Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T05:43:40.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Crop Density, Sowing Pattern, and Nitrogen Fertilization Effects on Weed Suppression and Yield In Spring Wheat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Lars Kristensen ,
Jannie Olsen  and
Jacob Weiner
Lars Kristensen
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, DK-1958 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Jannie Olsen
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, DK-1958 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Jacob Weiner*
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, DK-1958 Frederiksberg, Denmark
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jw@life.ku.dk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent studies have shown major advantages of increased crop density and spatial uniformity for competition of wheat with weeds. Field experiments were performed over 3 yr to determine whether the effects of crop density and sowing pattern on weed suppression are influenced by nitrogen fertilization. The independent variables were crop sowing pattern (normal rows and a highly uniform pattern), seeding density (204, 449, and 721 seed m−2) and nitrogen fertilization (0 and 80 kg nitrogen ha−1) of spring wheat, grown under high weed pressure. Increased crop density had strong and consistent negative effects on weed biomass and positive effects on crop biomass and yield. At the highest crop density, weed biomass was less than half that at the lowest density. Weed biomass was generally lower, and yield higher, in the uniform pattern, except in one case in which a combination of factors gave one weed species an early size advantage over the crop. When weeds were controlled with herbicide, no effects of crop density or spatial uniformity on crop biomass or yield were observed. Nitrogen fertilization increased weed biomass in 2 of 3 yr, and it also increased crop biomass in 2 of 3 yr, but there was little evidence that the relative effects of crop density and spatial pattern on weed suppression were influenced by nitrogen fertilization. In the presence of weeds, the highest yields were obtained with high crop density, high spatial uniformity and nitrogen fertilization. The results indicate that increased weed suppression through increased crop density and spatial uniformity will occur over a wide range of nitrogen levels.

Keywords

Spring wheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Leguan’.Cultural weed controlcrop densityspatial patterncrop–weed competition
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , February 2008 , pp. 97 - 102
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

Angonin, C., Caussanel, J. P., and Meynard, J. M. 1996. Competition between winter wheat and Veronica hederifolia: influence of weed density and the amount and timing of nitrogen application. Weed Res. 36:175–187.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Brandt, R. N., Janzen, H. H., Entz, T., Grant, C. A., and Derksen, D. A. 2003. Differential response of weed species to added nitrogen. Weed Sci. 51:532–539.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Semach, G., and Janzen, H. H. 2002. Fertilizer application method affects nitrogen uptake in weeds and wheat. Weed Sci. 50:634–641.Google Scholar
Cralle, H. T., Fojtasek, T. B., Carson, K. H., Chandler, J. M., Miller, T. D., Senseman, S. A., Bovey, R. W., and Stone, M. J. 2003. Wheat and Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) competition as affected by phosphorus nutrition. Weed Sci. 51:425–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhima, K. V. and Eleftherohorinos, I. G. 2001. Influence of nitrogen on competition between winter cereals and sterile oat. Weed Sci. 49:77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diggle, P. J. 2003. Statistical Analysis of Spatial Point Patterns. Oxford, UK Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. 1995. Approaches for improving crop competitiveness through the manipulation of fertilization strategies. Weed Sci. 43:491–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doll, H. 1997. The ability of barley to compete with weeds. Biol. Agric. Hortic. 14:43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erviö, L-R. 1972. Growth of weeds in cereal population. J. Sci. Agric. Soc. Finl. 44:19–27.Google Scholar
Håkansson, S. 1997. Competitive effects and competitiveness in annual plant stands, 2: measurements of plant growth as influenced by density and relative time of emergence. Swed. J. Agric. Res. 27:75–94.Google Scholar
Jørnsgard, B., Rasmussen, K., Hill, J., and Christiansen, J. L. 1996. Influence of nitrogen on competition between cereals and their natural weed populations. Weed Res. 36:461–470.Google Scholar
Lemerle, D., Gill, G. S., Murphy, C. E., Walker, S. R., Cousens, R. D., Mokhtari, S., Peltzer, S. J., Coleman, R., and Luckett, D. J. 2001. Genetic improvement and agronomy for enhanced wheat competitiveness with weeds. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 52:527–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebman, M. and Mohler, C. L. 2001. Weeds and the soil environment. in Liebman, M., Mohler, C.L., and Staver, C.P., eds. Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press. 210–268.Google Scholar
Lintell-Smith, G., Baylis, J. M., and Watkinson, A. R. 1992. The effects of reduced nitrogen and weed competition on the yield of winter wheat. Asp. Appl. Biol. 30:367–372.Google Scholar
Medd, R. W., Auld, B. A., Kemp, D. R., and Musison, R. D. 1985. The influence of wheat density and spatial arrangement on annual ryegrass, Lolium rigidum, competition. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 36:361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohler, C. L. 1996. Ecological bases for the cultural control of annual weeds. J. Prod. Agric. 9:468–474.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. 2001. Enhancing the competitive ability of crops. in Liebman, M., Mohler, C.L., and Staver, C.P., eds. Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press. 269–321.Google Scholar
Murphy, S. D., Yakubu, Y., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Effect of planting patterns and inter row cultivation on competition between corn (Zea mays) and late-emerging weeds. Weed Sci. 44:856–870.Google Scholar
Olsen, J., Kristensen, L., and Weiner, J. 2005a. Effects of density and spatial pattern of winter wheat on suppression of different weed species. Weed Sci. 53:690–694.Google Scholar
Olsen, J., Kristensen, L., and Weiner, J. 2006. Influence of sowing density and spatial pattern of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) on the suppression of different weed species. Weed Biol. Manag. 6:165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, J., Kristensen, L., Weiner, J., and Griepentrog, H-W. 2005b. Increased density and spatial uniformity increases weed suppression by spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Res. 45:316–321.Google Scholar
Olsen, J. and Weiner, J. 2007. The influence of Triticum aestivum density, sowing pattern and nitrogen fertilization on leaf area index and its spatial variation. Basic Appl. Ecol. 8:252–257.Google Scholar
Petersen, J. 2003. Weed : spring barley competition for applied nitrogen in pig slurry. Weed Res. 43:33–39.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, K. 2002. Influence of liquid manure application method on weed control in spring cereals. Weed Res. 42:287–298.Google Scholar
SAS 1996. SAS System for Mixed Models. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Schwinning, S. and Weiner, J. 1998. Mechanisms determining the degree of size-asymmetry in competition among plants. Oecologia. 113:447–455.Google Scholar
Wax, L. M. and Pendelton, J. W. 1968. Effect of row spacing on weed control in soybeans. Weed Sci. 15:462–465.Google Scholar
Weiner, J. 1990. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 5:360–364.Google Scholar
Weiner, J., Griepentrog, H-W., and Kristensen, L. 2001. Suppression of weeds by spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) increases with crop density and spatial uniformity. J. Appl. Ecol. 38:784–790.Google Scholar