Study

Earthworm communities in conventional wheat monocropping and low-input wheat-clover intercropping systems

  • Published source details Schmidt O., Curry J.P., Purvis G. & Clements R.O. (2001) Earthworm communities in conventional wheat monocropping and low-input wheat-clover intercropping systems. Annals of Applied Biology, 138, 377-388.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Undersow spring cereals, with clover for example

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Undersow spring cereals, with clover for example

    A study of paired, intercropped and conventional wheat fields at four sites in the UK (Schmidt et al. 2001) found that intercropping resulted in higher earthworm (Lumbricidae) abundance, biomass and species diversity than conventional wheat management. Earthworm populations and biomass were greater in wheat-clover Trifolium spp. fields (individuals: 548/m², biomass: 137 g/m²) than conventional wheat fields (194/m²,36 g/m²) from autumn 1995-1997. Abundance varied more between conventional sites (55-408/m²) than between wheat-clover sites (337-733/m²). Population size ratios (wheat-clover:conventional wheat) ranged from approximately 2:1 to 9:1 and the overall mean ratio was 4:1. Species diversity was greater in wheat-clover fields (7-10 species) than conventional fields (5-9 species). White clover Trifolium repens was established in spring, and winter wheat was direct-drilled into the clover sward. Mono-cropped wheat was drilled at the same time. Intercropped fields received reduced applications. Earthworm communities were sampled in spring and autumn using the formalin method (10-12 quadrats of 0.25 m²/field) and an electrical sampling method (5-10 samples of 0.125 m²/field). Community biomass values refer to the live biomass.

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust