Explore the vast range of titles available.

Ecological intensification of agriculture (EI) aims to conserve and promote biodiversity and the sustainable use of associated ecosystem services to support resource‐efficient production. In many cases EI requires fundamental changes in farm and landscape management as well as the organizations and institutions that support agriculture. Ecologists can facilitate EI by engaging with stakeholders and, in the process, by generating “actionable knowledge” (that is, knowledge that specifically supports stakeholder decision making and consequent actions). Using three case studies as examples, we propose four principles whereby science can improve the delivery of actionable knowledge for EI: (1) biodiversity conservation helps to ensure the delivery of ecosystem services, (2) management of ecosystem services benefits from a landscape‐scale approach, (3) ecosystem service trade‐offs and synergies need to be articulated, and (4) EI is associated with complex social dynamics involving farmers, governments, researchers, and related institutions. These principles have the potential to enhance adoption of EI, but institutional and policy challenges remain.

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.

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.

To reduce Fusarium Basal Rot caused by Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cepae (Foc) through crop rotation, plant species should be selected based on Foc multiplication in their roots. Foc multiplication rates in 13 plant species were tested in a greenhouse. All plant species enabled Foc multiplication. The lowest Foc levels (cfu g⁻¹ dry root) were found for wheat, sunflower, cowpea and millet, the highest for black bean. The highest Foc levels per plant were calculated for sudan grass. These data were used to calibrate the model Pf = Pi/(α + βPi) relating final (Pf) and initial (Pi) Foc levels in the soil. The rate of population increase at low Pi (1/α) was highest for onion and black oat and smallest for sunflower. The pathogen carrying capacity (1/β) was highest for black oat and black bean, and lowest for wheat, cowpea and foxtail millet. Foc soil population dynamics was simulated for crop sequences by concatenating Pi-Pf values, considering instantaneous or gradual pathogen release after harvest. Different soil Foc populations were attained after reaching steady states. Foc populations in the sequence onion –foxtail millet - wheat – cowpea were 67 % lower than in the sequence onion – sudan grass - black oat - black beans. In this work, by combining detailed greenhouse experiments with modelling, we were able to screen crops for their ability to increase Foc population and to explore potential crop sequences that may limit pathogen build-up.

Farming systems in the Costa Chica region in Mexico face limitations linked to low yields and soil fertility degradation. Several alternative maize-based cropping systems have been proposed to improve current limitations. These field-level options need to be evaluated at farm level in order to assess their feasibility, taking into account input requirements, contributions to self-sufficiency in food and long-term soil fertility, and the availability of labor. In this study, we defined four scenarios to explore consequences of changes in current farming systems for eight typical farms in the region; the first two scenarios comprised redressing current imbalances in crop nutrition and organic matter (OM) supply, respectively, and the last two scenarios explored high fertilizer input and animal husbandry. Farms responded in different ways to the various options depending on available land, current soil quality, current cropping systems and presence of livestock. Improvements in crop nutrition based on mineral fertilizers increased family income but only had substantial effects on soil OM (SOM) balances when fertilizer rates were double the amount currently subsidized. Addition of organic fertilizers resulted in positive effects on SOM balance, but with often strong trade-offs with family income due to costs of acquisition, transport and application. Animals played an important role in increasing SOM balances, but had relatively little effect on improving family income. The results demonstrated that improvements in family income and SOM balance at farm scale were feasible but that without more fundamental system changes trade-offs between short-term yield increases and longer-term soil fertility increases should be expected. The results highlight the need for policies that take into account farm-specific differences in crop and livestock intensification opportunities.

Invertebrates perform many vital functions in agricultural production, but many taxa are in decline, including pest natural enemies. Action is needed to increase their abundance if more sustainable agricultural systems are to be achieved. Conservation biological control (CBC) is a key component of integrated pest management yet has failed to be widely adopted in mainstream agriculture. Approaches to improving conservation biological control have been largely ad hoc. Two approaches are described to improve this process, one based upon pest natural enemy ecology and resource provision while the other focusses on the ecosystem service delivery using the QuESSA (Quantification of Ecological Services for Sustainable Agriculture) project as an example. In this project, a predictive scoring system was developed to show the potential of five seminatural habitat categories to provide biological control, from which predictive maps were generated for Europe. Actual biological control was measured in a series of case studies using sentinel systems (insect or seed prey), trade-offs between ecosystem services were explored, and heatmaps of biological control were generated. The overall conclusion from the QuESSA project was that results were context specific, indicating that more targeted approaches to CBC are needed. This may include designing new habitats or modifying existing habitats to support the types of natural enemies required for specific crops or pests.

Animals may respond to habitat quality and habitat edges and these responses may affect their distribution between habitats. We studied the movement behaviour of a ground-dwelling generalist predator, the carabid beetle Pterostichus melanarius (Illiger). We performed a mark-recapture experiment in two adjacent habitats; a large plot with oilseed radish (Raphanus sativus) and a plot with rye (Secale cereale). We used model selection to identify a minimal model representing the mark-recapture data, and determine whether habitat-specific motility and boundary behaviour affected population redistribution. We determined movement characteristics of P. melanarius in laboratory arenas with the same plant species using video recording. Both the field and arena results showed preference behaviour of P. melanarius at the habitat interface. In the field, significantly more beetles moved from rye to oilseed radish than from radish to rye. In the arena, habitat entry was more frequent into oilseed radish than into rye. In the field, movement was best described by a Fokker-Planck diffusion model that contained preference behaviour at the interface and did not account for habitat specific motility. Likewise, motility calculated from movement data using the Patlak model was not different between habitats in the arena studies. Motility (m2 d-1) calculated from behavioural data resulted in estimates that were similar to those determined in the field. Thus individual behaviour explained population redistribution in the field qualitatively as well as quantitatively. The findings provide a basis for evaluating movement within and across habitats in complex agricultural landscapes with multiple habitats and habitat interfaces.

Global biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate, with agriculture as a major driver. 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 pioneered by Dutch farmers as it is compatible with standard farm machinery. Here, we use ground beetle data from four experimental locations across four years of measurements because these are good agrobiodiversity indicators and hold keystone positions in agroecosystem foodwebs. We show that strip cropping systems that are designed for retaining productivity can also enhance ground beetle biodiversity, without incurring major yield loss. Strip cropped fields had on average 15% more ground beetle species and 30% more individuals than monocultural fields. 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 makes strip cropping a useful tool for bending the curve of biodiversity loss without compromising food production.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.

Current production systems for flower bulbs in the Netherlands employ considerable quantities of pesticides and nutrients per unit area. In 1993, an association of growers and environmentalists set out to design new farming systems that meet environmental objectives in addition to economic objectives. To support the design process, an explorative study was carried out to bring together the fragmented agronomic information and to assess agro-technical options for sustainable flower bulb production with a time horizon of 10 to 15 years. Crop and inter-crop management systems representing the agro-technical components of sustainability at the farm level, were generated with a computer model by systematically varying four system characteristics, three of which represented strategic and tactical aspects of crop protection. Subjective components, one economic and two environmental objectives and various socio-economic constraints, were identified in interaction with the stakeholders. Interactive multiple goal linear programming was used to optimize the objectives at the farm level and determine the exchange value of the economic objective in terms of the environmental objectives. Calculations were carried out for two reference farm types. The results revealed that the negative impact of environment-oriented production systems on farm gross margin is importantly mitigated by strategic choices at the farm level, such as renting land and allowing a soil health improving crop, even though of low gross margin, into the rotation. In contrast, the a priori attention of the growers was focused on improving tactical pest and nutrient management at the crop level, the effect of which on farm gross margin is constrained by the strategic choices. Sensitivity analyses highlighted the need for more insight into the ecology of soil-borne growth reducing factors and their effect on crop yield. The paper describes the approach used, reports results and discusses the usefulness of the approach for the stakeholders and for disciplinary crop protection research. (DBO)