ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Weed interference period and economic threshold level in barley
1
Department of Agronomy, Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul, Erechim, Brazil
2
Department of Agricultural Sciences, State University of Montes Claros, Minas Gerais, Brazil
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article
Submission date: 2021-06-29
Acceptance date: 2021-08-30
Online publication date: 2022-03-04
Corresponding author
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2022;62(1):33-48
HIGHLIGHTS
- The rectangular hyperbola estimates barley yield losses due to turnip infestation
- Barley yield components were not influenced by weed control or coexistence periods
- Weeds in barley should be controlled between 12 and 22 days after crop emergence
- Cultivars BRS Greta, BRS Swabia, ANA 01 and BRS Manduri were the most competitive
- The level of economic damage of turnip on barley ranged from 0.17 to 1.99 plants m-2
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Determination of interference periods, competitive ability and economic threshold level
(ETL) are important tools for integrated weed management (IWM) in barley. The objective
of the work was to determine the periods of interference, the competitive ability and
the ETL of weeds in barley (Hordeum vulgare). Two field experiments were carried out, in
a randomized block design, with four replications. In this study, the periods of coexistence
and control for ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) and turnip (Raphanus raphanistrum) infesting
barley cultivar, cv. ANA 01 were evaluated. The coexistence periods and/or control
were: 0, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42 and 120 days after barley emergence (DAE). In experiment
2the treatments for determination of ETLs were composed by barley cultivars (BRS Suábia,
ANA 01, BRS Korbel, BRS Manduri, BRS Cauê and BRS Greta), and turnip densities, from
zero (0) to maximum densities of 816, 788, 948, 394, 584 and 618 plants · m−2, in competition
with each cultivar. Control of turnip and ryegrass should be adopted in barley in the
period between 12 to 22 DAE, which is described as a critical control period. The rectangular
hyperbola adequately estimates losses in grain yield due to turnip infestation. There
is an effect on the competitive ability of the cultivars in relation to turnip, which resulted
in ETLs that ranged from 0.27 to 1.99 plants · m−2. The cultivars BRS Greta, BRS Suábia,
ANA 01 and BRS Manduri were the most competitive in the presence of turnip.
FUNDING
The authors are grateful to the National Council for
Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq),
Research Support Foundation of Rio Grande do
Sul (FAPERGS), Federal University of Fronteira Sul
(UFFS) and the Studies and Projects Financing Agency
(FINEP) for financial support. Leandro Galon and Ignácio
Aspiazú would like to thank the CNPq (process
numbers 306927/2019-5 and 307610/2019-5, respectively)
for the fellowships.
RESPONSIBLE EDITOR
Przemysław Kardasz
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
REFERENCES (31)
1.
Agostinetto D., Galon L., Silva JMBV., Tironi SP., Andres A. 2010. Interference and economic weed threshold (Ewt) of barnyardgrass on rice as a function of crop plant arrangement. Planta Daninha 28 (Sp.): 993−1003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
2.
Agostinetto D., Rigoli R.P., Schaedler C.E., Tironi S.P., Santos L.S. 2008. Critical period for weed competition with wheat. Planta Daninha 26 (2): 271−278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
3.
Agrofit Phytosanitary Pesticide Systems. Active ingredient query. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply – MAPA. General Coordination of Pesticides and Related Products/DFIA/SDA. 2021. Available on: https://www.agricultura.gov.br [Accessed: 10 August 2021] (in Portuguese).
4.
Bajwa A.A., Walsh M., Chauhan B.S. 2017. Weed management using crop competition in Australia. Crop Protection 95 (1): 8−13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crop....
5.
Cargnelutti Filho A., Storck L. 2007. Evaluation statistics of the experimental precision in corn cultivar trials. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 42 (1): 17−24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
6.
Catunda M.G., Freitas S.P., Oliveira J.G., Silva C.M.M. 2005. Effects of herbicides on the photosynthetic activity of pineapple (Ananas comossus). Planta Daninha 3 (1): 115−121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
7.
Cemetrs − Estadual Meteorology Center. 2012. Available on: https://seapi.rs.gov.br/centro... [Accessed: 5 May 2021] (in Portuguese).
8.
Conab – Companhia Nacional de Abastecimento. Monitoring the Brazilian harvest. Available on: https://portaldeinformacoes.co... [Accessed: 5 May 2021] (in Portuguese).
9.
Cousens R. 1985. An empirical model relating crop yield to weed and crop density and a statistical comparison with other models. The Journal of Agricultural Science 105 (3): 513–521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S00218....
10.
Cousens R. 1991. Aspects of the design and interpretation of competition (interference) experiments. Weed Technology 5 (3): 664−673. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S08900....
11.
Forte C.T., Basso F.J.M., Galon L., Agazzi L.R., Nonemacher F., Concenço G. 2017. Competitive ability of transgenic soybean cultivars coexisting with weeds. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Agrárias 12 (2): 185−193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5039/agrari....
12.
Galon L., Tironi S.P., Rocha P.R.R., Concenço G., Silva A.F., Vargas L., Silva A.A., Ferreira E.A., Minella E., Soares E.R., Ferreira F.A. 2011. Competitive ability of barley cultivars against ryegrass. Planta Daninha 29 (4): 771−781. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
13.
Galon L., Basso F.J.M., Chechi L., Pilla T.P., Santin C.O., Bagnara A.M.A., Franceschetti M.B., Castoldi C.T., Perin G.F., Forte C.T. 2019. Weed interference period and economic threshold level of ryegrass in wheat. Bragantia 78 (3): 409−422. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4....
14.
Georgescu M.I., Luchian V., Groza O., Ionescu N., Săvulescu E. 2016. Raphanus raphanistrum subsp. landra (Moretti ex DC.) Bonnier & Layens – adventitious species of Mediterranean origin adapted as weed in crops – some considerations on morphological and anatomical peculiarities. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 10: 123−128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aasp....
15.
Jha P., Kumar V., Godara R.K., Chauhan B.S. 2017. Weed management using crop competition in the United States: A review. Crop Protection 95 (1): 31−37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crop....
16.
Kumar V., Jha P. 2017. Influence of nitrogen rate, seeding rate, and weed removal timing on weed interference in barley and effect of nitrogen on weed response to herbicides. Weed Science 65 (1): 189−201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1614/WSD-16....
17.
Lamego F.P., Ruchel Q., Kaspary T.E., Gallon M., Basso C.J., Santi A.L. 2013. Competitive ability of wheat cultivars against weeds. Planta Daninha 31 (3): 521−531. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
18.
Lindquist J.L., Kropff M.J. 1996. Applications of an ecophysiological model for irrigated rice (Oryza sativa)-Echinochloa competition. Weed Science 44 (1): 52−56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S00431....
19.
Mahajan G., Hickey L., Chauhan B.S. 2020. Response of barley genotypes to weed interference. Australia. Agronomy 10 (1): 1−12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agrono....
20.
Merotto Jr. A., Fischer A.J., Vidal R.A. 2009. Perspectives for using light quality knowledge as an advanced ecophysiological weed management tool. Planta Daninha 27 (2): 407−419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
21.
Meulen A., Chauhan B.S. 2017. A review of weed management in wheat using crop competition. Crop Protection 95 (1): 38−44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crop....
22.
Minella E. 2013. Technical indications for the production of brewing barley in the 2013 and 2014 crop seasons. Passo Fundo: Embrapa Trigo, 105 pp. (in Portuguese).
23.
Paynter B.H., Hills A.L. 2009. Barley and rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) competition is influenced by crop cultivar and density. Weed Technology 23 (1): 40−48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1614/WT-08-....
24.
Peel M.C., Finlayson B.L., Mcmahon T.A. 2007. Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 11 (5): 1633−1644. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-1....
25.
Pies W., Werlang T., Luz A.C.P., Galon L., Tironi S.P. 2019. Competitive barley ability coexisting with ryegrass densities. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Agrárias 14 (2): e5630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5039/agrari....
26.
Santos H.G. dos, Jacomine P.K.T., Anjos L.H.C. dos, Oliveira V.A. de, Lumbreras J.F., Coelho M.R., Almeida J.A. de, Araujo Filho J.C. de, Oliveira J.B. de, Cunha T.J.F. 2018. Brazilian Soil Classification System, 5 ed. Brasília, DF, EMBRAPA, 356 pp. (in Portuguese).
27.
Swanton C.J., Nkoa R., Blackshaw R.E. 2015. Experimental methods for crop-weed competition studies. Weed Science 63 (2): 1−11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-1....
28.
Tavares L.C., Brunes A.P., Rufino C.A., Fonseca D.A.R., Gadotti G.I., Villela F.A. 2015. Barley seed treatment with zinc: seed physiological quality and yield. Semina: Ciências Agrárias 36 (2): 585−594. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0....
29.
Tavares L.C., Lemes E.S., Ruchel Q., Westendorff N.R., Agostinetto D. 2019. Criteria for decision making and economic threshold level for wild radish in wheat crop. Planta Daninha 37: e019178898. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-....
30.
Tironi S.P., Galon L., Silva A.F.D., Fialho C.M.T, Rocha P.R.R., Faria A.T., Radünz A.L. 2014. Time of emergency of ryegrass and wild radish on the competitive ability of barley crop. Ciência Rural 44 (9): 1527−1533. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8....
31.
Velini E.D., Osipe R., Gazziero D.L.P. 1995. Procedures for installation, evaluation and analysis of experiments with herbicides. Londrina, PR, Brazil: SBCPD, 42 pp. (in Portuguese).
| 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.
