Search

Crop production in Europe is intensive, highly specialized and responsible for some negative environmental impacts, raising questions about the sustainability of agricultural systems. The (re)integration of grain legumes into European agricultural systems could contribute to the transition to more sustainable food production. While the general benefits from legume cultivation are widely known, there is little evidence on how to re-design specific cropping systems with legumes to make this option more attractive to farmers. The objectives of this study were to describe the constraints and opportunities of grain legume production perceived by farmers, explain the agronomic impacts of current grain legume cropping, explore technical options to improve grain legume agronomy, and to re-design current grain legume cropping systems in a participatory process with farmers. A co-design approach was implemented with farmers, advisors and scientists on 25 farms in northern Germany, that were part of two large demonstration networks of about 170 farms supporting grain legumes across Germany. We used the DEED research cycle (Describe, Explain, Explore and Design) as a conceptual framework combining on-farm research, crop rotation modelling, and on-station experiments. From it, we identified nine agronomic practices that either were novel or confirmed known strategies under new conditions, to re-design grain legume cropping systems at the field and farm level. The practices included (i) inter-row hoeing, (ii) direct seeding into a cover-crop, (iii) species-specific inoculation, (iv) cover crops to reduce leaching, (v) reduced tillage, (vi) soybean for increased gross margins, (vii) cultivars for food and feed use, (viii) flexible irrigation, (ix) grain legumes with cover crop to enhance subsequent crop yields. We also demonstrate how to complement knowledge of farmers' perceptions (Describe step) and formal knowledge from classical on-station experiments and modelling (Explain step) with on-farm research including the local views of farmers (Explore step) to identify tailored options for specific farm contexts rather than prescriptive solutions (Design step) to intensify legume production. This approach therefore contrasts with traditional methods that are often solely participatory and qualitative or model/experimental-based and quantitative. Hence, our results provide new insights in how to re-design cropping systems using a combination of participatory and quantitative approaches. While participatory approaches are common in developing countries, this study shows their potential in an industrialized context with large-scale farmers in Europe. These novel findings can be used as a starting point for further adaptations of cropping systems and contribute to making grain legume production economically and environmentally more sustainable.

Introducing agro-ecological techniques such as no-tillage systems with cover crops in rotations with soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) could provide more resilience to changing climatic conditions and, at the same time, reduce soil erosion, nitrate leaching, and weed density in the main crop. However, there are challenges in introducing no-tillage techniques in crop systems in Europe as there is little quantitative knowledge about the agro-economic impact. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the agronomic and economic impacts of three soybean cropping systems involving a rye (Secale cereal L.) cover crop prior to soybean, i.e., two no-tillage systems, either herbicide-free with crimping the rye or herbicide-based without rye crimping and one plough-based in which rye was cut as green silage. The impacts of these cropping strategies were compared in a three-year cropping system experiment at a research station in north-eastern Germany with and without irrigation. The following parameters were measured: (1) cover crop biomass, (2) weed biomass, (3) soybean plant density, (4) soybean grain yield, and (5) gross margin of the cropping system. The results showed that all three soybean cropping systems can effectively suppress weeds. System (C), the no-tillage herbicide-based system, produced the lowest rye biomass and highest soybean yield, system (B), the no-tillage herbicide-free/crimped rye system, produced the highest rye biomass and lowest soybean yield compared to system (A), the standard cutting/plough-based system. The differences in rye biomass and soybean yield observed between the three systems could be mainly attributed to the timing of the cover crop termination and the soybean sowing date. The gross margin was highest in system (C), due to the high soybean grain yield. The low soybean grain yield in system (B) resulted in lower revenues and gross margins compared to systems (A) and (C), although system (B) could be economically attractive in organic farming with higher prices for organic soybean. In the particularly dry year 2016, gross margins were higher when soybean was irrigated compared to the rainfed cultivation, due to significantly higher grain yields. Before recommending the application of the no-tillage with cover crop technique for the conditions tested in north-eastern Germany, more investigations on the benefits and risks of this technique are needed. Further research needs to focus on maintaining a high rye biomass as well as on ensuring an early soybean planting date. Optimizing the crimping and drilling equipment is still required in order to develop good management practices for no-tillage herbicide-free systems in European conditions.

Methods are needed for the design and evaluation of cropping systems, in order to test the effects of introducing or reintroducing crops into rotations. The interaction of legumes with other crops (rotational effects) requires an assessment at the cropping system scale. The objective of this work is to introduce a cropping system framework to assess the impacts of changes in cropping systems in a participatory approach with experts, i.e., the integration of legumes into crop rotations and to demonstrate its application in two case studies. The framework consists of a rule-based rotation generator and a set of algorithms to calculate impact indicators. It follows a three-step approach: (i) generate rotations, (ii) evaluate crop production activities using environmental, economic and phytosanitary indicators, and (iii) design cropping systems and assess their impacts. Experienced agronomists and environmental scientists were involved at several stages of the framework development and testing in order to ensure the practicability of designed cropping systems. The framework was tested in Vastra Gotaland (Sweden) and Brandenburg (Germany) by comparing cropping systems with and without legumes. In both case studies, cropping systems with legumes reduced nitrous oxide emissions with comparable or slightly lower nitrate-N leaching, and had positive phytosanitary effects. In arable systems with grain legumes, gross margins were lower than in cropping systems without legumes despite taking pre-crop effects into account. Forage cropping systems with legumes had higher or equivalent gross margins and at the same time higher environmental benefits than cropping systems without legumes. The framework supports agronomists to design sustainable legume-supported cropping systems and to assess their impacts. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

