scholarly journals SUSTAINABLE URBAN WEED CONTROL: EXPERIENCES OF NON-CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL (MANUAL LABOUR, MECHANICAL AND THERMAL-FLAME WEEDING) IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF OCCHIOBELLO, ITALY

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
FILIPPO MORETTO ◽  
DAVIDE DI DOMENICO
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Manual Labour ◽  
Flame Weeding

scholarly journals Flaming to control weeds in seashore paspalum (Paspalum vaginatum Sw.) turfgrass

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luisa Martelloni ◽  
Marco Fontanelli ◽  
Lisa Caturegli ◽  
Monica Gaetani ◽  
Nicola Grossi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Liquefied Petroleum Gas ◽  
Seashore Paspalum ◽  
The Third ◽  
Paspalum Vaginatum ◽  
Weed Cover ◽  
The University ◽  
Flame Weeding

Weed control is crucial to ensure that turfgrass is established effectively. Although herbicides are commonly used to control weeds in turfgrasses, environmental and public health concerns have led to limiting or banning the use of synthetic herbicides in urban areas. The species seashore paspalum (Paspalum vaginatumSw.) is susceptible to such herbicides. Flame weeding could be an alternative to the use of synthetic herbicides for selective weed control in seashore paspalum. In this study, five different liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) doses of flaming (0, 61, 91, 157 and 237 kg ha-1) were tested in order to find the optimal dose, in terms of weed control and costs. The aim was to maintain a seashore paspalum (cultivar ‘Salam’) turf free of weeds during spring green-up, and at the same time avoid damaging the turfgrass. Using a self-propelled machine designed and built at the University of Pisa, flaming was applied three times when weeds started growing and the turfgrass started green-up. Our results highlight that an LPG dose of 157 kg ha-1was the most economic dose that led to a significant reduction in initial weed cover and density, enabling the turfgrass to recover three weeks after the third application.

scholarly journals Machines for non-chemical intra-row weed control in narrow and wide-row crops: a review

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Peruzzi ◽  
Luisa Martelloni ◽  
Christian Frasconi ◽  
Marco Fontanelli ◽  
Michel Pirchio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Conventional Agriculture ◽  
Row Crops ◽  
Agricultural Engineering ◽  
Recent Addition ◽  
Narrow Row ◽  
Mechanical Devices ◽  
Flame Weeding

Intra-row weed control in organic or low-input cropping systems is more difficult than in conventional agriculture. The various mechanical and thermal devices available for intra-row weed control are reported in this review. Low-tech mechanical devices such as cultivators, finger-weeders, brush weeders, and torsionweeders tend to be used in low density crops, while spring-tine harrows are mainly applied in narrow-row high-density crops. Flame weeding can be used for both narrow and wide-row sown crops, provided that the crop is heat-tolerant. Robotic weeders are the most recent addition to agricultural engineering, and only a few are available on the market. Nowadays, robotic weeders are not yet used in small and medium sized farms. In Europe, highincome niche crops are often cultivated in small farms and farmers cannot invest in high-tech solutions. Irrespectively of the choice of low- or high-tech machines, there are several weeders that can be used to reduce the use of herbicides, making of them a judicious use, or decide to avoid them.

Effectiveness of flame weeding and cultivation for weed control in organic maize

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Strahinja Stepanovic ◽  
Avishek Datta ◽  
Brian Neilson ◽  
Chris Bruening ◽  
Charles A. Shapiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Flame Weeding

scholarly journals Sustainable Organic Corn Production with the Use of Flame Weeding as the Most Sustainable Economical Solution

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 572
Author(s):  
Miloš Rajković ◽  
Goran Malidža ◽  
Mirela Tomaš Simin ◽  
Dragan Milić ◽  
Danica Glavaš-Trbić ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Economic Impacts ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Production Costs ◽  
Corn Production ◽  
Maize Production ◽  
Yield Increase ◽  
Flame Weeding ◽  
Propane Tank

Flame weeding is an alternative method of weed control. Essentially, it is a supplement to other physical and mechanical processes used in organic production. Weed control costs have a large share of the total cost of crop production. This study aimed to investigate hand weed hoeing’s cost-effectiveness, accompanied by inter-row cultivation and flame weeding applied in organic maize production using two different machines to determine the economically best solution. For this purpose, the prototype flame weeder and commercial flame-weeding machinery were used. Designed primarily for smaller fields, the prototype flame weeder was equipped with a cultivator and a 70 kg propane bottle. Commercial Red Dragon flame weeder, fitted with an 800 kg propane tank and featuring no cultivation implements, is designed for larger areas. The analysis has shown that hand hoeing produced a higher yield (8.3 t/ha in total), but it contributed significantly to the production costs. The costs per hectare decreased when the prototype flame weeder and the commercial Red Dragon flame weeder were used compared to hand hoeing. More beneficial economic impacts were recorded when the prototype flame weeder was used (489.39 €/ha) than in applying the Red Dragon flame weeder (456.47 €/ha). The efficacy of flame weeding is somewhat limited and could be enhanced by additional hand hoeing, if the effect of the machine in terms of weeding is observed. However, the analysis has shown that, in this case, investments in additional hand hoeing are not economically justified because the operating costs incurred therein (168 €/ha) were not met by a yield increase of 500 kg/ha, i.e., a surplus revenue of 100 €/ha. Moreover, the economic impacts of flame weeding would be considerably more significant in larger fields.

Weed Response to Flame Weeding at Different Developmental Stages

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 438-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan C. Sivesind ◽  
Maryse L. Leblanc ◽  
Daniel C. Cloutier ◽  
Philippe Seguin ◽  
Katrine A. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Control Method ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Maturity Stage ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Response Curves ◽  
Common Lambsquarters ◽  
Redroot Pigweed ◽  
Weed Flora ◽  
Flame Weeding

Flame weeding is often used for weed control in organic production and other situations where use of herbicides is prohibited or undesirable. Response to cross-flaming was evaluated on five common weed species: common lambsquarters, redroot pigweed, shepherd's-purse, barnyardgrass, and yellow foxtail. Dose-response curves were generated according to species and growth stage. Dicot species were more effectively controlled than monocot species. Common lambsquarters was susceptible to flame treatment with doses required for 95% control (LD95) ranging from 0.9 to 3.3 kg/km with increasing maturity stage. Comparable levels of control in redroot pigweed required higher doses than common lambsquarters, but adequate control was still achieved. Flaming effectively controlled shepherd's-purse at the cotyledon stage (LD95 = 1.2 kg/km). However, the LD95 for weeds with two to five leaves increased to 2.5 kg/km, likely due to the rosette stage of growth, which allowed treated weeds to avoid thermal injury. Control of barnyardgrass and yellow foxtail was poor, with weed survival > 50% for all maturity stages and flaming doses tested. Flame weeding can be an effective and labor-saving weed control method, the extent of which is partially dependent on the weed flora present. Knowledge of the local weed flora and their susceptibility to flame weeding is vital for the effective use of this method.

scholarly journals Propelled abrasive grit applications for weed management in transitional corn grain production

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauricio Erazo-Barradas ◽  
Claire N. Friedrichsen ◽  
Frank Forcella ◽  
Dan Humburg ◽  
Sharon A. Clay
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Developmental Stages ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Organic Systems ◽  
Weed Growth ◽  
Flame Weeding

AbstractWeed control is challenging to farmers who are transitioning from production systems that use synthetic herbicides to organic systems. A 2-year field study examined air-propelled corncob grit abrasion for in-row weed control efficacy and effect on corn yield. Grit was applied based on corn vegetative developmental stages with one (V1, V3 or V5), two (V1 + V3, V1 + V5, or V3 + V5), or three (V1 + V3 + V5) applications. Flame-weeding or cultivation was used after the V5 application for between-row weed control. Grit applications decreased in-row weed densities by about 60% (α = 0.05) and biomass up to 95% (α = 0.001). Between-row treatments provided similar control, and reduced weed biomass by 55% in 2013 (α = 0.01) and 86% (α = 0.001) in 2014. In-row grit treatments increased corn yield up to 44%, and yield was more influenced by in-row weeds than between row weeds. These results indicate that abrasive corncob grit for in-row weed control, supplemented with cultivation or flaming, can reduce weed biomass substantially and help maintain corn yield. However, timing and frequency of grit application need further refinement based on weed growth as influenced by climate, as treatments at similar corn growth stages did not consistently provide adequate weed control between years.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document