Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:23:49.836Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Greater Interference from Living Mulches than Weeds in Organic Broccoli Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Carlene A. Chase*
Affiliation:
University of Florida, Horticultural Sciences Department, P.O. Box 110690, Gainesville, FL 32611-0690
Odemari S. Mbuya
Affiliation:
Florida A&M University, Agronomy Program and Center for Water Quality, Tallahassee, FL 32307-4100
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Twelve winter cover crops were planted in Citra and Live Oak, FL, in 2004, to evaluate their potential for use as living mulches in organic vegetable production: black oat, rye, annual ryegrass, hard fescue, two cultivars of white clover, berseem clover, crimson clover, subterranean clover, arrowleaf clover, barrel medic, and a hybrid disc × strand medic cultivar. The best canopy development and weed suppression occurred with black oat, rye, and annual ryegrass. In 2005, black oat, two rye cultivars, and annual ryegrass were evaluated as living mulches in broccoli at Citra and Live Oak, using organic production methods. ‘Florida 401’ (FL 401) rye was tallest, black oat was intermediate, and ‘Wrens Abruzzi’ (WA) rye and ‘Gulf’ ryegrass were of similar height and were the shortest living mulches. Biomass harvested at 12 and 13 wk after planting at Citra and Live Oak, respectively, was greatest with FL 401 rye. At Live Oak, the three other mulches had similar amounts of biomass; however, at Citra, black oat biomass was greater than that of WA rye, and biomass of ryegrass was lowest. The greatest weed infestation occurred with the weedy control. Weed biomass was highest with the weedy control, intermediate with ryegrass, and lowest with rye and black oat. However, the biomass of the weedy control was lower than that of the living mulches plus any associated weeds. Marketable broccoli yield was highest with the weed-free control. Yields with black oat, WA rye, and ryegrass were similar to that of the weedy control, whereas yield with the FL 401 rye was lower than with the weedy control. Suppression of living mulches by mowing at 3 and 7 wk after planting had no effect on broccoli growth or yield.

Type
Weed-Management — Techniques
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

Biazzo, J. and Masiunas, J. B. 2000. The use of living mulches for weed management in hot pepper and okra. J. Sustain. Agric. 16:5979.Google Scholar
Brainard, D. C. and Bellinder, R. R. 2004. Weed suppression in a broccoli–winter rye intercropping system. Weed Sci. 52:281290.Google Scholar
Chase, C. A., Scholberg, J. M., and MacDonald, G. E. 2004. Preliminary evaluation of nonsynthetic herbicides for weed management in organic orange production. Proc. Fla. State Hortic. Soc. 117:135138.Google Scholar
Costello, M. J. 1994. Broccoli growth, yield and level of aphid infestation in leguminous living mulches. Biol. Agric. Hortic. 10:207222.Google Scholar
[FDACS] Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 2005. Water Quality/Quantity Best Management Practices for Florida: Vegetable and Agronomic Crops. http://www.floridaagwaterpolicy.com/PDFs/BMPs/vegetableagronomicCrops.pdf. Accessed: July 26, 2006.Google Scholar
Hooks, C. R. R. and Johnson, M. W. 2004. Using undersown clovers as living mulches: effects on yields, lepidopterous pest infestations, and spider densities in a Hawaiian broccoli agroecosystem. Int. J. Pest Manag. 50:115120.Google Scholar
Infante, M. L. and Morse, R. D. 1996. Integration of no tillage and overseeded legume living mulches for transplanted broccoli production. Hortscience. 31:376380.Google Scholar
Kaspar, T. C., Radke, J. K., and Laflen, J. M. 2001. Small grain cover crops and wheel traffic effects on infiltration, runoff, and erosion. J. Soil Water Conserv. 56:160164.Google Scholar
Kloen, H. and Altieri, M. A. 1990. Effect of mustard (Brassica hirta) as a non-crop plant on competition and insect pests in broccoli (Brassica oleracea). Crop Prot. 9:9096.Google Scholar
Nicholson, A. G. and Wien, H. C. 1983. Screening of turfgrasses and clovers for use as living mulches in sweet corn and cabbage. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 108:10711076.Google Scholar
Rice, P. J., Harman-Fetcho, J. A., Teasdale, J. R., Sadeghi, A. M., McConnell, L. L., Coffman, C. B., Herbert, R. R., Heighton, L. P., and Hapeman, C. J. 2004. Use of vegetative furrows to mitigate copper loads and soil loss in runoff from polyethylene (plastic) mulch vegetable production systems. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 23:719725.Google Scholar
Stall, W. M., Kostewicz, S. R., and Brown, R. L. 1987. Reduction in control of common nightshade (Solanum americanum Mill.) by paraquat due to copper fungicides. Proc. Fla. State Hortic. Soc. 100:222224.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. 1998. Cover crops, smother plants, and weed management. Pages 247270. in Hartfield, J. L., Buhler, D. D., and Stewart, B. A., editors. Integrated Weed and Soil Management. Chelsea, MI Ann Arbor Press.Google Scholar
[USDA-AMS] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service 2006. National Organic Program Standards. Available: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NOP/standards.html. Accessed: November 28, 2007.Google Scholar
Wiles, L. J., William, R. D., Crabtree, G. D., and Radosevich, S. R. 1989. Analyzing competition between a living mulch and a vegetable crop in an interplanting system. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 114:10291034.Google Scholar