Soils are vital for supporting food security and other ecosystem services. Climate change can affect soil functions both directly and indirectly. Direct effects include temperature, precipitation, and moisture regime changes. Indirect effects include those that are induced by adaptations such as irrigation, crop rotation changes, and tillage practices. Although extensive knowledge is available on the direct effects, an understanding of the indirect effects of agricultural adaptation options is less complete. A review of 20 agricultural adaptation case‐studies across Europe was conducted to assess implications to soil threats and soil functions and the link to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The major findings are as follows: (a) adaptation options reflect local conditions; (b) reduced soil erosion threats and increased soil organic carbon are expected, although compaction may increase in some areas; (c) most adaptation options are anticipated to improve the soil functions of food and biomass production, soil organic carbon storage, and storing, filtering, transforming, and recycling capacities, whereas possible implications for soil biodiversity are largely unknown; and (d) the linkage between soil functions and the SDGs implies improvements to SDG 2 (achieving food security and promoting sustainable agriculture) and SDG 13 (taking action on climate change), whereas the relationship to SDG 15 (using terrestrial ecosystems sustainably) is largely unknown. The conclusion is drawn that agricultural adaptation options, even when focused on increasing yields, have the potential to outweigh the negative direct effects of climate change on soil degradation in many European regions.

The objective of this research was to determine the capacity of a soil tillage system in soil conservation, in productivity and in energy efficiency. The minimum tillage and no-tillage systems represent good alternatives to the conventional (plough) system of soil tillage, due to their conservation effects on soil and to the good production of crops (Maize, 96%-98% of conventional tillage for minimum tillage, and 99.8% of conventional tillage for no till; Soybeans, 103%-112% of conventional tillage for minimum tillage and 117% of conventional tillage for no till; Wheat, 93%-97% of conventional tillage for minimum tillage and 117% of conventional tillage for no till. The choice of the right soil tillage system for crops in rotation help reduce energy consumption, thus for maize: 97%-98% energy consumption of conventional tillage when using minimum tillage and 91% when using no-tillage; for soybeans: 98% energy consumption of conventional tillage when using minimum tillage and 93 when using no-tillage; for wheat: 97%-98% energy consumption of conventional tillage when using minimum tillage and 92% when using no-tillage. Energy efficiency is in relation to reductions in energy use, but also might include the efficiency and impact of the tillage system on the cultivated plant. For all crops in rotation, energy efficiency (energy produced from 1 MJ consumed) was the best in no-tillage — 10.44 MJ ha−1 for maize, 6.49 MJ ha−1 for soybean, and 5.66 MJ ha−1 for wheat. An analysis of energy-efficiency in agricultural systems includes the energy consumed-energy produced-energy yield comparisons, but must be supplemented by soil energy efficiency, based on the conservative effect of the agricultural system. Only then will the agricultural system be sustainable, durable in agronomic, economic and ecological terms. The implementation of minimum and no-tillage soil systems has increased the organic matter content from 2% to 7.6% and water stable aggregate content from 5.6% to 9.6%, at 0–30 cm depth, as compared to the conventional system. Accumulated water supply was higher (with 12.4%-15%) for all minimum and no-tillage systems and increased bulk density values by 0.01%-0.03% (no significant difference) While the soil fertility and the wet aggregate stability have initially been low, the effect of conservation practices on the soil characteristics led to a positive impact on the water permeability in the soil. Availability of soil moisture during the crop growth period led to a better plant watering condition. Subsequent release of conserved soil water regulated the plant water condition and soil structure

Conventional farming (CONV) is the norm in European farming, causing adverse effects on some of the five major soil functions, viz. primary productivity, carbon sequestration and regulation, nutrient cycling and provision, water regulation and purification, and habitat for functional and intrinsic biodiversity. Conservation agriculture (CA) is an alternative to enhance soil functions. However, there is no analysis of CA benefits on the five soil functions as most studies addressed individual soil functions. The objective was to compare effects of CA and CONV practices on the five soil functions in four major environmental zones (Atlantic North, Pannonian, Continental and Mediterranean North) in Europe by applying expert scoring based on synthesis of existing literature. In each environmental zone, a team of experts scored the five soil functions due to CA and CONV treatments and median scores indicated the overall effects on five soil functions. Across the environmental zones, CONV had overall negative effects on soil functions with a median score of 0.50 whereas CA had overall positive effects with median score ranging from 0.80 to 0.83. The study proposes the need for field-based investigations, policies and subsidy support to benefit from CA adoption to enhance the five soil functions.

Background: The determination of micro-, macroelements and heavy metals in the soil-grapevine-wine system is extremely important for the wine industry, the grape and wine quality, and also for consumer health. The quantitative analysis of 10 elements: Na, Ca, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn, Pb, Cd, Ni, Co were made in soil at different depths and also in grapevines (leaves and canes). For grape juice and wine there were analyzed the concentrations of Cu, Zn, Pb, Ni and Cd on three cultivars Fetească albă, Fetească regală and Riesling italian, located in Turulung vineyard, NW Romania. All the elements were detected using flame atomic absorbtion spectrometry (FAAS). Results: Only the Cu concentration $$ \left(\overline{x}=479.64\kern0.5em \mathrm{mg}/\mathrm{kg}\right) $$ x ¯ = 479.64 mg / kg has higher values than the maximum limit admitted (20 mg/kg). The concentrations of micro-, macroelements and heavy metals in aerial parts of grapevine cultivars occur in the following order: Ca > Na > Mg > Fe > Cu > Zn > Ni > Pb > Co > Cd in canes and leaves. Cu, Pb, Ni and Zn concentration levels decreased in wine compared to grape must, possibly forming insoluble components that can be removed through sedimentation together with yeasts and lees during fermentation. Cd was under the limit of detection. Heavy metals detected in Romanian wines were below the recommended health limits of the International organization of wine and vine (O.I.V.). Conclusions: In soil, all the elements studied were under the maximum limit admitted, except, elevated concentrations of Cu. These high values obtained could be an effect of different Cu treatments in vineyards. In canes and leaves, Cu, Zn, Pb, Cd, Ni had higher concentration levels than in grape juice (must) and wine. Conversely, the metal acumulation of wines obtained by micro-vinification process (in the laboratory) are lower than in must.

The hydroponic production of microgreens has potential to develop, at both an industrial, and a family level, due to the improved production platforms. The literature review found numerous studies which recommend procedures, parameters and best intervals for the development of microgreens. This paper aims to develop, based on the review of the literature, a set of procedures and parameters, included in a test protocol, for hydroponically cultivated microgreens. Procedures and parameters proposed to be included in the trial protocol for evaluating platforms for growing microgreens in hydroponic conditions are: (1) different determinations: in controlled settings (setting the optimal ranges) and in operational environments settings (weather conditions in the area/testing period); (2) procedures and parameters related to microgreen growth (obtaining the microgreens seedling, determining microgreen germination, measurements on the morphology of plants, microgreens harvesting); (3) microgreens production and quality (fresh biomass yield, dry matter content, water use efficiency, bioactive compound analysis, statistical analysis). Procedures and parameters proposed in the protocol will provide us with the evaluation information of the hydroponic platforms to ensure: number of growing days to reach desired size; yield per area, crop health, and secondary metabolite accumulation.