Talk:Polyculture/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 19:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I will give this a read. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. Holiday rules apply but I'll do what I can to respond to comments promptly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I do not expect quick replies, please enjoy your holidays first!

Comments
My first impression is that the article lacks a number of important aspects, while picking a few aspects (such as pest control) that are discussed in detail. I would recommend to read-through this book chapter, which seems to be an comprehensive summary of polyculture covering all the aspects:. If you do not have that book, I do; just send me a wikimail and I will provide it.

Comparing the contents of that chapter with this article tells me that a lot is missing. For example, there are more advantages (in particular, the effects on soil properties are not covered; this goes way beyond tilling). Also, the improved resilience can be mentioned (i.e., more stable food yields). Some terms/practices are not mentioned (e.g., relay intercropping, living mulches, etc). And many more things.

Other comments

 * Crop yield is an issue in polycultures.[5][25] While a polyculture produces more biomass overall than a monoculture,[5] the yield of an individual crop inside the polyculture is lower, not least because only part of the land area of the field is available to it. – It makes sense that the yield of an individual crop is lower, and that overall biomass production is higher. But much more interesting is the total yield per unit area of the target foods (which, I think, is implied in "crop yield is an issue in polycultures"). Is that lower, too?
 * It is not so implied. Like-for-like comparisons are difficult as there are many variables; weeds are often tolerated in traditional polycultures, inputs are low, scientific measurements are probably absent. One would have to compare such a polyculture with a traditional-style and by modern standards low-yielding monoculture. If polyculture is applied to a modern farm, then the high biomass total (which is a "yield") is one of the rewards, but this does not equate to a higher mass of the "main" crop, wheat or whatever, and it can't be expected to do so. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * But your statements contradict what is written in the article. When comparing the crop yield per unit area is not possible (as you say), then why are the statements "crop yield is an issue in polycultures" and "the yield of an individual crop inside the polyculture is lower" possible? The same problems you that mention should apply to these. I don't even see where both claims are supported by any of the sources. Quite to the contrary, source [5] speaks of "win-wins" between yields and biocontrol. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look at all of this back at base. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, I've clarified the text, and added a variety of materials from the book chapter. Mostly this supports what the text already said; I've added some new subsections for additional points that it makes, including more history by continent, efficiency, improving the soil, living mulches, and mixed cropping.


 * I wonder if the "Effectiveness" section may be more appropriately called "Disadvantages", as this is what the content is about. The book chapter mentioned above has a list of disadvantages too, some important things that should be included, such as limited use of mechanization processes, making polycultures unattractive from an economical point of view.
 * Done, and grouped all 'Advantages' also.


 * Maybe the article should make clear that polyculture is the growing of more than one crop species together at the same time in a single space. Therefore, sequential cropping (growing crops one after the other in a single year on the same field) is not polyculture. Maybe it makes even sense to have an overview section on the possible approaches here that defines these terms. See the introduction of the mentioned book chapter for this. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Glossed both in lead and in body.
 * Regrouped text and table to form a concise 'Definitions' section.

Final comments
Looks excellent now! Just a couple of minor points, and then, I think, the article is ready.


 * However, the yield of an individual crop inside the polyculture is lower – Just to confirm: As written, this does refer to the individual crop (e.g., the maize in the Three Sisters), not to the individual plant?
 * Yes, edited.


 * Polyculture avoids the release of pesticides[11][12] and fertilizers into the environment.[13] Environmental impacts such as eutrophication of fresh water are greatly reduced.[11] – Add "can". It is of course possible to combine polyculture with pesticides and fertilizers. Some fertilizer (and be it a traditional organic one) is needed in most polycultures anyways, I think; so this might relate to industrial fertilizer only?
 * Yes, edited.


 * Tillage ... is reduced in polyculture – Again, not necessarily. I am also unsure what "reduced" means. Either you till, or you don't till.
 * Edited.


 * Polyculture can help increase diet diversity and improve people's nutrition – Does this refer to horticulture only?
 * Guess in the West it kind of implies horticulture, but in traditional systems there is barely any boundary between agriculture and horticulture, think of the Nigerian systems for instance.


 * In Mexico, coffee plants are often grown alongside other tree species.[2] – redundant with following paragraph
 * Removed.


 * Permaculture is the polyculture of perennial plants such as legume-grass mixtures and wildflower mixtures. – This does not match the definition provided in the permaculture article? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:51, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Removed, people can follow the link for explanation if required.