Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T02:00:37.282Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strategies to control Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) under organic farming conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2008

Pavel Lukashyk ,
Martin Berg  and
Ulrich Köpke
Pavel Lukashyk*
Affiliation:
Institute of Sugar Beet Research, Department of Coordination, D-37079 Göttingen, Germany.
Martin Berg
Affiliation:
Experimental Farm for Organic Agriculture‘Wiesengut’, D-53773 Hennef, Germany.
Ulrich Köpke
Affiliation:
Institute of Organic Agriculture, University of Bonn, D-53115 Bonn, Germany.
*
*Corresponding author: lukashyk@ifz-goettingen.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three strategies for controlling Cirsium arvense including (i) repeated stubble tillage with subsequent forage crop cultivation, (ii) repeated mowing of a ryegrass–clover ley and (iii) forage crop cultivation following a ryegrass–clover ley ploughed in May/June were investigated in field experiments over 3 years at the Experimental Farm for Organic Agriculture ‘Wiesengut’ in North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany. The development of C. arvense (shoot density, shoot size and ground cover) was regularly assessed on fixed standardized subplots. In the medium-term (9 months), repeated stubble tillage (i) decreased shoot density and regrowth capacity of C. arvense more effectively than a mowed ryegrass–clover ley (ii and iii). However, after 22 months, strategies (i) and (ii) resulted in a similar strong reduction of C. arvense shoot density of 95 and 97%, respectively. At this time, the efficacy of strategy (iii) (89%) was not significantly different to that of strategies (i) and (ii). After 26 months, the effect of all strategies was still apparent; however, the efficacy of strategy (iii) was significantly lower than that of strategy (ii). Generally, the different strategies showed only minor differences, thus delivering options for optimal strategies of thistle control under given specific conditions of sites and cropping systems.

Keywords

Canada thistlestubble ploughwing share cultivatormouldboard ploughtillageryegrass–clover leysforage cropmowing
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 23 , Special Issue 1: Researching Sustainable Agricultural Systems, ISOFAR 2005 , March 2008 , pp. 13 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Holm, L.G., Plucknett, D.L., Pancho, J.V., and Herberger, J.P. 1977. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. In The World's Worst Weed – Distribution and Biology. East-West Centre, University Press of Hawaii, Honolulu. p. 217–224.Google Scholar
2 Hodgson, J.M. 1968. The nature, ecology, and control of Canada thistle. United States Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin No. 1386, 32 pp.Google Scholar
3 Donald, W.W. 1990. Management and control of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Reviews in Weed Science 5:193–250.Google Scholar
4 Verschwele, A. and Häusler, A. 2003. Strategies to control Cirsium arvense in organic farming systems. Proceedings of the BCPC International Congress: Crop Science and Technology, Glasgow. p. 481–486.Google Scholar
5 Staniforth, D.W. and Wiese, A.F. 1985. Weed biology and its relationship to weed control in limited-tillage systems. In Wiese, A.F. (ed.) Weed Control in Limited Tillage Systems. Weed Science Society of America, Chamaign, IL. p. 15–25.Google Scholar
6 Pekrun, C. and Claupein, W. 2004. The effect of stubble tillage and primary tillage on population dynamics of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) in organic farming. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection (Special Issue XIX): 483–490.Google Scholar
7 Hatcher, P.E. and Melander, B. 2003. Combining physical, cultural and biological methods: prospects for integrated non-chemical weed management strategies. Weed Research 43:303–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Dock Gustavsson, A.-M. 1997. Growth and regenerative capacity of plants of Cirsium arvense. Weed Research 37:229–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 SAS Institute-Inc. 1999. The SAS System for Windows Edition 8.01. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
10 Håkansson, S. 2003. Weeds and Weed Management on Arable Land: An Ecological Approach. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 Boström, U. and Fogelfors, H. 1999. Type and time of autumn tillage with and without herbicides at reduced rates in southern Sweden 2. Weed flora and diversity. Soil and Tillage Research 50:283–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12 Zimdahl, R.L., Lin, J., and Dall'Armellina, A.A. 1991. Effect of light, watering frequency, and chlorsulfuron on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Science 39:590–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Dau, A. and Gerowitt, B. 2004. Cultural control of Cirsium arvense in a cereal-based crop rotation. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection (Special Issue XIX):475–481.Google Scholar
14 Häusler, A., Verschwele, A., and Zwerger, P. 2004. Bedeutung von Stoppelbearbeitung und Fruchtfolge für die Regulierung der Acker-Kratzdistel (Cirsium arvense) im ökologischen Landbau. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz (Sonderheft XIX):563–572.Google Scholar
15 Mitchell, R.B. and Abernethy, R.J. 1995. The effect of topping and repeat grazings on Californian thistle and pasture production. Proceedings of the 48th New Zealand Plant Protection Conference, Palmerston North, New Zealand, p. 189–193.Google Scholar
16 Hodgson, J.M. 1971. Canada Thistle and Its Control. United States Department of Agriculture Leaflet No. 523. Washington, DC, 8 pp.Google Scholar
17 Dock Gustavsson, A.-M. 1994. Akertistelns reaktion pa avslagning, omgrävning och konkurrens. Sveriges Lantbruksuniveritet Fakta Mark/Växter 13, Uppsala, 4 pp.Google Scholar
18 Arny, A.C. 1932. Variations in the organic reserves in underground parts of five perennial weeds from late April to November. Minnesota Agricultural Experiment station's Bulletin No. 84, 28 pp.Google Scholar
19 McAllister, R.S. and Haderlie, L.C. 1985. Seasonal variations in Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) root bud growth and root carbohydrate reserves. Weed Science 33:44–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 Welton, F.A., Morris, V.H. and Hartzler, A.J. 1929. Organic food reserves in relation to the eradication of Canada thistle. Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station's Bulletin No. 441, 25 pp.Google Scholar
21 Bakker, D. 1960. A comparative life history study of Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. and Tussilago farfara L., the most troublesome weeds in the newly reclaimed polders of the former Zuiderzee. In Harper, J.L. (ed.) The Biology of Weeds. Blackwell, Oxford. p. 205–222.Google Scholar
22 Otzen, D. and Koridon, A.H. 1970. Seasonal fluctuation of organic food reserves in underground part of Cirsium arvense and Tussilago farbara. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 19(4):495–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23 Heinisch, O. 1931. Die Ackerkratzdistel. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. In Roemer, Th. (ed.) Archiv für Pflanzenbau. Verlag von Julius Springer, Berlin. p. 348–420.Google Scholar
24 Wehsarg, O. 1954. Ackerunkräuter. Biologie, allgemeine Bekämpfung und Einzelbekämpfung. Akademie Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
25 Hansen, A.A. 1918. Canada thistle and methods of eradication. United States Department of Agriculture, Farmers Bulletin No. 1002, 15 pp.Google Scholar
26 Hunter, J.H., Hsiao, A.I., and McIntyre, G.I. 1985. Some effects of humidity on the growth and development of Cirsium arvense. Botanical Gazette 146:483–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar