Production systems that feature temporal and spatial integration of crop and livestock enterprises, also known as integrated crop-livestock systems (ICLS), have the potential to intensify production on cultivated lands and foster resilience to the effects of climate change without proportional increases in environmental impacts. Yet, crop production outcomes following livestock grazing across environments and management scenarios remain uncertain and a potential barrier to adoption, as producers worry about the effects of livestock activity on the agronomic quality of their land. To determine likely production outcomes across ICLS and to identify the most important moderating variables governing those outcomes, we performed a meta-analysis of 66 studies comparing crop yields in ICLS to yields in unintegrated controls across 3 continents, 12 crops, and 4 livestock species. We found that annual cash crops in ICLS averaged similar yields (-7% to +2%) to crops in comparable unintegrated systems. The exception was dual-purpose crops (crops managed simultaneously for grazing and grain production), which yielded 20% less on average than single-purpose crops in the studies examined. When dual-purpose cropping systems were excluded from the analysis, crops in ICLS yielded more than in unintegrated systems in loamy soils and achieved equal yields in most other settings, suggesting that areas of intermediate soil texture may represent a "sweet-spot" for ICLS implementation. This meta-analysis represents the first quantitative synthesis of the crop production outcomes of ICLS and demonstrates the need for further investigation into the conditions and management scenarios under which ICLS can be successfully implemented.

Agroecosystems are on both the receiving and contributing ends of increasingly demanding climatic and environmental conditions. Maintaining productive systems under resource scarcity and multiplicative stresses requires precise monitoring and systems-scale planning. By incorporating ecological resilience into agroecosystems research we can gain valuable insight into agroecosystem identity, change, responsivity, and performance under stress, but only if we move away from resilience as a mere touchstone concept. Using the productivity, stability, resistance, and recovery of system processes as a basic framework for resilience monitoring, we propose quantitative research approaches to tackle the continuing lack of biophysical, field-scale indicators needed to lend insight into dynamic resilience variables and mechanisms. We emphasize the importance of considering productive functions, sources of system regulation and disturbance, and cross-scale interactions when applying resilience theory to agroecosystems. Agroecosystem resilience research requires understanding of multiple scales and speeds of influence both above and below the focal scale. When these considerations are addressed, resilience theory can add tangible value to agroecosystems research, both for the purposes of monitoring current systems and of planning future systems that can reconcile productivity and sustainability goals.

Adaptive management practices that maximize yields while improving yield resilience are required in the face of resource variability and climate change. Ecological intensification such as organic farming and cover cropping are lauded in some studies for fostering yield resilience, but subject to criticism in others for their low productivity. We implemented a quantitative framework to assess yield resilience, emphasizing four aspects of yield dynamics: yield, yield stability, yield resistance (i.e., the ability of systems to avoid crop failure under stressful growing conditions), and maximum yield potential. We compared the resilience of maize-tomato rotation systems after 24 years of irrigated organic, cover cropped, and conventional management in a Mediterranean climate, and identified crop-specific resilience responses of tomato and maize to three management systems. Organic management maintained tomato yields comparable to those under conventional management, while increasing yield stability and resistance. However, organic and cover cropped system resulted in 36.1% and 35.8% lower maize yields and reduced yield stability and resistance than the conventional system. Our analyses suggest that investments in ecological intensification approaches could potentially contribute to long-term yield resilience, however, these approaches need to be tailored for individual crops and systems to maximize their benefits, rather than employing one-size-fits-all approaches.

Background

We report follow-up data from an ongoing prospective cohort study of COVID-19 in pediatric kidney transplantation through the Improving Renal Outcomes Collaborative (IROC).

Methods

Patient-level data from the IROC registry were combined with testing, indication, and outcomes data collected to describe the epidemiology of COVID testing, treatment, and clinical outcomes; determine the incidence of a positive COVID-19 test; describe rates of COVID-19 testing; and assess for clinical predictors of a positive COVID-19 test.

Results

From September 2020 to February 2021, 21 centers that care for 2690 patients submitted data from 648 COVID-19 tests on 465 patients. Most patients required supportive care only and were treated as outpatients, 16% experienced inpatient care, and 5% experienced intensive care. Allograft complications were rare, with acute kidney injury most common (7%). There was 1 case of respiratory failure and 1 death attributed to COVID-19. Twelve centers that care for 1730 patients submitted complete testing data on 351 patients. The incidence of COVID-19 among patients at these centers was 4%, whereas the incidence among tested patients was 19%. Risk factors to predict a positive COVID-19 test included age > 12 years, symptoms consistent with COVID-19, and close contact with a confirmed case of COVID-19.

Conclusions

Despite the increase in testing and positive tests over this study period, the incidence of allograft loss or death related to COVID-19 remained extremely low, with allograft loss or death each occurring in < 1% of COVID-19-positive patients and in less than < 0.1% of all transplant patients within the IROC cohort. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.