Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T11:18:40.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Long-term effects of herbicide-application strategies on weeds and yield in spring-sown cereals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Ullalena Boström  and
Håkan Fogelfors
Håkan Fogelfors
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Crop Production Science, SLU, P.O. Box 7043, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Different herbicide-application strategies may serve as part of an integrated weed management (IWM) system. In 1987 and 1988, ten field trials were initiated in the south-central part of Sweden, with the objective of studying the long-term effects of herbicide-application strategies on the development of weed populations and productivity of spring-sown cereals. Each year until 1997, herbicides were applied at 25, 50, 75, or 100% of the full recommended dose. Treatments included herbicide exclusion every second year and herbicide application at 25 or 50% of a full dose during two out of three years, with a full dose applied in the third year. An untreated control was included. In 1998, weed densities in 25, 50, 75, and 100% of a full dose were reduced 43, 58, 64, and 67% compared with the control. At seven sites, the exclusion of herbicides every second year resulted in 43 to 178% higher weed densities than in 50% of a full dose, although the same amount of herbicide was applied when summarized over 2 yr. At four sites, herbicide application each year at 50, 75, or 100% of a full dose increased the density of difficult-to-control species by 24% compared with the untreated control. Averaged over sites, the untreated control contained 30% more weed species than herbicide application at 75 or 100% of a full dose. At three sites in 1996, the full dose resulted in 520 kg ha–1 (pooled over sites) higher barley yields than in the control. Neither in 1996 nor in 1997, was there any difference in crop yield between herbicide application at 25 and 100% of a full dose. This study demonstrates the potential of reducing the input of agrochemicals for weed control by using herbicides at reduced rates in competitive crops.

Keywords

Spring barley, Hordeum distichon L.Oats (Avena sativa L.)wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)efficacyreduced ratescrop yieldbromoxynildichlorprop-PioxynilMCPAtribenuron-methylintegrated weed managementIWMseedbank
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 2002 , pp. 196 - 203
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

Andersson, L. 1996. Characteristics of seeds and seedlings from weeds treated with sublethal herbicide doses. Weed Res. 36:55–64.Google Scholar
Ball, D. A. 1992. Weed seedbank response to tillage, herbicides, and croprotation sequence. Weed Sci. 40:654–659.Google Scholar
Barralis, G., Chadoeuf, R., and Lonchamp, J. P. 1988. Longevity of annual weed seeds in a cultivated soil. Weed Res. 28:407–418.Google Scholar
Bason, C. W. and Colborn, T. 1998. US application and distribution of pesticides and industrial chemicals capable of disrupting endocrine and immune systems. J. Clean Technol. Environ. Toxicol. Occup. Medic. 7:147–156.Google Scholar
Bellinder, R. R., Gummesson, G., and Karlsson, C. 1994. Percentage-driven government mandates for pesticide reduction—the Swedish model. Weed Technol. 8:350–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boström, U. 1999. Type and time of autumn tillage with and without herbicides at reduced rates in southern Sweden. 1. Yields and weed quantity. Soil Till. Res. 50:271–281.Google Scholar
Boström, U. and Fogelfors, H. 1999. Type and time of autumn tillage with and without herbicides at reduced rates in southern Sweden. 2. Weed flora and diversity. Soil Till. Res. 50:283–293.Google Scholar
Boström, U. and Fogelfors, H. 2002. Response of weeds and crop yield to herbicide dose decision-support guidelines. Weed Sci 50:186–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, O. C., Wilson, R. G., Weisberg, S., and Hubbard, K. G. 1996. Seed longevity of 41 weed species buried 17 years in eastern and western Nebraska. Weed Sci. 44:74–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, S. 1994. Crop weed competition and herbicide performance in cereal species and varieties. Weed Res. 34:29–36.Google Scholar
Conn, J. S. and Deck, R. E. 1995. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 9.7 years of burial in Alaska. Weed Sci. 43:583–585.Google Scholar
Derksen, D. A., Thomas, A. G., Lafond, G. P., Loeppky, H. A., and Swanton, C. J. 1995. Impact of postemergence herbicides on weed community diversity within conservation-tillage systems. Weed Res. 35:311–320.Google Scholar
Fogelfors, H. 1990. Different doses of herbicide for control of weeds in cereals—final report from the long-term series. 31st Swedish Crop Prot. Conf. Weeds Weed Control. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Uppsala, Sweden. pp. 139–151.Google Scholar
Hallgren, E. 1993. Verkan av några ogräsmedel mot olika tvåhjärtbladiga ogräsarter vid skilda doser och behandlingspunkter. SLU, Institutionen för växtodlingslära Växtodl. 44. 85 p. [In Swedish]Google Scholar
Hallgren, E. 1995. De kemiska ogräsmedlens användningsområden och verkan mot ogräs. Pages 54–88 In Fogelfors, H., ed. Ogräsnyckeln. Uppsala, Sweden: Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet. Speciella skrifter 59. [In Swedish]Google Scholar
Hamill, A. S., Surgeoner, G. A., and Roberts, W. P. 1994. Herbicide reduction in North-America—in Canada, an opportunity for motivation and growth in weed management. Weed Technol. 8:366–371.Google Scholar
Hoogerkamp, M. and Hoogerbrugge, A. 1994. Reducing fitness, a tool in chemical weed control in crops? Med. Fac. Landbouww. Univ. Gent. 59/3b:1277–1284.Google Scholar
Hume, L. 1987. Long-term effects of 2,4-D application on plants. I. Effects on the weed community in a wheat crop. Can. J. Bot. 65:2530–2536.Google Scholar
KEMI. 1997. Sold quantities of pesticides. Kemikalieinspektionen, Solna, Sweden. 38 p.Google Scholar
Leguizamón, E. S. and Roberts, H. A. 1982. Seed production by an arable weed community. Weed Res. 22:35–39.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
Mohler, C. L. 1996. Ecological bases for the cultural control of annual weeds. J. Prod. Agric. 9:468–474.Google Scholar
Regnier, E. E. and Bakelana, K. B. 1995. Crop planting pattern effects on early growth and canopy shape of cultivated and wild oats (Avena fatua). Weed Sci. 43:88–94.Google Scholar
Saethre, M. G., Orpen, H. M., and Hofsvang, T. 1999. Action programs for pesticide risk reduction and pesticide use in different crops in Norway. Crop Prot. 18:207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salonen, J. 1992a. Yield responses of spring cereals to reduced herbicide doses. Weed Res. 32:493–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salonen, J. 1992b. Efficacy of reduced herbicide doses in spring cereals of different competitive ability. Weed Res. 32:483–491.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1995. SAS User's Guide. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 846 p.Google Scholar
Schaefers, G. A. 1996. Status of pesticide policy and regulations in developing countries. J. Agric. Entomol. 13:213–222.Google Scholar
SMHI. 1998. Väder och vatten—väderåret 1998. Norrköping, Sweden. [In Swedish]Google Scholar
Thompson, K., Bakker, J., and Bekker, R. 1997. The Soil Seed Banks of North West Europe—Methodology, Density and Longevity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 276 p.Google Scholar
Toler, J. E., Murdock, E. C., Stapleton, G. S., and Wallace, S. U. 1999. Corn leaf orientation effects on light interception, intraspecific competition, and grain yields. J. Prod. Agric. 12:396–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Acker, R. C., Lutman, P. J. W., and Froud-Williams, R. J. 1997. The influence of interspecific interference on the seed production of Stellaria media and Hordeum vulgare (volunteer barley). Weed Res. 37:277–286.Google Scholar
Wall, D. A. 1997. Dog mustard (Erucastrum gallicum) response to crop competition. Weed Sci. 45:397–403.Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J. and Lawson, H. M. 1992. Seedbank persistence and seedling emergence of seven weed species in autumn-sown crops following a single year's seeding. Ann. Appl. Biol. 120:105–116.Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J., Wright, K. J., Brain, P., Clements, M., and Stephens, E. 1995. Predicting the competitive effects of weed and crop density on weed biomass, weed seed production and crop yield in wheat. Weed Res. 35:265–278.Google Scholar
Zhang, Z. H., 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