P. Barberi

Integrating physical and cultural methods of weed control— examples from European research

Abstract Increasing concerns about pesticide use and a steadily increasing conversion to organic farming have been major factors driving research in physical and cultural weed control methods in Europe. This article reviews some of the major results achieved with nonchemical methods and strategies, especially adapted for row crops (e.g., corn, sugar beet, onion, leek, and carrot) and small-grain cereals (e.g., barley and wheat). In row crops, intrarow weeds constitute a major challenge, and research has mainly aimed at replacing laborious hand-weeding with mechanization. A number of investigations have focused on optimizing the use of thermal and mechanical weeding methods against intrarow weeds, such as flaming, harrowing, brush weeding, hoeing, torsion weeding, and finger weeding. And new methods are now under investigation such as robotic weeding for row crops with abundant spacing between individual plants and band-steaming for row crops developing dense crop stands. The strategic use of mechanical weed control methods in small-grain cereals has been another area of considerable interest. Weed harrowing and interrow hoeing provide promising results when they are part of a strategy that also involves cultural methods such as fertilizer placement, seed vigor, seed rate, and competitive varieties. Although research in preventive, cultural, and physical methods have improved weed control in row crops and small-grain cereals, effective long-term weed management in low external input and organic systems can only be achieved by tackling the problem in a wider context, i.e., at the cropping system level. Basic principles of this approach, examples of cover crop and intercropping use for weed suppression, and an application in a 2-yr rotation are presented and discussed. Nomenclature: Barley, Hordeum vulgare L.; carrot, Daucus carota L.; corn, Zea mays L.; leek, Allium porrum L.; onion, Allium cepa L.; sugar beet, Beta vulgaris L.; wheat, Triticum aestivum L.

Eight principles of integrated pest management

The use of pesticides made it possible to increase yields, simplify cropping systems, and forego more complicated crop protection strategies. Over-reliance on chemical control, however, is associated with contamination of ecosystems and undesirable health effects. The future of crop production is now also threatened by emergence of pest resistance and declining availability of active substances. There is therefore a need to design cropping systems less dependent on synthetic pesticides. Consequently, the European Union requires the application of eight principles (P) of Integrated Pest Management that fit within sustainable farm management. Here, we propose to farmers, advisors, and researchers a dynamic and flexible approach that accounts for the diversity of farming situations and the complexities of agroecosystems and that can improve the resilience of cropping systems and our capacity to adapt crop protection to local realities. For each principle (P), we suggest that (P1) the design of inherently robust cropping systems using a combination of agronomic levers is key to prevention. (P2) Local availability of monitoring, warning, and forecasting systems is a reality to contend with. (P3) The decision-making process can integrate cropping system factors to develop longer-term strategies. (P4) The combination of non-chemical methods that may be individually less efficient than pesticides can generate valuable synergies. (P5) Development of new biological agents and products and the use of existing databases offer options for the selection of products minimizing impact on health, the environment, and biological regulation of pests. (P6) Reduced pesticide use can be effectively combined with other tactics. (P7) Addressing the root causes of pesticide resistance is the best way to find sustainable crop protection solutions. And (P8) integration of multi-season effects and trade-offs in evaluation criteria will help develop sustainable solutions.

Mycorrhizal fungi suppress aggressive Agricultural weeds.

Plant growth responses to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) are highly variable, ranging from mutualism in a wide range of plants, to antagonism in some non-mycorrhizal plant species and plants characteristic of disturbed environments. Many agricultural weeds are non mycorrhizal or originate from ruderal environments where AMF are rare or absent. This led us to hypothesize that AMF may suppress weed growth, a mycorrhizal attribute which has hardly been considered. We investigated the impact of AMF and AMF diversity (three versus one AMF taxon) on weed growth in experimental microcosms where a crop (sunflower) was grown together with six widespread weed species. The presence of AMF reduced total weed biomass with 47% in microcosms where weeds were grown together with sunflower and with 25% in microcosms where weeds were grown alone. The biomass of two out of six weed species was significantly reduced by AMF (−66% & −59%) while the biomass of the four remaining weed species was only slightly reduced (−20% to −37%). Sunflower productivity was not influenced by AMF or AMF diversity. However, sunflower benefitted from AMF via enhanced phosphorus nutrition. The results indicate that the stimulation of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in agro-ecosystems may suppress some aggressive weeds.

Changes in weed community composition as influenced by cover crop and management system in continuous corn

Abstract Weed suppression by cover crops grown during the winter fallow period in continuous corn may lead to a reduction in herbicide use. Rye, crimson clover, and subterranean clover cover crops were compared with corn stubble under a conventional management system (CS) that included plowing and use of preemergence residual herbicides and a low-input management system (LIS) that included no-tillage and use of a presowing nonresidual herbicide for three consecutive years (1994–1996). Cover crop and above-ground weed biomass prior to desiccation were not influenced by management system. Cover crop biomass ranged from 1,420 to 5,657 kg ha−1 for rye, from 563 to 4,217 kg ha−1 for crimson clover, and from 563 to 4,248 kg ha−1 for subterranean clover. At crop planting, rye reduced weed biomass from 54 to 99%, crimson clover from 22 to 46% (with a negative value in 1995), and subterranean clover from 21 to 67%. Weed growth suppression was usually higher in years when cover crop biomass was higher. There were no differences in weed suppression by cover crops later in the season (corn in the fourth leaf stage), while total weed density was higher in LIS than CS in 2 of 3 yr. Total weed cover at corns ‘full dent’ stage ranged from 1 to 7% in CS and from 24 to 47% in LIS. Cover crops influenced weed composition only in years when cover crop growth was high; otherwise their effect was masked by that of the management system. Weed communities showed higher diversity under LIS than under CS. Consistency of associations between weed species and treatments over sampling dates and years was found especially for some of the species associated with LIS. After 3 yr, redroot pigweed, common lambsquarters, and black nightshade were regularly associated with rye-LIS at an early corn growth stage; this may indicate a species shift toward a more troublesome composition. Nomenclature: Dicamba; glyphosate; nicosulfuron; terbuthylazine; black nightshade, Solanum nigrum L. SOLNI; common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. CHEAL; corn, Zea mays L.; crimson clover, Trifolium incarnatum L.; redroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. AMARE; rye, Secale cereale L.; subterranean clover, Trifolium subterraneum L.

Functional agrobiodiversity and agroecosystem services in sustainable wheat production. A review

Agrobiodiversity can improve the sustainability of cropping systems in a context of low external inputs and unpredictable climate change. Agrobiodiversity strategies to grow wheat are breeding ad hoc cultivars for organic and low-input systems, wheat–legume intercrops and living mulches, cultivar mixtures, and the use of genetically heterogeneous populations. However, applying those strategies can fail due the lack of a well-focused framework. Therefore, we need a better integration between breeding and management and a clear focus on crop traits related to key agroecosystem services. Here, we review the use of agrobiodiversity in wheat production, focusing on breeding and management. We discuss five agroecosystem services: (1) weed reduction, (2) nitrogen use efficiency, (3) abiotic stress tolerance, (4) disease and pest reduction and (5) yield and yield stability. We categorise agrobiodiversity into functional identity, functional composition, and functional diversity, in order to link crop traits to agroecosystem services. Linking crop traits to agroecosystem services could in turn lead to concrete options for farmers and policy. We discuss the relations between crop identity and crop heterogeneity. We also discuss the partitioning of crop heterogeneity between functional composition and functional diversity.

Contrasting effects of cover crops on 'hot spot' arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal communities in organic tomato

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) communities are fundamental in organic cropping systems where they provide essential agro-ecosystem services, improving soil fertility and sustaining crop production. They are affected by agronomic practices, but still, scanty information is available about the role of specific crops, crop rotations and the use of winter cover crops on the AMF community compositions at the field sites. A field experiment was conducted to elucidate the role of diversified cover crops and AMF inoculation on AMF diversity in organic tomato. Tomato, pre-inoculated at nursery with two AMF isolates, was grown following four cover crop treatments: Indian mustard, hairy vetch, a mixture of seven species and a fallow. Tomato root colonization at flowering was more affected by AMF pre-transplant inoculation than by the cover crop treatments. An enormous species richness was found by morphological spore identification: 58 AMF species belonging to 14 genera, with 46 and 53 species retrieved at the end of cover crop cycle and at tomato harvest, respectively. At both sampling times, AMF spore abundance was highest in hairy vetch, but after tomato harvest, AMF species richness and diversity were lower in hairy vetch than in the cover crop mixture and in the mustard treatments. A higher AMF diversity was found at tomato harvest, compared with the end of the cover crop cycle, independent of the cover crop and pre-transplant AMF inoculation. Our findings suggest that seasonal and environmental factors play a major role on AMF abundance and diversity than short-term agronomic practices, including AMF inoculation. The huge AMF diversity is explained by the field history and the Mediterranean environment, where species characteristic of temperate and sub-tropical climates co-occur.

Finger harrowing of durum wheat under different tillage systems

ABSTRACT The effect of finger-harrowing (FH) on weed control and yield of durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf) grown under conventional tillage (CT) or no-tillage (NT) was studied in 1995–96. Mechanical weeding—eight combinations between four tine adjustments and two treatment intensities (one or two passes)—was compared with post-emergence herbicide spraying and an unweeded control. Tine working depth was higher in CT than in NT due to lower soil dry bulk density, and increased with the theoretical aggressiveness of tine adjustments, but its correlation with short- and long-term effects on crop and weeds overall was poor, suggesting that tine adjustment was not a major factor involved. In 1995, durum wheat grain yield in FH was very low, because of high weed development in both tillage systems. In 1996, lower weed pressure resulted in FH grain yield, on average 3982 kg ha−1 for CT and 2809 kg ha−1 for NT, comparable with that obtained with herbicides. Durum wheat grain yield and weed biomass were much more affected by tillage system than by tine adjustment or harrowing intensity, and seemed mostly dependent on the lower crop competitive ability in NT, caused by reduced emergence, higher weed abundance and presence of aggressive weed species, Ammi majus in 1995 and Lolium multiflorum in 1996. Dependence of FH effect upon soil and weed conditions encountered seasonally in the two tillage systems suggests that, in low-input durum wheat, mechanical methods alone would not always guarantee adequate weed control and grain yield.

