Conventional, low-input and organic farming systems compared
AuthorsSteven R. Temple
Oscar A. Somasco
Authors AffiliationsS.R. Temple is Extension Agronomist, UC Davis; O.A. Somasco was Research Manager and is now Agronomist, Argentina; M. Kirk was Research Manager and is now Horticulturist, Ithaca, NY; D. Friedman is Agronomist and Research manager of the SAFS project, UC Davis.
Hilgardia 48(5):14-19. DOI:10.3733/ca.v048n05p14. September 1994.
Cover-crop nitrogen supply and weed management were the most important challenges facing low-input and organic farming systems when compared to conventional systems in the first 4 years of the Sustainable Agriculture Farming Systems project at UC Davis. Cover-crop timing and management using appropriate equipment were important for the success of transitional systems. The participation of local farmers ensured that optimal agricultural practices were used to manage all farming systems. Researchers regularly consulted grower-cooprators to determine “best farmer practices” of conventional, low-input and organic farming systems.
Also in this issue:Effect of heterozygosity at the double-muscle locus on the performance of market calves
Can ‘sustainable’ be defined? New directions in research needed
Farming in transition – Editor's note
Farming in transition: News Briefs
Farming in transition Overview: Society pressures farmers to adopt more sustainable systems
Sidebar: CSAs: the consumer-farmer connection
Farming in transition: Analysis – Scientists and farmers try new approach to research
Transition from conventional to low-input agriculture changes soil fertility and biology
In low-input and organic systems: Researchers find short-term insect problems, long-term weed problems
Alternative systems aim to reduce inputs, maintain profits
Selecting the right cover crop gives multiple benefits