Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:31:53.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An assessment of reduced herbicide and fertilizer inputs on cereal grain yield and weed growth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

F.C. Stevenson ,
A.M. Johnston ,
S.A. Brandt  and
L. Townley-Smith
F.C. Stevenson
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, 206A Dunlop Street, Saskatoon, SK, CanadaS7N 2B7;
A.M. Johnston*
Affiliation:
Western Canada Director, Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada, CN Tower Midtown Plaza, Suite 704, Saskatoon, SK, CanadaS7K 1J5;
S.A. Brandt
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Farm, Box 10, Scott, SK, CanadaSOK 4A0;
L. Townley-Smith
Affiliation:
Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, 1800 Hamilton Street, Regina, SK, CanadaS4P 4L2.
*
Corresponding author is A.M. Johnston ([email protected]).
Get access

Abstract

Although crop production and weed growth could change if herbicides and fertilizer inputs were reduced, the short-term impact in an annual cropping system in the Northern Great Plains is not well understood. Data were collected from 14 sites in Saskatchewan, Canada, to investigate the influence of weed control method (cultural vs. herbicides) and N and P fertilizers on crop yield of fall rye, spring wheat, and barley, and the presence and number of weed species. Cultural weed control included 25% greater crop seeding rate, preseeding tillage closer to the time of seeding, and fertilizer N banding in closer proximity to the seed. Four weed species (wild oat, lambsquarters, wild buckwheat, and field penny cress) occurred more frequently in plots with cultural weed control compared with herbicide weed control for all cereal crops. However, straw and grain yields of all crops were unaffected by weed control method at all sites. The addition of fertilizer had a major impact on crop growth and some weed species. Green foxtail occurred more often in unfertilized compared with fertilized plots for all cereal crops. Straw and grain yields of all cereal crops were higher in fertilized compared with unfertilized plots. Crop yield response to fertilizer inputs was not consistent among sites for the three cereal crops. Producers making drastic reductions in fertilizer inputs may experience reductions in crop yields because of limited nutrient levels. However, the results indicate that herbicide inputs could be reduced or eliminated periodically with no short-term yield loss in cereal cropping systems.

Keywords

cereal crop yieldscultural practicesN and P fertilizersweed presence
Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , June 2000 , pp. 60 - 67
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2000

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.)

References

1.Anderson, R.L., Tanaka, D.L., Black, A.L., and Schweizer, E.E.. 1998. Weed community and species response to crop rotation, tillage, and nitrogen fertility. Weed Technol. 12:531–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Barberi, P., Silvestri, N., and Bonari, E.. 1997. Weed communities of winter wheat as influenced by input level and rotation. Weed Res. 37:301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Berkowitz, A.R. 1988. Competition for resources in weed-crop mixtures. In Altieri, M.A. and Liebman, M. (eds.). Weed Management In Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. p. 89–119.Google Scholar
4.Carlson, H.L., and Hill, J.E.. 1985. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition with spring wheat: Plant density effects. Weed Sci. 33:176–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Derksen, D.A., Thomas, A.G., Lafond, G.P., Loeppky, H.A., and Swanton, C.J.. 1995. Impact of post-emergence herbicides on weed community diversity within conservation-tillage systems. Weed Res. 35:311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Entz, M.H., Bullied, W.J., and Katepa-Mupondwa, F.. 1995. Rotational benefits of forage crops in Canadian prairie cropping systems. J. Prod. Agric. 8:521–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Hucl, P. 1998. Response to weed control by four spring wheat genotypes differing in competitive ability. Can. J. Plant Sci. 78:171–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Hume, L. 1982. The long-term effects of fertilizer application and three rotations on weed communities in wheat (after 21–22 years at Indian Head, Saskatchewan). Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:741–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Iqbal, J., and Wright, D.. 1997. Effects of nitrogen supply on competition between wheat and three annual weed species. Weed Res. 37:391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Kirkland, K.J. 1993. Weed management in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) in the absence of herbicides. J. Sustainable Agric. 3(3/4):95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Kirkland, K.J., and Beckie, H.J.. 1998. Contribution of nitrogen fertilizer placement to weed management in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 12:507–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Légère, A., Samson, N., Rioux, R., Angers, D.A., and Simard, R.R.. 1997. Response of spring barley to crop rotation, conservation tillage, and weed management intensity. Agron. J. 89:628–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Légère, A., Schreiber, M.M., Hickman, M.V., and Samson, N.. 1996. Residual weed populations: Innocent bystanders or potential time bombs? In H. Brown (ed.). Proc. Second International Weed Control Congress, 25–28 June 1996, Copenhagen, Denmark. Dept. of Weed Control and Pesticide Ecology, Flakkebjerg, Slagelse, Denmark, p. 1261–1266.Google Scholar
14.Lemerle, D., Verbeek, B., Cousens, R.D., and Combes, N.E.. 1996. The potential for selecting wheat varieties strongly competitive against weeds. Weed Res. 36:505–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Littel, R.C., Milliken, G.A., Stroup, W.W., and Wolfinger, R.D.. 1996. SAS System for Mixed Models. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
16.O'Donovan, J.T., De St. Remy, E.A., O'Sullivan, P.A., Dew, D.A., and Sharma, K.A.. 1985. Influence of the relative time of emergence of wild oat (Avena fatua) on yield loss of barley (Hordeum vulgare) and wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 33:498–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.O'Donovan, J.T., McAndrew, D.W., and Thomas, A.G.. 1997. Tillage and nitrogen influence weed population dynamics in barley (Hordeum vulgare). Weed Technol. 11:502–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Reinertsen, M.R., Cochran, V.L., and Morrow, L.A.. 1984. Response of spring wheat to N fertilizer placement, row spacing, and wild oat herbicides in a no-till system. Agron. J. 76:753–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Stevenson, F.C., and Johnston, A.M.. 1999. Annual broadleaf crop frequency and residual weed populations in Saskatchewan Parkland. Weed Sci. 47:208–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Swanton, C.J., Clements, D.R., and Derksen, D.A.. 1993. Weed succession under conservation tillage: A hierarchical framework for research and management. Weed Technol. 7:286–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Topham, P.B., and Lawson, H.M.. 1982. Measurement of weed species diversity in crop/weed competition studies. Weed Res. 22:285–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Townley-Smith, L., and Wright, A.T.. 1994. Field pea cultivar and weed response to crop seed rate in western Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 74:387–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Walker, R.H., and Buchanan, G.A.. 1982. Crop manipulation in integrated weed management systems. Weed Sci. 30(suppl. 1):17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Young, F.L., Ogg, A.G. Jr., Papendick, R.I., Thill, D.C., and Alldredge, J.R.. 1994. Tillage and weed management affect winter wheat yield in an integrated pest management system. Agron. J. 86:147–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Zimdahl, R.L. 1995. Weed science in sustainable agriculture. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 10:138–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar