Advertisement

Water Resources Management

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 1–29 | Cite as

Environmental Benefits and Control of Pollution to Surface Water and Groundwater by Agroforestry Systems: a Review

  • George Pavlidis
  • Vassilios A. TsihrintzisEmail author
Article

Abstract

Agricultural pollution consists a serious concern for environmental protection managers. Among the pollutants, nitrates, phosphoric compounds and organic pesticides from agricultural activities are the most common and hazardous to the environment and human health. Several mitigation techniques have been proposed to control these pollutants from entering aquatic systems. Agroforestry, which is the common cultivation of crops and trees, is one such mitigation technique. In the present study, the efficiency of agroforestry systems in pollutant reduction is reviewed. A search of relevant international literature was conducted using Scopus, Science Direct and Google Scholar search engines, using relevant keyword combinations for agrochemical pollution abatement with trees. More than 2000 results were found and the most relevant were selected and extensively studied, and are summarized here. From the current knowledge, it can be generally seen that tree roots in agroforestry systems are able to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus residues in soils from 20% up to 100%, have the potential to reduce pesticides leaching and runoff in considerable amounts (up to 90% for runoff), and simultaneously they provide additional benefits to the ecosystems including erosion control, improvement of soil quality and positive effects on biodiversity.

Keywords

Agroforestry systems Alley cropping Fertilizers Pesticides Control of leaching to groundwater Control of surface runoff pollution 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge a research scholarship from IKY and Siemens through the Research Scholarship Program “Research Projects for Excellence IKY/SIEMENS”, Grant No. 2603. Project title: “Design and implementation of an agroforestry pollution control system through the common cultivation of arable crops and trees for the control of soil and groundwater pollution from nutrients and pesticides”.

References

  1. Agus F, Garrity DP, Cassel DK, Mercado A (1999) Grain crop response to contour hedgerow systems on sloping Oxisols. Agrofor Syst 42(2):107–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alavalapati J, Shrestha R, Stainback G, Matta J (2004) Agroforestry development: an environmental economic perspective. Agric Syst 61:299–310Google Scholar
  3. Albrecht A, Kandji ST (2003) Carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 99(1–3):15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen SC, Jose S, Nair PKR, Brecke BJ, Nkedi-Kizza P, Ramsey CL (2004) Safety-net role of tree roots: evidence from a pecan (Carya Illinoensis K. Koch)–cotton (Gossypium Hirsutum L.) alley cropping system in the southern United States. For Ecol Manag 192(2–3):395–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Allen SC, Nair VD, Graetz DA, Jose S, Nair RPK (2006) Phosphorus loss from organic versus inorganic fertilizers used in alleycropping on a Florida Ultisol. Agric Ecosyst Environ 117(4):290–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anbumozhi V, Radhakrishnan J, Yamaji E (2005) Impact of riparian buffer zones on water quality and associated management considerations. Ecol Eng 24(5):517–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson SH, Udawatta RP, Seobi T, Garrett HE (2009) Soil water content and infiltration in agroforestry buffer strips. Agrofor Syst 75(1):5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Andrianarisoa KS, Dufour L, Bienaimé S, Zeller B, Dupraz C (2016) The introduction of hybrid walnut trees (Juglans Nigra × regia cv. NG23) into cropland reduces soil mineral N content in autumn in southern France. Agrofor Syst 90(2):193–205Google Scholar
  9. Babu S, Hallam A, Rajasekaran B (1995) Dynamic modelling of agroforestry and soil fertility interactions: implications for multi-disciplinary research policy, agricultural Economics.13:125-135Google Scholar
  10. Bandolin TH, Fisher RF (1991) Agroforestry systems in North America. Agrofor Syst 16(2):95–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Basnyat P, Teeter LD, Lockaby BG, Flynn KM (2000) The use of remote sensing and GIS in watershed level analyses of non-point source pollution problems. For Ecol Manag 128(1–2):65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bealey WJ, Dore AJ, Dragosits U, Reis S, Reay DS, Sutton MA (2016) The potential for tree planting strategies to reduce local and regional ecosystem impacts of agricultural ammonia emissions. J Environ Manag 165:106–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Beaudette C, Bradley RL, Whalen JK, McVetty PBE, Vessey K, Smith DL (2010) Tree-based intercropping does not compromise canola (Brassica Napus L.) seed oil yield and reduces soil nitrous oxide emissions. Agric Ecosyst Environ 139(1–2):33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Beenhouwer M, Aerts R, Honnay O (2013) A global meta-analysis of the biodiversity and ecosystem service benefits of coffee and cacao agroforestry. Agric Ecosyst Environ 175:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bellow JG, Nair PKR, Martin TA (2008) Crop interactions in fruit tree-based agroforestry Systems in the Western Highlands of Guatemala: component yields and system performance, presented in Jose S and Gordon AM, chapter 8 tree, toward agroforestry design - an ecological approach. Springer, pp 111-132Google Scholar
  16. Benites J (1990) Agroforestry systems with potential for acid soils of the humid tropics of Latin America and the Caribbean. For Ecol Manag 36:81–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bentrup G (2008) Conservation buffers: design guidelines for buffers, corridors, and greenways, general technical report, National Agroforestry Center: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, southern, SRS-109. Res Stat 110Google Scholar
  18. Bergeron M, Lacombe S, Bradley RL, Whalen J, Cogliastro A, Jutras M-F et al (2011) Reduced soil nutrient leaching following the establishment of tree-based intercropping systems in eastern Canada. Agrofor Syst 83(3):321–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bharati L, Lee KH, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC (2002) Soil-water infiltration under crops, pasture, and established riparian buffer in Midwestern USA. Agrofor Syst 56:249–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Borin M, Vianello M, Morari F, Zanin G (2005) Effectiveness of a buffer strip in removing runoff pollutants from a cultivated field in north-East Italy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 105:101–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Borin M, Passoni M, Thiene M, Tempesta T (2010) Multiple functions of buffer strips in farming areas. Eur J Agron 32(1):103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Breman H, Kessler J (1997) The potential benefits of agroforestry in the Sahel and other semi-arid regions. Eur J Agron 7:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Browaldh M (1995) The influence of trees on nitrogen dynamics in an agrisilvicultural system in Sweden. Agrofor Syst 30(3):301–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Buckley C, Hynes S, Mechan S (2012) Supply of an ecosystem service—farmers’ willingness to adopt riparian buffer zones in agricultural catchments. Environ Sci Pol 24:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Bullock H, Macmillan DC, Crabtree JR (1994) New perspectives on agroforestry in lowland Britain. Land Use Policy 11(3):222–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cadoux S, Sauzet G, Valantin-Morison M, Pontet C, Champolivier L, Robert C et al (2015) Intercropping frost-sensitive legume crops with winter oilseed rape reduces weed competition, insect damage, and improves nitrogen use efficiency. Ocl 22(3):D302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Calfapietra C, Gielen B, Karnosky D, Ceulemans R, Scarascia Mugnozza G (2010) Response and potential of agroforestry crops under global change. Environ Pollut 158(4):1095–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cardinael R, Mao Z, Prieto I, Stokes A, Dupraz C, Kim JH et al (2015) Competition with winter crops induces deeper rooting of walnut trees in a Mediterranean alley cropping agroforestry system. Plant Soil 391(1–2):219–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Cardoso IM, Guijt I, Franco FS, Carvalho AF, Ferreira Neto PS (2001) Continual learning for agroforestry system design: university, NGO and farmer partnership in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Agric Syst 69:235–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cerdán CR, Rebolledo MC, Soto G, Rapidel B (2012) Sinclair FL. Local knowledge of impacts of tree cover on ecosystem services in smallholder coffee production systems. Agric Syst 110:119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ceulemans R, Deraedt W (1999) Production physiology and growth potential of poplars under short-rotation forestry culture. For Ecol Manag 121(1–2):9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Christen B, Dalgaard T (2013) Buffers for biomass production in temperate European agriculture: a review and synthesis on function, ecosystem services and implementation. Biomass Bioenergy 55:53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. CRAAQ (2003) Guide de reference en fertilisation. Centre de Reference en Agriculture et en Agroalimentaire du Quebec, Sainte-Foy 294Google Scholar
  34. Dabbert S (1995) Agroforestry and land-use change in industrialized nations: a case study from northeastern Germany. Agrofor Syst 31:157–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Dawson IK, Leakey R, Clement CR, Weber JC, Cornelius JP, Roshetko JM et al (2014) The management of tree genetic resources and the livelihoods of rural communities in the tropics: non-timber forest products, smallholder agroforestry practices and tree commodity crops. For Ecol Manag 333:9–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Delgado JA, Berry JK (2008) Advances in Precision Conservation 98:1–44Google Scholar
  37. Delgado JA, Shaffer M, Hu C, Lavado R, Cueto-Wong J, Joosse P et al (2008) An index approach to assess nitrogen losses to the environment. Ecol Eng 32(2):108–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. DeLonge MS, Miles A, Carlisle L (2016) Investing in the transition to sustainable agriculture. Environ Sci Pol 55:266–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Dimitriou I, Busch G, Jacobs S, Schmidt-Walter P, Lamersdorf N (2009) A review of the impacts of short rotation coppice cultivation on water issues. Landbauforschung Volkenrode 59:197–206Google Scholar
  40. Dix ME, Johnson RJ, Harrell MO, Case RM, Wright RJ, Hodges L, Brandle JR et al (1995) Influences of trees on abundance of natural enemies of insect pests: a review. Agrofor Syst 29:303–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Domenicano S, Coll L, Messier C, Berninger F (2011) Nitrogen forms affect root structure and water uptake in the hybrid poplar. New For 42:347–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Dougherty MC, Thevathasan NV, Gordon AM, Lee H, Kort J (2009) Nitrate and Escherichia Coli NAR analysis in tile drain effluent from a mixed tree intercrop and monocrop system. Agric Ecosyst Environ 131(1–2):77–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Duchemin M, Hogue R (2009) Reduction in agricultural non-point source pollution in the first year following establishment of an integrated grass/tree filter strip system in southern Quebec (Canada). Agric Ecosyst Environ 131(1–2):85–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Dupraz C (1999) Adequate design of control treatments in long term agroforestry experiments with multiple objectives. Presented in Auclair D and Dupraz C (eds), Agroforestry for Sustainable Land-Use Fundamental Research and Modelling with Emphasis on Temperate and Mediterranean Applications 60: 35–48Google Scholar
  45. Dwivedi AP (1992) Agroforestry: Principles and Practices. Oxford IBH Publishing Company Pvt Ltd. N.A., New Delhi, pp 365Google Scholar
  46. Edwards CA, Grove TL, Harwood RR, Pierce Colfer CJ (1993) The role of agroecology and integrated farming systems in agricultural sustainability. Agric Ecosyst Environ 46:99–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ellis EA, Nair PKR, Linehan PE, Beck HW, Blanche CA (2000) A GIS-based database management application for agroforestry planning and tree selection. Comput Electron Agric 27:41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ellis EA, Nair PKR, Jeswani SD (2005) Development of a web-based application for agroforestry planning and tree selection. Comput Electron Agric 49(1):129–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ende HP and Huttl R (1997) Preface in Forest Ecology and Management 91:1–3Google Scholar
  50. Epila JSO (1986) The case for insect Pest Management in Agroforestry Research. Agric Syst 19:37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. European Commision (1991a) Council directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources. Official Journal of the European Communities, 31.12.91, No. L 375, pp 1-8, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:31991L0676
  52. European Commision (1991b) Council directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. Official Journal of the European Communities, 19.8.91, No. L 230, pp 1-32, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:31991L0414
  53. European Commision (2000) EU water framework directive 2000/60/EC of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, 22.12.2000, No. L 327, pp. 1-73, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/SL/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060Google Scholar
  54. European Commision (2009a) Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides. Official Journal of the European Union, 24.11.2009, No. L 309, pp 71-86, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32009L0128
