Meta-analysis reveals improved water use efficiency and reduced carbon emissions in Northeast China, suggesting enhanced crop productivity.
A tillage system (TS) is a fundamental strategic measure for increasing the comprehensive production capacity of land and food. In TS, the planting structure, tillage practices [no‐tillage (NT), shallow tillage (ST) and deep tillage (DT)] and water management practices interact and jointly influence economic benefits and environmental health. However, the sustainable optimization of TS under changing environments is challenging. In this study, a meta‐analysis‐based multi‐objective nonlinear model framework is proposed for TS optimization in Northeast China under changing environments, which is favorable for achieving synergy among the multiple goals of increasing agricultural economic benefits and water use efficiency and reducing carbon emissions through effective decision‐making related to water resource use, the planting structure, and tillage practices. The results revealed that TS optimization helps increase the synergy among the multi‐dimensional goals of the economy, carbon emissions, and resource use of TS by 37.5% compared with the status quo. The optimization of the planting structure (increasing the planting areas for rice and soybean by 3.1% and 0.7%, respectively, and decreasing that for maize by 2.8%) provided water savings of 12% and a reduction in carbon emissions of 11%. Water and planting area allocations are sensitive to the changing environments, with the SSP2‐4.5 scenario yielding the smallest amount of irrigation water and the SSP5‐8.5 scenario yielding the largest planting area. From the perspective of balanced attention to the economy, environment, and resource use efficiency, a weight ratio (DT:NT:ST) of 0.20:0.54:0.25 was obtained, indicating that NT is a more suitable tillage practice for Northeast China. This model can help decision‐makers manage water and land resources and tillage practices in TS in an efficient and environmentally friendly manner.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: