Science in the Supply Chain: Collaboration Opportunities for Advancing Sustainable Agriculture in the United States

Consumers and corporations are increasingly interested in understanding the sustainability of agricultural supply chains and reducing the environmental impacts of food, fiber, feed, and fuel production. This emerging need to quantify environmental impacts from agricultural production creates an opportunity for collaboration with the scientific community. Without such collaboration, sustainability efforts risk failure by adopting unrealistic goals or misguided approaches. This commentary explores the role of science in Field to Market, a nonprofit organization developing a sustainability program for US commodity crops, and highlights opportunities to address emerging science challenges. We evaluate changes over the past 35 years in key environmental impacts of crop production used to inform land managers as well as companies that are committed to improvements. Achieving improvements will only be possible if three key gaps are addressed regarding available simulation models and data, scale of implementation and uncertainty, and effectiveness of conservation practices. Filling these gaps presents an opportunity for dialogue between scientists, farmers, and private-sector stakeholders to advance scientific knowledge and promote the common objective of sustainable agriculture

Evidence synthesis as the basis for decision analysis: a method of selecting the best agricultural practices for multiple ecosystem services

Agricultural management practices have impacts not only on crops and livestock, but also on soil, water, wildlife, and ecosystem services. Agricultural research provides evidence about these impacts, but it is unclear how this evidence should be used to make decisions. Two methods are widely used in decision making: evidence synthesis and decision analysis. However, a system of evidence-based decision making that integrates these two methods has not yet been established. Moreover, the standard methods of evidence synthesis have a narrow focus (e.g., the effects of one management practice), but the standard methods of decision analysis have a wide focus (e.g., the comparative effectiveness of multiple management practices). Thus, there is a mismatch between the outputs from evidence synthesis and the inputs that are needed for decision analysis. We show how evidence for a wide range of agricultural practices can be reviewed and summarized simultaneously (“subject-wide evidence synthesis”), and how this evidence can be assessed by experts and used for decision making (“multiple-criteria decision analysis”). We show how these methods could be used by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in California to select the best management practices for multiple ecosystem services in Mediterranean-type farmland and rangeland, based on a subject-wide evidence synthesis that was published by Conservation Evidence (www.conservationevidence.com). This method of “evidence-based decision analysis” could be used at different scales, from the local scale (farmers deciding which practices to adopt) to the national or international scale (policy makers deciding which practices to support through agricultural subsidies or other payments for ecosystem services). We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this method, and we suggest some general principles for improving evidence synthesis as the basis for multi-criteria decision analysis

Science in the Supply Chain: Collaboration Opportunities for Advancing Sustainable Agriculture in the United States

Consumers and corporations are increasingly interested in understanding the sustainability of agricultural supply chains and reducing the environmental impacts of food, fiber, feed, and fuel production. This emerging need to quantify environmental impacts from agricultural production creates an opportunity for collaboration with the scientific community. Without such collaboration, sustainability efforts risk failure by adopting unrealistic goals or misguided approaches. This commentary explores the role of science in Field to Market, a nonprofit organization developing a sustainability program for US commodity crops, and highlights opportunities to address emerging science challenges. We evaluate changes over the past 35 years in key environmental impacts of crop production used to inform land managers as well as companies that are committed to improvements. Achieving improvements will only be possible if three key gaps are addressed regarding available simulation models and data, scale of implementation and uncertainty, and effectiveness of conservation practices. Filling these gaps presents an opportunity for dialogue between scientists, farmers, and private-sector stakeholders to advance scientific knowledge and promote the common objective of sustainable agriculture

Science in the Supply Chain: Collaboration Opportunities for Advancing Sustainable Agriculture in the United States

Consumers and corporations are increasingly interested in understanding the sustainability of agricultural supply chains and reducing the environmental impacts of food, fiber, feed, and fuel production. This emerging need to quantify environmental impacts from agricultural production creates an opportunity for collaboration with the scientific community. Without such collaboration, sustainability efforts risk failure by adopting unrealistic goals or misguided approaches. This commentary explores the role of science in Field to Market, a nonprofit organization developing a sustainability program for US commodity crops, and highlights opportunities to address emerging science challenges. We evaluate changes over the past 35 years in key environmental impacts of crop production used to inform land managers as well as companies that are committed to improvements. Achieving improvements will only be possible if three key gaps are addressed regarding available simulation models and data, scale of implementation and uncertainty, and effectiveness of conservation practices. Filling these gaps presents an opportunity for dialogue between scientists, farmers, and private-sector stakeholders to advance scientific knowledge and promote the common objective of sustainable agriculture

