Cited by 99Agronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesWeed Control and Herbicide Applications

Cover crop mixture diversity, biomass productivity, weed suppression, and stability

Open access
Florence, A. M., Higley, L. G., Drijber, R. A., Francis, C. A., Lindquist, J. L.·2019·PLOS ONE

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The diversity-productivity, diversity-invasibility, and diversity-stability hypotheses propose that increasing species diversity should lead, respectively, to increased average biomass productivity, invasion resistance, and stability. We tested these three hypotheses in the context of cover crop mixtures, evaluating the effects of increasing cover crop mixture diversity on aboveground biomass, weed suppression, and biomass stability. Twenty to forty cover crop treatments were replicated three or four times at eleven sites using eighteen species representing three cover crop species each from six pre-defined functional groups: cool-season grasses, cool-season legumes, cool-season brassicas, warm-season grasses, warm-season legumes, and warm-season broadleaves. Each species was seeded as a pure stand, and the most diverse treatment contained all eighteen species. Remaining treatments included treatments representing intermediate levels of cover crop species and functional richness and a no cover crop control. Cover crop seeding dates ranged from late July to late September with both cover crop and weed aboveground biomass being sampled prior to winterkill. Stability was assessed by evaluating the variability in cover crop biomass for each treatment across plots within each site. While increasing cover crop mixture diversity was associated with increased average aboveground biomass, we assert that this was the result of the average biomass of the pure stands being drawn down by low biomass species rather than due to niche complementarity or increased resource use efficiency. At no site did the highest biomass mixture produce more than the highest biomass pure stand. Furthermore, while increases in cover crop mixture diversity were correlated with increases in weed suppression and biomass stability, we argue that this was largely the result of diversity co-varying with aboveground biomass, and that differences in aboveground biomass rather than differences in diversity drove the differences observed in weed suppression and stability.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0206195

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Numerous studies have failed to show any benefit of species diversification in cover crops to the average performance of a range of criteria, or even on the stability of that performance.

    “Numerous studies have failed to show any benefit of species diversification in cover crops to the average performance of a range of criteria, or even on the stability of that performance (Florence et al., 2019;Florence and McGuire, 2020;Smith et al., 2020).”

    From Performance of innovative cropping systems diversified with oilseeds and protein crops: identification and resolution of methodological issues, using the Syppre experimental network as a case study (2024) · cites this paper as Florence et al., 2019

    The Conclusions report little evidence of a diversity benefit for weed suppression or biomass stability after controlling for biomass, and no advantage over a productive single species. But they also report that increasing diversity was associated with increased average cover crop biomass productivity. The claim's unqualified statement about no benefit to average performance therefore overstates what this paper found. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The most diverse cover crop mixtures (more than 5 to 10 species) were never the best performing.

    “These studies showed that the most diverse mixtures (more than 5 to 10 species) were never the best performing.”

    From Performance of innovative cropping systems diversified with oilseeds and protein crops: identification and resolution of methodological issues, using the Syppre experimental network as a case study (2024) · cites this paper as Florence et al., 2019

    The Discussion (Diversity-stability hypothesis; page unavailable) describes cover-crop studies in which the most diverse mixture was neither the most productive nor the most stable. The paper’s Conclusions likewise find no benefit from mixing over a productive single species. Neither passage establishes that mixtures with more than 5 to 10 species were *never* the best performing across the studies invoked by the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [2]Tilman D. Functional diversity In: Levin SA, editor. Encyclopedia of Biodiversity Vol. 3 Waltham, MA: Academic Press; 2001 pp. 109– 121.
  2. [3]DeLaplante K, Picasso V. The biodiversity-ecosystem function debate in ecology In: Gabbay DM, Brown B, Thagard P, De Laplante K, Peacock K, Woods J, editors. P hilosophy of ecology. Handbook of the philosophy of science Vol. 11 Oxford, UK: Elsevier; 2011 pp. 169– 200.
  3. [6]Moody K. Weed control in multiple cropping In: Proceedings of the symposium on cropping systems research and development for the Asian rice farmer. 21–27 Sept. 1976. Los Baños, Phillipines: IRRI; 1977 pp. 281– 294.
  4. [22]Clark A. (Ed.). Managing Cover Crops Profitably 3rd ed Sustainable Agriculture Network, Beltsville, MD 2007.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Florence, A. M., Higley, L. G., Drijber, R. A., Francis, C. A., & Lindquist, J. L.
Affiliations
University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US)
Corresponding author
Lindquist, J. L.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2019-03-14
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
e0206195
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2944746124
Cited by
99
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1
FWCI
13.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln (University of Nebraska) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1041000)
  • North Central SARE
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Weed Control and Herbicide Applications
Keywords
cover crop mixtures, species diversity, weed suppression, aboveground biomass, biomass stability, functional groups, pure stands, niche complementarity, resource efficiency, winterkill
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Seasons, Seeds, Ecosystem, Biomass, Crops, Agricultural, Biodiversity, Weed Control

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review