Search

Intercropping is a farming practice involving two or more crop species, or genotypes, growing together and coexisting for a time. On the fringes of modern intensive agriculture, intercropping is important in many subsistence or low-input/resource-limited agricultural systems. By allowing genuine yield gains without increased inputs, or greater stability of yield with decreased inputs, intercropping could be one route to delivering ‘sustainable intensification’. We discuss how recent knowledge from agronomy, plant physiology and ecology can be combined with the aim of improving intercropping systems. Recent advances in agronomy and plant physiology include better understanding of the mechanisms of interactions between crop genotypes and species – for example, enhanced resource availability through niche complementarity. Ecological advances include better understanding of the context-dependency of interactions, the mechanisms behind disease and pest avoidance, the links between above- and below-ground systems, and the role of microtopographic variation in coexistence. This improved understanding can guide approaches for improving intercropping systems, including breeding crops for intercropping. Although such advances can help to improve intercropping systems, we suggest that other topics also need addressing. These include better assessment of the wider benefits of intercropping in terms of multiple ecosystem services, collaboration with agricultural engineering, and more effective interdisciplinary research.

Modern "intensive" agriculture drives the biodiversity-climate crisis but is also central to global food security. Future farming needs management approaches that maintain (or even enhance) food production while reducing negative climate and biodiversity impacts. Intercrops could provide part of the solution, increasing biodiversity and boosting production with fewer inputs. However, barriers remain to their wide-scale uptake, in particular tailoring intercrops to local equipment, management practice, and environment. We analyze data from multiple trials of cereal-legume intercrops conducted on farms across Europe between 2018 and 2021. Our study is the first attempt, to our knowledge, to quantify the yield benefits of cereal-legume intercropping undertaken at commercially relevant scales for farms across Europe. We used crop performance ratio (CPR)—the ratio of the observed intercrop yield compared to the expected yield based on monoculture yields—as our metric of intercrop performance. Using CPR, we found a roughly 30% yield gain across all sites. However, CPR was modulated by a number of factors. CPR was not strongly affected by management except for the negative effects of direct drilling and the positive effects of organic fertilizer addition. CPR also depended on intercrop composition (number and identity of components), background yields (being highest where yields were lower), and rainfall (being higher with higher rainfall). Our findings allow us to reduce uncertainty about how intercrops will perform in realistic local farm conditions, give guidance for tailoring intercrops to local farming conditions, and provide key goals for further work to integrate intercrops into sustainable farming systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecological intensification (EI) is the enhancement of ecosystem services to complement or substitute for the role of anthropogenic inputs in maintaining or increasing yields. EI has potential to increase farming's environmental sustainability, e.g. reducing environmentally harmful management activities while sustaining yields. EI is based upon ecological processes which in turn are influenced by biodiversity. We review how biodiversity, particularly vascular plant diversity, can regulate ecosystem processes relevant to EI at multiple spatial scales. At an individual plant genotype level, complementarity in functional traits has a direct impact on productivity. At in-field, population level, mixtures of crop types confer resilience to minimize the risk of pest and disease incidence and spread. Scaling up to the field level, a diversity of non-crop plants (i.e. weeds) provides resources necessary for in-field functional processes, both below ground (carbon inputs, decomposition) and above ground (resource continuity for pollinators and natural enemies). At the landscape scale, mosaics of semi-natural and managed vegetation provide buffers against extreme events through flood and drought risk mitigation, climate amelioration and pest population regulation. Overall this emphasizes the importance of heterogeneity across scales in maintaining ecosystem functions in farmland. Major research challenges highlighted by our review include the need: to better integrate plant functional diversity (from traits to habitat scales) into cropping system design; to quantify the (likely interactive) contribution of plant diversity for effective EI relative to other management options; and to optimize through targeted management the system function benefits of biodiversity for resilient, efficient and productive agroecosystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modern agriculture is perceived to be unsustainable having pursued a high productivity, reductionist approach for many decades. The solution proposed for restoring 'sustainability' is often encapsulated in the term 'diversity' but this is frequently as ill-defined and open to wide interpretation as the word sustainable. Key to determining whether diversity is 'the answer' is defining what diversity means in practice in the field. We attempt to describe the concepts and components of diversity and, crucially, how they might combine and interact in agricultural systems. The key concepts are: (1) complexity, (2) variation, and (3) spatio-temporal interaction, with the latter comprising (a) heterogeneity, (b) spatial connectivity, and (c) temporal connectivity. We suggest that this might lead to new strategies of diversity deployment and an index of resilience, a key ingredient of sustainability. These measures of diversity are explored in the context of crop resistance to pests and pathogens and the potential to maximise the benefits for integrated pest management in arable crops. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Increased crop diversity and reduced management intensity promote arthropods. • Pollinators and natural enemies, but not all herbivores, benefit from intercropping. • Mostly, total grain yield is higher in mixtures than in monocultures. • Intercropping can obtain high yields and increase arthropod abundance and diversity. Arthropod diversity of different taxonomic groups and ecosystem services are declining, yet current measures to counteract losses are often restricted to small areas of land or field margins, particularly in agricultural systems. At the same time, large areas of land will be required to feed a growing global population. Intercropping has been proposed as a potential solution to maximize both biodiversity and yield at large scale, but experimental evidence is scarce. In a three-year field experiment, we manipulated crop diversity and management intensity in a cereal-legume intercropping experiment in Germany, where 50% of wheat was replaced by faba beans. We measured arthropod abundance and diversity of different functional groups (pollinators, natural enemies, herbivores) and crop yield. We found that increasing crop diversity increased abundance and diversity of arthropods. Notably, pollinator and natural enemy abundances increased in intercropped systems. Low management intensity generally had positive effects on arthropod abundance and especially on pollinator diversity, indicating benefits of reduced inputs of fertilizers and herbicides. While wheat yield was higher in monocultures and for high management intensity, total grain yield of the intercrop (indicated by land equivalent ratio) was higher in mixtures. We found that trade-offs were stronger between arthropod diversity and wheat yield than between arthropod abundance and wheat yield. Specialist wheat herbivores and generalist herbivores were more abundant at higher wheat yields. Conversely, pollinator and natural enemy diversity were negatively associated with wheat yield. Our results show that diversification can promote both higher yields and greater diversity of arthropods. Intercropping can thus be an opportunity to support biodiversity without risking significant yield losses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intensity of pastoral management in areas of High Nature Value farming is declining in some regions of Europe but increasing in others. This affects open habitats of conservation concern, such as the British uplands, where bird species that benefit from low‐intensity grazing may be most sensitive to such polarization. While experimental manipulations of livestock grazing intensities have improved our understanding of upland breeding bird responses in the short term, none have examined the long‐term impacts of altered management on reproductive success.Using a replicated landscape‐scale experiment that started in 2003, we investigated the effects of four grazing treatments (intensive sheep; low‐intensity sheep; low‐intensity mixed sheep and cattle; and no grazing) on the breeding productivity of meadow pipits Anthus pratensis, the most common upland passerine. Surveys were carried out systematically during early (2003 and 2004) and late (2015 and 2016) sampling periods of the experiment to compare the short‐ and long‐term effects of grazing treatments on breeding density and productivity of pipits specifically, but also on the overall bird community.Pipit breeding density was lowest under low‐intensity sheep grazing while the highest egg‐stage nest survival was observed in the same treatment, although no significant treatment effects were detected on overall nest survival or fledgling output. There were no significant differences in treatment effects between the sampling periods on any breeding variable, but overall nest survival was lower in the later sampling period across all treatments.Breeding bird species richness differed between treatments in the later sampling period, with highest species richness in the ungrazed treatment.Synthesis and applications. Livestock grazing management can have different outcomes for different upland birds. Our results showed that, with time, meadow pipit breeding productivity tended to be higher when sheep grazing intensity was reduced and/or mixed with cattle, and lower when livestock were removed, but not significantly so. Removal of grazing, however, can significantly increase bird species richness. The long‐term experiment showed an overall decline in fledglings regardless of grazing treatments, potentially a result of increased predator numbers harboured by nearby developing woodland, highlighting the importance of considering wider landscape processes in grazing management decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Food security is currently considered a major global problem. However, increasing intensity of food production in agricultural systems has driven reductions in farmland biodiversity. A major challenge is to enable biodiversity conservation whilst addressing the problem of food security., Here we describe how facilitative plant-plant interactions in crop systems could be used to help strike this balance. An obvious example is that of intercropping systems, where combinations of crop species can - under some circumstances - deliver reduced inputs of agrochemicals (fertilizers, pesticides) per unit yield, with potential knock-on benefits for biodiversity conservation., Other facilitative processes can also play a role in biodiversity conservation. Increased intraspecific crop genetic diversity can help protect crops from pests and diseases. Although overlooked in facilitation research, we argue that the mechanisms operate in a manner which is directly analogous to associational defence against herbivores, a process well recognized in the facilitation literature. As with intercropping, the benefits to nature conservation arise from reduced pesticide use per unit harvested crop., Crops may have facilitative effects on some arable weed species, particularly those that are currently considered rare in intensive farming systems. Work is in its early stages to understand the underlying mechanisms, but it appears that crops might create niche space to which some weed species are adapted. Increasing plant species diversity through niche space creation may then have cascading benefits for other components of farmland biodiversity., Our new understanding of facilitative processes arising from work on crop systems has lessons for the study of facilitative interactions in natural and semi-natural communities. We argue that, although easier to identify and quantify in crop systems, some of these facilitative processes have to date been overlooked in studies of non-crop systems and certainly deserve further consideration., Finally, we discuss what steps may be needed to move from our understanding of the role of facilitation to the development of new agricultural practice. In some cases the challenge may be one of the encouraging uptake of existing practices, and in others more research is needed to understand how new ecological understanding might deliver more sustainable agricultural practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]