Agriculture, the Green Revolution and Pest Management
A farmer in Iowa harvests about 190 bushels of corn from every acre. A century ago the same land gave far less. How did farms get so productive, what did that cost the soil, the water, and the wildlife, and can we grow food in a way that lasts? Let's find out.
The Green Revolution
Between about 1950 and 1970, scientists such as Norman Borlaug developed high-yield varieties (HYVs) of wheat, rice, and corn. These crops put more energy into grain, and they could produce two or three times more food per acre. Farmers in Mexico, India, and the United States adopted them quickly.
HYVs are a package deal. They produce big yields only when they get plenty of water and nutrients, and when pests are held back. That is why the Green Revolution depended on irrigation, synthetic fertilizer, and pesticides all together.
| Benefit | Environmental cost |
|---|---|
| More food per acre; fewer famines | Heavy water use; aquifers drained |
| Less new land needed for farming | Fertilizer runoff causes eutrophication (see the eutrophication page) |
| Cheaper food | Pesticides harm non-target species and select for resistant pests |
| Mechanization saves labor | Monoculture lowers genetic diversity and increases erosion; fossil fuel use rises |
Why do HYVs raise the demand for water and fertilizer? A plant that makes more grain must take in more water and more nitrogen and phosphorus to build that grain. Growing the same variety over huge fields (a monoculture) also gives pests an enormous, uniform food supply, so pest outbreaks spread fast.
Define the term Green Revolution*. Name two technologies or practices that were part of it and state one environmental drawback that came with them.
Define the term Green Revolution. Name two technologies or practices that were part of it and state one environmental drawback that came with them.
Soil Conservation: Tillage and Crop Rotation
Bare, loose soil is easy for wind and rain to carry away. The Dust Bowl of the 1930s, when plowed Great Plains soil blew away in giant storms, is the classic example. Modern farmers use several practices to protect soil.
Tillage means turning over the soil before planting. In conventional tillage the whole field is plowed. In no-till farming seeds are planted directly into the leftover residue of the last crop.
| Feature | Conventional tillage | No-till |
|---|---|---|
| Soil erosion | High (bare soil) | Low (residue holds soil) |
| Organic matter and carbon | Lost to the air as CO₂ | Builds up; soil stores more carbon |
| Water | More evaporation and runoff | More infiltration; soil holds more water |
| Fuel use | High | Lower |
| Drawback | Erosion, carbon loss | Often needs more herbicide; special planting equipment; weeds and cooler wet soils can slow early growth |
Other soil-saving practices:
-
Crop rotation: growing different crops in a repeating sequence (for example corn, then soybeans, then oats). Soybeans host nitrogen-fixing bacteria that add nitrogen to the soil, so the next crop needs less fertilizer. Rotation also breaks pest and disease cycles and keeps nutrients from being drained in only one way.
-
Contour plowing: plowing across a slope, along its curves, so furrows slow runoff.
-
Terracing: building flat steps on a steep hillside so water doesn't rush downhill.
-
Cover crops: planting clover or rye between harvests so the soil is never bare.
Emma visits a farm in Iowa where the farmer plants a new crop in the same field each year in a repeating cycle: corn, then soybeans, then oats. Name this practice and…
Emma visits a farm in Iowa where the farmer plants a new crop in the same field each year in a repeating cycle: corn, then soybeans, then oats. Name this practice and state one benefit it has for the soil.
A farmer in Nebraska switches a field from conventional tillage (plowing the whole field) to no-till farming. Explain how no-till changes (a) soil erosion and (b) the…
A farmer in Nebraska switches a field from conventional tillage (plowing the whole field) to no-till farming. Explain how no-till changes (a) soil erosion and (b) the soil's ability to store carbon and water. Then give one disadvantage a farmer might face when using no-till.
Irrigation Methods
Irrigation supplies water that rain doesn't. Agriculture is the largest user of freshwater worldwide, so how the water is delivered matters a lot.
| Method | How it works | Efficiency |
|---|---|---|
| Flood (furrow) | Water flows over the whole field or down furrows | Low: much is lost to evaporation and runoff |
| Spray (sprinkler) | Water sprayed through the air, often from a center-pivot rig | Medium: some evaporates before landing |
| Drip | Tubes deliver water slowly right to the roots | High: little evaporation; but equipment is expensive |
Flood irrigation loses the most water to evaporation, because the water spreads over a large open surface. Drip irrigation puts the water where the plant needs it.
The problem of salinization
All irrigation water carries small amounts of dissolved salts. In a dry climate, the water evaporates and the salts stay behind and build up in the soil. This is salinization. Salty soil pulls water out of roots by osmosis, so plants wilt even in wet soil, and yields drop. Poor drainage makes it worse. Waterlogging, too much water in the soil, can also starve roots of oxygen.
Other irrigation problems include aquifer depletion, such as the declining Ogallala Aquifer under the Great Plains, and the diversion of rivers like the Colorado.
Classify each irrigation method as using water efficiently or inefficiently, and say which one loses the most water to evaporation: (a) drip irrigation, (b) flood…
Classify each irrigation method as using water efficiently or inefficiently, and say which one loses the most water to evaporation: (a) drip irrigation, (b) flood (furrow) irrigation, (c) spray (sprinkler) irrigation.
A farm in California's Central Valley irrigates 40 hectares. Flood irrigation applies 12,000 m³ of water per hectare per season, while drip irrigation applies 7,500 m³…
A farm in California's Central Valley irrigates 40 hectares. Flood irrigation applies 12,000 m³ of water per hectare per season, while drip irrigation applies 7,500 m³ per hectare per season for the same yield.
(a) Calculate the total water saved per season if the whole farm switches to drip irrigation.
(b) Explain one long-term problem of irrigation in dry regions, such as salinization, and how it harms crops.
Pests and Integrated Pest Management
A pest is any organism that damages crops: insects, weeds, fungi, and rodents. Pesticides are chemicals that kill them. A broad-spectrum pesticide kills many species, including helpful ones such as bees and the predators that eat pests.
Pesticides cause several problems:
-
Non-target effects: pollinators, birds, and natural pest enemies die too.
-
Pesticide resistance: in any pest population, a few individuals survive by chance. They reproduce, and their offspring inherit the resistance. After several rounds of spraying, most pests are resistant (natural selection). Farmers then spray more or switch chemicals, a cycle called the pesticide treadmill.
-
Runoff and contamination of streams and groundwater, and buildup in food chains (see the persistent pollutants page).
Integrated pest management (IPM) combines several methods and uses chemicals only when needed.
Components of an IPM program:
-
Monitor fields and set an action threshold: spray only when pests reach a damaging number, not on a fixed calendar.
-
Biological control: introduce or protect natural enemies, such as ladybugs that eat aphids, or use pheromone traps.
-
Cultural practices: crop rotation, planting pest-resistant varieties, and keeping fields clean.
-
Targeted, limited pesticide use: a narrow-spectrum chemical, applied only where needed.
IPM slows resistance because fewer pesticide sprays mean less selection pressure, and rotating different control methods means pests rarely face the same threat repeatedly. Unsprayed, non-resistant pests also survive nearby and mate with resistant ones, which dilutes resistance.
Jayden's family grows apples and is considering integrated pest management (IPM) instead of spraying a broad-spectrum pesticide on a fixed schedule. Describe three…
Jayden's family grows apples and is considering integrated pest management (IPM) instead of spraying a broad-spectrum pesticide on a fixed schedule. Describe three components of an IPM program. Explain how IPM can reduce the problem of pesticide resistance.
Weighing Tradeoffs: Conventional and Sustainable Farming
Real decisions in farming involve tradeoffs: more yield now versus less damage later. AP® questions often give a table and ask you to calculate and then evaluate.
Percent reduction = $\dfrac{\text{old} - \text{new}}{\text{old}} \times 100$.
When you evaluate a tradeoff, use numbers from the data, name who benefits and who pays, and think about the long term. Here a small yield loss may be worth it: lost topsoil takes hundreds of years to rebuild, and less fertilizer means less runoff, so less eutrophication downstream.
Two approaches to feeding a growing population
| Green Revolution (HYVs + inputs) | IPM-based, low-input | |
|---|---|---|
| Soil | Benefit: high yields reduce need to plow new land. Cost: erosion and soil degradation under monoculture | Benefit: rotation and cover crops build soil. Cost: may need more land or labor for the same output |
| Water | Benefit: irrigation makes dry land productive. Cost: heavy water use, runoff of fertilizer and pesticides | Benefit: less fertilizer and pesticide runoff, less water use. Cost: yields may be lower in some places |
For a region with limited freshwater, a low-input approach with efficient irrigation (drip) and drought-tolerant crops is usually the stronger recommendation. HYVs depend on a lot of water and fertilizer, and the water may not be there in the long run. A good argument also admits the cost, lower peak yields, and suggests a fix such as combining efficient irrigation with improved varieties.
A county in the Midwest is comparing two farming systems on similar land. | Feature | System A (monoculture, heavy tillage) | System B (crop rotation, cover crops,…
A county in the Midwest is comparing two farming systems on similar land.
| Feature | System A (monoculture, heavy tillage) | System B (crop rotation, cover crops, no-till) |
|---|---|---|
| Soil lost per year (tons/acre) | 6 | 1.5 |
| Synthetic fertilizer applied (lb N/acre) | 180 | 90 |
| Yield (bushels/acre) | 190 | 175 |
| Pesticide applications per season | 5 | 2 |
(a) Calculate the percent reduction in soil loss and in fertilizer use for System B compared with System A.
(b) Evaluate the tradeoff between yield and environmental impact. Use evidence from the table.
(c) Explain how the choice between the systems could affect water quality in a downstream river.
Compare the Green Revolution approach (high-yield varieties with irrigation, fertilizer, and pesticides) with an IPM-based, low-input approach for feeding a growing…
Compare the Green Revolution approach (high-yield varieties with irrigation, fertilizer, and pesticides) with an IPM-based, low-input approach for feeding a growing population. Your answer must:
(a) describe one benefit and one cost of each approach for soil and water;
(b) explain why high-yield varieties can increase demand for irrigation water and fertilizer;
(c) argue which approach you would recommend for a region with limited freshwater, and justify your choice.
Back to the start: Iowa farms are so productive because of Green Revolution crops, fertilizer, irrigation, and pesticides. That productivity came at a cost in soil, water, and wildlife, and practices such as rotation, no-till, drip irrigation, and IPM help farmers keep high yields while limiting the damage.