| 英文摘要: | Powlson et al. reply
In our recent Perspective1, we concluded that no-till agriculture offered only limited potential for mitigating climate change through soil carbon (C) sequestration, in contrast to the claims made in the agriculture chapter of the 2013 UNEP Emissions Gap Report2. The authors of the UNEP report disagree with our conclusion and we are happy to respond to their comments3. They are correct that we concentrated totally on no-till rather than other agricultural practices as a means of mitigating climate change. This was deliberate because current uptake of no-till — and its probable rate of adoption in the medium term — is far greater than for the other practices mentioned, such as agroforestry and biochar applications to soil. And we have no disagreement with their comments on climate change mitigation through improved water and nutrient management and reduced use of fossil fuels — in fact, alterations to water and nutrient management are probably the most effective approaches in all agricultural systems, not only rice production. |