Abstract
Conservation agriculture is often assumed to reduce soil N2O emissions. Yet, studies analyzing the specific effect of conservation agriculture practices on N2O emissions give contradictory results. Herein, we synthesized a comprehensive database on the three main conservation agriculture practices (cover crops, diversified crop rotations, and no-till and/or reduced tillage (NT/RT)) to elucidate the role of conservation practices on N2O emissions. Further, we used a random meta-forest approach to identify the most important predictors of the effects of these practices on soil N2O emissions. Averaged across all comparisons, NT/RT significantly decreased soil N2O emissions by 11% (95% CI: –19 to –1%) compared to conventional tillage. The reductions due to NT/RT were more commonly observed in humid climates and in soils with an initial carbon content < 20 g kg–1. The implementation of cover crops and diversified crop rotations led to variable effects on soil N2O emissions. Cover crops were more likely to reduce soil N2O emissions at neutral soil pH, and in soils with intermediate carbon (~20 g kg–1) and nitrogen (~3 g kg–1) contents. Diversified crop rotations tended to increase soil N2O emissions in temperate regions and neutral to alkaline soils. Our results provide a comprehensive predictive framework to understand the conditions in which the adoption of various conservation agriculture practices can contribute to climate change mitigation. Combining these results with a similar mechanistic understanding of conservation agriculture impacts on ecosystem services and crop production will pave the way for a wider adoption globally of these management practices.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Conservation agriculture is a farming concept promoting maintenance of permanent soil cover (e.g., cover crops), crop diversification (e.g., different crops in rotation), and minimum soil disturbance (e.g., no-till and/or reduced tillage [NT/RT]) (Giller et al. 2015; Northrup et al. 2021). The main goals of these farming concepts are to promote soil and water conservation and increase soil carbon (C) storage (González-Sánchez et al. 2012; Knapp and van der Heijden 2018; Rusinamhodzi et al. 2011). However, the effects of these practices on soil nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions remain controversial (Basche et al. 2014; Lemke et al. 1998; Sainju 2015). Since N2O is a powerful greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting for ~6% of current anthropogenic climate change (IPCC 2014), it is critical to resolve the role of conservation practices on N2O emissions (Johnson et al. 2005). Nitrous oxide is predominantly emitted from agricultural soils and is mostly attributed to denitrification processes, but nitrification can also contribute strongly to soil N2O emissions (Reay et al. 2012). The 100-year global warming potential of N2O is 273 times that of carbon dioxide (IPCC 2021). Therefore, the potential benefits of these practices for climate change mitigation due to higher soil C storage can be offset by small increases in soil N2O emissions (Lugato et al. 2018).
Cover crops can offer many ecosystem benefits, such as weed suppression, improved soil fertility, and decreased nutrient leaching and soil erosion relative to no cover crops (Akhtar et al. 2018; Poeplau and Don 2015; Thapa et al. 2016). Although cover crops can enhance environmental quality and soil health through increased soil C and nitrogen (N) cycling (Abalos et al. 2022a; Muhammad et al. 2019), they have highly variable effects on soil N2O emissions. A meta-analysis by Basche et al. (2014) stated that the cover crop types (that is, legume or non-legume), biomass production, lignin content, and residue C/N ratios are the main factors driving the N2O emission variability. However, the relative importance of these factors was not identified. Furthermore, the role played by climatic and soil parameters is still largely unknown but is needed to understand the conditions in which cover crops can be used as an agricultural practice that also mitigates climate change.
Globally, cropping systems range from monocultures to complex crop rotations, which have many varied crops sequentially planted (Chen et al. 2020b; Tenuta et al. 2019). Increased crop diversification can induce complex changes in soil properties affecting the abundance and function of N2O-producing soil microbial communities (Adviento-Borbe et al. 2006; Banerjee et al. 2016; Tiemann et al. 2015). For example, several studies found that diversified crop rotations can increase soil N2O emissions (e.g., Alvarez et al. 2012; Mosier et al. 2006; Sainju et al. 2012), and this can be due to stimulation of nitrifying and denitrifying bacterial abundance (Linton et al. 2020). Conversely, Snyder et al. (2009) found that a corn-soybean-wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) rotation had lower soil N2O emissions in comparison to a continuous corn cropping for the entire rotation. Similarly, other studies found that more diverse crop rotations lowered soil N2O emissions compared to mono-crop planting (Adviento-Borbe et al. 2007; Jacinthe and Dick 1997; Johnson et al. 2010). This is especially evident when all phases of the rotation are considered so that a ‘rotational average’ is compared with less diverse rotations (Drury et al. 2014a, b, 2021). Despite their potential for N2O mitigation, the effects of diverse crop rotations have not been quantitatively synthesized.
The implementation of conservation tillage (NT/RT) is widely promoted globally among many diverse crop rotations and cropping systems to increase soil organic C, conserve soil water, enhance soil fertility, and reduce soil erosion, relative to conventional tillage (Rochette et al. 2008; Snyder et al. 2009; Venterea et al. 2005). Yet, from a climate change mitigation perspective, NT/RT effects on soil N2O emissions have been intensively debated and are highly variable among individual studies (Abdalla et al. 2013; Powlson et al. 2012; Rochette et al. 2008; van Kessel et al. 2013; Zhao et al. 2016). Previous studies on the impact of adopting NT/RT reported that soil N2O emissions were increased (Ball et al. 1999; Sainju 2015; Zhang et al. 2016), decreased (Drury et al. 2006, 2012; Gregorich et al. 2008; Mosier et al. 2006), or did not change (Lemke et al. 1998). A meta-analysis revealed that the effects of NT/RT on soil N2O emissions may be time- and climate-dependent, with NT/RT only leading to N2O reductions in dry climates and after more than 10 years after the implementation (van Kessel et al. 2013). The higher availability of studies since the meta-analysis of van Kessel et al. (2013) and the development of new statistical tools may allow us to better understand the robustness of these patterns. For example, a random-meta-forest analysis is a recently developed tool that can simultaneously assess various kinds of non-numeric and numeric variables, helping handle many potential predictors and their interactions (Abalos et al. 2022b; Chen et al. 2020a; Terrer et al. 2019). Therefore, it can be used to identify the main factors by which NT/RT (and cover crops and diversified crop rotations) regulates soil N2O emissions and rank their relative importance.
Our objective was to synthesize the results of studies measuring the effects of cover crops, diversified crop rotations and NT/RT on soil N2O emissions relative to no cover crops, mono-cropping and conventional tillage, respectively. A random-meta-forest approach was used to explore the main drivers of the effects of these conservation agriculture practices on soil N2O emissions. We hypothesized that the links between soil properties, climatic and management factors can be unfolded to develop a predictive framework of the effects of conservation agriculture practices on soil N2O emissions. Our study is the first to 1) concurrently test the effects of the three main conservation agriculture practices on soil N2O emissions; and 2) incorporate a wide variety of soil, experimental and environmental predictors affecting responses of soil N2O emissions to these practices.
2 Materials and methods
2.1 Data compilation
The dataset in this meta-analysis was constructed by using Scopus, Google Scholar (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA; http://scholar.google.com/) and Web of Science (WOS; http://apps.webofknowledge.com/) following a screening of applicable studies within the Managing Agricultural Greenhouse Gases Network (MAGGnet) (Liebig et al. 2016). We searched peer-reviewed articles evaluating the effects of conservation agriculture practices that included cover crops, diversified crop rotations and NT/RT on soil N2O emissions. For each study, we noted whether cover crops, diversified crop rotations, and NT/RT were compared with no cover crops, mono-cropping as well as conventional tillage, respectively. The keywords used for the paper selection were: (1) “cover crops” OR “reduced tillage” OR “rotations” OR “no-till” OR “zero tillage”, OR “conservation tillage”, AND (2) “nitrous oxide” OR “greenhouse gas” OR “N2O” OR “GHG”, AND (3) “soil” OR “land”. The publications were included in this meta-analysis if they met the following criteria: (a) all factors (e.g., fertilization, soil properties and climatic parameters) were similar for cover crops, diversified crop rotations and NT/RT and the corresponding control treatments, (b) studies reported the experimental design and the details of recent history, (c) results were obtained under field conditions, and (d) the mean and the number of replications (n) were available. Moreover, standard deviation (SD) or standard error (SE) values were collected from articles when possible. Missing variances were calculated using the average coefficient of variation (CV) across the data set (van Groenigen et al. 2017). If the SD values were not reported in the studies, they were calculated from reported SE values, or CV according to the following equations:
For each study in our data set, we also tabulated details on the experimental and environmental variables: climate variables [mean annual temperature (MAT), mean annual precipitation (MAP)], site location [latitude and longitude], elevation, soil pH, soil organic C, soil total N, soil clay content, soil C:N ratios, experiment duration (in years), and annual fertilizer rate (<150 kg N ha‒1 yr‒1, 150–200 kg ha‒1 yr‒1 and >200 kg N ha‒1 yr‒1). When published data were only presented graphically, WebPlotDigitizer (https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/) was used to extract data. There were a number of studies where some of the supporting information was not listed in the published manuscript with the soil N2O emissions data. In these cases, we contacted corresponding authors and requested the missing information. For the remaining missing values, we extracted MAT and MAP from WorldClim 2.1 (https://www.worldclim.org/), and soil clay content, soil pH, soil organic carbon (C), and soil total nitrogen (N) from SoilGrid 2.0 (https://soilgrids.org/). Soil C:N was calculated as the ratio of soil organic C and soil total N. Mean values of annual potential evapotranspiration for each study site were extracted from the Global Aridity Index geodatabase (https://cgiarcsi.community/data/global-aridity-and-pet-database/). Aridity Index (AI) was calculated as the ratio of MAP to mean annual potential evapotranspiration. Study sites with an AI <0.65 were categorized as ‘dry’, whereas study areas with a higher AI were categorized as ‘humid’ (UNEP 1997). Moreover, for cover crops, studies were divided into three categories (cash crops, cover crops, or both) based on the phase of the rotation in which the soil N2O emissions were measured. Cover crop types were grouped into legume and non-legume. For the diversified crop rotations, the results are also analyzed according to the phase in the crop rotation (entire rotation or only when the corresponding monoculture crop was present in the rotation) in which the soil N2O emissions were measured. The final database included 97 direct comparisons between cover crops and no cover crops, 33 direct comparisons between diversified crop rotations and mono-cropping, and 151 direct comparisons between NT/RT and conventional tillage. The geographical distribution of the studies is presented in Fig. 1. The articles and the number of comparisons within each article that were included in the analysis and related information such as experiment duration and climate are listed in Table S1.
2.2 Statistical analyses
We assessed the effects of cover crops, diversified crop rotations and NT/RT on soil N2O emissions by calculating the natural log-transformed response ratio (lnR) (Hedges et al. 1999):
where XTreatment refers to the cumulative mean value of soil N2O emissions in cover crops, diversified crop rotations, and NT/RT, XControl is the cumulative mean value of soil N2O emissions in the corresponding control treatment (that is, no cover crops, mono-cropping, or conventional tillage).
The variance (vi) of lnR was calculated as:
where SDTreatment is the standard deviation in cover crops, diversified crop rotations, and NT/RT, SDControl is the standard deviation values in the corresponding control treatment, nTreatment and nControl are the replicate numbers in cover crops, diversified crop rotations, or NT/RT and the corresponding control treatment, and XTreatment and XControl are cumulative values for soil N2O emissions for cover crops, diversified crop rotations, or NT/RT and the corresponding control treatment, respectively.
A weighted mixed-effects model was performed using the ‘rma.mv’ function in the R package ‘metafor’ (Abalos et al. 2022b; Chen et al. 2020a; Viechtbauer 2010). To ensure the independence of each observation, ‘publication’ and ‘observation’ were set as random factors in the mixed-effects models. The results were shown as percentage changes to ease interpretation [i.e., (elnR-1) × 100]. The effects of cover crops, diversified crop rotations, and NT/RT were considered significant if the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) did not overlap with zero. Moreover, a random-forest model selection was used to identify the most important predictors (soil properties, weather factors and management practices) of the effects of cover crops, diversified crop rotations and NT/RT on soil N2O emissions in the dataset. We incorporated available predictors in a bootstrapped random-forest meta-analysis with recursive preselection using the 'metaforest' package of R (Terrer et al. 2019; Van Lissa 2017; Zhang et al. 2022). Based on partial dependence plots (Figs. S1, S2 and S3), the reciprocal transformations were used for nonlinear predictors. The most important predictors (13 for cover crops, 12 for diversified crop rotations, and 11 for NT/RT) were included in a mixed-effects meta-regression model with the ‘metafor’ package of R (Terrer et al. 2016; Viechtbauer 2010). Finally, quadratic and linear meta-regressions were fitted to show the best model describing the links between the most important predictors and lnR. The optimal regression model was selected by Akaike information criterion (AIC; quadratic and linear models were considered), and the best model with lower AIC was retained.
3 Results
Averaged across the whole data set, NT/RT significantly decreased soil N2O emissions by 10.6% (95% CI = −18.9 to −1.4%; Fig. 2a). In contrast, cover crops (mean effect size = 3.3%; 95% CI = –14.8% to 25.2%) and diversified crop rotations (mean effect size = 1.6%; 95% CI = −27.8% to 43.0%) had no significant effects on soil N2O emissions due to a very large variability across the study sites (Fig. 2a). The responses of soil N2O emissions (lnR-N2O) were normally distributed for cover crops and the implementation of NT/RT, but not for diversified crop rotations (Fig. 2b).
a Effects of cover crops, diversified crop rotations (rotation), and no-till and/or reduced tillage (NT/RT) on soil N2O emissions. (b) Distribution of log-transformed response ratios of soil N2O emissions (lnR-N2O) to cover crops, diversified crop rotations and NT/RT practices. Error bars refer to bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The numbers are sample sizes. The fitted curves are from the estimated Gaussian distribution in frequency.
Our random-meta-forest method identified soil pH, soil total N, and soil organic C as the most important predictors of the effects of cover crops on soil N2O emissions (Fig. 3a). Cover crops-derived soil N2O emissions were lowest at neutral soil pH (AIC=152, n=97; Fig. 3b), soil total N of ~3 g kg–1 (AIC=151, n=97; Fig. 3c), and soil organic C of ~20 g kg–1 (AIC=152, n=97; Fig. 3d). An absence of variation in predicted cover crop effects across cover crop types and climatic conditions reflected the lower predictive power of these factors (Fig. S1).
a Variable importance of the factors regulating the impacts of cover crops on soil N2O emissions based on the random-meta-forest approach. (b, c, and d) Meta-analytic scatterplots between the effects of cover crops on soil N2O emissions and the most important predictors of these effects (soil pH, soil total nitrogen, and soil organic carbon). The optimal regression model was chosen by Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). Crop: the phase of the rotation in which the soil N2O emissions were measured (cash crops, cover crops, or both of them); MAP: mean annual precipitation; MAT: mean annual temperature; Cover crop types: legume and non-legume; Climate: humid and dry; Fertilizer rate: <150 kg N ha–1 yr–1, 150–200 kg N ha–1 yr–1 and >200 kg N ha–1 yr–1.
Among 11 potential predictors, MAT, soil pH, and soil clay content were the primary modulators of the responses of soil N2O emissions to diversified crop rotations vs mono-cropping (Fig. 4a). Soil N2O emissions from diversified crop rotations reached a maximum at the MAT values of 13–15℃ (AIC=82, n=33; p< .05) and at soil pH values of 7–8 (AIC=85, n=33; p < .05) compared to N2O emissions from mono-cropping (Figs. 4b, c). Soil N2O emissions from diversified crop rotations were reduced at increasing values of soil clay content (Fig. 4d). Partial dependence plots showed the weaker predictive power of other factors (i.e., soil total N, experiment duration, MAP, climate, fertilizer rate, and rotation crop) for the effects of diversified crop rotations on soil N2O emissions (Fig. S2).
a Variable importance of the factors regulating the impacts of diversified crop rotations on soil N2O emissions based on the random-meta-forest approach. (b, c, and d) Meta-analytic scatterplots between the effects of diversified crop rotations on soil N2O emissions and the most important predictors of these effects (MAT, soil pH, and soil clay content). The optimal regression model was chosen by Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). MAP: mean annual precipitation; MAT: mean annual temperature; Climate: humid and dry; Fertilizer rate: <150 kg N ha–1 yr–1, 150–200 kg N ha–1 yr–1 and >200 kg N ha–1 yr–1.
Our random-forest meta-analysis showed that the most important predictors of NT/RT effects on soil N2O emissions in our dataset were initial soil organic C, MAP, and soil C:N ratios (Fig. 5a). Soil N2O emissions from NT/RT increased with increasing values of soil organic C (AIC= 274, n=151; p=0.20; Fig. 5b) but decreased with increasing MAP (AIC=268, n=151; p=0.01; Fig. 5c). Soil N2O emissions from NT/RT increased with soil C:N ratios, reaching a maximum at ~10–12 (Fig. 5d). Soil N2O emissions responses to NT/RT were not well predicted by climate and fertilizer rate (Fig. S3).
a Variable importance of the factors regulating the impacts of no-till and/or reduced tillage (NT/RT) on soil N2O emissions based on the random-meta-forest approach. (b, c, and d) Meta-analytic scatterplots between the effects of no-till and/or reduced tillage on soil N2O emissions and the most important predictors of these effects (soil organic carbon, MAP, and soil C:N ratios). The optimal regression model was chosen by Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). MAP: mean annual precipitation; MAT: mean annual temperature; Climate: humid and dry; Fertilizer rate: <150 kg N ha–1 yr–1, 150–200 kg N ha–1 yr–1 and >200 kg N ha–1 yr–1.
Cover crops tended to reduce soil N2O emissions as the N fertilizer rate applied to the cash crops increased (Fig. 6). Cover crop effects on soil N2O emissions did not differ between cover crop types (legume or non-legume) or climate regimes (dry or humid). When separated by crop rotation phase in which the soil N2O emissions were measured, the increases in soil N2O emissions in cover crop studies were significant when only the cover crop phase was included, but not when measurements also included the cash crop phase (Fig. 6). No significant diversified crop rotation effects were found after separating the data set by fertilizer rate (<150 kg N ha‒1 yr‒1, 150–200 kg ha‒1 yr‒1and >200 kg N ha‒1 yr‒1), climate regime (dry or humid), or period in the rotation when soil N2O emissions were measured (entire rotation compared to a monoculture crop or only when the same crop in the rotation as the monoculture crop are compared). For NT/RT, the reductions of soil N2O emissions were only significant in humid climates. No significant NT/RT effect was found when separated by fertilizer rate.
Effect of cover crops, diversified crop rotations, and no-till and/or reduced tillage (NT/RT) on soil N2O emissions as a function of N fertilizer rate and climate. For the cover crops, the results are also shown as a function of the cover crop type, and crop of the phase of the rotation in which the soil N2O emissions were measured. For the diversified crop rotations, the results are also shown as a function of the phase in the crop rotation (entire rotation or only when the corresponding monoculture crop was present in the rotation) in which the soil N2O emissions were measured. Error bars represent bootstrap 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals, and the numbers refer to sample size.
4 Discussion
4.1 Effects of cover crops on soil N2O emissions
Our meta-analysis found that cover crops increased, decreased or had neutral effects on soil N2O emissions (Fig. 2a), confirming the trends observed in previous studies (Basche et al. 2014; Poeplau and Don 2015; Shan and Yan 2013). We found that the effects were modulated by specific management practices, N fertilizer rate and edaphoclimatic factors. Cover crops tended to increase soil N2O emissions mainly during the cover crop phase of the rotation (Fig. 6), and this could be explained by the C supply from rhizodeposition through actively growing root systems, promoting denitrification (Abdalla et al. 2013; Mitchell et al. 2013; Webb et al. 2000). Moreover, we found that the capacity of cover crops to reduce soil N2O emissions increased as N fertilizer rate to the previous cash crop rises (Fig. 6). This could be because cover crops can utilize the residual soil N in the late fall, which would reduce N2O emissions from both nitrification and denitrification (Abdalla et al. 2019; Drury et al. 2014b). Our finding of no significant effects of cover crop types (legume vs non-legume) on soil N2O emissions is inconsistent with Muhammad et al. (2019), who reported higher soil N2O emissions with legume cover crops than with non-legume cover crops. The lack of difference between cover crop types in our study supports the notion that legumes have a high capacity to self-regulate in terms of N input via N2 fixation (De Notaris et al. 2021), and therefore their effects on N cycling (including soil N2O emissions and nitrate leaching) are similar to those of non-legume cover crops. Additional field studies are warranted to clarify the potential differences between cover crop types in terms of N2O emissions, including other plant functional groups and more detailed trait-based approaches.
Soil pH, soil total N and soil organic C were strong predictors of the effect of cover crops on soil N2O emissions (Fig. 3a). Cover crops-derived N2O emissions were lowest at neutral soil pH (Fig. 3b). The reason may be that neutral soil pH values stimulate cover crop biomass production, which can decrease N2O emissions by increasing plant N uptake thereby lowering soil mineral N availability for nitrifiers and denitrifiers, and also due to higher plant water uptake, which could decrease soil moisture content below the optimum for N2O production (Abalos et al. 2020; Zhang et al. 2022). Cover crops were more likely to reduce soil N2O emissions from soils with intermediate soil N and soil organic C contents. In soils with low C and N contents, cover crops can trigger N2O by increasing the availability of C and N through root exudation and plant biomass decomposition. In soils with high C and N contents, a more diverse and abundant microbiome may be able to decompose the cover crop biomass more efficiently (Jian et al. 2020), and greater abundance of N-cycling microorganisms can increase the amount of N2O produced (Zhang et al. 2021).
4.2 Effects of diversified crop rotations on soil N2O emissions
Diversified crop rotations are a broad category often with a mixture of different agronomic practices, and the effects may depend on what crops are used to diversify, as well as the fertilization and tillage practices required for each of those crops (Venter et al. 2016; Zhao et al. 2020). In addition, in many diversified rotations total N2O emissions from the entire rotation sequence can be lower because there are fewer phases that receive mineral N fertilizer (Drury et al. 2021; MacWilliam et al. 2018; Zhao et al. 2022). However, we did not find differences in soil N2O emissions according to the period in the rotation in which soil N2O emissions were measured. Despite this high variation, our study was able to identify the main factors determining when diversified crop rotations may be able to reduce soil N2O emissions. Mean annual temperature was the best predictor of the effects of diversified crop rotation on soil N2O emissions, with emission reductions mainly observed at low MAT values (Fig. 4a). Diversified crop rotations can promote the growth of nitrifying and denitrifying communities (Linton et al. 2020), and stimulate soil N2O emissions by providing a higher quantity, quality, and chemical diversity of C inputs (Zhao et al. 2020). It is possible that these effects are less clear when N2O production processes and microbial mineralization are limited by low temperatures (Aulakh et al. 1992; Behnke et al. 2018; Chen et al. 2022; Johnson et al. 2011, 2012; Smith et al. 2011; Snyder et al. 2009). Another possibility is that, since complex rotations can increase soil moisture (Linton et al. 2020; Zhao et al. 2020), they might have increased soil N2O emissions in warmer and drier sites. In Mediterranean climates for example, nitrification can be the main contributor to N2O emissions because soil water-filled pore space does not exceed 60% often (Ardenti et al. 2022; Bateman and Baggs 2005; Perego et al. 2016) and therefore slight increases in soil moisture induced by complex rotations can stimulate N2O emissions.
Soil pH and soil clay content were important predictors of soil N2O emissions from diversified crop rotations (Fig. 4a). Increases in soil N2O emissions with more complex rotations were observed at neutral soil pH values, perhaps because soil acidity constrains the potential changes in soil microbial communities induced by diversified rotations. The relationship between soil clay content and lnR-N2O is difficult to explain, and the patterns are less clear (Fig. 4d), suggesting that a confounding variable may be behind these effects. Indeed, we found that soil clay content was positively correlated with soil pH for this dataset (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient = 0.49), and therefore the role of soil clay content should be interpreted with caution. The sample size for the extremes of clay content was small in this analysis, which could bias the results. More field studies are needed to rigorously explore the response of soil N2O emissions to diversified crop rotations as affected by soil clay content.
4.3 Effects of NT/RT on soil N2O emissions
Consistent with previous meta-analyses (Mei et al. 2018; van Kessel et al. 2013), the implementation of NT/RT significantly decreased soil N2O emissions (Fig. 2a). In contrast, a recent meta-analysis conducted by Shakoor et al. (2021) stated that NT significantly increased soil N2O emissions by 12%. We found that the N2O reductions induced by NT were positively related to the MAP (Fig. 5c), implying N2O mitigation was more commonly found in humid climates (Fig. 6), which is supported by Mei et al. (2018) and van Kessel et al. (2013). As indicated by the latter authors, the higher soil moisture content promoted by NT/RT might not be sufficient to increase soil N2O emissions from denitrification in regions where soil moisture content is already high due to abundant rainfall (humid climates); conversely, NT/RT can further stimulate nitrification, heterotrophic denitrification and/or nitrifier denitrification by increasing the soil water filled-pore space under dry climates (Cox et al. 1990; Dobbie and Smith 2003; Palma et al. 1997).
Our analysis using the random-meta-forest method showed that soil organic C and soil C:N ratios had strong predictive power regarding soil N2O emissions after NT/RT implementation, which is consistent with other meta-analyses (Shakoor et al. 2021). Reductions in soil N2O emissions from NT/RT in soil with low C content may be mediated by changes in soil physical conditions, as NT/RT can increase soil organic matter content (Ogle et al. 2012). Increasing soil organic matter can progressively improve soil structure, which could suppress the formation of anaerobic microsites conducive to soil N2O production (Ussiri et al. 2009; Malhi et al. 2006). Such soil organic matter increases are more likely to be observed in soils with lower initial C content relative to soils with greater soil C concentration (Huang et al. 2018).
