Simulation of vegetation cover on sidewalks in Denmark

Kristensen, Kai; Hansen, Preben Klarskov; Kristoffersen, Palle

doi:10.1002/ps.843

Cited by 3 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…gas burners and steamers), mechanical weed control (weed brushers), as well as equipment for semi‐hard surfaces, are subject to continual research and development (Kristoffersen & Larsen, 2001; Hansen et al. , 2004; Kristensen et al. , 2004; Rask & Kristoffersen, 2007).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of pesticide policies and regulations for urban amenity areas in seven European countries

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary An analysis of the regulations of herbicide use for weed control in non‐agricultural/urban amenity areas, including actual pesticide use, was carried out as a joint survey of seven European countries: Denmark, Finland, Germany, Latvia, the Netherlands, Sweden and United Kingdom. Herbicides constitute the major part of the pesticides used in urban amenity areas. Herbicide use on hard surfaces is the largest in terms of volume and potential contamination of surface and groundwater. The aim of the study was to investigate the differences in political interest and public debate on the ‘use of pesticides in public urban amenity areas’, regulations within each country at national, regional and local levels, possible use of alternative weed control methods and the amounts of pesticides used on urban amenity areas. A comparative analysis revealed major differences in political interest, regulations and availability of statistics on pesticide use. Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany have, or have had, a strong public and political interest for reducing the use of herbicides to control weeds in urban amenity areas and also have very strict regulations. The UK is currently undergoing a period of increasing awareness and strengthening regulation, while Latvia and Finland do not have specific regulations for weed control in urban amenity areas or on hard surfaces. Statistics on pesticide/herbicide use on urban amenity areas were only available in Denmark and the Netherlands. Developing this kind of information base reveals the differences in herbicide use, regulations and policies in European countries and may enhance the transfer of knowledge on sustainable weed control across countries.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of pesticide policies and regulations for urban amenity areas in seven European countries

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this analysis, extent of weed growth was estimated, using Incoming radiation adjusted for low temperatures Wear caused by traffic on the pavement Area of the joints Dying process of the weeds in autumn Number of runs/applied energy from the physical or thermal weed control methods. The estimated parameters and the model were used to build up a simulation model, simulating daily change in weed coverage. The simulation model is described in detail elsewhere 11…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim of this paper is to use a simulation model11 to suggest and evaluate five strategies for non‐chemical weed control. A strategy is defined as the proposed most suitable non‐chemical weed control method (or a combination of methods) to ensure the attainment of the desired weed control level.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies for non‐chemical weed control on public paved areas in Denmark

Hansen¹,

Kristoffersen²,

Kristensen

2004

Pest Management Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To be proactive in minimizing pesticide use, the public authorities in Denmark agreed in 1998 to phase out the use of pesticides on publicly owned areas by the end of 2002. A part of the agreement was an increasing focus on research into and development of new methods and implements for non-chemical weed control on paved areas. Due to a large increase in the costs of non-chemical weed control, the park authorities have to put the different types and locations of paved areas in order of priority to optimize the weed control effort. The present authors divided the paved areas into five weed control levels, dependent on placement, quality and use. For the 3 years 1999-2001, experiments with different non-chemical weed control methods were conducted on pavements at six locations in Denmark. The aim was to test the reaction of the weeds to different treatments and strategies. The efficacies of the methods were evaluated by analysis of digital images to estimate the fraction of the paved area covered with green vegetation (weed coverage). The weed coverage was used as the dependent variable in the subsequent statistical analysis. The independent variables in the model were incoming radiation, wear, area of joints in the pavement, the dying process of the weeds and the number of runs/applied energy of the mechanical or thermal weed control methods, respectively. The estimated parameters from the statistical model were used to build a simulation model, which was used to optimise five weed control strategies to fulfil the suggested weed control levels. In the suggested strategy for maximum weed control, 12 thermal weeding applications at 2-week intervals are suggested. The 'clean-up' strategy is based on one weed-brushing in late spring or early autumn.

show abstract

“…Previously, hard‐surface weed control was carried out with herbicides, primarily glyphosate in recent years (Holgersen, 1994; Schroeder, 1994; Kristensen et al. , 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, only a few studies have compared the effect of various alternative methods on hard surfaces during an entire growing season (Lefevre et al. , 2001; Augustin, 2003a; Kempenaar & Spijker, 2004; Kristensen et al. , 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non‐chemical weed control on traffic islands: a comparison of the efficacy of five weed control techniques

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The efficacy of five non‐chemical weed control methods for reducing weed cover on traffic islands was investigated in the growing season of 2004. Three trial sites were divided into six treatment areas which were treated with either flame, steam, hot air, hot water, brushes or left untreated. The treatments were carried out at regular intervals throughout the growing season. The percentage weed cover was measured every second week using a 75 × 75 cm quadratic frame with 100 squares. In the control areas, a rapid increase in weed cover was observed, whereas all treatments reduced weed cover. Hot water was the most effective method, although not significantly better than hot air or steam. Hot air treatment was more effective than brushing, whereas hot water was more effective than both flaming and brushing. The doses that were used were relatively high (150–355 kg ha−1), partly because of the irregular shape of the traffic islands and the treatment intervals were quite short in comparison with those in similar studies. However, the treatments could keep down the weeds only to a certain extent. The present knowledge of the efficacy of various weed control methods, as well as an increase in our knowledge of adequate treatment intervals, supports an optimisation of hard‐surface weed control. Data and experience gained from these trials were used to develop further calibrated application studies.

show abstract

Simulation of vegetation cover on sidewalks in Denmark

Cited by 3 publications

References 3 publications

A review of pesticide policies and regulations for urban amenity areas in seven European countries

A review of pesticide policies and regulations for urban amenity areas in seven European countries

Strategies for non‐chemical weed control on public paved areas in Denmark

Non‐chemical weed control on traffic islands: a comparison of the efficacy of five weed control techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About