Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R. Gerhards, S. Christensen (2003)
Real‐time weed detection, decision making and patch spraying in maize, sugarbeet, winter wheat and winter barleyWeed Research, 43
J. Cardina, G. Johnson, D. Sparrow (1997)
The nature and consequence of weed spatial distributionWeed Science, 45
Nordbo Nordbo, Christensen Christensen, Kristensen Kristensen, Walter Walter (1994)
Patch spraying of weeds in cereal cropsAsp. Appl. Biol., 40
J. Groenendael (1988)
Patchy distribution of weeds and some implications for modelling population dynamics: a short literature reviewWeed Research, 28
Dunker Dunker, Nordmeyer Nordmeyer (2000)
Ursachen einer kleinräumigen Verteilung von Unkrautarten auf Ackerflächen ‐ Feld‐ und Gewächshausuntersuchungen zum Einfluss von BodeneigenschaftenZ. Pflanzenkr. Pflanzenschutz, XVII
R. Gerhards, D. Wyse-Pester, D. Mortensen, G. Johnson (1997)
Characterizing spatial stability of weed populations using interpolated mapsWeed Science, 45
Dieleman, Mortensen (1999)
Characterizing the spatial pattern of Abutilon theophrasti seedling patchesWeed Research, 39
B. Wilson, P. Brain (1991)
Long‐term stability of distribution of Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. within cereal fieldsWeed Research, 31
R. Gerhards, M. Sökefeld, K. Schulze-Lohne, D. Mortensen, W. Kühbauch (1997)
Site Specific Weed Control in Winter WheatJournal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 178
L. Rew, R. Cousens (2001)
Spatial distribution of weeds in arable crops: are current sampling and analytical methods appropriate?Weed Research, 41
F. Dessaint, R. Chadoeuf, G. Barralis (1991)
Spatial pattern analysis of weed seeds in the cultivated soil seed bank.Journal of Applied Ecology, 28
Populations of Alopecurus myosuroides were studied in maize, sugar beet, winter wheat and winter barley over 5 years. Objective definitions for a ‘weed aggregation’ and a ‘weed patch’ within weed distribution maps were determined. Weedy areas in 1 year, whose distance to each other not exceeded a certain maximum value, are defined as ‘weed aggregation’. Field areas, which were defined as a weed aggregation in at least 1 year, were investigated for weed occurrence in the other years. Therefore, the resulting field area was determined by the spatial expansion of the aggregations of all years. Image analysis was a helpful tool for further investigation of the visually obtained information. With this method, marginal changes within the weed aggregations could be determined. The analysed weed populations were largely stable in their existence throughout the period of the study. Still, the aggregations varied in their size depending on the crop. ‘Weed patches’ were defined as weeds that appear in 4 of the 5 years at the same location and were limited themselves to very small field segments. Identification of the weed patches was enabled by image analysis. It is obvious that the field segments become smaller by increasing requirements on the repetition rate of a weed population at the same location.
Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science – Wiley
Published: Feb 1, 2006
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.