International audience; AbstractGrain legumes produce high-quality protein for food and feed, and potentially contribute to sustainable cropping systems, but they are grown on only 1.5% of European arable land. Low temporal yield stability is one of the reasons held responsible for the low proportion of grain legumes, without sufficient quantitative evidence. The objective of this study was to compare the yield stability of grain legumes with other crop species in a northern European context and accounting for the effects of scale in the analysis and the data. To avoid aggregation biases in the yield data, we used data from long-term field experiments. The experiments included grain legumes (lupin, field pea, and faba bean), other broad-leaved crops, spring, and winter cereals. Experiments were conducted in the UK, Sweden, and Germany. To compare yield stability between grain legumes and other crops, we used a scale-adjusted yield stability indicator that accounts for the yield differences between crops following Taylor’s Power Law. Here, we show that temporal yield instability of grain legumes (30%) was higher than that of autumn-sown cereals (19%), but lower than that of other spring-sown broad-leaved crops (35%), and only slightly greater than spring-sown cereals (27%). With the scale-adjusted yield stability indicator, we estimated 21% higher yield stability for grain legumes compared to a standard stability measure. These novel findings demonstrate that grain legume yields are as reliable as those of other spring-sown crops in major production systems of northern Europe, which could influence the current negative perception on grain legume cultivation. Initiatives are still needed to improve the crops agronomy to provide higher and more stable yields in future.

Adapting agricultural systems to the effects of climate change requires farm-specific innovations and adaptive measures. Such innovative measures were developed for organic farming systems in the federal state of Brandenburg, Germany by a regional innovation network using an action research approach. The goal of the presented approach was to address climate change-related farm-specific problems, develop specific adaptation measures and learn new approaches such as proactive risk management and strategic adaptive behaviour. In a cyclical process of analysis, planning, action and reflection, the network of researchers and organic farmers repeatedly used SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analyses to structure the transdisciplinary innovation and adaption process. First, the organic farmers identified as main weaknesses the water and nitrogen supply likely to be worsened by climate change; then, farm-specific adaption measures were identified and tested by conducting on-farm experiments at six organic farms. By evaluating and thus adjusting and retesting the measures in consecutive trials, new farming methods were developed to increase diversification and decrease risk in organic farming practices. Along with the iterative process, the network was expanding and the collective learning process led to changes in attitudes and behaviour. A clear example is the stakeholders’ initially positive view of reduced tillage, which they later questioned and changed. The participating organic farmers proved to be active partners; their openness to innovation and their approach to problem solving make them well suited to action research. In adapting regions to climate change, these kinds of stakeholders will play a decisive role.

There is a great demand for high-protein materials for livestock feed in Europe and European agriculture has a deficit of about 70% high-protein materials of which 87% is met by imported soybean and soy meal. This reflects the fact that grain legumes are currently under represented in European agriculture and produced on only 1.5% of the arable land in Europe compared with 14.5% on a worldwide basis. Several grain legumes have the potential to replace at least some of the soya currently used in the diets of monogastric animals, ruminants, and fish. There are also opportunities for greater use of legumes in new foods. Here we review the contribution of ecosystem services by grain legumes in European agriculture starting with provisioning services in terms of food and feed and moving on to the contribution they make to both regulating and supporting services which are in part due to the diversity which these crops bring to cropping systems. We explore the need to understand grain legume production on the time scale of a rotation rather than a cropping season in order to value and manage the agronomic challenges of weed, pests, and diseases alongside the maintenance or improvement of soil structure, soil organic matter, and nutrient cycling. A review of policy interventions to support grain legumes reveals that until very recently these have failed to make a difference in Europe. We contrast the European picture with the interventions that have allowed the development of grain legume production in both Canada and Australia. Whether farmers choose to grow more legumes will depend on market opportunities, the development of supply chains, and policy support as well as technical improvements of grain legume production such as breeding of new varieties and management development to improve yield stability. However, to really increase the production of grain legumes in Europe, the issues are far more wide reaching than agronomy or subsidy and require a fundamental rethinking of value chains to move grain legumes from being niche products to mainstream commodities.

The potential of biological nitrogen fixation (BNF) to provide sufficient N for production has encouraged re-appraisal of cropping systems that deploy legumes. It has been argued that legume-derived N can maintain productivity as an alternative to the application of mineral fertilizer, although few studies have systematically evaluated the effect of optimizing the balance between legumes and non N-fixing crops to optimize production. In addition, the shortage, or even absence in some regions, of measurements of BNF in crops and forages severely limits the ability to design and evaluate new legume-based agroecosystems. To provide an indication of the magnitude of BNF in European agriculture, a soil-surface N-balance approach was applied to historical data from 8 experimental cropping systems that compared legume and non-legume crop types (e.g., grains, forages and intercrops) across pedoclimatic regions of Europe. Mean BNF for different legume types ranged from 32 to 115 kg ha(-1) annually. Output in terms of total biomass (grain, forage, etc.) was 30% greater in non-legumes, which used N to produce dry matter more efficiently than legumes, whereas output of N was greater from legumes. When examined over the crop sequence, the contribution of BNF to the N-balance increased to reach a maximum when the legume fraction was around 0.5 (legume crops were present in half the years). BNF was lower when the legume fraction increased to 0.6-0.8, not because of any feature of the legume, but because the cropping systems in this range were dominated by mixtures of legume and non-legume forages to which inorganic N as fertilizer was normally applied. Forage (e.g., grass and clover), as opposed to grain crops in this range maintained high outputs of biomass and N. In conclusion, BNF through grain and forage legumes has the potential to generate major benefit in terms of reducing or dispensing with the need for mineral N without loss of total output.

International audience; AbstractSustainable development of agriculture is at the core of agricultural policy debates in Europe. There is a consensus that diversification of cropping would support sustainable development. However, a reduction in legume cultivation has been observed in the EU during the last decades. This decline has induced, in turn, a deficit of proteins and a reduction of ecosystem services provided by legumes. Therefore, we analysed the mechanisms that shape agricultural systems to identify leverage points for reviving European legume production. Specifically, we reviewed the factors that affect the market and non-market value of legumes and the relevant agricultural policies. We characterized the decline in legume cropping as an outcome of the dominance of economic forces that favour specialization of production systems over diversification. We found that the value of market outputs of legumes per unit area is relatively low and volatile, with a 25–78 % variation in pea gross margins, which reduces market competitiveness. We observed that the value of system-internal outputs of legumes such as the nitrogen fixed, of 130 to 153 kg N ha−1; crop protection services that reduce agrochemical costs, by 20–25 % in cereals; and yield enhancements of subsequent crops, of 0.2 to 1.6 t ha−1 in cereals, are often underestimated. In addition, markets fail to translate external effects of legumes such as biodiversity enhancement, reduction in emissions, of up to 50 % in N2O, and soil improvements into economic benefits. Current policies support legumes through selected mechanisms such as ecological focus areas, agri-environmental programmes and sparse coupled support measures. Domestic cultivation of legumes could be supported through trade policies such as import restrictions on genetically modified soybean or new mechanisms to appreciate non-market outputs including payments for ecosystem services and carbon markets. In addition, development of new value chains, niche markets, scaling-up of plant breeding efforts and dissemination of information is required.

An effective adaptive strategy for reducing climate change risks and increasing agro-system resiliency is broadening cropping system diversity, heightening the flexibility of cultivation and tillage methods. Climate change impacts on standard cultivation practices such as mineralisation and nitrate leaching due to mild and rainy winters, as well as frequent drought or water saturation, not only limiting fieldwork days, but also restricting ploughing. This calls for alternative methods to counteract these propensities. From 2010 to 2013, a farming system experiment was conducted on a distinctly heterogeneous organic farm in Brandenburg, Germany. With the intention of devising a more varied and flexible winter wheat cultivation method, standard organic farming practices (winter wheat cultivation after two years of alfalfa-clover-grass and ploughing in mid-October) were compared to four alternative test methods, which were then evaluated for their robustness and suitability as adaptive strategies. Two of the alternative methods, early sowing and catch crop, entailed moving up the date for alfalfa-clover-grass tilling to July. Instead of a plough, a ring-cutter was used to shallowly (8 cm) cut through and mix the topsoil. In the early sowing test method, winter wheat was sown at the end of August, after repeated ring-cutter processing. With the catch crop method, winter wheat seeding followed a summer catch crop and October tillage. The two oat methods (oat/plough; oat/ring-cutter) entailed sowing winter wheat in September, following oat cultivation. Overall, the cultivation methods demonstrated the following robustness gradation: standard practice = catch crop ≥ early sowing > oat/plough > oat/ring-cutter. When compared to standard procedures, the catch crop and early sowing test methods showed no remarkable difference in grain yields. Measured against early sowing, the catch crop test method was significantly more robust when it came to winterkill, quality loss, and weed infestation (40% lower weed-cover). High Nmin- values (up to 116 kg N ha-1) in autumn could have caused the chamomile and thistle infestation in both oat/ploughoat/ring-cutter test methods, which led to crop failure in the hollows. Compared to standard practices, the oat ring-cutter test method brought in over 50% less grain yield. This was attributed to ring-cutter processing, which reduced N mineralisation and caused high weed infestation. However, the ring-cutter effectively regulated alfalfa-clover-grass fields in both exceedingly wet and very dry weather; a temporal flexibility which increases the number of fieldwork days. The catch crop and early sowing test methods contributed most to boosting future agronomic diversity.