Growing annual species associations

From Triple Performance
Technical articles
Crop association in arable farming Protein autonomy Carbon cycle and GHG Climate resilience Biodiversity Soil regeneration


1. Presentation

Characterization of the technique

Description of the technique:

 

Patricke Saulas INRA patrick.saulas(at)grignon.inra.fr Grignon (78)
Lionel Jouy Arvalis Plant Institute l.jouy(at)arvalisinstitutduvegetal.fr Boigneville (91)
Jacques Girard Chamber of Agriculture of Calvados j.girard(at)calvados.chambagri.fr Caen (14)
Sébastien Minette Regional Chamber of Agriculture of Poitou-Charentes Sebastien.MINETTE(at)poitou-charentes.chambagri.fr Lusignan (86)
Elise Pelzer INRA elise.pelzer(at)grignon.inra.fr Grignon (78)
Véronique Biarnès UNIP v.biarnes(at)unip.fr Paris (75)
Innocent Pambou Chamber of Agriculture of Maine-et-Loire innocent.pambou(at)maine-et-loire.chambagri.fr Angers (49)
Julien Halska INRA julien.halska(at)grignon.inra.fr Dijon (21)

Spam protection: To use these addresses, replace (at) with @


Annual species association is the simultaneous cultivation of two or more species on the same area. The species are not necessarily sown and harvested at the same time but must coexist for a significant period during their growth. Plants can be mixed in the plot (sowing a seed mixture or sowing several times), or grown in alternating rows or strips. The association of a cereal and a legume is the most common. The crops can be harvested as dry grain, hay, or even silage by farmers or cereal growers (animal feed, quite frequent, or marketing, less frequent). The choice of species depends on possible outlets, physiological characteristics of the associated species (earliness, height) to harvest the mixture under good conditions, and the objectives sought (limiting weed infestation, avoiding diseases, lodging resistance, etc).


Example of implementation:


Example for silage. Sow in late October - early November on healthy and deep soil a mixture of triticale / pea forage / vetch respectively at 290, 15 and 15 grains/m². Sow at 2-3 cm depth. No mineral nitrogen input if organic matter is spread at establishment or if residue is more than 50 units at the end of winter. Otherwise, 50 to 60 units of nitrogen maximum applied from the 1 cm ear stage of triticale (mid-March). No commercial product is authorized for this crop. Harvest with drying for 1 or 2 days if early harvest or direct harvest during the day if late. Example built from (BRUNSCHWIG et al. 2009). Other examples of associations: camelina / lentil, camelina compensating for the competitiveness deficit of lentil compared to weeds.


Implementation period On established crop


Spatial scale of implementation Plot

Application of the technique to...

Neutre All crops: Sometimes difficult to generalize


Lack of reference for most arable crops species. This technique is more developed in livestock farming seeking autonomy.


Neutre All soil types: Sometimes difficult to generalize


On hydromorphic soils, cereal-legume associations may encounter a problem of winter loss of legume plants which unbalances the mixture. An association between a cereal and alfalfa (in undersowing) requires, for example, taking into account the active lime content and pH.


Positif All climatic contexts: Easily generalizable


Reduction of disease impact depends on the climatic year: the stronger the disease pressure, the more interesting the mixture and the better it values the differences in sensitivity between species.

Regulation


2. Services provided by the technique


3. Effects on the sustainability of the cropping system

"Environmental" criteria

Positif Effect on air quality: Increasing


Phytosanitary emissions: DECREASE


GHG emissions: UNKNOWN


Positif Effect on water quality: Increasing


N.P.: DECREASE


Pesticides: DECREASE


Positif Effect on fossil resource consumption: Decreasing


Fossil energy consumption: DECREASE


Neutre Other: No effect (neutral)


Air: Reduction in pesticide use. Likely reduction of GHG if number of passes and fertilizer inputs are reduced.


Water: Reduction in use of phytosanitary products and/or nitrogen fertilizers if species mixture includes legumes (e.g., triticale/pea).


Fossil energy: Reduction in number of mechanical passes, and possibly fertilizer use if legumes are introduced.

"Agronomic" criteria

Positif Productivity: Increasing


Yield of the mixture generally higher than that of pure species grown separately. The mixture yield is also more stable from year to year (less sensitive to climatic stress).


Neutre Soil fertility: Variable


If legumes are used in the mixture, generally positive effect on structure.


Positif Water stress: Decreasing


Associated crops are often more resistant to drought than single-species crops.


Positif Functional Biodiversity: Increasing


Increase in domestic plant biodiversity and diversification of habitats and resources offered by the agroecosystem. Increase in intra-plot diversity.


Neutre Other agronomic criteria: Variable


Protein content of cereals associated with legumes: Increase


Protein or nitrogen content of cereals in the mixture is generally improved.


Ability to predict proportions of different species at harvest: Decrease


It is difficult to predict the proportion of different species at harvest.


Control of bio-aggressors: Variable


While species associations generally seem less sensitive to bioagressors, this effect is variable and must be studied case by case. Some bio-aggressors are sometimes favored, for example aphids attracted by nitrogen-rich cereals in a cereal-legume association or cereal foot diseases favored by a humid microclimate linked to canopy density.

"Economic" criteria

Positif Operational costs: Decreasing


Reduction in use of phytosanitary products and/or nitrogen fertilizers if species mixture includes legumes (e.g., triticale/pea).


Positif Mechanization costs: Decreasing


Reduction in number of passes in the plot.


Neutre Margin: Variable


Variable depending on climatic conditions of the year, selling prices and valorization of the mixture because: 1) reduction of phytosanitary costs (at least fungicide) but 2) may be accompanied by additional sorting costs at harvest. These mixtures are very interesting for animal consumption valorization (silage, forage or grain harvest).


Neutre Other economic criteria: Variable


Fuel consumption: Decrease


Reduction in number of passes in the plot.


Markets: Decrease


Sorting tests of the mixture after harvest have been carried out in Poitou-Charentes (Terrena, conventional farming) or in Midi-Pyrénées (organic farming) but costs are currently too high and not profitable.

"Social" criteria

Positif Working time: Decreasing


Reduction in number of passes in the plot.


Négatif Peak period: Increasing


Harvest technicality: Increasing


Short intervention window for cereal-legume silage and valorization in livestock in general.


Positif Effect on farmer health: Increasing


Reduced risk of pesticide exposure for applicators.


Neutre Observation time: Variable


Diseases being delayed and slowed, the risk of a "major cryptogamic accident" is significantly reduced. This leads to a reduced "need for monitoring" and may allow a lighter fungicide program triggered at a well-chosen stage.



4. Organisms favored or disadvantaged

Favored bio-aggressors

Organism Impact of the technique Type Details
powdery mildew of cereals MEDIUM pathogen (bioaggressor) Favored or disadvantaged depending on associations, cf. Rusch 2006.

Disfavored Bioagressors

Organism Impact of the technique Type Details
White amaranth weeds
Blite amaranth weeds
Prostrate amaranth weeds
Hybrid amaranth weeds
Reflective amaranth weeds
Sterile brome weeds
Polyspermum goosefoot weeds
Wild oat weeds
Theophrastus abutilon weeds
yarrow weeds
agrostis capillaris weeds
creeping bentgrass weeds
field lady's mantle weeds
early blight on tomato MEDIUM pathogen (bioagressor) Mentioned in a document related to the marigold - tomato association
cabbage flea beetle LOW pest, predator or parasite Large flea beetles on rapeseed also seem reduced but still preliminary (CRA Poitou Charente document).
ragweed weeds
tall ammi weeds
pea anthracnose MEDIUM pathogen (bioagressor)
common anthriscus weeds
mayweed chamomile weeds
field chamomile weeds
tall chamomile weeds
thale cress weeds
common mugwort weeds
spreading orach weeds
Louisiana oatgrass weeds
clustered oatgrass weeds
intermediate barbarée weeds
three-lobed bident weeds
cornflower weeds
botrytis fabae MEDIUM pathogen (bioagressor)
irregular calepine weeds
shepherd's purse weeds
hairy bittercress weeds
carex weeds
wild carrot weeds
milk thistle weeds
couch grass couch grass
creeping bentgrass weeds
corn marigold weeds
white goosefoot weeds
wall goosefoot weeds
hybrid goosefoot weeds
nîmes hawkweed weeds
dodder weeds
clustered cerastium weeds
field cerastium weeds
jimsonweed weeds
red fingergrass weeds
false rocket weeds
hemlock-leaved erodium weeds
small spurge weeds
spurge clock weeds
common fennel weeds
lesser celandine weeds
common fumitory weeds
small-flowered fumitory weeds
cleavers weeds
cottony galactites weeds
tuberous vetchling weeds
field gromwell weeds
columbine geranium weeds
cut-leaved geranium weeds
soft geranium weeds
round-leaved geranium weeds
slender-stemmed geranium weeds
false vipers bugloss weeds
barley helminthosporiosis MEDIUM pathogen (bioagressor)
soft brome weeds
rigid ryegrass weeds
toad rush weeds
field hawkweed weeds
rough hawkweed weeds
red dead-nettle weeds
purple dead-nettle weeds
large-flowered hemp-nettle weeds
large-fruited lampourde weeds
common nipplewort weeds
bastard toadflax weeds
lesser flax weeds
elatine flax weeds
field bindweed weeds
hedge bindweed weeds
dioecious lychnis weeds
scentless mayweed weeds
scentless chamomile weeds
hedge mallow weeds
round-leaved mint weeds
annual mercury weeds
black nightshade weeds
cabbage fly LOW pest, predator or parasite Cabbage fly reduced in cabbage / clover associations (Finch et al., 2003).
field chickweed weeds
field mustard weeds
black mustard weeds
field forget-me-not weeds
corncockle weeds
nematode (bioagressor) MEDIUM pest, predator or parasite It is only known that associated crops can reduce nematode pressure (no details on species).
branched broomrape weeds
cereal powdery mildew MEDIUM pathogen (bioagressor) Favored or disfavored depending on associations, cf. Rusch 2006
hair grass weeds
panicum capillare weeds
panicum miliaceum weeds
panicum crus-galli weeds
panicum dichotomiflorum weeds
two-spiked paspalum weeds
field paspalum weeds
drave paspalum weeds
prickly poppy weeds
corn poppy weeds
venus comb weeds
field pansy weeds
corn parsley weeds
paradoxical phalaris weeds
ten-stamened phytolacca weeds
false hawkweed picris weeds
dandelion weeds
ribwort plantain weeds
greater plantain weeds
creeping potentilla weeds
purslane weeds
giant horsetail weeds
horsetails weeds
crucifer aphids MEDIUM pest, predator or parasite
annual meadow grass weeds
common meadow grass weeds
rough charlock weeds
charlock weeds
perennial ryegrass weeds
italian ryegrass weeds
field buttercup weeds
marsh buttercup weeds
creeping buttercup weeds
amphibious bistort terrestrial form weeds
knotweed weeds
bindweed knotweed weeds
persicaria knotweed weeds
patience-leaved knotweed weeds
curly dock weeds
small sorrel weeds
blunt-leaved dock weeds
mignonette mignonette weeds
field sherardia weeds
hedge mustard weeds
pea weevil MEDIUM pest, predator or parasite Dilution effect demonstrated in an oat - pea mixture.
aleppo sorghum weeds
edible chufa weeds
field spurrey weeds
venus' looking-glass weeds
intermediate stitchwort weeds
common groundsel weeds
glaucous setaria weeds
green setaria weeds
whorled setaria weeds
field thistle weeds
tall tordylium weeds
field torilis weeds
knotted torilis weeds
wild sunflower weeds
coltsfoot weeds
sumatra fleabane weeds
common vervain weeds
rat's-tail fescue weeds
field vulpia weeds
persian speedwell weeds
field speedwell weeds
shining speedwell weeds
ivy-leaved speedwell weeds
four-angled willowherb weeds
poison hemlock weeds

Favored auxiliaries

Organism Impact of the technique Type Details
Predatory and granivorous ground beetles MEDIUM Natural enemies of pests Predatory ground beetles of barley parasites favored in the case of a barley-pea or barley-turnip association.