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi shift competitive relationships among crop and weed species

AimsArbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) symbioses affect plant competitive relationships within and among species and may be involved in the interactions among agricultural weed species and crops, depending on their mycorrhizal status. In this work, the impact of native AM fungi (AMF) on maize-weed(s) and weed–weed competitive relationships was assessed, using Solanum nigrum and Chenopodium album as model host and non-host weeds, respectively.MethodsGrowth performance, nutrient use and competitive ability of crop and weed species were assessed in the pure stand and in different model plant communities of host and non-host species.ResultsResults showed that maize performance decrease was more severe when grown with C. album than with S. nigrum. Differential responses to AMF occurred in the two weed species tested: mycorrhizal S. nigrum showed reduced biomass and N uptake when grown in competition with C. album. The negative performances observed when mycorrhizal S. nigrum grew in competition with C. album corresponded to C. album larger biomass production and N uptake.ConclusionsResults showed that AMF are able to alter the competitive relationships between co-occurring plant species differing in their mycorrhizal status (host/non-host), thus representing key soil organisms to be taken into account in sustainable weed management strategies.

How organic farmers practice conservation agriculture in Europe

The interest of organic farmers in adopting conservation agriculture principles, including minimal soil disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop rotation has been growing since the early 2000s. However, currently there is no network for organic farmers practicing conservation agriculture, and a lack of knowledge on how organic farmers implement conservation agriculture in practice. Consequently, few technical references are available for organic farmers when they start applying conservation agriculture practices, in particular on controlling weeds without the use of herbicides. The main objectives of this study were: (1) to explore the diversity of conservation agriculture techniques (i.e., reduced tillage, no-tillage and green manures) practiced among European farmers, and (2) to identify farmers’ main strategies for implementing conservation agriculture and the agronomic and environmental factors that determine these strategies. Strategies were identified by analyzing survey results on: (1) the type and degree of use of conservation agriculture practices by farmers, and (2) the effects it produces in terms of soil disturbance and soil cover (low, medium and high). We carried out a survey of 159 European organic farmers and collected 125 data sets on management of winter-sown crops. Among the conservation agriculture practices, reduced tillage was used by 89%, no-tillage by 27% and green manure by 74% of the 159 interviewed farmers. Green manures were more frequently used in northern Europe than in the south (below 45°N). Most of the farmers used crop rotations, with a mean duration of 6 years. A wide diversity of conservation agriculture practices were used, with farmers rarely using all three techniques (no-till, reduced till and green manures) within one system. The range of practices was grouped into five strategies ranging from intensive non-inversion tillage without soil cover to very innovative techniques with no-tillage and intercrops. The five strategies for conservation agriculture could be grouped into two larger categories based on weed control approach: (1) intensification of the mechanical work without soil inversion or (2) biological regulation of weeds with cover crops. The diversity of strategies identified in this study shows that organic farmers use innovative approaches to implement conservation agriculture without herbicides. This studys findings will help organic farmers to experiment with innovative practices based on conservation agriculture principles and also benefit conventional farmers who use conservation agriculture practices and would like to reduce or eliminate the use of herbicides.

Organic Agriculture 3.0 is innovation with research

Organic agriculture can and should play an important role in solving future challenges in producing food. The low level of external inputs combined with knowledge on sustainablity minimizes environmental contamination and can help to produce more food for more people without negatively impacting our environment. Organic agriculture not only includes farming as a production practice but it also includes processing, trade and consumption. Nevertheless, Organic agriculture must always evolve to overcome emerging challenges. Science-based knowledge attained through dedicated research is required to strengthen organic food and farming as a means to solve future challenges. In 2010, a global discussion about Organic 3.0 was initiated to address current problems our agri-food systems are facing. Many scientifically and practically proven results are already available to make organic agriculture a strong tool to solve some of these challenges. However, the organic agri-food system has to be developed further to fulfill its potential. The contribution of organic agriculture to help solve current problems linked to food security and environmental quality was discussed during the International Society of Organic Agricultural Research (ISOFAR) Symposium “Organic 3.0 is Innovation with Research”, held September 20–22, 2015, in conjunction with the first ISOFAR International Organic Expo, in Goesan County, Republic of Korea. Some of the world’s most active scientists in organic agriculture attended the symposium. This paper is a result of their discussions and aims to give an overview of research conducted and required to strengthen organic agriculture in its ambitions to overcome agronomic challenges, contribute to food security and protect our common environment.