Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where S. Heijting is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by S. Heijting.


Ecological Applications | 2016

Ecologically sustainable weed management: How do we get from proof‐of‐concept to adoption?

Matt Liebman; Bàrbara Baraibar; Yvonne M. Buckley; Dylan Z. Childs; Svend Christensen; Roger D. Cousens; Hanan Eizenberg; S. Heijting; Donato Loddo; Aldo Merotto; Michael Renton; M.M. Riemens

Weed management is a critically important activity on both agricultural and non-agricultural lands, but it is faced with a daunting set of challenges: environmental damage caused by control practices, weed resistance to herbicides, accelerated rates of weed dispersal through global trade, and greater weed impacts due to changes in climate and land use. Broad-scale use of new approaches is needed if weed management is to be successful in the coming era. We examine three approaches likely to prove useful for addressing current and future challenges from weeds: diversifying weed management strategies with multiple complementary tactics, developing crop genotypes for enhanced weed suppression, and tailoring management strategies to better accommodate variability in weed spatial distributions. In all three cases, proof-of-concept has long been demonstrated and considerable scientific innovations have been made, but uptake by farmers and land managers has been extremely limited. Impediments to employing these and other ecologically based approaches include inadequate or inappropriate government policy instruments, a lack of market mechanisms, and a paucity of social infrastructure with which to influence learning, decision-making, and actions by farmers and land managers. We offer examples of how these impediments are being addressed in different parts of the world, but note that there is no clear formula for determining which sets of policies, market mechanisms, and educational activities will be effective in various locations. Implementing new approaches for weed management will require multidisciplinary teams comprised of scientists, engineers, economists, sociologists, educators, farmers, land managers, industry personnel, policy makers, and others willing to focus on weeds within whole farming systems and land management units.


Environmental and Ecological Statistics | 2007

Analyzing spatial count data, with an application to weed counts

Willem Kruijer; A. Stein; W. Schaafsma; S. Heijting

Count data on a lattice may arise in observational studies of ecological phenomena. In this paper a hierarchical spatial model is used to analyze weed counts. Anisotropy is introduced, and a bivariate extension of the model is presented.


Weed Research | 2018

Reviewing research priorities in weed ecology, evolution and management : a horizon scan

Paul Neve; Jacob N. Barney; Yvonne M. Buckley; Roger D. Cousens; Sonia Graham; Nicholas R. Jordan; Amy Lawton-Rauh; Matt Liebman; M B Mesgaran; Marc Schut; Justine D. Shaw; Jonathan Storkey; Bàrbara Baraibar; R S Baucom; M Chalak; Dylan Z. Childs; Svend Christensen; Hanan Eizenberg; César Fernández-Quintanilla; Kris French; Melanie A. Harsch; S. Heijting; Laura Harrison; Donato Loddo; M Macel; N Maczey; Aldo Merotto; D Mortensen; Jevgenija Necajeva; Duane A. Peltzer

Summary Weedy plants pose a major threat to food security, biodiversity, ecosystem services and consequently to human health and wellbeing. However, many currently used weed management approaches are increasingly unsustainable. To address this knowledge and practice gap, in June 2014, 35 weed and invasion ecologists, weed scientists, evolutionary biologists and social scientists convened a workshop to explore current and future perspectives and approaches in weed ecology and management. A horizon scanning exercise ranked a list of 124 pre‐submitted questions to identify a priority list of 30 questions. These questions are discussed under seven themed headings that represent areas for renewed and emerging focus for the disciplines of weed research and practice. The themed areas considered the need for transdisciplinarity, increased adoption of integrated weed management and agroecological approaches, better understanding of weed evolution, climate change, weed invasiveness and finally, disciplinary challenges for weed science. Almost all the challenges identified rested on the need for continued efforts to diversify and integrate agroecological, socio‐economic and technological approaches in weed management. These challenges are not newly conceived, though their continued prominence as research priorities highlights an ongoing intransigence that must be addressed through a more system‐oriented and transdisciplinary research agenda that seeks an embedded integration of public and private research approaches. This horizon scanning exercise thus set out the building blocks needed for future weed management research and practice; however, the challenge ahead is to identify effective ways in which sufficient research and implementation efforts can be directed towards these needs.


Weed Research | 2007

Are weed patches stable in location? application of an explicitly two - dimensional methodology

S. Heijting; W. van der Werf; A. Stein; M.J. Kropff


Computers and Electronics in Agriculture | 2009

Spatial optimisation of cropped swaths and field margins using GIS

Sytze de Bruin; Peter Lerink; Aad Klompe; Tamme van der Wal; S. Heijting


Weed Research | 2009

Seed dispersal by forage harvester and rigid-tine cultivator in maize

S. Heijting; W. van der Werf; M.J. Kropff


Precision Agriculture | 2011

The arable farmer as the assessor of within-field soil variation

S. Heijting; S. de Bruin; A.K. Bregt


Weed Research | 2007

Testing the spatial significance of weed patterns in arable land using Mead's test

S. Heijting; W. van der Werf; W.T. Kruijer; A. Stein


Weed Research | 2016

Transdisciplinary weed research: new leverage on challenging weed problems?

Nicholas R. Jordan; Marc Schut; Sonia Graham; Jacob N. Barney; Dylan Z. Childs; Svend Christensen; Roger D. Cousens; Adam S. Davis; Hanan Eizenberg; D.E. Ervin; César Fernández-Quintanilla; Laura Harrison; Melanie A. Harsch; S. Heijting; Matt Liebman; Donato Loddo; Steven B. Mirsky; M.M. Riemens; Paul Neve; Duane A. Peltzer; Michael Renton; Martin M. Williams; Jordi Recasens; Mette Sønderskov


Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics | 2016

How Technology Features Influence Public Response to New Agrifood Technologies

A. Ronteltap; Machiel J. Reinders; Suzanne M. van Dijk; S. Heijting; Ivo A. van der Lans; L.A.P. Lotz

Collaboration


Dive into the S. Heijting's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

M.J. Kropff

Wageningen University and Research Centre

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

C. Kempenaar

Wageningen University and Research Centre

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Bàrbara Baraibar

Pennsylvania State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge