Weed control using no-till soybean growing technology in the Right-Bank Forest-Steppe of Ukraine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Goal. To study the effect of long-term application of moldboard tillage (plowing) to a depth of 20—22 cm and no-till technology on weed infestation, and to develop a weed control system to reduce the carbon footprint in soybean cultivation technologies. Methods. The research included field and laboratory studies, as well as mathematical-statistical analysis to assess the reliability of the obtained data. The primary tillage methods were: moldboard plowing to a depth of 20—22 cm and no-till technology. Results. Analysis of the weed species composition in soybean crops, averaged over 2021—2024, revealed 17 species from 10 families. Before the application of post-emergence herbicides, the total number of weeds amounted to 329 plants/m² under moldboard plowing and 367 plants/ m² under no-till technology. Regardless of the primary tillage method, annual dicotyledonous species dominated the weed community (77—88%), with white goosefoot (Chenopodium album L.) prevailing (64—78%) and spotted lady’s thumb (Polygonum persicaria L.) accounting for 8—14%. A significant increase in the number of Canadian fleabane (Erigeron canadensis L.) was observed with long-term no-till application compared to plowing. Application of herbicides with different mechanisms of action—specifically, the graminicide Miura EC (quizalofop-P-ethyl, 125 g/L) at 1.0 L/ha, and a tank mixture of Basagran SL (bentazon, 480 g/L) at 1.8 L/ ha + Harmony WG (thifensulfuron-methyl, 750 g/kg) at 7 g/ ha — reduced total weed infestation by 93% under moldboard plowing and by 95% under no-till technology. Grass weed control reached 96—97%, while the mixture of Basagran SL 1.8 L/ ha + Harmony WG 7 g/ha ensured 93—98% mortality of dicotyledonous species. Under no-till technology, the use of the non-selective herbicide Roundup Max SL (450 g/L glyphosate acid equivalent; 551 g/L as potassium salt) at 2.5 L/ha, applied 10 days before sowing, ensured E. canadensis control at the level of 90%, which may require additional measures in the future. Average soybean yield under moldboard plowing was 3.1 t/ha, while under no-till with effective weed control it was 2.84 t/ha. Production costs for soybean cultivation under no-till were 23.5 thousand UAH/ ha, compared to 26.7 thousand UAH/ ha under plowing — 3.2 thousand UAH/ ha lower. Fuel and lubricants consumption was reduced by 22—25 L/ha, and profitability increased to 86%, which is 15% higher than under plowing. Conclusions. The weed control system, which includes the application under no-till technology of the non-selective herbicide Roundup Max SL at 2.5 L/ha 10 days before sowing, the graminicide Miura EC at 1.0 L/ ha, and the tank mixture of Basagran SL 1.8 L/ha + Harmony WG 7 g/ha at the 1—3 trifoliate leaf stage of the crop during the juvenile stages of weed development, is a key element in low-carbon soybean cultivation technology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".