Next Article in Journal
Reddening of the Unicellular Green Alga Euglena gracilis by Dried Bonito Stock and Intense Red Light Irradiation
Previous Article in Journal
Physiological and Molecular Response of Liriodendron chinense to Varying Stand Density
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 13
Issue 4
10.3390/plants13040509
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Environmental Assessment of Dryland and Irrigated Winter Wheat Cultivation under Compost Fertilization Strategies

by
Elnaz Amirahmadi
*,
Mohammad Ghorbani
,
Jan Moudrý
,
Jaroslav Bernas
,
Chisenga Emmanuel Mukosha
and
Trong Nghia Hoang
Department of Agroecosystems, Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1645/31A, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2024, 13(4), 509; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/plants13040509
Submission received: 17 January 2024 / Revised: 30 January 2024 / Accepted: 9 February 2024 / Published: 12 February 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Physiology and Crop Production)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is a strategic agricultural crop that plays a significant role in maintaining national food security and sustainable economic development. Increasing technical performance considering lowering costs, energy, and environmental consequences are significant aims for wheat cultivation. For drylands, which cover approximately 41% of the world’s land surface, water stress has a considerable negative impact on crop output. The current study aimed to assess the environmental aspects of chemical fertilizer in combination with compost in dryland and irrigated winter wheat production systems through life cycle assessment (LCA). The cradle-to-farm gate was considered as the system boundary based on one tone of wheat yield and four strategies: D-C (dryland with compost), D (dryland without compost), I-C (irrigated with compost), and I (irrigated without compost). Based on the results, the highest and lowest amounts of wheat yield were related to the I-C and D strategies with 12.2 and 6.7 ton ha−1, respectively. The LCA result showed that the I strategy in comparison with other strategies had the highest negative impact on human health (49%), resources (59%), ecosystem quality (44%), and climate change (43%). However, the D-C strategy resulted in the lowest adverse effect of 6% on human health, 1% on resources, 10% on ecosystem quality, and 11% on climate change. Utilizing a combination of fertilizer and compost in dryland areas could ensure a higher yield of crops in addition to alleviating negative environmental indicators.

1. Introduction

Cereals are frequently cultivated in industrialized monocultures, which are notorious for requiring enormous quantities of water, fuel, fertilizer, and pesticides, with the main objective of helping to increase production yields and, thus, best meet the world’s ever-increasing need for food [1,2,3,4]. For a large portion of the world’s population, wheat is the primary food crop, and it is the second most widely grown grain in the world [3]. The production and use of cereals are crucial since they not only greatly improve human nutrition but also pose a substantial danger to ecosystem functioning and biodiversity. Despite making up over 35% of the calories consumed by humans, cereal production typically entails damaging methods of agriculture that have the potential to drastically change the climate and deplete energy, water, and land resources [5,6].
Particularly in arid and semi-arid regions, water scarcity is a global concern that is becoming increasingly serious since it affects food insecurity [7,8,9]. Iran is one of the semi-arid countries that suffers from water scarcity. One of the best methods for increasing water production and rationalizing irrigation water has previously been described as dryland (rainfed) farming [4]. Three-quarters of the world’s population live in drylands, which make up 41% of the planet’s geographical area [10]. Dryland farming relies mostly on rainfed agriculture, in which precipitation serves as the only available supply of water for crop development [1]. However, several studies have demonstrated the detrimental effects of water stress circumstances on lowering plant metabolic activities and leaf turgor pressure in dryland farming, so crop production is significantly reduced as a result [11,12,13]. Additionally, global warming will also cause drought stress to occur more frequently in drylands, according to several studies [14,15]. As a result, improving dryland crop yields and yield stability is a major problem because of climate change and rising global food demand. On the other hand, diesel fuel is a common source of energy that is directly used by diesel engines in many agricultural activities, especially for water pumping. The use of several management techniques, such as dryland farming and nutrient management, could undoubtedly cut down on the quantity of fossil fuels required in agriculture. In other words, as an important part of agricultural activities, irrigation influences soil properties, crop growth, and the environment. Dryland farming has influenced agricultural systems by allowing growers to manage greater areas of land with reduced water and machinery inputs [1,3,16,17].
Previous research showed that adding organic amendments or fertilizers, such as composts, has been implemented for decades to maintain and enhance agricultural soil functioning [18,19,20,21,22,23]. In addition to providing crop nutrients, organic fertilizer could quickly enhance a wide range of soil characteristics, including water dynamics, nutrient cycling, and soil structure [22,24]. Among the organic fertilizers, composting has been widely accepted to produce high-quality organic fertilizer.
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a method that is frequently used to evaluate the environmental effects of food-producing activities in the agriculture sector. With a closer look at the literature, the focus of published studies in terms of life cycle assessment in wheat cultivation is primarily on irrigated wheat farming [25,26] or dryland farming [27]. Furthermore, the evaluated factors through LCA are only based on a few environmental impact categories. To fill these knowledge gaps, a comprehensive environmental LCA of a winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production system considering compost strategies in dryland and irrigated farming was investigated. The goal of the current study was to provide a complete evaluation of the environmental performance of compost fertilizer in both dryland and irrigated winter wheat farming systems. To fully investigate various manufacturing processes and food items, we examined several effective environmental categories in the LCA process including human health, resources, ecosystem quality, and climate change impact categories. We assumed that compost application in dryland farming could increase the dry matter accumulation and yield, as well as decrease GHG emissions and other environmental damages. The objectives of the study were to (1) determine the effects of compost fertilizer in dryland and irrigated farming on grain yield and (2) estimate the environmental damage of each cropping system. The present study’s influence is mostly related to the following aspects: the relevant number of considered impact categories, the effect of compost application on crop yield, the environmental impact of dryland and irrigated wheat farming, and, finally, the limited available literature on the topic.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Yield

Applying too much or improper fertilizer does not ensure consistently high yields, which might lead to inefficient use of nutrients and numerous other issues affecting the environment and economy [28]. Therefore, learning how to improve the soil water status and optimize the coupling of fertilization and water is key to obtaining high and sustainable crop yields in arid areas. Figure 1 shows the results of wheat yield (ton ha−1) in different strategies. Based on the results, wheat yield (grain and straw) in irrigated farming was higher than in dryland farming, and compost fertilizer significantly affected wheat grain, straw, and total yield in both dryland and irrigated farming. In detail, the total yield of the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 8.6, 6.7, 12.2, and 10.7 (ton ha−1), respectively. Compost fertilizer increased the wheat grain in dryland and irrigated farming by 27.4% and 14.4%, respectively. Also, wheat straw yield notably increased with the use of compost fertilizer in dryland and irrigated farming by 17.7% and 9.5%, respectively. The effect of compost application on dryland farming was higher than irrigated farming. It has been observed that under standard moisture conditions, compost application to dry soil may increase nitrogen (N) and carbon (C) mineralization [29]. Further, it was reported that compost application, both alone and combined with mineral fertilizer, improved wheat grain yield compared to the equivalent level of mineral fertilizer due to macronutrients and micronutrients in the composts. Therefore, it is obvious that when compost was given at the highest nitrogen level, the accessible phosphorus in the compost was greater than in the mineral fertilizer treatment. Furthermore, iron was only found in the compost and not in the mineral fertilizer [30]. On the other hand, the already existing organic matter in the compost substance provides an excellent habitat for microbial activity and successfully promotes nutrient transformation [31]. Consequently, a significant increase in yield in response to compost application in both dryland and irrigated is inevitable. It has been demonstrated in many countries around the world that applying organic fertilizers to agricultural soil is an effective way to regulate fertility and is the key to achieving sustained agricultural productivity.

2.2. Environmental Impact Assessment

Table 1 and Figure 2 show the impact assessment of compost fertilizer in dryland and irrigated winter wheat farming per ton. The midpoint environmental impact assessment of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ha is given in Appendix A. The values of environmental impact levels in Figure 2 were expressed in %, where 100% is the highest value within the impact categories. Based on the results, irrigated wheat farming without compost in comparison with other strategies had the highest impact categories. In detail, in dryland farming, there was a notable difference between compost and no compost strategies in PMFP, ODP, FETP, FEP, LOP, TAP, TETP, and GWP, but in irrigated farming, the significant difference was observed in all eighteen categories in terms of compost application. The results showed that compost application in both dryland and irrigated farming reduced the environmental impacts. Jiang et al. (2021) conducted a life cycle assessment of wheat production and stated that the environmental impacts of wheat production greatly improved in the manure compost strategy [32]. In addition, some research showed that compost application has many environmental benefits for improving soil quality and reducing negative environmental impact, including increasing the level of carbon storage capacity in the soil; alleviating global warming; reducing the need for fertilizers, pesticides, and peat use; improving soil structure, density, and porosity; increasing water retention capacity; and reducing erosion and nutrient leaching [33,34,35].

