Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:52:47.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Volunteer Barley Interference in Spring Wheat Grown in a Zero-Tillage System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

John T. O'Donovan ,
K. Neil Harker ,
George W. Clayton ,
Linda M. Hall ,
Jason Cathcart ,
Kenneth L. Sapsford ,
F. A. Holm  and
Kristin Hacault
John T. O'Donovan*
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
K. Neil Harker
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
George W. Clayton
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
Linda M. Hall
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2E1
Jason Cathcart
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2E1
Kenneth L. Sapsford
Affiliation:
Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 5A8
F. A. Holm
Affiliation:
Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 5A8
Kristin Hacault
Affiliation:
BASF Canada, 132, 9650 20th Avenue, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6N 1N1
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: odonovanj@agr.gc.ca.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is no published information on the impact of volunteer barley on wheat yield loss or on the economics of controlling barley with a herbicide. With the registration of imazamox-resistant wheat, it is now possible to control volunteer barley in wheat. Thus, the likelihood of growing wheat in rotation with barley may increase. Field experiments were conducted in 2003 and 2004 at Beaverlodge, Lacombe, and Edmonton, AB, Canada, and Saskatoon, SK, Canada, to determine the impact of volunteer barley on yield of imazamox-resistant spring wheat seeded at relatively low (100 kg ha−1) and high (175 kg ha−1) rates. Barley was seeded at different densities to simulate volunteer barley infestations. Regression analysis indicated that wheat-plant density influenced the effects of volunteer barley interference on wheat yield loss, economic threshold values, and volunteer barley fecundity among locations and years. Economic thresholds varied from as few volunteer barley plants as 3 m−2 at Beaverlodge in 2003 and 2004 to 48 m−2 at Lacombe in 2003. In most cases, wheat yield loss and volunteer barley fecundity were lower and economic thresholds were higher when wheat was seeded at the higher rate. For example, averaged over both years at Beaverlodge initial slope values (percentage of wheat yield loss at low barley density) were 4.5 and 1.7%, and economic threshold values of volunteer barley plants were 3 m−2 and 8 m−2 at low and high wheat seeding rates, respectively. Results indicate that volunteer barley can be highly competitive in wheat, but yield losses and wheat seed contamination due to volunteer barley can be alleviated by seeding wheat at a relatively high rate.

Keywords

Barley, Hordeum vulgare L. ‘AC Lacombe’wheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘CDC Imagine’Admixtureeconomic thresholdimazamox-resistant wheatvolunteer barley fecunditywheat seeding ratewheat yield loss
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , February 2007 , pp. 70 - 74
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

[AAFRD] Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development 2006. Fertilizer Requirements of Cereals. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/crop4689. Accessed: April 22, 2006.Google Scholar
Canadian Grain Commission 2005. Official Grain Grading Guide. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/Pubs/GGG/2005/04-wheat-2005-e.pdf Accessed: April 22, 2006.Google Scholar
Carlson, H. L. and Hill, J. H. 1985. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition in spring wheat: plant density effects. Weed Sci. 33:176–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:239–252.Google Scholar
Friesen, L., Morrison, I. N., Marshall, G., and Rother, W. 1990. Effects of volunteer wheat and barley on the growth and yield of flax. Can. J. Plant Sci. 70:1115–1122.Google Scholar
Hume, L. 1985. Crop losses in wheat (Triticum aestivum) as determined using weeded and nonweeded quadrats. Weed Sci. 33:734–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasieniuk, M., Maxwell, B. D., and Anderson, R. L. et al. 2001. Evaluation of models predicting winter wheat yield as a function of winter wheat and jointed goatgrass densities. Weed Sci. 49:48–60.Google Scholar
Leeson, J. Y., Thomas, A. G., Hall, L. M., Brenzil, C. A., Andrews, T., Brown, K. R., and Van Acker, R. C. 2005. Prairie weed surveys of cereal, oilseed and pulse crops from the 1970s to the 2000s. Saskatoon, SK Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saskatoon Research Centre Weed Survey Series Publication 05-1CD.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Mortensen, D. A., Clay, S. A., Schmenk, R., Kells, J. J., Howatt, K., and Westra, P. 1996. Stability of corn (Zea mays)–velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference relationships. Weed Sci. 44:309–313.Google Scholar
Marshall, G., Morrison, I. N., Friesen, L., and Rother, W. 1989. Effects of “volunteer” wheat and barley on the growth and yield of rapeseed. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:445–453.Google Scholar
Martin, R. J., Cullis, B. R., and McNamara, D. W. 1987. Prediction of wheat yield loss due to competition by wild oats (Avena spp). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 38:487–499.Google Scholar
Newhouse, K. E., Smith, W. A., Starrett, M. A., Schaefer, T. J., and Bing, B. K. 1992. Tolerance to imidazolinone herbicides in wheat. Plant Physiol. 100:882–886.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T. 1991. Quackgrass (Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.) interference in canola (Brassica campestris L). Weed Sci. 39:397–401.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T. and Blackshaw, R. E. 1997. Effect of volunteer barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) interference on field pea (Pisum sativum L.) yield and profitability. Weed Sci. 45:249–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Blackshaw, R. E., Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., and Maurice, D. C. 2005a. Field evaluation of regression equations to estimate crop yield losses due to weeds. Can. J. Plant Sci. 85:955–962.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Blackshaw, R. E., Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., and McKenzie, R. 2005b. Variable plant establishment contributes to differences in competitiveness with wild oat among wheat and barley varieties. Can. J. Plant Sci. 85:771–776.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Kirkland, K. J., and Sharma, A. K. 1989. Canola yield and profitability as influenced by volunteer wheat infestations. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:1235–1244.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Newman, J. C., Harker, K. N., Blackshaw, R. E., and McAndrew, D. W. 1999. Effect of barley plant density on wild oat interference, shoot biomass and seed yield under zero tillage. Can. J. Plant Sci. 79:655–662.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Sharma, A. K., Kirkland, K. J., and de St. Remy, E. A. 1988. Volunteer barley (Hordeum vulgare) interference in canola (Brassica campestris and B. napus). Weed Sci. 36:734–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS 1999. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 8. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Shinn, S. L., Thill, D. C., and Price, W. J. 1999. Volunteer barley (Hordeum vulgare) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with MON 37500. Weed Technol. 13:88–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar