Archive for the ‘Mechanical control’ Category

The prototype will be presented at Macfrut by the Italian company Bagioni

How to weed organic asparagus mechanically

A system that keeps the asparagus field clean of weeds, through mechanical weeding, without increasing costs is Aurenzo Bagioni’s latest solution which will be presented at Macfrut, during the Asparagus Days.

The Forlì-based company Bagioni, which already produces asparagus harvesting machines, will present this new concept in Rimini, Italy. This accessory is mounted on the back of the asparagus harvesting machines and is particularly aimed at organic farms but can also be used by those who cultivate using conventional methods. Basically, the concept is based on a weeder that allows the central part (30-50 centimeters) – where the asparagus grows – to remain free, but moves the soil laterally at each harvesting operation, to an adjustable depth of 1-3 centimeters. You don’t have to do any extra work, but the device works when you harvest.

Given that the harvest takes place every day, the idea was to attach a weeder to the back of the machine, keeping the central 50 centimeters free for the asparagus to grow. This daily operation should keep the soil moving and prevent the grass from growing.

We had already seen this prototype in June 2021, but Bagioni asked not to announce it until the end of August, because he was thinking of filing a patent.

“This concept is being presented with the aim of understanding whether the idea is interesting to customers and then possibly start building it,” concluded the owner.

For more information: 
Bagioni Alfiero Snc 
Via Bologna 100
47121 Forlì – Italy
+39 0543 703993

Publication date: Thu 26 Aug 2021

Read Full Post »

Weed electrocution research sparks interest as herbicide resistance impedes current methods

July 29, 2021 at 4:00 a.m.COURTESY PHOTO The United Soybean Board, Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council and the Weed Zapper company are partners in this weed electrocution research project.

COLUMBIA — Move over, herbicides. There’s a new sheriff in town. And he’s toting some powerful guns loaded with electricity to kill weeds.

This shocking new method of weed control was demonstrated at the 2021 Pest Management Field Day at the University of Missouri Bradford Research Center in Columbia.

Weekly Newsletter
Stay connected and informed with McDonald County Press news updates delivered straight to your inbox.

As more weeds develop resistance to herbicides, electrocution may be the weed management approach of the future, says MU Extension weed scientist Kevin Bradley. MU graduate student Haylee Schreier has studied weed electrocution in row crops for the past two years under Bradley’s direction.

The is of special interest to Bradley because it might be the answer to Missouri’s growing waterhemp problem. A prolific producer of seeds, waterhemp is Missouri’s No. 1 weed problem and one of 14 weeds that are herbicide-resistant.

Two brothers in Illinois with backgrounds in farming and engineering designed The Weed Zapper machine. A different pair of brothers purchased the technology and manufacture Weed Zappers at a plant in Sedalia, Mo.

The Weed Zapper model used in MU research has a copper boom that attaches to the front of a tractor. Driven by a PTO, it hits weeds with 15,000 volts of electricity from a 110,000-watt generator on the back of the tractor. Models cost between $42,000 and $72,000.

Metal wheels are grounded, and booms adjust to different heights. Tractor speed is about 2-4 miles per hour, Bradley says. Weed kill is best at lower speeds and is even more effective on some of the more challenging weeds when used at seven-day intervals in late summer.

Schreier’s data shows that by the end of the season there is almost complete control of giant ragweed, common ragweed, marestail and waterhemp. It is slightly less effective on grasses.

The growth stage of soybean and the degree of contact that the boom makes with the foliage influences soybean injury. Soybean yield loss is possible if the boom makes constant contact with the soybean canopy at growth stages R3 or later.

In addition to killing weeds, electrocution also affects the viability of surviving weed seeds. The most impact is seen in waterhemp, where about 65% of seeds become nonviable.

Electrocution is not new to the weed management world, says Bradley. Sugar beet growers in North and South Dakota have been trying this method since the 1950s and 1960s.

The United Soybean Board, Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council and the Weed Zapper company are partners in this project.

Learn more about Weed Zappers at http://www.TheWeedZapper.com.

Weed electrocution research shows promising results for weed management, especially in waterhemp, Missouri’s No. 1 weed problem. The Weed Zapper attaches to a tractor and kills in-row weeds with high-voltage electricity. Photo by Linda Geist.

For more than 100 years, University of Missouri Extension has extended university-based knowledge beyond the campus into all counties of the state. In doing so, Extension has strengthened families, businesses and communities. MU Extension news: extension.missouri.edu/news.

Print Headline: Weed electrocution research sparks interest as herbicide resistance impedes current methods

Read Full Post »

Cedar fight goes across fence and state lines

TAGS: CONSERVATIONLIVESTOCKCurt ArensA few members of the Bristow, Neb. area crew pose in front of the trucks they purchased to help on prescribed burnsCRUCIAL CREW: A few members of the Bristow, Neb., area crew pose in front of the trucks they bought to help on prescribed burns. Over the past eight years, this group has burned more than 30,000 acres in their fight to reclaim grasslands from invasive eastern red cedar.Working together has been a successful formula for Nebraska and South Dakota advocates of prescribed fire.

Curt Arens | Dec 23, 2020

Gathering landowners to work together on prescribed burn projects has been a winning model in the successful defeat of eastern red cedar encroachment on grazing lands. Normally, prescribed burn associations work across fence lines with neighboring landowners.

Over the past decade, eastern members of the Niobrara Valley Prescribed Fire Association, covering much of north-central Nebraska, have not only reached across fence lines, but also state lines into neighboring South Dakota, to beat the invasion of ERC.

Related: New strategy in battle against invasive cedars

It started in 2010 when Jerald Dennis, Bristow, Neb., sheared ERC trees in a large portion of family-owned grasslands on the south shore of Lake Francis Case in South Dakota, behind Fort Randall Dam. He piled the dead cedar trees for curing. In 2011, Dennis deferred grazing on the tract, to grow fuel for the prescribed burn he was planning the following spring.

“It took an entire year to plan the burn, coordinating between five landowners, four government agencies along with local law enforcement and fire departments,” Dennis explains. On that burn with Dennis, Dave Steffen from Gregory, S.D., and other interested landowners in the area watched as observers.

Dennis has worked at Nebraska State Bank in Bristow for nearly 40 years. Most of that time, he has also served on the Bristow Fire Department. His family owns about 2,000 acres of pasture in both states, so he’s been involved in prescribed burning for the past 13 years. The Prescribed Fire Association that Dennis works with has conducted burns on just over 30,000 acres since 2012.

They normally develop their burn schedule at a meeting each February, so 10 to 12 people can plan to be involved with each burn. The local members of the association bought two Army surplus pickup trucks to transport skid water pumping units with 250-gallon tanks, hoses and a reel they borrow from the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

The burn near Fort Randall encompassed 3,145 acres. “We had a well-seasoned crew of 12 from Nebraska working that burn,” Dennis says. “It also helped that we had Lake Francis Case to the north and a highway to the south.”

Steffen watched the Nebraska crew and became interested in conducting more prescribed burns locally. “The following year, Steffen and a few other interested parties came down from South Dakota and attended our local meeting, and a few controlled burns,” Dennis says. “We collaborated on burns in South Dakota by helping that group develop burn plans and assisting with the burns. Our motivation was to teach their group how to safely conduct controlled burns, so they could teach others in the state.”

In 2017, the South Dakota group formed its own Mid-Missouri River Prescribed Burn Association —the first in the state — with Steffen and several neighbors as driving forces in the effort.

“Cedar trees were just beginning to become a problem,” Steffen recalls. “I looked at maps that showed the encroachment problems, especially big bunches along the Missouri River.”  The aerial maps showed about one-third of Gregory County with cedar tree problems. “Thanks to funds from the South Dakota Grasslands Coalition, we sent out a questionnaire, asking landowners about cedars on their land, and if they would consider prescribed fire as a control.”

Jerald DennisA prescribed burnLIGHTING IT UP:  Two years before the actual burn near Fort Randall Dam in South Dakota, Jerald Dennis sheared several large cedar trees and pushed them up against mature live trees. In 2012, when they started their prescribed burn in that area, the sheared trees ignited easily and burned into the live trees.

