Next Article in Journal
Experimental Research on the Effect of Sugarcane Stalk Lifting Height on the Cutting Breakage Mechanism Based on the Sugarcane Lifting–Cutting System (SLS)
Next Article in Special Issue
Opportunities and Challenges for Cover Cropping in Sustainable Agriculture Systems in Southern Australia
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of Agricultural Machinery Operational Benefits Based on Semi-Supervised Learning
Previous Article in Special Issue
Better Performance of the Modified CERES-Wheat Model in Simulating Evapotranspiration and Wheat Growth under Water Stress Conditions
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 12
Issue 12
10.3390/agriculture12122076
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Cover Crops for Sustainable Cropping Systems: A Review

by
Valentina Quintarelli
1,
Emanuele Radicetti
1,*,
Enrica Allevato
2,
Silvia Rita Stazi
1,
Ghulam Haider
3,
Zainul Abideen
4,
Safia Bibi
3,
Aftab Jamal
5 and
Roberto Mancinelli
6
1
Department of Chemical, Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via Luigi Borsari n. 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
2
Department of Environmental and Prevention Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via Luigi Borsari n. 46, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
3
Department of Plant Biotechnology, Atta-ur-Rahman School of Applied Biosciences, National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
4
Dr. Muhammed Ajmal Khan, Institute of Sustainable Halophyte Utilization, University of Karachi, Karachi 75270, Pakistan
5
Key Laboratory of Arable Land Conservation (Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River), Ministry of Agriculture, College of Resources and Environment, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
6
Department of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, University of Tuscia, Via San Camillo de Lellis snc, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2022, 12(12), 2076; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122076
Submission received: 1 November 2022 / Revised: 26 November 2022 / Accepted: 30 November 2022 / Published: 3 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cover Crops - Series II)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Cover cropping is a promising and sustainable agronomic practice to ameliorate soil health and crop performances in agro-ecosystems. Indeed, cover crops (CCs) may regulate several ecosystem services such as nutrient cycling, soil fertility, moderation of extreme meteorological events, pollination, and climate and water regulation; in addition, CCs are also used as forage crops and have considerable effects on plant and soil biodiversity. However, to achieve the desired effects on agro-ecosystems, cover cropping should be carefully adopted by considering the specie choice, period of cultivation, and termination method based on site, farm, or purpose-specific. The main objective of this manuscript is to analyze the effects of modern agriculture on soil and environmental health and how cover crops can support sustainable cropping systems and global food security. In addition, it focuses on how the incorporation of cover crops into conventional cropping systems can help in the diversification of crops and assist in mitigating the environmental effects of cropping systems. Finally, this review thoroughly investigates the potential effects of CCs on environmental sustainability, which can be an important source of information for sustainable crop production and food security.

1. Introduction

Global agri-food systems are facing challenges in realizing food chains for feeding the growing population, which is expected to be 10 billion people by 2050 [1]. At the same time, agricultural systems need to be managed by a sustainable approach to reducing external inputs, such as fossil fuels, and non-judicious use of mineral fertilizers and pesticides. In addition, environmental concerns such as greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), nutrient leaching, especially nitrogen, and its associated environmental pollution should be addressed by means of sustainable practices [2].
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines conventional farming systems as “agricultural practices which include the use of synthetic chemical fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and other continual inputs, genetically modified organisms, concentrated animal feeding operations, heavy irrigation, intensive tillage, or concentrated monoculture production” [3]. In fact, these approaches to managing agricultural lands are considered unsustainable in terms of solving environmental issues such as climate change, environmental pollution, soil erosion, and loss of natural resources [4]. Although modern agricultural practices are managed through highly specialized machinery in industrialized farming to apply carefully agricultural inputs, this behavior is leading to unsustainable cropping systems that generates, in time, a progressive loss of soil fertility and weakening of agro-ecosystems [5]. This kind of “conventionally” managed agriculture is characterized by excessive use of inputs, with negative effects on air, soil, and water and causing pollution and biodiversity loss [6]. Recently, Scopel et al. [7] explained that monoculture has led to a negative impact on the agro-ecosystems and increased the loss of soil organic matter (SOM), as well as increasing soil erosion, nitrate leaching, and agrochemicals utilization required for pest control. In addition, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Ginevra) observed that the greenhouse gasses (GHGs) emissions from modern agricultural practices contribute to climate change accounting for about 24% of net emissions of anthropogenic activities [8]. Therefore, to preserve limited resources and agro-environmental stability, it is necessary to develop sustainable agronomic practices that could sustain crop production and environmental issues.
Agroecological practices contribute to agri-environmental sustainability because they are based on different ecological and biological processes that combine high-quality crops without damaging the environment, stimulating natural soil regeneration, enhancing biodiversity, and mitigating climate change [9]. The development of sustainable agricultural practices, therefore, has become necessary to combine the need to produce enough quantities of food for consumers with the conscious use of natural resources [10]. The importance of sustainable agricultural production is increasingly recognized also in European policies with the EU Green Deal and Common Agricultural Policy [11].
Cover crops are defined as a “close-growing crop that provides soil protection, seeding protection, and soil improvement between periods of normal crop production” [12]. The cultivation of cover crops is performed during the bare fallow period, between the cultivation of two consecutive main cash crops by using the residual soil nutrients, and their growth is interrupted either before the next main crop is sown or after sowing the next crop, in any case before competition between cover crop and main crop starts (Figure 1). Cover crops can increase soil cover during the bare period, and their biomass support photosynthetic process, root exudation, and microbial biomass, increasing biodiversity at the agro-ecosystem level; in addition, cover crop biomass also contributes to the input of litter to the soil leading to an increase of C and N contents to the soil that could become available for the next crops [13,14]. In fact, in contrast to the bare soil, the cultivation of cover crops improves soil physical properties (e.g., soil structural stability, water retention capacity, infiltration rate). It promotes C sequestration and N retention [15]. In addition, root exudates of cover crop plants can contribute to an integrated strategy to manage biotic crop constraints, like weeds, insects, and diseases [16]. Cover crops can contribute indirectly to overall soil and water quality by absorbing excess nutrients before they leach from the soil profile, especially with grass species, or by adding nitrogen (N) to the soil in the case of legume cover crops [17], resulting in a reduced N requirement of the next cash crop (Figure 1). For instance, the decomposing residues of brassica cover crops, through the release of glucosinolates, aid in the control of parasitic nematodes (Figure 2). In addition, during the same phase, they can cause chemical and physical changes in the soil and facilitate root penetration of the next crop and act as a buffer for the soil [18]. Several studies confirm that the use of legume cover crops in crop rotations, such as clover and alfalfa, and graminaceous cover crops, such as ryegrass, oat, and barley, enhance the yields of the following cash crop [19,20,21] (Figure 2). In addition, even with the exclusive use of grass species, the soil nutrient profile can be improved compared to monoculture [22]. All these benefits identify the cover crops as a sustainable practice able to support a series of agro-ecological services, even if proper cover crop management is needed to significantly increase soil C stocks and climate change mitigation, especially in semi-arid Mediterranean environments, through the reduction of GHGs emissions [23,24]. In fact, the biomass produced by CC cultivation represent an input of organic matter that has an ameliorative effect on microbial activity in the soil, which is the main driver of soil greenhouse gas fluxes [25]. Moreover, recent research has evaluated the potential beneficial effects of cover crops on nitrate leaching [26,27], weed control [28], cash crop yield [29], and pollinator insects [30,31].
The adoption of CCs in innovative agricultural systems opens alternative solutions toward sustainable approaches to cultivation (Figure 1). The cultivation of cover crops associated with no-tillage management is increasingly accepted by researchers and farmers that identify it as conservation agriculture (CA) practice [32,33] (Figure 1). Under conservation agriculture, cover crop cultivation allows an increase in a diverse range of beneficial soil flora and fauna that contribute to nutrient cycling and affect plant nutrition [34]. The increase in plant diversity affects the composition and abundance of soil microorganisms which can have ameliorative effects on the uptake and cycling of limited nutrients [35]. Generating residues and adding diversity to the CA system could be achieved by cover crops (CCs). Indeed, one of the fundamental principles of conservation agriculture is to keep the soil covered by employing crop residues that are left on the soil surface; however, when the period between the harvesting of the previous main crop and the establishment of the next one is too long, crop residues cannot be sufficient to cover the soil generating a gap where the soil is exposed to weather conditions. Cover crops represent a key aspect of conservation agriculture needed to avoid this gap and improve the stability of the CA system, not only in the improvement of soil properties but also for their capacity to promote increased biodiversity in the agro-ecosystem.
Although cover crops are associated with sustainable cropping systems and support crop production and the environment, their effective adoption presents some challenges that should be addressed to avoid misleading farmers in carrying out efficient agroecosystems. Hence, the main aim of this review is, therefore, to produce a critical overview of the use of cover cropping to assess the change in environmental aspects and cropping systems due to cover crop adoption. The specific objectives are: (i) to review the available literature on soil and environmental health associated with cover crops, (ii) to summarize the role of cover crops in improving soil conditions for sustainable agriculture, and (iii) to report the effect of cover crops on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change mitigation.

