<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">HESS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Hydrology and Earth System Sciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">HESS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1607-7938</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/hess-22-3075-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Precipitation alters plastic film mulching impacts on soil respiration in an
arid area of northwest China</article-title><alt-title>Precipitation alters plastic film mulching impacts on soil respiration</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Precipitation alters plastic film mulching impacts on soil respiration}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{G. Ming et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Ming</surname><given-names>Guanghui</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Hu</surname><given-names>Hongchang</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Tian</surname><given-names>Fuqiang</given-names></name>
          <email>tianfq@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9406-7369</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Peng</surname><given-names>Zhenyang</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>Pengju</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Luo</surname><given-names>Yiqi</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Hydraulic Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Department of Earth System Science, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>College of Engineering, Forestry, and Natural Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Fuqiang Tian (tianfq@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>30</day><month>May</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>5</issue>
      <fpage>3075</fpage><lpage>3086</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>7</day><month>July</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>11</day><month>August</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>21</day><month>April</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>10</day><month>May</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018.html">This article is available from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e141">Plastic film mulching (PFM) has widely been used around the world
to save water and improve crop yield. However, the effect of PFM on soil
respiration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) remains unclear and could be further confounded
by irrigation and precipitation. To address these topics, controlled
experiments were conducted in mulched and non-mulched fields under drip
irrigation from 2014 to 2016 in an arid area of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous
Region, northwest China. The spatio-temporal pattern of soil surface CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
flux as an index of soil respiration under drip irrigation with PFM was
investigated, and the confounded effects of PFM and irrigation/precipitation
on soil respiration were explored. The main findings were as follows.
(1) Furrows, planting holes, and plastic mulch are three important pathways
of soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in mulched fields, of which the planting hole
efflux outweighs that from the furrow, with the largest values of 8.0 and
6.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, and the plastic mulch
itself can emit up to 3.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.
(2) The frequent application of water (i.e. through irrigation and
precipitation) elevates soil moisture and soil respiration and enhances their
variation. The resultant higher variation of soil moisture further alleviates
the sensitivity of soil respiration to soil temperature, leading to a weak
correlation and lower <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values. (3) Soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> effluxes from
furrows and ridges in mulched fields outweigh the corresponding values in
non-mulched fields in arid areas. However, this outweighing relation
attenuates with increasing precipitation. Furthermore, by combining our
results with those from the literature, we show that the difference in soil
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> effluxes between non-mulched and mulched fields presents a linear
relation with the amount of precipitation, which results in negative values
in arid areas and positive values in humid areas. Therefore, whether PFM
increases soil respiration or not depends on the amount of precipitation
during the crop-growing season.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e282">Soil respiration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the flux of microbe- and plant-respired
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from the soil surface to the atmosphere, represents the second
largest CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux of the terrestrial biosphere following gross primary
productivity and amounts to 10 times the current rate of fossil-fuel
combustion (Bond-Lamberty and Thomson, 2010; Davidson et al., 2006; L. Liu et
al., 2016; Reichstein and Beer, 2008). Anthropogenic activities,
particularly agriculture expansion and changes in cultivation practices, have
brought significant challenges to the control of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in
association with climate change (Baker et al., 2007). The conversion of
natural to agricultural ecosystems has been recognized to cause a depletion
of the soil organic carbon pool by as much as 60 % (Lal, 2004), and soil
respiration in agricultural ecosystems is relatively greater than that in
natural ecosystems due to intensive cultivation (Buyanovsky et al., 1987;
Raich and Tufekciogul, 2000).</p>
      <p id="d1e323">A particular example is plastic film mulching (PFM), which was invented as an
advanced agriculture cultivation technology for saving water and improving
crop yield in the 1950s and has since been widely applied around the world,
e.g. in the tropical USA, Europe, South Korea, and China. For instance,
approximately 19 % of the total arable land<?pagebreak page3076?> (130 million ha) in China
was cultivated using PFM in 2014, while 0.85 % of the arable land around
the world was cultivated using this method (Y. P. Wang et al., 2016).
Specifically, the PFM area has reached 1.2 million ha in the arid Xinjiang
Uygur Autonomous Region, northwest China (Zhang et al., 2014). In a PFM
field, this new method may alter the albedo, soil temperature, soil moisture,
and crop growth conditions (Zhang et al., 2011), all of which can affect both
heterotrophic and autotrophic respiration. Furthermore, the large-scale
application of PFM may alter the regional climate, hydrologic cycle, and
carbon cycle (Bonan, 2008; Li et al., 2016; Cox et al., 2000). Therefore,
detecting the altered environmental conditions and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in PFM
fields is crucial for the maintenance of regional and global soil carbon
balances under the conditions of global climate change.</p>
      <p id="d1e335">Only a few studies have addressed CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in PFM fields, and they
have provided contrasting results. For example, Yu et al. (2016) showed that
the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from the soil surface in a mulched field in the southern
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China increased by 8 % relative to a
non-mulched field and that this increase mainly originates from furrows
rather than ridges (please see Fig. 1 below for the configuration of furrows,
ridges, planting holes, and mulch, etc.). However, Li et al. (2011) found that
the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in soil profiles are higher in mulched fields,
but the soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> efflux decreases by 21 % relative to that in
non-mulched fields in the northern Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China.
Similar results showing that PFM decreased CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were also found
on the Loess Plateau of China (Xiang et al., 2014), in southwest China (Lei,
2016), and in a temperate monsoon climate area in Japan (Okuda et al., 2007).
When investigating the emission pathways for greenhouse gases in the field,
Berger et al. (2013) found that planting holes and furrows are important
pathways for N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O emissions in mulched ridges. In addition, Nishimura et
al. (2012) revealed in a laboratory experiment that N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O gradually
permeates the plastic mulch. These findings indicate that the pathways for
gas emissions in a mulched field may include furrows, planting holes, and
plastic mulch, which have not been evaluated in terms of soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> efflux
in PFM fields. Some experimental studies have simply interpreted the soil
respiration from furrows as the field averaged flux (Qian-Bing et al., 2012;
Q. Liu et al., 2016), which may lead to the underestimation of soil respiration
flux because ridges usually emit more CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> than furrows.</p>
      <p id="d1e420">In addition, irrigation and precipitation are also crucial to soil
respiration due to the nature of the effects of moisture limitation on soil
respiration in arid and semiarid regions, to which less attention has been
paid. After irrigation and precipitation, soil moisture undergoes a
wetting–drying cycle that affects soil porosity and influences the activities
of root biomass and microorganisms, which control the soil carbon dynamics
(Yan et al., 2014). Both the intensity and amount of irrigation/precipitation
affect soil respiration. A small number of studies have indicated that the
soil respiration rate in a drip irrigation field is greater than that in a
flood irrigation field (Guo et al., 2017; Qian-Bing et al., 2012). Plastic
film mulching can modify the hydrological processes affected by precipitation
or irrigation in different ways and may further impact soil respiration. For
example, rainwater cannot infiltrate into ridges in a mulched field due to
the barrier provided by plastic mulch, which, however, can cause an
additional soil moisture increase in furrows. In contrast, the infiltration
of irrigation water principally occurs in ridges under drip irrigation, as
drip tapes are placed beneath the plastic mulch. The different impacts of PFM
on the distribution of soil moisture caused by precipitation or irrigation
may further have different influences on soil respiration. To the best of our
knowledge, however, such different influences of PFM on soil respiration in
terms of irrigation or precipitation have not yet been explored.</p>
      <p id="d1e424">The main objective of this study was therefore to address the effect of PFM
on soil respiration and the confounding influences of irrigation and
precipitation. Controlled experiments under mulched and non-mulched drip
irrigation conditions were conducted in a cotton field in the arid area of
the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, northwest China. The soil respiration
in different locations in mulched and non-mulched fields was continuously
monitored in the growing seasons from 2014 to 2016. Based on the results from
the experiment, we addressed the following questions. (1) What is the
spatio-temporal pattern of soil respiration in a PFM field? (2) How does PFM
affect soil respiration through its alteration of soil temperature and
moisture? (3) What are the confounding effects of
irrigation/precipitation and PFM on soil respiration?</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Study area and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Study area</title>
      <p id="d1e438">The experimental field site (86<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>12<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 41<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>36<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 886 m
above sea level) is located in one of the oases scattered on the alluvial
plain of the Kaidu–Kongqi River (a tributary of the Tarim River) basin, north
of the Taklamakan Desert in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of northwest
China. This region has a temperate continental climate, with a mean annual
precipitation of 60 mm, mean annual temperature of 11.48 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, and
mean annual water surface evaporation of 2788 mm, as measured using a
20 cm diameter pan. The annual sunshine duration is 3036 h, which is
favourable for cotton (<italic>Gossypium hirsutum</italic> L.) growth. The
experimental field covers an area of 3.48 ha. The major soil texture in the
field is silt loam, the contents of the sand, silt and clay separately are
32.8, 62.4, and 4.8 %, respectively, and the soil bulk density ranges from
1.4 to 1.64 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the 1.5 m soil profile. The soil porosity is
0.42, which was directly determined in the<?pagebreak page3077?> laboratory using undisturbed soil
columns collected in the experimental field.</p>
      <p id="d1e502">Cotton is usually sown in April and harvested during October and November;
i.e. the growing season is from approximately DOY (day of the year) 100 to
300. The planting style is “one film, one drip pipe beneath the film, and
four rows of cotton above the film”, as depicted in Fig. 1. The plastic film
(0.008 mm thick) was white and made of dense and airtight transparent
polyethylene film. The width of the film was 1.1 m, and the inter-film zone
was 0.4 m. Before sowing, small square holes (2 cm length and width) were
cut in the plastic film in rows at 0.1 m intervals for germination, seeds
were placed in the holes, and each hole was covered with soil. The planting
density was approximately 160 000 plants ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The basic fertilizer
that was applied annually before sowing included 173 kg ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of
compound fertilizers (14 % N, 16 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 15 %
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), 518 kg ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of calcium superphosphate (18 % N and
40 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and 288 kg ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of diammonium phosphate
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 16 %). Supplemental fertilizers
applied during the growing season included approximately 292 kg ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
of urea (46 % N), 586 kg ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of drip compound fertilizer
(13 % N, 18 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 16 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and
foliar fertilizer (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 52 % and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 34 %). Drip irrigation usually began on
12 June in the bud stage, with an approximate amount of 20–50 mm during
each application and 9–12 applications per growing season. The annual
irrigation amount was 500–600 mm.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Experimental set-up</title>
      <p id="d1e704">This study focuses on the growing season, as soil respiration in the
non-growing season is extremely low. The mulched and non-mulched treatments
were arranged in a randomized block design with three replicates in the same
field with the same fertilization and irrigation scheme from the year 2014 to
2016. The plastic mulch had been covered until the seed germinated in the
non-mulched treatment to protect the germinating seeds. The experiments began
approximately before the bud stage, when the cotton began to grow faster. The
dates of the beginning of the experiments were DOY 184, 175, and 167, and the
lengths of the measured periods were 95, 60, and 100 days, respectively. Soil
respiration measurements were carried out using an LI-8100A (LI-COR, Inc.,
Lincoln, Nebraska) on a day between two irrigation events. Therefore, soil
respiration was measured approximately every week during the cotton-growing
season. The automated soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux measurement system consisted of two
parts, PVC collars (10 cm in diameter and 5 cm in height) and a measuring
chamber. The PVC collars were inserted 2–3 cm into the soil by removing the
living plants and litter within the collars at least 1 day before the
measurements. Data were recorded using the data logger in the LI-8100A
system.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e718">Schematic drawing of the experimental configuration for
<bold>(a)</bold> a non-mulched field and <bold>(b)</bold> a mulched field.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e733">The soil respiration was measured in the following areas: the furrow and
ridge in the non-mulched treatment and the furrow, planting hole, and plastic
mulch in the mulched treatment in 2016 (see Fig. 1 for the experimental
configuration). Soil respiration was measured in the furrow in the mulched
treatment and in the ridge in the non-mulched treatment in 2014, and it was
measured in the furrow in the mulched treatment and in both the furrow and
ridge in the non-mulched treatment in 2015. The measurements were performed
every 2 h during the experimental day from 08:00 to 24:00 UTC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>8. To measure the soil respiration at the soil
surface without film covering (i.e. the furrows in the mulched and
non-mulched fields and the non-mulched ridges), the PVC collars were inserted
directly into the soil. Before measuring the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions through the
planting holes, the PVC collars were inserted into the soil covering two
planting holes, and Scotch tape was used to seal the interspaces between the
plastic mulch and collar to prevent air leakage. To measure the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions through the plastic mulch, PVC collars were buried into the soil
under the mulch, with Scotch Tape sealing the interspaces. Detailed
measurement methods are further described in Berger et al. (2013). The soil
temperature and soil moisture adjacent to each PVC collar at a depth of 5 cm
were monitored using the auxiliary sensors of the LI-8100A concurrently with
the soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux measurements. The amount of drip irrigation was
determined using water meters installed on the branch pipes of the drip
irrigation system. The precipitation was measured using a tipping bucket rain
gauge (model TE525MM, Campbell Scientific Inc., Logan, UT, USA), which was
mounted 0.7 m above the ground.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <title>Data analysis</title>
      <p id="d1e776">The soil respiration from different areas at a particular time of a day was
calculated as the average of three replicates. The daily mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was
calculated as the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measured at various times in a day. The
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the mulched ridges was calculated based on the area ratio of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measured through the planting holes and the plastic mulch:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M57" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represent the soil respiration
from the planting hole and plastic mulch, respectively, and constitute the
soil respiration in the ridge (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The term <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the
area ratio of the different parts, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
are 0.3 and 0.7, respectively, in our field.</p>
      <?pagebreak page3078?><p id="d1e977">The seasonal accumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the ridges and furrows was
calculated by summing the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values over the measurement period
(Yu et al., 2016; Berger et al., 2013). The soil respiration in plastic
mulched and non-mulched fields was calculated based on the area ratio of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> through ridges and furrows:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M67" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represent soil respiration in
mulched and non-mulched fields, respectively, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the area ratios of the ridge and furrow, respectively,
which are the same for mulched and non-mulched fields and are 0.73 and 0.27,
respectively, in our field.</p>
      <p id="d1e1196">We used <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> tests to test the significance of differences between the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values from the furrows and ridges of mulched and non-mulched fields.</p>
      <p id="d1e1217">The relationships between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and soil temperature and moisture were
analysed using regression analysis in SPSS (Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences) software. The van't Hoff equation was used to represent the
relationship of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with soil temperature (van't Hoff, 1898):

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M76" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the soil respiration, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the soil
temperature, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the intercept of soil respiration when the soil
temperature is 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (i.e. reference soil respiration). Moreover,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the temperature sensitivity of soil respiration. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
value, which describes the change in soil respiration over a 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
increase in soil temperature, is calculated as

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M84" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          Considering that low and high values of soil water content both limit soil
respiration, we adopted a quadratic equation to simulate the effect of soil
moisture on soil respiration according to
Davidson et al. (1998):

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M85" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SWC</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SWC</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where SWC is the soil water content, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are regressed
parameters.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Environmental factors and crop growth</title>
      <p id="d1e1421">Figure 2 shows the dynamics of albedo, soil moisture, soil temperature, and
cotton leaf area index (LAI), which suggest that these environmental factors
and crop growth conditions are modified by PFM and other cultivation
practices. Other than two snowfall events that occurred in January 2015 and
January 2016 and elevated the albedo beyond 0.4, the albedo was altered by
cultivation, as shown in Fig. 2b. In early March, it was increased by the
spring irrigation conducted 1 month before sowing. Then, it was decreased
by ploughing several days before mulching on approximately 20 April. After
plastic mulching in April, the surface albedo showed a sudden rise and then
slowly decreased with crop canopy development. In general, the albedo reached
its minimum value along with the highest value of LAI during the bud stage in
August and then increased very slowly with leaf fall.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1426">Environmental factors and crop growth in the PFM field under drip
irrigation: <bold>(a)</bold> SWC in the ridge (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and furrow
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) affected by irrigation and precipitation,
<bold>(b)</bold> albedo affected by cultivation practices and snowfall in the
mulched field, <bold>(c)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (soil temperature) in the furrow
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and ridge (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the mulched field, and <bold>(d)</bold> LAI in the mulched and non-mulched fields (comparative LAI
measurements were only conducted in 2016). The shaded area indicates the
non-growing season.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1499">The spatial distributions of soil moisture and soil temperature were both
affected by plastic mulching. As shown in Fig. 2a, the soil moisture in
ridges was mostly higher than that in furrows from the effect of frequent
drip irrigation. Figure 2c shows that the soil temperature in the mulched ridge
was higher than that in the open furrow. However, in the later growth stages,
the soil temperature in the furrow became similar to or even exceeded that in
the ridge due to canopy development.</p>
      <p id="d1e1502">Plastic film mulching can also affect plant phenology. As shown in Fig. 2d,
the LAI began to increase with seed germination, reached its maximum value
during the bud stage in August, and then decreased with leaf fall. The LAI in
the mulched field was higher than that in the non-mulched field during the
comparative experiment year of 2016, particularly in the vigorous growing
stages.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Seasonal and spatial variations in soil respiration</title>
      <p id="d1e1511">As shown in Fig. 3, the magnitude and amplitude of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were rather
different in different years. For example, the soil respiration fluxes in the
non-mulched ridges were 1–6, 4–7, and
3–11 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, in the 3 years.
The seasonal variation in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was generally mostly affected by
soil temperature dynamics (this correlation will be further addressed<?pagebreak page3079?> in
Sect. 3.4), although some anomalies occurred. For example, on DOY 180 in
2016, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rates in the non-mulched ridge and planting hole
reached peak values, while those in the furrows in both the mulched and
non-mulched fields were fairly low. On the following DOY 192, however, the
situation was reversed, and on DOY 235, all <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes experienced
an abnormal declining and then rising cycle. These anomalies may be related
to the SWC dynamics caused by irrigation and precipitation, which will be
further explained in Sects. 3.5 and 3.6.</p>
      <p id="d1e1590"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> showed significant spatial variability at the field scale. As
shown in Fig. 3, the results in 2015 and 2016 indicated a consistently higher
soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission rate from the ridge than from the furrow in the
non-mulched field. In the mulched field, as indicated by Fig. 3c, the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the plastic film was very low, while the rate from the
planting hole was higher than that from the furrow most of the time. For the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the furrow, its rate in the mulched field generally
exceeded that in the non-mulched field in 2015 and 2016 except on DOY 222 in
2016, which occurred just after a 12.8 mm rainfall event, as shown in
Fig. 8.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><caption><p id="d1e1636">Spatio-temporal variation in soil respiration in mulched and
non-mulched fields over the 3 years. The whiskers represent the standard
deviation of three replicate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements (f-m, h-m, and p-m
represent furrow, planting hole, and plastic mulch in the mulched field,
respectively; f-nm and r-nm represent the furrow and ridge in the non-mulched
field, respectively; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents soil temperature).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Comparison of soil respiration in the mulched and non-mulched
fields</title>
      <p id="d1e1669">Figure 4 depicts the seasonal accumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and precipitation
over the three experimental years. It should be noted that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the
mulched ridge is the area-weighted summation of the terms from the plastic
mulch and planting holes. A prominent feature of the figure is that the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes over the ridge and furrow in the mulched field are
consistently larger than the corresponding values in the non-mulched field.
However, this magnitude relation was not significant in the furrow in 2015
and 2016 or in the ridge in<?pagebreak page3080?> 2016 at a significance level of 0.05 (Table 1).
Overall, the seasonal average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was 444.69 g C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in
the mulched field and 359.9 g C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the non-mulched field during
the growing season over the 3 years. The accumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in
the mulched field was indeed significantly larger than that in the
non-mulched field in the years of 2014 and 2015. However, for the year of
2016, with a substantial precipitation amount of 130 mm, the positive
deviation of the mulched field <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was not significant.</p>
      <p id="d1e1763">Additionally, the difference in the furrow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> between the mulched and
non-mulched field was smaller than the difference in the ridge over all the
3 years, and the magnitude of such differences decreased from 2014 to
2016. It should be noted that the seasonal precipitation presented an increasing trend
from 2014 to 2016. This indicates that more precipitation tends to eliminate
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> differences between mulched and non-mulched fields.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1791">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test of significance was conducted for soil respiration in furrows and ridges
and total soil respiration between mulched and non-mulched fields (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represent the total soil respiration in mulched and non-mulched
fields, respectively.
df represents the degrees of freedom, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>(4) is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value at a significance value of 0.05 and a
df of 4).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Year</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><italic>R</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <italic>R</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><italic>R</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <italic>R</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>R</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <italic>R</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">df</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><italic>t</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2014</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.92</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.27</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.87</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.776</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2015</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.25</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.59</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.04</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2016</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.40</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.91</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.52</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><caption><p id="d1e2063">Seasonal accumulative soil respiration and precipitation over the
three experimental years. The whiskers represent standard deviations (f-m and
r-m represent the furrow and ridge in the mulched field, respectively; f-nm
and r-nm represent the furrow and ridge in the non-mulched field,
respectively).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <title>Functional relations between soil respiration and soil
temperature</title>
      <p id="d1e2078">All<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes in the different locations in the mulched and non-mulched
fields showed increasing trends with temperature (Fig. 5), which were fitted
using the exponential equation described in Sect. 2.3. However, their
correlations are very weak and vary with location and time. The furrow
possessed a higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> than the ridge because of the relatively stable
soil moisture in the furrow. Additionally, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values in the furrows
were much lower than those in the ridges.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><caption><p id="d1e2116">Relations between soil respiration and soil temperature at different
locations in the mulched and non-mulched fields. The data represent the
means <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> standard deviations (SDs) of three replicates. The regression
lines for the different locations were fitted using Eq. (4), and the
regression equations are shown in Table 2 (f-m, h-m, and p-m represent
furrow, planting hole, and plastic mulch, respectively; f-nm and r-nm
represent furrow and ridge in non-mulched fields, respectively).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><caption><p id="d1e2135">Parameters for the fitted exponential equations relating soil
respiration and soil temperature for different locations in the mulched and
non-mulched fields (refer to Eqs. 4 and 5).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Year</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Parameters</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">f-m</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">f-nm</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">r-nm</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">h-m</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">p-m</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="3">2014</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.87</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.86</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.04</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.05</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.54</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.65</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.29</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.18</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="3">2015</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.33</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.23</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.01</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.02</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.04</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.05</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.25</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.46</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.60</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.18</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.27</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.43</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1" morerows="3">2016</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.42</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.16</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.92</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.48</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.13</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.04</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.04</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.04</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.04</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.09</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.45</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.49</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.52</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.42</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.41</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.23</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.39</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.20</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.18</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.44</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <title>Irrigation and soil respiration</title>
      <p id="d1e2535">The year 2014 was chosen to investigate the response of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to
irrigation because of the very low number of precipitation events occurring
in this year, and the results are shown in Fig. 6. It is clear that the soil
moisture in the non-mulched ridge was always lower than that in the furrow in
the mulched field except for some days immediately following irrigation.
