a b s t r a c tPerennial weeds can be a major constraint to organic crop production and direct control actions applied between crops can then be necessary to reduce the problems. We conducted two experiments, one on a sandy loam and one on a sandy soil in Denmark, with the aim of studying the efficacy of different implement types and strategies. The treatments were employed against mixed stands of perennials after harvest of spring barley in two consecutive years. Time of treatment, cultivation depth and combinations of implements constituted the strategies. Treatment effects were evaluated in the growing season that followed the post-harvest treatments. In the one experiment, repeated tine cultivation caused an 80 e90% annual reduction of the population of mainly Cirsium arvense. With treatments conducted in two consecutive years, the accumulated effects reached 99% control. In the second experiment, power take-off driven implements with rotating weeding devices demonstrated similar control efficacies against a mixed stand composing C. arvense, Tussilago farfara, Elytrigia repens and Artemisia vulgaris. One pass was conducted a week after barley harvest followed by another pass 3 weeks later and ending the strategy with mouldboard ploughing in the succeeding spring. Grain yields did not differ among the treatments in the two experiments as a result of the generally high effectiveness exerted by the control strategies. Especially post-harvest control strategies based on rotating weed devices and mouldboard ploughing appear to be effective solutions against mixed stands of perennials on sandy soils but they do not comply with optimal nutrient management in organic cropping. Therefore, intensive autumn cultivation is only relevant where a perennial weed problem is uncontrollable by other means.
To be proactive in minimizing pesticide use, the public authorities in Denmark agreed in 1998 to phase out the use of pesticides on publicly owned areas by the end of 2002. A part of the agreement was an increasing focus on research into and development of new methods and implements for non-chemical weed control on paved areas. Due to a large increase in the costs of non-chemical weed control, the park authorities have to put the different types and locations of paved areas in order of priority to optimize the weed control effort. The present authors divided the paved areas into five weed control levels, dependent on placement, quality and use. For the 3 years 1999-2001, experiments with different non-chemical weed control methods were conducted on pavements at six locations in Denmark. The aim was to test the reaction of the weeds to different treatments and strategies. The efficacies of the methods were evaluated by analysis of digital images to estimate the fraction of the paved area covered with green vegetation (weed coverage). The weed coverage was used as the dependent variable in the subsequent statistical analysis. The independent variables in the model were incoming radiation, wear, area of joints in the pavement, the dying process of the weeds and the number of runs/applied energy of the mechanical or thermal weed control methods, respectively. The estimated parameters from the statistical model were used to build a simulation model, which was used to optimise five weed control strategies to fulfil the suggested weed control levels. In the suggested strategy for maximum weed control, 12 thermal weeding applications at 2-week intervals are suggested. The 'clean-up' strategy is based on one weed-brushing in late spring or early autumn.
Summary A screening programme for crop variety competitiveness would ideally be based on only a few, non‐destructive measurements of key growth traits. In this study we measured the weed suppressive ability of 79 varieties of spring barley in two ways: (i) directly, by weed coverage assessments under weedy conditions at three Danish locations in 2002–2004 and (ii) indirectly, by non‐destructive measurements of varietal growth traits under weed‐free conditions in 17 other experiments in Denmark in 2001–2003. Based on just four varietal growth traits (reflectance, leaf area index, leaf angle and culm length), we successfully developed a method for indexing the weed suppressive ability of spring barley varieties. The suppressive index ranged from 12% in Lux and 55% in Modena in proportion to the 90% quantile coverage of all varieties. The index was validated against independent data from two locations in 2005 with 14 and 24 varieties and was found valuable for future use in regular screening programmes.
SummaryWe investigated the tolerance to weed harrowing of four spring barley varieties and examined the possible interactions between varietal weed suppressive ability and two nutrient levels. Tolerance was defined as the combined effect of crop resistance (ability to resist soil covering) and crop recovery (the ability to recover in terms of yield). The weed harrowing strategy was a combination of one pre-and one post-emergence weed harrowing. In terms of yield, the four varieties responded significantly differently to weed harrowing and the response depended on nutrient level. At the lower nutrient level, weed harrowing caused an increase in yield of 4.4 hkg ha )1 for a strong competitor (cv. Otira),while there was no effect on yield at the higher nutrient level. For a weaker competitor (cv. Brazil), weed harrowing caused no change in yield at the lower nutrient level, whereas yield decreased by 6.0 hkg haat the higher nutrient level. There were marked differences between the weed suppressive ability of the four varieties when not harrowed, with less pronounced but significant differences when harrowed. Weed harrowing did not change the weed suppressive ability of a variety.Varieties that are tall at post-emergence harrowing and have increased density after pre-emergence harrowing, are the ones that benefit most from weed harrowing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.