Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:51:18.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the influence of weeds on cranberry yield and quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2022

Jed Colquhoun Open the ORCID record for Jed Colquhoun [Opens in a new window] ,
Thierry Besançon Open the ORCID record for Thierry Besançon [Opens in a new window] ,
Katherine Ghantous Open the ORCID record for Katherine Ghantous [Opens in a new window]  and
Hilary Sandler Open the ORCID record for Hilary Sandler [Opens in a new window]
Jed Colquhoun*
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
Thierry Besançon
Affiliation:
Associate Professor and Extension Specialist, Rutgers University Philip E. Marucci Center for Blueberry and Cranberry Research, Chatsworth, NJ, USA
Katherine Ghantous
Affiliation:
Research Associate, University of Massachusetts Cranberry Station, East Wareham, MA, USA
Hilary Sandler
Affiliation:
Extension Professor, University of Massachusetts Cranberry Station, East Wareham, MA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Jed Colquhoun, Department of Horticulture, 1575 Linden Drive, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706. Email: colquhoun@wisc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The influence of weeds on cranberry yield and quality is not well known and cannot be extrapolated from other cropping systems given the unique nature of both cranberry production and the weed species spectrum. The work presented here addresses this need with four common weed species across multiple production seasons and systems in Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and New Jersey: Carolina redroot, earth loosestrife, bristly dewberry, and polytrichum moss. The objectives were to use these representative species to quantify the impact of weed density, groundcover, and biomass on several cranberry yield components and related interactions with other cranberry pests, and to determine whether these relationships were consistent enough across seasons to be reliably used in weed management decision-making. The relationships between Carolina redroot and bristly dewberry growth measures and marketable cranberry yield were highly significant (P ≤ 0.001 in 12 of 13 regressions) and consistent across growing seasons, but not significant for similar regressions with earth loosestrife. In particular, the strong relationship between Carolina redroot and bristly dewberry visual groundcover observations and cranberry yield suggests a simple way for growers and crop scouts to reliably estimate yield loss. The relationship between polytrichum moss biomass and cranberry yield was also significant in both years, but not consistent between years. Weed competition also affected cranberry quality, in that Carolina redroot density was strongly related to the percentage of insect-damaged fruit and bristly dewberry growth reduced cranberry color development. On a practical level, this information can be used to educate growers, consultants, agrichemical registrants, and regulators about the impacts of weeds on cranberry yield and quality, and to economically prioritize management efforts based on the weed species and extent of infestation.

Keywords

Bristly dewberryRubus hispidus L.Carolina redrootLachnanthes caroliana (Lam.) Dandypolytrichum mossPolytrichum commune Hedw.earth loosestrifeLysimachia terrestris (L.) BrittonSterns & Poggenb.cranberryVaccinium macrocarpon Ait.weed interferenceweed competitioncrop qualitythresholds
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , June 2022 , pp. 390 - 396
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Peter J. Dittmar, University of Florida

References

Averill, AL, Sylvia, MM (1998) Pages 52–56 in Cranberry insects of the Northeast - A guide to identification, biology and management. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Extension Google Scholar
Besançon, TE, Oudemans, PV, Rodriguez-Saona, C (2021) 2021 Commercial cranberry pest control recommendations for New Jersey. New Brunswick: Rutgers New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station. 18 pGoogle Scholar
Besançon, TE (2019) Carolina redroot (Lachnanthes caroliniana) vegetative growth and rhizome production as affected by environmental factors and planting depth. Weed Sci 67:572–579 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquhoun, J, Roper, T, Sulman, J (2009) Weeds of the cranberry marsh. Madison: University of Wisconsin Extension and Wisconsin Cranberry Board. 206 pGoogle Scholar
de Lange, E, Rodriguez-Saona, C (2015) Sparganothis Fruitworm: A Pest of Cranberry in New Jersey. https://njaes.rutgers.edu/fs1249/. Accessed: October 20, 2021Google Scholar
Else, MJ, Sandler, HA, Schluter, S (1995) Weed mapping as a component of integrated pest management in cranberry production. HortTechnol 5:302–305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghantous, KM, Sylvia, MM, Gauvin, D, eds. (2021) Cranberry Chart Book: Management Guide for Massachusetts. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Extension. 104 pGoogle Scholar
Gordon, M (2009) Costs of renovating MA cranberry farms-final report. UMass cranberry research station reports and surveys. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cranberry_research_repts/25/. Accessed: August 19, 2021Google Scholar
Gornall, JL, Woodin, SJ, Jónsdóttir, IS, van der Wal, R (2011) Balancing positive and negative plant interactions: how mosses structure vascular plant communities. Oecologia 166:769–782 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guedot, C, Colquhoun, J, Nice, G, Holland, L (2021) Cranberry pest management in Wisconsin. UW Extension Bulletin A3276. https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0145/8808/4272/files/A3276-2021.pdf. Accessed: August 18, 2021Google Scholar
Hoekstra, B, Neill, C, Kennedy, C (2020) Trends in the Massachusetts cranberry industry create opportunities for the restoration of cultivated riparian wetlands. Restor Ecol 28:185–195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Les, DH (2020) Pages 345–348 in Aquatic Monocotyledons of North America - Ecology, Life History, and Systematics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Google Scholar
Neron, R, Deland, JP, Drolet, I, Painchaud, J (2013) Guide D’identification des Mauvaises Herbes de la Canneberges. Quebec: Centre de Reference en Agriculture et Agroalimantaire du Quebec (CRAAQ) Google Scholar
Patten, K, Wang, J (1994) Cranberry yield and fruit quality reduction caused by weed competition. HortSci 29:1127–1130 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, DT (1995) Effects of environmental stress on weed/crop interactions. Weed Sci 43:483–490 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Percival, D, Garbary, D (2012) Moss competition dynamics and suppression technologies in wild blueberry production. Int J Fruit Sci 12:135–145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, HA (2018) Weed management in cranberry: a historical perspective and a look to the future. Agriculture 8:1–20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, HA, Dalbec, L, Ghantous, KM (2015) Identification guide for weeds in cranberries. Quebec: Centre de référence en agriculture et agroalimentaire due Québec. 293 ppGoogle Scholar
Swanton, CJ, Harker, KN, Anderson, RL (1993) Crop losses due to weeds in Canada. Weed Technol 7:537–542 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USDA-NASS] U.S. Department of Agriculture–National Agricultural Statistics Service (2021) Noncitrus fruits and nuts: 2020 summary. https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/zs25x846c/sf269213r/6t054c23t/ncit0521.pdf. Accessed: August 18, 2021Google Scholar
[USDA-NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Service (2021) USDA Plants Database. https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/home. Accessed: August 31, 2021Google Scholar