Paper · 2025 · Journal of Environmental Management

Straw return and nitrogen-phosphorus fertilization coordinates crop yields, soil nutrient function and carbon emissions

Jiajie Song; Jianheng Song; Shahzad Haider; et al.

11
claims
23
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Addressing the key challenge of reconciling agricultural intensification with ecological sustainability, this study investigated the synergistic effects of straw return and fertilization on winter wheat production systems in the Loess Plateau of China. Through a two-year field split-plot experiment, six treatments were established: control (S 0 W), mineral nitrogen application (S 0 N), nitrogen-phosphorus application (S 0 NP), straw return (SW), straw return combined with nitrogen application (SN), and straw return combined with nitrogen-phosphorus application (SNP). This study systematically assessed their impacts on soil nutrient function index (NFI), ecological stoichiometry, crop yield, and CO 2 emissions. Our findings revealed that SNP and SN treatments elevated NFI by 258.29 % and 186.69 %, respectively, compared to S 0 W. The SNP treatment achieved optimal yield enhancement (28.95–31.19 %) through optimization of NFI. In addition, compared to SW treatment, the SN treatment demonstrated a pronounced inhibitory effect on CO 2 emissions, achieving a reduction effect of 27.01 %. We applied the sustainability performance index (SPI) to assess the interdependence of yield-NFI-CO 2 emissions. The SNP obtained a better SPI (3.58) through the compensatory mechanism in the presence of increased CO 2 emissions. Partial least squares path model revealed that straw and fertilization directly increased carbon-nitrogen availability (P < 0.001) and indirectly enhanced NFI through improving physicochemical properties (P < 0.001). On the other hand, straw return combined with fertilization significantly reduced the dissolved organic carbon:nitrogen ratio and imbalanceCN. Enzyme stoichiometric analysis indicated that SNP treatment reduced vector length by 34.22–47.12 %, significantly alleviating carbon limitation. This mitigated competition between microorganisms and crops for resources, enhanced nutrient synchronization, and ultimately achieved synergistic improvements in productivity and NFI, but it also significantly increased CO 2 emissions. In conclusion, SNP treatment coordinates CO 2 emissions, crop productivity, and NFI through microbially mediated ecological stoichiometry. However, the long-term stability of these synergistic effects requires further validation through extended field trials under diverse agroecological conditions.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP elevated soil nutrient function index by 258.29% versus the control.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
SNPe0
Outcome
NFIe0
Direction
elevatede0
Value
258.29 %e0
Comparator
S 0 We0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“SNP and SN treatments elevated NFI by 258.29 % and 186.69 %, respectively, compared to S 0 W.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–840 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SN elevated soil nutrient function index by 186.69% versus the control.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
SNe0
Outcome
NFIe0
Direction
elevatede0
Value
186.69 %e0
Comparator
S 0 We0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“SNP and SN treatments elevated NFI by 258.29 % and 186.69 %, respectively, compared to S 0 W.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–840 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP increased yield by 28.95–31.19%.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
SNPe0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
enhancemente0
Value
28.95–31.19 %e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The SNP treatment achieved optimal yield enhancement (28.95–31.19 %) through optimization of NFI.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 841–938 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SN reduced CO2 emissions by 27.01% relative to SW.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
SNe0
Outcome
CO 2 emissionse0
Direction
reductione0
Value
27.01 %e0
Comparator
SW treatmente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“compared to SW treatment, the SN treatment demonstrated a pronounced inhibitory effect on CO 2 emissions, achieving a reduction effect of 27.01 %.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 952–1098 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP had an SPI of 3.58.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
SNPe0
Outcome
SPIe0
Direction
bettere0
Value
3.58e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The SNP obtained a better SPI (3.58) through the compensatory mechanism in the presence of increased CO 2 emissions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1212–1328 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Straw and fertilization directly increased carbon-nitrogen availability.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
straw and fertilizatione0
Outcome
carbon-nitrogen availabilitye0
Direction
increasede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“straw and fertilization directly increased carbon-nitrogen availability (P < 0.001)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1376–1459 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Straw and fertilization indirectly enhanced NFI through physicochemical properties.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Outcome
NFIe0
Direction
enhancede0
Qualifier
improving physicochemical propertiese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“indirectly enhanced NFI through improving physicochemical properties (P < 0.001)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1464–1544 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Straw return with fertilization reduced dissolved organic carbon:nitrogen ratio and imbalanceCN.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
straw return combined with fertilizatione0
Outcome
dissolved organic carbon:nitrogen ratio and imbalanceCNe0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“straw return combined with fertilization significantly reduced the dissolved organic carbon:nitrogen ratio and imbalanceCN.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1565–1688 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP reduced enzyme stoichiometric vector length by 34.22–47.12%.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
SNP treatmente0
Outcome
vector lengthe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
34.22–47.12 %e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“SNP treatment reduced vector length by 34.22–47.12 %, significantly alleviating carbon limitation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1735–1833 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP alleviated carbon limitation.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
SNP treatmente0
Outcome
carbon limitatione0
Direction
alleviatinge0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“SNP treatment reduced vector length by 34.22–47.12 %, significantly alleviating carbon limitation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1735–1833 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP increased CO2 emissions.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
Straw return and nitrogen-phosphorus fertilizationt0
Outcome
CO 2 emissionse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“it also significantly increased CO 2 emissions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2022–2069 · show in text ↑
t0

“Straw return and nitrogen-phosphorus fertilization coordinates crop yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–74 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 190–221 · show in text ↑

sodium nitroprusside · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

18 papers: 17 positive, 1 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

sodium nitroprusside · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

11 papers: 11 positive, 0 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

sodium nitroprusside · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

30 papers: 30 positive, 0 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

organic · environment: emissions · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 6 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

nitrogen · environment: emissions · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

29 papers: 19 positive, 10 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

fertilization · environment: emissions · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

47 papers: 29 positive, 18 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 29 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 papers →

organic · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

57 papers: 53 positive, 4 negative or no effect

52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

53 papers more in this group

See all 57 papers →

fertilization · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

214 papers: 190 positive, 24 negative or no effect

189 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

210 papers more in this group

See all 214 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.