Agricultural weeds remain an important production constraint, with labor shortages and a lack of new herbicide options in recent decades making the problem even more acute. Robotic weeding machines are a possible solution to these increasingly intractable weed problems. Franklin Robotics’ Tertill™ is an autonomous weeding robot designed for home gardeners that relies on a minimalistic design to be cost-effective. The objectives of this study were to investigate the ability of the Tertill to control broadleaf and grass weeds, and based on early observations, experiments were conducted with and without its string-trimmer–like weeding implement. Tertill demonstrated high weed-control efficacy, supporting its utility as a tool for home gardeners. Weeds were best controlled by the combined effect of soil disturbance caused by the action of the robot’s wheels and the actuation of the string trimmer. Despite the regrowth potential of an annual grass due to its meristem location, Tertill maintained low densities of millet in an experimental arena. The simple and effective design of the Tertill may offer insights to inform future development of farm-scale weeding robots. Weed density, emergence periodicity, robot working rate, and robotic weeding mechanisms are important design criteria regardless of the technology used for plant detection.

Wild oat (Avena fatua L.) is one of the most problematic weed species in western Canada due to widespread populations, herbicide resistance, and seed dormancy. In wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), and especially in shorter crops such as lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.), A. fatua seed panicles elongate above the crop canopy, which can facilitate physical cutting of the panicles (clipping) to reduce viable seed return to the seedbank. However, the viability of A. fatua seed at the time of panicle elongation is not known. The objective of this study was to determine the viability of A. fatua seed at successive time intervals after elongation above a wheat or lentil crop canopy. A 2-yr panicle clipping and removal study in wheat and lentil was conducted in Lacombe, AB, and Saskatoon, SK, in 2015 and 2016 to determine the onset of viability in A. fatua seeds at successive clipping intervals. Manual panicle clipping of A. fatua panicles above each crop canopy began when the majority of panicles were visible above respective crop canopies and continued weekly until seed shed began. At the initiation of panicle clipping, A. fatua seed viability was between 0% and 10%. By the last clipping treatment (approximately 6 to 7 wk after elongation), 95% of the A. fatua seeds were viable. Seed moisture and awn angle were not good predictors of A. fatua viability, and therefore were unlikely to provide effective tools to estimate appropriate timing for implementation of A. fatua clipping as a management technique. Based on A. fatua seed viability, earlier clipping of A. fatua is likely to be more effective in terms of population management and easier to implement in shorter crops such as lentil. Investigations into long-term effects of clipping on A. fatua populations are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this management strategy on A. fatua.

The long-term success of weed management programs requires that all crops in a rotation receive satisfactory weed control. Band sowing with inter-band hoeing has been proposed as an innovative weed management strategy for grain crops. In the band-sowing system, crops are sown in a broadcast pattern within a band of some chosen width (here we selected 12.7 cm); weeds between bands are controlled with inter-band hoeing, with or without so-called “blind cultivation,” for example, tine harrowing. Alteration of the crop spatial arrangement from typical single-line rows to a more evenly distributed pattern aims to enhance interspecific competition while reducing intraspecific competition. Field experiments, conducted in Maine in 2016 and 2017, compared band sowing with inter-band hoeing to the region’s standard practice of planting in 16.5-cm rows and tine harrowing in four test crops: spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ‘Glenn’), oat (Avena sativa L. ‘Colt’), field pea (Pisum sativum L. ‘Jetset’), and flax (Linum usitatissimum L. ‘Prairie Thunder’). Band sowing improved weed control relative to the standard practice, especially in crops with greater competitive ability (wheat and oat). Despite improved weed control, in most cases, yields were unaffected by treatment. While band sowing with hoeing provided improved weed control in multiple crops, further study is warranted to optimize seeding rate, band width, and inter-band width to improve crop yields.

Weeds remain the foremost production challenge for organic small grain farmers in the northeastern United States. Instead of crops sown in narrow, single-line rows, band sowing offers a more uniform spatial arrangement of the crop, maximizing interspecific while reducing intraspecific competition. Weeds in the inter-band zone are controlled by cultivating with aggressive sweeps; tine harrowing can target weeds in both intra- and inter-band zones. Field experiments in Maine and Vermont in 2016 and 2017 evaluated band sowing for improved weed control, crop yield, and grain quality in organic spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Newdale’). Specifically, we compared: (1) the standard practice of sowing 16.5-cm rows at a target crop density of 325 plants m−2, (2) narrow-row sowing with increased crop density, (3) wide-row sowing with interrow hoeing, and (4) band sowing both with and (5) without inter-band hoeing. Mustard (Sinapis alba L. ‘Ida Gold’) was planted throughout the experiment as a surrogate weed. Compared with the standard practice, band sowing with hoeing reduced surrogate weed density on average by 45% across site-years. However, effects on weed biomass and yield were inconsistent, perhaps due to suboptimal timing of hoeing and adverse weather conditions. In 1 out of 4 site-years, band sowing with hoeing reduced surrogate weed biomass by 67% and increased crop yield compared with the standard treatment. Results also indicate that band sowing with hoeing may improve 1,000-kernel weight and plump kernel grain-quality parameters.

Harvest weed seed control (HWSC) systems have been developed to exploit the high proportions of seed retained at maturity by the annual weeds rigid ryegrass, wild radish, bromegrass, and wild oats. To evaluate the efficacy of HWSC systems on rigid ryegrass populations, three systems, the Harrington Seed Destructor (HSD), chaff carts, and narrow-windrow burning were compared at 24 sites across the western and southern wheat production regions of Australia. HWSC treatments were established at harvest (Nov. – Dec.) in wheat crops with low to moderate rigid ryegrass densities (1 to 26 plants m−2). Rigid ryegrass counts at the commencement of the next growing season (Apr. – May) determined that HWSC treatments were similarly effective in reducing emergence. Chaff carts, narrow-windrow burning, or HSD systems act similarly on rigid ryegrass seed collected during harvest to deliver substantial reductions in subsequent rigid ryegrass populations by restricting seedbank inputs. On average, population densities were reduced by 60%, but there was considerable variation between sites (37 to 90%) as influenced by seed production and the residual seedbank. Given the observed high rigid ryegrass seed production levels at crop maturity it is clear that HWSC has a vital role in preventing seedbank inputs in Australian conservation cropping systems.

Intensive cultivation in organic peanut is partially effective, but in-row weed control remains problematic. In an attempt to improve in-row weed control, irrigated trials were conducted from 2011 to 2013 near Ty Ty, GA to determine the feasibility of early-season cultivation perpendicular to row direction using a tine weeder when integrated with other weed-control practices. Combinations of perpendicular cultivation (cultivation perpendicular to row direction), parallel cultivation (cultivation in the same direction of the rows), and banded applications of herbicides derived from natural sources were compared. Perpendicular cultivation improved overall weed control and peanut yield (two years of three), but this benefit was independent of weed control from any form of parallel cultivation. Additionally, tractor tire tracks from perpendicular cultivation across the rows repeatedly crushed peanut seedlings. Parallel cultivation with the tine weeder was generally more effective than parallel cultivation with sweeps, particularly for southern crabgrass and Texas millet. Herbicides derived from natural products were inconsistent in controlling dicot weeds, ineffective in controlling annual grasses, and did not protect peanut yield from weed interference.

Yellow and purple nutsedge are common in the southeastern United States, and both perennial species are difficult to control in organic crop-production systems. Tubers are generally confined to the upper portions of the soil profile and are vulnerable to desiccation when brought to the soil surface. A peanut digger is a common implement found in the coastal plain region of the southeastern United States and has shown promise controlling perennial nutsedges in fallow sites. The peanut digger undercuts perennial nutsedges, deposits weeds on the soil surface, and exposes weeds to desiccation. However, rainfall after tillage with the peanut digger allows displaced nutsedges to survive. As part of a senior-level class project, undergraduate mechanical engineering students from Auburn University designed and constructed a cart attached to a peanut digger that collected nutsedges. Key features included a custom hitch that allowed the correct plane of movement and a hydraulic conveyor system that discarded the perennial nutsedges off-site, away from the field. The prototype was tested in a fallow location in the summer of 2014 with a yellow nutsedge infestation averaging 148 plants m−2. One week after the initial field test, tillage using the peanut digger with specialized cart reduced yellow nutsedge densities in the tilled area by > 99%.

Abrasive weed control is a novel weed management tactic that has great potential to increase the profitability and sustainability of organic vegetable cropping systems. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of air-propelled organic abrasive grits (e.g., organic fertilizers) on weed seedling emergence and growth and vegetable crop growth. A series of thirteen greenhouse trials were conducted to determine the susceptibility of weeds to abrasive weed control with one of six organic materials including: corn cob grits, corn gluten meal, greensand fertilizer, walnut shell grits, soybean meal, and bone meal fertilizer. In addition, crop injury was quantified to determine the potential utility of each organic material as abrasive grits in tomato and pepper cropping systems. Of the six organic materials, corn gluten meal, greensand fertilizer, walnut shell grits, and soybean meal provided the broadest range of POST weed control. For example, one blast of corn gluten meal and greensand fertilizer reduced Palmer amaranth (one-leaf stage) seedling biomass by 95 and 100% and green foxtail (one-leaf stage) biomass by 94 and 87%, respectively. None of the organic materials suppressed weed seedling emergence when applied to the soil surface, suggesting that residual weed control with abrasive grits is unlikely. Tomato and pepper stems were relatively tolerant of abrasive grit applications, though blasting with select materials did increase stem curvature in tomato and reduced biomass (corn cob grit) and relative growth rate (corn gluten meal and greensand) in pepper. Results suggest that organic fertilizers can be effectively used as abrasive grits in vegetable crops, simultaneously providing weed suppression and supplemental crop nutrition. Field studies are needed to identify cultural practices that will increase the profitability of multifunctional abrasive weed control in organic specialty crops.

Effective in-season weed management options are limited for organic cereal farmers. Two alternatives to current farmer practices are improving efficacy of physical weed control through use of interrow cultivation or increasing the competitive ability of the crop through elevated seeding rates and more uniform spatial planting patterns. It is unknown how these two methods affect yield, quality, and economic returns. Field experiments were conducted in the northeast United States to determine whether the yield gain from increased weed control from these contrasting weed management strategies resulted in increased net returns and how these different systems affected grain quality. Wheat was planted at two seeding rates (400 and 600 plants m−2), in three row spacings (11, 18, and 23 cm). A fourth crop arrangement that approaches a more uniform spatial distribution through a combination of drilling and broadcasting seed was included. For weed control, treatments received tine harrowing. Wheat sown in wide rows also received interrow cultivation. Each system was sown in the presence and absence of condiment mustard, which was sown as a surrogate weed. Increased seeding rate reduced weed density 64% compared to a crop-free check and 30% compared to regional farmers' practices of 18-cm rows and 400 plants m−2. Increased seeding rates lowered grain protein 5% compared to standard seeding rates. Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivation, reduced weed density 62%, increased yield 16%, and net returns 19% compared to regional organic practices. Significant increases in grain N were limited to weed-free plots. While increased seeding rates improved weed suppression, the high input cost of organic seed make this an unsatisfactory alternative to interrow cultivation and current farmer practices, as yield would need to be. 15 t ha−1 higher at elevated density to offset the extra cost of seed.

POST weed harrowing and other cultivation methods to control weeds in early crop growth stages may result in crop damage due to low selectivity between crop and weeds. Crop tolerance to cultivation plays an important role but it has not been clearly defined and analyzed. We introduce a procedure for analyzing crop tolerance on the basis of digital image analysis. Crop tolerance is defined as the ability of the crop to avoid yield loss from cultivation in the absence of weeds, and it has two components: resistance and recovery. Resistance is the ability of the crop to resist soil covering and recovery is the ability to recover from it. Soil covering is the percentage of the crop that has been buried because of cultivation. We analyzed data from six field experiments, four experiments with species of small grains, barley, oat, wheat, and triticale, and two experiments with barley cultivars with different abilities to suppress weeds. The order of species' tolerance to weed harrowing was triticale > wheat > barley > oat and the differences were mainly caused by different abilities to recover from soil covering. At 25% soil covering, grain yield loss in triticale was 0.5%, in wheat 2.5%, in barley 3.7%, and in oat 6.5%. Tolerance, resistance, and recovery, however, were influenced by year, especially for oat and barley. There was no evidence of differences between barley cultivars in terms of tolerance indicating that differences among species are more important than differences among cultivars. Selectivity analysis made it possible to calculate the crop yield loss due to crop damage associated with a certain percentage of weed control. In triticale, 80% weed control was associated with 22% crop soil cover on average, which reduced grain yield 0.4% on average in the absence of weeds. Corresponding values for wheat, barley, and oat were 23, 21, and 20% crop soil cover and 2.3, 3.6, and 5.1% grain yield loss.

A 3-yr study was conducted to assess cranberry bean susceptibility to mechanical weeding using a rotary hoe at preemergence, hook, cotyledon, unifoliate, and first to fourth trifoliate stages of bean development and at different combinations of stages. The experiment was conducted in a weed-free environment. Cultivation with the rotary hoe reduced bean yield only for the treatment that received four cultivations at four different bean growth stages. Three cultivations improved yield compared with no cultivation. Single cultivation done at any of the eight crop growth stages did not affect yield. Crop density at harvest was decreased 6% in the treatments receiving two cultivations and 9% in the treatments receiving four cultivations compared to no cultivation. The effects of the cultivations on grain moisture were not consistent and differed from year to year. Seed weight did not differ among treatments in either year. Because this study was conducted under weed-free conditions, the beneficial effects of cultivating with the rotary hoe are probably mostly related to breaking the soil crust, improving soil aeration, preserving soil moisture, or promoting mineralization of the nutrients required by the crop.

New tools for controlling weeds would be useful for soybean production in organic systems. Air-propelled abrasive grit is one such tool that performs well for in-row weed control in corn, but crop safety in soybean is unknown. Responses to abrasion by corn-cob grit of soybean seedlings were examined at VE, VC, VU, V1, V2 (emergence, cotyledon, unifoliate, first trifoliate, and second trifoliate, respectively) and combinations of these growth stages, in both greenhouse and field settings. Seedling leaf areas and dry weights in greenhouse experiments were reduced by treatments that included abrasion at VC, with the primary effect expressed through reductions in the size of the unifoliate leaf. In the field, soybean stand also was reduced by grit applications at VC, especially if followed by a second application at VU or V1. However, soybean yield was not reduced by grit applied at any soybean stage of growth. End-of-season weed dry weights did not differ from hand-weeded checks, and weeds did not impact soybean yields. Thus, abrasive grit for in-row weed control can be applied at least twice at VE through V2 growth stages without lowering soybean yield, but applications at VC probably should be avoided.

Polyethylene mulch is an effective component of weed management in vegetable production. However, nutsedges are persistent and proliferate in these systems. Greenhouse studies evaluated the growth and tuber production of purple nutsedge and yellow nutsedge grown in pots covered with black-opaque polyethylene mulch, clear-colorless polyethylene mulch, or nonmulched. Single, presprouted nutsedge tubers were planted and growth evaluated over 16 wk. Relative to the nonmulched, yellow nutsedge shoot production was reduced 46 and 72% by black and clear mulch, respectively. The number of yellow nutsedge shoots that pierced and emerged through black and clear mulches was reduced 96% relative to emerged shoots in the nonmulched control. Yellow nutsedge in the nonmulched produced 366 tubers per initial tuber, whereas tuber production was reduced 49 to 51% in black and clear mulch. Growth of purple nutsedge shoots and tubers in black polyethylene mulch was similar to the nonmulched. Clear polyethylene reduced purple nutsedge tuber biomass relative to nonmulched, but clear mulch was similar to black mulch in nearly all measured variables. Without mulch, yellow nutsedge produced more shoots, shoot biomass, tubers, tuber biomass, and root biomass than purple nutsedge. However, growth of yellow nutsedge was hindered by polyethylene mulch, whereas differences in purple nutsedge growth among mulches could not be detected. The relative insensitivity of purple nutsedge and sensitivity of yellow nutsedge growth to the physical mulch barrier could lead to a shift in nutsedge species composition in mulched vegetable production.

Integrated weed management (IWM) can be defined as a holistic approach to weed management that integrates different methods of weed control to provide the crop with an advantage over weeds. It is practiced globally at varying levels of adoption from farm to farm. IWM has the potential to restrict weed populations to manageable levels, reduce the environmental impact of individual weed management practices, increase cropping system sustainability, and reduce selection pressure for weed resistance to herbicides. There is some debate as to whether simple herbicidal weed control programs have now shifted to more diverse IWM cropping systems. Given the rapid evolution and spread of herbicide-resistant weeds and their negative consequences, one might predict that IWM research would currently be a prominent activity among weed scientists. Here we examine the level of research activity dedicated to weed control techniques and the assemblage of IWM techniques in cropping systems as evidenced by scientific paper publications from 1995 to June 1, 2012. Authors from the United States have published more weed and IWM-related articles than authors from any other country. When IWM articles were weighted as a proportion of country population, arable land, or crop production, authors from Switzerland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada were most prominent. Considerable evidence exists that research on nonherbicidal weed management strategies as well as strategies that integrate other weed management systems with herbicide use has increased. However, articles published on chemical control still eclipse any other weed management method. The latter emphasis continues to retard the development of weed science as a balanced discipline.

Yellow nutsedge is a problematic weed in plasticulture strawberry because herbicides and fumigants currently used in California provide little to no control and because nutsedge shoots easily penetrate standard low-density polyethylene (LDPE) mulch to rapidly establish and compete with the crop. Field studies were conducted at two California locations near Oxnard and Camarillo from 2007 to 2009 to evaluate yellow nutsedge control with physical barriers. Nutsedge germinated in both autumn and spring through LDPE mulch alone, but paper placed between two layers of standard 0.15-mm black LDPE mulch, weed barrier fabric commonly used in landscapes placed under LDPE mulch, and Tyvek Home Wrap placed under LDPE mulch suppressed nutsedge emergence. In 1 yr, the size of strawberry plants grown with weed barrier fabric was reduced 23% compared with the other treatments and the number of marketable fruit in the third month of harvest was reduced 20% compared with LDPE mulch alone, likely because inadequately cut planting holes in this barrier restricted plant growth. Estimated costs for barrier treatments ranged from $5,000 to $12,000 ha−1 compared with estimated hand-weeding costs of up to $24,000 ha−1. In 2007 to 2008 barrier treatments reduced the number of wind-dispersed weeds that commonly land and germinate in strawberry planting holes 67% compared with LDPE mulch alone. Removing the barriers at the end of the two seasons revealed that nutsedge plants sprouted but failed to grow and produce new tubers under the barriers. This observation suggests that nutsedge-impermeable barriers may aid in depletion of the soil tuber bank and therefore can be an effective tool in managing nutsedge for the length of the growing season.

Weed management is often the most troublesome technical problem to be solved in organic farming, especially in poorly competitive crops like vegetables. A four-year (2000–2003) series of trials was established to assess the possibility of adopting an innovative non-chemical weed management system in organic carrot grown on the Fucino plateau, i.e., the most important carrot-growing area in Italy. The system utilized for physical weed control was based first on a false seedbed technique followed by pre-sowing weed removal, performed with a special 2 m wide 6-row spring-tine harrow. Prior to crop emergence, a pass with a flame weeder equipped with four 50 cm wide-open flame burners was also performed. Post-emergence weed control consisted of one or more hoeing passes with a purpose-designed 11-tine precision hoe equipped with spring implements (torsion weeders and vibrating tines), in addition to hand weeding. This innovative system was applied to a novel planting pattern (sowing in ten individual rows within 2 m wide beds) and compared to the standard management system of the area (sowing within 2 m wide beds but in five bands, use of spring-tine harrowing and flame weeding pre-emergence and of traditional hoeing post-emergence). The new system was tested in different commercial farms including both early and late-sown carrot. Assessments included machine operative characteristics, labor time, weed density and biomass, crop root yield and yield quality, and economic data (physical weed control costs and crop gross margin). Compared to the standard system, the innovative system usually resulted in reduced labor time (from 28 to 40%) and total costs for physical weed control (on average −416 € ha−1). Use of the precision hoe resulted in intra-row weed reduction ranging from 65 to 90%, which also led to a marked reduction in the labor required for hand weeding. In 2001 the two systems did not differ in terms of yield and yield quality, whereas in 2002 and 2003 the innovative system showed a higher mean density of carrot plants (from 28 to 55%), root yield (from 30 to 42%), and gross margin (from 40 to 100%). Carrot yield was higher in farms which adopted an early sowing whereas root commercial quality was somewhat variable between systems and years. In general, results obtained with the innovative management system look very promising.