Paper · 2021 · Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment

How weed management influence plant community composition, taxonomic diversity and crop yield: A long-term study in a Mediterranean vineyard

J.G. Guerra; F. Cabello; C. Fernández-Quintanilla; et al.

11
claims
22
verbatim quotes
34
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Agricultural expansion and intensification is a major driver of biodiversity loss. Conventional weed management (e.g. tillage, herbicide) has encouraged the promotion of a few more competitive species over a wide range of arable plants that are now in decline. A reduction in plant diversity would negatively affect the provision of key ecosystem services in agroecosystems. In vineyards, the use of plant covers has emerged as the principal alternative to conventional weed management, providing multiple ecosystem services such as enhance biodiversity, but usually with a decrease in yields in Mediterranean vineyards. This long-term study assessed how weed management (herbicide, mowing, tillage) influenced plant community composition, taxonomic diversity and vineyard yield. Plant surveys and grape yield measurements were carried out from 2015 to 2018 in an experiment established in 2008. Effects on plant community composition were analysed, focusing on two groups: noxious grapevine weeds and terophytic grassland species. In addition, three fundamental components of taxonomic diversity were measured: β-diversity, evenness and species richness. Linear mixed models and generalised linear mixed model were used to examine the response of different variables to weed management. Position (row, inter-row) as well as the indirect effect of adjacent management on the subplots were also included as fixed factors. Furthermore, the percentage of bare soil, related to disturbance degree associated with management, was explored as a potential predictor of taxonomic diversity and vineyard yield. Results indicated that plant community composition was affected by weed management and to a lesser extent by position. Noxious grapevine weeds were more abundant in herbicide-sprayed rows, while terophytic grasslands species showed a higher presence in mown subplots. Weed management had a strong effect on bare soil, which proved to be a good predictor of the variables studied. Indeed, the highest species richness were associated with the lowest percentages of bare soil (mown subplots), while the lowest values were found at high percentages of bare soil (tilled subplots). Herbicide showed intermediate values, with a response dependent on adjacent management. On the other hand, vineyard yields were higher with increased bare soil, although with the consequent loss of species richness. Conversely, mowing in spontaneous plant covers caused a decrease in yield, but still production was within the maximum limit established by the Regulatory Council, while increasing the species richness and a significant presence of therophytic grasslands species. These findings could foster the development of more sustainable management in Mediterranean vineyards.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weed management affected plant community composition more than subplot position.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
weed managemente0
Outcome
plant community compositione0
Comparator
positione0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“plant community composition was affected by weed management and to a lesser extent by position”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1625–1719 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Noxious grapevine weeds were more abundant in herbicide-sprayed rows.

Taxon
grapevineVitise0
Treatment
herbicide-sprayed rowse0
Interactor
Noxious grapevine weedse0weed
Outcome
Noxious grapevine weedse0
Direction
more abundante0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Vitis
Vitis · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Victor M. Vicente Selvas · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Noxious grapevine weeds were more abundant in herbicide-sprayed rows”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1721–1789 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Therophytic grassland species had higher presence in mown subplots.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
mown subplotse0
Outcome
terophytic grasslands speciese0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“terophytic grasslands species showed a higher presence in mown subplots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1797–1868 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weed management strongly affected bare soil.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
Weed managemente0
Outcome
bare soile0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0

“Weed management had a strong effect on bare soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1870–1918 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Species richness was highest at low bare soil percentages in mown subplots.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
mown subplotse0
Outcome
species richnesse0
Direction
higheste0
Qualifier
lowest percentages of bare soile0

Verbatim

e0

“the highest species richness were associated with the lowest percentages of bare soil (mown subplots)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1990–2091 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Species richness was lowest at high bare soil percentages in tilled subplots.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
tilled subplotse0
Outcome
species richnesse1
Direction
loweste0
Qualifier
high percentages of bare soile0

Verbatim

e0

“the lowest values were found at high percentages of bare soil (tilled subplots)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2099–2178 · show in text ↑
e1

“highest species richness”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1994–2018 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide produced intermediate diversity values dependent on adjacent management.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
Herbicidee0
Outcome
species richnesse1
Direction
intermediatee0
Qualifier
dependent on adjacent managemente0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Herbicide showed intermediate values, with a response dependent on adjacent management”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2180–2266 · show in text ↑
e1

“highest species richness”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1994–2018 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vineyard yields were higher as bare soil increased.

Taxon
vineyarde0
Outcome
vineyard yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
increased bare soile0
Setting
vineyarde0

Verbatim

e0

“vineyard yields were higher with increased bare soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2287–2339 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mowing spontaneous plant covers reduced vineyard yield.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
mowing in spontaneous plant coverse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“mowing in spontaneous plant covers caused a decrease in yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2408–2469 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield under mowing remained within the regulatory maximum.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Outcome
productione0
Qualifier
within the maximum limit established by the Regulatory Councile0

Verbatim

e0

“production was within the maximum limit established by the Regulatory Council”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2481–2558 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mowing spontaneous covers increased species richness and the presence of therophytic grassland species.

Taxon
vineyardt0
Treatment
mowing in spontaneous plant coverse0
Outcome
species richness and a significant presence of therophytic grasslands speciese0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“mowing in spontaneous plant covers caused a decrease in yield, but still production was within the maximum limit established by the Regulatory Council, while increasing the species richness and a significant presence of therophytic grasslands species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2408–2658 · show in text ↑
t0

“vineyard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–140 · show in text ↑

herbicide · weed · VitisPositive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

8 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.