Crop competition in winter wheat has a higher potential than farming practices to regulate weeds

Crop resilience via inter-plant spacing brings to the fore the productive ideotype

Natural selection favors the competitive ideotype, enabling native plants to survive in the face of intense competition. The productive ideotype is the goal of artificial selection to achieve high crop yields via the efficient use of resources in a self-competition regime. When breeding is established under inter-genotypic competition, the competitive ideotype dominates and may fictitiously become selectable. The productive ideotype becomes selectable at the nil-competition regime, where widely spaced individuals prevent plant-to-plant interference for any input. Principal reasons bring to the fore the productive ideotype that combines low competitiveness and improved plant yield efficiency. Crop spacing via the productive ideotype is mandated to alleviate the varying optimum density and ensure efficient use of resources inter-seasonally, cope with intra-field variation and optimize resource use, compensate for missing plants and promote stability, counteract unpredictable stresses and offer a buffer against environmental diversity, and adopt low-input agriculture to conserve natural resources and the environment. For breeding toward the productive ideotype, nil-competition is the due condition to overcome the confounding effects of competition, maximize phenotypic differentiation and facilitate selection from an early segregating generation, optimize heritability due to moderated environmental variance and experimental designs that sample spatial heterogeneity, apply high selection pressure focusing exclusively on the targeted genotype, and avoid the risk of bias selection or loss of desired genotypes due to proximity to empty hills. The view of a modern crop variety composed of genotype(s) belonging to the productive ideotype is a viable option to reach crop resilience serving sustainability in enormously fluctuating agroecosystems.

Landscape Is the Main Driver of Weed Assemblages in Field Margins but Is Outperformed by Crop Competition in Field Cores

Weeds are considered a major pest for crops, and as such have been intensively managed by farmers. However, weeds, by providing resources, also support farmland biodiversity. The challenge for sustainable weed management is therefore to maintain weed diversity without compromising crop production. Meeting this challenge requires determining the processes that shape weed assemblages, and how agricultural practices and landscape arrangement affect them. In this study, we assess the effects of crop competition on weeds, nitrogen input, weed control and landscape on both weed diversity and abundance in the margins and centres of 115 oilseed rape fields in Western France. We show that weed assemblages in field cores were mainly shaped by crop height, a proxy of crop competition. By contrast, weed assemblages in field margins increased with the number of meadows in the landscape, revealing the role of spatial dispersal. Using structural equation modelling, we further show that in the field core, weed assemblages were also indirectly shaped by landscape through spatial dispersal from the field margin. Overall, our study gives empirical support for crop competition as a way to reduce the intensity of chemical weeding, and for meadows as a way to enhance biodiversity in the landscape.

Weeds: Against the Rules?

Establishing laws of plant and ecosystems functioning has been an overarching objective of functional and evolutionary ecology. However, most theories neglect the role of human activities in creating novel ecosystems characterized by species assemblages and environmental factors that are not observed in natural systems. We argue that agricultural weeds, as an emblematic case of such an 'ecological novelty', constitute an original and underutilized model for challenging current concepts in ecology and evolution. We highlight key aspects of weed ecology and evolutionary biology that can help to test and recast ecological and evolutionary laws in a changing world. We invite ecologists to seize upon weeds as a model system to improve our understanding of the short-term and long-term dynamics of ecological systems in the Anthropocene.

Weed diversity is driven by complex interplay between multi-scale dispersal and local filtering

Arable weeds are key organisms for biodiversity maintenance and ecosystem service provision in agroecosystems. Disentangling the drivers of weed diversity is critical to counteract the global decline of farmland biodiversity. Even if distinct scale-dependent processes were alternatively proposed, no general framework unifying the multi-scale drivers of weed dynamics has yet emerged. Here, we investigate the joint effects of field- and landscape-scale processes on weed assemblages in 444 arable fields. First, field margins sheltered greater weed diversity than field core, evidencing their role as biodiversity refugia. Second, community similarity between field core and margin decreased with the distance to margin, highlighting a major role of local dispersal. Third, weed diversity at field margins increased with organic field cover in the landscape, pointing out massive regional dispersal. Fourth, while both local and landscape dispersal explained up to 41% of field core weed diversity, crop type strongly modulated their strength, depicting an intense filtering effect by agricultural management. This study sheds new light on the complex multi-scale interactions shaping weed diversity, field margins playing a key role by strengthening regional dispersal and sustaining local dispersal. Land-sharing strategies improving habitat heterogeneity both locally and regionally should largely promote agroecosystem multifunctionality and sustainability.

Experimental and empirical evidence shows that reducing weed control in winter cereal fields is a viable strategy for farmers

Modern agriculture needs a paradigm shift to make the world’s food production sustainable while mitigating social and environmental externalities. Although various policies to limit the use of agrochemicals have recently been implemented in the European Union, the use of both herbicides and fertilizers has remained fairly constant. Farmers are assumed to behave optimally, producing the best they can, given the agronomic constraints of their fields. Based on this assumption, reducing agrochemicals should inevitably have negative effects on food production, or reduce farmers’ incomes. Coupling empirical analysis based on field surveys and experimental trials where weed management and nitrogen input were manipulated in the same production fields and under real farming conditions, we demonstrate that high use of N fertiliser or intense weed control slightly increase yields, but that this increase is not enough to offset the additional costs incurred by their use. Our experimental design allowed inputs to be varied in a two-factor design, along a gradient spanning from organic to highly intensive farming, while holding all other conditions constant and thus avoiding confounding effects. Quantification of crop yields and gross margins from winter cereal farming showed that reducing dependence on weed management may not hamper cereal production in this system, and is economically profitable at the field level on the short term. Our study thus contributes to addressing a key gap in our economic knowledge, and gives hope for implementing win-win strategies for farmers and the environment.