28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Prairie strips improve biodiversity and the delivery of multiple ecosystem services from corn–soybean croplands

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p id="d5943321e425">Prairie strips are a new conservation technology designed to alleviate biodiversity loss and environmental damage associated with row-crop agriculture. Results from a multiyear, catchment-scale experiment comparing corn and soybean fields with and without prairie vegetation indicated prairie strips raised pollinator and bird abundance, decreased water runoff, and increased soil and nutrient retention. These benefits accrued at levels disproportionately greater than the land area occupied by prairie strips. Social surveys revealed demand among both farm and nonfarm populations for the outcomes prairie strips produced. We estimated prairie strips could be used to improve biodiversity and ecosystem services across 3.9 million ha of cropland in Iowa and a large portion of the 69 million ha under similar management in the United States. </p><p class="first" id="d5943321e428">Loss of biodiversity and degradation of ecosystem services from agricultural lands remain important challenges in the United States despite decades of spending on natural resource management. To date, conservation investment has emphasized engineering practices or vegetative strategies centered on monocultural plantings of nonnative plants, largely excluding native species from cropland. In a catchment-scale experiment, we quantified the multiple effects of integrating strips of native prairie species amid corn and soybean crops, with prairie strips arranged to arrest run-off on slopes. Replacing 10% of cropland with prairie strips increased biodiversity and ecosystem services with minimal impacts on crop production. Compared with catchments containing only crops, integrating prairie strips into cropland led to greater catchment-level insect taxa richness (2.6-fold), pollinator abundance (3.5-fold), native bird species richness (2.1-fold), and abundance of bird species of greatest conservation need (2.1-fold). Use of prairie strips also reduced total water runoff from catchments by 37%, resulting in retention of 20 times more soil and 4.3 times more phosphorus. Corn and soybean yields for catchments with prairie strips decreased only by the amount of the area taken out of crop production. Social survey results indicated demand among both farming and nonfarming populations for the environmental outcomes produced by prairie strips. If federal and state policies were aligned to promote prairie strips, the practice would be applicable to 3.9 million ha of cropland in Iowa alone. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Carbon sequestration in agricultural soils via cultivation of cover crops – A meta-analysis

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Global metaanalysis of the nonlinear response of soil nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions to fertilizer nitrogen.

            Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a potent greenhouse gas (GHG) that also depletes stratospheric ozone. Nitrogen (N) fertilizer rate is the best single predictor of N2O emissions from agricultural soils, which are responsible for ∼ 50% of the total global anthropogenic flux, but it is a relatively imprecise estimator. Accumulating evidence suggests that the emission response to increasing N input is exponential rather than linear, as assumed by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change methodologies. We performed a metaanalysis to test the generalizability of this pattern. From 78 published studies (233 site-years) with at least three N-input levels, we calculated N2O emission factors (EFs) for each nonzero input level as a percentage of N input converted to N2O emissions. We found that the N2O response to N inputs grew significantly faster than linear for synthetic fertilizers and for most crop types. N-fixing crops had a higher rate of change in EF (ΔEF) than others. A higher ΔEF was also evident in soils with carbon >1.5% and soils with pH <7, and where fertilizer was applied only once annually. Our results suggest a general trend of exponentially increasing N2O emissions as N inputs increase to exceed crop needs. Use of this knowledge in GHG inventories should improve assessments of fertilizer-derived N2O emissions, help address disparities in the global N2O budget, and refine the accuracy of N2O mitigation protocols. In low-input systems typical of sub-Saharan Africa, for example, modest N additions will have little impact on estimated N2O emissions, whereas equivalent additions (or reductions) in excessively fertilized systems will have a disproportionately major impact.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Ecosystem Services in Biologically Diversified versus Conventional Farming Systems: Benefits, Externalities, and Trade-Offs

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
                Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
                Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
                0027-8424
                1091-6490
                October 17 2017
                October 17 2017
                : 114
                : 42
                : 11247-11252
                Article
                10.1073/pnas.1620229114
                5651729
                28973922
                7c5c524e-94bc-4ae7-959f-e5dca876fd2c
                © 2017

                http://www.pnas.org/site/misc/userlicense.xhtml

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article