Nonsynthetic herbicides offer a potentially useful addition to the suite of weed management tools available to organic growers, but limited information is available to guide the optimal use of these products. The objectives of this research were to (1) evaluate the efficacy of clove oil– and vinegar-based herbicides on weeds across multiple states, and (2) assess the potential role of temperature, relative humidity (RH), and cloud cover in explaining inter-state variations in results. From 2006 to 2008, a total of 20 field trials were conducted in seven states using an identical protocol. Seeds of brown mustard were sown and herbicides applied to both mustard and emerged weeds when mustard reached the three- to four-leaf stage. Treatments included clove oil at 2.5, 5, 7.5, and 10% v/v concentrations at 54 L ha−1, and vinegar at 5, 10, 15, and 20% v/v concentrations at 107 L ha−1. Results varied widely across trials. In general, concentrations of at least 7.5% for clove oil and 15% for vinegar were needed for adequate control of mustard. Both products were more effective at suppressing mustard than Amaranthus spp. or common lambsquarters. Poor control was observed for annual grasses. No significant effects of cloud cover on the efficacy of either product were detected. In contrast, RH was positively correlated with control of brown mustard by both clove oil and vinegar with improved control at higher RH. Temperature had no detectable effect on the efficacy of clove oil, but higher temperatures improved control of brown mustard by vinegar.

Field studies were conducted in 1996, 1997, and 1998 at Clinton, NC, to determine the influence of Palmer amaranth establishment and removal periods on the yield and quality of plasticulture-grown ‘Mountain Spring' fresh market tomato. Treatments consisted of 14 Palmer amaranth establishment and removal periods. Half of the treatments were weed removal treatments (REM), in which Palmer amaranth was sowed at the time tomato transplanting and allowed to remain in the field for 0 (weed-free all season), 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, or 10 wk after transplanting (WAT). The second set of the treatments, weed establishment treatments (EST), consisted of sowing Palmer amaranth 0 (weedy all season), 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, or 10 WAT and allowing it to grow in competition with tomato the remainder of the season. Tomato shoot dry weight was reduced 23, 7, and 11 g plant−1 for each week Palmer amaranth removal was delayed from 0 to 10 WAT in 1996, 1997, and 1998, respectively. Marketable tomato yield ranged from 87,000 to 41,000 kg ha−1 for REM of 0 to 10 WAT and 28,000 to 88,000 kg ha−1 for EST of 0 to 6 WAT. Percentage of jumbo, large, medium, and cull tomato yields ranged from 49 to 33%, 22 to 31%, 2 to 6%, and 9 to 11%, respectively, for REM of 0 to 10 WAT and 30 to 49%, 38 to 22%, 3 to 2%, and 12 to 9%, respectively, for EST of 0 to 6 WAT. To avoid losses of marketable tomato yield and percentage of jumbo tomato fruit yield, tomato plots must remain free of Palmer amaranth between 3 and 6 WAT. Observed reduction in marketable tomato yield was likely due to competition for light as Palmer amaranth plants exceeded the tomato plant canopy 6 WAT and remained taller than tomato plants for the remainder of the growing season.

A late-summer survey of herbicide-resistant (HR) weeds was conducted in Alberta in 2007, Manitoba in 2008, and Saskatchewan in 2009, totaling 1,000 randomly selected annually cropped fields. In addition, we screened 1,091 weed seed samples (each sample from one field) submitted by Prairie growers between 2007 and 2011. Of 677 fields where wild oat samples were collected, 298 (44%) had an HR biotype. Group 1 (acetyl CoA carboxylase inhibitor)-HR wild oat was confirmed in 275 fields (41%), up from 15% in previous baseline surveys (2001 to 2003). Group 2 (acetolactate synthase)-HR wild oat was found in 12% of fields (vs. 8% in 2001 to 2003). Group 8 (triallate, difenzoquat)-HR wild oat was identified in only 8% of fields (not tested in 2001 to 2003); the frequency of occurrence of group 1+2-HR wild oat was similar (8%, vs. 3% in 2001 to 2003). Group 1-HR green foxtail was found in 27% of 209 fields sampled for the weed (vs. 6% in 2001 to 2003). Group 2-HR spiny sowthistle was confirmed in all Alberta fields sampled (vs. 67% in 2001); common chickweed was found mainly in Alberta in 40% of fields (vs. 17% in 2001). Group 2-HR weed biotypes not previously detected in the baseline surveys included false cleavers mainly in Alberta (17% of fields) and Saskatchewan (21%), Powell amaranth in Manitoba (16% of fields), wild mustard (three populations in Saskatchewan and Manitoba), and wild buckwheat (one population in Alberta). No sampled weed populations across the Prairies were found to be resistant to herbicides from group 4 (synthetic auxins), group 9 (glyphosate), or group 10 (glufosinate). Based on the proportion of total field area at each site infested with HR weeds, it is estimated that 7.7 million ha (29% of annually cropped land) are infested with HR weeds (eight-fold increase from 2001 to 2003), in a total field area of 9.9 million ha (37%)—over a two-fold increase. Of 816 cases of HR wild oat identified from submitted samples, 69% were group 1-HR, 15% group 2-HR, and 16% group 1+2-HR. Additionally, there were 10 populations of group 1-HR green foxtail in Saskatchewan or Manitoba, and six populations of group 1-HR Persian darnel in southern Alberta and Saskatchewan. Various group 2-HR broadleaf weeds were identified, including 17 wild mustard populations mainly from Saskatchewan and 39 cleavers populations across the three Prairie provinces. Herbicide-use data from 2006 to 2010 indicated continued reliance on group 1 herbicides in cereal crops and group 2 herbicides in pulse crops.

In Alaska Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands, succession of fields planted with grass and clover to shrubs and small trees is resulting in program compliance problems related to ease of reconversion to crop lands. Standard practice for slowing this succession is mowing every 2 to 3 yr, which does not kill the woody vegetation. A field study was conducted at three sites over 2 yr to determine if 2,4-D (2.2 kg ae ha−1 2-ethylhexyl ester) or triclopyr (2.2 kg ae ha−1 butoxyethyl ester) applied broadcast or 2,4-D (2.2 kg ae ha−1 2,4-D dimethylamine salt) or triclopyr (1.7 kg ae ha−1 triclopyr triethylamine salt) applied with a Diamond Wet Blade™ mower (DWB) would result in longer shrub control compared to mowing. Mowing was conducted at both 15 and 45 cm above ground level and herbicides were applied with the DWB at three rates. Measurements 2 yr after treatment (YAT) confirmed that both herbicides reduced shrub cover about 50% compared to controls. Reduced rates of the herbicides applied with the DWB did not result in decreased shrub control. Grass cover was negatively correlated with shrub cover. Typically, mower height did not alter treatment effects. Treatments had little impact on forb cover and composition 2 YAT, with the exception of fireweed, which was generally reduced where herbicides were applied. Application of 2,4-D and triclopyr does not decrease the frequency of shrub control in CRP lands in Alaska. Use of 2,4-D and triclopyr with or without mowing resulted in no widespread improvement over the current practice of mowing to 15 cm every 2 to 3 yr.

Reduced-tillage systems including no-tillage and striptillage have well-known benefits for conserving and improving soils, protecting vulnerable crops from extreme weather events, and reducing labor and fuel costs associated with full-width inversion tillage (Franzluebbers 2002, 2005; Parsch et al. 2001; Pesant et al. 1987; Spargo et al. 2008). Despite these benefits, reduced-tillage has not been widely adopted in many cropping systems due in part to the increased difficulty of managing weeds when tillage is not used. Not surprisingly, adoption of reduced-tillage has occurred primarily in crops for which low-cost, effective herbicides are available, including glyphosate-resistant soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], corn (Zea mays L.), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), and sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L.) (Horowitz et al. 2010; Tarkalson et al. 2012). Increased use of a narrow range of herbicides in these cropping systems has exacerbated problems of herbicide resistance (Duke and Powles 2009; Heap 2012). Conversely, adoption of reduced-tillage has been limited in crops where effective herbicides are not available (e.g. in “minor crops” like vegetables) or prohibited (e.g. in organic production systems). Research aimed at identifying nonchemical approaches to managing weeds in reduced-tillage production systems has the potential to increase adoption of reducedtillage while minimizing herbicide use and selection pressure for herbicide resistance in production systems currently using reduced tillage (Figure 1).