Steffen says that working with the Nebraska group helped their association in South Dakota organize and conduct burns of its own.

“We’ve had burns in the hundreds of acres so far, mostly in Gregory County, but also in Charles Mix County. That included a couple of big ranches,” Steffen says. “In many cases, nonresident landowners contact us about conducting a burn on their property. In most cases, we like it when landowners participate in the burn themselves, but with some nonresidents, we accept a payment for doing the burns.”

The Mid-Missouri River group now covers four counties, including Gregory, Charles Mix, Brule and Lyman.

“From the prescribed burns, we have witnessed tremendous recovery of warm-season native grasses on those grasslands where there was grazing management to go along with it,” Steffen says. “There has been fantastic recovery to a typical native plant community in the rough hills and breaks of the Missouri River.”

Cedar treesDEAD TIMBER:  At specific heights, cedar trees do not stand a chance against a well-run prescribed burn. Most of the trees pictured here are completed destroyed. Grass recovery in an area like this is surprisingly rapid.

Steffen says that landowners are amazed with the amount of new grass growth there has been within a year’s time. “Keep in mind, we’ve had plenty of rain in recent years to grow grass, so we have been above normal in soil moisture,” he adds.

For the group based in Bristow, fire has been a worthwhile tool in their war against ERC for more than a decade. “We add new, younger members to our group every year,” Dennis says. “Most of them are members of the fire department, so they are comfortable with conducting a burn. We all work together, and it is great knowing that the other guys have got your back.”

Learn more about Nebraska prescribed fire associations at the state’s Pheasants Forever and Quail Forever website, nebraskapf.com. Learn about the Mid-Missouri River Prescribed Burn Association of South Dakota online at midmissouririverpba.com.RELATEDYoung farmers get involved in ag groupsNovember 17, 2020Landowners band together to confront eastern red cedarJune 22, 2020

Read Full Post »

Delta Farm Press 1

Boll weevil photo
A boll weevil-free growing environment has saved millions of dollars for cotton growers across the Cotton Belt as a result of a years-long program to eradicate the pest.

Arkansas weevil eradication force ramps up with expected cotton acre rise

Rebate headed to 2017 growers mailbox

David Bennett | Apr 06, 2018

Did you grow cotton in Arkansas last year? If so, a rebate is headed your way.

The reason has to do with boll weevils — or, more precisely, the eradication program (http://www.aad.arkansas.gov/boll-weevil-eradication-program) to keep them out of the state.

“At the end of last year, by the time we got through (with the eradication effort), the cost averaged out to about $2 per acre,” says Regina Coleman, Arkansas Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation executive director. “The assessment is $3 per acre and we keep a two-year operating reserve. It turned out we ended up with a surplus and that will now be given back to the growers in the form of a rebate.”

And it’s going to be an actual rebate, not a credit.

“It will be a 75-cent per acre rebate to growers who had cotton (in 2017). Those funds should be going to the growers in the next several weeks.”

Coleman, understandably, is very happy. “This is good news! Agriculture has taken a hit so many ways through the years. This whole program is for the growers and their benefit and it’ll be so nice to send those checks out.”

Acres rising

Bill Robertson, Arkansas Extension cotton specialist, expects north of 500,000 acres of cotton to be planted in the state this year. A big concern is growers coming to the crop for the first time.

“We need to remember we’re still in a boll weevil eradication program,” says Robertson. “Even though we haven’t caught a weevil in a long time, it’s still in force.

“The eradication program is paid for by Arkansas cotton producers. Mapping, establishing traps, and monitoring traps can be very costly. … The goal of the program is to implement an effective and economical program to ensure the sustainability of the Arkansas cotton industry.

“The eradication folks are working very hard right now. Think about it: there are a lot of new farmers coming into cotton. Some of them have never grown an acre before, and they may not understand how important it is to let the eradication monitors know where the cotton will be planted. That info needs to get on the monitors’ radar screens as quickly as possible.”

Coleman agrees. “The program has obviously been successful at eradicating the boll weevil. That’s due to a lot of hard work and diligence of a lot of people through the years. We had some folks early on say, ‘there’s no way we’re getting rid of the boll weevil.’ But we did through a consistent approach on spraying, being steady. A lot of money went into eradication, and because of that and the benefits growers receive from being weevil-free so, anyone growing cotton needs to report it.”

To maintain a weevil-free state, “we need everyone to participate. There are rules and regulations in place and the Arkansas State Plant Board is in charge of making sure those are followed. Basically, if you grow cotton in Arkansas you must report it to the Arkansas Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation. The acres must be reported by June 15. If you don’t report your acres, there is a $3 per acre penalty.”

Ramping up

Last year, Arkansas had 424,351 acres of cotton — up from 365,000 acres, says Coleman. “This year, we’re anticipating being over 500,000 acres. From all indications from the information I’ve gathered, that’s what we’re going to budget for.

“Last year, with the jump in acres, the field staff did an extremely good job. I can’t say enough about how good a job they did. We had a few changes in staffing we had to do. But we still only had four field staff and hired several seasonal workers. Everyone jumped in and took care of it and got the job done — covered everything, saw all the growers, took care of the trappings in an efficient manner.”

This year, with acres going up again, “we’ve added another full-time field staffer, and we’ll have three part-time seasonal workers. We’re still operating on a skeletal-type crew even though the acres are rising. But with the people we have on staff and the technology we use, the job can be done properly.”

Again, growers must have everything reported by June 15, and Coleman is “very anxious to see where we end up at.”


One interesting development is an expected increase in cotton acres in southwest Arkansas.

“It’s kind of surprising how cotton is going back into the southwest,” says Coleman. “Our Southwest Zone is a four-county area around Texarkana. In 2006, I believe, they had almost 11,000 acres. Then, there was a big decline and there were no acres, gins closed. There was a small plot of cotton at one of the rest areas. So, we monitored that along with the trapping line we always work because Texas still has an active eradication program.”

Then, in 2016, 200 acres of cotton were planted.

“Last year, we had 1,800 acres with more intended but the weather didn’t cooperate. This year, after visiting with growers in the area, it looks like we might be back up to 10,000 acres.”

What kind of pressure does that put on the eradication force?

“The trapping line would have been worked regardless, so that’s normal. Now, trying to locate the growers and potential growers is a worry. Are these people who are coming back into cotton so they know to report? Or, are there brand-new cotton growers who don’t know to report?”

FSA offices have always been very helpful in providing Coleman and colleagues with information and “also to let growers know if they’re planning to plant cotton they need to let the eradication team know.”


One point of emphasis form both Coleman and Robertson: ornamental cotton.


“Driving through the country, I’ve seen people growing big, long rows of cotton in their front yards. The bolls were open and plants were loaded. So, that really complicates things for the boll weevil eradication effort. There’s all this ornamental cotton that the folks monitoring for weevils don’t have on their maps and they don’t know about.

“Can you imagine if weevils came back in because of private gardens? It’s just not a good idea to put cotton in your flowerbeds. That could cost millions of dollars to clean up if an outbreak were to occur, and it’s not worth taking the chance.”

Even though the eradication foundation strongly discourages ornamental planting, “we’re always happy to work with schools, museums and parks that are growing non-commercial cotton for education programs,” says Coleman. “In fact, we’re working with several this year. Someone who wants to grow non-commercial must call (the Foundation) or the Plant Board. There’s an application process they have to go through.

“We had a program we worked with last year around Conway (in central Arkansas). They were growing pumpkins along with the cotton. So, when schools came in to visit the pumpkin patch, they were given a lesson on cotton. Conway is way outside the normal cotton-growing areas of the state, obviously. But when you can educate the public on agriculture in a positive way, we’re definitely excited to help.”

TAGS: Insects

Read Full Post »

logo-feed-the-future 1

Two Sides of the Same Leaf: Controlling Pests in Cambodia

February 28, 2018
Kim Fooyontphanich

A Cambodian farmer working under the Pest Exclusion Nets in Battambang, Cambodia.

Innovation Lab for Pest Management
Cambodian agricultural scientists, extension agents, NGOs, and entrepreneurs learn about Trichoderma, a beneficial fungus that can control vegetable-attacking pests.

A Simple Pest Control Technology Helps Farmers Find Success

Phai Sila has been farming since she can remember, growing up in a farming family in Battambang, Cambodia.

“Agriculture has been a big part of my life,” Sila said. “I helped my parents in the field since I was very young and still continue to farm for a living after getting married and having my own children.”

South and Southeast Asia are regions with enormous potential for horticulture production, yet farmers like Sila still follow traditional farming methods that produce low yields and make farming less profitable.

One element of farming that contributes to decreased profits for smallholder farmers is the use of pesticides. While pesticides are used in many countries’ agricultural industries, for smallholder farmers in villages around the world, their cost can be prohibitively expensive. So farmers like Sila have begun exploring other pest control options.

Through support from Feed the Future, Sila and other farmers in Battambang learned how to install pest exclusion nets (PEN) to protect their crops from pests, control temperature and soil moisture, and reduce their reliance on pesticides that impact both the environment and human health.

“The PEN technology can help me reduce pesticide use in farming, protect my crops from the heat, and maintain soil moisture in the summer season,” said Sila. “The best thing I noticed after using this technology is that the number of insects that come and attack my crops is reduced by 80 percent.”

By using PEN, Sila was the only farmer in the village to successfully grow leafy vegetables this past summer. Because of the lack of vegetable supply at the local market, she earned 10 times more than in the winter season.

“The price is really good in the summer,” said Sila. “Buyers at the market could not believe that my vegetables were grown locally; they suspected that the produce was imported and went through heavy pesticide use because it looked fresh with very little damage from pests.”

Embracing Biological Pest Control to Protect Crops

Pest exclusion net technology is not the only new method of pest control being explored in Cambodia.

Beneficial bacteria, fungi and viruses are a viable alternative to chemical pesticides for controlling pests and diseases that attack cultivated crops.

Since 2009, the Feed the Future Integrated Pest Management Innovation Lab has worked to control pests and diseases that affect high-value vegetable crops. The lab has identified several potential biological pesticides for protecting crops in place of chemical pesticides, but one in particular – Trichoderma – could be produced locally and has proven to be highly effective.

There was one major hurdle to introducing Trichoderma to local farmers, though: The Government of Cambodia did not have a process for registering biological pesticide use within the country.

So the Feed the Future Integrated Pest Management Innovation Lab conducted a workshop in Cambodia’s capital, Phnom Penh, to educate and train local agricultural scientists, extension agents, NGOs and entrepreneurs about Trichoderma. It also helped local entrepreneurs establish companies that produce this beneficial fungus and sell it to farmers.

In collaboration with a project sponsored by the German government, the lab also worked to encourage the Cambodian government to establish a registry for biological control agents. A Trichoderma application produced by Kean Sophea, a local entrepreneur with whom the lab had worked, led to the first officially registered and locally produced biological control agent in Cambodia.

“We are happy with the government’s decision,” said Mao Canady, manager of Eco-Agri Co, Ltd, a Cambodian company that produces Trichoderma, of the new registry. “It will build trust between farmers, the private sector, and consumers.”

And because biological control agents are not only cheaper than chemical pesticides, but also generally have a much smaller impact on the soil and the environment, the future of Cambodia’s farmers looks promising.

The Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Integrated Pest Management, led by Virginia Tech, supports improved, environmentally sustainable yields for smallholder farmers through an environmentally-friendly, sustainable approach to reducing plant and crop damage caused by pests. The lab works with researchers, scientists, extension agents, farmers, policymakers, and government officials around the world, as well as universities in the United States and national and international agriculture research centers to tackle pest problems of vegetables, fruits, cereals, and legumes.

The Feed the Future Asia Innovative Farmers Project, funded by USAID and implemented by Winrock International, transforms the lives of farmers in South and Southeast Asia by supporting the discovery, development, and dissemination of impactful innovations that help farmers boost their incomes and improve their food security. The project works to identify, test, scale and disseminate critical technologies that enable smallholder farmers to improve productivity and income sustainably.

Read Full Post »