When it comes to yields and what influences them, farmers are very knowledgeable. They know their fields, their varieties, the crop protection products, the weather, current plant diseases and much more. And at the end of each year, they can see from the yield for each field whether their own judgement and actions were appropriate given the unchangeable circumstances. This creates local precision experience for the yields and the chance to do at least as well or even better in the future.

When it comes to biodiversity and environmental impact, however, the empirical situation is much worse. Even for plant protection products such as glyphosate, which have been used for decades, European expert committees have found that a clear ecotoxicological risk assessment is still not possible (Glyphosate: no critical areas of concern; data gaps identified). Insecticides that were previously used very selectively in the pelleting of seeds have been banned there, but the widespread, indiscriminate spraying of almost the same insecticides on entire fields has been permitted again, at least as an emergency solution and also in different ways depending on the EU country. The farmer’s understanding and detailed local knowledge of how to optimise biodiversity and environmental impact just as effectively as yield quickly fails.

But the reality is different. Instead of targeted determinations of when and where exactly too much nitrate gets into the groundwater and what today’s fertilisation will mean for the groundwater in 20 years’ time, there are large red zones. They make no distinction between farmers who have used fertilisers responsibly for decades and others who have often maximised yields according to fertiliser specifications.  Many of the measures for eco-points or other environmental services that must be provided by the farmer or lead to compensation payments change at short intervals, differ from country to country (which leads to economic injustice), are hardly comprehensible from an agronomic point of view and are linked to calendar dates, for example. Especially in times of climate change and extremely fluctuating weather conditions, it should be clear that this type of rule-based micromanagement does not help to protect the environment. Nobody would think of telling a farmer by deadline when to plant potatoes, apply crop protection or harvest. At the same time, this multitude of regulations also creates mountains of bureaucracy (which should actually be reduced), forcing the farmer to sit at a desk instead of being able to look after the fields in a sensible way.

How can we get out of this situation? Here are a few suggestions that are certainly not the only solution, but can provide an impetus as to which direction it makes sense to go in.

Micromanagement with centralised rules and data in a rapidly changing environment will never do justice to a highly diverse system like agriculture – and even less so in the future.

The aim must be more personal responsibility and individual action on the part of farmers, because biodiversity and soil health – just like yield – are created in every single field.

In order for farmers to assume more personal responsibility, they must be able to assess the effects of their actions as well as possible. This also applies to environmental protection and, for example, soil health. There are extremely large deficits here. Even for known herbicides (see above), the effects on insects are still frighteningly unclear. The risk assessment for insecticides is often not much better.  Here too, the effects of individual PPPs are more complex and, for example, temperature-dependent (DE: Major challenges for small soil organisms Drought and high temperatures make fungicides more toxic) or there are previously unexpected effects in deeper soil layers without large product concentrations (DE: Assessment of the risk to soil organisms under real conditions).

Consequently, in many cases even the general patterns of impact are unclear and even less so the specific local effects. There will still be many surprises – if we were to measure them.

This brings us to one of the key challenges. There is no precision ecotoxicology and precision ecology. But that is exactly what we need for biodiversity and soil health as part of precision agriculture, as well as for field cultivation and yield. Precision does not mean measuring or knowing EVERYTHING, but using effective tools to achieve the best possible information at the lowest possible cost. A GPS of biodiversity and environmental protection would be ideal.

crop.zone, although not a chemical plant protection product, has nevertheless carried out extensive studies on its influence on earthworms, springtails, soil mites and soil bacteria during electrophysical siccation. No influence was found. Farmers also need reliable general data on the effects of ploughing, tilling, cultivating and other methods on soil life on soils that are at least similar to their own for optimisation purposes. It is known that ploughing and large-scale soil movement through potato cultivation and sugar beet, for example, can reduce the number of earthworms by up to 50 %. Nevertheless, there are farmers who, thanks to decades of soil care, have 50 to 200 earthworms per square metre without any problems, even with potatoes and sugar beet in the crop rotation.

crop.zone ist zwar kein chemisches Pflanzenschutzmittel, hat aber dennoch umfangreiche Studien über seinen Einfluss auf Regenwürmer, Springschwänze, Bodenmilben und Bodenbakterien während der elektrophysikalischen Sikkation durchgeführt. Es wurde kein Einfluss festgestellt. Auch die Landwirte benötigen zur Optimierung verlässliche allgemeine Daten über die Auswirkungen von Pflügen, Bodenbearbeitung, Kultivierung und anderen Methoden auf das Bodenleben auf Böden, die ihren eigenen zumindest ähnlich sind. Es ist bekannt, dass das Pflügen und die großflächige Bodenbewegung durch z. B. Kartoffelanbau und Zuckerrüben die Anzahl der Regenwürmer um bis zu 50 % reduzieren kann. Dennoch gibt es Landwirte, die dank jahrzehntelanger Bodenpflege auch bei Kartoffeln und Zuckerrüben in der Fruchtfolge problemlos 50 bis 200 Regenwürmer pro Quadratmeter haben.

This shows that, just as with yield, we also need simple but highly meaningful measurement parameters in ecotoxicology and environmental assessment that provide every farmer with annual feedback. Digging in the field with a spade more often is certainly helpful and recommended (Video: New video on the spade test). In the future, however, even more objective methods for measuring biodiversity in the field, for example, will become increasingly important for monitoring success and payments for social added value. The DLG is also working on researching such methods (DE: BioMonitor4CAP: EU biodiversity monitoring project launched) and evaluating measures (DE: Strengthening species diversity and biodiversity in arable farming).

Only if precision agriculture also includes precision ecotoxicology can it take account of the high diversity of individual fields, local conditions and climate change, including biodiversity. Targeted action by farmers requires the best possible information about the effects of the methods in general and also about the specific effects on their own fields. Data alone will not help here, but artificial intelligence as an advisor for utilising shared experience and good simulation models will certainly provide a great deal of support, just as they do for weather forecasting. This can be an important contribution to less bureaucratic, less rule-based environmental protection and more reality-based, concrete action for the benefit of biodiversity. crop.zone supports this with its own ecotox tests and the development of crop control methods without chemical agents and soil movement. Innovation for the benefit of agriculture and society as a whole needs more meaningful and highly efficient environmental information, including for local field conditions. After all, biodiversity is generated on the individual field just as much as yield.

Fallow land in the sense of unproductive land with self-vegetation is an option under current agricultural policy. The requirement to do nothing is controversial for good reasons.

However, someone seems to have realised when the regulation was made that letting it run is not really an option. As an alternative, it is therefore also possible to grow legumes on larger areas (DE: Recommendations for the creation of fallow land). Furthermore, the regulations have currently been completely suspended in many areas (DE: EU agricultural policy: Commission sets mandatory fallow period for 2024)

But suspension is not cancellation. And in people’s minds, the image of “natural idleness” is becoming entrenched as a desirable state in the field. Fallow land sounds very much like popular nature conservation and also seems to have the textbook image of medieval three-field farming in mind.

This brings us back to the basic question of whether temporary fallow land in general and especially with self-vegetation are really forward-looking elements for improving biodiversity and part of future-oriented agriculture.

At that time, a limited amount of nutrients were additionally available from the soil in the fallow year, and the grazing animals supplemented the nutrients. Both could be utilised (more) profitably in the following year. The diverse plant community of this fallow year and the grazing animals further nourished the soil life and prevented monocultures. In the following years, farmers had to live with many weeds in the same way as before.

The plants still present in the seed bank are those that are difficult to control but cannot be eliminated. Lambsquarter, goosefoot and similar plants are certainly not a good basis for biodiversity. The plants that colonise in the  fallow year are (volunteer) plants from previous crops, stubborn weeds and rapid first colonisers. However, these are not stable, favourable or even reasonably diverse plant communities.

Lambsquarter and goosefoot enjoy ideal propagation conditions on many high-yielding fields with self-greening fallow thanks to an abundant seed bank and strong soil warming without shading as heat germinators. Herbicide manufacturers and those who favour deep tillage will benefit in subsequent years from bringing the rapidly growing weed seed bank back under control in the crop.

crop.zone could also be pleased with the electrophysical treatment of many weeds (= wrong plants in the wrong place in the wrong numbers) if they were not growing there to the detriment of the soil, the environment and farmers.

Farmers who normally work integrated, regenerative or with minimal tillage and otherwise carefully remove weeds or wild beet, for example, will have problems with self-vegetation for years if they want to achieve reasonable yields without significant amounts of herbicides or soil movement. If heavy tillage is resumed after the fallow period, humus, soil life and, for example, soil-dwelling bumblebees will suffer.

Under many circumstances, soil life has only benefited to a limited extent from fallow. Depending on the previous crop and the year, the fields are completely bare in autumn and winter and even in spring, for example, chickweed only emerges very late. There was then also little humus build-up and soil exudates. Not a good balance for climate and soil life.

The pictures shown in this blog hardly need any commentary. If nothing is done, a previously well-maintained sugar beet field will turn into a mixture of maturing lambsquarter, a few other common weeds and volunteer crops such as potatoes or wild beet by September. Legumes and other cover crops, on the other hand, keep the soil cooler so that the mildew does not get out of hand or does not emerge at all. They also provide food and shelter for many animals in addition to binding knitwear. In the illustrated trial, no species-rich green manure mixtures were used, which would certainly have been better for the soil and biodiversity. However, in addition to technical objectives, the main aim was to demonstrate that self-greening fallow on fertile soils is merely organised irresponsibility without any major long-term (=sustainable) biodiversity benefits.

Incidentally, no fields were tortured for this experiment. The field was located in front of a sand pit and was excavated a few months later.

To first control a field as a highly productive location in practically every aspect and then simply leave it to its own devices seems to be based on a very romanticised view of nature. Man is the exploiter. And without exploiters, “nature” simply gets better straight away. But who simply sends highly protected city children into the forest without minimal equipment and unprepared so that they can get to know natural life? Hardly anyone. Self-vegetating fallow land on productive fields also appears to be legally legitimised neglect. More on the topic of “fallow land” and its exciting cultural background at Master’s thesis Kruse 2022 (DE)

There are good reasons why, for example, regenerative agriculture exists (regenerative agriculture (DE)). In other words, agriculture that wants to continue to produce yields, but at the same time wants and needs to RESTORE many soil functions. This requires a lot of work and intelligent, active field management.  And that continuously over many years.

At the same time, depending on the region and soil, there are of course a large number of other valuable measures to protect the soil and stabilise and increase biodiversity. But in practically all cases, this involves active and targeted measures (100 fields for diversity (DE)).

Just like farmers, crop.zone is also committed to taking responsibility. That is why crop.zone is developing processes that replace non-selective herbicides, e.g. for desiccation, pre-sowing treatment and green manure control, with electricity and leave no residues. crop.zone has also actively demonstrated that soil life is not harmed by electricity.

Together, we must all find ways to reconcile profitability, food security, fair access to soils, climate protection and biodiversity. This is not easy, but agriculture, agricultural technology and customised ecology grow with the challenges and take on the responsibility.

Potatoes are grown in at least 159 countries around the world. In many countries, the food culture would be poorer without potatoes and many people would be hungrier. Growing potatoes with a high yield and a tasty product is very demanding for farmers. From breeding, soil preparation and planting the potatoes to plant protection, siccation, harvesting and storage, everything has to be right to ensure that good potatoes end up on the table.

crop.zone supports potato farmers with the electrophysical crop.zone process following the increasing elimination of chemical siccatives. Using electricity instead of chemicals as an active ingredient, crop.zone allows the potatoes to develop a firm skin for good harvesting, transport and storage. And all this without waiting times required by regulations and with reduced dependence on the weather.

Because only with innovative technologies and farmers can we continue to produce the high yields, safe availability and affordable, healthy food that people need in line with the Green Deal and the Farm2Fork goal. 

Catch crops, which are sown to green the soil before winter, play a crucial role in keeping it healthy. They contribute to humus enrichment and thus create the basis for high-yield agriculture.

Catch crops are diverse and can offer many advantages due to their different properties. Their selection should be adapted to climatic and site-specific conditions as well as the crop rotation. Their later use, e.g. as fodder crops or green manure, can also be a selection criterion. With his selective choice of catch crop, the farmer can decide which advantages of catch crop cultivation he wants to use.

Some of the most common catch crops are:

Mixtures of different catch crops combine the advantages of the individual plants.

The post-winter treatment of catch crops is an essential part of their use and depends on the cultivation objectives, the stage of development of the plants, the soil and climatic conditions and operational requirements.

Incorporation can be done mechanically by repeated tillage. On the one hand as deeper incorporation using a plow. On the other hand, as shallow incorporation with a cultivator, tiller or harrow, which mixes the plants with the top layer of soil. As a result, the soil is initially uncovered again and more susceptible to heavy rainfall and sunlight. Shallow incorporation is only possible with frost-sensitive catch crops that die completely in winter. Winter-hardy catch crops such as rye or winter vetch survive the winter and must be treated in spring. However, mild winters can also cause frost-sensitive plants such as oil radish or mustard to sprout again and cause weed problems.

Catch crops can be left on the soil surface as mulch. This regulates the soil temperature, retains moisture and suppresses weeds. Later main crops can be sown directly into the mulch, for which special seed drills are required.

Both in systems with minimum tillage and in direct sowing, the chemical killing of catch crops is usually unavoidable. This is done with glyphosate. An alternative to this is the killing of catch crop residues with the Volt.apply system. This technology is based on the pre-treatment of plants with a conductive liquid, followed by an electrical application that destroys the cells and water-conducting bundles of the plants, leading to ripening and drying.

Products containing glyphosate are traded internationally. At the same time, protein-containing pulses in particular represent a major opportunity for European farmers. This is why the definition of maximum limits and the usability of desiccation technologies have a major influence on innovations and opportunities for sustainable agriculture.

While the MRL (maximum residue limit) for glyphosate in the EU is 0.1 mg/kg for most fresh plant foods, there are up to 200 times higher limits (2, 10 or 20 mg/kg) for dried beans/lentils/peas, mustard seeds, wheat, rapeseed, linseed, sunflower seeds, rye, oats, millet and soya beans.

( https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database/start/screen/products  (as of 20 April 2024)) 

This means that even after the ban on desiccation with glyphosate in the EU, the import of food desiccated with glyphosate into the EU can be maintained.

Particularly in the case of pulses with their high protein content, new market opportunities are also arising due to the protein strategy of the EU and, for example, Germany (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2023/751426/EPRS_BRI(2023)751426_EN.pdf  ; https://www.bmel.de/DE/themen/landwirtschaft/pflanzenbau/ackerbau/eiweisspflanzenstrategie.html  ). And the trend towards vegetarian and vegan foods actually supports the opportunities for European farmers who are not allowed to use glyphosate for desiccation even further (https://www.cbi.eu/market-information/grains-pulses-oilseeds/dried-lentils/market-potential).

 This distorts market opportunities for farmers, further exposes food to glyphosate and at the same time harms the environment worldwide.

Desiccation can increase quality and secure the harvest in unfavourable weather conditions. The basic idea of desiccation therefore makes a lot of sense.

Desiccation of plants is the targeted drying out of a plant before harvesting. This is done, for example, to make harvesting easier, to improve quality, to synchronise the time of harvest or to avoid harvest losses due to rain or frost.

Desiccation is preferably used for cereals, pulses and oilseeds that ripen unevenly. In the case of potatoes, desiccation enables the targeted formation of firm-skinned tubers.

The plants can be desiccated chemically, mechanically or by electric current. The herbicide glyphosate is frequently used for this purpose worldwide (except for potatoes). It penetrates the root system, but also leaves residues in the harvest and, for example, in the unripe grains left in the field, which are then eaten by small mammals and insects.

In line with the important precautionary principle, the answer is yes. In 2023, the EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) assessed the future use of glyphosate in a comprehensive scientific opinion as a template for political decision-makers. In its brief summary, it writes: “With regard to biodiversity, the experts found that the risks associated with the representative uses of glyphosate are complex and dependent on several factors. They also pointed to the lack of harmonised methods and agreed specific protection requirements. Overall, the available information does not allow for clear conclusions on this aspect of the risk assessment….”. (https://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/news/glyphosate-no-critical-areas-concern-data-gaps-identified )

crop.zone is working on replacing desiccation with glyphosate in many areas of application with electric current so that specially increased threshold values are no longer necessary. This also applies to pulses. This is good for the consumer and also for the environment. At the same time, European farmers who are now prohibited from desiccation with glyphosate will once again have the opportunity to safeguard their harvests while maintaining high quality. This will also open up new and growing markets, for example in the field of protein crops. This is because desiccation secures harvests, even if it gets too wet again before the harvest – also due to climate change

Invasive plant species, such as Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia japonica), pose a significant threat to agricultural productivity and biodiversity. These aggressive plants can spread rapidly, outcompeting native vegetation, damaging infrastructure, and reducing the land’s overall fertility. Japanese Knotweed, in particular, is known for its resilience and difficult-to-control nature, characterised by its large leaves, hollow stems, and extensive rhizome network. Traditional methods often fall short, but crop.zone offers an innovative, sustainable solution for managing these invasive plants effectively.

Invasive plants like Japanese Knotweed are challenging to control due to their rapid growth and extensive root systems. These plants can grow up to 3 metres (10 feet) in a single season, with rhizomes spreading horizontally up to 7 metres (23 feet) and vertically up to 3 metres (10 feet). This extensive root system makes them incredibly resilient, capable of regenerating from small root fragments. Conventional herbicides often require multiple applications and can harm surrounding crops and soil health. Mechanical removal is labour-intensive and rarely effective, as even small rhizome fragments can regenerate.

crop.zone utilises an electro-physical treatment method that offers a sustainable and highly effective alternative to chemical herbicides. This technology targets the plant’s physiology, disrupting its cellular function and causing it to die back without the need for repeated chemical applications.

Here’s how it works:

Implementing crop.zone’s technology in the fight against invasive plants offers several key benefits:

Invasive plants, such as Japanese Knotweed, pose a formidable challenge for professional farmers, but they are not insurmountable. With crop.zone’s innovative electro-physical treatment, farmers can achieve effective and sustainable control of these invasive species. Our technology not only addresses the immediate problem but also supports the broader goals of sustainable agriculture by reducing chemical use and preserving soil health.

By adopting crop.zone’s solution, farmers can protect their land, enhance productivity, and contribute to a more sustainable agricultural future. Embrace the power of innovation and sustainability with crop.zone, and together, let’s tackle the challenge of invasive plants head-on.

For more information on how crop.zone can assist in managing invasive plant species on your farm, visit our website or contact our support team.

Potato desiccation is a crucial process in potato cultivation that significantly affects the quality of the tubers. This is where crop.zone’s technology comes in, offering a sustainable and effective alternative to chemical herbicides. The innovative method from crop.zone ensures optimised skin formation, improved baking quality, and longer storability of potatoes.

By applying crop.zone technology, the desiccation process is precisely controlled. This leads to uniform and robust skin formation. Well-formed skin not only protects the potato from mechanical damage during harvest but also from sprouting and diseases during storage.

Potatoes treated with crop.zone technology stand out due to their higher baking quality. The targeted desiccation optimises the ripeness of the potatoes, resulting in better texture and more intense flavour when baked. This quality improvement is particularly important for processing and sales.

Another advantage of crop.zone technology is the improved storability of the potatoes. Effective desiccation reduces the risk of rot and sprouting, allowing potatoes to be stored for a longer period without losing quality. This ensures that farmers can market their harvest more efficiently and minimise losses.

The application of crop.zone technology also facilitates haulm detachment during harvest. The precise desiccation causes the potato haulm to dry evenly, making it easier to separate from the tubers. This reduces the effort during harvest and minimises the risk of damage to the potatoes.

crop.zone technology offers farmers a sustainable and efficient solution for potato desiccation. The resulting improvements in skin formation, baking quality, and storability, as well as the easier haulm detachment during harvest, significantly contribute to enhancing the overall quality of the yield. Thus, farmers benefit not only from higher product quality but also from a more efficient and environmentally friendly production method.

Potato farming, an essential agricultural activity worldwide, faces numerous challenges, particularly in weed management. Traditional chemical herbicides, while effective, pose significant environmental and health risks. Enter crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide, a revolutionary solution designed to transform potato farming.

1. Environmental Sustainability

One of the most compelling reasons potato farmers should consider crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide is its commitment to environmental sustainability. Traditional chemical herbicides often contaminate soil and water sources, leading to long-term ecological damage. In contrast, crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide employs a combination of electrical energy and a biodegradable liquid, significantly reducing chemical reliance. This approach not only protects the environment but also promotes healthier soil, ensuring that potato farms remain productive and sustainable for generations to come.

2. Health and Safety

Health concerns related to chemical herbicides have been well-documented. These substances can pose risks to farmers, farm workers, and consumers alike. Prolonged exposure to chemical herbicides is associated with a range of health issues, including respiratory problems, skin conditions, and even certain cancers. Crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide mitigates these risks by minimising the use of harmful chemicals. By leveraging electrical energy to disrupt weed growth, this innovative solution provides a safer working environment for farmers and produces healthier crops for consumers.

3. Cost-Effectiveness

Economic viability is a critical factor for potato farmers. Crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide offers a cost-effective alternative to traditional herbicides. While the initial investment in the hybrid system may be higher, the long-term savings are substantial. Reduced reliance on chemical inputs means lower ongoing costs for herbicides. Additionally, healthier soil and crops translate to improved yields and higher-quality produce, enhancing profitability. Over time, the hybrid herbicide system proves to be a financially sound investment, offering both economic and environmental benefits.

4. Enhanced Efficacy

The hybrid herbicide system from crop.zone is not only sustainable and safe but also highly effective. Traditional herbicides can struggle with resistant weed species, necessitating higher doses and frequent applications. Crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide, however, utilises a dual-action approach that targets weeds more precisely and efficiently. The electrical energy disrupts the cellular structure of the weeds, while the biodegradable liquid ensures thorough coverage and penetration. This results in more effective weed control, reducing the need for repeated treatments and enhancing overall crop health.

5. Regulatory Compliance

With increasing regulations on chemical herbicides, farmers face growing pressure to adopt safer and more sustainable practices. Crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide aligns with these regulatory trends, providing a compliant solution that meets stringent environmental and safety standards. By adopting this innovative technology, potato farmers can stay ahead of regulatory changes, avoiding potential fines and market restrictions associated with non-compliance. This proactive approach not only safeguards their operations but also positions them as leaders in sustainable farming practices.

6. Technological Innovation

At the heart of crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide is cutting-edge technology that exemplifies the future of farming. This innovative solution integrates seamlessly with modern agricultural practices, offering a user-friendly and efficient system. The combination of electrical and chemical weed control represents a paradigm shift in herbicide technology, setting a new standard for the industry. By embracing this innovation, potato farmers can leverage the latest advancements to enhance their productivity and sustainability.

Conclusion

Crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide is a game-changer for potato farmers, offering a sustainable, safe, and cost-effective solution to weed management. By reducing chemical reliance, enhancing efficacy, and aligning with regulatory trends, this innovative technology addresses the key challenges faced by modern potato farming. As the agricultural industry continues to evolve, crop.zone’s hybrid herbicide stands out as the best solution for farmers committed to sustainable and successful practices.

Japanese Knotweed (Reynoutria japonica) is rapidly becoming one of the most formidable invasive species across Europe. Known for its large leaves, robust and hollow stems, and complex rhizome system, this plant poses a significant challenge for farmers. Its aggressive growth not only disrupts crop yields but also damages infrastructure, reducing land value and complicating management efforts. For professional farmers, finding an effective and sustainable solution to combat Japanese Knotweed is crucial.

Traditional methods to control Japanese Knotweed often fall short. Mechanical removal is labor-intensive and typically ineffective due to the plant’s extensive rhizome network, which can regrow from small fragments. Chemical herbicides, while somewhat effective, pose environmental risks and are not always a viable option, especially for those practicing organic farming. Enter crop.zone – a pioneering technology that offers a novel approach to managing this stubborn weed.

Crop.zone utilises an innovative method known as electric weeding to combat Japanese Knotweed effectively. Our solution combines a conductive liquid with a targeted electrical charge to disrupt the plant’s cellular structure, leading to desiccation and eventual death. This method addresses the unique challenges posed by Japanese Knotweed, providing farmers with a powerful tool to manage this invasive species sustainably.

The crop.zone approach involves a few critical steps. First, a conductive liquid is applied to the Japanese Knotweed. This liquid enhances the plant’s ability to conduct electricity. Following this, a specialised device delivers an electric charge directly to the plant. This electrical treatment penetrates deep into the plant tissues, reaching the roots and rhizomes that are often missed by conventional methods. By attacking the plant at its source, crop.zone ensures a more comprehensive and lasting solution to Japanese Knotweed infestations.

One of the significant advantages of using crop.zone for Japanese Knotweed control is its precision and sustainability. Unlike chemical herbicides, our electric weeding technology poses no risk to the surrounding environment or non-target species. This makes it an ideal solution for organic farmers and those committed to sustainable agriculture practices. Additionally, the method is non-discriminatory, effectively targeting only the unwanted plants without harming nearby crops or beneficial soil organisms.

Moreover, the use of crop.zone’s technology can lead to cost savings and increased efficiency. The labor and time required for manual removal of Japanese Knotweed can be substantial, often requiring repeated efforts to achieve any level of control. Chemical treatments, while less labor-intensive, come with the costs of purchasing herbicides and potential regulatory restrictions. Electric weeding, on the other hand, offers a one-time or periodic treatment option that reduces long-term management costs and labour demands.

Adopting crop.zone’s technology also aligns with integrated pest management (IPM) strategies, promoting a holistic approach to farm management. By integrating electric weeding with other sustainable practices, farmers can achieve better overall weed control while maintaining soil health and biodiversity.

In conclusion, the battle against Japanese Knotweed requires innovative and effective solutions. Crop.zone provides a cutting-edge method to address this challenge, offering farmers a sustainable and efficient way to manage one of Europe’s most problematic invasive species. By leveraging our electric weeding technology, professional farmers can protect their crops, preserve their land’s value, and contribute to more sustainable agricultural practices. Embrace the future of weed management with crop.zone and take control of Japanese Knotweed for good.

In recent years, the agricultural community has increasingly recognised the critical role of no-till farming in promoting soil health, enhancing water retention, and most importantly, sequestering carbon dioxide. As professional farmers, your role in adopting sustainable practices cannot be overstated. No-till farming, by leaving the soil undisturbed, allows for the build-up of organic matter and fosters an environment where soil microbes can thrive. This practice not only improves soil structure but also acts as a significant carbon sink, thereby mitigating climate change.

However, the transition to no-till farming presents unique challenges, especially for organic farmers. The cornerstone of no-till farming is the minimisation of soil disturbance, which in conventional systems often necessitates the use of chemical herbicides such as glyphosate to manage weeds effectively. This reliance on chemical herbicides creates a significant barrier for organic farmers who adhere to strict guidelines that prohibit synthetic inputs.

Organic farmers have long faced the dilemma of balancing effective weed control with maintaining their organic certification. Traditional organic farming methods, which often rely on tillage to manage weeds, can be detrimental to soil health and counterproductive to the benefits no-till farming offers. This contradiction places organic farmers in a difficult position, forcing them to choose between the benefits of no-till practices and their commitment to organic farming principles.

Enter crop.zone, a pioneering solution that bridges this gap. At crop.zone, we have developed an innovative, organic-compatible herbicide that empowers organic farmers to adopt no-till practices without compromising their organic integrity. Our technology leverages electric weeding to desiccate weeds effectively, offering a sustainable and chemical-free alternative to traditional herbicides.

Our approach involves the application of a conductive liquid to the weeds, followed by a targeted electrical charge. This combination disrupts the cellular structure of the plants, effectively controlling weeds without the need for chemical herbicides. The result is a system that aligns with organic farming principles while delivering the benefits of no-till farming, such as improved soil health, reduced erosion, and enhanced carbon sequestration.