Field boundary vegetation and the effects of agrochemical drift: botanical change caused by low levels of herbicide and fertilizer

  • Published source details Kleijn D. & Snoeijing G.I.J. (1997) Field boundary vegetation and the effects of agrochemical drift: botanical change caused by low levels of herbicide and fertilizer. Journal of Applied Ecology, 34, 1413-1425.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Reduce fertilizer, pesticide or herbicide use generally

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Reduce fertilizer, pesticide or herbicide use generally

    A replicated, controlled, randomized study on a low productive grassland and high productive fallow arable field in the Netherlands (Kleijn & Snoeijing 1997) found that decreased fertilizer applications resulted in an increase in the number of plant species, minimal effects of herbicide applications were found on fallow land. There were significantly more plant species in the plots receiving no fertilizer (grassland: 16 species/m², fallow: 23-27/m²) compared to those with 25% (grass: 14/m², fallow: 19-23/m²) and 50% (grass: 13/m², fallow: 19-23/m²) of conventional fertilizer applications. In the grassland there was no significant effect of herbicide, whereas in the fallow land there was an effect in the final assessment when 0 and 5% of conventional herbicide application plots had significantly greater species diversity than 50% of conventional herbicide application plots (24-25 vs 22/m²). The most species-rich plots were the 0% herbicide-0% fertilizer plots (grass: 15/m², fallow: 31/m²) and the 10%-0% plots (grass: 15/m²); 50-50% fertilizer plots had the least species (grass: 10/m², fallow: 20/m²). Forty-eight plots (2 x 2 m) were established on a low productivity grassland and an adjacent fallow field sown with 30 broadleaved grassland species. Fertilizer treatments were: 0, 25 and 50% of the conventional application (110 kg N/ha/year). Herbicide (fluroxypyr) treatments were: 0, 5, 10 and 50% of the standard agricultural dose (200 g/ha). Vegetation composition was assessed in April-May (grass and fallow) and September (fallow only) 1993-1996.


Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 20

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust