Improving Efficiency of Crop Protection Measures. A Technical Contribution for Better Weed Control, Less Pesticide Use and Decreasing Soil Tillage Intensity in Dry Farming Regions Exposed to Wind Erosion

  • L.-C. GrunwaldEmail author
  • V. I. Belyaev
  • T. Meinel
Part of the Innovations in Landscape Research book series (ILR)


The extensification of tillage in farming the steppe regions of the earth with the goal of reducing erosion and maintaining soil fertility has been leading to a more intensive use of chemical plant protection products for a while now. Field hygiene and stable yields have been achieved as a result of this method to date. However, the excessive application of herbicides leads to an increase in resistance among weeds and higher expenses. The application of glyphosate as an effective and inexpensive general herbicide is very common in the agricultural steppes of America, Eurasia and Australia. However, its use is limited to short periods before seeding and after harvesting due to climate conditions in these areas. An application to the entire soil surface is effective but also very cost intensive against the background of the vast farm lands in these regions. A selective use and targeted application to weeds without coating free soil surface areas saves product and time while reducing the dangers of resistances in the agricultural ecosystem. A technical method of optical selection between weeds which need to be sprayed and areas which do not need to be treated was developed over several years as a part of Kulunda research project. The strong decrease in the overall amount of the applied herbicide results in greater productivity due to a reduction of filling downtimes and higher driving speeds in the field. The money saved is reinvested in better agents and higher concentrations. This promises more treatment success and lower resistance development. Chemical fallow periods therefore represent an effective tool instead of mechanical black fallow in the summer, even without extensive application of chemical agents to the soil, making them an adequate means to fight soil erosion and water loss.


Reducing erosion Chemical plant protection Resistance Selective application Increasing efficiency 


  1. Adkins S, Tanpipat S, Swarbrick J, Boersma M (1998) Influence of environmental factors on glyphosate efficacy when applied to Avena fatua or Urochloa panichoides. Weed Res 38(2):129–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amazone (2015). Innovationen von Amazone. Agritechnica-Silbermedaille 2015 für AmaSpot [Agritechnica silver medal 2015 for AmaSpot]. Accessed 06 Feb 2018 (in German)
  3. Baraev AI (1967) Nauchnye osnovy zemledeliia i puti uvelicheniia proizvodstva zerna v severnykh raionakh Kazakhstana i stepnykh raionakh Zapadnoi Sibiri [Scientific foundations of agriculture and ways to increase grain production in the northern regions of Kazakhstan and the steppe regions of Western Siberia]. In: Siniagin II (ed) Problemy sel’skogo khoziaistva severnogo Kazakhstana i stepnych raionov Zapadnoi Sibiri. Zelinograd, Kolos, pp 28–49 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  4. Baylis AD (2000) Why glyphosate is a global herbicide: strengths, weaknesses and prospects. Pest Manage Sci 56(4):299–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beckie HJ (2011) Herbicide-resistant weed management: focus on glyphosate. Pest Manage Sci 67:1037–1048Google Scholar
  6. Benbrook CM (2016) Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally. Environmental Science Europe. Bridging Science and Regulation at the Regional and European Level 28(3)Google Scholar
  7. BfR (ed) (2015) Löst Glyphosat Krebs aus? [Does glyphosate cause cancer?] Official note 007/2015 of the BfR from 23 Mar 2015. Accessed 21 Jan 2017 (in German)
  8. BfR (ed) (2016) BfR-Studie bestätigt: Kein Glyphosat in der Muttermilch nachweisbar [BfR study confirms: no glyphosate detectable in breast milk]. Accessed 21 Jan 2017 (in German)
  9. Blackshaw RE, Larney FO, Lindwall WC, Kozub GC (1994) Crop rotation and tillage effects on weed populations on the Semi-Arid Canadian Prairies. Weed Technol 8(2):231–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bott S (2010) Rhizosphere processes as determinants for glyphosate damage of non-target plants. Dissertation, University Stuttgart-Hohenheim Accessed 06 Feb 2018
  11. Buiatti M, Christou P, Pastore G (2013) The application of GMOs in agriculture and in food production for a better nutrition: two different scientific points of view. Genes and Nutrition 8(3):255–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Derksen DA, Lafond GP, Thomas AG, Loeppky HA, Swanton CJ (1993) Impact of agronomic practise on weed communities: tillage systems. Weed Sci 41:409–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Derpsch R, Freidrich T, Kassam A, Hongwein L (2010) Current status of adoption of no-till farming in the world and some of its main benefits. Int J Agric Bio Eng 3(1):1–24Google Scholar
  14. Deter A (2016) Russland verbietet Anbau von GMO-Pflanzen [Russia forbids cultivation of GMO plants]. Topgrar online. Accessed 06 Feb 2018 (in German)
  15. Dinkins CP, McVay K (2008) Nutrient management in no-till and minimum till systems. Montana State University Extension EB0182. Bozeman: Montana State University. Accessed 06 Feb 2018
  16. Doran JW (1980) Soil microbial and biochemical changes associated with reduced tillage. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44(4):765–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duke SO, Powles SB (2008) Mini-review Glyphosate: a once-in-a-century herbicide. Pest Manage Sci 64:319–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elliot JG, Wilson BJ (1983) The influence of weather on the efficiency and safety of pesticide application: the drift of herbicides. British Crop Protection Council, CroydonGoogle Scholar
  19. FAO (ed) (2009) Kazakhstan: technical assistance to the sunflower seed sector. Report Series N. 14. Sept 2009. Accessed 06 Feb 2018
  20. FAO (2017) Dataset provided from faostat edited/processed by the author. Published at the website of FAOSTAT.
  21. Fernandez MR, Zentner RP, Basnay P, Gehl D, Selles F, Huber D (2009) Glyphosate associations with cereal diseases caused by Fusarium spp. in the Canadian Prairies. Eur J Agron 31(3):133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fileccia T (2009) Importance of zero-tillage with high stubble to trap snow and increase wheat yields in Northern Kazakhstan. FAO Investment Centre Division, RomeGoogle Scholar
  23. Friedrich T (2005) Does no-till farming require more herbicides? Outlooks Pest Manage 16(4):145–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frühauf M, Meinel T, Belaev VI (2004) Ecological consequences of steppe conversion to arable land in west Siberia. Europa Regional 12(1):13–21Google Scholar
  25. Grunwald L-C, Meinel T, Belaev VI, Frühauf M (2015) Effekte der Schwarzbrache in verschiedenen Trockenfeldbauregionen der GUS [Effects of fallow land in various dry-field regions of the CIS]. Hallesches Jahrbuch der Geowissenschaften 37:163–193 (in German)Google Scholar
  26. Grunwald L-C, Belaev VI, Hamann M, Illiger P, Stephan E, Bischoff N, Rudev NV, Kozhanov NA, Schmidt G, Frühauf M, Meinel T (2016) Modern cropping systems and technologies for soil conservation in Siberian agriculture. In: Müller L, Sheudshen AK, Eulenstein F (eds) Novel methods fsor monitoring and managing land and water resources in Siberia. Springer, Cham, pp 681–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johal GS, Huber DM (2009) Glyphosate effects on diseases of plants. Eur J Agron 31(3):144–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Johnston AM (2002) Fertility issues and long-term no-till. Taken from: Direct Seeding advantage 2002—Reduced Tillage Linkages. Accessed 06 Feb 2018
  29. Kozhanov SA (2016) Protocol of an interview on the use of the spot—spraying technology in the PARTNER test farm in Altai Krai, PoluyamkiGoogle Scholar
  30. Lafond GP, May WE, Stevenson FC, Derksen DA (2006) Effects of tillage systems and rotations on crop production for thin Black Chernozem in the Canadian Prairies. Soil Tillage Res 89:232–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Land Commodities (ed) (2017) Variations in farm size across the Australian Wheatbelt. Accessed 21 Jan 2017
  32. Lindwall WC, Sonntag B (eds) (2010) Landscapes transformed: the history of conservation tillage and direct seeding. Knowledge Impact in Society, SaskatoonGoogle Scholar
  33. Lydolph PE (1990) Geography of the U.S.S.R. Elkhart Lake, WI: Misty Valley PublishingGoogle Scholar
  34. Maitland K (2012) Selective spray units help war on weeds. SANTFA Cutting Edge Spring 2012:292–295Google Scholar
  35. Mathews OR, Cole JS (1938) Special dry farming problems. In: United States department of agriculture (ed). Yearbook 1938. Washington D.C.: US GPO, pp. S. 679–693Google Scholar
  36. McConkey BG, Liang BC, Campbell CA, Curtin D, Moulin A, Brandt SA, Lafond GP (2003) Crop rotation and tillage impact on carbon sequestration in Canadian Prairie soils. Soil Tillage Res 74:81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Müller L, Sheudshen AK, Syso A, Barsukov P, Smolentseva EN, Khodzher T, Sychev VG, Romanenkov VA, Rukhovich OV, Puzanov A, Dannowski R, Schindler U, Eulenstein F (2016) Land and water resources of Siberia, their functioning and ecological state. In: Müller L, Sheudshen AK, Eulenstein F (eds) Novel methods for monitoring and managing land and water resources in Siberia. Springer, Cham, pp 3–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Powles SB, Lorraine-Colwill DF, Dellow JJ, Preston C (1998) Evolved resistance to glyphosate in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) in Australia. Weed Sci 46:604–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Powles SB (2008) Evolved glyphosate-resistant weeds around the world: lessons to be learnt. Pest Manage Sci 64(4):360–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Statistics Canada (ed) (2016) 2011—Farm and Farm Operator Data. Accessed 21 Jan 2017
  41. Suleimenov M, Saparov A, Akshalov K, Kaskarbaev Z (2012). Land degradation issues in Kazakhstan and measures to address them: research and adoption. Pedologist, pp 373–381Google Scholar
  42. Tuleuov AS, Nikishov AV, Dauletalyeva SR (2011) Vozdelyvanie Podsolnechnika v usloviiakh Aktiubinskoi Oblasti [Cultivation of Sunflower in Aktyubinsk Oblast]. Dostizheniia Nauki I Tekhniki APK 11:32–34 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  43. Uhlmann F (2003) Internationaler Handel mit gentechnisch veränderten pflanzlichen Erzeugnissen: Der Versuch einer Statusbeschreibung [International trade in genetically modified herbal products: attempting to describe the status]. Work Report 1/2003. Federal agricultural research center, institute for market analysis and agricultural trade policy. Accessed 06 Feb 2018 (in German)

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BBG Bodenbearbeitungsgeräte Leipzig GmbH & Co. KGLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Altai State Agricultural UniversityBarnaulRussian Federation
  3. 3.TOO AmazoneAstanaKazakhstan

Personalised recommendations