this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2025
772 points (99.9% liked)
Greentext
6865 readers
830 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this makes sense from a mathematical perspective, because you're diversifying risks so in a year where one type of plant doesn't grow well, another can take over. so it's more likely that there's a plant in there that can grow well that year.
Yeah, it didn't blow my mind but I'm glad that people do the science so we can actually quantify these things. They had big improvements up to 4 species and then the gains were less as they increased it.
Of course this doesn't mean you can drop monoculture in agriculture. You still need your grains to mature at the same time so you can harvest mechanically. Buyers don't want mixes of stuff either. All that jazz. But lawns would probably be much better off with mixed plants.
interesting. is that why we plant 4 different types of plant on a field in a row? i.e. year-on-year cycle
Three Sisters in native american agriculture. (three is approximately four)