FolR1: a novel cell surface marker for isolating midbrain dopamine neural progenitors and nascent dopamine neurons

Cell type-specific surface markers offer a powerful tool for purifying defined cell types for restorative therapies and drug screenings. Midbrain dopaminergic neurons (mesDA) are the nerve cells preferentially lost in the brains of Parkinson’s disease patients. Clinical trials of transplantation of fetal neural precursors suggest that cell therapy may offer a cure for this devastating neurological disease. Many lines of preclinical studies demonstrate that neural progenitors committed to dopaminergic fate survive and integrate better than postmitotic DA neurons. We show that the folate-receptor 1 (FolR1), a GPI-anchored cell surface molecule, specifically marks mesDA neural progenitors and immature mesDA neurons. FolR1 expression superimposes with Lmx1a, a bona-fide mesDA lineage marker, during the active phase of mesDA neurogenesis from E9.5 to E14.5 during mouse development, as well as in ESC-derived mesDA lineage. FolR1+ neural progenitors can be isolated by FACS or magnetic sorting (MAC) which give rise to dopamine neurons expressing TH and Pitx3, whilst FolR1 negative cells generate non-dopaminergic neurons and glia cells. This study identifies FolR1 as a new cell surface marker selectively expressed in mesDA progenitors in vivo and in vitro and that can be used to enrich in vitro differentiated TH neurons

Table_1_Evidence Synthesis as the Basis for Decision Analysis: A Method of Selecting the Best Agricultural Practices for Multiple Ecosystem Services.DOCX

Agricultural management practices have impacts not only on crops and livestock, but also on soil, water, wildlife, and ecosystem services. Agricultural research provides evidence about these impacts, but it is unclear how this evidence should be used to make decisions. Two methods are widely used in decision making: evidence synthesis and decision analysis. However, a system of evidence-based decision making that integrates these two methods has not yet been established. Moreover, the standard methods of evidence synthesis have a narrow focus (e.g., the effects of one management practice), but the standard methods of decision analysis have a wide focus (e.g., the comparative effectiveness of multiple management practices). Thus, there is a mismatch between the outputs from evidence synthesis and the inputs that are needed for decision analysis. We show how evidence for a wide range of agricultural practices can be reviewed and summarized simultaneously (“subject-wide evidence synthesis”), and how this evidence can be assessed by experts and used for decision making (“multiple-criteria decision analysis”). We show how these methods could be used by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in California to select the best management practices for multiple ecosystem services in Mediterranean-type farmland and rangeland, based on a subject-wide evidence synthesis that was published by Conservation Evidence (www.conservationevidence.com). This method of “evidence-based decision analysis” could be used at different scales, from the local scale (farmers deciding which practices to adopt) to the national or international scale (policy makers deciding which practices to support through agricultural subsidies or other payments for ecosystem services). We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this method, and we suggest some general principles for improving evidence synthesis as the basis for multi-criteria decision analysis.</p

Table_3_Evidence Synthesis as the Basis for Decision Analysis: A Method of Selecting the Best Agricultural Practices for Multiple Ecosystem Services.DOCX

Agricultural management practices have impacts not only on crops and livestock, but also on soil, water, wildlife, and ecosystem services. Agricultural research provides evidence about these impacts, but it is unclear how this evidence should be used to make decisions. Two methods are widely used in decision making: evidence synthesis and decision analysis. However, a system of evidence-based decision making that integrates these two methods has not yet been established. Moreover, the standard methods of evidence synthesis have a narrow focus (e.g., the effects of one management practice), but the standard methods of decision analysis have a wide focus (e.g., the comparative effectiveness of multiple management practices). Thus, there is a mismatch between the outputs from evidence synthesis and the inputs that are needed for decision analysis. We show how evidence for a wide range of agricultural practices can be reviewed and summarized simultaneously (“subject-wide evidence synthesis”), and how this evidence can be assessed by experts and used for decision making (“multiple-criteria decision analysis”). We show how these methods could be used by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in California to select the best management practices for multiple ecosystem services in Mediterranean-type farmland and rangeland, based on a subject-wide evidence synthesis that was published by Conservation Evidence (www.conservationevidence.com). This method of “evidence-based decision analysis” could be used at different scales, from the local scale (farmers deciding which practices to adopt) to the national or international scale (policy makers deciding which practices to support through agricultural subsidies or other payments for ecosystem services). We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this method, and we suggest some general principles for improving evidence synthesis as the basis for multi-criteria decision analysis.</p