Integrating Water Management, Nutrient Inputs, and Plant Density: A Holistic Review on Optimizing Cotton Yield under Variable Agroecosystems

1. Introduction

Cotton (Gossypium spp.) is a globally significant crop, cultivated for its natural fiber and contributing substantially to the economies of both developing and developed nations. As of 2024, over 30 million hectares of land are devoted to cotton cultivation worldwide, with major producers including China, India, the United States, Pakistan, and Brazil. Beyond its industrial value in textiles and garments, cotton is also a livelihood source for millions of smallholder farmers, particularly in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Its cultivation spans a wide spectrum of agroecological zones—from rainfed drylands with minimal inputs to highly mechanized, irrigated farms with intensive management practices [1-2]. The global scale of cotton production, attaining and sustaining high yield levels, remains a persistent challenge. The productivity of cotton is profoundly influenced by complex interactions among environmental conditions, genotype selection, and agronomic management. Among these, water availability, nutrient supply, andplant density are critical interacting factors that determine crop performance. Individually, each of these inputs has been the focus of extensive research and technological innovation [3]. However, their combined influence, particularly under variable agroecosystems characterized by fluctuating climate, soil heterogeneity, and socio-economic constraints, has received comparatively less holistic attention.

Water management is a fundamental component of cotton cultivation due to the crop’s relatively high evapotranspiration demand. Cotton is particularly sensitive to moisture deficits during the flowering and boll development stages. In water-scarce regions, the adoption of efficient irrigation systems such as drip or sprinkler methods has been shown to enhance water use efficiency (WUE) and maintain yield stability. Conversely, excessive irrigation or poor drainage can lead to waterlogging, nutrient leaching, and increased vulnerability to root diseases, especially in poorly structured soils. Thus, understanding water dynamics and matching irrigation schedules to the crop’s physiological needs is crucial for optimizing performance [5-6]. Nutrient management is equally pivotal. Cotton requires substantial inputs of macronutrients—notably nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), alongside micronutrients such as boron and zinc. These nutrients influence vegetative growth, reproductive development, boll retention, and fiber quality [7]. An imbalanced or indiscriminate fertilizer application can lead to nutrient deficiencies or toxicities, soil degradation, and environmental contamination. Enhancing nutrient use efficiency (NUE)throughsite-specific nutrient management (SSNM), split applications, andintegrated nutrient management (INM)strategies, including the use of organic manures and biofertilizers, can support both productivity and sustainability goals.

Plant density, including intra-row and inter-row spacing, also plays a vital role in shaping crop architecture, canopy light interception, and intra-specific competition. Too high a plant population may lead to shading, increased disease pressure, and competition for nutrients and water, while too low a density often results in underutilization of resources and lower yield potential. Optimal spacing varies by variety, climatic zone, and input levels, necessitating location-specific recommendations [8-9]. The plant geometry, including paired-row planting and skip-row configurations, has been used successfully to balance plant growth and mechanization efficiency in certain agroecosystems. While each of these agronomic factors has been studied extensively in isolation, there is growing recognition that a systems-based approach is essential to address the multi-dimensional challenges of cotton production under changing climatic and resource conditions [10-12]. The interactions between water availability, nutrient supply, and plant density are often non-linear and context-dependent. For instance, high plant density may exacerbate water stress in arid conditions but may increase yield potential under high-input, irrigated systems. Similarly, nutrient uptake and efficiency are closely tied to soil moisture availability and root zone architecture, both of which are influenced by plant spacing and irrigation method. This review synthesizes and critically evaluates recent research on the integrated management of water, nutrients, and plant density in cotton production [13-14]. Emphasis is placed on resource-use efficiency, climate resilience, and sustainability, all of which are increasingly important in the face of climate change, rising input costs, and environmental degradation. Ultimately, the goal is to provide a holistic framework for cotton cultivation that leverages synergies among agronomic practices, fosters informed decision-making, and supports resilient farming systems adaptable to both biophysical variability and socio-economic realities. This approach aligns with broader goals of sustainable intensification, enabling farmers to “produce more with less” while preserving the long-term productivity of natural resources.

2. Water Management in Cotton Production

Efficient water management is a cornerstone of successful cotton cultivation, particularly in regions prone to variable rainfall or water scarcity. Cotton has a moderately high water requirement, with total seasonal water use ranging from 500 to 700 mm depending on climate, soil type, and management practices. Unlike some crops, cotton can withstand short-term drought episodes through physiological adjustments such as stomatal regulation and reduced leaf area [15-16]. This makes it moderately drought-tolerant, but also highly responsive to timely and adequate irrigation. The strategic management of water not only influences yield quantity and quality but also interacts with nutrient dynamics and root development. This section explores the physiological importance of water in cotton growth, reviews key irrigation strategies, and highlights methods for improving water use efficiency (WUE).

2.1 Role of Water in Cotton Physiology

Water plays a fundamental role in nearly every physiological and metabolic process in cotton plants. It serves as the medium for nutrient transport, photosynthesis, cell expansion, and turgor maintenance. Critical growth stages such as flowering, boll formation, and boll filling are particularly sensitive to water deficits [17]. Water stress during these phases often leads to boll shedding, reduced fiber elongation, and ultimately lower yields and fiber quality. Conversely, excessive soil moisture, resulting from over-irrigation or poor drainage, can cause hypoxic conditions in the root zone, restricting root respiration, promoting pathogen proliferation, and impairing nutrient uptake. Studies have shown that early-season water stress can limit vegetative growth and root expansion, whereas late-season stress impacts boll maturation and fiber quality [18-20]. Therefore, an understanding of crop water requirements at different phenological stages is essential for developing responsive irrigation schedules. Additionally, water availability modulates stomatal conductance, influencing photosynthetic rate and transpiration, thereby impacting biomass accumulation and water productivity.

2.2 Irrigation Strategies

In response to water scarcity and increased competition for freshwater resources, various irrigation methods have been developed to optimize cotton water use. These include:

• Deficit Irrigation:
  This strategy involves the deliberate application of less water than the crop’s full evapotranspiration (ET) demand during non-critical growth phases. Research indicates that mild water stress before flowering can enhance root depth and improve WUE, while avoiding significant yield penalties [21]. However, care must be taken to ensure full water availability during the flowering and boll setting stages. This approach is particularly useful in semi-arid environments where water resources are limited but predictable.
• Drip Irrigation: Drip or trickle irrigation delivers water directly to the plant’s root zone through emitters, minimizing losses due to evaporation and deep percolation [22]. This method has proven highly effective in water-scarce regions and allows for fertigation—the application of soluble fertilizers along with irrigation, which further enhances nutrient uptake efficiency [23]. Drip systems also reduce weed proliferation by limiting surface wetting and contribute to uniform water distribution across fields, particularly in undulating terrains.
• Alternate Furrow Irrigation (AFI):
  AFI involves irrigating every other furrow during an irrigation event, with subsequent events alternating between dry and wet furrows. This method induces a mild, controlled stress that can stimulate root growth and enhance water productivity. Additionally, it minimizes waterlogging and reduces the germination of weed seeds in dry furrows [24]. AFI has shown promise in semi-arid and salinity-prone areas by reducing the cumulative irrigation volume while sustaining yields. Each of these irrigation strategies must be aligned with soil texture, climatic conditions, and crop growth stage to achieve maximum benefits. The choice of strategy also depends on infrastructural investments, labor availability, and farm-scale mechanization potential.

2.3 Water Use Efficiency

Improving water use efficiency (WUE)—defined as the ratio of biomass or yield produced per unit of water used—is critical for both economic and environmental sustainability in cotton farming. Several techniques and technologies can enhance WUE:

• Selection of Drought-Tolerant Cultivars:
  Breeding programs have produced cotton varieties that maintain yield under moderate drought through osmotic adjustment, reduced canopy size, and efficient root systems [25].
• Soil Moisture Monitoring:
  The use of tensiometers, capacitance sensors, and time-domain reflectometry (TDR) enables precise monitoring of soil water status, supporting irrigation scheduling based on real-time data rather than fixed intervals [26].
• Remote Sensing and GIS Tools:
  Advances in remote sensing technologies, including satellite imagery and UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles), can assess crop stress, evapotranspiration rates, and soil moisture variability across fields. These tools help in precision irrigation, reducing unnecessary water application while targeting high-need zones.
• Mulching and Conservation Practices:
  Organic and plastic mulches reduce surface evaporation and improve soil moisture retention. Additionally, conservation tillage systems preserve soil structure and increase infiltration, contributing to long-term water conservation.
• Rainwater Harvesting and Supplemental Irrigation: In rainfed areas, small-scale water harvesting systems such as farm ponds, contour bunds, and check dams can provide supplemental irrigation during dry spells, stabilizing yield under erratic rainfall [27]. The water management in cotton production must be adaptive and data-driven, incorporating a mix of traditional knowledge and modern technology. The future of cotton sustainability hinges on our ability to use water smarter, not just more abundantly.

3. Nutrient Management in Cotton

Effective nutrient management is vital for realizing the genetic yield potential of cotton and ensuring long-term soil health. Cotton is a deep-rooted, indeterminate crop with a prolonged growing season, and thus requires a consistent and balanced nutrient supply throughout its lifecycle. Among the essential plant nutrients, nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) are the most critical for cotton productivity, though secondary nutrients (calcium, magnesium, sulfur) and micronutrients (boron, zinc, iron) also play important roles in fiber quality and reproductive development [28]. The nutrient needs of cotton vary depending on cultivar, soil type, and environmental conditions. This section explores the nutrient requirements of cotton, current fertilization techniques, and strategies to enhance nutrient use efficiency (NUE).

3.1 Nutrient Requirements

Cotton’s nutrient demand is dynamic, with distinct uptake peaks aligned with specific growth stages. Nutrient accumulation begins during early vegetative growth and intensifies during flowering and boll development stages, which are characterized by rapid biomass accumulation and reproductive organ differentiation.

• Nitrogen (N) is essential for vegetative growth, chlorophyll production, protein synthesis, and boll retention. Deficiency leads to chlorosis and stunted growth, while over-application may cause excessive vegetative growth at the expense of reproductive development and delays in maturity.
• Phosphorus (P) promotes root development, energy transfer via ATP, and early boll setting. It is especially important in early-season growth to support a robust root system capable of sustaining boll load later.
• Potassium (K) enhances fiber development, improves boll size, and increases resistance to biotic and abiotic stressors such as drought and pest pressure. Potassium also regulates stomatal opening, improving water and nutrient uptake efficiency.

Cotton typically removes around 60–100 kg N, 25–35 kg P₂O₅, and 70–120 kg K₂O per hectare, depending on yield level. These values underscore the importance of timely and targeted fertilization to prevent nutrient deficiencies that could compromise both yield and fiber quality.

3.2 Fertilizer Application Techniques

To meet cotton’s nutrient demands effectively and sustainably, farmers must adopt fertilization techniques that align nutrient supply with crop uptake patterns. Key approaches include:

• Split Application of Nitrogen:
  Applying nitrogen in multiple doses (e.g., basal, early vegetative, and pre-flowering stages) synchronizes nutrient availability with peak crop demand and minimizes losses through leaching or volatilization. This method improves nitrogen use efficiency and supports steady plant growth.
• Foliar Feeding: Foliar applications of urea, micronutrients (like zinc or boron), or water-soluble NPK formulations can be used to rapidly correct deficiencies, particularly during critical reproductive stages or under stress conditions such as drought or salinity. Foliar sprays bypass soil-mediated limitations like poor structure or nutrient fixation.
• Biofertilizers and Soil Amendments:
  Incorporating plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) such as Azotobacter, Rhizobium, and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB) helps enhance nutrient solubilization and uptake. Additionally, the application of organic manures, compost, and vermicompost improves soil organic matter, microbial activity, and cation exchange capacity, leading to more sustained nutrient availability and improved soil health.
• Fertigation: In conjunction with drip irrigation, fertigation allows for the application of water-soluble nutrients directly to the root zone in precise quantities and intervals, significantly enhancing uptake efficiency and reducing wastage [29].

3.3 Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE)

Improving Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE) is essential for sustainable intensification in cotton systems. Low NUE not only results in economic losses due to inefficient fertilizer use but also contributes to nitrate leaching, greenhouse gas emissions, and eutrophication of water bodies. Several advanced strategies are now being adopted to optimize NUE:

• Precision Agriculture:
  Techniques such as variable-rate nutrient application based on soil nutrient mapping, real-time chlorophyll sensing (e.g., SPAD meters), and remote sensing enable farmers to apply the right nutrient at the right rate, time, and place (4R principle). These methods minimize over-application and promote more targeted interventions.
• Soil Testing and Leaf Tissue Analysis:
  Periodic soil and plant tissue diagnostics help assess nutrient status accurately, enabling data-driven adjustments in fertilization schedules. For example, leaf reddening in cotton is often linked to potassium deficiency, which can be managed more proactively through regular monitoring.
• Integrated Nutrient Management (INM):
  INM blends chemical fertilizers with organic and biological sources to enhance nutrient availability, reduce dependency on synthetic inputs, and maintain soil fertility. Long-term field trials have shown that INM approaches can sustain yields while improving soil structure and microbial diversity.
• Use of Enhanced Efficiency Fertilizers (EEFs):
  Controlled-release formulations and urease/nitrification inhibitors (e.g., NBPT) reduce nitrogen losses and prolong nutrient availability, especially under high-temperature or rain-prone conditions [30-31]. With the fertilization practices with crop needs, environmental conditions, and technological advancements, farmers can significantly boost cotton productivity while preserving natural resources. New research must focus on developing site-specific nutrient management packages and decision-support tools that are scalable and accessible to both smallholders and commercial growers.

4. Plant Density and Spatial Arrangement

Optimizing plant density and spatial arrangement is a critical agronomic decision in cotton cultivation, directly influencing canopy structure, resource use efficiency, and ultimately, yield and fiber quality. Plant density affects how individual plants access sunlight, water, and nutrients, and also impacts air flow within the crop canopy, which in turn influences disease dynamics and microclimate [32-33]. Both excessive and insufficient plant populations can be detrimental. Overcrowding results in intense competition for essential resources, reduced ball retention, poor light penetration, and higher susceptibility to foliar diseases. On the other hand, underpopulated fields often lead to suboptimal land use, reduced yield potential per unit area, and increased weed pressure due to more exposed soil surface. The ideal plant density for cotton is not universal; it must be adapted to the agroecological conditions, including water availability, soil fertility, and cultivar traits such as growth habit and branching pattern. High-Density Planting (HDP) is increasingly being adopted in irrigated or high-rainfall regions with fertile soils, where water and nutrients are not limiting factors. HDP promotes early canopy closure, reduces weed competition, and may increase overall boll numbers per hectare, even if individual plant productivity is slightly compromised. Modern compact and semi-determinate cotton varieties are particularly suited to HDP systems [34]. In contrast, in arid and semi-arid regions where water and nutrients are limiting, low-density planting is more appropriate. Wider spacing in these systems reduces intra-specific competition, allows for better root expansion, and enhances individual plant performance under stress conditions. Row spacing and planting geometry also play an important role in optimizing the plant population’s spatial distribution. Traditional single-row configurations are gradually being replaced or modified to include alternating row widths or paired-row systems. These arrangements help balance light interception and facilitate air circulation, thereby reducing disease incidence and improving fiber quality. Moreover, they enable easier access for mechanical operations such as weeding, spraying, and harvesting, especially in mechanized farming systems [34]. For instance, paired-row planting allows for denser planting within the row but maintains adequate inter-row spacing for equipment. Additionally, precision planting technologies that ensure uniform seed placement and depth are critical to achieving uniform emergence and optimal stand establishment, both of which are prerequisites for efficient crop management. Integrating plant population strategies with water and nutrient management practices enhances overall resource use efficiency. For example, HDP systems may require more precise irrigation and fertilization to prevent resource dilution and stress symptoms, while low-density systems must ensure that the reduced canopy does not compromise the yield potential. Ultimately, site-specific optimization of plant density and spatial arrangement, in conjunction with cultivar selection and input management, provides a flexible framework for enhancing cotton productivity across diverse agroecosystems.

5. Synergies and Trade-offs

The integration of water management, nutrient application, and plant density in cotton production does not operate in isolation; rather, these factors are deeply interconnected, and their interactions can create both synergies and trade-offs. A systems-based approach that harmonizes these variables is essential for optimizing cotton yield sustainably across varying agroecological zones. Synergies occur when the combined effect of practices exceeds the sum of their contributions [12]. For instance, appropriate plant spacing in conjunction with efficient drip irrigation can improve water infiltration and root development, thereby enhancing both water and nutrient uptake. Similarly, precision nutrient management in high-density planting systems can prevent nutrient depletion and support vigorous growth. High fertilizer use efficiency is often observed when fertilizers are applied through fertigation in well-spaced rows under regulated irrigation schedules. These combined approaches promote not only higher yield but also better fiber quality and improved environmental outcomes.

The trade-offs are inevitable and must be carefully managed. For example, increasing plant density may maximize yield per hectare but also elevate the risk of disease outbreaks due to limited air circulation. Likewise, intensive irrigation to support high-density systems can lead to nutrient leaching or waterlogging if not properly controlled [6].  Reducing fertilizer inputs to cut costs or mitigate environmental impacts may compromise productivity if not compensated by organic amendments or improved agronomic practices. Understanding and managing these synergies and trade-offs is essential for site-specific optimization. The challenge lies in tailoring interventions that align with local soil, climate, and socio-economic conditions. Adaptive management, supported by decision-support tools, farmer education, and continuous monitoring, can help balance the trade-offs and amplify the synergies. Such integrated strategies are crucial for developing resilient cotton production systems that meet the dual goals of productivity and sustainability in the face of climate variability and resource constraints.

5.1 Interactions Among Factors

The relationship between plant density, water management, and nutrient input in cotton cultivation is highly interdependent, with each factor influencing the performance of the others. High plant density, while potentially increasing yield per unit area, also raises transpiration rates and thereby elevates water demand. If water supply does not match this heightened requirement, plants may suffer from water stress, negating the potential yield benefits of dense planting [12]. Similarly, nutrient uptake and fertilizer use efficiency are closely tied to moisture availability in the soil. Nutrients, particularly nitrogen, are mobilized through the soil solution, making adequate water essential for root absorption. In dry conditions, even well-fertilized soils may fail to meet plant needs due to restricted nutrient movement. Drip irrigation systems provide a unique opportunity to address these challenges through precise water delivery and integration with fertigation. By applying water and soluble nutrients directly to the root zone, drip irrigation enhances both Water Use Efficiency (WUE) and Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE). This method also reduces leaching losses, ensures better synchrony between nutrient availability and crop uptake, and allows for fine-tuned responses to plant needs during critical growth phases. Thus, understanding and managing the interactions among these key agronomic inputs is vital for optimizing cotton production systems.

5.2 System-Level Trade-offs

In any integrated production system, optimizing one input can inadvertently compromise another. For instance, efforts to reduce irrigation frequency to conserve water may lower soil moisture below optimal levels, thereby inhibiting nutrient dissolution and uptake. Similarly, increasing plant density for higher yield potential may strain nutrient and water resources if not matched with proportional input adjustments. These system-level trade-offs must be carefully balanced to avoid diminishing returns or unintended environmental impacts. Trade-offs also manifest in economic and operational terms [1-2]. High-input strategies that maximize yield may incur greater costs or require sophisticated management tools, potentially limiting accessibility for smallholders. Conversely, resource-conserving practices may enhance sustainability but reduce short-term productivity. Therefore, achieving balance involves not only biological and ecological considerations but also socio-economic realities. This complex interplay underscores the need for adaptive, context-sensitive approaches that allow for real-time adjustments in management practices based on changing conditions. A holistic perspective, supported by data and guided by clear objectives—whether yield maximization, input efficiency, or environmental sustainability—is essential for resolving these trade-offs effectively.

6. Adaptive Management Strategies

In response to the complexity and variability of modern agroecosystems, adaptive management strategies have emerged as essential tools for sustainable cotton production. These strategies emphasize flexibility, site-specific decision-making, and continuous feedback loops that allow producers to adjust practices based on real-time data and evolving field conditions [7].

Site-Specific Nutrient Management (SSNM) is a foundational adaptive strategy that involves customizing fertilizer applications based on soil testing, crop growth stage, and anticipated nutrient demands [10]. This approach avoids blanket recommendations and instead targets nutrient application where and when it is most needed, improving both efficiency and yield outcomes. SSNM can significantly reduce input costs and environmental impacts while ensuring adequate nutrition throughout the crop cycle.

Decision Support Tools (DSTs) represent the technological frontier of adaptive agriculture. These tools often integrate remote sensing data, geographic information systems (GIS), and predictive weather modeling to inform timely decisions regarding irrigation, fertilization, pest control, and planting schedules [14]. For example, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) data from satellite imagery can help identify underperforming field areas that require intervention. Similarly, soil moisture sensors and weather forecasts can help schedule irrigation to coincide with peak plant demand, minimizing waste.

Integrated Crop Management (ICM) brings together the best available practices across various agronomic domains—irrigation, nutrient application, pest and disease control, and tillage—in a coordinated system. The objective is to enhance resource use efficiency, reduce environmental footprints, and build resilience against climate variability. ICM practices such as conservation tillage, crop rotation, and organic amendments not only improve soil health but also contribute to long-term productivity and ecosystem stability. These adaptive strategies enable cotton growers to navigate the complex interactions among water, nutrients, and plant density [12]. By integrating traditional knowledge with scientific research and modern technology, adaptive management can transform cotton farming into a more resilient, efficient, and sustainable enterprise across diverse agroecological zones.

8. Conclusion

Cotton production systems are becoming increasingly complex due to fluctuating climatic conditions, resource limitations, and the growing demand for sustainable agricultural practices. In this context, optimizing cotton yield necessitates a holistic approach that considers the dynamic interactions among water availability, nutrient management, and plant density. These three agronomic factors are not isolated; rather, they are deeply interconnected, with each influencing the effectiveness and efficiency of the others. For instance, high plant density increases water demand and nutrient competition, while efficient irrigation can enhance both nutrient uptake and overall crop performance. Adaptive management strategies offer promising solutions. Site-Specific Nutrient Management (SSNM), Decision Support Tools (DSTs), and Integrated Crop Management (ICM) enable producers to tailor practices based on real-time data, local conditions, and long-term sustainability goals. These strategies not only optimize input use and crop productivity but also reduce environmental risks such as nutrient leaching and water overuse. Furthermore, technologies like drip irrigation and precision planting can significantly enhance both Water Use Efficiency (WUE) and Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE), particularly when integrated into broader, system-based frameworks. Future research should prioritize the development of predictive models that simulate the interactions among these key variables under various climate change scenarios. Such models can guide the creation of resilient, scalable farming systems suited to both smallholder and commercial operations, bridging the gap between traditional agricultural knowledge and modern precision technologies will be essential. Local practices, when integrated with scientific innovations, can create contextually relevant, efficient, and sustainable cotton production systems. Optimizing cotton yield in diverse agroecosystems requires a systems-thinking approach that harmonizes resource management with environmental and economic sustainability. With the right strategies and tools, cotton farming can evolve into a more resilient and productive enterprise amidst growing global challenges.

References

• Matloob, A., Aslam, F., Rehman, H. U., Khaliq, A., Ahmad, S., Yasmeen, A., & Hussain, N. (2020). Cotton-based cropping systems and their impacts on production. Cotton Production and Uses: Agronomy, Crop Protection, and Postharvest Technologies, 283-310.
• Ahmad, M., Muhammad, W., & Sajjad, A. (2020). Ecological management of cotton insect pests. Cotton Production and Uses: Agronomy, Crop Protection, and Postharvest Technologies, 213-238.
• Wu, W., & Ma, B. (2015). Integrated nutrient management (INM) for sustaining crop productivity and reducing environmental impact: A review. Science of the Total Environment, 512, 415-427.
• Bhuvaneswari, R., Saravanan, K. R., Vennila, S., & Suganthi, S. (2019). Soil Moisture and Plant Water Relations: Implications for Agriculture and Ecosystem Management. Plant Science Archives.
• Neupane, J., & Guo, W. (2019). Agronomic basis and strategies for precision water management: A review. Agronomy, 9(2), 87.
• Garbach, K., Milder, J. C., DeClerck, F. A., Montenegro de Wit, M., Driscoll, L., & Gemmill-Herren, B. (2017). Examining multi-functionality for crop yield and ecosystem services in five systems of agroecological intensification. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 15(1), 11-28.
• Thorp, K. R. (2020). Long-term simulations of site-specific irrigation management for Arizona cotton production. Irrigation Science, 38(1), 49-64.
• Wezel, A., Casagrande, M., Celette, F., Vian, J. F., Ferrer, A., & Peigné, J. (2014). Agroecological practices for sustainable agriculture. A review. Agronomy for sustainable development, 34(1), 1-20.
• Hussain, M. I., Farooq, M., Muscolo, A., & Rehman, A. (2020). Crop diversification and saline water irrigation as potential strategies to save freshwater resources and reclamation of marginal soils—A review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(23), 28695-28729.
• Porporato, A., Feng, X., Manzoni, S., Mau, Y., Parolari, A. J., & Vico, G. (2015). Ecohydrological modeling in agroecosystems: Examples and challenges. Water Resources Research, 51(7), 5081-5099.
• Douglas-Mankin, K. R. (2018). Current research in land, water, and agroecosystems: ASABE journals 2017 year in review. Transactions of the ASABE, 61(5), 1639-1651.
• Idoko, J. A., Osang, P. O., & Ijoyah, M. O. (2016). Evaluation of the agronomic characters of three sweet potato varieties for intercropping with soybean in Makurdi, Southern Guinea Savannah, Nigeria. Plant Science Archives.
• Tittonell, P., & Giller, K. E. (2013). When yield gaps are poverty traps: The paradigm of ecological intensification in African smallholder agriculture. Field Crops Research, 143, 76-90.
• Gaba, S., Lescourret, F., Boudsocq, S., Enjalbert, J., Hinsinger, P., Journet, E. P., & Ozier-Lafontaine, H. (2015). Multiple cropping systems as drivers for providing multiple ecosystem services: from concepts to design. Agronomy for sustainable development, 35, 607-623.
• Garibaldi, L. A., Gemmill-Herren, B., D’Annolfo, R., Graeub, B. E., Cunningham, S. A., & Breeze, T. D. (2017). Farming approaches for greater biodiversity, livelihoods, and food security. Trends in ecology & evolution, 32(1), 68-80.
• Bhuvaneswari, R., Saravanan, K. R., Vennila, S., & Suganthi, S. (2019). Soil-Plant Interactions: The Chemistry of Nutrient Uptake and Utilization. Plant Science Archives, 4(06).
• Tonitto, C., & Ricker-Gilbert, J. E. (2016). Nutrient management in African sorghum cropping systems: applying meta-analysis to assess yield and profitability. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 36, 1-19.
• Bhuvaneswari, R., Saravanan, K. R., Vennila, S., & Suganthi, S. (2020). Advances in Genomic Selection for Enhanced Crop Improvement: Bridging the Gap between Genomics and Plant Breeding. Plant Science Archives.
• Sanderson, M. A., Archer, D., Hendrickson, J., Kronberg, S., Liebig, M., Nichols, K., & Aguilar, J. (2013). Diversification and ecosystem services for conservation agriculture: Outcomes from pastures and integrated crop–livestock systems. Renewable agriculture and food systems, 28(2), 129-144.
• Gupta, S., Kotyal, K., Beleri, P. S., Langangmeilu, G., & Malathi, G. (2019). Advancing Nature-Based Solutions for Climate Adaptation and Ecosystem Restoration. Environmental Reports; an International Journal.
• Mai, W., Xue, X., Feng, G., Yang, R., & Tian, C. (2018). Can optimization of phosphorus input lead to high productivity and high phosphorus use efficiency of cotton through maximization of root/mycorrhizal efficiency in phosphorus acquisition?. Field Crops Research, 216, 100-108.
• Renwick, L. L., Bowles, T. M., Deen, W., & Gaudin, A. C. (2019). Potential of increased temporal crop diversity to improve resource use efficiencies: Exploiting water and nitrogen linkages. In Agroecosystem diversity (pp. 55-73). Academic Press.
• Baghel, V. S., Hare, V., Katiyar, P., & Bharti, N. (2018). Microbial Antibiotic Resistance and Heavy Metal Tolerance and their Implications and prospects with Environment. Plant Science Archives; an International Journal
• VijayKumar, R. (2019). Biochar in soil restoration: A comprehensive review on enhancing soil health and carbon sequestration. Environmental Reports.
• VijayKumar, R. (2020). Impact of Microbial Inoculants on Rice Growth and Yield in a Drumstick-Based Agroforestry System. Microbiology Archives, an International Journal.
• Daryanto, S., Fu, B., Wang, L., Jacinthe, P. A., & Zhao, W. (2018). Quantitative synthesis on the ecosystem services of cover crops. Earth-Science Reviews, 185, 357-373.
• Le Mire, G., Nguyen, M., Fassotte, B., du Jardin, P., Verheggen, F., Delaplace, P., & Jijakli, H. (2016). Implementing biostimulants and biocontrol strategies in the agroecological management of cultivated ecosystems. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement; an International Journal
• Anten, N. P., & Vermeulen, P. J. (2016). Tragedies and crops: understanding natural selection to improve cropping systems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 31(6), 429-439.
• Nicholls, C. I., & Altieri, M. A. (2013). Plant biodiversity enhances bees and other insect pollinators in agroecosystems. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable development, 33, 257-274.
• Gautam, S. K. (2019). The role of indigenous knowledge in biodiversity conservation: Integrating traditional practices with modern environmental approaches. Environmental Reports.
• El-Zik, K. M., & Frisbie, R. E. (2018). Integrated crop management systems for pest control. In Handbook of Natural Pesticides: Methods (pp. 21-122). CRC Press.
• Korres, N. E., Norsworthy, J. K., Tehranchian, P., Gitsopoulos, T. K., Loka, D. A., Oosterhuis, D. M., … & Palhano, M. (2016). Cultivars to face climate change effects on crops and weeds: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 36, 1-22.
• Anten, N. P., & Vermeulen, P. J. (2016). Tragedies and crops: understanding natural selection to improve cropping systems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 31(6), 429-439.
• Fatima, Z., Ahmed, M., Hussain, M., Abbas, G., Ul-Allah, S., Ahmad, S., … & Hussain, S. (2020). The fingerprints of climate warming on cereal crops phenology and adaptation options. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 18013.