scholarly journals Punch planting, flame weeding and stale seedbed for weed control in row crops

Weed Research ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 393-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Rasmussen
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Row Crops ◽  
Flame Weeding

scholarly journals Machines for non-chemical intra-row weed control in narrow and wide-row crops: a review

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Peruzzi ◽  
Luisa Martelloni ◽  
Christian Frasconi ◽  
Marco Fontanelli ◽  
Michel Pirchio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Conventional Agriculture ◽  
Row Crops ◽  
Agricultural Engineering ◽  
Recent Addition ◽  
Narrow Row ◽  
Mechanical Devices ◽  
Flame Weeding

Intra-row weed control in organic or low-input cropping systems is more difficult than in conventional agriculture. The various mechanical and thermal devices available for intra-row weed control are reported in this review. Low-tech mechanical devices such as cultivators, finger-weeders, brush weeders, and torsionweeders tend to be used in low density crops, while spring-tine harrows are mainly applied in narrow-row high-density crops. Flame weeding can be used for both narrow and wide-row sown crops, provided that the crop is heat-tolerant. Robotic weeders are the most recent addition to agricultural engineering, and only a few are available on the market. Nowadays, robotic weeders are not yet used in small and medium sized farms. In Europe, highincome niche crops are often cultivated in small farms and farmers cannot invest in high-tech solutions. Irrespectively of the choice of low- or high-tech machines, there are several weeders that can be used to reduce the use of herbicides, making of them a judicious use, or decide to avoid them.

Post-emergence weed control through abrasion with an approved organic fertilizer

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Forcella ◽  
Trevor James ◽  
Anis Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Quartz Sand ◽  
Organic Fertilizer ◽  
Annual Grass ◽  
Corn Gluten Meal ◽  
Row Crops ◽  
Stages Of Growth ◽  
Effective Form ◽  
Corn Gluten ◽  
Fine Quartz

AbstractCorn gluten meal (CGM) is an approved organic fertilizer and pre-emergence herbicide that can be manufactured in the form of grit. This grit was tested for its ability to abrade seedlings of the summer annual weedy grass, Setaria pumila, when plants were in the 1- to 5-leaf stages of growth. CGM was propelled at air pressures of 250–750 kPa at distances of 30–60 cm from the plants. Established seedlings of S. pumila were controlled more effectively when grit was applied at 500 and 750 kPa than at 250 kPa, as well as when the applicator's nozzle was 30 cm from the plants compared to 60 cm distance. Seedling growth and dry weights were greatly reduced by exposures to grit at 60 cm and 500 kPa for 2 s or less, and seedlings were nearly completely destroyed at 30 cm distance and 750 kPa. CGM, a soft grit, was as effective for abrading seedlings as fine quartz sand, a hard grit. CGM had little pre-emergence herbicidal effect on S. pumila. Although regrowth can occur in S. pumila after abrasion by grit, the initial grit-induced stunting is sufficient to allow competing crop plants, like maize, to escape competition and suppress the weed. Consequently, CGM may be an effective form of soft grit for post-emergence abrasion of seedlings of summer annual grass weeds in organic row crops, while simultaneously supplying the crop with fertilizer.

scholarly journals Flaming to control weeds in seashore paspalum (Paspalum vaginatum Sw.) turfgrass

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luisa Martelloni ◽  
Marco Fontanelli ◽  
Lisa Caturegli ◽  
Monica Gaetani ◽  
Nicola Grossi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Liquefied Petroleum Gas ◽  
Seashore Paspalum ◽  
The Third ◽  
Paspalum Vaginatum ◽  
Weed Cover ◽  
The University ◽  
Flame Weeding

Weed control is crucial to ensure that turfgrass is established effectively. Although herbicides are commonly used to control weeds in turfgrasses, environmental and public health concerns have led to limiting or banning the use of synthetic herbicides in urban areas. The species seashore paspalum (Paspalum vaginatumSw.) is susceptible to such herbicides. Flame weeding could be an alternative to the use of synthetic herbicides for selective weed control in seashore paspalum. In this study, five different liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) doses of flaming (0, 61, 91, 157 and 237 kg ha-1) were tested in order to find the optimal dose, in terms of weed control and costs. The aim was to maintain a seashore paspalum (cultivar ‘Salam’) turf free of weeds during spring green-up, and at the same time avoid damaging the turfgrass. Using a self-propelled machine designed and built at the University of Pisa, flaming was applied three times when weeds started growing and the turfgrass started green-up. Our results highlight that an LPG dose of 157 kg ha-1was the most economic dose that led to a significant reduction in initial weed cover and density, enabling the turfgrass to recover three weeks after the third application.

Effect of row width on herbicide and cultivation requirements in row crops

1992 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 161-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Forcella ◽  
Mark E. Westgate ◽  
Dennis D. Warnes
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Row Crops ◽  
Low Input ◽  
Application Rates ◽  
Row Width ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Herbicide Use

AbstractCrops grown in narrow rows (NR, 0.25 to 0.38 m) shade weed seedlings more than do those grown in traditional wide rows (WR, 0.76 m). NR crops may require less herbicide and interrow cultivation than WR crops for equally effective weed control. This hypothesis was tested by comparing weed control and crop yield in NR and WR crops when the following percentages of recommended application rates (RAR) of standard herbicides were applied: soybean, 0, 50 and 100%; sunflower, 0, 25, 50, and 100%; and corn, 0, 33, and 100% in three separate sets of experiments conducted over 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively. In all treatments with 100% RAR, excellent weed control prevented reductions in crop yield. When only 25 to 50% RAR was applied, weed control was consistently high in NR (82 to 99% control), but variable in WR (42 to 99% control). Weed control and crop yields typically were lowest in NR without herbicides. Interrow cultivation controlled 0 to 81% of weeds in WR crops. In reduced herbicide treatments (25 to 50% RAR), yields of NR soybean and sunflower typically were about equal to those in WR with 100% RAR, but NR corn yields were about 10% less. Considering the reduced herbicide use and lower weed control costs, planting corn, soybean, and sunflower in narrow rows may represent a practical form of low-input production of these important crops.

Field Pea and Lentil Tolerance to Interrow Cultivation

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine A. Stanley ◽  
Steven J. Shirtliffe ◽  
Dilshan Benaragama ◽  
Lena D. Syrovy ◽  
Hema S. N. Duddu
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Field Pea ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Row Crops ◽  
Narrow Row ◽  
Mechanical Weed Control

AbstractInterrow cultivation is a selective, in-crop mechanical weed control tool that has the potential to control weeds later in the growing season with less crop damage compared with other in-crop mechanical weed control tools. To our knowledge, no previous research has been conducted on the tolerance of narrow-row crops to interrow cultivation. The objective of this experiment was to determine the tolerance of field pea and lentil to interrow cultivation. Replicated field experiments were conducted in Saskatchewan, Canada, in 2014 and 2015. Weekly cultivation treatments began at the 4-node stage of each crop, continuing for 6 wk. Field pea and lentil yield linearly declined with later crop stages of cultivation. Cultivating multiple times throughout the growing season reduced yield by 15% to 30% in both crops. Minimal yield loss occurred when interrow cultivation was conducted once at early growth stages of field pea and lentil; however, yield loss increased with delayed and more frequent cultivation events.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document