3rd International Seminar, Regional Network on Poverty Eradication In Conjunction With UNESCO International Days, Years, Decades, 2012

University of Bengkulu, Indonesia, October 15th 17th 2012

STRATEGIES TO REDUCING HERBICIDE USE BY INCREASING CROP COMPETITIVE ABILITY AGAINST WEED
IKHSAN HASIBUAN Majoring Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture University of Hazairin (UNIHAZ) Bengkulu, Indonesia Email: ikhsanhasibuan.org@gmail.com

Abstract Food security is a major issue in all over the world. In Bengkulu province, 17,94% of people living in rural, mostly farmers, are living only with less than one dollar a day. One of important factors related to farmers poverty is due to high cost of input production should be spend by farmers. Reducing input production cost is believed will make a significant effect to farmer economic household. Strategies to reducing cost production evaluated in this study is focus on weed management. Improving crop competitive ability against weed could increased weed suppression and as a result herbicide use will be reduced or eliminated. The data of this paper taken from two separated researches conducting between 2010 and 2012. Results of the study showed that weed biomass is reduced 90% while crop biomass is increased significantly by using uniform crop spatial arrangement compared to row and random crop spatial arrangements. Similarly, sowing crop earlier than weed growth gave significant effect on weed and crop biomass. This finding is believe could decrease amount of herbicide needed to control weed or might be could eliminated herbicide use. As a result, farmers could get more benefit from saving money for buying input. Most importantly, Implementation of these two methods do not need additional cost. Keywords: poverty, crop, weed, uniform arrangement

Introduction Food security is a major issue in all over world. It is might be caused by the impact of climate change that treated global food production. Almost half of billion people in developing countries are undernourished as a consequence of limited nutritious food intake. This number could increase by 20 percent within a decade (Hoffman, 2012). In tropical countries, food production is vulnerable. As a result, most of the farmers in tropical region for example, Indonesia, are living in poor economic condition. According to BPS Bengkulu (2012), 17,94% of people living in rural are living only with less than one dollar per day. The percentage will increase very high when we use international standard of energy intake per day which is about two dollars a day. In addition, at this moment more than 50% of people living in rural area are working as farmers (Hanani, 2012). Farmers poverty is a main problem that should be solved with the right strategies. One of the important aspects we should give more attention is the farmers income from their farms. A huge production will be meaningless if farmers also have to pay much money to buy input productions. Therefore, it is not only farmers have to increase production but also they have to reduce input cost production. In common practice, corns farmers have to spend about 1 million rupiahs ($ 105) for input productions that are seed, chemical fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide. This amount is about 40% of total cost production of corn farming. Giving more attention to herbicide, about 13% ($ 25) of total cost production of corn farming should be spend for dealing with weed; to buy and to apply herbicide.
1

3rd International Seminar, Regional Network on Poverty Eradication In Conjunction With UNESCO International Days, Years, Decades, 2012 University of Bengkulu, Indonesia, October 15th 17th 2012

It is believe that farmers need to spend less if they could control weeds without using herbicide. This is big challenge for weed scientists who concern with ecological issues. The traditional method to control weed mainly by using herbicide is unacceptable in ecological farming systems such as organic agriculture and dynamic agriculture. Besides that, use of herbicide has causing many problems regarding to human and environmental health, therefore this chemical method has less support from people who care about health and environmental issues (Ahn et al. 2001). for that reason, strategies to manage weed without using herbicide is very important not only because of economic reason but also due to health and environmental problems. Eliminating using of herbicide is meaning how to eliminate weed without herbicide. We have to find strategies that effectively kill weed, need less money, easy to be adapted by farmers and environmentally friendly. One of major options is improving the competitiveness of the crop against weeds (Kropff et al. 1993). Strengthening the competitive ability of the crop potentially has great impact on weed control because final dry matter of crop is directly related to its domain area; an area occupied or influenced by a plant. Therefore optimizing crop domain area will increase crop exploitation to environmental resources such as nutrients, light, space and water. Mithen et al. (1984) stated that one important factor influencing a plants growth is the area available for the plant. Furthermore, the competitive ability of a crop can be improved by considering some factors such as planting pattern (Fischer and Miles, 1973). Some researchers reported benefits of using a uniform spatial arrangement relative to a normal row pattern. These benefits included optimum crop seed emergence (Olsen, et al. 2005a), low intraspecific competition, maximum total shade cast in the early growing season and increased weed suppression (Kristensen, et al. 2008). Spatial distribution is important for agricultural production in terms of growth and development of the individual crop. Tilman and Kareiva (1998) wrote that spatial arrangement is an important tool for suppressing weeds, although field application is still very limited (Kristensen et al., 2008). Results of some researches supported the observation that a uniform arrangement is more weed suppressive than a row arrangement. Weiner et al. (2001) and Kristensen et al. (2006) reported that there was 30% less weed biomass when crops were planted in a uniform arrangement compared to a standard row (12 cm row distance). Olsen et al. (2005a) found that weed biomass in a uniform crop arrangement was 23% lower compared to a crop in a row arrangement. However, the effect of uniform arrangement on weed suppression is not always positive. Medd, et al. (1985) found that uniform arrangement had no significant effect on weed competition and led to wheat yield reduction. Therefore, information on how uniformity improves weed suppression is not consistent. However, the success of the crop uniform pattern is influenced by initial size differences between crop and weed plants. Differences in initial plant size depend on factors such as age differences due to sowing time of the crop and competition (Weiner, 1985; Kropff and Spitters, 1991). Early emerging plants give rise to the largest plants in the population (Black and Wilkinson, 1963; Van Baalen et al, 1984). The initial size advantage of crop plants might often be a more important factor influencing crop-weed competition than crop density (Ross and Harper, 1972; Howell, 1981; Weiner, 1985). One aspect related to crop sowing date is crop plant height that possibly gives an advantage to the crop in its competition with weeds (Ibrahim et al., 1986). In general, if the crop emerges earlier than the weed, this gives the crop a better ability to compete with the weed both for space and nutrients. However, when the crop emerges later than the weed, crop has a disadvantage compared to the weeds during the early growth stages. In this research, the role of uniformity for weed suppression will be evaluated. Based on the above description, special emphasis will be on the influence of initial size differences between crop and weed on the role of uniformity in weed suppression.

3rd International Seminar, Regional Network on Poverty Eradication In Conjunction With UNESCO International Days, Years, Decades, 2012 University of Bengkulu, Indonesia, October 15th 17th 2012

Methodology Two researches were conducted to evaluate the study. First study was done in Wageningen University, The Netherlands in 2010. The second study was conducted Faculty of Agriculture University of Hazairin Bengkulu in 2012. For both studies, Crop and weed plants were grown under glasshouse condition in trays with a size of 45 x 30 x 30 cm (length x width x depth). Each tray represented a single plot. Treatments evaluated were comparing uniform, row and random crop spatial arrangements. As an addition, effect of crop sowing time was also evaluated. During experiment, plants were regularly watered. Limited fertilizers were applied once a week. After 3 weeks, all crop and weed plants were harvested. Harvesting was done by cutting sample plants at the ground level and put them in paper bags. All samples were oven-dried at 105 oC for 48 hours. Weighing was done soon after the samples were taken out of the oven to record the dry biomass of weed and crop plants. Data then statistically analyzed to assess the effect of both treatments. Results & Discussions In this research we investigated how crop spatial arrangement and crop sowing time affected crop and weed biomass and in addition crop production. To investigate this, data from three experiments were conducted in which, apart from crop spatial arrangement and initial size differences between crop and weed. A. Weed Biomass Statistical analysis showed a clear effect of crop spatial arrangements on weed biomass (figure 1). The similar result also found on the effect of crop sowing times on biomass (figure 2).

Treatment 1: uniform crop spatial arrangement with planting ratio 1:1, 2: is planting ratio 1:2, 3: is planting ratio 1:3, 4: planting ratio 1:4, 5: planting ratio 1:5, 6: planting ratio 1:6, 7: planting ratio 1:7, 8: planting ratio 1:8, 9: planting ratio 1:9, and 10: random planting arrangement. Figure 1. weed biomass influence by crop spatial arrangement. Lower quantity of weed biomass especially at treatment 1 (uniform crop spatial arrangement) is effect of weed growth of crop. Uniform crop spatial arrangement had 90% weed
3

3rd International Seminar, Regional Network on Poverty Eradication In Conjunction With UNESCO International Days, Years, Decades, 2012 University of Bengkulu, Indonesia, October 15th 17th 2012

biomass lower than crop spatial arrangement used by farmers (ratio 1:4). The percentage could become much higher compared to higher planting ratio (ratio 1:5 until ratio 1:9). The fact that uniform crop arrangement had a better weed suppression is related to weedcrop competition for space. With a uniform crop arrangement, crop plants are distributed in a perfect grid pattern. This condition creates the largest possible space among individual crop plants, so that intraspecific competition is delayed as much as possible. Furthermore, the maximum possible distance between crop and weed is shorter and consequently interspecific competition will occur faster (Fisher and Miles, 1973). With a uniform arrangement, crop plants have a better chance to absorb resources of its domain area, especially at early stage. In contrast, with a row arrangement, crop plants stand close in the rows, resulting in intraspecific competition to occur earlier, while the large distance between crop rows allows the interspecific competition between crop and weed to start relatively late. In this experiment uniform arrangement was found to have a better suppression against weeds compared to other arrangement. Most of the previous experiments agreed with what was expected by Weiner et al. (2001), for instance the research reported by Olsen et al. (2006) and Hara and Wyszomirsky (1994).

Early: crop plants were planted 1 week earlier than weed; Simultaneously: crop and week planted in the same time Late: crop plants were planted one week later than weed Figure 2. Weed biomass influenced by crop sowing times. Crop sowing time also had a significant effect on weed biomass. Sowing the crop one week later than weed increased weed biomass with 21% compared to simultaneous sowing. On the other hand sowing the crop one week earlier than the weed reduced weed biomass with 25% (Figure 2). This research found that when crop emerged earlier than weed, weed biomass reduced (figure 2) and crop biomass increased (figure 4) significantly compared to the situations where crop emerged simultaneously or later than the weed. Previous studies, such as a research conducted by Ahmad et al. (2005), found similar results. The ability of larger plants to maintain its initial size advantage over smaller plants is often found, particularly when competition for light is important (Weiner, 1990). Larger plants dominate the competition by shadowing smaller plants, whereas smaller plants can only pose a relatively marginal competitive effect on a larger plant (Schwinning and Weiner,
4

3rd International Seminar, Regional Network on Poverty Eradication In Conjunction With UNESCO International Days, Years, Decades, 2012 University of Bengkulu, Indonesia, October 15th 17th 2012

1998). This phenomenon is known as asymmetric competition (Begon, 1984) or one-sided competition (Weiner, 1985). Capturing the light means that larger plants are able to produce biomass through the process of photosynthesis, which allows these plants to further improve their competitive situation relative to smaller plants (Hara, 1984). B. Crop Biomass Crop sowing time caused a significant effect on crop biomass (Figure 4). The highest crop biomass was produced when crop was sown early. Sowing crop earlier than weed increased crop biomass with 14% compared to simultaneous sowing, while sowing crop later than weed plants reduced crop biomass with 23%. The higher crop biomass produced by early crop sowing was not only related to a better competitive position relative to the weed, but also due to a longer growing period.

Treatment 1: uniform crop arrangement with planting ratio 1:1, 2: is planting ratio 1:2, 3: is planting ratio 1:3, 4: planting ratio 1:4, 5: planting ratio 1:5, 6: planting ratio 1:6, 7: planting ratio 1:7, 8: planting ratio 1:8, 9: planting ratio 1:9, and 10: random planting arrangement. Figure 3. Crop biomass influence by crop spatial arrangements.

Early: crop plants were planted 1 week earlier than weed; Simultaneously: crop and week planted in the same time Late: crop plants were planted one week later than weed Figure 4. Crop biomass influenced by crop sowing times. Means followed by different letters differ significantly as established by LSD-test (P < 0.05; 0.149).

3rd International Seminar, Regional Network on Poverty Eradication In Conjunction With UNESCO International Days, Years, Decades, 2012 University of Bengkulu, Indonesia, October 15th 17th 2012

Conclusion The major finding of this study is that a uniform crop spatial arrangement had better weed suppression than row and random crop arrangements. This finding supports earlier reports conducted by weed scientist including Weiner et al. (2001), Kristensen et al (2006), dan Olsen et al. (2005) stated that a uniform crop spatial arrangement would particularly be beneficial if the crop would have an initial advantage over the weed. The other discovering that planting crop earlier than weed growth gave significant reduce of weed biomass. Reducing weed until 90% by using uniform crop spatial arrangement and planting crop earlier than weed growth is believed will decrease herbicide needed. As stated in introduction, decrease of herbicide use will reduce cost for input. As a result, farmers could get more benefit from saving money for buying input. Most importantly, Implementation of these two methods do not need additional cost. References Hoffman, M. 2012. Food Security and Climate Change. AAAS. Badan Pusat Statistik Bengkulu. 2012. Berita Resmi Statistik (Official news for statistic). Nr. 30/07/17 Th VI. 2 July 2012. Hanani, N. 2012. Pilar Pembangunan Ketahanan Pangan (Precondition for food security development). Seminar: Toward Agricultural Souverignity Ahn, Y-J., Kim, Y-J. and Yoo, J-K. 2001. Toxicity of the herbicide glufosinate-ammonium to predatory insects and mites of Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) under laboratory conditions. Journal of Economic Entomology 94.1: 157-161. Black, J.N. and Wilkinson, G.N. 1963. The role of time emergence in determining the growth of individual plants in swards of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.) Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 14:628-638. Fischer, R.A. and Miles, R.E. 1973. The role of spatial pattern in the competition between crop plants and weeds; A theoretical analysis. Mathematical Biosciences 18:335-350. Howell, N. 1981. The effect of seed size and relative emergence time on fitness in a natural population of impatiens capensis Meerb. (Balsaminaceae). American Midland Naturalist 105:312-320. Ibrahim, A.F., Kandil, A.A., El-Hattab, A.H., and Eissa, A.K. 1986. Effect of sowing date and weed control on grain yield and its components in some wheat cultivars. J. Agronomy and Crop Science. 157:199-207. Kropff, M.J. and Spitters, C.J.T. 1991. A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations of on relative leaf area of the weeds. Weed Research 31:465-471. Mithen, R.J., Harper, L., and Weiner, J. 1984. Growth and mortality of individual plants as a function of available area. Oecologia 62:57-60. Olsen, J., Kristensen, L., Weiner, J., and Griepentrog, H.W. 2005b. Increase Density and Spatial Uniformity Increase Weed Suppression by Spring Wheat. Weed Research 45:316-321. Medd, R.W., Auld, B.A., Kemp, D.R., and Murison, R.D. 1985. The influence of wheat density and spatial arrangement on annual ryegrass, Lolium rigidum Gaudin, competition. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 36:361-371. Mithen, R.J., Harper, L., and Weiner, J. 1984. Growth and mortality of individual plants as a function of available area. Oecologia 62:57-60. Kristensen, L., Olsen, J., Griepentrog, H.W., and Norremark, M. 2006. Describing the spatial pattern of crop plants with special reference to crop-weed competition studies. Field Crop Research 96: 207-215 Kristensen, L., Olsen, J., and Weiner, J. 2008. Crop Density, Sowing Pattern, and Nitrogen Fertilisation Effects on Weed Suppression and Yield in Spring Wheat. Weed Science 56 (1): 97-102.
6

3rd International Seminar, Regional Network on Poverty Eradication In Conjunction With UNESCO International Days, Years, Decades, 2012 University of Bengkulu, Indonesia, October 15th 17th 2012

Ross, M.A. and Harper, J.L. 1972. Occupation of biological space during seedling establishment. Journal of Ecology 60:77-88. Tilman, D.F. and Kareiva, P.M. 1998. Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Van Baalen, J., Kuiter, A.T., and Van der Woude, C.S.C. 1984. Interference of Scrophularia nodosa and Digitalis purpurea in mixed seedling cultures, as affected by the specific emergence date. Acta Oecologia/Oecol Plant 5:279-290. Weiner, J. 1985. Size hierarchies in experimental populations of annual plants. Ecology 66:743752. Weiner, J., Griepentrog, H.W., and Kristensen, L. 2001. Suppression of Weeds by Spring Wheat Triticum aestivum increases with crop density and spatial uniformity. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 784-790.