Cover crops play an increasingly important role in improving soil quality, reducing agricultural inputs and improving environmental sustainability. The main objectives of this critical global review and systematic analysis were to assess cover crop practices in the context of their impacts on nitrogen leaching, net greenhouse gas balances (NGHGB) and crop productivity. Only studies that investigated the impacts of cover crops and measured one or a combination of nitrogen leaching, soil organic carbon (SOC), nitrous oxide (N2O), grain yield and nitrogen in grain of primary crop, and had a control treatment were included in the analysis. Long\uffe2\uff80\uff90term studies were uncommon, with most data coming from studies lasting 2\uffe2\uff80\uff933\uffc2\uffa0years. The literature search resulted in 106 studies carried out at 372 sites and covering different countries, climatic zones and management. Our analysis demonstrates that cover crops significantly (p\uffc2\uffa0<\uffc2\uffa00.001) decreased N leaching and significantly (p\uffc2\uffa0<\uffc2\uffa00.001) increased SOC sequestration without having significant (p\uffc2\uffa0>\uffc2\uffa00.05) effects on direct N2O emissions. Cover crops could mitigate the NGHGB by 2.06\uffc2\uffa0\uffc2\uffb1\uffc2\uffa02.10\uffc2\uffa0Mg CO2\uffe2\uff80\uff90eq\uffc2\uffa0ha\uffe2\uff88\uff921\uffc2\uffa0year\uffe2\uff88\uff921. One of the potential disadvantages of cover crops identified was the reduction in grain yield of the primary crop by \uffe2\uff89\uff884%, compared to the control treatment. This drawback could be avoided by selecting mixed cover crops with a range of legumes and non\uffe2\uff80\uff90legumes, which increased the yield by \uffe2\uff89\uff8813%. These advantages of cover crops justify their widespread adoption. However, management practices in relation to cover crops will need to be adapted to specific soil, management and regional climatic conditions.
", "keywords": ["Crops", " Agricultural", "net greenhouse gas balance", "330", "Supplementary Data", "Nitrogen", "QH301 Biology", "Supplementary data available", "12. Responsible consumption", "Nitrous oxide emissions", "QH301", "Greenhouse Gases", "Soil", "N content", "nitrate", "C sequestration", "N leaching", "Environmental Chemistry", "General Environmental Science", "NE/M019691/1", "2. Zero hunger", "Global and Planetary Change", "Catch crop", "Ecology", "Soil organic carbon", "green manure", "Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)", "Research Review", "Agriculture", "04 agricultural and veterinary sciences", "15. Life on land", "yield", "Crop Production", "13. Climate action", "N in grain", "Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC)", "Cover crop", "0401 agriculture", " forestry", " and fisheries", "BB/N013484/1", "BB/N013468/1"]}, "links": [{"href": "https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14644"}, {"rel": "related", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/Global%20Change%20Biology", "name": "related record", "description": "related record", "type": "application/json"}, {"rel": "self", "type": "application/geo+json", "title": "10.1111/gcb.14644", "name": "item", "description": "10.1111/gcb.14644", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/10.1111/gcb.14644"}, {"rel": "collection", "type": "application/json", "title": "Collection", "name": "collection", "description": "Collection", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main"}], "time": {"date": "2019-05-13T00:00:00Z"}}, {"id": "10.1111/gcb.14878", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"updated": "2026-07-28T16:18:39Z", "type": "Journal Article", "created": "2019-10-22", "title": "Which practices co\u2010deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?", "description": "AbstractThere is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as \uffe2\uff80\uff9cland challenges\uffe2\uff80\uff9d). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3\uffc2\uffa0Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing\uffe2\uff80\uff90up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as \uffe2\uff80\uff9cland challenges\uffe2\uff80\uff9d). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3\uffc2\uffa0Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing\uffe2\uff80\uff90up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.