Plants for Zone 2a
Hay & Grazing Crops (15)
| Plant Name | Score* | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Crested Wheatgrass | 64.8% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Agropyron cristatum*. However, the existing information highlights its role in erosion control and |
| Bluestem Wheatgrass | 64.3% | The provided sources mention bluestem wheatgrass (*Pascopyrum smithii*) primarily as a component of diverse perennial pastures being re-established or managed regeneratively. While the specific reason |
| Timothy Grass | 74.3% | Regenerative farmers select timothy grass (Phleum pratense) for its significant contributions to soil health and farm system resilience. Its deep root system enhances soil structure, improves water in |
| Purple Prairie Clover | 70.5% | The provided knowledge base highlights purple prairie clover (Dalea purpurea) as a valuable component in regenerative agriculture, though it offers limited insight into the specific reasons *why* farm |
| Tall Fescue | 70.0% | The provided sources mention Schedonorus arundinaceus (tall fescue) primarily in the context of its forage value and management for livestock grazing. Tall fescue is identified as a high-yielding cool |
| Self-Heal | 67.6% | While the provided sources offer limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose *Prunella vulgaris*, they highlight certain beneficial characteristics. Source indicates *Prunell |
| Bromegrass | 66.7% | Sources indicate that smooth bromegrass (*Bromus inermis*) is utilized in regenerative systems for its role as a forage crop and for its potential to improve soil health. In livestock operations, it i |
| Meadow Brome | 64.8% | The provided sources mention meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehmann) in the context of perennial forage blends and pasture systems, often alongside legumes like alfalfa. While the knowledge base d |
| Reed Canary Grass | 63.8% | The provided sources offer limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Phalaris arundinacea* (reed canarygrass). However, the information does highlight certain characteristics |
| Little Bluestem | 62.4% | Regenerative farmers select little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) for its significant contributions to ecosystem health and farm resilience. Its deep root system is a key benefit, enhancing soil s |
| Giant Feather Grass | 52.9% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail why regenerative farmers choose *Stipa grandis*, they offer insights into its ecological roles within grassland systems. Source indicates that *Stip |
| Short-Flower Needle Grass | 51.0% | The provided knowledge base offers limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose *Stipa breviflora*. However, the sources highlight its role in a desert steppe ecosystem and it |
| Dog Rose | 45.2% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose *Rosa canina*. While the sources mention its presence in grassland ecosystems and its po |
| Baby Sage | 42.4% | While direct knowledge base mentions of Salvia microphylla in regenerative agriculture are limited, available information suggests potential benefits that align with regenerative principles. Its value |
| Heather | 42.4% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Calluna vulgaris. The available research focuses on its ecological role in natural and semi-natural |
How Regenerative Scores Are Calculated
The regenerative score aggregates the trait dimensions shown in each plant's radar chart (excluding climate tolerance, which is already factored into zone suitability):
- Profit Potential (2× weight)
- Palatability
- Nutritional Value
- Grazing Durability
- Management Ease
- Multi-Benefit Value
Aggregation: Each trait is scored 1.0-3.0 (Limited → Typical → Exceptional). The regenerative score = (sum of weighted trait scores ÷ maximum possible) × 100. Profit Potential and System Value receive 2× weight because economic viability and ecosystem contribution are critical for supporting the transition to regenerative practices.
Click through to any plant to see its radar chart and detailed explanations for each trait dimension.
Tree Crops & Agroforestry (60)
| Plant Name | Score* | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Chokecherry | 87.8% | The provided knowledge base highlights several key characteristics of Prunus virginiana (choke cherry) relevant to regenerative agriculture, though it does not explicitly detail *why* regenerative far |
| Haskap | 86.7% | While the provided sources offer insights into haskap (Lonicera caerulea) cultivation and soil impacts, they offer limited direct information on the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose this p |
| Siberian Peashrub | 81.1% | Caragana arborescens is chosen by regenerative farmers primarily for its significant contributions to soil health and ecosystem services. As a legume, it is a nitrogen fixer, enriching soil fertility |
| Canadian Plum | 73.9% | While the provided knowledge base offers limited direct insights into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Prunus nigra*, general principles of regenerative agriculture suggest potential bene |
| Box Elder | 68.9% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Acer negundo. However, the available information suggests potential benefits related to ecosystem se |
| Balsam Poplar | 62.2% | Limited knowledge base coverage restricts a comprehensive understanding of why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Populus balsamifera*. The provided sources focus on distinct scientific investi |
| Scots Pine | 60.0% | Regenerative farmers may select Scots pine (*Pinus sylvestris*) for its multi-faceted contributions to farm ecosystem health and economic viability. While direct mentions of nitrogen fixation or polli |
| Silver Birch | 60.0% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Betula pendula* (European White Birch). However, the sources do highlight its role in ecosy |
| Eastern Redcedar | 56.7% | Regenerative farmers are interested in Juniperus virginiana, commonly known as Eastern red-cedar, for its potential to enhance ecosystem services and soil health. Studies indicate that Juniperus virgi |
| Chinese Red Pine | 55.0% | The provided sources indicate that *Pinus tabuliformis* is present in the Yellow River basin and Loess Plateau regions, where it contributes to ecosystem health and vegetation recovery. Studies show * |
| Sitka Spruce | 46.1% | The provided sources offer limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Picea sitchensis (Sitka spruce). The majority of mentions focus on its role in commercial forestry and carb |
| Lodgepole Pine | 45.0% | The provided sources focus on the ecological characteristics and management of *Pinus contorta* (lodgepole pine), rather than explicit reasons for its adoption in regenerative agriculture systems. Lim |
| Norway Spruce | 44.4% | While Picea abies (Norway spruce) is not a primary focus in the provided regenerative agriculture sources, its mentions offer insights into its role within forest ecosystems and agricultural interface |
| Black Spruce | 42.8% | While the provided sources focus on the ecological impacts of Picea mariana (black spruce) in boreal forest ecosystems, they offer limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose thi |
| Common Osier | 91.7% | While the provided sources offer limited direct insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose Salix viminalis (common osier), they highlight several key benefits relevant to regenerati |
| Saskatoon Berry | 87.8% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insights into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Amelanchier alnifolia (Western Serviceberry). While the sources do not detail its ecosystem |
| Black Locust | 86.7% | Regenerative farmers select Robinia pseudoacacia, commonly known as black locust, for its multifaceted benefits within agroecosystems. Its deep root system contributes significantly to soil health by |
| Canadian Serviceberry | 86.1% | The provided sources do not offer specific insights into why regenerative farmers choose Amelanchier canadensis. The knowledge base primarily focuses on identifying and managing invasive species, with |
| Willow | 84.4% | Regenerative farmers select Salix (willow) for its multifaceted contributions to farm ecosystems and resilience. Willow is noted for its rapid biomass production and ease of propagation, making it a v |
| Nanking Cherry | 81.1% | The provided sources offer limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Prunus tomentosa (Nanking cherry). Source identifies Nanking cherry as an edible shrub suitable for windbre |
| Red Elderberry | 80.0% | While the provided sources offer limited direct insights into specific regenerative farming choices for Sambucus racemosa, general principles of regenerative agriculture suggest potential benefits. Pl |
| American Basswood | 76.7% | While explicit reasons for regenerative farmers selecting *Tilia americana* are not extensively detailed in the provided knowledge base (16 mentions total), its known ecological attributes suggest sev |
| Beaked Hazelnut | 75.6% | While specific mentions of Corylus cornuta within the provided regenerative agriculture sources are limited, the plant's characteristics suggest potential benefits for regenerative farming systems. It |
| Littleleaf Linden | 75.6% | The provided knowledge base, with 23 mentions of Tilia cordata (linden), offers limited direct insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose this species. The sources primarily focus o |
| Rowan | 75.6% | While explicit details on *Sorbus aucuparia*'s specific adoption by regenerative farmers are limited in the provided knowledge base, the plant's characteristics suggest potential benefits aligned with |
| Asian Wild Apple | 75.0% | While specific knowledge base evidence for *Malus sieversii*'s application in regenerative agriculture is limited, its wild apple heritage suggests potential ecological and economic benefits. As a fou |
| Arctic Beauty Kiwi | 74.4% | The provided sources offer limited direct insights into the specific reasons regenerative farmers might choose Actinidia kolomikta. While Actinidia kolomikta is mentioned, the knowledge base does not |
| Korean Pine | 74.4% | The provided sources on *Pinus koraiensis* (Korean pine) focus on its ecological impacts within forest ecosystems, particularly concerning soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics and responses to environme |
| Cherry Plum | 73.9% | While direct mentions of Prunus cerasifera within the provided regenerative agriculture context are limited, its potential contributions align with key regenerative principles. Its value likely stems |
| Red Osier Dogwood | 73.3% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Cornus sericea. However, general information on drought-tolerant plants, such as that from the Unive |
| Bird Cherry | 72.8% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Prunus padus. The mentions focus primarily on distinguishing it from Prunus virginiana throu |
| Sweet Chestnut | 72.8% | The provided knowledge base offers limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose *Castanea sativa* (European chestnut). While source indicates its presence in forest studies as |
| Blue Gum | 71.7% | While the provided sources do not extensively detail the reasons regenerative farmers choose Eucalyptus globulus, they offer insights into its utility within broader agricultural contexts. Source high |
| Common Hackberry | 71.1% | The provided sources highlight Celtis occidentalis, or hackberry, primarily for its significant value as a wildlife food source and its ecological resilience. While the knowledge base does not directl |
| Bur Oak | 67.8% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Quercus macrocarpa* (bur oak). However, the existing research highlights its utility in ecosystem r |
| Swamp White Oak | 67.8% | The provided sources on Quercus bicolor (swamp white oak) offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose this species for its ecosystem services, soil benefits, livesto |
| White Oak | 67.8% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Quercus alba* (white oak). The knowledge base primarily focuses on ecological roles and establishme |
| Mexican Plum | 66.1% | While the provided sources offer limited explicit detail on the specific regenerative agricultural reasons for choosing Prunus mexicana (Mexican plum), they highlight its considerable ecosystem servic |
| Shagbark Hickory | 66.1% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Carya ovata (Shagbark Hickory). While the sources identify key botanical characteristics, su |
| Sugar Maple | 65.0% | The provided sources predominantly focus on *Acer saccharum*'s role in maple syrup production and its ecological interactions within temperate forests. While direct explanations from regenerative farm |
| Dawn Redwood | 64.4% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Metasequoia glyptostroboides. The available information focuses primarily on its paleobotanical sign |
| Mongolian Oak | 63.3% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail the reasons regenerative farmers choose *Quercus mongolica*, they highlight its positive impacts on soil health and ecosystem function. Studies in N |
| Black Poplar | 62.2% | The provided sources offer limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose Populus nigra. Source notes its use in nonnative plantations, where it supported lower species richness |
| Eastern White Pine | 61.7% | While the provided sources do not extensively detail the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose *Pinus strobus* (eastern white pine), they offer some insights into its potential ecological roles |
| Green Ash | 61.7% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Fraxinus pennsylvanica. However, one study in Saskatchewan indicates that shelterbelts of F. pennsyl |
| Red Maple | 61.1% | The provided sources offer limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose red maple (*Acer rubrum*) for their systems. While the knowledge base details red maple's role in nursery p |
| Wild Cherry | 61.1% | The provided knowledge base offers limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Prunus avium* (sweet cherry). The sources focus primarily on horticultural aspects, such as prunin |
| Paper Birch | 58.3% | While the provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Betula papyrifera, the sources highlight its significant ecosystem services. Betula pa |
| Ponderosa Pine | 58.3% | The provided sources mention *Pinus ponderosa* (Ponderosa pine) primarily in the context of forest ecology and fire management, with limited direct discussion on its specific integration into regenera |
| Red Oak | 57.8% | The provided sources offer limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Quercus rubra (Northern Red Oak) for their systems. The knowledge base primarily details challenges and obs |
| Monkey Puzzle Tree | 57.2% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Araucaria araucana*. However, we can infer potential benefits based on its characteristics. Source |
| European Beech | 51.7% | Sources indicate that Fagus sylvatica, commonly known as European beech, is valued in regenerative agriculture primarily for its role in forest ecosystem management and biodiversity. Studies highlight |
| Corkscrew Willow | 51.1% | While specific knowledge base excerpts for Garrya elliptica in regenerative agriculture are limited, the plant's characteristics suggest potential reasons for its adoption. Regenerative systems priori |
| Douglas Fir | 48.9% | The provided knowledge base offers limited explicit information regarding why regenerative farmers specifically choose Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). However, existing sources highlight its role |
| Red Columbine | 48.9% | While specific regenerative agriculture practices involving Aquilegia formosa are not extensively detailed in the provided sources, its inclusion suggests potential contributions to farm system resili |
| Dragon Spruce | 47.2% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail why regenerative farmers choose *Picea asperata* (dragon spruce), they offer insights into its potential ecosystem contributions. Studies indicate * |
| Lilac | 44.4% | While specific reasons for regenerative farmers choosing Syringa vulgaris are not extensively detailed in the provided sources, its inclusion can be inferred through its potential ecosystem services. |
| Arborvitae | 42.8% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Thuja occidentalis (Northern White Cedar) for its ecosystem services, soil benefits, integration wit |
| Western Red Cedar | 42.8% | The provided sources indicate that Thuja plicata, or Western Red Cedar, holds significant cultural and ecological value, particularly for Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest. While these sourc |
| Eastern Hemlock | 42.2% | Eastern hemlocks (*Tsuga canadensis*) are identified as keystone species in certain forest ecosystems, demonstrating significant ecological value. These trees create vital climate-controlled environme |
How Regenerative Scores Are Calculated
The regenerative score aggregates the trait dimensions shown in each plant's radar chart (excluding climate tolerance, which is already factored into zone suitability):
- System Value (2× weight)
- Time to Production
- Management Ease
- Integration Friendliness
- Multi-Benefit Value
Aggregation: Each trait is scored 1.0-3.0 (Limited → Typical → Exceptional). The regenerative score = (sum of weighted trait scores ÷ maximum possible) × 100. Profit Potential and System Value receive 2× weight because economic viability and ecosystem contribution are critical for supporting the transition to regenerative practices.
Click through to any plant to see its radar chart and detailed explanations for each trait dimension.
Cover Crops & Soil Builders (38)
| Plant Name | Score* | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Green Alder | 72.5% | The provided knowledge base offers limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose *Alnus viridis*. Source indicates its use in Arctic research, highlighting its role in tall shr |
| Sea Buckthorn | 65.8% | Regenerative farmers select Hippophae rhamnoides for its valuable ecosystem services and soil benefits. Sources highlight its role as a nitrogen-fixing shrub, contributing to nutrient cycling within t |
| Quaking Aspen | 62.5% | While the provided sources focus on the ecological characteristics and soil benefits of Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides), they offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specificall |
| Korshinsky Caragana | 61.7% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail the reasons regenerative farmers choose Caragana korshinskii, they highlight its significant ecological impacts, suggesting potential benefits. Stud |
| Siberian Elm | 54.2% | The provided sources offer limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose *Ulmus pumila*. While *Ulmus pumila* is mentioned as a land use pattern in a study on soil organic carb |
| Siberian Crabapple | 49.2% | The provided sources offer limited insight into the specific reasons why regenerative farmers choose *Malus baccata* (Siberian crabapple). However, they do highlight its potential roles within an ecos |
