A multi-year study was carried out at two citrus groves with mature trees in Southwest Florida in the United States to evaluate the effects of cover cropping on the citrus inter-row as a sustainable weed management strategy in the Florida citrus production system. Two cover crop (CC) mixes (legume + nonlegume species and only non-legume species) were compared with a no-CC grower standard management (GSM) that utilized the herbicide paraquat for weed suppression in the citrus tree inter-row spaces. We gathered data on the biomass and density of both cover crops and weeds, during the spring and summer/fall CC planting seasons throughout the study years. Both mixes of CCs effectively reduced weed density in the citrus inter-row by 58 to 99% (P<0.05), depending on the growing season and study locations, compared to GSM. Additionally, there were no significant differences observed between the different CC mixes. Similarly, both CC mixes reduced the weed biomass by 95 to 99% (P<0.05) in the citrus inter-row compared to the GSM. However, weed suppression by CCs varied between growing seasons, mainly due to differences in germination and establishment of the CCs in each season.

Weeds are a fundamental component of agroecosystems and, if not appropriately managed, can cause severe crop yield losses. New perspectives on weed management are required, because current approaches, such as herbicide application or soil tillage, have significant environmental and agronomic drawbacks. We propose the concept of “neutral weed communities,” which are weed communities that coexist with crops and do not negatively affect crop yield and quality compared with weed-free conditions. Management practices that promote neutral weed communities can enable reduced use of herbicides and soil tillage while enhancing ecosystem services and biodiversity. We report scientific evidence of neutral weed communities and survey ecological explanations for why different weed communities have different effects on crop production. We also propose two weed management approaches for attaining neutral weed communities. The first approach aims to maximize weed biodiversity using traditional approaches such as cropping system diversification and integrated weed management. Higher weed biodiversity is associated with lower dominance of competitive weed species that reduce crop yield. The second approach relies on modern tools such as robots and biotechnology to manipulate the density of specific weed species. This approach can remove highly problematic species and minimize niche overlap between the weeds and crops. Given the complexity of interactions among crops, weeds, and other components of the agroecosystem, we highlight the need for multidisciplinary research to illuminate mechanisms that determine the neutrality of weed communities.

Clearfield™ (CL) rice (Oryza sativa L.) is a weedy rice (Oryza spp.; synonym = red rice) control tool that has been used in Brazil since 2003. This system includes the use of an imidazolinone (IMI)-tolerant cultivar and the application of IMI herbicides. In this review article, Brazilian weed scientists evaluate the challenges and lessons learned over 18 yr of CL use. CL system benefits include selective weedy rice control, better crop establishment during the most advantageous period of the year, and more efficient fertilizer use. In Rio Grande do Sul state, the CL system, in conjunction with other improvements, has contributed to rice grain yield gains from 5,500 kg ha−1 before 2002 to around 8,400 kg ha−1 currently. In contrast, the main problem that has arisen over this period is the rapid evolution of IMI-resistant weedy rice, caused by gene flow from CL rice cultivars. The off-label use (rate and continuous use) of IMI herbicides has contributed to the evolution of resistance in Echinochloa spp. and other weeds. IMI herbicide carryover has also affected susceptible crops grown after CL rice. Crop rotation with soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] is increasing, ensuring system sustainability. The importance of minimum tillage has also become apparent. Such cultivation includes applying nonselective herbicides before sowing or just before crop emergence (at the spiking stage to eliminate as much weedy rice as possible and other weeds at an early growth stage). It also includes the use of certified seeds free of weedy rice, following label instructions for IMI herbicides, applying the herbicide PRE followed by POST, and complementary weedy rice management practices, such as roguing of surviving weedy rice plants.

In Bangladesh, weeds in transplanted rice are largely controlled by labor-intensive and costly manual weeding, resulting in inadequate and untimely weed control. Labor scarcity coupled with intensive rice production has triggered increased use of herbicides. These factors warrant a cost-effective and strategic integrated weed management (IWM) approach. On-farm trials with transplanted rice were conducted during monsoon (‘Aman’) season in 2016 and 2017 and winter (‘Boro’) season in 2016 to 2017 in agroecological zones 11 and 12 with ten treatments—seven herbicide-based IWM options, one mechanical weed control-based option, and two checks (farmers’ current weed control practice and weed-free)—to assess effects on weed control, grain yield, labor use, and profitability. Compared to farmers’ practice, herbicide-based IWM options with mefenacet + bensulfuron-methyl as preemergence followed by (fb) either bispyribac-sodium or penoxsulam as postemergence fb one hand-weeding were the most profitable alternatives, with reductions in labor requirement by 11 to 25 person-days ha–1 and in total weed control cost by US$44 to 94 ha–1, resulting in net returns increases by US$54 to 77 ha–1 without compromising on grain yield. In contrast, IWM options with bispyrbac-sodium or penoxsulam as postemergence application fb one hand-weeding reduced yields by 12% to 13% and profits by US$71 to 190 ha–1. The nonchemical option with mechanical weeding fb one hand-weeding performed similarly to farmers’ practice on yield and profitability. We suggest additional research to develop feasible herbicide-free approaches to weed management in transplanted rice that can offer competitive advantages to current practices.

Living mulches can provide many sustainability benefits. However, living mulch–cash crop competition and unreliable weed control are major challenges in living mulch systems. In this study, we evaluated the potential of herbicides used at reduced rates in combination with living mulch to suppress weeds, while simultaneously reducing living mulch vigor. Herbicide treatments were a combination of two POST applications, each consisting of a single, different herbicide. Field trials were conducted in Freeville, NY, USA, using: fresh market field tomato as cash crop; sesbania and sunn hemp as living mulch; and the herbicides fomesafen, halosulfuron, metribuzin, and rimsulfuron. In 2015, when water was not limiting, tomato yield and living mulch biomass were positively correlated. This relationship was negative in 2016, likely because of drought during the growing season. Compared with the untreated living mulch check, using the herbicide treatments in combination with living mulch reduced tomato yield losses by up to 71% in 2015 and 51% in 2016. In these herbicide plus living mulch plots, weed biomass was reduced by up to 97%, compared with the weedy check. Living mulch in herbicide treatments generated up to 2500 kg ha−1 of dry matter during both 2015 and 2016, with an average ground cover of 63% in 2015 and 85% in 2016. A predominantly PRE herbicide with residual soil activity (metribuzin), followed by a herbicide with greater POST activity (halosulfuron/rimsulfuron) was the most effective herbicide application sequence. Results from our study indicate that well-designed herbicide applications may enhance the practicability of living mulch systems.

Diffuse knapweed, a biennial or short-lived perennial, and spotted knapweed, a perennial, are taprooted Eurasian weeds invading rangeland in the western United States and Canada. Knapweed (Centaurea spp.) invasion is associated with reductions in biodiversity, wildlife, and livestock forage, and increased erosion. Spotted knapweed grows to about 1 m and usually has purple flowers, whereas diffuse knapweed is slightly shorter, usually with white flowers. Persistent flower bracts on diffuse knapweed bear a rigid terminal spine about 8 mm long with four or five pairs of shorter lateral spines. Bracts on spotted knapweed have dark spotted tips. Knapweed management involves a combination of containing infestations and control efforts. Hand pulling in areas with small infestations can be effective for controlling spotted and diffuse knapweeds. Picloram applied at 0.28 kg ha−1 provides control for about 3 yr. Effective long-term control of knapweeds requires periodic applications of picloram, which are only cost-effective on highly productive range sites with a residual grass understory. About 12 insect species have been released for knapweed biocontrol. Seed production has been reduced by 46% by insects feeding in the flower heads. Although insects have not reduced spotted knapweed densities, they may stress the weed and shift the competitive balance to associated species. Sheep grazing reduces the density of very young seedlings and may limit seedling recruitment into the population. In areas without a residual understory of desired plant species, revegetation of knapweed-infested rangeland is required. Components of any integrated weed management program are sustained effort, constant evaluation, and the adoption of improved strategies.