14.08.2013 Views

Diversifying crop rotations with temporary grasslands - Université de ...

Diversifying crop rotations with temporary grasslands - Université de ...

Diversifying crop rotations with temporary grasslands - Université de ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

and higher production costs or eventually reduced <strong>crop</strong> yields may be compensated by higher<br />

marked prizes of the labelled products.<br />

A.III.3 Combining high weed diversity <strong>with</strong> low weed abundance?<br />

One strategy for alleviating the tra<strong>de</strong>-off between the harms and functions of weeds might be<br />

the increase of weed species diversity <strong>with</strong>out increasing the total weed abundance, thus<br />

increasing the evenness of the plant community. Higher plant diversity may increase the<br />

diversity of other trophic levels (animals and micro-organisms) as <strong>de</strong>tailed in section A.II.3<br />

above. However, weed abundance and weed diversity are generally positively related as both<br />

<strong>de</strong>pend on the intensity of weed control. Hyvonen et al. (2003) observed always positive<br />

linear relationships when plotting the weed species richness against the number of weed<br />

individuals (both on logarithmic scales). However, the intercepts of these regressions were<br />

higher for organic <strong>crop</strong>ping systems compared to conventional systems indicating that the<br />

abundance-diversity relationship may differ between <strong>crop</strong>ping systems. At equal abundances,<br />

organic systems had about 2 more species compared to conventional systems. Such an<br />

improvement might be caused by the replacement of one dominating weed control technique<br />

that is very efficient on most weed species (e.g. herbici<strong>de</strong>s <strong>with</strong> broad ranges) by several less<br />

efficient techniques and principles (IWM, see section A.III.2 above) or due to the rotation of<br />

dissimilar <strong>crop</strong>s (see section A.III.8 below).<br />

A.III.4 ‘Good’ vs. ‘bad’ weeds?<br />

Another approach goes beyond the former approach in consi<strong>de</strong>ring differences between the<br />

weed species according to (i) their potential harm for <strong>crop</strong> production, (ii) their difficulty to be<br />

controlled and (iii) their role for biodiversity (habitat and trophic resource) and ecosystem<br />

functioning. Fig. 4 shows that weed species may consi<strong>de</strong>rably differ in ‘harmfulness’<br />

(competitive ability) and ‘biodiversity value’ (number of associated insect species). But when<br />

combining these two criteria, many weed species are neither ‘very good’ nor ‘very bad’ but<br />

somehow intermediate.<br />

12

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!