Y (2008) Quantifying net ecosystem carbon dioxide exchange of a short-plant cropland with intermittent chamber measurements. Global Biogeochem Cycle 22, GB3031CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Md. Mozammel Haque
    • 1
  • Sang Yoon Kim
    • 1
  • Muhammad Aslam Ali
    • 2
  • Pil Joo Kim
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of Applied Life Science (BK 21+ Program)Gyeongsang National UniversityJinjuSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Environmental ScienceBangladesh Agricultural UniversityMymensinghBangladesh
  3. 3.Institute of Agriculture and Life ScienceGyeongsang National UniversityJinjuSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations