Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Environmental Benefits and Control of Pollution to Surface Water and Groundwater by Agroforestry Systems: a Review

  • Published:
Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Agricultural pollution consists a serious concern for environmental protection managers. Among the pollutants, nitrates, phosphoric compounds and organic pesticides from agricultural activities are the most common and hazardous to the environment and human health. Several mitigation techniques have been proposed to control these pollutants from entering aquatic systems. Agroforestry, which is the common cultivation of crops and trees, is one such mitigation technique. In the present study, the efficiency of agroforestry systems in pollutant reduction is reviewed. A search of relevant international literature was conducted using Scopus, Science Direct and Google Scholar search engines, using relevant keyword combinations for agrochemical pollution abatement with trees. More than 2000 results were found and the most relevant were selected and extensively studied, and are summarized here. From the current knowledge, it can be generally seen that tree roots in agroforestry systems are able to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus residues in soils from 20% up to 100%, have the potential to reduce pesticides leaching and runoff in considerable amounts (up to 90% for runoff), and simultaneously they provide additional benefits to the ecosystems including erosion control, improvement of soil quality and positive effects on biodiversity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agus F, Garrity DP, Cassel DK, Mercado A (1999) Grain crop response to contour hedgerow systems on sloping Oxisols. Agrofor Syst 42(2):107–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alavalapati J, Shrestha R, Stainback G, Matta J (2004) Agroforestry development: an environmental economic perspective. Agric Syst 61:299–310

  • Albrecht A, Kandji ST (2003) Carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 99(1–3):15–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen SC, Jose S, Nair PKR, Brecke BJ, Nkedi-Kizza P, Ramsey CL (2004) Safety-net role of tree roots: evidence from a pecan (Carya Illinoensis K. Koch)–cotton (Gossypium Hirsutum L.) alley cropping system in the southern United States. For Ecol Manag 192(2–3):395–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen SC, Nair VD, Graetz DA, Jose S, Nair RPK (2006) Phosphorus loss from organic versus inorganic fertilizers used in alleycropping on a Florida Ultisol. Agric Ecosyst Environ 117(4):290–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anbumozhi V, Radhakrishnan J, Yamaji E (2005) Impact of riparian buffer zones on water quality and associated management considerations. Ecol Eng 24(5):517–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson SH, Udawatta RP, Seobi T, Garrett HE (2009) Soil water content and infiltration in agroforestry buffer strips. Agrofor Syst 75(1):5–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrianarisoa KS, Dufour L, Bienaimé S, Zeller B, Dupraz C (2016) The introduction of hybrid walnut trees (Juglans Nigra × regia cv. NG23) into cropland reduces soil mineral N content in autumn in southern France. Agrofor Syst 90(2):193–205

  • Babu S, Hallam A, Rajasekaran B (1995) Dynamic modelling of agroforestry and soil fertility interactions: implications for multi-disciplinary research policy, agricultural Economics.13:125-135

  • Bandolin TH, Fisher RF (1991) Agroforestry systems in North America. Agrofor Syst 16(2):95–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basnyat P, Teeter LD, Lockaby BG, Flynn KM (2000) The use of remote sensing and GIS in watershed level analyses of non-point source pollution problems. For Ecol Manag 128(1–2):65–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bealey WJ, Dore AJ, Dragosits U, Reis S, Reay DS, Sutton MA (2016) The potential for tree planting strategies to reduce local and regional ecosystem impacts of agricultural ammonia emissions. J Environ Manag 165:106–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaudette C, Bradley RL, Whalen JK, McVetty PBE, Vessey K, Smith DL (2010) Tree-based intercropping does not compromise canola (Brassica Napus L.) seed oil yield and reduces soil nitrous oxide emissions. Agric Ecosyst Environ 139(1–2):33–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beenhouwer M, Aerts R, Honnay O (2013) A global meta-analysis of the biodiversity and ecosystem service benefits of coffee and cacao agroforestry. Agric Ecosyst Environ 175:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellow JG, Nair PKR, Martin TA (2008) Crop interactions in fruit tree-based agroforestry Systems in the Western Highlands of Guatemala: component yields and system performance, presented in Jose S and Gordon AM, chapter 8 tree, toward agroforestry design - an ecological approach. Springer, pp 111-132

  • Benites J (1990) Agroforestry systems with potential for acid soils of the humid tropics of Latin America and the Caribbean. For Ecol Manag 36:81–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentrup G (2008) Conservation buffers: design guidelines for buffers, corridors, and greenways, general technical report, National Agroforestry Center: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, southern, SRS-109. Res Stat 110

  • Bergeron M, Lacombe S, Bradley RL, Whalen J, Cogliastro A, Jutras M-F et al (2011) Reduced soil nutrient leaching following the establishment of tree-based intercropping systems in eastern Canada. Agrofor Syst 83(3):321–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharati L, Lee KH, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC (2002) Soil-water infiltration under crops, pasture, and established riparian buffer in Midwestern USA. Agrofor Syst 56:249–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borin M, Vianello M, Morari F, Zanin G (2005) Effectiveness of a buffer strip in removing runoff pollutants from a cultivated field in north-East Italy. Agric Ecosyst Environ 105:101–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borin M, Passoni M, Thiene M, Tempesta T (2010) Multiple functions of buffer strips in farming areas. Eur J Agron 32(1):103–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breman H, Kessler J (1997) The potential benefits of agroforestry in the Sahel and other semi-arid regions. Eur J Agron 7:25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browaldh M (1995) The influence of trees on nitrogen dynamics in an agrisilvicultural system in Sweden. Agrofor Syst 30(3):301–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley C, Hynes S, Mechan S (2012) Supply of an ecosystem service—farmers’ willingness to adopt riparian buffer zones in agricultural catchments. Environ Sci Pol 24:101–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock H, Macmillan DC, Crabtree JR (1994) New perspectives on agroforestry in lowland Britain. Land Use Policy 11(3):222–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadoux S, Sauzet G, Valantin-Morison M, Pontet C, Champolivier L, Robert C et al (2015) Intercropping frost-sensitive legume crops with winter oilseed rape reduces weed competition, insect damage, and improves nitrogen use efficiency. Ocl 22(3):D302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calfapietra C, Gielen B, Karnosky D, Ceulemans R, Scarascia Mugnozza G (2010) Response and potential of agroforestry crops under global change. Environ Pollut 158(4):1095–1104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinael R, Mao Z, Prieto I, Stokes A, Dupraz C, Kim JH et al (2015) Competition with winter crops induces deeper rooting of walnut trees in a Mediterranean alley cropping agroforestry system. Plant Soil 391(1–2):219–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardoso IM, Guijt I, Franco FS, Carvalho AF, Ferreira Neto PS (2001) Continual learning for agroforestry system design: university, NGO and farmer partnership in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Agric Syst 69:235–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerdán CR, Rebolledo MC, Soto G, Rapidel B (2012) Sinclair FL. Local knowledge of impacts of tree cover on ecosystem services in smallholder coffee production systems. Agric Syst 110:119–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceulemans R, Deraedt W (1999) Production physiology and growth potential of poplars under short-rotation forestry culture. For Ecol Manag 121(1–2):9–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christen B, Dalgaard T (2013) Buffers for biomass production in temperate European agriculture: a review and synthesis on function, ecosystem services and implementation. Biomass Bioenergy 55:53–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CRAAQ (2003) Guide de reference en fertilisation. Centre de Reference en Agriculture et en Agroalimentaire du Quebec, Sainte-Foy 294

  • Dabbert S (1995) Agroforestry and land-use change in industrialized nations: a case study from northeastern Germany. Agrofor Syst 31:157–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson IK, Leakey R, Clement CR, Weber JC, Cornelius JP, Roshetko JM et al (2014) The management of tree genetic resources and the livelihoods of rural communities in the tropics: non-timber forest products, smallholder agroforestry practices and tree commodity crops. For Ecol Manag 333:9–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delgado JA, Berry JK (2008) Advances in Precision Conservation 98:1–44

  • Delgado JA, Shaffer M, Hu C, Lavado R, Cueto-Wong J, Joosse P et al (2008) An index approach to assess nitrogen losses to the environment. Ecol Eng 32(2):108–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLonge MS, Miles A, Carlisle L (2016) Investing in the transition to sustainable agriculture. Environ Sci Pol 55:266–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimitriou I, Busch G, Jacobs S, Schmidt-Walter P, Lamersdorf N (2009) A review of the impacts of short rotation coppice cultivation on water issues. Landbauforschung Volkenrode 59:197–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Dix ME, Johnson RJ, Harrell MO, Case RM, Wright RJ, Hodges L, Brandle JR et al (1995) Influences of trees on abundance of natural enemies of insect pests: a review. Agrofor Syst 29:303–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domenicano S, Coll L, Messier C, Berninger F (2011) Nitrogen forms affect root structure and water uptake in the hybrid poplar. New For 42:347–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty MC, Thevathasan NV, Gordon AM, Lee H, Kort J (2009) Nitrate and Escherichia Coli NAR analysis in tile drain effluent from a mixed tree intercrop and monocrop system. Agric Ecosyst Environ 131(1–2):77–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duchemin M, Hogue R (2009) Reduction in agricultural non-point source pollution in the first year following establishment of an integrated grass/tree filter strip system in southern Quebec (Canada). Agric Ecosyst Environ 131(1–2):85–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupraz C (1999) Adequate design of control treatments in long term agroforestry experiments with multiple objectives. Presented in Auclair D and Dupraz C (eds), Agroforestry for Sustainable Land-Use Fundamental Research and Modelling with Emphasis on Temperate and Mediterranean Applications 60: 35–48

  • Dwivedi AP (1992) Agroforestry: Principles and Practices. Oxford IBH Publishing Company Pvt Ltd. N.A., New Delhi, pp 365

  • Edwards CA, Grove TL, Harwood RR, Pierce Colfer CJ (1993) The role of agroecology and integrated farming systems in agricultural sustainability. Agric Ecosyst Environ 46:99–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis EA, Nair PKR, Linehan PE, Beck HW, Blanche CA (2000) A GIS-based database management application for agroforestry planning and tree selection. Comput Electron Agric 27:41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis EA, Nair PKR, Jeswani SD (2005) Development of a web-based application for agroforestry planning and tree selection. Comput Electron Agric 49(1):129–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ende HP and Huttl R (1997) Preface in Forest Ecology and Management 91:1–3

  • Epila JSO (1986) The case for insect Pest Management in Agroforestry Research. Agric Syst 19:37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commision (1991a) Council directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources. Official Journal of the European Communities, 31.12.91, No. L 375, pp 1-8, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:31991L0676

  • European Commision (1991b) Council directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. Official Journal of the European Communities, 19.8.91, No. L 230, pp 1-32, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:31991L0414

  • European Commision (2000) EU water framework directive 2000/60/EC of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, 22.12.2000, No. L 327, pp. 1-73, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/SL/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060

  • European Commision (2009a) Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides. Official Journal of the European Union, 24.11.2009, No. L 309, pp 71-86, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32009L0128

  • European Commision (2009b) Regulation 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing council directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC. Official Journal of the European Union, 24.11.2009, No. L 309, pp 1-50, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32009R1107

  • European Commision (2009c) Regulation (EC) no 1185/2009 of the European Parliament and of the council of 25 November 2009 concerning statistics on pesticides. Official Journal of the European Union, 10.12.2009, No. L 324, pp 1-22, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32009R1185

  • European Commision (2013) Regulation 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing council regulation (EC) no 1698/2005. Official Journal of the European Union, 20.12.2013, No. L 347, pp 487-547, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32013R1305

  • Evans P (1988) Designing agroforestry innovations to increase their adoptability: a case study from Paraguay. J Rural Stud 4(1):45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felix JD, Avery GB, Mead RN, Kieber RJ, Willey JD (2016) Nitrogen content and isotopic composition of Spanish Moss (Tillandsia Usneoides L.): reactive nitrogen variations and source implications across an urban coastal air shed. Environ Process 3(4):711–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrett G, Buck L (1997) Agroforestry practice and policy in the United States of America. For Ecol Manag 1:5–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrett HE, Rietveld WJ, Fisher RF (eds.) (2000) North American Agroforestry: An Integrated Science and Practice. 1st ed., American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 402

  • George SJ, Harper RJ, Hobbs RJ, Tibbett M (2012) A sustainable agricultural landscape for Australia: a review of interlacing carbon sequestration, biodiversity and salinity management in agroforestry systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 163:28–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gikas GD, Tsihrintzis VA, Sykas D (2016) Effect of trees on the reduction of nutrient concentrations in the soils of cultivated areas. Environ Monit Assess 188(6):327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie AR, Jose S, Mengel DB, Hoover WL, Pope PE, Seifert JR et al (2000) Defining competition vectors in a temperate alley cropping system in the midwestern USA: 1. Production physiology. Agrofor Syst 48(1):25–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnankambary Z, Ilstedt U, Nyberg G, Hien V, Malmer A (2008) Nitrogen and phosphorus limitation of soil microbial respiration in two tropical agroforestry parklands in the south-Sudanese zone of Burkina Faso: the effects of tree canopy and fertilization. Soil Biol Biochem 40(2):350–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gold M, Hanover LW (1987) Agroforestry systems for the temperate zone. Agrofor Syst 5:109–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grewal SS, Juneja ML, Singh K, Singh S (1994) A comparison of two agroforestry systems for soil, water and nutrient conservation on degraded land. Soil Technol 7:145–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggar JP, Tanner EVJ, Beers JW, Kass DCL (1993) Nitrogen dynamics of tropical agroforestry and annual cropping systems, soil biol. Biochemist 25(10):1363–1378

    Google Scholar 

  • Harou PA (1983) Economic principles to appraise agroforestry projects. Agric Adm 12:127–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasanuzzaman M (2012) Hasanuzzaman.webs.Com classification of agroforestry systems. Accessed: http://www.Hasanuzzaman.Webs.Com/ (cited 10/6/2016)

  • Hellenic Agroforestry Network (2014) www.agroforestry.gr Accessed 10/6/2016

  • Herzog F (1998) Streuobst: a traditional agroforestry system as a model for agroforestry development in temperate. Europe Agroforestry Systems 42:61–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosier R (1989) The economics of smallholder agroforestry: two case studies. World Dev 17(11):1827–1839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huth NI, Carberry PS, Poulton PL, Brennan LE, Keating BA (2003) A framework for simulating agroforestry options for the low rainfall areas of Australia using APSIM. Eur J Agron 18:171–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaac ME, Hinsinger P, Harmand JM (2012) Nitrogen and phosphorus economy of a legume tree-cereal intercropping system under controlled conditions. Sci Total Environ 434:71–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izydorczyk K, Fratczak W, Drobniewska A, Cichowicz E, Michalska-Hejduk D, Gross R et al (2013) A biogeochemical barrier to enhance a buffer zone for reducing diffuse phosphorus pollution—preliminary results. Ecohydrol Hydrobiol 13(2):104–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jose S (2009) Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agrofor Syst 76(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jose S, Gillespie AR, Seifert JR, Mengel DB, Pope PE (2000) Defining competition vectors in a temperate alley cropping system in the mid-western USA. 3. Competition for nitrogen and litter decomposition dynamics. Agrofor Syst 48:61–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang BT (1997) Alley cropping-soil productivity and nutrient recycling. For Ecol Manag 91:75–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karacic A, Verwijst T, Weih M (2003) Above-ground woody biomass production of short-rotation Populus plantations on agricultural land in Sweden. Scand J For Res 18:427–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kass D, Sylvester-Bradley R, Nygren P (1997) The role of nitrogen fixation and nutrient supply in some agroforestry systems of the Americas, soil bio. Biochemist 29(5/6):715–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Kho R (2000) A general tree-environment-crop interaction equation for predictive understanding of agroforestry systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 80:87–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knauer N and Mander U (1989) Studies on the filtration effect of differently vegetated buffer strips along inland waters in Schleswig-Holstein. 1. Information: filtration or nitrogen and phosphorus. Zeit. Fur Kulturtechnik and Landentwicklung 31: 52-57

  • Köhler K, Duynisveld WHM, Böttcher J (2006) Nitrogen fertilization and nitrate leaching into groundwater on arable sandy soils. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 169(2):185–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lal K, Minhas PS, Yadav RK (2015) Long-term impact of wastewater irrigation and nutrient rates II. Nutrient balance, nitrate leaching and soil properties under peri-urban cropping systems. Agric Water Manag 156:110–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Licht L, Isebrands JG (2005) Proceedings of the joint IEA bioenergy task 30 and task 31 workshop sustainable bioenergy production systems: environmental, operational and social implications linking phytoremediated pollutant removal to biomass economic opportunities. Biomass Bioenergy 28(2):203–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CH, Lerch RN, Garrett HE, George MF (2004) Incorporating forage grasses in riparian buffers for bioremediation of atrazine, isoxaflutole and nitrate in Missouri. Agrofor Syst 63:91–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovell ST, Sullivan WC (2006) Environmental benefits of conservation buffers in the United States: evidence, promise, and open questions. Agric Ecosyst Environ 112(4):249–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren B (1982) Introduction. Agrofor Syst 1(1):3–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mander Ü (1985) The renovation effect of polluted surface flow in vegetated buffer strips. Acta et commentationes Universitatis Tartuensis 701: 77-89. (in Russian, with summary in English)

  • Mander Ü, Kuusemets V, Ivask M (1995) Nutrient dynamics of riparian ecotones: a case study from the Porijogi River catchment, Estonia. Landsc Urban Plan 31:1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mander Ü, Kuusemets V, Lõhmus K, Mauring T (1997) Efficiency and dimensioning of riparian buffer zones in agricultural catchments. Ecol Eng 8(4):299–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matteo M, Randhir T, Bloniarz D (2006) Watershed-scale impacts of Forest buffers on water quality and runoff in urbanizing environment. J Water Resour Plan Manag 132(3):144–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayus M, Van Keulen H, Stroosnijder L (1999) Analysis for dry and wet years with the WIMISA model of tree-crop competition for windbreak systems in Sahel. Agrofor Syst 43:203–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirck J, Isebrands JG, Verwijst T, Ledin S (2005) Development of short-rotation willow coppice systems for environmental purposes in Sweden. Biomass Bioenergy 28(2):219–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell JK, Walker SE, Hirschi MC, Cooke RAC (1999) Nitrate losses under various cropping systems (Article), Proceedings of the 1999 IUGG 99, the XXII General Assembly of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics; Birmingham, UK; 18–30 July 1999; Code 55779, 257: 33–39. IAHS-AISH Publication

  • Mobbs DC, Lawson GJ, Frien AD, Crout NMJ, Arah JRM, Hodnet MG (1999) Hypar model for agroforestry system. Technical Manual, DFID Forestry Research Programme

    Google Scholar 

  • Motis T (2007) Agroforestry principles. ECHO technical note. www.Echonet.Org accessed 10/6/2016

  • Nair PKR (1985) Classification of agroforestry systems. Agrofor Syst 3(9):7–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair PKR (1987) Agroforestry and firewood production. In: Hall DO, Overend RP (eds) Biomass. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp 367–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair PKR (1991) State-of-the-art of agroforestry systems. For Ecol Manag 45:5–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nair PKR (2005) Agroforestry: trees in support of sustainable agriculture. In: Hillel H, Rosenzweig C, Powlson D, Scow K, Singer M, Sparks D (eds) Encyclopedia of soils in the environment, Elsevier, London, UK, vol 1, pp 35–44

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nair VD, Graetz DA (2004) Agroforestry as an approach to minimizing nutrient loss from heavily fertilized soils: the Florida experience. Agrofor Syst 61:269–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair VD, Nair PKR, Kalmbacher RS, Ezenwa IV (2007) Reducing nutrient loss from farms through silvopastoral practices in coarse-textured soils of Florida, USA. Ecol Eng 29(2):192–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nerlich K, Graeff-Hönninger S, Claupein W (2013) Agroforestry in Europe: a review of the disappearance of traditional systems and development of modern agroforestry practices, with emphasis on experiences in Germany. Agrofor Syst 87(2):475–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ning SK, Chang NB, Jeng KY, Tseng YH (2006) Soil erosion and non-point source pollution impacts assessment with the aid of multi-temporal remote sensing images. J Environ Manag 79(1):88–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ó hUallacháin D, Copland A, Buckley K, McMahon B (2015) Opportunities within the revised EU common agricultural policy to address the decline of farmland birds: an Irish perspective. Diversity 7(3):307–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2001) Environmental indicators for agriculture: methods and results. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2008) Environmental performance of agriculture in OECD countries since 1990. Main report, Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Osman KT (2014) Soil Degradation, Conservation and Remediation. Springer, Netherlands, pp 237

  • Otto S, Vianello M, Infantino A, Zanin G, Di Guardo A (2008) Effect of a full-grown vegetative filter strip on herbicide runoff: maintaining of filter capacity over time. Chemosphere 71(1):74–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palma JHN, Graves AR, Bunce RGH, Burgess PJ, de Filippi R, Keesman KJ et al (2007a) Modeling environmental benefits of silvoarable agroforestry in Europe. Agric Ecosyst Environ 119(3–4):320–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palma JHN, Graves AR, Burgess PJ, Keesman KJ, van Keulen H, Mayus M et al (2007b) Methodological approach for the assessment of environmental effects of agroforestry at the landscape scale. Ecol Eng 29(4):450–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passeport E, Richard B, Chaumont C, Margoum C, Liger L, Gril JJ et al (2014) Dynamics and mitigation of six pesticides in a "wet" forest buffer zone. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 21(7):4883–4894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pe’er G, Zinngrebe Y, Hauck J, Schindler S, Dittrich A, Zingg S et al (2016) Adding some green to the greening: improving the EU's ecological focus areas for biodiversity and farmers. Conservation Letters, pp 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12333

  • Peterjohn WT, Correll DL (1984) Nutrient dynamics in an agricultural watershed: observations on the role of a riparian forest. Ecology 65(5):1466–1475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinay G, Decamps H (1988) The role of riparian woods in regulating nitrogen fluxes between the alluvial aquifer and surface water: a conceptual model. Regul Rivers: Res Manage 2(4):507–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popov VH, Cornish PS, Sun H (2006) Vegetated biofilters: the relative importance of infiltration and adsorption in reducing loads of water-soluble herbicides in agricultural runoff. Agric Ecosyst Environ 114(2–4):351–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinkenstein A, Wöllecke J, Böhm C, Grünewald H, Freese D, Schneider BU et al (2009) Ecological benefits of the alley cropping agroforestry system in sensitive regions of Europe. Environ Sci Pol 12(8):1112–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radersma S, Ong CK (2004) Spatial distribution of root length density and soil water of linear agroforestry systems in sub-humid Kenya: implications for agroforestry models. For Ecol Manag 188(1–3):77–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raintree JB (1986) Agroforestry pathways: land tenure, shifting cultivation and sustainable agriculture. Unasylva 38(4):2–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramos C, Carbonell EA (1991) Nitrate leaching and soil moisture prediction with the LEACHM model. Fertilizer Research 27:171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raun WR, Johnson GV (1999) Improving nitrogen use efficiency for cereal production. Agron J 91(3):357–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichenberger S, Bach M, Skitschak A, Frede HG (2007) Mitigation strategies to reduce pesticide inputs into ground- and surface water and their effectiveness; a review. Sci Total Environ 384(1–3):1–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisner Y, de Filippi R, Herzog F, Palma J (2007) Target regions for silvoarable agroforestry in Europe. Ecol Eng 29(4):401–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivest D, Cogliastro A, Olivier A (2009) Tree-based intercropping systems increase growth and nutrient status of hybrid poplar: a case study from two northeastern American experiments. J Environ Manag 91(2):432–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockwood DL, Naidu CV, Carter DR, Rahmani M, Spriggs TA, Lin C et al (2004) Short-rotation woody crops and phytoremediation: opportunities for agroforestry? Agrofor Syst 61:51–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenstock TS, Tully KL, Arias-Navarro C, Neufeldt H, Butterbach-Bahl K, Verchot LV (2014) Agroforestry with N2-fixing trees: sustainable development's friend or foe? Curr Opin Environ Sustain 6:15–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe EC, Hairiah K, Giller KE, van Noordwijk M, Cadisch G (1999) Testing the safety-net role of hedgerow tree roots by 15N placement at different soil depths. Agrofor Syst 43:81–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryszkowski L, Kedziora A (2007) Modification of water flows and nitrogen fluxes by shelterbelts. Ecol Eng 29(4):388–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Perez J-M, Lucot E, Bariac T, Tremolieres M (2008) Water uptake by trees in a riparian hardwood forest (Rhine floodplain, France). Hydrol Process 22:366–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoonover JE, Williard KWJ, Zaczek JJ, Mangun JC, Carver AD (2005) Nutrient attenuation in agricultural surface runoff by riparian buffer zones in southern Illinois, USA. Agrofor Syst 64(2):169–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz RC, Colletti JP, Isenhart TM, Simpkins WW, Mize CW, Thompson ML (1995) Design and placement of a multi-species riparian buffer strip system. Agrofor Syst 29:201–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sequinatto L, Reichert JM, Rheinheimer dos Santos D, Reinert DJ, Copetti ACC (2013) Occurrence of agrochemicals in surface waters of shallow soils and steep slopes cropped to tobacco. Química Nova 36(6):768–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard SC, Sheppard MI, Long J, Sanipelli B, Tait J (2006) Runoff phosphorus retention in vegetated field margins on flat landscapes. Can J Soil Sci 86(5):871–884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair FL (2004) Agroforestry. In: Evans BJ, Youngquist JA (eds) Encyclopedia of forest sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 27–32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Smethurst PJ, Comerford NB (1993) Potassium and phosphorus uptake by competing pine and grass: observations and model verification. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57(6):1602–1610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stancheva J, Bencheva S, Petkova K, Piralkov V (2007) Possibilities for agroforestry development in Bulgaria: outlooks and limitations. Ecol Eng 29(4):382–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoltz E, Nadeau E (2014) Effects of intercropping on yield, weed incidence, forage quality and soil residual N in organically grown forage maize (Zea Mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia Faba L.) Field Crop Res 169:21–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straight R (2012) Shade coffee production enjoys resurgence. Inside Agroforestry: Many paths to success 21(1):1–16, https://nac.unl.edu/documents/insideagroforestry/vol21issue1.pdf

  • Suarez, LA (2006) PRZM-3, A Model for predicting pesticide and nitrogen fate in the crop root and unsaturated soil zones: User’s Manual for Release 3.12.2 EPA/600/R-05/111

  • Todd R, Lowrance R, Hendrickson D, Asmussen L, Leonard R et al (1983) Riparian vegetation as filters of nutrients exported from a coastal plain agricultural watershed. Int. Symp. Nutrient cycling in agricultural ecosystems (Athens, 1980). Spec Publ 23:475–493

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomer MD, Dosskey MG, Burkart MR, James DE, Helmers MJ, Eisenhauer DE (2009) Methods to prioritize placement of riparian buffers for improved water quality. Agrofor Syst 75(1):17–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsakiris G (2015) The status of the European waters in 2015: a review. Environ Process 2(3):543–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsonkova P, Böhm C, Quinkenstein A, Freese D (2012) Ecological benefits provided by alley cropping systems for production of woody biomass in the temperate region: a review. Agrofor Syst 85(1):133–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsonkova P, Quinkenstein A, Böhm C, Freese D, Schaller E (2014) Ecosystem services assessment tool for agroforestry (ESAT-A): an approach to assess selected ecosystem services provided by alley cropping systems. Ecol Indic 45:285–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udawatta RP, Garrett HE, Kallenbach RL (2010) Agroforestry and grass buffer effects on water quality in grazed pastures. Agrofor Syst 79(1):81–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2015) World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP.241

  • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2004) Agroforestry working trees for water quality. USDA and National Agroforestry Center. Lincoln, NE

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2011). USDA Agroforestry Strategic Framework, Fiscal Year 2011–2016. http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=FOREST_FORESTRY Accessed 15/6/2016

  • van der Werf W, Keesman K, Burgess P, Graves A, Pilbeam D, Incoll LD et al (2007) Yield-SAFE: a parameter-sparse, process-based dynamic model for predicting resource capture, growth, and production in agroforestry systems. Ecol Eng 29(4):419–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Noordwijk M, Lusiana B (1999) WaNuLCAS, a model of water, nutrient and light capture in agroforestry systems. Agrofor Syst 43:217–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vianello M, Vischetti C, Scarponi L, Zanin G (2005) Herbicide losses in runoff events from a field with a low slope: role of a vegetative filter strip. Chemosphere 61(5):717–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volk T, Abrahamson L, Nowak C, Smart L, Tharakan P, White E (2006) The development of short-rotation willow in the northeastern United States for bioenergy and bioproducts, agroforestry and phytoremediation. Biomass Bioenergy 30(8–9):715–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker TS (1987) Economic prospects for agroforestry intervention in Indian SAT: implication for research resource allocation at ICRISAT, economic group progress report 79. ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan N (2015) Pesticides exposure modeling based on GIS and remote sensing land use data. Appl Geogr 56:99–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Tang L, Wang X, Chen F (2010) Effects of alley crop planting on soil and nutrient losses in the citrus orchards of the three gorges region. Soil Tillage Res 110(2):243–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Zhang B, Lin L, Zepp H (2011) Agroforestry system reduces subsurface lateral flow and nitrate loss in Jiangxi Province, China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 140(3–4):441–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weih M (2004) Intensive short rotation forestry in boreal climates: present and future perspectives. Can J For Res 34(7):1369–1378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams PA, Gordon AM (1992) The potential of intercropping as an alternative land use system in temperate North America. Agrofor Syst 19:253–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winterbottom R, Hazelwood PT (1987) Agroforestry and sustainable development: making the connection. Ambio 16:100–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang L, Ding X, Liu X, Li P, Eneji AE (2016) Impacts of long-term jujube tree/winter wheat–summer maize intercropping on soil fertility and economic efficiency - a case study in the lower North China plain. Eur J Agron 75:105–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge a research scholarship from IKY and Siemens through the Research Scholarship Program “Research Projects for Excellence IKY/SIEMENS”, Grant No. 2603. Project title: “Design and implementation of an agroforestry pollution control system through the common cultivation of arable crops and trees for the control of soil and groundwater pollution from nutrients and pesticides”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for the Assessment of Natural Hazards and Proactive Planning & Laboratory of Reclamation Works and Water Resources Management, School of Rural and Surveying Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 9 Iroon Polytechniou St., Zografou, 15780, Athens, Greece

    George Pavlidis & Vassilios A. Tsihrintzis

  2. Laboratory of Chemical Control of Pesticides, Department of Pesticides Control and Phytopharmacy, Benaki Phytopathological Institute, 8 Delta St., Kifissia, 14561, Athens, Greece

    George Pavlidis

Authors
  1. George Pavlidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vassilios A. Tsihrintzis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vassilios A. Tsihrintzis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pavlidis, G., Tsihrintzis, V.A. Environmental Benefits and Control of Pollution to Surface Water and Groundwater by Agroforestry Systems: a Review. Water Resour Manage 32, 1–29 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1805-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1805-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation