Does diversifying crop rotations suppress weeds? A meta-analysis.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
08
02
2019
accepted:
02
07
2019
entrez:
19
7
2019
pubmed:
19
7
2019
medline:
3
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Over the past half-century, crop rotations have become increasingly simplified, with whole regions producing only one or two crops in succession. Simplification is problematic from a weed management perspective, because it results in weeds' repeated exposure to the same set of ecological and agronomic conditions. This can exacerbate weed infestations and promote the evolution of herbicide resistance. Diversifying crop rotations through addition of crop species and their associated managements may suppress weeds and reduce selection pressure for herbicide resistance by altering stress and mortality factors affecting weed dynamics. Here we report the results of a meta-analysis using 298 paired observations from 54 studies across six continents to compare weed responses due to simple and more diverse crop rotations. We found diversifying from simple rotations reduced weed density (49%), but did not have a significant effect on weed biomass. We investigated the effect of management practices, environmental factors, and rotation design on this effect. Diversification that increased the variance around crop planting dates was more effective in suppressing weeds than increasing crop species richness alone. Increasing rotational diversity reduced weed density more under zero-tillage conditions (65%) than tilled conditions (41%), and did so regardless of environmental context and auxiliary herbicide use. Our findings highlight the value of diversifying crop rotations to control weed populations, and support its efficacy under varied environmental conditions and management scenarios.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31318949
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219847
pii: PONE-D-19-03886
pmc: PMC6638938
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0219847Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
GM Crops. 2011 Jan-Mar;2(1):7-23
pubmed: 21844695
Ecol Appl. 1993 Feb;3(1):92-122
pubmed: 27759234
Ecol Appl. 2018 Jan;28(1):249-261
pubmed: 29112790
Weed Res. 2018 Aug;58(4):239-243
pubmed: 30174354
Nature. 2015 Jan 15;517(7534):365-8
pubmed: 25337882
Pest Manag Sci. 2014 Sep;70(9):1306-15
pubmed: 24302673
Nature. 2018 Mar 7;555(7695):175-182
pubmed: 29517004
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2018 Apr 29;69:789-815
pubmed: 29489395
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Feb 12;363(1491):543-55
pubmed: 17720669
J Anim Ecol. 2008 Jul;77(4):802-13
pubmed: 18397250
Pest Manag Sci. 2017 Nov;73(11):2209-2220
pubmed: 28618159
Pest Manag Sci. 2018 Oct;74(10):2277-2286
pubmed: 29569406
New Phytol. 2009 Dec;184(4):783-93
pubmed: 19780985
Ecol Appl. 2016 Jul;26(5):1352-1369
pubmed: 27755749
Phys Ther. 2009 Sep;89(9):873-80
pubmed: 19723669
Pest Manag Sci. 2017 Jun;73(6):1045-1052
pubmed: 28160383