Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-nlwjb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T14:45:22.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of crop-topping strategies to reduce common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) seed production in potato production systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 September 2023

Laura Anderson
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Charlottetown Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
Scott Neil White
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Plant, Food, and Environmental Sciences, Dalhousie University, Truro, NS, Canada
Andrew McKenzie-Gopsill*
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Charlottetown Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Charlottetown, PE, Canada
*
Corresponding author: Andrew McKenzie-Gopsill; Email: andrew.mckenzie-gopsill@agr.gc.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Potato producers in Canada’s Atlantic provinces of Prince Edward Island (PE) and New Brunswick rely on photosystem II (PSII)-inhibiting herbicides to provide season-long weed control. Despite this fact, a high proportion of common lambsquarters populations in the region have been identified as resistant to this class of herbicides. Crop-topping is a late-season weed management practice that exploits the height differential between weeds and a developing crop canopy. Two field experiments were conducted in Harrington, PE, in 2020 and 2021, one each to evaluate the efficacy of a different crop-topping strategy, above-canopy mowing or wick-applied glyphosate, at two potato phenological stages, on common lambsquarters viable seed production and potato yield and quality. Mowing common lambsquarters postflowering decreased viable seed production (72% to 91%) in 2020 but increased seed production (78% to 278%) in 2021. Mowing had minimal impact on potato marketable yield across cultivars in both years. In contrast, treating common lambsquarters with wick-applied glyphosate had variable impacts on seed output in 2020 but dramatically reduced seed production (up to 95%) in 2021 when treatments were applied preflowering. Glyphosate damage to potato tubers was not influenced by timing and resulted in a 14% to 15% increase in culled tubers due to black spotting and rot. Our results highlight the importance of potato and common lambsquarters phenology when selecting a crop-topping strategy and demonstrate that above-canopy mowing and wick-applied glyphosate can be utilized for seedbank management of herbicide-resistant common lambsquarters in potato production systems.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© Crown Copyright - Government of Canada, 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Weed Science Society of America
Figure 0

Table 1. Mean height of potato and common lambsquarters (CHEAL) prior to early and late mowing and wick weeding treatment application in two separate experiments in 2020 and 2021 at Harrington PE.a

Figure 1

Table 2. Effects of crop-topping with a mower or wick-applied glyphosate in two separate experiments on visual ratings of potato and common lambsquarters (CHEAL) injury at early and late treatment timings in 2020 and 2021 at Harrington PE.a

Figure 2

Figure 1. The effect of early and late crop-topping with a mower on common lambsquarters vegetative (light gray bars) and reproductive (dark gray bars) biomass allocation and harvest index (circles) in 2020 (A, C, E) and 2021 (B, D, F) in Harrington PE in semi-erect (A, B), spreading (C, D), and upright (E, F) potato cultivars. Data are least square means ± SEM of total biomass. Values not connected by the same letter are significantly different according to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (α = 0.05). Uppercase letters refer to the effect of treatment timing on total biomass (vegetative and reproductive) accumulation, and lowercase letters refer to the effect of treatment timing on harvest index.

Figure 3

Table 3. ANOVA table of common lambsquarters total biomass, seed biomass, harvest index, germination percentage, and thousand seed weight by year, cultivar, treatment timing, and their interaction following crop-topping with a mower or wick-applied glyphosate.a,b

Figure 4

Figure 2. Effect of early and late crop-topping with a mower on common lambsquarters viable seeds plant−1 (bars) and thousand seed weight (TSW) (circles) in 2020 (A, C, E) and 2021 (B, D, F) in Harrington PE in semi-erect (A, B), spreading (C, D), and upright (E, F) potato cultivars. Data are least square means ± SEM. Values not connected by the same letter are significantly different according to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (α = 0.05). Uppercase letters refer to the effects of treatment timing on viable seed plant−1, and lowercase letters refer to the effects of treatment timing on TSW.

Figure 5

Figure 3. Relationship between thousand seed weight (TSW) and germination percentage of common lambsquarters seed following crop-topping with a mower or wick-applied glyphosate.

Figure 6

Table 4. ANOVA table of potato marketable yield, cull yield, and percentage of yield lost to culls by year, cultivar, treatment timing, and their interaction following crop-topping with a mower or wick-applied glyphosate.a,b

Figure 7

Figure 4. Effect of crop-topping with a mower on yield of marketable tubers (black bars) and culled tubers (gray bars) in 2020 (A) and 2021 (B) of semi-erect, spreading, and upright potato cultivars. Data are least square means ± SEM. Values above bars indicate percentage of yield lost to culls, and letters refer to the effects of treatment timing on percentage of yield lost to culls. Values not connected by the same letter are significantly different according to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (α = 0.05).

Figure 8

Figure 5. Effect of early and late crop-topping with wick-applied glyphosate on common lambsquarters vegetative (light gray bars) and reproductive (dark gray bars) biomass allocation and harvest index (circles) in 2020 (A, C, E) and 2021 (B, D, F) in Harrington PE in semi-erect (A, B), spreading (C, D), and upright (E, F) potato cultivars. Data are least square means ± SEM of harvest index. Values not connected by the same letter are significantly different according to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (α = 0.05). Uppercase letters refer to the effect of treatment timing on total biomass accumulation, and lowercase letters refer to the effect of treatment timing on harvest index.

Figure 9

Figure 6. Effect of early and late crop-topping with wick-applied glyphosate on common lambsquarters viable seeds plant−1 (bars) and thousand seed weight (TSW) (circles) in 2020 (A, C, E) and 2021 (B, D, F) in Harrington PE in semi-erect (A, B), spreading (C, D), and upright (E, F) potato cultivars. Data are least square means ± SEM. Values not connected by the same letter are significantly different according to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (α = 0.05). Uppercase letters refer to the effects of treatment timing on viable seeds plant−1, and lowercase letters refer to the effects of treatment timing on TSW.

Figure 10

Figure 7. Impact of early and late crop-topping with wick-applied glyphosate on yield of potato marketable tubers (black bars) and culled tubers (gray bars) in 2020 (A) and 2021 (B). Data are least square means ± SEM. Values above bars indicate percentage of yield lost to culls, and letters refer to the effects of treatment timing on percentage of yield lost to culls. Values not connected by the same letter are significantly different according to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (α = 0.05).

Supplementary material: PDF

Anderson et al. supplementary material

Figures 1-3

Download Anderson et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 607.1 KB