The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low‐external‐input farming systems
Abstract
Greater adoption and refinement of low‐external‐input (LEI) farming systems have been proposed as ways to ameliorate economic, environmental and health problems associated with conventional farming systems. Organic soil amendments and crop diversification are basic components of LEI systems. Weed scientists can improve the use of these practices for weed management by improving knowledge of four relevant ecological mechanisms. First, multispecies crop rotations, intercrops and cover crops may reduce opportunities for weed growth and regeneration through resource competition and niche disruption. Secondly, weed species appear to be more susceptible to phytotoxic effects of crop residues and other organic soil amendments than crop species, possibly because of differences in seed mass. Thirdly, delayed patterns of N availability in LEI systems may favour large‐seeded crops over small‐seeded weeds. Finally, additions of organic materials can change the incidence and severity of soil‐borne diseases affecting weeds and crops. Our research on LEI sweetcorn and potato production systems in central and northern Maine (USA) suggests that these mechanisms can reduce weed density and growth while maintaining crop yields. Low‐external‐input farming systems will advance most quickly through the application of interdisciplinary research focused on these and other ecological mechanisms.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Grime, J. P. (1977) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283244 · Cited by 5,754 · cited 1×
“Grime (1977) suggested, however, that competitive advantages conferred by a high maximal RGR strategy come at the cost of greater growth reductions in stressful environments.”
Background
Cited by
A framework for evaluating ecosystem services provided by cover crops in agroecosystems
Schipanski, M. E., Barbercheck, M., Douglas, M. R., Finney, D. M., Haider, K., Kaye, J. P., Kemanian, A. R., Mortensen, D. A., Ryan, M. R., Tooker, J., et al. (2014) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2013.11.004 · Cited by 652
Managing soil fertility in organic farming systems
Watson, C. A., Atkinson, D., Gosling, P., Jackson, L. R., & Rayns, F. W. (2002) · Soil Use and Management · doi:10.1111/j.1475-2743.2002.tb00265.x · Cited by 522
Vencill, W. K., Nichols, R. L., Webster, T. M., Soteres, J. K., Mallory-Smith, C., Burgos, N. R., Johnson, W. G., & McClelland, M. R. (2012) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-d-11-00206.1 · Cited by 309
Managing soil fertility in organic farming systems
C.A.*, W., Atkinson, D., Gosling, P., Jackson, L. R., & Rayns, F. W. (2002) · Soil Use and Management · doi:10.1079/sum2002131 · Cited by 292
Mirsky, S. B., Curran, W. S., Mortenseny, D. M., Ryany, M. R., & Shumway, D. L. (2011) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-d-10-00101.1 · Cited by 217
Metadata
- Authors
- Liebman, & Davis
- Venue
- Weed Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-02
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 27-47
- ISSN
- 0043-1737 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-3180
- OpenAlex
- W2167889321
- Cited by
- 578
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 22.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low‐external‐input farming systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00164.x
- The paper
- Liebman, & Davis. (2000). Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low‐external‐input farming systems. Weed Research. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00164.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
