Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T18:30:07.468Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enhanced wheat competition effects on the growth, seed production, and seed retention of major weeds of Australian cropping systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2019

Michael J. Walsh Open the ORCID record for Michael J. Walsh [Opens in a new window]
Michael J. Walsh*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, University of Sydney, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, I. A. Watson International Grains Research Centre, Narrabri, NSW, Australia
*
Author for correspondence: Michael J. Walsh, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, I. A. Watson Grains Research Centre, University of Sydney, 12656 Newell Highway, Narrabri, NSW 2390, Australia. Email: m.j.walsh@sydney.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The loss of herbicide options due to resistance and lack of new chemistries have delivered the realization that herbicides are a finite resource and weed control alternatives are desperately needed. In Australian conservation cropping, the only available alternatives suited to routine use are the recently introduced harvest weed seed control (HWSC) and the ever-present but undervalued crop competition. Target-neighbor design pot studies examined wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) competition effects on biomass and seed production of rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum Gaudin), wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum L.), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus Roth), and wild oat (Avena fatua L.). The influence of wheat competition on crop canopy distribution of weed biomass and seed production was also examined. At the current commercially targeted wheat density (120 plants m−2) weed biomass was reduced by 69%, 73%, 72%, and 49% and seed production by 78%, 78%, 77%, and 50% for L. rigidum, R. raphanistrum, B. diandrus, and A. fatua, respectively, when compared with no competition. These results highlighted the importance of uniform wheat crop establishment in minimizing the ongoing impact of weeds. Enhanced what competition (from 120 to 400 plants m−2) resulted in further smaller, but substantial, reductions in biomass (19%, 13%, 20%, and 39%) and seed production (12%, 13%, 17%, and 45%) for L. rigidum, R. raphanistrum, B. diandrus, and A. fatua, respectively. This enhanced competition also increased weed seed retention in the upper crop canopy (>40 cm) by 35% and 31% for L. rigidum and B. diandrus, respectively, but not for A. fatua and R. raphanistrum, for which weed seed retention was already >80% at the wheat density of 120 plants m−2. Enhanced wheat crop competition, then, has the dual effect of restricting the growth and development of L. rigidum, R. raphanistrum, B. diandrus, and A. fatua as well increasing the susceptibility of these weed species to HWSC.

Keywords

Muthukumar V. Bagavathiannan, Texas A&M UniversityCrop competitionharvest weed seed controlweed seed retention
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 67 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 657 - 665
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 

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

Anderson, WK, Sharma, DL, Shackley, BJ, D’Antuono, MF (2004) Rainfall, sowing time, soil type and cultivar influence optimum plant population for wheat in Western Australia. Aust J Agric Res 55:921–930 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazzaz, FA, Carlson, RW (1982) Photosynthetic acclimation to variability in the light environment of early and late successional plants. Oecologia 54:313–316 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blackshaw, RE (2004) Application method of nitrogen fertilizer affects weed growth and competition with winter wheat. Weed Biol Manag 4:103–113 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borger, CPD, Hashem, A, Pathan, S (2009) Manipulating crop row orientation to suppress weeds and increase crop yield. Weed Sci 58:174–178 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borger, CPD, Riethmuller, G, D’Antuono, M (2016) Eleven years of integrated weed management: long-term impacts of row spacing and harvest weed seed destruction on Lolium rigidum control. Weed Res 56:359–366 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, NR, Beckie, HJ, Willenborg, CJ, Shirtliffe, SJ, Schoenau, JJ, Johnson, EN (2016) Evaluating seed shatter of economically important weed species. Weed Sci 64:673–682 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehret, M, Graß, R, Wachendorf, M (2015) The effect of shade and shade material on white clover/perennial ryegrass mixtures for temperate agroforestry systems. Agrofor Syst 89:557–570 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eslami, SV, Gill, GS, Bellotti, B, McDonald, G (2006) Wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum) interference in wheat. Weed Sci 54:749–756 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, G, Poole, M, Holmes, J (1987) Competition between wheat and brome grass in Western Australia. Aust J Exp Agric 27:291–294 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, DE, Fleetwood, L (1987) Competitive effect and response in four annual plants. J Ecol 75:1131–1143 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, DE, Werner, PA (1983) Equivalence of competitors in plant communities: a null hypothesis and a field experimental approach. Am J Bot 70:1098–1104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, JS (1995) Plant responses to light: a potential tool for weed management. Weed Sci 43:474–482 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, CL, Mortimer, AM, Gould, P, Putwain, PD, Cousens, R, Cussens, GW (1991) The dispersal of weeds—seed movement in arable agriculture. Pages 664–673 in Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds. Lavenham, UK: Lavenham Press Google Scholar
Koscelny, JA, Peeper, TF, Solie, JB, Solomon, SG (1990) Effect of wheat (Triticum aestivum) Row spacing, seeding rate, and cultivar on yield loss from cheat (Bromus secalinus). Weed Technol 4:487–492 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemerle, D, Cousens, RD, Gill, GS, Peltzer, SJ, Moerkerk, M, Murphy, CE, Collins, D, Cullis, BR (2004) Reliability of higher seeding rates of wheat for increased competitiveness with weeds in low rainfall environments. J Agric Sci 142:395–409 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemerle, D, Lockley, P, Koetz, E, Diffey, S (2013) Herbicide efficacy for control of annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum Gaud.) is influenced more by wheat seeding rate than row spacing. Crop Pasture Sci 64:708–715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemerle, D, Verbeek, B, Orchard, B (2001) Ranking the ability of wheat varieties to compete with Lolium rigidum . Weed Res 41:197–209 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutman, PJW, Moss, SR, Cook, S, Welham, SJ (2013) A review of the effects of crop agronomy on the management of Alopecurus myosuroides . Weed Res 53:299–313 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, DC, Smith, H (1979) A systematic relationship between phytochrome-controlled development and species habitat, for plants grown in simulated natural radiation. Planta 145:253–258 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radford, BJ, Wilson, BJ, Cartledge, O, Watkins, FB (1980) Effect of wheat seeding rate on wild oat competition. Aust J Exp Agric Anim Husb 20:77–81 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirtliffe, SJ, Entz, MH, Van Acker, RC (2000) Avena fatua development and seed shatter as related to thermal time. Weed Sci 48:555–560 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, H (1982) Light quality, photoperception, and plant strategy. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 33:481–518 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tidemann, BD, Hall, LM, Harker, KN, Beckie, HJ, Johnson, EN, Stevenson, FC (2017) Suitability of wild oat (Avena fatua), false cleavers (Galium spurium), and volunteer canola (Brassica napus) for harvest weed seed control in western Canada. Weed Sci 65:769–777 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Broster, JC, Aves, C, Powles, SB (2018) Influence of crop competition and harvest weed seed control on rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) seed retention height in wheat crop canopies. Weed Sci 66:627–633 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Minkey, DM (2006) Wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum L.) development and seed production in response to time of emergence, crop topping and sowing rate of wheat. Plant Prot Q 21:25–29 Google Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Powles, SB (2014) High seed retention at maturity of annual weeds infesting crop fields highlights the potential for harvest weed seed control. Weed Technol 28:486–493 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, J (1982) A neighbourhood model of annual-plant interference. Ecology 63:1237–1241 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zerner, MC, Gill, GS, Vandeleur, RK (2008) Effect of height on the competitive ability of wheat with oats. Agron J 100:1729–1734 CrossRefGoogle Scholar