Agronomy for Sustainable Development最新文献

In agriculture, species mixtures can provide ecosystem services and make agroecosystems more resilient. In particular, weed control and improved nitrogen cycling are much sought-after services provided by species mixtures. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the choice of species to mix to provide these services. Using different sources of knowledge, we therefore investigated the utilization of the Trait-Function-Service (TFS) approach of functional ecology as a way of representing the functioning of species mixtures in order to help in the choice of species. The novelty here is the use of a generalizable framework integrating empirical knowledge and scientific knowledge to establish the link between species traits and the ecosystem services they provide. Consequently, our objective is to (i) create functional trees that reflect how mixtures of species work to control weeds and improve nitrogen cycling; and (ii) identify the rules for assembling the traits that enable these two ecosystem services to be provided, which can be used to design mixtures. To do this, we organized four knowledge exchange workshops, two on weed control and two on improving nitrogen cycling. These workshops involved scientists, advisors, and farmers to mobilize their expertise. Our results show that the improvement of nitrogen cycling depends on the achievement of the meta-functions “favour and diversify the sources of nitrogen”, “reduce nitrogen losses” and “improve nitrogen use efficiency”. The weed control service is composed of the meta-functions “increase the competition towards the weeds” and “avoid weed germination/emergence”. We show that providing an ecosystem service depends on multiple traits and that the same trait can be important for providing different ecosystem services. The empirical knowledge of farmers can differ significantly from that of scientists. Integrating the knowledge of farmers into functional trees highlights that expert knowledge, derived from experience gained in specific contexts, can be decontextualized to produce generic knowledge.

Weed control in vineyards often relies on intensive tillage, which can negatively affect soil health. While cover crops offer potential benefits (such as weed suppression and soil improvement), they may also compete with grapevines. Few studies have examined inter-row management from a functional perspective. Understanding how soil management shapes inter-row plant communities is essential to support beneficial groundcover–vine interactions and foster plant assemblages that deliver multiple ecosystem services. To fill this gap, we assessed how different inter-row soil management strategies influence plant biomass, diversity, and functional traits (specific leaf area, height, and Grime strategies) in two farms in Chianti Classico (Italy). Treatments included tillage, mulched spontaneous vegetation, green-manured pigeon bean (Vicia faba var. minor), and a barley–clover (Hordeum vulgare–Trifolium squarrosum) mixture, either mulched or green-manured. This is the first research on the topic based on data of biomass by species. Soil management significantly influenced inter-row biomass, species diversity, and plant traits. Tillage reduced biomass and selected homogenous, high-specific leaf area communities. In spring, cover crops yielded more biomass than tillage; pigeon bean was most productive and led to less diverse plant communities. Mulched cover crops supported less competitive assemblages in autumn, though autumn sowing may increase erosion risks. Mulched spontaneous vegetation maintained permanent soil cover but selected stable, competitive plant assemblages. Overall, mulched groundcovers can enhance biodiversity without compromising grapevine yield. Alternating sown and spontaneous mulched vegetation presents a promising, sustainable alternative to tillage, promoting soil conservation and supporting functionally diverse plant communities in vineyard inter-rows.

Soil erosion threatens mixed farms in marginal areas, endangering their cultural and economic role in territories where pastoralist systems are already under pressure for climatic, socioeconomic, and generational factors. The rise in extreme rainfall events worsens soil loss on farmland, underscoring the need to co-develop practices that boost climate resilience in agriculture. This study helps fill the gap in understanding how the integration of farmers’ perceptions with spatial modeling can inform land management strategies. We combined farmers’ perceptions, model predictions, and farm management to provide an integrated assessment of the soil erosion. We represented the geographical distribution of soil erosion risk through geographical information systems-based RUSLE modeling. Farmers’ perceptions on soil erosion were assessed through surveys and fuzzy cognitive mapping conducted across 25 sheep farms. Our model shows that 37% of cropland is at risk, mainly due to land topography and soil cover. Fuzzy cognitive maps reveal that farmers are aware of the main environmental and human-linked soil erosion drivers. Farmers recognize cropping system design, especially using perennial forage instead of annual crops, as key to reducing soil erosion, and also see temporary ditches, reduced tillage, and agroforestry as effective measures. Utilizing a multivariate ordinal logistic regression, we showed that sheep farmers with a higher education level tend to perceive higher soil erosion risk. The number of conservation measures adopted increases when farmers are more aware of soil erosion issues, when they identify a higher number of fuzzy cognitive map connections, and when the predicted soil erosion risk is higher. Farmers’ perceptions of erosion risks and soil conservation measures aligned with model predictions on soil erosion, highlighting the importance of systematically involving farmers in research and policy design. Their detailed mental models enhance environmental models and should be considered in the European Common Agricultural Policy for sustainable rural development.

Vine is one of the most treated crops. In the Mediterranean area, vineyards are vulnerable to runoff and erosion, both vectors of pesticide dispersion. The substantial pesticide use along with acute dispersal risk threatens the surrounding water bodies. Pesticide sorption contributes to regulate their dispersal. Identifying sustainable management practices enhancing sorption is key to improve water quality. Vineyard cover cropping regulates runoff and erosion. Yet its influence on the sorption of contrasted pesticides and its variability remains to be characterized. Accordingly, this study evaluated the effects of grass cover management on the sorption of widely used pesticides. The study site was a catchment in Southern France, part of a long-term observatory, where grass cover has been monitored for the past 20 years. Topsoil was sampled from the vine rows and inter-rows of 23 vineyards. These vineyards had diverse soils, slopes, and grass cover rates. The adsorption coefficient of the soils was measured for two herbicides, glyphosate and napropamide, and a fungicide, difenoconazole. This study highlights the heterogeneity in cover cropping strategies. Spontaneous cover cropping dominated, and the most popular pattern was to alternate frequently tilled inter-rows and grassed inter-rows. For most of the vineyards, the rows and the tilled inter-rows had low-medium grass cover rate (0–50%). The majority of the grassed inter-rows had high grass cover rate (50–75%). The sorption coefficients of napropamide, difenoconazole, and glyphosate were similar for the vine rows and tilled inter-rows and significantly greater in grassed inter-rows. This was related to an increase of soil organic carbon from the low to high grass cover class. Other catchment characteristics did not affect pesticide sorption. This is the first study evaluating the influence of vineyard cover cropping on the sorption of pesticides at the catchment scale, and it shows that it is an efficient lever to enhance it.

Agriculture faces multiple challenges, including reducing negative environmental impacts and producing quality food for a growing world population. One of the significant issues is the need for an increased proportion of plant-based foods in diets in the developed world and its combination with the ecosystemic services provided, such as those provided by legumes, allowing a reduction in the use of nitrogen fertilizers. This requires systemic innovation in order to increase the sustainable production and consumption of diverse plant protein sources in an interaction between knowledge, tools, regulation, and acceptability. The case of France is chosen to reflect on these innovation issues. There have been a number of recent reviews either on production or on food processing, but none has addressed their systemic interrelations, critical to select the levers such as genetics, agronomy, and processing to improve protein quality and use while maintaining crop performance in an environmentally friendly manner. Here, we review the issues of proteins for healthy and sustainable diets in synergy with agronomical benefits and recommend research priorities to address this topic from farm to fork. This review includes (1) analysis of the economic context for plant-based protein production for food in the context of the agroecological transition towards sustainability and on the consequences in plant breeding schemes; (2) assessment of overall protein production from a diversity perspective, including genetics and diversity of the production systems and territories; and (3) plant proteins in healthy and attractive foods: protein content and quality, typology of processing options for the production of protein-rich food products in relation to consumer needs and demands. Next, we identify major knowledge gaps and emphasize the need for transdisciplinary research from plant breeding to the food market, involving the various stakeholders in the food value chain, to address such complex issues for more sustainable agri-food systems.

Green manure is widely employed to substitute chemical N fertilizer. However, the potential of further alleviating N₂O emission when combined with efficient management technologies has not been fully explored. To reduce this research gap, a 2-year field experiment was conducted in northwestern China. The aim was to investigate the impact of zeolite application on N₂O emission in the maize-common vetch intercropping system under 30% N reduction, as well as the possible mechanisms. The experiment included two cropping systems, namely monoculture maize and maize-common vetch intercropping, along with three amendment practices, namely conventional N, 70% conventional N, and zeolite application under 70% conventional N. Compared with monoculture maize under conventional N, maize-green manure intercropping combined with zeolite application under 70% chemical N achieved comparable yields. Simultaneously, this practice reduced cumulative N₂O and yield-scaled N₂O emissions by 36.9% and 39.2%, respectively. This reduction can be attributed to a decrease in soil ammonium-N by 20.9%–57.7%, nitrate-N by 47.7%–51.3%, nitrate reductase activities by 25.3%–34.4% and N₂O-producer (i.e., nirS and nirK) abundance by 17.3%–79.4% in denitrification, and an increase in the N₂O-reducer (i.e., nosZ) abundance by 40.0%–103.4%. Compared with 100% N input, 70% chemical N treatment reduced ammonium-N by 22.3%–41.0%, nitrate-N by 25.4%–41.0%, and N₂O-producer abundance by 17.1%–35.0% in denitrification. Zeolite application reduced denitrifying enzyme activities by 8.2%–12.9%, N₂O-producer abundance by 42.5%–56.4%, but increased N₂O-reducer abundance by 13.3%–23.3% in denitrification. PLS-PM analysis showed that N₂O emission mitigation was mainly related to reduced soil ammonium-N and nitrate-N, decreased N₂O-producer abundance, and increased N₂O-reducer abundance in denitrification. These findings provide new insights into the fact that intercropping green manure combined with zeolite application effectively mitigates N₂O emission by regulating mineral N, N-cycling enzymes, and denitrifier abundances while maintaining maize yield after cutting 30% N input.

Peanut is a crucial cash crop across numerous West African countries, especially in Senegal, where small-scale family farms frequently rotate it with millet. Despite significant research on yield enhancement, the drivers behind farmers’ choices have been largely ignored. Recognizing that effective agricultural recommendations must be tailored to the specific context of individual farms, this study aimed for the first time, to understand the decision-making of peanut farmers in a typical rainfed region of the central-western Senegalese peanut basin. We surveyed 46 farmers, gathering data on their resources, perceptions, peanut area allocation, and management practices, as well as socio-economic outcomes. High-peanut farmers, with an average of 28% of their cultivated area allocated to peanut, had more resources than low-peanut farmers, which allocated only 3%. The former enhanced their peanut management by employing farm-saved seeds, hiring labor, and utilizing both manure and synthetic fertilizers. Their average peanut unshelled grain yield (625 kg ha⁻¹) was the highest, although largely under the achievable yield. Their return on investment, which included the value of their own consumption, was also the highest (974%). Medium-peanut farmers presented intermediate characteristics. A widespread high level of self-consumption and investment in watermelon as a new cash crop suggested weak market opportunities for peanut. Low-peanut farmers identified lack of equipment and finance as major constraints, while high-peanut farmers cited lack of finance and quality seeds. All categories recognized peanut’s ecological advantages. These results highlight that limited peanut cultivation and unsustainable practices do not stem from farmers lacking technical knowledge or undervaluing peanut advantages but rather from the socio-economic constraints they face. Solutions for high-peanut farmers may not suit or be adopted by low-peanut farmers. Addressing this disparity requires multi-faceted research and innovations targeting both external and internal farm constraints, shifting from mere inputs provision to co-designing innovations directly with farmers.

Cereal/legume intercropping is gaining attention due to its potential contribution to achieving sustainable intensification of forage production. Productivity and quality of cereal/legume fodder mixtures are expected to vary among species combinations. However, for intercropping with different species combinations, the impacts of management practices on productivity and fodder quality have remained largely unexplored. We report a meta-analysis (with 467 data records from 49 publications) to evaluate options for improving forage yield and quality (%crude protein) in cereal/legume fodder mixtures through management (e.g., varying crop density and species combination). Our findings indicate how much forage mixture gains in yield or quality varied among 16 species combinations with ≥ 8 records. The net effect ratio for dry matter yield of barley/vetch (1.18±0.061), maize/cowpea (1.33±0.160), maize/soybean (1.66±0.188), and triticale/pea (1.41±0.139) intercrops was positive (> 1). The net effect ratio for % crude protein of barley/faba bean (0.87±0.025) and triticale/pea (0.85±0.026) intercrops was negative (< 1). In addition, intercropping design (replacement (relative density = 1)/additive (1 < relative density ≤ 2)) influences the size of effects without affecting their direction. Oat/pea intercropping in an additive design had a higher net effect ratio for %crude protein than that with a replacement design. Both maize/cowpea and sorghum/cowpea intercrops with additive designs had positive net effect ratios for dry matter yield, while those with a replacement design had net effect ratios similar to one. Here, we report a quantitative review demonstrating for the first time how yield and quality performance of cereal/legume intercropping for fodder production differs between species combinations and how management practices influence the size of the effect. Our findings support the design of intercropping systems for specific agro-ecological settings and production aims of target animal farming systems, thereby contributing to the forage production literature.

Service plants are primarily used in agroecosystems to provide ecosystem services that are not directly marketable. They are a promising option to promote biological pest regulation. Past studies have demonstrated their usefulness for regulating one pest category (either pathogens/parasites, herbivores or weeds). However, a multi-pest view of the role of service plants, including the potential disservices (negative impacts) that they may generate, is lacking. Such an overview is essential to meet the challenge of agroecology. This paper aims to fill this gap. Here, a trait-based approach was used to provide an overview of the potentialities of service plants, (inserted either in intercropping, in rotation with the crops, or in field edges) for regulating multiple pests, while limiting disservices. For that purpose, we first laid the foundation of a conceptual framework by synthesizing the mechanisms and service plant traits involved in the regulation of each pest category and in the mitigation of each disservice. On this basis, we analyzed (1) the compatibility in the regulation of the different pests by service plants, and (2) the compatibility between multi-pest regulation vs disservice mitigation. Our main conclusions are: (1) Despite knowledge gaps, there is good potential of service plants for multi-pest regulation; (2) The challenge lies at least as much to mitigate disservices that service plants may cause as to promote multi-pest regulation; (3) The level of incompatibility between promoting multi-pest regulation vs mitigating disservices varies with the mode of insertion of service plants, increasing with interactions with crop plants. This review shows how a trait-based approach can be used to synthesize knowledge from different disciplines and provides a tool for cross-disciplinary dialogue. It identifies priority research actions that are needed to increase synergy, genericity and adaptation of service plants to local conditions, and provides foundations for the design of service-plant based agroecosystems.