Estimation on paddy field carrying capacity of chicken manure based on imidacloprid ecological risk value

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20250420

Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2026, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (4): 745-754.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20250420

• Environmental Science • Previous Articles Next Articles

Estimation on paddy field carrying capacity of chicken manure based on imidacloprid ecological risk value

CHU Tianshu¹(), ZHU Kebai², YANG Yuchen², HE Xueni², ZHAO Zhiqiang³, DAI Ziyang⁴, CHENG Shenhang⁵, TANG Shusheng⁶^,^*()

¹ College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
² College of Engineering, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China
³ School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, Guangdong, China
⁴ College of Veterinary Medicine, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712199, Shaanxi, China
⁵ School of Synthetic Biology, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, China
⁶ College of Veterinary Medicine, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China

Received:2025-06-04 Online:2026-04-25 Published:2026-05-08
Contact: TANG Shusheng

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate whether pesticide residues would limit the amount of manure returned to fields and the quantity of livestock and poultry farming, this study took paddy fields in Zhejiang Province as the research object in crop planting, broiler and laying hens farming as the research objects in animal husbandry, and imidacloprid as the pesticide type for study. According to the flow characteristics of imidacloprid between crop planting and animal husbandry, this study constructed a paddy field carrying capacity model of chicken manure based on the ecological risk value of imidacloprid by using material flow analysis, risk quotient method and soil environmental impact prediction. Considering the variability of parameters such as soil physicochemical parameters, pesticide residues in soil and chicken manure, and chicken manure excretion, the Monte Carlo analysis method was used to estimate the appropriate variation range of broiler or laying hens farming scale. Our results showed that the short-term, medium-term and long-term carrying capacity of broiler breeding per hectare in Zhejiang Province were 38 064-62 793, 5 336-15 759 and 0-1 492 birds, respectively, and those of laying hens breeding were 4 996-9 188, 715-2 245 and 0-205 birds, respectively. If imidacloprid residues in broiler manure and soil decreases by 25%, the carrying capacity of broiler farming per hectare will increase by 33.3% and 8.4%, respectively. Considering the development needs of livestock and poultry farming and the protection of farmland soil environment, it is recommended to actively promote pesticide reduction and efficiency enhancement technologies to reduce imidacloprid residues in soil. Meanwhile, pesticide residues in manure should be monitored to promote the green development of crop planting and animal husbandry in Zhejiang Province.

Key words: paddy field carrying capacity, imidacloprid, ecological risk assessment, Zhejiang Province, chicken manure

CLC Number:

CHU Tianshu, ZHU Kebai, YANG Yuchen, HE Xueni, ZHAO Zhiqiang, DAI Ziyang, CHENG Shenhang, TANG Shusheng. Estimation on paddy field carrying capacity of chicken manure based on imidacloprid ecological risk value[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2026, 38(4): 745-754.

Figures/Tables 5

Table 1 Toxicity parameters of imidacloprid

物种 Species	观察时间/d Observed duration/d	EC₅₀/ (mg·kg^-1)	参考文献 Reference
灰虫Aporrectodea caliginosa	7	0.8	[17]
蚯蚓Lumbricus terrestris	7	0.8	[17]
盆虫Enchytraeus albidus	21	22.3	[18]
线虫Enchytraeus crypticus	21	2.0	[19]
螨虫Oppia nitens	35	119.0	[19]
普通土鳖Porcellio scaber	28	6.7	[19]
蚯蚓Eisenia andrei	2~56	0.1~4.1	[19-29]
跳虫Folsomia candida	14~91	0.1~2.1	[20-23,30-34]

Table 2 Calculate parameters and reference on paddy field carrying capacity of chicken manure

参数 Index		取值范围 Data range	平均值 Mean	标准差 SD	参考文献 Reference
C_b/(mg·kg^-1)	稻田土壤吡虫啉的质量分数 The mass fraction of imidacloprid in paddy fields soil	1.00×10^-4~7.27×10^-3	3.69×10^-3	1.20×10^-3	[41]
D/m	稻田耕层厚度 The thickness of the plough layer in the paddy fields	0.07~0.40	0.24	0.06	[42]
ρ/(kg·m^-3)	稻田耕层土壤容重 The bulk density of the plough layer soil in the	700~1 590	1 145	148	[42]
	paddy fields
W_m/(mg·kg^-1)	鸡粪吡虫啉质量分数 The mass fraction of imidacloprid in chicken manure	7.56×10^-3~9.24×10^-3	8.40×10^-3	2.80×10^-4	[7]
H_b/kg	每只肉鸡整个饲养周期的粪便排泄量 Total fecal excretion per broiler throughout	2.23~5.20	3.72	0.50	[43]
	the entire rearing period
H_l/kg	每只蛋鸡整个饲养周期的粪便排泄量 Total fecal excretion per laying hens throughout the	3.84~50.94	27.39	7.85	[43]
	entire rearing period
Q_p/mg	每年农药施用后的稻田吡虫啉残留量 The residue of imidacloprid in the paddy fields after	8.03~984.19	496.19	162.72	[41]
	application each year

Fig.1 Cumulative distribution function curve for paddy field carrying capacity of chicken manure in Zhejiang Province A, Short-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; B, Medium-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; C, Long-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; D, Short-term paddy field carrying capacity of laying hen manure; E, Medium-term paddy field carrying capacity of laying hen manure; F, Long-term paddy field carrying capacity of laying hen manure.

Fig.2 The sensitivity analysis results of the medium-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure in Zhejiang Province Cb represents the mass fraction of imidacloprid in paddy fields soil, D represents the thickness of the plough layer in the paddy fields, ρ represents the bulk density of the plough layer soil in the paddy fields, Wm represents the mass fraction of imidacloprid in chicken manure, Hb represents the total amount of feces excreted by broilers throughout the entire rearing period, Qp represents the residue of imidacloprid in the paddy fields after application each year, and t represents the time required to reach the environmental carrying capacity. In the figure, the results of sensitivity analysis for ρ and D are identical, and the results for Wm and Hb are also identical, hence, the symbols and the curves overlap.

Fig.3 Scenario analysis result at different time scales A, Short-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; B, Medium-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; C, Long-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; D, CV of short-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; E, CV of medium-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure; F, CV of long-term paddy field carrying capacity of broiler manure. The paddy field carrying capacity of chicken manure is the median value in the Monte Carlo analysis results.

References 56

[1]	世界粮农组织. 统计数据库(FAOSTAT)2010—2021[EB/OL]. (2024-02-06) [2025-06-01]. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home.
[2]	MAGGI F, TANG F H M, TUBIELLO F N. Agricultural pesticide land budget and river discharge to oceans[J]. Nature, 2023, 620(7976): 1013-1017.
[3]	LI Y J, MIAO R Q, KHANNA M. Neonicotinoids and decline in bird biodiversity in the United States[J]. Nature Sustainability, 2020, 3(12): 1027-1035.
[4]	MAMY L, PESCE S, SANCHEZ W, et al. Impacts of neonicotinoids on biodiversity: a critical review[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2025, 32(6): 2794-2829.
[5]	JØRGENSEN P S, AKTIPIS A, BROWN Z, et al. Antibiotic and pesticide susceptibility and the anthropocene operating space[J]. Nature Sustainability, 2018, 1(11): 632-641.
[6]	TANG W X, WANG D, WANG J Q, et al. Pyrethroid pesticide residues in the global environment: an overview[J]. Chemosphere, 2018, 191: 990-1007.
[7]	WANG J M, XU J, JI X F, et al. Determination of veterinary drug/pesticide residues in livestock and poultry excrement using selective accelerated solvent extraction and magnetic material purification combined with ultra-high-performance liquid chromatograp-tandem mass spectrometry[J]. Journal of Chromatography A, 2020, 1617: 460808.
[8]	DONG Y, DAS S, PARSONS J R, et al. Simultaneous detection of pesticides and pharmaceuticals in three types of bio-based fertilizers by an improved QuEChERS method coupled with UHPLC-q-ToF-MS/MS[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2023, 458: 131992.
[9]	SHAO S Y, ZHANG S F, YU Z Y, et al. Insights into the fate of the novel pesticide vanisulfane from animal manure in plant-soil systems: assisted by carbon-14 labeling[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2023, 71(2): 1139-1148.
[10]	楚天舒, 王柄雄, 孟坦, 等. 基于农田土壤抗生素生态风险值的畜禽粪污农田承载力估算[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2021, 26(3): 138-151.
	CHU T S, WANG B X, MENG T, et al. Estimation on farmland carrying capacity for livestock and poultry manure based on farmland soil antibiotics ecological risk values[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2021, 26(3): 138-151.
[11]	楚天舒, 王柄雄, 高思程, 等. 基于农田土壤重金属污染风险筛选值的畜禽粪污农田承载力估算[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2021, 26(2): 125-138.
	CHU T S, WANG B X, GAO S C, et al. Estimation on farmland carrying capacity for livestock and poultry manure based on risk screening values for farmland soil heavy metal contamination[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2021, 26(2): 125-138.
[12]	穆虹宇, 庄重, 李彦明, 等. 我国畜禽粪便重金属含量特征及土壤累积风险分析[J]. 环境科学, 2020(2): 986-996.
	MU H Y, ZHUANG Z, LI Y M, et al. Heavy metal contents in animal manure in China and the related soil accumulation risks[J]. Environmental Science, 2020(2): 986-996.
[13]	浙江省生态环境厅,浙江省农业农村厅. 关于印发浙江省农业面源污染治理与监督指导实施方案的通知[EB/OL]. (2022-08-02) [2025-06-01]. http://sthjt.zj.gov.cn/art/2022/8/2/art_1229263469_2413645.html.
[14]	浙江省统计局,国家统计局浙江调查总队. 浙江统计年鉴-2011[M]. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2011.
[15]	浙江省发展和改革委员会,浙江省农业农村厅. 关于印发《浙江省畜牧业高质量发展“十四五”规划》的通知[EB/OL]. (2021-07-07) [2025-06-01]. https://www.zj.gov.cn/art/2021/7/7/art_1229203592_2310415.html.
[16]	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ECOTOX Databases[EB/OL]. (2024-02-06) [2025-06-01]. https://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/.
[17]	DITTBRENNER N, TRIEBSKORN R, MOSER I, et al. Physiological and behavioural effects of imidacloprid on two ecologically relevant earthworm species (Lumbricus terrestris and Aporrectodea caliginosa)[J]. Ecotoxicology, 2010, 19(8): 1567-1573.
[18]	NYOKA N W, KANYILE S N, BREDENHAND E, et al. Biochar alleviates the toxicity of imidacloprid and silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) to Enchytraeus albidus (Oligochaeta)[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2018, 25(11): 10937-10945.
[19]	ALVES P R L, CARDOSO E J B N, MARTINES A M, et al. Earthworm ecotoxicological assessments of pesticides used to treat seeds under tropical conditions[J]. Chemosphere, 2013, 90(11): 2674-2682.
[20]	DE LIMA E SILVA C, BRENNAN N, BROUWER J M, et al. Comparative toxicity of imidacloprid and thiacloprid to different species of soil invertebrates[J]. Ecotoxicology, 2017, 26(4): 555-564.
[21]	BANDEIRA F O, ALVES P R L, HENNIG T B, et al. Toxicity of imidacloprid to the earthworm Eisenia andrei and collembolan Folsomia candida in three contrasting tropical soils[J]. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2020, 20(4): 1997-2007.
[22]	DE LIMA E SILVA C, DE ROOIJ W, VERWEIJ R A, et al. Toxicity in neonicotinoids to Folsomia candida and Eisenia andrei[J]. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2020, 39(3): 548-555.
[23]	BANDEIRA F O, LOPES ALVES P R, HENNIG T B, et al. Effect of temperature on the toxicity of imidacloprid to Eisenia andrei and Folsomia candida in tropical soils[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2020, 267: 115565.
[24]	WANG K, QI S Z, MU X Y, et al. Evaluation of the toxicity, AChE activity and DNA damage caused by imidacloprid on earthworms, Eisenia fetida[J]. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 2015, 95(4): 475-480.
[25]	GE J, XIAO Y Z, CHAI Y Y, et al. Sub-lethal effects of six neonicotinoids on avoidance behavior and reproduction of earthworms (Eisenia fetida)[J]. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2018, 162: 423-429.
[26]	GOMEZ-EYLES J L, SVENDSEN C, LISTER L, et al. Measuring and modelling mixture toxicity of imidacloprid and thiacloprid on Caenorhabditis elegans and Eisenia fetida[J]. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2009, 72(1): 71-79.
[27]	WANG X, ZHU X P, PENG Q, et al. Multi-level ecotoxicological effects of imidacloprid on earthworm (Eisenia fetida)[J]. Chemosphere, 2019, 219: 923-932.
[28]	WANG K, PANG S, MU X Y, et al. Biological response of earthworm, Eisenia fetida, to five neonicotinoid insecticides[J]. Chemosphere, 2015, 132: 120-126.
[29]	BORI J, RIBALTA C, DOMENE X, et al. Environmental impacts of an imidacloprid-containing formulation: from soils to waters[J]. Afinidad, 2015, 72(571): 169-176.
[30]	IDINGER J. Laboratory studies to detect effects of selected plant protection products on Folsomia candida(Collembola: Isotomidae)[J]. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection, 2002, 109(5): 512-529.
[31]	MABUBU J I, NAWAZ M, CAI W L, et al. Ecotoxicity of the neonicotinoid insecticides imidacloprid and thiacloprid to the soil-dwelling arthropod Folsomia candida(Collembola)[J]. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society, 2017, 90(4): 323-333.
[32]	REYNOLDS W N P E. Imidacloprid insecticide treatments for hemlock woolly adelgid, Adelges tsugae Annand (Hemiptera: Adelgidae), affect a non-target soil arthropod community surrounding eastern hemlock, Tsuga canadensis(l.) Carriere[D]. State of Tennessee: The University of Tennessee, 2008
[33]	OGUNGBEMI A O, VAN GESTEL C A M. Extrapolation of imidacloprid toxicity between soils by exposing Folsomia candida in soil pore water[J]. Ecotoxicology, 2018, 27(8): 1107-1115.
[34]	VAN GESTEL C A M, DE LIMA E SILVA C, LAM T, et al. Multigeneration toxicity of imidacloprid and thiacloprid to Folsomia candida[J]. Ecotoxicology, 2017, 26(3): 320-328.
[35]	于相毅. 发达国家化学品环境风险评估原则与方法[M]. 北京: 中国环境出版集团, 2019.
[36]	环境影响评价技术导则土壤环境(试行): HJ 964—2018[S].
[37]	朱介北, 邱威, 孙宁, 等. 基于序贯蒙特卡洛法的安全稳定控制系统架构可靠性分析[J]. 电力系统自动化, 2021, 45(15): 21-27.
	ZHU J B, QIU W, SUN N, et al. Reliability analysis of security and stability control system architecture based on sequential Monte Carlo method[J]. Automation of Electric Power Systems, 2021, 45(15): 21-27.
[38]	杨子涵, 宋正河. 利用优选状态数的MCMC模拟农机装备负载[J]. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(20): 15-22.
	YANG Z H, SONG Z H. Simulation of agricultural equipment load using MCMC with optimal state number[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2021, 37(20): 15-22.
[39]	QUAICOE O, ASISEH F, ALOKA A S. Enhancing year-round profitability for small-scale ranchers: an economic analysis of integrated cattle and mushroom production system[J]. Sustainability, 2024, 16(13): 5320.
[40]	SONG J, LIU Y Z, ZHUANG M H, et al. Estimating crop carbon footprint and associated uncertainty at prefecture-level city scale in China[J]. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2023, 199: 107263.
[41]	李喆. 新烟碱类杀虫剂的环境残留及风险评价研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江工业大学, 2017.
	LI Z. The environmental residue and risk assessment of neonicotinoid insecticides[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University of Technology, 2017.
[42]	农业农村部耕地质量监测保护中心. 长三角区耕地质量评价[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2019.
[43]	董红敏. 畜禽养殖业粪便污染监测核算方法与产排污系数手册[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2019.
[44]	全国畜牧业标准化技术委员会. 畜禽粪便土地承载力测算方法: NY/T 3877—2021[S].
[45]	李琪. 水稻化肥农药减量增效技术推广路径分析[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2018.
	LI Q. A study on the extension of fertilizer-and pesticides-reducing technologies in rice[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2018.
[46]	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 关于印发《到2025年化肥减量化行动方案》和《到2025年化学农药减量化行动方案》的通知[EB/OL]. (2022-11-18) [2026-06-01]. https://www.moa.gov.cn/govpublic/ZZYGLS/202212/t20221201_6416398.htm.
[47]	邵宜添. 信息对称促进农药减量化: 理论模型、典型案例与监管策略选择[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2022(6): 1326-1337.
	SHAO Y T. How information symmetry promotes pesticide reduction: theoretical models, typical cases and regulatory strategies[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022(6): 1326-1337.
[48]	江德权, 莫小荣, 王宏航, 等. 衢州市农药包装废弃物回收和农药减量对策建议[J]. 中国植保导刊, 2022, 42(4): 103-106.
	JIANG D Q, MO X R, WANG H H, et al. Countermeasures and suggestions on recycling pesticide packaging waste and pesticide reduction in Quzhou City[J]. China Plant Protection, 2022, 42(4): 103-106.
[49]	项朝阳, 纪楠楠. 社会资本对农户化肥农药减量技术采纳意愿的影响: 基于学习能力的中介和生态认知的调节[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2021, 26(2): 150-163.
	XIANG Z Y, JI N N. Impacts of social capital on farmers’ willingness to adopt for chemical fertilizer and pesticide reduction technology: based on the mediating effect of learning ability and the moderating effect of ecological cognition[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2021, 26(2): 150-163.
[50]	操敏敏, 齐振宏, 刘可, 等. 农户兼业对其施用生物农药的影响: 基于农业社会化服务的调节作用[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2020, 25(1): 191-205.
	CAO M M, QI Z H, LIU K, et al. Effects of farmers’ concurrent business on biopesticide application: the moderating effect of agricultural social service[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2020, 25(1): 191-205.
[51]	秦国庆, 杜宝瑞, 贾小虎, 等. 政策性农业保险的化肥、农药、农膜减量效应分析[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2023, 28(1): 237-251.
	QIN G Q, DU B R, JIA X H, et al. Analyze the reduction effect of policy-oriented agricultural insurance on chemical fertilizer, pesticide and agricultural plastic film[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2023, 28(1): 237-251.
[52]	PENG Y F, TANG J F, HONG M S, et al. Suppression of rice planthopper populations by the entomopathogenic fungus Metarhizium anisopliae without affecting the rice microbiota[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2020, 86(21): e01337-e01320.
[53]	TANG L, LUO X F. Can agricultural insurance encourage farmers to apply biological pesticides? Evidence from rural China[J]. Food Policy, 2021, 105: 102174.
[54]	HUANG Y Z, LUO X F, LI Z L. Substitution or complementarity: why do rice farmers use a mix of biopesticides and chemical pesticides in China?[J]. Pest Management Science, 2022, 78(4): 1630-1639.
[55]	GUO Z H, CAI D D, BAI J C, et al. Intelligent rice field weed control in precision agriculture: from weed recognition to variable rate spraying[J]. Agronomy, 2024, 14(8): 1702.
[56]	WANG X, ZHANG Y Q, HU H F, et al. Evaluation of the droplet deposition and control effect of a special adjuvant for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) sprayers[J]. Journal of Pesticide Science, 2023, 48(3): 78-85.

Estimation on paddy field carrying capacity of chicken manure based on imidacloprid ecological risk value

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 5

References 56

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	GU Xingguo, FANG Qiaokun. Distribution characteristics and value assessment of agricultural heritage systems in Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(2): 493-506.
[2]	HAO Zhongna, QIU Haiping, CHAI Rongyao, HAN Zhanyu, ZHANG Zhen, WANG Yanli, WANG Jiaoyu, LIU Xin. Analysis of rice blast resistance in rice varieties from regional trials in Zhejiang Province of China from 2014 to 2023 [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(12): 2449-2457.
[3]	WANG Lutong, JIANG Lihong, DAI Jiapeng, CHEN Liang, ZENG Guangxi, LIU Erlun, ZHOU Xiangdan, XIAO Yunhua, FANG Jun. Effect of ferrous sulfate on fungal community of chicken manure compost and its application potential [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2025, 37(1): 169-177.
[4]	CHU Tianfen, LEI Ling, LI Qinfeng, WU Ping, HONG Wenjie, ZHENG Weiran. Quality safety risk assessment of watermelon industry in Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2024, 36(5): 1153-1160.
[5]	CHEN Yupei, SHAN Yingjie, LU Ruohui, ZHU Weifeng, KONG Haimin. Fertilization status and reduction potential for major crops in Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2024, 36(11): 2566-2574.
[6]	WANG Jie, LU Ruohui, ZHU Weifeng, CHEN Yupei, SHAN Yingjie. Potential of straw returning as substitute for chemical fertilizer of main grain crops in Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2023, 35(8): 1853-1863.
[7]	FU Jiayi, TONG Lei, SU Fei, ZHENG Ke, LI Hailin, CAO Yirong, SU Na. Driving effect and influence path of “agricultural makers” in rural development of Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(8): 1796-1805.
[8]	GUO Liangxi, HU Bao. Review on mechanism innovation and countermeasures of policy-oriented agricultural insurance in Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(5): 1081-1090.
[9]	WANG Lijuan, CHEN Yangfen, XU Mengjie. Study on agricultural cross-regional investment location and its decision-making mechanism from perspective of rural revitalization: a case study of Zhejiang Province [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(4): 841-850.
[10]	GU Xingguo, MIN Qingwen, WANG Ying, WANG Bin. Conservation and development of agricultural heritage systems in Zhejiang Province, China: progress, problems and countermeasures [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(2): 397-408.
[11]	LIN Chai, YING Shanting, GU Xingguo. Inner logic and realization path of agricultural heritage systems protection and utilization to promote common prosperity: a case study of Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(10): 2310-2318.
[12]	FU Linlin, MAO Xiaohong, MAO Xiaobao, CAI Rixuan. Evaluation of comprehensive grain production capacity in Zhejiang Province in 2013-2018 [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(9): 1748-1758.
[13]	YE Han, WU Bowen, XU Hongwei, GAN Muye, ZHANG Jing, WANG Ke. Analysis on influencing factors and spatial distribution of leisure agriculture at provincial level based on geographic big data: a case study of Zhejiang Province, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(7): 1264-1274.
[14]	MIAO Miao, ZE Hanlu, WU Yonghua. Spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of cultivated land use transition in Zhejiang Province [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(4): 753-760.
[15]	MENG Youqing, WANG Enguo, CHEN Wujian, LI Yanmin, CHENG Fan, MENG Minxia. Distribution and growth dynamics of Candidatus Liberibacter asiaticus positive Asian citrus psyllid in Zhejiang Province [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(3): 464-469.