Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T21:18:13.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition Effects on Yield, Tissue Nitrogen, and Germination of Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) and Italian Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Abul Hashem ,
Steve R. Radosevich  and
Richard Dick
Abul Hashem
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
Steve R. Radosevich*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
Richard Dick
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: steve.radosevich@orst.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted to study the competition effect of winter wheat planted in a square arrangement and Italian ryegrass planted randomly on biomass yields of both species, ryegrass seed yield, N use efficiency, and progeny seed germination. Increases in wheat density up to 800 plants/m2 reduced ryegrass seed yield by 87% but increased its harvest index up to 42% compared to its monoculture yield. Species densities and their interactions accounted for 66 to 73% of the total variation in per-unit area biomass of species, and their association was more favorable to ryegrass biomass than wheat. Seeds of each species had three times greater nitrogen percentage than did shoots. Intra- and interspecific competition increased nitrogen percentage in wheat seeds. In Italian ryegrass, only interspecific competition increased N percentage in seeds. Although total nitrogen uptake by winter wheat was three times greater than in Italian ryegrass, Italian ryegrass was two times more efficient than wheat at producing biomass per unit of N taken up and specific leaf area at heading stage in mixture. Germination percentages of progeny seeds of both species in mixtures were greater in presence of high densities of the companion species than in their monocultures. Nitrogen was not the main limiting factor for competition between winter wheat and Italian ryegrass in this study.

Keywords

Italian ryegrass, Lolium multiflorum (Lam) #3 LOLMUwheat, Triticum aestivum L.Ryegrass harvest indexnitrogen uptakenitrogen concentration in seeds and shootsnitrogen use efficiencybiomass productionprogeny seed germinationspecific leaf areaDAE, days after emergenceHI, harvest indexNUE, nitrogen use efficiencyR, Italian ryegrassRE, rectangularitySLA, specific leaf areaW, winter wheatWR, interaction between winter wheat and Italian ryegrass
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , December 2000 , pp. 718 - 725
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

Ampong-Nyarko, K. and De Datta, S. K. 1993. Effect of nitrogen application on growth, nitrogen use efficiency and rice-weed competition. Weed Res. 33: 269–276.Google Scholar
Angonin, C., Caussanel, J. P., and Meynard, J. M. 1996. Competition between winter wheat and Veronica hederiifolia: influence of weed density and the amount and timing of N application. Weed Res. 36: 175–187.Google Scholar
Appleby, A. P., Olson, P. O., and Colbert, D. R. 1976. Winter wheat yield reduction from interference by Italian ryegrass. Agron. J. 68: 463–466.Google Scholar
Bremner, J. M. and Mulvaney, C. S. 1982. N-Total. In Page, A. L., Miller, R. H., and Keeney, , eds. Methods of Soil Analysis. Agronomy No. 9 Part 2. pp. 595–625.Google Scholar
Burrill, L. C., Braunworth, W. S. Jr., William, R. D., Parker, R. R., Swan, D. G., and Kidder, D. W. 1988. Pacific Northwest Handbook. Corvallis, Or: Oregon State University agricultural communication. pp. 29–48.Google Scholar
Chapin, F. S. III. 1980. The mineral nutrition of wild plants. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Arrang. 11: 233–260.Google Scholar
Concannon, J. A. 1987. The effect of density and proportion of spring wheat and Lolium multiform L. . Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 101 p.Google Scholar
Gill, G. S. and Blacklow, W. M. 1984. Effect of great brome (Bromus diandrus) on the growth of wheat and great brome and their uptake of N and phosphorus. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 35: 1–8.Google Scholar
Grundy, A. C., Frond-Williams, R. J., and Boatman, N. D. 1993. The use of cultivar, crop seed rate and nitrogen level for the suppression of weeds in winter wheat. In Proceedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds, Brighton. Brighton, UK: British Crop Protection Council. pp. 997–1002.Google Scholar
Hashem, A., Radosevich, S. R., and Roush, M. L. 1998. Effect of proximity factors on competition between winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) and Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum). Weed Sci. 46: 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iqbal, J. and Wright, D. 1997. Effects of nitrogen supply on competition between wheat and three annual weed species. Weed Res. 37: 391–400.Google Scholar
Lemerle, D., Verbeek, B. R., and Coombees, N. E. 1995. Losses in grain yield of winter crops from Lolium rigidum . Weed Res. 35: 503–509.Google Scholar
Liebl, R. and Worsham, A. D. 1987. Interference of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) in wheat (Triticum rigidum). Weed Sci. 35: 819–823.Google Scholar
Mason, M. 1987. Effect of agronomic practices on wheat protein levels. J. Agric. West. Aust. 28: 128–130.Google Scholar
Mason, M. G. and Madin, R. W. 1996. Effect of weeds and N fertiliser on yield and grain protein percentage of wheat. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 36: 443–450.Google Scholar
Poorter, H. 1989. Interspecific variation in relative growth rate: on the ecological and physiological consequences. In Limbers, H., Cambridge, M. L., Conings, H., and Pons, T. L., eds. Causes and Consequences of Variation in Growth Rate and Productivity of Higher Plants. The Hague, The Netherlands: SPB Academic. pp. 45–68.Google Scholar
Radosevich, S. R. 1987. Methods to study interaction among crops and weed. Weed Technol. 1: 190–198.Google Scholar
Radosevich, S. R. 1988. Methods to study crop and weed interaction. In Alteiri, M. A. and Leibman, M., eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Logical Approaches. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 121–143.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1987. SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computers. Version 6 ed. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Spitters, C.J.T. 1983. An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiment. I. Estimation of competition effects. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 31: 1–11.Google Scholar
Tanji, A. and Zimdahl, R. L. 1997. The competitive ability of wheat (Triticum aestivum) compared to rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) and cowcockle (Vaccaria hispanica). Weed Sci. 45: 481–487.Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J., Peters, N.C.B., Wright, K. J., and Atkins, H. A. 1988. The influence of crop competition on the seed production of Lamium purpureum, Viola arvensis, and Papever rhoeas in winter wheat. Asp. Appl. Biol. 18: 71–80.Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J., Wright, K. J., Brain, P., Clements, M., and Stephens, E. 1995. Predicting competitive effects of weed and crop density on weed biomass, weed production and crop yield in wheat. Weed Res. 35: 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T. T., and Konzak, C. F. 1974. A decimal code for the growth stage of cereals. Weed Res. 14: 415–421.Google Scholar