不同方法对保护性耕作的生态评价结果对比  

Comparison of ecological evaluation results on conservation tillage by different methods

作　　者：陈源泉[1] 隋鹏[1] 高旺盛[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国农业大学农学与生物技术学院/循环农业发展研究中心,北京100193

出　　处：《农业工程学报》2014年第6期80-87,共8页Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering

基　　金："十二五"国家科技支撑计划项目(2011BAD16B15;2012BAD14B03)

摘　　要：应用生态经济学方法对农业生产技术进行综合评价是农业技术应用决策的重要参考,目前国际上存在各种不同的生态经济学评价方法,许多得到较为广泛的应用。但是不同方法的理论基础和评价侧重点不同、自成体系,应用单一方法难以全面系统评价农业技术。因此,该文基于农业技术评价的经济效益、生态功能以及环境影响3个方面的需求,选择目前国际上热门的能值、生态系统服务、生命周期评价3种生态经济评价方法对吉林省4种保护性耕作模式:玉米留茬垄侧种植技术(CT1)、玉米宽窄行交替休闲种植技术(CT2)、玉米留茬直播种植技术(CT3)和玉米灭高茬深松整地种植技术(CT4)的评价结果进行综合比较,探索吸收各种方法的优点用于系统综合评价农业生产技术的生态经济和环境影响效应的可行性。能值评价结果表明,4种模式的能值产出率高于对照模式9.6%,技术选择优先序是CT3>CT4>CT2>CT1;生态服务价值评价结果表明,4种模式的生态服务价值是对照模式的2.1倍,技术排序是:CT2>CT1>CT3>CT4;生命周期评价结果表明,4种模式的环境影响综合指数平均比对照模式低1.7%,技术排序为CT2>CT3>CT4>CT1。研究结果表明3种方法的评价结果均显示了保护性耕作模式对于传统耕作模式在生态、经济和环境影响等方面都具有综合优势。但是,不同研究方法对于同一具体技术的评价结果有一定的差异。根据3种方法评价结果的排名平均计算,比较科学的综合排名结果应该是:CT2>CT3>CT4>CT1。因此,采用单一方法难以全面系统评价某一具体的农业生产技术,在进行农业技术选择决策时,需要采取多方面、多方法进行综合评价,综合各种方法来选择合适的农业技术。Comprehensive evaluation on agricultural production technologies can provide scientific base for technology application for agriculture production. However, a good comprehensive evaluation on agricultural production system must integrate the economic, ecological and environmental aspects of a production system. Agricultural production should not only focus on the yield increasing, but also should avoid the degradation of ecosystem services and alleviate the negative environmental impacts. Therefore, when selecting an appropriate agricultural technology for a production system, a comprehensive evaluation is needed for decision-make process. In recent decades, many kinds of theories and methods in the ecological economic research have been developed and some are used widely, such as emergy, ecosystem services, ecosystem health, ecological footprint, life cycle assessment, etc. However, each method has its independent theory base and calculation process. In additional, single method is hard to meet the multi-aspect evaluation needs. Therefore, to compare the results of different ecological evaluation methods, three methods including emergy （EM）, ecosystem services （ES） and life circle assessment （LCA） were used in this research to evaluate economic, ecological and environmental concerns of an agricultural production technology. Four kinds of conservation tillage （CT） patterns in Jilin province, northeastern of China were taken as case study. The four CT patterns include‘direct-seeding on ridge side and standing-stubble return’ （CT1）, ‘wide/narrow row alternation planting and high stubble mulching’ （CT2）, ‘stubble mulching and direct-seeding on ridge’ （CT3） and‘cutting stubble combined ridge with subsoiling’ （CT4）. The results showed that four kinds of CT methods had a consistent trend of advantage of eco-ecological effects compared to the conventional tillage （CK）. Based on evaluation result of EM, the average value of EYR （emergy yield ratio） of the four CT me

关 键 词：农业 技术 生态 生态评价 能值 生态系统服务 生命周期评价 保护性耕作 

分 类 号：S341[农业科学—作物栽培与耕作技术]