No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Relationships between soil, forage, and grazing parameter effects on weed incidence in Missouri pastures
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 December 2019
Abstract
During the 2015, 2016, and 2017 growing seasons, a survey of 63 pastures in Missouri was conducted to determine the effects of selected soil and forage parameters on the density of common annual, biennial, and perennial weed species. Permanent sampling areas were established in each pasture at a frequency of one representative 20-m2 area per 4 ha of pasture, and weed species and density in each area were determined at 14-d intervals for a period from mid-April until late September. The parameters evaluated included soil pH, phosphorus (P), potassium (K), magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sulfur (S), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), and copper (Cu) concentrations, as well as tall fescue density, forage groundcover density, and stocking rate. An increase of 1 unit in soil pH was associated with 146 fewer weeds per hectare, the largest reduction in weed density in response to any soil parameter. Increased soil pH was associated with the greatest reduction in perennial grass weed density, along with an average reduction of 1,410 brush weeds per hectare for each 1-unit increase in soil pH. Common ragweed, a widespread weed of pastures, could be reduced by 3,056 weeds ha−1 when soil pH was 1 unit greater. A 1-ppm increase in soil P was correlated with a decrease of 206 biennial broadleaf weeds per hectare. Perennial broadleaf weed density was reduced in soils with greater concentrations of P, K, and Ca. Additionally, for every 1% increase of tall fescue and forage groundcover, there was a decrease of 18 and 38 perennial broadleaf weeds per hectare. The results from this research indicate that the density of many common weed species can be reduced with higher soil pH and adjustments to soil macro- and micronutrient concentrations, especially P.
Keywords
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © Weed Science Society of America, 2019
Footnotes
Associate Editor: Patrick E. McCullough, University of Georgia
References
Amor, RL (1973) Ecology and control of blackberry (Rubus fruticosus L. agg.). I. Rubus spp. as weeds in Victoria. Weed Res 13:218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, DJ, Collins, M (2018) Forage fertilization and nutrient management. Pages 235–268in Collins, M, Nelson, CJ, Barnes, RF, Moore, KJ, eds. Forages, Vol. 1: An Introduction to Grassland Agriculture, 7th edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
Barnhart, SK, Mallarino, AP, Sawyer, JE (2013) Fertilizing Pasture. Iowa State University PM869, p 4Google Scholar
Bucholz, DD, Brown, JR (1993) Potassium in Missouri Soils. University of Missouri Extension G9185, p 2Google Scholar
Buchholz, DD, Brown, JR, Crocker, DK, Garret, JD, Hanson, RG, Lory, JA, Nathan, MV, Scharf, PC, Wheaton, HN (2004) Soil Test Interpretations and Recommendations Handbook. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri. Pp 15–21Google Scholar
Burnell, JN (1988) The biochemistry of manganese in plants. Pages 125–137in Graham, RD, Hannam, RJ, Uren, NC, eds., Manganese in Soils and Plants. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran, WS, Lingenfelter, DD (2009) Weed Management in Pasture Systems. Penn State Extension UC172, p 9Google Scholar
Dick, WA, Kost, D, Chen, L (2008) Availability of sulfur to crops from soil and other sources. Pages 59–82in Jez, J, ed., Sulfur: A Missing Link Between Soils, Crops, and Nutrition. Agronomy Monographs 50. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of AmericaGoogle Scholar
DiTomaso, JM (2000) Invasive weeds in rangelands: species, impacts, and management. Weed Sci 48:255–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishel, F (2001) Plants poisonous to livestock. University of Missouri Extension G4970, p 1Google Scholar
Gerrish, J, Roberts, C (1999) Missouri Grazing Manual. University of Missouri Extension M157, p 35Google Scholar
Glenn, S, Glenn, B, Rieck, CE, Ely, DG, Bush, LP (1981) Chemical quality, in vitro cellulose digestion, and yield of tall fescue forage affected by mefluidide. J Agric Food Chem 29:1158–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, JD, Witt, WW, Martin, JR (2006) Weed management in grass pastures, hayfields, and other farmstead sites. University of Kentucky Extension Service AGR-172, p 1Google Scholar
Grekul, CW, Bork, EW (2007) Fertilization augments Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense L. Scop.) control in temperate pastures with herbicides. J Crop Prot 26:668–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henning, JC, Wheaton, HN, Roberts, CA (1993) Tall Fescue. University of Missouri Extension G4646, p 3Google Scholar
Holford, ICR (1997) Soil phosphorus: its measurement, and its uptake by plants. Soil Res 35: 227–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Israel, TD, Rhodes, GN (2013) Pasture Weed Fact Sheet Tall Ironweed. University of Tennessee Extension W307, p 1Google Scholar
Kaiser, DE, Rosen, CJ (2018) Potassium for crop production. University of Minnesota extension. https://extension.umn.edu/phosphorus-and-potassium/potassium-crop-production. Accessed: November 1, 2018Google Scholar
Kelling, KA, Schulte, EE (2004) Soil and Applied Calcium. University of Wisconsin extension. Publication A2523, p 1Google Scholar
McCarty, MK, Scifres, CJ, Smith, AL, Horst, GL (1969) Germination and early seedling development of musk and plumeless thistle. University of Nebraska-Lincoln Research Bulletin 229, p 9Google Scholar
Metson, AJ, Saunders, WMH, Collie, TW, Graham, VW (1966) Chemical composition of pastures in relation to grass tetany in beef breeding cows. New Zealand J Agri Res 9:410–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, EJ, Lowance, SA (1974) Fertility and management treatments to control broomsedge in pastures. Weed Sci 22:201–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phelan, P, Moloney, AP, McGeough, EJ, Humphreys, J, Bertilsson, J, O’Riordan, EG, O’Kiely, P (2015) Forage legumes for grazing and conserving in ruminant production systems. Crit Rev Plant Sci 34:281–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popay, I, Field, R (1996) Grazing animals as weed control agents. Weed Technol 10:217–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, GI, Folkins, LP, Pigden, WJ (1962) The in vitro digestibility of whole grasses and their parts at progressive stages of maturity. Can J Plant Sci 43:79–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redfearn, DD, Bidwell, TD (2003) Stocking rate: the key to successful livestock production. Oklahoma cooperative extension service PSS-2871, p 1Google Scholar
Rocateli, A, Manuchehri, M (2017) Johnsongrass in pastures: weed or forage? Oklahoma cooperative extension service PSS-2598, p 2Google Scholar
Sanderson, MA, Jolley, LW, Dobrowolski, JP (2012) Pastureland and hayland in the USA: land resources, conservation practices, and ecosystem services. Pages 25–40 in Conservation Outcomes from Pastureland and Hayland Practices: Assessment, Recommendations, and Knowledge Gaps. Lawrence, KS: Allen PressGoogle Scholar
Sanderson, MA, Stair, DW, Hussey, MA (1997) Physiological and morphological responses of perennial forages to stress. Adv Agron 59:171–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santelmann, PW, Meade, JA, Peters, RA (1963) Growth and development of yellow foxtail and giant foxtail. Weeds 11:139–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sather, BC, Kallenbach, RL, Sexten, WJ, Bradley, KW (2013) Evaluation of cattle grazing distribution in response to weed and legume removal in mixed tall fescue (Schedonorus phoenix) and legume pastures. Weed Technol 27:101–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schachtman, DP, Reid, RJ, Ayling, SM (1998) Phosphorus uptake by plants: from soil to cell. Plant Physiol 116:447–453CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulte, EE (2004) Soil and Applied Zinc. University of Wisconsin extension. Publication A2528, p 1Google Scholar
Schulte, EE, Kelling, KA (1981) Soil and Applied Sulfur. University of Wisconsin extension. Publication A2525, p 1Google Scholar
Schulte, EE, Kelling, KA (1999a) Soil and Applied Manganese. University of Wisconsin extension. Publication A2526, p 1Google Scholar
Schulte, EE, Kelling, KA (1999b) Soil and Applied Copper. University of Wisconsin n extension. Publication A2527, p 1Google Scholar
Sexsmith, JJ, Russell, GC (1963) Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization on wild oats and spring wheat. Can J Plant Sci 43:64–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, S, Singh, M (2009) Effect of temperature, light and pH on germination of twelve weed species. Indian J Weed Sci 41:113–126Google Scholar
Steavenson, HA (1946) Multiflora rose for farm hedges. J Wildlife Manage 10:227–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tierney, KR (2013) Effects of training on cattle grazing spotted knapweed and Canada thistle. Master’s thesis. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University. 75 pGoogle Scholar
USDA (2002) Plant fact sheet: purple top. Natural Resources Conservation Service. https://plants.usda.gov/factsheet/pdf/fs_trfl2.pdf. Accessed: March 20, 2019Google Scholar
USDA ERS (2017) United States state fact sheets. Economic Research Service. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/state-fact-sheets/. Accessed: January 5, 2020Google Scholar
USDA NASS (2018) Missouri agricultural overview, 2017 in USDA ERSa: National Agricultural Statistics ServiceGoogle Scholar
Van Breemen, N, Mulder, J, Driscoll, CT (1983). Acidification and alkalinization of soils. Plant and Soil 75:283–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voss, R (1998) Micronutrients. Iowa State University. Department of Agronomy. http://www.agronext.iastate.edu/soilfertility/info/Micronutrients_VossArticle.pdf. Accessed: March 4, 2019Google Scholar
Wen, L (2001) Evaluation of the forage quality of interseeding birdsfoot trefoil with tall fescue and grazing steers performance on the pastures. Ph. D. dissertation. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri. 152 pGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, SR, Welch, RM, Mayland, HF, Grunes, DL (1990) Magnesium in plants: uptake, distribution, function, and utilization by man and animals. Metal ions in biological systems. Vol. 26. New York: Marcel DekkerGoogle Scholar