Maintaining Yield and Improving Water Use Efficiency of Soybean (Glycine max) with Wheat (Triticum spp.) Straw Mulch: An Assessment Based on Field Experiment and Modeling

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

Effat Paravar ¹

Afshin Soltani ¹

Seyed Reza Amiri ²

Ebrahim Zeinali ¹

Farshid Ghaderi far ¹

¹ Faculty of Plant Production, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran

² Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Jiroft, Jiroft, Iran

10.22067/agry.2026.96489.1260

Abstract

Introduction
Freshwater scarcity and the increasing demand from the agricultural sector, which consumes approximately 70% of global freshwater, have posed serious challenges to global food security. This pressure is particularly severe in arid and semi-arid regions like Iran, where high evaporation rates and irregular rainfall threaten crop production sustainability. Conservation agriculture, particularly the retention of crop residues (straw mulch) on the soil surface, is an effective strategy to manage soil and water resources. Mulch conserves soil moisture by physically reducing the solar radiation reaching the soil, thus directly decreasing soil evaporation, especially during the early stages of crop growth. In Golestan province, Iran’s primary soybean (Glycine max L.) production hub, soybean is mostly cultivated in rotation with wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). However, farmers commonly burn or remove wheat residues to accelerate land preparation, exposing the soil to severe evaporation. Despite the importance of residue retention, there is a lack of quantitative knowledge regarding the effects of different mulch rates on soybean water-saving in this region. Therefore, this study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the impact of various rates of wheat straw mulch on soil evaporation, irrigation requirements, and the water use efficiency (WUE) of soybean using an integrated field experiment and simulation modeling approach.
Materials and Methods
This study utilized a two-step integrated approach comprising a field experiment and long-term simulation modeling. First, a field experiment was conducted at the research farm of Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran, to quantify the effect of mulch on soybean phenology. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Treatments consisted of six levels of wheat straw mulch: 0 (control), 750, 1500, 2250, 3000, and 3750 kg.ha⁻¹. Soybean (cv. DPX) was sown on July 1. Phenological stages, particularly days to emergence and flowering, were meticulously recorded to extract linear correction factors. In the second step, the SSM-iLegume model was employed for long-term simulations (2000-2020) across two distinct climates in Golestan province: Gorgan and Minodasht. The model’s genetic coefficients for the DPX cultivar had been previously parameterized and evaluated for the region in previous studies. The primary novelty in the modeling phase was incorporating the mulch effect. Using the field data, correction factors were applied to simulate the delay in phenology caused by mulch. Furthermore, the physical effect of mulch on reducing potential soil evaporation (Ep) was dynamically simulated based on the soil cover fraction. The model simulated crop responses, water balance components, and WUE under the specified mulch treatments and automated irrigation scenarios. Output data were statistically analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Duncan’s multiple range test (P<0.05) in SAS 9.4 software.
Results and Discussion
Field observations indicated that wheat straw mulch significantly delayed soybean phenology by shading the soil and reducing received thermal time. Specifically, for every one ton per hectare of applied mulch, emergence and flowering were delayed by 0.7 and 1.03 days, respectively. These correction factors were successfully integrated into the SSM-iLegume model. Long-term simulation results revealed that while straw mulch did not significantly alter the total above-ground dry matter and grain yield in either Gorgan or Minodasht, it profoundly impacted the soil water balance. Mulch cover significantly reduced cumulative evaporation (CE) from the soil surface, especially during the early growth stages before canopy closure. The application of 3.75 t.ha⁻¹ of mulch decreased CE by 51% (equivalent to 68 mm) in Gorgan and by 50% (equivalent to 92 mm) in Minodasht over the growing season. Consequently, the ratio of soil evaporation to total evapotranspiration (E/ET) decreased to its lowest levels (0.16 and 0.18 in Gorgan and Minodasht, respectively). The significant reduction in non-productive evaporation translated directly into decreased irrigation water requirements. Applying 3.75 t.ha⁻¹ of mulch reduced the required irrigation volume by 15% (from 329 mm to 280 mm) in Gorgan and by 21% (from 366 mm to 288 mm) in Minodasht, eliminating the need for approximately one irrigation event per season. Because grain yield was maintained while water consumption decreased, Water Use Efficiency (WUE) improved significantly, reaching maximum values of 14.9 and 16.8 kg.ha⁻¹.mm⁻¹ in Gorgan and Minodasht, respectively, under the highest mulch rate. Furthermore, scaling these findings to the 57,462 hectares of soybean cultivated area in Golestan province demonstrated that implementing this residue management strategy could potentially save up to 34.41 million cubic meters of agricultural water annually.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the integrated field and modeling assessment demonstrated that utilizing wheat straw mulch is a highly efficient agronomic strategy for soybean production in semi-arid regions. Retaining up to 3.75 t.ha⁻¹ of crop residues significantly suppresses soil evaporation and improves water use efficiency without incurring any yield penalty. This practice not only ensures the sustainability of crop production but also plays a vital role in conserving scarce regional freshwater resources. Transitioning from the conventional practice of residue burning to conservation agriculture is strongly recommended to optimize water footprints and mitigate the impacts of climate change on agricultural ecosystems.

Keywords

Mulch

Soil evaporation

Water productivity

Water saving

Subjects

• Ecological approaches in agroecology

---

Authors retain the copyright. This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)

 

References

1.         Abdul Kader, M., Mojid, M.A., & Nakamura, K. (2017). Mulching type-induced soil moisture and temperature regimes and water use efficiency of soybean under rain-fed condition in central Japan. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 10(4), 570-580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2017.08.001

2.         Baloch, S. B., Ali, S., Bernas, J., Konvalina, P., Naveed, M., Baloch, F. B., Jamali, Z. H., Lošák, T., Roubík, H., & Ghafoor, A. (2025). Crop residue management for soil health and environmental sustainability: A comprehensive review. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 25, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-025-02633-3

3.          Buczek, J., Migut, D., & Jańczak-Pieniążek, M. (2021). Effect of soil tillage practice on photosynthesis, grain yield and quality of hybrid winter wheat. Agriculture, 11(6), 479. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060479

4.          Davis, S. J., Alexander, K., Moreno-Cruz, J., Hong, C., Shaner, M., Caldeira, K., & McKay, I. (2024). Food without agriculture. Nature Sustainability, 7(1), 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-023-01241-2 

5.          Demo, A. H., & Asefa Bogale, G. (2024). Enhancing crop yield and conserving soil moisture through mulching practices in dryland agriculture. Frontiers in Agronomy, 6, 1361697. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2024.1361697

6.          FAO. (2022). Production Year Book. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy.

7.          Gebeyhu, B., & Markos, G. (2023). Assessment of soil mulching field management, and deficit irrigation effect on productivity of watermelon varieties, and AquaCrop model validation. Heliyon, 9(11), e21824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21824

8.          Grover, D., Mishra, A. K., Rani, P., Kalonia, N., Chaudhary, A., & Sharma, S. (2024). Soil management in sustainable agriculture: principles and techniques. In: Technological Approaches for Climate Smart Agriculture (pp. 41–77). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52708-1_4  

9.          Imran. (2024). Integration of organic, inorganic and bio fertilizer, improve maize-wheat system productivity and soil nutrients. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 47(15), 2494–2510. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2024.2354190 

10.      Klopp, H. W., & Blanco‐Canqui, H. (2022). Implications of crop residue removal on soil physical properties: A review. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 86(4), 979–1001. https://doi.org/10.1002/saj2.20418

11.      Koskei, K., Munyasya, A. N., Wang, Y. B., Zhao, Z. Y., Zhou, R., Indoshi, S. N., Wang, W., Cheruiyot, W. K., Mburu, D. M., & Nyende, A. B. (2021). Effects of increased plastic film residues on soil properties and crop productivity in agro-ecosystem. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 414, 125521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125521

12.      Kulkarni, S. (2021). Sustainable soil conservation and management: Principles, issues, and strategies. In: Field Practices for Wastewater Use in Agriculture (pp. 133–178). Apple Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003034506-11

13.      Li, R., Hou, X., Jia, Z., Han, Q., Ren, X., & Yang, B. (2013). Effects on soil temperature, moisture, and maize yield of cultivation with ridge and furrow mulching in the rainfed area of the Loess Plateau, China. Agricultural Water Management, 116, 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.10.001

14.      Li, Y., Chai, S., Chai, Y., Li, R., Lan, X., Ma, J., Cheng, H., & Chang, L. (2021). Effects of mulching on soil temperature and yield of winter wheat in the semiarid rainfed area. Field Crops Research, 271, 108244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108244

15.      Liang, M., Chen, L., Chen, G., Zhao, Y., Liu, G., Sun, E., Yong, C., Huang, H., Li, F., & Qu, P. (2025). Protective effects of straw mulching on soil health and function: A review. Environmental Pollutants and Bioavailability, 37(1), 2533900. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395940.2025.2533900

16.      Liao, C., Tang, M., Zhang, C., Deng, M., Li, Y., & Feng, S. (2025). Impacts of various straw mulching strategies on soil water, nutrients, thermal regimes, and yield in wheat–soybean rotation systems. Plants, 14(14), 2233. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14142233

