Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T10:26:17.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Geographic Information System for Predicting Weed Changes on Set-Aside Arable Land

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ruth D. Swetnam ,
Les G. Firbank ,
Noranne E. Ellis  and
Mark O. Hill
Ruth D. Swetnam
Affiliation:
Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE17 2LS, United Kingdom
Les G. Firbank
Affiliation:
Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE17 2LS, United Kingdom
Noranne E. Ellis
Affiliation:
Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE17 2LS, United Kingdom
Mark O. Hill
Affiliation:
Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE17 2LS, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Arable Area Payments Scheme of the European Union has been in operation since 1992, paying farmers to set aside a portion of their arable land from production for 1 to 5 yr. Management of the land is prescribed, both in terms of timing and type. The scheme is potentially beneficial to the environment, as set-aside land can be used to improve bird, mammal, and insect habitats. However, environmental and agronomic objectives frequently conflict, particularly in the area of weed management. To predict weed growth and succession, a tool was required to model vegetation at set-aside sites using the key environmental factors, location, and soil that could account for differences in the weed species likely to be invasive. To this end, a Geographical Information System has been developed that links modeled species distributions to a model of successional change. The system has a simple menu structure allowing speedy manipulation of the data and models to predict the effects of management on the weed communities at known geographical locations.

Keywords

Managementmodelingsuccessionuser interfaceweed distributionAML, Arc Macro LanguageBSBI, Botanical Society of the British IslesCAP, Common Agricultural PolicyGIS, Geographic Information SystemsGUI, Graphical User InterfaceITE, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 1998 , pp. 53 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Aspinall, R. J., 1994. GIS and spatial analysis for ecological modelling. <i>In</i> Michener, W. K., Brunt, J. W., and Stafford, S. G., eds. Environmental Information Management: Ecosystem to Global Scale. London: Taylor and Francis. pp. 378–396.Google Scholar
Batty, M., and Xie, Y. 1994. Modelling inside GIS: Part 1. Model structures, exploratory spatial data analysis and aggregation. Int. J. Geogr. Info. Syst. 8:291–307.Google Scholar
Carver, S., Heywood, I., Cornelius, S., and Sear, D. 1995. Evaluating field-based GIS for environmental characterization, modelling and decision support. Int. J. Geogr. Info. Syst. 9:475–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J., ed. 1992. Set-aside. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council. 283 p.Google Scholar
Coleman, M. B., Bearly, T. L., Burke, I. C., and Laurenroth, W. B. 1994. Linking ecological simulation models to geographic information systems: an automated solution. <i>In</i> Michener, W. K., Brunt, J. W., and Stafford, S. G., eds. Environmental Information Management: Ecosystem to Global Scale. London: Taylor and Francis, pp. 397–412.Google Scholar
Corbet, S. A., 1995. Insects, plants and succession: advantages of long-term set-aside. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 53:201–217.Google Scholar
Davis, F. W., and Dozier, J. 1990. Information analysis of a spatial database for ecological land classification. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 56: 605–613.Google Scholar
Dodds, G. W., Appelby, M. J., and Evans, A. D. 1995. A Management Guide to Birds of Lowland farmland. Sandy, Bedfordshire, UK: Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. 65 p.Google Scholar
[DOE] Department of the Environment. 1994. Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan, Summary Report. Department of the Environment. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 16 p.Google Scholar
Firbank, L. G., Arnold, H. R., Eversham, B. C., Mountford, J. O., Radford, G. L., Telfer, M. G., Treweek, J. R., Webb, N.C.R., and Wells, T.C.E. 1993. Managing Set-Aside Land for Wildlife. ITE Research Publication 7. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 146 p.Google Scholar
Firbank, L. G., Ellis, N. E., Hill, M. O., Lockwood, A. J., and Swetnam, R. D. 1998. Mapping the distribution of weeds in Great Britain in relation to national survey data and to soil type. Weed. Res. In press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firbank, L. G., and Wilson, P. J. 1995. Arable weeds and set-aside: a cause for conservation or a cause for concern? <i>In</i> Colston, A. and Perring, F., eds. Insects, Plants and Set-aside. London: Botanical Society of the British Isles. pp. 19–28.Google Scholar
Floyd, W. D., 1992. Political aspects of set aside as a policy instrument in the European Community. <i>In</i> Clarke, J., ed. Set-aside. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council. pp. 13–20.Google Scholar
M, Fuller. R., Groom, G. B., and Jones, A. R. 1994. The Land Cover Map of Great Britain: an automated classification of Landsat Thematic Mapper data. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 60:553–562.Google Scholar
Goodchild, M. F., Parks, B. O., and Steyaert, L. T. 1993. Environmental modelling with GIS. New York: Oxford University Press. 488 p.Google Scholar
Grime, J. P., Hodgson, J. G., and Hunt, R. 1988. Comparative Plant Ecology: A Functional Approach to Common British Species. London: Unwin Hyman. 742 p.Google Scholar
Haines-Young, R., Green, D. R., and Cousins, S. 1993. Landscape Ecology and Geographic Information Systems. London: Taylor and Francis. 288 p.Google Scholar
Harding, P. T., and Sheail, J. 1990. The Biological Records Centre: a pioneer in data gathering and retrieval. <i>In</i> Harding, P. T., ed. Biological Recording of Changes in British Wildlife. ITE Symposium 26. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. pp. 5–19.Google Scholar
Hill, M. O., 1992. Modelling vegetation succession in abandoned arable fields in Britain. Coenoses 7:153–159.Google Scholar
Ji, W., and Mitchell, L. C. 1995 Analytical model-based decision support GIS for wetland resource management. <i>In</i> Lyon, J. G., and McCarthy, J., eds. Wetland and Environmental Applications of GIS. London: Lewis Publishers. pp. 31–47.Google Scholar
Jongman, R.H.G., Ter Braak, C.J.F., and Van Tongeren, O.F.R. 1987. Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Pudoc. 299 p.Google Scholar
Kielty, J. P., Allen-Williams, L. J., and Underwood, N. 1992. The effects of set-aside field margins on the distribution and biocontrol potential of polyphagous predatory arthropods in arable crops. <i>In</i> Clarke, J., ed, Setaside. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council. pp. 169–74.Google Scholar
Lang, R., Müller, A., and Lenz, R. 1995. The Agroecological Information System (AIS) within the Research Network on Agroecosystems Munich (FAM). Ecol. Eng. 4:173–180.Google Scholar
Le Duc, M. G., Sparks, T. H., and Hill, M. O. 1992. A method for predicting the probability of species occurrence using data from systematic surveys. Watsonia 19:97–105.Google Scholar
Levin, S. A., 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 1943–1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[MAFF] Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food. 1992. Area Arable Payments: Explanatory Booklet. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 45 p.Google Scholar
D, Miller. 1994. Coupling of process-based vegetation models to GIS and knowledge-based systems for analysis of vegetation change. <i>In</i> Michener, W. K., Brunt, J. W., and Stafford, S. G., eds. Environmental Information Management: Ecosystem to Global Scale. London: Taylor and Francis. pp. 497–510.Google Scholar
Palmer, M. O., and Bratton, J. H. 1995. A Sample Flora of Britain and Ireland. Botanical Society of the British Isles Monitoring Scheme. Peterborough, UK: Joint Nature Conservation Committee. p. 350.Google Scholar
[SSLRC] Soil Survey and Land Use Research Centre. 1983. Soil Survey of England and Wales 1:250,000 Soil Map. Soil Survey and Land Use Research Centre. Silsoe, Bedford, UK: Silsoe College, Cranfield University.Google Scholar
Stewart, A., Pearman, D. A., and Preston, C. D., eds. 1994. Scarce Plants in Britain. Peterborough, UK: Joint Nature Conservation Committee. 515 p.Google Scholar
Topping, C. J., and Sutherland, K. D. 1994. The potential influence of setaside on populations of <i>Lepthyphantes tenuis</i> (Arancae: Linyphiidae) in the agroecosystem. Aspects Appl. Biol. 40:225–228.Google Scholar
Wheeler, D. J., 1993. Commentary: linking environmental models with Geographic Information Systems for global change research. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 59:1497–1501.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. P., Inskeep, W. P., Rubright, P. R., Cooksey, D., Jacobsen, J. S., and Snyder, R. D. 1993. Coupling Geographic Information Systems and models for weed control and groundwater protection. Weed Technol. 7:255–264.Google Scholar