Data extracted in January 2023
Fiche created in December 2023

Note to the reader: This general fiche summarises all the environmental and climate impacts of WATER-SAVING IRRIGATION PRACTICES IN FLOODED LANDS found in a review of 13 synthesis papers[1]. These papers were selected from an initial number of 658 obtained through a systematic literature search strategy, according to the inclusion criteria reported in section 4. The impacts reported here are those for which there is scientific evidence available in published synthesis papers, what does not preclude the farming practice to have other impacts on the environment and climate still not covered by primary studies or by synthesis papers.

The synthesis papers review a number of primary studies ranging from 12 to 307. Therefore, the assessment of impacts relies on a large number of results from the primary studies, obtained mainly in field conditions, or sometimes in lab experiments or from model simulations.

1.     DESCRIPTION OF THE FARMING PRACTICE

  • Description:
    • Water-saving irrigation practices aim to reduce water use in irrigated fields. In flooded lands, specifically in rice paddy fields, the common feature of water-saving irrigation techniques is to keep the field in a water-free or thin water layer condition at a certain growth stage, by introducing short term drainage of flooding water during the rice cultivation.[2],[3]
    • Continuous flooding corresponds to flooding rice paddies throughout the growing season.[4]
  • Key descriptors:
    • In this review, different water-saving irrigation practices applied in flooded lands are compared to continuous flooding.
    • Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands in this review include:
      • water-saving irrigation practices that vary according to the number of drainages applied during the rice growing season (single or multiple), irrigation water amount, and irrigation schedule (e.g. alternate wet and dry irrigation, intermittent irrigation, mid-season drainage, controlled irrigation, moist irrigation, shallow irrigation and deep storage, thin and wet irrigation),
      • drip irrigation,
      • dry cultivation,[5]
      • and drill seeding methods[6]
    • In some studies the effect of water-saving irrigation practice compared to continuous flooding is not provided separately for each water-saving practice.
    • Please, note that this is not an exhaustive list of all water-saving irrigation techniques in flooded lands, but of those found in the synthesis papers that meet the requirements to be included in our review.
    • Please, note that some water-saving irrigation practices included in this review were not clearly defined by the authors (e.g., moist irrigation, shallow irrigation and deep storage, thin and wet irrigation).
    • This review does not present the results of the comparisons between water-saving and non-water saving irrigation practices in non-flooded lands and between no irrigation and non-water saving irrigation practices, as these two types of alternative comparisons are presented in two separate sets of fiches.
    • This review does not include irrigation practices applied in non-agricultural land or in non-flooded lands.

2.    EFFECTS OF THE FARMING PRACTICE ON CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

We reviewed the impacts of water-saving irrigation practices applied in flooded lands (i.e. rice paddies) compared to continuous flooding (Table 1).

The table below shows the number of synthesis papers with statistical tests reporting i) a significant difference between the Intervention and the Comparator, that is to say, a significant statistical effect, which can be positive or negative; or ii) a non-statistically significant difference between the Intervention and the Comparator. In addition, we include, if any, the number of synthesis papers reporting relevant results but without statistical test of the effects. Details on the quality assessment of the synthesis papers can be found in the methodology section of this WIKI.

Out of the 13 selected synthesis papers, 4 included studies conducted in Europe, and 13 have a quality score higher than 50%.

Table 1: Summary of effects. Number of synthesis papers reporting positive, negative or non-statistically significant effects on environmental and climate impacts. The number of synthesis papers reporting relevant results but without statistical test of the effects are also provided. When not all the synthesis papers reporting an effect are of high quality, the number of synthesis papers with a quality score of at least 50% is indicated in parentheses. Some synthesis papers may report effects for more than one impact, or more than one effect for the same impact.

 

 

 

 

Statistically tested

Non-statistically tested

Impact

Metric

Intervention

Comparator

 Significantly positive

Significantly negative

Non-significant

Decrease Air pollutants emissions

Ammonia emission

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

1

0

1

0

Increase Carbon sequestration

Soil organic carbon

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

0

1

0

0

Decrease GHG emissions

Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) emissions

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

4

1

0

0

Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) emissions - yield scale

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

3

0

0

0

Methane (CH4) emission

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

9

0

0

0

Nitrous oxide (N2O) emission

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

0

8

2

0

Decrease Nutrient leaching and run-off

Nitrogen leaching loss

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

1

0

1

0

Nitrogen runoff loss

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

1

0

1

0

Increase Plant nutrient uptake

Nitrogen use efficiency

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

1

0

1

0

Increase Soil nutrients

Soil organic nitrogen

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

0

0

1

0

Decrease Water use

Water supply

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

3

0

0

0

Water use efficiency

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

2

0

0

0

Increase Crop yield

Crop yield

Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands

Continuous flooding

3

7

4

0

3.     FACTORS INFLUENCING THE EFFECTS ON CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

The factors significantly influencing the size and/or direction of the effects on the impacts, according to the synthesis papers included in this review, are reported below. Details about the factors can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses available in this WIKI.

Table 2: List of factors reported to significantly affect the size and/or direction of the effects on environmental and climate impacts, according to the synthesis papers reviewed. The reference number of the synthesis papers where those factors are explored is given in parentheses.

Impact

Factors

Air pollutants emissions

N fertilisation (Ref3)

Carbon sequestration

Mean annual precipitation (Ref8)

GHG emissions

GHG emissions (Ref9), N fertilisation (Ref3), Organic fertiliser type (Ref7), Soil organic carbon (Ref7), Timing (Ref6) and Water management (Ref7)

Nutrient leaching and run-off

N fertilisation (Ref3)

Plant nutrient uptake

N fertilisation (Ref3)

Water use

Soil properties * field management (Ref11)

Crop yield

Degree of soil drying (Ref11), N fertilisation (Ref3), Soil organic carbon (Ref5), Soil pH (Ref11), Soil properties * field management (Ref11), Soil texture and soil type (Ref5), Timing of alternate wet and dry (Ref11), Water management (Ref7) and Water restriction amount (Ref5)

4.    SYSTEMATIC REVIEW SEARCH STRATEGY

Table 3: Systematic review search strategy - methodology and search parameters.

Parameter

Details

Keywords

WOS: ((TS=((((“sustainab*” OR “improv*” OR “reduc*” OR “limit*” OR “deficit*” OR “efficien*”) NEAR “irrigat*”) OR  ((“sustainab*” OR “improv*”) NEAR  ((“water” NEAR (“use” OR “reuse”)) OR “water use efficiency” OR “WUE” OR “water productivity” OR “water harvest*” OR “water balance” OR “water quality” OR “water uptake” OR “water holding capacity”)) OR  ((“sustainab*” OR “improv*”) NEAR (“water” NEAR (“management” OR “storage” OR “retention” OR  “conservation” OR “infiltration”))) OR  ((“sustainab*” OR “improv*”) NEAR (“water” NEAR (“blueprint” OR “footprint”)))) )) AND
TS=((“plant*” OR “crop*” OR “agricult*” OR “cult*” OR “farm*”))) AND
TS=((“meta-analy*” OR “systematic* review*” OR “evidence map” OR “global synthesis” OR “evidence synthesis” OR “research synthesis”))

 and

SCOPUS: TITLE-ABS-KEY(("sustainab*" OR "improv*" OR "reduc*" OR "limit*" OR "deficit*" OR "efficien*") W/3 "irrigat*" ) OR (("sustainab*" OR "improv*") W/3 (("water" W/3 ("use" OR "reuse")) OR "water use efficiency" OR "WUE" OR "water productivity" OR "water harvest*" OR "water balance" OR "water quality" OR "water uptake" OR "water holding capacity")) OR (("sustainab*" OR "improv*") W/3 ("water" W/3 ("management" OR "storage" OR "retention" OR "conservation" OR "infiltration")) OR (("sustainab*" OR "improv*") W/3 ( "water" W/3 ("blueprint" OR "footprint")))) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY("plant*" OR "crop*" OR "agricult*" OR "cult*" OR "farm*") AND TITLE-ABS-KEY("meta-analy*" OR "systematic* review*" OR "evidence map" OR "global synthesis" OR "evidence synthesis" OR "research synthesis") AND ( LIMIT-TO ( SRCTYPE,"j" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA,"ENVI" ) OR LIMIT-TO ( SUBJAREA,"AGRI" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE,"English" ) )

Time reference

No time restriction.

Databases

Web of Science and Scopus: run on 24 January 2023

Exclusion criteria

The main criteria that led to the exclusion of a synthesis paper are: 

1)        The topic of the meta-analysis is out of the scope of this review,

2)        The paper is neither a systematic review nor a meta-analysis of primary research,

3)        The analysis is not based on pairwise comparisons,

4)        The paper is not written in English,

5)        The full text is not available and

6)        The intervention (water-saving irrigation practice in flooded lands) and/or comparator (non water-saving irrigation practice OR another water-saving irrigation practice in flooded lands) are not clear.

The search returned 636 synthesis papers from WOS and SCOPUS on Water-saving irrigation practices in flooded lands plus other 22 retrieved in the search of other farming practices, potentially relevant for the practice object of our fiche. 
From the 658 potentially relevant synthesis papers, 471 were excluded after reading the title and abstract, and 174 after reading the full text according to the above-mentioned criteria. Finally, 13 synthesis papers were selected.

5.     SYNTHESIS PAPERS INCLUDED IN THE REVIEW

Table 4: List of synthesis papers included in this review. More details can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses.