17.      Liebhard, G., Klik, A., Neugschwandtner, R. W., & Nolz, R. (2022). Effects of tillage systems on soil water distribution, crop development, and evaporation and transpiration rates of soybean. Agricultural Water Management, 269, 107719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107719

18.      Liu, J., & Lobb, D. A. (2021). An overview of crop and crop residue management impacts on crop water use and runoff in the Canadian prairies. Water, 13(20), 2929. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13202929

19.      Mingotte, F., Jardim, C., Yada, M., Amaral, C., Chiamolera, T., Coelho, A., Lemos, L., & Fornasieri Filho, D. (2020). Impact of crop management and no-tillage system on grain and straw yield of maize crop. Cereal Research Communications, 48, 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-020-00051-y 

20.      Mirzaei, M., Gorji Anari, M., Razavy-Toosi, E., Asadi, H., Moghiseh, E., Saronjic, N., & Rodrigo-Comino, J. (2021). Preliminary effects of crop residue management on soil quality and crop production under different soil management regimes in corn-wheat rotation systems. Agronomy, 11(2), 302. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11020302

21.      Musie, W., & Gonfa, G. (2023). Fresh water resource, scarcity, water salinity challenges and possible remedies: A review. Heliyon, 9(8), e18685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18685

22.      Rahman, K. U., Hussain, A., Ejaz, N., Shahid, M., Duan, Z., Mohammadi, B., Hoai, P. N., Pham, Q. B., Khedher, K. M., & Anh, D. T. (2022). Evaluating the impact of the environment on depleting groundwater resources: A case study from a semi-arid and arid climatic region. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 67(5), 791–805. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2022.2044483

23.      Rivier, P. A., Jamniczky, D., Nemes, A., Makó, A., Barna, G., Uzinger, N., Rékási, M., & Farkas, C. (2022). Short-term effects of compost amendments to soil on soil structure, hydraulic properties, and water regime. Journal of Hydrology and Hydromechanics, 70(1), 74-88. https://doi.org/10.2478/johh-2022-0004

24.      Singh, R. J., Ward, P., & Oliver, Y. (2025). Modelling the long-term effects of wheat monoculture vs wheat in diversified crop sequences managed with varied crop residue amounts on water-use and grain yields in a Mediterranean dryland. Plant and Soil, 524, 17–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-025-07682-2

25.      Soltani, A., Alimagham, S. M., Nehbandani, A., Torabi, B., Zeinali, E., Dadrasi, A., Zand, E., Ghassemi, S., Pourshirazi, S., Alasti, O., Hosseini, R. S., Zahed, M., Arabameri, R., Mohammadzadeh, Z., Rahban, S., Kamari, H., Fayazi, H., Mohammadi, S., Keramat, S., Meyari, A., & Sinclair, T. R. (2020). SSM-iCrop2: A simple model for diverse crop species over large areas. Agricultural Systems, 182, 102855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102855

26.      Soltani, A., & Sinclair, T. R. (2011). A simple model for chickpea development, growth and yield. Field Crops Research, 124(2), 252–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2011.06.021

27.      Soltani, A., & Sinclair, T. R. (2012). Modeling Physiology of Crop Development, Growth and Yield. CABi. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845939700.0000

28.      Thind, H., Sharma, S., Sidhu, H., & Singh, V. (2023). Tillage, crop establishment and residue retention methods for optimising productivity and profitability under rice–wheat system. Crop and Pasture Science, 74(9), 828-842. https://doi.org/10.1071/CP21595

29.      Van Wart, J., Grassini, P., & Cassman, K. G. (2013). Impact of derived global weather data on simulated crop yields. Global Change Biology, 19(12), 3822–3834. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12302

30.      Zhang, P., Zhang, Z., Xiao, M., Chao, J., Dai, Y., Liu, G., & Senge, M. (2023). Effects of organic mulching on moisture and temperature of soil in greenhouse production of tomato under unheated greenhouse cultivation in the cold zone of China. Food Science & Nutrition, 11(8), 4829–4842. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.3460

31.      Zhang, Y., Zhu, K., Tang, Y., & Feng, S. (2024). Rice cultivation under film mulching can improve soil environment and be beneficial for rice production in China. Rice Science, 31(5), 545–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsci.2024.06.009

32.      Zhao, X.-d., Qin, X.-r., Li, T.-L., Cao, H.-b., & Xie, Y.-h. (2023). Effects of planting patterns plastic film mulching on soil temperature, moisture, functional bacteria and yield of winter wheat in the Loess Plateau of China. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 22(5), 1560-1573.  https://doi. 10.1016/j.jia.2023.02.026