Carbon cycle and GHG Climate resilience Biodiversity Soil regeneration

Presentation

Technique characterization

Technique description :

Header photo : grass strip between a hedge (surrounding a ditch) and a plowed field

Daphné Durant	INRA	daphne.durant(at)stlaurent.lusignan.inra.fr	Saint Laurent de la Prée (17)
Jean-Michel Hillaireau	INRA	jean-michel.hillaireau(at)stlaurent.lusignan.inra.fr	Saint Laurent de la Prée (17)
Régis Wartelle	Regional Chamber of Agriculture of Picardy	r.wartelle(at)picardie.chambagri.fr	Amiens (80)

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

The principle :

Field margins can take various forms: hedges, embankments, grass strips, narrow grassy edges, path edges, etc. The cases of hedges, embankments, and grass strips are covered by specific sheets. Generally, it is advised not to intervene too often and outside breeding and nesting periods, to prefer mowing over shredding, and to remove residues. It is also preferable to limit vehicle speed and use a deterrent system. During interventions in the field, avoid excessive driving on field edges and avoid applying fertilizer or phytosanitary products to these areas.

Implementation period On established crops

Field edges are fixed landscape elements whose lifespan exceeds that of crop rotations.

Spatial scale of implementation Field

Farm

Territory

Application of the technique to...

All crops : Easily generalizable

All soil types : Easily generalizable

All climatic contexts : Easily generalizable

Regulations

These measures help with necessary investments and encourage management of these landscape elements favorable to biodiversity. However, mowing dates do not always seem adapted to local contexts (flora and animal breeding periods).

Some Agri-Environmental Measures

Environmental Plant Plan

Mowing dates

Effects on cropping system sustainability

“Environmental” criteria

Effect on air quality : Increasing

GHG emissions : DECREASE

Effect on water quality : Variable

pesticides : VARIABLE

Effect on fossil resource consumption : Variable

fossil energy consumption : VARIABLE

Other : No effect (neutral)

Air : Vegetation fixes carbon (effect on CO2). No effect on N2O.

Water : Slight reduction in pollutant transfer to water bodies possible. This type of arrangement may not be sufficient to favor beneficial organisms at a level that reduces pesticide use.

Fossil energy : Variable depending on field edge management. Mowing is low energy and should not be done too frequently (once a year to once every two years).

Biodiversity : Variable

Increase in biodiversity due to habitats and resources offered and thanks to the ecological corridor effect. Plant biodiversity is more favored when the field edge soil is nutrient-poor (no fertilizer input, residue removal). Plant biodiversity can be limited (specific flora) or influenced by 1) pedoclimatic context (% clay, acidity, hydromorphic, drying…) and 2) maintenance actions (vehicle passage, soil compaction, mulch…).

Diversity of semi-natural areas in landscapes : Increase

Increase in diversity of landscape elements through establishment of semi-natural areas.

“Agronomic” criteria

Productivity : No effect (neutral)

Soil fertility : No effect (neutral)

In the case of wide field margins (several meters), increase through erosion reduction, development of soil microfauna, both contributing to improved soil structure at the margin and at best a few centimeters around.

Water stress : No effect (neutral)

Water infiltrates better in a grassy field edge and is better retained there, but is no longer available for the crop. Water infiltration into soil is higher where there is no vehicle passage (better porosity due to roots). Embankments and hedges slow surface water flow and favor deep percolation.

Functional biodiversity : Variable

Increase in biodiversity, especially functional biodiversity (beneficial organisms, pollinators). However, the role is weak regarding soil microfauna and microflora, which are less mobile.

Other agronomic criteria : Variable

Development of pathogens and pests : Variable

Field edges can also be reservoirs of bio-aggressors. Examples include thistle or couch grass for weeds, slugs for pests, or ergot for pathogens (the latter can develop on some weeds). Minimum monitoring is therefore necessary, for example for thistle or ergot on weeds. However, maintenance by shredding/mowing (1 to 2 times/year) can be sufficient for the grass strip to act as a "filter effect" against weed dispersion into the crop, at least short term. In the long term, this filter effect may fade.

“Economic” criteria

Operational costs : Increasing

Costs for a 2-meter wide by 100-meter long grass strip (Ibis sheet, see bibliography): 1.5 to 2.5 euros depending on equipment and working speed.

Mechanization costs : Increasing

Costs for a 2-meter wide by 100-meter long grass strip (Ibis sheet, see bibliography): 0.8 euros for a mower, 1.4 euros for a flail mower.

Margin : No effect (neutral)

Very limited impact on farm economics.

Other economic criteria : Increasing

Fuel consumption : Increase

Costs for a 2-meter wide by 100-meter long grass strip (Ibis sheet, see bibliography): 0.1 euros for a mower, 0.2 euros for a flail mower.

“Social” criteria

Working time : Increasing

Limited increase, estimated at 1 minute 30 to 3 minutes for 100 linear meters at 2 meters wide (Ibis network, see bibliography).

Effect on farmer health : Increasing

Image quality of the agricultural environment : Increase

Improvement of the agricultural environment image due to environmental measures taken and landscape evolution, provided the public is informed about farmers' involvement in implementing these measures.

Observation time : Variable

No effect, except additional observations in the margin (beneficial organisms, weeds).

Favored or disadvantaged organisms

Disadvantaged bio-aggressors

Organism	Type	Details
Tomato moth	pest, predator or parasite
mite	pest, predator or parasite	All these bio-aggressors are targets of beneficial organisms favored by the technique. They are thus indirectly disadvantaged.
stem weevil	pest, predator or parasite
terminal bud weevil	pest, predator or parasite
beet leafhopper	pest, predator or parasite
wheat leafhopper	pest, predator or parasite
corn leafhopper	pest, predator or parasite
wheat flower midge	pest, predator or parasite
pea midge	pest, predator or parasite
cockchafer	pest, predator or parasite
slug	pest, predator or parasite
pollen beetle	pest, predator or parasite
cutworm	pest, predator or parasite
autumn aphid	pest, predator or parasite
black bean aphid	pest, predator or parasite
black bean aphid	pest, predator or parasite
green pea aphid	pest, predator or parasite
green and pink potato aphid	pest, predator or parasite
potato aphids	pest, predator or parasite
potato aphids	pest, predator or parasite
potato aphids	pest, predator or parasite
crucifer aphids	pest, predator or parasite
aphids vectoring severe yellows	pest, predator or parasite
aphids vectoring moderate yellows	pest, predator or parasite
corn borer	pest, predator or parasite
ground beetles	pest, predator or parasite
wireworm	pest, predator or parasite
flax and cereal thrips	pest, predator or parasite
pea thrips	pest, predator or parasite
pea moth	pest, predator or parasite

Favored beneficial organisms

Organism	Technique impact	Type	Details
Spiders	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors	Certain species
Predatory and granivorous ground beetles	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors
Fungi (beneficial)	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors	Areas untreated with fungicides.
Green lacewings and dobsonflies	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors	If melliferous plants are present in the grass strip.
Ladybirds	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors	Certain species
Insectivorous birds	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors	Trees, hedges, groves and gaps in vegetation are important.
Parasitoids	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors
Parasitoids	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors
Predatory or granivorous bugs	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors	Including mirids. Predatory bugs need an environment close to natural state (ecological compensation areas, rich companion flora).
Rove beetles	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors
Predatory hoverflies	MEDIUM	Natural enemies of bio-aggressors	If melliferous plants are present in the grass strip.

For more information

Beneficial organisms : establishment of reservoir zones; Beneficial organisms : management of crop edges
-French Association for Plant Protection, coordination : Jean-Louis Bernard

AFPP guide working group, Technical brochure, 2011

AFPP website

Beneficial organisms in arable crops
-Hasler M.; Keller L.; Meyer A.

Roman agricultural extension service. UFA Review 1/99, 8401 Winterthur, 1st edition, Technical brochure, 1999

link to article

Grass strips. Weeds do not spread into the field
-Isabelle Escoffier

La France agricole n°3378, 25 March 2011, Press article, 2011

article

Field margins
-Ibis

Technical brochure, 2011

Cost indications for establishment and maintenance of grass strips

Practical guide for designing vegetable cropping systems saving phytopharmaceutical products. Technical sheet T24.
-Launais M., Bzdrenga L., Estorgues V., Faloya V., Jeannequin B., Lheureux S., Nivet L., Scherrer B., Sinoir N., Szilvasi S., Taussig C., Terrentroy A., Trottin-Caudal Y., Villeneuve F.

Ministry of Agriculture, French Biodiversity Agency, GIS PIClég., Book, 2014

To access the Guide see link

Other means to limit weed risk
-Pierre Mischler (Agro-Transfert ressources et Territoires)

Agro-Transfert ressources et Territoires, Technical brochure, 2011

link to article

Keywords

Bio-aggressor control method : Cultural control

Mode of action : Action on initial stock

Type of pesticide use strategy : Redesign

Appendices

Favorise les auxiliaires

Défavorise les bioagresseurs suivants

Managing and Maintaining Plot Borders

Contents