Abstract
Most cropland in the United States is characterized by large monocultures, whose productivity is maintained through a strong reliance on costly tillage, external fertilizers, and pesticides (Schipanski et al., 2016). Despite this, farmers have developed a regenerative model of farm production that promotes soil health and biodiversity, while producing nutrient-dense farm products profitably. Little work has focused on the relative costs and benefits of novel regenerative farming operations, which necessitates studying in situ , farmer-defined best management practices. Here, we evaluate the relative effects of regenerative and conventional corn production systems on pest management services, soil conservation, and farmer profitability and productivity throughout the Northern Plains of the United States. Regenerative farming systems provided greater ecosystem services and profitability for farmers than an input-intensive model of corn production. Pests were 10-fold more abundant in insecticide-treated corn fields than on insecticide-free regenerative farms, indicating that farmers who proactively design pest-resilient food systems outperform farmers that react to pests chemically. Regenerative fields had 29% lower grain production but 78% higher profits over traditional corn production systems. Profit was positively correlated with the particulate organic matter of the soil, not yield. These results provide the basis for dialogue on ecologically based farming systems that could be used to simultaneously produce food while conserving our natural resource base: two factors that are pitted against one another in simplified food production systems. To attain this requires a systems-level shift on the farm; simply applying individual regenerative practices within the current production model will not likely produce the documented results.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Regenerative corn farming systems provided greater ecosystem services than input-intensive corn production.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse1 - Treatment
- Regenerative farming systemse1
- Outcome
- ecosystem servicese1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Comparator
- an input-intensive model of corn productione1
- Setting
- Northern Plains of the United Statese6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Regenerative farming systems provided greater ecosystem services and profitability for farmers than an input-intensive model of corn production”
e6“throughout the Northern Plains of the United States”
Claim · model-written summary
Pests were 10-fold more abundant in insecticide-treated corn fields than on insecticide-free regenerative farms.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse2
- Treatment
- insecticide-treatede2
- Interactor
- Pestse2pest
- Outcome
- Pests were 10-fold more abundante2
- Direction
- more abundante2
- Value
- 10-folde2
- Comparator
- insecticide-free regenerative farmse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Pests were 10-fold more abundant in insecticide-treated corn fields than on insecticide-free regenerative farms”
Claim · model-written summary
Regenerative fields had 29% lower grain production than traditional corn production systems.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse3
- Treatment
- Regenerative fieldse3
- Outcome
- grain productione3
- Direction
- lowere3
- Value
- 29%e3
- Comparator
- traditional corn production systemse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Regenerative fields had 29% lower grain production but 78% higher profits over traditional corn production systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Regenerative fields had 78% higher profits than traditional corn production systems.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse3
- Treatment
- Regenerative fieldse3
- Outcome
- profitse3
- Direction
- highere3
- Value
- 78%e3
- Comparator
- traditional corn production systemse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Regenerative fields had 29% lower grain production but 78% higher profits over traditional corn production systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Profit, rather than yield, was positively correlated with the particulate organic matter of the soil.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- particulate organic matter of the soile4
- Outcome
- Profite4
- Direction
- increaseinferrede4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Regenerative farming systems provided greater ecosystem services and profitability for farmers than an input-intensive model of corn production”
e4“Profit was positively correlated with the particulate organic matter of the soil, not yield”
Claim · model-written summary
A systems-level shift on the farm is required to produce food while conserving the resource base in corn systems.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Outcome
- a systems-level shift on the farme5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Regenerative farming systems provided greater ecosystem services and profitability for farmers than an input-intensive model of corn production”
e5“To attain this requires a systems-level shift on the farm”
The same questions in other papers
insecticide · pest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 48 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
58 papers more in this group
See all 62 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.