Farmers’ motivations for landrace cereal cultivation in Sweden

References

• Abay F, Bjørnstad A, Smale M. 2009. Measuring on farm diversity and determinants of barley diversity in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Momona Ethiop J Sci. Internet. 1(2):44–66. [accessed 2023 Jan 17. doi:10.4314/mejs.v1i2.46048
   Google Scholar
• Allkorn. 2023. FÖRENINGEN ALLKORN [Internet]. [accessed 2021 May 5]. http://allkorn.se/
   Google Scholar
• Altieri MA, Merrick LC. 1987. In Situ conservation of crop genetic resources through maintenance of traditional farming systems. Econ Bot. 41(1):86–96. place unknown. doi:10.1007/BF02859354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson E. 2014. Doing gender (in) equality in Swedish family farming gendered labour and resources in agrarian change. Department of Forest Resource Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Atlin GN, Cairns JE, Das B. 2017. Rapid breeding and varietal replacement are critical to adaptation of cropping systems in the developing world to climate change. Glob Food Sec. 12:31–37. doi:10.1016/J.GFS.2017.01.008.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Batur F, Bocci R, Bartha B. 2021. Marketing farmers’ varieties in Europe: encouraging pathways with missing links for the recognition and support of farmer seed systems. Agron. Internet. 1111(11):2159–2159. [accessed 2022 Jan 25. doi:10.3390/AGRONOMY11112159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bektas H, Hohn CE, Waines JG. 2016. Root and shoot traits of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) landraces and cultivars. Euphytica. 212(2):297–311. doi:10.1007/s10681-016-1770-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellon MR. 2004. Conceptualizing interventions to support on-farm genetic resource conservation. World Dev. 32(1):159–172. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2003.04.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellon MR, Dulloo E, Sardos J, Thormann I, Burdon JJ. 2017. In situ conservation—harnessing natural and human-derived evolutionary forces to ensure future crop adaptation. Evol Appl. Internet. [accessed 2022 Feb 17. 10(10):965–977. doi:10.1111/EVA.12521
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bezançon G, Pham JL, Deu M, Vigouroux Y, Sagnard F, Mariac C, Kapran I, Mamadou A, Gérard B, Ndjeunga J, et al. 2009. Changes in the diversity and geographic distribution of cultivated millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) varieties in Niger between 1976 and 2003. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 56(2):223–236. doi:10.1007/s10722-008-9357-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bisht IS, Mehta PS, Bhandari DC. 2007. Traditional crop diversity and its conservation on-farm for sustainable agricultural production in Kumaon Himalaya of Uttaranchal State: a case study. Genet Resour Crop Evol. Internet. 54(2):345–357. [accessed 2021 Mar 16]. doi:10.1007/s10722-005-5562-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowen GA. 2016. Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts Internet. Int J Qual Methods. [accessed 2022 Jan 20]. 5(3):12–23. doi:10.1177/160940690600500304
   Google Scholar
• Brouwer BO, Murphy KM, Jones SS. 2016. Plant breeding for local food systems: a contextual review of end-use selection for small grains and dry beans in Western Washington. Renew Agric Food Syst. 31(2):172–184. doi:10.1017/S1742170515000198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton RJF, Wilson GA. 2006. Injecting social psychology theory into conceptualisations of agricultural agency: towards a post-productivist farmer self-identity? J Rural Stud. 22(1):95–115. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.07.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camacho Villa TC, Maxted N, Scholten M, Ford-Lloyd B. 2005. Defining and identifying crop landraces. Plant Genet Resour. 3(3):373–384. doi:10.1079/pgr200591.
   Google Scholar
• Coolsaet B. 2016. Towards an agroecology of knowledges: recognition, cognitive justice and farmers’ autonomy in France. J Rural Stud. Internet. [accessed 2021 Feb 2. 47: 165–171. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.07.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darnhofer I, Lindenthal T, Bartel-Kratochvil R, Zollitsch W. 2009. Conventionalisation of organic farming practices: from structural criteria towards an assessment based on organic principles. Sustain Agric. 2:331–349. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0394-0_18.
   Google Scholar
• Daving Götberg L 2018. New ways to distribute food-REKO-rings in Sweden [Internet]. [place unknown]: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; [accessed 2020 Dec 15]. http://stud.epsilon.slu.se
   Google Scholar
• Demeter. 2022. Production, Processing and Labelling International Standard for the use and certification of Demeter, Biodynamic and related trademarks [Internet]. [place unknown]; [accessed 2023 Apr 13]. https://demeter.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20220929_BFDI_Standard_englVersion_final_fs.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Desclaux D, Nolot JM, Chiffoleau Y, Gozé E, Leclerc C. 2008. Changes in the concept of genotype × environment interactions to fit agriculture diversification and decentralized participatory plant breeding: pluridisciplinary point of view. Euphytica. 163(3):533–546. doi:10.1007/s10681-008-9717-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Wit J, Verhoog H. 2007. Organic values and the conventionalization of organic agriculture. NJAS - Wageningen J Life Sci. 54(4):449–462. doi:10.1016/S1573-5214(07)80015-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diederichsen A, Solberg S, Jeppson S. 2012. Morphological changes in Nordic spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) landraces and cultivars released from 1892 to 1994. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 60(2):569–585. doi:10.1007/s10722-012-9858-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diop BM, Gueye MC, Agbangba CE, Cissé N, Deu M, Diack O, Fofana A, Kane NA, Ndir KN, Ndoye I, et al. 2018. Fonio (Digitaria exilis (kippist) stapf): a socially embedded cereal for food and nutrition security in senegal. Ethnobiology Letters. 9(2):150–165. Internet. [accessed 2022 May 6]. doi:10.14237/EBL.9.2.2018.1072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eldrimner. 2016. Eldrimner info folder.
   Google Scholar
• Esquinas-Alcázar J. 2005. Protecting crop genetic diversity for food security: political, ethical and technical challenges. Nat Rev Genet. Internet. 6(12):946–953. [accessed 2022 Feb 16]. doi:10.1038/nrg1729
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018. Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 [Internet]. [place unknown];[accessed 2023 Apr 13]. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02018R0848-20220101&qid=1681391143790
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2021. COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2021/1189 of 7 May 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the production and marketing of plant reproductive material of organic heterogeneous material of particular genera or species [Internet]. [place unknown]; [accessed 2022 Jul 13]. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2021/1189
   Google Scholar
• Ficiciyan A, Loos J, Sievers-Glotzbach S, Tscharntke T. 2018. More than yield: ecosystem services of traditional versus modern crop varieties revisited. Sustainability. Internet. [accessed 2023 Mar 3]. 10(8):2834. doi:10.3390/su10082834
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer K. 2016. Why new crop technology is not scale-neutral—A critique of the expectations for a crop-based African Green Revolution. Res Policy. 45(6):1185–1194. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garibaldi LA, Gemmill-Herren B, D’Annolfo R, Graeub BE, Cunningham SA, Breeze TD. 2017. Farming Approaches for Greater Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Food Security. Trends Ecol Evol. 32(1):68–80. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2016.10.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garland G, Banerjee S, Edlinger A, EM O, Herzog C, Wittwer R, Philippot L, Fernando MT, MGA VDH, Hector A. 2021. A closer look at the functions behind ecosystem multifunctionality: a review. J Ecol. 109(2):600–613. doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13511.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hailu F. 2017. Farmers perception of pesticide use and genetic erosion of landraces of tetraploid wheat (Triticum spp.) in Ethiopia. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 64(5):979–994. doi:10.1007/s10722-016-0419-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellin J, Bellon MR, Hearne SJ. 2014. Maize Landraces and Adaptation to Climate Change in Mexico. J Crop Improv. 28(4):484–501. doi:10.1080/15427528.2014.921800. Internet.
   Google Scholar
• IFOAM. 2008. The four principles of organic agriculture | IFOAM - Organics International [Internet]. [accessed 2021 Dec 6]. https://www.ifoam.bio/why-organic/shaping-agriculture/four-principles-organic
   Google Scholar
• IPBES. 2019. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. [place unknown].
   Google Scholar
• IPCC. 2014. Climate Change 2014 Part A: global and Sectoral Aspects. [place unknown]. https://www.papers2://publication/uuid/B8BF5043-C873-4AFD-97F9-A630782E590D
   Google Scholar
• IPCC. 2021. Climate change 2021: the physical science basis. contribution of working group i to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. [place unknown].
   Google Scholar
• Kingsbury N. 2009. Hybrid : the history and science of plant breeding. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Konvalina P, Capouchová I, Stehno Z, Moudrý J. 2010. Morphological and biological characteristics of the land races of the spring soft wheat grown in the organic farming system. J Cent Eur Agric. 11(2):235–244. doi:10.5513/jcea.v11i2.829.
   Google Scholar
• KRAV. 2023. Standards for KRAV-certified Production-2023 Edition. Sweden: KRAV.
   Google Scholar
• Larsson H. 2020. Personal communication.
   Google Scholar
• Lazzaro M, Bàrberi P, Dell’acqua M, Pè ME, Limonta M, Barabaschi D, Cattivelli L, Laino P, Vaccino P. 2019. Unraveling diversity in wheat competitive ability traits can improve integrated weed management. Agron Sustain Dev. 39(1). doi:10.1007/s13593-018-0551-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazzaro M, Costanzo A, Farag DH, Bàrberi P. 2017. Grain yield and competitive ability against weeds in modern and heritage common wheat cultivars are differently influenced by sowing density. Ital J Agron. 12(4):343–349. doi:10.4081/ija.2017.901.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leino MW. 2017. Spannmål: svenska lantsorter. Stockholm: Nordiska museets förlag. [place unknown].
   Google Scholar
• Leoni V, Pedrali D, Zuccolo M, Rodari A, Giupponi L, Giorgi A. 2021. The importance of technical support in the return of traditional crops in the alps: the case of rye in camonica valley. Sustain. Internet. 1313(24):13818–13818. [accessed 2022 Feb 2. doi:10.3390/SU132413818
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, van Bueren ET L, Jiggins J, Leeuwis C. 2012. Farmers’ adoption of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids and the persistence of landraces in Southwest China: implications for policy and breeding. Genet Resour Crop Evol. Internet. [accessed 2023 Jan 17. 59(6):1147–1160. doi:10.1007/S10722-011-9750-1/FIGURES/3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopes MS, El-Basyoni I, Baenziger PS, Singh S, Royo C, Ozbek K, Aktas H, Ozer E, Ozdemir F, Manickavelu A, et al. 2015. Exploiting genetic diversity from landraces in wheat breeding for adaptation to climate change. J Exp Bot. 66(12):3477–3486. Internet. [accessed 2020 May 13. doi:10.1093/jxb/erv122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowder SK, Skoet J, Raney T. 2016. The number, size, and distribution of farms, smallholder farms, and family farms worldwide. World Dev. 87:16–29. doi:10.1016/J.WORLDDEV.2015.10.041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahon N, McGuire S, Islam MM. 2016. Why bother with Bere? An investigation into the drivers behind the cultivation of a landrace barley. J Rural Stud. 45:54–65. doi:10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2016.02.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marquardt K, Eriksson C, Kuns B. 2022. Towards a deeper understanding of agricultural production systems in Sweden – linking farmer’s logics with environmental consequences and the landscape. Rural Landscapes. 9(1):1–15. doi:10.16993/rl.78.
   Google Scholar
• Maxim A, Străjeru S, Albu C, Sandor M, Mihalescu L, Pauliuc, Sînziana SE, Pauliuc E2020Conservation of vegetable genetic diversity in Transylvania-RomaniaSci RepInternet[accessed 2021 May 7101. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-75413-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Migliorini P, Spagnolo S, Torri L, Arnoulet M, Lazzerini G, Ceccarelli S. 2016. Agronomic and quality characteristics of old, modern and mixture wheat varieties and landraces for organic bread chain in diverse environments of northern Italy. Eur J Agron. 79:131–141. doi:10.1016/j.eja.2016.05.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monteros-Altamirano Á. 2018. On-farm conservation of potato landraces in ecuador. Agron Colomb. Internet. 36(3):189–200. [accessed 2021 May 10. doi:10.15446/agron.colomb.v36n3.66640
   Google Scholar
• Murphy KM, Dawson JC, Jones SS. 2008. Relationship among phenotypic growth traits, yield and weed suppression in spring wheat landraces and modern cultivars. F Crop Res. 105(1–2):107–115. doi:10.1016/J.FCR.2007.08.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy KM, Reeves PG, Jones S. 2008. Relationship between yield and mineral nutrient concentrations in historical and modern spring wheat cultivars. Euphytica. 163:381–390. doi:10.1007/s10681-008-9681-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nchanji EB, Lutomia CK, Ageyo OC, Karanja D, Kamau E, Lauteri M. 2021. Gender-Responsive Participatory Variety Selection in Kenya: implications for Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Breeding in Kenya. Sustainability. 13(23):13164. Internet. doi:10.3390/su132313164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Negri V. 2003. Landraces in central Italy: where and why they are conserved and perspectives for their on-farm conservation. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 50(8):871–885. doi:10.1023/A:1025933613279. Internet.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton AC, Akar T, Baresel JP, Bebeli PJ, Bettencourt E, Bladenopoulos KV, JH C, DA F, Katsiotis A, Koutis K, et al. 2009. Cereal landraces for sustainable agriculture. Sustain Agric. 2:147–186. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0394-0_10.
   Google Scholar
• Nizam D, Yenal Z. 2020. Seed politics in Turkey: the awakening of a landrace wheat and its prospects. J Peasant Stud. Internet. 47(4):741–766. [accessed 2020 Oct 23]. doi:10.1080/03066150.2019.1708725
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noy C. 2008. Sampling knowledge: the hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 11(4):327–344. doi:10.1080/13645570701401305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. 2001. Multifunctionality: towards an analytical framework [Internet]. [place unknown];[accessed 2022 Mar 9]. https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/agriculture-and-food/multifunctionality_9789264192171-en#page1
   Google Scholar
• Öhnfeldt R. 2019. Ordinary and extraordinary heritage plants and their farmers. Uppsala University.
   Google Scholar
• Olson MB, Morris KS, Méndez VE. 2012. Cultivation of maize landraces by small-scale shade coffee farmers in western El Salvador. Agric Syst. 111:63–74. doi:10.1016/J.AGSY.2012.05.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orsini S, Costanzo A, Solfanelli F, Zanoli R, Padel S, Messmer MM, Winter E, Schaefer F. 2020. Factors affecting the use of organic seed by organic farmers in Europe. Sustainability. Internet. [accessed 2021 Jan 22]. 12(20):8540. doi:10.3390/su12208540
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osman AM, Almekinders CJM, Struik PC, Lammerts van Bueren ET. 2016. Adapting spring wheat breeding to the needs of the organic sector. NJAS - Wageningen J Life Sci. 76(1):55–63. doi:10.1016/j.njas.2015.11.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ovaska U, Soini K. 2017. Local breeds – rural heritage or new market opportunities? colliding views on the conservation and sustainable use of landraces. Sociol Ruralis. 57(November 2017):709–729. doi:10.1111/soru.12140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peratoner G, Seling S, Klotz C, Florian C, Figl U, Schmitt AO. 2015. Variation of agronomic and qualitative traits and local adaptation of mountain landraces of winter rye (Secale cereale L.) from Val Venosta/Vinschgau (South Tyrol). Genet Resour Crop Evol. 63(2):261–273. doi:10.1007/s10722-015-0245-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretty J, Sutherland WJ, Ashby J, Auburn J, Baulcombe D, Bell M, Bentley J, Bickersteth S, Brown K, Burke J, et al. 2010. The top 100 questions of importance to the future of global agriculture. Int J Agric Sustain. 8(4):219–236. doi:10.3763/ijas.2010.0534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raggi L, Caproni L, Negri V. 2021a. Landrace added value and accessibility in Europe: what a collection of case studies tells us. Biodivers Conserv. Internet. [accessed 2023 Mar 2]. 30(4):1031–1048. doi:10.1007/S10531-021-02130-W/TABLES/4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raggi L, Caproni L, Negri V. 2021b. Landrace added value and accessibility in Europe: what a collection of case studies tells us. Biodivers Conserv. Internet. [accessed 2023 Feb 27. 30(4):1031–1048. doi:10.1007/S10531-021-02130-W/TABLES/4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roche M, Argent N. 2015. The fall and rise of agricultural productivism? An Antipodean viewpoint. Internet[accessed 2022 Mar 8. 39(5):621–635. doi:10.1177/0309132515582058.
   Google Scholar
• Scholten M. 2012. Diversity and conservation of Scottish landraces: shetland Cabbage (Brassica oleracea L.) and Small oat (Avena strigosa Schreb.). The University of Edinburgh.
   Google Scholar
• Smale M. 1997. The green revolution and wheat genetic diversity: some unfounded assumptions. World Dev. 25(8):1257–1269. doi:10.1016/S0305-750X(97)00038-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soini K, Diaz C, Gandini G, de Haas Y, Lilja T, Martin-Collado D, Pizzi F, Hiemstra SJ. 2012. Developing a typology for local cattle breed farmers in Europe. J Anim Breed Genet. 129(6):436–447. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0388.2012.01009.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swarup S, Cargill EJ, Crosby K, Flagel L, Kniskern J, Glenn KC. 2021. Genetic diversity is indispensable for plant breeding to improve crops. Crop Sci. Internet. 61(2):839–852. [accessed 2022 Mar 8]. doi:10.1002/CSC2.20377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swedish board of Agriculture. 2021. Jordbruksföretag och företagare 2020. Sweden: Swedish board of Agriculture. JO0106. [accessed 2021 May]. https://jordbruksverket.se/om-jordbruksverket/jordbruksverkets-officiella-statistik/jordbruksverkets-statistikrapporter/statistik/2021-04-28-jordbruksforetag-och-foretagare-2020#h-SummaryinEnglish
   Google Scholar
• Van Bueren ET L, Jones SS, Tamm L, Murphy KM, Myers JR, Leifert C, Messmer MM. 2011. The need to breed crop varieties suitable for organic farming, using wheat, tomato and broccoli as examples: a review. NJAS: Wagening J Life Sci. 58(3–4):193–205. doi:10.1016/j.njas.2010.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Bueren ET L, Myers JR. 2012. Organic crop breeding. Lammerts van Bueren ET Edith T., Myers JR editors. Chichester West Sussex UK : Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Varia F, Macaluso D, Vaccaro A, Caruso P, Guccione GD. 2021. The adoption of landraces of durum wheat in Sicilian organic cereal farming analysed using a system dynamics approach. Agronomy. Internet. [accessed 2021 Apr 8]. 11(2):319. doi:10.3390/agronomy11020319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veteläinen M, Negri V, Maxted N 2009. European landraces: on-farm conservation, management and use. BIOVERSITY Tech Bull NO 15 [Internet]. [accessed 2021 Feb 23]. www.bioversityinternational.org
   Google Scholar
• Wattnem T. 2016. Seed laws, certification and standardization: outlawing informal seed systems in the Global South. J Peasant Stud. 43(4):850–867. doi:10.1080/03066150.2015.1130702.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wendin K, Mustafa A, Ortman T, Gerhardt K. 2020. Consumer awareness, attitudes and preferences towards heritage cereals. Foods. 9(6):742. Foods.(June). doi:10.3390/foods9060742.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willett W, Rockström J, Loken B, Springmann M, Lang T, Vermeulen S, Garnett T, Tilman D, DeClerck F, Wood A, et al. 2019. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet. 393(10170):447–492. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe M, Baresel J, Desclaux D, Goldringer I, Hoad S, Kovacs G, Löschenberger F, Miedaner T, Østergård H, Lammerts Van Bueren ET. 2008. Developments in breeding cereals for organic agriculture. Euphytica. 163(3):323–346. doi:10.1007/s10681-008-9690-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe M, Ceccarelli S. 2019. The increased use of diversity in cereal cropping requires more descriptive precision. J Sci Food Agric. 100(11):4119–4123. doi:10.1002/jsfa.9906.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods M. 2011. Rural. New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203844304.
   Google Scholar
• Xu F, X A, Zhang F, Zhang E, Tang C, Dong C, Yang Y, Liu X, Dai L. 2014. On-farm conservation of 12 cereal crops among 15 ethnic groups in Yunnan (PR China). Genet Resour Crop Evol. 61(2):423–434. doi:10.1007/s10722-013-0047-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yahiaoui S, Cuesta-Marcos A, Gracia MP, Medina B, Lasa JM, Casas AM, Ciudad FJ, Montoya JL, Moralejo M, Molina-Cano JL, et al. 2014. Spanish barley landraces outperform modern cultivars at low-productivity sites. Plant Breed. 133(2):218–226. doi:10.1111/pbr.12148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerer KS. 2010. Biological diversity in agriculture and global change. Annu Rev Environ Resour. Internet. 35(1):137–166. [accessed 2021 Jan 5]. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-040309-113840.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar