Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:12:32.436Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanisms of Yield Loss in Maize Caused by Weed Competition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Diego Cerrudo ,
Eric R. Page ,
Matthijs Tollenaar ,
Greg Stewart  and
Clarence J. Swanton
Diego Cerrudo
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, Crop Science Building, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road E., Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada
Eric R. Page
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Greenhouse and Crops Processing Centre, 2585 County Rd. 20, Harrow, Ontario, N0R 1G0, Canada
Matthijs Tollenaar
Affiliation:
Monsanto Company,110 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, Raleigh, NC 27709
Greg Stewart
Affiliation:
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affaires, Department of Plant Agriculture, Crop Science Building, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
Clarence J. Swanton*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, Crop Science Building, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road E., Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: cswanton@uoguelph.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The physiological process underlying grain yield (GY) loss in maize as a result of weed competition is not understood clearly. We designed an experiment to test the hypotheses that early season stress caused by the presence of neighboring weeds will increase plant-to-plant variability (PPV) of individual plant dry matter (PDM) within the population. This increase in PPV will reduce GY through a reduction in harvest index (HI). Field experiments were conducted in 2008, 2009, and 2010. A glyphosate-resistant maize hybrid was cropped at a density of 7 plants m−2. As a model weed, winter wheat was seeded at the same time as maize and controlled with glyphosate at the 3rd or 10th to 12th leaf-tip stage of maize. Weed competition early in the development of maize decreased PDM and GY. This reduction in PDM, which occurred early in the development of maize, was attributed initially to a delay in rate of leaf appearance. Reductions in PDM were accompanied by an increase in PPV of PDM. This increase in PPV, however, did not reduce HI and did not contribute to the GY reductions created by weed competition, as hypothesized. As weed control was delayed, a reduction in fraction of photosynthetically active radiation (fIPAR) accounted for a further reduction in PDM and notably, a reduction in DMA from 17th leaf-tip stage through to maturity. The rapid loss of PDM and the subsequent inability to accumulate dry matter during maturation accounted for a rapid decline in kernel number (KN) and kernel weight (KW).

Keywords

Glyphosatemaize, Zea mays L. ZEAMXwinter wheat, Triticum aestivum L. TRZAWHarvest indexkernel numberkernel weightplant-to-plant variability
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 60 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 225 - 232
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

Amir, J. and Sinclair, T. R. 1991. A model of the temperature and solar-radiation effects on spring wheat growth and yield. Field Crops Res. 28:47–58.Google Scholar
Andrade, F. H., Otegui, M. E., and Vega, C. R. C. 2000. Intercepted radiation at flowering and kernel number in maize. Agron. J. 92:92–97.Google Scholar
Andrade, F. H., Vega, C. R. C., Uhart, S. A., Cirilo, A. G., Cantarero, M., and Valentinuz, O. R. 1999. Kernel number determination in maize. Crop Sci. 39:453–459.Google Scholar
Basseti, P. and Westgate, M. E. 1993. Senescence and receptivity of maize silks. Crop Sci. 33:275–278.Google Scholar
Bonaparte, E. E. N. A. and Brown, R. I. 1976. Effects of plant density and planting date on leaf number and some developmental events in corn. Can. J. Plant Sci. 56:691–698.Google Scholar
Borras, L. and Otegui, M. E. 2001. Maize kernel weight response to source–sink ratio. Crop Sci. 41:1816–1822.Google Scholar
Brown, D. M. and Boosma, A. 1993. Crop heat units for corn and other warm-season crops in Ontario. OMAF Factsheet, Agdex JJJ/31. Toronto, Ontario, Canada Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food.Google Scholar
Çakir, R. 2004. Effect of water stress at different development stages on vegetative and reproductive growth of corn. Field Crops Res. 89:1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carcova, J. and Otegui, M. E. 2001. Ear temperature and pollination timing effects on maize kernel set. Crop Sci. 41:1809–1815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, W. J., Hahan, 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
Duvick, D. N. 1997. What is yield? Pages 332–335 in Edmeades, G. O., Banzinger, B., Mickelson, H. R., and Pena-Valdivia, C. B., eds. Developing Drought and Low N-Tolerant Maize. El Batan, Mexico CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Echarte, L., Luque, S., Andrade, F. H., Sadras, V. O., Cirilo, A., Otegui, M. E., and Vega, C. R. C. 2000. Response of maize kernel number to plant density in Argentinean hybrids released between 1965 and 1993. Field Crops Res. 68:1–8.Google Scholar
Edmeades, G. O. 1976. Aspects of plant-to-plant variability in maize (Zea mays L.). . University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.174 p.Google Scholar
Edmeades, G. O. and Daynard, T. B. 1979. The relationship between final yield and photosynthesis at flowering in individual maize plants. Can. J. Plant Sci. 59:585–601.Google Scholar
Evans, P. S., Knezevic, S. Z., Linquist, L. J., and Shapiro, C. A. 2003. Influence of nitrogen and duration of weed interference on corn growth and development. Weed Sci. 51:546–556.Google Scholar
Girardin, P. and Tollenaar, M. 1992. Leaf azimuth in maize: origin and effects of canopy patterns. Eur. J. Agron. 1:227–233.Google Scholar
Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 40:441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, E. A. and Tollenaar, M. 2007. Physiological basis of successful breeding strategies for maize grain yield. Crop Sci. 47(S3):S202–S215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, W. and Tollenaar, M. 2009. Physiological mechanism underlying shade tolerance in maize. Crop Sci. 49:1817–1826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, W., Tollenaar, M., Stewart, G., and Deen, W. 2004a. Response of corn grain yield to spatial and temporal variability in emergence. Crop Sci. 44:847–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, W., Tollenaar, M., Stewart, G., and Deen, W. 2004b. Within-row plant spacing variability does not affect corn yield. Agron. J. 96:275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, W., Tollenaar, M., Stewart, G., and Deen, W. 2004c. Impact of planter type, planting speed, and tillage on stand uniformity and yield of corn. Agron. J. 96:1668–1672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddonni, G. A. and Otegui, M. E. 1996. Leaf area, light interception and crop development in maize. Field Crops Res. 41:81–87.Google Scholar
Maddonni, G. A. and Otegui, M. E. 2004. Intra-specific competition in maize: early establishment of hierarchies among plant affects final kernel set. Field Crops Res. 85:1–13.Google Scholar
Padilla, J. M. and Otegui, M. E. 2005. Co-ordination between leaf initiation and leaf appearance in field grown maize (Zea mays L.): genotypic differences in response of rates to temperature. Ann. Bot. (London). 96:997–1007.Google Scholar
Pagano, E. and Maddoni, G. A. 2007. Intra-specific competition in maize: early establishment hierarchies differ in plant growth and biomass partitioning to the ear around silking. Field Crops Res. 101:306–320.Google Scholar
Page, E. R., Tollenaar, M., Lee, E. A., Lukens, L., and Swanton, C. J. 2009. Does shade avoidance underlie the critical period for weed control in maize (Zea mays L.)? Weed Res. 49:563–571.Google Scholar
Page, E. R., Tollenaar, M., Lee, E. A., Lukens, L., and Swanton, C. J. 2010a. Shade avoidance: an integral component of crop-weed competition. Weed Res. 50:281–288.Google Scholar
Page, E. R., Tollenaar, M., Lee, E. A., Lukens, L., and Swanton, C. J. 2010b. Timing, effect, and recovery from intraspecific competition in maize. 2010b. Agron. J. 102:1007–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajcan, I., Chandler, K. J., and Swanton, C. J. 2004. Red–far-red ratio of reflected light: a hypothesis why early-season weed control is important in corn. Weed Sci. 52:774–778.Google Scholar
Rajcan, I. and Swanton, C. J. 2001. Understanding maize–weed competition: resource competition, light quality and the whole plant. Field Crops Res. 71:139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajcan, I. and Tollenaar, M. 1999. Source ∶ sink ratio and leaf senescence in maize: I. Dry matter accumulation and partitioning during grain filling. Field Crops Res. 60:245–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, J. T. and NeSmith, D. S. 1991. Temperature and crop development. Pages 5–29 in Hanks, R. J., and Ritchie, J. T., eds. Modeling Plant and Soil Systems. Agronomy Monograph 31. Madison, WI American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Ritchie, S. W., Hanway, J. J., and Benson, G. O. 1993. How a Corn Plant Develops. Special Report 48. Ames, IA Iowa State University. 21 p.Google Scholar
Ruget, F., Bonhomme, R., and Chartier, M. 1996. Estimation simple de la surface foliaire de plantes de maïs en croissance. Agronomie. 16:553–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanton, C. J., Weaver, S., Cowan, P., Van Acker, R., Deen, W., and Shrestha, A. 1999. Weed thresholds: theory and applicability. J. Crop Prod. 2:9–29.Google Scholar
Tetio-Kagho, F. and Gardner, F. P. 1988. Responses of maize to plant population density. II. Reproductive development, yield, and yield adjustments. Agron. J. 80:935–940.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M. 1992. Is low plant density a stress in maize? Maydica. 37:305–311.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M. and Daynard, T. B. 1978. Effects of defoliation on kernel development in maize. Can. J. Plant Sci. 58:207–212.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M., Daynard, T. B., and Hunter, R. B. 1979. Effect of temperature on rate of leaf appearance and flowering date in maize. Crop Sci. 19:363–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tollenaar, M. and Wu, J. 1999. Yield improvement in temperate maize is attributable to greater stress tolerance. Crop Sci. 39:1597–1604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uribelarrea, M., Moose, S. P., and Below, F. E. 2007. Divergent selection for grain protein affects nitrogen use in maize hybrids. Field Crops Res. 100:82–90.Google Scholar
Valentinuz, O. and Tollenaar, M. 2004. Vertical profile of leaf senescence during the grain-filling period in older and newer maize hybrids. Crop Sci. 44:827–834.Google Scholar
Vega, C. R. C., Andrade, F. H., and Sadras, V. O. 2001a. Reproductive partitioning and seed set efficiency in soybean, sunflower and maize. Field Crops Res. 72:163–175.Google Scholar
Vega, C. R. C., Andrade, F. H., Sadras, V. O., Uhart, S. A., and Valentinuz, O. R. 2001b. Seed number as a function of growth. A comparative study in soybean, sunflower, and maize. Crop Sci. 41:748–754.Google Scholar
Wu, H., Pratley, J., Lemerle, D., and Haig, T. 2001. Allelopathy in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Ann. Appl. Biol. 139:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, J. 1998. On the relationship between plant-to-plant variability and stress tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids from different breeding eras. , University of Guelph, ON Canada.85 p.Google Scholar