4.4 The way forward
Using a yield-scaled approach can be a valuable tool to reconcile the targets of increasing food production while reducing agricultural GHG emissions. This methodology should be considered in future meta-studies to understand the feasibility of conservation agriculture practices, since their potential effects on crop yields are highly uncertain. For example, while diversified crop rotations tend to increase crop yield (Zhao et al. 2020), NT/RT can reduce it, depending on climatic and soil factors (Huang et al. 2018; Pittelkow et al. 2015; van Kessel et al. 2013; Wang et al. 2018). The impact of cover crops on yield is particularly variable, and depends on the cover crop species, the termination timing, and the method of termination, among others management practices (Abdalla et al. 2019; Tonitto et al. 2006; Valkama et al. 2015; Wang et al. 2021).
Conservation agriculture practices can increase agroecosystem complexity (Abalos et al. 2019; Grandy et al. 2022), providing an opportunity to transition into more biologically based agroecosystems that rely more on internal N cycling and less on external N inputs, and this could be better assessed in future synthesis work by normalizing N2O emission (and ammonia volatilization, nitrate leaching, nitric oxide and N2 emissions) based on N application. This emission factor approach (IPCC 2021) can be a way to account for the differences in N fertilizer rates due to e.g., the extra N provided by biological N fixation with legumes, or for reduced N losses with cover crops (i.e., N quota), providing a clearer picture of the wider implications of conservation agriculture practices for N cycling.
5 Conclusion
We conducted a global meta-analysis to understand the impacts of conservation agriculture practices (cover crops, diversified crop rotations and NT/RT) on soil N2O emissions. Conservation agriculture can promote ecosystem multi-functionality by enhancing regulating and supporting services, including biodiversity preservation, soil and water quality, and climate mitigation (Wittwer et al. 2021). However, our results show that climate benefits may be sometimes compromised under specific edaphoclimatic conditions due to potential increases in soil N2O emissions. Only conservation tillage (NT/RT) appeared to mitigate soil N2O emissions consistently across the three main conservation agriculture practices included in this analysis. However, NT/RT can jeopardize crop production if not adopted in combination with cover crops and longer rotations (Pittelkow et al. 2015) as expected according to the principles of conservation agriculture. This is particularly the case under wet and cool soil conditions in humid regions, which may delay emergence and reduce cash crop yields (Allam et al. 2021; Morugán-Coronado et al. 2020). In these situations, alternative conservation tillage practices such as zone or strip tillage may represent a better option to manage the cover crops under reduced tillage (Drury et al. 2006, 2012).
We found that the large variation in the response of soil N2O emissions to cover crops and diversified crop rotations could be well predicted by specific soil and climatic factors. Accordingly, our results provide a roadmap of the regions of the world in which the adoption of specific conservation agriculture practices will help mitigate climate change more efficiently.
Data availability
The data will be available from Figshare once the manuscript is published.
Code availability
Not applicable
References
Abalos D, van Groenigen JW, Philippot L, Lubbers IM, De Deyn GB (2019) Plant trait-based approaches to improve nitrogen cycling in agroecosystems. J Appl Ecol 56:2454–2466. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13489
Abalos D, Liang Z, Dörsch P, Elsgaard L (2020) Trade-offs in greenhouse gas emissions across a liming-induced gradient of soil pH: Role of microbial structure and functioning. Soil Biol Biochem 150:108006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.108006
Abalos D, Recous S, Butterbach-Bahl K, De Notaris C, Rittl TF, Topp CF, Petersen SO, Hansen S, Bleken MA, Rees RM, Olesen JE (2022a) A review and meta-analysis of mitigation measures for nitrous oxide emissions from crop residues. Sci Total Environ 828:154388. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13137
Abalos D, Rittl TF, Recous S, Thiébeau P, Topp CFE, van Groenigen KJ, Butterbach-Bahl K, Thorman RE, Smith KE, Ahuja I, Olesen JE, Bleken MA, Rees RM, Hansen S (2022b) Predicting field N2O emissions from crop residues based on their biochemical composition: A meta-analytical approach. Sci Total Environ 812:152532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152532
Abdalla M, Osborne B, Lanigan G, Forristal D, Williams M, Smith P, Jones MB (2013) Conservation tillage systems: A review of its consequences for greenhouse gas emissions. Soil Use Manag 29:199–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12030
Abdalla M, Hastings A, Cheng K, Yue Q, Chadwick D, Espenberg M, Truu J, Smith P (2019) A critical review of the impacts of cover crops on nitrogen leaching, net greenhouse gas balance and crop productivity. Glob Chang Biol 25(8):2530–2543. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14644
Adviento-Borbe MAA, Doran JW, Drijber RA, Dobermann A (2006) Soil electrical conductivity and water content affect nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide emissions in intensively managed soils. J Environ Qual 35:1999–2010. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2006.0109
Adviento-Borbe M, Haddix M, Binder D, Walters D, Dobermann A (2007) Soil greenhouse gas fluxes and global warming potential in four high-yielding maize systems. Glob Chang Biol 13:1972–1988. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01421.x
Akhtar K, Wang W, Ren G, Khan A, Feng Y, Yang G (2018) Changes in soil enzymes, soil properties, and maize crop productivity under wheat straw mulching in Guanzhong, China. Soil Tillage Res 182:94–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2018.05.007
Allam M, Radicetti E, Petroselli V, Mancinelli R (2021) Meta-analysis approach to assess the effects of soil tillage and fertilization source under different cropping systems. Agriculture 11(9):823. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11090823
Alvarez C, Costantini A, Alvarez CR, Alves BJ, Jantalia CP, Martellotto EE, Urquiaga S (2012) Soil nitrous oxide emissions under different management practices in the semiarid region of the Argentinian Pampas. Nutr Cycl Agroecosystems 94(2):209–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-012-9534-9
Ardenti F, Abalos D, Capra F, Lommi M, Maris SC, Perego A, Bertora C, Tabaglio V, Fiorini A (2022) Matching crop row and dripline distance in subsurface drip irrigation increases yield and mitigates N2O emissions. Field Crops Res 289:108732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108732
Aulakh M, Doran J, Mosier A (1992) Soil denitrification—significance, measurement, and effects of management. Advances in Soil Science Springer-Verlag, New York 1–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2844-8_1
Ball BC, Scott A, Parker JP (1999) Field N2O, CO2 and CH4 fluxes in relation to tillage, compaction and soil quality in Scotland. Soil Tillage Res 53:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(99)00074-4
Banerjee S, Helgason B, Wang L, Winsley T, Ferrari BC, Siciliano SD (2016) Legacy effects of soil moisture on microbial community structure and N2O emissions. Soil Biol Biochem 95:40–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.12.004
Basche AD, Miguez FE, Kaspar TC, Castellano MJ (2014) Do cover crops increase or decrease nitrous oxide emissions? A meta-analysis. J Soil Water Conserv 69(6):471–482. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.69.6.471
Bateman EJ, Baggs EM (2005) Contributions of nitrification and denitrification to N2O emissions from soils at different water-filled pore space. Biol Fertil Soils 41(6):379–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-005-0858-3
Behnke GD, Zuber SM, Pittelkow CM, Nafziger ED, Villamil MB (2018) Long-term crop rotation and tillage effects on soil greenhouse gas emissions and crop production in Illinois, USA. Agric Ecosyst Environ 261:62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2018.03.007
Chen J, Elsgaard L, van Groenigen KJ, Olesen JE, Liang Z, Jiang Y, Larke PE, Zhang Y, Luo YQ, Hungate BA, Sinsabaugh RL, Jørgensen U (2020a) Soil carbon loss with warming: New evidence from carbon-degrading enzymes. Glob Chang Biol 26:1944–1952. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14986
Chen J, Lærke PE, Jørgensen U (2020b) Optimized crop rotations increase biomass production without significantly changing soil carbon and nitrogen stock. Ecol Indic 117:106669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106669
Chen J, Manevski K, Lærke PE, Jørgensen U (2022) Biomass yield, yield stability and soil carbon and nitrogen content under cropping systems destined for biorefineries. Soil Tillage Res 221:105397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2022.105397
Cox WJ, Zobel RW, van Es HM (1990) Tillage effects on some soil physical and corn physiological characteristics. Agron J 82:806–812. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1990.00021962008200040030x
De Notaris C, Mortensen EØ, Sørensen P, Olesen JE, Rasmussen J (2021) Cover crop mixtures including legumes can self-regulate to optimize N2 fixation while reducing nitrate leaching. Agric Ecosyst Environ 309:107287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.107287
Dobbie K, Smith K (2003) Nitrous oxide emission factors for agricultural soils in Great Britain: the impact of soil water-filled pore space and other controlling variables. Glob Chang Biol 9:204–218. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00563.x
Drury CF, Reynolds WD, Tan C, Calder TW, McLaughlin NB (2006) Emissions of nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide: influence of tillage type and nitrogen placement depth. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:570–581. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2005.0042
Drury CF, Reynolds WD, Yang XM, Welacky TW, McLaughlin NB, Calder W, Grant CA (2012) Nitrogen source, application time, and tillage effects on soil nitrous oxide emissions and corn grain yields. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76:1268–1279. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2011.0249
Drury CF, Reynolds WD, Tan CS, McLaughlin NB, Yang XM, Calder W, Oloya TO, Yang JY (2014a) Impacts of 49–51 years of fertilization and crop rotation on growing season nitrous oxide emissions, nitrogen uptake and corn yields. Can J Soil Sci 94:421–433. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss2013-101
Drury CF, Tan CS, Welacky TW, Reynolds WD, Zhang TQ, Oloya TO, McLaughlin NB, Gaynor JD (2014b) Reducing nitrate loss in tile drainage water with cover crops and water-table management systems. J Environ Qual 43:587–598. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2012.0495
Drury CF, Reynolds WD, Yang X, McLaughlin N, Calder W, Phillips LA (2021) Diverse rotations impact microbial processes, seasonality and overall nitrous oxide emissions from soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 85:1448–1464. https://doi.org/10.1002/saj2.20298
Giller KE, Andersson JA, Corbeels M, Kirkegaard J, Mortensen D, Erenstein O, Vanlauwe B (2015) Beyond conservation agriculture. Front. Plant Sci 6:870. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00870
González-Sánchez EJ, Ordóñez-Fernández R, Carbonell-Bojollo R, Veroz-González O, Gil-Ribes JA (2012) Meta-analysis on atmospheric carbon capture in Spain through the use of conservation agriculture. Soil Tillage Res 122:52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2012.03.001
Grandy AS, Daly AB, Bowles TM, Gaudin ACM, Jilling A, Leptin A, McDaniel MD, Wade J, Waterhouse H (2022) The nitrogen gap in soil health concepts and fertility measurements. Soil Biol Biochem 175:108856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108856
Gregorich EG, Rochette P, St-Georges P, McKim UF, Chan C (2008) Tillage effects on N2O emissions from soils under corn and soybean in eastern Canada. Can J Soil Sci 88:153–161. https://doi.org/10.4141/CJSS06041
Hedges LV, Gurevitch J, Curtis PS (1999) The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80(4):1150–1156. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:TMAORR]2.0.CO;2
Huang YW, Ren W, Wang LX, Hui DF, Grove JH, Yang XJ, Tao B, Goff B (2018) Greenhouse gas emissions and crop yield in no-tillage systems: A meta-analysis. Agric Ecosyst Environ 268:144–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2018.09.002
IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [core writing team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, 151 pp
IPCC (2021) Climate change 2021: the physical science basis. contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Oxford, pp 7–125
Jacinthe PA, Dick WA (1997) Soil management and nitrous oxide emissions from cultivated fields in southern Ohio. Soil Tillage Res 41:221–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(96)01094-X
Jian JS, Du X, Reiter MS, Stewart RD (2020) A meta-analysis of global cropland soil carbon changes due to cover cropping. Soil Biol Biochem 143:107735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107735
Johnson JMF, Reicosky DC, Allmaras RR, Sauer TJ, Venterea RT, Dell CJ (2005) Greenhouse gas contributions and mitigation potential of agriculture in the central USA. Soil Tillage Res 83:73–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.02.010
Johnson JMF, Archer D, Barbour N (2010) Greenhouse gas emission from contrasting management scenarios in the northern Corn Belt. Soil Sci Soc Am J 74(2):396–406. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2009.0008
Johnson JMF, Archer DW, Weyers SL, Barbour NW (2011) Do mitigation strategies reduce global warming potential in the northern U.S. corn belt? J Environ Qual 40(5):1551–1559. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2011.0105
Johnson JMF, Weyers SL, Archer DW, Barbour NW (2012) Nitrous oxide, methane emission, and yield-scaled emission from organically and conventionally managed systems. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76:1347–1357. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2012.0017
Knapp S, van der Heijden MG (2018) A global meta-analysis of yield stability in organic and conservation agriculture. Nat Commun 9(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05956-1
Lemke RL, Izaurralde RC, Nyborg M (1998) Seasonal distribution of nitrous oxide emissions from soils in the Parkland region. Soil Sci Soc Am J 62:1320–1326. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1998.03615995006200050025x
