Cozim-Melges Felipe, Ripoll-Bosch Raimon, Veen G F Ciska, Oggiano Philipp, Bianchi Felix J J A, van der Putten Wim H, van Zanten Hannah H E
Farming Systems Ecology Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Wageningen Gelderland, Wageningen, Netherlands.
NPJ Biodivers. 2024 Jan 9;3(1):1. doi: 10.1038/s44185-023-00034-2.
Intensive agriculture for food and feed production is a key driver of global biodiversity loss. It is generally assumed that more extensive practices are needed to reconcile food production with biodiversity conservation. In a literature review across biomes and for seven taxa, we retrieved 35 alternative practices (e.g. no-tillage, cover crops, organic fertilizer) from 331 studies. We found that no single practice enhanced all taxonomic groups, but that overall less intensive agricultural practices are beneficial to biodiversity. Nevertheless, often practices had no effects observed and very rarely contrasting impacts on aboveground versus belowground taxa. Species responses to practices were mostly consistent across biomes, except for fertilization. We conclude that alternative practices generally enhance biodiversity, but there is also variation in impacts depending on taxonomic group or type of practice. This suggests that a careful selection of practices is needed to secure biodiversity across taxa in future food systems worldwide.
用于粮食和饲料生产的集约化农业是全球生物多样性丧失的关键驱动因素。人们普遍认为，需要采用更粗放的做法来使粮食生产与生物多样性保护相协调。在一项针对生物群落和七个分类群的文献综述中，我们从331项研究中检索出35种替代做法（如免耕、覆盖作物、有机肥料）。我们发现，没有一种单一做法能提升所有分类群，但总体而言，集约化程度较低的农业做法有利于生物多样性。然而，这些做法往往没有观察到效果，而且对地上和地下分类群产生对比影响的情况非常罕见。除施肥外，各生物群落中物种对这些做法的反应大多一致。我们得出结论，替代做法通常能提升生物多样性，但影响也因分类群或做法类型而异。这表明，需要谨慎选择做法，以确保全球未来粮食系统中各分类群的生物多样性。
