Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:23:53.924Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Barley (Hordeum vulgare) and Wild Oat (Avena fatua) Competition Is Affected by Crop and Weed Density

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Julio A. Scursoni  and
Emilio H. Satorre
Julio A. Scursoni*
Affiliation:
Departmento de Producción Vegetal, Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de Buenos Aires. Avenida de San Martín 4453 (1417) Buenos Aires, Argentina
Emilio H. Satorre
Affiliation:
Departmento de Producción Vegetal, Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de Buenos Aires. Avenida de San Martín 4453 (1417) Buenos Aires, Argentina
*
Corresponding authors' E-mail: scursoni@mail.agro.uba.ar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wild oat is the most serious grass weed in Argentine barley crops and its control has concentrated on herbicide strategies. Increasing crop density could be an effective strategy to reduce the effect of wild oat on barley yield. However, limited research has been conducted to evaluate the effect of crop density on the competitive balance between barley and spontaneous populations of wild oat. A field experiment was conducted in 1992, 1993, and 1999, to study the effect of spontaneous populations of wild oat on barley sown at densities of 160, 220, and 280 plants/m2. Wild oat density averaged 84 plants/m2. Wild oat biomass increased linearly with weed density in all treatments but was reduced by increasing barley seeding rates. Barley biomass and yield were not affected by wild oat at high crop sowing densities, but for the low and medium barley densities, yield loss was almost 25% when 70 wild oat plants/m2 were established. Barley yield loss was mostly related to competition from the early emerged wild oat. The relationship between yield losses and wild oat density was equally significant when the whole population or only early emerged individuals of the weed were considered.

Keywords

Wild oat, Avena fatua L. # AVEFAbarley, Hordeum vulgare L.Wild oat interference in barleyintegrated wild oat managementseeding rates of barley
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , December 2005 , pp. 790 - 795
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

Barton, D. L., Thill, D. C., and Bahman, S. 1992. Integrated wild oat (Avena fatua) management affects spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) yield and economics. Weed Technol. 6:129–135.Google Scholar
Batla, D., Kruk, B. C., and Benech Arnold, R. L. 2000. Very early detection of canopy presence by seeds through perception of stubble modifications in red : far-red signals. Funct. Ecol. 14:195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belles, D. S., Thill, D. C., and Shafii, B. 2000. PP-604 rate and Avena fatua density effects on seed production and viability in Hordeum vulgare . Weed Sci. 48:378–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benech Arnold, R., Ghersa, C., and Sanchez, R. 1988. The role of fluctuating temperatures in the germination and establishment of Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. Regulation of germination under leaf canopies. Funct. Ecol. 2:311–318.Google Scholar
Carlson, H. L. and Hill, J. 1985. Wild oat (Avena fatua L.) competition with spring wheat: plant density effects. Weed Sci. 33:176–181.Google Scholar
Cattena, H. P., Avalle, P., Strimmer, F., and Durante, M. 1988. Control químico de Avena fatua en trigo (Triticum aestivum), XI:. reunión Argentina sobre la maleza y su control 16 (2):63–78. Córdoba, Argentina.Google Scholar
Chancellor, R. J. and Peters, N. C. B. 1976. Competition between wild oat and crops. in Jones, D. P., ed. Wild Oats in World Agriculture. London: Agricultural Research Council. Pp. 99–112.Google Scholar
Chancellor, R. J. and Froud Williams, R. J. 1984. A second survey of cereal weeds in central southern England. Weed Res. 24:29–36.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:239–252.Google Scholar
Cousens, R., Weaver, S. E., Porter, J. R., Rooney, J. M., Butler, D. R., and Johnson, M. P. 1992. Growth and development of Avena fatua (wild-oat) in the field. Ann. Appl. Biol. 120:339–351.Google Scholar
Evans, R. M., Thill, D. C., Tapia, L., Shafii, B., and Lish, J. M. 1991. Wild oat (Avena fatua) and spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) density affect barley grain yield. Weed Technol. 5:33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. Avena fatua L. and other members of the ‘wild oat’ group. in World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology. Honolulu: University of Hawaii. Pp. 105–113.Google Scholar
Istilart, C. M. 1991. Relevamiento de malezas en cultivos de trigo en los Partidos de Tres Arroyos, Gonzales Chaves y Necochea, XII: reunión Argentina sobre la Maleza y su Control. Tomo II:87–96.Google Scholar
Kirkland, K. J. 1993. Weed management in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) in the absence of herbicides. J. Sust. Agric. 3: (3/4). 95–103.Google Scholar
Kirkland, K. J., Holm, F. A., and Stevenson, F. C. 2000. Appropriate crop seeding rate when herbicide rate is reduced. Weed Technol. 14:692–698.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
Morishita, D. W. and Thill, D. C. 1988. Factors of wild oat (Avena fatua) interference on spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) growth and development in monoculture and mixture culture. Weed Sci. 36:43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T. 1988. Wild oat infestations and economics returns as influenced by frequency of control. Weed Technol. 2:495–498.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., de St. Remy, E. A., O'Sullivan, P. A., Dew, D. A., and Sharma, A. K. 1985. Influence of the relative time of emergence of wild oat (Avena fatua) on yield loss of barley (Hordeum vulgare) and wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Sci. 33:498–503.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., Newman, J. C., Robinson, D., and Hall, L. 2001. Barley seeding rate influences the effects of variable herbicide rates on wild oat. Weed Sci. 49:746–754.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., and Hall, L. M. 2000. Wild oat (Avena fatua) interference in barley (Hordeum vulgare) is influenced by barley varieties and seeding rate. Weed Technol. 14:624–629.Google Scholar
Rooney, J. M., Brian, P., and Yin Loh, S. 1989. The influence of temperature on leaf production and vegetative growth of Avena fatua . Ann. Bot. 64:469–479.Google Scholar
[SAGPyA] Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Pesca y Allimentos. 2002. http://www.sagpya.mecon.gov.ar. Accessed August 14, 2002.Google Scholar
Satorre, E. H. 1989. Cultivos mas competitivos en la lucha contra las malezas. Tecnicrea 15:17–20.Google Scholar
Satorre, E. H. and Snaydon, R. W. 1992. A comparison of root and shoot competition between spring cereals and Avena fatua L. Weed Res. 32:45–55.Google Scholar
Scursoni, J. 1995. Relevamiento de malezas en cultivos de cebada cervecera (Hordeum vulgare L.) en la Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Revista de la Facultad de Agronomía La Plata, Argentina: Universidad National de La Plata 71:235–243.Google Scholar
Scursoni, J., Benech Arnold, R., and Hirchoren, H. 1999. Demography of wild oat in barley crops: effect of crop, sowing rate and herbicide treatment. Agron. J. 91:478–485.Google Scholar
Snaydon, R. W. and Satorre, E. H. 1989. Bivariate diagrams for plant competition data: modifications and interpretation. J. Appl. Ecol. 26:1043–1057.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. M. 1990. Seed dormancy in grasses. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
Thill, D. C., O'Donovan, J. T., and Mallory-Smith, C. A. 1994. Integrated weed management strategies for delaying herbicide resistance. Phytoprotection 75: (Suppl.). 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, B. J. and Peters, N. C. B. 1982. Some studies of competition between Avena fatua L. and spring barley, I: the influence of A. fatua on yield of barley. Weed Res. 22:143–148.Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J., Cousens, R., and Wright, K. J. 1990. The response of spring barley and winter wheat to Avena fatua population density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 116:601–609.Google Scholar
Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T., and Konzak, C. 1974. A decimal code for the growth stage of cereals. Weed Res. 14:415–421.Google Scholar