| Common Juniper | 45.0% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Juniperus communis* (juniper). Source identifies juniper bushes as a land cover type in revegetatin |
| Red Alder | 77.5% | The provided sources, while mentioning Alnus rubra (red alder), offer limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers might choose this plant. The knowledge base primarily focuses on th |
| Rye | 75.8% | Regenerative farmers select rye (Secale cereale) primarily for its robust ecosystem services and soil-building capabilities. Sources highlight its effectiveness in erosion control, particularly on rol |
| Grey Alder | 72.5% | While the provided sources offer limited insight into the specific motivations of regenerative farmers for selecting *Alnus incana*, they highlight several key ecosystem services and soil benefits rel |
| Spring Vetch | 72.5% | Regenerative farmers select spring vetch (*Vicia sativa*) primarily for its role as a nitrogen-fixing legume, significantly contributing to nutrient cycling and reducing the need for synthetic nitroge |
| Triticale | 71.7% | Triticale is selected by regenerative farmers for its versatile role in enhancing farm systems. Its rapid spring growth and cold hardiness make it a valuable component in winter cover crop mixes, cont |
| Jerusalem Artichoke | 70.8% | Regenerative farmers select Jerusalem artichokes (Helianthus tuberosus) for their significant contributions to soil health and ecosystem services. The plant's vigorous growth and deep root system enha |
| Russian Olive | 68.3% | Regenerative farmers may select Elaeagnus angustifolia for its nitrogen-fixing capabilities, a key ecosystem service that enhances soil fertility and reduces the need for synthetic fertilizers. Source |
| Swedish Clover | 68.3% | While the provided knowledge base offers limited explicit detail on the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose Swedish clover (Trifolium hybridum), it highlights several key ecosystem services a |
| Yellow Sweet Clover | 68.3% | Regenerative farmers select yellow sweet clover (*Melilotus officinalis*) for its multifaceted benefits, significantly contributing to ecosystem health and farm resilience. Its deep root system is cru |
| Common Dandelion | 64.2% | Regenerative farmers may tolerate or integrate common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) into their systems due to several ecosystem services and soil benefits, even though direct mentions in the provid |
| Silverberry | 63.3% | While direct knowledge base excerpts for Elaeagnus x ebbingei in regenerative agriculture are limited, its selection by farmers can be inferred from its known characteristics and alignment with regene |
| Flax | 62.5% | Regenerative farmers select flax (*Linum usitatissimum*) for its role in enhancing farm system resilience and soil health. While the provided sources do not extensively detail flax's ecosystem service |
| Stinging Nettle | 62.5% | Regenerative farmers utilize stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) for its multifaceted contributions to farm ecosystems. While direct mentions of nitrogen fixation, pollinator support, erosion control, or |
| Sweet Gale | 62.5% | While direct information on Myrica gale's specific adoption by regenerative farmers is limited within the provided knowledge base, the plant's known characteristics suggest potential benefits aligned |
| Black Cottonwood | 61.7% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose *Populus trichocarpa*. However, they do highlight characteristics relevant to regenerative agricultu |
| Nodding Wild Rye | 60.8% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail the reasons regenerative farmers select nodding wild rye (Elymus canadensis), their mentions offer insights into its ecological context. Source high |
| Red Fescue | 60.8% | The provided sources mention Festuca rubra (creeping red fescue) in the context of regenerative agriculture but offer limited direct insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose this |
| Blue False Indigo | 56.7% | While the provided sources do not extensively detail the specific reasons regenerative farmers choose blue false indigo (Baptisia australis), existing information suggests its potential value. One sou |
| Rugosa Rose | 55.0% | The provided knowledge base does not offer specific reasons why regenerative farmers choose Rosa Rugosa. The limited mentions in the text focus on general farming practices, crop rotations, and soil f |
| Common Mullein | 54.2% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail why regenerative farmers choose Verbascum thapsus (Mullein) for specific ecosystem services like nitrogen fixation, pollinator support, erosion cont |
| Staghorn Sumac | 54.2% | The provided sources mention Rhus typhina (Staghorn Sumac) as a pollen source for bees in feeding trials, alongside Taraxacum officinale and Crataegus sp.. However, these specific texts do not detail |
| Tall Goldenrod | 54.2% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into explicit reasons why regenerative farmers choose Solidago Altissima. However, source indicates interactions with other plants, suggesting |
| Common Ash | 52.5% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail the reasons regenerative farmers choose *Fraxinus excelsior* (European ash), they highlight its significant soil-related benefits. Studies indicate |
| Caraway | 51.7% | While the provided sources do not explicitly detail the reasons regenerative farmers choose Carum carvi (caraway), they highlight its utility in agroecosystem improvement and soil health. Source demon |
| Red Valerian | 51.7% | While the provided knowledge base has limited direct mentions of Centranthus ruber, existing information suggests its potential value in regenerative agriculture systems. Its deep root structure is li |
| Austrian Pine | 50.8% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Pinus nigra for its regenerative benefits. However, the sources highlight several characteri |
| Wild Strawberry | 50.0% | While the provided sources offer limited insight into the specific economic drivers or livestock integration for Fragaria vesca in regenerative agriculture, they do highlight its potential ecosystem s |
| Canadian Buffaloberry | 47.5% | While specific knowledge base excerpts detailing the reasons regenerative farmers choose Shepherdia canadensis are limited, its inclusion in regenerative systems can be inferred from its known ecologi |
| Japanese White Birch | 47.5% | The provided sources offer limited insight into the specific reasons regenerative farmers might choose *Betula platyphylla*. Three of the eight mentions focus on ecological studies, examining its role |
| Meadowsweet | 47.5% | While specific mentions of Filipendula ulmaria within the provided regenerative agriculture sources are limited, its inclusion in such systems can be inferred from its known ecological and agronomic p |
| Siberian Ginseng | 47.5% | The provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Eleutherococcus senticosus. Source focuses on the plant's association with microbial communities in |
How Regenerative Scores Are Calculated
The regenerative score aggregates the trait dimensions shown in each plant's radar chart (excluding climate tolerance, which is already factored into zone suitability):
- System Value (2× weight)
- Nitrogen Fixation
- Soil Building
- Weed Suppression
- Establishment Ease
- Adaptability
- Low Maintenance
Aggregation: Each trait is scored 1.0-3.0 (Limited → Typical → Exceptional). The regenerative score = (sum of weighted trait scores ÷ maximum possible) × 100. Profit Potential and System Value receive 2× weight because economic viability and ecosystem contribution are critical for supporting the transition to regenerative practices.
Click through to any plant to see its radar chart and detailed explanations for each trait dimension.
Vegetables & Specialty Crops (7)
| Plant Name | Score* | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Field Mint | 75.6% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Mentha arvensis for its ecosystem services, soil benefits, livestock integration, or resilie |
| Black Chokeberry | 75.0% | The provided sources on Aronia melanocarpa (aronia/chokeberry) do not explicitly detail the reasons regenerative farmers choose this plant, particularly concerning ecosystem services, soil benefits, l |
| Coneflower | 69.4% | Regenerative farmers may choose *Echinacea purpurea* for its potential to enhance farm system resilience and soil health. Sources indicate its use in meadow designs and interseeded into pastures, sugg |
| Bramble | 67.8% | While the provided sources focus on the nutritional and health benefits of Rubus species, their specific integration into regenerative agriculture systems and the rationale behind farmer adoption is n |
| Ramps | 64.4% | The provided knowledge base offers limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Allium tricoccum (ramps). However, the sources do touch upon propagation methods, indicating |
| Angelica | 61.7% | While the provided sources offer limited direct insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Angelica archangelica, they highlight its potential ecosystem services and soil benefits. Sour |
| St. John's Wort | 61.7% | The provided sources offer limited insight into why regenerative farmers specifically choose Hypericum perforatum (St. John's Wort). The knowledge base primarily details its cultivation, phytochemical |
How Regenerative Scores Are Calculated
The regenerative score aggregates the trait dimensions shown in each plant's radar chart (excluding climate tolerance, which is already factored into zone suitability):
- Profit Potential (2× weight)
- Production Reliability
- Growing Ease
- Space Productivity
- Multi-Benefit Value
Aggregation: Each trait is scored 1.0-3.0 (Limited → Typical → Exceptional). The regenerative score = (sum of weighted trait scores ÷ maximum possible) × 100. Profit Potential and System Value receive 2× weight because economic viability and ecosystem contribution are critical for supporting the transition to regenerative practices.
Click through to any plant to see its radar chart and detailed explanations for each trait dimension.