Adopting soil and crop management practices that conserve or enhance soil structure is critical for supporting the sustainable adaptation of agriculture to climate change, as it should help maintain agricultural production in the face of increasing drought or water excess without impairing environmental quality. In this paper, we evaluate the evidence for this assertion by synthesizing the results of 34 published meta-analyses of the effects of such practices on soil physical and hydraulic properties relevant for climate change adaptation in European agriculture. We also review an additional 127 meta-analyses that investigated synergies and trade-offs or help to explain the effects of soil and crop management in terms of the underlying processes and mechanisms. Finally, we identify how responses to alternative soil–crop management systems vary under contrasting agro-environmental conditions across Europe. This information may help practitioners and policymakers to draw context-specific conclusions concerning the efficacy of management practices as climate adaptation tools.Our synthesis demonstrates that organic soil amendments and the adoption of practices that maintain “continuous living cover” result in significant benefits for the water regulation function of soils, mostly arising from the additional carbon inputs to soil and the stimulation of biological processes. These effects are clearly related to improved soil aggregation and enhanced bio-porosity, both of which reduce surface runoff and increase infiltration. One potentially negative consequence of these systems is a reduction in soil water storage and groundwater recharge, which may be problematic in dry climates. Some important synergies are reductions in nitrate leaching to groundwater and greenhouse gas emissions for nonleguminous cover crop systems. The benefits of reducing tillage intensity appear much less clear-cut. Increases in soil bulk density due to traffic compaction are commonly reported. However, biological activity is enhanced under reduced tillage intensity, which should improve soil structure and infiltration capacity and reduce surface runoff and the losses of agro-chemicals to surface water. However, the evidence for these beneficial effects is inconclusive, while significant trade-offs include yield penalties and increases in greenhouse gas emissions and the risks of leaching of pesticides and nitrate.Our synthesis also highlights important knowledge gaps on the effects of management practices on root growth and transpiration. Thus, conclusions related to the impacts of management on the crop water supply and other water regulation functions are necessarily based on inferences derived from proxy variables. Based on these knowledge gaps, we outlined several key avenues for future research on this topic.

中文翻译：

---

土壤和作物管理实践以及土壤的水分调节功能：与欧洲农业相关的荟萃分析的定性综合

采用保护或增强土壤结构的土壤和作物管理做法对于支持农业可持续地适应气候变化至关重要，因为它应有助于在干旱或水资源过剩的情况下维持农业生产而不损害环境质量。在本文中，我们通过综合 34 项已发表的荟萃分析的结果来评估这一论断的证据，这些荟萃分析分析了此类做法对与欧洲农业适应气候变化相关的土壤物理和水力特性的影响。我们还审查了另外 127 项荟萃分析，这些分析研究了协同作用和权衡取舍，或有助于解释土壤和作物管理在潜在过程和机制方面的影响。最后，我们确定了在整个欧洲对比鲜明的农业环境条件下，对替代土壤-作物管理系统的反应如何变化。这些信息可能有助于从业者和政策制定者就管理实践作为气候适应工具的功效得出特定背景的结论。我们的综合表明，有机土壤改良剂和采用保持“持续生命覆盖”的做法会给水带来显着好处土壤的调节功能，主要来自对土壤的额外碳输入和生物过程的刺激。这些影响显然与改善土壤聚集和增强生物孔隙率有关，这两者都减少了地表径流并增加了渗透。这些系统的一个潜在负面后果是土壤储水量和地下水补给量减少，这在干旱气候下可能会产生问题。一些重要的协同作用是减少硝酸盐浸入地下水和减少非豆科覆盖作物系统的温室气体排放。降低耕作强度的好处似乎不那么明确。交通压实导致土壤容重增加的情况很常见。然而，在降低耕作强度的情况下生物活性增强，这将改善土壤结构和渗透能力，减少地表径流和农用化学品向地表水的损失。然而，这些有益效果的证据尚无定论，虽然重要的权衡包括产量损失和温室气体排放的增加以及杀虫剂和硝酸盐浸出的风险。我们的综合还强调了管理实践对根系生长和蒸腾作用的重要知识差距。因此，与管理对作物供水和其他水调节功能的影响相关的结论必然基于代理变量的推论。基于这些知识差距，我们概述了该主题未来研究的几个关键途径。与管理对作物供水和其他水调节功能的影响有关的结论必然基于从代理变量得出的推论。基于这些知识差距，我们概述了该主题未来研究的几个关键途径。与管理对作物供水和其他水调节功能的影响有关的结论必然基于从代理变量得出的推论。基于这些知识差距，我们概述了该主题未来研究的几个关键途径。