Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:08:14.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Soil Amendments on the Abundance of a Parasitic Weed, Yellow Rattle (Rhinanthus minor) in Hay Fields

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Richard G. Smith  and
Dorn A. Cox
Richard G. Smith*
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of New Hampshire, 264 James Hall, 56 College Road, Durham, NH 03824
Dorn A. Cox
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of New Hampshire, 264 James Hall, 56 College Road, Durham, NH 03824
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: richard.smith@unh.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Yellow rattle is a hemiparasitic weed that is becoming increasingly problematic in hay fields in the northeastern United States. The biomass of yellow rattle was assessed in two experiments in which commercially available soil amendments were applied to an infested hay field under no-till management. The amendments were applied in the fall of 2010 and 2011 and included wood ash, biochar, hardwood sawdust, lime, and K. Wood ash applied at a rate of 8,967 kg ha−1 (4 tons per acre) had the greatest suppressive effect and reduced yellow rattle biomass the following summer by 86 and 92% relative to the untreated control in Experiments 1 and 2, respectively. Two additional treatments included in Experiment 2, a doubled rate of wood ash and sawdust applied at a rate of 13,450 kg ha−1, also reduced yellow rattle biomass. No other treatments affected yellow rattle biomass. A partial least-squares regression (PLSR) analysis that included aboveground plant community and soil biochemical data explained only 42.4% of the variation in yellow rattle biomass, suggesting that the mechanisms responsible for the suppression of yellow rattle by wood ash and sawdust are complex. Amending hay fields with wood ash or sawdust may be an effective nonherbicide strategy for managing yellow rattle infestations. Additional research will be required to determine the mechanisms and generality of yellow rattle suppression by wood ash and sawdust amendments to the soil.

Keywords

Yellow rattle, Rhinanthus minor L. yellow rattleBiocharparasitic weedpartial least-squares regressionwood ash
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 118 - 124
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

Arshad, MA, Soon, YK, Azooz, RH, Lupwayi, NZ, Chang, SX (2012) Soil and crop response to wood ash and lime application in acidic soils. Agron J. 104:715–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augusto, L, Bakker, MR, Meredieu, C (2008) Wood ash applications to temperate forest ecosystems—potential benefits and drawbacks. Plant Soil. 306:181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baer, SG, Blair, JM, Collins, SL, Knapp, AK (2003) Soil resources regulate productivity and diversity in newly established tallgrass prairie. Ecology. 84:724–735.Google Scholar
Björk, RG, Ernfors, M, Sikström, U, Nilsson, MB, Andersson, MX, Rütting, T, Klemedtsson, L (2010) Contrasting effects of wood ash application on microbial community structure, biomass and processes in drained forested peatlands. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 73:550–562.Google ScholarPubMed
Cameron, DD, Coats, AM, Seel, WE (2006) Differential resistance among host and non-host species underlies the variable success of the hemi-parasitic plant Rhinanthus minor . Ann Bot. 98:1289–1299.Google Scholar
Carrascal, LM, Galvan, I, Gordo, O (2009) Partial least squares regression as an alternative to current regression methods used in ecology. Oikos 118:681–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, DM, Graves, JD (2000) The impact of phosphorus on interactions of the hemiparasitic angiosperm Rhinanthus minor and its host Lolium perenne . Oecologia 124:100–106.Google Scholar
Gibson, CC, Watkinson, AR (1989) The host range and selectivity of a parasitic plant: Rhinanthus minor L. Oecologia 78:401–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hudson, D (2011) Now is the time to look for yellow rattle in your fields. University of Vermont Extension. http://agronomator.wordpress.com/2011/06/13/now-is-the-time-to-look-for-yellow-rattle-in-your-fields/. Accessed November 28, 2012Google Scholar
Lupwayi, NZ, Arshad, MA, Azooz, RH, Soon, YK (2009) Soil microbial response to wood ash or lime applied annual crops and perennial grass in an acid soil of northwestern Alberta. Can J Soil Sci. 89:169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magda, D, Duru, M, Theau, JP (2004) Defining management rules for grasslands using weed demographic characteristics. Weed Sci. 52:339–345.Google Scholar
Magda, D, Theau, JP, Duru, M, Coleno, F (2003) Herbage production and weed dynamics as influenced by management of hay meadows. J Range Manage 56:127–133.Google Scholar
Odlare, M, Pell, M (2009) Effect of wood fly ash and compost on nitrification and denitrification in agricultural soil. Appl Energy 86:74–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohno, T (1992) Neutralization of soil acidity and release of phosphorus and potassium by wood ash. J Environ Qual 21:433–438.Google Scholar
Oja, T, Talve, T (2012) Genetic diversity and differentiation in six species of the genus Rhinanthus (Orobanchaceae). Plant Syst Evol 298:901–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Risse, ML (2002) Best management practices for wood ash as agricultural soil amendment. University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1142, 4 pGoogle Scholar
Schiemenz, K, Eichler-Lobermann, B (2010) Biomass ashes and their phosphorus fertilizing effect on different crops. Nutr Cycling Agroecosyst. 87:471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seel, WE, Parsons, AN, Press, MC (1993) Do inorganic solutes limit the growth of the facultative hemiparasite Rhinanthus minor L. in the absence of a host. New Phytol 124:283–289.Google Scholar
Smith, RS, Corkhill, P, Shiel, RS, Millward, D (1996a) The conservation management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England. 2. Effects of grazing, cutting date, fertilizer and seed application on the vegetation of an agriculturally improved sward. Grass Forage Sci. 51:292–305.Google Scholar
Smith, RS, Pullan, S, Shiel, RS (1996b) Seed shed in the making of hay from mesotrophic grassland in a field in northern England: effects of hay cut date, grazing and fertilizer in a split–split-plot experiment. J Appl Ecol 33:833–841.Google Scholar
Spokas, KA, Cantrell, KB, Novak, JM, Archer, DW, Ippolito, JA, Collins, HP, Boateng, AA, Lima, IM, Lamb, MC, McAloon, AJ, Lentz, RD, Nichols, KA (2012) Biochar: a synthesis of its agronomic impact beyond carbon sequestration. J Environ Qual 41:973–989.Google Scholar
Turaj, S (2010) A surprising weed, yellow rattle. University of New Hampshire Extension http://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/stnr_nh_06172011_weed.pdf. Accessed: November 28, 2012Google Scholar
Van Hulst, R, Shipley, B, Theriault, A (1987) Why is Rhinanthus minor (Scrophulariaceae) such a good invader? Can J Bot. 65:2373–2379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westbury, DB (2004) Rhinanthus minor L. J Ecol 92:906–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wortman, SE, Davis, AS, Schutte, BJ, Lindquist, JL, Cardina, J, Felix, J, Sprague, CL, Dille, JA, Ramirez, AHM, Reicks, G, Clay, SA (2012) Local conditions, not regional gradients, drive demographic variation in giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida) and common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) across northern U.S. maize belt. Weed Sci. 60:440–450.Google Scholar