Intercropping in high input agriculture supports arthropod diversity without risking significant yield losses

Brandmeier, Jana; Reininghaus, Hannah; Pappagallo, Silvia; Karley, Alison J.; Kiær, Lars Pødenphant; Scherber, Christoph

doi:10.1016/j.baae.2021.02.011

Cited by 34 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Subsequent reductions in crop losses can enhance carbon assimilation by the retained crops (Heeb et al 2019). Another win-win example is intercropping, which entails planting strips of habitat between crop rows to support natural enemies and pollinators (e.g., Brandmeier et al 2021). Planting windbreaks composed of non-flowering woody vegetation (e.g., conifers) to shelter habitat and pollinators from pesticide drift also creates benefits to pollinators while increasing carbon sequestering via on-farm woody biomass (Lee-Mäder et al 2020).…”

Section: Managing For Pollinatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon farming can enhance pollinator resources

Sardiñas¹,

Ryals²,

Williams³

2023

Calif Agr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Native California bees and other wild pollinators, which are essential to many fruit and vegetable crops, are being threatened by climate change, pesticides and habitat degradation. Carbon farming, a set of practices that sequester carbon in the soil or woody biomass, can create habitat that supports these pollinators. This paper focuses on habitat management and farming practices that both increase carbon sequestration and benefit pollinator communities. By incentivizing and supporting conservation practices that incorporate carbon farming, we can protect wild pollinators and increase the resilience of California agriculture in the face of ongoing climate change.

show abstract

Section: Managing For Pollinatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon farming can enhance pollinator resources

Sardiñas¹,

Ryals²,

Williams³

2023

Calif Agr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…in ancient Greece where evidences of it found with wheat, barley, and certain pulses often integrated with vines and olives [2]. Intercropping which is also known as companion cropping not only popular in production of vegetables, cereals and pulses cropsbut are also observed equally emphasized with forage production in the temperate regions as fodder crops are in high demand [3,4].…”

Section: Intercroppingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intercropping Systems in Wheat (Triticum sativum L.) for Insect Pests and Disease Management – A Review

Kaur

Gupta

Hooda

2021

JPRI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cereal crop wheat, Triticum sativum L., is an important food and feed crop that is grown all over the world. There is a complementary relationship between legumes and cereals for nitrogen resources, it was found that intercropped legumes acquire a higher amount of atmospheric nitrogen in comparison to legumes grown as an individual crop. Furthermore, both wheat and pulse intercropping give benefits in terms of minimizing pests and diseases. Intercropping not only restricts onset of pest species but also crop combinations conserves beneﬁcial insects that can preserve the damaging pest population below the threshold level. In the current study, numerous instances were provided that show successful control of various insect pests when wheat was intercropped with mustard, Linseed, barley, mung bean, canola, and other crops. Wheat intercropping with other crops can be used as part of an integrated pest management strategy to reduce pest incidence while also increasing the number of beneficial organisms.

show abstract

“…Compared with sole crops, intercrops have great potential to improve yields and enhance land use efficiency ( Yang et al, 2019 ; Li et al, 2020 , 2021a , b ; Weih et al, 2021 ). Additionally, legume–cereal intercrops can provide ecosystem services, such as (i) improved resource use efficiency ( Li et al, 2021b ; Zhang et al, 2021 ), particularly for nitrogen ( Jensen, 1996 ; Bedoussac and Justes, 2010a ; Naudin et al, 2010 ), (ii) greater biodiversity, including beneficial insects ( Brandmeier et al, 2021 ); (iii) pest and pathogen regulation ( Finckh and Wolfe, 2015 ; Zhang et al, 2019 ; Finckh et al, 2021 ); (iv) enhanced soil health ( Yang et al, 2019 ; Uwase et al, 2021 ; Zhang et al, 2021 ); and (v) healthy and nutritious food products ( Dwivedi et al, 2017 ). Although legume-based intercrops are not practiced widely in modern farming systems, they can contribute toward national and EU policy targets for reducing pesticide use, minimizing fertilizer losses, reversing biodiversity declines, and delivering secure and resilient food systems ( Iannetta et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supply Chain Perspectives on Breeding for Legume–Cereal Intercrops

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compared to sole crops, intercropping—especially of legumes and cereals—has great potential to improve crop yield and resource use efficiency, and can provide many other ecosystem services. However, the beneficial effects of intercrops are often greatly dependent on the end use as well as the specific species and genotypes being co-cultivated. In addition, intercropping imposes added complexity at different levels of the supply chain. While the need for developing crop genotypes for intercropping has long been recognized, most cultivars on the market are optimized for sole cropping and may not necessarily perform well in intercrops. This paper aims to place breeding targets for intercrop-adapted genotypes in a supply chain perspective. Three case studies of legumes and cereals intercropped for human consumption are used to identify desirable intercrop traits for actors across the supply chains, many of which are not targeted by traditional breeding for sole crops, including certain seed attributes, and some of which do not fit traditional breeding schemes, such as breeding for synchronized maturity and species synergies. Incorporating these traits into intercrop breeding could significantly reduce complexity along the supply chain. It is concluded that the widespread adoption and integration of intercrops will only be successful through the inclusion and collaboration of all supply chain actors, the application of breeding approaches that take into account the complexity of intercrop supply chains, and the implementation of diversification strategies in every process from field to fork.

show abstract

Intercropping in high input agriculture supports arthropod diversity without risking significant yield losses

Cited by 34 publications

References 44 publications

Carbon farming can enhance pollinator resources

Carbon farming can enhance pollinator resources

Intercropping Systems in Wheat (Triticum sativum L.) for Insect Pests and Disease Management – A Review

Supply Chain Perspectives on Breeding for Legume–Cereal Intercrops

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About