Cover crop–based organic rotational no-till soybean production has attracted attention from farmers, researchers, and other agricultural professionals because of the ability of this new system to enhance soil conservation, reduce labor requirements, and decrease diesel fuel use compared to traditional organic production. This system is based on the use of cereal rye cover crops that are mechanically terminated with a roller-crimper to create in situ mulch that suppresses weeds and promotes soybean growth. In this paper, we report experiments that were conducted over the past decade in the eastern region of the United States on cover crop–based organic rotational no-till soybean production, and we outline current management strategies and future research needs. Our research has focused on maximizing cereal rye spring ground cover and biomass because of the crucial role this cover crop plays in weed suppression. Soil fertility and cereal rye sowing and termination timing affect biomass production, and these factors can be manipulated to achieve levels greater than 8,000 kg ha−1, a threshold identified for consistent suppression of annual weeds. Manipulating cereal rye seeding rate and seeding method also influences ground cover and weed suppression. In general, weed suppression is species-specific, with early emerging summer annual weeds (e.g., common ragweed), high weed seed bank densities (e.g. > 10,000 seeds m−2), and perennial weeds (e.g., yellow nutsedge) posing the greatest challenges. Due to the challenges with maximizing cereal rye weed suppression potential, we have also found high-residue cultivation to significantly improve weed control. In addition to cover crop and weed management, we have made progress with planting equipment and planting density for establishing soybean into a thick cover crop residue. Our current and future research will focus on integrated multitactic weed management, cultivar selection, insect pest suppression, and nitrogen management as part of a systems approach to advancing this new production system.

The challenges associated with the adoption of conservation tillage and/or low-input cropping systems, whether organic or herbicide-free, across Canada are shaped by scale, environment, and local practices. A study in eastern Canada captured the challenges of introducing low-input cropping systems in mature (20+ yr) tillage treatments in a barley/red clover/corn/soybean rotation. Each mature tillage system came with its own weed problems, but this did not affect crops such as barley and red clover, which produced similar yields across high and low input systems. However, some form of primary tillage was needed to achieve adequate weed control and yield in organic (ORG) and herbicide-free (HF) systems. The HF and ORG systems with no-till actually failed to produce a corn crop but produced soybean yields that were half or less than that for other treatments. The successful combination of conservation tillage practices and low-input systems in eastern Canada would thus appear to be crop-specific, being easier to achieve in competitive cereal crops. In western Canadian organic agriculture, tillage is practiced with low-disturbance chisel plows instead of inversion plows. However, green manure crops (summer cover crops) are often terminated with tandem discs. Both roller crimpers and mowing can successfully kill annual green manure crops such as field pea and rye, and usually result in reduced weed growth following termination. However, the lack of tillage can result in lower crop yields in wheat following green manure terminated by roller crimping compared to tillage. Challenges for no-till organic practices include perennial weed control and soil fertility. Overall, flexible crop production programs such as the former Manitoba Pesticide Free Production program and the “Agriculture raisonnéeTM” program in Québec are more likely to promote sustained environmental, economic, and social prosperity than rigid adherence to organic or no-till practices.

With growing agricultural demands from both conventional and organic systems comes the need for sustainable practices to ensure long-term productivity. Implementation of reduced- or no-till practices offers a number of environmental benefits for agricultural land and maintains adequate yield for current and future production. Concerns over satisfactory pest control options, particularly weed control, have contributed to the slow adoption of conservation practices in many areas. To identify effective alternative weed management options for use in conservation systems, research in the Southeast has continued to evaluate the use of cover crops in conjunction with reduced-tillage practices. A number of cover crop species, including cereal grains, legumes, and Brassicaceae species, that have potential to suppress weeds through direct crop interference or allelopathic potential have been investigated. Many recent research projects in the Midsouth and southeastern United States have assessed the success of cover crops in reduced-tillage row crop settings with promising outcomes in some systems. However, continued research is necessary to identify appropriate cover crop and tillage systems for use in other agricultural settings, such as vegetable crops and organic production systems.

In northern U.S. vegetable cropping systems, attempts at no-till (NT) production have generally failed because of poor crop establishment and delayed crop maturity. Strip tillage (ST) minimizes these problems by targeting tillage to the zone where crops are planted while maintaining untilled zones between crop rows, which foster improvements in soil quality. ST has been shown to maintain crop yields while reducing energy use and protecting soils in vegetable crops, including sweet corn, winter squash, snap bean, carrot, and cole crops. Despite potential benefits of ST, weed management remains an important obstacle to widespread adoption. Increased adoption of ST in cropping systems for which effective, low-cost herbicides are either limited (e.g., most vegetable crops) or prohibited (e.g., organic systems) will require integration of multiple cultural, biological, and mechanical approaches targeting weak points in weed life cycles. Weed population dynamics under ST are more complex than under either full-width, conventional tillage (CT) or NT because weed propagules—as well as factors influencing them—can move readily between zones. For example, the untilled zone in ST may provide a refuge for seed predators or a source of slowly mineralized nitrogen, which affects weed seed mortality and germination in the tilled zone. Greater understanding of such interzonal interactions may suggest manipulations to selectively suppress weeds while promoting crop growth in ST systems. Previous studies and recent experiences in ST vegetable cropping systems suggest a need to develop weed management strategies that target distinct zones while balancing crop and soil management tradeoffs. For example, in untilled zones, optimal management may consist of weed-suppressive cover crop mulching, combined with nitrogen exclusion and high-residue cultivation as needed. In contrast, weed management in the tilled zone may benefit from innovations in precision cultivation and flame-weeding technologies. These short-term strategies will benefit from longer-term approaches, including tillage-rotation, crop rotation, and cover cropping strategies, aimed at preventing seed production, promoting seed predation and decay, and preventing buildup of problematic perennial weeds. However, a concerted research effort focused on understanding weed populations as well as testing and refining integrated weed management strategies will be necessary before ST is likely to be widely adopted in vegetable cropping systems without increased reliance on herbicides.

Noninversion tillage with tine- or disc-based cultivations prior to crop establishment is the most common way of reducing tillage for arable cropping systems with small grain cereals, oilseed rape, and maize in Europe. However, new regulations on pesticide use might hinder further expansion of reduced-tillage systems. European agriculture is asked to become less dependent on pesticides and promote crop protection programs based on integrated pest management (IPM) principles. Conventional noninversion tillage systems rely entirely on the availability of glyphosate products, and herbicide consumption is mostly higher compared to plow-based cropping systems. Annual grass weeds and catchweed bedstraw often constitute the principal weed problems in noninversion tillage systems, and crop rotations concurrently have very high proportions of winter cereals. There is a need to redesign cropping systems to allow for more diversification of the crop rotations to combat these weed problems with less herbicide input. Cover crops, stubble management strategies, and tactics that strengthen crop growth relative to weed growth are also seen as important components in future IPM systems, but their impact in noninversion tillage systems needs validation. Direct mechanical weed control methods based on rotating weeding devices such as rotary hoes could become useful in reduced-tillage systems where more crop residues and less workable soils are more prevalent, but further development is needed for effective application. Owing to the frequent use of glyphosate in reduced-tillage systems, perennial weeds are not particularly problematic. However, results from organic cropping systems clearly reveal that desisting from glyphosate use inevitably leads to more problems with perennials, which need to be addressed in future research.

In the rice–wheat (RW) systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia, conservation tillage practices, including zero-tillage (ZT), are being promoted to address emerging problems such as (1) shortages of labor and water, (2) declining factor productivity, (3) deterioration of soil health, and (4) climate change. Despite multiple benefits of ZT, weed control remains a major challenge to adoption, resulting in more dependence on herbicides for weed control. Alternative management strategies are needed to reduce dependence on herbicides and minimize risks associated with their overuse, including evolution of herbicide resistance. The objectives of this review are to (1) highlight and synthesize research efforts in nonchemical weed management in ZT RW systems and (2) identify future weed ecology and management research needs to facilitate successful adoption of these systems. In ZT RW systems, crop residue can play a central role in suppressing weeds through mulch effects on emergence and seed predation. In ZT rice, wheat residue mulch (5 t ha−1) reduced weed density by 22 to 76% and promoted predation of RW weeds, including littleseed canarygrass and barnyardgrass seeds. For ZT wheat, rice residue mulch (6 to 10 t ha−1) in combination with early sowing reduced emergence of littleseed canarygrass by over 80%. Other promising nonchemical approaches that can be useful in suppressing weeds in ZT RW systems include use of certified seeds, weed-competitive cultivars, stale seedbed practices, living mulches (e.g., sesbania coculture), and water and nutrient management practices that shift weed–crop competition in favor of the crop. However, more research on emergence characteristics and mulching effects of different crop residues on key weeds under ZT, cover cropping, and breeding crops for weed suppression will strengthen nonchemical weed management programs. Efforts are needed to integrate multiple tactics and to evaluate long-term effects of nonchemical weed management practices on RW cropping system sustainability.