No abstract

No abstract

To combat climate change, farmers must innovate through ecological intensification to boost food production, increase resilience to weather extremes, and shrink the carbon footprint of agriculture. Intercropping (where alternative crops or noncrop plants are integrated with cash crops) can strengthen and stabilize agroecosystems under climate change by improving resource use efficiency, enhancing soil water holding capacity, and increasing the diversity and quality of habitat for beneficial insects that provide pollination services and natural pest control. Despite these benefits, intercropping has yet to be widely adopted due to perceived risks and challenges including decreased crop yield, increased management complexity, a steep learning curve for successful management, and increased susceptibility to pests. Here, we explore the major benefits of intercropping in agricultural systems for pest control and climate resilience reported in 24 meta-analyses, while addressing risks and barriers to implementation. Most studies demonstrate clear benefits of intercropping for weed, pathogen, insect pest control, relative yield, and gross profitability. However, relatively few studies document ecosystem services conferred by intercrops alongside labor costs, which are key to economic sustainability for farmers. In addition to clearer demonstrations of the economic viability of intercropping, farmers also need strong technical and financial support during the adoption process to help them troubleshoot the site-specific complexities and challenges of managing polycultures. Ecological intensification of agriculture requires a more strategic approach than simplified production systems and is not without risks and challenges. Calibrating incentive programs to reduce financial burdens of risk for farmers could promote more widespread adoption of intercropping.

Non-consumptive effects (NCEs) of predators are ubiquitous in food webs with well-detailed impacts on trophic cascades over multiple levels. However, integrating NCEs with other predator-mediated interactions, like intraguild predation, as well as context-specific habitat factors that shape top-down pressure, remains a challenge. Focusing on two common seed predators, mice (Peromyscus spp.) and carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae), we quantify trophic and behavioral consequences of predation risk and availability of refuge vegetation on both intraguild predators (mice) and intraguild prey (beetles). In a 2-year field experiment, we manipulated refuge habitat (red clover), small mammal access, and moonlight, which small mammals use as an indirect cue of predation risk. We found that avoidance of predation risk by mice in simulated moonlight reduced carabid activity density in vegetation by up to 50% compared to exposed habitat, but had no cascading effects on seed predation. We linked patterns observed in the field with behavioral mechanisms by observing beetle foraging activity, and found that exposure to both indirect and direct vertebrate predator cues reduced movement by 50%, consistent with predator-mediated activity reductions observed in the field. However, predation risk increased carabid seed consumption by 43%. Thus, weak effects of predation risk on seed removal in the field may be explained by overcompensatory seed feeding by beetles. This work demonstrates that predators elicit responses that cascade over multiple trophic levels, triggering behavioral changes in species lower on the food chain. These behavior-mediated cascades are controlled by their spatiotemporal context and have important downstream impacts on predator-prey dynamics.