Organic Agriculture

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 197–207 | Cite as

Productivity, economics, and fruit and soil quality of weed management systems in commercial organic orchards in Washington State, USA

  • David GranatsteinEmail author
  • Preston Andrews
  • Alan Groff


Organic tree fruit producers often rely on tillage in the tree row to control weeds and disrupt rodent pest habitat. This inexpensive practice can potentially damage the trees’ trunk and roots, thereby reducing yield and fruit quality. In contrast, mulching under the trees to suppress weeds often improves tree performance but at a high initial installation cost, whereas flame weeding and organic-compliant herbicides can control weeds without disturbing the soil. These three systems of weed management in the tree row were compared in commercial, certified organic apple and pear orchards in Washington State, USA, to determine the effectiveness for weed control and the impacts on tree performance, soil organic matter, and economic return of each system when taking into account both the cost of the weed control itself and its impact on fruit yield and quality. Mulching produced a large net economic benefit relative to tillage, more so in the apple orchard that had sandier soil than in the pear orchard on a loam soil. Flame weeding was similar to tillage in cost, whereas organic herbicides proved extremely expensive and relatively ineffective. Tillage did not lead to a decline in soil organic matter over three seasons, nor did mulching increase it. Overall, mulching led to better tree performance and economic returns but was not a successful stand-alone weed control practice over 3 years. A combination of flaming and tillage and/or mulch may offer the best overall results.


Apple Pear Tillage Mulch Flame weeding Soil organic matter Economics 



Funding for the study came from a USDA Specialty Crop Block Grant through the Washington State Department of Agriculture. We gratefully acknowledge the generous support of the Foreman Fruit and Land Co., Wenatchee, WA, for the use of their orchards to conduct these trials. We also acknowledge the valuable assistance of Cindy Kahn, Rachel Miller, Jackie Pitts, Awais Sial, and Luke Gustafson for their contributions to this study.

Supplementary material

13165_2014_68_MOESM1_ESM.docx (18 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 18 kb)


  1. Atucha A, Merwin IA, Brown MG (2011) Long-term effects of four groundcover management systems in an apple orchard. HortSci 46:1176–1183Google Scholar
  2. Blanpied GD, Silsby KJ (1992) Predicting the harvest date window for apples. Information Bulletin 221, Cornell University Cooperative Extension, Ithaca, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Cambardella CA, Elliott ET (1992) Particulate soil organic-matter changes across a grassland cultivation sequence. Soil Sci Soc Amer J 56:777–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cockroft B, Wallbrink JC (1966) Root distribution of orchard trees. Austr J Agric Res 17:49–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Forge TA, Hogue E, Neilsen G, Neilsen D (2003) Effects of organic mulches on soil microfauna in the root zone of apple: implications for nutrient fluxes and functional diversity of the soil food web. Appl Soil Ecol 22:39–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Granatstein D, Mullinix K (2008) Mulching options for Northwest organic and conventional orchards. HortSci 43:45–50Google Scholar
  7. Granatstein D, Sánchez E (2009) Research knowledge and needs for orchard floor management in organic tree fruit systems. Intl J Fruit Sci 9:257–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Granatstein D, Wiman M, Kirby E, Mullinix K (2010) Sustainability trade-offs in organic orchard floor management. Acta Hort 873:115–121Google Scholar
  9. Granatstein D, Kirby E, Willer H (2013) Global area and trends of organic fruit production. Acta Hort 1001:383–394Google Scholar
  10. Kirby E, Granatstein D (2012) Status of organic tree fruit in Washington State. Washington State University Extension EM046E, Pullman, WA, 32 ppGoogle Scholar
  11. Marriott EE, Wander MM (2006) Total and labile soil organic matter in organic and conventional farming systems. Soil Sci Soc Amer J 70:950–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Merwin IA (2003) Orchard-floor management systems. In: Ferree DC, Warrington IJ (eds) Apples: botany, production, and uses. CABI, Cambridge, pp 303–318Google Scholar
  13. Merwin IA, Stiles WC (1994) Orchard groundcover management impacts on apple tree growth and yield, and nutrient availability and uptake. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 119:209–215Google Scholar
  14. Neilsen GH, Hogue EJ, Forge T, Neilsen D (2003) Mulches and biosolids affect vigor, yield and leaf nutrition of fertigated high density apple. HortSci 38:41–45Google Scholar
  15. Pitts T, Craver D, Granatstein D, Stephens N (2010) Survey of organic growers toolbox: information gaps and research needs. Wash. St. Hort Assoc. Annual Meeting, Yakima, WA. Accessed 9/13/13
  16. Singleton VL, Orthofer R, Lamuela-Raventós RM (1999) Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. Methods Enzymol 299:152–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stiles WC, Reid WS (1991) Orchard nutrition management. Information Bulletin 219, Cornell Cooperative Extension, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 23 ppGoogle Scholar
  18. USDA (2001) National Organic Program. Sec. 205.203(a). e-CFR, USGPO, Washington, DC. Accessed 9/13/13
  19. Wiman MR, Kirby EM, Granatstein DM, Sullivan TP (2009) Cover crops influence meadow vole presence in organic orchards. HortTech 19:558–562Google Scholar
  20. Wooldridge J, Harris RE (1989) Effect of ground covers on the performance of young apple trees and on certain topsoil characteristics. Deciduous Fruit Grower 39:427–430Google Scholar
  21. Yao S, Merwin IA, Bird GW, Abawi GS, Thies JE (2005) Orchard floor management practices that maintain vegetative or biomass groundcover stimulate soil microbial activity and alter soil microbial community composition. Plant Soil 271:377–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhao C-Z, Lu L, Peng C-Z, Chen B-H (2002) Effect of straw mulching on leaf physiological properties, size and growth curves of pear fruit in an arid desert area. Acta Hort 587:605–610Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Granatstein
    • 1
    Email author
  • Preston Andrews
    • 2
  • Alan Groff
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural ResourcesWashington State UniversityWenatcheeUSA
  2. 2.Department of HorticultureWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  3. 3.Foreman Fruit and Land Co., LLCWenatcheeUSA

Personalised recommendations