2. Effect of Cover Crops on Soil Health

There are numerous crop options that can be used as vegetative covers, like grains, legumes, root crops and oil crops, all of which show different benefits to support soil health (Figure 2). Among the benefits related to the adoption of CCs in agricultural lands there are the increased soil organic carbon and available soil nutrients, reduced soil compaction and increased soil structure and particle aggregation; as well as enhanced microbial activity, abundance, and diversity [36]. In particular, some species of cover crops may enrich the soil with nitrogen (N) due to their ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen (e.g., Vicia sativa L.) [37] or their fibrous root system able to scavenge nutrients lost from the previous crop and act as catch crop for reducing the leaching of nutrients (e.g., Avena sativa L.) [38]. In addition, rye is effective in reducing N leaching from winter to spring [39]. Grass and crucifer species (e.g., Secale cereale L. or Sinapis alba L.) can improve soil hydraulic properties through the improvement of soil structure, aggregate stability, and soil porosity [15]. In addition, Brassicaceous CCs are chosen to improve soil penetration resistance due to taproot growth but are also used as a highly effective catch crop [40]. Indeed, the taproot system of brassicas, by creating cavities, can help in reducing soil compaction, and improve water infiltration, ultimately reducing soil erosion. For example, radish (Raphanus raphanistrum subsp. sativus), a widely used and highly beneficial cover crop, catch soil nutrients, especially nitrogen [41]. All CCs, due to photosynthesis activity, produce high above- and belowground biomass that contributes to enhancing soil organic matter accumulation [36,42] (Figure 3). In addition, CCs are characterized by a rapid establishment rate covering the soil and providing a significant reduction of the soil erosion process [43]. The adoption of rye (Secale cereale L.) under no-tillage conditions sustains the yield performance of main crops [44], enhancing soil quality parameters and keeping N2O emissions under control [24].
Recently, Papp et al. [45] showed that cultivation of cover crops affects soil microorganism environments that are critically important for maintaining soil functions and ecosystem sustainability as they are involved in the cycling of nutrients and the turnover of organic matter (Table 1). It has been reported that cover crops can alter the dynamics of soil bacterial and fungal communities [46], stimulate beneficial microorganisms [47], and suppress soilborne pathogens [48]. It is interesting to note that some cruciferous CCs, such as rape (Brassica rapa L.) and canola (Brassica napus L.), when terminated, release isothiocyanates (ITCs) through hydrolysis of glucosinolates (GSLs) throughout the decomposition process of their tissues that are effective biofumigants for the control of a range of soil-borne pathogens and pests [49]. In that sense, the use of cruciferous species as cover crops could allow the natural control of potential diseases. Waisen et al. [50] showed that radish (Raphanus raphanistrum subsp. sativus) or brown mustard (Brassica juncea L.) as a biofumigant crop could be effective against plant-parasitic nematodes without compromising on soil health or changing the structure of the nematode community. Furthermore, Aydınlı et al. [51] revealed that using radish (R. sativus) and arugula (Eruca sativa) as winter cycle plants before plants that are susceptible to the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne arenaria would help to reduce gall index, egg masses and consequently damage and also increase crop yields. Last, leguminous CCs are recognized as the most effective when maximizing nitrogen (N) input becomes the priority [52]. Indeed, leguminous CCs can deposit significant amounts of N in the soil during growth and have the ability to acidify the rhizosphere by facilitating the uptake of insoluble phosphorous into the soil [53,54]. Especially, legume cover crops can fix atmospheric N through symbiosis with rhizobia in the root nodules [55]. In addition, the fixed N can be transferred to intercropped non-legumes in mixed cropping systems, or it can follow crops in rotations [56,57,58,59]. The biological N-fixing (BNF) systems can reduce the internal inputs of industrial N fertilizers [60,61,62]. According to Scavo et al. [63], the presence of Trifolium subterraneum, for three consecutive years, determined a considerable increase in ammoniacal nitrogen, nitric nitrogen, and the N cycle bacteria (Table 1). Similarly, Campiglia et al. [64] observed similar wheat yield when subterranean clover is used as living mulch in intercropping systems. Furthermore, Guardia et al. [65] revealed that the mitigation effect of the legume (vetch) CC is mainly due to the reduction of synthetic N inputs in the subsequent cash crop as well as a decrease in indirect N2O emissions from NO3− leaching and an increase in C sequestration due to an intensive photosynthetic activity (Figure 3). In addition, the mitigation efficacy of barley is mainly due to C sequestration in agreement with Aguilera et al. [66] and the abatement of NO3− leaching, as reported by Ferrari Machado et al. [60]. One of the potential disadvantages of cover crops identified by Abdalla et al. [26] was the yield reduction of about −4% of the following cash crop compared to the bare soil. However, in the selection of the right cover crop species with a range of legumes and non-legumes, several studies showed an average increase of 13% in crop yield [67,68,69]. Recently, Taab et al. [70] observed a yield reduction of wheat when Persian clover (T. resupinatum L.) is sown at a high rate because it competes with the cereal for limited resources. Therefore, management practices concerning cover crops (i.e., choice, cultivation period, termination) needed to be adapted to the specific soil and cash crop, farming system, and regional climatic conditions (Table 1).
The adoption of cover crops in agro-ecosystems provides multiple benefits to the agro-ecosystems (Figure 3) [71]. To maximize the agro-ecological functions, complementing and synergizing the effects, cover crops are usually cultivated in a mixture. Very important, in the constitution of these mixes is to use the functional complementarity of the species [72]. The potential application of crop mixtures (involving cereal, legume, and even crucifer CCs) is an issue of strategic interest when designing low-C cropping systems in Mediterranean areas. Couëdel et al. [73] and Kaye et al. [74] have obtained positive results regarding N2O emissions and N leaching in comparison with the use of monoculture. For example, mixing radish with rye can mitigate both soil compaction and soil erosion risks due to the bio-drilling potential of radish and abundant aboveground biomass cover produced by rye [75].
In long-term cropping systems such as orchards, cover crops have economic benefits because, in addition to protecting soil against water and wind erosion (Figure 4), they can contribute, through residue deposition, to nutrient recycling, increased soil health and reduced mineral fertilization needs [76,77]. This could be useful on vineyard and olive tree systems that are generally affected by erosion due to the high loss of organic matter and excessive tillage operations [78]. Other tree systems that have the same issues are those consisting of almond [79], apricot [80], and persimmon orchards [81]. Several studies showed that the cultivation of cover crops is an effective solution to minimize soil erosion in these orchards caused by intensive tillage, excessive mineral fertilizer applications and herbicide use [82] and, therefore, preserve soil from the risk of desertification [83,84,85]. García-Díaz et al. [86] observed that the use of CCs could reduce soil losses by 3.8 to 0.7 Mg ha−1 in a vineyard. Novara et al. [87] showed that using CC reduces by 27% annual water runoff and can be used as an agronomic strategy for improving water use efficiency.
Table
Table 1. Agro-ecosystem services related to the use of different species of CCs.
Table 1. Agro-ecosystem services related to the use of different species of CCs.
TypeManagement GoalsReferences
GraminaceousIncrease SOM[36,42]
Reduce erosion, control weed growth[43]
Sustain crops yield performance[44]
Effective C sequestration[66]
Keeping N2O emissions under control[24]
Reduce NO3− leaching[39,60,77]
Reduction of weeds and increase in production yield[88]
BrassicaceousReduce subsoil compaction, reduce soil erosion[40,75]
Catch soil nutrients, especially nitrogen[41]
Effective against pest[50]
Reduce significantly gall index, increase crop yields[51]
LegumePromote nitrogen (N) input[52]
Promote uptake of insoluble phosphorous[53,54]
Increase ammoniacal nitrogen, nitric nitrogen, increase N cycle bacteria[63]
Nitrogen fixation, effective C sequestration[65]
Improve soil quality[89]
Reduce water and wind erosion, contribute to nutrient recycling, and reduce fertilization application[76,78,79,80,81,83,84,85,86,87]

3. Effects of Cover Crops on Different Cropping Systems

It is widely recognized that the adoption of monoculture and conventional farming practices causes changes in the biodiversity of agro-ecosystems leading to the reduction of soil fertility due to high inputs of chemical fertilizers and increasing resistance in weeds and phytopathogens associated with overuse of pesticides [90]. This farming approach of modern industrialized agriculture leads farmers to assume that a simple and linear system is more productive and profitable than sustainable agronomic practices into farm planning [91]. It is certainly true that the introduction of cover crops into cropping systems means a series of modifications in the technical and productive organization [92]. However, as shown by Bowles et al. [93], long term crop diversification produces the ‘rotation effect’, which in most cases leads to an increase in agro-ecosystem productivity compared to a monoculture system and leads to a reduced inputs uses [94]. Jacobs et al. [32] have shown that the cultivation of winter CCs reduces cash crop production costs in both conventional and conservation systems (Table 2). Therefore, when introducing cover crops into the farm cropping systems, it is very important to choose the appropriate species of cover crop and its suitable termination method must be chosen according to the intended aims [95,96,97]. In general, legumes and brassicas tend to have a more in-depth effect due to their taproot system, while grasses have more superficial effects due to their fasciculate root system [98]. Effects of cover crops on the various soil organisms are extremely complex and diversified, most frequently including an increase in the biological activity of soils, which promotes nematode diversity and thus control the allelopathic effect of certain species and varieties of brassicaceous and graminaceous plants on certain pathogens and nematodes [99,100]. An important benefit of adopting cover crops is the reduction of chemical inputs for weed control (Figure 3). Indeed, the cultivation of CCs have an important role in low input agro-ecosystems, because reduce the ecological niche available for weed establishment and growth, as observed by Campiglia et al. [101]. Grass CCs have an important role in weeds control are mainly represented by rye, sorghum, wheat, barley, and oats. Leguminous plants include alfalfa, vetches, peas, and clovers while Brassicaceae cover crops are generally represented by rape and mustard [63]. In addition, CCs have important functions in reducing the presence of weeds and costs in herbicide applications [101,102]. For example, Demir et al. [89] have observed that the specific use of Trifolium repens and Vicia villosa as cover crops can improve soil quality and yield in apple orchards. Moreover, the use of V. villosa and Festuca arundinacea Schreb. in hazelnut orchards enhance the reduction of weeds and increase production yield [88].
After their suppression the CCs residue management are a key factor for weed management in the next following crop (Table 2). Under CA systems, the CCs residues left on the soil surface as organic dead mulches can physically impede weed germination and emergence due to a reduction of seed stimulus (temperature, light and moisture) to germination [103]. In addition, during their decomposition, they can exude and release in the soil allelochemicals that have phytotoxic effects on weeds [104]. This phenomenon is variable depending on the climatic conditions, the cover crop species, the amount and type of mulch, and the weed species composition [105].
At cover crop termination, the aboveground biomass represents an important source of soil organic matter input that could determine increases in soil microbial biomass and their respiration and enzymatic activity [106]. The findings of Thapa et al. [107] using variations in the species composition of cover crops showed that the different biomass sources influenced the relative microbial growth and their respective enzymatic activity [108,109]. The presence of a diversified bacterial community can also directly promote crop yields, as different types of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria are found in agricultural soils. Garland et al. [110] revealed that increased bacterial diversity improves the nitrogen cycle in the soil leading to more efficient use of the added fertilizers. Thus, improved nitrogen uptake by cover crop residue mineralization leads to higher grain yields. The type and number of benefits provided by organic matter from cover cropping are highly dependent on the species that is chosen. For example, crops characterized by succulent tissues and a low C/N ratio (e.g., Leguminosae), undergoing mineralization processes, represent sources of available nutrients, especially nitrogen, in the short term (Figure 5) [109]. On the other hand, the phytomass characterized by a high C/N ratio (e.g., Graminaceae) with a high lignin content will persist in the soil for a longer time, improving physical characteristics and increasing element exchange capacity (Figure 5) [87]. However, the use of these species must be carefully evaluated concerning the amount of soil nitrogen available for the main crop, to avoid competition between the associated crops or unavailability of the element for the cash crops that will follow [111]. The use of cover crops through improved soil macroaggregate architecture provides diverse microhabitats for soil micro and macro fauna (Table 2). Indeed, optimal soil microstructural organization provides a suitable environment for nematodes to graze on microorganisms [112]. These trophic niches are characterized by important differences in the availability of numerous resources (e.g., SOC and nutrients), physical pore networks, or predation pressures [113]. These microscopic worms are the largest component of the active soil community and serve multiple functions. Primarily, nematodes act on the regulation of carbon cycling [114], biogeochemical cycling of elements [115,116], and in the evolution of soil microbial population composition [117,118], contributing to soil functionality. Diversifying plant species in the cropping system using rotations and cover crops has been shown to promote benefits in agroecosystem functioning [119,120]. The results of the meta-analysis conducted by Kim et al. [121], showed that the use of CCs increases microbial activity and its activity compared to bare fallow. Similar results were also confirmed by the findings of Daryanto et al. [76]. This, most likely, is due to the input of plant biomass and from cover crop root exudates [47] increasing the amount of available carbon main substrate for microbial activity and nematode populations.
Table
Table 2. Benefits of cropping systems achieved through the use of cover crops.
Table 2. Benefits of cropping systems achieved through the use of cover crops.
Cropping Systems BenefitsReferences
Reduction in inputs[94]
Reduction of cash crop production costs[32]
Increase in the biological activity of soils[99,100]
Reduction of weeds[103,122]
Reducing infestations for the next cash crop[123]
Release in the soil allelochemicals that have phytotoxic effects on weeds[104]
Influence soil microbial biomass, soil respiration, enzymatic activity [106,107,108,109]
Support cash crop growth[124]
Improve tropic niches[112]
Increasing soil water retention capacity and organic matter content[125,126,127]
Increases microbial activity[47,120,121]

4. Effects of Cover Crops on Greenhouse Gas Emission and Climate Change Mitigation

The term “climate change” refers to anomalous variations of climate conditions that persist over an extended period, usually a few decades or even longer [8]. These phenomena include the increased temperature trends known as global warming, even if they also encompass changes such as sea-level rise and extreme weather events. Climate change has a significant impact on agriculture because it generates several abiotic stresses that reduce plant establishment, growth, and shifts in their blooming [128] and; therefore, it is one of the factors affecting production yields and food security, despite the continued efforts and advances in crop selection and the optimization of agricultural practices [129].
Biomass production is the result of terrestrial plants being able to catch and convert solar radiation through the process of photosynthesis, which, however, can be hindered by undesired climatic variations such as extreme temperature changes and/or low water availability [130]. Due to climate changes that increase flood and drought intensity, cover crop cultivation has recently gained considerable attention due to its benefits in agro-ecosystem services conservation. Indeed, cover crops could represent a valid agricultural management option, which has the potential to increase soil C stocks [131] and contribute to climate change mitigation by sequestering atmospheric CO2, by increase soil organic carbon (SOC) pools, and offsetting emissions from fossil fuels [132,133]. Recently, it has been estimated that cover crops have the potential to mitigate climate change through C sequestration of up to 0.22 t ha−1 year−1 of C fixed in their biomass and useful integrated with the agro-ecosystem [40]. Adopting practices of crop diversification, such as cover crops for periods between 4–12 years determine a significant accumulation of organic matter in the soil [134,135]. This is mostly due to the production of biomass from the whole plant is incorporated in the agro-ecosystems, through transformations operated by soil microorganisms, becoming an integrated part of the soil carbon pools [134,136]. In addition, the difference in concentrations and proportions of SOC fractions between available and recalcitrant C pools biomass inputs may have an impact on soil fauna through modifications in their microhabitat and food resources [45,137]. After cover crop termination, the management of the CC residues increases the rate of C input to the soil, thus promoting soil organic matter accumulation that can potentially reduce the use of synthetic fertilizers and, through the production of some secondary metabolites, could reduce pest damage and, therefore, support sustainable agro-chemicals application [37,40,45,138]. However, the intensity and the benefits could differ based on the soil tillage practice adopted for cover crop suppression [38,67,102]. Indeed, the CC biomass could be terminated by incorporating residues into the soil, as green manure under the traditional tillage approach, or left on the soil surface as dead organic mulch under a no-tillage regime [36]. In general, the mineralization of organic residues is faster when CC residues are green-manured compared with CC residue left on the soil surface because there are greater surface contacts of CC residues with the soil microorganisms that in aerobic conditions mineralize more rapidly the organic residues with the release of plant nutrients [139,140]. In addition, higher greenhouse gas emissions are more intensive when CC residues are incorporated into the soil than CC residues left on the surface [141]. Therefore, CCs could also be responsible for GHGs emissions, especially CO2, that are commonly associated with CC characteristics such as botanical species, CC phenological stage, residue quality (C: N ratio), and method of CC termination [142]. Several studies have shown that some legume CC species are found to have higher GHGs emissions than other cover crops [142,143,144]. It was observed that the biomass of CC legume, i.e., vetches or clovers, is characterized by residues with low C: N ratio and therefore decompose faster than grass cover crops, i.e., ryegrass or oat, that are commonly characterized by a high C: N ratio in their residues and, therefore, could cause an increase in nitrous oxide emissions (N2O) [145,146,147]. Some findings suggest that the cultivation of mixtures of legume CC and grass CC species could mitigate the excessive biomass mineralization of residues [148]. However, regardless of the CC species, the period of CC termination represents a valuable aspect that affect the C: N ratio of CC residues [149,150]. Indeed, early suppression of cover crops before the flowering stage showed a biomass characterized by a lower C: N ratio than those cover crops that are terminated in the late season, after the flowering stage [151].
Although cover crop residues and their management could be responsible for CO2 and N2O emissions from agricultural soils, their impact on GHGs emissions should be evaluated by a holistic approach. Recently, Radicetti et al. [131] showed that the cultivation of cover crops in vegetable cropping systems resulted in a greater C input: C output ratio than conventional cropping systems without the adoption of cover crops, meaning that the carbon accumulated was higher compared with the one that leaves the agroecosystem with crop yield and CO2 emissions (Table 3). Furthermore, replacing bare fallow with CC provides additional C inputs from plant biomass and rhizodeposition [152], determining a significative impact on soil health and environmental benefits [37,45]. In addition, the findings of Behnke et al. [153] indicate that cover crops can significantly reduce GHG emissions by reducing inorganic soil N, confirming the hypothesis that cover crops reduce N2O emissions (Table 3). Moreover, if the growing conditions are suitable, some winter CC species can become well established and consequently produce significant biomass in the spring season, reducing air and water pollution without affecting subsequent cash crop yields [153].
Although nitrogen (N) is one of the essential macro-elements in plant nutrition, it is also the main nutrient reintegrated employing fertilization practices each year through the application of synthetic nitrogen. The direct emission from agricultural soils of nitrous oxide (N2O) is estimated at 1.8 N2O Tg N year−1; more than half of it is lost from the agro-ecosystems in the form of reactive N forms to the environment due to meteorological variation. This is particularly true in Mediterranean areas, characterized by hot and dry summers followed by torrential autumn precipitations. The amount of N2O emission due to synthetic fertilizers alone accounted for 0.9 N2O Tg N year−1 [154]. Nitrification is the process of microbial conversion of ammonium ions (NH4+) to nitrite and nitrate ions (NO3−) under aerobic conditions, and it is also responsible for producing N2O via denitrification. However, NO3− is highly labile and prone to leaching and runoff losses, particularly in well-drained, light-textured soils. Nitrate leaching and contamination of ground and surface water bodies due to generally too severe rain phenomenon led to deterioration of water quality (e.g., eutrophication, algal bloom, loss of biodiversity in rivers and lakes), toxicity for fauna, and also human health problems [98,155,156,157,158]. Through the choice of timing of sowing, harvesting, and CC species, farmers can achieve diversified levels of agro-ecosystem benefits when referring to the dynamic nitrogen [159,160,161]. Furthermore, cover crop management could decrease water erosion and alternate nitrogen cycling microbial groups, and therefore on NO3− leaching [162]. The use of cover crops has an improving effect on precipitation storage efficiency (PSE), which has an important role in the sustainability of natural and farm resource use [76]. During the crop cycle, CCs reduce soil water content for the following crop due to the transpiration process [163]. However, if CC residues are left on the soil surface, these can reduce water evaporation [164] and also facilitate soil water retention and infiltration [165], reducing the need for irrigation (Table 3). Specifically, cover crop termination through the incorporation of residues into the soil can have ameliorative effects on soil water storage, succeeding crop yield, and water use efficiency [166].
Another major problem of modern agriculture contributing to the increase in climate change is methane (CH4) emissions [8]. Specifically, the contribution of agricultural land to CH4 emissions accounts for ~52% of global methane emissions [167]. Specifically, emissions from rice crops, a staple food for most of the world’s population, account for ~48% of global agricultural emissions [168]. The introduction of catch crops can be considered an effective strategy for improving soil carbon storage capacity and hence enhancing the fertility of soil. Concerning rice cultivation and its massive emissions, a long-term experiment was designed to clarify the impact of catch crops on this phenomenon [169], comparing different crops, showed that continuous planting of milk vetch, compared to ryegrass, is a recommended catch crop strategy as it maintains rice yield without increasing CH4 emissions (Table 3).
Incorporation and decomposition of legumes have a solubilizing effect on N, P, K, and micronutrients (Zn, Mn, Fe, and Cu) in the soil and mitigate the deficiency of different nutrient elements by way of recycling of nutrients [134,170], reducing the leaching and gaseous losses of N and increasing the efficiency of applied plant nutrients [171,172,173,174,175,176,177]. In addition to a reduction of synthetic fertilizers, the adoption of cover crops allows for reducing the farming operation contributing to a reduction of fossil fuel consumption. Alonso-Ayuso et al. [178] observed that the use of roller crimping, commonly used for terminating cover crops in conservation agriculture, contributes to reduced energy consumption. In addition, Duzy et al. [179] observed that combining cover crop termination and cash crop sowing reduces fuel consumption by 47% on average, CO2 emissions by 43–51%, and labor and machinery hours, which can increase production efficiency and reduce the environmental impact. Another effect of climate change is represented by the salinity phenomenon caused by precipitation deficiency. Efficient and sustainable management of agricultural resources can mitigate and overcome the negative effects of drought on cash crop yield [180]. Soil salinity can be recovered through the leaching of salt from the rhizosphere, the modification of agronomic practices at the farm level, and the introduction of salt-tolerant crops [181,182]. Different studies revealed that cover crop residues left on the soil surface in combination with amendments allows the notable reduction of salinity phenomena while maintaining an acceptable level of cash crop productivity [183]. Forkutsa et al. [184] have demonstrated that the use of mulching would notably decrease secondary soil salinization. In this regard, straw mulching is a promising option for farmers to control soil salinity, as it decreases soil water evaporation and regulates soil water and salt movement. Song et al. [185] proved that the better straw method is the combination of surface mulch and straw layer burial. Zhang et al. [186] demonstrated that the presence of a residue layer on the soil, in addition to allowing the reduction of salt concentration, improves crop water utilization compared to bare soil conditions. These results can be considered important in contributing to the resilience of farming systems to climate change.
Table
Table 3. Environmental aspects influenced by the use of cover crops.
Table 3. Environmental aspects influenced by the use of cover crops.
Environmental AspectsReferences
Increase C and N stocks[131,132,133,134,135,136,152,179]
Reduce N2O emissions,[153]
influence soil thermal condition[160]
Increase SOM[161,187]
Increase soil water storage[165,166,188,189,190]
Reduce evaporation[166]
Improving soil porosity[191]
Decrease CH4 emission[169]
Limit excess soil NO3−[170,171,172,173,174]
Increase the efficiency of applied plant nutrients[176,177]
Reduce energy consumption[134,178,179]
Mitigate the negative effects of drought[180,183]
Decrease secondary soil salinization[184,185,186]

5. Final Remarks and Future Challenges

There is a lot of scientific evidence that supports the adoption of cover crops as a valid solution for allowing the ecological transition of modern and intensive systems toward sustainable farming systems. Several beneficial effects could be accounted for following the cultivation of cover crops, such as the improvement of soil health, enhancement of nutrient cycling, carbon sequestration and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, reduction of synthetic fertilizers, and economic returns. Therefore, the introduction of cover crops into agricultural systems can sustain the productive stability of cash crops and increase soil fertility through organic matter accumulation. Furthermore, cover crops may enhance soil structure, water conservation, and aid in pests and weed management.
Most likely, the limited use of cover crops could be due to insufficient evaluation of the short-term economic costs and long-term benefits of introducing cover crops into conventional systems such as conservation, protection, and valuation of natural resources. However, it is also important to note that cover crops could be subjected to practical limitations that require special attention. In fact, not all cropping systems are equally suited to cover cropping, especially when there are long-season cash crop rotations that may not be compatible with a cover crop cultivation period. Although in the long-term period cover crops increase soil, organic matter, soil water infiltration, and soil water capacity, in the short term, cover crop could result in a shortage of available water for the cash crop. Other important limitation includes the cost to establish cover crops and expenditures for new equipment (i.e., roller-crimper). In addition, regardless of the farming system adopted, the termination of cover crops currently represents an unusual and complicated management practice for farmers, which adsorbs time rather than managing cash crops. Therefore, there is a need to expand knowledge on the effects of the use of cover crops through short- and long-term field trials, regarding the implications of using various CCs species in agricultural systems with different climate characteristics to achieve more sustainable global agricultural production, considering that the contribution of cover crops on soil health is crucial in climate change mitigation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.Q., E.R., R.M.; methodology, V.Q., E.R., S.R.S., E.A.; investigation, V.Q., E.R.; resources, E.R.; data curation, V.Q., E.R.; writing—original draft preparation, V.Q., E.R., G.H., A.J.; writing—review and editing, E.R., S.R.S., E.A., G.H., Z.A., S.B., A.J., R.M.; visualization, E.R., S.R.S., E.A., G.H., Z.A., S.B., A.J., R.M.; supervision, E.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research is a part of Valentina Quintarelli’s Ph.D. thesis entitled “Impact of sustainable agronomic practices for the improvement of agricultural production”, funded by the University of Ferrara. The manuscript is funded under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 04 Component 2 Investment 1.5–NextGenerationEU, Call for tender n. 3277 dated 30/12/2021.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Preamble; A/RES/70/1; 2015; Volume 16301, Available online: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf (accessed on 2 October 2022).
  2. Smith, L.G.; Lampkin, N.H. Greener farming: Managing carbon and nitrogen cycles to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. In Managing Global Warming: An Interface of Technology and Human Issues; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 553–577. ISBN 9780128141052. [Google Scholar]
  3. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). USDA Coexistence Factsheets—Conventional Farming; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2015; Volume 1300, p. 2. [Google Scholar]
  4. Rosati, A.; Borek, R.; Canali, S. Agroforestry and organic agriculture. Agrofor. Syst. 2021, 95, 805–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Tsiafouli, M.A.; Thébault, E.; Sgardelis, S.P.; de Ruiter, P.C.; van der Putten, W.H.; Birkhofer, K.; Hemerik, L.; de Vries, F.T.; Bardgett, R.D.; Brady, M.V.; et al. Intensive agriculture reduces soil biodiversity across Europe. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2015, 21, 973–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Trigo, A.; Marta-costa, A.; Fragoso, R. Principles of Sustainable Agriculture. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Scopel, E.; Triomphe, B.; Affholder, F.; Da Silva, F.A.M.E.; Corbeels, M.; Xavier, J.H.V.; Lahmar, R.; Recous, S.; Bernoux, M.; Blanchart, E.; et al. Conservation agriculture cropping systems in temperate and tropical conditions, performances and impacts. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2013, 33, 113–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Stocker, T.F.; Qin, D.; Plattner, G.K.; Tignor, M.M.B.; Allen, S.K.; Boschung, J.; Nauels, A.; Xia, Y.; Bex, V.; Midgley, P.M. Climate Change 2013 the Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2013; ISBN 9781107057. [Google Scholar]
  9. Baldantoni, D.; Bellino, A.; Cicatelli, A.; Castiglione, S. Influence of the choice of cultivar and soil fertilization on pte concentrations in lactuca sativa l. In the framework of the regenerative agriculture revolution. Land 2021, 10, 1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Garnett, T.; Müller, A. Grazed and Confused? Ruminating on Cattle, Grazing Systems, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, the Soil Carbon Sequestration Question-and What It All Means for Greenhouse Gas Emissions; South and East Asian Livestock Futures View project FCRN Foodsource View project; FCRN: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  11. European Union. From Farm to Fork: Our Food, Our Health, Our Planet, Our Future; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2020; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
  12. Soil Science Glossary Terms Committee; Soil Science Society of America. SSSA Glossary of Soil Science Terms 2008; Google Books; ASA-CSSA-SSSA: Madison, WI, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sokol, N.W.; Kuebbing, S.E.; Karlsen-Ayala, E.; Bradford, M.A. Evidence for the primacy of living root inputs, not root or shoot litter, in forming soil organic carbon. New Phytol. 2019, 221, 233–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Somenahally, A.; DuPont, J.I.; Brady, J.; McLawrence, J.; Northup, B.; Gowda, P. Microbial communities in soil profile are more responsive to legacy effects of wheat-cover crop rotations than tillage systems. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2018, 123, 126–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. García-González, I.; Hontoria, C.; Gabriel, J.L.; Alonso-Ayuso, M.; Quemada, M. Cover crops to mitigate soil degradation and enhance soil functionality in irrigated land. Geoderma 2018, 322, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Sturm, D.J.; Peteinatos, G.; Gerhards, R. Contribution of allelopathic effects to the overall weed suppression by different cover crops. Weed Res. 2018, 58, 331–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hanrahan, B.R.; King, K.W.; Duncan, E.W.; Shedekar, V.S. Cover crops differentially influenced nitrogen and phosphorus loss in tile drainage and surface runoff from agricultural fields in Ohio, USA. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 293, 112910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jabro, J.D.; Allen, B.L.; Rand, T.; Dangi, S.R.; Campbell, J.W.; Cruse, R.; Rusu, T. Effect of Previous Crop Roots on Soil Compaction in 2 Yr Rotations under a No-Tillage System. Land 2021, 10, 202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Jensen, J.L.; Thomsen, I.K.; Eriksen, J.; Christensen, B.T. Spring barley grown for decades with straw incorporation and cover crops: Effects on crop yields and N uptake. Field Crops Res. 2021, 270, 108228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Marcillo, G.S.; Miguez, F.E. Corn yield response to winter cover crops: An updated meta-analysis. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2017, 72, 226–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Chu, M.; Jagadamma, S.; Walker, F.R.; Eash, N.S.; Buschermohle, M.J.; Duncan, L.A. Effect of Multispecies Cover Crop Mixture on Soil Properties and Crop Yield. Agric. Environ. Lett. 2017, 2, 170030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Zhang, W.P.; Liu, G.C.; Sun, J.H.; Fornara, D.; Zhang, L.Z.; Zhang, F.F.; Li, L. Temporal dynamics of nutrient uptake by neighbouring plant species: Evidence from intercropping. Funct. Ecol. 2017, 31, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lazcano, C.; Gonzalez-Maldonado, N.; Yao, E.H.; Wong, C.T.F.; Merrilees, J.J.; Falcone, M.; Peterson, J.D.; Casassa, L.F.; Decock, C. Sheep grazing as a strategy to manage cover crops in Mediterranean vineyards: Short-term effects on soil C, N and greenhouse gas (N2O, CH4, CO2) emissions. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2022, 327, 107825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Fiorini, A.; Maris, S.C.; Abalos, D.; Amaducci, S.; Tabaglio, V. Combining no-till with rye (Secale cereale L.) cover crop mitigates nitrous oxide emissions without decreasing yield. Soil Tillage Res. 2020, 196, 104442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Drost, S.M.; Rutgers, M.; Wouterse, M.; de Boer, W.; Bodelier, P.L.E. Decomposition of mixtures of cover crop residues increases microbial functional diversity. Geoderma 2020, 361, 114060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Abdalla, M.; Hastings, A.; Cheng, K.; Yue, Q.; Chadwick, D.; Espenberg, M.; Truu, J.; Rees, R.M.; Smith, P. A critical review of the impacts of cover crops on nitrogen leaching, net greenhouse gas balance and crop productivity. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2019, 25, 2530–2543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Vogeler, I.; Hansen, E.M.; Thomsen, I.K.; Østergaard, H.S. Legumes in catch crop mixtures: Effects on nitrogen retention and availability, and leaching losses. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 239, 324–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Araújo, F.C.D.E.; Nascente, A.S.; Nunes, J.L. Cover crops in the off-season in the weed management at no-tillage area. Rev. Caatinga 2021, 2125, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Acharya, B.S.; Dodla, S.; Gaston, L.A.; Darapuneni, M.; Wang, J.J.; Sepat, S.; Bohara, H. Winter cover crops effect on soil moisture and soybean growth and yield under different tillage systems. Soil Tillage Res. 2019, 195, 104430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Inveninato Carmona, G.; Delserone, L.M.; Nogueira Duarte Campos, J.; Ferreira De Almeida, T.; Vieira Branco Ozório, D.; David Betancurt Cardona, J.; Wright, R.; McMechan, A.J. Does Cover Crop Management Affect Arthropods in the Subsequent Corn and Soybean Crops in the United States? A Systematic Review. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2021, 114, 151–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mallinger, R.E.; Franco, J.G.; Prischmann-Voldseth, D.A.; Prasifka, J.R. Annual cover crops for managed and wild bees: Optimal plant mixtures depend on pollinator enhancement goals. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2019, 273, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jacobs, A.A.; Evans, R.S.; Allison, J.K.; Garner, E.R.; Kingery, W.L.; McCulley, R.L. Cover crops and no-tillage reduce crop production costs and soil loss, compensating for lack of short-term soil quality improvement in a maize and soybean production system. Soil Tillage Res. 2022, 218, 105310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wulanningtyas, H.S.; Gong, Y.; Li, P.; Sakagami, N.; Nishiwaki, J.; Komatsuzaki, M. A cover crop and no-tillage system for enhancing soil health by increasing soil organic matter in soybean cultivation. Soil Tillage Res. 2021, 205, 104749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lal, R. Soil management for carbon sequestration. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 2021, 38, 231–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Vassilev, N.; Malusà, E.; Neri, D.; Xu, X. Editorial: Plant Root Interaction With Associated Microbiomes to Improve Plant Resiliency and Crop Biodiversity. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 10–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Adetunji, A.T.; Ncube, B.; Mulidzi, R.; Lewu, F.B. Management impact and benefit of cover crops on soil quality: A review. Soil Tillage Res. 2020, 204, 104717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mancinelli, R.; Muleo, R.; Marinari, S.; Radicetti, E. How soil ecological intensification by means of cover crops affects nitrogen use efficiency in pepper cultivation. Agriculture 2019, 9, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Radicetti, E.; Campiglia, E.; Marucci, A.; Mancinelli, R. How winter cover crops and tillage intensities affect nitrogen availability in eggplant. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2017, 108, 177–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Thapa, R.; Mirsky, S.B.; Tully, K.L. Cover Crops Reduce Nitrate Leaching in Agroecosystems:A Global Meta-Analysis. J. Environ. Qual. 2018, 47, 1400–1411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Blanco-Canqui, H.; Ruis, S.J. Cover crop impacts on soil physical properties: A review. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2020, 84, 1527–1576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Stocking Gruver, L.; Weil, R.R.; Zasada, I.A.; Sardanelli, S.; Momen, B. Brassicaceous and rye cover crops altered free-living soil nematode community composition. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2010, 45, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Duval, M.E.; Galantini, J.A.; Capurro, J.E.; Martinez, J.M. Winter cover crops in soybean monoculture: Effects on soil organic carbon and its fractions. Soil Tillage Res. 2016, 161, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Magdoff, F.; Van Es, H. Building Soils for Better Crops: Ecological management for healthy soils. Sustain. Agric. Res. Educ. 2019, 10, 394. [Google Scholar]
  44. Boselli, R.; Fiorini, A.; Santelli, S.; Ardenti, F.; Capra, F.; Maris, S.C.; Tabaglio, V. Cover crops during transition to no-till maintain yield and enhance soil fertility in intensive agro-ecosystems. Field Crops Res. 2020, 255, 107871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Papp, R.; Marinari, S.; Moscatelli, M.C.; van der Heijden, M.G.A.; Wittwer, R.; Campiglia, E.; Radicetti, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Fradgley, N.; Pearce, B.; et al. Short-term changes in soil biochemical properties as affected by subsidiary crop cultivation in four European pedo-climatic zones. Soil Tillage Res. 2018, 180, 126–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Patkowska, E.; Błażewicz-Woźniak, M.; Konopiński, M.; Wach, D. The effect of cover crops on the fungal and bacterial communities in the soil under carrot cultivation. Plant Soil Environ. 2016, 62, 237–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Vukicevich, E.; Lowery, T.; Bowen, P.; Úrbez-Torres, J.R.; Hart, M. Cover crops to increase soil microbial diversity and mitigate decline in perennial agriculture. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2016, 36, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Gao, H.; Tian, G.; Khashi u Rahman, M.; Wu, F. Cover Crop Species Composition Alters the Soil Bacterial Community in a Continuous Pepper Cropping System. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 12, 3882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Ntalli, N.; Caboni, P. A review of isothiocyanates biofumigation activity on plant parasitic nematodes. Phytochem. Rev. 2017, 16, 827–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Waisen, P.; Cheng, Z.; Sipes, B.S.; Wang, K.H. Biofumigation effects of brassicaceous cover crops on soil health in cucurbit agroecosystems in Hawaii, USA. Pedosphere 2022, 32, 521–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Aydınlı, G.; Mennan, S. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology Biofumigation Studies by Using Raphanus sativus and Eruca sativa as a Winter Cycle Crops to Control Root-knot Nematodes. Agribus. Biotechnol. 2018, 61, 18180249. [Google Scholar]
  52. Gabriel, J.L.; Quemada, M. Replacing bare fallow with cover crops in a maize cropping system: Yield, N uptake and fertiliser fate. Eur. J. Agron. 2011, 34, 133–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mukherjee, R.; Sen, S. Harvest (Online); Bi-Annual Sustainable Agriculture & N agricultural sustainability through nitrogen fixation: Approaches and techniques. Harvest 2021, 6, 48–55. [Google Scholar]
  54. Wang, Y.; Lambers, H. Root-released organic anions in response to low phosphorus availability: Recent progress, challenges and future perspectives. Plant Soil 2020, 447, 135–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Castellano-Hinojosa, A.; Strauss, S.L. Impact of cover crops on the soil microbiome of tree crops. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Meena, R.S.; Kumar, S.; Yadav, G.S. Soil carbon sequestration in crop production. In Nutrient Dynamics for Sustainable Crop Production; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 1–39. ISBN 9789811386602. [Google Scholar]
  57. Génard, T.; Etienne, P.; Laîné, P.; Yvin, J.C.; Diquélou, S. Nitrogen transfer from Lupinus albus L., Trifolium incarnatum L. and Vicia sativa L. contribute differently to rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) nitrogen nutrition. Heliyon 2016, 2, e00150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Fustec, J.; Lesuffleur, F.; Mahieu, S.; Cliquet, J.B. Nitrogen rhizodeposition of legumes. In Sustainable Agriculture; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; Volume 2, pp. 869–881. ISBN 9789048126651. [Google Scholar]
  59. Lai, H.; Gao, F.; Su, H.; Zheng, P.; Li, Y.; Yao, H. Nitrogen Distribution and Soil Microbial Community Characteristics in A Legume–cereal Intercropping System: A Review. Agronomy 2022, 12, 1900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ferrari Machado, P.V.; Farrell, R.E.; Bell, G.; Taveira, C.J.; Congreves, K.A.; Voroney, R.P.; Deen, W.; Wagner-Riddle, C. Crop residues contribute minimally to spring-thaw nitrous oxide emissions under contrasting tillage and crop rotations. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2021, 152, 108057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Machado, P.V.F.; Farrell, R.E.; Wagner-Riddle, C. Spatial variation of nitrous oxide fluxes during growing and non-growing seasons at a location subjected to seasonally frozen soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2021, 101, 555–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Meena, R.S.; Vijayakumar, V.; Yadav, G.S.; Mitran, T. Response and interaction of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in the soybean rhizosphere. Plant Growth Regul. 2018, 84, 207–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Scavo, A.; Restuccia, A.; Lombardo, S.; Fontanazza, S.; Abbate, C.; Pandino, G.; Anastasi, U.; Onofri, A.; Mauromicale, G. Improving soil health, weed management and nitrogen dynamics by Trifolium subterraneum cover cropping. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 40, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Campiglia, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Radicetti, E.; Baresel, J.P. Evaluating spatial arrangement for durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) and subclover (Trifolium subterraneum L.) intercropping systems. Field Crops Res. 2014, 169, 49–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Guardia, G.; Aguilera, E.; Vallejo, A.; Sanz-Cobena, A.; Alonso-Ayuso, M.; Quemada, M. Effective climate change mitigation through cover cropping and integrated fertilization: A global warming potential assessment from a 10-year field experiment. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 241, 118307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Aguilera, E.; Guzmán, G.I.; Álvaro-Fuentes, J.; Infante-Amate, J.; García-Ruiz, R.; Carranza-Gallego, G.; Soto, D.; González de Molina, M. A historical perspective on soil organic carbon in Mediterranean cropland (Spain, 1900–2008). Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 621, 634–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Radicetti, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Moscetti, R.; Campiglia, E. Management of winter cover crop residues under different tillage conditions affects nitrogen utilization efficiency and yield of eggplant (Solanum melanogena L.) in Mediterranean environment. Soil Tillage Res. 2016, 155, 329–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Campiglia, E.; Radicetti, E.; Mancinelli, R. Cover crops and mulches influence weed management and weed flora composition in strip-tilled tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Weed Res. 2015, 55, 416–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Campiglia, E.; Radicetti, E.; Brunetti, P.; Mancinelli, R. Do cover crop species and residue management play a leading role in pepper productivity? Sci. Hortic. 2014, 166, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Taab, A.; Khazaie, M.; Andersson, L.; Bergkvist, G.; Radicetti, E. Ecological intensification using Persian clover to support weed management in winter wheat under semiarid conditions. Crop Prot. 2022, 164, 106142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ahmadnia, F.; Ebadi, A.; Hashemi, M.; Ghavidel, A. Investigating the short time effect of cover crops on physical and biological properties of soil. J. Water Soil Conserv. 2020, 26, 277–290. [Google Scholar]
  72. Chapagain, T.; Lee, E.A.; Raizada, M.N. The Potential of Multi-Species Mixtures to Diversify Cover Crop Benefits. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Couëdel, A.; Alletto, L.; Tribouillois, H.; Justes, É. Cover crop crucifer-legume mixtures provide effective nitrate catch crop and nitrogen green manure ecosystem services. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2018, 254, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Kaye, J.; Finney, D.; White, C.; Bradley, B.; Schipanski, M.; Alonso-Ayuso, M.; Hunter, M.; Burgess, M.; Mejia, C. Managing nitrogen through cover crop species selection in the U.S. Mid-Atlantic. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0215448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Chen, G.; Weil, R.R. Penetration of cover crop roots through compacted soils. Plant Soil 2010, 331, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Daryanto, S.; Fu, B.; Wang, L.; Jacinthe, P.A.; Zhao, W. Quantitative synthesis on the ecosystem services of cover crops. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2018, 185, 357–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Tassinari, A.; da Silva, L.O.S.; Drescher, G.L.; de Oliveira, R.A.; Baldi, E.; de Melo, G.W.B.; Zalamena, J.; Mayer, N.A.; Giacomini, S.J.; Carranca, C.L.D.A.F.; et al. Contribution of Cover Crop Residue Decomposition to Peach Tree Nitrogen Nutrition. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2021, 21, 2124–2136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Barrena-González, J.; Rodrigo-Comino, J.; Gyasi-Agyei, Y.; Fernández, M.P.; Cerdà, A. Applying the RUSLE and ISUM in the Tierra de Barros Vineyards (Extremadura, Spain) to estimate soil mobilisation rates. Land 2020, 9, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Martínez Raya, A.; Durán Zuazo, V.H.; Francia Martínez, J.R. Soil erosion and runoff response to plant-cover strips on semiarid slopes (SE Spain). Land Degrad. Dev. 2006, 17, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Keesstra, S.; Pereira, P.; Novara, A.; Brevik, E.C.; Azorin-Molina, C.; Parras-Alcántara, L.; Jordán, A.; Cerdà, A. Effects of soil management techniques on soil water erosion in apricot orchards. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 551–552, 357–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  81. Rodrigo-Comino, J.; Ponsoda-Carreres, M.; Salesa, D.; Terol, E.; Gyasi-Agyei, Y.; Cerdà, A. Soil erosion processes in subtropical plantations (Diospyros kaki) managed under flood irrigation in Eastern Spain. Singap. J. Trop. Geogr. 2020, 41, 120–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. López-Vicente, M.; García-Ruiz, R.; Guzmán, G.; Vicente-Vicente, J.L.; Van Wesemael, B.; Gómez, J.A. Temporal stability and patterns of runoff and runon with different cover crops in an olive orchard (SW Andalusia, Spain). Catena 2016, 147, 125–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. Kaye, J.P.; Quemada, M. Using cover crops to mitigate and adapt to climate change. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 37, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Beniaich, A.; Silva, M.L.N.; Guimarães, D.V.; Bispo, D.F.A.; Avanzi, J.C.; Curi, N.; Pio, R.; Dondeyne, S. Assessment of soil erosion in olive orchards (Olea Europaea L.) Under cover crops management systems in the tropical region of Brazil. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 2020, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. López-Vicente, M.; Calvo-Seas, E.; Álvarez, S.; Cerdà, A. Effectiveness of cover crops to reduce loss of soil organic matter in a rainfed vineyard. Land 2020, 9, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. García-Díaz, A.; Marqués, M.J.; Sastre, B.; Bienes, R. Labile and stable soil organic carbon and physical improvements using groundcovers in vineyards from central Spain. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 621, 387–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Novara, A.; Cerda, A.; Barone, E.; Gristina, L. Cover crop management and water conservation in vineyard and olive orchards. Soil Tillage Res. 2021, 208, 104896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Isik, D.; Dok, M.; Ak, K.; Macit, I.; Demir, Z.; Mennan, H. Use of cover crops for weed suppression in hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.) in turkey. Commun. Agric. Appl. Biol. Sci. 2014, 79, 105–110. [Google Scholar]
  89. Demir, Z.; Işik, D. The impact of different cover crops, mechanical cultivation and herbicide treatment on the soil quality variables and yield in apple (Malus domestica borkh.) orchard with a coarse-textured soil. Tarim Bilim. Derg. 2020, 26, 452–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Sonko, S.; Maksymenko, N.; Vasylenko, O.; Chornomorets, V.; Koval, I. Biodiversity and landscape diversity as indicators of sustainable development. In Proceedings of the E3S Web of Conferences, Kenitra, Morocco, 25–27 December 2021; Volume 255. [Google Scholar]
  91. Lin, B.B. Resilience in agriculture through crop diversification: Adaptive management for environmental change. Bioscience 2011, 61, 183–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Knowler, D.; Bradshaw, B. Farmers’ adoption of conservation agriculture: A review and synthesis of recent research. Food Policy 2007, 32, 25–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Bowles, T.M.; Mooshammer, M.; Socolar, Y.; Calderón, F.; Cavigelli, M.A.; Culman, S.W.; Deen, W.; Drury, C.F.; Garcia y Garcia, A.; Gaudin, A.C.M.; et al. Long-Term Evidence Shows that Crop-Rotation Diversification Increases Agricultural Resilience to Adverse Growing Conditions in North America. One Earth 2020, 2, 284–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Hunt, N.D.; Hill, J.D.; Liebman, M. Reducing Freshwater Toxicity while Maintaining Weed Control, Profits, and Productivity: Effects of Increased Crop Rotation Diversity and Reduced Herbicide Usage. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 1707–1717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Pott, L.P.; Amado, T.J.C.; Schwalbert, R.A.; Gebert, F.H.; Reimche, G.B.; Pes, L.Z.; Ciampitti, I.A. Effect of hairy vetch cover crop on maize nitrogen supply and productivity at varying yield environments in Southern Brazil. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 759, 144313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Ruark, M.D.; Chawner, M.M.; Ballweg, M.J.; Proost, R.T.; Arriaga, F.J.; Stute, J.K. Does cover crop radish supply nitrogen to corn? Agron. J. 2018, 110, 1513–1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Snapp, S.; Surapur, S. Rye cover crop retains nitrogen and doesn’t reduce corn yields. Soil Tillage Res. 2018, 180, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Liu, J.; Peng, Y.; Li, C.; Gao, Z.; Chen, S. Characterization of the hydrochemistry of water resources of the Weibei Plain, Northern China, as well as an assessment of the risk of high groundwater nitrate levels to human health. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 268, 115947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Eshel, G.; Unc, A.; Egozi, R.; Shakartchy, E.; Doniger, T.; Steinberger, Y. Orchard floor management effect on soil free-living nematode communities. Soil Res. 2021, 60, 310–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Abbas, T.; Ahmad, A.; Kamal, A.; Nawaz, M.Y.; Jamil, M.A.; Saeed, T.; Abid, M.A.; Ali, H.H.; Ateeq, M. Ways to Use Allelopathic Potential for Weed Management: A Review. Int. J. Food Sci. Agric. 2021, 5, 492–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Campiglia, E.; Radicetti, E.; Mancinelli, R. Weed control strategies and yield response in a pepper crop (Capsicum annuum L.) mulched with hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth.) and oat (Avena sativa L.) residues. Crop Prot. 2012, 33, 65–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Langeroodi, A.S.; Radicetti, E.; Campiglia, E. How cover crop residue management and herbicide rate affect weed management and yield of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.) crop. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2019; 34, 492–500. [Google Scholar]
  103. Gerhards, R.; Schappert, A. Advancing cover cropping in temperate integrated weed management. Pest Manag. Sci. 2020, 76, 42–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Scavo, A.; Abbate, C.; Mauromicale, G. Plant allelochemicals: Agronomic, nutritional and ecological relevance in the soil system. Plant Soil 2019, 442, 23–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Franczuk, J.; Kosterna, E.; Zaniewicz-Bajkowska, A. Weed-control effects on different types of cover-crop mulches. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B–Soil Plant Sci. 2010, 60, 472–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. dos Santos Soares, D.; Ramos, M.L.G.; Marchão, R.L.; Maciel, G.A.; de Oliveira, A.D.; Malaquias, J.V.; de Carvalho, A.M. How diversity of crop residues in long-term no-tillage systems affect chemical and microbiological soil properties. Soil Tillage Res. 2019, 194, 104316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Thapa, V.R.; Ghimire, R.; Acosta-Martínez, V.; Marsalis, M.A.; Schipanski, M.E. Cover crop biomass and species composition affect soil microbial community structure and enzyme activities in semiarid cropping systems. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 157, 103735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. De Carvalho, A.M.; Coelho, M.C.; Dantas, R.A.; Fonseca, O.P.; Júnior, R.G.; Figueiredo, C.C.; de Carvalho, A.M.; Coelho, M.C.; Dantas, R.A.; Fonseca, O.P.; et al. Chemical composition of cover plants and its effect on maize yield in no-tillage systems in the Brazilian savanna. Crop Pasture Sci. 2013, 63, 1075–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Finney, D.M.; White, C.M.; Kaye, J.P. Biomass production and carbon/nitrogen ratio influence ecosystem services from cover crop mixtures. Agron. J. 2016, 108, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Garland, G.; Edlinger, A.; Banerjee, S.; Degrune, F.; García-Palacios, P.; Pescador, D.S.; Herzog, C.; Romdhane, S.; Saghai, A.; Spor, A.; et al. Crop cover is more important than rotational diversity for soil multifunctionality and cereal yields in European cropping systems. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Li, X.; Tan, A.; Chen, K.; Pan, Y.; Gentry, T.; Dou, F. Effect of cover crop type and application rate on soil nitrogen mineralization and availability in organic rice production. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Jiang, Y.; Zhou, H.; Chen, L.; Yuan, Y.; Fang, H.; Luan, L.; Chen, Y.; Wang, X.; Liu, M.; Li, H.; et al. Nematodes and microorganisms interactively stimulate soil organic carbon turnover in the macroaggregates. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  113. Rillig, M.C.; Muller, L.A.; Lehmann, A. Soil aggregates as massively concurrent evolutionary incubators. ISME J. 2017, 11, 1943–1948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Sohlenius, B.; Sohlenius, B. Abundance, Biomass and Contribution to Energy Flow by Soil Nematodes in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Oikos 1980, 34, 186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Bardgett, R.D.; Cook, R.; Yeates, G.W.; Denton, C.S. The influence of nematodes on below-ground processes in grassland ecosystems. Plant Soil 1999, 212, 23–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Trap, J.; Bonkowski, M.; Plassard, C.; Villenave, C.; Blanchart, E. Ecological importance of soil bacterivores for ecosystem functions. Plant Soil 2016, 398, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Knox, O.G.G.; Killham, K.; Artz, R.R.E.; Mullins, C.; Wilson, M. Effect of nematodes on rhizosphere colonization by seed-applied bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 4666–4671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  118. Irshad, U.; Brauman, A.; Villenave, C.; Plassard, C. Phosphorus acquisition from phytate depends on efficient bacterial grazing, irrespective of the mycorrhizal status of Pinus pinaster. Plant Soil 2012, 358, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Altieri, M.A. The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1999, 74, 19–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. Barot, S.; Lata, J.C.; Lacroix, G. Meeting the relational challenge of ecological engineering within ecological sciences. Ecol. Eng. 2012, 45, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Kim, N.; Zabaloy, M.C.; Guan, K.; Villamil, M.B. Do cover crops benefit soil microbiome? A meta-analysis of current research. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2020, 142, 107701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Restuccia, A.; Scavo, A.; Lombardo, S.; Pandino, G.; Fontanazza, S.; Anastasi, U.; Abbate, C.; Mauromicale, G. Long-term effect of cover crops on species abundance and diversity of weed flora. Plants 2020, 9, 1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Mennan, H.; Jabran, K.; Zandstra, B.H.; Pala, F. Non-chemical weed management in vegetables by using cover crops: A review. Agronomy 2020, 10, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  124. Mortensen, E.Ø.; De Notaris, C.; Peixoto, L.; Olesen, J.E.; Rasmussen, J. Short-term cover crop carbon inputs to soil as affected by long-term cropping system management and soil fertility. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2021, 311, 107339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Henneron, L.; Bernard, L.; Hedde, M.; Pelosi, C.; Villenave, C.; Chenu, C.; Bertrand, M.; Girardin, C.; Blanchart, E. Fourteen years of evidence for positive effects of conservation agriculture and organic farming on soil life. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 35, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  126. Margenot, A.J.; Hodson, A.K. Relationships between labile soil organic matter and nematode communities in a California oak woodland. Nematology 2016, 18, 1231–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. van den Hoogen, J.; Geisen, S.; Routh, D.; Ferris, H.; Traunspurger, W.; Wardle, D.A.; de Goede, R.G.M.; Adams, B.J.; Ahmad, W.; Andriuzzi, W.S.; et al. Soil nematode abundance and functional group composition at a global scale. Nature 2019, 572, 194–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  128. Agovino, M.; Casaccia, M.; Ciommi, M.; Ferrara, M.; Marchesano, K. Agriculture, climate change and sustainability: The case of EU-28. Ecol. Indic. 2019, 105, 525–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Ray, D.K.; West, P.C.; Clark, M.; Gerber, J.S.; Prishchepov, A.V.; Chatterjee, S. Climate change has likely already affected global food production. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0217148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Li, Y.; Guan, K.; Schnitkey, G.D.; DeLucia, E.; Peng, B. Excessive rainfall leads to maize yield loss of a comparable magnitude to extreme drought in the United States. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2019, 25, 2325–2337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  131. Radicetti, E.; Osipitan, O.A.; Reza, A.; Langeroodi, S.; Marinari, S.; Mancinelli, R. CO2 Flux and C Balance due to the Replacement of Bare Soil with Agro-Ecological Service Crops in Mediterranean Environment. Agriculture 2019, 9, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  132. McNunn, G.; Karlen, D.L.; Salas, W.; Rice, C.W.; Mueller, S.; Muth, D.; Seale, J.W. Climate smart agriculture opportunities for mitigating soil greenhouse gas emissions across the U.S. Corn-Belt. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 268, 122240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Arrouays, D.; Horn, R. Soil Carbon-4 per Mille—An introduction. Soil Tillage Res. 2019, 188, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Fornara, D.A.; Tilman, D. Plant functional composition influences rates of soil carbon and nitrogen accumulation. J. Ecol. 2008, 96, 314–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Cong, W.-F.; Van Ruijven, J.; Mommer, L.; De Deyn, G.B.; Berendse, F.; Hoffland, E. Plant species richness promotes soil carbon and nitrogen stocks in grasslands without legumes. J. Ecol. 2014, 102, 1163–1170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Lange, M.; Eisenhauer, N.; Sierra, C.A.; Bessler, H.; Engels, C.; Griffiths, R.I.; Mellado-Vázquez, P.G.; Malik, A.A.; Roy, J.; Scheu, S.; et al. Plant diversity increases soil microbial activity and soil carbon storage. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 6707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  137. Menta, C.; Conti, F.D.; Fondón, C.L.; Staffilani, F.; Remelli, S. Soil arthropod responses in agroecosystem: Implications of different management and cropping systems. Agronomy 2020, 10, 982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Radicetti, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Campiglia, E. Impact of managing cover crop residues on the floristic composition and species diversity of the weed community of pepper crop (Capsicum annuum L.). Crop Prot. 2013, 44, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Thapa, R.; Tully, K.L.; Hamovit, N.; Yarwood, S.A.; Schomberg, H.H.; Cabrera, M.L.; Reberg-Horton, C.; Mirsky, S.B. Microbial processes and community structure as influenced by cover crop residue type and placement during repeated dry-wet cycles. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2022, 172, 104349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Lacey, C.; Nevins, C.; Camberato, J.; Kladivko, E.; Sadeghpour, A.; Armstrong, S. Carbon and nitrogen release from cover crop residues and implications for cropping systems management. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2020, 75, 505–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Basche, A.D.; Miguez, F.E.; Kaspar, T.C.; Castellano, M.J. Do cover crops increase or decrease nitrous oxide emissions? A meta-analysis. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2014, 69, 471–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  142. Guardia, G.; Abalos, D.; García-Marco, S.; Quemada, M.; Alonso-Ayuso, M.; Cárdenas, L.M.; Dixon, E.R.; Vallejo, A. Effect of cover crops on greenhouse gas emissions in an irrigated field under integrated soil fertility management. Biogeosciences 2016, 13, 5245–5257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  143. Mancinelli, R.; Marinari, S.; Brunetti, P.; Radicetti, E.; Campiglia, E. Organic mulching, irrigation and fertilization affect soil CO2 emission and C storage in tomato crop in the Mediterranean environment. Soil Tillage Res. 2015, 152, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Radicetti, E.; Massantini, R.; Campiglia, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Ferri, S.; Moscetti, R. Yield and quality of eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) as affected by cover crop species and residue management. Sci. Hortic. 2016, 204, 161–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Abdalla, M.; Hastings, A.; Helmy, M.; Prescher, A.; Osborne, B.; Lanigan, G.; Forristal, D.; Killi, D.; Maratha, P.; Williams, M.; et al. Assessing the combined use of reduced tillage and cover crops for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from arable ecosystem. Geoderma 2014, 223–225, 9–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Sanz-Cobena, A.; García-Marco, S.; Quemada, M.; Gabriel, J.L.; Almendros, P.; Vallejo, A. Do cover crops enhance N2O, CO2 or CH4 emissions from soil in Mediterranean arable systems? Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 466–467, 164–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Kocira, A.; Staniak, M.; Tomaszewska, M.; Kornas, R.; Cymerman, J.; Panasiewicz, K.; Lipińska, H. Legume cover crops as one of the elements of strategic weed management and soil quality improvement. A review. Agriculture 2020, 10, 394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Muhammad, I.; Sainju, U.M.; Zhao, F.; Khan, A.; Ghimire, R.; Fu, X.; Wang, J. Regulation of soil CO2 and N2O emissions by cover crops: A meta-analysis. Soil Tillage Res. 2019, 192, 103–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Alonso-Ayuso, M.; Gabriel, J.L.; Quemada, M. The kill date as a management tool for cover cropping success. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e109587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Benedict, C.; Cogger, C.; Andrews, N. Methods for Successful Cover Crop Management in Your Home Garden; Washington State University: Pullman, WA, USA, 2014; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  151. Gao, J.; Xie, Y.; Jin, H.; Liu, Y.; Bai, X.; Ma, D.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, C.; Guo, T. Nitrous Oxide Emission and Denitrifier Abundance in Two Agricultural Soils Amended with Crop Residues and Urea in the North China Plain. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0154773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  152. Pausch, J.; Kuzyakov, Y. Carbon input by roots into the soil: Quantification of rhizodeposition from root to ecosystem scale. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2018, 24, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Behnke, G.D.; Villamil, M.B. Cover crop rotations affect greenhouse gas emissions and crop production in Illinois, USA. Field Crops Res. 2019, 241, 107580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Mohanty, S.; Swain, C.K.; Kumar, A.; Nayak, A.K. Nitrogen footprint: A useful indicator of agricultural sustainability. In Nutrient Dynamics for Sustainable Crop Production; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 135–156. ISBN 9789811386602. [Google Scholar]
  155. Exner, M.E.; Hirsh, A.J.; Spalding, R.F. Nebraska’s groundwater legacy: Nitrate contamination beneath irrigated cropland. Water Resour. Res. 2014, 50, 4474–4489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  156. Water and Air Quality Bureau; Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, H.C. Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: Guideline Technical Document—Bromate; 2016; Volume 24, ISBN 9780660074924. Available online: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/healthy-living/guidelines-canadian-drinking-water-quality-guideline-technical-document-bromate/guidance-document.html (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  157. Parsons, M.L.; Dortch, Q. Sedimentological evidence of an increase in Pseudo-nitzschia (Bacillariophyceae) abundance in response to coastal eutrophication. Limnol. Oceanogr. 2002, 47, 551–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Scott, G.; Crunkilton, R.L. Acute and chronic toxicity of nitrate to fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas), Ceriodaphnia dubia, and Daphnia magna. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2000, 19, 2918–2922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Blanco-Canqui, H.; Shaver, T.M.; Lindquist, J.L.; Shapiro, C.A.; Elmore, R.W.; Francis, C.A.; Hergert, G.W. Cover crops and ecosystem services: Insights from studies in temperate soils. Agron. J. 2015, 107, 2449–2474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Chatterjee, A.; Clay, D.E. Cover crops impacts on nitrogen scavenging, nitrous oxide emissions, nitrogen fertilizer replacement, erosion, and soil health. Soil Fertil. Manag. Agroecosyst. 2016, 76–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Ogilvie, C.M.; Ashiq, W.; Vasava, H.B.; Biswas, A. Quantifying root-soil interactions in cover crop systems: A review. Agriculture 2021, 11, 218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Campiglia, E.; Mancinelli, R.; Radicetti, E.; Marinari, S. Legume cover crops and mulches: Effects on nitrate leaching and nitrogen input in a pepper crop (Capsicum annuum L.). Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2011, 89, 399–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Sharma, V.; Irmak, S. Soil-Water Dynamics, Evapotranspiration, and Crop Coefficients of Cover-Crop Mixtures in Seed Maize Cover-Crop Rotation Fields. II: Grass-Reference and Alfalfa-Reference Single (Normal) and Basal Crop Coefficients. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 2017, 143, 04017033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Delpuech, X.; Metay, A. Adapting cover crop soil coverage to soil depth to limit competition for water in a Mediterranean vineyard. Eur. J. Agron. 2018, 97, 60–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Basche, A.D.; DeLonge, M.S. Comparing infiltration rates in soils managed with conventional and alternative farming methods: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0215702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  166. Dabney, S.M. Cover crop impacts on watershed hydrology. J. Soil Water Conserv. 1998, 53, 207–213. [Google Scholar]
  167. Smith, P.; Martino, D.; Cai, Z.; Gwary, D.; Janzen, H.; Kumar, P.; McCarl, B.; Ogle, S.; O’Mara, F.; Rice, C.; et al. Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2008, 363, 789–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  168. Carlson, K.M.; Gerber, J.S.; Mueller, N.D.; Herrero, M.; MacDonald, G.K.; Brauman, K.A.; Havlik, P.; O’Connell, C.S.; Johnson, J.A.; Saatchi, S.; et al. Greenhouse gas emissions intensity of global croplands. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2017, 7, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Hou, P.; Xue, L.; Wang, J.; Petropoulos, E.; Deng, X.; Qiao, J.; Xue, L.; Yang, L. Continuous milk vetch amendment in rice-fallow rotation improves soil fertility and maintains rice yield without increasing CH4 emissions: Evidence from a long-term experiment. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2022, 325, 107774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Zhang, S.; Jain, M.; Fleites, L.A.; Rayside, P.A.; Gabriel, D.W. Identification and characterization of menadione and benzethonium chloride as potential treatments of Pierce’s disease of grapevines. Phytopathology 2019, 109, 233–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  171. Zhao, J.; De Notaris, C.; Olesen, J.E. Autumn-based vegetation indices for estimating nitrate leaching during autumn and winter in arable cropping systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2020, 290, 106786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. De Notaris, C.; Rasmussen, J.; Sørensen, P.; Olesen, J.E. Nitrogen leaching: A crop rotation perspective on the effect of N surplus, field management and use of catch crops. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2018, 255, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Carey, P.L.; Cameron, K.C.; Di, H.J.; Edwards, G.R.; Chapman, D.F. Sowing a winter catch crop can reduce nitrate leaching losses from winter-applied urine under simulated forage grazing: A lysimeter study. Soil Use Manag. 2016, 32, 329–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Constantin, J.; Mary, B.; Laurent, F.; Aubrion, G.; Fontaine, A.; Kerveillant, P.; Beaudoin, N. Effects of catch crops, no till and reduced nitrogen fertilization on nitrogen leaching and balance in three long-term experiments. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2010, 135, 268–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Kristensen, H.L.; Thorup-Kristensen, K. Root Growth and Nitrate Uptake of Three Different Catch Crops in Deep Soil Layers. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2004, 68, 529–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Soltangheisi, A.; Teles, A.P.B.; Sartor, L.R.; Pavinato, P.S. Cover Cropping May Alter Legacy Phosphorus Dynamics under Long-Term Fertilizer Addition. Front. Environ. Sci. 2020, 8, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  177. Sharma, V.; Irmak, S.; Padhi, J. Effects of cover crops on soil quality: Part II. Soil exchangeable bases (potassium, magnesium, sodium, and calcium), cation exchange capacity, and soil micronutrients (zinc, manganese, iron, copper, and boron). J. Soil Water Conserv. 2018, 73, 652–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Alonso-Ayuso, M.; Gabriel, J.L.; Hontoria, C.; Ibáñez, M.Á.; Quemada, M. The cover crop termination choice to designing sustainable cropping systems. Eur. J. Agron. 2020, 114, 126000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Duzy, L.M.; Kornecki, T.S. Effects of cover crop termination and cotton planting methods on cotton production in conservation systems. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2019, 34, 406–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. EL Sabagh, A.; Çiğ, F.; Seydoşoğlu, S.; Leonardo Battaglia, M.; Javed, T.; Aamir Iqbal, M.; Mubeen, M.; Ali, M.; Ali, M.; Bengisu, G.; et al. Salinity Stress in Maize: Effects of Stress and Recent Developments of Tolerance for Improvement. In Cereal Grains—Volume 1; Books on Demand: Norderstedt, Germany, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  181. Bello, S.K.; Alayafi, A.H.; Al-Solaimani, S.G.; Abo-Elyousr, K.A.M. Mitigating soil salinity stress with gypsum and bio-organic amendments: A review. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Alkharabsheh, H.M.; Seleiman, M.F.; Hewedy, O.A.; Battaglia, M.L.; Jalal, R.S.; Alhammad, B.A.; Schillaci, C.; Ali, N.; Al-Doss, A. Field crop responses and management strategies to mitigate soil salinity in modern agriculture: A review. Agronomy 2021, 11, 2299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Cuevas, J.; Daliakopoulos, I.N.; Del Moral, F.; Hueso, J.J.; Tsanis, I.K. A review of soil-improving cropping systems for soil salinization. Agronomy 2019, 9, 295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  184. Forkutsa, I.; Sommer, R.; Shirokova, Y.I.; Lamers, J.P.A.; Kienzler, K.; Tischbein, B.; Martius, C.; Vlek, P.L.G. Modeling irrigated cotton with shallow groundwater in the Aral Sea Basin of Uzbekistan: II. Soil salinity dynamics. Irrig. Sci. 2009, 27, 319–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Song, X.; Sun, R.; Chen, W.; Wang, M. Effects of surface straw mulching and buried straw layer on soil water content and salinity dynamics in saline soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 2020, 100, 58–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Zhang, M.; Dong, B.; Qiao, Y.; Yang, H.; Wang, Y.; Liu, M. Effects of sub-soil plastic film mulch on soil water and salt content and water utilization by winter wheat under different soil salinities. Field Crops Res. 2018, 225, 130–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Novara, A.; Minacapilli, M.; Santoro, A.; Rodrigo-Comino, J.; Carrubba, A.; Sarno, M.; Venezia, G.; Gristina, L. Real cover crops contribution to soil organic carbon sequestration in sloping vineyard. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 652, 300–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  188. Barker, J.B.; Heeren, D.M.; Koehler-Cole, K.; Shapiro, C.A.; Blanco-Canqui, H.; Elmore, R.W.; Proctor, C.A.; Irmak, S.; Francis, C.A.; Shaver, T.M.; et al. Cover crops have negligible impact on soil water in Nebraska Maize–Soybean rotation. Agron. J. 2018, 110, 1718–1730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  189. Alfonso, C.; Barbieri, P.A.; Hernández, M.D.; Lewczuk, N.A.; Martínez, J.P.; Echarte, M.M.; Echarte, L. Water productivity in soybean following a cover crop in a humid environment. Agric. Water Manag. 2020, 232, 106045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Wang, J.; Zhang, S.; Sainju, U.M.; Ghimire, R.; Zhao, F. A meta-analysis on cover crop impact on soil water storage, succeeding crop yield, and water-use efficiency. Agric. Water Manag. 2021, 256, 378–3774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Hudek, C.; Putinica, C.; Otten, W.; De Baets, S. Functional root trait-based classification of cover crops to improve soil physical properties. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2022, 73, e13147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agriculture 12 02076 g001 550
Figure 1. Comparison between conventional (A), improved (B), and high sustainable cropping systems (C) to support the adoption of cover cropping strategy for improving the sustainability of agro-ecosystems.
Figure 1. Comparison between conventional (A), improved (B), and high sustainable cropping systems (C) to support the adoption of cover cropping strategy for improving the sustainability of agro-ecosystems.
Agriculture 12 02076 g001
Agriculture 12 02076 g002 550
Figure 2. Schematic diagram explaining the role of different type of cover crops in the agroecosystems and their main ecological services. A = Leguminous species, B = Brassicaceous species, C = Gramineous species.
Figure 2. Schematic diagram explaining the role of different type of cover crops in the agroecosystems and their main ecological services. A = Leguminous species, B = Brassicaceous species, C = Gramineous species.
Agriculture 12 02076 g002
Agriculture 12 02076 g003 550
Figure 3. Ecological services associated with cover crops.
Figure 3. Ecological services associated with cover crops.
Agriculture 12 02076 g003
Agriculture 12 02076 g004 550
Figure 4. Benefits of cover crops on physical, chemical, and biological components of agro-ecosystems.
Figure 4. Benefits of cover crops on physical, chemical, and biological components of agro-ecosystems.
Agriculture 12 02076 g004
Agriculture 12 02076 g005 550
Figure 5. Role of cover crops and their residues on nitrogen cycling in the agroecosystem.
Figure 5. Role of cover crops and their residues on nitrogen cycling in the agroecosystem.
Agriculture 12 02076 g005
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Quintarelli, V.; Radicetti, E.; Allevato, E.; Stazi, S.R.; Haider, G.; Abideen, Z.; Bibi, S.; Jamal, A.; Mancinelli, R. Cover Crops for Sustainable Cropping Systems: A Review. Agriculture 2022, 12, 2076. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122076

AMA Style

Quintarelli V, Radicetti E, Allevato E, Stazi SR, Haider G, Abideen Z, Bibi S, Jamal A, Mancinelli R. Cover Crops for Sustainable Cropping Systems: A Review. Agriculture. 2022; 12(12):2076. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122076

Chicago/Turabian Style

Quintarelli, Valentina, Emanuele Radicetti, Enrica Allevato, Silvia Rita Stazi, Ghulam Haider, Zainul Abideen, Safia Bibi, Aftab Jamal, and Roberto Mancinelli. 2022. "Cover Crops for Sustainable Cropping Systems: A Review" Agriculture 12, no. 12: 2076. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122076

APA Style

Quintarelli, V., Radicetti, E., Allevato, E., Stazi, S. R., Haider, G., Abideen, Z., Bibi, S., Jamal, A., & Mancinelli, R. (2022). Cover Crops for Sustainable Cropping Systems: A Review. Agriculture, 12(12), 2076. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122076

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop