Water deficiency and low water use efficiency severely constrain wheat yield in dryland regions. This study aimed to identify suitable tillage methods and straw management to improve dry matter production, grain yield, and water use efficiency of wheat in the dryland winter wheat–summer bean (hereafter referred to as wheat-soybean) double-cropping system. A long-term located field experiment (onset in October 2009) with two tillage methods—plowing (PT) and rotary tillage (RT)—and two straw management—no straw mulching (NS) and straw mulching (SM)—was conducted at a typical dryland in China. The wheat yield and yield component, dry matter accumulation and translocation characteristics, and water use efficiency were investigated from 2014 to 2018. Straw management significantly affected wheat yield and yield components, while tillage methods had no significant effect. Furthermore, the interaction of tillage methods and straw management significantly affected yield and yield components except for the spike number. RTSM significantly increased the spike number, grains per spike, 1000-grain weight, harvest index, and grain yield by 12.5%, 8.4%, 6.0%, 3.4%, and 13.4%, respectively, compared to PTNS. Likewise, RTSM significantly increased the aforementioned indicators by 14.8%, 10.1%, 7.5%, 3.6%, and 20.5%, compared to RTNS. Mechanistic analysis revealed that, compared to NS, SM not only significantly enhanced pre-anthesis and post-anthesis dry matter accumulation, and pre-anthesis dry matter tanslocation to grain, but also significantly improved pre-sowing water storage, water consumption during wheat growth, water use efficiency, and water-saving for produced per kg grain yield, with the greatest improvements obtained under RT than PT. Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) analysis confirmed RTSM’s yield superiority was mainly ascribed to straw-induced improvements in dry matter and water productivity. In a word, rotary tillage with straw mulching could be recommended as a suitable practice for high-yield wheat production in a dryland wheat-soybean double-cropping system.

Ridge and furrow planting is a prevalent drought-resistant cultivation technique in dryland regions. Notably, the effects of this technology on crop grain yield and quality in dryland maize–wheat double-cropping systems remain limited. This study utilized a long-term positioning experiment initiated in 2004, which included five treatments: a permanent ridge and furrow with a border ridge of 133 cm row space (PRFBR); a ridge and furrow created each year with a border ridge of 133 cm row space (EYRFBR); a permanent ridge with a normal ridge of 100 cm row space (PRFNR); a ridge and furrow created each year with a normal ridge of 100 cm row space (EYRFNR), and a conventional flat planting pattern according to the local farmer (CF). The crop grain yield in 2015–2021, as well as the protein and phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) content in maize and wheat grains, and the protein components in winter wheat grains in 2020–2021 were investigated. The results showed that, compared to CF, all four ridge and furrow planting patterns significantly enhanced crop yield in dry and normal years, and the effects varied depending on crop species, with increases of 45.3–97.8% for wheat and 11.0–33.8% increases annually in dry years; and 24.5–51.6% increases for maize and 12.2–37.5% increases annually in the normal years. EYRFBR treatment increased wheat grain P and K content by 24.3% and 13.7%, as well as increasing the total protein, albumin, gliadin, soluble protein, and storage protein content by 9.7%, 22.3%, 9.6%, 14.5%, and 5.6%, whereas PRFNR reduced the glutenin content and glutenin/gliadin ratio in winter wheat grains by 5.1% and 10.9%, respectively. The yield achieved with a permanent ridge and furrow (PRF) surpassed that achieved when the ridge and furrow was created anew each year (EYRF), yet the normal ridge width (NR) outperformed the border ridge width (BR). However, the P, K, protein, and protein component content in wheat grains under EYRF was superior to that under PRF. Comprehensive evaluations through principal component analysis (PCA) and TOPSIS analysis consistently demonstrated that the EYRFBR treatment delivered optimal performance in yield and quality for winter and annual, while PRFNR achieved superior yield for summer maize. Consequently, in dryland maize–wheat double-cropping systems, an EYRFBR planting pattern should be recommended for high-yield and high-quality wheat production; however, the PRFNR planting pattern is more suitable for summer maize production.