Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:54:09.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conventional vs. Glyphosate-Resistant Cropping Systems in Ontario: Weed Control, Diversity, and Yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robert H. Gulden ,
Peter H. Sikkema ,
Al S. Hamill ,
Francois Tardif  and
Clarence J. Swanton
Robert H. Gulden
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, Agriculture Building, University of Manitoba, 66 Dafoe Road, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
Peter H. Sikkema
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, Crop Science Building, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road E., Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
Al S. Hamill
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow, 2585 Country Road 20, ON N0R 1G0, Canada
Francois Tardif
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, Crop Science Building, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road E., Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
Clarence J. Swanton*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, Crop Science Building, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road E., Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: cswanton@uoguelph.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops have been adopted rapidly since their commercial introduction, and with the increase in commercially available crops resistant to glyphosate, continuous use of the same herbicide mode of action is now possible in some crop rotations. A 6-yr study was initiated to investigate the effects of conventional herbicides compared with continuous use of glyphosate in GR or Roundup Ready corn and GR soybean in a corn–soybean and a corn–soybean–winter wheat rotation. Individual experiments were fully phased and established at three locations under conventional tillage (CT) and at two locations under no-tillage (NT). Results indicated that midseason weed ground cover was lower when weeds were controlled with glyphosate; however, in most cases, this did not result in improved corn or soybean yields. Within locations, species richness, which strongly influenced other diversity indicators, was most affected by the herbicide treatments. Including winter wheat in the crop rotation had little effect on corn and soybean weed ground cover, density, and community structure and only affected soybean yield. Moreover, no effects of herbicide system used in previous corn and soybean were observed in winter wheat, with the exception of species diversity in NT, where species diversity tended to be greater when weeds in previous corn and soybean were treated with conventional herbicides. After 6 yr, the effects of continuous use of GR crops in rotation were similar to those reported in previous studies; however, continued monitoring and longer-term investigations of these systems are necessary to detect the early stages of development of herbicide-resistant biotypes.

Keywords

Glyphosatecorn, Zea mays L. ZEAMXsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr GLXMAwinter wheat, Triticum aestivum L. TRZAWGlyphosate-resistantcornsoybeanwinter wheatrotationyield stabilitybroad-leaved controlgrass controlRoundup Ready
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 57 , Issue 6 , December 2009 , pp. 665 - 672
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

Anonymous 2004. Guide to Weed Control 2004. Toronto, ON, Canada Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Pub. 75. 348.Google Scholar
Beckie, H. J. 2006. Herbicide-resistant weeds: management tactics and practices. Weed Technol. 20:793–814.Google Scholar
Bullied, W. J., Marginet, A. M., and Van Acker, R. C. 2003. Conventional- and conservation-tillage systems influence emergence periodicity of annual weed species in canola. Weed Sci. 51:886–897.Google Scholar
Cathcart, R. J., Topinka, A. K., Kharbanda, P., Lange, R., Yang, R. C., and Hall, L. M. 2006. Rotation length, canola variety and herbicide resistance system affect weed populations and yield. Weed Sci. 54:726–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chancellor, R. J. 1985. Changes in the weed flora of an arable field cultivated for 20 years. J. Appl. Ecol. 22:491–501.Google Scholar
Cox, W. J., Hahn, R. R., and Stachowski, P. J. 2006. Time of weed removal with glyphosate affects corn growth and yield components. Agron. J. 98:349–353.Google Scholar
Derksen, D. A., Thomas, A. G., Lafond, G. P., Loeppky, H. A., and Swanton, C. J. 1995. Impact of postemerence herbicides on weed community diversity within conservation-tillage systems. Weed Res. 35:311–320.Google Scholar
Doucet, C., Weaver, S. E., Hamill, A. S., and Zhang, J. 1999. Separating the effects of crop rotation from weed management on weed density and diversity. Weed Sci. 47:729–735.Google Scholar
Garcia-Graza, J. A., Neumann, S., Vyn, T. J., and Boland, G. J. 2002. Influence of crop rotation and tillage on production of apothecia by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Can. J. Plant Sci. 24:137–143.Google Scholar
Gianessi, L. P. 2005. Economic and herbicide use impacts of glyphosate-resistant crops. Pest Manag. Sci. 61:241–245.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., Blackshaw, R. E., O'Donovan, J. T., Lupwayi, N. Z., Johnson, E. N., Lafond, G. P., and Irvine, R. B. 2005. Glyphosate-resistant spring wheat production system effects on weed communities. Weed Sci. 53:451–464.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2009. Glycine (G/9) Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org/summary/MOASummary.asp. Accessed: February 1, 2009.Google Scholar
Heard, M. S., Hawes, C., Champion, G. T., et al. 2003a. Weeds in fields with contrasting conventional and genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops, I: effects on abundance and diversity. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 358:1819–1832.Google Scholar
Heard, M. S., Hawes, C., Champion, G. T., et al. 2003b. Weeds in fields with contrasting conventional and genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops, II: effects on individual species. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 358:1833–1846.Google Scholar
Heard, M. S., Rothery, P., Perry, J. N., and Firbank, L. G. 2005. Predicting longer-term changes in weed populations under GMHT crop management. Weed Res. 45:331–338.Google Scholar
Heatherly, L. G., Reddy, K. N., and Spurlock, S. R. 2005. Weed management in glyphosate-resistant and non-glyphosate-resistant soybean grown continuously and in rotation. Agron. J. 97:568–577.Google Scholar
Hough-Goldstein, J. A., VanGessel, M. J., and Wilson, A. P. 2004. Manipulation of weed communities to enhance ground-dwelling arthropod populations in herbicide-resistant field corn. Environ. Entomol. 33:577–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivany, J. A. 2004. Comparison of weed control strategies in glyphosate-resistant soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] in Atlantic Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 84:1199–1204.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Bradley, R. P., Hart, S. E., Buesinger, M. L., and Massey, R. E. 2000. Efficacy and economics of weed management in glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 14:57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Légère, A., Samson, N., Rioux, R., Angers, D. A., and Simmard, R. R. 1997. Response of spring barley to crop rotation, conservation tillage, and weed management intensity. Agron. J. 89:628–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magurran, A. E. 1988. Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. Princeton, NJ Princeton University Press. 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohler, C. L. and Calloway, M. B. 1995. Effects of tillage and mulch on weed seed production and seed banks in sweet maize. J. Appl. Ecol. 32:627–639.Google Scholar
Murphy, S. D., Clements, D. R., Belaoussoff, S., Kevan, P. G., and Swanton, C. J. 2006. Promotion of weed species diversity and reduction of weed seedbanks with conservation tillage and crop rotation. Weed Sci. 54:69–77.Google Scholar
Nurse, R. E., Hamill, A. S., Swanton, C. J., Tardif, F., Deen, W., and Sikkema, P. H. 2007. Is the application of a residual herbicide required prior to glyphosate application in no-till glyphosate-tolerant soybean (Glycine max). Crop Prot. 26:484–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurse, R. E., Swanton, C. J., Tardif, F., and Sikkema, P. H. 2006. Weed control and yield are improved when glyphosate is preceded by a residual herbicide in glyphosate-tolerant corn (Zea mays). Crop Prot. 25:1174–1179.Google Scholar
[OMAFRA] Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs 2005. Summary of Agriculture Statistics for Ontario. http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/stats/agriculture_summary.pdf. Accessed: June 20, 2007.Google Scholar
Payne, S. A. and Oliver, L. R. 2000. Weed control programs in drilled glyphosate-resistant soybeans. Weed Technol. 14:413–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peet, R. K. 1974. The measurement of species diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5:285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piepho, H. P. 1999. Stability analysis using the SAS system. Agron. J. 91:154–160.Google Scholar
Puricelli, E. and Tuesca, D. 2005. Weed density and diversity under glyphosate-resistant crop sequences. Crop Prot. 24:533–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, K. N. and Whiting, K. 2000. Weed control and economic comparisons of glyphosate-resistant, sulfonylurea-tolerant, and conventional soybean (Glycine max) systems. Weed Technol. 14:204–211.Google Scholar
Schellhorn, N. A. and Sork, V. L. 1997. The impact of weed diversity on insect population dynamics and crop yield in collards, Brassica oleracea (Brassicaceae). Oecologia (Berl.) 111:233–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schilling, B. S., Harker, K. N., and King, J. R. 2006. Glyphosate can reduce glyphosate-resistant canola growth after individual or sequential applications. Weed Technol. 20:825–830.Google Scholar
Scursoni, J., Forcella, F., Gunsolus, J., Owen, M., Oliver, R., Smeda, R., and Virdine, R. 2006. Weed diversity and soybean yield with glyphosate management along a north-south transect in the United States. Weed Sci. 54:713–719.Google Scholar
Shannon, C. E. and Weaver, W. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, IL University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Sikkema, P. H., Shropshire, C., Hamill, A. S., Weaver, S. E., and Cavers, P. B. 2004. Response of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) to glyphosate application timing and rate in glyphosate-resistant corn. Weed Technol. 18:908–916.Google Scholar
Sikkema, P. H., Shropshire, C., Hamill, A. S., Weaver, S. E., and Cavers, P. B. 2005. Response of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) to glyphosate application timing and rate in glyphosate-resistant corn. Weed Technol. 19:830–837.Google Scholar
Smith, R. G. 2006. Timing of tillage is an important filter on the assembly of weed communities. Weed Sci. 54:705–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, R. G. D., Torrie, J. H., and Dickey, D. A. 1997. Transformations in Principles and Procedures of Statistics—A Biometrical Approach. 3rd ed. New York McGraw-Hill. 242–252.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Frick, B., Derksen, D. A., Brandt, S. A., and Zentner, R. P. 1996. Crop rotations and weed community dynamics on the Canadian prairies. Pages 227–232. in. Proceedings of the Second International Weed Control Congress. Volume 1. Copenhagen, Denmark International Weed Science Society.Google Scholar
Thomas, W. E., Burke, I. C., and Wilcut, J. W. 2004. Weed management in glyphosate-resistant corn with glyphosate and halosulfuron. Weed Technol. 18:1049–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitta, J. I., Tuesca, D., and Puricelli, E. 2004. Widespread use of glyphosate tolerant soybean and weed community richness in Argentina. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 103:621–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westra, P., Wilson, R. G., Miller, S. D., et al. 2008. Weed population dynamics after six years under glyphosate- and conventional herbicide-based weed control strategies. Crop Sci. 48:1170–1177.Google Scholar
Zuver, K. A., Bernards, M. L., Kells, J. J., Sprague, C. L., Medlin, C. R., and Loux, M. M. 2006. Evaluation of postemergence weed control strategies in herbicide-resistant isolines of corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 20:172–178.Google Scholar