Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:21:02.481Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nitrogen Application Timing Effects on Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum) and Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Growth and Yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Daniel A. Ball ,
Donald J. Wysocki  and
Thomas G. Chastain
Daniel A. Ball
Affiliation:
Columbia Basin Agric. Res. Ctr., Oregon State Univ., Pendleton, OR 97801
Donald J. Wysocki
Affiliation:
Columbia Basin Agric. Res. Ctr., Oregon State Univ., Pendleton, OR 97801
Thomas G. Chastain
Affiliation:
Crop and Soil Sci. Dep., Oregon State Univ., Pendleton, OR 97801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted for two years at two locations near Pendleton and Moro, OR to evaluate the influence of single sub-surface nitrogen (N) fertilizer application timings and multiple N applications on downy brome and winter wheat growth and yield. N applications in fallow, at planting, during the crop season, and several split N application timings were compared to evaluate downy brome interference in winter wheat. N application rates varied between locations as a function of average annual precipitation and accepted agricultural practice. Pendleton and Moro were considered high and low precipitation sites, respectively. At Pendleton in a year of above average precipitation, N applied at planting, in-crop, or split applications of N with part of N applied at planting and part in-crop, increased downy brome dry matter production compared to N applied in fallow. Downy brome infestation eliminated otherwise positive wheat yield benefits of split N application compared to the conventional commercial practice of N application in fallow. In a year of moderate precipitation, N applications at planting, in-crop, or split N applications did not benefit wheat yield compared to N application in fallow, but downy brome dry matter was increased. In a dry season, N rates and timings did not increase downy brome dry weight or wheat grain yield. In the absence of downy brome, alternative N application techniques increased wheat yield only under high growing season precipitation.

Keywords

Downy brome, Bromus tectorum (L.) # BROTEwinter wheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Madsen.’Fertilizationpoint injectionpopulation dynamicsBROTE
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , June 1996 , pp. 305 - 310
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by the 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

1. Anderson, R. L., 1991. Timing of nitrogen application affects downy brome (Bromus tectorum) growth in winter wheat. Weed Technol. 5:582–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Ayoub, M., Guertin, S., Lussier, S., and Smith, D. L. 1994. Timing and level of nitrogen fertility effects on spring wheat yield in eastern Canada. Crop Sci. 34:748–756.Google Scholar
3. Baker, J. L., Colvin, T. S., Marley, S. J., and Dawelbeit, M. 1989. A point-injector applicator to improve fertilizer management. J. Appl. Eng. Agric. 5:334–338.Google Scholar
4. Carlson, H. L., and Hill, J. E. 1985. Wild Oat (Avena fatua) competition with spring wheat: effects of nitrogen fertilization. Weed Sci. 34:29–33.Google Scholar
5. Cochran, V. L., Morrow, L. A., and Schirman, R. D., 1990. The effect of N placement on grass weeds and winter wheat responses in three tillage systems. Soil & Tillage Res. 18:347–355.Google Scholar
6. Dakheel, A. J., Radosevich, S. R., and Barbour, M. G. 1993. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth and interference between Bromus tectorum and Tae niatherumasperum . Weed Res. 33:415–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Gomez, K. A., and Gomez, A. A. 1984. p. 467–469 in Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Wiley & Sons. New York.Google Scholar
8. Henson, J. F., and Jordan, L. S. 1982. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition with wheat for nitrate. Weed Sci. 30:297–300.Google Scholar
9. Keeney, D. R., and Follett, R. F. 1991. Managing nitrogen for groundwater quality and farm profitability: overview and introduction. p. 1–8 in Follett, R. F., Keeney, D. R., and Cruse, R. M., eds., Managing Nitrogen for Groundwater Quality and Farm Profitability. Soil Sci. Soc. of Am. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
10. Knowles, T. C., Hipp, B. W., Graff, P. S., and Marshall, D. S. 1994. Timing and rate of topdress nitrogen for rainfed winter wheat. J. Prod. Agric. 7:216–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Mahler, R. L., Koehler, F. E., and Lutcher, L. K. 1994. Nitrogen source, timing of application, and placement: effects on winter wheat production. Agron. J. 86:637–642.Google Scholar
12. Ramig, R. E., and Ekin, L. G. 1985. Winter wheat response to rate and placement of nitrogen in two wheat/fallow tillage systems. p. 22–26 in Rassmussen, P. E., Douglas, C. L., and Pumphrey, V., eds., 1985 Columbia Basin Agricultural Research Annual Report. Ore. State Univ. Spec. Rep. No. 738.Google Scholar
13. Rasmussen, P. E., 1995. Effects of fertilizer and stubble burning on downy brome competition in winter wheat. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 26:951–960.Google Scholar
14. Rasmussen, P. E., and Rohde, C. R. 1991. Tillage, soil depth, and precipitation effects on wheat response to nitrogen. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 55:121–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Reinertsen, M. R., Cochran, V. L., and Morrow, L. A. 1984. Response of spring wheat to N fertilizer placement, row spacing, and wild oat herbicides in a no-till system. Agron. J. 76:753–756.Google Scholar
16. Sowers, K. E., Miller, B. C., and Pan, W. L. 1994. Optimizing yield and grain protein in soft white winter wheat with split nitrogen applications. Agron. J. 86:1020–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Stark, J. C., and Tindall, T. A. 1992. Timing split applications of nitrogen for irrigated hard red spring wheat. J. Prod. Agric. 5:221–226.Google Scholar