Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T18:54:19.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards a No-Till No-Spray Future? Introduction to a Symposium on Nonchemical Weed Management for Reduced-Tillage Cropping Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Daniel C. Brainard ,
Erin Haramoto ,
Martin M. Williams II  and
Steven Mirsky
Daniel C. Brainard*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, A440 A Plant and Soil Science Building, East Lansing, MI, 48824
Erin Haramoto
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, A440 A Plant and Soil Science Building, East Lansing, MI, 48824
Martin M. Williams II
Affiliation:
Invasive Weed Management Unit, USDA-ARS University of Illinois, 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Room N-325, Urbana, IL 61801
Steven Mirsky
Affiliation:
Sustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD 20705
*
Corresponding Author's Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Reduced-tillage systems including no-tillage and striptillage have well-known benefits for conserving and improving soils, protecting vulnerable crops from extreme weather events, and reducing labor and fuel costs associated with full-width inversion tillage (Franzluebbers 2002, 2005; Parsch et al. 2001; Pesant et al. 1987; Spargo et al. 2008). Despite these benefits, reduced-tillage has not been widely adopted in many cropping systems due in part to the increased difficulty of managing weeds when tillage is not used. Not surprisingly, adoption of reduced-tillage has occurred primarily in crops for which low-cost, effective herbicides are available, including glyphosate-resistant soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], corn (Zea mays L.), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), and sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L.) (Horowitz et al. 2010; Tarkalson et al. 2012). Increased use of a narrow range of herbicides in these cropping systems has exacerbated problems of herbicide resistance (Duke and Powles 2009; Heap 2012). Conversely, adoption of reduced-tillage has been limited in crops where effective herbicides are not available (e.g. in “minor crops” like vegetables) or prohibited (e.g. in organic production systems). Research aimed at identifying nonchemical approaches to managing weeds in reduced-tillage production systems has the potential to increase adoption of reducedtillage while minimizing herbicide use and selection pressure for herbicide resistance in production systems currently using reduced tillage (Figure 1).

Type
Symposium
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 190 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Brainard, D. C., Peachey, E., Haramoto, E., Luna, J., and Rangarajan, A. 2013. Weed ecology and management under strip-tillage: implications for Northern U.S. vegetable cropping systems. Weed Technol. 27 :218–230.Google Scholar
Duke, S. O. and Powles, S. B. 2009. Glyphosate resistant crops and weeds: Now and in the future. AgBioForum 12 :346–357.Google Scholar
Franzluebbers, A. J. 2002. Water infiltration and soil structure related to organic matter and its stratification with depth. Soil Tillage Res. 66 :197–205.Google Scholar
Franzluebbers, A. J. 2005. Soil organic carbon sequestration and agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the southeastern USA. Soil Tillage Res. 83 :120–147.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2012. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Weed-Science.org. www.weedscience.org. Accessed October 12, 2012.Google Scholar
Horowitz, J., Ebel, R., and Ueda, K. 2010. “No-Till” Farming Is a Growing Practice. Report by the Economic Research Service. United States Department of Agriculture. Economic Information Bulletin Number 70. Pages 22 p.Google Scholar
Kumar, V., Singh, S., Chhokar, R. S., Malik, R. K., Brainard, D. C., and Ladha, J. K. 2013. Weed management strategies to reduce herbicide use in zero-tillage rice-wheat cropping systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains. Weed Technol. 27 :241–254.Google Scholar
Légère, A., Shirtliffe, S. J., Vanasse, A., and Gulden, R. H. 2013. Extreme grain-based cropping systems: When herbicide-free weed nanagement meets conservation tillage in Northern climates. Weed Technol. 27 :204–211.Google Scholar
Melander, B., Munier-Jolain, N., Charles, R., Wirth, J., Schwarz, J., van der Weide, R., Bonin, L., Jensen, P. K., and Kudsk, P. 2013. European perspectives on the adoption of nonchemical weed management in reduced-tillage systems for arable crops. Weed Technol. 27 :231–240.Google Scholar
Mirsky, S. B., Ryan, M. R., Teasdale, J. R., Curran, W. S., Reberg-Horton, C. R., Spargo, J. T., Wells, S. M., Keene, C. L., and Moyer, J. W. 2013. Overcoming weed management challenges in cover crop-based organic rotational no-till soybean production in the eastern US. Weed Technol. 27 :193–203.Google Scholar
Parsch, L. D., Keisling, T. C., Sauer, P. A., Oliver, L. R., and Crabtree, N. S. 2001. Economic analysis of conservation and conventional tillage cropping systems on clayey soil in eastern Arkansas. Agron. J. 93 :1296–1304.Google Scholar
Pesant, A. R., Dionne, J. L., and Genest, J. 1987. Soil and nutrient losses in surface runoff from conventional and no-till corn systems. Can. J. Soil Sci. 67 :835–843.Google Scholar
Price, A. J. and Norsworthy, J. K. 2013. Cover crop use for weed management in Southern reduced-tillage vegetable cropping systems. Weed Technol. 27 :212–217.Google Scholar
Spargo, J. S., Alley, M. M., Follett, R. F., and Wallace, J. V. 2008. Soil carbon sequestration with continuous no-till management of grain cropping systems in the Virginia Coastal Plain. Soil Tillage Res. 100 :133–144.Google Scholar
Tarkalson, D. D., Bjorneberg, D. L., and Moore, A. 2012. Effects of tillage system and nitrogen supply on sugarbeet production. J. Sugar Beet Res. 49 :79–102.Google Scholar