Evaluation and Screening of Co-Culture Farming Models in Rice Field Based on Food Productivity
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Region and Location of Experiment
2.2. Experimental RFCF Models
2.3. Estimation of Food Productivity
2.3.1. Food-Equivalent Unit Method
2.3.2. Arable-Land-Equivalent Unit Method
3. Results
3.1. Comparison of Food Productivity
3.2. Comparison of Economic Performances
3.3. Comprehensive Comparison and Selection of RFCF Models
3.4. Potential Effects of Model Promotion on Regional Food Productivity
4. Conclusions and Discussion
4.1. Conclusions
4.2. Policy Implications
- Integrated intensification of rice paddy fields. The co-culture of rice and aquatic animals in rice fields increases food production via efficient utilization of land and water resources [38]. Beyond the RFCF models mentioned in this study, more intensive and innovative models such as "double-stubble duck with one-season rice” and "double- and triple-stubble crayfish with one-season rice” are also promoted in actual practice, conforming to the trend towards sustainable intensive agriculture in densely populated areas. In view of the dual limitations of labor force and land/water resources in Jiangsu, RFCF should focus on judicious utilization of the existing resources ecologically and intensively rather than the expansion of the rice paddy aquaculture area. Moreover, the operation standards of RFCF should be further regulated, while the area scale and space scope of RFCF should be clearly stated.
- Promoting industrialization according to local conditions. The three models proposed in the conclusions may not represent the premium schemes for application in Jiangsu Province. As new RFCF models continuously emerge, it is hardly possible to select one unified province-scale model. Industrial clusters of aquatic product processing can provide possibilities for spillover effects on RFCF practice. In different regions, the RFCF promotion should rely on local production experience and industrial foundations, and follow the strategy of "one region, one (aquatic) product, one industry” to guide clustered agriculture development.
- Consolidation of producers’ bottom line awareness in ecology and assurance of high-quality food production. In actual operation, farmers may pursue high aquaculture production and therefore use too much feed, fertilizer, and fishery drugs, which may weaken the rice as well as cause stresses to the environment. To prevent pollution from agro-chemicals, on one side, the government should raise farmers’ awareness of the "bottom-line” in the ecology and provide technical training to farmers. On the other side, the government and industry organizations should specify the regulations and standards of crucial techniques in developing RFCF, including high-quality rice variety standards, field engineering guidance, rice field water regulation, fertilizer application standards, aquaculture requirements, pollution-free methods of weed- and pest-control in rice fields, etc., to ensure the production of high-quality output.
4.3. Limitations and Further Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- National Bureau of Statistics. China Statistical Yearbook. Available online: http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2019/indexch.htm (accessed on 3 February 2020).
- Ministry of Natural Resources of the People’s Republic of China. Natural Resource Bulletin. Available online: http://www.mnr.gov.cn/sj/tjgb/ (accessed on 3 February 2020).
- Li, W.; Cheng, S. Study on Strategies for the Sustainable Development of China’s Agricultural Resources and Environment. Strateg. Study CAE 2016, 18, 64–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nations. The United Nations World Water Development Report 2018: Nature-Based Solutions for Water. 2018. Available online: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/002614/261424e.pdf (accessed on 15 January 2020).
- Zhu, Z.; Chen, D. Nitrogen fertilizer use in China—Contributions to food production, impacts on the environment and best management strategies. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys. 2002, 63, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhong, Y.; Wang, X.; Yang, J.; Zhao, X. Tracing the fate of nitrogen with 15N isotope considering suitable fertilizer rate related to yield and environment impacts in paddy field. Paddy Water Environ. 2017, 15, 843–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, S.; Lu, C.; Guo, J.; Liu, L.; Xu, Z.; Huang, S. Problems and suggestions for agricultural resource and environment of china. Sci. Technol. Rev. 2018, 36, 13–21. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Tilman, D.; Cassman, K.G.; Matson, P.A.; Naylor, R.; Polasky, S. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 2002, 418, 671–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwong, K.F.N.K.; Bholah, A.; Volcy, L.; Pynee, K. Nitrogen and phosphorus transport by surface runoff from a silty clay loam soil under sugarcane in the humid tropical environment of mauritius. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2002, 91, 147–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, B.; Zhang, L.; Yang, L.; Zhang, F.; Norse, D.; Zhu, Z. Agricultural non-point source pollution in china: Causes and mitigation measures. AMBIO 2012, 41, 370–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i1688e/i1688e00.htm (accessed on 29 December 2019).
- The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2013. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i3434e/i3434e00.htm (accessed on 9 December 2019).
- Wu, Y.; Xi, X.; Tang, X.; Luo, D.; Gu, B.; Lam, K.L.; Vitousek, P.M.; Chen, D. Policy Distortions, Farm Size, and the Overuse of Agricultural Chemicals in China. PNAS 2018, 115, 7010–7015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, W.; Jiang, L. Efficiency performance of fertilizer use in arable agricultural production in China. China Agr. Econ. Rev. 2019, 11, 52–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, J.; Li, X. Review of rice-fish-farming systems in china—One of the globally important ingenious agricultural heritage systems (giahs). Aquaculture 2006, 260, 106–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, J.; Hu, L.; Tang, J.; Wu, X.; Chen, X. Ecological mechanisms underlying the sustainability of the agricultural heritage rice-fish coculture system. PNAS 2011, 108, 1381–1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hu, L.; Zhang, J.; Ren, W.; Guo, L.; Cheng, Y.; Li, J.; Li, K.; Zhu, Z.; Zhang, J.; Luo, S.; et al. Can the co-cultivation of rice and fish help sustain rice production? Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 28728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Frei, M.; Becker, K. Integrated rice—Fish production and methane emission under greenhouse conditions. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2005, 1, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed, N.; Garnett, S.T. Integrated rice-fish farming in Bangladesh: Meeting the challenges of food security. Food Secur. 2011, 3, 81–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.A. Integration of aquaculture with rice farming: A way to increase farm productivity, food security, livelihood improvement and better environment. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Agriculture, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 21–22 December 2016; pp. 149–151. [Google Scholar]
- Wan, N.; Li, S.; Li, T.; Cavalieri, A.; Weiner, J.; Zheng, X.; Ji, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, H.; et al. Ecological intensification of rice production through rice-fish co-culture. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 234, 1002–1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, H.; Sha, Z.; Wang, F.; Fang, K.; Dai, W.; Yi, X.; Cao, L. Nitrogen leakage in a rice–duck co-culture system with different fertilizer treatments in China. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 686, 555–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The National Standards and Guidelines for Rice-Fishery Co-Culture Farming Development. Available online: http://www.shuichan.cc/news_view-355566.html (accessed on 23 December 2019). (In Chinese).
- The Development of Rice-Fishery Co-Culture Farming in China. Available online: http://www.haichaninfo.com/news/show-59956.html (accessed on 15 January 2020). (In Chinese).
- Wang, Y.; Lei, W. Studies on the ecological effect of planting breeding models in the rice field. Acta Ecol. Sinica 2000, 20, 311–316. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Hu, L.; Ren, W.; Tang, J.; Li, N.; Zhang, J.; Chen, X. The productivity of traditional rice-fish co-culture can be increased without increasing nitrogen loss to the environment. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2013, 177, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Hu, L.; Ren, W.; Guo, L.; Tang, J.; Shu, M.; Chen, X. Rice-soft shell turtle coculture effects on yield and its environment. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2016, 224, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Si, G.; Peng, C.; Yuan, J.; Xu, X.; Zhao, S.; Xu, D.; Wu, J. Changes in soil microbial community composition and organic carbon fractions in an integrated rice–crayfish farming system in subtropical china. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, D.; Liu, M.; Min, Q.; Cheng, S.; Sun, Y.; Jiao, W. Comparing the ecological service value of rice-fish co-culture systems- an example of Qingtian county in Zhejiang and Congjiang county in Guizhou. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2019, 19, 30–36. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, K.; Zhu, Z.; Qian, Y. The develoing trend and of rice-field co-culture and corresponding suggestions. China Fish. Econ. 2011, 29, 17–21. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zheng, H.; He, H.; Yao, L.; Liu, J.; Huang, H. Ecological cconomic effects and its prospects of raising animals in paddy field. Wetl. Sci. 2015, 13, 510–517. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed, N.; Ward, J.D.; Saint, C.P. Can integrated aquaculture-agriculture (IAA) produce “more crop per drop”? Food Secur. 2014, 6, 767–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, J.; Hou, F. Change traditional thinking about food grain production and use food equivalent in yield measurement. Acta Pratacult. Sin. 1999, S1, 55–75. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Ren, J.; Lin, H. Arable land equivalent unit and potential food productivity of land resources in China. Acta Pratacult. Sin. 2006, 15, 1–10. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Tan, Y.; He, J.; Yu, Z.; Tan, Y. Can arable land alone ensure food security? The concept of arable land equivalent unit and its implications in Zhoushan City, China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ren, J.; Lin, H.; Hou, X. Developing the agro-grassland system to insure food security of China. Scientia Agric. Sinica 2007, 40, 614–621. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Davis, K.F.; Gephart, J.A.; Emery, K.A.; Leach, A.M.; Galloway, J.N.; D’Odorico, P. Meeting future food demand with current agricultural resources. Global Environ. Change. 2016, 39, 125–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frei, M.; Becker, K. Integrated rice-fish culture: Coupled production saves resources. Nat. Resour. Forum. 2005, 29, 135–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
RFCF Model | Area (ha) | Symbiote | Source of model |
---|---|---|---|
Rice-duck | 2.67 | Gaoyou Duck | Major model used in the Jiangyan district |
Rice-catfish | 2.00 | African Sharptooth Catfish | Introduced from Jiangxi Province; with six years’ history and good results |
Rice-crayfish | 1.33 | Louisiana Crayfish | Started in Qianjiang, Hubei Province; with the largest scale in China |
Rice-turtle | 0.67 | Local Turtle | Started in Deqing County, Zhejiang Province |
Rice-loach | 0.67 | Taiwan Loach | Applied in many provinces; with a small-scale demonstration in our experimental base |
Rice-carp | 0.67 | Amur Carp | Typically applied in Yangzhou, Jiangsu Province; mainly aimed at increasing visits to tourist sites |
Duck | Catfish | Crayfish | Turtle | Loach | Carp | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FEUa | 0.74 | 0.90 | 0.93 | 0.85 | 0.87 | 0.95 |
Corrected FEUa | 0.74 | 0.83 | 0.93 | 0.86 | 0.81 | 1.21 |
Converted FEU | 7.43 | 8.28 | 9.33 | 8.63 | 8.08 | 12.09 |
Model | Rice (kg) | Symbiote (kg) | Actual Rice (FEU) | Symbiote (FEU) | Integrated Rice Field (FEU) | Integrated Rice Field (ALEU) | Rice Grain (ALEU) | Symbiote (ALEU) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rice-duck | 9870 | 405 | 8883.0 | 4895.7 | 13,778.7 | 1.65 | 1.06 | 0.59 |
Rice-catfish | 8775 | 4050 | 7897.5 | 34,947.3 | 42,844.8 | 5.13 | 0.95 | 4.18 |
Rice-crayfish | 8730 | 1950 | 7857.0 | 14,488.5 | 22,345.5 | 2.67 | 0.94 | 1.73 |
Rice-turtle | 7419 | 720 | 6677.1 | 5965.0 | 12,642.1 | 1.51 | 0.80 | 0.71 |
Rice-loach | 7815 | 4200 | 7033.5 | 39,190.6 | 46,224.1 | 5.53 | 0.84 | 4.69 |
Rice-carp | 7440 | 750 | 6696.0 | 6061.0 | 12,757.0 | 1.53 | 0.80 | 0.73 |
Control | 8355 | -- | -- | -- | -- | 1.00 | 1.00 | -- |
Model | Rice | Symbiote | Actual Gain from Rice | Integrated Gain | ALEU from Net Gain | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cost | Profits | Net Gain | Cost | Profits | Net Gain | ||||
Rice-duck | 14.2 | 68.9 | 54.6 | 6.8 | 18.9 | 12.2 | 49.2 | 61.3 | 4.02 |
Rice-catfish | 14.2 | 63.2 | 48.9 | 13.5 | 40.5 | 27.0 | 44.0 | 71.0 | 4.66 |
Rice-crayfish | 14.6 | 62.9 | 48.2 | 26.0 | 78.0 | 52.1 | 43.4 | 95.5 | 6.26 |
Rice-turtle | 14.2 | 53.6 | 39.4 | 40.4 | 115.2 | 74.9 | 35.5 | 110.3 | 7.23 |
Rice-loach | 14.2 | 56.3 | 42.0 | 66.3 | 84.0 | 17.7 | 37.8 | 55.5 | 3.64 |
Rice-carp | 14.2 | 55.3 | 41.0 | 19.5 | 22.5 | 3.0 | 36.9 | 39.9 | 2.62 |
Control | 10.7 | 25.9 | 15.3 | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | 1.00 |
Model | ALEU | Food Productivity | Rice Productivity | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Estimated Increment of ALEU | % of Estimated Increment | Estimated Changes in Rice Cropland | % of Cropland Change | ||
Rice-duck | 219.3 | 86.3 | 3.8 | 8.4 | 0.37 |
Rice-catfish | 355.7 | 222.7 | 9.8 | −7.9 | −0.35 |
Rice-crayfish | 682.0 | 549.0 | 24.1 | −7.3 | −0.32 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Jin, T.; Ge, C.; Gao, H.; Zhang, H.; Sun, X. Evaluation and Screening of Co-Culture Farming Models in Rice Field Based on Food Productivity. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2173. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062173
Jin T, Ge C, Gao H, Zhang H, Sun X. Evaluation and Screening of Co-Culture Farming Models in Rice Field Based on Food Productivity. Sustainability. 2020; 12(6):2173. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062173
Chicago/Turabian StyleJin, Tao, Candi Ge, Hui Gao, Hongcheng Zhang, and Xiaolong Sun. 2020. "Evaluation and Screening of Co-Culture Farming Models in Rice Field Based on Food Productivity" Sustainability 12, no. 6: 2173. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062173