Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T19:22:17.067Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Barley seeding rate influences the effects of variable herbicide rates on wild oat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

John T. O'Donovan ,
K. Neil Harker ,
George W. Clayton ,
Jeff C. Newman ,
Darren Robinson  and
Linda M. Hall
K. Neil Harker
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
George W. Clayton
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
Jeff C. Newman
Affiliation:
Alberta Research Council, Vegreville, AB, Canada T9C 1T4
Darren Robinson
Affiliation:
Alberta Research Council, Vegreville, AB, Canada T9C 1T4
Linda M. Hall
Affiliation:
Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6H 4P2
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted at Vegreville, Alberta, in 1997, 1998, and 1999 and in Lacombe, Alberta, in 1997 and 1998, to determine if barley row spacing (20 and 30 cm) and seeding rate (75, 125, and 175 kg ha−1) influenced the effects of variable tralkoxydim rates on barley seed yield, net economic returns, and wild oat seed production. In most cases, barley seed yield was unaffected by row spacing or seeding rate. Where no herbicide was applied, the presence of wild oat reduced barley yield at each location each year. When the herbicide was applied at 50, 75, or 100% of the recommended rate, barley yields were not affected by the presence of wild oat. Results were more variable at 25% of the recommended rate, especially at Lacombe, where yield losses occurred both years at this rate. The lowest net economic returns consistently occurred in the absence of herbicide application; however, the influence of herbicide rate on net returns varied among years and locations. Net returns were either higher at the lower herbicide rates or were unaffected by herbicide rate. Seeding rate and herbicide rate affected wild oat seed production at each location each year and also the amount of seeds in the soil seedbank at Vegreville in 1999. Row spacing had little or no effect on wild oat seed production. There was a consistent and highly significant seeding rate by herbicide rate interaction on wild oat seed production. The effects of tralkoxydim on wild oat seed production, especially at relatively low rates, were superior at the higher barley seeding rates. The results suggest that seeding barley at relatively high rates can result in optimum barley yields, undiminished economic returns, and effective wild oat management when tralkoxydim is used at lower than recommended rates.

Keywords

BromoxynilglyphosateMCPAtralkoxydimbarley, ‘Falcon’, Hordeum vulgare L.wild oat, Avena fatua L. AVEFAHull-less barleyintegrated weed managementnet economic returnreduced herbicide ratesrow spacingsoil seedbank
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 6 , December 2001 , pp. 746 - 754
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

Barton, D. L., Thill, D. C., and Bahman, S. 1992. Integrated wild oat (Avena fatua) management affects spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) yield and economics. Weed Technol. 6:129–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belles, D. S., Thill, D. C., and Shafi, B. 2000. PP-604 rate and Avena fatua density effects on seed production and viability in Hordeum vulgare . Weed Sci. 48:378–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Semach, G., Li, X., O’Donovan, J. T., and Harker, K. N. 2000. Tillage, fertilizer and glyphosate timing effects on foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum) management in wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 80:655–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brain, P. and Cousens, R. 1989. An equation to describe dose responses where there is stimulation of growth at low doses. Weed Res. 29:93–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dew, D. A. 1972. An index of competition for estimating crop loss due to weeds. Can. J. Plant Sci. 52:921–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edney, M. J., Tkachuk, R., and MacGregor, A. W. 1992. Nutrient composition of the hull-less barley ‘Condor’. J. Sci. Food Agric. 60:451–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, R. M., Thill, D. C., Thapia, L. S., 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
Harker, K. N. and Blackshaw, R. E. 1991. Influence of growth stage and broadleaf herbicides on tralkoxydim activity. Weed Sci. 39:650–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holm, F. A., Kirkland, K. J., and Stevenson, F. C. 2000. Defining optimum rates and timing for wild oat control in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 14:167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasieniuk, M. and Maxwell, B. D. 1994. Population genetics and the evolution of herbicide resistance in weeds. Phytoprotection 75 (Suppl.): 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkland, K. J. 1993. Weed management in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) in the absence of herbicides. J. Sust. Agric. 3:95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koutsoyiannis, A., ed. 1977. Theory of Econometrics. 2nd ed. London: MacMillan Education. pp. 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebman, M. and Janke, R. J. 1990. Sustainable weed management practices. Pages 111–143 In Francis, C. A., Flora, C. B., and King, L. D., eds. Sustainable Agriculture in Temperate Zones. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
Little, T. M. and Hills, F. J. 1978. Agricultural Experimentation: Design and Analysis. New York: J. Wiley. pp. 61–76.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. 1996. Ecological bases for the cultural control of annual weeds. J. Prod. Agric. 9:468–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T. 1994. Canola (Brassica rapa) plant density influences Tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum) interference, biomass and seed yield. Weed Sci. 42:385–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T. 1996. Weed economic thresholds: useful agronomic tool or pipe dream? Phytoprotection 77:13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T., Blackshaw, R. E., Harker, K. N., McAndrew, D. W., and Clayton, G. W. 2001. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) management in canola (Brassica rapa) and barley (Hordem vulgare) rotations under zero tillage. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:183–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T., De St. Remy, E. A., O’Sullivan, P. A., and Dew, D. 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
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
O’Donovan, J. T. and McAndrew, D. W. 1997. Tillage and nitrogen influence weed population dynamics in barley (Hordeum vulgare). Weed Technol. 11:502–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T. and Newman, J. C. 1996. Manipulation of canola (Brassica rapa) plant density and herbicide rate for economical and sustainable weed management. Pages 969–974 In Proceedings of the 2nd International Weed Control Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark. Flakkeberg, Denmark: Department of Weed Control and Pesticide Ecology.Google Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T., Newman, J. C., Harker, K. N., Blackshaw, R. E., and McAndrew, D. W. 1999. Effect of barley plant density on wild oat interference, shoot biomass and seed yield under zero tillage. Can. J. Plant Sci. 79:655–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salonen, J. 1992. Efficacy of reduced herbicide doses in spring cereals of different competitive ability. Weed Res. 32:483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1990. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 6, 4th ed. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose-response relationships. Weed Technol. 9:218–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, M. P. and Vanden Born, W. H. 1983. Crop competition aids efficacy of wild oat herbicides. Can. J. Plant Sci. 63:503–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spandl, E. B., Durgan, R., and Miller, D. W. 1997. Wild oat (Avena fatua) control in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare) with reduced rates of postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 11:591–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, F. C., Holm, F. A., and Kirkland, K. J. 2000. Optimizing wild oat (Avena fatua) control with ICIA 0604. Weed Technol. 14:608–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stougaard, R. N., Maxwell, B. D., and Harris, J. D. 1997. Influence of application timing on the efficacy of reduced rate postemergence herbicides for wild oat (Avena fatua) control in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare). Weed Technol. 11:283–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thill, D. C., O’Donovan, J. T., and Mallory-Smith, C. A. 1994. Integrated weed management strategies for delaying herbicide resistance. Phytoprotection 75 (Suppl.): 61–70.CrossRefGoogle 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
Wille, M. J., Thill, D. C., and Price, W. J. 1998. Wild oat (Avena fatua) seed production in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) is affected by the interaction of wild oat density and herbicide rate. Weed Sci. 46:336–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J., Weaver, S. E., and Hamill, A. S. 2000. Risks and reliability of using herbicides at below-labeled rates. Weed Technol. 14:106–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar