Multi-country evidence that crop diversification promotes ecological intensification of agriculture (original) (raw)

Nature Plants volume 2, Article number: 16014 (2016) Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Global food security requires increased crop productivity to meet escalating demand1–3. Current food production systems are heavily dependent on synthetic inputs that threaten the environment and human well-being2,4,5. Biodiversity, for instance, is key to the provision of ecosystem services such as pest control6,7, but is eroded in conventional agricultural systems. Yet the conservation and reinstatement of biodiversity is challenging5,8,9, and it remains unclear whether the promotion of biodiversity can reduce reliance on inputs without penalizing yields on a regional scale. Here we present results from multi-site field studies replicated in Thailand, China and Vietnam over a period of four years, in which we grew nectar-producing plants around rice fields, and monitored levels of pest infestation, insecticide use and yields. Compiling the data from all sites, we report that this inexpensive intervention significantly reduced populations of two key pests, reduced insecticide applications by 70%, increased grain yields by 5% and delivered an economic advantage of 7.5%. Additional field studies showed that predators and parasitoids of the main rice pests, together with detritivores, were more abundant in the presence of nectar-producing plants. We conclude that a simple diversification approach, in this case the growth of nectar-producing plants, can contribute to the ecological intensification of agricultural systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

$119.00 per year

only $9.92 per issue

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

Figure 1: Multi-site, multi-year comparison of diversification of rice (intervention) with conventional practice (control).

The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

Figure 2: Parasitoid activity in rice with diversification (intervention) and with conventional practice (control).

The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

Figure 3: Response of ecosystem service provider guilds and taxa to insecticide and the presence of nectar-producing plants (sesame) on bunds around rice fields.

The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Godfray, H. C. & Garnett, T. Food security and sustainable intensification. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 369, 20120273 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
  2. West, P. C. et al. Leverage points for improving global food security and the environment. Science 345, 325–328 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  3. Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J. & Befort, B. L. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 20260–20264 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  4. Stehle, S. & Schulz, R. Agricultural insecticides threaten surface waters at the global scale. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 5750–5755 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  5. Foley, J. A. et al. Global consequences of land use. Science 309, 570–574 (2005).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  6. Costanza, R. et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253–260 (1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  7. Losey, J. E. & Vaughan, M. The economic value of ecological services provided by insects. Bioscience 56, 311–323 (2006).
    Article Google Scholar
  8. Matson, P. A., Parton, W. J., Power, A. G. & Swift, M. J. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 277, 504–509 (1997).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  9. Bennett, E. et al. Toward a more resilient agriculture. Solutions 5, 65–75 (2014).
    Google Scholar
  10. Phalan, B., Onial, M., Balmford, A. & Green, R. E. Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: land sharing and land sparing compared. Science 333, 1289–1291 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  11. Foley, J. A. et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478, 337–342 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  12. Gill, R. J., Ramos-Rodriguez, O. & Raine, N. E. Combined pesticide exposure severely affects individual- and colony-level traits in bees. Nature 491, 105–108 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  13. Diaz, R. J. & Rosenberg, R. Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321, 926–929 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  14. Eskenazi, B. et al. Organophosphate pesticide exposure and neurodevelopment in young Mexican-American children. Environ. Health Persp. 115, 792–798 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  15. Loos, J. et al. Putting meaning back into “sustainable intensification”. Front. Ecol. Environ. 12, 356–361 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
  16. Cardinale, B. J. et al. Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystems. Nature 443, 989–992 (2006).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  17. Bommarco, R., Kleijn, D. & Potts, S. G. Ecological intensification: harnessing ecosystem services for food security. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 230–238 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
  18. Wood, S. A. et al. Functional traits in agriculture: agrobiodiversity and ecosystem services. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 531–539 (2015).
    Article Google Scholar
  19. Ekroos, J., Olsson, O., Rundlöf, M., Wätzold, F. & Smith, H. G. Optimizing agri-environment schemes for biodiversity, ecosystem services or both? Biol. Conserv. 172, 65–71 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
  20. Letourneau, D. K. et al. Does plant diversity benefit agroecosystems? A synthetic review. Ecol. Appl. 21, 9–21 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
  21. Pretty, J. N. et al. Resource-conserving agriculture increases yields in developing countries. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40, 1114–1119 (2006).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  22. Khan, Z. R. et al. Exploiting chemical ecology and species diversity: stem borer and striga control for maize and sorghum in Africa. Pest Manag. Sci. 56, 957–962 (2000).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  23. Crowder, D. W., Northfield, T. D., Strand, M. R. & Snyder, W. E. Organic agriculture promotes evenness and natural pest control. Nature 466, 109–112 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  24. Seufert, V., Ramankutty, N. & Foley, J. A. Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature 485, 229–232 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  25. Kremen, C. & Miles, A. Ecosystem services in biologically diversified versus conventional farming systems: benefits, externalities, and trade-offs. Ecol. Soc. 17, 40 (2012).
    Google Scholar
  26. Luck, G. W. et al. Quantifying the contribution of organisms to the provision of ecosystem services. Bioscience 59, 223–235 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
  27. Wäckers, F. L., Romeis, J. & van Rijn, P. Nectar and pollen feeding by insect herbivores and implications for multitrophic interactions. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 52, 301–323 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
  28. Zhu, P. et al. Laboratory screening supports the selection of sesame (Sesamum indicum) to enhance Anagrus spp. parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) of rice planthoppers. Biol. Control 64, 83–89 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
  29. Liu, Z. et al. A nicotinic acetylcholine receptor mutation conferring target-site resistance to imidacloprid in Nilaparvata lugens (brown planthopper). Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 8420–8425 (2005).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  30. Czaja, K. et al. Biopesticides—towards increased consumer safety in the European Union. Pest Manag. Sci. 71, 3–6 (2015).
    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Asian Development Bank (TA7648-R-RDTA) and National Basic Research Program of China (973, grant no. 2010CB126200). G.M.G. is supported by a Chinese Government Thousand Talents fellowship. We thank the farmers who hosted field experiments and J. Tylianakis (Christchurch University, New Zealand) for comments on this manuscript. Assistance with arthropod sorting and taxonomy was provided by Y. Yang, G. Wenqin, L. Ding and D. Biqing of Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, and F. Zhang and X. Sheng of Jianhua Plant Protection Station, China.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Geoff M. Gurr and Zhongxian Lu: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Applied Ecology, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry, University, Fuzhou, 35002, Fujian, China
    Geoff M. Gurr & David J. Perovic
  2. Graham Centre, Charles Sturt University, Orange, 2800, New South Wales, Australia
    Geoff M. Gurr & Helen I. Nicol
  3. State Key Laboratory Breeding Base for Zhejiang Sustainable Pest and Disease Control, Institute of Plant Protection and Microbiology, Zhejiang Academy of Agriculture Sciences, Hangzhou 310021, China
    Zhongxian Lu, Xusong Zheng & Hongxing Xu
  4. Jinhua Plant Protection Station, Jinhua 321017, China
    Pingyang Zhu, Guihua Chen & Xiaoming Yao
  5. Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
    Jiaan Cheng & Zengrong Zhu
  6. Crop and Environmental Sciences Division, International Rice Research Institute, DAPO Box 7777, Metro Manila 1301, The Philippines
    Josie Lynn Catindig, Sylvia Villareal & Kong Luen Heong
  7. Southern Regional Plant Protection Center, Long Dinh 860000, Vietnam
    Ho Van Chien & Le Quoc Cuong
  8. Chainat Rice Research Center, Chainat 17000, Thailand
    Chairat Channoo & Nalinee Chengwattana
  9. Institute of Agricultural Science for Southern Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
    La Pham Lan
  10. TienGiang University, Tien Giang 860000, Vietnam
    Le Huu Hai
  11. Rice Department, Bureau of Rice Research and Development, Bangkok 10220, Thailand
    Jintana Chaiwong
  12. Bio-Protection Research Centre, Lincoln University, Christchurch 7642, New Zealand
    Steve D. Wratten
  13. Centre for Agricultural Biosciences International (CABI), South East Asia, Regional Centre, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Malaysia
    Kong Luen Heong

Authors

  1. Geoff M. Gurr
  2. Zhongxian Lu
  3. Xusong Zheng
  4. Hongxing Xu
  5. Pingyang Zhu
  6. Guihua Chen
  7. Xiaoming Yao
  8. Jiaan Cheng
  9. Zengrong Zhu
  10. Josie Lynn Catindig
  11. Sylvia Villareal
  12. Ho Van Chien
  13. Le Quoc Cuong
  14. Chairat Channoo
  15. Nalinee Chengwattana
  16. La Pham Lan
  17. Le Huu Hai
  18. Jintana Chaiwong
  19. Helen I. Nicol
  20. David J. Perovic
  21. Steve D. Wratten
  22. Kong Luen Heong

Contributions

G.M.G. and K.L.H. conceived and designed the project; Z.L., Z.Z., J.C. and G.C. led the Chinese studies supported by X.Z., X.Y., H.X. and P.Z.; H.V.C. and L.Q.C. led the Vietnamese studies; C.C. led the Thai studies; N.C. and P.Z. performed the bait plant study; and P.Z. and X.Z. performed the factorial study; P.V., J.L.C., L.P.L., J.C. and S.V. identified arthropods; H.I.N., D.J.P. and G.M.G. analysed the data; G.M.G. led the manuscript writing with input from all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence toKong Luen Heong.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gurr, G., Lu, Z., Zheng, X. et al. Multi-country evidence that crop diversification promotes ecological intensification of agriculture.Nature Plants 2, 16014 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2016.14

Download citation

This article is cited by

Associated content