LaCanne Claire E, Lundgren Jonathan G
Natural Resource Management Department, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA.
Ecdysis Foundation, Estelline, SD, USA.
PeerJ. 2018 Feb 26;6:e4428. doi: 10.7717/peerj.4428. eCollection 2018.
Most cropland in the United States is characterized by large monocultures, whose productivity is maintained through a strong reliance on costly tillage, external fertilizers, and pesticides (Schipanski et al., 2016). Despite this, farmers have developed a regenerative model of farm production that promotes soil health and biodiversity, while producing nutrient-dense farm products profitably. Little work has focused on the relative costs and benefits of novel regenerative farming operations, which necessitates studying , farmer-defined best management practices. Here, we evaluate the relative effects of regenerative and conventional corn production systems on pest management services, soil conservation, and farmer profitability and productivity throughout the Northern Plains of the United States. Regenerative farming systems provided greater ecosystem services and profitability for farmers than an input-intensive model of corn production. Pests were 10-fold more abundant in insecticide-treated corn fields than on insecticide-free regenerative farms, indicating that farmers who proactively design pest-resilient food systems outperform farmers that react to pests chemically. Regenerative fields had 29% lower grain production but 78% higher profits over traditional corn production systems. Profit was positively correlated with the particulate organic matter of the soil, not yield. These results provide the basis for dialogue on ecologically based farming systems that could be used to simultaneously produce food while conserving our natural resource base: two factors that are pitted against one another in simplified food production systems. To attain this requires a systems-level shift on the farm; simply applying individual regenerative practices within the current production model will not likely produce the documented results.
美国的大多数农田以大规模单一作物种植为特征,其生产力通过严重依赖昂贵的耕作、外部肥料和杀虫剂来维持(施潘斯基等人,2016年)。尽管如此,农民们已经开发出一种促进土壤健康和生物多样性的农场生产再生模式,同时能够盈利地生产营养丰富的农产品。很少有研究关注新型再生农业经营的相对成本和收益,这就需要研究农民定义的最佳管理实践。在这里,我们评估了再生和传统玉米生产系统对美国北部平原害虫管理服务、土壤保护以及农民盈利能力和生产力的相对影响。与投入密集型玉米生产模式相比,再生农业系统为农民提供了更多的生态系统服务和更高的盈利能力。使用杀虫剂处理的玉米田中的害虫数量比不使用杀虫剂的再生农场多10倍,这表明积极设计抗虫害粮食系统的农民比采用化学方法应对害虫的农民表现更优。与传统玉米生产系统相比,再生农田的谷物产量降低了29%,但利润提高了78%。利润与土壤中的颗粒有机物呈正相关,而非与产量相关。这些结果为基于生态的农业系统对话提供了基础,这种系统可用于在保护自然资源基础的同时生产粮食:在简化的粮食生产系统中,这两个因素通常是相互矛盾的。要实现这一点需要农场层面的系统转变;仅仅在当前生产模式中应用个别再生实践不太可能产生已记录的结果。