Publikasjoner
NIBIOs ansatte publiserer flere hundre vitenskapelige artikler og forskningsrapporter hvert år. Her finner du referanser og lenker til publikasjoner og andre forsknings- og formidlingsaktiviteter. Samlingen oppdateres løpende med både nytt og historisk materiale. For mer informasjon om NIBIOs publikasjoner, besøk NIBIOs bibliotek.
2022
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Weed-free zone underneath apple trees is important to maximize vegetative growth, fruit yield- and quality. Glyphosate applied twice is the usual strategy in apple orchards in Norway. Due to uncertain future of glyphosate there is a need for alternative strategies. A field trial was conducted during 2021 in an orchard (three-year-old trees). Five alternative strategies were tested: 1) Hot water at 3 L m-2 x 3 (spring, early summer, summer), 2) Hot water at 6 L m-2 x 3 (times as previous), 3) Pelargonic acid at full dose (10.9 kg a.s. ha-1) x 1 (early summer), 4) Pelargonic acid at half dose (5.44 kg a.s. ha-1) x 2 (spring, early summer), and 5) Rotary hoe x 3 (early spring, early summer, summer). Glyphosate at 1.08 kg a.s. ha-1 x 2 (early summer, summer) was included as reference strategy. Hot water (about 80 C, 0.1 bar) was applied with a commercial machine (Heatweed Technologies, Norway). Visual assessments of percentage of ground covered by living vegetation were used to estimate weed control efficacy. Dominating species were Taraxacum officinale, Tripleurospermum inodorum, Poa annua, Polygonum aviculare, Galium aparine, Viola arvensis and Senecio vulgaris. Assessed mid-summer (June 24), hot water applied twice (both 3 L m-2 and 6 L m-2) showed very high efficacies, both about 90%. Pelargonic acid showed rather low efficacies, about 15% (10.9 kg a.s. ha-1 x 1) and 45% (5.44 kg a.s. ha-1 x 2). Rotary hoe twice had almost 60%. Efficacy of glyphosate once was 75%. The last assessment was conducted in mid-July, i.e. about 1-2 weeks after the last application of hot water, rotary hoe and glyphosate. The two hot water strategies resulted in very good weed control, i.e.
Forfattere
Gunnhild Jaastad Nina Trandem Gaute Myren Sigrid Mogan Line Beate Lersveen Endre Bjotveit Irén Lunde Sekse Marianne BøthunSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
VIPS is a technology platform for prognosis, monitoring and decision support for integrated pest management in crops in Norway. The service facilitates access to a Danish decision support tool, IPMwise, for the management of weeds. This tool, called VIPS-weeds in Norway, is adjusted to the Norwegian conditions for cereals. VIPS-weeds selects and adjusts the dose of herbicides according to weed species, weed density and temperature. The tool is being tested each year for local adaptations and updating. In 2021, four experiments were performed in spring wheat and barley. The experiments were designed in completely randomised blocks with three replications, and each included a control (unsprayed), a VIPS-weeds, and an adviser choice plot as well as plots for a variety of herbicides that are common in these crops. The weed species and density, development stage and possible herbicide resistance of each species in the control plots as well as crop information and temperature data were registered in VIPS-weeds three days before the normal spraying time. The suggested herbicides (set to be suggested based on the price) were applied to the VIPS-weeds plots. The effect of suggested herbicides and their dose was assessed as the reduction of weed coverage (%) in sprayed plots compared to the control plots 3-4 weeks after spraying. The average efficacy targets for the weed species (observed at least in two fields) Spergula arvensis, Viola sp., Stellaria media, Galeopsis sp., Chenopodium album, and Fumaria officinalis were predicted to be at 91, 84, 65, 83, 80, and 72% respectively, by VIPS-weeds. The results showed an average efficacy of 45, 58, 79, 80, 91 and 82% for these weeds, respectively. The VIPS-weeds solution was economically reasonable and gave similar results as adviser choice in terms of weed control and yield.