2.2.1. Human Health

Table 1 shows the environmental impact of human health categories in dryland and irrigated winter wheat farming. The percentage contribution of dryland and irrigated wheat farming with and without compost on human health is given in Figure 3a. Irrigated farming had the highest impact on human health by 49%, but dryland compost farming, by 6%, had the lowest impact. The effect of each input on the human health of dryland and irrigated wheat farming with and without compost can be seen in Figure 3b. In dryland farming (with and without compost), diesel fuel and nitrogen fertilizer are responsible for the highest proportion of impacts on human health. On the other hand, in irrigated farming (with and without compost), diesel fuel and irrigation had the greatest impact on the human health category. It has been reported that agrochemical contamination has a long-term impact on humans, food chains, and the environment [36]. One of the issues with the use of agrochemicals is the migration of them into surface water after treatment, which can harm aquatic ecosystems and human health [37,38]. Furthermore, excessive urea fertilizer application and inadequate nitrogen usage efficiency may exacerbate these negative environmental consequences [39].
The human health impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming are given in Figure 4 as follows: particulate matter formation (PMFP) (Figure 4a), human carcinogenic toxicity (HTPc) (Figure 4b), human noncarcinogenic toxicity (HTPnc) (Figure 4c), ionizing radiation (IRP) (Figure 4d), ozone formation in ecosystems (EOFP) (Figure 4e), and stratospheric ozone depletion (ODP) (Figure 4f).

Particulate Matter Formation (PMFP)

Particulate matter (PM) is one of the major environmental pollutants and has negative effects on human health [40]. Several studies have shown that these practices affect the ecosystem and have impacts on human health [41,42,43]. The results of this research show that the PMFP in irrigated farming was higher than in dryland, and in both strategies, compost application reduced the PMEP by 23.77% and 38.72% in dryland and irrigated farming, respectively (Figure 4a). Based on the displayed results in Table 2, the share of chemical fertilizers in the compost strategy in both dryland and irrigated farming was lower than without compost strategies. Therefore, it can be a reason for the significant reduction in PMEP. On the other hand, irrigated farming relies on irrigation pumps normally powered by fossil fuels or electricity, while dryland farming relies on precipitation, resulting in lower energy consumption in this system than in irrigated farming. Also, a closer look at Table 2 shows a lower share of fossil fuel in dryland than in irrigated farming, resulting in lower emissions of air pollutants including particulates finer than 2.5 μm.

Human Carcinogenic Toxicity (HTPc) and Human Noncarcinogenic Toxicity (HTPnc)

The human toxicity potential (HTP) describes the potential for health damage from exposure to toxic chemicals, including carcinogens (HTPc) and noncarcinogens (HTPnc) [44,45]. In the agricultural sector, most emitted pollutants to the atmosphere are related to chemical fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and other agrochemicals, which play an essential role in human carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic toxicity [46,47]. The recent literature suggests that decreasing chemicals (fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides, and seed products) could be an effective technique for minimizing the human toxicity impact of wheat agriculture [48,49]. The results show that the highest HTPc and HTPnc were related to the irrigated without compost scheme and the lowest ones were related to the dryland compost farming. In detail, HTPc in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 4.31, 5.29, 19.9, and 30.3 kg 1.4-DCB, respectively (Figure 4b), while HTPnc in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 218.9, 271.3, 734.3, and 1057 kg 1.4-DCB, respectively (Table 1). In both dryland and irrigated farming, compost application reduced the HTPc and HTPnc. Darzi-Naftchali et al. reported that urea fertilizer had the largest influence on the carcinogenic diseases index [50], matching the result of current research. Table 2 shows the lower share of chemical fertilizers and biocides in compost application strategies, as a hotspot of HTP and soil emissions in both dryland and irrigated farming.

Ionizing Radiation (IRP)

Ionizing radiation is typically associated with traditional energy-generating operations including natural gas and petroleum extraction, coal combustion, and mining. According to the results, in both strategies, compost application reduced the IRP by 21.87% and 69.26% in dryland and irrigated farming, respectively. In detail, IRP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 3.85, 4.69, 69.3, and 117.4 kBq Co-60 eq, respectively (Figure 4d). In cropping systems, excessive chemical fertilizer application and inadequate usage efficiency may exacerbate these negative environmental consequences [49]. On the other hand, Table 2 shows the lower share of chemical fertilizers, biocides, and diesel fuel in compost application strategies. It has been demonstrated that the use of diesel-based fossil fuels had the greatest influence on the ionizing radiation potential, followed by triple superphosphate and urea fertilizers [50]. Also, Biermann and Geist reported that agricultural machinery is the main cause of increasing ionizing radiation [51].

Ozone Formation (EOFP) and Stratospheric Ozone Depletion (ODP)

Heat and sunlight cause chemical reactions between oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOC) are the main cause of ozone formation, which are also known as hydrocarbons. This reaction can occur both near the ground and high in the atmosphere. The results show that the highest and lowest EOFP were related to irrigated without compost and dryland compost farming, respectively. EOFP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 2.15, 1.55, 0.932, and 0.709 kg NOx eq, respectively (Figure 4e). In other words, compost application reduced the EOFP by 38.42% in dryland and by 31.45% in irrigated farming. The recent literature reported that approximately 90% of anthropogenic N2O reaches the stratosphere, thus contributing to the catalytic destruction of ozone [52,53]. As a result, the function of compost fertilizer in irrigated farming was higher than in dryland farming. The inventory data of wheat cultivation per ton (Table 2) show the higher fossil fuel consumption in irrigated farming due to the irrigation pump powered by fossil fuels in these strategies. Zheng et al. stated that agricultural machinery that operates on diesel fuel can exacerbate ozone layer depletion. Ozone-depleting compounds are a class of synthetic chemicals that cause the ozone layer’s thickness to decrease [54]. The stratospheric ozone depletion ODP in both dryland and irrigated farming was 0.002 kg CFC11 eq, and in both strategies, compost application reduced the ODP by 100%; accordingly, ODP in both dryland and irrigated farming was 0.001 kg CFC11 eq (Figure 4f). The consumption of butachlor herbicides is a source of ozone depletion. Because of the chlorine in its composition, this herbicide has high destructive power and is categorized as category one in terms of potential danger to water resources and ozone depletion [54]. Also, agricultural machinery that operates on diesel fuel can exacerbate ozone layer depletion. This claim matches the inventory data of wheat cultivation and the share of inputs in different strategies (Table 2).

2.2.2. Resources

Table 1 shows the environmental impact of resource categories in dryland and irrigated winter wheat farming. The percentage contribution of dryland and irrigated wheat farming with and without compost on resources is given in Figure 5a. Irrigated farming (without compost), with a 59% contribution, had the highest impact on resources, while dryland farming both with compost and without compost fertilizer, with a 1% contribution share, had the lowest impact on resources. The effect of each input on the resource categories for dryland and irrigated wheat farming can be seen in Figure 5b. In dryland farming (with and without compost), diesel and nitrogen fertilizers are responsible for the highest proportion of impacts on resources. On the other hand, in irrigated farming, irrigation had a major impact on the resource category.
The resource impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming is given in Figure 6. The impact assessment of the resource categories includes fossil resource scarcity (FFP) (Figure 6a), mineral resource scarcity (SOP) (Figure 6b), and water consumption (WCP) (Figure 6c).

Fossil Resource Scarcity (FFP) and Mineral Resource Scarcity (SOP)

The scarcity of natural resources is a developing worry in many places in the world; on the other hand, rapid population growth and growing industrialization are putting significant strain on the world’s scarce resources, resulting in shortages in many areas [55]. Further, around 1.3–1.8% of the world’s fossil fuel consumption is attributable to the manufacturing of nitrogen fertilizers [56]. According to previous studies, chemicals such as fertilizers and insecticides account for 25–97% of all nonrenewable inputs [57]. Also, around 14% of the world’s ammonia production is based on coal gasification and 77% on natural gas reform [56]. The results show that the highest and lowest FFP was related to the irrigated without compost and dryland compost farming, respectively. Table 1 showed that FFP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 23.37, 29.96, 73.33, and 107.5 kg oil eq, respectively. With a closer look at Table 2, it is obvious that diesel fuel and water consumption causes higher inputs in irrigated farming. Therefore, higher FFP in irrigated farming than in dryland farming is inevitable. Some studies showed that natural resource scarcity can be alleviated through conservation efforts, such as reducing water usage, improving soil fertility with appropriate amendments, and reducing energy consumption [58,59]. The result of current research shows that compost application reduced the FFP by 28.2% in dryland and by 46.4% in irrigated farming per one ton of wheat yield.
According to the results, SOP in irrigated farming was higher than in dryland, and in both strategies, compost application reduced the SOP by 31.1% and 36.3% in dryland and irrigated farming, respectively. In detail, SOP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 2.07, 2.72, 4.06, and 5.54 kg Cu eq, respectively (Figure 5b). The use of lower amounts of fertilizers and diesel fuel in compost strategies could help to lessen the negative environmental impact on FFP and SOP.

Water Consumption (WCP)

The results show that the highest WCP was related to irrigated (without compost) farming with 469.8 m3 and the lowest WCP was related to dryland (with compost) farming with 4.407 m3 per ton of wheat (Table 1). Compost application reduced the WCP by 34.4% in dryland and by 73.7% in irrigated farming (Figure 5c). The impact of water depletion on individuals and ecosystems was explored under the water consumption category. WCP was calculated using m3 water consumption equivalents. Environmental degradation and natural resource scarcity are today’s most significant challenges. Unsustainable use of natural resources such as land, water, and air, as well as habitat degradation, are reducing the quality and availability of these resources. By improving yield and water productivity, connected irrigation and organic fertilizer management may assist farmers in coping with water shortages in drought and water-limited conditions [60]. Compost application is a reliable approach for restoring the physical and nutritional features of most soils and improving their function, particularly soils with low organic matter levels and poor structure [61]. Based on the results, the function of compost fertilizer in irrigated farming was higher than in dryland farming. Soil fertilizers, such as composting, have been demonstrated to boost soil carbon storage while also enhancing plant production and soil water-holding capacity [62]. The improvements in soil water holding capacity can have a reduction impact on drought conditions, allowing for continuous plant development even with a reduced water supply, especially in drylands [63]. It has been reported that a suitable fertilizer application can enhance water availability for crops by increasing soil water storage capacity, reducing soil evaporation, and allowing a high and sustainable crop yield [64].

2.2.3. Ecosystem Quality

The percentage contribution of different wheat farming strategies on ecosystem quality is given in Figure 7a. Table 1 and Figure 8 show the ecosystem quality categories in dryland and irrigated winter wheat farming. Irrigated farming (without compost), by 44%, had the highest impact on ecosystem quality, but dryland farming (with compost), by 10%, had the lowest impact on ecosystem quality. The effect of each input on the ecosystem quality for dryland and irrigated wheat farming can be seen in Figure 7b. In dryland farming (with and without compost), nitrogen fertilizer and diesel fuel are responsible for the highest proportion of impacts on ecosystem quality. On the other hand, in irrigated farming (with and without compost), diesel fuel and irrigation had the greatest impact on the ecosystem quality category.
The ecosystem quality impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming is given in Figure 8. The impact assessment of ecosystem quality categories includes freshwater ecotoxicity (FETP) (Figure 8a), freshwater eutrophication (FEP) (Figure 8b), land use (LOP) (Figure 8c), marine ecotoxicity (METP) (Figure 8d), marine eutrophication (MEP) (Figure 8e), ozone formation in terrestrial ecosystems (HOFP) (Figure 8f), terrestrial acidification (TAP) (Figure 8g), and terrestrial ecotoxicity (TETP) (Figure 8h).

Freshwater Ecotoxicity (FETP) and Freshwater Eutrophication (FEP)

Groundwater contamination and freshwater ecotoxicity are caused by the leaching of soil contaminants and toxic substances that affect the quality of surface water [65]. However, eutrophication is caused by excessive phytoplankton development on surface waters because of the availability of nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen derivative compounds, which causes the loss of both ecosystem health and aquatic biodiversity. Chemical pollution’s impact on freshwater ecosystems not only leads to a direct impact on aquatic life but also decreases their potential for producing ecosystem services in ways that negatively affect human well-being, creating a challenge to sustainable ecosystem service production [66]. The results show that FETP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 7.58, 9.03, 15.65, and 21.32 kg 1.4-DCB, respectively (Figure 8a), while FEP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 0.07, 0.09, 0.12, and 0.18 kg P eq, respectively (Figure 8b). FETP in dryland farming was lower than in irrigated farming. The results showed that compost application reduced FETP by 19.1% in dryland and 36.2% in irrigated farming. The toxicity impact is mostly caused by the emission of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) into the air or soil [67], which is significantly reduced by compost application in both dryland and irrigated farming (Table 2 and Table 3). Soil toxicity is related to the use of fertilizers and chemical pesticides in agriculture, and soil is a significant pollution sink due to particle adsorption on the soil surface [68]. Compost is used as a natural soil nourishment or organic fertilizer as a substitute for synthetic fertilizers, whose unregulated usage has resulted in negative environmental problems, loss of various soil qualities, and crop yields over time [53]. Also, previous research reported that during crop cultivation, the use of fertilizer leads to higher eutrophication potential [3,69,70].

Land Use (LOP)

The impact category ‘land use’ describes the environmental impacts of occupying, reshaping, and managing land for human purposes. Land use can either be the long-term use of land (e.g., for arable farming) or changing the type of land use (e.g., from natural to urban area). LOP is expressed in (m2 × yearly) crop equivalents [53]. According to the results, LOP in irrigated farming was higher than in dryland, and in both strategies, compost application reduced the LOP by 33.4% and 24.6% in dryland and irrigated farming, respectively. In detail, LOP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 53.29, 71.12, 80.65, and 100.5 m2a crop eq, respectively (Figure 8c). In this study, the total yield of the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 8.6, 6.7, 12.2, and 10.7 (ton ha−1), respectively, and compost fertilizer increased the wheat grain of dryland and irrigated farming by 27.4% and 14.4%, respectively. Therefore, to produce the same amount of wheat, less land is required. This emphasized that in order to achieve equivalent yields with chemical fertilizer, compost application requires a lower surface area of land and also reduces the agricultural machinery.

Marine Ecotoxicity (METP) and Marine Eutrophication (MEP)

In general, human activities continue to put strain on marine ecosystems, such as pollution from chemicals generated through manufacturing cycles [71]. Marine ecotoxicity is the effect of harmful compounds emitted into the environment on marine creatures, but eutrophication is the unwanted increase in biomass in ecosystems caused by nutrient enrichment, and fertilizer emissions of nitrogen and phosphorus are a key contribution to eutrophication [56]. The results show that METP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 6.16, 7.71, 16.9, and 24.3 kg 1.4-DCB, respectively (Figure 8d). Irrigation contributes to nitrate leaching; therefore, irrigation water promotes absorption through the soil profile, which may result in the transfer of soluble nitrogen, mostly in the form of nitrate [72]. If the amount of irrigation water used exceeds the soil’s water-holding capacity, nitrate could leach beyond the root zone, which may cause marine ecotoxicity and water pollution [73,74]. In detail, compost application reduced METP, by 25.2% and 10.7%, in both dryland and irrigated farming, respectively, owing to lower diesel fuel consumption and synthetic fertilizer use (Table 2). Leachate can pollute both groundwater and surface water as the main reason for marine ecotoxicity. According to the results, compost application reduced MEP, by 26.2% and 10.7%, in dryland and irrigated farming, respectively, owing to lower levels of agrochemicals and synthetic fertilizer use (Table 2). Prechsl et al. found that heavy metal emissions from fertilizers had the greatest influence on the ecosystem [75]; on the other hand, organic fertilizers have a lower impact on eutrophication due both to the lower quantity used and to the formation of N, which is organic. Fertilizer emissions of nitrogen and phosphorus are a key contribution to eutrophication. According to the previous reports, in terms of eutrophication potential, phosphorus fertilizers and pesticides had a much larger percentage than other input sources. Also, the use of nitrogen fertilizer has a significant impact on the eutrophication of water sources [56,68,70].

Ozone Formation in Terrestrial Ecosystems (HOFP), Terrestrial Acidification (TAP), and Terrestrial Ecotoxicity (TETP)

The results show that the highest ozone formation in terrestrial ecosystems (HOFP) was related to irrigated farming (without compost) by 2.21 kg NOx eq and the lowest HOFP was related to dryland (with compost) by 0.71 kg NOx eq per ton wheat (Figure 8f). Compost application reduced the HOFP by 31.3% in dryland and by 38.6% in irrigated farming. It is obvious that agrochemicals are being used to reduce some undesirable organisms to increase crop productivity. However, certain agrochemicals may have an influence on humans as well as aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems through leaching, evaporation, and surface run-off [76,77]. Terrestrial acidification (TAP) is being calculated using kg SO2 equivalents emitted into the atmosphere [77]. Soil acidity changes are caused by atmospheric deposition of inorganic chemicals, such as sulfates, nitrates, and phosphates, and have an adverse effect on all plant species and soil microorganisms, while terrestrial ecotoxicity considers the potential damage and hazardous effects caused to terrestrial ecosystems by releasing chemicals into the environment [76].
According to the results, TAP and TETP in irrigated farming were higher than in dryland. In detail, TAP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 2.17, 2.65, 2.41, and 3.18 kg SO2 eq, respectively (Figure 8g), and TETP in the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies was 384.8, 506.9, 1053, and 1529 kg 104-DCB, respectively (Figure 8h). The results showed that compost application reduced the TAP by 22.31% and 32.38% in dryland and irrigated farming, respectively. Organic fertilizers, in general, have a low potential to acidify the soil. Chemical fertilizers, on the other hand, have varying qualities depending on their composition. Also, TETP was reduced under compost application by 31.72% in dryland and 45.21% in irrigated farming. Crop cultivation influences acidification and ecotoxicity due to the production of the chemicals used, transportation of raw materials, and energy generation for the process. The result of the current research shows that compost application reduced the inputs (agrochemicals and diesel fuel consumption) in both dryland and irrigated farming (Table 2), and it aligned with the lowest TAP and TETP in compost application strategies. Studies have shown that the unbalanced and excessive use of mineral and chemical fertilizers decreases crop yield and soil physical characteristics and increases nitrate and heavy metal accumulation, as well as soil acidity [33,78]. It has been reported that fertilization treatments have a significant influence on terrestrial ecotoxicity. By evaluating various fertilization procedures, Krzyżaniak et al. discovered that decreasing fertilization reduced terrestrial ecotoxicity [79].

2.2.4. Climate Change and Global Warming (GWP)

Table 1 shows the global warming potential of dryland and irrigated winter wheat farming. Also, the global warming potential of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) are given in Figure 9c. The percentage contribution of dryland and irrigated wheat farming to climate change is given in Figure 9a. Based on the results, irrigated farming (without compost), with a contribution share of 43%, had the highest impact on climate change, while dryland (with compost) farming, with an 11% contribution, had the lowest impact on climate change. According to Wang et al. deficit irrigation significantly reduced greenhouse gas emissions from winter wheat fields when compared to full irrigation due to the lower fossil fuel consumption [80]. Also, Zornoza et al. showed that irrigation increases N2O and CO2 emissions compared to no irrigation because of an enhancement in soil respiration, soil-accessible water, and carbon and nitrogen mineralization (Zornoza et al., 2018) [81].
The effect of each input on climate change for dryland and irrigated wheat farming with and without compost can be seen in Figure 9b. In dryland farming, nitrogen fertilizer and diesel fuel are responsible for the highest proportion of impacts on climate change, since fertilizer production uses a lot of coal or natural gas as a source of hydrogen (to synthesize ammonia), resulting in increasing CO2 emissions. On the other hand, in irrigation farming (with and without compost), diesel fuel and irrigation (relying on an irrigation pump powered by fossil fuels) had a major impact on climate change. According to Hokazono and Hayashi, in the rice system, direct emissions and field operations significantly contribute to the environmental impacts [82]. Similar research studies showed that the usage of chemical fertilizers (especially urea) and fossil fuels had the greatest impact on global warming potential and GHG emissions in other crops [28]. The global warming potential (GWP) values found for the D-C, D, I-C, and I strategies were 162.6, 217.6, 359.7, and 504.8 kg CO2 eq per one ton of total yield, respectively (Table 1). The results showed that compost application reduced the GWP by 33.8% and 40.3% in dryland and irrigated farming, respectively. Compost application can boost soil carbon stocks directly by adding organic material and indirectly by improving soil C sequestration through plant inputs [83]. In other words, compost fertilizer improves water-holding capacity, and the slow-release nutrients in compost promote carbon sequestration through photosynthesis after which carbon is incorporated into plant biomass [33].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Study Site and Data Collection

This study was conducted in Hamedan state of Iran, which is located at 33°59′–35°48′ N, and 47°34′–49°36′ E. This region had a cold semi-arid climate (Koppen climate classification BSk) with an average rainfall of 33.9 and 51 mm and an average annual temperature of 13.3 and 11.7 °C. Soil chemical and physical properties in the study area are given in Table S1. The data were collected using questionnaires and interviews from 88 farms. The appropriate sample number for this study was determined using Cochran’s formula and using a simple random sampling technique:
n = N s × t 2 N − 1 d 2 + N s × t 2
where n is the required sample number, N is the population size, t is the t value at 95% confidence limit (1.96), s is the standard deviation (SD), and d is the permissible error (5%).
Four strategies were considered for this research: D-C (dryland with compost), D dryland without compost), I-C (irrigated with compost), and I (irrigated without compost). Table S2 indicates the fundamental properties of each strategy.

3.2. Life Cycle Assessment

The LCA methodology of this study is based on the ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 standards and contains four phases, including goal and scope definition, life cycle inventory (LCI), life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), and data interpretation. In the current research, the environmental impact of compost fertilizer in dryland and irrigated farming was evaluated. The LCA of this study is conducted with the ReCiPe 2016 midpoint (H) impact assessment, AGRIBALYSE v1.2/v1.3, and Ecoinvent V.3.5 databases. OpenLCA software V.11.0 was used to assess the environmental impact of compost fertilizer in dryland and irrigated farming.
The goal and scope are the first phase of any LCA research and consist of the functional unit, system boundary, and study aim. As a comparative condition, the functional unit is connected to the inputs and outputs. Several operations are required for wheat cultivation, i.e., land preparation, deep plowing, plowing, cultivation, sowing, fertilizing, compost application, irrigation, and harvesting. One tone of dry matter was considered as the functional unit for this research. Also, the system boundary of cradle-to-farm gate was considered in this research, (Figure 10). The emissions and nutrient losses were evaluated based on the following terms: carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), nitrates (NO3), nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ammonia (NH3), nitrogen (N), phosphates (PO4), and phosphorus (P).
In the second phase, life cycle inventory (LCI) includes information on all environmental inputs and outputs at each step of the life cycle. The LCI was constructed using two datasets including foreground and background. Foreground data for this study were obtained through farmer interviews, and the sources of the background data were AGRIBALYSE v1.2/v1.3 and Ecoinvent V.3.5 databases. The inventory data of wheat cultivation in each strategy are shown in Table 2 (per ton) and Table 3 (per hectare)
In the next step, classification, characterization, normalization, and weighting were four categories of the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) as the third phase of LCA. The ReCiPe 2016 model was used for the assessment of the environmental impact in this study. The overall purpose of the ReCiPe method is to condense a lengthy list of life cycle inventory data into a small number of indicator scores. The ReCiPe midpoint technique includes 18 environmental impact indicators, which are further divided into four damage categories (human health, ecosystem quality, resources, and climate change) (Figure 11).
Finally, the goal of data interpretation as the fourth phase of LCA was to analyze the findings to discover the restrictions, suggestions, and results of the LCA to assist decision makers.

4. Conclusions

Water shortages have shown detrimental impacts on crop yield. This problem could be overcome by applying organic amendments and fertilizers. In the current research, wheat yield and environmental indicators of compost fertilization in dryland and irrigated wheat production were compared from multi-environmental aspects using the life cycle assessment (LCA) technique. In both dryland and irrigated farming, compost application increased the amount of yield due to providing a sustainable source of essential nutrients for plant growth. In general, the impact of compost fertilization on grain yield in dryland farming was higher than in irrigated farming. Also, the application of compost notably reduced the environmental indicators in both farming systems. The lowest environmental impacts of compost application in dryland and irrigated farming showed the outstanding potential of compost as an organic soil fertilizer, in terms of securing human health, resources, ecosystem quality, and net-zero emissions. Therefore, it would be suggested that utilizing a combination of fertilizer and compost, especially in dryland areas, could ensure a higher yield while also alleviating the negative environmental indicators.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://0-www-mdpi-com.brum.beds.ac.uk/article/10.3390/plants13040509/s1, Table S1: Characteristics of soil in the studied site before the experiment. Table S2: Fundamental properties of the production systems.

Author Contributions

E.A.: conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, investigation, resources, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, visualization, supervision, project administration, M.G.: software, validation, investigation, data curation, writing—review and editing, J.M.: funding acquisition, writing—review and editing, J.B.: methodology, writing—review and editing, C.E.M. and T.N.H.: writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice (GAJU 085/2022/Z).

Data Availability Statement

Dataset available on request from the authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Nomenclature

Four strategies in the study
D-C Dryland farming with compost
D Dryland farming without compost
I-C Irrigated farming with compost
I Irrigated farming without compost
LCA Life cycle assessment
LCI Life cycle inventory
PMFP Particulate matter formation
HTPc Human carcinogenic toxicity
HTPnc Human noncarcinogenic toxicity
IRP Ionizing radiation
EOFP Ozone formation
ODP Stratospheric ozone depletion
FFP Fossil resource scarcity
SOP Mineral resource scarcity
WCP Water consumption
FETP Freshwater ecotoxicity
FEP Freshwater eutrophication
LOP Land use
METP Marine ecotoxicity
MEP Marine eutrophication
HOFP Ozone formation, terrestrial ecosystems
TAP Terrestrial acidification
TETP Terrestrial ecotoxicity
GWP Global warming

Appendix A

Table A1. Midpoint environmental impact assessment of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ha.
Table A1. Midpoint environmental impact assessment of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ha.
Damage CategoryImpact CategoryAbbreviationUnitDrylandIrrigated
With
Compost		Without
Compost		With
Compost		Without
Compost
Human healthParticulate matter formationPMFPkg PM2.5 eq3.545 c3.427 c8.635 b10.55 a
Human carcinogenic toxicityHTPckg 1.4-DCB37.51 c35.88 c243.9 b327.1 a
Human noncarcinogenic toxicityHTPnckg 1.4-DCB1903 c1838 c8984 b11,413 a
Ionizing radiationIRPkBq Co-60 eq33.51 c31.82 c849.2 b1267 a
Ozone formationEOFPkg NOx eq6.167 c6.317 c19.08 b23.29 a
Ozone formationODPkg CFC11 eq0.013 b0.015 b0.018 a0.019 a
ResourcesFossil resource scarcityFFPkg oil eq203.2 c202.9 c897.8 b1161 a
Mineral resource scarcitySOPkg Cu eq18.05 c18.46 c49.75 b59.82 a
Water consumptionWCPm338.29 c40.14 c3310 b5071 a
Ecosystem qualityFreshwater ecotoxicityFETPkg 1.4-DCB65.04 c61.55 c187.4 b229.3 a
Freshwater eutrophicationFEPkg P eq0.671 c0.673 c1.558 b1.954 a
Land useLOPm2a crop eq463.1 c481.7 c987.6 b1085 a
Marine ecotoxicityMETPkg 1.4-DCB53.27 c52.41 c206.9 b262.9 a
Marine eutrophicationMEPkg N eq1.956 b1.894 b2.278 a2.228 a
Ozone formation, terrestrial ecosystemsHOFPkg NOx eq6.238 c6.382 c19.52 b23.87 a
Terrestrial acidificationTAPkg SO2 eq18.89 c18.07 c29.46 b34.37 a
Terrestrial ecotoxicityTETP kg 1.4-DCB 3341 c3436 c12,890 b16,503 a
Climate changeGlobal warmingGWPkg CO2 eq1413 c1474 c4401 b5449 a
The lower-case characters represent significant differences between strategies, while the same letters indicate no significant difference between strategies.

References

  1. Yang, W.; Chang, F.; Ma, D.; Wang, S.; Yin, L. Subsoil Water Use to Attain Stable High Yields of Winter Wheat in Drylands Loess Plateau of China. Eur. J. Agron. 2022, 139, 126558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Shan, A.; Pan, J.; Kang, K.J.; Pan, M.; Wang, G.; Wang, M.; He, Z.; Yang, X. Effects of Straw Return with N Fertilizer Reduction on Crop Yield, Plant Diseases and Pests and Potential Heavy Metal Risk in a Chinese Rice Paddy: A Field Study of 2 Consecutive Wheat-Rice Cycles. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 288, 117741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Verdi, L.; Marta, A.D.; Falconi, F.; Orlandini, S.; Mancini, M. Comparison between Organic and Conventional Farming Systems Using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): A Case Study with an Ancient Wheat Variety. Eur. J. Agron. 2022, 141, 126638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Mu, L.; Su, K.; Zhou, T.; Yang, H. Yield Performance, Land and Water Use, Economic Profit of Irrigated Spring Wheat/Alfalfa Intercropping in the Inland Arid Area of Northwestern China. Field Crops Res. 2023, 303, 109116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zingale, S.; Guarnaccia, P.; Matarazzo, A.; Lagioia, G.; Ingrao, C. A Systematic Literature Review of Life Cycle Assessments in the Durum Wheat Sector. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 844, 157230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Soto-Gómez, D.; Pérez-Rodríguez, P. Sustainable Agriculture through Perennial Grains: Wheat, Rice, Maize, and Other Species. A Review. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2022, 325, 107747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Saad, A.M.; Elhabbak, A.K.; Abbas, M.H.H.; Mohamed, I.; AbdelRahman, M.A.E.; Scopa, A.; Bassouny, M.A. Can Deficit Irrigations Be an Optimum Solution for Increasing Water Productivity under Arid Conditions? A Case Study on Wheat Plants. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2023, 30, 103537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Ahmed, N.; Ehsan, A.; Danish, S.; Ali, M.A.; Fahad, S.; Dawar, K.; Taban, S.; Akça, H.; Shah, A.A.; Ansari, M.J.; et al. Mitigation of Lead (Pb) Toxicity in Rice Cultivated with Either Ground Water or Wastewater by Application of Acidified Carbon. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 307, 114521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Zhang, C.; Xie, Z.; Wang, Q.; Tang, M.; Feng, S.; Cai, H. AquaCrop Modeling to Explore Optimal Irrigation of Winter Wheat for Improving Grain Yield and Water Productivity. Agric. Water Manag. 2022, 266, 107580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Burrell, A.L.; Evans, J.P.; De Kauwe, M.G. Anthropogenic Climate Change Has Driven over 5 Million Km2 of Drylands towards Desertification. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 3853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Nazim, M.; Ali, M.; Shahzad, K.; Ahmad, F.; Nawaz, F.; Amin, M.; Anjum, S.; Nasif, O.; Ali Alharbi, S.; Fahad, S.; et al. Kaolin and Jasmonic Acid Improved Cotton Productivity under Water Stress Conditions. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 28, 6606–6614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Mubeen, M.; Ahmad, A.; Hammad, H.M.; Awais, M.; Farid, H.U.; Saleem, M.; ul Din, M.S.; Amin, A.; Ali, A.; Fahad, S.; et al. Evaluating the Climate Change Impact on Water Use Efficiency of Cotton-Wheat in Semi-Arid Conditions Using DSSAT Model. J. Water Clim. Chang. 2020, 11, 1661–1675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Amjad, S.F.; Mansoora, N.; Din, I.U.; Khalid Iqbal, R.; Jatoi, G.H.; Murtaza, G.; Yaseen, S.; Naz, M.; Danish, S.; Fahad, S.; et al. Application of Zinc Fertilizer and Mycorrhizal Inoculation on Physio-Biochemical Parameters of Wheat Grown under Water-Stressed Environment. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ault, T.R. On the Essentials of Drought in a Changing Climate. Science 2020, 368, 256–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Trnka, M.; Feng, S.; Semenov, M.A.; Olesen, J.E.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Rötter, R.P.; Semerádová, D.; Klem, K.; Huang, W.; Ruiz-Ramos, M.; et al. Mitigation Efforts Will Not Fully Alleviate the Increase in Water Scarcity Occurrence Probability in Wheat-Producing Areas. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaau2406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lotfi, R.; Abbasi, A.; Kalaji, H.M.; Eskandari, I.; Sedghieh, V.; Khorsandi, H.; Sadeghian, N.; Yadav, S.; Rastogi, A. The Role of Potassium on Drought Resistance of Winter Wheat Cultivars under Cold Dryland Conditions: Probed by Chlorophyll a Fluorescence. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2022, 182, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Dou, Y.; Zhao, H.; Yang, H.; Wang, T.; Liu, G.; Wang, Z.; Malhi, S. The First Factor Affecting Dryland Winter Wheat Grain Yield under Mulching Measures: Spike Number. J. Integr. Agric. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Luo, Y.; van Veelen, H.P.J.; Chen, S.; Sechi, V.; ter Heijne, A.; Veeken, A.; Buisman, C.J.N.; Bezemer, T.M. Effects of Sterilization and Maturity of Compost on Soil Bacterial and Fungal Communities and Wheat Growth. Geoderma 2022, 409, 115598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Xu, Y.; Ma, Y.; Cayuela, M.L.; Sánchez-Monedero, M.A.; Wang, Q. Compost Biochemical Quality Mediates Nitrogen Leaching Loss in a Greenhouse Soil under Vegetable Cultivation. Geoderma 2020, 358, 113984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Cheng, Y.; Wan, W. Strong Linkage between Nutrient-Cycling Functional Gene Diversity and Ecosystem Multifunctionality during Winter Composting with Pig Manure and Fallen Leaves. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 867, 161529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Calderón, F.J.; Vigil, M.F.; Benjamin, J. Compost Input Effect on Dryland Wheat and Forage Yields and Soil Quality. Pedosphere 2018, 28, 451–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kelly, C.; Byrne, P.F.; Schipanski, M.E.; Schneekloth, J.; Calderón, F.; Fonte, S.J. Soil Management Legacy Interacts with Wheat Genotype to Determine Access to Organic N in a Dryland System. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2023, 345, 108336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Atoloye, I.A.; Jacobson, A.R.; Creech, J.E.; Reeve, J.R. Soil Organic Carbon Pools and Soil Quality Indicators 3 and 24 Years after a One-Time Compost Application in Organic Dryland Wheat Systems. Soil Tillage Res. 2022, 224, 105503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hoang, T.N.; Konvalina, P.; Kopecký, M.; Ghorbani, M.; Amirahmadi, E.; Bernas, J.; Ali, S.; Nguyen, T.G.; Murindangabo, Y.T.; Tran, D.K.; et al. Assessing Grain Yield and Achieving Enhanced Quality in Organic Farming: Efficiency of Winter Wheat Mixtures System. Agriculture 2023, 13, 937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. He, G.; Cui, Z.; Ying, H.; Zheng, H.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, F. Managing the Trade-Offs among Yield Increase, Water Resources Inputs and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Irrigated Wheat Production Systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 164, 567–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Galán-Martín, Á.; Vaskan, P.; Antón, A.; Esteller, L.J.; Guillén-Gosálbez, G. Multi-Objective Optimization of Rainfed and Irrigated Agricultural Areas Considering Production and Environmental Criteria: A Case Study of Wheat Production in Spain. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 816–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Xue, J.-F.; Yuan, Y.-Q.; Zhang, H.-L.; Ren, A.-X.; Lin, W.; Sun, M.; Gao, Z.-Q.; Sun, D.-S. Carbon Footprint of Dryland Winter Wheat under Film Mulching during Summer-Fallow Season and Sowing Method on the Loess Plateau. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 95, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhang, Y.; Wang, S.; Wang, H.; Wang, R.; Wang, X.; Li, J. Crop Yield and Soil Properties of Dryland Winter Wheat-Spring Maize Rotation in Response to 10-Year Fertilization and Conservation Tillage Practices on the Loess Plateau. Field Crops Res. 2018, 225, 170–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Brempong, M.B.; Norton, U.; Norton, J.B. Compost and Soil Moisture Effects on Seasonal Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics, Greenhouse Gas Fluxes and Global Warming Potential of Semi-Arid Soils. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 2019, 8, 367–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bezabeh, M.W.; Haile, M.; Sogn, T.A.; Eich-Greatorex, S. Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Production and Grain Quality Resulting from Compost Application and Rotation with Faba Bean. J. Agric. Food Res. 2022, 10, 100425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gryta, A.; Frąc, M.; Oszust, K. Genetic and Metabolic Diversity of Soil Microbiome in Response to Exogenous Organic Matter Amendments. Agronomy 2020, 10, 546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jiang, Z.; Zheng, H.; Xing, B. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Wheat Production Using Chemical Fertilizer, Manure Compost, and Biochar-Amended Manure Compost Strategies. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 760, 143342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Qiao, Y.; Tie, J.; Wang, X.; Wei, B.; Zhang, W.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, G.; Lyu, J.; Liao, W.; Hu, L.; et al. Comprehensive Evaluation on Effect of Planting and Breeding Waste Composts on the Yield, Nutrient Utilization, and Soil Environment of Baby Cabbage. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 341, 117941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sun, R.; Fu, M.; Ma, L.; Zhou, Y.; Li, Q. Iron Reduction in Composting Environment Synergized with Quinone Redox Cycling Drives Humification and Free Radical Production from Humic Substances. Bioresour. Technol. 2023, 384, 129341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pajura, R. Composting Municipal Solid Waste and Animal Manure in Response to the Current Fertilizer Crisis—A Recent Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 912, 169221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Dhankhar, N.; Kumar, J. Impact of Increasing Pesticides and Fertilizers on Human Health: A Review. Mater. Today Proc. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Yang, Q.; Ma, J.; Yang, F.; Zheng, H.; Lu, Z.; Qiao, F.; Zhang, K.; Gong, H.; Men, X.; Li, J.; et al. The Hidden Indirect Environmental Effect Undercuts the Contribution of Crop Nitrogen Fertilizer Application to the Net Ecosystem Economic Benefit. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 426, 139204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Suciu, N.A.; De Vivo, R.; Rizzati, N.; Capri, E. Cd Content in Phosphate Fertilizer: Which Potential Risk for the Environment and Human Health? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2022, 30, 100392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mukosha, C.E.; Moudrý, J.; Lacko-Bartošová, M.; Lacko-Bartošová, L.; Eze, F.O.; Neugschwandtner, R.W.; Amirahmadi, E.; Lehejček, J.; Bernas, J. The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach. Agriculture 2023, 13, 2068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lee, J.; Choi, S.; Lee, Y.; Kim, S.Y. Impact of Manure Compost Amendments on NH3 Volatilization in Rice Paddy Ecosystems during Cultivation. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 288, 117726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Yang, W.; Pudasainee, D.; Gupta, R.; Li, W.; Wang, B.; Sun, L. An Overview of Inorganic Particulate Matter Emission from Coal/Biomass/MSW Combustion: Sampling and Measurement, Formation, Distribution, Inorganic Composition and Influencing Factors. Fuel Process. Technol. 2021, 213, 106657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Magalhaes, D.; Kazanc, F. Influence of Biomass Thermal Pre-Treatment on the Particulate Matter Formation during Pulverized Co-Combustion with Lignite Coal. Fuel 2022, 308, 122027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Cotrufo, M.F.; Haddix, M.L.; Kroeger, M.E.; Stewart, C.E. The Role of Plant Input Physical-Chemical Properties, and Microbial and Soil Chemical Diversity on the Formation of Particulate and Mineral-Associated Organic Matter. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2022, 168, 108648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Dueñas-Moreno, J.; Vázquez-Tapia, I.; Mora, A.; Cervantes-Avilés, P.; Mahlknecht, J.; Capparelli, M.V.; Kumar, M.; Wang, C. Occurrence, Ecological and Health Risk Assessment of Phthalates in a Polluted Urban River Used for Agricultural Land Irrigation in Central Mexico. Environ. Res. 2024, 240, 117454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Chen, D.; Yang, S.; Jiang, Z.; Wang, Z.; Wang, Z.; Tian, H. Spatial Distribution, Ecological Risk and Health Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Agricultural Soil from Ankang Basin, Shaanxi Province. Heliyon 2023, 9, e22580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Ahmed, R.S.; Abuarab, M.E.; Ibrahim, M.M.; Baioumy, M.; Mokhtar, A. Assessment of Environmental and Toxicity Impacts and Potential Health Hazards of Heavy Metals Pollution of Agricultural Drainage Adjacent to Industrial Zones in Egypt. Chemosphere 2023, 318, 137872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Temkin, A.M.; Uche, U.I.; Evans, S.; Anderson, K.M.; Perrone-Gray, S.; Campbell, C.; Naidenko, O.V. Racial and Social Disparities in Ventura County, California Related to Agricultural Pesticide Applications and Toxicity. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 853, 158399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Sydow, M.; Chrzanowski, Ł.; Hauschild, M.Z.; Owsianiak, M. Influence of Metal Speciation on Soil Ecotoxicity Impacts in Life Cycle Assessment. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 266, 110611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Wang, L.; Gao, S.; Yin, X.; Yu, X.; Luan, L. Arsenic Accumulation, Distribution and Source Analysis of Rice in a Typical Growing Area in North China. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 167, 429–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Darzi-Naftchali, A.; Motevali, A.; Keikha, M. The Life Cycle Assessment of Subsurface Drainage Performance under Rice-Canola Cropping System. Agric. Water Manag. 2022, 266, 107579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Biermann, G.; Geist, J. Life Cycle Assessment of Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio L.)—A Comparison of the Environmental Impacts of Conventional and Organic Carp Aquaculture in Germany. Aquaculture 2019, 501, 404–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Revell, L.E.; Bodeker, G.E.; Huck, P.E.; Williamson, B.E.; Rozanov, E. The sensitivity of stratospheric ozone changes through the 21st century to N2O and CH4. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2012, 12, 11309–11317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Le Pera, A.; Sellaro, M.; Bencivenni, E. Composting Food Waste or Digestate? Characteristics, Statistical and Life Cycle Assessment Study Based on an Italian Composting Plant. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 350, 131552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zheng, S.; Chen, B.; Qiu, X.; Chen, M.; Ma, Z.; Yu, X. Distribution and Risk Assessment of 82 Pesticides in Jiulong River and Estuary in South China. Chemosphere 2016, 144, 1177–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Wang, J.; Azam, W. Natural Resource Scarcity, Fossil Fuel Energy Consumption, and Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Top Emitting Countries. Geosci. Front. 2024, 15, 101757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zappe, A.L.; Fernandes de Oliveira, P.; Boettcher, R.; Rodriguez, A.L.; Machado, Ê.L.; Mantey dos Santos, P.A.; Rodriguez Lopez, D.A.; Amador de Matos, M.A. Human Health Risk and Potential Environmental Damage of Organic and Conventional Nicotiana Tobaccum Production. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 266, 114820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Houshyar, E.; Wu, X.F.; Chen, G.Q. Sustainability of Wheat and Maize Production in the Warm Climate of Southwestern Iran: An Emergy Analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 2246–2255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Schmidt, M. Scarcity and Environmental Impact of Mineral Resources—An Old and Never-Ending Discussion. Resources 2018, 8, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hassan, S.T.; Xia, E.; Khan, N.H.; Shah, S.M.A. Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and Ecological Footprints: Evidence from Pakistan. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 2929–2938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ding, Z.; Kheir, A.M.S.; Ali, M.G.M.; Ali, O.A.M.; Abdelaal, A.I.N.; Lin, X.; Zhou, Z.; Wang, B.; Liu, B.; He, Z. The Integrated Effect of Salinity, Organic Amendments, Phosphorus Fertilizers, and Deficit Irrigation on Soil Properties, Phosphorus Fractionation and Wheat Productivity. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 2736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Tavali, I.E. Short-Term Effect of Compost Amendment on the Fertility of Calcareous Soil and Basil Growth. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2021, 52, 172–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Cooper, A.; DeMarco, J. Composted Biosolids Amendments for Enhanced Soil Organic Carbon and Water Storage in Perennial Pastures in Colorado. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2023, 347, 108401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Epelde, L.; Jauregi, L.; Urra, J.; Ibarretxe, L.; Romo, J.; Goikoetxea, I.; Garbisu, C. Characterization of Composted Organic Amendments for Agricultural Use. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2018, 2, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Agbede, T.M. Tillage and Fertilizer Effects on Some Soil Properties, Leaf Nutrient Concentrations, Growth and Sweet Potato Yield on an Alfisol in Southwestern Nigeria. Soil Tillage Res. 2010, 110, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zhang, J.; Li, Z.; Zhou, X.; Ding, W.; Wang, X.; Zhao, M.; Li, H.; Zou, G.; Chen, Y. Long-Term Application of Organic Compost Is the Primary Contributor to Microplastic Pollution of Soils in a Wheat–Maize Rotation. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 866, 161123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Oginah, S.A.; Posthuma, L.; Maltby, L.; Hauschild, M.; Fantke, P. Linking Freshwater Ecotoxicity to Damage on Ecosystem Services in Life Cycle Assessment. Environ. Int. 2023, 171, 107705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Amirahmadi, E.; Moudrý, J.; Konvalina, P.; Hörtenhuber, S.J.; Ghorbani, M.; Neugschwandtner, R.W.; Jiang, Z.; Krexner, T.; Kopecký, M. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment in Organic and Conventional Rice Farming Systems: Using a Cradle to Farm Gate Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Sharma, A.; Lee, B.-S. Toxicity Test Profile for Deep Eutectic Solvents: A Detailed Review and Future Prospects. Chemosphere 2024, 350, 141097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Fan, Y.; Luo, Z.; Hao, X.; Li, S.; Kang, S. Potential Pathways to Reduce Environmental Impact in a Greenhouse Tomato Production: Life Cycle Assessment for Different Irrigation and Fertilization Treatments. Sci. Hortic. 2022, 305, 111411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Luo, D.; Wang, L.; Nan, H.; Cao, Y.; Wang, H.; Kumar, T.V.; Wang, C. Phosphorus Adsorption by Functionalized Biochar: A Review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2023, 21, 497–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Persson, L.; Carney Almroth, B.M.; Collins, C.D.; Cornell, S.; de Wit, C.A.; Diamond, M.L.; Fantke, P.; Hassellöv, M.; MacLeod, M.; Ryberg, M.W.; et al. Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 1510–1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Kończak, M.; Huber, M. Application of the Engineered Sewage Sludge-Derived Biochar to Minimize Water Eutrophication by Removal of Ammonium and Phosphate Ions from Water. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 331, 129994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Strokal, M.; Kahil, T.; Wada, Y.; Albiac, J.; Bai, Z.; Ermolieva, T.; Langan, S.; Ma, L.; Oenema, O.; Wagner, F.; et al. Cost-Effective Management of Coastal Eutrophication: A Case Study for the Yangtze River Basin. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 154, 104635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Singh, A.; Rana, M.S.; Tiwari, H.; Kumar, M.; Saxena, S.; Anand, V.; Prajapati, S.K. Anaerobic Digestion as a Tool to Manage Eutrophication and Associated Greenhouse Gas Emission. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 861, 160722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Prechsl, U.E.; Wittwer, R.; van der Heijden, M.G.A.; Lüscher, G.; Jeanneret, P.; Nemecek, T. Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Cropping Systems and Cover Crops: Life Cycle Assessment of FAST, a Long-Term Arable Farming Field Experiment. Agric. Syst. 2017, 157, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Viveros Santos, I.; Levasseur, A.; Bulle, C.; Deschênes, L.; Boulay, A.-M. Modelling the Influence of Climate Change on Characterization Factors for Copper Terrestrial Ecotoxicity. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 414, 137601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Medel-Jiménez, F.; Krexner, T.; Gronauer, A.; Kral, I. Life Cycle Assessment of Four Different Precision Agriculture Technologies and Comparison with a Conventional Scheme. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 434, 140198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Yoshida, H.; Nielsen, M.P.; Scheutz, C.; Jensen, L.S.; Bruun, S.; Christensen, T.H. Long-Term Emission Factors for Land Application of Treated Organic Municipal Waste. Environ. Model. Assess. 2016, 21, 111–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Krzyżaniak, M.; Stolarski, M.J.; Warmiński, K. Life Cycle Assessment of Virginia Mallow Production with Different Fertilisation Options. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 177, 824–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, C.; Zhao, J.; Feng, Y.; Shang, M.; Bo, X.; Gao, Z.; Chen, F.; Chu, Q. Optimizing Tillage Method and Irrigation Schedule for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation, Yield Improvement, and Water Conservation in Wheat–Maize Cropping Systems. Agric. Water Manag. 2021, 248, 106762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Zornoza, R.; Acosta, J.A.; Gabarrón, M.; Gómez-Garrido, M.; Sánchez-Navarro, V.; Terrero, A.; Martínez-Martínez, S.; Faz, Á.; Pérez-Pastor, A. Greenhouse gas emissions and soil organic matter dynamics in woody crop orchards with different irrigation regimes. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 644, 1429–1438. [Google Scholar]
  82. Hokazono, S.; Hayashi, K. Life Cycle Assessment of Organic Paddy Rotation Systems Using Land- and Product-Based Indicators: A Case Study in Japan. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2015, 20, 1061–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Sung-inthara, T.; Juntahum, S.; Senawong, K.; Katekaew, S.; Laloon, K. Pelletization of Soil Amendment: Optimizing the Production and Quality of Soil Amendment Pellets from Compost with Water and Biochar Mixtures and Their Impact on Soil Properties. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2024, 33, 103505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 13 00509 g001
Figure 1. The grain, straw, and wheat yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated farming (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Figure 1. The grain, straw, and wheat yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated farming (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Plants 13 00509 g001
Plants 13 00509 g002
Figure 2. Midpoint environmental impact assessment of total yield (one ton) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with and without compost (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Figure 2. Midpoint environmental impact assessment of total yield (one ton) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with and without compost (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Plants 13 00509 g002
Plants 13 00509 g003
Figure 3. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) and inputs (b) for LCA analysis in terms of human health impact category (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Figure 3. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) and inputs (b) for LCA analysis in terms of human health impact category (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Plants 13 00509 g003
Plants 13 00509 g004aPlants 13 00509 g004b
Figure 4. Midpoint human health impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with compost (blue color) and without compost (orange color).
Figure 4. Midpoint human health impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with compost (blue color) and without compost (orange color).
Plants 13 00509 g004aPlants 13 00509 g004b
Plants 13 00509 g005
Figure 5. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) and inputs (b) for LCA analysis in terms of resources impact category (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Figure 5. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) and inputs (b) for LCA analysis in terms of resources impact category (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Plants 13 00509 g005
Plants 13 00509 g006
Figure 6. Midpoint resources impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with compost (blue color) and without compost (orange color).
Figure 6. Midpoint resources impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with compost (blue color) and without compost (orange color).
Plants 13 00509 g006
Plants 13 00509 g007
Figure 7. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) and inputs (b) for LCA analysis in terms of ecosystem quality impact category. (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Figure 7. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) and inputs (b) for LCA analysis in terms of ecosystem quality impact category. (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Plants 13 00509 g007
Plants 13 00509 g008aPlants 13 00509 g008b
Figure 8. Midpoint ecosystem quality impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with compost (blue color) and without compost (orange color).
Figure 8. Midpoint ecosystem quality impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (ton ha−1) in dryland and irrigated wheat farming with compost (blue color) and without compost (orange color).
Plants 13 00509 g008aPlants 13 00509 g008b
Plants 13 00509 g009
Figure 9. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) inputs (b), and midpoint global warming impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (c) (ton ha−1) (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Figure 9. The percentage contribution of different farming strategies (a) inputs (b), and midpoint global warming impact assessment of grain, straw, and total yield (c) (ton ha−1) (D-C: dryland farming with compost, D: dryland farming without compost, I-C: irrigated farming with compost, I: irrigated farming without compost).
Plants 13 00509 g009
Plants 13 00509 g010aPlants 13 00509 g010b
Figure 10. System boundaries of dryland and irrigated wheat farming.
Figure 10. System boundaries of dryland and irrigated wheat farming.
Plants 13 00509 g010aPlants 13 00509 g010b
Plants 13 00509 g011
Figure 11. Overview of the midpoint impact categories in four different damage categories (human health, ecosystem quality, resources, and climate change).
Figure 11. Overview of the midpoint impact categories in four different damage categories (human health, ecosystem quality, resources, and climate change).
Plants 13 00509 g011
Table 1. Midpoint environmental impact assessment of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ton.
Table 1. Midpoint environmental impact assessment of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ton.
Damage CategoryImpact CategoryAbbreviationUnitDrylandIrrigated
With
Compost		Without
Compost		With
Compost		Without Compost
Human health Particulate matter formationPMFPkg PM2.5 eq0.408 d0.505 c0.705 b0.978 a
Human carcinogenic toxicityHTPckg 1.4-DCB4.314 c5.297 c19.92 b30.3 a
Human noncarcinogenic toxicityHTPnckg 1.4-DCB218.9 c271.3 c734.3 b1057 a
Ionizing radiationIRPkBq Co-60 eq3.854 c4.697 c69.36 b117.4 a
Ozone formationEOFPkg NOx eq0.709 c0.932 c1.559 b2.158 a
Stratospheric ozone depletionODPkg CFC11 eq0.001 b0.002 a0.001 b0.002 a
Resources Fossil resource scarcityFFPkg oil eq23.37 c29.96 c73.33 b107.5 a
Mineral resource scarcitySOPkg Cu eq2.076 c2.726 c4.064 b5.542 a
Water consumptionWCPm34.407 c5.927 c270.4 b469.8 a
Ecosystem quality Freshwater ecotoxicityFETPkg 1.4-DCB7.582 d9.034 c15.65 b21.32 a
Freshwater eutrophicationFEPkg P eq0.077 c0.099 c0.127 b0.181 a
Land useLOPm2 a crop eq53.29 d71.12 c80.65 b100.5 a
Marine ecotoxicityMETPkg 1.4-DCB6.162 c7.719 c16.95 b24.38 a
Marine eutrophicationMEPkg N eq0.225 a0.284 a0.186 b0.206 a
Ozone formation, terrestrial ecosystemsHOFPkg NOx eq0.717 c0.942 c1.595 b2.212 a
Terrestrial acidificationTAPkg SO2 eq2.174 c2.659 b2.406 b3.185 a
Terrestrial ecotoxicityTETPkg 1.4-DCB384.8 d506.9 c1053 b1529 a
Climate change Global warmingGWPkg CO2 eq162.6 d217.6 c359.7 b504.8 a
The lower-case characters represent significant differences between strategies, while the same letters indicate no significant difference between strategies.
Table 2. The inventory data of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ton.
Table 2. The inventory data of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ton.
DrylandIrrigated
With CompostWithout CompostWith CompostWithout Compost
Inputs1. Human labor (h)17.6522.1813.0915.24
2. Machinery (h)1.3861.5875.5027.676
(a) Tractor, land preparation (h)0.3680.4430.2290.232
(b) Moldboard plow, plowing (h)0.1380.1770.0820.093
(b) Disc plow, plowing (h)0.1440.1850.0900.102
(d) Field cultivator, cultivating (h)0.1730.2210.1100.125
(e) Broadcaster, sowing (h)0.1040.1330.0650.074
(f) Broadcaster, fertilizing (h)0.0580.0740.0410.046
(g) Tractor, compost applying (h)0.1270.0000.0900.000
(g) Irrigation (h)0.0000.0004.5996.782
(h) Combine harvester, harvesting (h)0.2760.3540.1960.222
3. Diesel fuel (L)5.035.5519.2526.86
4. Chemical fertilizers (kg)
(a) Nitrogen (N)6.74610.256.0167.079
(b) Phosphate (P2O5)8.32210.582.8193.144
(c) Potassium (K2O)1.2101.6151.1701.284
6. Organic fertilizer (kg)
Compost345.110.00245.060.00
7. Biocides (kg)
Insecticides0.0190.0210.0180.019
Herbicides0.0200.0270.0940.106
Fungicides0.0190.0240.0250.031
8. Water (m3)0.00.0262.6459.3
9. Seed (kg)15.5821.0119.5122.73
OutputsCO2 (kg eq. CO2)51.568.083.2110.2
N2O (kg N2O)0.2950.2640.2500.198
NO3 (kg NO3- N)2.5123.1921.7851.993
NO (kg NO)0.2880.4090.2360.283
NO2 (kg NO2)0.2880.4100.2370.283
NH3 (kg NH3)0.7830.9210.4770.558
N (kg N)0.1880.1680.1590.126
PO4 (kg PO4)0.0020.0020.0010.001
P (kg P)0.0460.0590.0260.030
Grain (kg)453.5423.3470.5457.0
Straw (kg)546.5576.7529.5543.0
Table 3. The inventory data of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ha.
Table 3. The inventory data of wheat cultivation in each strategy per ha.
DrylandIrrigated
With CompostWithout CompostWith CompostWithout Compost
Inputs1. Human labor (h)153.4150.2160.3164.5
2. Machinery (h)12.0510.7567.3582.85
(a) Tractor, land preparation (h)3.232.82.5
(b) Moldboard plow, plowing (h)1.21.211
(b) Disc plow, plowing (h)1.251.251.11.1
(d) Field cultivator, cultivating (h)1.51.51.351.35
(e) Broadcaster, sowing (h)0.90.90.80.8
(f) Broadcaster, fertilizing (h)0.50.50.50.5
(g) Tractor, compost applying (h)1.101.10
(g) Irrigation (h)0056.373.2
(h) Combine harvester, harvesting (h)2.42.42.42.4
3. Diesel fuel (L)43.7537.62235.7289.9
4. Chemical fertilizers (kg)
(a) Nitrogen (N)58.64 69.42 73.65 76.41
(b) Phosphate (P2O5)72.3471.6534.5133.94
(c) Potassium (K2O)10.5210.9414.3213.86
6. Organic fertilizer (kg)
Compost3000 0 3000 0
7. Biocides (kg)
Insecticides0.1610.1440.2150.201
Herbicides0.1750.1821.1541.149
Fungicides0.1650.1610.3120.335
8. Water (m3)0032154958
9. Seed (kg)135.4142.3238.9245.4
OutputsCO2 (kg eq. CO2)447.3460.61019.11189.8
N2O (kg N2O)2.5641.7853.0552.133
NO3 (kg NO3- N)21.8421.6221.8521.51
NO (kg NO)2.5022.7712.8913.053
NO2 (kg NO2)2.5042.7772.8973.056
NH3 (kg NH3)6.8056.2375.8436.018
N (kg N)1.6311.1351.9441.357
PO4 (kg PO4)0.0180.0160.0130.012
P (kg P)0.4030.4010.3200.319
Grain (kg)3942286757604933
Straw (kg)4751390664825861
Yield (kg)8693677312,24210,794
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Amirahmadi, E.; Ghorbani, M.; Moudrý, J.; Bernas, J.; Mukosha, C.E.; Hoang, T.N. Environmental Assessment of Dryland and Irrigated Winter Wheat Cultivation under Compost Fertilization Strategies. Plants 2024, 13, 509. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/plants13040509

AMA Style

Amirahmadi E, Ghorbani M, Moudrý J, Bernas J, Mukosha CE, Hoang TN. Environmental Assessment of Dryland and Irrigated Winter Wheat Cultivation under Compost Fertilization Strategies. Plants. 2024; 13(4):509. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/plants13040509

Chicago/Turabian Style

Amirahmadi, Elnaz, Mohammad Ghorbani, Jan Moudrý, Jaroslav Bernas, Chisenga Emmanuel Mukosha, and Trong Nghia Hoang. 2024. "Environmental Assessment of Dryland and Irrigated Winter Wheat Cultivation under Compost Fertilization Strategies" Plants 13, no. 4: 509. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/plants13040509

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop