Mechanical weed control in maize for smallholder farmers, an alternative to chemical control?
Material type:
TextLanguage: English Publication details: Mexico : EiA : CIMMYT, 2023.Description: 16 pagesSubject(s): Summary: Weeds compete with crops for water, light, nutrients, and space, and if left uncontrolled, can represent significant losses in crop yields. To address this problem, there are several methods of weed control, with chemical control through the application of herbicides being the most widely used. However, their intensive use has serious environmental implications and, in the specific case of Mexico, in December 2020 the federal government launched a decree to achieve the total substitution of glyphosate and agrochemicals used that contain it as an active ingredient, pressing on the need for sustainable and culturally appropriate alternatives. Six maize trials were established in the spring-summer 2022 cycle in southern and southeastern Mexico, where conventional tools, non-self-propelled power tools, two-wheel tractor-driven tools and chemical control were evaluated. Parameters such as field capacity, weed control efficiency (WCE), operating costs, and grain yield for one and two interventions were determined. Regarding field capacity, chemical control was superior to the other tools (0.15 ha/h). WCE values and grain yields varied according to the experimental site and its agroecological conditions. Under limited resource conditions, making at least one intervention helped to obtain higher yields than the no control treatment, under intermediate resource conditions making two interventions helped to increase yields, however, under good resource conditions, making two interventions grain yields were lower than making one. The highest cost was reported by the rototiller (4,677 MXN$/ha), the lowest by the machete (1,570 MXN$/ha) and, regarding chemical control, by not considering personal protective equipment, costs are considerably reduced, however, not using it has an even more serious cost, the operator's health. The results show that it is possible to substitute chemical control for some of the mechanical control alternatives, but it is not possible to establish which specific tool is the optimal solution for weed control for all sites, as this depends on several factors, including the willingness to pay for these alternatives. For adequate weed control it is important to consider an integrated weed management plan that includes the use of mechanical tools.
| Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | Item holds | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Report | CIMMYT Knowledge Center: John Woolston Library | CIMMYT Publications Collection | Available |
Open Access
Draft version
Weeds compete with crops for water, light, nutrients, and space, and if left uncontrolled, can represent significant losses in crop yields. To address this problem, there are several methods of weed control, with chemical control through the application of herbicides being the most widely used. However, their intensive use has serious environmental implications and, in the specific case of Mexico, in December 2020 the federal government launched a decree to achieve the total substitution of glyphosate and agrochemicals used that contain it as an active ingredient, pressing on the need for sustainable and culturally appropriate alternatives. Six maize trials were established in the spring-summer 2022 cycle in southern and southeastern Mexico, where conventional tools, non-self-propelled power tools, two-wheel tractor-driven tools and chemical control were evaluated. Parameters such as field capacity, weed control efficiency (WCE), operating costs, and grain yield for one and two interventions were determined. Regarding field capacity, chemical control was superior to the other tools (0.15 ha/h). WCE values and grain yields varied according to the experimental site and its agroecological conditions. Under limited resource conditions, making at least one intervention helped to obtain higher yields than the no control treatment, under intermediate resource conditions making two interventions helped to increase yields, however, under good resource conditions, making two interventions grain yields were lower than making one. The highest cost was reported by the rototiller (4,677 MXN$/ha), the lowest by the machete (1,570 MXN$/ha) and, regarding chemical control, by not considering personal protective equipment, costs are considerably reduced, however, not using it has an even more serious cost, the operator's health. The results show that it is possible to substitute chemical control for some of the mechanical control alternatives, but it is not possible to establish which specific tool is the optimal solution for weed control for all sites, as this depends on several factors, including the willingness to pay for these alternatives. For adequate weed control it is important to consider an integrated weed management plan that includes the use of mechanical tools.
Text in English
Click on an image to view it in the image viewer