Use of a mechanical roller-crimper as an alternative kill method for cover crops
By D. Ashford, D. W. Reeves. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 2003
219 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Cover crops have long been recognized as a beneficial component of many cropping systems; however, their use is still not commonplace. Usage may be increased by identifying more cost-effective and environment-friendly techniques for cover-crop management. This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of using a mechanical roller-crimper as-an alternative method for killing cover crops. The study location was in east-central Alabama, using a split-split plot experimental design with four replications and 3 site-years during 1999–2000. Rye, wheat and black oat were evaluated in terms of ease of kill and optimum time of kill using a roller-crimper, two herbicides (paraquat and glyphosate) at their labeled rate, and two reduced chemical (half label rate) combinations of the same chemicals with the roller-crimper. Four Feekes' scale growth stages were used to determine optimum time of kill; 8.0 (flag leaf), 10.51 (anthesis), 10.54 (early milk) and 11.2 (soft dough). Plant growth stage was the main determining factor for effectiveness of the roller-crimper for killing the cover crops. At the flag leaf stage, the roller-crimper provided only 19% kill across all covers over the 3 site-years. After plants reached anthesis, the roller-crimper with half-rate herbicide combinations equaled the effectiveness of herbicides alone at their label rate, averaging 94% kill. By the soft dough growth stage, all kill methods were equally effective due to accelerating plant senescence (95% mean kill across kill methods). Use of the roller-crimper alone after anthesis can decrease costs by as much as $26.28 per ha, while providing a kill rate equivalent to that of herbicide treatment alone.
Subfields: Agronomy and Crop Science, Plant Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/93100401ca66ca6b69d3fb5a8a0ae6de4c038614
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Agronomy and Crop Science
In Plant Science
Citations in the corpus
- Rolled Rye Mulch for Weed Suppression in Organic No-Tillage Soybeans (2010, background): “Ashford and Reeves (2003) averaged 9,725 kg dry rye biomass ha21 in Alabama, and Yenish et al. (1996) averaged 5,140 and 4,540 kg ha21 in North Carolina.”
- Cover-Crop Roller–Crimper Contributes to Weed Management in No-Till Soybean (2010, background): “Recent advances in cover-crop roller–crimper design have improved its operation, reducing vibrations (Kornecki et al. 2006), increasing planting efficiency (Sayre 2003), and improving efficacy in terminating cover crops (Ashford and Reeves 2003; Mirsky et al. 2009).”
- Timing of Cover-Crop Management Effects on Weed Suppression in No-Till Planted Soybean using a Roller-Crimper (2011, methodology): “The roller-crimper used in this experiment was made from cylindrical steel well casing (3.2-m length by 51-cm diam by 3.2-mm thickness) with metal slats spaced 10.2 cm apart welded onto the cylinder in a chevron pattern (Ashford and Reeves 2003) (Figure 1).”
- Control of cereal rye with a roller/crimper as influenced by cover crop phenology. (2009, methodology): “Ashford and Reeves (2003) consistently observed greater than 95% control when rolling cereal grain cover crops at the soft dough growth stage (Zadoks 68).”
- Evaluation of Three Winter Cereals for Weed Control in Conservation-Tillage Nontransgenic Cotton1 (2005, methodology): “Within 3 d after glyphosate application, the covers were rolled with a mechanical roller-crimper, as described by Ashford and Reeves (2003), to flatten all residues on the soil surface.”
- A review of economic considerations for cover crops as a conservation practice (2017, background): “Timing roller-crimper use affects termination efficacy (Ashford and Reeves, 2003).”