Weed control in maize, brassica and fodder beet crops

Thompson, F.B.

doi:10.30843/nzpp.1962.15.7416

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Forage brassicas (e.g. forage rape) also have medium–high mitigation potential due to higher digestibility that can lead to reduced enteric CH 4 per unit dry matter consumed, higher livestock growth rates and potentially increased soil CS (Ruis & Blanco‐Canqui, 2017; Sun et al, 2016; Thomson et al, 2016). But dietary composition is also important: If perennial legumes or forage brassicas form only a small part of annual intake, mitigation of enteric CH 4 is likely to be small.…”

Section: Economic Social Environmental and Biophysical Co‐benefits An...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon myopia: The urgent need for integrated social, economic and environmental action in the livestock sector

Harrison

Cullen

Mayberry

et al. 2021

Global Change Biology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Livestock have long been integral to food production systems, often not by choice but by need. While our knowledge of livestock greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions mitigation has evolved, the prevailing focus has been—somewhat myopically—on technology applications associated with mitigation. Here, we (1) examine the global distribution of livestock GHG emissions, (2) explore social, economic and environmental co‐benefits and trade‐offs associated with mitigation interventions and (3) critique approaches for quantifying GHG emissions. This review uncovered many insights. First, while GHG emissions from ruminant livestock are greatest in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMIC; globally, 66% of emissions are produced by Latin America and the Caribbean, East and southeast Asia and south Asia), the majority of mitigation strategies are designed for developed countries. This serious concern is heightened by the fact that 80% of growth in global meat production over the next decade will occur in LMIC. Second, few studies concurrently assess social, economic and environmental aspects of mitigation. Of the 54 interventions reviewed, only 16 had triple‐bottom line benefit with medium–high mitigation potential. Third, while efforts designed to stimulate the adoption of strategies allowing both emissions reduction (ER) and carbon sequestration (CS) would achieve the greatest net emissions mitigation, CS measures have greater potential mitigation and co‐benefits. The scientific community must shift attention away from the prevailing myopic lens on carbon, towards more holistic, systems‐based, multi‐metric approaches that carefully consider the raison d'être for livestock systems. Consequential life cycle assessments and systems‐aligned ‘socio‐economic planetary boundaries’ offer useful starting points that may uncover leverage points and cross‐scale emergent properties. The derivation of harmonized, globally reconciled sustainability metrics requires iterative dialogue between stakeholders at all levels. Greater emphasis on the simultaneous characterization of multiple sustainability dimensions would help avoid situations where progress made in one area causes maladaptive outcomes in other areas.

show abstract

Section: Economic Social Environmental and Biophysical Co‐benefits An...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon myopia: The urgent need for integrated social, economic and environmental action in the livestock sector

Harrison

Cullen

Mayberry

et al. 2021

Global Change Biology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The development of weed control in Chou Moellier {Brassica oleracea L. [Kale group]) has paralleled that in the U.K. for kale. Various workers (Till, 1955;Sewell, 1956;Thompson, 1958) have reported field results which were summarized by Foreman (1960) who concluded that 15 lb/ac SMA could be sprayed on Chou Moellier for the control of P. album would not be controlled; MCPB at up to | lb/ac at the 4-6-leaf stage could be used as an emergency measure to control C. album; sulphuric acid, TCA and chlorpropham had been used on a limited scale.…”

Section: Weed Control Prior To 1963mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Selective Herbicides for Kale in the United Kingdom

Elliott

Cox

1965

Weed Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is firstly to describe the background of an investigation started in 1961 to develop new herbicides for the control of weeds in agricultural kale, Brassica oleracea vars, acephala D.C, SinA fruticosa Metz, and secondly to present the results of four experiments concerned with the effects of weeds on the yield of' kale. The results of the herbicide investigation are to be presented in subsequent papers.Kale as grown in the United Kingdom is a valuable fodder crop and relatively easy to grow, but beset by weeds against which existing mechanical and chemical methods of control have not usually been successful. The effect of weed competition on the yield of four farmers' crops was investigated in 1961 and 1962, When grown entirely free of weeds, the crops provided yields in the range of 20-9-34-5 tons of green material per acre. Where no attempt was made to control the weeds, the yields were reduced by 9'4, 14-5 and 18-9 tons/ac, respectively, in three experiments. In no case did kale, hoed only between the rows, produce as high a yield as the weed-free crop. Although variable in effect, uncontrolled weed growth early in the life of the crop always lowered the yield of kale, Le developpement de I'usage des herbicides selectifs pour le chou fourrager dans le Royaume-Uni. La plante cultive'e, les mauvaises herbes et le probleme J. G. Elliott and T. I. Cox keine Unkrautbekampfung, so wurde der Ertrag in drei Versuchen um 23,2, 35,8 bzw. 46,7 to/ha reduziert. Wurde zwischen den Reihen gehackt, so war der Ertrag in alien Fallen niedriger als in den unkrautfreien Parzellen. Unkrautkonkurrenz wahrend der fruhen Entwicklung des Kohls beeintrachtigte den Ertrag in jedem Fall, wenn auch jeweils in unterschiedlichem Masse.

show abstract

Evaluation of pre-emergence and post-emergence herbicides in fodder beet and sugar beet in Canterbury

Bourdôt¹,

Butler²

1985

New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fodder beet and sugar beet crops grown in Canterbury were treated with pre-emergence and post-emergence herbicides alone or in sequence during the 1980-81 and 1981-82 seasons. High levels of weed control and maximum yields of beet roots were achieved with sequences of preand post-emergence herbicides, whereas preemergence or post-emergenceherbicides alone failed to give the necessary level of weed control for maximum yields.

show abstract

Weed control in maize, brassica and fodder beet crops

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Carbon myopia: The urgent need for integrated social, economic and environmental action in the livestock sector

Carbon myopia: The urgent need for integrated social, economic and environmental action in the livestock sector

The Development of Selective Herbicides for Kale in the United Kingdom

Evaluation of pre-emergence and post-emergence herbicides in fodder beet and sugar beet in Canterbury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About