Final report for LNE20-406R
Project Information
Problem, novel approach and justification. Sweet corn, produced on over 5,400 Northeastern farms1, is the second largest processing crop. In 2017, its production value in five Northeastern states (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA) totaled $110 million. Herbicides and cultivation are used routinely in sweet corn plantings. However, herbicides registered for sweet corn are dwindling because of no-reregistration of older compounds and suspensions over environmental concerns. Cultivation increases fuel usage, and farmers’ reliance on cultivation and manual weeding increases their production cost. Further, sweet corn is vulnerable to three yield reducing insects (corn earworm, fall armyworm, and European corn borer). Although some GMO sweet corn cultivars are protected from these insects, similar to insecticides, resistance problems reduce their efficacy period. Thus, there is a need for additional practices that target weeds and insects concomitantly. Reduced tillage with cover cropping can reduce insect and weed pests, and production cost through enhanced natural pest suppression and reduced tillage, pesticide and fuel use. However, farmers are reluctant to adopt this combination partially from fears of inadequate pest suppression, accompanied with limited knowledge on implementation. Thus, opportunities exist to create and share innovative tactics that lessen farmers’ reliance on tillage and boosts their confidence in implementing novel solutions.
Hypothesis and research plan.We hypothesized that using reduce tillage with an interplanted living mulch and cover crop residue would suppress insect and weed pests more, and at reduced cost than conventional tillage with or without herbicides. Specific questions being addressed included whether this cover crop combination would reduce pests and augment beneficial insects including pollinators, require less operational cost and maintain yields comparable or higher than conventional tillage. We addressed also whether combining a living mulch with cover crop residue would mitigate pests more than using residue alone. In doing so, we anticipated generating knowledge that will allow adoption of a novel cover cropping practice in sweet corn.
These hypothesis were tested through field studies. Whole plot treatments included sweet corn grown under: conventional till, no-till with cover crop residue, living mulch + cover crop residue or living mulch + winter killed residue. Subplot factors included herbicide or no herbicide. We collected data on insect and weed pests, pollinators, natural enemy efficacy, time spent manually weeding, input cost, yield and profits. Outreach plan. Methods for disseminating findings and engaging stakeholders included: 1) field day and walking tour events at research and commercial farms, 2) uploading information to MD extension and commodity websites, 3) integrating findings into local and regional extension publications and trade journals, 4) presentations at local and regional commodity meetings, and 5) sharing information with agri-educators at commodity meetings.
Project objective. Objectives included generating novel information on the synergistic usage of conservation tillage and winter cover cropping to concurrently manage insect and weed pests as well as enhance beneficial arthropod pollinator richness and abundance. Further goals included using findings to help sweet corn growers reduce their disproportionate reliance on GMO technology, pesticides and/or tillage by generating knowledge on low input practices that provide similar benefits. Potential impacts included similar or enhanced yields at lower operational and environmental cost, which tentatively boosted sweet corn farmers’ confidence in using cover crops as part of their weed management plan.
Summary of findings & Conclusion - Weeds. Overall, interplanting sweet corn with a red clover living mulch and planting the corn rows into rolled rye or winter-killed forage radish residue resulted in the suppression of annual and perennial broadleaf and grass weeds in the inter- and intra-row areas throughout the sweet corn cropping cycle. Furthermore, the weed suppressive effect was similar to the standard practice of tilling in the cover crop and applying a pre-emergent herbicide mixture at planting. These cover crop diculture systems can optimize the weed suppressive benefits of an interplanted living mulch while minimizing competition. As such, cover crop living mulch systems researched may be viable options for diversifying integrated weed management programs in sweet corn and other vegetable plantings.
Beneficial arthropods - Natural enemies. A primary objective of this study included assessing the ability of a living mulch (red clover) and cover crop residue (rye or forage radish) combination and cover crop residue (NT) alone to increase the abundance of generalist predators on corn plants, and subsequently reduce insect feeding injury to sweet corn ears. During each study year, total number of generalist predator and parasitoid numbers found on the sweet corn foliage and capture via yellow sticky card and pitfall traps were mostly similar among treatments. In contrast, emergence trap data indicated that by the end of the sweet corn growing season, the total abundance of predators and parasitoids was greater in all cover crop compared to the conventional till treatment. Still, ear damage by insect herbivores was similar among treatments. Pollinators. Visual results from weekly pollinator observations in plots with red clover supported our hypothesis that the red clover living mulch would increase food resources for floral visitors in monoculture sweet corn plantings. Observations of floral visitation to red clover flowers revealed frequent visits by multiple species of bee and butterfly pollinators throughout the sweet corn growth cycle.
Economic analysis. Analysis of the costs and net returns associated with treatments investigated in this study supported, in part, the economic feasibility of incorporating cover crop residues and interplanted red clover living mulch into sweet corn production. Results highlighted the potential for similar profits to be obtained between conventionally tilled sweet corn inclusive of synthetic herbicides and cover crop diversified treatments with and without herbicides. Though insect pest control expenses were not factored into the current study, similar levels of harvest damage suggest they would be identical across all production practices investigated, and as such, would not alter the significance of profit margins between treatments.
Implications. This study provides evidence that increasing in-field plant diversity through the inclusion of a flowering cover crop can be used to suppress weeds as well as support arthropod natural enemies and foraging pollinators at no significant increase in production cost. Nevertheless, additional research is needed to better understand the conservation benefits of incorporating red clover into sweet corn and other cropping systems, as well as to identify any potential benefits of enhanced natural enemy activity and pollinator foraging on crop productivity. Though these responses were not consistent across experiment years, the overall findings generally supported our hypothesis that red clover living mulch can be used to suppress weeds as well as augment and conserve beneficial arthropods in sweet corn plantings but may not result in less insect caused ear damage. This study also highlighted the use of flowering living mulches for pollinator conservation.
Objectives include generating novel information on the synergistic usage of conservation tillage and winter cover cropping to concurrently manage insect and weed pests. Further goals include helping sweet corn growers reduce their disproportionate reliance on GMO technology, pesticides and/or tillage by generating knowledge on low input practices that provide similar benefits. Potential impacts include similar or enhanced yields at lower operational and environmental cost, which will boost Northeast sweet corn farmers’ confidence, profits and sustainability.
American farmers spend roughly $6 billion annually on tillage, cultivation and herbicides for weed control. Herbicides are used routinely on more than 90% of the acreage of most US crops. Many herbicides registered for sweet corn use provide only partial weed control, necessitating hand weeding and cultivation. Still weeds often escape control in conventional and organic sweet corn systems. Subsequently, yield losses from weed interference are prevalent, and poor weed control in sweet corn can exacerbate weed problems in rotational vegetable crops. Sweet corn growers use cultivation routinely, which increases fossil fuel usage and cost. Further, organic sweet corn growers must conduct a minimum of three inter-row cultivation tasks to sustain similar yields as fields treated with synthetic herbicides. Although GMO technology offers some management benefits to conventional sweet corn growers, resistance development by economically important insect and weed pests in the northeast, reduce their efficacy period. Further, this technology is not compatible with organic farmers. Moreover, increased cost associated with energy needs, labor and other inputs are making current production practices less practical and have driven a necessity for more sustainable low-cost solutions. Opportunities exist to disseminate novel practices that are: 1) eco-friendlier, 2) less costly, 3) target weeds and insects concurrently, and 4) decreases sweet corn farmers’ reliance on tillage, chemicals and manual weeding.
Using reduced-tillage (RT) in concert with cover cropping can significantly lessen pest pressure and management cost in vegetables through reduced pesticide, tillage and fuel use. PD Hooks conducted research on organically produced eggplant in conventional and RT (strip- and no-till) systems. A comparison of field operations showed that more activities requiring tractor use and fuel were needed in conventional than RT systems and that eggplant planted into cover crop residue required less manual weeding than conventional tilled plots. In a separate organic study, co-PD Leslie found that planting red clover as a winter cover crop and allowing strips to remain as a living mulch between pepper rows resulted in less weed biomass, establishment and time devoted to manual weeding compared to conventional tilled peppers. Similar experiments where cucumber was inter-planted into red clover strips showed significantly less insect pests and more beneficial insects compared to monoculture plantings. Thus, we hypothesized that combining cover crop residue with red clover living mulch will further mitigate insect and weed pests. Our goal was to create solutions that enhanced Northeast farmers’ confidence, sustainability and profitability.
