Mitigating crop yield losses through weed diversity

Adeux, Guillaume; Vieren, Eric; Carlesi, Stefano; Bàrberi, Paolo; Munier‐Jolain, Nicolas; Cordeau, Stéphane

doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0415-y

Cited by 153 publications

(129 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

117

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This result is consistent with many studies (e.g. Bybee-Finley, Mirsky & Ryan, 2017; Adeux et al , 2019), which also find a negative relationship between crop productivity and weed biomass, and it suggests that crops and weeds compete for the same resources and hinder each other’s performances. The effects of our ecotype treatment on crops and weeds supports this idea: the Swiss ecotypes showed higher yield, but also lower weed diversity and biomass compared to the Spanish varieties (Fig S1 of SI, Table 2).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…These two weed species thrive on nitrogen-rich soils, particularly Echinochloa , which can remove available soil nitrogen by up to 80% and thereby significantly reduce crop yield (Randall, 2012; Heuzé, 2017). Weed evenness can consecutively influence crop yield: increasing weed community evenness decreases weed biomass and increases crop productivity (Adeux et al . 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Weeds are not always evil: crop-weed relationships are context-dependent and cannot fully explain the positive effects of intercropping on yield

Stefan¹,

Engbersen²,

Schöb³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

6 1. Implementing sustainable weed control strategies is a major challenge in agriculture. Intercropping offers a 7 potential solution to control weed pressure by reducing the niche space available for weeds; however, available 8 research on the relationship between crop diversity and weed pressure, and its consequences on crop yield is not 9 fully conclusive yet. 10 2. In this study, we performed an extensive intercropping experiment using eight crop species and 40 different 11 species mixtures to examine how crop diversity affects weed communities and how the subsequent changes in 12 weeds influence crop yield. Field experiments were carried out in Switzerland and in Spain, which differ drastically 13 in terms of climate and soil, and included monocultures, 2-and 4-species mixtures, and a control treatment without 14 crops. Weed communities were assessed in terms of biomass, species richness and evenness, and community 15 composition.16 3. Results indicate that intercropping per se does not reduce weed performance or diversity, but crop species 17 composition does. In particular, the presence of cereals in crop mixtures significantly reduced weed biomass and 18 diversity.19 4. Despite the lack of crop diversity effect on weeds, crop yield increased with crop species richness, particularly 20 in Switzerland. Moreover, in Switzerland, where soil resources were abundant, increasing crop yield correlated 21with increased weed suppression and reduced weed diversity. In Spain, where water and nutrients were limited, 22 crop yield was not related to weed biomass or diversity. 23 5. Synthesis and applications: We demonstrate that in our study, increased crop yield in mixtures was not due to 24 increased weed suppression in diverse crop communities, but must be the result of other ecological processes. We 25 also show that crop-weed relationships vary across environmental conditions, which emphasizes the need for a 26 better understanding of weed communities' assembly mechanisms, as well as locally adapted weed management 27 strategies. 28

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Weeds are not always evil: crop-weed relationships are context-dependent and cannot fully explain the positive effects of intercropping on yield

Stefan¹,

Engbersen²,

Schöb³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yield loss is then estimated as the difference of the yield in the different zones or fields relative to the maximum observed yield, and then linked the yieldloss estimation to a series of weed flora variables (e.g., plant densities, biomass). But simple weed metrics are not sufficient to explain yield loss as recent field studies reported that yield loss decreases with increasing diversity and richness in the weed community (Storkey and Neve, 2018;Adeux et al, 2019b).…”

Section: How Crop: Weed Interference Is Quantifiedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both events can lead to underestimating potential yield. The best way to estimate yield losses at the annual scale consists in comparing the yield in weedy zones to that in weedfree controls without chemical or mechanical weeding (Adeux et al, 2019b). Indeed, mechanical weeding is also likely to affect crop growth, e.g., through modification in the nitrogen dynamics (Gilbert et al, 2009) or by uprooting crop plants (Rasmussen et al, 2009).…”

Section: How Crop: Weed Interference Is Quantifiedmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pitfalls of Relating Weeds, Herbicide Use, and Crop Yield: Don't Fall Into the Trap! A Critical Review

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing recognition of the environmental and health issues associated to pesticide use requires to investigate how to manage weeds with less or no herbicides in arable farming while maintaining crop productivity. The questions of weed harmfulness, herbicide efficacy, the effects of herbicide use on crop yields, and the effect of reducing herbicides on crop production have been addressed over the years but results and interpretations often appear contradictory. In this paper, we critically analyze studies that have focused on the herbicide use, weeds and crop yield nexus. We identified many inconsistencies in the published results and demonstrate that these often stem from differences in the methodologies used and in the choice of the conceptual model that links the three items. Our main findings are: (1) although our review confirms that herbicide reduction increases weed infestation if not compensated by other cultural techniques, there are many shortcomings in the different methods used to assess the impact of weeds on crop production; (2) Reducing herbicide use rarely results in increased crop yield loss due to weeds if farmers compensate low herbicide use by other efficient cultural practices; (3) There is a need for comprehensive studies describing the effect of cropping systems on crop production that explicitly include weeds and disentangle the impact of herbicides from the effect of other practices on weeds and on crop production. We propose a framework that presents all the links and feed-backs that must be considered when analyzing the herbicide-weed-crop yield nexus. We then provide a number of methodological recommendations for future studies. We conclude that, since weeds are causing yield loss, reduced herbicide use and maintained crop productivity necessarily requires a redesign of cropping systems. These new systems should include both agronomic and biodiversity-based levers acting in concert to deliver sustainable weed management.

show abstract

“…While seedbank sizes are of primary concern, the seedbank composition can provide insight into weed dynamics and differences in composition can be used to assess the relative strength of the filters defining the weed community (e.g., Ryan et al, 2010). Additionally, there is some evidence that crop yield loss and weed diversity are negatively correlated (Adeux et al, 2019) and more diverse assemblages of weed seeds in the soil may reflect the impacts of more sustainable management strategies (Storkey and Neve, 2018). Information about the size and composition of weed seedbanks after two or more full crop rotation sequences may therefore provide a more complete picture of weed responses to cover cropping.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Long-Term Cover Cropping on Weed Seedbanks

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cool-season cover crops have been shown to reduce soil erosion and nutrient discharge from maize (Zea mays L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] production systems. However, their effects on long-term weed dynamics are not well-understood. We utilized five long-term research trials in Iowa to quantify germinable weed seedbank densities and compositions after 10+ years of cover cropping treatments. All five trials consisted of zero-tillage maize-soybean rotations managed with and without the inclusion of a yearly winter rye (Secale cereal L.) cover crop. Seedbank sampling was conducted in the early spring before crop planting at all locations, with three of the five trials having grown a soybean crop the preceding year, and two a maize crop. Two of the trials (both previously soybean) showed significant and biologically relevant decreases (4,070 and 927 seeds m−2, respectively) in seedbank densities in cover crop treatments compared to controls. In another two trials, one previously maize and one previously soybean, no difference was detected in seedbank densities. In the fifth trial (previously maize), there was a significant, but biologically unimportant increase of 349 seeds m−2. All five trials' weed communities were dominated by common waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.)], and changes in seedbank composition from cover-cropping were driven by changes in this species. Although previous studies have shown that increases in cover crop biomass are strongly correlated with weed suppression, in our study we did not find a relationship between seedbank changes and the mean amount of cover crop biomass produced over a 10-years period (experiment means ranging from 0.5 to 2.0 Mg ha−1 yr−1), the stability of the cover crop biomass production, nor the amount produced going into the previous crop's growing season. We conclude that long-term use of a winter rye cover crop in a maize-soybean system has the potential to meaningfully reduce the size of weed seedbanks compared to winter fallows. However, identifying the mechanisms by which this occurs requires further research into processes such as seed predation and seed decay in cover cropped systems.

show abstract

Mitigating crop yield losses through weed diversity

Cited by 153 publications

References 59 publications

Weeds are not always evil: crop-weed relationships are context-dependent and cannot fully explain the positive effects of intercropping on yield

Weeds are not always evil: crop-weed relationships are context-dependent and cannot fully explain the positive effects of intercropping on yield

The Pitfalls of Relating Weeds, Herbicide Use, and Crop Yield: Don't Fall Into the Trap! A Critical Review

Effects of Long-Term Cover Cropping on Weed Seedbanks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About