Relatively higher soil moisture favours soil respiration, and the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the furrow in the mulched field was consequently always
higher than that in the non-mulched ridge. Another dominant feature shown in
Fig. 6 is the quick response of soil moisture and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to
irrigation. The soil moisture experienced a quick increase after irrigation,
while the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> underwent a decline, which indicates that too much
water in soil may restrain its respiration. Due to the configuration of the
drip tape and plastic mulch, the soil moisture and respiration in the ridges
of the mulched and non-mulched fields experienced similar but more drastic
variations than those in the furrow.</p>
      <p id="d1e2582">To investigate the response of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to irrigation in more detail,
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> dynamics across an irrigation cycle were explored. As
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements were conducted on random dates between two
irrigation events, data from different days after irrigation were collected
to analyse the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> variation. The effect of irrigation is
presented by plotting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> versus the number of days after
irrigation during an irrigation cycle of approximately 6 days. The results in
Fig. 7a show again that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rate in the non-mulched ridge was
extremely low immediately after irrigation and then slowly recovered, while
irrigation had almost no influence on soil respiration in the furrow of the
mulched field. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rates from both the<?pagebreak page3081?> furrow and ridge
reached maximum values on the fourth day after irrigation and then began to
decrease over the soil drying process. The relation between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and soil moisture can be expressed in the form of a binomial equation, as
shown in Fig. 7b, which indicates that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is very low in dry soil
and increases with soil moisture. However, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> shows a declining
trend when soil moisture exceeds a certain threshold. The threshold is
approximately 0.25 in the furrow of the mulched field and approximately 0.2
in the non-mulched ridge. The above thresholds are approximately 60 and
50 % of the water-filled pore space, respectively.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><caption><p id="d1e2698">The responses of soil moisture and respiration to irrigation at
different locations in the mulched and non-mulched fields in 2014 (f-m and
r-nm represent the furrow in the mulched field and the ridge in the
non-mulched field, respectively).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><caption><p id="d1e2710">Influence of irrigation on soil respiration. <bold>(a)</bold> Variation
in soil respiration with number of days after irrigation.
<bold>(b)</bold> Relation between soil respiration and soil moisture (regression
lines are fitted with the binomial equation in Eq. (6) (f-m and r-nm
represent the furrow in the mulched field and the ridge in the non-mulched
field, respectively).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS6">
  <title>Precipitation and soil respiration</title>
      <p id="d1e2731">The year 2016 was chosen to investigate the response of soil respiration to
precipitation because a significant amount of rainfall occurred in this year.
As shown in Fig. 8, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exhibited similar responses to irrigation
in the planting hole and plastic mulch and non-mulched ridges, while it
presented similar responses to precipitation in the furrows of mulched and
non-mulched fields. In particular, three large rainfall events, with amounts
of 12.8, 36.8, and 48 mm, occurred on DOY 222, 192, and 235 in 2016,
respectively. As we can see from Fig. 8, the light event (12.8 mm, DOY 222)
had little effect on the soil moisture or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the moderate event
(36.8 mm, DOY 192) restrained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the non-mulched ridge and
planting hole but increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the furrows of the mulched and
non-mulched fields, and the heavy event (48 mm, DOY 235) restrained
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in all parts of the mulched and non-mulched fields.</p>
      <?pagebreak page3082?><p id="d1e2789">Using the heavy event as an example, the effect of precipitation on
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during a wetting–drying cycle was more closely investigated
before and after the event. As shown in Fig. 9, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rates at
all locations were restrained by substantially high soil water content. Then,
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> recovered slowly with a decline in SWC and remained steady
after 3 days.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><caption><p id="d1e2827">Response of soil moisture and soil respiration to precipitation and
irrigation during 2016 (f-m, h-m and p-m represent the furrow, planting hole,
and plastic mulch in the mulched field, respectively; f-nm and r-nm represent
the furrow and ridge in the non-mulched field, respectively).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>Effect of plastic mulch on soil respiration</title>
      <p id="d1e2848">Our experiment indicates that the planting hole emitted more CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> than
the furrow, with the largest values of 8.0 and
6.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, during the observation
period (Fig. 3). In addition, the plastic mulch itself can also emit CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
at a rate of 3.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Considering that plastic
mulch occupies most of the ridge area, it is also an important pathway of
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in mulched fields. In fact, the soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission
rate of the plastic mulch depends on film features, including its thickness,
texture, and colour. For example, according to Berger et al. (2013), thick
black PE mulch releases extraordinarily low N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O emissions, while high
amounts of N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O can be emitted from polyethylene film that is only
0.02 mm thick (Nishimura et al., 2012). Q. Liu et al. (2016) also reported
that transparent plastic film emits more CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> than black plastic mulch.
Local farmers in our study area often use clear polyvinyl chloride (PVC) film
with a thickness of only 0.008 mm because of its low price. This film has a
relatively high diffusion capacity for CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, as indicated by our results.
Additionally, thin and low-density plastic film is easily damaged, resulting
in plastic film residue, which can affect crop germination, water absorption,
nutrition, and yield. Plastic film residue can also inhibit soil microbial
activity, which reduces soil fertility, causing substantive costs to the
environment and farmers (J. Wang et al., 2016; Adhikari et al., 2016).
High-density plastic film is therefore recommended for the purpose of
reducing soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and plastic film residues despite its higher
price. In general, the planting hole, furrow, and plastic mulch are primary
pathways that are responsible for CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in a mulched field. A
comprehensive measurement scheme including different locations is therefore
necessary to assess <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in a mulched field. Our results can
potentially be used to correct the reported CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions measured only
at the furrow in a mulched field (Qian-Bing et al., 2012; Q. Liu et al., 2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e3026">Our experiment also showed higher soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission rates from furrows
and ridges in the mulched field compared to the corresponding locations in
the non-mulched field. Therefore, PFM can indeed promote soil respiration in
our study area. This is principally due to improved soil temperature, soil
moisture, and crop growth as a result of<?pagebreak page3083?> plastic mulching (see Fig. 2).
Improved crop growth conditions result in the production of more root biomass
and litter fall, which will promote root respiration and litter fall
decomposition. Moreover, improved soil temperature and soil moisture can
promote the activities of roots and microorganisms to increase the
mineralization of soil organic carbon, for example, by stimulating the
decomposition of buried crop straw (Y. P. Wang et al., 2016). This result was
partly confirmed by Yu et al. (2016), who reported that furrow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
in the mulched field is greater than that in the non-mulched field. However,
they also reported that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rates from mulched and non-mulched
ridges are similar, which differs from our results. Furthermore, some other
studies found contrasting results (i.e. PFM decreases <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the
northern Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China (Li et al., 2011), the
Loess Plateau of China (Xiang et al., 2014), southwest China (Lei, 2016), and
central Japan (Okuda et al., 2007). Additionally, Berger et al. (2013) found
that PFM significantly decreases N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O emissions in South Korea.
Therefore, the effects of plastic mulch on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> differ in different
areas. Our work reveals that the difference in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> between mulched
and non-mulched fields depends on the precipitation amount. This could be the
reason leading to the contradictory results, which will be discussed in more
detail in the following section.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><caption><p id="d1e3105">Variations in soil moisture and soil respiration during a
wetting–drying cycle after a heavy rainfall.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Effects of irrigation and precipitation on soil respiration</title>
      <p id="d1e3122">Our results indicate that the substantially high SWC occurring right after
irrigation and precipitation restrained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and this effect
decreased as the soil moisture returned to the normal level (Figs. 7a and
9). In contrast, in natural ecosystems, precipitation always immediately
increases <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, similar to water addition after a long drought in a
tallgrass prairie ecosystem in Oklahoma, USA (Liu et al., 2002), and 12 mm
of precipitation in an oak/grass savanna ecosystem in California (Xu and
Baldocchi, 2004). This is due to the so-called soil degassing effect, which
is the non-steady-state CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> efflux at the soil surface occurring mostly
during rainfall or irrigation after long periods of drought (Luo and Zhou,
2006). In agricultural systems, however, frequent irrigation occurs to
satisfy crop water requirements and maintains favourable soil moisture. This
further renders higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> than in natural ecosystems,
particularly in arid areas. Our results further indicate that SWC that is
either too low or too high can restrain <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which can be
expressed by a quadratic equation (Fig. 7b). The quadratic (parabolic)
relationship between SWC and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has also been detected in maize
fields, a tallgrass prairie, and oak/grass savannah ecosystems (Yinkun et al.,
2013; Xu et al., 2004; Liu et al., 2002; Mielnick and Dugas, 2000). This is
because that lower water content affects the diffusion of soluble substrates,
while higher water content affects the diffusion and availability of oxygen
(Davidson et al., 2006; Linn and Doran, 1984). Our results confirm findings
by Wang et al. (2010), who reported that irrigation stimulates <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
but that too much water reduces it, especially shortly after irrigation (Wang
et al., 2010). In addition to our quadratic functional relation between SWC
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the effect of SWC on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has<?pagebreak page3084?> also been
described by linear, logarithmic, or parabolic functions in different
ecosystems around the world (Davidson et al., 2000). For example, in a
mountain oasis in Oman, soil respiration has been described to be linearly
correlated with the SWC (Wichern et al., 2004). To be noted, the range of SWC
in Wichern et al. (2004) is from 0.14 to 0.25, which is lower than the soil
moisture threshold necessary to restrain <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> found in our study;
therefore, the authors did not find a parabolic correlation like we did. More
theoretical efforts should be made to reconcile these different experimental
results and obtain a general relationship between SWC and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3245">Our results indicate that the correlations between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
temperature and the temperature sensitivity (i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are rather low
in our PFM field equipped with drip irrigation (Table 2). The obtained
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values of 0.18–0.44 are much lower than the reported values from
natural ecosystems, such as in a tall grass prairie in central Oklahoma, USA,
with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.77–0.97 (Luo et al., 2001), and in the Harvard Forest
in central Massachusetts, USA, with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.8 (Davidson et al.,
1998). The obtained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values of 1.25–1.65 (Table 2, except for in the
planting hole) are below the median of 2.4 reported in a literature review of
global soil respiration (Raich and Schlesinger, 1992). Additionally, they are
much smaller than the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 3.8 found in rain-fed maize cropland on the
Loess Plateau of China (Xiang et al., 2012). In contrast, relatively higher
correlations between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SWC indicate that the SWC may be the
main factor affecting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in a PFM field under drip irrigation.
Lower <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values indicate that the sensitivity of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to
temperature has been weakened by higher variation in the soil moisture
induced by irrigation and precipitation.</p>
      <p id="d1e3370">Our results clearly reveal the confounding influence of PFM and precipitation
on soil respiration. The hydrological responses to precipitation in the field
were changed by the impermeable plastic mulch, which is the reason that the
effect of precipitation on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> differed in the mulched and
non-mulched fields. For example, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rate in the non-mulched
ridge was higher than that in the furrow of mulched fields and planting hole
during 2016, in which high precipitation occurred. However, this result
contrasted with the results from 2014 and 2015, during which less rainfall
occurred. Additionally, although the soil respiration rate in the mulched
field was always higher than that in the non-mulched field during all 3
years, the significance of this magnitude relation decreased with increasing
precipitation. Therefore, we can speculate that the magnitude at which the
mulch accelerates soil respiration should be related to the amount of
precipitation.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><caption><p id="d1e3397">The relationship of the difference in soil respiration between the
mulched and non-mulched fields with precipitation; df represents the
soil respiration in the non-mulched field minus that in the mulched field.
Among the five points representing arid areas, the data from Yu et al. (2016)
are within the circle, while those from our study are outside of the
circle.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3075/2018/hess-22-3075-2018-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3407">To verify the above assertion, a meta-analysis was carried out. The
relationship between the amount of annual precipitation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the
differences in the annual <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (denoted as df, i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the non-mulched field minus that in the mulched field) was
analysed (Fig. 10). The relevant studies include studies conducted in an arid
area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">45.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) in southern Xinjiang (Yu et al., 2016), a semiarid area
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">160</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) in northern Xinjiang (Li et al., 2011), a semi-humid area
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">566.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) on the Loess Plateau of China (Xiang et al., 2014), a
subtropical monsoon area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1105</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) in southwest China (Lei, 2016), and a
temperate monsoon climate area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1954</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm) in Japan (Okuda et al., 2007).
The df was found to have a linear relationship with the amount of
precipitation. Under the condition of 200 mm of annual precipitation, the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> rates in the mulched and non-mulched fields are roughly
identical. When the annual precipitation was greater than 200 mm, the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was lower in the mulched field than in the non-mulched field.
This is the reason why the results of some studies contrasted with our
results showing that PFM decreases <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3533">Based on the relationships between precipitation and soil respiration in the
PFM fields obtained above, plastic film mulching is recommended for
application in areas with precipitation greater than 200 mm, i.e. semi-arid
and humid areas, to decrease soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and increase soil carbon
sequestration. Decreasing soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions indicates increasing soil
organic carbon and maintenance of soil fertility to obtain a stable yield. Our
results are consistent with those of Zhang et al. (2018), who concluded that
PFM where precipitation is greater than 230 mm can result in a stable crop
yield on the Loess Plateau.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page3085?><sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Summary</title>
      <p id="d1e3563">Plastic film mulching is now widely used in agriculture around the world due
to the continuous fall in the prices of plastic products, particularly in
developing countries, such as China. The changing land cover with great
numbers of PFM fields and the changing climate will affect the energy, water,
and carbon cycles regionally and globally. From the comprehensive analysis
and discussion of the effects of plastic mulch, irrigation, and precipitation
on soil respiration based on the results of our controlled experiment, some
new findings were discovered in this study. First, PFM can enhance the
spatial heterogeneity of soil respiration under drip irrigation, and
planting holes, furrows, and plastic mulch (ordered by emission rate) are
three important pathways of surface soil CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. Second, PFM can
increase soil respiration at the field scale in arid areas, while this
enhancement depends on the amount of precipitation. A linear relationship
was found between the difference in soil respiration (between non-mulched
and mulched fields) and the amount of precipitation at the annual scale.
Plastic film mulching is therefore beneficial for carbon sequestration in
wet areas, while it is harmful in arid areas. Third, the frequent
application of water elevates soil moisture and soil respiration and
enhances their variation. The resultant higher variation in soil moisture
further alleviates the sensitivity of soil respiration to soil temperature,
leading to a weak correlation and low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values.</p>
      <p id="d1e3586">Our results suggest that the rapid expansion of PFM fields in arid areas
brings new challenges for controlling greenhouse gas emissions. Plastic film
mulching and irrigation should be better integrated into future soil carbon
models. Linking the hydrologic and carbon cycles via the conservation of
water resources is crucial for improving agronomic yields and soil carbon
sequestration in dry lands.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e3593">In order to access the data, we kindly ask researchers to
contact the corresponding author.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e3599">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3605">This research was support by the National Key Research and Development
Program of China (2016YFC0402701, 2016YFA0601603), the National Science
Foundation of China (NSFC 91647205), and the Foundation of the State Key
Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering of Tsinghua University
(2016-KY-03). We gratefully appreciate their support. We acknowledge the
staff at Tsinghua University Oasis Eco-Hydrology Experimental Research
Station for their kind help and assistance. Additionally, the authors thank
Mohd Yawar Ali Khan for help with language improvement.
<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><?xmltex \hack{\noindent}?>Edited by: Nandita Basu <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Adhikari, R., Bristow, K. L., Casey, P. S., Freischmidt, G., Hornbuckle, J.
W., and Adhikari, B.: Preformed and sprayable polymeric mulch film to improve
agricultural water use efficiency, Agric. Water Manage., 169, 1–13,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.02.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agwat.2016.02.006</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Baker, J. M., Ochsner, T. E., Venterea, R. T., and Griffis, T. J.: Tillage
and soil carbon sequestration – What do we really know?, Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ., 118, 1–5, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Berger, S., Kim, Y., Kettering, J., and Gebauer, G.: Plastic mulching in
agriculture – Friend or foe of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions?, Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ., 167, 43–51, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2013.01.010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agee.2013.01.010</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bonan, G.: Ecological climatology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 352–359, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Bond-Lamberty, B. and Thomson, A.: A global database of soil respiration
data, Biogeosciences, 7, 1915–1926, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1915-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-7-1915-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Buyanovsky, G. A., Kucera, C. L., and Wagner, G. H.: Comparative Analyses of
Carbon Dynamics in Native and Cultivated Ecosystems, Ecology, 68, 2023–2031,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1939893" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2307/1939893</ext-link>, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Cox, P. M., Betts, R. A., Jones, C. D., Spall, S. A., and Totterdell, I. J.:
Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled
climate model, Nature, 408, 184–187, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Davidson, E. A., Belk, E., and Boone, R. D.: Soil water content and
temperature as independent or confounded factors controlling soil respiration
in a temperate mixed hardwood forest, Global Change Biol., 4, 217–227,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.00128.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.00128.x</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E. A., Verchot, L. V., Catt, X., Nio, J. H., Ackerman, I. L., and
Carvalho, J. E. M.: Effects of Soil Water Content on Soil Respiration in
Forests and Cattle Pastures of Eastern Amazonia, Biogeochemistry, 48, 53–69,
2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Davidson, E. A., Janssens, I. A., and Luo, Y.: On the variability of
respiration in terrestrial ecosystems: moving beyond <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Global Change
Biol., 12, 154–164, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01065.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01065.x</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Guo, S., Qi, Y., Peng, Q., Dong, Y., He, Y., Yan, Z., and Wang, L.:
Influences of drip and flood irrigation on soil carbon dioxide emission and
soil carbon sequestration of maize cropland in the North China Plain, J. Arid
Land, 9, 222–233, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-017-0011-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s40333-017-0011-9</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Lal, R.: Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food
Security, Science, 304, 1623–1627, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097396" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1097396</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Lei, L.: Study of effect of plastic film mulching on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from a vegetable field, Master of Environmental
Engineering, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, 59 pp., 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Li, N., Tian, F., Hu, H., Lu, H., and Ming, G.: Effects of Plastic Mulch on
Soil Heat Flux and Energy Balance in a Cotton Field in Northwest China,
Atmosphere, 7, 1–16, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Li, Z.-G., Zhang, R.-H., Wang, X.-J., Wang, J.-P., Zhang, C.-P., and Tian,
C.-Y.: Carbon Dioxide Fluxes and<?pagebreak page3086?> Concentrations in a Cotton Field in
Northwestern China: Effects of Plastic Mulching and Drip Irrigation,
Pedosphere, 21, 178–185, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s1002-0160(11)60116-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/s1002-0160(11)60116-1</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Linn, D. M. and Doran, J. W.: Effect of Water-Filled Pore Space on Carbon
Dioxide and Nitrous Oxide Production in Tilled and Nontilled Soils1, Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J., 48, 1267–1272,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800060013x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800060013x</ext-link>, 1984.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Liu, L., Wang, X., Lajeunesse, M. J., Miao, G., Piao, S., Wan, S., Wu, Y.,
Wang, Z., Yang, S., Li, P., and Deng, M.: A cross-biome synthesis of soil
respiration and its determinants under simulated precipitation changes,
Global Change Biol., 22, 1394–1405, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13156" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.13156</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Liu, Q., Chen, Y., Li, W., Liu, Y., Han, J., Wen, X., and Liao, Y.:
Plastic-film mulching and urea types affect soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and
grain yield in spring maize on the Loess Plateau, China, Sci. Rep., 6, 28150,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28150" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/srep28150</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Liu, X., Wan, S., Su, B., Hui, D., and Luo, Y.: Response of soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
efflux to water manipulation in a tallgrass prairie ecosystem, Plant Soil,
240, 213–223, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015744126533" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1023/a:1015744126533</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Luo, Y. and Zhou, X. (Eds.): Soil respiration and the environment, Elsevier,
New York, 35–40, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Luo, Y., Wan, S., Hui, D., and Wallace, L. L.: Acclimatization of soil
respiration to warming in a tall grass prairie, Nature, 413, 622–625, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Mielnick, P. C. and Dugas, W. A.: Soil CO2 flux in a tallgrass prairie, Soil
Biol. Biochem., 32, 221–228, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(99)00150-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0038-0717(99)00150-9</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Nishimura, S., Komada, M., Takebe, M., Yonemura, S., and Kato, N.: Nitrous
oxide evolved from soil covered with plastic mulch film in horticultural
field, Biol. Fertil. Soils, 48, 787–795, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-012-0672-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00374-012-0672-7</ext-link>,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Okuda, H., Noda, K., Sawamoto, T., Tsuruta, H., Hirabayashi, T., Yonemoto, J.
Y., and Yagi, K.: Emission of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and Uptake of CH4 in Soil from a
Satsuma Mandarin Orchard under Mulching Cultivation in Central Japan, J. Jpn.
Soc. Hort. Sci., 76, 279–287, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2503/jjshs.76.279" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2503/jjshs.76.279</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Qian-Bing, Z., Ling, Y., Jin, W., Hong-Hai, L., Ya-Li, Z., and Wang-Feng, Z.:
Effects of Different Irrigation Methods and Fertilization Measures – on Soil
Respiration and Its Component Contrib, Sci. Agricult. Sin., 45, 2420–2430,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Raich, J. W. and Schlesinger, W. H.: The global carbon dioxide flux in soil
respiration and its relationship to vegetation and climate, Tellus B, 44,
81–99, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.1992.t01-1-00001.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1034/j.1600-0889.1992.t01-1-00001.x</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Raich, J. W. and Tufekciogul, A.: Vegetation and soil respiration:
Correlations and controls, Biogeochemistry, 48, 71–90,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006112000616" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1023/a:1006112000616</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Reichstein, M. and Beer, C.: Soil respiration across scales: The importance
of a model–data integration framework for data interpretation, J. Plant
Nutr. Soil Sci., 171, 344–354, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200700075" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jpln.200700075</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>van't Hoff, J.: Lectures on Theoretical and Physical Chemistry. Part 1. Chemical
Dynamics, Edward Arnold, London, 224–226, 1898.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, J., Fenghua, Z., and Zhu, O.: Effects of irrigation quantity on soil
respiration in wheat field in filling stage, Agricult. Boreali-Sim., 25,
186–189, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Wang, J., Lv, S., Zhang, M., Chen, G., Zhu, T., Zhang, S., Teng, Y.,
Christie, P., and Luo, Y.: Effects of plastic film residues on occurrence of
phthalates and microbial activity in soils, Chemosphere, 151, 171–177,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.02.076" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.02.076</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Y. P., Li, X. G., Fu, T., Wang, L., Turner, N. C., Siddique, K. H. M.,
and Li, F.-M.: Multi-site assessment of the effects of plastic-film mulch on
the soil organic carbon balance in semiarid areas of China, Agric. For.
Meteorol., 228–229, 42–51, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Wichern, F., Luedeling, E., Müller, T., Joergensen, R. G., and Buerkert,
A.: Field measurements of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> evolution rate under different
crops during an irrigation cycle in a mountain oasis of Oman, Appl. Soil
Ecol., 25, 85–91, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Xiang, G., Weiping, H., Fengxue, G., and Rui, G.: The impact of rainfall on
soil respiration in a rain-fed maize cropland, Acta Ecol. Sin., 32,
7883–7893, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Xiang, G., Gong, D., and Fengxue, G.: Inhibiting soil respiration and
improving yield of spring maize in fields with plastic film mulching, T.
Chinese Soc. Agr. Eng., 30, 62–70, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Xu, L. and Baldocchi, D. D.: Seasonal variation in carbon dioxide exchange
over a Mediterranean annual grassland in California, Agric. For. Meteorol.,
123, 79–96, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2003.10.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agrformet.2003.10.004</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Xu, L., Baldocchi, D. D., and Tang, J.: How soil moisture, rain pulses, and
growth alter the response of ecosystem respiration to temperature, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 18, 1–10, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004gb002281" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004gb002281</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Yan, M., Zhou, G., and Zhang, X.: Effects of irrigation on the soil
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> efflux from different poplar clone plantations in arid northwest
China, Plant Soil, 375, 89–97, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1944-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-013-1944-1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Yinkun, L., Minpeng, C., Xu, X., and Xurong, M.: Dynamics of soil respiration
and carbon balance of summer-maize field under different nitrogen addition,
Ecol. Environ. Sci., 22, 18–24, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Yu, Y., Zhao, C., Stahr, K., Zhao, X., Jia, H., and de Varennes, A.: Plastic
mulching increased soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration and emissions from an oasis
cotton field in Central Asia, Soil Use Manage., 32, 230–239,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12266" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/sum.12266</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, F., Zhang, W., Qi, J., and Li, F.-M.: A regional evaluation of plastic
film mulching for improving crop yields on the Loess Plateau of China, Agric.
For. Meteorol., 248, 458–468, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.10.030" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.10.030</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Z., Tian, F., Zhong, R., and Hu, H.: Spatial and Temporal pattern of
soil temperature in cotton field under mulched drip irrigation conditions in
Xinjiang, T. CSAE, 27, 44–51, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Z., Hu, H., Tian, F., Yao, X., and Sivapalan, M.: Groundwater dynamics
under water-saving irrigation and implications for sustainable water
management in an oasis: Tarim River basin of western China, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 18, 3951–3967, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3951-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-18-3951-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Precipitation alters plastic film mulching impacts on soil respiration in an arid area of northwest China</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Plastic film mulching (PFM) has widely been used around the world
to save water and improve crop yield. However, the effect of PFM on soil
respiration (<i>R</i><sub>s</sub>) remains unclear and could be further confounded
by irrigation and precipitation. To address these topics, controlled
experiments were conducted in mulched and non-mulched fields under drip
irrigation from 2014 to 2016 in an arid area of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous
Region, northwest China. The spatio-temporal pattern of soil surface CO<sub>2</sub>
flux as an index of soil respiration under drip irrigation with PFM was
investigated, and the confounded effects of PFM and irrigation/precipitation
on soil respiration were explored. The main findings were as follows.
(1) Furrows, planting holes, and plastic mulch are three important pathways
of soil CO<sub>2</sub> emissions in mulched fields, of which the planting hole
efflux outweighs that from the furrow, with the largest values of 8.0 and
6.6 µmol m<sup>−2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>, respectively, and the plastic mulch
itself can emit up to 3.6 µmol m<sup>−2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> of CO<sub>2</sub>.
(2) The frequent application of water (i.e. through irrigation and
precipitation) elevates soil moisture and soil respiration and enhances their
variation. The resultant higher variation of soil moisture further alleviates
the sensitivity of soil respiration to soil temperature, leading to a weak
correlation and lower <i>Q</i><sub>10</sub> values. (3) Soil CO<sub>2</sub> effluxes from
furrows and ridges in mulched fields outweigh the corresponding values in
non-mulched fields in arid areas. However, this outweighing relation
attenuates with increasing precipitation. Furthermore, by combining our
results with those from the literature, we show that the difference in soil
CO<sub>2</sub> effluxes between non-mulched and mulched fields presents a linear
relation with the amount of precipitation, which results in negative values
in arid areas and positive values in humid areas. Therefore, whether PFM
increases soil respiration or not depends on the amount of precipitation
during the crop-growing season.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Adhikari, R., Bristow, K. L., Casey, P. S., Freischmidt, G., Hornbuckle, J.
W., and Adhikari, B.: Preformed and sprayable polymeric mulch film to improve
agricultural water use efficiency, Agric. Water Manage., 169, 1–13,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.02.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.02.006</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Baker, J. M., Ochsner, T. E., Venterea, R. T., and Griffis, T. J.: Tillage
and soil carbon sequestration – What do we really know?, Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ., 118, 1–5, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Berger, S., Kim, Y., Kettering, J., and Gebauer, G.: Plastic mulching in
agriculture – Friend or foe of N<sub>2</sub>O emissions?, Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ., 167, 43–51, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2013.01.010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2013.01.010</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bonan, G.: Ecological climatology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 352–359, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bond-Lamberty, B. and Thomson, A.: A global database of soil respiration
data, Biogeosciences, 7, 1915–1926, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1915-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1915-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Buyanovsky, G. A., Kucera, C. L., and Wagner, G. H.: Comparative Analyses of
Carbon Dynamics in Native and Cultivated Ecosystems, Ecology, 68, 2023–2031,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1939893" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2307/1939893</a>, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Cox, P. M., Betts, R. A., Jones, C. D., Spall, S. A., and Totterdell, I. J.:
Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled
climate model, Nature, 408, 184–187, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E. A., Belk, E., and Boone, R. D.: Soil water content and
temperature as independent or confounded factors controlling soil respiration
in a temperate mixed hardwood forest, Global Change Biol., 4, 217–227,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.00128.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.00128.x</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E. A., Verchot, L. V., Catt, X., Nio, J. H., Ackerman, I. L., and
Carvalho, J. E. M.: Effects of Soil Water Content on Soil Respiration in
Forests and Cattle Pastures of Eastern Amazonia, Biogeochemistry, 48, 53–69,
2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Davidson, E. A., Janssens, I. A., and Luo, Y.: On the variability of
respiration in terrestrial ecosystems: moving beyond <i>Q</i><sub>10</sub>, Global Change
Biol., 12, 154–164, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01065.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01065.x</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Guo, S., Qi, Y., Peng, Q., Dong, Y., He, Y., Yan, Z., and Wang, L.:
Influences of drip and flood irrigation on soil carbon dioxide emission and
soil carbon sequestration of maize cropland in the North China Plain, J. Arid
Land, 9, 222–233, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-017-0011-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-017-0011-9</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Lal, R.: Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food
Security, Science, 304, 1623–1627, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097396" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097396</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Lei, L.: Study of effect of plastic film mulching on CO<sub>2</sub> and
CH<sub>4</sub> emissions from a vegetable field, Master of Environmental
Engineering, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, 59 pp., 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Li, N., Tian, F., Hu, H., Lu, H., and Ming, G.: Effects of Plastic Mulch on
Soil Heat Flux and Energy Balance in a Cotton Field in Northwest China,
Atmosphere, 7, 1–16, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Li, Z.-G., Zhang, R.-H., Wang, X.-J., Wang, J.-P., Zhang, C.-P., and Tian,
C.-Y.: Carbon Dioxide Fluxes and Concentrations in a Cotton Field in
Northwestern China: Effects of Plastic Mulching and Drip Irrigation,
Pedosphere, 21, 178–185, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s1002-0160(11)60116-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/s1002-0160(11)60116-1</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Linn, D. M. and Doran, J. W.: Effect of Water-Filled Pore Space on Carbon
Dioxide and Nitrous Oxide Production in Tilled and Nontilled Soils1, Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J., 48, 1267–1272,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800060013x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800060013x</a>, 1984.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, L., Wang, X., Lajeunesse, M. J., Miao, G., Piao, S., Wan, S., Wu, Y.,
Wang, Z., Yang, S., Li, P., and Deng, M.: A cross-biome synthesis of soil
respiration and its determinants under simulated precipitation changes,
Global Change Biol., 22, 1394–1405, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13156" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13156</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, Q., Chen, Y., Li, W., Liu, Y., Han, J., Wen, X., and Liao, Y.:
Plastic-film mulching and urea types affect soil CO<sub>2</sub> emissions and
grain yield in spring maize on the Loess Plateau, China, Sci. Rep., 6, 28150,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28150" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28150</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, X., Wan, S., Su, B., Hui, D., and Luo, Y.: Response of soil CO<sub>2</sub>
efflux to water manipulation in a tallgrass prairie ecosystem, Plant Soil,
240, 213–223, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015744126533" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015744126533</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Luo, Y. and Zhou, X. (Eds.): Soil respiration and the environment, Elsevier,
New York, 35–40, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Luo, Y., Wan, S., Hui, D., and Wallace, L. L.: Acclimatization of soil
respiration to warming in a tall grass prairie, Nature, 413, 622–625, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Mielnick, P. C. and Dugas, W. A.: Soil CO2 flux in a tallgrass prairie, Soil
Biol. Biochem., 32, 221–228, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(99)00150-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(99)00150-9</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Nishimura, S., Komada, M., Takebe, M., Yonemura, S., and Kato, N.: Nitrous
oxide evolved from soil covered with plastic mulch film in horticultural
field, Biol. Fertil. Soils, 48, 787–795, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-012-0672-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-012-0672-7</a>,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Okuda, H., Noda, K., Sawamoto, T., Tsuruta, H., Hirabayashi, T., Yonemoto, J.
Y., and Yagi, K.: Emission of N<sub>2</sub>O and CO<sub>2</sub> and Uptake of CH4 in Soil from a
Satsuma Mandarin Orchard under Mulching Cultivation in Central Japan, J. Jpn.
Soc. Hort. Sci., 76, 279–287, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2503/jjshs.76.279" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2503/jjshs.76.279</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Qian-Bing, Z., Ling, Y., Jin, W., Hong-Hai, L., Ya-Li, Z., and Wang-Feng, Z.:
Effects of Different Irrigation Methods and Fertilization Measures – on Soil
Respiration and Its Component Contrib, Sci. Agricult. Sin., 45, 2420–2430,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Raich, J. W. and Schlesinger, W. H.: The global carbon dioxide flux in soil
respiration and its relationship to vegetation and climate, Tellus B, 44,
81–99, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.1992.t01-1-00001.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.1992.t01-1-00001.x</a>, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Raich, J. W. and Tufekciogul, A.: Vegetation and soil respiration:
Correlations and controls, Biogeochemistry, 48, 71–90,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006112000616" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1006112000616</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Reichstein, M. and Beer, C.: Soil respiration across scales: The importance
of a model–data integration framework for data interpretation, J. Plant
Nutr. Soil Sci., 171, 344–354, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200700075" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200700075</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
van't Hoff, J.: Lectures on Theoretical and Physical Chemistry. Part 1. Chemical
Dynamics, Edward Arnold, London, 224–226, 1898.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, J., Fenghua, Z., and Zhu, O.: Effects of irrigation quantity on soil
respiration in wheat field in filling stage, Agricult. Boreali-Sim., 25,
186–189, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, J., Lv, S., Zhang, M., Chen, G., Zhu, T., Zhang, S., Teng, Y.,
Christie, P., and Luo, Y.: Effects of plastic film residues on occurrence of
phthalates and microbial activity in soils, Chemosphere, 151, 171–177,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.02.076" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.02.076</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Y. P., Li, X. G., Fu, T., Wang, L., Turner, N. C., Siddique, K. H. M.,
and Li, F.-M.: Multi-site assessment of the effects of plastic-film mulch on
the soil organic carbon balance in semiarid areas of China, Agric. For.
Meteorol., 228–229, 42–51, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Wichern, F., Luedeling, E., Müller, T., Joergensen, R. G., and Buerkert,
A.: Field measurements of the CO<sub>2</sub> evolution rate under different
crops during an irrigation cycle in a mountain oasis of Oman, Appl. Soil
Ecol., 25, 85–91, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Xiang, G., Weiping, H., Fengxue, G., and Rui, G.: The impact of rainfall on
soil respiration in a rain-fed maize cropland, Acta Ecol. Sin., 32,
7883–7893, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Xiang, G., Gong, D., and Fengxue, G.: Inhibiting soil respiration and
improving yield of spring maize in fields with plastic film mulching, T.
Chinese Soc. Agr. Eng., 30, 62–70, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, L. and Baldocchi, D. D.: Seasonal variation in carbon dioxide exchange
over a Mediterranean annual grassland in California, Agric. For. Meteorol.,
123, 79–96, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2003.10.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2003.10.004</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, L., Baldocchi, D. D., and Tang, J.: How soil moisture, rain pulses, and
growth alter the response of ecosystem respiration to temperature, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 18, 1–10, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004gb002281" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004gb002281</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Yan, M., Zhou, G., and Zhang, X.: Effects of irrigation on the soil
CO<sub>2</sub> efflux from different poplar clone plantations in arid northwest
China, Plant Soil, 375, 89–97, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1944-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1944-1</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Yinkun, L., Minpeng, C., Xu, X., and Xurong, M.: Dynamics of soil respiration
and carbon balance of summer-maize field under different nitrogen addition,
Ecol. Environ. Sci., 22, 18–24, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, Y., Zhao, C., Stahr, K., Zhao, X., Jia, H., and de Varennes, A.: Plastic
mulching increased soil CO<sub>2</sub> concentration and emissions from an oasis
cotton field in Central Asia, Soil Use Manage., 32, 230–239,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12266" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12266</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, F., Zhang, W., Qi, J., and Li, F.-M.: A regional evaluation of plastic
film mulching for improving crop yields on the Loess Plateau of China, Agric.
For. Meteorol., 248, 458–468, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.10.030" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.10.030</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Z., Tian, F., Zhong, R., and Hu, H.: Spatial and Temporal pattern of
soil temperature in cotton field under mulched drip irrigation conditions in
Xinjiang, T. CSAE, 27, 44–51, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Z., Hu, H., Tian, F., Yao, X., and Sivapalan, M.: Groundwater dynamics
under water-saving irrigation and implications for sustainable water
management in an oasis: Tarim River basin of western China, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 18, 3951–3967, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3951-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3951-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
