Challenges and Opportunities in Weed Management Under a Changing Agricultural Scenario

Barman, Keshab; Singh, Vineeta; Dubey, Rachana; Singh, Prabhjot; Dixit, Anil Kumar; Sharma, A. R.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-1019-9_16

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the biggest concerns for landholders and scientists is the possibility of a gradual decline in soil quality caused by long-term, repeated herbicide applications (Barman et al, 2014;Strom, 2013). Biological shifts may not be detectable in shortterm laboratory or glasshouse experiments and a lack of control and investment in long-term field studies means potential effects may be overlooked or misattributed to other factors.…”

Section: Chronic Effects Of Repeated Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Herbicides on Soil Biology and Function

Rose

Cavagnaro

Scanlan³

et al. 2016

Advances in Agronomy

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the embargo period via non-commercial hosting platforms such as their institutional repository  via commercial sites with which Elsevier has an agreement In all cases accepted manuscripts should: link to the formal publication via its DOI  bear a CC-BY-NC-ND licensethis is easy to do  if aggregated with other manuscripts, for example in a repository or other site, be shared in

show abstract

Section: Chronic Effects Of Repeated Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Herbicides on Soil Biology and Function

Rose

Cavagnaro

Scanlan³

et al. 2016

Advances in Agronomy

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, experts including social and natural scientists now agree that farmers should utilize multiple best management practices for controlling weeds, as part of an integrated weed management (IWM) plan (Livingston et al 2015;Ervin, Glenna, and Jussaume 2010;Frisvold and Reeves 2011;Llewellyn, Lindner, Pannell, and Powles 2004). Such a plan would involve the integration and rotational use of a variety of chemical and nonchemical weed control practices, including preventative, mechanical, cultural, chemical, and biological techniques (Barman et al 2014) Although recommended, IWM is more cost and labor intensive to farmers, particularly in comparison to a glyphosate-only plan, complicating their support for IWM.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techno-optimism as a barrier to overcoming herbicide resistance: Comparing farmer perceptions of the future potential of herbicides

Dentzman

Gunderson

Jussaume

2016

Journal of Rural Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this analysis is to explore how U.S. grower perceptions of the future potential of different weed management approaches is conditioned by faith in technological fixes and how the latter is influenced by the rate and persistence of herbicide resistant weeds (HRW). We ground our analysis in rural studies literature on location and environmental sociological evaluations of techno-optimism. Using a coding typology of techno-optimism,-skepticism, anddissonance, focus group data show that farmers in Southern states responded with more skepticism and dissonance to the potential of chemical herbicides as a solution to HRW while farmers in Northern states, where there have historically been fewer HRW, have greater optimism in the potential of chemicals to solve the problem. We conclude that (1) the presence of HRWs provides an important context for farmer ideology and (2) those working with farmers in areas with high HRW rates may be able to tap into the skepticism and dissonance farmers feel toward the future potential of chemical herbicide solutions by providing integrated weed management alternatives.

show abstract

“…This weed is an emerging threat in several Asian countries, including India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Vietnam, China, and Sri Lanka (Shabbir and Bajwa, 2006;Barman et al, 2014). In Australia, parthenium has become a dominant species in the pastoral regions of Queensland.…”

Section: Uganda (Damentioning

confidence: 99%