|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10174/29914
|
Title: | Weed management practices and benefits in Conservation Agriculture systems |
Authors: | Teixeira, Fernando Basch, Gottlieb |
Editors: | Kassam, Amir |
Keywords: | Conservation Agriculture Weed management No-till |
Issue Date: | Feb-2020 |
Publisher: | Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing Limited |
Abstract: | 1 Introduction. When growing crops, the eradication of plants from a field has only a temporary
effect and, soon after, it is readily recolonized from the soil seedbank, vegetative
structures in the soil and by seeds transported to the field by wind, run-off
water, animals, soil mass movement or even agricultural practices (irrigation,
harvesting, manuring, tillage etc.). We must be grateful for the tenacity that
plants show to occupy most terrestrial environments, as it allowed the evolution
of terrestrial animals and ultimately us. But, in agricultural fields, most plants
are out of place and will compete with crops for water, nutrients, light and
space, may diminish the quality of pastures, may impair the harvest, may be
a repository of diseases or pest insects and so on. From the moment humans
moved from nomad gathering communities and began producing their own
food through agriculture, they conceived a multitude of methods to manage
weeds based on the technologies and knowledge of its time. In an everchanging
world methods of weed control that seem very promising at a given
moment sooner or later will be questioned by their impact on the environment
or the development of new, more efficient alternatives.Conservation Agriculture (CA), as defined by FAO (FAO, 2017), means
farming systems that aim at sustained crop production by the compliance
with three principles: no or minimum mechanical soil disturbance, permanent
organic soil cover (by both crop residues and cover crops) and species diversity
(through rotations, sequences and associations). These farming systems were
practised on circa 180 Mha worldwide in 2015/16 and the expansion rate since
2008/09 has been calculated at 10 Mha/year (Kassam et al., 2015, 2019). The
growing adoption of CA systems worldwide shows that farmers experience
benefits when converting to CA. However, lack of soil disturbance, permanent
soil cover and crop rotation/association under CA are likely to have an effect on
weeds’ dynamics, both in terms of diversity/composition and size.
In high input systems, heavy reliance on herbicides for weed control often
means that integrated weed control strategies are disregarded by the farmer.
Unfortunately, this is true in many no-till systems that purely focus on minimum
soil disturbance but disregard the other two pillars of CA: diverse crop rotations
and cover crops to revegetate the fields in fallow periods. Herbicide-resistant
weeds, withdrawal of some herbicides from the market, more restrictive
environmental and health regulations and policies that promote the reduction/
banning of pesticide input (e.g. organic farming promotion), all converge
to question if alternative weed control methods and practices under CA are
feasible and whether integrated weed control strategies tailored to reduce
herbicide inputs provide the economical results farmers need to maintain their
livelihood. |
URI: | http://dx.doi.org/10.19103/AS.2019.0049.04 http://hdl.handle.net/10174/29914 |
Type: | bookPart |
Appears in Collections: | MED - Publicações - Capítulos de Livros
|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|