A framework for evaluating ecosystem services provided by cover crops in agroecosystems

Meagan E. Schipanski, Mary Ellen Barbercheck, Margaret R. Douglas, Denise M. Finney, Kristin Haider, Jason Philip Kaye, Armen Ricardo Kemanian, David Mortensen, Matthew R. Ryan, John Frazier Tooker, Charles Macaulay White

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

143 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Cropping systems that provide ecosystem services beyond crop production are gaining interest from farmers, policy makers and society at large, yet we lack frameworks to evaluate and manage for multiple ecosystem services. Using the example of integrating cover crops into annual crop rotations, we present an assessment framework that: (1) estimates the temporal dynamics of a suite of ecosystem services; (2) illustrates ecosystem multifunctionality using spider plots; and (3) identifies key time points for optimizing ecosystem service benefits and minimizing trade-offs. Using quantitative models and semi-quantitative estimates, we applied the framework to analyze the temporal dynamics of 11 ecosystem services and two economic metrics when cover crops are introduced into a 3-year soybean (Glycine max)-wheat (Triticum aestivum)-corn (Zea mays) rotation in a typical Mid-Atlantic climate. We estimated that cover crops could increase 8 of 11 ecosystem services without negatively influencing crop yields. We demonstrate that when we measure ecosystem services matters and cumulative assessments can be misleading due to the episodic nature of some services and the time sensitivity of management windows. For example, nutrient retention benefits occurred primarily during cover crop growth, weed suppression benefits occurred during cash crop growth through a cover crop legacy effect, and soil carbon benefits accrued slowly over decades. Uncertainties exist in estimating cover crop effects on several services, such as pest dynamics. Trade-offs occurred between cover crop ecosystem benefits, production costs, and management risks. Differences in production costs with and without cover crops varied 3-fold over 10. years, largely due to changes in fertilizer prices, and thus cover crop use will become more economical with increasing fertilizer prices or if modest cost-sharing programs are established. Frameworks such as that presented here provide the means to quantify ecosystem services and facilitate the transition to more multifunctional agricultural systems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)12-22
Number of pages11
JournalAgricultural Systems
Volume125
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2014

Fingerprint

cover crops
agroecosystems
ecosystem services
production costs
fertilizers
nutrient retention
cash crops
ecosystems
risk management
crop production
Araneae
cropping systems
weed control
crop yield
Glycine max
Triticum aestivum
uncertainty
Zea mays
pests
soybeans

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Agronomy and Crop Science

Cite this

Schipanski, Meagan E. ; Barbercheck, Mary Ellen ; Douglas, Margaret R. ; Finney, Denise M. ; Haider, Kristin ; Kaye, Jason Philip ; Kemanian, Armen Ricardo ; Mortensen, David ; Ryan, Matthew R. ; Tooker, John Frazier ; White, Charles Macaulay. / A framework for evaluating ecosystem services provided by cover crops in agroecosystems. In: Agricultural Systems. 2014 ; Vol. 125. pp. 12-22.
@article{545bc1827eae41f3980f736515e841d3,
title = "A framework for evaluating ecosystem services provided by cover crops in agroecosystems",
abstract = "Cropping systems that provide ecosystem services beyond crop production are gaining interest from farmers, policy makers and society at large, yet we lack frameworks to evaluate and manage for multiple ecosystem services. Using the example of integrating cover crops into annual crop rotations, we present an assessment framework that: (1) estimates the temporal dynamics of a suite of ecosystem services; (2) illustrates ecosystem multifunctionality using spider plots; and (3) identifies key time points for optimizing ecosystem service benefits and minimizing trade-offs. Using quantitative models and semi-quantitative estimates, we applied the framework to analyze the temporal dynamics of 11 ecosystem services and two economic metrics when cover crops are introduced into a 3-year soybean (Glycine max)-wheat (Triticum aestivum)-corn (Zea mays) rotation in a typical Mid-Atlantic climate. We estimated that cover crops could increase 8 of 11 ecosystem services without negatively influencing crop yields. We demonstrate that when we measure ecosystem services matters and cumulative assessments can be misleading due to the episodic nature of some services and the time sensitivity of management windows. For example, nutrient retention benefits occurred primarily during cover crop growth, weed suppression benefits occurred during cash crop growth through a cover crop legacy effect, and soil carbon benefits accrued slowly over decades. Uncertainties exist in estimating cover crop effects on several services, such as pest dynamics. Trade-offs occurred between cover crop ecosystem benefits, production costs, and management risks. Differences in production costs with and without cover crops varied 3-fold over 10. years, largely due to changes in fertilizer prices, and thus cover crop use will become more economical with increasing fertilizer prices or if modest cost-sharing programs are established. Frameworks such as that presented here provide the means to quantify ecosystem services and facilitate the transition to more multifunctional agricultural systems.",
author = "Schipanski, {Meagan E.} and Barbercheck, {Mary Ellen} and Douglas, {Margaret R.} and Finney, {Denise M.} and Kristin Haider and Kaye, {Jason Philip} and Kemanian, {Armen Ricardo} and David Mortensen and Ryan, {Matthew R.} and Tooker, {John Frazier} and White, {Charles Macaulay}",
year = "2014",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.agsy.2013.11.004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "125",
pages = "12--22",
journal = "Agricultural Systems",
issn = "0308-521X",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

A framework for evaluating ecosystem services provided by cover crops in agroecosystems. / Schipanski, Meagan E.; Barbercheck, Mary Ellen; Douglas, Margaret R.; Finney, Denise M.; Haider, Kristin; Kaye, Jason Philip; Kemanian, Armen Ricardo; Mortensen, David; Ryan, Matthew R.; Tooker, John Frazier; White, Charles Macaulay.

In: Agricultural Systems, Vol. 125, 01.03.2014, p. 12-22.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A framework for evaluating ecosystem services provided by cover crops in agroecosystems

AU - Schipanski, Meagan E.

AU - Barbercheck, Mary Ellen

AU - Douglas, Margaret R.

AU - Finney, Denise M.

AU - Haider, Kristin

AU - Kaye, Jason Philip

AU - Kemanian, Armen Ricardo

AU - Mortensen, David

AU - Ryan, Matthew R.

AU - Tooker, John Frazier

AU - White, Charles Macaulay

PY - 2014/3/1

Y1 - 2014/3/1

N2 - Cropping systems that provide ecosystem services beyond crop production are gaining interest from farmers, policy makers and society at large, yet we lack frameworks to evaluate and manage for multiple ecosystem services. Using the example of integrating cover crops into annual crop rotations, we present an assessment framework that: (1) estimates the temporal dynamics of a suite of ecosystem services; (2) illustrates ecosystem multifunctionality using spider plots; and (3) identifies key time points for optimizing ecosystem service benefits and minimizing trade-offs. Using quantitative models and semi-quantitative estimates, we applied the framework to analyze the temporal dynamics of 11 ecosystem services and two economic metrics when cover crops are introduced into a 3-year soybean (Glycine max)-wheat (Triticum aestivum)-corn (Zea mays) rotation in a typical Mid-Atlantic climate. We estimated that cover crops could increase 8 of 11 ecosystem services without negatively influencing crop yields. We demonstrate that when we measure ecosystem services matters and cumulative assessments can be misleading due to the episodic nature of some services and the time sensitivity of management windows. For example, nutrient retention benefits occurred primarily during cover crop growth, weed suppression benefits occurred during cash crop growth through a cover crop legacy effect, and soil carbon benefits accrued slowly over decades. Uncertainties exist in estimating cover crop effects on several services, such as pest dynamics. Trade-offs occurred between cover crop ecosystem benefits, production costs, and management risks. Differences in production costs with and without cover crops varied 3-fold over 10. years, largely due to changes in fertilizer prices, and thus cover crop use will become more economical with increasing fertilizer prices or if modest cost-sharing programs are established. Frameworks such as that presented here provide the means to quantify ecosystem services and facilitate the transition to more multifunctional agricultural systems.

AB - Cropping systems that provide ecosystem services beyond crop production are gaining interest from farmers, policy makers and society at large, yet we lack frameworks to evaluate and manage for multiple ecosystem services. Using the example of integrating cover crops into annual crop rotations, we present an assessment framework that: (1) estimates the temporal dynamics of a suite of ecosystem services; (2) illustrates ecosystem multifunctionality using spider plots; and (3) identifies key time points for optimizing ecosystem service benefits and minimizing trade-offs. Using quantitative models and semi-quantitative estimates, we applied the framework to analyze the temporal dynamics of 11 ecosystem services and two economic metrics when cover crops are introduced into a 3-year soybean (Glycine max)-wheat (Triticum aestivum)-corn (Zea mays) rotation in a typical Mid-Atlantic climate. We estimated that cover crops could increase 8 of 11 ecosystem services without negatively influencing crop yields. We demonstrate that when we measure ecosystem services matters and cumulative assessments can be misleading due to the episodic nature of some services and the time sensitivity of management windows. For example, nutrient retention benefits occurred primarily during cover crop growth, weed suppression benefits occurred during cash crop growth through a cover crop legacy effect, and soil carbon benefits accrued slowly over decades. Uncertainties exist in estimating cover crop effects on several services, such as pest dynamics. Trade-offs occurred between cover crop ecosystem benefits, production costs, and management risks. Differences in production costs with and without cover crops varied 3-fold over 10. years, largely due to changes in fertilizer prices, and thus cover crop use will become more economical with increasing fertilizer prices or if modest cost-sharing programs are established. Frameworks such as that presented here provide the means to quantify ecosystem services and facilitate the transition to more multifunctional agricultural systems.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890929148&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890929148&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.agsy.2013.11.004

DO - 10.1016/j.agsy.2013.11.004

M3 - Article

VL - 125

SP - 12

EP - 22

JO - Agricultural Systems

JF - Agricultural Systems

SN - 0308-521X

ER -