Contributions of Weed Science to Weed Control and Management1

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (sp1) ◽  
pp. 1563-1565 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALLAN S. HAMILL ◽  
JODIE S. HOLT ◽  
CAROL A. MALLORY-SMITH
Keyword(s):  
1993 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 763-770 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward W. Stoller ◽  
Loyd M. Wax ◽  
David M. Alm

A survey determined the views of individuals in seven groups comprising the weed science community in the corn belt (primarily in Illinois) for importance of 8 environmental and 14 crop production issues and 16 weed species in setting weed science research priorities for the next 3 to 5 yr. The survey also considered if funding of research to solve these environmental and production issues should be from the private or public sector. Velvetleaf, foxtail species, and common lambsquarters were considered the top three weed species by all respondents, and each of these weeds was among the five most important weeds within each of the seven survey groups. Improving ground and surface water quality were the foremost environmental issues for all respondents, but soybean growers listed herbicide carryover as their top environmental concern. Reducing herbicide residues in food and developing sustainable practices were given low preference by all groups. Sustainable growers rated reducing herbicide carryover and minimizing applicator exposure as their lowest priorities. Among all respondents, the top three production issues were improved weed control in conservation tillage, more economical weed control, and improved integrated control strategies. Studying the biology/life cycles of weeds was the third highest production priority of University and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) weed scientists, but was the last choice when averaged over the aggregate survey group. Developing strategies for resistant weeds and herbicide-resistant crops were chemical dealers top two priorities. Industry representatives gave the former subject their highest rating and the latter their lowest rating. Crop consultants seemed to want decision aids, as they chose assessing weed loss/thresholds and developing weed control/economic models among their top three production issues. Both corn and soybean growers desired more economical weed control as a first choice, while sustainable growers wanted improved cultural control strategies. Corn and soybean growers ranked developing new herbicides among their top three choices, but this issue was the lowest choice of the sustainable growers. University, USDA, and industrial weed scientists suggested that their own organizations conduct the research on their highest priorities issues.


1992 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 788-795 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven R. Radosevich ◽  
Claudio M. Ghersa

The agricultural community is currently involved in a debate with other members of society concerning many of the tools and tactics used to grow food. The discipline of weed science represents a microcosm of this larger societal debate, and thus is indicative of many other applied agricultural disciplines. Weed science comprises six fundamental disciplines, which have been arranged to depict its three major areas of research: weed technology, weed biology, and the ethics of weed control. Insight into those components of the debate that involve weed science is gained by examining each area. It seems unlikely that solutions to the “neckriddle” can be found through traditional research because of the integrative nature of agriculture, which involves environmental, economic, and social components. It is hoped that movement toward more holistic approaches to research will lead to resolution of the debate between society and the agricultural community.


1992 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 635-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven R. Radosevich ◽  
Claudio M. Ghersa ◽  
Gary Comstock

There are three primary activities that characterize the discipline of Weed Science. These activities are weed technology, weed biology, and the ethics of weed control. Each of these activities needs to be considered as herbicide-tolerant crops (HTCs) are introduced. HTCs are the most recent refinement in the existing technology to control weeds. The potential benefits from the improved weed control must be weighed against possible increased costs of production and potential for genes that control herbicide tolerance to escape into non-tolerant plant populations. These questions about herbicide resistance are primarily technological and biological. They demonstrate the paucity of information in Weed Science on weed genetics, gene flow, fitness, and other aspects of weed-crop population dynamics. Other questions about HTCs are ethical. They require that we ask who benefits from the technology and what are the economic, ecological, and social consequences of it.


1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 871-872 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard P. Gianessi ◽  
David C. Bridges

A major debate is going on in the United States regarding the proper methods for crop pest management. One issue in this debate is whether weed control should be based largely on nonchemical or chemical means. This isn't the only issue that should be of interest to weed scientists, but it is important, and it illustrates the need to extend weed science research to influence public policy.


1990 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. A. Mortensen ◽  
H. D. Coble ◽  
J. R. Smart ◽  
T. A. Bauer

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.R. Vidal ◽  
R.A. Vidal

The augmented reality (AR) technology has applications in many fields as diverse as aeronautics, tourism, medicine, and education. In this review are summarized the current status of AR and it is proposed a new application of it in weed science. The basic algorithmic elements for AR implementation are already available to develop applications in the area of weed economic thresholds. These include algorithms for image recognition to identify and quantify weeds by species and software for herbicide selection based on weed density. Likewise, all hardware necessary for AR implementation in weed science are available at an affordable price for the user. Thus, the authors propose weed science can take a leading role integrating AR systems into weed economic thresholds software, thus, providing better opportunities for science and computer-based weed control decisions.


Weed Science ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 621-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virgil H. Freed

President Hay, distinguished officers of the Society, and learned colleagues. Let me express my deep appreciation for the honor you confer on me.It was my good fortune to begin a career in weed control at the point of transition between the modern chemical era and what I have chosen to call the cultural-mechanical era of weed control, which just preceded it. It was, therefore, my privilege to have known and worked with some of the handful of scientists who laid the foundation of weed science. Some are yet with us, but most have passed on to a greater glory.


1988 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chester G. Mcwhorter ◽  
William L. Barrentine

Members from all four Weed Science Society of America (WSSA) regions in the United States ranked the research need to “develop new methods for controlling the movement of herbicides and their metabolites into ground water, surface water, and air” first of six major weed science research needs. Canadian members ranked the need to “devise more efficient and less costly weed control technology for conservation-tillage crop-production systems” first; but they also gave high ratings to “improve base knowledge of weed science, improve applicator training, and transfer of information to Extension Service personnel, farm producers, and administrators” and to “discover new ecological, biological, and non-chemical methods of weed control.” The needs to “develop improved methods of increasing the tolerance of crops to herbicides” and to “develop new technology for control of perennial weeds of crops and rangeland” were ranked low. The WSSA Research Committee, at the request of WSSA Presidents J. D. Riggleman (1985) and O. C. Burnside (1986), asked 977 members to rank weed science research needs. The members (ca 50% of the active membership in North America) were selected at random from every other state, federal, industry, and “other” member of each state or province from the up-to-date list of the WSSA business office. Within the highest ranked priority research need, the 422 U.S. and Canadian respondents consistently ranked the research areas (a) to “develop new application techniques that minimize or eliminate herbicides and their residues in air and water”, and (b) to “conduct research to regulate movement of herbicides through the soil profile to avoid contamination of ground water” high, regardless of the type of employment. They emphasized increasing research on the morningglory (Ipomoea spp. # IPOXX) complex, yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L. # CYPES), quackgrass [Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. # AGREE], and several other weeds. More members, regardless of region or type of employment, ranked conservation tillage the most important crop or situation that needed new and improved weed control technology.


Weed Science ◽  
1974 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 464-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. G. Rodgers

Weed Science is a relatively young but challenging and dynamic discipline. It includes all aspects of combating weeds and reducing their undesirable effects on mankind–directly or indirectly. The need for effective weed control is not new; it has prevailed since the primitive beginning of crop culture. It has evolved into a strong discipline, however, only since World War II, stimulated by a pressing need for more economic weed control. In response to this need, numerous advances have been made that help to produce higher crop yields at lower cost. Herbicides have become common, intensive research and educational programs have been established, and Weed Science has taken its rightful place as a respected discipline in the academic and industrial communities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document