Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 161

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Response and effect traits of arable weeds in agro‐ecosystems: a review of current knowledge

Open access
Gaba, S, Perronne, R, Fried, G, Gardarin, A, Bretagnolle, F, Biju‐Duval, L, Colbach, N, Cordeau, S, Fernández‐Aparicio, M, Gauvrit, C, Gibot‐Leclerc, S, Guillemin, J‐P, Moreau, D, Munier‐Jolain, N, Strbik, F, Reboud, X·2017·Weed Research

Abstract

Summary: Integrating principles of ecological intensification into weed management strategies requires an understanding of the many relationships among weeds, crops and other organisms of agro‐ecosystems in a changing context. Extensively used during the last two decades in weed science, trait‐based approaches have provided general insights into weed community response to agricultural practices, and recently to understanding the effect of weeds on agro‐ecosystem functioning. In this review, we provide a holistic synthesis of the current knowledge on weed response and effect functional traits. Based on the literature and recent advances in weed science, we review current knowledge on (i) weed functional groups and ecological strategies, (ii) weed functional response traits to cropping systems and (iii) weed functional effect traits affecting agro‐ecosystem functioning. For each functional trait, we explicitly present the assumptions and evidence on the linkage between trait values and ecological functions, in response to either management practices, for example tillage, sowing and herbicides, or biotic interactions, for example crop–weed competition and pollination. Finally, we address and discuss major research avenues that may significantly improve the use of traits and the knowledge of functional diversity in weed science for the future, especially to design and implement more environmentally sustainable weed management strategies.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/wre.12245

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 161

Metadata

Authors
Gaba, S., Perronne, R., Fried, G., Gardarin, A., Bretagnolle, F., Biju‐Duval, L., Colbach, N., Cordeau, S., Fernández‐Aparicio, M., Gauvrit, C., Gibot‐Leclerc, S., Guillemin, J., Moreau, D., Munier‐Jolain, N., Strbik, F., & Reboud, X.
Venue
Weed Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-04-11
Volume
57
Issue
3
Pages
123-147
ISSN
  • 0043-1737 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3180
OpenAlex
W2605667688
Cited by
161
References
3
FWCI
11.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Response and effect traits of arable weeds in agro‐ecosystems: a review of current knowledge. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/wre.12245
The paper
Gaba, S., Perronne, R., Fried, G., Gardarin, A., Bretagnolle, F., Biju‐Duval, L., Colbach, N., Cordeau, S., Fernández‐Aparicio, M., Gauvrit, C., Gibot‐Leclerc, S., Guillemin, J., Moreau, D., Munier‐Jolain, N., Strbik, F., & Reboud, X. (2017). Response and effect traits of arable weeds in agro‐ecosystems: a review of current knowledge. Weed Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/wre.12245

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.