Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-b4m5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-23T15:48:30.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ability of 29 barley cultivars to compete and withstand competition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Paul R. Watson ,
Douglas A. Derksen  and
Rene C. Van Acker
Douglas A. Derksen
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Brandon Research Centre, Box 1000A RR#3, Brandon, MB, R7A 5Y3, Canada
Rene C. Van Acker
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using competitive crops and cultivars can be an important integrated weed management (IWM) tool, useful in both conventional and low-external-input (LEI) farming systems. Barley is considered a competitive crop, but cultivar competitiveness varies. There are two aspects of cultivar competitive ability; the ability to compete (AC) and the ability to withstand competition (AWC). However, the relationship between these aspects has not been addressed in barley. A study was conducted to explore aspects of barley cultivar competitive ability with oats, and to examine the feasibility of ranking cultivars based on either, or both, AWC and AC. Field trials were undertaken in 2001 and 2002 to determine cultivar competitive ability for 29 barley cultivars commonly grown on the Canadian prairies. Cultivars were selected from semidwarf and full height, hulled and hull-less, 2- and 6-row, and feed and malt classes. Yield loss ranged from 6 to 79% while weed seed return ranged from 10 to 83% of gross yield. As a class, semidwarf and hull-less cultivars were less competitive than full height and hulled cultivars, respectively. However, considerable variation existed within these classes, and an absolute relationship between class membership and competitive ability did not exist. Ability to withstand competition was significantly correlated with ability to compete, but correlation coefficients were not strong enough to attempt reliable co-selection within a breeding program. Ability to compete was a more consistent measure of competitive ability than AWC. Ranking barley cultivar competitive ability would make it a valuable IWM tool for farmers and extension personnel.

Keywords

Barley, Hordeum vulgare L.oat, Avena sativa L. cv. AC AssiniboiaBarleycompetitive cultivarintegrated weed managementweed competition
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 54 , Issue 4 , August 2006 , pp. 783 - 792
Copyright
Copyright © 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.)

References

Literature Cited

Achen, C. H. 1982. Interpreting and using regression. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Application in the Social Sciences. Series no. 07-029. Beverly Hills and London: Sage. P. 44.Google Scholar
Andersson, L. and Milberg, P. 1998. Variation in seed dormancy among mother plants, populations and years of seed collection. Seed Sci. Res 8:29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 2001. 2001 Guide to Crop Protection. Carman, MB: Manitoba Agriculture and Food. 358 pp.Google Scholar
Anonymous 2006. Canadian Climate Data. http://www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/climateData/canada_e.htm.Google Scholar
Baghestani, A., Lemieux, C., Leroux, G. D., Baziramakenga, R., and Simard, R. R. 1999. Determination of allelochemicals in spring cereal cultivars of different competitiveness. Weed Sci 47:498–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, D. A., Klepper, B., and Rydrych, D. J. 1995. Comparative above-ground development rates for several annual grass weeds and cereal grains. Weed Sci 43:410–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, A. R. and Nalewaja, J. D. 1968. Competition of wild oat in wheat and barley. Weed Sci 16:505–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Stobbe, E. H., and Sturko, A. R. W. 1981. Effect of seeding dates and densities of green foxtail (Setaria viridis) on the growth and production of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci 29:212–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourgeois, L., Moes, J., and Stobbe, E. H. 1996. Impact of threshing on hard red spring wheat seed vigour. Can. J. Plant Sci 76:215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, S. 1994. Crop weed competition and herbicide performance in cereal species and varieties. Weed Res 34:29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, S. 1995. Weed suppression ability of spring barley varieties. Weed Res 35:241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985. An empirical model relating crop yield to weed and crop density and a statistical comparison with other models. J. Agric. Sci 105:513–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R., Brain, P., O'Donovan, J. T., and O'Sullivan, P. A. 1987. The use of biologically realistic equations to describe the effects of weed density and relative time of emergence on crop yield. Weed Sci 35:720–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R. D. and Mokhtari, S. 1998. Seasonal and site variability in the tolerance of wheat cultivars to interference from Lolium rigidum . Weed Res 38:301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derksen, D. A. 2002. Field Crop Pest Management (Weeds). Pages 274–275 in Pimentel, D. ed. Encyclopedia of Pest Management. New York: Dekker.Google Scholar
Didon, U. M. E. 2002. Variation between cultivars in early response to weed competition. J. Agron. Crop Sci 188:176–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doll, H., Holm, U., and Søgaard, B. 1995. Effect of crop density on competition by wheat and barley with Agrostemma githago and other weeds. Weed Res 35:391–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, R. E., Thill, D. C., Tapia, L., Shafii, B., and Lish, J. M. 1991. Wild oat (Avena fatua) and spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) density affect spring barley grain yield. Weed Technol 5:33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finney, D. J. 1989. Was this in your statistics textbook? V. Data transformation. Expl. Agric 25:165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forcella, F., Eradat-Oskoui, K., and Wagner, S. W. 1993. Application of weed seedbank ecology to low-input crop management. Ecol. Appl 3:74–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, P. N., Crossa, J., and Romagosa, I. 1997. Multi-environment testing and genotype × environment interaction. Pages 112–129 in Statistical Methods for Plant Variety Evaluation. Kempton, R. A. and Fox, P. N. ed. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Goldberg, D. E. and Landa, K. 1991. Competitive effect and response: hierarchies and correlated traits in the early stages of competition. Ecology 79:1013–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, N. 1993. Prospects for weed control through crop interference. Ecol. Applic 3:84–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Konesky, D. W., Siddiqi, M. Y., and Glass, A. D. M. 1989. Wild oat and barley interactions: varietal differences in competitiveness in relation to phosphorus supply. Can. J. Bot 67:3366–3371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanning, S. P., Talbert, L. E., Martin, J. M., Blake, T. K., and Bruckner, P. L. 1997. Genotype of wheat and barley affects light penetration and wild oat growth. Agron. J 89:100–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemerle, D., Gill, G. S., Murphy, C. E., Walker, S. R., Cousens, R. D., Mokhtari, S., Peltzer, S. J., Coleman, R., and Luckett, D. J. 2001a. Genetic improvement and agronomy for enhanced weed competitiveness with weeds. Aust. J. Agric. Res 52:527–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemerle, D., Verbeck, B., and Orchard, B. 2001b. Ranking the ability of wheat varieties to compete with Lolium rigidum . Weed Res 41:197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebman, M. and Davis, A. S. 2000. Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low-external-input farming systems. Weed Res 40:27–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López-Castañeda, C., Richards, R. A., and Farquhar, G. D. 1995. Variation in early vigor between wheat and barley. Crop Sci 35:472–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lotz, L. A. P., Christensen, S., and Cloutier, D. et al. 1996. Prediction of the competitive effects of weeds on crop yields based on the relative leaf area of weeds. Weed Res 36:93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, I. N., Nawolsky, K. M., Entz, M. H., and Smith, A. E. 1991. Differences among certified wheat seedlots in response to trifluralin. Agron. J 83:119–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nazarko, O. M., Van Acker, R. C., Entz, M. H., Schoofs, A., and Martens, G. 2003. Pesticide free production of field crops: results of an on-farm pilot project. Agron. J 95:1262–1273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., and Hall, L. M. 2000. Wild oat (Avena fatua) interference in barley (Hordeum vulgare) is influenced by barley variety and seeding rate. Weed Technol 14:624–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, R. K. D. and Higley, L. G. 2001. Illuminating the black box: the relationship between injury and yield. Pages 1–12 in Biotic Stress and Yield Loss. Higley, L. G. and Peterson, R. K. ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.Google Scholar
Satorre, E. H. and Snaydon, R. W. 1992. A comparison of root and shoot competition between spring cereals and Avena fatua L. Weed Res 32:45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seavers, G. P. and Wright, K. J. 1999. Crop canopy development and structure influence weed suppression. Weed Res 39:319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siddiqi, M. Y., Glass, A. D. M., Hsiao, A. I., and Minjas, A. N. 1985. Wild oat/barley interactions: varietal differences in competitiveness in relation to K+ supply. Ann. Bot 56:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonntag, C. W., Rossnagel, B. G., and Baker, R. J. 1993. Seed characteristics related to stand density and yield from different barley and wheat seed lots. Plant Var. Seeds 6:207–213.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D., Torrie, J. H., and Dickey, D. A. 1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Murphy, S. D. 1996. Weed science beyond weeds: the role of integrated weed management (IWM) in agroecosystem health. Weed Sci 44:437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Frick, B. L., and Hall, L. M. 1998a. Alberta weed survey of cereal and oilseed crops in 1997. Saskatoon, SK: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Weed Survey Series, Publication 98-1.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Frick, B. L., Van Acker, R. C., Knezevic, S. Z., and Joosse, D. 1998b. Manitoba weed survey of cereal and oilseed crops in 1997. Saskatoon, SK: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Weed Survey Series, Publication 98-1.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Wise, R. F., Frick, B. L., and Juras, L. T. 1996. Saskatchewan weed survey of cereal oilseed and pulse crops in 1995. Saskatoon SK: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Weed Survey Series Publ. 96-1.Google Scholar
Todd, B. G. 1989. Weed control in barley. Pages 43–48 in Proceedings of the Prairie Barley Symposium. Slinkard, A. E., Rossnagel, B. G., and Holm, F. A. ed. Saskatoon, SK: Crop Development Centre.Google Scholar
Tremere, A. W. 1989. Food uses of barley. Pages 123–128 in Proceedings of the Prairie Barley Symposium. Slinkard, A. E., Rossnagel, B. G., and Holm, F. A. ed. Saskatoon, SK: Crop Development Centre.Google Scholar
Velleman, P. F. 1997. Data Desk Statistics Guide. 6th ed. Ithaca, NY: Data Description Inc.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1993. Comparison of green foxtail (Setaria viridis) and wild oat (Avena fatua) growth, development, and competitiveness under three temperature regimes. Weed Sci 41:369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, P. R. 2004. The contribution of attributes in the seed, seedling, and mature plant phases to barley (Hordeum vulgare) cultivar competitiveness against weeds. . University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.Google Scholar
White, E. M. 1990. The effect of seed on seedlot characteristics and yield potential in spring barley. Plant Var. Seeds 3:31–41.Google Scholar
White, N. D. G., Hulasare, R. B., and Jayas, D. S. 1999. Effects of storage conditions on quality loss of hull-less and hulled oat and barley. Can. J. Plant Sci 79:475–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar