Nitrogen (N) fertilization plays a pivotal role in the nitrogen transport process and yield formation of field-grown Tibetan barley (Hordeum vulgare L., qingke in Chinese); however, little is known about its interaction with irrigation regimes. Here, we performed a control experiment to investigate the effects of irrigation regimes (primary irrigation and double irrigation, mentioned as W1 and W2) and N levels (0, 90, 120, and 150 kg ha⁻¹, mentioned as N0, N9, N12, and N15) on the nitrogen accumulation, translocation, and utilization of Tibetan barley in the Tibetan Plateau during the spring barley seasons in 2022. The results showed that the highest yield (6242.28 kg ha⁻¹) and aboveground biomass (12,354.13 kg ha⁻¹ for anthesis; 15,827.9 kg ha⁻¹ for maturity) were achieved in W2N15 as compared to other treatments. The maximum grain N accumulation (117.66 kg ha⁻¹), the N translocation (54.16 kg ha⁻¹), and the post-anthesis N accumulation (63.5 kg ha⁻¹) were achieved in the W1N15 treatment. The N utilization efficiency increased with irrigation frequency and decreased with N application; however, the conclusion given by the N agronomic efficiency is contrary to this trend. The grain yield had significant positive correlations with the grain N accumulation (W1: r = 0.98; W2: r = 0.97) and N translocation (W1: r = 0.84; W2: r = 0.94), but significant negative correlations with the N harvest index (W1: r = −0.95; W2: r = −0.95) and N utilization efficiency (W1: r = −0.9; W2: r = −0.85). The path analysis revealed that the factors related to N utilization (β = 0.875) and the factors related to N translocation (β = −1.426) were the significant direct contributors towards grain yield. The influence of N application (total effect = 0.922) on the grain yield was much stronger than that of the irrigation regime (total effect = 0.324). Our findings can guide future efforts in designing sustainable water and N fertilizer management strategies for Tibetan barley in the Tibetan Plateau.

Using the water footprint (WF) approach to evaluate the water-use efficiency in agricultural production is crucial for assessing the sustainable use of water resources and mitigating water scarcity and pollution. This study calculated the blue, grey, green and total water footprints of spring maize production in Northeast China in 2019 and 2020 and compared the water footprint values at the provincial and municipal scales. In addition, this study analyzed the spatial variation and drivers of the water footprint. The results show that the average water footprints of spring maize production in Northeast China in 2019 and 2020 were 1.78 m³kg⁻¹ and 2.00 m³kg⁻¹, out of which the grey water footprint contributed the most, accounting for 55.19% and 49.85% of the total water footprint, respectively, while the blue water footprint contributed the least, accounting for only 17.44% and 18.68% of the total water footprint. At the provincial level, the water footprint of spring maize production in Northeast China was spatially clustered, with the lowest total water footprint in Heilongjiang Province and the highest total water footprint in Jilin Province. The spatial distribution difference of the spring maize unit yield was the fundamental factor explaining the difference in the water footprint. The precipitation, surface water resources, average temperature, effective irrigated area and the proportion of effective irrigated area also had impacts on the water footprint. This study provides a scientific basis for optimizing the distribution of spring maize production in Northeast China, formulating appropriate sustainable water resource management plans, improving water-use efficiency and realizing sustainable water resource management in Northeast China.

The global ecological crisis has impacted the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) region, and due to the diverse geographical characteristics, the ecological problems in countries along the Belt and Road vary. Overcoming these environmental and ecological challenges is essential for advancing and genuinely implementing green development, and has become a practical necessity for building a “Green Belt and Road.” China, the creator of the Green “Belt and Road Initiative”, actively aligns with international environmental protection standards and plays a leading role in global ecological conservation efforts. China vigorously promotes the development of key policy documents for the Green Belt and Road, providing institutional support for the initiative’s environmentally friendly construction and development. Under comprehensive theoretical planning, various green practices have been implemented, including thematic in-depth research on the Green “Belt and Road” and the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” the establishment of the “International Green Development Coalition” along the Belt and Road, the implementation of overseas investment and green finance, and the proposal of the “Ten, Hundred, Thousand” initiative for South-South Cooperation on Climate Change. These green practices clearly indicate China’s commitment to building ecological civilization and its relentless efforts toward advancing the construction of a global ecological community with shared-benefits.