Disfavored auxiliaries

Organism Impact of the technique Type Details

Favored climatic and physiological accidents

Organism Impact of the technique Details

Disfavored climatic and physiological accidents

Organism Impact of the technique Details



5. For further information

  • Detailed studies of how undersowing with clover affects host-plant selection by the cabbage root fly.
    -Morley K. ; Finch S.


Bulletin OILB/SROP Volume: 26 Issue: 3 Pages: 155-161 Published: 2003, 2003


Conference paper. On the control of cabbage fly by cabbage / clover association.

  • Ensiling cereal - protein crop associations to secure the forage system
    -Philippe BRUNSCHWIG (Livestock Institute) ; Nicolas BULOT (CA Sarthe) ; Jean-Paul COUTARD (CA Maine-et-Loire) ; Stéphanie GUIBERT (CA Mayenne) ; Julien JURQUET (milk control Vendée) ; Myriam LAURENT (CRA Pays de Loire) ; Yvelyse MATHIEU (milk control Loire-Atlantique) ; Frédéric MAZOUE (CA Vendée) ; Emmanuel MEROT (CA Loire-Atlantique) ; Innocent PAMBOU (CA Maine-et-Loire) ; Patrice PIERRE (CA Mayenne)


Chambre d'Agriculture des Pays de Loire, Technical brochure, 2009


link to the brochure

  • Trial of Cereal-Pea protein crop Association in Organic farming - Campaign 2008 – 2009
    -Prieur Loïc (CREAB Midi-Pyrénées) Laffont Laurent (CREAB Midi-Pyrénées)


CREAB Midi-Pyrénées, 2009


Experiment report

  • Is it possible to improve the yield and protein content of wheat in Organic Farming by means of cover crops or intercropping?
    -Justes E (INRA) ; Bedoussac L. (INRA) ; Prieur L. (CREAB Midi-Pyrénées)


Innovations Agronomiques (2009) 4, 165-176, Conference proceedings, 2009


Conference communication

  • Cereal-protein crop associations - Producing protein crops organically in Alsace
    -OPABA


OPABA (Professional Organization of Organic Agriculture in Alsace), Technical brochure, 2005


link to the brochure

  • Associations based on triticale/forage pea in organic farming
    -L. Fontaine (ITAB) ; G. Corre (ESA Angers) ; I. Chaillet (ITCF-UNIP) ; V. Biarnès (UNIP) ; J.-P. Coutard (CA 49/Ferme de Thorigné d’Anjou) ; B. Chareyron (CRA Franche-Comté) ; C. Denis (CA de l’Yonne) ; A. Lecat (CA du Nord) ; E. Maille (Agrobio Poitou-Charentes) ; J.-L. Audfray (CA 56)


ITAB, Technical brochure, 2003


link to the brochure

  • Effects of intercropping on pests
    -Rusch Adrien (INRA / INA)


INRA / INA, 2006


Bibliographic report

  • Species mixtures: unlimited possibilities
    -Jean-Martial Poupeau


Biofil - Field crops n°71, July-August 2010, Press article, 2010


Link to the site

  • Soils, biodiversity and practices
    -Steinberg Christian (UMR MSE INRA/University of Burgundy) ; Alabouvette Claude (UMR MSE INRA/University of Burgundy)


Phytoma - plant protection, Press article, 2010


Article



6. Keywords

Pest control method: Cultural control


Mode of action: Mitigation


Type of strategy regarding pesticide use: Redesign

Annexes

Est complémentaire des leviers

Favorise les bioagresseurs suivants

Favorise les auxiliaires

Défavorise les bioagresseurs suivants

Retrieved from "https://en.tripleperformance.ag/index.php?title=Growing_annual_species_associations&oldid=9906"

 

 

Share
thumb_up
Instructive
notifications
Follow
forum
Discussions

More
Poser une question, partager un retour :
people Infos+2

Triple Performance

Community

Productions

Themes

 

Made with ♡ by Neayi