Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:50:53.819Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cover-Crop Systems Affect Weed Communities in a California Vineyard

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kendra Baumgartner ,
Kerri L. Steenwerth  and
Lissa Veilleux
Kendra Baumgartner*
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture—Agricultural Research Service, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616
Kerri L. Steenwerth
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture—Agricultural Research Service, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616
Lissa Veilleux
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture—Agricultural Research Service, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: kbaumgartner@ucdavis.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Vineyard weed communities were examined under four dormant-season cover-crop systems representative of those used in the north-coastal grape-growing region of California: no-till annuals (ANoT) (rose clover, soft brome, zorro fescue), no-till perennials (PNoT) (blue wildrye, California brome, meadow barley, red fescue, yarrow), tilled annual (AT) (triticale), and a no-cover-crop tilled control (NoCT). Treatments were carried out for 3 yr in the interrows of a wine grape vineyard. Glyphosate was used to control weeds directly beneath the vines, in the intrarows. Treatments significantly impacted weed biomass, community structure, and species diversity in the interrows. Orthogonal contrasts showed that tillage, and not the presence of a cover crop, impacted interrow weed biomass. Distance-based redundancy analyses (db-RDA) revealed significant effects of the cover-crop systems and of tillage on weed community structure in the interrows. For scarlet pimpernel and spiny sowthistle, the combination of ANOVA and orthogonal contrasts confirmed their association with the tilled treatments, as revealed by db-RDA. This same approach identified the association between California burclover and the no-till treatments. Our findings of no significant effects of the cover-crop systems on weed biomass, community structure, or diversity in the intrarows demonstrate that the impacts the cover-crop management systems had on the interrows did not carry over to adjacent intrarows. In addition, the fact that the cover crops did not affect vine yield, growth, or nutrition relative to the no-cover-crop control suggests that cover crops are likely to minimize soil erosion from winter rains, which is the primary purpose of vineyard cover cropping in northern California, without adversely affecting vine health or weed control.

Keywords

Glyphosateblue wildrye, Elymus glaucus Buckley ELYGLCalifornia brome, Bromus carinatus Hook. & Arn. BROCNCalifornia burclover, Medicago polymorpha L. MEDPOmeadow barley, Hordeum brachyantherum Nevski HORBRred fescue, Festuca rubra L. FESRUrose clover, Trifolium hirtum All. TRH14scarlet pimpernel, Anagallis arvensis L. ANGARsoft brome, Bromus hordeaceus L. BROMOspiny sowthistle, Sonchus asper (L.) Hill SONAStriticale, X Triticosecale rimpaui Wittm. TRITIyarrow, Achillea millefolium L. AMAREzorro fescue, Vulpia myuros (L.) K. C. Gmel. VLPMYwine grape, Vitis vinifera L. ‘Merlot’Grapevineintegrated weed managementperennial cropping systemsustainable vineyard floor managementtillage
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 56 , Issue 4 , August 2008 , pp. 596 - 605
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

Barberì, P. and Mazzoncini, M. 2001. Changes in weed community composition as influenced by cover crop and management system in continuous corn. Weed Sci. 49:491–499.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, K., Smith, R. F., and Bettiga, L. 2005. Weed control and cover crop management affect mycorrhizal colonization of grapevine roots and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal spore populations in a California vineyard. Mycorrhiza. 15:111–119.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, K., Steenwerth, K. L., and Veilleux, L. 2007. Effects of organic and conventional practices on weed control in a perennial cropping system. Weed Sci. 55:352–358.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. 2002. Challenges and opportunities for integrated weed management. Weed Sci. 50:273–280.Google Scholar
Chauhan, B. S., Gill, G. S., and Preston, C. 2006. Tillage system effects on weed ecology, herbicide activity and persistence: a review. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 46:1557–1570.Google Scholar
Cheng, X. and Baumgartner, K. 2005. Overlap of grapevine and cover-crop roots enhances interactions among grapevines, cover crops, and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Pages 171–174. in. Soil Environment and Vine Mineral Nutrition: Symposium Proceedings and Related Papers. San Diego, CA American Society of Enology and Viticulture.Google Scholar
Christensen, L. P., Kasimatis, A. N., and Jensen, F. L. 1978. Grapevine Nutrition and Fertilization in the San Joaquin Valley. Oakland University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources.Google Scholar
Critchley, C. N. R., Fowbert, J. A., and Sherwood, A. J. 2006. The effects of annual cultivation on plant community composition of uncropped arable field boundary strips. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 113:196–205.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. and Healy, E. A. 2007. Weeds of California and Other Western States. Volume 2. Geraniaceae–Zygophyllaceae. Oakland, CA University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication No. 3488.Google Scholar
Du Croix Sissons, M. J., Van Acker, R. C., Derksen, D. A., and Thomas, A. G. 2000. Depth of seedling recruitment of five weed species measured in situ in conventional- and zero-tillage fields. Weed Sci. 48:327–332.Google Scholar
Dyer, W. E. 1995. Exploiting weed seed dormancy and germination requirements through agronomic practices. Weed Sci. 43:498–503.Google Scholar
Gago, P., Cabaleiro, C., and Garcia, J. 2007. Preliminary study of the effect of soil management systems on the adventitious flora of a vineyard in northwestern Spain. Crop Prot. 26:584–591.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2005. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Weed Sci. http://www.weedscience.com. Accessed November 2, 2007.Google Scholar
Hyvönen, T. and Salonen, J. 2002. Weed species diversity and community composition in cropping practices at two intensity levels—a six year experiment. Plant Ecol. 154:73–81.Google Scholar
Ingels, C. A., Bugg, R. L., McGourty, G. T., and Christensen, L. P. 1998. Cover Cropping in Vineyards: A Grower's Handbook. Oakland, CA University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication No. 3338.Google Scholar
Ingels, C. A., Scow, K. M., Whisson, D. A., and Drenovsky, R. E. 2005. Effects of cover crops on grapevines, yield, juice composition, soil microbial ecology, and gopher activity. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 56:19–29.Google Scholar
Keller, M., Mills, L. J., Wample, R. L., and Spayd, S. E. 2005. Cluster thinning effects on three deficit-irrigated Vitis vinifera cultivars. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 56:91–103.Google Scholar
Lanini, W. T. and Bendixen, W. E. 1992. Characteristics of important vineyard weeds. Pages 321–325. in Flaherty, D. L., Christensen, L. P., Lanini, W. T., Marois, J. J., Phillips, P. A., and Wilson, L. T. Grape Pest Management. 2nd ed. Oakland, CA University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication No. 3343.Google Scholar
Legendre, P. and Anderson, M. J. 1999. Distance-based redundancy analysis: Testing multispecies responses in multifactorial ecological experiments. Ecol. Monogr. 69:1–24.Google Scholar
Leps, J. and Smilauer, P. 2003. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data Using CANOCO. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Liebman, M. and Gallandt, E. R. 1997. Many little hammers: ecological approaches for management of crop–weed interactions. Pages 291–343. in Jackson, L. E. Ecology in Agriculture. San Diego, CA Academic.Google Scholar
Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., and Wolfinger, R. D. 1996. SAS System for Mixed Models. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Ludwig, J. F. and Reynolds, J. A. 1988. Statistical Ecology, a Primer on Methods and Computing. New York Wiley.Google Scholar
Mas, M. T. and Verdù, A. M. C. 2003. Tillage system effects on weed communities in a 4-year crop rotation under Mediterranean dryland conditions. Soil Tillage Res. 74:15–24.Google Scholar
Matthews, M. A., Ishii, R., Anderson, M. M., and O'Mahony, M. 1990. Dependence of wine sensory attributes on vine water status. J. Sci. Food Agric. 51:321–335.Google Scholar
McGourty, G. T. and Christensen, L. P. 1998. Cover cropping systems and their management. Pages 43–57. in Ingels, C. A., Bugg, R. L., McGourty, G. T., and Christensen, L. P. Cover cropping in vineyards: A grower's handbook. Oakland, CA University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication No. 3338.Google Scholar
Moonen, A. C. and Barberi, P. 2004. Size and composition of the weed seedbank after 7 years of different cover-crop–maize management systems. Weed Res. 44:163–177.Google Scholar
Mullins, M. G., Bouquet, A., and Williams, L. E. 1992. Biology of the Grapevine. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ngouajio, M. and McGiffen, M. E. 2002. Going organic changes weed population dynamics. HortTechnology. 12:590–596.Google Scholar
Patrick, A. E., Smith, R., Keck, K., and Berry, A. M. 2004. Grapevine uptake of 15N-labeled nitrogen derived from a winter-annual leguminous cover-crop mix. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 55:187–190.Google Scholar
Patrick-King, A. and Berry, A. M. 2005. Vineyard delta 15-N, nitrogen and water status in perennial clover and bunch grass cover crop systems of California's central valley. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 109:262–272.Google Scholar
Perret, P., Weissenbach, P., Schwager, H., Heller, W. E., and Koblet, W. 1983. Adaptive nitrogen-management: a tool for the optimization of N-fertilization in vineyards. Vitic. Enol. Sci. 48:124–126.Google Scholar
Potthoff, M., Jackson, L. E., Steenwerth, K. L., Ramirez, I., Stromberg, M. R., and Rolston, D. E. 2005. Soil biological and chemical properties in restored perennial grassland in California. Restor. Ecol. 13:61–73.Google Scholar
Puricelli, E. and Tuesca, D. 2005. Weed density and diversity under glyphosate-resistant crop sequences. Crop Protect. 24:533–542.Google Scholar
Reberg-Horton, C., Gallandt, E. R., and Molloy, T. 2006. Measuring community shifts in a weed seedbank study with the use of distance-based redundancy analysis. Weed Sci. 54:861–866.Google Scholar
Shrestha, A., Knezevic, S. Z., Roy, R. C., Ball-Coelho, B. R., and Swanton, C. J. 2002. Effect of tillage, cover crop and crop rotation on the composition of weed flora in a sandy soil. Weed Res. 42:76–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soriano, A., Zeiger, E., Servey, E., and Suero, A. 1968. The effect of cultivation on the vertical distribution of seeds in the soil. J. Appl. Ecol. 5:253–257.Google Scholar
Sutton, K. F., Lanini, W. T., Mitchell, J. P., Miyao, E. M., and Shrestha, A. 2006. Weed control, yield, and quality of processing tomato production under different irrigation, tillage, and herbicide systems. Weed Technol. 20:831–838.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R., Beste, C. E., and Potts, W. E. 1991. Response of weeds to tillage and cover crop residue. Weed Sci. 39:195–199.Google Scholar
Tesic, D., Keller, M., and Hutton, R. J. 2007. Influence of vineyard floor management practices on grapevine vegetative growth, yield, and fruit composition. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 58:1–11.Google Scholar
Townsend, C. R. and Hildrew, A. G. 1994. Species traits in relation to a habitat templet for river systems. Freshw. Biol. 31:265–275.Google Scholar
Westfall, P. H., Tobias, R. D., Rom, D., Wolfinger, R. D., and Hochberg, Y. 1999. Multiple Comparisons and Multiple Tests. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Winkler, A. J., Cook, J. A., Kliewer, W. M., and Lider, L. A. 1965. General Viticulture. Berkeley, CA University of California Press.Google Scholar