Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:09:07.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Biomass Production Response to Plant Spacing and Corn (Zea mays) Hybrids Differing in Canopy Architecture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Sultan H. Begna ,
Robert I. Hamilton ,
Lianne M. Dwyer ,
Doug W. Stewart ,
Daniel Cloutier ,
Louis Assemat ,
Kayhan Foroutan-Pour  and
Donald L. Smith
Sultan H. Begna
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, McGill University, Macdonald Campus, 21111 Lakeshore Road, Ste. Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada H9X 3V9
Robert I. Hamilton
Affiliation:
Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, K.W. Neatby Building, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6
Lianne M. Dwyer
Affiliation:
Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, K.W. Neatby Building, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6
Doug W. Stewart
Affiliation:
Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, K.W. Neatby Building, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6
Daniel Cloutier
Affiliation:
C.P. 222, Ste. Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada H9X 3R9
Louis Assemat
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Laboratoire de Malherbologie, BV 1540-21034, Dijon, Cedex, France
Kayhan Foroutan-Pour
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, McGill University, Macdonald Campus, 21111 Lakeshore Road, Ste. Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada H9X 3V9
Donald L. Smith*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, McGill University, Macdonald Campus, 21111 Lakeshore Road, Ste. Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec, Canada H9X 3V9
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: dsmith@macdonald.mcgill.ca.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1996, 1997, and 1998 at Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Quebec, Canada, and in 1996 at Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, to quantify the impact of corn hybrids, differing in canopy architecture and plant spacing (plant population density and row spacing), on biomass production by transplanted and naturally occurring weeds. The treatments consisted of a factorial combination of corn type (leafy reduced stature [LRS], late-maturing big leaf [LMBL], a conventional Pioneer 3979 [P3979], and, as a control, a corn-free condition [weed monoculture]), two weed levels (low density [transplanted weeds: common lambsquarters and redroot pigweed] and high density [weedy: plots with naturally occurring weeds]), two corn population densities (normal and high), and row spacings (38 and 76 cm). At all site-years under both weed levels, the decrease in biomass production by both transplanted and naturally occurring weeds was greater due to the narrow row spacing than due to the high plant population density. The combination of narrower rows and higher population densities increased corn canopy light interception by 3 to 5%. Biomass produced by both transplanted and naturally occurring weeds was five to eight times less under the corn canopy than in the weed monoculture treatment. Generally, weed biomass production was reduced more by early-maturing hybrids (LRS and P3979) than by LMBL. Thus, hybrid selection and plant spacing could be used as important components of integrated pest management (weed control) for sustainable agriculture.

Keywords

Common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALcorn, Zea mays L.redroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMARECompetitivness, early maturity, weed managementLAI, leaf area indexLfy, leafyLMBL, late-maturing big leafLRS, Leafy reduced statureP3979, Pioneer 3979rd1, reduced stature
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , December 2001 , pp. 647 - 653
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

Begna, H. S., Hamilton, R. I., Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., Cloutier, D., Assemat, L., Foroutan-pour, K., and Smith, D. L. 2001. Morphology and yield response to weed pressure by corn hybrids differing in canopy architecture. Eur. J. Argon. In press.Google Scholar
Begna, H. S., Hamilton, R. I., Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., and Smith, D. L. 1997a. Effects of population density on the yield and yield components of leafy reduced-stature maize in short-season areas. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 178: 103–110.Google Scholar
Begna, H. S., Hamilton, R. I., Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., and Smith, D. L. 1997b. Effects of population density and planting pattern on the yield and yield components of leafy reduced-stature maize in a short-season area. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 179: 9–17.Google Scholar
Begna, H. S., Hamilton, R. I., Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., and Smith, D. L. 1999. Effects of population density on the vegetative growth of leafy reduced-stature maize in short-season areas. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 182: 49–55.Google Scholar
Board, J. E. and Harville, B. J. 1992. Explanations for greater light interception in narrow- vs wide-row soybean. Crop Sci. 32: 198–202.Google Scholar
Callaway, M. B. 1992. A compendium of crop varietal tolerance to weeds. Am. J. Alt. Agric. 4: 169–180.Google Scholar
Chase, S. S. and Nanda, D. K. 1967. Number of leaves and maturity classification in Zea mays L. Crop Sci. 7: 431–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felton, W. L. 1976. The influence of row spacing and plant population on the effect of weed competition in soybeans (Glycine max). Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 16: 926–931.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. B., Hunt, L. A., and Kannenberg, C. W. 1974. Photoperiod and temperature effects on corn. Can. J. Plant Sci. 54: 21–28.Google Scholar
Jordan, N. 1993. Prospects for weed control through crop interference. Ecol. Appl. 3: 84–91.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L. and Mortensen, D. A. 1998. Tolerance and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) suppressive ability of two old and two modern corn (Zea mays) hybrids. Weed Sci. 46: 569–574.Google Scholar
McLachlan, S. M., Tollenaar, M., Swanton, C. J., and Weise, S. F. 1993. Effect of corn-induced shading on dry matter accumulation, distribution, and architecture of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.). Weed Sci. 41: 568–573.Google Scholar
Modarres, A. M., Hamilton, R. I., Dijak, M., Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., Mather, D. E., and Smith, D. L. 1998. Plant population density effects on maize inbred lines in short-season environments. Crop Sci. 38: 104–108.Google Scholar
Modarres, A. M., Hamilton, R. I., Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., Mather, D. E., Dijak, M., and Smith, D. L. 1997a. Leafy reduced-stature maize (Zea mays L.) for short-season environments: morphological aspects of inbred lines. Euphytica 96: 301–309.Google Scholar
Modarres, A. M., Hamilton, R. I., Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., Mather, D. E., Dijak, M., and Smith, D. L. 1997b. Leafy reduced-stature maize (Zea mays L.) for short-season environments: yield and yield components of inbred lines. Euphytica 97: 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, S. D., Yakubu, Y., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Effect of planting patterns and inter-row cultivation on competition between corn and late emerging weeds. Weed Sci. 44: 865–870.Google Scholar
Ottman, M. J. and Welch, L. F. 1989. Planting patterns and radiation interception, plant nutrient concentration and yield in corn. Agron. J. 81: 167–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute. 1994. SAS STAT User's Guide, Version 6. 4th ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Shaver, D. L. 1983. Genetics and breeding of maize with extra leaves above the ear. Proc. Annu. Corn Sorghum Res. Conf. 38: 161–180.Google Scholar
Sinoquet, H. and Caldwell, R. M. 1995. Estimation of light capture and partitioning in intercropping systems. In Sinoquet, H. and Cruz, P., eds. Ecophysiology of Tropical Intercropping. Paris: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA). pp. 79–80.Google Scholar
Staniforth, D. W. 1961. Responses of corn hybrids to yellow foxtail competition. Weeds 9: 132–136.Google Scholar
Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biometrical Approach. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M., Dibo, A. A., Aguilera, A., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994a. Effect of crop density on weed interference in maize. Agron. J. 86: 591–595.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M., Nissanka, S. P., Aguilera, A., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994b. Effects of weed interference and soil nitrogen on four maize hybrids. Agron. J. 86: 596–601.Google Scholar