As such, field studies were conducted to determine whether combining reduced tillage with an interplanted living mulch and cover crop residue would suppress insect and weed pests more, and at reduced cost than conventional tillage with or without herbicides. Specific questions included whether a living mulch and cover crop residue combination could reduce insect pests and augment beneficial arthropods, require less operational cost and maintain yields comparable or higher than conventional tillage. We also addressed the question of whether combining a living mulch with cover crop residue could mitigate pests more than using residue alone. In doing so, we generated some positive data indicating that the novel cover cropping practice of combining living mulches with cover crop residue is a viable production tool for suppressing weeds and augmenting beneficial arthropods in sweet corn plantings.
Cooperators
- (Educator and Researcher)
- (Educator and Researcher)
- (Educator and Researcher)
- (Educator and Researcher)
Research
We hypothesize that using RT with an interplanted living mulch and cover crop residue will suppress insect and weed pests more, and at reduced cost than conventional tillage with or without herbicides. Specific questions being addressed include whether this cover crop combination will reduce pests and augment beneficials, require less operational cost and maintain yields comparable or higher than conventional tillage. We will address also whether combining a living mulch with cover crop residue will mitigate pests more than using residue alone. In doing so, we anticipate generating knowledge that will allow adoption of a novel practice in sweet corn.
Objectives. The overall aims of the field studies conducted during the course of this three year project were to investigate the impact of border flowering cover crop and inter-planted living mulch system on weeds and/or insects in sweet corn, and compare these treatments with a traditional monoculture sweet corn plantings. Interests included determining how the different treatments impact 1) beneficial arthropods (i.e., natural enemies, pollinators), 2) herbivores and 3) weed abundance.
Methods - initial field studies. Field experiments were conducted at the Central Maryland Research and Education Centers. Treatments were arranged in a Latin square: split-plot design with four replicates. Whole plot treatments included: (1) conventional till (CT), (2) no-till with cover crop residue (NT), (3) living mulch + cover crop residue (LMRye), and (4) living mulch + winter killed residue (LMFR). The split-plot factor consisted of herbicide treatments: (1) an at-planting application of residual herbicides (herbicide) or (2) no herbicide application (no herbicide). Main plots measured 82.8 m2 (9.1 m x 9.1 m) and each subplot measured
41.9 m2 (4.6 m x 9.1 m). During early fall, a mixture of crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum; 3.36 kg ha-1), forage radish (Raphanus sativus; 3.9 kg ha-1), and cereal rye (Secale cereale L. ‘Aroostook’; 62.8 kg ha-1) was planted in CT and NT plots. In living mulch treatments, rows alternated between two rows of red clover (Trifolium pratense) and three rows of cereal rye (75.1 kg ha-1) in LMRye or forage radish (11.2 kg ha-1) in LMFR. Red clover was seeded at a rate of 9 kg ha-1 in LMRye plots and 16.8 kg ha-1 in LMFR plots. All cover crops were drilled at an interrow spacing of 15.2 cm. In the spring, when the rye reached anthesis,
cover crops in CT plots were mowed, plowed, and incorporated into the soil. Crimson clover senesced naturally, and the forage radish was winter killed. A roller crimper was used to terminate the rye in the NT and LMRye treatments, and temporarily slow red clover growth in LMRye and LMFR plots. In late May, sweet corn (Zea mays convar. saccharata var. rugosa) was seeded into each plot at an inter-row spacing of 76.2 cm, resulting in 12 crop rows per plot. In LMRye and LMFR plots, sweet corn seeds were planted within the center of the strips of forage radish or rye residue. A pre-emergence herbicide combination of 1.68 kg ai ha-1 atrazine and 1.42 kg ai ha-1 S-metolachlor was immediately applied to herbicide subplots following sweet corn planting. Herbicides were broadcasted in NT and CT herbicide subplots and banded within the strips (intra-row area) of the forage radish (LMFR) or rye (LMRye) herbicide subplots. Plots were overhead irrigated as needed to mitigate periods of low rainfall and a split-application of nitrogen fertilizer was applied according to recommended production practices.
Data were collected on cover crop and weed biomass, crop yield as well as the abundance of insect pests, arthropod natural enemies and pollinators. Quadrats were used to assess plant biomass data and a combination of direct visual foliage survey, yellow sticky cards, pitfall traps and emergence cages were used to quantify the number of arthropod pests and beneficials. Bee bowl traps and visual observations were used to estimate pollinator numbers.
Economic assessment - Sweet corn cost and profit analysis were performed using budget computations created by University of Maryland Extension (2023). The following formula was used to calculate net profit (P):
P = I – (Cv + Cf)
where I = income generated from sweet corn yields, Cv = variable costs, and Cf = fixed costs. Variable costs (Cv) consisted of seeds, fertility, chemicals, irrigation expenses (electric, fuel, repair/maintenance), harvest labor, and interest on operating capital. Fixed costs (Cf) consisted of planting, field preparation, crop maintenance, interest on spring custom rates, irrigation payments, and land charges. Income from sweet corn produced in each treatment plot was calculated by counting the number of dozens of harvested ears and multiplying this number by the market price reported by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Variable costs were determined using local costs from seed and chemical dealers and averaged, and the 2023 University of Maryland Extension custom rate survey was used to determine fixed costs in the absence of individual farm expenses.
Methods - final field study. treatment plots were replicated five times and each block was placed in separate fields with similar crop production histories. Treatments within a block were separated by at least 40 ft (12 m) of regularly mowed natural vegetation. Each block contained two cover crop treatments. Sweet corn grown: i) in conventional tilled cover crop (green manure) or ii) inter-planted with a clover mix [red clover, Alice white clover and Ladino clover (all 30%)] + Dutch white clover (10%). Experimental plots were ~ 38 x 40 ft2 (11.6 x 12.2 m2) and each plot contained 12 sweet corn rows planted at an inter-row spacing of 36 in (91 cm). Cover crop treatments were original planted in the fall of 2022. However, an early frost killed all the small seedlings. Thus, the cover crops were replanted during the spring 2023 of the growing season.
Rationale. From earlier field research, we found that red clover when inter-planted with sweet corn can help enhance the abundance of natural enemies and suppress weeds within the cropping system. However, it can be competitive with the crop. The interest included looking at different clovers planted as mixtures as we hypothesized that greater diversity afforded by mixed species clover may attract a greater number and diversity of beneficial arthropods and more importantly the clover mixture could work as well in suppressing weeds compared to using red clover alone.
Data collection: Because we had collected a plethora of data on insect response to flowering cover crops and had a solid understanding of how arthropods respond to the presence of cover crop, for the final field study the focus was on weed suppression. As such, small quadrats were used to estimate weed density in the different treatment plots during early and late summer.
Impacts on Weeds
In the final field study, we found that the clover was better at suppressing grass weeds by late season but the level of broadleaf weeds were similar among treatments. These results were not surprising considering that clover is slow growing and as opposed to it being established in the fall prior to the growing season, it was planted in the spring.
In prior field studies, overall, we found that inter-planting sweet corn with a red clover living mulch and planting the corn rows into rolled rye or winter-killed forage radish residue resulted in the suppression of annual and perennial broadleaf and grass weeds in the inter- and intrarow areas throughout the sweet corn cropping cycle. Furthermore, the weed suppressive effect of the cover crop treatments (red clover + forage radish residue, red clover + rye residue, residue from No-till) was similar to the standard practice of tilling in the cover crop (conventional tillage) and applying a pre-emergence herbicide mixture at planting. As such, the cover crop systems researched during this project may be viable options for diversifying integrated weed management programs in sweet corn and other vegetable plantings.
Following our initial sweet corn field trial, it was noted during the fall period that the red clover remained established and the crimson clover in the no-till treatment reseeded itself. As such, as an added study protocol, we investigated the ability of a second year self-regenerated annual (crimson clover) and second-year perennial (red clover) cover crops to suppress weeds during a subsequent field season. Thus, the same research and treatment plots used for the sweet corn study was utilized the subsequent field season. However, cover crops in the conventional till treatment plots had to be replanted as the cover crop in these plots was tilled under. We also used soybean as the test crop for the subsequent field season as we needed to rotate in a different crop. Our interest include determining whether the cover crop treatments could keep weeds suppressed through and beyond the critical period of weed control (CPWC) in soybean. For this experiment, it was hypothesized that the self regenerating annual and perennial cover crop systems would provide greater weed suppression in a subsequent soybean crop than the conventional tillage system. We further investigated treatment impacts on weed maturity and hypothesized that more weeds would reach their reproductive stages in the conventional tillage compared to self-regenerating annual and perennial cover cropping systems by the late soybean reproductive stage.
Overall, total annual cover crop biomass during the second field season was comparable to biomass obtained from direct seeded stands during the initial field season. All cover crop treatments reduced total weed biomass through the CPWC compared to conventional till. Soybean yield were similar between cover crop and conventional till treatments at one site-year, however, yields were lower in all cover crop treatments at the other site-year. The findings highlighted the potential for annual cover crops and perennial clovers to be used over multiple growing seasons as part of an integrated weed management program. Self-regenerating annual cover crops and continued establishment of perennial cover crops may be useful to growers experiencing challenges such as limited time available for planting following fall harvest. Natural reestablishment may also benefit growers that desire to avoid the added seed and labor expenses associated with replanting and/or prefer that their cover crops are established earlier in the growing season and lack the time needed to plant cover crops early.
Impact on Pollinators
The influence of the red clover living mulch systems on pollinator abundance and richness was also investigated in the prior sweet corn treatment plots. It was hypothesized that the red clover living mulch would increase food resources for pollinators in monoculture sweet corn plantings; and that this increase would result in higher pollinator species richness and abundance in red clover diversified than monoculture sweet corn habitats. Visual results from weekly pollinator observations in red clover supported our hypothesis; however, numbers within bee bowl traps were similar among treatments. Observations of pollinator visitation to red clover flowers revealed frequent floral visits by multiple species of bee and butterfly pollinators throughout the sweet corn growth cycle. Overall, bumblebees were the most frequently observed visitors of red clover flowers, followed by skipper butterflies, honeybees, white/sulfur butterflies and brushfoot butterflies. Visual observations of sweet corn tassels revealed honeybees were the most frequent pollinators across all treatments, followed by large dark bees and metallic bees. With the exception of honeybees, differences in the composition of pollinator groups observed foraging sweet corn and red clover suggests that these plants provide food resources to two distinct communities of pollinators. Further, red clover flowers supported a diverse community of pollinators throughout the cropping season, however, sweet corn tassels provided pollen during the ephemeral blooming period which lasted approximately one week. This study highlighted the potentiality of using a flowering living mulch within crop fields for pollinator conservation. Results of this experiment demonstrate that interplanting red clover into sweet corn plantings can enhance the number of foraging bee and butterfly pollinators. However, consideration should be given to the pest management program within a cropping systems manipulated to attract pollinators, as husbandry practices such as administering pesticides could prove hazardous to populations of honey and wild bee species.
Impact on Natural Enemies
In addition to pollinators other beneficial arthropods were monitored as part of the study. Sticky card and pitfall trap data indicated that the total abundance of predators and parasitoids was similar across all treatments during most sampling events, with the exception of greater total predator abundance detected in pitfall traps in all cover crop treatments compared to conventional till (CT) during one study year and some inconsistent differences detected from sticky cards during specific sample dates. In contrast, emergence trap data indicated that by the end of the sweet corn growing season, the total abundance of predators and parasitoids was greater in all cover crop treatments [no-till (NT), red clover living mulch+ forage radish residue (LMFR) and red clover living mulch + rye residue (LMRye)] compared to CT. As such, these findings partially support our hypothesis that there would be an increased number of natural enemies in cover crop diversified treatments. Sticky card results indicated that several families of parasitoids and predators representing multiple taxa were positively impacted by the presence of red clover; and one family of hyperparasitoids was less abundant in plots with red clover. Natural enemy responses to the NT treatment which consisted solely of cover crop residue were mostly more similar to the conventional till (CT) than the red clover systems during the sweet corn growing season.
Following harvest, emergence cage data also showed that several families of predators and parasitoids were more abundant in red clover treatments. Additionally, several families of predators and parasitoids were more abundant in the NT treatment. As such, emergence cage results fully support our hypothesis, however, these samples were taken after the sweet corn had been harvested.
Several families of parasitoids and predators representing multiple taxa were enhanced in sweet corn interplanted with red clover. Additionally, bumblebees and lepidopteran pollinators were frequently observed foraging red clover flowers. Overall, this study provides evidence that the inclusion of red clover living mulch in combination with terminated cover crop residues can increase the abundance of some insect natural enemies while simultaneously serving as a food source for pollinators in crop fields.
Overall, interplanting sweet corn with a red clover living mulch and planting the corn rows into rolled rye or winter-killed forage radish residue resulted in the suppression of annual and perennial broadleaf and grass weeds in the between and within row areas throughout the cropping cycle. Furthermore, the weed suppressive effect was similar to the standard practice of tilling in the cover crop and applying a pre-emergence herbicide mixture at planting. This system can optimize the weed suppressive benefits of an interplanted living mulch while minimizing competition. As such, the cover crop systems researched here may be a viable option for diversifying integrated weed management programs in sweet corn and other vegetable plantings.
The field studies provided evidence that increasing in-field plant diversity through the inclusion of a perennial flowering cover crop or border insectary plants can be used to conserve insect natural enemies and foraging pollinators. However, this may not improve biological control through greater predation and parasitism of economically important insect pests in sweet corn plantings. Nevertheless, additional research is needed to better understand the conservation benefits of incorporating red clover into sweet corn, as well as to identify any potential benefits of enhanced natural enemy activity and pollinator foraging on crop productivity. Though the responses were not consistent across experiment years, the overall findings generally supported our hypothesis that red clover living mulch can be used to augment and conserve beneficial arthropods.
Education & Outreach Activities and Participation Summary
Educational activities:
Participation Summary:
Webcast
- Title: Integrated weed management with plasticulture: The good, the bad and the ugly. https://umd.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=e9315f75-53de-4da0-a2c9-ae2201134133
- Title: Mowing: A casually thought of Integrated Weed Management tool https://umd.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=2d76c2ad-b077-4195-927a-af520113d1ad
- Title: Tillage: a well-known tradesman of integrated weed management https://umd.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=961fce0b-d358-4c7c-8f94-ae22011340d4
- Title: Herbicides and integrated weed management https://umd.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=3676faff-e137-45fb-9d91-ae22011340d2
Scientific Presentation
- Hooks, C.R.R. and V. Yurchak. 2022. Symposium title: Cover Crop and Pest Management. Talk title: Assessing the efficacy of using a perennial and self-reseeded cover crop for pest suppression in a sweet corn soybean rotation system. Northeast Cover Crop Conference. Virtual March 10th-11th. Attendance 40
- Nunez, D., V. Yurchak, A. Leslie, CRR Hooks. 2022. Symposium title: Agricultural Entomology. Talk title: Investigating French marigold (Tagetes patula L.) as an insectary plant for sweet corn plantings. Eastern Branch Entomological Society of America. Philadelphia, PA April 24-26
- Hooks, C.R.R., G. Chen, H.M. Kahl, A.W. Leslie and V. Yurchak. 2022. Cerruti’s adventures into managing insects and weeds with a living mulch. Department of Environmental, Science, Policy and Management Fall Seminar Series, University of California, Berkeley. November 3, 2022.
- Hooks, C.R.R., W. Leslie, and V. Yurchak. 2023. Symposium title: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly – The current state of cover crops and weed management. Talk title: The highs and lows of working with a perennial cover crop as a living mulch for weed suppression. Weed Science Society of America. Jan 30 – Feb 02, Arlington, VA
- Yurchak, Veronica, Alan W. Leslie, Bill Phillips and Cerruti RR Hooks, 2023. Weed suppression provided by a second season perennial living mulch and self-reseeded cover crop. Weed Science Society of America, Jan 30 – Feb 02, Arlington, VA (Poster)
- Yurchak, Veronica, Alan W. Leslie, Bill Phillips and Cerruti RR Hooks, 2023. Assessing the efficacy of a biculture living and dead cover crop mixture for weed suppression in sweet corn. Weed Science Society of America, Jan 30 – Feb 02, Arlington, VA
- Yurchak, V., A. Leslie and C.R.R. Hooks, 2023. Creating an ecofriendly pest suppression program in sweet corn. Northeast Integrated Pest Management Research Update Conference. November 16, 2023.
Extension Presentation
- Yurchak, V., A. Leslie and C.R.R. Hooks. Pros and cons of using red clover to manage weeds. Beltsville Agricultural Research Center Pesticide Recertification Conference. March 03. Attendance 77
- Hooks, C.R.R. and V. Yurchak. 2022. Using a living mulch as part of an IWM program in a sweet corn crop rotation system. University of Maryland Eastern Shore 19th Annual Small Farm Conference. November 04-05. Princess Anne, MD Attendance 20
- Hooks, C.R.R., H. Kahl and V. Yurchak. 2023. University of Maryland Eastern Shore Small Farm Conference. Workshop session ‘Sustainable Disease, Insect, and Weed Management in Vegetable Crops. Talk title: Using perennial cover crops to conquer insect and weed pests in vegetables. November 06-07, 2020. Attendance 26
- Yurchak, V., A.W. Leslie, S.R. McCluen and C.R.R. Hooks, Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable & Farm Market Expo, Grand Rapids, MI. December 05-07. Attendance 85
- Hooks, C.R.R. 2024. The good, the bad and the ugly of partnering with perennial cover crops to fight agricultural nuisances. 24th Annual Virginia Biological Farming Conference, Roanoke, VA, January 20-21. Attendance
Journal Publication
- Yurchak, V., A. Leslie, S.R. McCluen, and R.R Hooks. 2023. Evaluating French marigold as a border insectary plant for the enhancement of beneficial arthropods in sweet corn plantings. Ecol. Eng. 190, 106928
- Yurchak, V., A. Leslie, and R.R Hooks. 2023. Assessing the efficacy of a living and dead cover crop mixture for weed suppression in sweet corn. Agronomy, 13(3), 688; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13030688
- Yurchak, V., A. Leslie and R.R. Hooks. 2023. Influence of cover cropping and conservation tillage on weeds during the critical period for weed control in soybean. Weed Technol. 1-29. doi:10.1017/wet.2023.82
Extension Publication
- Hooks, C.R.R. and D. Joseph. 2022. Mowing: a casually thought of integrated weed management tool.
https://blog.umd.edu/agronomynews/2022/03/23/mowing-a-casually-thought-of-integrated-weed-management-tool/
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Cz1MSXMVBOUtLWayOGj1L3YuI9N0Cyyx/view
Vegetable and Fruit News 13(4), 11-17.
- Hooks, C.R.R. and D. Joseph. 2022. Flaming as a weed management tool. Vegetable and Fruit News. 13 (3), 4-7.
https://extension.umd.edu/resource/flaming-weed-management-tool
https://blog.umd.edu/agronomynews/2022/06/09/flaming-as-a-weed-management-tool/
PhD Dissertation
Yurchak, V. 2023. Evaluating the potential benefits and sustainability of a novel living and dead cover crop mixture in mid-Atlantic crop production. PhD Dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park
Campus Lecture
Fall 2022 Guest Lecturer, Class Title: A story of a perennial clover’s journey in pest management. Sustainable Agriculture (ENST441 or NRSC441). 30 students
Field day
- Leslie, A. and C.R.R. Hooks. 2022. Using clover mixtures to mitigate insect and weed pests in sweet corn. Crops Twilight Tour and Ice Cream Social. Upper Marlboro, MD August 03, 2022.
- Leslie, A. and C.R.R. Hooks 2023. Exploring perennial clovers for their adaptability to vegetable systems. Crops Twilight Tour and Ice Cream Social Upper Marlboro, MD August 02, 2023. Attendance 76
- Environmental Technology and Economy, College Park Scholars Service Day. Spoke with undergraduate scholars on the use of conservation biological control/cover cropping/manipulating cropping systems to attract natural enemies of pests. CMREC Upper Marlboro, MD Facility August 25, 2023. Attendance 65
Learning Outcomes
Though we did not take any survey data after the various outreach events, based on the discussions with attendees during and after presentations, areas in which there were changes in knowledge include 1) greater understanding of how cover crops influence pests, 2) more knowledgeable on the different cover cropping tactics, 3) more familiarity with the benefits and limitations of using perennial cover crops for pest suppression, and 4) know how to better manage perennial cover crops and living mulch so as to limit competition between the cash crop and cover crop.
Project Outcomes
An outcome of the project is that we were able to obtain additional funding to build on some of the work that originated from the NESARE project. An unanticipated outcome of the project is that we determined that if you are working with a perennial cover crop or self reseeding annual cover crop, the weed suppression benefits of the cover crop can be extended multiple cropping season without having to replant the cover crop.