Explore the vast range of titles available.

Phosphorus (P) plays a vital role in global crop production and food security. In this study, we investigate the changes in soil P pool inventories calibrated from historical countrywide crop P uptake, using a 0.5-by-0.5° spatially explicit model for the period 1900–2010. Globally, the total P pool per hectare increased rapidly between 1900 and 2010 in soils of Europe (+31 %), South America (+2 %), North America (+15 %), Asia (+17 %), and Oceania (+17 %), while it has been stable in Africa. Simulated crop P uptake is influenced by both soil properties (available P and the P retention potential) and crop characteristics (maximum uptake). Until 1950, P fertilizer application had a negligible influence on crop uptake, but recently it has become a driving factor for food production in industrialized countries and a number of transition countries like Brazil, Korea, and China. This comprehensive and spatially explicit model can be used to assess how long surplus P fertilization is needed or how long depletions of built-up surplus P can continue without affecting crop yield.

Legume crops hold promise to diversify the currently simplified rotations that dominate Europe and to increase the sustainability of European farming systems. Nevertheless, most legumes have been ignored by farmers, advisors, and value chain agents in the EU, where legumes are estimated to occupy only ~2% of arable land. Recent surveys find that farmers see a lack of knowledge on the agroecological impacts of (re)introducing legumes as a key barrier to legume adoption. A review of current research on the agroecological potential of legume-inclusive cropping systems would help in assessing whether research targeting sufficiently supports farmers in overcoming this barrier. We have systematically reviewed and synthesized published literature reporting on agricultural ecosystem service delivery in European cropping systems with legumes included compared to those without legumes. Our analysis of 163 published articles revealed: (1) the bulk of published research addresses production-related services delivered by few legume species (pea, clover, faba bean, and vetch, 70% of reviewed studies) comparatively assessed in cereal-based rotations; (2) substantial knowledge gaps also exist, encompassing ecosystem services with less direct relevance to economic outcomes (e.g., biodiversity) and with potential for high variability (e.g., pest and disease suppression); (3) studies at plot-level and within-season scales dominate (92% and 75% of reviewed studies, respectively). Assessed in the context of recent complementary studies, we find that a limited research focus is both counter to knowledge demands from farmers and likely the result of self-reinforcing socio-technical regimes which prioritize production over non- or indirectly-marketable ecosystem services. We conclude that scientists in Europe should diversify research to include legume species, ecosystem services, contexts, and scales not yet well studied, in order to provide the agroecological knowledge base farmers need to amplify the potential benefits of crop diversity.

Intercropping is both a well-established and yet novel agricultural practice, depending on one’s perspective. Such perspectives are principally governed by geographic location and whether monocultural practices predominate. Given the negative environmental effects of monoculture agriculture (loss of biodiversity, reliance on non-renewable inputs, soil degradation, etc.), there has been a renewed interest in cropping systems that can reduce the impact of modern agriculture while maintaining (or even increasing) yields. Intercropping is one of the most promising practices in this regard, yet faces a multitude of challenges if it is to compete with and ultimately replace the prevailing monocultural norm. These challenges include the necessity for more complex agricultural designs in space and time, bespoke machinery, and adapted crop cultivars. Plant breeding for monocultures has focused on maximizing yield in single-species stands, leading to highly productive yet specialized genotypes. However, indications suggest that these genotypes are not the best adapted to intercropping systems. Re-designing breeding programs to accommodate inter-specific interactions and compatibilities, with potentially multiple different intercropping partners, is certainly challenging, but recent technological advances offer novel solutions. We identify a number of such technology-driven directions, either ideotype-driven (i.e., “trait-based” breeding) or quantitative genetics-driven (i.e., “product-based” breeding). For ideotype breeding, plant growth modeling can help predict plant traits that affect both inter- and intraspecific interactions and their influence on crop performance. Quantitative breeding approaches, on the other hand, estimate breeding values of component crops without necessarily understanding the underlying mechanisms. We argue that a combined approach, for example, integrating plant growth modeling with genomic-assisted selection and indirect genetic effects, may offer the best chance to bridge the gap between current monoculture breeding programs and the more integrated and diverse breeding programs of the future.

Strip cropping, where several crops are grown in adjacent long and narrow multi-row strips, is an innovation niche that challenges monocropping by offering a greater range of ecosystem services, including higher biodiversity and aesthetic value at similar yield. It can be implemented within the current regime by adjusting the strip width to fit machinery working width. However, its novelty and complexity, that mobilize four dimensions of diversity—space, time, gene, and operational crop management—make transitions from monocropping difficult. This study aims to learn from the experiences of strip cropping frontrunners by: 1) capturing the contexts, objectives, challenges, and outcomes of farmers’ first-year strip cropping experience, and 2) identifying patterns in farmers’ decision rules following its uptake. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with ten Dutch farmers with at least one-year strip cropping experience. Upon formulating the farmers’ operational management decision rules, we used two analytical lenses to find patterns in the changes compared to monocropping. Results showed that all farmers shared the objective of increasing insect biodiversity. Common challenges included a lack of agro-ecological knowledge and experience, incompatible machinery working width, and crop neighbor damage. Most farmers positively evaluated the feasibility to adjust or acquire adapted machines, were neutral on yield changes, and negatively evaluated workload. We identified 49 decision rules comprising 113 condition-decision relations. We found two clusters or archetypes of farmers that differed in their propensity to adjust mechanization. No pattern was found among the other adjustments from monocropping to strip cropping, indicating that changes were highly farmer-specific. The two most often mentioned decisions included machine investment and crop choice adjustment. These apparent key decisions may guide exchanges among strip cropping farmers, advisors, and researchers. Leveraging diverse decision rules captured in this study, alongside strengthening the infrastructure and institutional support for strip cropping will help farmers transition towards sustainable agricultural systems.

Intercropping is proposed as a promising strategy to meet future food demand while reducing agriculture’s environmental impact by re-diversifying agricultural fields. Strip cropping, a form of intercropping, has a potential to simultaneously deliver multiple ecosystem services including productivity, while facilitating management as strip width can be adjusted to the working width of available machines. While the yield performance of strip cropping systems is influenced by the interaction between neighboring crops, to date, empirical studies on the performance of various crop combinations in strip cropping systems are limited. Here we used three-year data (2020–2022) from a 64-ha organic strip cropping system in the Netherlands to (1) evaluate the effects of crop neighbors and strip cropping on yield and (2) explore if optimizing the allocation of crop neighbors in alternative strip cropping configurations can improve yield and revenue performances. We analyzed the edge effect and strip cropping effect on yield of six crops grown in strips, each neighboring a total of five crops. The yield data was then used to evaluate the performance of the current and alternative strip configurations in terms of LER and relative revenue. Results showed that except for the positive effect observed on potato when neighboring celeriac or broccoli, edge effects lacked statistical significance. Strip cropping effect varied per crop: positive for faba bean and parsnip, neutral for celeriac and potato, and negative for oat and onion. Analysis across crops showed an overall significant positive strip cropping effect on yield. These findings highlighted the value of analysis at the cropping system level in developing designs aimed at unlocking the potential of strip cropping. The positive but variable strip cropping effects observed in the current experimental design and the two alternative configurations suggests prioritizing an overall increased crop diversity over optimizing their spatial arrangement. While we demonstrated increased productivity with strip cropping, further research is needed to expand the database on optimal crop combinations, extending the evaluation beyond yield and revenue performances to facilitate broader adoption of strip cropping in the Netherlands and Western Europe.

Global biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate, with agriculture as one of the major drivers. There is mounting evidence that intercropping can increase insect biodiversity while maintaining or increasing yield. Yet, intercropping is often considered impractical for mechanized farming systems. Strip cropping is a type of intercropping that is compatible with standard farm machinery and has been pioneered by Dutch farmers since 2014. Here, we present ground beetle data from four organically managed experimental farms across four years. Ground beetles are sensitive to changes in habitats and disturbances, and hold keystone positions in agroecosystem food webs. We show that strip cropping systems can enhance ground beetle biodiversity, while other studies showed that these increases have been achieved without incurring major yield loss. Strip-cropped fields had on average 15% more ground beetle species and 30% more individuals than monocultural fields. The higher ground beetle richness in strip crops was explained by the merger of crop-related ground beetle communities, rather than by ground beetle species unique to strip cropping systems. The increase in field-level beetle species richness in organic agriculture through strip cropping approached increases found for other readily deployed biodiversity conservation methods, like shifting from conventional to organic agriculture (+19% –+23%). This indicates that strip cropping is a potentially useful tool supporting ground beetle biodiversity in agricultural fields without compromising food production. Insects are the largest and most diverse group of animals, comprising approximately 80% of all animal species. They inhabit nearly every place on Earth and play important and varied roles in ecosystems, from serving as a food source for other animals and as recyclers of organic matter and nutrients, to acting as crop pollinators and pest controllers. Sadly, insect biodiversity is declining worldwide, with agriculture being a major contributor to this decline. For example, monoculture farming is a common form of farming where only one crop species is grown at a time, providing limited habitats and food resources for insects. By cultivating a diversity of crops in narrow, alternating strips, a technique known as strip cropping, farmers might make fields more suitable for insects, without reducing crop yield and productivity. However, so far, it was unknown if strip cropping can indeed increase insect biodiversity. Croijmans et al. set out to investigate whether strip cropping can increase the biodiversity of ground beetles. Ground beetles play a key role in agricultural ecosystems, preying on common insect pests and weeds. They are sensitive to changes in farming practices and are often used as an indicator of agricultural sustainability. For this purpose, the researchers analysed four years of data from four organically managed experimental farms in the Netherlands, which included a diverse set of crops. Croijmans et al. found that strip-cropped fields have more beetle species and more individual beetles than monocultures. As different ground beetle communities have natural preferences for specific crops, it is thought that the higher number of ground beetle species in strip-cropped fields is mostly due to the combination of two crop-related communities, rather than species unique to strip cropping. For example, if cabbage is strip-cropped with wheat, one would mostly find the ground beetle species corresponding to both cabbage and wheat, but few additional species. Interestingly, some ground beetle species preferred strip-cropped fields, while others preferred monocultures. In conclusion, strip cropping can be a strategy to increase ground beetle biodiversity without losses to crop production. Therefore, farmers wanting to increase biodiversity might consider this approach instead of standard monocultures. Many biodiversity-increasing measures, such as flower strips or hedgerows, take up land that might otherwise be used for crop production. Strip cropping allows a more biodiverse field while keeping all land in production, making it a biodiversity measure that enables farmers to maintain the same level of crop production.

Root herbivores pose a major threat to agricultural crops. They are difficult to control and their damage often goes unnoticed until the larvae reach their most devastating late instar stages. Crop diversification can reduce pest pressure, generally without compromising yield. We studied how different diversified cropping systems affected the oviposition and abundance of the specialist cabbage root fly Delia radicum , the most important root herbivore in Brassica crops. The cropping systems included a monoculture, pixel cropping, and four variations of strip cropping with varying intra- and interspecific crop diversity, fertilization and spatial configuration. Furthermore, we assessed whether there was a link between D. radicum and other macroinvertebrates associated with the same plants. Cabbage root fly oviposition was higher in strip cropping designs compared to the monoculture and was highest in the most diversified strip cropping design. Despite the large number of eggs, there were no consistent differences in the number of larvae and pupae between the cropping systems, indicative of high mortality of D. radicum eggs and early instars especially in the strip cropping designs. D. radicum larval and pupal abundance positively correlated with soil-dwelling predators and detritivores and negatively correlated with other belowground herbivores. We found no correlations between the presence of aboveground insect herbivores and the number of D. radicum on the roots. Our findings indicate that root herbivore presence is determined by a complex interplay of many factors, spatial configuration of host plants, and other organisms residing near the roots.

Resilience has been growing in importance as a perspective for governing social-ecological systems. The aim of this paper is first to analyze a well-studied human dominated agroecosystem using five existing key heuristics of the resilience perspective and second to discuss the consequences of using this resilience perspective for the future management of similar human dominated agroecosystems. The human dominated agroecosystem is located in the Dutch Northern Frisian Woodlands where cooperatives of dairy farmers have been attempting to organize a transition toward more viable and environmental friendly agrosystems. A mobilizing element in the cooperatives was the ability of some dairy farmers to obtain high herbage and milk yield production with limited nitrogen fertilizer input. A set of reinforcing measures was hypothesized to rebalance nitrogen flows and to set a new equilibrium. A dynamic farm model was used to evaluate the long-term effects of reinforcing measures on soil organic matter content, which was considered the key indicator of an alternative system state. Simulations show that no alternative stable state for soil organic matter exists within a plausible range of fertilizer applications. The observed differences in soil organic matter content and nutrient use efficiency probably represent a time lag of long-term nonequilibrium system development. The resilience perspective proved to be especially insightful in addressing interacting long-term developments expressed in the panarchy. Panarchy created a heterogeneity of resources in the landscape providing local landscape-embedded opportunities for high N-efficiencies. Stopping the practice of grassland renewal will allow this ecological landscape embedded system to mature. In contrast, modern conventional dairy farms shortcut the adaptive cycle by frequent grassland renewals, resulting in high resilience and adaptability. This comes at the cost of long-term accumulated ecological capital of soil organic matter and transformability, thus reinforcing the incremental adaptation trap. Analysis of such a human dominated agroecosystem reveals that rather than alternative states, an alternative set of relationships within a multiscale setting applies, indicating the importance for embedding panarchy in the analysis of sustainable development goals in agroecosystems.

Global biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate, with agriculture as one of the major drivers. There is mounting evidence that intercropping can increase insect biodiversity while maintaining or increasing yield. Yet, intercropping is often considered impractical for mechanized farming systems. Strip cropping is a type of intercropping that is compatible with standard farm machinery and has been pioneered by Dutch farmers since 2014. Here, we present ground beetle data from four organically managed experimental farms across four years. Ground beetles are sensitive to changes in habitats and disturbances, and hold keystone positions in agroecosystem food webs. We show that strip cropping systems can enhance ground beetle biodiversity, while other studies showed that these increases have been achieved without incurring major yield loss. Strip-cropped fields had on average 15% more ground beetle species and 30% more individuals than monocultural fields. The higher ground beetle richness in strip crops was explained by the merger of crop-related ground beetle communities, rather than by ground beetle species unique to strip cropping systems. The increase in field-level beetle species richness in organic agriculture through strip cropping approached increases found for other readily deployed biodiversity conservation methods, like shifting from conventional to organic agriculture (+19% –+23%). This indicates that strip cropping is a potentially useful tool supporting ground beetle biodiversity in agricultural fields without compromising food production. Insects are the largest and most diverse group of animals, comprising approximately 80% of all animal species. They inhabit nearly every place on Earth and play important and varied roles in ecosystems, from serving as a food source for other animals and as recyclers of organic matter and nutrients, to acting as crop pollinators and pest controllers. Sadly, insect biodiversity is declining worldwide, with agriculture being a major contributor to this decline. For example, monoculture farming is a common form of farming where only one crop species is grown at a time, providing limited habitats and food resources for insects. By cultivating a diversity of crops in narrow, alternating strips, a technique known as strip cropping, farmers might make fields more suitable for insects, without reducing crop yield and productivity. However, so far, it was unknown if strip cropping can indeed increase insect biodiversity. Croijmans et al. set out to investigate whether strip cropping can increase the biodiversity of ground beetles. Ground beetles play a key role in agricultural ecosystems, preying on common insect pests and weeds. They are sensitive to changes in farming practices and are often used as an indicator of agricultural sustainability. For this purpose, the researchers analysed four years of data from four organically managed experimental farms in the Netherlands, which included a diverse set of crops. Croijmans et al. found that strip-cropped fields have more beetle species and more individual beetles than monocultures. As different ground beetle communities have natural preferences for specific crops, it is thought that the higher number of ground beetle species in strip-cropped fields is mostly due to the combination of two crop-related communities, rather than species unique to strip cropping. For example, if cabbage is strip-cropped with wheat, one would mostly find the ground beetle species corresponding to both cabbage and wheat, but few additional species. Interestingly, some ground beetle species preferred strip-cropped fields, while others preferred monocultures. In conclusion, strip cropping can be a strategy to increase ground beetle biodiversity without losses to crop production. Therefore, farmers wanting to increase biodiversity might consider this approach instead of standard monocultures. Many biodiversity-increasing measures, such as flower strips or hedgerows, take up land that might otherwise be used for crop production. Strip cropping allows a more biodiverse field while keeping all land in production, making it a biodiversity measure that enables farmers to maintain the same level of crop production.

Strip cropping, where several crops are grown in adjacent long and narrow multi-row strips, is an innovation niche that challenges monocropping by offering a greater range of ecosystem services, including higher biodiversity and aesthetic value at similar yield. It can be implemented within the current regime by adjusting the strip width to fit machinery working width. However, its novelty and complexity, that mobilize four dimensions of diversity-space, time, gene, and operational crop management-make transitions from monocropping difficult. This study aims to learn from the experiences of strip cropping frontrunners by: 1) capturing the contexts, objectives, challenges, and outcomes of farmers' first-year strip cropping experience, and 2) identifying patterns in farmers' decision rules following its uptake. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with ten Dutch farmers with at least one-year strip cropping experience. Upon formulating the farmers' operational management decision rules, we used two analytical lenses to find patterns in the changes compared to monocropping. Results showed that all farmers shared the objective of increasing insect biodiversity. Common challenges included a lack of agro-ecological knowledge and experience, incompatible machinery working width, and crop neighbor damage. Most farmers positively evaluated the feasibility to adjust or acquire adapted machines, were neutral on yield changes, and negatively evaluated workload. We identified 49 decision rules comprising 113 condition-decision relations. We found two clusters or archetypes of farmers that differed in their propensity to adjust mechanization. No pattern was found among the other adjustments from monocropping to strip cropping, indicating that changes were highly farmer-specific. The two most often mentioned decisions included machine investment and crop choice adjustment. These apparent key decisions may guide exchanges among strip cropping farmers, advisors, and researchers. Leveraging diverse decision rules captured in this study, alongside strengthening the infrastructure and institutional support for strip cropping will help farmers transition towards sustainable agricultural systems.