Diffusive losses of nitrogen and phosphorus from agricultural areas have detrimental effects on freshwater and marine ecosystems. Mitigation measures treating drainage water before it enters streams hold a high potential for reducing nitrogen and phosphorus losses from agricultural areas. To achieve a better understanding of the opportunities and challenges characterising current and new drainage mitigation measures in oceanic and continental climates, we reviewed the nitrate and total phosphorus removal efficiency of: (i) free water surface constructed wetlands, (ii) denitrifying bioreactors, (iii) controlled drainage, (iv) saturated buffer zones and (v) integrated buffer zones. Our data analysis showed that the load of nitrate was substantially reduced by all five drainage mitigation measures, while they mainly acted as sinks of total phosphorus, but occasionally, also as sources. The various factors influencing performance, such as design, runoff characteristics and hydrology, differed in the studies, resulting in large variation in the reported removal efficiencies.

Background: Water resources are very important to agricultural crop production due to increasing demand for food, feed, and fiber. There is a growing requirement for more use of our natural resources of land, soil, and water. There is ever-increasing pressure on water resources for our extensive use in agricultural production. There needs to be innovative solutions for more efficient irrigation techniques for better development of agricultural irrigation management. Main body of the This review paper shows the consequences of partial root-zone drying happening on various plant species, its advantages and disadvantages, and also the hormone production under partial root-zone drying. In this technique of irrigation, a wet-dry cycle irrigates the crop, i.e., irrigation is scheduled at a regular interval with half way root drying. Short conclusion: This is a water-saving irrigation strategy used in arid and semi-arid environments for increasing irrigation water use efficiency and water productivity as compared to fully irrigated crop plants in area with limited water resources. Scientists have worked a lot with different morphological, physiological, and yield related parameters of horticultural crops with partial root-zone drying but little work with agronomic crops.

In recent years, interest in studying the climate and environmental impact of organic food has grown. Here, we compared the environmental impacts of organic and conventional food using data from 100 life cycle assessment studies. Most studies focused on climate impacts, with fewer addressing biodiversity loss and ecotoxicity. Findings revealed no significant differences in global warming, eutrophication potential, and energy use per mass unit. However, organic food showed lower global warming, eutrophication potential, and energy use per area unit, with higher land use. Additionally, organic farming showed lower potential for biodiversity loss and ecotoxicity. Challenges in life cycle assessment include evaluating biodiversity, toxicity, soil quality, and carbon changes. The choice of functional units influences results, highlighting the importance of considering multiple units in assessing organic food’s environmental footprint. This study emphasizes the necessity for comprehensive assessments at both product and diet levels to support informed decisions.

In this study, using an LCA approach we explored how bio-based peat alternatives (wood fiber, compost, and hydrochar based on willow and degassed fiber from agricultural waste) and their mixtures (75 % peat with 25 % peat alternative) as growing media (GM) for plant production in Denmark may provide benefits for reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to peat. To perform this, foreground data (collected via personal communication and literature) was used together with background data from Ecoinvent V3.8. The chosen functional unit was 1 m³ of GM and the system boundary was from cradle to use as GM. The global warming potential of all the peat alternatives showed significant reduction, varying between 89 and 109 % compared to peat. When incorporating 25 % of each alternative with peat, the climate footprint was reduced by 16 to 33 % compared to pure peat. Thus, there are large climate prospects in replacing peat with bio-based alternatives, and the results underlines the relevance of being able to increase the proportion of the bio-based components in their mixtures with peat beyond the 25 % and towards 100 % replacement. The effectiveness of peat substitutes in term of reducing the CO₂ emissions is affected by choice of the feedstock, their processing method and emissions of their end-use.