Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Climate variability has resulted in mismatches between recommended and optimum seeding rates, sowing and harvest dates, fertilizer application, and irrigation levels in North China Plain double cropped systems. The objective of this study was to compare traditional local double‐crop practices (LP) with high‐yield double‐cropped treatments (HY) and precision double‐cropped managements (PM). The LP treatment follows local practices, whereas HY optimizes yield regardless of cost, and PM optimizes economic returns by adjusting the planting and harvest dates, and the seeding and fertilizing rates. The average production cost for LP, HY, and PM was 3775, 4824, and 4218 USD ha −1 , respectively, and the average income was 5882, 6892, and 6622 USD ha −1 . The annual yield for the PM was 3.9% lower, and the annual profit was 16.2% higher than those for HY. The annual yield for the PM was 11.8% higher, and the annual profit was 11.0% higher than those for the LP. Unlike LP, HY and PM transferred 1.19–2.52% of the redundant effective accumulated temperature and the cumulative solar radiation received during the wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) season to the maize ( Zea mays L.) season. This increased the production efficiency attributed to temperature and light energy by 12.86–17.48%. In addition, PM obtained the greatest N use efficiency among all treatments. These results show that PM is the appropriate approach to simultaneously increase yields, resource efficiency, and profit. The findings can be used to provide a scientific basis for double‐crop wheat and maize systems featuring high yield and high efficiency.
Cheng et al. (Tue,) studied this question.