Crop Matrix¶
Purpose¶
This page presents crops as system components, not as winners or losers.
The project provides scoring, classifications and visualizations. The final interpretation belongs to the reader.
A tomato, a bean, a nettle patch and a butternut squash field do different jobs. Comparing them as if they were the same tool is how people end up arguing with vegetables. Humanity has peaked, apparently.
Current Context¶
Baylovo does not replace the original project plan.
It is a working system where we can:
- participate in an existing productive setup;
- observe real soil, water, weeds, pests and labor requirements;
- collect experience;
- collect seed where possible;
- improve efficiency of current work;
- gradually introduce new crops without breaking what already works.
For next year the direction remains broadly the same:
Increase efficiency of current activity
+
Introduce additional resilient crops
+
Use observations to improve the original plan
Current additional focus crops:
- nettle;
- lapad;
- alfalfa;
- amaranth Red Garnet;
- amaranth Green Garnet;
- butternut squash;
- sorghum;
- sunflower;
- chickpea;
- Jerusalem artichoke.
Method¶
The crop matrix separates three layers:
- Data — observations, measurements, literature values and working scores.
- Classification — crop roles, plant parts, lifecycle and ecological function.
- Visualization — Kiviat charts, scatter plots, function matrices and comparison tables.
The goal is to support design decisions such as:
- low-maintenance food production;
- soil restoration;
- biomass generation;
- drought-tolerant planting;
- crop combinations;
- balcony, greenhouse and field experiments;
- Baylovo field learning and process validation.
Full 24-Criteria Matrix¶
The full matrix is intended to be shown as a heatmap in a later version.
| Group | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Production | calories per m², protein per m², edible mass, harvest duration |
| Resilience | drought tolerance, heat tolerance, cold tolerance, disease and pest resistance |
| Resource demand | irrigation need, fertility need, human labor, maintenance operations |
| Soil and ecosystem | soil improvement, biomass production, pollinator support, compost/mulch value |
| Storage and propagation | no-fridge storage, storage duration, seed collection, self-reproduction |
| Practical value | nutrient density, usage flexibility, failure risk, beginner suitability |
10-Axis Kiviat Profile¶
The Kiviat chart uses a compact 10-criterion profile.
| Axis | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Calories/m² | Energy production from area |
| Protein/m² | Protein production from area |
| Nutrient density | Vitamins, minerals and general nutritional value |
| Drought tolerance | Performance with limited water |
| Disease resistance | Lower disease and pest sensitivity |
| Low labor | Lower human maintenance demand |
| Soil improvement | Contribution to soil function |
| Biomass | Organic matter production |
| Storability | Storage potential without advanced infrastructure |
| Low failure risk | Chance of still producing something in bad conditions |
Note
These are working scores from 0 to 10. They are not final truth. That would be suspiciously convenient, and nature does not do convenient.
Interactive Kiviat Visualization¶
Scatter Comparison: Calories vs Low Labor¶
This graph shows one practical question: which crops give higher calorie score with lower labor demand.
Score Comparison Table¶
This table exposes the same 10-axis working score used by the Kiviat visualization.
Static fallback¶
| Crop | Calories/m² | Protein/m² | Nutrient density | Drought | Disease | Low labor | Soil | Biomass | Storage | Low risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amaranth | 7 | 7 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Jerusalem artichoke | 9 | 4 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 7 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Butternut squash | 8 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 7 |
| Nettle | 2 | 4 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 2 | 10 |
| Lapad | 3 | 3 | 9 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 2 | 10 |
| Alfalfa | 1 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 9 | 1 | 10 |
| Sorghum | 7 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 7 | 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Common bean | 6 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 10 | 6 | 10 | 7 |
| Lentil | 5 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 4 | 10 | 8 |
| Chickpea | 6 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 5 | 10 | 7 |
| Sunflower | 7 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 8 |
| Okra | 4 | 4 | 7 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Potato | 9 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Sweet potato | 8 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 6 |
| Cherry tomato | 5 | 3 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 4 |
| Pink tomato | 5 | 3 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Peppers | 4 | 3 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 |
| Vetch | 2 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 3 | 8 |
| Clover | 2 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 7 | 3 | 8 |
| Phacelia | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 3 | 8 |
Functional Matrix¶
This table shows what each crop does inside the system.
Static fallback¶
| Crop | Calories | Protein | Biomass | Nitrogen | Soil | Pollinators | Mulch | Storage | Ground cover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amaranth | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Jerusalem artichoke | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| Butternut squash | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| Nettle | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| Lapad | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| Alfalfa | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Common bean | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| Lentil | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| Chickpea | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| Sunflower | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| Vetch | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| Clover | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| Phacelia | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Crop Groups¶
Future Visualizations¶
Planned views:
- full 24-criteria heatmap;
- yield vs irrigation demand scatter plot;
- biomass vs soil improvement scatter plot;
- seasonal work and harvest calendar;
- interaction matrix between companion crops.