Weeds of Direct-Seeded Rice in Asia: Problems and Opportunities

Rice production symbolizes the single largest land use for food production on the Earth. The significance of this cereal as a source of energy and income seems overwhelming for millions of people in Asia, representing 90% of global rice production and consumption. Estimates indicate that the burgeoning population will need 25% more rice by 2025 than today's consumption. As the demand for rice is increasing, its production in Asia is threatened by a dwindling natural resource base, socioeconomic limitations, and uncertainty of climatic optima. Transplanting in puddled soil with continuous flooding is a common method of rice crop establishment in Asia. There is a dire need to look for rice production technologies that not only cope with existing limitations of transplanted rice but also are viable, economical, and secure for future food demand.Direct seeding of rice has evolved as a potential alternative to the current detrimental practice of puddling and nursery transplanting. The associated benefits include higher water productivity, less labor and energy inputs, less methane emissions, elimination of time and edaphic conflicts in the rice-wheat cropping system, and early crop maturity. Realization of the yield potential and sustainability of this resource-conserving rice production technique lies primarily in sustainable weed management, since weeds have been recognized as the single largest biological constraint in direct-seeded rice (DSR). Weed competition can reduce DSR yield by 30-80% and even complete crop failure can occur under specific conditions. Understanding the dynamics and outcomes of weed-crop competition in DSR requires sound knowledge of weed ecology, besides production factors that influence both rice and weeds, as well as their association. Successful adoption of direct seeding at the farmers' level in Asia will largely depend on whether farmers can control weeds and prevent shifts in weed populations from intractable weeds to more difficult-to-control weeds as a consequence of direct seeding. Sustainable weed management in DSR comprises all the factors that give DSR a competitive edge over weeds regarding acquisition and use of growth resources. This warrants the need to integrate various cultural practices with weed control measures in order to broaden the spectrum of activity against weed flora. A weed control program focusing entirely on herbicides is no longer ecologically sound, economically feasible, and effective against diverse weed flora and may result in the evolution of herbicide-resistant weed biotypes. Rotation of herbicides with contrasting modes of action in conjunction with cultural measures such as the use of weed-competitive rice cultivars, sowing time, stale seedbed technique, seeding rate, crop row spacing, fertilizer and water inputs and their application method/timing, and manual and mechanical hoeing can prove more effective and need to be optimized keeping in view the type and intensity of weed infestation. This chapter tries to unravel the dynamics of weed-crop competition in DSR. Technological issues, limitations associated with DSR, and opportunities to combat the weed menace are also discussed as a pragmatic approach for sustainable DSR production. A realistic approach to secure yield targets against weed competition will combine the abovementioned strategies and tactics in a coordinated manner. This chapter further suggests the need of multifaceted and interdisciplinary research into ecologically based weed management, as DSR seems inevitable in the near future.

Climate Clever Beef: options to improve business performance and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in northern Australia

The Rangeland Journal – Climate Clever Beef special issue examines options for the beef industry in northern Australia to contribute to the reduction in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to engage in the carbon economy. Relative to its gross value (A$5 billion), the northern beef industry is responsible for a sizable proportion of national reportable GHG emissions (8–10%) through enteric methane, savanna burning, vegetation clearing and land degradation. The industry occupies large areas of land and has the potential to impact the carbon cycle by sequestering carbon or reducing carbon loss. Furthermore, much of the industry is currently not achieving its productivity potential, which suggests that there are opportunities to improve the emissions intensity of beef production. Improving the industry’s GHG emissions performance is important for its environmental reputation and may benefit individual businesses through improved production efficiency and revenue from the carbon economy. The Climate Clever Beef initiative collaborated with beef businesses in six regions across northern Australia to better understand the links between GHG emissions and carbon stocks, land condition, herd productivity and profitability. The current performance of businesses was measured and alternate management options were identified and evaluated. Opportunities to participate in the carbon economy through the Australian Government’s Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) were also assessed. The initiative achieved significant producer engagement and collaboration resulting in practice change by 78 people from 35 businesses, managing more than 1 272 000 ha and 132 000 cattle. Carbon farming opportunities were identified that could improve both business performance and emissions intensity. However, these opportunities were not without significant risks, trade-offs and limitations particularly in relation to business scale, and uncertainty in carbon price and the response of soil and vegetation carbon sequestration to management. This paper discusses opportunities for reducing emissions, improving emission intensity and carbon sequestration, and outlines the approach taken to achieve beef business engagement and practice change. The paper concludes with some considerations for policy makers.