Integrating climate change mitigation and adaptation in agriculture and forestry: opportunities and trade-offs

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.International audienceAlthough many activities can jointly contribute to the climate change strategies of adaptation and mitigation, climate policies have generally treated these strategies separately. In recent years, there has been a growing interest shown by practitioners in agriculture, forestry, and landscape management in the links between the two strategies. This review explores the opportunities and trade-offs when managing landscapes for both climate change mitigation and adaptation; different conceptua-lizations of the links between adaptation and mitigation are highlighted. Under a first conceptualization of 'joint outcomes,' several reviewed studies analyze how activities without climatic objectives deliver joint adaptation and mitigation outcomes. In a second conceptualization of 'unintended side effects,' the focus is on how activities aimed at only one climate objective—either adaptation or mitigation—can deliver outcomes for the other objective. A third conceptualization of 'joint objectives' highlights that associating both adaptation and mitigation objectives in a climate-related activity can influence its outcomes because of multiple possible interactions. The review reveals a diversity of reasons for mainstreaming adaptation and mitigation separately or jointly in landscape management. The three broad conceptualizations of the links between adaptation and mitigation suggest different implications for climate policy mainstreaming and integration

Iron nutrition of fruit tree crops

Although iron (Fe) needs by fruit trees are relatively low, Fe deficiency represents the main constraint for successful cultivation of fruit tree crops in calcareous and alkaline soils. Kiwifruit, peach and pear, several Citrus and Vaccinium spp. are very susceptible to Fe chlorosis, cherry and grape are relatively susceptible and apple is relatively tolerant. The typical Fe deficiency symptoms, the interveinal leaf yellowing starting from apical leaves which may progress and turn into necrosis, exhibit a temporal and spatial variability, requiring an efficient diagnosis systems. Iron deficiency reduces yields and fruit quality and forces growers to adopt measures for controlling and preventing the development of Fe chlorosis. The most widely adopted Fe fertilizers are the synthetic chelates, that do not represent a sustainable management approach, due to the cost and their potential pollution of the soil and water environments. The genetic approach to prevent chlorosis is based on the choice of tolerant rootstocks, which are known to activate mechanisms for improving Fe uptake under condition of low Fe availability. Unfortunately, for several fruit crops iron tolerant rootstocks have some adverse agronomic characteristics (e.g. excessive vigor) which make their adoption unlikely in modern fruit industry. Alternatives to Fe chelates have been identified and need to be tested and adapted to different conditions: they should aim at the improvement of soil environment for root growth and activity and/or to the enhancement of Fe availability in the soil and in the tree