Regenerative Almond Production Systems Improve Soil Health, Biodiversity, and Profit

Abstract

Regenerative agriculture aims to improve soil health and promote biodiversity while producing nutritious food profitably. Almonds are the dominant crop in California agriculture in terms of acreage and revenue generated. We examined the soil health, biodiversity, yield, and profit of regenerative and conventional almond production systems that represented farmer-derived best management practices. Regenerative practices included abandoning some or all synthetic agrichemicals, planting perennial ground covers, integrating livestock, maintaining non-crop habitat, and using composts and compost teas. Total soil carbon (TSC), soil organic matter (SOM), total soil nitrogen (TSN), total soil phosphorous, calcium, sulfur, and soil health test scores were all significantly greater in regenerative soils. Water infiltrated regenerative soils six-fold faster than conventional soils. Total microbial biomass, total bacterial biomass, Gram+ bacteria, and Actinobacteria were significantly greater in regenerative soils. There was more plant biomass, species diversity, and percent cover in regenerative orchards. Invertebrate richness and diversity, and earthworm abundance and biomass were significantly greater in regenerative orchards. Pest populations, yields, and nutrient density of the almonds were similar in the two systems. Profit was twice as high in the regenerative orchards relative to their conventional counterparts. No one practice was responsible for the success of regenerative farms; their success was the result of simultaneously combining multiple regenerative practices into a single, functional farm system. This style of farming may assist in combatting planetary scale problems (e.g., climate change, biodiversity loss, agricultural pollution, chronic human health problems, and declining rural communities) while making farms more profitable and resilient.

Aumentar la biodiversidad en predios chilenos requiere de protocolos agroecológicos adaptados localmente

“…At the farm level, recent research suggests that infield biodiversity can provide multiple ecosystem services without compromising crop yield (Dainese et al, 2019;Tamburini et al, 2020;Ricciardi et al, 2021;Fenster et al, 2021;Tscharntke et al, 2021), while also contributing to the mitigation of climate change impacts on farm production (Altieri et al, 2015). However, similar farm principles applied to different crops and geographic areas can have different impacts on the outcome.…”

“…However, similar farm principles applied to different crops and geographic areas can have different impacts on the outcome. For example, the concept of regenerative agriculture uses the principle of harnessing biodiversity that when applied to corn fields can reduced corn yield compared to conventionally-managed fields (LaCanne and Lundgren, 2018), while in almond orchards, the same principle was applied but no yield differences were found when compared to conventional almond orchards (Fenster et al, 2021). Despite these inconsistencies in yield responses, in both examples, net profit was higher in regenerative farms (LaCanne SPECIAL ISSUE: BIODIVERSITY AND CROP MANAGEMENT and Lundgren, 2018;Fenster et al, 2021), highlighting the economic feasibility of enhancing biodiversity in conventionally managed agroecosystems.…”

“…For example, the concept of regenerative agriculture uses the principle of harnessing biodiversity that when applied to corn fields can reduced corn yield compared to conventionally-managed fields (LaCanne and Lundgren, 2018), while in almond orchards, the same principle was applied but no yield differences were found when compared to conventional almond orchards (Fenster et al, 2021). Despite these inconsistencies in yield responses, in both examples, net profit was higher in regenerative farms (LaCanne SPECIAL ISSUE: BIODIVERSITY AND CROP MANAGEMENT and Lundgren, 2018;Fenster et al, 2021), highlighting the economic feasibility of enhancing biodiversity in conventionally managed agroecosystems. Then, manipulating biodiversity in farms as a strategy to enhance specific ecosystem functions could also produce neutral or negative effects on multiple ecosystem services (Tamburini et al, 2020), likely as different socio-ecological factors interacting at a given time and space generate complex outcomes (Liu et al, 2007;Tscharntke et al, 2016;Karp et al, 2018).…”

“…For instance, most pesticides negatively impact soil invertebrates regardless of the types of pesticides and invertebrates involved (Gunstone et al, 2021), also increasing the likelihood of pest resistance against the chemical compounds applied (Gould et al, 2018). Therefore, the direct and indirect effects of pesticides, particularly sub-lethal doses, and long-term effects, on agroecosystems needs to better be understood, especially as these compounds reduce the efficacy of biodiversity-based approaches (Brzozowski and Mazourek 2018;Dainese et al, 2019;Fenster et al, 2021). Nevertheless, if correctly assessed, agroecological practices can reduce the need for chemical inputs by restoring missed ecological functions (Altieri 1999;Gurr et al, 2016;Tamburini et al, 2020;Wezel et al, 2020).…”

Alteração da biodiversidade microbiana do solo devido ao cultivo agrícola: uma revisão

“…A abundância de onívoros foi maior em campos manejados organicamente em comparação com campos manejados convencionalmente. Fenster, et al, (2021) Vargas Hoyos et. al., (2021) ao avaliarem a comunidade bacteriana de trigo isolaram a cepa 3AS4, que foi identificada como pertencente ao gênero Streptomyces e apresentou capacidade de mobilização de fósforo, mineralizando aproximadamente 410 μg ml -1 de fitato, 300 μg ml -1 de fosfato de cálcio e 200 μg ml -1 de fosfato de rocha.…”