  55. European Commision (2009b) Regulation 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing council directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC. Official Journal of the European Union, 24.11.2009, No. L 309, pp 1-50, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32009R1107
  56. European Commision (2009c) Regulation (EC) no 1185/2009 of the European Parliament and of the council of 25 November 2009 concerning statistics on pesticides. Official Journal of the European Union, 10.12.2009, No. L 324, pp 1-22, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32009R1185
  57. European Commision (2013) Regulation 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing council regulation (EC) no 1698/2005. Official Journal of the European Union, 20.12.2013, No. L 347, pp 487-547, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32013R1305
  58. Evans P (1988) Designing agroforestry innovations to increase their adoptability: a case study from Paraguay. J Rural Stud 4(1):45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Felix JD, Avery GB, Mead RN, Kieber RJ, Willey JD (2016) Nitrogen content and isotopic composition of Spanish Moss (Tillandsia Usneoides L.): reactive nitrogen variations and source implications across an urban coastal air shed. Environ Process 3(4):711–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Garrett G, Buck L (1997) Agroforestry practice and policy in the United States of America. For Ecol Manag 1:5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Garrett HE, Rietveld WJ, Fisher RF (eds.) (2000) North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice. 1st ed., American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 402Google Scholar
  62. George SJ, Harper RJ, Hobbs RJ, Tibbett M (2012) A sustainable agricultural landscape for Australia: a review of interlacing carbon sequestration, biodiversity and salinity management in agroforestry systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 163:28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Gikas GD, Tsihrintzis VA, Sykas D (2016) Effect of trees on the reduction of nutrient concentrations in the soils of cultivated areas. Environ Monit Assess 188(6):327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Gillespie AR, Jose S, Mengel DB, Hoover WL, Pope PE, Seifert JR et al (2000) Defining competition vectors in a temperate alley cropping system in the midwestern USA: 1. Production physiology. Agrofor Syst 48(1):25–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Gnankambary Z, Ilstedt U, Nyberg G, Hien V, Malmer A (2008) Nitrogen and phosphorus limitation of soil microbial respiration in two tropical agroforestry parklands in the south-Sudanese zone of Burkina Faso: the effects of tree canopy and fertilization. Soil Biol Biochem 40(2):350–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Gold M, Hanover LW (1987) Agroforestry systems for the temperate zone. Agrofor Syst 5:109–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Grewal SS, Juneja ML, Singh K, Singh S (1994) A comparison of two agroforestry systems for soil, water and nutrient conservation on degraded land. Soil Technol 7:145–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Haggar JP, Tanner EVJ, Beers JW, Kass DCL (1993) Nitrogen dynamics of tropical agroforestry and annual cropping systems, soil biol. Biochemist 25(10):1363–1378Google Scholar
  69. Harou PA (1983) Economic principles to appraise agroforestry projects. Agric Adm 12:127–139Google Scholar
  70. Hasanuzzaman M (2012) Hasanuzzaman.webs.Com classification of agroforestry systems. Accessed: http://www.Hasanuzzaman.Webs.Com/ (cited 10/6/2016)
  71. Hellenic Agroforestry Network (2014) www.agroforestry.gr Accessed 10/6/2016
  72. Herzog F (1998) Streuobst: a traditional agroforestry system as a model for agroforestry development in temperate. Europe Agroforestry Systems 42:61–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Hosier R (1989) The economics of smallholder agroforestry: two case studies. World Dev 17(11):1827–1839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Huth NI, Carberry PS, Poulton PL, Brennan LE, Keating BA (2003) A framework for simulating agroforestry options for the low rainfall areas of Australia using APSIM. Eur J Agron 18:171–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Isaac ME, Hinsinger P, Harmand JM (2012) Nitrogen and phosphorus economy of a legume tree-cereal intercropping system under controlled conditions. Sci Total Environ 434:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Izydorczyk K, Fratczak W, Drobniewska A, Cichowicz E, Michalska-Hejduk D, Gross R et al (2013) A biogeochemical barrier to enhance a buffer zone for reducing diffuse phosphorus pollution—preliminary results. Ecohydrol Hydrobiol 13(2):104–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Jose S (2009) Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agrofor Syst 76(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Jose S, Gillespie AR, Seifert JR, Mengel DB, Pope PE (2000) Defining competition vectors in a temperate alley cropping system in the mid-western USA. 3. Competition for nitrogen and litter decomposition dynamics. Agrofor Syst 48:61–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Kang BT (1997) Alley cropping-soil productivity and nutrient recycling. For Ecol Manag 91:75–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Karacic A, Verwijst T, Weih M (2003) Above-ground woody biomass production of short-rotation Populus plantations on agricultural land in Sweden. Scand J For Res 18:427–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Kass D, Sylvester-Bradley R, Nygren P (1997) The role of nitrogen fixation and nutrient supply in some agroforestry systems of the Americas, soil bio. Biochemist 29(5/6):715–185Google Scholar
  82. Kho R (2000) A general tree-environment-crop interaction equation for predictive understanding of agroforestry systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 80:87–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Knauer N and Mander U (1989) Studies on the filtration effect of differently vegetated buffer strips along inland waters in Schleswig-Holstein. 1. Information: filtration or nitrogen and phosphorus. Zeit. Fur Kulturtechnik and Landentwicklung 31: 52-57Google Scholar
  84. Köhler K, Duynisveld WHM, Böttcher J (2006) Nitrogen fertilization and nitrate leaching into groundwater on arable sandy soils. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 169(2):185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lal K, Minhas PS, Yadav RK (2015) Long-term impact of wastewater irrigation and nutrient rates II. Nutrient balance, nitrate leaching and soil properties under peri-urban cropping systems. Agric Water Manag 156:110–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Licht L, Isebrands JG (2005) Proceedings of the joint IEA bioenergy task 30 and task 31 workshop sustainable bioenergy production systems: environmental, operational and social implications linking phytoremediated pollutant removal to biomass economic opportunities. Biomass Bioenergy 28(2):203–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lin CH, Lerch RN, Garrett HE, George MF (2004) Incorporating forage grasses in riparian buffers for bioremediation of atrazine, isoxaflutole and nitrate in Missouri. Agrofor Syst 63:91–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Lovell ST, Sullivan WC (2006) Environmental benefits of conservation buffers in the United States: evidence, promise, and open questions. Agric Ecosyst Environ 112(4):249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Lundgren B (1982) Introduction. Agrofor Syst 1(1):3–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Mander Ü (1985) The renovation effect of polluted surface flow in vegetated buffer strips. Acta et commentationes Universitatis Tartuensis 701: 77-89. (in Russian, with summary in English)Google Scholar
  91. Mander Ü, Kuusemets V, Ivask M (1995) Nutrient dynamics of riparian ecotones: a case study from the Porijogi River catchment, Estonia. Landsc Urban Plan 31:1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Mander Ü, Kuusemets V, Lõhmus K, Mauring T (1997) Efficiency and dimensioning of riparian buffer zones in agricultural catchments. Ecol Eng 8(4):299–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Matteo M, Randhir T, Bloniarz D (2006) Watershed-scale impacts of Forest buffers on water quality and runoff in urbanizing environment. J Water Resour Plan Manag 132(3):144–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Mayus M, Van Keulen H, Stroosnijder L (1999) Analysis for dry and wet years with the WIMISA model of tree-crop competition for windbreak systems in Sahel. Agrofor Syst 43:203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  96. Mirck J, Isebrands JG, Verwijst T, Ledin S (2005) Development of short-rotation willow coppice systems for environmental purposes in Sweden. Biomass Bioenergy 28(2):219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Mitchell JK, Walker SE, Hirschi MC, Cooke RAC (1999) Nitrate losses under various cropping systems (Article), Proceedings of the 1999 IUGG 99, the XXII General Assembly of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics; Birmingham, UK; 18–30 July 1999; Code 55779, 257: 33–39. IAHS-AISH PublicationGoogle Scholar
  98. Mobbs DC, Lawson GJ, Frien AD, Crout NMJ, Arah JRM, Hodnet MG (1999) Hypar model for agroforestry system. Technical Manual, DFID Forestry Research ProgrammeGoogle Scholar
  99. Motis T (2007) Agroforestry principles. ECHO technical note. www.Echonet.Org accessed 10/6/2016
  100. Nair PKR (1985) Classification of agroforestry systems. Agrofor Syst 3(9):7–128Google Scholar
  101. Nair PKR (1987) Agroforestry and firewood production. In: Hall DO, Overend RP (eds) Biomass. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp 367–386Google Scholar
  102. Nair PKR (1991) State-of-the-art of agroforestry systems. For Ecol Manag 45:5–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Nair PKR (2005) Agroforestry: trees in support of sustainable agriculture. In: Hillel H, Rosenzweig C, Powlson D, Scow K, Singer M, Sparks D (eds) Encyclopedia of soils in the environment, Elsevier, London, UK, vol 1, pp 35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Nair VD, Graetz DA (2004) Agroforestry as an approach to minimizing nutrient loss from heavily fertilized soils: the Florida experience. Agrofor Syst 61:269–279Google Scholar
  105. Nair VD, Nair PKR, Kalmbacher RS, Ezenwa IV (2007) Reducing nutrient loss from farms through silvopastoral practices in coarse-textured soils of Florida, USA. Ecol Eng 29(2):192–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Nerlich K, Graeff-Hönninger S, Claupein W (2013) Agroforestry in Europe: a review of the disappearance of traditional systems and development of modern agroforestry practices, with emphasis on experiences in Germany. Agrofor Syst 87(2):475–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Ning SK, Chang NB, Jeng KY, Tseng YH (2006) Soil erosion and non-point source pollution impacts assessment with the aid of multi-temporal remote sensing images. J Environ Manag 79(1):88–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Ó hUallacháin D, Copland A, Buckley K, McMahon B (2015) Opportunities within the revised EU common agricultural policy to address the decline of farmland birds: an Irish perspective. Diversity 7(3):307–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2001) Environmental indicators for agriculture: methods and results. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  110. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2008) Environmental performance of agriculture in OECD countries since 1990. Main report, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  111. Osman KT (2014) Soil Degradation, Conservation and Remediation. Springer, Netherlands, pp 237Google Scholar
  112. Otto S, Vianello M, Infantino A, Zanin G, Di Guardo A (2008) Effect of a full-grown vegetative filter strip on herbicide runoff: maintaining of filter capacity over time. Chemosphere 71(1):74–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Palma JHN, Graves AR, Bunce RGH, Burgess PJ, de Filippi R, Keesman KJ et al (2007a) Modeling environmental benefits of silvoarable agroforestry in Europe. Agric Ecosyst Environ 119(3–4):320–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Palma JHN, Graves AR, Burgess PJ, Keesman KJ, van Keulen H, Mayus M et al (2007b) Methodological approach for the assessment of environmental effects of agroforestry at the landscape scale. Ecol Eng 29(4):450–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Passeport E, Richard B, Chaumont C, Margoum C, Liger L, Gril JJ et al (2014) Dynamics and mitigation of six pesticides in a "wet" forest buffer zone. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 21(7):4883–4894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Pe’er G, Zinngrebe Y, Hauck J, Schindler S, Dittrich A, Zingg S et al (2016) Adding some green to the greening: improving the EU's ecological focus areas for biodiversity and farmers. Conservation Letters, pp 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12333
  117. Peterjohn WT, Correll DL (1984) Nutrient dynamics in an agricultural watershed: observations on the role of a riparian forest. Ecology 65(5):1466–1475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Pinay G, Decamps H (1988) The role of riparian woods in regulating nitrogen fluxes between the alluvial aquifer and surface water: a conceptual model. Regul Rivers: Res Manage 2(4):507–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Popov VH, Cornish PS, Sun H (2006) Vegetated biofilters: the relative importance of infiltration and adsorption in reducing loads of water-soluble herbicides in agricultural runoff. Agric Ecosyst Environ 114(2–4):351–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Quinkenstein A, Wöllecke J, Böhm C, Grünewald H, Freese D, Schneider BU et al (2009) Ecological benefits of the alley cropping agroforestry system in sensitive regions of Europe. Environ Sci Pol 12(8):1112–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Radersma S, Ong CK (2004) Spatial distribution of root length density and soil water of linear agroforestry systems in sub-humid Kenya: implications for agroforestry models. For Ecol Manag 188(1–3):77–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Raintree JB (1986) Agroforestry pathways: land tenure, shifting cultivation and sustainable agriculture. Unasylva 38(4):2–15Google Scholar
  123. Ramos C, Carbonell EA (1991) Nitrate leaching and soil moisture prediction with the LEACHM model. Fertilizer Research 27:171–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Raun WR, Johnson GV (1999) Improving nitrogen use efficiency for cereal production. Agron J 91(3):357–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Reichenberger S, Bach M, Skitschak A, Frede HG (2007) Mitigation strategies to reduce pesticide inputs into ground- and surface water and their effectiveness; a review. Sci Total Environ 384(1–3):1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Reisner Y, de Filippi R, Herzog F, Palma J (2007) Target regions for silvoarable agroforestry in Europe. Ecol Eng 29(4):401–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Rivest D, Cogliastro A, Olivier A (2009) Tree-based intercropping systems increase growth and nutrient status of hybrid poplar: a case study from two northeastern American experiments. J Environ Manag 91(2):432–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Rockwood DL, Naidu CV, Carter DR, Rahmani M, Spriggs TA, Lin C et al (2004) Short-rotation woody crops and phytoremediation: opportunities for agroforestry? Agrofor Syst 61:51–63Google Scholar
  129. Rosenstock TS, Tully KL, Arias-Navarro C, Neufeldt H, Butterbach-Bahl K, Verchot LV (2014) Agroforestry with N2-fixing trees: sustainable development's friend or foe? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 6:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Rowe EC, Hairiah K, Giller KE, van Noordwijk M, Cadisch G (1999) Testing the safety-net role of hedgerow tree roots by 15N placement at different soil depths. Agrofor Syst 43:81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Ryszkowski L, Kedziora A (2007) Modification of water flows and nitrogen fluxes by shelterbelts. Ecol Eng 29(4):388–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Sanchez-Perez J-M, Lucot E, Bariac T, Tremolieres M (2008) Water uptake by trees in a riparian hardwood forest (Rhine floodplain, France). Hydrol Process 22:366–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Schoonover JE, Williard KWJ, Zaczek JJ, Mangun JC, Carver AD (2005) Nutrient attenuation in agricultural surface runoff by riparian buffer zones in southern Illinois, USA. Agrofor Syst 64(2):169–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Schultz RC, Colletti JP, Isenhart TM, Simpkins WW, Mize CW, Thompson ML (1995) Design and placement of a multi-species riparian buffer strip system. Agrofor Syst 29:201–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Sequinatto L, Reichert JM, Rheinheimer dos Santos D, Reinert DJ, Copetti ACC (2013) Occurrence of agrochemicals in surface waters of shallow soils and steep slopes cropped to tobacco. Química Nova 36(6):768–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Sheppard SC, Sheppard MI, Long J, Sanipelli B, Tait J (2006) Runoff phosphorus retention in vegetated field margins on flat landscapes. Can J Soil Sci 86(5):871–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Sinclair FL (2004) Agroforestry. In: Evans BJ, Youngquist JA (eds) Encyclopedia of forest sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Smethurst PJ, Comerford NB (1993) Potassium and phosphorus uptake by competing pine and grass: observations and model verification. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57(6):1602–1610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Stancheva J, Bencheva S, Petkova K, Piralkov V (2007) Possibilities for agroforestry development in Bulgaria: outlooks and limitations. Ecol Eng 29(4):382–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Stoltz E, Nadeau E (2014) Effects of intercropping on yield, weed incidence, forage quality and soil residual N in organically grown forage maize (Zea Mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia Faba L.) Field Crop Res 169:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Straight R (2012) Shade coffee production enjoys resurgence. Inside Agroforestry: Many paths to success 21(1):1–16, https://nac.unl.edu/documents/insideagroforestry/vol21issue1.pdf
  142. Suarez, LA (2006) PRZM-3, A Model for predicting pesticide and nitrogen fate in the crop root and unsaturated soil zones: User’s Manual for Release 3.12.2 EPA/600/R-05/111Google Scholar
  143. Todd R, Lowrance R, Hendrickson D, Asmussen L, Leonard R et al (1983) Riparian vegetation as filters of nutrients exported from a coastal plain agricultural watershed. Int. Symp. Nutrient cycling in agricultural ecosystems (Athens, 1980). Spec Publ 23:475–493Google Scholar
  144. Tomer MD, Dosskey MG, Burkart MR, James DE, Helmers MJ, Eisenhauer DE (2009) Methods to prioritize placement of riparian buffers for improved water quality. Agrofor Syst 75(1):17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Tsakiris G (2015) The status of the European waters in 2015: a review. Environ Process 2(3):543–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Tsonkova P, Böhm C, Quinkenstein A, Freese D (2012) Ecological benefits provided by alley cropping systems for production of woody biomass in the temperate region: a review. Agrofor Syst 85(1):133–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Tsonkova P, Quinkenstein A, Böhm C, Freese D, Schaller E (2014) Ecosystem services assessment tool for agroforestry (ESAT-A): an approach to assess selected ecosystem services provided by alley cropping systems. Ecol Indic 45:285–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Udawatta RP, Garrett HE, Kallenbach RL (2010) Agroforestry and grass buffer effects on water quality in grazed pastures. Agrofor Syst 79(1):81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2015) World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP.241Google Scholar
  150. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2004) Agroforestry working trees for water quality. USDA and National Agroforestry Center. Lincoln, NEGoogle Scholar
  151. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2011). USDA Agroforestry Strategic Framework, Fiscal Year 2011–2016. http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=FOREST_FORESTRY Accessed 15/6/2016
  152. van der Werf W, Keesman K, Burgess P, Graves A, Pilbeam D, Incoll LD et al (2007) Yield-SAFE: a parameter-sparse, process-based dynamic model for predicting resource capture, growth, and production in agroforestry systems. Ecol Eng 29(4):419–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. van Noordwijk M, Lusiana B (1999) WaNuLCAS, a model of water, nutrient and light capture in agroforestry systems. Agrofor Syst 43:217–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Vianello M, Vischetti C, Scarponi L, Zanin G (2005) Herbicide losses in runoff events from a field with a low slope: role of a vegetative filter strip. Chemosphere 61(5):717–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Volk T, Abrahamson L, Nowak C, Smart L, Tharakan P, White E (2006) The development of short-rotation willow in the northeastern United States for bioenergy and bioproducts, agroforestry and phytoremediation. Biomass Bioenergy 30(8–9):715–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Walker TS (1987) Economic prospects for agroforestry intervention in Indian SAT: implication for research resource allocation at ICRISAT, economic group progress report 79. ICRISAT, Hyderabad, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  157. Wan N (2015) Pesticides exposure modeling based on GIS and remote sensing land use data. Appl Geogr 56:99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Wang L, Tang L, Wang X, Chen F (2010) Effects of alley crop planting on soil and nutrient losses in the citrus orchards of the three gorges region. Soil Tillage Res 110(2):243–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Wang Y, Zhang B, Lin L, Zepp H (2011) Agroforestry system reduces subsurface lateral flow and nitrate loss in Jiangxi Province, China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 140(3–4):441–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Weih M (2004) Intensive short rotation forestry in boreal climates: present and future perspectives. Can J For Res 34(7):1369–1378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Williams PA, Gordon AM (1992) The potential of intercropping as an alternative land use system in temperate North America. Agrofor Syst 19:253–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Winterbottom R, Hazelwood PT (1987) Agroforestry and sustainable development: making the connection. Ambio 16:100–110Google Scholar
  163. Yang L, Ding X, Liu X, Li P, Eneji AE (2016) Impacts of long-term jujube tree/winter wheat–summer maize intercropping on soil fertility and economic efficiency - a case study in the lower North China plain. Eur J Agron 75:105–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for the Assessment of Natural Hazards and Proactive Planning & Laboratory of Reclamation Works and Water Resources Management, School of Rural and Surveying EngineeringNational Technical University of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.Laboratory of Chemical Control of Pesticides, Department of Pesticides Control and PhytopharmacyBenaki Phytopathological InstituteAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations