Sustainable strategies for managing weeds are critical to meeting agriculture’s potential to feed the world’s population while conserving the ecosystems and biodiversity on which we depend. The dominant paradigm of weed management in developed countries is currently founded on the two principal tools of herbicides and tillage to remove weeds. However, evidence of negative environmental impacts from both tools is growing, and herbicide resistance is increasingly prevalent. These challenges emerge from a lack of attention to how weeds interact with and are regulated by the agroecosystem as a whole. Novel technological tools proposed for weed control, such as new herbicides, gene editing, and seed destructors, do not address these systemic challenges and thus are unlikely to provide truly sustainable solutions. Combining multiple tools and techniques in an Integrated Weed Management strategy is a step forward, but many integrated strategies still remain overly reliant on too few tools. In contrast, advances in weed ecology are revealing a wealth of options to manage weedsat the agroecosystem levelthat, rather than aiming to eradicate weeds, act to regulate populations to limit their negative impacts while conserving diversity. Here, we review the current state of knowledge in weed ecology and identify how this can be translated into practical weed management. The major points are the following: (1) the diversity and type of crops, management actions and limiting resources can be manipulated to limit weed competitiveness while promoting weed diversity; (2) in contrast to technological tools, ecological approaches to weed management tend to be synergistic with other agroecosystem functions; and (3) there are many existing practices compatible with this approach that could be integrated into current systems, alongside new options to explore. Overall, this review demonstrates that integrating systems-level ecological thinking into agronomic decision-making offers the best route to achieving sustainable weed management.
1 November 2019 in Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
In arable fields, plant species richness consistently increases at field edges. This potentially makes the field edge an important habitat for the conservation of the ruderal arable flora (or ‘weeds’) and the invertebrates and birds it supports. Increased diversity and abundance of weeds in crop edges could be owing to either a reduction in agricultural inputs towards the field edge and/or spatial mass effects associated with dispersal from the surrounding landscape. We contend that the diversity of weed species in an arable field is a combination of resident species, that can persist under the intense selection pressure of regular cultivation and agrochemical inputs (typically more ruderal species), and transient species that rely on regular dispersal from neighbouring habitats (characterised by a more ‘competitive’ ecological strategy). We analysed a large dataset of conventionally managed arable fields in the UK to study the effect of the immediate landscape on in‐field plant diversity and abundance and to quantify the contribution of spatial mass effects to plant diversity in arable fields in the context of the ecological strategy of the resulting community. We demonstrated that the decline in diversity with distance into an arable field is highly dependent on the immediate landscape, indicating the important role of spatial mass effects in explaining the increased species richness at field edges in conventionally managed fields. We observed an increase in the proportion of typical arable weeds away from the field edge towards the centre. This increase was dependent on the immediate landscape and was associated with a higher proportion of more competitive species, with a lower fidelity to arable habitats, at the field edge. Synthesis and applications. Conserving the ruderal arable plant community, and the invertebrates and birds that use it as a resource, in conventionally managed arable fields typically relies on the targeted reduction of fertilisers and herbicides in so‐called ‘conservation headlands’. The success of these options will depend on the neighbouring habitat and boundary. They should be placed along margins where the potential for ingress of competitive species, that may become dominant in the absence of herbicides, is limited. This will enhance ecosystem services delivered by the ruderal flora and reduce the risk of competitive species occurring in the crop.
1 December 2019 in Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
Concerns around herbicide resistance, human risk, and the environmental impacts of current weed control strategies have led to an increasing demand for alternative weed management methods. Many new weed management strategies are under development; however, the poor availability of accurate weed maps, and a lack of confidence in the outcomes of alternative weed management strategies, has hindered their adoption. Developments in field sampling and processing, combined with spatial modelling, can support the implementation and assessment of new and more integrated weed management strategies. Our review focuses on the biological and mathematical aspects of assembling within-field weed models. We describe both static and spatio-temporal models of within-field weed distributions (including both cellular automata (CA) and non-CA models), discussing issues surrounding the spatial processes of weed dispersal and competition and the environmental and anthropogenic processes that affect weed spatial and spatio-temporal distributions. We also examine issues surrounding model uncertainty. By reviewing the current state-of-the-art in both static and temporally dynamic weed spatial modelling we highlight some of the strengths and weaknesses of current techniques, together with current and emerging areas of interest for the application of spatial models, including targeted weed treatments, economic analysis, herbicide resistance and integrated weed management, the dispersal of biocontrol agents, and invasive weed species.
• Incremental changes to the life-cycle of A. myosuroides due to soil properties, when combined in a modelling approach, reveals them as important determinants of the within-field distribution of this species. • Scale-dependent correlations between A. myosuroides and soil properties observed in the field are an emergent property of the modelled dynamics of the A. myosuroides life-cycle. • Our model predicts areas of field that are vulnerable to A. myosuroides based on soil properties and so could support effective site-specific management of A. myosuroides within field.