Liebig MA, Franzluebbers AJ, Alvarez C, Chiesa TD, Lewczuk N et al (2016) MAGGnet: An international network to foster mitigation of agricultural greenhouse gases. Carbon Manag 7(3–4):243–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2016.1180586
Linton NF, Machado PVF, Deen B, Wagner-Riddle C, Dunfield KE (2020) Long-term diverse rotation alters nitrogen cycling bacterial groups and nitrous oxide emissions after nitrogen fertilization. Soil Biol Biochem 149:107917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107917
Lugato E, Leip A, Jones A (2018) Mitigation potential of soil carbon management overestimated by neglecting N2O emissions. Nat Clim Chang 8(3):219–223. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0087-z
MacWilliam S, Parker D, Marinangeli CP, Trémorin D (2018) A meta-analysis approach to examining the greenhouse gas implications of including dry peas (Pisum sativum L.) and lentils (Lens culinaris M.) in crop rotations in western Canada. Agric Syst 166:101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.07.016
Malhi SS, Lemke R, Wang Z, Chhabra BS (2006) Tillage, nitrogen and crop residue effects on crop yield, nutrient uptake, soil quality, and greenhouse gas emissions. Soil Tillage Res 90:171–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.09.001
Mei K, Wang Z, Huang H, Zhang C, Shang X, Dahlgren RA, Zhang MH, Xia F (2018) Stimulation of N2O emission by conservation tillage management in agricultural lands: A meta-analysis. Soil Tillage Res 182:86–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2018.05.006
Mitchell DC, Castellano MJ, Sawyer JE, Pantoja J (2013) Cover crop effects on nitrous oxide emissions: role of mineralizable carbon. Soil Sci Soc Am J 77(5):1765–1773. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2013.02.0074
Morugán-Coronado A, Linares C, Gómez-López MD, Faz Á, Zornoza R (2020) The impact of intercropping, tillage and fertilizer type on soil and crop yield in fruit orchards under Mediterranean conditions: A meta-analysis of field studies. Agric Syst 178:102736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102736
Mosier AR, Halvorson AD, Reule CA, Liu XJ (2006) Net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity in irrigated cropping systems in northeastern Colorado. J Environ Qual 35:1584–1598. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2005.0232
Muhammad I, Sainju UM, Zhao F, Khan A, Ghimire R, Fu X, Wang J (2019) Regulation of soil CO2 and N2O emissions by cover crops: a meta-analysis. Soil Tillage Res 192:103–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2015.06.015
Northrup DL, Basso B, Wang MQ, Morgan CL, Benfey PN (2021) Novel technologies for emission reduction complement conservation agriculture to achieve negative emissions from row-crop production. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 118(28):e2022666118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022666118
Ogle SM, Swan A, Paustian K (2012) No-till management impacts on crop productivity, carbon input and soil carbon sequestration. Agric Ecosyst Environ 149:37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.12.010
Palma RM, Rimolo M, Saubidet MI, Conti ME (1997) Influence of tillage system on denitrification in maize-cropped soils. Biol Fertil Soils 25:142–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003740050294
Perego A, Wu L, Gerosa G, Finco A, Chiazzese M, Amaducci S (2016) Field evaluation combined with modelling analysis to study fertilizer and tillage as factors affecting N2O emissions: A case study in the Po valley (Northern Italy). Agric Ecosyst Environ 225:72–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.04.003
Pittelkow CM, Liang XQ, Linquist BA, van Groenigen KJ, Lee J, Lee J, Lundy ME, van Gestel N, Six J, Venterea RT, van Kessel C (2015) Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture. Nature 517(7534):365–368. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13809
Poeplau C, Don A (2015) Carbon sequestration in agricultural soils via cultivation of cover crops–A meta-analysis. Agric Ecosyst Environ 200:33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.10.024
Powlson DS, Bhogal A, Chambers BJ, Coleman K, Macdonald AJ, Goulding KWT, Whitmore AP (2012) The potential to increase soil carbon stocks through reduced tillage or organic material additions in England and Wales: a case study. Agric Ecosyst Environ 146(1):23–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.10.004
Reay DS, Davidson EA, Smith KA, Smith P, Melillo JM, Dentener F, Crutzen PJ (2012) Global agriculture and nitrous oxide emissions. Nat Clim Chang 2(6):410–416. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1458
Rochette P, Worth DE, Lemke RL, McConkey BG, Pennock DJ, Wagner-Riddle C, Desjardins RJ (2008) Estimation of N2O emissions from agricultural soils in Canada. I. Development of a country-specific methodology. Can J Soil Sci 88:641–654. https://doi.org/10.4141/CJSS07025
Rusinamhodzi L, Corbeels M, Van Wijk MT, Rufino MC, Nyamangara J, Giller KE (2011) A meta-analysis of long-term effects of conservation agriculture on maize grain yield under rain-fed conditions. Agron Sustain Dev 31(4):657–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0040-2
Sainju UM (2015) Comparison of net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity affected by management practices in two dryland cropping systems. J Environ Prot 6:1042–1056. https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2015.69092
Sainju UM, Caesar-TonThat T, Lenssen AW, Barsotti JL (2012) Dryland soil greenhouse gas emissions affected by cropping sequence and nitrogen fertilization. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76(5):1741–1757. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2012.0076
Shakoor A, Shahbaz M, Farooq TH, Sahar NE, Shahzad SM, Altaf MM, Ashraf M (2021) A global meta-analysis of greenhouse gases emission and crop yield under no-tillage as compared to conventional tillage. Sci Total Environ 750:142299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142299
Shan J, Yan X (2013) Effects of crop residue returning on nitrous oxide emissions in agricultural soils. Atmospheric Environ 71:170–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.02.009
Smith DR, Hernandez-Ramirez G, Armstrong SD, Bucholtz DL, Stott DE (2011) Fertilizer and tillage management impacts on non-carbon-dioxide greenhouse gas emissions. Soil Sci Soc Am J 75:1070. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2009.0354
Snyder CS, Bruulsema TW, Jensen TL, Fixen PE (2009) Review of greenhouse gas emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects. Agric Ecosyst Environ 133:247–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2009.04.021
Tenuta M, Amiro BD, Gao X, Wagner-Riddle C, GervaisM. (2019) Agricultural management practices and environmental drivers of nitrous oxide emissions over a decade for an annual and an annual-perennial crop rotation. Agric For Meteorol 276:107636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2019.107636
Terrer C, Vicca S, Hungate BA, Phillips RP, Prentice IC (2016) Mycorrhizal association as a primary control of the CO2 fertilization effect. Science 353(6294):72–74. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf4610
Terrer C, Jackson RB, Prentice IC et al (2019) Nitrogen and phosphorus constrain the CO2 fertilization of global plant biomass. Nat Clim Chang 9:684–689. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0545-2
Thapa R, Chatterjee A, Awale R, McGranahan DA, Daigh A (2016) Effect of enhanced efficiency fertilizers on nitrous oxide emissions and crop yields: A meta-analysis. Soil Sci Soc Am J 80:1121–1134. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2016.06.0179
Tiemann LK, Grandy AS, Atkinson EE, Marin-Spiotta E, McDaniel MD (2015) Crop rotational diversity enhances belowground communities and functions in an agroecosystem. Ecol Lett 18(8):761–771. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12453
Tonitto C, David MB, Drinkwater LE (2006) Replacing bare fallows with cover crops in fertilizer-intensive cropping systems: A meta-analysis of crop yield and N dynamics. Agric Ecosyst Environ 112(1):58–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.07.003
UNEP (1997) World atlas of desertification, 2nd edn (eds Middleton N, Thomas D). Edward Arnold, London
Ussiri DAN, Lal R, Jarecki MK (2009) Nitrous oxide and methane emissions from long-term tillage under a continuous corn cropping system in Ohio. Soil Tillage Res 104:247–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2009.03.001
Valkama E, Lemola R, Känkänen H, Turtola E (2015) Meta-analysis of the effects of undersown catch crops on nitrogen leaching loss and grain yields in the Nordic countries. Agric Ecosyst Environ 203:93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.01.023
van Groenigen KJ, Osenberg CW, Terrer C, Carrillo Y, Dijkstra FA, Heath J, Nie M, Pendall E, Phillips RP, Hungate BA (2017) Faster turnover of new soil carbon inputs under increased atmospheric CO2. Glob Chang Biol 23(10):4420–4429. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13752
van Kessel C, Venterea R, Six J, Adviento-Borbe MA, Linquist B, van Groenigen KJ (2013) Climate, duration, and N placement determine N2O emissions in reduced tillage systems: A meta-analysis. Glob Chang Biol 19:33–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02779.x
Van Lissa CJ (2017) MetaForest: exploring heterogeneity in meta-analysis using random forests. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/myg6s
Venter ZS, Jacobs K, Hawkins HJ (2016) The impact of crop rotation on soil microbial diversity: A meta-analysis. Pedobiologia 59(4):215–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedobi.2016.04.001
Venterea RT, Burger M, Spokas KA (2005) Nitrogen oxide and methane emissions under varying tillage and fertilizer management. J Environ Qual 34:1467–1477. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2005.0018
Viechtbauer W (2010) Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw 36(3):1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03
Wang YQ, Zhang YH, Zhou SL, Wang ZM (2018) Meta-analysis of no-tillage effect on wheat and maize water use efficiency in China. Sci Total Environ 635:1372–1382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.202
Wang J, Zhang S, Sainju UM, Ghimire R, Zhao F (2021) A meta-analysis on cover crop impact on soil water storage, succeeding crop yield, and water-use efficiency. Agric Water Manag 256:107085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107085
Webb J, Harrison R, Ellis S (2000) Nitrogen fluxes in three arable soils in the UK. Eur J Agron 13:207–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(00)00075-7
Wittwer RA, Bender SF, Hartman K, Hydbom S, Lima RA, Loaiza V, Nemecek T, Oehl F, Olsson PA, Petchey O, Prechsl WE, Klaus Schlaeppi K, Scholten T, Seitz S, Six J, Van Der Heijden MG (2021) Organic and conservation agriculture promote ecosystem multifunctionality. Sci Adv 7(34):eabg6995. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abg6995
Zhang ZS, Chen J, Liu TQ, Cao CG, Li CF (2016) Effects of nitrogen fertilizer sources and tillage practices on greenhouse gas emissions in paddy fields of central China. Atmos Environ 144:274–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.09.003
Zhang Y, Zhang F, Abalos D, Luo YQ, Hui DF, Hungate BA, Garcia-Palacios P, Kuzyakov Y, Olesen JE, Jorgensen U, Chen J (2021) Stimulation of ammonia oxidizer and denitrifier abundances by nitrogen loading: Poor predictability for increased soil N2O emission. Glob Chang Biol 28(6):2158–2168. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16042
Zhang HM, Liang Z, Li Y, Chen ZX, Zhang JB, Cai ZC, Elsgaard L, Cheng Y, Van Groenigen KJ, Abalos D (2022) Liming modifies greenhouse gas fluxes from soils: A meta-analysis of biological drivers. Agric Ecosyst Environ 340:108182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2022.108182
Zhao X, Liu S, Pu C, Zhang X, Xue J, Zhang R, Wang Y, Lal R, Zhang H, Chen F (2016) Methane and nitrous oxide emissions under no-till farming in China: a meta-analysis. Glob Chang Biol 22:1372–1384. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13185
Zhao J, Yang Y, Zhang K, Jeong J, Zeng Z, Zang H (2020) Does crop rotation yield more in China? A meta-analysis. Field Crops Res 245:107659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107659
Zhao J, Chen J, Beillouin D, Lambers H, Yang Y, Smith P, Zeng ZH, Olesen JE, Zang H (2022) Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers. Nat Commun 13(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32464-0
Funding
Open access funding provided by Royal Danish Library, Aarhus University Library Diego Abalos thanks financial support by the Danish Council for Independent Research via the projects No. 9041-00324B and No. 1051-00060B. We would also like to acknowledge the multiple researchers who provided supplementary information on their studies and for the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (https://globalresearchalliance.org/) for their role in facilitating meetings, which connected researchers and their field studies. Funding for Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada is also appreciated. Chen’s laboratory is funded by Aarhus Universitets Forskningsfond (AUFF-E-2019-7-1), Danish Independent Research Foundation (1127-00015B), EU H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (839806), and Nordic Committee of Agriculture and Food Research (https://nordicagriresearch.org/2020-5/). This study was also financially supported by the China Scholarship Council (CSC) project awarded to Yue Li (CSC No. 202006300072) and Aarhus University in Denmark for hosting her visiting research. This research was supported in-part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. The findings and conclusions in this publication are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization was conducted by DA, JC, CD. Data curation was conducted by ZW, DA and CD. YL conducted the statistical analysis and produced all graphs. Formal analysis and methodology of the meta-analysis data was conducted by YL, JC, and DA. Writing (original draft preparation) was conducted by YL, DA, CD, and JC. ML, JJ, and ZW gave intensive feedback on the first draft. All authors contributed to the writing (editing and review) and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
Not applicable
Consent to participate
Not applicable
Consent for publication
Not applicable
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
About this article
Cite this article
Li, Y., Chen, J., Drury, C.F. et al. The role of conservation agriculture practices in mitigating N2O emissions: A meta-analysis. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 43, 63 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-023-00911-x
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-023-00911-x