Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T07:55:49.371Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Combining agronomic practices and herbicides improves weed management in wheat–canola rotations within zero-tillage production systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robert E. Blackshaw ,
Hugh J. Beckie ,
Louis J. Molnar ,
Toby Entz  and
James R. Moyer
Hugh J. Beckie
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saskatoon Research Centre, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0X2, Canada
Louis J. Molnar
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Research Centre, Lethbridge, AB T1J 4B1, Canada
Toby Entz
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Research Centre, Lethbridge, AB T1J 4B1, Canada
James R. Moyer
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Research Centre, Lethbridge, AB T1J 4B1, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Development of more comprehensive and cost-effective integrated weed management systems is required to facilitate greater integrated weed management adoption by farmers. A field experiment was conducted at two locations to determine the combined effects of seed date (April or May), seed rate (recommended or 150% of recommended), fertilizer timing (applied in fall or spring), and in-crop herbicide dose (50% or 100% of recommended) on weed growth and crop yield. This factorial set of treatments was applied in four consecutive years within a spring wheat–spring canola–spring wheat–spring canola rotation in a zero-till production system. Both wheat and canola phases of the rotation were grown each year. Weed biomass was often lower with May than with April seeding because more weeds were controlled with preplant glyphosate. However, despite fewer weeds being present with May seeding, wheat yield was only greater in 1 of 7 site-years, and canola yield was never greater with May compared with April seeding. Higher crop seed rates had a consistently positive effect on reducing weed growth and the weed seedbank. Crop yield was sometimes greater, and never lower, with higher seed rates. Fertilizer timing did not have a large effect on crop yield, but applying N in the spring compared with fall was less favorable for weeds as indicated by lower weed biomass and a 20% decrease in the weed seedbank. In-crop herbicides applied at 50% compared with 100% doses often resulted in similar weed biomass and crop yield, especially when higher crop seed rates were used. Indeed, the weed seedbank at the conclusion of the 4-yr experiment was not greater with the 50% compared with 100% herbicide dose at one of two locations. This study demonstrates the combined merits of early seeding (April), higher crop seed rates, and spring-applied fertilizer in conjunction with timely but limited herbicide use to manage weeds and maintain high crop yields in rotations containing wheat and canola.

Keywords

Glyphosatecanola, Brassica napus L.wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Fertilizer timingintegrated weed managementreduced herbicide doseseed dateseed rateweed competition
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 53 , Issue 4 , August 2005 , pp. 528 - 535
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

Angadi, S. V., Cutforth, H. W., Miller, P. R., McKonkey, B. G., Entz, M. H., Brandt, S. A., and Volkmar, K. M. 2000. Response of three Brassica species to high temperature stress during reproductive growth. Can. J. Plant Sci 80:693–701.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Molnar, L. J., and Janzen, H. H. 2004. Nitrogen fertilizer timing and application method affects weed growth and competition with spring wheat. Weed Sci 52:614–622.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Semach, G., and O'Donovan, J. T. 2000. Utilization of wheat seed rate to manage redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium) in a zero-tillage cropping system. Weed Technol 14:389–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Semach, G., Li, X., O'Donovan, J. T., and Harker, K. N. 1999. An integrated weed management approach to managing foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum) in conservation tillage systems. Weed Technol 13:347–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, D. D. 1999. Expanding the Context of Weed Management. Binghamton, NY: Haworth. 289 p.Google Scholar
Canadian Fertilizer Institute. 2002. Western Retail Sales Statistics—2002. www.cfi.ca/fertfacts.cfm?itemid=300.Google Scholar
Cardina, J. and Sparrow, D. H. 1996. A comparison of methods to predict weed seedling populations from the soil seedbank. Weed Sci 44:46–51.Google Scholar
Clayton, G. W., Harker, K. N., O'Donovan, J. T., Blackshaw, R. E., Dosdall, L. M., Stevenson, F. C., and Ferguson, T. 2004. Fall and spring seeding date effects on herbicide-tolerant canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Can. J. Plant Sci 84:419–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cudney, D. W., Jordan, L. S., Holt, J. S., and Reints, J. S. 1989. Competitive interactions of wheat (Triticum aestivum) and wild oats (Avena fatua) grown at different densities. Weed Sci 37:538–543.Google Scholar
Degenhardt, D. F. and Kondra, Z. P. 1981. The influence of seeding date and seeding rate on seed yield and growth characters of five genotypes of Brassica napus . Can. J. Plant Sci 61:185–190.Google Scholar
Derksen, D. A., Anderson, R. L., Blackshaw, R. E., and Maxwell, B. 2002. Weed dynamics and management strategies for cropping systems in the northern Great Plains. Agron. J 94:174–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, K. S., Arshad, M. A., and Moyer, J. R. 1997. Cultural control of weeds. Pages 237–275 in Pimental, D. ed. Techniques for Reducing Pesticide Use. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Grant, C. A., Peterson, G. A., and Campbell, C. A. 2002. Nutrient considerations for diversified cropping systems in the northern Great Plains. Agron. J 94:186–198.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N. 2001. Survey of yield losses due to weeds in central Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci 81:339–342.Google Scholar
Kirkland, K. J. 1993. Weed management in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) in the absence of herbicides. J. Sustainable Agric 3:95–103.Google Scholar
Kirkland, K. J., Holm, F. A., and Stevenson, F. C. 2000. Appropriate crop seeding rate when herbicide rate is reduced. Weed Technol 14:692–698.Google Scholar
Lafond, G. P. and Derksen, D. A. 1996. Long-term potential of conservation tillage systems on the Canadian Prairies. Can. J. Plant Pathol 18:151–158.Google Scholar
Lemerle, D., Verbeek, B., and Coombes, N. E. 1996. Interaction between wheat (Triticum aestivum) and diclofop to reduce the cost of annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) control. Weed Sci 44:634–639.Google Scholar
Liebman, M., Mohler, C. L., and Staver, C. P. 2001. Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 532 p.Google 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.Google 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.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., Newman, J. C., Robinson, D., and Hall, L. M. 2001. Barley seeding rate influences the effects of variable herbicide rates on wild oat. Weed Sci 49:746–754.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1999. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 8. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute, Cary, NC. 3884 p.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada. 2002. Table 7—Tillage practices used to prepare land for seeding, by province, census agricultural region (CAR) and census division (CD), 2001 in 2001 Census of Agriculture, Farm Data: Initial Release, Data Tables. www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/95F0301XIE/tables/html/Table7Can.htm#46.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada. 2003. Statistical Handbook 2003. Ottawa, Canada: Canada Grains Council.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. 633 p.Google Scholar
Zentner, R. P., Wall, D. D., Hagy, C. N., Smith, E. G., Young, D. L., Miller, P. R., Campbell, C. A., McConkey, B. G., and Brandt, S. A. 2002. Economics of crop diversification and soil tillage opportunities in the Canadian prairies. Agron. J 94:216–230.Google Scholar