Early adopter insights on physical impact mill technology for harvest weed seed control in Canada

B. Tidemann, C. Geddes, Shaun M. Sharpe
{"title":"Early adopter insights on physical impact mill technology for harvest weed seed control in Canada","authors":"B. Tidemann, C. Geddes, Shaun M. Sharpe","doi":"10.1139/cjps-2024-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The evolution and spread of herbicide resistance among the weed community has increased interest in alternative weed management strategies such as harvest weed seed control. Western Canadian producers have begun adopting physical impact mills as an additional weed management strategy. A survey of early adopters of physical impact mill technology in Canada was conducted to better understand the motivations behind producers adopting, initial experiences, and research needs. Ten producers responded to the survey, accounting for 18 out of an estimated 30 impact mills in use in Canada, believed to be located primarily in the Canadian Prairies. These producers were mainly from larger farms (> 4,000 ha), equipped the majority of their combines (75% average) and used the mills in essentially all crops grown. The majority of respondents were located in Saskatchewan, with 2 mills being used in Alberta. Wild oat (60%) and kochia (50%) were the weeds most frequently mentioned as specific motivators of impact mill adoption. Average increased fuel cost from the mill was estimated at CAD $3.46 ha-1, with average annual maintenance costs of about $1,500 per impact mill. Producers relied on information from mill companies and other early-adopting farmers primarily, followed by extension talks and social media. Research needs were also identified by producers that could inform the future direction of harvest weed seed control research in Canada. Future research should focus on confirming efficacy, optimizing combine settings, and looking at integrated systems with precision agriculture technologies.","PeriodicalId":502175,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Plant Science","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Plant Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1139/cjps-2024-0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The evolution and spread of herbicide resistance among the weed community has increased interest in alternative weed management strategies such as harvest weed seed control. Western Canadian producers have begun adopting physical impact mills as an additional weed management strategy. A survey of early adopters of physical impact mill technology in Canada was conducted to better understand the motivations behind producers adopting, initial experiences, and research needs. Ten producers responded to the survey, accounting for 18 out of an estimated 30 impact mills in use in Canada, believed to be located primarily in the Canadian Prairies. These producers were mainly from larger farms (> 4,000 ha), equipped the majority of their combines (75% average) and used the mills in essentially all crops grown. The majority of respondents were located in Saskatchewan, with 2 mills being used in Alberta. Wild oat (60%) and kochia (50%) were the weeds most frequently mentioned as specific motivators of impact mill adoption. Average increased fuel cost from the mill was estimated at CAD $3.46 ha-1, with average annual maintenance costs of about $1,500 per impact mill. Producers relied on information from mill companies and other early-adopting farmers primarily, followed by extension talks and social media. Research needs were also identified by producers that could inform the future direction of harvest weed seed control research in Canada. Future research should focus on confirming efficacy, optimizing combine settings, and looking at integrated systems with precision agriculture technologies.
早期采用者对加拿大收割杂草种子控制物理冲击磨技术的见解
除草剂抗药性在杂草群体中的演变和传播,增加了人们对收割杂草种子控制等替代杂草管理策略的兴趣。加拿大西部的生产商已开始采用物理冲击碾磨机作为额外的杂草管理策略。为了更好地了解生产者采用该技术的动机、初步经验和研究需求,我们对加拿大早期采用物理冲击碾磨技术的生产者进行了调查。十家生产商对调查做出了回应,在加拿大使用的约 30 台冲击式碾磨机中,有 18 台被认为主要位于加拿大草原地区。这些生产商主要来自较大的农场(> 4,000 公顷),装备了大部分联合收割机(平均 75%),并且基本上将碾磨机用于种植所有作物。大多数受访者位于萨斯喀彻温省,阿尔伯塔省使用了两台碾磨机。野燕麦(60%)和禾本科杂草(50%)是最常被提及的采用抗冲磨机的具体原因。据估计,磨粉机平均增加的燃料成本为每公顷 3.46 加元,每台冲击式磨粉机的年平均维护成本约为 1,500 加元。生产者主要依靠磨坊公司和其他早期采用的农民提供的信息,其次是推广讲座和社交媒体。生产者还提出了研究需求,这些需求可为加拿大收割杂草种子控制研究的未来方向提供参考。未来的研究应侧重于确认药效、优化联合收割机设置以及研究与精准农业技术的集成系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信