Find Paper, Faster
Example:10.1021/acsami.1c06204 or Chem. Rev., 2007, 107, 2411-2502
A comprehensive experimental assessment of glyphosate ecological impacts in riparian forest restoration
Ecological Applications  (IF4.657),  Pub Date : 2021-10-15, DOI: 10.1002/eap.2472
Flávia G. Florido, Jussara B. Regitano, Pedro A. M. Andrade, Fernando D. Andreote, Pedro H. S. Brancalion

Competition with invasive grasses is one of the most important drivers of tree planting failures, especially in tropical forests. A widely disseminated weeding approach has been glyphosate spraying, the most used herbicide globally in forestry and ecosystem restoration. However, glyphosate use in restoration is highly controversial and requires further studies to elucidate its effects on restoration processes and the environment. We evaluated the use of glyphosate in riparian forest restoration and its impacts on tree planting costs, weed control efficiency, planted seedling performance, herbaceous and woody species regeneration, soil bacteria, and environmental contamination, using mowing treatments as a reference and based on a controlled experiment established in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Glyphosate spraying reduced by one-half and one-third the accumulated aboveground biomass of, respectively, weeds in general and of the invasive grass Urochloa decumbens compared to mowing treatments, and it reduced the cost by half. The performance of planted tree seedlings was markedly favored by glyphosate spraying compared to mowing treatments, as expressed by improved seedling height (˜twice higher), crown area (˜5× higher), and basal area (˜5× higher); the regeneration of both native woody and ruderal herbaceous plants were also enhanced. Neither glyphosate nor its metabolite Aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) residues were detected in either water runoff or soil samples, but they were found at relatively high concentrations in the runoff sediments (from 1.32 to 24.75 mg/kg for glyphosate and from 1.75 to 76.13 mg/kg for AMPA). Soil bacteria communities differed before and after glyphosate spraying in comparison to mowing plots (without glyphosate). Glyphosate spraying was far more cost effective than mowing for controlling U. decumbens and greatly improved the performance of planted tree seedlings and natural regeneration, while not leaving residues in soil and water. However, the changes in the structure of bacterial communities and high concentration of glyphosate and AMPA residues in runoff sediments highlight the need for caution when using this herbicide in riparian buffers. We present alternatives for reducing glyphosate use and minimizing its risks in tree planting initiatives.