Barnyardgrass was grown at densities of 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 5, and more than 50 plants m−1 of tomato crop row in either a regular, random, or clumped pattern. Tomato was established at 0, 5, 10, or 20 plants m−1 of crop row in a regular pattern. Crop density and weed density or spatial arrangement had little effect on phenological development of barnyardgrass. In the absence of tomato, barnyardgrass was estimated to produce over 400,000 seeds plant−1 when not subjected to intraspecific competition (0.25 plants m−1 density), decreasing to about 10,000 seeds plant−1 when weed density exceeded 50 plants m−1 of row. Differences in seed production between plants in the regular and random spatial arrangements were minor, but the clumped distribution resulted in 30 to 50% reduction in seed production at weed densities between 1 and 5 plants m−1 of row. Tomato reduced barnyardgrass seed production. The magnitude of the reduction depended on both tomato density and barnyardgrass density. In the absence of tomato, barnyardgrass produced over 200,000 seeds m−2 in 1993 and over 500,000 seeds m−2 in 1994 at 5 plants m−1 of row. Production was almost 700,000 seeds m−2 when the weed density exceeded 50 plants m−1 of row. Barnyardgrass seed production at the single-season economic threshold density in tomato was sufficient to maintain the seedbank at a level that would mandate high levels of weed control in subsequent crops. Because of the high fecundity of barnyardgrass, our experiments suggest that stopping seed production is the best long-term management strategy for the weed. Spatial arrangement of the weed, at the scale used in these studies, would not be a factor in establishing long-term management guidelines based on weed population biology.

Field studies were conducted to determine how the spatial arrangement of weed populations influences interspecific competition. We studied the influence of regular, random, and clumped distributions of barnyardgrass on growth and yield of direct-seeded tomato planted at different densities. Increasing aggregation increased intraspecific competition in barnyardgrass. At the same time, interspecific competition experienced by tomato from barnyardgrass decreased. Differences in the amount of shading of the tomato canopy by barnyardgrass contributed to yield loss differences for the various spatial arrangements. Clumped barnyardgrass caused significantly less average shading than barnyardgrass in regular or random arrangements. At a typical planting density of 10 tomato plants m−1 of row, yield losses ranged from 10 to 35% (1993) or 8 to 50% (1994) when competing with a clumped arrangement of barnyardgrass. At the same tomato density, yields were reduced from 20 to 50% (1993) or 11 to 75% (1994) for the regular and random arrangements for the same barnyardgrass densities. Predicted single-season economic threshold densities for barnyardgrass at a typical tomato planting density of 10 plants m−1 would be one barnyardgrass plant per 25, 19, or 15 m of crop row, respectively, for regular, random, and clumped spatial distributions.