ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The morphological features and canopy parameters as factors affecting the competition between winter wheat varieties and weeds
1
Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation – State Research Institute
Czartoryskich 8, 24-100 Puławy, Poland
Submission date: 2013-03-13
Acceptance date: 2013-08-08
Corresponding author
Beata Feledyn-Szewczyk
Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation – State Research Institute Czartoryskich 8, 24-100 Puławy, Poland
Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation – State Research Institute Czartoryskich 8, 24-100 Puławy, Poland
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2013;53(3):203-209
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to determine the relationship between morphological features and canopy parameters of winter wheat varieties and weed infestation. The 2-year-long field experiments were conducted at 3 locations, on 13 varieties of winter wheat cultivated on organic farms. The response of the tested cultivars to weed infestation was similar regardless of the location. The number of weeds did not differ significantly between the wheat varieties and was similar in all locations and years of the study (109–122 plants/m2). The weed dry matter was significantly lower in Chomentowo (38 g/m2) compared to Osiny and Chwałowice (66 and 85 g/m2). Nateja and Legenda wheat varieties showed the biggest competitiveness against weeds in both years and locations, whereas Alcazar, Boomer and Jenga were characterized as having the least competitive ability. Natula, Kohelia, Batuta and Ostroga wheat varieties showed a different response to weed infestation over the years. The analysis of correlation and cluster analysis showed that wheat dry matter, plant density, and wheat height had the greatest impact on the number and dry matter of weeds. There was no significant correlation between number of tillers per plant and weed infestation parameters measured in the dough stage.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
REFERENCES (30)
1.
Balyan R.S., Malik R.K., Panwar R.S., Singh S. 1993. Competitive ability of winter wheat cultivars with wild oat (Avena ludoviciana). Weed Sci. 39 (2): 154–158.
2.
Bertholdsson N.-O. 2005. Early vigour and allelopathy – two useful traits for enhanced barley and wheat competitiveness against weeds. Weed Res. 45 (2): 94–102.
3.
Bertholdsson N.-O. 2011. Use of multivariate statistics to separate the allelopathic and competitive factors influencing weed suppression ability in winter wheat. Weed Res. 51 (3): 273–283.
4.
Blackshaw R.E., Semach G.P., O’Donovan J.T. 2000. Utilization of wheat seed rate to manage redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium) in a zero-till cropping system. Weed Technol. 14 (2): 389–396.
5.
Carlson H.L., Hill J.E. 1985. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition in spring wheat: plant density effects. Weed Sci. 33 (2): 176–181.
6.
Challaiah Burnside O.C., Wicks G.A., Johnson V.A. 1986. Competition between winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars and downy brome (Bromus tectorum). Weed Sci. 34 (5): 689–693.
7.
Christensen S. 1995. Weed suppression ability of spring barley varieties. Weed Res. 35 (4): 241–247.
8.
Davies D.H.K., Welsh J.P. 2001. Weed control in organic cereals and pulses. p. 77–114. In: “Organic Cereals and Pulses” (D. Younie, B.R. Taylor, J.P. Welsh, J.M. Wilkinson, eds.). Chalcombe Publications, Lincoln, 172 pp.
9.
Didon U.M.E. 2002. Variation between barley cultivars in early response to weed competition. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 188 (3): 176–184.
10.
Eisele J.-A., Köpke U. 1997. Choice of cultivars in organic farming: New criteria for winter wheat ideotypes. Pflanzenbauwissenschaften 1: 19–24.
11.
Feledyn-Szewczyk B. 2009. Comparison of the competitiveness of modern and old winter wheat varieties in relations to weeds. J. Res. Appl. Agric. Eng. 54 (3): 60–67.
12.
Feledyn-Szewczyk B. 2011. The weed infestation of spring wheat varieties cultivated in organic system. J. Res. Appl. Agric. Eng. 56 (3): 71–76.
13.
Feledyn-Szewczyk B. 2013. The influence of morphological features of spelt wheat (Triticum aestivum ssp. spelta) and common wheat (Triticum aestivum ssp. vulgare) varieties on the competitiveness against weeds in organic farming system. J. Food Agric. Environ. 11 (1): 416–421.
14.
Håkansson S. 1997. Competitive effects and competitiveness in annual plant stands. Measurement methods and problems related to plant density. Swed. J. Agric. Res. 27 (2): 53–73.
15.
Hoad S., Topp C., Davies K. 2008. Selection of cereals for weed suppression in organic agriculture: a method based on cultivar sensitivity to weed growth. Euphytica 163 (3): 355–366.
16.
Hucl P. 1998. Response to weed control by four spring wheat genotypes differing in competitive ability. Can. J. Plant Sci. 78 (1): 171–173.
17.
Kraska P. 2006. Wpływ zróżnicowanych dawek herbicydów na zachwaszczenie pszenicy ozimej. [The influence of different herbicides doses on winter wheat infestation]. Prog. Plant Prot./Post. Ochr. Roślin 46 (2): 256–260.
18.
Krawczyk R., Kaczmarek S., Kaniuczak Z. 2008. Wybrane metody agrotechniczne regulacji zachwaszczenia pszenicy ozimej uprawianej w ekologicznym i konwencjonalnym systemie produkcji. [Selected cultivation methods for weed infestation management in winter wheat cultivated in organic and conventional crop production systems]. p. 242–249. In: „Poszukiwanie nowych rozwiązań w ochronie upraw ekologicznych” (E. Matyaszczyk, ed.). [The search for new solutions in crop protection in organic agriculture]. Inst. Ochr. Roślin, Poznań, 393 pp.
19.
Lemerle D., Verbeek B., Cousens R.D., Coombers N.E. 1996. The potential for selecting wheat varieties strongly competitive against weeds. Weed Res. 36 (6): 505–513.
20.
O’Donovan J.T., Newman J.C., Harker K.N., Blackshow R.E., 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 (4): 655–662.
21.
O’Donovan J.T., Harker K.N., Clayton G.W., Hall L.M. 2000. Wild oat (Avena fatua) interference in barley (Hordeum vulgare) is influenced by barley variety and seeding rate. Weed Technol. 14 (3): 624–629.
22.
O’Donovan J.T., Blackshaw R.E., Harker K.N., Clayton G.W., McKenzie R. 2005. Variable plant establishment contributes to differences in competitiveness with wild oat among wheat and barley varieties. Can. J. Plant Sci. 85 (4): 771–776.
23.
O’Donovan J.T., Blackshaw R.E., Harker K. N., Clayton G.W., Moyer J.R., Dosdall L.M., Maurice D.C., Turkington T.K. 2007. Integrated approaches to managing weeds in springsown crops in western Canada. Crop Prot. 26: 390–398.
24.
Owczarczuk A., Snarska K., Jędruszczak M. 2005. Odmiana a zachwaszczenie łanu żyta ozimego. [Variety and weed infestation of winter rye]. Prog. Plant Prot./Post. Ochr. Roślin 45 (2): 970–973.
25.
Parylak D., Zawieja J., Jędruszczak M., Stupnica-Rodzynkiewicz E., Dąbkowska T., Snarska K. 2006. Wykorzystanie zasiewów mieszanych, własności odmian lub zjawiska allelopatii w ograniczaniu zachwaszczenia. [Use of the mix crops, cultivar properties or allelopathy in weed control]. Prog. Plant Prot./ Post. Ochr. Roślin 46 (1): 33–44.
26.
Praczyk T., Adamczewski K. 1994. Integrowany system zwalczania chwastów w uprawach rolniczych. [Integrated system of weed control in crops]. Mat. XXXIV Sesji Nauk. Inst. Ochr. Roślin, 1: 82–89.
27.
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 (1): 45–55.
28.
Seavers G.P., Wright K.J. 1999. Crop canopy development and structure influence weed supression. Weed Res. 39 (4): 319–328.
29.
Wicks G.A., Ramsel R.E., Nordquist P.T., Smith J.W., Challaiah R.E. 1986. Impact of wheat cultivars on establishment and suppression of summer annual weeds. Agron. J. 78 (1): 59–62.
30.
Wolfe M.S., Baresel J.P., Desclaux D., Goldringer I., Hoad S., Kovacs G., Löschenberger F., Miedaner T., Østergård H., Lammerts van Bueren E.T. 2008. Developments in breeding cereals for organic agriculture. Euphytica 163 (3): 323–346.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1899-007X |
| ISSN: | 1427-4345 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
