首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


On-farm evaluation of integrated weed management tools for maize production in three different agro-environments in Europe: Agronomic efficacy,herbicide use reduction,and economic sustainability
Institution:1. National Research Council (CNR), Institute of Agro-Environmental and Forest Biology, Legnaro, PD, Italy;2. Applied Plant Research, Wageningen University, Lelystad, The Netherlands;3. Agricultural Institute of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia;4. Julius Kühn-Institut, Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Braunschweig, Germany;5. Veneto Agricoltura, Legnaro, PD, Italy;1. Instituto de Agricultura Sostenible (CSIC), Finca Alameda del Obispo, Aptdo 4084, 14080 Córdoba, Spain;2. Instituto Madrileño de Investigación y Desarrollo Rural, Agrario y Alimentario (IMIDRA), Finca ‘El Encín’ A2, Km. 38.2, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid 28800, Spain;1. Crop Protection Department, Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA), Ctra. de la Coruña, Km 7,5. Madrid 28040, Spain;2. Environmental Science Department, Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA), Ctra. de la Coruña, Km 7.5, Madrid 28040, Spain;1. ICAR - Directorate of Weed Research, Jabalpur 482 004, MP, India;2. JNKVV - KVK Katni, Jabalpur 482 004, MP, India;1. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141004, India;2. Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation (QAAFI), The University of Queensland, Toowoomba 4350, Queensland, Australia;1. Agroecosystems Research Group, IRBio, University of Barcelona, Avda. Diagonal 643, 08028 Barcelona, Spain;2. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Ackerstrasse 113, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland;3. Institute of Life Sciences, Scuola Superiore Sant?Anna, Piazza Martiri della Libertà 33, 56127 Pisa, Italy;4. Institut fir biologësch Landwirtschaft an Agrarkultur asbl IBLA Luxembourg, 13, rue Gabriel Lippmann L-5365 Munsbach, Luxembourg;5. ISARA Lyon, 23 rue Jean Baldassini, 69364 Lyon cedex 7, France;6. University of Kassel, Faculty of Organic Agricultural Sciences, Department of Organic Farming and Cropping, Nordbahnhofstr. 1a, 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany;7. Wageningen University and Research Centre, Applies Plant Research, Edelhertweg 1, 8219 PH Lelystad, The Netherlands;8. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) Austria, Doblhoffgasse 7/10, A-1010 Wien, Austria;9. Estonian University of Life Sciences (EULS), Kreutzwaldi 1, 51 014 Tartu, Estonia;10. The Organic Research Centre, Elm Farm, Hamstead Marshall, Newbury, Berkshire RG20 0HR, United Kingdom;11. Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, 41 rue du Brill, L-4422 Belvaux, Luxembourg
Abstract:The development and implementation of integrated weed management (IWM) strategies that provide good weed control while reducing dependence on herbicides, and preferably without having side effects on the overall system economic performance, is still a challenge that has to be met. In 2011 and 2012, nine on-farm experiments (i.e., real field conditions on commercial farms, with natural weed flora) were conducted in three important European maize producing regions-countries, which represent the range of climatic and edaphic conditions in Europe, to evaluate the efficacy of different locally selected IWM tools for direct weed control in maize vs. the conventional approach (CON) followed by the farms. The IWM tools tested were: (1) early post-emergence herbicide band application combined with hoeing followed by a second hoeing in Southern Germany, (2) early post-emergence herbicide broadcast application when indicated by a predictive model of weed emergence after performing one scouting in the field to supply data for the model, followed by hoeing in Northern Italy, and (3) tine harrowing at 2–3rd leaf stage of maize and low dose of post-emergence herbicide in Slovenia. Results showed that the IWM tools tested in the different countries: (1) provided sufficient weed control without any significant differences in yields, (2) greatly reduced maize reliance on herbicides, and (3) IWM implementation was economically sustainable as no significant differences in gross margin were observed in any country compared to CON.
Keywords:Corn  Integrated pest management  Pesticide risk reduction  Economic sustainability
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号