Growing smothering species

From Triple Performance
(header image; author: INRA, Jean Weber; license: (CC BY 2.0))

Introduce one or more smothering species into the rotation: these crops are characterized by a high potential for spatial coverage, as well as rapid growth and good establishment capacity. The objective is to establish strong competition for light to the detriment of weeds. These crops can be annual, perennial, or integrated into intermediate covers.

Authors:

Rodriguez Alain ACTA Baziège (31)
Guichard Laurence INRA Grignon (78)
Munier-Jolain Nicolas INRA Dijon (21)
Cherifi Alexandra EPLEFPA 89 Auxerre (89)
Halska Julien INRA Dijon (21)
Bernicot Marie-Hélène INRA Dijon (21)

Presentation

Characterization of the technique

Description of the technique:

This involves integrating certain crops into the rotation, targeting certain weeds to be disadvantaged by their competition: for example alfalfa against thistle (well documented) or bindweed (less documented). They can be grown pure or in mixtures. High-density sowing with reduced spacing increases the smothering power (see complementary techniques). The chosen crop(s) must develop rapidly and cover the soil well before it becomes infested. Smothering crops: alfalfa, mixed cereal-legume association (for example pea-wheat each at 75% of their pure crop density), hemp, buckwheat, mustard, vetch, triticale, winter oat, rye, winter barley, etc. Annual legumes are generally poor competitors.

Example of implementation: Example taken from the ENDURE network document. Farm located in Burgundy (limestone plateau, shallow soils, degraded oceanic climate), initial rotation: winter oilseed rape - winter soft wheat - winter barley. Weed management is one of the priorities in designing a new cropping system. The proposed new rotation is: winter oilseed rape - winter soft wheat - spring barley - alfalfa - alfalfa - winter soft wheat - mustard as cover crop - sunflower - triticale. The smothering crops introduced are thus alfalfa, mustard as cover crop, and triticale.

Details on the technique:

The effect on weeds depends on the covers and rotations. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to think that ubiquitous species (found in wide and varied territories), composites, willows and grasses are less disadvantaged by this technique than other species. These are pioneer species with intense and rapid development in early stages, as well as those that germinate year-round or those that are not demanding in terms of pedoclimatic conditions.

Application of the technique to...

Implementation period On established crop

Spatial scale of implementation Plot

Positif All crops: Easily generalizable


Positif All soil types: Easily generalizable


Positif All climatic contexts: Easily generalizable

Effects on the sustainability of the cropping system

Expected reduction in the use of herbicides (and possibly other phytosanitary products) and low level of inputs required by smothering crops. The transfer of phytosanitary products depends on the physico-chemical characteristics of the molecules. Possible reduction in the number of sprayer passes, but variable balance depending on the technical itineraries of the introduced crops. Possible reduction in nitrogen fertilizer inputs if pure or associated legumes are introduced. Furthermore, if smothering crops diversify rotations, a reduction in the use of fungicides and insecticides can also be expected due to interruption of cycles of other pests than weeds.

"Environmental" criteria

Neutre Effect on air quality: Variable

Phytosanitary emissions: DECREASE

GHG emissions: VARIABLE


Positif Effect on water quality: Increasing

Eutrophication: DECREASE

Pesticides: DECREASE


Neutre Effect on fossil resource consumption: Variable

Fossil energy consumption: VARIABLE


NeutreGHG emissions: variable, at the CO2 level, possible reduction in the number of herbicide passes, but variable balance depending on the technical itineraries of the introduced crops. No knowledge for N2O.

"Agronomic" criteria

Neutre Productivity: Variable, the previous effect of the introduced crop can improve or deteriorate the yield of the following crop. However, the physico-chemical fertility of the soil is maintained or even improved, as well as the control of pest development.


Positif Soil fertility: Increasing, varied crops explore different soil compartments and different resources.


Neutre Water stress: No effect (neutral)


Positif Functional Biodiversity: Increasing, increase in cultivated biodiversity, and likely associated wild biodiversity (more varied habitats and resources).


Positif Other agronomic criteria: Decreasing, pest pressure: Decrease, if smothering crops diversify rotations, a reduction in pressure from insects and diseases can be expected due to interruption of cycles of other pests than weeds.

"Economic" criteria

Finding buyers may be difficult for some crops depending on the local context and volumes produced. However, economic risks can also be considered reduced thanks to the existence of varied outlets.


Positif Operating costs: Decreasing, evolution depending on the introduced crops (increased costs for cover crops, but possible compensation if they provide nitrogen to the system). Possible reduction in phytosanitary costs due to reduced pressure from certain pests in the cover (effect of diversification of rotations).


Neutre Mechanization costs: Variable, variable evolution depending on the chosen species and associated technical itineraries.


Neutre Margin: Variable, the evolution of margins on the rotation will depend on the introduced crop (potential margin of the crop and previous effect). However, if current rotations are economically optimized, there is a risk that diversification tends to affect margins negatively. But there are counter-examples. Phytosanitary costs are reduced.

"Social" criteria

Neutre Working time: Variable depending on the introduced crop(s).


Positif Peak period: Decreasing, diversification does not imply a systematic increase in overall workload. It can limit workload peaks by spreading out operations (sowing, harvesting). Farmers often feel an increase in workload which actually comes from a different distribution. The system is however more complex, some activities take more time (tool adjustment for example).


Négatif Observation time: Increasing, each crop requires specific observations. Introducing smothering crops partly means diversifying crops, which implies more observation time.


Neutre Need for farmer training: increasing, managing a greater number of crops requires more know-how, necessitates learning, etc.

Favored or disadvantaged organisms

Disfavored Bioagressors

Organism Impact of the technique Type Details
Amaranth white weeds
Amaranth blite weeds
Amaranth prostrate weeds
Amaranth hybrid weeds
Amaranth reflective weeds
Brome sterile weeds
Chenopodium polyspermum weeds
Wild oat weeds
Abutilon theophrasti weeds
Yarrow weeds
Agrostis capillaris weeds
Agrostis stolonifera weeds
Field lady's mantle weeds
Ambrosia artemisiifolia weeds
Ammi majus weeds
Anthriscus sylvestris weeds
Anthemis cotula weeds
Anthemis arvensis weeds
Anthemis tinctoria weeds
Thlaspi arvense weeds
Artemisia vulgaris weeds
Atriplex patula weeds
Avena sterilis ssp. ludoviciana weeds
Avena fatua weeds
Barbarea intermedia weeds
Bidens tripartita weeds
Centaurea cyanus weeds
Calepina irregularis weeds
Capsella bursa-pastoris weeds
Cardamine hirsuta weeds
Carex weeds
Daucus carota weeds
Silybum marianum weeds
Cynodon dactylon Cynodon dactylon
Elymus repens weeds
Chrysanthemum segetum weeds
Chenopodium album weeds
Chenopodium murale weeds
Chenopodium hybridum weeds
Crepis capillaris weeds
Cuscuta weeds
Cerastium glomeratum weeds
Cerastium arvense weeds
Datura stramonium weeds
Digitaria sanguinalis weeds
Diplotaxis tenuifolia weeds
Erodium cicutarium weeds
Euphorbia exigua weeds
Euphorbia helioscopia weeds
Foeniculum vulgare weeds
Ranunculus ficaria weeds
Fumaria officinalis weeds
Fumaria parviflora weeds
Galium aparine weeds
Galactites tomentosa weeds
Lathyrus tuberosus weeds
Lithospermum arvense weeds
Geranium columbinum weeds
Geranium dissectum weeds
Geranium molle weeds
Geranium rotundifolium weeds
Geranium pusillum weeds
Helminthotheca echioides weeds
Holcus mollis weeds
Lolium rigidum weeds
Juncus bufonius weeds
Sonchus arvensis weeds
Sonchus asper weeds
Lactuca scariola weeds
Lamium amplexicaule weeds
Lamium purpureum weeds
Sicyos angulatus weeds
Lapsana communis weeds
Linaria vulgaris weeds
Linaria minor weeds
Linaria elatine weeds
Convolvulus arvensis weeds
Calystegia sepium weeds
Lychnis dioica weeds
Matricaria chamomilla weeds
Matricaria discoidea weeds
Malva sylvestris weeds
Mentha suaveolens weeds
Mercurialis annua weeds
Solanum nigrum weeds
Stellaria media weeds
Sinapis arvensis weeds
Brassica nigra weeds
Myosotis arvensis weeds
Nigella weeds
Orobanche ramosa weeds
Panicum capillare weeds
Panicum miliaceum weeds
Panicum crus-galli weeds
Panicum dichotomiflorum weeds
Paspalum distichum weeds
Poa annua weeds
Poa trivialis weeds
Papaver argemone weeds
Papaver rhoeas weeds
Papaver rhoeas weeds
Venus comb weeds
Viola arvensis weeds
Petroselinum crispum weeds
Phalaris paradoxa weeds
Phytolacca decandra weeds
Picris hieracioides weeds
Taraxacum officinale weeds
Plantago lanceolata weeds
Plantago major weeds
Potentilla reptans weeds
Portulaca oleracea weeds
Portulaca oleracea weeds
Equisetum giganteum weeds
Equisetum weeds
Poa annua weeds
Poa pratensis weeds
Raphanus raphanistrum weeds
Raphanus raphanistrum weeds
Lolium perenne weeds
Lolium multiflorum weeds
Ranunculus arvensis weeds
Ranunculus palustris weeds
Ranunculus repens weeds
Persicaria amphibia weeds
Polygonum aviculare weeds
Fallopia convolvulus weeds
Persicaria maculosa weeds
Persicaria lapathifolia weeds
Rumex crispus weeds
Rumex acetosella weeds
Rumex obtusifolius weeds
Reseda phyteuma weeds
Sherardia arvensis weeds
Sisymbrium officinale weeds
Sorghum halepense weeds
Cyperus esculentus weeds
Spergula arvensis weeds
Specularia perfoliata weeds
Stellaria media weeds
Senecio vulgaris weeds
Setaria glauca weeds
Setaria viridis weeds
Setaria verticillata weeds
Thlaspi arvense weeds
Torilis arvensis weeds
Torilis nodosa weeds
Helianthus annuus weeds
Trifolium weeds
Tussilago farfara weeds
Erigeron sumatrensis weeds
Verbena officinalis weeds
Vulpia myuros weeds
Vulpia bromoides weeds
Veronica persica weeds
Veronica arvensis weeds
Veronica lucida weeds
Veronica hederifolia weeds
Epilobium tetragonum weeds
Ethusa cynapium weeds

Further reading

  • Herbicide-free agriculture principles and methods - Joseph Pousset, France Agricole Editions, p216, Book, 2003.


  • Beyond Herbicides: New Approaches to Managing Weeds - Robert E. Blackshaw (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada); John T. O’Donovan (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada); K. Neil Harker (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada) and Xiangju Li (Institute of Cereal and Oil Crops, Hebei Academy of Agricultural Sciences), ICESA 2002, Peer-reviewed article, 2002/


  • Genotype of wheat and barley affects light penetration and wild oat growth - Lanning S.P.; L.E. Talbert; J.M. Martin; T.K. Blake; P.L. Bruckner, Agronomy journal 89, pp 100-103, Peer-reviewed article, 1997/


  • Weed smothering - Pierre Mischler (Agro-Transfert ressources et Territoires) Agro-Transfert ressources et Territoires, Technical brochure, 2011.


  • Competitive crops and cultivars - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, page visited on 24/06/2011, Website, 2011.


  • Redesigning cropping systems in three French regions - Gabriele Fortino (INRA); Laurence Guichard (INRA); Elise Pelzer (INRA); Raymond Reau (INRA); Muriel Valantin-Morison (INRA); Xavier Pinochet (CETIOM) ENDURE Network - From Science to Field - Winter Crops Based Cropping Systems (WCCS) Case Study - Guide Number 2, Peer-reviewed article, 2010.


  • Crop protection strategies saving phytosanitary products - Gran Aymerich L. Ministry of Agriculture and Fishing, Professional report, 2006


Appendices

Est complémentaire des leviers

Défavorise les bioagresseurs suivants