Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:23:34.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed and seedbank management with integrated methods as influenced by tillage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Dawit Mulugeta  and
David E. Stoltenberg
Dawit Mulugeta
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
David E. Stoltenberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
*
destolte@facstaff.wisc.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many growers perceive that reduced herbicide inputs and greater reliance on mechanical methods will result in increased weed management problems over time. Previous research has shown short-term benefits of integrated weed management strategies, but information concerning the long-term implications of these strategies is lacking. Therefore, research was conducted from 1992 through 1995 to determine the influence of full-rate preemergence broadcast, half-rate preemergence broadcast plus cultivation, and full-rate preemergence band plus cultivation treatments on weed population and seedbank dynamics in no-tillage (NT), chisel plow (CP), and moldboard plow (MP) systems in both continuous corn (CC) and corn—soybean (CS) rotation. Seventeen weed species were identified in the plant population and seedbank across all treatments, but common lambsquarters, giant foxtail, and redroot pigweed dominanted. Vertical distribution of weed seeds in soil was influenced by tillage, with 74, 59, and 43% of the total viable seed of these species less than 10 cm deep in NT, CP, and MP, respectively. In contrast, seed dormancy in the spring was not influenced greatly by tillage and averaged 79, 10, and 42% for common lambsquarters, giant foxtail, and redroot pigweed, respectively, across tillage methods. Crop rotation was not a major factor influencing weed population and seedbank dynamics. From 1992 to 1995, reduction of shoot biomass and seed production of the predominant weed species were similar among weed management treatments in most tillage and crop rotation systems. The influence of weed management treatments on the seedbank was also similar, with up to 50, 95, and 92% less seed of common lambsquarters, giant foxtail, and redroot pigweed, respectively, in the seedbank in 1995 than in 1992. Corn and soybean grain yields were similar among weed management treatments and were greater than the nontreated check in each tillage and crop rotation treatment. These results indicate that reduced herbicide inputs plus interrow cultivation were as effective as full-rate herbicide inputs for the management of several annual weed species in both conventional- and conservation-tillage systems over 4 yr.

Keywords

Common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. CHEALgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm. SETFAredroot pigweed, Amaranthus reteroflexus L. AMAREcorn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3417’soybean, Glycine max (L) MERR. ‘Kaltenberg 142’Chisel plowinterrow cultivationmoldboard plowno-tillagereduced herbicide inputseed dormancyseed production
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 45 , Issue 5 , October 1997 , pp. 706 - 715
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by the 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. 1990. Agricultural Resources. Input Situation and Outlook Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 62 p.Google Scholar
Ball, D. A. 1992. Weed seed bank response to tillage, herbicide and crop rotation sequence. Weed Sci. 40: 654–659.Google Scholar
Ball, D. A. and Miller, S. D. 1990. Weed seed population response to tillage, and herbicide use in three irrigated cropping sequences. Weed Sci. 38: 511–517.Google Scholar
Banks, P. A., Tripp, T. N., Wells, J. W., and Hammel, J. E. 1986. Effects of tillage on sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) interference with soybeans (Glycine max) and soil water use. Weed Sci. 34: 143–149.Google Scholar
Buchholtz, K. P. and Doersch, R. E. 1968. Cultivation and herbicides for weed control in corn. Weed Sci. 16: 232–234.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Daniel, T. C. 1988. Influence of tillage system on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) population and control in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 36: 642–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Doll, J. D., Proost, R. T., and Visocky, M. R. 1995. Integrating mechanical weeding with reduced herbicide use in conservation tillage corn production systems. Agron. J. 87: 507–512.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Mester, T. C. 1991. Effect of tillage system on the emergence depth of giant (Setaria faberi) and green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Sci. 39: 200–203.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1993. Weed science—the stepchild. Weed Technol. 7: 515–518.Google Scholar
Cardina, J., Regnier, E., and Harrison, K. 1991. Long-term tillage effects on seed banks in three Ohio soils. Weed Sci. 39: 186–194.Google Scholar
Clements, D. R., Benoit, D. L., Murphy, S. D., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Tillage effects on weed seed return and seed bank composition. Weed Sci. 44: 314–322.Google Scholar
Derksen, D. A., Lafond, G. D., Thomas, A. G., Loeppky, H. A., and Swanton, C. J. 1993. Impact of agronomic practices on weed communities: tillage systems. Weed Sci. 41: 409–417.Google Scholar
Fenner, M. 1995. Ecology of seed banks. in Kiget, J. and Galili, G., eds. Seed Development and Germination. New York: Marcel-Dekker, pp. 507–528.Google Scholar
Forcella, F. 1992. Prediction of weed seedling densities from buried seed reserves. Weed Res. 32: 29–38.Google Scholar
Forcella, F., Buhler, D. D., and McGiffen, M. E. 1994. Pest management and crop residues. in Hatfield, J. L. and Stewart, B. A., eds. Crop Residue Management. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis, pp. 173–189.Google Scholar
Forcella, F. and Lindstrom, M. J. 1988. Weed seed population in ridge and conventional tillage. Weed Sci. 36: 500–502.Google Scholar
Forcella, F., Wilson, R. G., Renner, K. A., Dekker, J., Harvey, R. G., Alm, D. A., Buhler, D. D., and Cardina, J. 1992. Weed seed banks of the US corn belt: magnitude, variation, emergence, and application. Weed Sci. 40: 636–644.Google Scholar
Gunsolus, J. L. 1990. Mechanical and cultural weed control in corn and soybeans. Am. J. Alt. Agric. 5: 114–119.Google Scholar
Gupta, S. C. 1985. Predicting corn planting dates for moldboard and no-tillage systems in the corn belt. Agron. J. 77: 446–455.Google Scholar
Hallberg, G. R. 1989. Pesticide pollution of groundwater in the humid United States. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 26: 299–367.Google Scholar
Harper, J. L., Williams, J. T., and Sager, G. R. 1965. The behavior of seeds in soil. I. The heterogeneity of soil surfaces and its role in determining the establishment of plants from seed. J. Ecol. 53: 273–286.Google Scholar
Hartwig, R. O. and Laflen, J. M. 1978. A meterstick method for measuring crop residue cover. J. Soil Water Conserv. 33: 90–91.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G., Kooten, B.D.V., Stoltenberg, D. E., Hall, E. M., and Fawcett, R. S. 1993. On-farm evaluation of mechanical and chemical weed management practices in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 7: 1001–1004.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. D., Wyse, D. L., and Lueschen, W. E. 1989. The influence of herbicide formulation on weed control in four tillage systems. Weed Sci. 37: 238–249.Google Scholar
Kovach, D. A., Thill, D. C., and Young, F. L. 1988. A water-spray system for removing seed from soil. Weed Technol. 2: 338–341.Google Scholar
LeBaron, H. L. and Gressel, J. 1982. Practical significance and means of control of herbicide resistant weeds. in LeBaron, H. L. and Gressel, J., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants. New York: J. Wiley, pp. 309–322.Google Scholar
Lindwall, C. W., Larney, F. J., Johnston, A. M., and Moyer, J. R. 1994. Crop management in conservation tillage systems. in Unger, P. W., ed. Managing Agricultural Residues. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis, pp. 185–209.Google Scholar
Maxwell, B. D., Roush, M. L., and Radosevich, S. R. 1990. Predicting the evolution and dynamics of herbicide resistance in weed populations. Weed Technol. 4: 2–13.Google Scholar
Mulder, T. A. and Doll, J. D. 1993. Integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 7: 382–389.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. and Dawson, J. H. 1984. Time of emergence of eight weed species. Weed Sci. 32: 327–335.Google Scholar
Pareja, M. R., Staniforth, D. W., and Pareja, G. P. 1985. Distribution of weed seed among soil structural units. Weed Sci. 33: 182–189.Google Scholar
Poston, D. H., Murdock, E. C., and Toler, J. E. 1992. Cost-efficient weed control in soybean (Glycine max) with cultivation and banded herbicide applications. Weed Technol. 6: 990–995.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. A. 1981. Seed banks in soils. Adv. Appl. Biol. 6: 1–55.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. A. and Feast, P. M. 1972. Fate of seeds of some annual weeds in different depths of cultivated and undisturbed soil. Weed Res. 12: 316–324.Google Scholar
Schreiber, M. M. 1992. Influence of tillage, crop rotation, and weed management on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) population dynamics and corn yield. Weed Sci. 40: 645–653.Google Scholar
Schweizer, E. E. and Zimdahl, R. L. 1984. Weed seed decline in irrigated soil after rotation of crops and herbicides. Weed Sci. 32: 84–89.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
Wax, L. M. and Pendleton, J. W. 1968. Effect of row spacing or weed control in soybeans. Weeds 16: 462–464.Google Scholar
Wyse, D. L. 1992. Future of weed science research. Weed Technol. 6: 162–165.Google Scholar
Yenish, J. P., Doll, J. D., and Buhler, D. D. 1992. Effect of tillage on vertical distribution and viability of weed seed in the soil. Weed Sci. 40: 429–433.Google Scholar
Zorner, P. S., Zimdahl, R. L., and Schweizer, E. E. 1984. Effect of depth and duration of seed burial on kochia (Kochia scoparia). Weed Sci. 32: 602–607.Google Scholar