Nature-based solutions of soil management and agriculture

REFERENCES

1. 1. Acreman, M.,
   2. A. Smith,
   3. L. Charters,
   4. D. Tickner,
   5. J. Opperman,
   6. S. Acreman,
   7. F. Edwards,
   8. P. Sayers, and
   9. F. Chivava

   . 2021. Evidence for the effectiveness of nature-based solutions to water issues in Africa. Environmental Research Letters 16(6):063007.

   OpenUrl
2. ↵
   1. Andrikopoulou, T.,
   2. R.M.J. Schielen,
   3. C.J. Spray,
   4. C.A. Schipper, and
   5. A. Blom

   . 2021. A framework to evaluate the SDG contribution of fluvial nature-based solutions. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(20):11320. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011320.

   OpenUrl
3. ↵
   1. Apollonio, C.,
   2. A. Petroselli,
   3. F. Tauro,
   4. M. Cecconi,
   5. C. Biscarini,
   6. C. Zarotti, and
   7. S. Grimaldi

   . 2021. Hillslope erosion mitigation: An experimental proof of a nature-based solution. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(11):6058. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116058.

   OpenUrl
4. 1. Aquije, C.,
   2. H.P. Schmidt,
   3. K. Draper,
   4. S. Joseph, and
   5. B. Ladd

   . 2021. Low tech biochar production could be a highly effective nature-based solution for climate change mitigation in the developing world. Plant and Soil (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-021-05159-6.
5. ↵
   1. Beierkuhnlein, C.

   2021. Nature-based solutions must be realized—not just proclaimed—in face of climatic extremes. Erdkunde 75(3):225–244.

   OpenUrl
6. ↵
   1. Beyer, F.,
   2. F. Jansen,
   3. G. Jurasinski,
   4. M. Koch,
   5. B. Schröder, and
   6. F. Koebsch

   . 2021. Drought years in peatland rewetting: Rapid vegetation succession can maintain the net CO₂ sink function. Biogeosciences 18(3):917–935.

   OpenUrl
7. 1. Boelee, E.,
   2. J. Janse,
   3. A. Le Gal,
   4. M. Kok,
   5. R. Alkemade, and
   6. W. Ligtvoet

   . 2017. Overcoming water challenges through nature-based solutions. Water Policy 19(5):820–836.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
8. 1. Bradfer-Lawrence, T.,
   2. T. Finch,
   3. R.B. Bradbury,
   4. G.M. Buchanan,
   5. A. Midgley, and
   6. R.H. Field

   . 2021. The potential contribution of terrestrial nature-based solutions to a national “net zero” climate target. Journal of Applied Ecology 58(11):2349–2360.

   OpenUrl
9. 1. Bridgewater, P.

   2018. Whose nature? What solutions? Linking ecohydrology to nature-based solutions. Ecohydrology & Hydrobiology 18(4):311–316.

   OpenUrl
10. 1. Chausson, A.,
    2. B. Turner,
    3. D. Seddon,
    4. N. Chabaneix,
    5. C.A.J. Girardin,
    6. V. Kapos,
    7. I. Key, et al.

    2020. Mapping the effectiveness of nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation. Global Change Biology 26(11):6134–6155.

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Collier, M.J.

    2021. Are field boundary hedgerows the earliest example of a nature-based solution? Environmental Science and Policy 120(2021):73–80.

    OpenUrl
12. 1. Collier, M.J., and
    2. M. Bourke

    . 2020. The case for mainstreaming nature-based solutions into integrated catchment management in Ireland. Biology and Environment-Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 120B(2):107–113.

    OpenUrl
13. ↵
    1. Dekker, I.,
    2. S. Sharifyazd,
    3. E. Batung, and
    4. K. L. Dubrawski

    . 2021. Maximizing benefits to nature and society in techno-ecological innovation for water. Sustainability 13(11):6400. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116400.

    OpenUrl
14. 1. Doelle, M., and
    2. T.G. Puthucherril

    . 2021. Nature-based solutions to sea level rise and other climate change impacts on oceanic and coastal environments: A law and policy perspective. Nordic Journal of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1111/njb.03051.
15. ↵
    1. Faivre, N.,
    2. M. Fritz,
    3. T. Freitas,
    4. B. de Boissezon, and
    5. S. Vandewoestijne

    . 2017. Nature-based solutions in the EU: Innovating with nature to address social, economic and environmental challenges. Environmental Research 159(2017):509–518.

    OpenUrl
16. ↵
    1. FAO and ITPS (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils)

    . 2015. Status of the World’s Soil Resources (SWSR) – Main Report. Rome, Italy: FAO and ITPS.
17. ↵
    1. Fernandes, J.P., and
    2. N. Guiomar

    . 2018. Nature-based solutions: The need to increase the knowledge on their potentialities and limits. Land Degradation and Development 29(6):1925–1939.

    OpenUrl
18. ↵
    1. N. Kabisch,
    2. H. Korn,
    3. J. Stadler, and
    4. A. Bonn

    1. Fritz, M.

    2017. Nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas—Linkages between science, policy and practice. In Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: Linkages between Science, Policy and Practice, eds. N. Kabisch, H. Korn, J. Stadler, and A. Bonn, 1–11. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
19. ↵
    1. Gallotti, G.,
    2. M.A. Santo,
    3. I. Apostolidou,
    4. J. Alessandri,
    5. A. Armigliato,
    6. B. Basu,
    7. S. Debele, et al.

    2021. On the management of nature-based solutions in open-air laboratories: New insights and future perspectives. Resources 10(4):36. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources10040036.

    OpenUrl
20. 1. Gooden, J., and
    2. R. Pritzlaff

    . 2021. Dryland watershed restoration with rock detention structures: A nature-based solution to mitigate drought, erosion, flooding, and atmospheric carbon. Frontiers in Environmental Science 9:679189. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.679189.

    OpenUrl
21. ↵
    1. Hamidov, A., and
    2. K. Helming

    . 2020. Sustainability considerations in water-energy-food nexus research in irrigated agriculture. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(15):6274. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156274.

    OpenUrl
22. ↵
    1. Han, S., and
    2. C. Kuhlicke

    . 2021. Barriers and drivers for mainstreaming nature-based solutions for flood risks: The case of South Korea. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 12(5):661–672.

    OpenUrl
23. 1. Hernandez-Morcillo, M.,
    2. P. Burgess,
    3. J. Mirck,
    4. A. Pantera, and
    5. T. Plieninger

    . 2018. Scanning agroforestry-based solutions for climate change mitigation and adaptation in Europe. Environmental Science & Policy 80(2018):44–52.

    OpenUrl
24. ↵
    1. Hewett, C.J.M.,
    2. M.E. Wilkinson,
    3. J. Jonczyk, and
    4. P.F. Quinn

    . 2020. Catchment systems engineering: An holistic approach to catchment management. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water 7(3):e1417. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1417.

    OpenUrl
25. ↵
    1. Houle, D.,
    2. G. Lajoie, and
    3. L. Duchesne

    . 2016. Major losses of nutrients following a severe drought in a boreal forest. Nature Plants 2(12):16187.

    OpenUrl
26. ↵
    1. Hovis, M.,
    2. J.C. Hollinger,
    3. F. Cubbage,
    4. T. Shear,
    5. B. Doll,
    6. J.J. Kurki-Fox,
    7. D. Line, et al.

    2021. Natural infrastructure practices as potential flood storage and reduction for farms and rural communities in the North Carolina coastal plain. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(16):9309. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169309.

    OpenUrl
27. ↵
    1. Hoyos-Santillan, J.,
    2. A. Miranda,
    3. A. Lara,
    4. A. Sepulveda-Jauregui,
    5. C. Zamorano-Elgueta,
    6. S. Gómez-González,
    7. F. Vásquez-Lavín,
    8. R. D. Garreaud, and
    9. M. Rojas

    . 2021. Diversifying Chile’s climate action away from industrial plantations. Environmental Science and Policy 124(2021):85–89.

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Hrabanski, M., and
    2. J.F. Le Coq

    . 2022. Climatisation of agricultural issues in the international agenda through three competing epistemic communities: Climate-smart agriculture, agroecology, and nature-based solutions. Environmental Science and Policy 127(2022):311–320.

    OpenUrl
29. ↵
    1. S. Díaz,
    2. J. Settele,
    3. E.S. Brondízio,
    4. H.T. Ngo,
    5. M. Guèze,
    6. J. Agard,
    7. A. Arneth, et al.

    1. IPBES (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services)

    . 2019. Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, eds. S. Díaz, J. Settele, E.S. Brondízio, H.T. Ngo, M. Guèze, J. Agard, A. Arneth, et al. Bonn, Germany: IPBES Secretariat.
30. ↵
    1. V. Masson-Delmotte,
    2. P. Zhai,
    3. H.-O. Pörtner,
    4. D. Roberts,
    5. J. Skea, and
    6. P.R. Shukla

    1. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)

    . 2018. Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, eds. V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, and P.R. Shukla. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC.
31. ↵
    1. Jerzy, Z.,
    2. S. Lukasz,
    3. Z. Anna,
    4. K. Kornelia, and
    5. B. Maksym

    . 2020. Water retention in nature-based solutions-assessment of potential economic effects for local social groups. Water 12(12):3347. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12123347.

    OpenUrl
32. 1. Kan, Z.R.,
    2. J.Y. Qi,
    3. Q.Y. Liu,
    4. C. He,
    5. A.L. Virk,
    6. R. Lal, and
    7. H.L. Zhang

    . 2020. Effects of conservation tillage on wheat growth duration and grain yield in the North China Plain. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2020.1868039.
33. ↵
    1. Keesstra, S.,
    2. J. Nunes,
    3. A. Novara,
    4. D. Finger,
    5. D. Avelar,
    6. Z. Kalantari, and
    7. A. Cerdà

    . 2018. The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing ecosystem services. Science of the Total Environment 610–611(2018):997–1009.

    OpenUrl
34. ↵
    1. Keesstra, S.,
    2. S. Sannigrahi,
    3. M. Lopez-Vicente,
    4. M. Pulido,
    5. A. Novara,
    6. S. Visser, and
    7. Z. Kalantari

    . 2021. The role of soils in regulation and provision of blue and green water. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B–Biological Sciences 376(1834). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0175.
35. ↵
    1. Kiedrzyńska, E.,
    2. K. Belka,
    3. P. Jarosiewicz,
    4. M. Kiedrzyński, and
    5. M. Zalewski

    . 2021. The enhancement of valley water retentiveness in climate change conditions. Science of the Total Environment 799(2021):149427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149427.

    OpenUrl
36. ↵
    1. Kumar, P.,
    2. S.E. Debele,
    3. J. Sahani,
    4. L. Aragao,
    5. F. Barisani,
    6. B. Basu,
    7. E. Bucchignani, et al.

    2020. Towards an operationalisation of nature-based solutions for natural hazards. Science of the Total Environment 731(2020):138855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138855.

    OpenUrl
37. ↵
    1. Lal, R.

    2020. Home gardening and urban agriculture for advancing food and nutritional security in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Food Security 12(4):871–876.

    OpenUrl
38. ↵
    1. Lal, R.,
    2. J. Bouma,
    3. E. Brevik,
    4. L. Dawson,
    5. D.J. Field,
    6. B. Glaser,
    7. R. Hatano, et al.

    2021a. Soils and sustainable development goals of the United Nations: An International Union of Soil Sciences perspective. Geoderma Regional 25(June 2021):e00398.

    OpenUrl
39. ↵
    1. Lal, R.,
    2. E.C. Brevik,
    3. L. Dawson,
    4. D. Field,
    5. B. Glaser,
    6. A.E. Hartemink,
    7. R. Hatano, et al.

    2020. Managing soils for recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic. Soil Systems 4(3):46.

    OpenUrl
40. ↵
    1. Lal, R.,
    2. R.H. Mohtar,
    3. A.T. Assi,
    4. R. Ray,
    5. H. Baybil, and
    6. M. Jahn

    . 2017. Soil as a basic nexus tool: Soils at the center of the food–energy–water nexus. Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports 4(3):117–129.

    OpenUrl
41. 1. Lal, R.,
    2. C. Monger,
    3. L. Nave, and
    4. P. Smith

    . 2021b. The role of soil in regulation of climate. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 376(1834):20210084.

    OpenUrl
42. ↵
    1. Lefroy, E.C.,
    2. F. Flugge,
    3. A. Avery, and
    4. I. Hume

    . 2005. Potential of current perennial plant-based farming systems to deliver salinity management outcomes and improve prospects for native biodiversity: A review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 45(11):1357–1367.

    OpenUrl
43. ↵
    1. Lehman, R.,
    2. C. Cambardella,
    3. D. Stott,
    4. V. Acosta-Martinez,
    5. D. Manter,
    6. J. Buyer,
    7. J. Maul, et al.

    2015. Understanding and enhancing soil biological health: The solution for reversing soil degradation. Sustainability 7(January 1, 2015):988–1027.

    OpenUrl
44. ↵
    1. Mancuso, G.,
    2. G.F. Bencresciuto,
    3. S. Lavrnic, and
    4. A. Toscano

    . 2021. Diffuse water pollution from agriculture: A review of nature-based solutions for nitrogen removal and recovery. Water 13(14):1893. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13141893.

    OpenUrl
45. 1. Martin, E.G.,
    2. M.M. Costa,
    3. S. Egerer, and
    4. U.A. Schneider

    . 2021a. Assessing the long-term effectiveness of Nature-Based Solutions under different climate change scenarios. Science of the Total Environment 794(2021):148515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148515.

    OpenUrl
46. 1. Martin, J.G.C.,
    2. A. Scolobig,
    3. J. Linnerooth-Bayer,
    4. W. Liu, and
    5. J. Balsiger

    . 2021b. Catalyzing innovation: Governance enablers of nature-based solutions. Sustainability 13(4):1971. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041971.

    OpenUrl
47. ↵
    1. Mayor, B.,
    2. P. Zorrilla-Miras,
    3. P. Le Coent,
    4. T. Biffin,
    5. K. Dartee,
    6. K. Pena,
    7. N. Graveline, et al.

    2021. Natural assurance schemes canvas: A framework to develop business models for nature-based solutions aimed at disaster risk reduction. Sustainability 13(3):1291. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031291.

    OpenUrl
48. 1. Mickovski, S.B.

    2021. Re-thinking soil bio-engineering to address climate change challenges. Sustainability 13(6):3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063338.

    OpenUrl
49. 1. Nelson, D.R.,
    2. B.P. Bledsoe,
    3. S. Ferreira, and
    4. N.P. Nibbelink

    . 2020. Challenges to realizing the potential of nature-based solution. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 45(2020):49–55.

    OpenUrl
50. ↵
    1. Osaka, S.,
    2. R. Bellamy, and
    3. N. Castree

    . 2021. Framing “nature-based” solutions to climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews - Climate Change 12(5):e729. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.729.

    OpenUrl
51. ↵
    1. Padma, P.,
    2. S. Ramakrishna, and
    3. S.M. Rasoolimanesh

    . 2019. Nature-based solutions in tourism: A review of the literature and conceptualization. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research (December 2, 2019):109634801989005.
52. 1. Panagopoulos, Y., and
    2. E. Dimitriou

    . 2020. A large-scale nature-based solution in agriculture for sustainable water management: The Lake Karla case. Sustainability 12(17):6761. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176761.

    OpenUrl
53. ↵
    1. N. Kabisch,
    2. H. Korn,
    3. J. Stadler, and
    4. A. Bonn

    1. Pauleit, S.,
    2. T. Zolch,
    3. R. Hansen,
    4. T.B. Randrup, and
    5. C.K. van den Bosch

    . 2017. Nature-based solutions and climate change - Four shades of green. In Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: Linkages Between Science, Policy And Practice, eds. N. Kabisch, H. Korn, J. Stadler, and A. Bonn, 29–49. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Open.
54. 1. Peter, B.G.,
    2. L.M. Mungai,
    3. J.P. Messina, and
    4. S.S. Snapp

    . 2017. Nature-based agricultural solutions: Scaling perennial grains across Africa. Environmental Research 159(2017):283–290.

    OpenUrl
55. 1. Plieninger, T.,
    2. J. Muñoz-Rojas,
    3. L.E. Buck, and
    4. S.J. Scherr

    . 2020. Agroforestry for sustainable landscape management. Sustainability Science 15(5):1255–1266.

    OpenUrl
56. ↵
    1. Rey, F.

    2021. Harmonizing erosion control and flood prevention with restoration of biodiversity through ecological engineering used for co-benefits nature-based solutions. Sustainability 13(20):11150. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011150.

    OpenUrl
57. ↵
    1. Rocha, F.,
    2. M. E. Lucas-Borja,
    3. P. Pereira, and
    4. M. Muñoz-Rojas

    . 2020. Cyanobacteria as a nature-based biotechnological tool for restoring salt-affected soils. Agronomy 10(9):1321. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10091321.

    OpenUrl
58. ↵
    1. Seddon, N.,
    2. A. Chausson,
    3. P. Berry,
    4. C.A.J. Girardin,
    5. A. Smith, and
    6. B. Turner

    . 2020. Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 375(1794). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0120.
59. 1. Seifollahi-Aghmiuni, S.,
    2. M. Nockrach, and
    3. Z. Kalantari

    . 2019. The potential of wetlands in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda. Water 11(3):609.

    OpenUrl
60. ↵
    1. Sowinska-Swierkosz, B.,
    2. J. Wojcik-Madej, and
    3. M. Michalik-Sniezek

    . 2021. An assessment of the Ecological Landscape Quality (ELQ) of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) based on existing elements of Green and Blue Infrastructure (GBI). Sustainability 13(21):11674. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111674.

    OpenUrl
61. ↵
    1. Spyrou, C.,
    2. M. Loupis,
    3. N. Charizopoulos,
    4. I. Apostolidou,
    5. A. Mentzafou,
    6. G. Varlas,
    7. A. Papadopoulos, et al.

    2021. Evaluating nature-based solution for flood reduction in spercheios river basin under current and future climate conditions. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(7):3885. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073885.

    OpenUrl
62. ↵
    1. Taillardat, P.,
    2. B.S. Thompson,
    3. M. Garneau,
    4. K. Trottier, and
    5. D.A. Friess

    . 2020. Climate change mitigation potential of wetlands and the cost-effectiveness of their restoration. Interface Focus 10(5). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsfs.2019.0129.
63. 1. Tanneberger, F.,
    2. L. Appulo,
    3. S. Ewert,
    4. S. Lakner,
    5. N.O. Brolchain,
    6. J. Peters, and
    7. W. Wichtmann

    . 2021. The power of nature-based solutions: How peatlands can help us to achieve key EU sustainability objectives. Advanced Sustainable Systems 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/adsu.202000146.
64. 1. Teo, H.C.,
    2. Y.W. Zeng,
    3. T.V Sarira,
    4. T.K. Fung,
    5. Q.M. Zheng,
    6. X.P. Song,
    7. K.Y. Chong, and
    8. L.P. Koh

    . 2021. Global urban reforestation can be an important natural climate solution. Environmental Research Letters 16(3):034059. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abe783.

    OpenUrl
65. 1. Thorslund, J.,
    2. J. Jarsjo,
    3. F. Jaramillo,
    4. J.W. Jawitz,
    5. S. Manzoni,
    6. N.B. Basu,
    7. S.R. Chalov, et al.

    2017. Wetlands as large-scale nature-based solutions: Status and challenges for research, engineering and management. Ecological Engineering 108(2017):489–497.

    OpenUrl
66. ↵
    1. Triest, L.,
    2. I. Stiers, and
    3. S. Van Onsem

    . 2016. Biomanipulation as a nature-based solution to reduce cyanobacterial blooms. Aquatic Ecology 50(3):461–483.

    OpenUrl
67. 1. Turkelboom, F.,
    2. R. Demeyer,
    3. L. Vranken,
    4. P. De Becker,
    5. F. Raymaekers, and
    6. L. De Smet

    . 2021. How does a nature-based solution for flood control compare to a technical solution? Case study evidence from Belgium. AMBIO 50(8):1431–1445.

    OpenUrl
68. ↵
    1. UN (United Nations)

    . 2021. United Nations Food System Summit. https://www.unfoodsystems.org/.
69. 1. Van Cauwenbergh, N.,
    2. P.A. Dourojeanni,
    3. P. van der Zaag,
    4. M. Brugnach,
    5. K. Dartee,
    6. R. Giordano, and
    7. E. Lopez-Gunn

    . 2022. Beyond TRL-Understanding institutional readiness for implementation of nature-based solutions. Envrionmental Science and Policy 127(2022):293–302.

    OpenUrl
70. 1. Van Noordwijk, M.

    2021. Agroforestry-based ecosystem services: Reconciling values of humans and nature in sustainable development. Land 10(7):699. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10070699.

    OpenUrl
71. ↵
    1. Vörösmarty, C.J.,
    2. V. Rodríguez Osuna,
    3. A.D. Cak,
    4. A. Bhaduri,
    5. S.E. Bunn,
    6. F. Corsi,
    7. J. Gastelumendi, et al.

    2018. Ecosystem-based water security and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Ecohydrology and Hydrobiology 18(4):317–333.

    OpenUrl
72. 1. Wamsler, C.,
    2. B. Wickenberg,
    3. H. Hanson,
    4. J.A. Olsson,
    5. S. Stalhammar,
    6. H. Bjorn,
    7. H. Falck, et al.

    2020. Environmental and climate policy integration: Targeted strategies for overcoming barriers to nature-based solutions and climate change adaptation. Journal of Cleaner Production 247(2020):119-154.

    OpenUrl
73. ↵
    1. Welden, E.A.,
    2. A. Chausson, and
    3. M.S. Melanidis

    . 2021. Leveraging nature-based solutions for transformation: Reconnecting people and nature. People and Nature 3(5):966–977.

    OpenUrl
74. 1. Wolz, K.J.,
    2. S.T. Lovell,
    3. B.E. Branham,
    4. W.C. Eddy,
    5. K. Keeley,
    6. R.S. Revord,
    7. M.M. Wander,
    8. W.H. Yang, and
    9. E.H. DeLucia

    . 2018. Frontiers in alley cropping: Transformative solutions for temperate agriculture. Global Change Biology 24(3):883–894.

    OpenUrl
75. 1. Wong, J.W.C., and
    2. U.O. Ogbonnaya

    . 2021. Biochar porosity: A nature-based dependent parameter to deliver microorganisms to soils for land restoration. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 28(34):46894–46909.

    OpenUrl
76. 1. V. Singh,
    2. S. Yadav, and
    3. R. Yadava

    1. Yadav, R.C.

    2018. Development of universal ultimate total green chemistry and eco-agriculture for sustainable productivity. In Water Resoures Management, eds. V. Singh, S. Yadav, and R. Yadava. Water Science and Technology Library, vol. 78. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5711-3_4.