Effect of Crop Rotation on the Soil Pathogen Population Dynamics and Canola Seedling Establishment

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 106-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.F. Hwang ◽  
H.U. Ahmed ◽  
B.D. Gossen ◽  
H.R. Kutcher ◽  
S.A. Brandt ◽  
...  
Weed Science ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 417-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vince M. Davis ◽  
Kevin D. Gibson ◽  
Thomas T. Bauman ◽  
Stephen C. Weller ◽  
William G. Johnson

Horseweed is an increasingly common and problematic weed in no-till soybean production in the eastern cornbelt due to the frequent occurrence of biotypes resistant to glyphosate. The objective of this study was to determine the influence of crop rotation, winter wheat cover crops (WWCC), residual non-glyphosate herbicides, and preplant application timing on the population dynamics of glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed and crop yield. A field study was conducted from 2003 to 2007 in a no-till field located at a site that contained a moderate infestation of GR horseweed (approximately 1 plant m−2). The experiment was a split-plot design with crop rotation (soybean–corn or soybean–soybean) as main plots and management systems as subplots. Management systems were evaluated by quantifying in-field horseweed plant density, seedbank density, and crop yield. Horseweed densities were collected at the time of postemergence applications, 1 mo after postemergence (MAP) applications, and at the time of crop harvest or 4 MAP. Viable seedbank densities were also evaluated from soil samples collected in the fall following seed rain. Soybean–corn crop rotation reduced in-field and seedbank horseweed densities vs. continuous soybean in the third and fourth yr of this experiment. Preplant herbicides applied in the spring were more effective at reducing horseweed plant densities than when applied in the previous fall. Spring-applied, residual herbicide systems were the most effective at reducing season-long in-field horseweed densities and protecting crop yields since the growth habit of horseweed in this region is primarily as a summer annual. Management systems also influenced the GR and glyphosate-susceptible (GS) biotype population structure after 4 yr of management. The most dramatic shift was from the initial GR : GS ratio of 3 : 1 to a ratio of 1 : 6 after 4 yr of residual preplant herbicide use followed by non-glyphosate postemergence herbicides.


Weed Science ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 382-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula R. Westerman ◽  
Matt Liebman ◽  
Fabián D. Menalled ◽  
Andrew H. Heggenstaller ◽  
Robert G. Hartzler ◽  
...  

1975 ◽  
Vol 53 (24) ◽  
pp. 3022-3031 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. G. Thomas ◽  
H. M. Dale

In the crowded parts of patches of Hieracium floribundum Wimm. and Grab., which were established for at least a decade in an ungrazed pasture, 7–10% of the population (3700 individuals/m2) flowered. Of the plants that flowered, 94% were alive a year later, but only 5% of these flowered. Abortion of flower heads was common; one half of all those which were initiated in early June had aborted by flowering time in early July. Freshly dispersed seed had a viability of 57%, which was reduced to 17% a year later, after its storage close to the soil surface. Less than 6% of the viable seed was innately dormant. Dry, laboratory-stored seed retained its viability for the year but was slower to germinate than soil-stored seed. In field conditions, germination was temperature inhibited during most of the growing season. Maximum daytime microsite temperatures of less than 32 °C, which is necessary for germination, were found to occur only in early spring and late fall. Successful seedling establishment accounts for 1% of the individuals in a crowded population. Based on the maximum sexual reproduction from plants in crowded populations, a seed has a probability of 1 in 20 000 of becoming an established seedling. A model of population dynamics in a high-density patch traces the fate of seedling establishment, surviving adults, and stolon-derived rosettes for a single year.


2002 ◽  
Vol 94 (5) ◽  
pp. 1146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaylon D. Morgan ◽  
Ann E. MacGuidwin ◽  
Jun Zhu ◽  
Larry K. Binning

Weed Science ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 508-516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vince M. Davis ◽  
Kevin D. Gibson ◽  
Thomas T. Bauman ◽  
Stephen C. Weller ◽  
William G. Johnson

Horseweed is an increasingly problematic weed in soybean because of the frequent occurrence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) biotypes. The objective of this study was to determine the influence of crop rotation, winter wheat cover crops (WWCC), residual nonglyphosate herbicides, and preplant herbicide application timing on the population dynamics of GR horseweed and crop yield. A field study was conducted at a site with a moderate infestation of GR horseweed (approximately 1 plant m−2) with crop rotation (soybean–corn or soybean–soybean) as main plots and management systems as subplots. Management systems were evaluated by quantifying horseweed plant density, seedbank density, and crop yield. Crop rotation did not influence in-field horseweed or seedbank densities at any data census timing. Preplant herbicides applied in the spring were more effective at reducing horseweed plant densities than when applied in the previous fall. Spring-applied, residual herbicide systems were the most effective at reducing season long horseweed densities and protecting crop yield because horseweed in this region behaves primarily as a summer annual weed. Horseweed seedbank densities declined rapidly in the soil by an average of 76% for all systems over the first 10 mo before new seed rain. Despite rapid decline in total seedbank density, seed for GR biotypes remained in the seedbank for at least 2 yr. Therefore, to reduce the presence of GR horseweed biotypes in a local no-till weed flora, integrated weed management (IWM) systems should be developed to reduce total horseweed populations based on the knowledge that seed for GR biotypes are as persistent in the seed bank as glyphosate-sensitive (GS) biotypes.


2005 ◽  
Vol 102 (15) ◽  
pp. 5438-5442 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. J. Bearchell ◽  
B. A. Fraaije ◽  
M. W. Shaw ◽  
B. D. L. Fitt

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document