<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Sustain. Food Syst.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Sustain. Food Syst.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2571-581X</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsufs.2024.1402803</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Sustainable Food Systems</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Original Research</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Rice residue management alternatives and nitrogen optimization: impact on wheat productivity, microbial dynamics, and enzymatic activities</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Chaudhary</surname> <given-names>Charul</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2674852/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/formal-analysis/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/investigation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>Dharam B.</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1667713/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/conceptualization/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/resources/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/supervision/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name><surname>Hooda</surname> <given-names>Virender S.</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c001"><sup>&#x002A;</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2686282/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/supervision/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Chaudhary</surname> <given-names>Ankur</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1938211/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/supervision/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Parshad</surname> <given-names>Jagdish</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/resources/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>Ankush</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5"><sup>5</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/formal-analysis/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/visualisation/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Khedwal</surname> <given-names>Rajbir SIngh</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/supervision/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>Ashok</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><sup>1</sup><institution>Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University</institution>, <addr-line>Hisar, Haryana</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><sup>2</sup><institution>Regional Research Station, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University</institution>, <addr-line>Bawal, Haryana</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff3"><sup>3</sup><institution>Regional Research Station, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University</institution>, <addr-line>Karnal, Haryana</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff4"><sup>4</sup><institution>Department of Microbiology, College of Basic Sciences, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University</institution>, <addr-line>Hisar, Haryana</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff5"><sup>5</sup><institution>Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University</institution>, <addr-line>Hisar, Haryana</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by" id="fn0001">
<p>Edited by: Johann G. Zaller, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Austria</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by" id="fn0002">
<p>Reviewed by: Anchal Dass, Division of Agronomy, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), India</p>
<p>Parvender Sheoran, Central Soil Salinity Research Institute (ICAR), India</p>
<p>S. M. Mofijul Islam, Bangladesh Rice Research Institute, Bangladesh</p>
</fn>
<corresp id="c001">&#x002A;Correspondence: Virender S. Hooda, <email>vshooda79@gmail.com</email></corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>11</day>
<month>11</month>
<year>2024</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2024</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>8</volume>
<elocation-id>1402803</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>18</day>
<month>03</month>
<year>2024</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>04</day>
<month>09</month>
<year>2024</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#x00A9; 2024 Chaudhary, Yadav, Hooda, Chaudhary, Parshad, Kumar, Khedwal and Yadav.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2024</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Chaudhary, Yadav, Hooda, Chaudhary, Parshad, Kumar, Khedwal and Yadav</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<p>In response to the degraded soil health and lack of improvement in the yield of rice&#x2013;wheat cropping systems in South Asia&#x2019;s Indo-Gangetic Plains, an experiment was formulated in a split-plot design. Four rice residue management practices were the primary factor, alongside two nitrogen levels (150 and 180&#x2009;kg/ha) and two nitrogen split levels (two and three splits) as sub-treatments. The findings revealed a notable increase in soil organic carbon (SOC), microbial count, and enzymatic activity in plots subjected to conservation tillage and residue treatment compared to those in plots subjected to partial residue (anchored stubbles) and conventional methods (residue incorporated with chopping). The collective analysis demonstrated a significant influence of rice residue management practices and nitrogen application levels on wheat yield attributes and productivity. Specifically, zero tillage with full residue (unchopped) in wheat exhibited a 5.23% increase in grain yield compared to conventional tillage with full residue (chopped), concurrently boosting the soil microbial count by 19.80&#x2013;25%, the diazotrophic count by 29.43&#x2013;31.6%, and the actinomycete count by 20.15&#x2013;32.99% compared with conventional tillage. Moreover, applying nitrogen in three splits (at sowing, before the 1st irrigation, and after the 1st irrigation) led to a 6.25% increase in grain yield than that in two splits (at sowing and after the 1st irrigation), significantly impacting wheat productivity in the soil. Furthermore, the zero tillage-happy seeder with full residue elevated dehydrogenase activity from 77.94 to 88.32&#x2009;&#x03BC;g TPF/g soil/24&#x2009;h during the study year, surpassing that in the conventional plot. This increase in enzymatic activity was paralleled by a robust positive correlation between the microbial population and enzymatic activity across various residue retention practices. In conclusion, the results underscore the efficacy of crop residue retention following conservation tillage, in tandem with nitrogen optimization and scheduling, in enhancing wheat yield within the rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>rice residue</kwd>
<kwd>organic carbon</kwd>
<kwd>microbial dynamics</kwd>
<kwd>soil dynamics</kwd>
<kwd>wheat productivity</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<counts>
<fig-count count="4"/>
<table-count count="8"/>
<equation-count count="0"/>
<ref-count count="86"/>
<page-count count="14"/>
<word-count count="11983"/>
</counts>
<custom-meta-wrap>
<custom-meta>
<meta-name>section-at-acceptance</meta-name>
<meta-value>Agroecology and Ecosystem Services</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec sec-type="intro" id="sec1">
<label>1</label>
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>The rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (RWCS) constitutes a dominant agricultural paradigm in Asia, particularly in southeastern Asia, encompassing an expanse of approximately 24&#x2009;mha (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref56">Nawaz et al., 2019</xref>). It occupies approximately 13.5&#x2009;mha across South Asia&#x2019;s Indo-Gangetic Plains (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref58">Padre et al., 2016</xref>). This cropping system holds paramount importance for the maintenance of livelihoods, food security, employment, and income generation for millions across Asia. Approximately 33 and 42% of the total acreage devoted to these crops are rice and wheat, respectively. In addition, it contributes significantly, at 25 and 33%, to aggregate rice&#x2013;wheat production (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">Gupta et al., 2024</xref>). In northwestern India, the RWCS prevails as the principal cropping system, encompassing an area of approximately 12&#x2009;mha (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">Bhatt et al., 2016</xref>).</p>
<p>On average, paddy cultivation yields approximately 5&#x2013;6 tons of straw per hectare. It is estimated that Southeast Asian countries collectively generate 150 million metric tons of rice residues annually (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref72">Singh et al., 2021</xref>). The window between paddy harvesting and subsequent sowing of wheat, following field cleansing or paddy straw management, is markedly short, typically spanning 2&#x2013;3&#x2009;weeks (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref50">Meena et al., 2020</xref>), compelling farmers to resort to paddy straw burning. Paddy residue is assimilated through tillage post-partial incorporation/removal, facilitating expedited field preparation before seeding operations for the succeeding crop in the sequence (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">DOACFW, 2019</xref>). However, the RWCS faces numerous secondary challenges, including declining groundwater tables, deteriorating soil health, and diminished total factor productivity. One prospective strategy involves <italic>in situ</italic> management of paddy straw, encompassing direct drilling of wheat under no-till circumstances utilizing zero-tillage (ZT) machinery or a happy seeder (retention of residues on the surface). In addition, the incorporation of paddy straw into the soil can be achieved through conventional tillage (CT) machinery, such as harrows and rotavators, or straw chopping followed by mixing into the soil. Tillage is an energy-intensive farm operation which contributes to ~30% of the total energy use in crop production (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref84">Yadav et al., 2018</xref>). Retaining paddy straw as mulch on the surface of soil preserves soil moisture, moderates thermal regimes, enriches soil nutrient content, suppresses weed growth, and augments soil health, thereby fostering improved crop yields. Nitrogen (N) dynamics may undergo alteration due to ZT and surface residue retention, thereby necessitating nuanced N management strategies vis-&#x00E0;-vis residue burning and conventional tillage (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref71">Singh et al., 2015</xref>). The influx of crop residue-derived N is intricately linked with soil N management (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref85">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>). However, ZT combined with residue retention holds promise for augmenting long-term N availability to crops by elevating soil nitrogen levels and the labile nitrogen pool within upper soil strata (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref77">Sun et al., 2015</xref>). The implementation of farming systems that conserves soil and water through minimal soil disturbances and residue retention cover is one of the best management practices and improving the fertility status and microscopic population in degraded lands (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">Babu et al., 2023</xref>). In the last 60&#x2009;years, the consumption of nitrogen fertilizer in India has grown rapidly. Emerging trends have resulted in escalating losses of nitrogen, posing significant threats to the quality of air, soil, and freshwater resources and consequently jeopardizing climate, ecosystems, and human health (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref53">M&#x00F3;ring et al., 2021</xref>). Conservation agriculture increases available soil water, saves irrigation water, reduces heat and drought stresses, reduces GHG emissions, captures carbon, and improves soil health in the long term (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">Dhillon and Sohu, 2024</xref>).</p>
<p>Crop residues serve as nutrient-rich sources, liberating essential plant nutrients upon microbial decomposition in the soil. Consequently, reintegrating crop residues into soil, instead of incinerating them, serves to enhance several soil quality parameters. To withstand soil health within the RWCS in northwestern India, it is imperative to manage rice residue in a manner that is economically viable, environmentally sustainable, and logistically feasible. Generally, crop residues comprise approximately 40 to 45% of the carbon content, the restitution of which to the soil facilitates its utilization by soil microbes, thereby bolstering the soil organic matter (OM) content and mitigating organic carbon (OC) loss (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">Bin et al., 2021</xref>). Soil organic carbon (SOC) plays a pivotal role in shaping biological soil properties (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref81">Varatharajan et al., 2022</xref>). Microbial populations exert a profound influence on nutrient accessibility and contribute to the growth of various soil health indices. Consequently, understanding soil biological attributes is highly important for sustainability (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">Harish et al., 2022</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">Gopinath et al., 2022</xref>). Parameters such as total microbial count (TMC), actinomycetes, diazotrophs, and enzymatic activities, including dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase, and urease, serve as pivotal indicators of soil eminence (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">Doran and Zeiss, 2000</xref>). Soil-inhabiting microbes are central to nutrient release and soil purification. The inherent characteristics of soil, encompassing various soil classes, exert control over the soil microbiota, which in turn plays a pivotal role in modulating soil nutrient contents and rendering them bioavailable (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref47">Majumdar et al., 2024</xref>). The decomposition and biochemical transformation processes are expedited by soil enzymes, facilitating the release of nutrients from plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref48">Meena et al., 2022</xref>). Soil bacteria play a pivotal role in converting OM from its organic to accessible inorganic form, thereby facilitating the breakdown of OM (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref73">Six et al., 2004</xref>). Soil microorganisms are sensitive to changes in soil moisture as it affects the physiological state of microorganisms and plants which may lead to changes in their population in the soil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">Gangmei et al., 2024</xref>). Recycling crop residues is imperative for reintegrating organic matter into the soil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref62">Rajanna et al., 2022</xref>). Reduced tillage practices coupled with stubble retention promote the proliferation of diazotrophs, which is ascribed to reduced soil composition, fostering an optimal soil pore network conducive to interactions between stubble decomposers and nitrogen-fixing organisms (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">Gupta et al., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9003">Li et al., 2021</xref>). In the short term, applying cereal residues may require higher levels of fertilizer N to account for N immobilization, compared to not using residues (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref66">Sharma et al., 2021</xref>). However, over the long term, returning crop residues can lead to a net build-up of readily mineralized soil organic N, potentially reducing crops&#x2019; fertilizer N requirements (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref40">Jat et al., 2019</xref>). The amount of N loss due to volatilization increases when the food&#x2013;water pH and temperature are favorable (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">Hayashi et al., 2008</xref>). Broadcast application of PU results in higher food&#x2013;water NH4&#x2009;+&#x2009;-N compared to deep placement of N (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref35">Huda et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref38">Islam et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref37">Islam et al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref45">Liu et al., 2015</xref>), which increases N loss through NH3 volatilization. Excessive use of N fertilizer through broadcast application has negative environmental consequences, including N<sub>2</sub>O and NO emissions, nitrate pollution of groundwater, and eutrophication (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref65">Savant and Stangel, 1990</xref>).</p>
<p>The initial yellowing of upper wheat leaves observed under mulched conditions is associated with a reduction in soil temperature (minimum) during the late January period of 2020 and 2021, which is attributable to the insulating effect of mulch on the soil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">Chaudhary et al., 2023</xref>). Consequently, a standard shift in agronomic practices concerning rice straw management is warranted to enhance resource utilization efficiency and system productivity. We hypothesized that combined application of N@150&#x2009;kg/ha in 3 splits at basal, before, and after 1st irrigation and residue incorporation improve productivity of wheat. Hence, the present study aimed to explore the timing, number of splits, and nitrogen application rates of wheat crops to achieve improved productivity, microbial dynamics, and enzymatic activities and optimal nitrogen management in the northwestern Indian Plains. Given the circumstances within the RWCS, there is an urgent need for systematic research endeavors aimed at evaluating diverse nitrogen dosages and scheduling regimes to optimize productivity.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="materials|methods" id="sec2">
<label>2</label>
<title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="sec3">
<label>2.1</label>
<title>Experimental site description</title>
<p>The experiment was conducted at CCS Haryana Agricultural University&#x2019;s Regional Research Station in Karnal, India [290 43&#x2032; 41&#x2033; North and 760 58&#x2032; 50&#x2033; East]. The soil was sandy loam with proportions of sand, silt, and clay (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab1">Table 1</xref>). Prior to starting the study, soil was sampled from the entire experimental field at five locations at 0 to 15&#x2009;cm depth, the samples were mixed thoroughly, the bulk was reduced to approximately 1 kg by quartering, and then the samples were analyzed. The initial pH of the soil was correlated with the electrical conductivity (EC), bulk density, soil organic carbon (SOC), KMnO4 oxidizable N, NaHCO3 extractable phosphorus (P), and 1.0&#x2009;N NH4OAc exchangeable potassium (K) and is shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab1">Table 1</xref>.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab1">
<label>Table 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Physical and chemical properties of the experimental soil.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">Property</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Values (units)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Soil texture</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Sandy loam (Sandy loam: 57.5%, Silt: 23.4%, Clay: 18.2%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Soil pH (1:2.5)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7.74</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">EC</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.22&#x2009;dS/m</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Bulk density</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.52&#x2009;g/cm<sup>3</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">SOC</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Available N</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">134.2&#x2009;kg/ha</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Available P</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.74&#x2009;kg/ha</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Available K</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">280.4&#x2009;kg/ha</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec4">
<label>2.2</label>
<title>Experimental details and field management</title>
<p>In 2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021, field experiments comprised of four main-plot treatments, <italic>viz.</italic>, Zero tillage wheat-Happy Seeder (ZTW-HS) with full residue (chopped), ZTW-HS with full residue (unchopped), ZTW-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), and conventional tillage wheat-drill sown (CTW-DS) with full residue (chopped), and six subplots with two N levels, <italic>viz.</italic>, 150 and 180 kg/ha, applied into 2 (at sowing and after 1<sup>st</sup> irrigation) and 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before 1<sup>st</sup> irrigation, after 1<sup>st</sup> irrigation and at sowing, after 1st irrigation, after 2<sup>nd</sup> irrigation (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab2">Table 2</xref>). The hypothesis behind the two nitrogen levels was that N@150&#x2009;kg/ha is the state-recommended practice for conventional sown wheat, and a higher dose of N@180&#x2009;kg/ha is used because there is yellowing of plants during the initial days in zero-tillage wheat because of the nitrogen used by microbes for the decomposition of rice residues, which leads to nitrogen immobilization. In zero tillage, sowing was performed by a Happy Seeder, which is a machine towed on a tractor that cuts paddy stubble, lifts it, sows wheat seeds into the soil, and covers the sown area with straw as mulch. The individual plot size was 6 m &#x00D7; 2.2 m, totaling 13.2&#x2009;m<sup>2</sup>, and the treatment details are summarized in <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab2">Table 2</xref>. To remove the residue (M3), loose straw was manually collected, and the remaining anchored stubble was left in the field. Full residue loose straw was uniformly spread and chopped using a chopper-<italic>cum</italic>-spreader machine before wheat crop planting (M1). In the M4 treatment, loose straw from the full residue was uniformly spread and chopped using a chopper-<italic>cum</italic>-spreader machine, and then, a rotavator was used to mix the chopped residue in the soil. Presowing irrigation at a depth of 6&#x2009;cm through an irrigation channel preceded wheat sowing. In ZT plots with full residue (chopped or unchopped), seeding was performed using a happy seeder, and the seeds were directly sown into chopped or loose stubble residues (M1, M2) and seed-<italic>cum</italic>-fertilizer drill machine was used for sowing conventional plots. All the operations were conducted 1&#x2013;2&#x2009;days prior to sowing. Rice variety HKR-47 was transplanted on 1st July and harvested on 25th October and 22nd October throughout the Kharif seasons of 2019 and 2020, respectively. Cultivation practices followed the university&#x2019;s package of practices. Wheat sowing in the ZT plots utilized a happy seeder, while the plants in the CT plots with residues were drill-sown. Wheat variety HD-2967 was sown 2019 and 12th November 2020, and the seed rate was 100&#x2009;kg/ha. Recommended fertilizer doses of phosphorus (60&#x2009;kg P2O5/ha) and nitrogen (150 and 180&#x2009;kg&#x2009;N/ha) were applied in both growing seasons, that is, 2019 and 2020, using urea and DAP as nitrogen and phosphorus sources, respectively. The herbicide mesosulfuron (12&#x2009;g/ha)&#x2009;+&#x2009;iodosulfuron (2.4&#x2009;g/ha) was applied 35&#x2009;days after sowing (DAS) for weed control in 500&#x2009;L/ha of water via a knapsack sprayer with a flat fan nozzle.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab2">
<label>Table 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Details of different treatments.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">Sr. no.</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">Main plots (sowing method)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th/>
<th align="left" valign="top">Sub-plots (N dose and scheduling)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation&#x002A;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">5.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">6.</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>ZTW&#x2014;zero-tillage wheat; CTW&#x2014;conventional tillage wheat; HS&#x2014;happy seeder sown; DS&#x2014;drill sown. &#x002A;1/2&#x2009;N at sowing through DAP (drill) and urea broadcast before sowing, 1/2&#x2009;N as urea broadcast after 1st irrigation. &#x002A;&#x002A;1/3&#x2009;N at sowing through DAP (drill) and urea broadcast before sowing, 1/3&#x2009;N as urea broadcast before 1st irrigation, 1/3&#x2009;N as urea broadcast after 1st irrigation. &#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;N through DAP (drill) as basal, remaining 1/2&#x2009;N as urea broadcast after 1st irrigation, 1/2&#x2009;N as urea broadcast after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec5">
<label>2.3</label>
<title>Soil physicochemical properties</title>
<p>Soil was sampled from three pots in each plot at 0 to 15&#x2009;cm soil depth after wheat crop harvesting in 2020&#x2013;2021 to determine the impact of rice residue management. These samples were properly processed before the analysis, including all the processes, that is, drying, grinding, and sieving. SOC (%) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref82">Walkley and Black, 1934</xref>), available N (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref76">Subbiah and Asija, 1956</xref>), available P (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref57">Olsen et al., 1954</xref>), available K (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref39">Jackson, 1967</xref>), and soil moisture content (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref75">Su et al., 2014</xref>) were determined 105&#x00B0;C until constant weight is obtained and dry weight of the sample is recorded.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec6">
<label>2.4</label>
<title>Soil biological properties</title>
<sec id="sec7">
<label>2.4.1</label>
<title>Bacterial activity analysis</title>
<p>To assess the soil biological properties, soil samples were collected from three locations within each plot after last season crop harvesting. Microbial counts were determined on various agar-based media by using the standard serial dilution plate assay (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">Ben-David and Davidson, 2014</xref>). Serial dilutions were prepared from 10&#x2009;g soil samples in 90&#x2009;mL sterile water, followed by incubation of the Petri plates at 28&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2&#x00B0;C for 2 to 6&#x2009;days in a BOD incubator. The colony-forming units (CFUs) were enumerated and are expressed as dry soil/gram (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9004">Wright et al., 1933</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec8">
<label>2.4.2</label>
<title>Enzymatic activity analysis</title>
<p>For dehydrogenase enzyme activity, soil samples (1&#x2009;g each) were incubated with 0.2&#x2009;mL of 2,3,5-triphenyl tetrazolium chloride (TTC, 3% w/v) and 0.5&#x2009;mL of glucose solution (1% w/v) at 28&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2&#x00B0;C for 24&#x2009;h (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">Casida et al., 1964</xref>). The absorbance at 485&#x2009;nm was measured after extraction with methanol and filtration. Enzyme activity was quantified using a TPF standard curve.</p>
<p>The <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref78">Tabatabai and Bremner (1969)</xref> method was used to determine soil alkaline phosphatase activity. The yellow color formed by adding <italic>p</italic>-nitrophenyl phosphate solution was measured at 420&#x2009;nm and is expressed as &#x03BC;g p-nitrophenol released/g/soil/h.</p>
<p>The <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">Bremner and Douglas (1971)</xref> method was used to determine urease activity. Soil samples (5&#x2009;g) were incubated with 5&#x2009;mL of 2,000&#x2009;ppm urea solution at 37&#x00B0;C for 7&#x2009;h. After adding 2&#x2009;M KCl-PMA, the solution was filtered and analyzed for urea content. Enzyme activity was calculated from a standard curve and expressed as &#x03BC;g urea/g dry soil/min.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec9">
<label>2.5</label>
<title>Statistical analysis</title>
<p>The data were analyzed by using two-way ANOVA to assess the effects of different treatments. Significant differences between treatments were determined using Duncan&#x2019;s multiple range test (DMRT) in conjunction with standard error of the mean (SEM &#x00B1;) and least significant difference (LSD) computations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9001">Gomez and Gomez, 1984</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="results" id="sec10">
<label>3</label>
<title>Results</title>
<sec id="sec11">
<label>3.1</label>
<title>Impact of rice residue management practices and nutrient scheduling on soil physicochemical properties</title>
<p>The impact of rice residue management on soil chemical properties was investigated, with a particular focus on sowing methods and treatments with rice residues during the 2020&#x2013;2021 cropping season, as depicted in <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab3">Table 3</xref>. Significant levels of soil organic carbon (OC) were observed among the various treatments at the final wheat harvest stage. Notably, during the initial phase of the experiment, the effects were deemed non-significant. However, in 2020&#x2013;2021, treatments such as M1 (0.41%) and M2 (0.42%) exhibited higher OC levels than did M3, which had an OC content of 0.37%. In addition, the OC content of M4 was notably lower at 0.32%. Intriguingly, the results were not significantly influenced by the nitrogen dose or scheduling treatments applied during either year.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab3">
<label>Table 3</label>
<caption>
<p>SOC under rice residue and nitrogen management under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" colspan="2" rowspan="2">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Soil OC (%)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">Initial</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Final</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.002a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.41&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.004a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.33&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.002a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.42&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.003a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.002a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.37&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.003b</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.30&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.002a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.32&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.004c</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.35&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.003a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.26&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.009a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.002a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.009a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.00a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.43&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.009a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.002a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.39&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.008a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.00a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.40&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.008a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.35&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.00a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.41&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.009a</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Values with different superscripts in a column are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05 according to the Duncan multiple range test (DMRT). Treatments abbreviations M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>According to the data, varying nitrogen levels did not exert a significant impact on the soil organic carbon content. However, it is noteworthy that a higher numerical value was observed when a high dose of nitrogen was administered.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec12">
<label>3.2</label>
<title>Impact of rice residue management practices and nutrient scheduling on soil moisture content</title>
<p>The investigation revealed a discernible pattern of increasing soil moisture content as the cropping season progressed, as detailed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab4">Table 4</xref>. Across both years of observation, treatments featuring M1 consistently exhibited SMC (%) at 75&#x2009;days after sowing (DAS) and at maturity that was statistically equivalent to 13.91&#x2013;15.25% in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 17.88&#x2013;20.34% in 2020&#x2013;2021, respectively. These values were significantly greater than those in M3. Conversely, M4 yielded notably lower soil moisture contents (%), with values of 12.22 and 12.45% at 75 DAS and 16.34 and 18.67% at maturity in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021, respectively.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab4">
<label>Table 4</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of rice residue practices, wheat crop establishment methods, and nutrient scheduling on soil moisture content (%) (SMC) in wheat crop under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" colspan="2" rowspan="3">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="4">SMC (%) at 0&#x2013;10&#x2009;cm soil depth</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">75 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Harvest</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">15.25&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.093a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">13.91&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.095a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">17.88&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.11a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">20.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.09a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">15.13&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.098a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">13.98&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.081a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">17.78&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.11a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">20.21&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.11a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles)</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.61&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.096b</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.58&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.088a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">17.08&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.11b</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">19.77&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.11b</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.22&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.099b</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.097a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">16.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.11c</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">18.67&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.27c</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">13.51&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.53a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.66&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.66a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">17.31&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">19.76&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.20a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">13.35&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.53a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">13.51&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.66a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">16.73&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">18.88&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.43a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">13.57&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.52a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.69&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.70a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">17.42&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">19.10&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.95&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.52a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">13.92&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.73a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">16.37&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.41a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">18.36&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.56&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.52a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.27&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.68a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">16.87&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">19.25&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.43a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">14.57&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.52a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">12.91&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.68a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">17.69&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">20.41&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Values with different superscripts in a column are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05 according to the Duncan multiple range test (DMRT). Treatments abbreviations M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3&#x2014;splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>Furthermore, the subplot analysis indicated a non-significant difference in soil moisture content (%) across treatments, underscoring the consistent influence of rice residue practices on soil moisture dynamics throughout the cropping season.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec13">
<label>3.3</label>
<title>Impact of rice residue management practices and nutrient scheduling on microbial count</title>
<p>Microbial activity serves as the primary catalyst driving decomposition processes within the soil matrix. Notably, the management of rice crop residues in wheat cultivation significantly influenced the soil microbial populations throughout the study, as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab5">Table 5</xref>. Soil samples were meticulously analyzed at two critical crop growth stages: 75&#x2009;days after sowing (DAS) and at harvest. Remarkably, the microbial count was markedly greater at 75 DAS than at harvest, underscoring the dynamic nature of microbial populations throughout the cropping season. In addition, the second year of the study, specifically 2020&#x2013;2021, yielded higher microbial counts than did the preceding year. Across both years, M1 consistently had greater microbial counts: 93.42 at 75 DAS and 88.09 &#x00D7; 107&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil at harvest in 2019&#x2013;2020; 98.53 at 75 DAS and 88.52 &#x00D7; 107&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil at harvest in 2020&#x2013;2021. Conversely, M4 exhibited lower counts: 78.76 at 75 DAS and 66.06 &#x00D7; 107&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil at harvest in 2019&#x2013;2020; 66.06 at 75 DAS and 70.99 &#x00D7; 107&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil at harvest in 2020&#x2013;2021. Moreover, within subplots defined by nitrogen dose and scheduling, no significant differences were observed in the total microbial count. Notably, in the T4 treatment, the total microbial counts at 75 DAS (89.44 in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 96.63 &#x00D7; 107&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil in 2020&#x2013;2021) and at harvest (79.73 in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 83.06 &#x00D7; 107&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil in 2020&#x2013;2021) were greater than those in the T1 treatment (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab5">Table 5</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab5">
<label>Table 5</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods, rice residue practices, and nutrient scheduling on soil microbial count under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="3">S. N</th>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="3">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="4">Microbial count (10<sup>7</sup> cfu/g soil)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">75 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">At harvest</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">93.42&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.42a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">98.53&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.39a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">88.09&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.34a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">88.52&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.34a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">92.60&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.44a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">97.24&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.43a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">86.47&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.43ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">87.99&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.38ab</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">87.01&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.45ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">95.38&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.38ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">73.05&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.41bc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">79.27&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.47ab</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">78.76&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.51b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">90.07&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.42b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">66.06&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">70.99&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.43b</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">86.54&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.42a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">94.02&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.88a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">77.13&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.34a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">80.41&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.20a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">87.05&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.46a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">94.52&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.85a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">77.68&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.34a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">80.91&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.19a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">88.20&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.29a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">95.59&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.85a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">78.61&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.34a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">81.87&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.18a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">89.44&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.36a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">96.63&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.83a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">79.73&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.31a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">83.06&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.07a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">87.55&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.41a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">94.96&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.86a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">78.15&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.31a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">81.39&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.15a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">88.90&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.32a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">96.12&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.89a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">79.20&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.29a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">82.51&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.10a</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Values with different superscripts in a column are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05 according to the Duncan multiple range test (DMRT). Treatments abbreviations M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>Throughout both years of observation, treatments involving M1 consistently exhibited greater diazotrophic counts at 75&#x2009;days after sowing (DAS) and at harvest, comparable to those of M2 and significantly greater than those of M3 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab6">Table 6</xref>). Specifically, the diazotrophic counts for M1 were 64.49 in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 88.52 &#x00D7; 104&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil in 2020&#x2013;2021 at 75 DAS and 62.87 in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 71.49 &#x00D7; 104&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil in 2020&#x2013;2021 at harvest. Within subplots defined by nitrogen dose and scheduling, no significant differences were detected in the diazotrophic count. However, treatment T4 consistently yielded a greater diazotrophic count at both 75 DAS and harvest.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab6">
<label>Table 6</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods, rice residue practices, and nutrient scheduling on diazotrophic count under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="3">S. N</th>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="3">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="4">Diazotrophic count (10<sup>4</sup> cfu/g soil)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">75 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">At harvest</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">64.49&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.49a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">88.52&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.44a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">62.87&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.43a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">71.49&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.36a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">60.72&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.41ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">87.99&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.39a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">57.05&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.37ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">69.92&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">57.58&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.41bc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">79.27&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.39ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">52.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.41b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">62.43&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.30a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">54.15&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.39c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">70.99&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.43b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.00&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.45c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">50.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.39b</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">57.65&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.63a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">80.41&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.51a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">51.00&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.32a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">62.72&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.80a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">58.17&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.63a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">80.91&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.51a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">51.53&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.33a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">63.22&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.78a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">59.01&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.58a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">81.87&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.57a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">52.62&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.27a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">63.65&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.78a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">60.42&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.71a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">83.06&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.46a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">53.72&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.26a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">64.69&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;5.31a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">58.80&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.69a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">81.39&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.48a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">52.05&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.33a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">62.95&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.79a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">59.85&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;1.72a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">82.51&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.49a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">53.13&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.25a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">64.19&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;4.76a</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Values with different superscripts in a column are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05 according to the Duncan multiple range test (DMRT). Treatments abbreviations M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>The data in <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab7">Table 7</xref> indicate that the actinomycete count in M1 was statistically similar to that in M2 at both 75&#x2009;days after sowing (DAS) and at harvest across both years. Specifically, the counts were 67.51 at 75 DAS and 47.17 &#x00D7; 105&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil at harvest in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 63.09 at 75 DAS and 51.65 &#x00D7; 105&#x2009;cfu/g dry soil at harvest in 2020&#x2013;2021. These counts were significantly greater than those observed in M3 at both stages. Conversely, significantly lower actinomycete counts were recorded in M4 at both 75 DAS and harvest during both years. Subplot analysis revealed no significant differences in the actinomycete count. However, treatments involving nitrogen application at 180&#x2009;kg/ha with three splits consistently resulted in higher counts at both 75 DAS and harvest. In comparison, a lower count was observed with nitrogen application at 150&#x2009;kg/ha with two splits.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab7">
<label>Table 7</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of rice residue practices, wheat crop establishment methods, and nutrient scheduling on actinomycete count of wheat under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="3">S. N</th>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="3">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="4">Actinomycete count (10<sup>5</sup> cfu/g soil)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">75 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">At harvest</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;2020</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;2021</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">67.51&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.40a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">63.09&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.34a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">47.17&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.35a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">51.65&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.37a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">66.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.35a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">62.69&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.35a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">46.21&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.38a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">50.38&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.55ab</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">56.63&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.38b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">56.89&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.35ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">39.62&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.37a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">44.73&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.37bc</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">51.50&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.35b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">50.37&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.55b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">31.61&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.36b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">41.24&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;0.37c</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">59.37&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.86a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">56.99&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.10a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">39.96&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.59a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">45.76&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.38a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">59.77&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.85a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">57.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.08a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">40.45&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.61a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">46.11&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.40a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">60.59&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.99a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">58.60&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.91a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">41.40&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.60a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">47.35&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.50a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">61.77&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.89a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">59.53&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.85a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.36&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.60a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">48.34&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.49a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">60.36&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.80a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">57.90&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.11a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">40.89&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.59a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">46.60&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.40a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">61.25&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.89a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">59.07&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.88a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">41.87&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;3.59a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">47.83&#x2009;&#x00B1;&#x2009;2.47a</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Values with different superscripts in a column are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05 according to the Duncan multiple range test (DMRT). Treatments abbreviations M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec14">
<label>3.4</label>
<title>Impact of rice residue management practices and nutrient scheduling on yield</title>
<p>M2 exhibited the highest grain yield, with yields of 5,849&#x2009;kg/ha in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 5,874&#x2009;kg/ha in 2020&#x2013;2021, which were statistically similar to those of M3, which yielded 5,753&#x2009;kg/ha in 2019&#x2013;2020 and 5,636&#x2009;kg/ha in 2020&#x2013;2021. Compared to M4, M2 resulted in a 5.23% increase in grain yield. M2 increased the grain yield of wheat by 9.18% more than did M4. Three splits, that is, at sowing, before the 1st irrigation, and after the 1st irrigation, improved the grain yield of wheat by 8.08% compared with 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after the 1st irrigation. Within subplots, a significantly greater grain yield was observed under T4 (5,791&#x2013;5,771&#x2009;kg/ha during the study), which was statistically on par with T3 (5,724&#x2013;5,712&#x2009;kg/ha during the study), while T5 and T6 has lower grain yield. Applying nitrogen in three splits of wheat led to a 6.25% increase in grain yield than that in two splits (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab8">Table 8</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab8">
<label>Table 8</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of rice residue practices, wheat crop establishment methods, and nutrient scheduling on yield of wheat under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="2">S.N.</th>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="2">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Grain yield (kg/ha)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Straw yield (kg/ha)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Harvest Index</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;20</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;21</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;20</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;21</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2019&#x2013;20</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2020&#x2013;21</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5351c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5387b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6609ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7223a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.39c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.24a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5849a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5874a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6720a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7347a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.51bc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.01a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5753ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5636ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6800a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7426a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.03a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.64b</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">M4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5543bc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5566b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6458b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6952b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.72b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.17a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5366d</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5332d</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6612c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7202c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.7d</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.11e</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5554c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5490c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6626bc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7215bc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.86c</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.62d</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5724a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5712a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6667a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7256ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.65d</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.69a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5791a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5771a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6682a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7280a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.82a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.37b</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5610b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5640b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6641b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7229b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">42.39e</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.01c</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">T6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation&#x002A;&#x002A;&#x002A;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5698abc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5721a</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6655ab</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7241abc</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.56b</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">43.62a</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Values with different superscripts in a column are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05 according to the Duncan multiple range test (DMRT). Treatments abbreviations M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec15">
<label>3.5</label>
<title>Impact of rice residue management practices and nutrient scheduling on enzymatic activity</title>
<p>Enzyme activity in soil, which is indicative of microbial processes, was significantly affected by rice residue practices during wheat cultivation. Notably, dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase, and urease activities were impacted during both cropping seasons, with higher levels observed at 75&#x2009;days after sowing (DAS). For dehydrogenase activity, M1 displayed activity levels statistically similar to those of M2 but significantly greater than those of M3. The dehydrogenase activity ranged from 77.94 to 88.32&#x2009;&#x03BC;g TPF/g soil/24&#x2009;h and from 67.42 to 71.29&#x2009;&#x03BC;g TPF/g soil/24&#x2009;h at 75 DAS and harvest, respectively (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig1">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of rice residue practices, wheat crop establishment methods. and nutrient scheduling on dehydrogenase activity in wheat under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021). The values within same color columns with different alphabetical letters differed significantly with each other. Treatments abbreviations: M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-08-1402803-g001.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Similarly, alkaline phosphatase activity was significantly influenced by rice residue management. M1 and M2 exhibited similar activity levels that were significantly greater than that of M3 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). The urease activity at 75 DAS ranged from 95.21 to 98.51&#x2009;&#x03BC;g TPF/g soil/24&#x2009;h and that at harvest ranged from 82.77 to 88.43&#x2009;&#x03BC;g TPF/g soil/24&#x2009;h. Urease activity also significantly varied with residue management. M1 activity at 75 DAS ranged from 6.93 to 7.02&#x2009;&#x03BC;g urea/g dry soil/min and at harvest from 4.73 to 4.82&#x2009;&#x03BC;g urea/g dry soil/min; M2 had similar activity levels, which were significantly greater than those of M3. Subplot analysis revealed no significant differences in enzyme activity under different nitrogen doses or schedules. However, treatments involving nitrogen application at 180&#x2009;kg/ha with three splits consistently exhibited greater enzyme activity than treatments involving two splits (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig2">
<label>Figure 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of rice residue practices, wheat crop establishment methods, and nutrient scheduling on alkaline phosphatase activity in wheat under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021). The values within same color columns with different alphabetical letters differed significantly with each other. Treatments abbreviations: M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-08-1402803-g002.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig position="float" id="fig3">
<label>Figure 3</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of rice residue practices, wheat crop establishment methods, and nutrient scheduling on urease activity in wheat under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system (2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021). The values within same color columns with different alphabetical letters differed significantly with each other. Treatments abbreviations: M1&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (chopped), M2&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with full residue (unchopped), M3&#x2014;ZT Wheat-HS with partial residues (anchored stubbles), M4&#x2014;CT Wheat-DS with full residue (chopped), T1&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irrigation, T2&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 2 splits, that is, at sowing and after 1st irritation, T3&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T4&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, before, and after 1st irrigation, T5&#x2014;N @ 150&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation, T6&#x2014;N @ 180&#x2009;kg/ha, 3 splits, that is, at sowing, after 1st irrigation, and after 2nd irrigation.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-08-1402803-g003.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="sec16">
<label>3.6</label>
<title>Correlations between microbial dynamics and enzymatic activity</title>
<p>The rice residue practice treatments demonstrated statistically significant correlations (<italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x003C;&#x2009;0.05) between microbial dynamics and enzymatic activities in wheat crops within the rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system across both cropping seasons (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figures 4A</xref>&#x2013;<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">D</xref>). The increase in enzymatic activity was consistently paralleled by robust positive correlations between the microbial population and enzymatic activity across various residue retention practices.</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig4">
<label>Figure 4</label>
<caption>
<p><bold>(A&#x2013;D)</bold> Correlation analysis between microbial dynamics and enzymatic activities at 75 DAS and at maturity during 2019&#x2013;2020 and 2020&#x2013;2021, respectively.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-08-1402803-g004.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Notably, TMC exhibited strong positive correlations with DHA at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.76) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.78) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.68) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.62) in 2020&#x2013;2021, with APA at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.77) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.64) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.66) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.63) in 2020&#x2013;2021, and with urease activity at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.54) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.64) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.66) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.63) in 2020&#x2013;2021. Moreover, DC was significantly positively correlated with DHA at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.78) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.80) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.68) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.56) in 2020&#x2013;2021, with APA at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.77) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.68) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.63) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.59) in 2020&#x2013;2021, and with urease activity at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.54) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.48) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.36) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.38) in 2020&#x2013;2021. Similarly, actinomycete activity was strongly positively correlated with DHA at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.73) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.79) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.73) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.64) in 2020&#x2013;2021, with APA at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.74) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.64) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.65) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.63) in 2020&#x2013;2021, and with urease activity at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.51) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.48) in 2019&#x2013;2020 and at 75 DAS (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.43) and maturity (<italic>r</italic>&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.55) in 2020&#x2013;2021 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figures 4A</xref>&#x2013;<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">D</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="discussion" id="sec17">
<label>4</label>
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>The impact of straw on crop yields is still under debate since field investigations across various pedoclimatic environments are indecisive, because of multiple and complex interaction of factors that affect the straw-derived N cycling under field conditions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref54">Mu et al., 2016</xref>). Conservation tillage with residue retention (chopped and unchopped) significantly improved the physicochemical properties, microbial count, and soil enzymatic activities. Zero tillage with full residue (unchopped) in wheat exhibited a 5.23% increase in grain yield compared to conventional tillage with full residue (chopped), concurrently boosting the soil microbial count by 19.80&#x2013;25%, the diazotrophic count by 29.43&#x2013;31.6%, and the actinomycete count by 20.15&#x2013;32.99% compared with conventional tillage.</p>
<p>Notably, there was a marked increase in SOC within the upper soil layer (0&#x2013;15&#x2009;cm) in ZTW-HS with full residue compared to that in CTW-DS (chopped) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4D</xref>). Numerous studies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref52">Mondal et al., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref85">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">Chen et al., 2021</xref>) have consistently reported significant increases in SOC under ZTW-HS compared to conventional practices. Throughout the study years, ZTW-HS and full residue load, both chopped and unchopped, exhibited higher soil moisture contents. Crop residues add a considerable amount of labile organic carbon to soils and boost enzyme activity due to the increased presence of microbial communities (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">Fang et al., 2018</xref>). Zero tillage (ZT) significantly enhances soil moisture availability by reducing soil compaction and ensuring a uniform distribution of soil micropores and macropores (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref49">Meena et al., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9002">Huang et al., 2012</xref>). Zero tillage with residue retention (ZTW) has become a vital practice for conserving soil organic carbon (SOC) and minimizing carbon mineralization. This practice boosts nutrient availability for crops, improves soil water-holding capacity, and promotes aeration through the formation of continuous soil pores in the root zone (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref81">Varatharajan et al., 2022</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">Biswakarma et al., 2022</xref>). In addition, retaining crop residues encourages a higher microbial population than residue removal in both ZT and conventional tillage (CT) systems (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">Govaerts et al., 2008</xref>). Over a 2-year crop cycle, ZTW-HS with full residue or stubble resulted in a significant increase in SOC within the upper 0&#x2013;15&#x2009;cm soil layer. This increase can be attributed to the disruption of soil macroaggregates under CT without residue, which promotes direct contact between straw and microorganisms, leading to increased carbon mineralization. In contrast, ZTW-HS with residue retention prevents direct microbial contact and provides fewer nutrients to microbes.</p>
<p>Soil microorganisms enhance soil quality, health, fertility, and overall microbial community. Among these parameters, microbial activity serves as a subtle indicator for assessing soil quality. Adding crop residues has been shown to stimulate the microbial activity of bacteria, fungi, and actinomycetes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">Choudhary et al., 2018</xref>). Studies have demonstrated that rice straw returned to the soil, along with cow manure, significantly increases SOM, total N, and available P compared to those in scenarios without residue incorporation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">Cheng et al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">Gu et al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref51">Moharana et al., 2012</xref>). Moreover, numerous reports have highlighted the positive impact of residue management, whether through incorporation or retention, on the soil organic carbon balance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">Gangwar et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">Gupta et al., 2007</xref>). During the wheat season, rice straw returned to the soil promoted the growth and reproduction of soil microbes, which was conducive to the stability and promotion of microbial community structures. This accelerated the decomposition of straw and enhanced nutrient availability into the soil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref60">Pathak et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref79">Tan et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref61">Qian et al., 2012</xref>). Straw incorporation enhances the metabolic activity of microorganisms, the relevant enzyme activity, and microbial population (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref67">Sharma et al., 2020a</xref>). The soil microbial population gradually increased up to 75&#x2009;days after the sowing of wheat and decreased during later growth periods. Rice residue had a pronounced impact on the soil microbial community, particularly up to 75 DAS. However, at maturity, the increase in mineralization of the prevailing microbial community decreased, possibly due to the solubility of residues or relative microbial availability in the field (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref44">Lehmann and Kleber, 2015</xref>). The presence of an adequate amount of rice residue in the soil regulates soil temperature, facilitating better microbial reproduction up to 75 DAS and maturity. The TMC and diazotrophic count exceeded the actinomycete count under the various treatments, corroborating previous findings (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">Choudhary et al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">Bhagat and Gosal, 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref74">Stagnari et al., 2020</xref>). Microbial populations, including fungal, bacterial, and actinomycetes populations, were greater under ZT with surface residue retention than under ZT with incorporation or removal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref40">Jat et al., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref74">Stagnari et al., 2020</xref>). These microbial communities likely have advanced to grow rapidly in response to easily mineralized OM (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref83">Whitman et al., 2016</xref>). Excessive nitrogen doses failed to enhance microbial quantity or enzyme activity. Studies suggest that high nitrogen levels can lead to the accretion of toxic substances, such as ammonia, which is detrimental to plant health and can impede the growth of certain microbial groups. In addition, excessive nitrogen can lower the soil pH, which is necessary for enzyme activity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">Brzezi&#x0144;ska and W&#x0142;odarczyk, 2005</xref>).</p>
<p>Soil microbial activity and enzymatic activity are strongly linked to increased nutritional mineralization of native organic C after residue integration (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">Guenet et al., 2010</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref43">Kirkby et al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref46">Liu et al., 2011</xref>). Enzymatic activity exhibits a strong relationship with the soil microbial population, with increased microbial populations correlating with enhanced enzymatic activities, such as DHA, APA, and urease activity. Residue management practices have demonstrated a considerable and favorable relationship between enzymatic activity and SMC during the study period. Similar findings were reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9005">Tang et al. (2020)</xref>, who reported a positive correlation between diazotrophic and actinomycete counts and DHA and APA. These soil microbes are significantly improved under ZT conditions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref62">Rajanna et al., 2022</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">Choudhary et al., 2018</xref>). ZTW-HS with full residue (unchopped) produced more grain, straw, and biological yields, similar to ZTW with partial residues (anchored stubbles). This finding aligns with previous research highlighting the significant effect of rice residues on wheat yield (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">Chandra, 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">Dhar et al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref42">Kesarwani et al., 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref64">Sah et al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref72">Singh et al., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref59">Pandiaraj et al., 2015</xref>). The higher wheat yield in straw-retained plots can be attributed to improved soil nutrient levels and microbial abundance following straw residue incorporation as mulch in the field (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">Chaudhary et al., 2023</xref>). ZT has emerged as the most competent tillage method for conserving resources and increasing wheat yield (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref80">Usman et al., 2013</xref>). Higher grain and straw yields of wheat were recorded with ZT-HS than with conventional methods (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref55">Nandan et al., 2018</xref>). The higher grain yield under the retention of residue/incorporation treatments can be ascribed to increased growth parameters, facilitated by improved SOM content, nutrient availability, and moderation of the soil&#x2019;s hydrothermal regime (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">Gupta et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref36">Iqbal et al., 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref63">Ram et al., 2013</xref>). Straw incorporation/retention enhances soil properties, leading to improved root growth, improved nutrient uptake, and ultimately enhanced plant growth and grain yield. Similar results have been reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">Gupta et al. (2016)</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref49">Meena et al. (2015)</xref>, and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref69">Sharma et al. (2019)</xref>. The reason for the lowest yields under CTW when full residues are incorporated after a chopper and spreader could be that the N that bacteria utilize to break down incorporated residues causes the plants to turn yellow in the early days. T5 and T6 have lower yield due to more N losses as it was applied after 1st and 2nd irrigation.</p>
<p>Moreover, applying nitrogen in three splits (at sowing, before the 1st irrigation, and after the 1st irrigation) led to a 6.25% increase in grain yield than that in two splits (at sowing and after the 1st irrigation), significantly impacting wheat productivity in the soil. Optimal nitrogen management practices have been highlighted by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref70">Sidhu et al. (2007)</xref>, who reported a greater grain yield of ZTW-HS in rice residues with fertilizer broadcasting at sowing and before the 1st irrigation. A study by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">Gill et al. (2019)</xref> determined that nitrogen management involving three equal splits applied at specific intervals was the most efficient practice for enhancing yield. Similarly, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref71">Singh et al. (2015)</xref> reported that specific nitrogen management practices significantly increased the mean wheat yield.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="conclusions" id="sec18">
<label>5</label>
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>In summary, our study highlights the profound impact of various rice residue management techniques on the microbial characteristics of wheat, ultimately enhancing grain yield, SOC, and enzymatic activity. In particular, ZTW-HS (chopped) consistently demonstrated increased TMC and enzymatic activities, contrasting with the lowest count observed in CTW-DS (chopped), emphasizing the pivotal role of rice residue retention in fostering soil biological properties. Embracing zero tillage coupled with full residue retention, facilitated by machinery such as a happy seeder, has emerged as a crucial approach in rice&#x2013;wheat cropping systems. This approach not only ensures the sustained productivity and income of farms but also enhances soil vigor and environmental quality. By adopting such innovations, the agricultural sector can improve rice residue management practices for long-term productivity and environmental sustainability, both regionally and globally. Moreover, optimizing nitrogenous fertilizer dosages for wheat crops alongside rice residue management approaches is imperative. Residue incorporation or retention significantly influences the chemical and biological properties of soil, reducing the need for nitrogenous fertilizers. In addition, our findings underscore the significant impact of nitrogen levels on wheat grain yield traits, with grain yield equivalent to the recommended N fertilizer dose (150&#x2009;kg&#x2009;N/ha) with partial and full residue (unchopped) residue retention. Rice residue management in the rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system is a multidisciplinary effort that combines technology advancements and sustainable agriculture techniques with economic considerations and legislative support. The agricultural sector may improve residue management techniques for long-term productivity and environmental stewardship by addressing these issues collectively in South Asia and globally in similar crop-growing regions. We must determine that the repercussions of harvesting crop residues for any purpose must be specified, and methods applied using site-specific technologies to ensure that productivity and agronomic resources are not jeopardized for future generations.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<sec sec-type="data-availability" id="sec19">
<title>Data availability statement</title>
<p>The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="author-contributions" id="sec20">
<title>Author contributions</title>
<p>CC: Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing &#x2013; original draft, Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing. DY: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing. VH: Supervision, Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing. AC: Methodology, Supervision, Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing. JP: Methodology, Resources, Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing. AK: Writing - review &#x0026; editing, Formal analysis, Visualisation. RK: Writing &#x2013; review&#x0026; editing, Supervision. AY: Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="funding-information" id="sec21">
<title>Funding</title>
<p>The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</p>
</sec>
<ack>
<p>The first author duly acknowledges CCSHAU for providing the fellowships and facilities to carry out the research.</p>
</ack>
<sec sec-type="COI-statement" id="sec22">
<title>Conflict of interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="disclaimer" id="sec23">
<title>Publisher&#x2019;s note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="ref1">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Babu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Avasthe</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rathore</surname> <given-names>S. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2023</year>). <source>Soil carbon dynamics under organic farming: Impact of tillage and cropping diversity</source>: <publisher-name>Ecolo. Indicators</publisher-name>. 147:109940. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.109940</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref2">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ben-David</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Davidson</surname> <given-names>C. E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Estimation method for serial dilution experiments</article-title>. <source>J. of Microbio. Methods</source> <volume>107</volume>, <fpage>214</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>221</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.mimet.2014.08.023</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39198281</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref3">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bhagat</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gosal</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Long-term application of rice straw and nitrogen fertilizer affects soil health and microbial communities</article-title>. <source>Chem. Sci. Rev. Lett.</source> <volume>7</volume>, <fpage>586</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>593</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.9734/CJAST/2018/39631</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref4">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bhatt</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kukal</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Busari</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arora</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Sustainability issues on rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system</article-title>. <source>Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res.</source> <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>64</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>74</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.iswcr.2015.12.001</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37361480</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref5">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bin</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ling</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hongying</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ping</surname> <given-names>Q.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhenggui</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Impacts of crop residues on soil health: A review</article-title>. <source>Environ. Pollut. Bio availab.</source> <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>164</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>173</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/26395940.2021.1948354</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref6">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Biswakarma</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pooniya</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhiipao</surname> <given-names>R. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shivay</surname> <given-names>Y. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>M. C.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Designing resource efficient integrated crop management modules for direct seeded rice -zero till wheat rotation of north western India: impacts on system productivity, energy-nutrient-carbon dynamics</article-title>. <source>Arch. Agron. Soil Sci.</source> <volume>69</volume>: <fpage>1236</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1250</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03650340.2022.2079635</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref7">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bremner</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Douglas</surname> <given-names>L. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1971</year>). <article-title>Inhibition of urease activity in soils</article-title>. <source>Soil Biol. Biochem.</source> <volume>3</volume>, <fpage>297</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>307</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0038-0717(71)90039-3</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39245721</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref8">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Brzezi&#x0144;ska</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>W&#x0142;odarczyk</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Enzymes of intracellular redox transformations (oxidoreductases)</article-title>. <source>Acta Agrophysica</source> <volume>3</volume>, <fpage>11</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>26</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref9">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Casida</surname> <given-names>L. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Klein</surname> <given-names>D. A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Santoro</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1964</year>). <article-title>Soil dehydrogenase activity</article-title>. <source>Soil Sci.</source> <volume>98</volume>, <fpage>371</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>376</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00010694-196412000-00004</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39235999</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref11">
<citation citation-type="other"><person-group person-group-type="author">
<name><surname>Chandra</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name>
</person-group> (<year>2018</year>). Effect of rice residue management on soil quality and productivity of wheat crop. M.Sc. Thesis, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref12">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chaudhary</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>D. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chaudhary</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hooda</surname> <given-names>V. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>Influence of crop residue and nitrogen management on nutrient uptake, yield, and economics of rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system</article-title>. <source>J. Plant Nutr.</source> <volume>47</volume>, <fpage>376</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>391</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/01904167.2023.2277399</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref13">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sheng</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hou</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Long-term partial replacement of mineral fertilizer with in situ crop residues ensures continued rice yields and soil fertility: A case study of a 27-year field experiment in subtropical China</article-title>. <source>Sci. Total Environ.</source> <volume>787</volume>:<fpage>147523</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147523</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref14">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cheng</surname> <given-names>Z. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yun</surname> <given-names>C. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jiang</surname> <given-names>L. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Qiu</surname> <given-names>S. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wei</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ping</surname> <given-names>H. E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Effects of long-term straw return on soil fertility, nitrogen pool fractions and crop yields on a fluvo-aquic soil in North China</article-title>. <source>J. Plant Nutri. Fert.</source> <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>1441</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1449</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref15">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Choudhary</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Datta</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jat</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gathala</surname> <given-names>M. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sapkota</surname> <given-names>T. B.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Changes in soil biology under conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification of cereal systems in indo-Gangetic Plains</article-title>. <source>Geoderma</source> <volume>313</volume>, <fpage>193</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>204</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.041</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref16">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dhar</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Datta</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Basak</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Paul</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Badole</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thomas</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Residual effect of crop residues on growth, yield attributes and soil properties of wheat under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Agric Res.</source> <volume>48</volume>, <fpage>373</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>378</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5958/0976-058X.2014.01317.1</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref17">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dhillon</surname> <given-names>B. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sohu</surname> <given-names>V. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2024</year>). <article-title>Climate change shocks and crop production: the foodgrain bowl of India</article-title>. <source>Indian J. of Agron.</source> <volume>69</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>10</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.59797/ija.v69i1.5474</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref18">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author">
<collab id="coll1">DOACFW</collab>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <source>Review of the scheme "promotion of agricultural mechanization for in situ management of crop residue in states of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and NCT of Delhi", Ministry of Agriculture and farmers welfare</source>. <publisher-loc>Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Deptt. of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare</publisher-name>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref19">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Doran</surname> <given-names>J. W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zeiss</surname> <given-names>M. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Soil health and sustainability: managing the biotic component of soil quality</article-title>. <source>Appl. Soil Ecol.</source> <volume>15</volume>, <fpage>3</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>11</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0929-1393(00)00067-6</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37841397</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref20">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fang</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>B. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Collins</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhu</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tavakkoli</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Nutrient supply enhanced wheat residue-carbon mineralization, microbial growth, and microbial carbon-use efficiency when residues were supplied at high rate in contrasting soils</article-title>. <source>Soil Biol. Biochem.</source> <volume>126</volume>, <fpage>168</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>178</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.09.003</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref21">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gangmei</surname> <given-names>T. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kaur</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thakur</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sahu</surname> <given-names>K. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sandal</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2024</year>). <article-title>Microbial population and yield of rice&#x2013;wheat system under variable irrigation and nutrient management</article-title>. <source>Indian J. of Agron.</source> <volume>69</volume>, <fpage>17</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>22</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.59797/ija.v69i1.5476</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref22">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gangwar</surname> <given-names>K. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>K. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tomar</surname> <given-names>O. K.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Alternative tillage and crop residue management in wheat after rice in sandy loam soils of indo-Gangetic plains</article-title>. <source>Soil Tillage Res.</source> <volume>88</volume>, <fpage>242</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>252</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.still.2005.06.015</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref23">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gill</surname> <given-names>S. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tripathi</surname> <given-names>S. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chhokar</surname> <given-names>R. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>R. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jha</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Nitrogen top dressing just before irrigation improves wheat growth, productivity and nitrogen use efficiency and profitability</article-title>. <source>J. Cereal Res.</source> <volume>11</volume>, <fpage>17</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>22</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.25174/2249-4065/2019/83006</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref9001">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gomez</surname> <given-names>K. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gomez</surname> <given-names>A. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1984</year>). <source>Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research</source>. <edition>2nd Edn</edition>, <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>John Wiley and Sons</publisher-name>, <fpage>680</fpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref24">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gopinath</surname> <given-names>K. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rajanna</surname> <given-names>G. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Venkatesh</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jayalakshmi</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumari</surname> <given-names>V. V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Prabhakar</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Influence of crops and different production systems on soil carbon fractions and carbon sequestration in rainfed areas of semiarid tropics in India</article-title>. <source>Sustain. For.</source> <volume>14</volume>:<fpage>4207</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/su14074207</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref25">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Govaerts</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mezzalama</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sayre</surname> <given-names>K. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Crossa</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lichter</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Troch</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Long-term consequences of tillage, residue management, and crop rotation on selected soil microflora groups in the subtropical highlands</article-title>. <source>Appl. Soil Ecol.</source> <volume>38</volume>, <fpage>197</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>210</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.apsoil.2007.10.009</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref26">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Guo</surname> <given-names>X.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cai</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>X.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Residue management alters microbial diversity and activity without affecting their community composition in black soil</article-title>. <source>Northeast China Peer J.</source> <volume>6</volume>:<fpage>5754</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7717/peerj.5754</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref27">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guenet</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Neill</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bardoux</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Abbadie</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Is there a linear relationship between priming effect intensity and the amount of organic matter input?</article-title> <source>Appl. Soil Ecol.</source> <volume>46</volume>, <fpage>436</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>442</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.09.006</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref28">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gupta</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Roper</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thompson</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Harnessing the benefits of soil biology in conservation agriculture</article-title>. In <source>Australian agriculture in 2020: from conservation to automation</source> (eds. <person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name><surname>Pratley</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name>
</person-group> &#x0026; <person-group person-group-type="author">
<name><surname>Kirkegaard</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name>
</person-group>) <fpage>237</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>253</lpage> (<publisher-name>Agronomy Australia and Charles Sturt University</publisher-name>).</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref29">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gupta</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ladha</surname> <given-names>J. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Yield and phosphorus transformations in a rice&#x2013;wheat system with crop residue and phosphorus management</article-title>. <source>Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.</source> <volume>71</volume>, <fpage>1500</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1507</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2136/sssaj2006.0325</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref30">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gupta</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sraw</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kang</surname> <given-names>J. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kaur</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pathania</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2024</year>). <article-title>Interactive effects of long term management of crop residue and phosphorus fertilization on wheat productivity and soil health in the rice&#x2013;wheat</article-title>. <source>Sci. Rep.</source> <volume>14</volume>:<fpage>1399</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41598-024-51399-8</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">38228839</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref31">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gupta</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gaikwad</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kushwah</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>A. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bainsla</surname> <given-names>N. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Genetic improvement trend analysis for end-use quality characteristics among wheat cultivars of North-Western India</article-title>. <source>Indian Jo. Genet. Plant Breeding</source> <volume>76</volume>, <fpage>137</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>143</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5958/0975-6906.2016.00030.4</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref33">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Harish</surname> <given-names>M. N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Choudhary</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bhupenchandra</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rajanna</surname> <given-names>G. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Double zero-tillage and foliar-P nutrition coupled with bioinoculants enhance physiological photosynthetic characteristics and resilience to nutritional and environmental stresses in maize&#x2013;wheat rotation</article-title>. <source>Front. Plant Sci.</source> <volume>13</volume>:<fpage>959541</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fpls.2022.959541</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36186084</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref34">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hayashi</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nishimura</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yagi</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Ammonia volatilization from a paddy field following applications of urea: Rice plants are both an absorber and an emitter for atmospheric ammonia</article-title>. <source>Sci. Total Environ.</source> <volume>390</volume>, <fpage>485</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>494</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.10.037</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18054067</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref35">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Huda</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gaihre</surname> <given-names>Y. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Islam</surname> <given-names>M. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Islam</surname> <given-names>M. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sanabria</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Floodwater ammonium, nitrogen use efficiency and rice yields with fertilizer deep placement and alternate wetting and drying under triple rice cropping systems</article-title>. <source>Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst.</source> <volume>104</volume>, <fpage>53</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>66</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10705-015-9758-6</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref9002">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Huang</surname> <given-names>P. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sumner</surname> <given-names>M. P.</given-names></name></person-group>, <comment>(Eds).</comment> (<year>2012</year>) <source>Handbook of Soil Sciences, Properties and Processes</source>. <edition>2nd Edn</edition>. <publisher-loc>Boca Raton</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>CRC Press</publisher-name>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref36">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Iqbal</surname> <given-names>M. F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hussain</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Faisal</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Iqbal</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rehaman</surname> <given-names>A. U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmad</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Happy seeder zero tillage equipment for sowing of wheat in standing rice stubbles</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Adv. Res. Biol. Sci.</source> <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>101</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>105</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22192/ijarbs.2017.04.04.014</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref37">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Islam</surname> <given-names>S. M. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gaihre</surname> <given-names>Y. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Biswas</surname> <given-names>J. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jahan</surname> <given-names>M. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Adhikay</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Different nitrogen rates and methods of application for dry season rice cultivation with alternate wetting and drying irrigation: fate of nitrogen and grain yield</article-title>. <source>Agric. Water Manag.</source> <volume>196</volume>, <fpage>144</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>153</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.agwat.2017.11.002</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref38">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Islam</surname> <given-names>S. M. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gaihre</surname> <given-names>Y. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shah</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sarkar</surname> <given-names>M. I. U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Satter</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Rice yields and nitrogen use efficiency with different fertilizers and water management under intensive lowland rice cropping systems in Bangladesh</article-title>. <source>Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst.</source> <volume>106</volume>, <fpage>143</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>156</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10705-016-9795-9</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref39">
<citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author">
<name><surname>Jackson</surname> <given-names>M. L.</given-names></name>
</person-group> (<year>1967</year>). <source>Soil chemical analysis</source>. New Delhi, India: <publisher-name>Prentice Hall of India, Private Limited</publisher-name>, <fpage>234</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>246</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref40">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jat</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sutaliya</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Choudhary</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Conservation agriculture based sustainable intensification of basmati rice&#x2013;wheat system in north&#x2013;West India</article-title>. <source>Arch. Agron. Soil Sci.</source> <volume>65</volume>, <fpage>1370</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1386</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03650340.2019.1566708</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref42">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kesarwani</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shukla</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pandey</surname> <given-names>D. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pramanick</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>In situ Rice residue management under rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system and their influence on wheat productivity</article-title>. <source>J. Pharmacognosy Phytochem.</source> <volume>6</volume>, <fpage>1422</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1425</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref43">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kirkby</surname> <given-names>C. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Richardson</surname> <given-names>A. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wade</surname> <given-names>L. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Passioura</surname> <given-names>J. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Batten</surname> <given-names>G. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blanchard</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Nutrient availability limits carbon sequestration in arable soils</article-title>. <source>Soil Biol. Biochem.</source> <volume>68</volume>, <fpage>402</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>409</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.soilbio.2013.09.032</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39043302</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref44">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lehmann</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kleber</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>The contentious nature of soil organic matter</article-title>. <source>Nature</source> <volume>528</volume>, <fpage>60</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>68</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nature16069</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26595271</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref9003">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jia</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fang</surname> <given-names>Q.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Irrigation has a higher impact on soil bacterial abundance, diversity and composition than nitrogen fertilization</article-title>. <source>Sci. Rep.</source> <volume>11</volume>:<fpage>16901</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41598-021-96234-6</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref45">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>T. Q.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fan</surname> <given-names>D. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>X. X.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hen</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>C. F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cao</surname> <given-names>C. G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Deep placement of nitrogen fertilizers reduces ammonia volatilization and increases nitrogen utilization efficiency in no-tillage paddy fields in Central China</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>184</volume>, <fpage>80</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>90</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2015.09.011</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref46">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meng</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zheng</surname> <given-names>X.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Han</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Effects of irrigation, fertilization and crop straw management on nitrous oxide and nitric oxide emissions from a wheat&#x2013;maize rotation field in northern China</article-title>. <source>Agric. Ecosys. Environ.</source> <volume>140</volume>, <fpage>226</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>233</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.agee.2010.12.009</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref47">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Majumdar</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moulick</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Srivastava</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2024</year>). <article-title>Editorial: &#x2018;save soil&#x2019; by managing soil nutrient losses, agronomic practices and crop-microbial interaction: world soil day 2022</article-title>. <source>Front. Sustain. Food Syst.</source> <volume>8</volume>:<fpage>1360937</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsufs.2024.1360937</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref48">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>H. N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ajay</surname> <given-names>B. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rajanna</surname> <given-names>G. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>R. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jain</surname> <given-names>N. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>M. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Polythene mulch and potassium application enhances peanut productivity and biochemical traits under sustained salinity stress condition</article-title>. <source>Agric. Water Manag.</source> <volume>273</volume>:<fpage>107903</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107903</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref49">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>J. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Behera</surname> <given-names>U. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chakraborty</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>A. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Tillage and residue management effect on soil properties, crop performance and energy relations in green gram (<italic>Vigna radiata</italic> L.) under maize-based cropping systems</article-title>. <source>Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res.</source> <volume>3</volume>, <fpage>261</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>272</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.iswcr.2015.11.001</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref50">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>R. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Venkatesh</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khobra</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tripathi</surname> <given-names>S. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Prajapat</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Effect of rice residue retention and foliar application of k on water productivity and profitability of wheat in north West India</article-title>. <source>Agronomy</source> <volume>10</volume>:<fpage>434</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/agronomy10030434</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref51">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Moharana</surname> <given-names>P. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>B. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Biswas</surname> <given-names>D. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dwivedi</surname> <given-names>B. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>R. V.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Long-term effect of nutrient management on soil fertility and soil organic carbon pools under a 6-year-old pearl millet-wheat cropping system in an inceptisol of subtropical India</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>136</volume>, <fpage>32</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>41</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2012.07.002</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref52">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mondal</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mishra</surname> <given-names>J. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Poonia</surname> <given-names>S. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dubey</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Can yield, soil C and aggregation be improved under long-term conservation agriculture in the eastern indo-Gangetic plain of India?</article-title> <source>Eur. J. Soil Sci.</source> <volume>72</volume>, <fpage>1742</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1761</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/ejss.13092</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34413692</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref53">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>M&#x00F3;ring</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hooda</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Raghuram</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Adhya</surname> <given-names>T. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmad</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bandyopadhyay</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Nitrogen challenges and opportunities for agricultural and environmental science in India</article-title>. <source>Front. Sustain. Food Syst.</source> <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>505347</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsufs.2021.505347</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39185562</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref54">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mu</surname> <given-names>X. Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhao</surname> <given-names>Y. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ji</surname> <given-names>B. Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Guo</surname> <given-names>H. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xue</surname> <given-names>Z. W.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Responses of soil properties, root growth and crop yield to tillage and crop residue management in a wheat&#x2013;maize cropping system on the North China plain</article-title>. <source>Eur. J. Agron.</source> <volume>78</volume>, <fpage>32</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>43</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.eja.2016.04.010</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref55">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nandan</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hazra</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nath</surname> <given-names>P. C.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Performance of crop residue management with different tillage and crop establishment practices on weed flora and crop productivity in rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system of eastern indo-Gangetic plains</article-title>. <source>J. Crop Weed</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>65</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>71</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5555/20193025284</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref56">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nawaz</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Farooq</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nadeem</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Siddique</surname> <given-names>K. H. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lal</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Rice-wheat cropping systems in South Asia: issues, options and opportunities</article-title>. <source>Crop Pasture Sci.</source> <volume>70</volume>, <fpage>395</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>427</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1071/CP18383</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref57">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Olsen</surname> <given-names>S. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cole</surname> <given-names>C. V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Watanabe</surname> <given-names>F. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dean</surname> <given-names>L. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1954</year>). <article-title>Estimation of available phosphorus in soil by extraction with sodium bicarbonate</article-title>. <source>USDA Circ.</source> <volume>939</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>19</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref58">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Padre</surname> <given-names>A. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rai</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gathala</surname> <given-names>M. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>P. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Quantifying changes to the global warming potential of rice&#x2013;wheat systems with the adoption of conservation agriculture in northwestern India</article-title>. <source>Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.</source> <volume>219</volume>, <fpage>56</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>67</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.agee.2015.12.020</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref59">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pandiaraj</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Selvaraj</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ramu</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Effects of crop residue management and nitrogen fertilizer on soil nitrogen and carbon content and productivity of wheat (<italic>Triticum aestivum</italic> L.) in two cropping systems</article-title>. <source>J. Agric Sci. Tech.</source> <volume>17</volume>, <fpage>249</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>260</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref60">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pathak</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bhatia</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jain</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Recycling of rice straw to improve wheat yield and soil fertility and reduce atmospheric pollution</article-title>. <source>Paddy Water Environ.</source> <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>111</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>117</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10333-006-0038-6</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref61">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Qian</surname> <given-names>H. Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>B. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Huang</surname> <given-names>G. Q.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yan</surname> <given-names>Y. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fang</surname> <given-names>Z. W.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Effects of returning rice straw to fields with fertilizers and microorganism liquids on soil enzyme activities and microorganisms in paddy fields</article-title>. <source>Ecol. Environ. Sci.</source> <volume>21</volume>, <fpage>440</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>445</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref62">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rajanna</surname> <given-names>G. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Suman</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Babu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Venkatesh</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Co-implementation of tillage, irrigation, and fertilizers in soybean: impact on crop productivity, soil moisture, and soil microbial dynamics</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>288</volume>:<fpage>108672</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108672</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref63">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ram</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dadhwal</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vashist</surname> <given-names>K. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kaur</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Grain yield and water use efficiency of wheat (<italic>Triticum aestivum</italic> L.) in relation to irrigation levels and rice straw mulching in north West India</article-title>. <source>Agric. Water Manag.</source> <volume>128</volume>, <fpage>92</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>101</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.agwat.2013.06.011</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref64">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sah</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shah</surname> <given-names>S. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sah</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thapa</surname> <given-names>R. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>McDonald</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sidhu</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Tillage, crop residue, and nitrogen level effects on soil properties and crop yields under rice&#x2013;wheat system in the Terai region of Nepal</article-title>. <source>GJBAHS</source> <volume>3</volume>, <fpage>139</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>147</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24925/turjaf.v8i3.610-615.3068</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref65">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Savant</surname> <given-names>N. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stangel</surname> <given-names>P. J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>Deep placement of urea supergranules in transplanted rice: principles and practices</article-title>. <source>Fertil. Res.</source> <volume>25</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>83</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/BF01063765</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref66">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Choudhary</surname> <given-names>O. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Neemisha</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Nitrogen and rice straw incorporation impact nitrogen use efficiency, soil nitrogen pools and enzyme activity in rice-wheat system in North-Western India</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>266</volume>:<fpage>108131</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108131</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref67">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2020a</year>). <article-title>Responses of soil carbon pools, enzymatic activity and crop yields to nitrogen and straw incorporation in a rice-wheat cropping system in North-Western India</article-title>. <source>Front. Sus. Food Sys.</source> <volume>4</volume>:<fpage>532704</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsufs.2020.532704</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref69">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thind</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadvinder-Singh</surname> <given-names>S. H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sidhu</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jat</surname> <given-names>M. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Parihar</surname> <given-names>C. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Effects of crop residue retention on soil carbon pools after 6 years of rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system</article-title>. <source>Environ. Earth Sci.</source> <volume>78</volume>:<fpage>296</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s12665-019-8305-1</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref70">
<citation citation-type="other"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sidhu</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Humphreys</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dhillon</surname> <given-names>S. S.</given-names></name></person-group>, et al. (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>The happy Seeder enables direct drilling of wheat into rice stubble</article-title>. <source>Aust. J. Exp. Agric.</source>, <volume>47</volume>, <fpage>844</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>854</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1071/EA06225</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref71">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sidhu</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Humphreys</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thind</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jat</surname> <given-names>M. L.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Nitrogen management for zero till wheat with surface retention of rice residues in north&#x2013;West India</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>184</volume>, <fpage>183</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>191</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2015.03.025</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref72">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sodhi</surname> <given-names>G. P. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Energy optimization in wheat establishment following rice residue management with happy Seeder technology for reduced carbon footprints in northwestern India</article-title>. <source>Energy</source> <volume>230</volume>:<fpage>120680</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.energy.2021.120680</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref73">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Six</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ogle</surname> <given-names>S. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bredit</surname> <given-names>F. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Conant</surname> <given-names>R. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mosier</surname> <given-names>A. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Paustian</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>The potential to mitigate global warming with no-tillage management is only realized when practiced in the long term</article-title>. <source>Glob. Change Biol.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>155</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>160</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00730.x</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref74">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Stagnari</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pagnani</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Galieni</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>D&#x2019;Egidio</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Matteucci</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pisante</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Effects of conservation agriculture practices on soil quality indicators: A case study in a wheat-based cropping system of Mediterranean areas</article-title>. <source>Soil Sci. Plant Nutr.</source> <volume>66</volume>, <fpage>624</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>635</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/00380768.2020.1779571</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref75">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Su</surname> <given-names>S. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>D. N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baghini</surname> <given-names>M. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>A critical review of soil moisture measurement</article-title>. <source>Measurement</source> <volume>54</volume>, <fpage>92</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>105</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.measurement.2014.04.007</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">39205103</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref76">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Subbiah</surname> <given-names>B. V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Asija</surname> <given-names>G. L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1956</year>). <article-title>A rapid procedure for the estimation of available nitrogen in soils</article-title>. <source>Curr. Sci.</source> <volume>25</volume>, <fpage>259</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>260</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref77">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>S. Q.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cai</surname> <given-names>H. Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chang</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Sample storage-induced changes in the quantity and quality of soil labile organic carbon</article-title>. <source>Sci. Rep.</source> <volume>51</volume>:<fpage>7496</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/srep17496</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref78">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tabatabai</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bremner</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1969</year>). <article-title>Use of p-nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity</article-title>. <source>Soil Biol. Biochem.</source> <volume>1</volume>, <fpage>301</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>307</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0038-0717(69)90012-1</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">35279799</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref79">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tan</surname> <given-names>Z. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Q.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>D. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>Q. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xiao</surname> <given-names>Q. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>J. G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>On the effect of rice straw returned to the field on microbes and enzyme activity in paddy soil</article-title>. <source>Acta Ecol. Sin.</source> <volume>26</volume>, <fpage>3385</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>3392</lpage>.</citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref9005">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tang</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cerd&#x00E1;n-Garc&#x00ED;a</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Berthelot</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Polyviou</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baylay</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>New insights into the distributions of nitrogen fixation and diazotrophs revealed by high-resolution sensing and sampling methods</article-title>. <source>ISME J.</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>2514</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2526</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41396-020-0703-6</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref80">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Usman</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khan</surname> <given-names>E. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khan</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khan</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ghulam</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khan</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Effect of tillage and nitrogen on wheat production, economics, and soil fertility in rice&#x2013;wheat cropping system</article-title>. <source>Am. J. Plant Sci.</source> <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>17</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>25</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ajps.2013.41004</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref81">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Varatharajan</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Choudhary</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sudhishri</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pooniya</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Das</surname> <given-names>T. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Integrated management enhances crop physiology and final yield in maize intercropped with blackgram in semiarid South Asia</article-title>. <source>Front. Plant Sci.</source> <volume>13</volume>:<fpage>975569</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fpls.2022.975569</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36212325</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref82">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Walkley</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Black</surname> <given-names>I. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1934</year>). <article-title>An examination of the degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method</article-title>. <source>Soil Sci.</source> <volume>37</volume>, <fpage>29</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>38</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref83">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Whitman</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Peperanney</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Enders</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Koechli</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Campbell</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Buckley</surname> <given-names>D. H.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Dynamics of microbial community composition and soil organic carbon mineralization in soil following addition of pyrogenic and fresh organic matter</article-title>. <source>ISME J.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>2918</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2930</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/ismej.2016.68</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27128990</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref9004">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wright</surname> <given-names>S. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Centonze</surname> <given-names>V. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stricker</surname> <given-names>S. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>DeVries</surname> <given-names>P. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Paddock</surname> <given-names>S. W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schatten</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Introduction to confocal microscopy and three-dimensional reconstruction</article-title>. <source>Methods Cell Biol.</source>, <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>45</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0091-679X(08)60998-X</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref84">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>G. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Das</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lal</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Babu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>R. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Saha</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Energy budget and carbon footprint in a no-till and mulch-based rice&#x2013;mustard cropping system</article-title>. <source>J. Cleaner Produ.</source> <volume>191</volume>, <fpage>144</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>157</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.173</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref85">
<citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ding</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jiang</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Long-term straw incorporation increases rice yield stability under high fertilization level conditions in the rice&#x2013;wheat system</article-title>. <source>Crop J.</source> <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>1191</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1197</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.cj.2020.11.007</pub-id></citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>