Ref Num

Author(s)

Year

Title

Journal

DOI

Ref1

Chan, K; Bottomley, C; Saito, K; Lines, J; Tusting, LS

2022

The control of malaria vectors in rice fields: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Sci rep 12, 19694 (2022)

10.1038/s41598-022-24055-2

Ref2

Gu, XY; Weng, SM; Li, YE; Zhou, XQ

2022

Effects of Water and Fertilizer Management Practices on Methane Emissions from Paddy Soils: Synthesis and Perspective

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public health 2022, 19(12), 7324

10.3390/ijerph19127324

Ref3

Qiu, HN; Yang, SH; Jiang, ZW; Xu, Y; Jiao, XY

2022

Effect of Irrigation and Fertilizer Management on Rice Yield and Nitrogen Loss: A Meta-Analysis

Plants 2022, 11(13), 1690

10.3390/plants11131690

Ref4

Shang, ZY; Abdalla, M; Xia, LL; Zhou, F; Sun, WJ; Smith, P

2021

Can cropland management practices lower net greenhouse emissions without compromising yield?

Global change biology, 27, 4657–4670

10.1111/gcb.15796

Ref5

He, G; Wang, ZH; Cui, ZL

2020

Managing irrigation water for sustainable rice production in China

Journal of cleaner production 245: 118928

10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118928

Ref6

Yagi, K; Sriphirom, P; Cha-un, N; Fusuwankaya, K; Chidthaisong, A; Damen, B; Towprayoon, S

2020

Potential and promisingness of technical options for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from rice cultivation in Southeast Asian countries

Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 66:1, 37-49

10.1080/00380768.2019.1683890

Ref7

Jiang Y., Carrijo D., Huang S., Chen J., Balaine N., Zhang W., van Groenigen K.J., Linquist B.

2019

Water management to mitigate the global warming potential of rice systems: A global meta-analysis

Field crops research 2019, 234, 47-54

10.1016/j.fcr.2019.02.010

Ref8

Livsey, J; Katterer, T; Vico, G; Lyon, SW; Lindborg, R; Scaini, A; Da, CT; Manzoni, S

2019

Do alternative irrigation strategies for rice cultivation decrease water footprints at the cost of long-term soil health?

Environ. Res. Lett. 14 074011

10.1088/1748-9326/ab2108

Ref9

Zhao, X; Pu, C; Ma, ST; Liu, SL; Xue, JF; Wang, X; Wang, YQ; Li, SS; Lal, R; Chen, F; Zhang, HL

2019

Management-induced greenhouse gases emission mitigation in global rice production

Science of the total environment 2019, 649, 1299-1306

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.392

Ref10

Linquist B.A., Marcos M., Arlene Adviento-Borbe M., Anders M., Harrell D., Linscombe S., Reba M.L., Runkle B.R.K., Tarpley L., Thomson A.

2018

Greenhouse gas emissions and management practices that affect emissions in US rice systems

Journal of Environmental Quality 2018, 47, 3, 395-409

10.2134/jeq2017.11.0445

Ref11

Carrijo, DR; Lundy, ME; Linquist, BA

2017

Rice yields and water use under alternate wet and dry irrigation: A meta-analysis

Field crops research 2017, 203, 173-180

10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.002

Ref12

Nayak, D; Saetnan, E; Cheng, K; Wang, W; Koslowski, F; Cheng, YF; Zhu, WY; Wang, JK; Liu, JX; Moran, D; Yan, XY; Cardenas, L; Newbold, J; Pan, GX; Lui, YL; Smith, P

2015

Management opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from Chinese agriculture

Agriculture ecosystems & environment 2015, 209, 108-124

10.1016/j.agee.2015.04.035

Ref13

Feng, JF; Chen, CQ; Zhang, Y; Song, ZW; Deng, AX; Zheng, CY; Zhang, WJ

2013

Impacts of cropping practices on yield-scaled greenhouse gas emissions from rice fields in China: A meta-analysis

Agriculture ecosystems & environment 2013, 164, 220-228

10.1016/j.agee.2012.10.009

 

Disclaimer: These fiches present a large amount of scientific knowledge synthesised to assess farming practices impacts on the environment, climate and productivity. The European Commission maintains this WIKI to enhance public access to information about its initiatives. Our goal is to keep this information timely and accurate. If errors are brought to our attention, we will try to correct them. However, the Commission accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever with regard to the information on these fiches and WIKI.


[1] Synthesis research papers include either meta-analysis or systematic reviews with quantitative results. Details can be found in the methodology section of the WIKI.

[2] Qiu et al., 2022. Effect of Irrigation and Fertilizer Management on Rice Yield and Nitrogen Loss: A Meta-Analysis. Plants, 11(13), 1690; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11131690

[3] Yagi et al., 2019. Potential and promisingness of technical options for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from rice cultivation in Southeast Asian countries. SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT NUTRITION, 66 (1), 37-49; https://doi.org/10.1080/00380768.2019.1683890

[4] Climate and Clean Air Coalition, 2014. https://www.ccacoalition.org/en/activity/paddy-rice-production

[5] Non-flooded rice but might be irrigated.

[6] Rice is continuously flooded from the 3–6 leaf stage to final drain for harvest.

  • No labels