Repaying Darwin’s Debt to Agriculture

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Ford Denison
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Natural Selection ◽  
Plant Breeding ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Genetic Improvement ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Evolutionary Change ◽  
Resource Use Efficiency ◽  
Agricultural Ecosystems ◽  
Use Efficiency

This book proposes new approaches to improving agriculture based on the principles of evolutionary biology and natural selection. It argues that two popular approaches to improving agriculture, biotechnology and traditional plant breeding, have tended to ignore evolutionary tradeoffs—that is, cases where an evolutionary change that is positive in one context is negative in another—and that both of them would benefit from greater attention to evolution. Whether we focus on genetic improvement of crops or better management of agricultural ecosystems, the book emphasizes the need to identify (and sometimes accept) tradeoffs that constrained past evolution in order to find new solutions to agricultural problems. It also considers some of the challenges facing agriculture, such as resource-use efficiency and food security. This chapter provides an overview of the book.

What Won’t Work

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Ford Denison
Keyword(s):  
Plant Breeding ◽  
Water Use ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Genetic Improvement ◽  
Nutrient Use Efficiency ◽  
Yield Potential ◽  
Resource Use Efficiency ◽  
Nutrient Use ◽  
Use Efficiency ◽  
Near Term

This chapter considers the challenge of improving crop resource-use efficiency using biotechnology or traditional plant breeding. It argues that some of biotechnology's stated goals, such as more efficient use of water by crops, are unlikely to be achieved without tradeoffs. After providing an overview of crop genetic improvement via traditional plant breeding or biotechnology, the chapter discusses the importance of greater resource-use efficiency and increasing yield potential. It then explains how natural selection has improved the efficiency of photosynthesis as well as water-use efficiency and how tradeoffs limit biotechnology improvement of crop water use. It also assesses the potential of genetic engineering to improve nutrient-use efficiency and asserts that near-term benefits of biotechnology have been exaggerated. The chapter concludes with a review of biotechnology's possible benefits and risks.

Resource Use Efficiency in Gram Production of Amravati Division

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (9) ◽  
pp. 532-534
Author(s):  
Ganeshkumar D Rede ◽  
◽  
Dr. S. J. Kakde Dr. S. J. Kakde ◽  
Vanita Khobarkar
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Resource Use Efficiency ◽  
Use Efficiency

Role of Finance in Resource use Efficiency and Constraints in Banana Cultivation in Uttar Pradesh

2020 ◽  
pp. 437-441
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Uttar Pradesh ◽  
Sampling Technique ◽  
Farm Size ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Resource Use Efficiency ◽  
Regular Source ◽  
Block Level ◽  
Use Efficiency ◽  
Secondary Information

The study was conducted using purposive cum random sampling technique and two hundred respondents comprised of 100 each borrowers and non-borrowers were selected from two block of district including marginal, small and medium categories of farm size. Primary data were collected through personal interview technique and required secondary information was taken from the record available at district and block level. Simple tabular and functional analysis and Garrett ranking were done to draw inferences. As per the result obtained from the study, no much difference was seen between the resource use efficiency of borrower and non-borrower farms and constraints faced by borrower. Since banana is a cash crop and it needs initial costs for its establishment, and after harvesting the crop regular source of income was generated by selling of suckers (seed) plant and its fruits. It’s by-product, leaves, etc. also used for various purposes. Minute inspection of the analysis showed that finance played important role for initiating the cultivation of banana crops showed the resource use efficiency that there is no considerable difference found on sample farms of borrower and non-borrower categories. Constraints faced by majority of the farmers were mainly delay in disbursement of loan and lack of the repayment period insufficient and improper management for withdraws on KCC.

Comparison of Yield and Light-temperature Resource Use Efficiency between Wheat-Maize and Maize-Maize Cropping Systems

2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (9) ◽  
pp. 1393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bao-Yuan ZHOU ◽  
Zhi-Min WANG ◽  
Yang YUE ◽  
Wei MA ◽  
Ming ZHAO
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Resource Use Efficiency ◽  
Use Efficiency

Resource use efficiency in a cotton-wheat double-cropping system in the Yellow River Valley of China

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 422-439
Author(s):  
Guoping Wang ◽  
Yabing Li ◽  
Yingchun Han ◽  
Zhanbiao Wang ◽  
Beifang Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Yellow River ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Cropping System ◽  
River Valley ◽  
The Yellow River ◽  
Resource Use Efficiency ◽  
Yellow River Valley ◽  
Double Cropping ◽  
Use Efficiency

AbstractThe cotton-wheat double-cropping system is widely used in the Yellow River Valley of China, but whether and how different planting patterns within cotton-wheat double-cropping systems impact heat and light use efficiency have not been well documented. A field experiment investigated the effects of the cropping system on crop productivity and the capture and use efficiency of heat and light in two fields differing in soil fertility. Three planting patterns, namely cotton intercropped with wheat (CIW), cotton directly seeded after wheat (CDW), and cotton transplanted after wheat (CTW), as well as one cotton monoculture (CM) system were used. Cotton-wheat double cropping significantly increased crop productivity and land equivalent ratios relative to the CM system in both fields. As a result of increased growing degree days (GDD), intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (IPAR), and photothermal product (PTP), the capture of light and heat in the double-cropping systems was compared with that in the CM system in both fields. With improved resource capture, the double-cropping systems exhibited a higher light and heat use efficiency according to thermal product efficiency, solar energy use efficiency (Eu), radiation use efficiency (RUE), and PTP use efficiency (PTPU). The cotton lint yield and biomass were not significantly correlated with RUE across cropping patterns, indicating that RUE does not limit cotton production. Among the double-cropping treatments, CDW had the lowest GDD, IPAR, and PTP values but the highest heat and light resource use efficiency and highest overall resource use efficiency. This good performance was even more obvious in the high-fertility field. Therefore, we encourage the expanded use of CDW in the Yellow River Valley, especially in fields with high fertility, given the high productivity and resource use efficiency of this system. Moreover, the use of agronomic practices involving a reasonably close planting density, optimized irrigation and nutrient supply, and the application of new short-season varieties of cotton or wheat can potentially enhance CDW crop yields and productivity.

scholarly journals Synergies and tradeoffs among yield, resource use efficiency, and environmental footprint indicators in rice systems

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 100070
Author(s):  
Meng-Chun Tseng ◽  
Álvaro Roel ◽  
Ignacio Macedo ◽  
Muzio Marella ◽  
José A. Terra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Resource Use ◽  
Environmental Footprint ◽  
Resource Use Efficiency ◽  
Use Efficiency
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document