Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-v9xhf Total loading time: 0.512 Render date: 2022-05-22T19:33:21.532Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Integrated Weed Management: The Rationale and Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Clarence J. Swanton
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON., Canada N1G 2W1
Stephan F. Weise
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON., Canada N1G 2W1

Abstract

A growing awareness of environmental issues in Canada has had a major influence on government policies. An initiative was launched by the government of Ontario to promote research toward the development of an integrated weed management (IWM) system. Research in IWM must take all aspects of the cropping system into consideration and evolve in a progressive manner. This approach must encompass the role of conservation tillage, knowledge of the critical period of weed interference, alternative methods of weed control, enhancement of crop competitiveness, modeling of crop-weed interference, influence of crop rotation and seed bank dynamics, and education and extension of the findings. The complexity involved in addressing these issues requires a multi-disciplinary approach.

Type
Symposium
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Agriculture Canada. 1989. Growing together. A vision for Canada's agri-food industry. Agriculture Canada Publ. 5269/E. Communications Branch, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, ON. 74 p.Google Scholar
2. Anderson, W. P. 1983. Weed Science: Principles. 2nd ed. West Publ., St. Paul, MN. 655 p.Google Scholar
3. Aspinall, J. D., Kachanoski, R. G., and Lang, H. C. 1989. Tillage 2000 Soil Conservation. Progress Report. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Guelph, ON. 24 p.Google Scholar
4. Barrie, E. C. 1969. Influence of crop row spacing, population and plant type on weed control in soybeans. MS. Thesis, Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON. 55 p.Google Scholar
5. Berkowitz, A. R. 1988. Competition for resources in weed-crop mixtures. p. 89119 in Altieri, M. A. and Liebman, M., eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
6. Blair, B. D., and Parochetti, J. V. 1982. Extension implementation of integrated pest management systems. Weed Sci. 30 (Suppl. 1):4853.Google Scholar
7. Carlson, H. L., and Hill, J. E. 1986. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition with spring wheat: effects of nitrogen fertilization. Weed Sci. 34:2933.Google Scholar
8. Cavers, P. B., and Benoit, D. L. 1989. Seed banks in arable land. p. 309328 in Leck, M. A., Parker, V. T., and Simpson, R. L., eds. Ecology of Soil Seed Banks. Academic Press, San Diego.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Chandler, K., and Swanton, C. J. 1990. Effect of tillage on control of quackgrass [Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.]. Proc. Quackgrass Symp. Oct. 24–25, London, ON. p. 135150.Google Scholar
10. Cousens, R. 1985. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:239252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Cousens, R. D. 1987. Theory and reality of weed control thresholds. Plant Prot. Q. 2:1320.Google Scholar
12. Cousens, R., Brain, P., O'Donovan, J. T., and O'Sullivan, P. A. 1987. The use of biologically realistic equations to describe the effects of weed density and relative time of emergence on crop yield. Weed Sci. 35:720725.Google Scholar
13. Cousens, R., Doyle, C. J., Wilson, B. J., and Cussans, G. W. 1986. Modelling the economics of controlling Avena fatua in winter wheat. Pestic. Sci. 17:112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Dale, J. E., and Chandler, J. M. 1979. Herbicide-crop rotation for johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control. Weed Sci. 27:479485.Google Scholar
15. Derksen, D. 1990. Weed control within crops in a conservation tillage system. p. 7590 in Lafond, G. P. and Fowler, D. B., eds. Crop Management for Conservation. Proc. Soil Conserv. Symp. Feb. 22–23, Yorkton, SK.Google Scholar
16. Dowler, C. C., Hauser, E. W., and Johnson, A. W. 1974. Crop-herbicide sequences on a southeastern coastal plain soil. Weed Sci 22:500505.Google Scholar
17. Doyle, C. J., Cousens, R., and Moss, S. R. 1986. A model of the economics of controlling Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. in winter wheat. Crop Prot. 5:143150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Duffy, M., and Hanthorn, M. 1984. Returns to corn and soybean tillage practices. Agric. Econ. Rep. 508. U.S. Dep. Agric., Washington, DC. 14 p.Google Scholar
19. Eadie, A. G. 1991. The role of inter-row cultivation and cover crops for weed management in conservation tillage systems. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON. (in preparation).Google Scholar
20. Enache, A., and Ilnicki, R. D. 1988. Subterranean clover: a new approach to weed control. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:34.Google Scholar
21. Erbach, D. C., and Lovely, W. G. 1975. Effect of plant residue on herbicide performance in no-tillage corn. Weed Sci. 23:512515.Google Scholar
22. Forcella, F. 1987. Characteristics associated with highly competitive soybeans. Agron. Abstr. 1987:111.Google Scholar
23. Proud-Williams, R. J. 1988. Changes in weed flora with different tillage and agronomic management systems. p. 213236 in Altieri, M. A. and Liebman, M., eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
24. Glaze, N. C. 1987. Cultural and mechanical manipulation of Cyperus spp. Weed Technol. 1:8283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Hall, M. R. 1990. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays L.) and the impact of weed interference upon corn development. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON. 99 p.Google Scholar
26. Hildebrand, P. E. 1990. Agronomy's role in sustainable agriculture: integrated farming systems. J. Prod. Agric. 3:285288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Holzner, W. 1982. Concepts, categories and characteristics of weeds. p. 320 in Holzner, W. and Numata, M., eds. Biology and Ecology of Weeds. Junk, The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Hume, L. 1989. Yield losses in wheat due to weed communities dominated by green foxtail [Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv.]: a multispecies approach. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:521529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. Johnson, M. D., Wyse, D. L., and Lueschen, W. E. 1989. The influence of herbicide formulation on weed control in four tillage systems. Weed Sci. 37:239249.Google Scholar
30. Keeny, D. 1990. Sustainable agriculture: definition and concepts. J. Prod. Agric. 3:281285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31. Koskinen, W. C., and McWhorter, C. G. 1986. Weed control in conservation tillage. J. Soil Water Conserv. 41:365370.Google Scholar
32. Kropff, M. J. 1988. Modelling the effects of weeds on crop production. Weed Res. 28:465471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Lee, G. A. 1986. Integrated control of rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea) in the western U.S. Weed Sci. 34 (Suppl. 1):26.Google Scholar
34. Légère, A., and Schreiber, M. M. 1988. Simulation of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) growth, development and validation of the model AMSIM. VIIIe Colloque Int. sur la Biol., l'Ecol. et la Syst. des Mauvaises Heroes 2:641647.Google Scholar
35. Légère, A., and Schreiber, M. M. 1989. Competition and canopy architecture as affected by soybean (Glycine max) row width and density of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci. 37: 8492.Google Scholar
36. Lockeretz, W. 1988. Open questions in sustainable agriculture. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 3:174181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. MacRae, R. J., Hill, S. B., Henning, J., and Mehuys, G. R. 1988. Agricultural Science and Sustainable Agriculture: a review of the existing scientific barriers to sustainable food production and potential solutions. Res. Paper no. 6. Macdonald College of McGill University, Ste-Anne de Bellevue, PQ. 61 p.Google Scholar
38. Malik, V. S. 1990. Impact of white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars, row-spacing and seeding density on annual weed interference. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON. 93 p.Google Scholar
39. Minotti, P. L., and Sweet, R. D. 1981. Role of crop competition in limiting losses from weeds. p. 351367 in Pimentel, D., ed. CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture, Vol. II. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
40. Moore, M. J. 1991. The effect of cover crops on soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] and weed development. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON. (in preparation).Google Scholar
41. Moxley, J. 1989. Survey of pesticide use in Ontario, 1988. Econ. Info. Rep. no. 89–08. Economics and Policy Coordination Branch, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Toronto, ON. 40 p.Google Scholar
42. Orwick, P. L., Schreiber, M. M., and Holt, D. A. 1978. Simulation of foxtail (Setaria viridis var. robusta-alba, Setaria viridis var. robusta-purpurea) growth: the development of SETSIM. Weed Sci. 26: 691699.Google Scholar
43. Parks, D. L. 1955. Successful Crop Production in Eastern Canada. McClelland and Stewart, Canada. 314 p.Google Scholar
44. Paul, E. A., and Robertson, G. P. 1989. Ecology and the agricultural sciences: a false dichotomy? Ecology 70:15941597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45. Putnam, A. R. 1988. Allelopathy: problems and opportunities in weed management. p. 7788 in Altieri, M. A. and Liebman, M., eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
46. Putnam, A. R., DeFrank, J., and Barnes, J. P. 1983. Exploitation of allelopathy for weed control in annual and perennial cropping systems. J. Chem. Ecol. 9:10011010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47. Reganold, J. P., Papendick, R. I., and Parr, J. F. 1990. Sustainable agriculture. Sci. Am. 1990 (June):112120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48. Regnier, E. E., and Janke, R. R. 1990. Evolving strategies for managing weeds. p. 174202 in Edwards, C. A., Lal, R., Madden, P., Miller, R. H., and House, G., eds. Sustainable Agricultural Systems. Soil Water Conser. Soc., Ankeny, IA.Google Scholar
49. Samson, R. A. 1989. On-farm evaluation of cultivation, cover crops and chemical banding for crop and weed management in integrated farming systems. MS. Thesis, Macdonald College of McGill Univ., Ste Anne de Bellevue, PQ.Google Scholar
50. Shaw, W. C. 1982. Integrated weed management systems technology for pest management. Weed Sci. 30 (Suppl. 1):212.Google Scholar
51. Smith, R. J. Jr., and Shaw, W. C. 1966. Weeds and their control in rice production. U.S. Dep. Agric. Bull. 292. 64 p.Google Scholar
52. Spitters, C.J.T., and Aerts, R. 1983. Simulation of competition for light and water in crop-weed associations. Aspects Appl. Biol. 4:467484.Google Scholar
53. Spitters, C.J.T., Kropff, M. J., and deGroot, W. 1989. Competition between maize and Echinochloa crus-galli analysed by a hyperbolic regression model. Ann. Appl. Biol. 115:541551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54. Swanton, C. J., and Benoit, D. L. 1989. Dynamique des populations de mauvaises heroes en pratiques culturales reduites. Journée d'information sur la malherbologie. Conseil des productions végétales du Québec. Agdex 640. p. 2937.Google Scholar
55. Templeton, G. E., Smith, R. J. Jr., and TeBeest, D. O. 1986. Progress and potential of weed control with mycoherbicides. Rev. Weed Sci. 2: 114.Google Scholar
56. Thomas, A. G., and Derksen, D. 1990. Changes in weed spectrum with changes in tillage practices, p. 5974 in Lafond, G. P. and Fowler, D. B., eds. Crop Management for Conservation. Proc. Soil Conserv. Symp. Feb. 22–23, Yorkton, SK.Google Scholar
57. Voutsinos, M. 1989. Effect of a rye (S. cereale L.) mulch on soybean (G. max L.) growth, yield, and microclimate, and on associated weed populations. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON. 87 p.Google Scholar
58. Walker, R. H., and Buchanan, G. A. 1982. Crop manipulation in integrated weed management systems. Weed Sci. 30 (Suppl. 1):1724.Google Scholar
59. Wapshere, A. J., Delfosse, E. S., and Cullen, J. M. 1989. Recent developments in biological control of weeds. Crop Prot. 8:227250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
60. Watson, A. K. 1989. Current advances in bioherbicide research. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.–Weeds 3:987996.Google Scholar
61. Weaver, S. E. 1984. Critical period of weed competition in three vegetable crops in relation to management practices. Weed Res. 24: 317325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
62. Wilson, B. J., and Phipps, P. A. 1985. A long term experiment on tillage, rotation and herbicide use for the control of A. fatua in cereals. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.–Weeds 2:693700.Google Scholar
63. Woolley, B. L. 1989. Integrated weed management in white beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). M.S. Thesis, Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON. 144 p.Google Scholar
64. Zimdahl, R. L. 1988. The concept and application of the critical weed-free period, p. 145155 in Altieri, M. A. and Liebman, M., eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
267
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Integrated Weed Management: The Rationale and Approach
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Integrated Weed Management: The Rationale and Approach
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Integrated Weed Management: The Rationale and Approach
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *