Stacked crop rotations exploit weed-weed competition for sustainable weed management
Open accessAbstract
Crop rotation has long been considered one of the simplest and most effective tools for managing weeds. In this paper, we demonstrate how crop rotations can be strategically arranged to harness a novel mechanism of weed suppression: weed-weed competition. Specifically, we consider how crop stacking, or increasing the number of consecutive plantings of a single crop within a rotation, can decrease the size of the weed seed bank, by forcing weeds to compete with each other in similar environments for longer periods of time, while still reaping the traditional benefits of crop rotation. Using an annual plant model, we investigate the theoretical effects of stacked crop rotations on weeds that have different life-history strategies and phenology. Our results show that when weeds compete within a season, stacking can reduce the weed seed bank compared to rotations without stacked crops. Although more research is needed to fully understand the effects of crop stacking on other aspects of the system, such as insect pests and diseases, our research suggests that crop stacking has the potential to improve weed suppression without additional inputs, and their associated costs and externalities. More generally, improving management by changing the temporal arrangement of disturbances is a novel, process-based approach that could likely be applied to other weed management practices, such as mowing and herbicide application, and which could involve mechanisms other than weed-weed competition. Leveraging this new application of existing ecological theory to improve weed management strategies holds great promise.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Another beneficial aspect of crop rotation is regulation of weeds and disease suppression.
“Another beneficial aspect is the regulation of weeds and disease suppression (Garrison et al., 2014).”
From Intensify production, transform biomass to energy and novel goods and protect soils in Europe—A vision how to mobilize marginal lands (2018) · cites this paper as Garrison et al., 2014
Cites
Mechanisms of Maintenance of Species Diversity
Chesson, P. (2000) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.343 · Cited by 6,645 · see citing works
The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics.
Proctor, J., Pickett, S. T. A., & White, P. S. (1986) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.2307/2403105 · Cited by 3,948 · see citing works
The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics
(1985) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-02952-3 · Cited by 2,125 · see citing works
THE INTERMEDIATE DISTURBANCE HYPOTHESIS: PATCH DYNAMICS AND MECHANISMS OF SPECIES COEXISTENCE
Roxburgh, S. H., Shea, K., & Wilson, J. B. (2004) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/03-0266 · Cited by 683 · see citing works
Self-citationIncreasing Cropping System Diversity Balances Productivity, Profitability and Environmental Health
Davis, A. S., Hill, J., Chase, C. A., Johanns, A. M., & Liebman, M. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047149 · Cited by 610 · see citing works
Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low‐external‐input farming systems
Liebman, M., & Davis, A. S. (2000) · Weed Research · doi:10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00164.x · Cited by 578 · see citing works
Moving from pattern to process: coexistence mechanisms under intermediate disturbance regimes
Shea, K., Roxburgh, S. H., & Rauschert, E. S. J. (2004) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00600.x · Cited by 489 · see citing works
Self-citationEcological Management of Agricultural Weeds
Liebman, M., Mohler, C. L., & Staver, C. P. (2001) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511541810 · Cited by 344 · see citing works
Many Little Hammers: Ecological Management of Crop-Weed Interactions
Liebman, M., & Gallandt, E. R. (1997) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-012378260-1/50010-5 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Assembly theory applied to weed communities
Booth, B. D., & Swanton, C. J. (2002) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/0043-1745(2002)050[0002:aiatat]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 260 · see citing works
How frequency and intensity shape diversity–disturbance relationships
Miller, A. D., Roxburgh, S. H., & Shea, K. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1018594108 · Cited by 254 · see citing works
Self-citationWeed Dynamics and Management Strategies for Cropping Systems in the Northern Great Plains
Derksen, D. A., Anderson, R. L., Blackshaw, R. E., & Maxwell, B. D. (2002) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj2002.1740 · Cited by 247 · see citing works
Seed Longevity of 41 Weed Species Buried 17 Years in Eastern and Western Nebraska
Burnside, O. C., Wilson, R., Weisberg, S., et al. (1996) · Weed Science · doi:10.1017/s0043174500093589 · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Focus on ecological weed management: what is hindering adoption?
Bastiaans, L., Paolini, R., & Baumann, D. T. (2008) · Weed Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.2008.00662.x · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Methods to Study Interactions Among Crops and Weeds
Radosevich, S. R. (1987) · Weed Technology · doi:10.1017/s0890037x00029523 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Westerman, P. R., Liebman, M., Menalled, F. D., et al. (2005) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-04-130r · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Evolutionary Agroecology: the potential for cooperative, high density, weed‐suppressing cereals
Weiner, J., Andersen, S. B., Wille, W., Griepentrog, H. W., & Olsen, J. M. (2010) · Evolutionary Applications · doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2010.00144.x · Cited by 195 · see citing works
A Multi‐Tactic Approach to Manage Weed Population Dynamics in Crop Rotations
Anderson, R. L. (2005) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0194 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Using Assembly Theory to Explain Changes in a Weed Flora in Response to Agricultural Intensification
Storkey, J., Moss, S. R., & Cussans, J. W. (2010) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-09-096.1 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Separating the effects of crop rotation from weed management on weed density and diversity
Doucet, C., Weaver, S. E., Hamill, A. S., & Zhang, J. (1999) · Weed Science · doi:10.1017/s0043174500091402 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
ESS germination strategies in randomly varying environments. II. Reciprocal Yield-Law models
Ellner, S. P. (1985) · Theoretical Population Biology · doi:10.1016/0040-5809(85)90023-1 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Schreiber, M. M. (1992) · Weed Science · doi:10.1017/s0043174500058252 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Ryan, M. R., Smith, R. G., Mirsky, S. B., et al. (2010) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-d-09-00054.1 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Self-citationCrop diversification for weed management
Liebman, M., & Staver, C. P. (2001) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511541810.008 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Miller, A. D., & Chesson, P. (2009) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/595750 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Self-citationHow Important are Crop Spatial Pattern and Density for Weed Suppression by Spring Wheat?
Olsen, J. M., Griepentrog, H. W., Nielsen, J., & Weiner, J. (2012) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-d-11-00172.1 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Modelling rotations: can crop sequences explain arable weed seedbank abundance?
Bohan, D. A., Powers, S. J., Champion, G. T., Haughton, A. J., Hawes, C., Squire, G. R., Cussans, J. W., & Mertens, S. K. (2011) · Weed Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.2011.00860.x · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Munier-Jolain, N. M., Chavvel, B., & Gasquez, J. (2002) · Weed Research · doi:10.1046/j.1365-3180.2002.00267.x · Cited by 64 · see citing works
WEED POPULATIONS AND CROP ROTATIONS: EXPLORING DYNAMICS OF A STRUCTURED PERIODIC SYSTEM
Mertens, S. K., van den Bosch, F., & Heesterbeek, H. (2002) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[1125:wpacre]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Growth and Fecundity of Several Weed Species in Corn and Soybean
Clay, S. A., Kleinjan, J., Clay, D. E., et al. (2005) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0294a · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Nord, E. A., Ryan, M. R., Curran, W. S., et al. (2012) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-d-12-00024.1 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Self-citationEyre, M. D., Critchley, C. N. R., Leifert, C., & Wilcockson, S. J. (2011) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/j.eja.2011.01.001 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
McCLOSKEY, Firbank, L. G., WATKINSON, et al. (1998) · Weed Research · doi:10.1046/j.1365-3180.1998.00067.x · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Interactions between frequency and size of disturbance affect competitive outcomes
Miller, A. D., Reilly, D., Bauman, S., et al. (2012) · Ecological Research · doi:10.1007/s11284-012-0954-4 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Self-citationUnderstanding weed-crop interactions to manage weed problems.
Maxwell, B. D., & O’Donovan, J. T. (2007) · CABI eBooks · doi:10.1079/9781845932909.0017 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Sequencing Crops to Minimize Selection Pressure for Weeds in the Central Great Plains1
Anderson, R. L. (2004) · Weed Technology · doi:10.1614/wt-03-090r · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Miller, A. D., Roxburgh, S. H., & Shea, K. (2011) · Theoretical Ecology · doi:10.1007/s12080-011-0133-1 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Self-citationIntegrating multiple disturbance aspects: management of an invasive thistle, Carduus nutans
Zhang, R., & Shea, K. (2011) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mcr312 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Self-citationGarrison, A., Miller, A. D., Roxburgh, S. H., et al. (2012) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02187.x · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Self-citationA 2-Year Small Grain Interval Reduces Need for Herbicides in No-Till Soybean
Anderson, R. L. (2009) · Weed Technology · doi:10.1614/wt-09-030.1 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schröder, P., Beckers, B., Daniels, S., Gnädinger, F., Maestri, E., Marmiroli, N., Mench, M., Millan, R., Obermeier, M. M., Oustriere, N., et al. (2018) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.209 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
- Authors
- Garrison, A. J., Miller, A. D., Ryan, M. R., Roxburgh, S. H., & Shea, K.
- Affiliations
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Cornell University (US)
- Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Shea, Katriona
- Venue
- Weed Science
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 166-176
- ISSN
- 0043-1745 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-2759
- OpenAlex
- W2168837991
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6
- FWCI
- 5.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Locations
- Weed Science (publishedVersion)
- BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Weed Control and Herbicide Applications
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Allelopathy and phytotoxic interactions
- Keywords
- weed seed bank, weed suppression, crop rotation, weed phenology, sustainable weed management
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
