[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"item-3538":3,"related-3538":102},{"id":4,"title":5,"url":6,"summary":7,"summary_zh":8,"content":9,"source_name":10,"source_url":6,"published_at":11,"category":12,"cover_url":9,"hotness":13,"is_selected":14,"score":15,"score_detail":16,"sources":23,"tags":25,"primary_topic":9,"secondary_topics":31,"classification":32,"search_phrases":76,"slug":79,"view_count":80,"doi":81,"paper":82,"created_at":101},3538,"Rethinking ecological balance: An assessment of farmers' ecological knowledge and agrochemical use in the Sissala East Municipality, Ghana","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1080\u002F27658511.2026.2736409","Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa is central to livelihoods, but agrochemical use poses environmental risks. This study examined the links between farmers' ecological knowledge, agrochemical use and farm management practices through a mixed-methods design involving 382 household surveys, 17 key informant interviews and 5 focus group discussions. Quantitatively, data were analysed using chi-square tests, while qualitative data were thematically analysed. The findings revealed that farmers understood the ecological risks of fertilisers, herbicides, insecticides and fungicides, with management decisions significantly shaped by farmers education, extension service access and farming experience (p ≤ 0.05). Despite farmers awareness of sustainable farming practices such as agroforestry, climate-smart agriculture and manure application, adoption remained low. The study concludes that while farmers possess adequate ecological knowledge, a gap exists between awareness and practice. The study recommends empowering farmers with training, skills and decision-making support to enhance adoption of sustainable agroecological farming systems and reduce dependence on synthetic inputs.","撒哈拉以南非洲的农业是生计的核心，但农用化学品的使用带来了环境风险。本研究通过混合方法设计，结合382份农户调查、17次关键知情人访谈和5次焦点小组讨论，考察了农民生态知识、农用化学品使用与农场管理实践之间的联系。定量数据采用卡方检验分析，定性数据则进行主题分析。研究发现，农民了解化肥、除草剂、杀虫剂和杀菌剂的生态风险，其管理决策显著受农民教育程度、推广服务获取和务农经验的影响（p ≤ 0.05）。尽管农民对农林业、气候智能型农业和施用粪肥等可持续农业实践有所认识，但采用率仍然较低。研究认为，虽然农民具备足够的生态知识，但认知与实践之间存在差距。研究建议通过培训、技能培养和决策支持赋能农民，以促进可持续农业生态耕作系统的采用，并减少对合成投入品的依赖。",null,"Sustainable Environment","2026-09-25T00:00:00Z","论文",10,false,64,{"impact":17,"substance":18,"depth":19,"authority":20,"freshness":17,"relevant":21,"comment":22},8,20,16,12,1,"基于加纳382户调查的混合方法研究，揭示农户生态认知与绿色实践之间的知行落差，对农业绿色转型与推广服务有参考价值，但属区域案例、影响层级有限。",[24],{"name":10,"url":6},[26,27,28,29,30],"农业技术推广","撒哈拉以南非洲","农药减量","生态农业","农户认知",[],{"status":33,"locked":14,"version":34,"method":35,"evidence":36},"needs_review","2026-10-22.2","rules",{"candidates":37,"agricultural_evidence":41,"reason":75},[38,46,52,59,65,70],{"code":39,"score":40,"supported":41,"title":42,"abstract":43,"tags":45},"F4",4,true,[],[44],"除草",[28],{"code":47,"score":40,"supported":41,"title":48,"abstract":49,"tags":51},"H8",[],[50],"可持续农业",[29],{"code":53,"score":54,"supported":41,"title":55,"abstract":56,"tags":58},"H6",3,[],[57],"农业生态",[],{"code":60,"score":54,"supported":41,"title":61,"abstract":62,"tags":64},"I1",[],[63],"smart agriculture",[],{"code":66,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":67,"abstract":68,"tags":69},"G1",[],[],[26],{"code":71,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":72,"abstract":73,"tags":74},"J3",[],[],[27],"多个产业证据相当，需要确认主归属",[77,78],"加纳 Sissala East 农户 农药使用","农户生态知识 农药投入","加纳SissalaEast农户农药使用-3538",2,"10.1080\u002F27658511.2026.2736409",{"doi":81,"openalex_id":83,"authors":84,"venue":10,"cited_by_count":92,"oa_url":6,"card":93,"direction":99,"ingested_from":100},"W7214316034",[85,88,90],{"name":86,"orcid":87},"Godwin Kumpong Naazie","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-4498-3673",{"name":89,"orcid":9},"John Bosco B. Sumani",{"name":91,"orcid":9},"Suleman Mula",0,{"tldr":94,"method":95,"finding":96,"direction":97,"opportunity":98},"研究加纳农户生态知识与农药使用的关系，发现认知高但可持续实践采用率低。","混合方法：382户问卷、17个关键访谈、5组焦点讨论，卡方检验与主题分析。","农户了解农药生态风险，但教育、推广服务和经验影响管理决策，知行差距显著。","农业绿色发展与碳","可探索数字推广工具如何弥合生态认知与可持续实践之间的知行差距。","智慧农业 \u002F 农业物联网","openalex","2026-09-26T23:30:09.775806Z",{"total":103,"page":21,"page_size":103,"items":104},6,[105,171,212,307,397,462],{"id":106,"title":107,"url":108,"summary":109,"summary_zh":9,"content":110,"source_name":111,"source_url":9,"published_at":112,"category":113,"cover_url":9,"hotness":13,"is_selected":14,"score":114,"score_detail":115,"sources":119,"tags":121,"primary_topic":125,"secondary_topics":131,"classification":137,"search_phrases":166,"slug":169,"view_count":92,"doi":9,"paper":9,"created_at":170},5281,"省农科院植保所江油武都\"三水\"绿色融合样板田连续10余年综合治理 稻鱼鸭共生","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.toutiao.com\u002Farticle\u002F7696132538393215528","10月12日江油市武都镇阳亭坝金黄稻田迎来丰收,四川省农科院植保所研究员姬红丽蹲在田埂查叶背(无病斑),亩产干谷不低于1300斤;自2013年起省农科院植保所在此实施\"农田有害生物综合治理课题\"持续10余年,通过田埂种植甜荞、蔷薇、紫云英、二月兰、香根草等蜜源植物为天敌提供庇护所,基地稻田麦田天敌种群数量达农户常规田块的10倍以上。","视频加载中...\n\n川观新闻记者 张彧希 四川农村日报记者 徐灿红 洪瑜\n\n10月12日，江油市武都镇阳亭坝，秋风掠过，稻田翻起金色波浪。\n\n四川省农业科学院植物保护研究所研究员姬红丽蹲在田埂上，拔起一株水稻查看叶背——干干净净，没有病斑。“亩产干谷不会低于1300斤。”再过一两天，这里就要开镰。\n\n这片稻田不普通。自2013年起，省农科院植保所在此实施“农田有害生物综合治理课题”，持续10余年。曾经抛荒的土地，如今稻穗丰盈、游鱼戏水、白鹭翩跹，成为国内率先实现水稻、水产、水禽“三水”绿色融合的样板田。\n\n曾经令人头痛的有害生物，是如何被“赶出”这片田的？\n\n![Image 1](https:\u002F\u002Fp3-sign.toutiaoimg.com\u002Ftos-cn-i-axegupay5k\u002F0236314001894642bb5bcf371554180b~tplv-tt-origin-web:gif.jpeg?_iz=58558&from=article.pc_detail&lk3s=953192f4&x-expires=1792973320&x-signature=XhegSE7aGrMWXTC4o0zuZt8sDFo%3D)\n俯瞰基地。\n\n**第一招：良种打底，病害止步田外**\n\n“三水”融合，第一关是选品种。“不光看产量和米质，更看重抗病性。”姬红丽说。西南稻区主要病害有稻瘟病、纹枯病、稻曲病，农户常规靠打药防病，但基地全生育期几乎不施化学杀菌剂，底气来自多抗性品种。\n\n连续十多年，团队每年从市场主流品种中筛选多抗性优异品种，在江油基地展示。“江油气候利于多种病害发生，对品种抗性要求更高，也更容易筛出好品种。”姬红丽说。\n\n今年基地集中示范川康优2115、品香优607等优质水稻，在稻瘟、稻曲等病害抗性上表现优异。品种自身抗性强，病害起不来，化学农药自然省了。\n\n品种抗性究竟如何？种子企业也很关心。四川金色绿丹种业有限公司川北区域经理陈胜龙沿试验田看了几遍：“没找到稻瘟病、稻曲病症状，叶片干净，秆壮穗大，产量很乐观。”\n\n**第二招：田埂布阵，天敌与“陷阱”控虫**\n\n![Image 2](https:\u002F\u002Fp3-sign.toutiaoimg.com\u002Ftos-cn-i-tjoges91tu\u002Facfcb249e48cd472f480260e5551bb65~tplv-tt-origin-web:gif.jpeg?_iz=58558&from=article.pc_detail&lk3s=953192f4&x-expires=1792973320&x-signature=B1pojs4Mx2mcaw2GJlWWImuIBDk%3D)\n田埂上种的甜荞。\n\n病害靠品种扛，虫害靠天敌控。不足半米宽的田埂，像一座迷你花园：甜荞开白花，蔷薇正艳，菜粉蝶、蜜蜂穿梭其间。\n\n![Image 3](https:\u002F\u002Fp3-sign.toutiaoimg.com\u002Ftos-cn-i-tjoges91tu\u002F85a45dc6b1fa07d071fd5c3d1578c4f2~tplv-tt-origin-web:gif.jpeg?_iz=58558&from=article.pc_detail&lk3s=953192f4&x-expires=1792973320&x-signature=oCp5UghEu2I%2BkG6F5S36WgQDGUA%3D)\n田埂上种的蔷薇。\n\n“这些都是蜜源植物，是精心选的‘生态卫士’。”姬红丽说。稻麦轮作茬口期，田里没有庄稼，自然天敌没处安身，蜜源植物便补上空当，提供花粉、花蜜和庇护所。\n\n目前田埂还种了紫云英、二月兰，基地稻田麦田里的天敌种群数量，达到农户常规自防田块的10倍以上，全是自然天敌，没有人工投放。\n\n记者发现，田埂上还种着一人高的香根草。姬红丽介绍，这是从泰国引进的“陷阱植物”：气味吸引二化螟产卵，但含有毒活性物质，不适合幼虫发育，孵化幼虫大多低龄死亡，无法发育为成虫。一代代下来，基地二化螟数量越来越低。\n\n效果有数据支撑：水稻螟虫、麦蚜虫连续八年没达到化学防治用药阈值；蜘蛛、青蛙、田螺、泥鳅、黄鳝、蛇、野鸭、翠鸟等指示生物相继回归，并向周边农田扩散。“插秧时，当地村民都来抓黄鳝，知道我们不用药，黄鳝比别处多。”姬红丽笑着说。\n\n**第三招：生态当家，少打药照样高产**\n\n开农资店的罗勇，生意不如以前，但他却为啥挺开心？\n\n罗勇原是当地农资店主，卖农药化肥。“那会儿种植户见虫就打药，我生意也好。”但姬红丽团队来了之后，带来一个新理念：生态当家，少打药照样高产。\n\n“一开始我不信。”姬红丽团队带着罗勇一次次下田示范，请他到基地看效果。“后来发现人家不打药，虫子比我的还少，稻子还壮。”\n\n罗勇动了心，一边开农资店，一边承包土地。如今种植已发展到400多亩。“跟着团队学病虫害防治，品种从他们筛出的抗病品种里选，少打药减少人工，一亩地省100多块钱，产量基本不受影响。”他估计，今年亩产干谷能到1300至1400斤，在武都镇算高的。\n\n自己尝到甜头，罗勇又向周边大户推广：“少打药不是不管，是要靠品种抗病、靠天敌控虫。”如今，武都镇大户基本减少了打药次数，但产量没降。","今日头条川观新闻(2026-10-13)","2026-10-13T00:00:00Z","报道",69,{"impact":116,"substance":18,"depth":117,"authority":13,"freshness":40,"relevant":21,"comment":118},18,17,"连续十余年综合治理的实证报道，数据与多方信源扎实，具行业示范价值，但时效偏旧。",[120],{"name":111,"url":108},[122,28,123,29,124],"绿色防控","生物多样性","稻鱼鸭共生",{"code":126,"slug":127,"name":128,"path":129,"parent_code":130},"D3","integrated-aquaculture","稻渔种养与生态渔业","\u002Ftopic\u002Faquaculture\u002Fintegrated-aquaculture","D",[132],{"code":39,"slug":133,"name":134,"path":135,"parent_code":136},"crop-protection","农药与绿色防控","\u002Ftopic\u002Finputs-equipment\u002Fcrop-protection","F",{"status":138,"locked":14,"version":34,"method":35,"evidence":139},"classified",{"candidates":140,"agricultural_evidence":41},[141,147,152,158,162],{"code":39,"score":142,"supported":41,"title":143,"abstract":145,"tags":146},13,[144],"植保",[144],[28,122],{"code":126,"score":17,"supported":41,"title":148,"abstract":150,"tags":151},[149],"稻鱼",[],[],{"code":153,"score":54,"supported":41,"title":154,"abstract":155,"tags":157},"A1",[],[156],"稻田",[],{"code":47,"score":80,"supported":14,"title":159,"abstract":160,"tags":161},[],[],[29,122],{"code":53,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":163,"abstract":164,"tags":165},[],[],[123],[167,168],"四川省农科院 植保所 江油 稻鱼鸭","三水融合 绿色防控 样板田","四川省农科院植保所江油稻鱼鸭-5281","2026-10-19T00:07:41.376347Z",{"id":172,"title":173,"url":174,"summary":175,"summary_zh":9,"content":9,"source_name":176,"source_url":9,"published_at":177,"category":12,"cover_url":9,"hotness":13,"is_selected":14,"score":178,"score_detail":179,"sources":182,"tags":184,"primary_topic":186,"secondary_topics":191,"classification":192,"search_phrases":205,"slug":208,"view_count":209,"doi":210,"paper":9,"created_at":211},36,"撒哈拉以南非洲农业创新扩散仍偏重横向推广：基于系统综述的研究议程","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.frontiersin.org\u002Fjournals\u002Fsustainable-food-systems\u002Farticles\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1891557\u002Fabstract","按PRISMA范围综述方法，从2,070项研究中筛选2016—2026年间的54项实证研究。结果显示86%研究集中在2016—2021年发布；地理分布以肯尼亚（28%）、埃塞俄比亚（12%）和多国SSA研究（16%）为主；方法偏量化，随机对照试验占47%、比较调查26%、面板数据16%；65%研究聚焦农资与增产技术，仅9%关注价值链或市场导向创新；70%研究将扩展框架为'横向扩散'。促进因素以信息\u002F推广\u002F社会网络（60%）和金融可及性（30%）为主，主要障碍为资金约束（23%）、可及性（21%）和知识缺口（16%）；仅不足15%研究显式考虑系统维度，提示需从扩散中心论转向系统导向整合方法。","Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · 2026-07-22 接收","2026-07-22T00:00:00Z",73,{"impact":116,"substance":180,"depth":116,"authority":142,"freshness":80,"relevant":21,"comment":181},22,"系统综述方法规范，数据详实，对非洲农业推广模式有深刻洞察，但时效性差且地域远离中国，影响有限。",[183],{"name":176,"url":174},[26,185,27],"系统综述",{"code":71,"slug":187,"name":188,"path":189,"parent_code":190},"global-agriculture","国际合作与全球农业","\u002Ftopic\u002Fpolicy\u002Fglobal-agriculture","J",[],{"status":138,"locked":14,"version":34,"method":35,"evidence":193},{"candidates":194,"agricultural_evidence":41},[195,201],{"code":71,"score":196,"supported":41,"title":197,"abstract":199,"tags":200},9,[198],"非洲农业",[],[27],{"code":66,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":202,"abstract":203,"tags":204},[],[],[26],[206,207],"撒哈拉以南非洲 农业技术推广 系统综述","撒哈拉以南非洲 农业技术推广","撒哈拉以南非洲农业技术推广系统综述-36",11,"10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1891557\u002Fabstract","2026-07-28T03:05:27.127667Z",{"id":213,"title":214,"url":215,"summary":216,"summary_zh":217,"content":9,"source_name":218,"source_url":215,"published_at":219,"category":12,"cover_url":9,"hotness":13,"is_selected":14,"score":220,"score_detail":221,"sources":223,"tags":225,"primary_topic":230,"secondary_topics":236,"classification":237,"search_phrases":273,"slug":276,"view_count":92,"doi":277,"paper":278,"created_at":306},5548,"Agroecological transition in olive based farming systems among smallholder farms in northwestern Tunisia","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1903591","Agricultural intensification has increased production and economic growth but has also generated significant environmental and social challenges that threaten long-term sustainability, highlighting the need for more sustainable farming models. Agroecology offers a promising pathway to enhance resilience and support inclusive rural development. In this context, Tunisia’s olive sector provides a relevant case for examining agroecological transitions in semi-arid smallholder systems. This study evaluates the degree of agroecological transition among smallholder olive farms in the Elles region of northwestern Tunisia using the FAO Tool for Agroecology Performance Evaluation (TAPE). Based on a sample of 60 farms, the analysis applies the Characterization of Agroecological Transition (CAET) index, grounded in the 10 Elements of Agroecology, to compare four production systems: (i) olive monoculture, (ii) diversified cropping, (iii) olive–livestock integration, and (iv) integrated olive–crop–livestock systems. Economic, social, environmental and institutional performance were explored using the TAPE Core Criteria of Performance (Step 2) and examined in relation to CAET scores. Results reveal a clear agroecological gradient, with diversified and integrated systems achieving markedly higher CAET scores (up to 52%) compared to monoculture systems (31%). Spearman correlations show strong associations between CAET and key dimensions, including synergy (ρ = 0.79), human and social values (ρ = 0.78), and diversity (ρ = 0.71). Several TAPE economic performance indicators, including monthly income, which ranged from approximately 1,349 TND in monoculture systems to 4,892 TND in diversified olive–crop–livestock systems, were positively associated with higher CAET scores, suggesting that agroecological transition may not necessarily imply a trade-off between productivity and sustainability. However, limited collective action, weak market integration, and insufficient extension services constrain broader adoption. These findings highlight the potential of diversification as a key lever for agroecological transition and underscore the importance of targeted policy support.","农业集约化提高了产量并促进了经济增长，但也产生了威胁长期可持续性的重大环境与社会挑战，凸显了对更可持续耕作模式的需求。农业生态学为增强韧性和支持包容性农村发展提供了一条有前景的路径。在此背景下，突尼斯橄榄产业为研究半干旱小农系统中的农业生态转型提供了相关案例。本研究利用联合国粮农组织农业生态性能评价工具（TAPE），评估突尼斯西北部埃勒斯地区小农橄榄农场的农业生态转型程度。基于60个农场的样本，分析采用以农业生态学十大要素为基础的农业生态转型特征（CAET）指数，比较四种生产系统：（i）橄榄单作，（ii）多样化种植，（iii）橄榄—畜牧结合，以及（iv）橄榄—作物—畜牧综合系统。研究利用TAPE核心性能标准（第二步）探讨经济、社会、环境和制度绩效，并将其与CAET得分进行关联分析。结果揭示了明显的农业生态梯度，多样化与综合系统的CAET得分（最高达52%）显著高于单作系统（31%）。斯皮尔曼相关性分析显示，CAET与关键维度之间存在强关联，包括协同性（ρ = 0.79）、人文与社会价值（ρ = 0.78）和多样性（ρ = 0.71）。若干TAPE经济绩效指标——包括月收入，其从单作系统的约1，349突尼斯第纳尔到橄榄—作物—畜牧多样化系统的4，892突尼斯第纳尔不等——与更高的CAET得分呈正相关，表明农业生态转型未必意味着生产力与可持续性之间的权衡。然而，集体行动有限、市场整合薄弱和推广服务不足制约了更广泛的采纳。这些发现凸显了多样化作为农业生态转型关键杠杆的潜力，并强调了有针对性的政策支持的重要性。","Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems","2026-10-21T00:00:00Z",71,{"impact":20,"substance":18,"depth":117,"authority":142,"freshness":196,"relevant":21,"comment":222},"基于FAO TAPE方法对突尼斯小农户橄榄系统农生态转型的实证研究，数据扎实、结论有新意，但属区域性案例，公共影响有限。",[224],{"name":218,"url":215},[226,227,29,228,229],"小农户","农业转型","突尼斯","油橄榄",{"code":231,"slug":232,"name":233,"path":234,"parent_code":235},"G2","farm-services","社会化服务与规模经营","\u002Ftopic\u002Frural-services\u002Ffarm-services","G",[],{"status":138,"locked":14,"version":34,"method":35,"evidence":238},{"candidates":239,"agricultural_evidence":41},[240,245,252,258,263,269],{"code":231,"score":20,"supported":41,"title":241,"abstract":243,"tags":244},[242],"smallholder",[242],[226],{"code":246,"score":103,"supported":41,"title":247,"abstract":248,"tags":251},"C",[],[249,250],"畜牧","livestock",[],{"code":235,"score":103,"supported":41,"title":253,"abstract":254,"tags":257},[],[255,256],"农村发展","rural development",[],{"code":53,"score":103,"supported":41,"title":259,"abstract":260,"tags":262},[],[57,261],"agroecology",[],{"code":264,"score":54,"supported":41,"title":265,"abstract":266,"tags":268},"H7",[],[267],"干旱",[],{"code":47,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":270,"abstract":271,"tags":272},[],[],[29],[274,275],"突尼斯 油橄榄 小农户","TAPE 农生态 评估","突尼斯油橄榄小农户-5548","10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1903591",{"doi":277,"openalex_id":279,"authors":280,"venue":218,"cited_by_count":92,"oa_url":215,"card":301,"direction":97,"ingested_from":100},"W7223108121",[281,283,285,288,291,293,296,299],{"name":282,"orcid":9},"Rihab Mejri",{"name":284,"orcid":9},"Meriem Oueslati Zlaoui",{"name":286,"orcid":287},"Inès Gharbi","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-2558-2134",{"name":289,"orcid":290},"Asma Souissi","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-8680-5875",{"name":292,"orcid":9},"Ghada Ferchichi",{"name":294,"orcid":295},"Rania Soula","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-6086-9176",{"name":297,"orcid":298},"Boubaker Dhehibi","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-3854-6669",{"name":300,"orcid":9},"Mohamed Zied Dhraief",{"tldr":302,"method":303,"finding":304,"direction":97,"opportunity":305},"用FAO TAPE工具评估突尼斯西北小农橄榄农场生态农业转型程度。","FAO TAPE框架与CAET指数，调查60个农场比较四类种植系统。","多样化与综合系统CAET得分达52%，单作仅31%，且收入更高。","可将TAPE与CAET指标数字化，构建小农生态转型监测与决策支持系统。","2026-10-22T11:20:15.716064Z",{"id":308,"title":309,"url":310,"summary":311,"summary_zh":312,"content":9,"source_name":313,"source_url":310,"published_at":314,"category":12,"cover_url":9,"hotness":13,"is_selected":14,"score":315,"score_detail":316,"sources":319,"tags":321,"primary_topic":326,"secondary_topics":332,"classification":333,"search_phrases":353,"slug":356,"view_count":92,"doi":357,"paper":358,"created_at":396},5306,"A growing challenge: stakeholder perceptions of AI and ML applications in U.S. agriculture","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1007\u002Fs11119-026-10459-x","Abstract Context The global population is expected to exceed ten billion by 2050 and food demand is projected to increase by up to 100% in the same timeframe. Agricultural management must adapt to meet the increasing global demands. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies can help the agricultural community respond to these needs. Aims An online survey and follow-up interviews were conducted to examine patterns of use, perceptions, and barriers among early adopting stakeholders regarding AI and ML. Methods The online survey with agricultural stakeholders (n=129) included questions regarding the participants’ views on incorporating AI and ML techniques into farming practices and individual follow-up interviews with agricultural stakeholders (n=10) were conducted to better understand their concerns toward technology use and adoption of AI-enabled tools and technologies. Key results Using a mixed-methods approach, four challenges to establishing AI-\u002FML-enabled technology in agriculture were identified. Namely, challenges related to (1) systems of systems (SoS), (2) sub-seasonal to seasonal weather (S2S) forecasts, (3) precision soil management, and (4) policy and economics. Each challenge was discussed in the context of recent literature. Conclusion Concerns were voiced clustered around four broad research themes. This brief communication brings the perspective of agricultural stakeholders to the discussion of the potential of AI\u002FML-enabled technology and the direction of their development in the agricultural sector. Implications Data collected in 2021, establish an important baseline for the early phase of AI\u002FML use in U.S. agriculture, enabling comparison of future perceptions and developments in the sector. Impact This brief communication describes a survey and follow-up interviews conducted with agricultural stakeholders on factors influencing their willingness and reluctance to incorporate AI and ML techniques into farming practices. The findings, summarized and discussed as four key challenges for AI and ML in the agricultural sector, have the potential to streamline research activities.","摘要\n\n背景 预计到2050年全球人口将超过100亿，同期粮食需求预计将增加多达100%。农业管理必须作出调整以满足不断增长的全球需求。人工智能（AI）和机器学习（ML）技术可帮助农业界应对这些需求。\n\n目的 通过开展在线调查和后续访谈，考察早期采用相关技术的利益相关者在AI和ML方面的使用模式、认知及障碍。\n\n方法 针对农业利益相关者（n=129）的在线调查包含有关参与者对将AI和ML技术纳入农业实践看法的问题，并对农业利益相关者（n=10）进行个体后续访谈，以更好地了解他们对技术使用及采用AI赋能工具和技术的顾虑。\n\n主要结果 采用混合方法，识别出在农业中建立AI\u002FML赋能技术面临的四项挑战，即与以下方面相关的挑战：（1）系统之系统（SoS），（2）次季节至季节天气（S2S）预报，（3）精准土壤管理，以及（4）政策与经济。每项挑战均结合近期文献进行了讨论。\n\n结论 所表达的顾虑集中于四个广泛的研究主题。本简报将农业利益相关者的视角引入关于AI\u002FML赋能技术潜力及其在农业部门发展方向讨论中。\n\n意义 2021年收集的数据为美国农业中AI\u002FML应用的早期阶段建立了重要基线，有助于比较该部门未来的认知和发展。\n\n影响 本简报描述了针对农业利益相关者开展的一项调查和后续访谈，内容涉及影响其愿意和不愿将AI和ML技术纳入农业实践的因素。研究结果总结并讨论为农业部门AI和ML的四项关键挑战，有望优化研究活动。","Precision Agriculture","2026-10-18T00:00:00Z",77,{"impact":116,"substance":18,"depth":117,"authority":317,"freshness":17,"relevant":21,"comment":318},14,"基于129份问卷与10次访谈的混合方法研究，系统梳理美国农业AI\u002FML应用的四大挑战，为早期采用者认知提供基线数据，对智慧农业研究有参考价值。",[320],{"name":313,"url":310},[322,323,324,325,30],"智慧农业","农业人工智能","机器学习","精准农业",{"code":327,"slug":328,"name":329,"path":330,"parent_code":331},"I2","agricultural-ai","农业AI与大模型","\u002Ftopic\u002Fdigital-agriculture\u002Fagricultural-ai","I",[],{"status":138,"locked":14,"version":34,"method":35,"evidence":334},{"candidates":335,"agricultural_evidence":41},[336,342,349],{"code":327,"score":209,"supported":41,"title":337,"abstract":338,"tags":341},[],[324,339,340],"machine learning","artificial intelligence",[323,324],{"code":343,"score":103,"supported":41,"title":344,"abstract":345,"tags":348},"H2",[],[346,347],"土壤","soil",[],{"code":60,"score":80,"supported":14,"title":350,"abstract":351,"tags":352},[],[],[322,325],[354,355],"美国农业 AI ML 调查","农业人工智能 应用障碍","美国农业AIML调查-5306","10.1007\u002Fs11119-026-10459-x",{"doi":357,"openalex_id":359,"authors":360,"venue":313,"cited_by_count":92,"oa_url":310,"card":390,"direction":394,"ingested_from":100},"W7222866367",[361,364,367,370,373,376,379,382,384,387],{"name":362,"orcid":363},"Jennifer Koch","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-7067-2705",{"name":365,"orcid":366},"Andrew Fox","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0001-6719-8902",{"name":368,"orcid":369},"Richa Bhattarai","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-3827-7761",{"name":371,"orcid":372},"Hank C. Jenkins‐Smith","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-5204-2726",{"name":374,"orcid":375},"Jonathan McFadden","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-3762-1428",{"name":377,"orcid":378},"Audrey Reinert","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0001-8951-702X",{"name":380,"orcid":381},"Juan Sesmero","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-2669-4536",{"name":383,"orcid":9},"M. Z. Walkup",{"name":385,"orcid":386},"Wolfgang Jentner","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-1045-6020",{"name":388,"orcid":389},"David S. Ebert","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0001-6177-1296",{"tldr":391,"method":392,"finding":393,"direction":394,"opportunity":395},"通过问卷与访谈调查美国农业利益相关者对AI\u002FML应用的认知与障碍。","在线问卷129人加10人深度访谈的混合方法。","识别出系统之系统、次季节天气预报、精准土壤管理和政策经济四大挑战。","农业人工智能与决策模型","可针对四类障碍开展分区域、分作物类型的采纳意愿追踪与干预研究。","2026-10-19T23:30:02.345893Z",{"id":398,"title":399,"url":400,"summary":401,"summary_zh":402,"content":9,"source_name":218,"source_url":400,"published_at":403,"category":12,"cover_url":9,"hotness":13,"is_selected":14,"score":404,"score_detail":405,"sources":407,"tags":409,"primary_topic":414,"secondary_topics":418,"classification":419,"search_phrases":435,"slug":438,"view_count":92,"doi":439,"paper":440,"created_at":461},5072,"Exploring the influence of farmers’ networks and social interactions to sustain soil health management","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1823295","Introduction Soil health management practices have increasingly been promoted across US agroecosystems to address many interrelated environmental and economic food system challenges. Sustaining soil health management behavior—through farmer’s adoption and continued use of practices—is key to ensuring that these challenges are addressed and also known to be in part influenced by farmers social networks and interactions. Methods Drawing on the diffusion of innovation theories, this grounded theory study explores the influence of networks and social interactions on farmers sustaining soil health management. In-depth interviews were conducted with eight participants of a partnership integrating on-farm experimentation and outreach in the U.S. Midwestern agroecosystem. Results Four interrelated dimensions emerged as influencing sustained soil health management: (1) peer influences and social interactions, including land tenure arrangements, perceived acceptance within farming communities, and farming traditions; (2) co-learning processes that supported collaborative knowledge development; (3) expansion of farmer networks through on-farm experimentation and demonstration activities; and (4) experiential tradeoffs associated with practice implementation. Farmers described how participation in on-farm research increased opportunities for peer exchange, field-day engagement, and knowledge sharing while strengthening confidence in management decisions through trialability. At the same time, participants highlighted barriers to long-term practice use related to social expectations, management challenges, and competing farm priorities. Discussion Our findings emphasize that soil health management practice adoption is not a one-time decision, but rather a dynamic process in part influenced by farmers networks and social interactions. Applying factors such as landowner–tenant relationships, perception of acceptance within specific network groups, farming practices carried out by previous generations, and collaborative construction of soil health knowledge as well as prioritizing social components when designing on-farm approaches to experimentation can help sustain soil health management.","引言 在美国的农业生态系统中，土壤健康管理实践日益受到推广，以应对粮食系统中许多相互关联的环境和经济挑战。维持土壤健康管理行为——通过农民的采纳和持续使用实践——是确保这些挑战得到解决的关键，并且已知这部分受到农民社会网络和互动的影响。方法 借鉴创新扩散理论，本扎根理论研究探讨了网络和社会互动对农民维持土壤健康管理的影响。对美国中西部农业生态系统中一个整合了农场试验和推广的合作项目的八名参与者进行了深度访谈。结果 出现了四个相互关联的维度影响持续的土壤健康管理：（1）同伴影响和社会互动，包括土地权属安排、在农业社区内感知到的接受度以及农业传统；（2）支持协作知识发展的共同学习过程；（3）通过农场试验和示范活动扩大农民网络；（4）与实践实施相关的经验性权衡。农民描述了参与农场研究如何增加了同伴交流、田间日活动和知识分享的机会，同时通过可试验性增强了管理决策的信心。与此同时，参与者强调了与长期实践使用相关的障碍，涉及社会期望、管理挑战和相互竞争的农场优先事项。讨论 我们的发现强调，土壤健康管理实践的采纳不是一次性决定，而是一个动态过程，部分受到农民网络和社会互动的影响。应用诸如地主与佃农关系、在特定网络群体内感知到的接受度、前几代人开展的农业实践以及土壤健康知识的协作构建等因素，并在设计农场试验方法时优先考虑社会因素，可以帮助维持土壤健康管理。","2026-10-15T00:00:00Z",63,{"impact":17,"substance":116,"depth":19,"authority":142,"freshness":17,"relevant":21,"comment":406},"基于扎根理论的质性研究，样本仅8人但揭示了农户网络与社交互动对土壤健康管理持续采纳的作用机制，对农技推广与数字乡村社交化传播有参考价值。",[408],{"name":218,"url":400},[26,410,411,412,413],"土壤健康","田间试验","农户社交网络","采纳行为",{"code":343,"slug":347,"name":415,"path":416,"parent_code":417},"土壤健康与改良","\u002Ftopic\u002Fenvironment\u002Fsoil","H",[],{"status":138,"locked":14,"version":34,"method":35,"evidence":420},{"candidates":421,"agricultural_evidence":41},[422,427,431],{"code":343,"score":423,"supported":41,"title":424,"abstract":425,"tags":426},15,[347],[346,347],[410],{"code":53,"score":54,"supported":41,"title":428,"abstract":429,"tags":430},[],[57],[],{"code":66,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":432,"abstract":433,"tags":434},[],[],[26],[436,437],"美国中西部 土壤健康 农户网络","农场试验 知识共享 土壤管理","美国中西部土壤健康农户网络-5072","10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1823295",{"doi":439,"openalex_id":441,"authors":442,"venue":218,"cited_by_count":92,"oa_url":400,"card":455,"direction":459,"ingested_from":100},"W7222303587",[443,446,449,452],{"name":444,"orcid":445},"Fernanda Souza Krupek","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-6132-2770",{"name":447,"orcid":448},"Taylor K. Ruth","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0002-5269-9154",{"name":450,"orcid":451},"Daren D. Redfearn","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-0295-3131",{"name":453,"orcid":454},"Andrea Basche","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0001-6805-8522",{"tldr":456,"method":457,"finding":458,"direction":459,"opportunity":460},"基于扎根理论访谈八位农户，探究社交网络与互动如何影响土壤健康管理行为的持续。","扎根理论，深度访谈美国中西部八位参与农场试验的农户。","持续管理受同伴影响、共同学习、网络扩展和体验权衡四维度共同作用，非一次性决策。","数字乡村与农业信息化","可研究数字社交平台与在线农户网络如何补充线下互动，促进土壤健康管理持续采纳。","2026-10-16T23:30:06.505721Z",{"id":463,"title":464,"url":465,"summary":466,"summary_zh":467,"content":9,"source_name":218,"source_url":465,"published_at":403,"category":12,"cover_url":9,"hotness":468,"is_selected":14,"score":469,"score_detail":470,"sources":474,"tags":479,"primary_topic":483,"secondary_topics":484,"classification":485,"search_phrases":516,"slug":519,"view_count":92,"doi":520,"paper":521,"created_at":539},5069,"The impact of digital technology on green economies","https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1787960","Introduction Digital agriculture is regarded as an important instrument for achieving green economies, with the potential to raise productivity while reducing environmental impacts. This study explores how digitalization in agriculture affects greenhouse gas emissions, pesticide use and productivity. Methods The research uses a mixed-methods design. Quantitative analysis draws on international environmental and economic indicators for approximately 180 countries between 2000 and 2023 (415 country-year observations), combining Spearman correlations, regression models with GDP interaction terms, and K-means cluster analysis. A qualitative case study of digital agriculture in Latin America complements the statistical findings. Results Digital infrastructure is strongly associated with the adoption of agricultural digital technologies, and smart farming investment is associated with better economic performance of the agricultural sector. Investment in digital agriculture shows a positive association with both emissions and pesticide use, while the interaction with GDP is negative and significant. Cluster analysis confirms that countries with higher GDP and stronger digital infrastructure achieve more balanced environmental outcomes. Discussion The environmental benefits of digital agriculture are conditional on economic capacity. In economically advanced settings, digital technologies reduce resource use, waste and emissions; in economically constrained regions, higher output can offset the environmental gains. Digital agricultural transformation therefore offers opportunities for sustainable development, but its success depends on equitable access to digital technologies and on policy support that mitigates the trade-off between productivity and environmental protection.","引言 数字农业被视为实现绿色经济的重要工具，具有提高生产力同时减少环境影响的潜力。本研究探讨农业数字化如何影响温室气体排放、农药使用和生产力。方法 研究采用混合方法设计。定量分析基于约180个国家2000年至2023年的国际环境和经济指标（415个国家-年份观测值），结合斯皮尔曼相关性分析、包含GDP交互项的回归模型以及K均值聚类分析。拉丁美洲数字农业的定性案例研究补充了统计发现。结果 数字基础设施与农业数字技术的采用密切相关，智慧农业投资与农业部门更好的经济表现相关。数字农业投资与排放量和农药使用量均呈正相关，而与GDP的交互项为负且显著。聚类分析证实，GDP较高且数字基础设施较强的国家实现了更平衡的环境结果。讨论 数字农业的环境效益以经济能力为条件。在经济发达环境中，数字技术减少了资源使用、浪费和排放；在经济受限地区，更高的产出可能抵消环境收益。因此，数字农业转型为可持续发展提供了机遇，但其成功取决于数字技术的公平获取以及能够缓解生产力与环境保护之间权衡的政策支持。",25,86,{"impact":180,"substance":471,"depth":472,"authority":317,"freshness":17,"relevant":21,"comment":473},23,19,"基于180国2000—2023年面板数据与拉美案例，揭示数字农业环境效益受经济水平制约，方法扎实、结论有政策参考价值。",[475,476],{"name":218,"url":465},{"name":477,"url":478},"Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 2026-10-15","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.frontiersin.org\u002Fjournals\u002Fsustainable-food-systems\u002Farticles\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1787960\u002Ffull",[480,322,481,482,28],"数字农业","农业数字化","农业碳排放",{"code":39,"slug":133,"name":134,"path":135,"parent_code":136},[],{"status":138,"locked":14,"version":34,"method":35,"evidence":486},{"candidates":487,"agricultural_evidence":41},[488,493,500,507,512],{"code":60,"score":20,"supported":41,"title":489,"abstract":490,"tags":492},[],[322,480,491],"digital agriculture",[481,480,322],{"code":39,"score":494,"supported":41,"title":495,"abstract":496,"tags":499},7,[],[497,498],"农药","pesticide",[28],{"code":501,"score":103,"supported":41,"title":502,"abstract":503,"tags":506},"B7",[],[504,505],"温室","greenhouse",[],{"code":508,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":509,"abstract":510,"tags":511},"H4",[],[],[482],{"code":331,"score":21,"supported":14,"title":513,"abstract":514,"tags":515},[],[],[481],[517,518],"数字农业 温室气体排放","拉丁美洲 数字农业 案例","数字农业温室气体排放-5069","10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1787960",{"doi":520,"openalex_id":522,"authors":523,"venue":218,"cited_by_count":92,"oa_url":533,"card":534,"direction":99,"ingested_from":100},"W7221916400",[524,527,530],{"name":525,"orcid":526},"Botond Géza Kálmán","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0001-8031-8016",{"name":528,"orcid":529},"Zsuzsanna Szeiner","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0000-0003-3051-9674",{"name":531,"orcid":532},"Szilvia Valéria Módosné Szalai","https:\u002F\u002Forcid.org\u002F0009-0005-2164-9014","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.frontiersin.org\u002Fjournals\u002Fsustainable-food-systems\u002Farticles\u002F10.3389\u002Ffsufs.2026.1787960\u002Fpdf",{"tldr":535,"method":536,"finding":537,"direction":97,"opportunity":538},"研究约180国2000-2023年数据，分析农业数字化对温室气体排放、农药使用与生产率的影响。","混合方法：Spearman相关、含GDP交互项的回归、K-means聚类，辅以拉","数字农业环境效益取决于经济能力，高GDP国家更均衡，低GDP国家增产抵消环境收益。","可探究不同经济水平下数字农业减排阈值与政策干预机制，关注数字鸿沟对绿色转型的调节作用。","2026-10-16T23:30:06.211945Z"]