Sowing / transplanting at close spacing
Presentation
Characterization of the technique
Description of the technique :
| Julien Halska | INRA | julien.halska(at)grignon.inra.fr | Dijon (21) |
Sow with a row spacing as close as possible to the spacing between plants within the row in order to obtain a homogeneous distribution of plants in space. Another option is to sow broadcast.
Example of implementation :
Perform sowing at a spacing :
less than 17 cm for cereals with straw
less than 34 cm for rapeseed
less than 30 cm for corn (beware of compatibility with harvesting equipment)
close to 10-20 cm for soybean
Precision on the technique :
Spacing also depends on the available equipment. It is possible to use opener coulters or to sow broadcast (however, in the latter case, there may be plant losses and staggered emergence, which can lead to a reduction of the smothering effect).
Implementation period On established crop
Spatial scale of implementation Plot
Application of the technique to...
All crops : Sometimes difficult to generalize
It is not possible to reduce row spacing too much on hoed crops or those planned to be hoed.
All soil types : Easily generalizable
The presence of residues can hinder sowing, especially when sowing at narrow spacing. In this case, broadcast sowing may be preferred.
All climatic contexts : Easily generalizable
Effects on the sustainability of the cropping system
“Environmental” criteria
Effect on air quality : Increasing
phytosanitary emissions : DECREASE
Effect on water quality : Increasing
pesticides : DECREASE
Other : No effect (neutral)
This technique contributes to reducing the use of herbicides.
Erosion risk :
This technique has a low contribution to erosion reduction through maximum soil cover by the crop.
“Agronomic” criteria
Productivity : No effect (neutral)
Other agronomic criteria : Increasing
Risk of poor establishment :
In the case of broadcast sowing, the risk of plant losses is higher and emergence may be staggered, which reduces the smothering effect of reduced spacing.
“Economic” criteria
Operational costs : Decreasing
Operational costs are reduced if herbicide use is reduced.
Mechanization costs : Decreasing
Mechanical costs are reduced if the number of herbicide passes is reduced.
Margin : Increasing
“Social” criteria
Working time : Variable
In the case of broadcast sowing, mechanization and working time are reduced because sowing is faster than row sowing.
Favored or disadvantaged organisms
Disadvantaged bioagressors
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual weeds | MEDIUM | weeds | |
| perennials | LOW | weeds |
For more information
- Agronomic solutions limiting herbicide use
- -Gran Aymerich L.
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Professional report, 2006
Link to the report. Sheet no. 10 largely inspired this technical sheet.
- Weed smothering
- -Pierre Mischler (Agro-Transfert)
Agro-Transfert Resources and Territories, Press article, 2011
Keywords
Bioagressor control method : Cultural control
Mode of action : Mitigation
Type of strategy regarding pesticide use : Redesign
Appendices
S'applique aux cultures suivantes
Défavorise les bioagresseurs suivants
