IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jasjnl/v4y2012i9p39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Sampling Methods for Estimating Seed Bank and Weed Population Densities during the Growing Season

Author

Listed:
  • Masoomeh Gholami Golafshan
  • Esmaeil Yasari

Abstract

In order to compare sampling methods for estimating the populations of the seed bank and the populations of weed seedlings during the growing season in the field, an experiment was conducted in the research field of the Agriculture college of Karaj in the cropping year of 2007. In this experiment, sampling of the seed bank was carried out first at the start of the growing season. Then, during the growing season, the weed populations were sampled in 96 points using the networking method, and their means were considered as the base and the real means of the populations of the weeds. Next, to compare other methods with the networking method, sampling was carried out using the systematic, the diagonal, and the random methods, and then the variance of error of each method was calculated and compared with that of the networking method in the format of factorial using a completely randomized design. The first factor studied, the species of weeds, included the three species of grasses, Amaranthus, and Portulaca. The zigzag, the diagonal, and the random sampling methods constituted the second factor. Results relating to the seed bank and those concerning the populations of the weeds were different from each other. The results obtained showed that the suitable method for each species differed according to the different distribution patterns of the weed species in the field. In the seed bank, there were no significant differences among sampling methods for any of the species, but the random method for grasses and Portulaca showed the least error in predicting weed populations. Altogether, among the sampling methods used for Amaranthus, there were no differences in accuracy. Concerning the populations of weed seedlings, the random method for broadleaf weeds (Amaranthus and Portulaca), and the zigzag method for grasses, were the best. As for the seed bank, the variance of error of all the methods decreased with an increase in the number of samples taken; and when more than 15 samples were taken, this trend of decrease in the variance of error stabilized and no more reduction in error was observed. Regarding the populations of the weeds, no trend was found between the number of samples taken and the variance of error.

Suggested Citation

  • Masoomeh Gholami Golafshan & Esmaeil Yasari, 2012. "Comparison of Sampling Methods for Estimating Seed Bank and Weed Population Densities during the Growing Season," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 4(9), pages 1-39, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:4:y:2012:i:9:p:39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/16197/12704
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/view/16197
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Auld, Bruce A. & Tisdell, Clem A., 1987. "Economic thresholds and response to uncertainty in weed control," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 219-227.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David J. Pannell, 1991. "Pests and pesticides, risk and risk aversion," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(4), pages 361-383, August.
    2. Feng, Shuaizhang & Han, Yujie & Qiu, Huanguang, 2021. "Does crop insurance reduce pesticide usage? Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    3. Archer, David Walter, 1995. "Self-insurance and self-protection in weed control: implications for nonpoint source pollution," ISU General Staff Papers 1995010108000012033, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Falconer, K. & Hodge, I., 2000. "Using economic incentives for pesticide usage reductions: responsiveness to input taxation and agricultural systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 175-194, March.
    5. Jotham Akaka & Aurora García-Gallego & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Jean-Christian Tisserand, 2021. "Decision support systems adoption in pesticide management," Working Papers 2021/08, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    6. de Buck, A. J. & Schoorlemmer, H. B. & Wossink, G. A. A. & Janssens, S. R. M., 1999. "Risks of post-emergence weed control strategies in sugar beet: development and application of a bio-economic model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 283-299, March.
    7. Pannell, David J., 1988. "Weed Management: A Review of Applied Economics Research in Australia," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(03), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Jones, Randall E. & Cacho, Oscar J., 2000. "A Dynamic Optimisation Model of Weed Control," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123685, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. D. J. Pannell, 1990. "Responses To Risk In Weed Control Decisions Under Expected Profit Maximisation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 391-401, September.
    10. Gu, Xi & Marsh, Thomas L., 2017. "Pesticide Substitution Under Maximum Residue Limits: Application to Hops Production," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258572, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Odom, Doreen I.S. & Griffith, Garry R. & Sinden, Jack A., 2000. "Economic Issues Relating To Weed Management In Natural Ecosystems: The Case Of Scotch Broom On Barrington Tops, Nsw," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123712, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. Davis, Rex & Tisdell, Clement A., 2001. "Alternative Specifications and Extensions of the Economic Threshold Concept and the Control of Livestock Pests," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48381, University of Queensland, School of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:4:y:2012:i:9:p:39. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.