Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T09:49:01.517Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cover Crop Management Affects Weeds and Yield in Organically Managed Sweetpotato Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Danielle D. Treadwell ,
Nancy G. Creamer ,
Jonathan R. Schultheis  and
Greg D. Hoyt
Danielle D. Treadwell*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticultural Science, Campus Box 7609, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27529-7609
Nancy G. Creamer
Affiliation:
Department of Horticultural Science, Campus Box 7609, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27529-7609
Jonathan R. Schultheis
Affiliation:
Department of Horticultural Science, Campus Box 7609, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27529-7609
Greg D. Hoyt
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science, North Carolina State University, 455 Research Dr., Fletcher, NC 28732
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: ddtreadw@ufl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A 3-yr field experiment was initiated in 2001 to evaluate weed suppression and sweetpotato productivity in three organic sweetpotato production systems. Organic systems were (1) compost and no cover crop with tillage (Org-NC), (2) compost and a cover crop mixture of hairy vetch and rye incorporated before transplanting (Org-CI), and (3) compost and the same cover crop mixture with reduced tillage (Org-RT). A conventional system with tillage and chemical controls (Conv) was included for comparison. Suppression of monocot and dicot weed density and biomass was similar between Org-NC and Org-CI each year, and were frequently similar to Conv. Org-RT was as effective as Org-NC in controlling dicot weed density and biomass each year, but did not suppress monocot weeds. At sweetpotato harvest, an increase in cover crop surface residue biomass in Org-RT was associated with a decrease in cumulative total weed density (R2 = 0.43, P = 0.0001); however, the amount of that residue was insufficient to suppress late-emerging monocot weeds. Total sweetpotato yield in Org-RT was at least 45% lower than other systems in 2002 and was most likely due to an increase in monocot weed density and biomass concurrent with a decrease in sweetpotato vine biomass. Total sweetpotato yield was similar among all systems in 2001 and 2004; the exception was lowest yields obtained in the Org-RT system in 2002. Organically managed sweetpotato with or without an incorporated cover crop produced sweetpotato yields equal to conventionally managed systems despite difficulties controlling weeds that emerged later in the season.

Keywords

EPTCnapropamidehairy vetch, Vicia villosa Rothrye, Secale cereale L. ‘Wrens Abruzzi’sweetpotato, Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. ‘Beauregard’VegetableproductiontillagemulchinterferenceCyperus esculentusSida spinosaSida rhombifoliaMollugo verticullata
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 1039 - 1048
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

Brainard, D. C., DiTommaso, A., and Mohler, C. L. 2006. Intraspecific variation in germination response to ammonium nitrate of Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii) seeds originating from organic vs. conventional vegetable farms. Weed Sci. 54/3:435–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, E. B. and Smith, R. F. 2005. Winter cover crop growth and weed suppression on the Central Coast of California. Weed Technol. 19/4:1017–1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D.C. Bridges, ed. 1992. Crop Losses Due to Weeds in the United States—1992. Champaign, IL Weed Science Society of America. 403.Google Scholar
Carolina Farm Stewardship Association 1997. Certified Organic Growers' Manual: A Guide for Ecologically Responsible Farming Practices. Pittsboro, NC. 33.Google Scholar
Clemments, D. R., Benoit, D. L., Murphy, S. D., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Tillage effects on weed seed return and seedbank composition. Weed Sci. 44:314–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creamer, N. G., Bennett, M. A., Stinner, B. R., Cardina, J., and Regnier, E. E. 1996. Mechanisms of weed suppression in cover crop-based production systems. HortSci. 31/3:410–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creamer, N. G., Plassman, B., Bennett, M. A., Wood, R. K., Stinner, B. R., and Cardina, J. 1995. A method for mechanically killing cover crops to optimize weed suppression. J. Alt. Agr. 10:157–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitri, C. and Greene, C. 2003. Recent growth patterns in the US organic foods market. Agriculture Information Bulletin No. AIB777. U. S. Department of Agriculture, ERS. 1 Feb. 2005. 〈http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib777/〉.Google Scholar
Fennimore, S. A. and Jackson, L. E. 2003. Organic amendment and tillage effects on vegetable field weed emergence and seedbanks. Weed Technol. 17/1:42–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillger, D. E., Weller, S. C., Maynard, E. T., and Gibson, K. D. 2006. Emergent weed communities associated with tomato production systems in Indiana. Weed Sci. 54/6:1106–1112.Google Scholar
Hoyt, G. D. 1999. Tillage and cover residue affects on vegetable yields. HortSci. 9:351–358.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, C. M. and McGiffen, M. E. Jr. 2000. Cowpea cover crop mulch for weed control in desert pepper production. HortScience 35:196–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyvönen, T., Ketoja, E., Salonen, J., Jalli, H., and Tiainen, J. 2003. Weed species diversity and community composition in organic and conventional cropping of spring cereals. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 97/1–3:131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jett, L. W. 1999. Tillage methods affect the growth of sweetpotato. HortSci. Program and Abstracts of the 96th Conference of the American Society for Horticultural Science 34:476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jett, L. W. and Talbot, T. P. 1998. Conservation Tillage of Sweetpotato I. Grass Cover Crops. 1998 Annual Sweetpotato Report of Louisiana State University Sweetpotato Research Station.Google Scholar
Keeney, D. R. and Nelson, D. W. 1986. Nitrogen—Inorganic forms. Pages 463–698. in Page, A.L., Miller, R.H., Keeney, D.R. eds. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part II. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 2nd ed. Madison, WI American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Kremer, R. J. and Souissi, T. 2001. Cyanide production by Rhizobacteria and potential for suppression of weed seedling growth. Curr. Microbiol. 43:182–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
La Bonte, D. R., Harrison, H. F., and Motsenbocker, C. E. 1999. Sweetpotato clone tolerance to weed interference. HortScience 34:229–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J. and Kremer, R. J. 2000. Rhizobacteria associated with weed seedlings in different cropping systems. Weed Sci. 48:734–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebman, M. and Ohno, T. 1998. Crop rotation and legume residue effects on weed emergence and growth: Applications for weed management. Pages 181–221. in. Integrated Weed and Soil Management. Chelsea, MI Ann Arbor Press.Google Scholar
Menalled, F. D., Gross, K. L., and Hammond, M. 2001. Weed aboveground and seedbank community responses to agricultural management systems. Ecol. Applic. 11/6:1586–1601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menalled, F. D., Smith, R. G., Dauer, J. T., and Fox, T. B. 2007. Impact of agricultural management on carabid communities and weed seed predation. Agric. Ecosystems Environ. 118/1–4:49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohler, C. L. and Teasdale, J. R. 1993. Response of weed emergence to rate of Vicia villosa Roth and Secale cereale L. residue. Weed Res. 33:487–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morse, R. D., Vaughan, D. H., and Belcher, L. W. 1993. Evaluation of conservation tillage systems for transplanting crops—Potential role the subsurface tillage transplanter. Pages 145–151. in Bollich, P.K. ed. The Evolution of Conservation Tillage Systems. Monroe, LA Proceedings of the Southern Conservation Tillage Conference for Sustainable Agriculture.Google Scholar
[NCDA & CS] North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 2005. North Carolina Agricultural Statistics 2004. North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and the US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
[NCSU] North Carolina State University and College of Agriculture and Life Sciences 2005. North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual.Google Scholar
Ngouajio, M. and Mennan, H. 2005. Weed populations and pickling cucumber (Cucumis sativus) yield under summer and winter cover crop systems. Crop Prot. 24/6:521–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[OMRI] Organic Materials Review Institute 2001. 〈http://www.omri.org〉. Accessed: April 1, 2005.Google Scholar
[OTA] Organic Trade Association 2006. 2006 Manufacturer Survey Overview. 〈http://ota.com/organic/mt.html〉. Accessed: August 8, 2006.Google Scholar
Pardales, J. R. and Esquibel, C. B. 1997. Effect of drought during the establishment period on the root system development of cassava. Jpn. J. Crop Sci. 65/1:93–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pardales, J. R. and Yamauchi, A. 2003. Regulation of root development in sweetpotato and cassava by soil moisture during their establishment period. Plant Soil 255:201–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeves, D. W., Price, A. J., and Patterson, M. G. 2005. Evaluation of three winter cereals for weed control in conservation-tillage in nontransgenic cotton. Weed Technol. 19:731–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolston, L. H., Clark, C. A., Cannon, J. M., Randle, W. M., Riley, E. G., Wilson, P. W., and Robbins, M. L. 1987. ‘Beauregard’ sweetpotato. HortScience. 22:1338–1339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultheis, J. R., Walters, S. A., Adams, D. E., and Estes, E. A. 1999. In-row plant spacing and date of harvest of ‘Beauregard’ sweetpotato affect yield and return on investment. HortScience 34:1229–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seem, J. E., Creamer, N. G., and Monks, D. W. 2003. Critical weed-free period for ‘Beauregard’ sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas). Weed Technol. 17:686–695.Google Scholar
Shipley, B. and Keddy, P. A. 1988. The relationship between relative growth rate and sensitivity to nutrient stress in twenty-eight species of emergent macrophytes. J. Ecol. 76:1101–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shipley, P. R., Meisinger, J. J., and Decker, A. M. 1992. Conserving residual corn fertilizer nitrogen with winter cover crops. Agron. J. 85:673–680.Google Scholar
Sooby, J., Landeck, J., and Lipson, M. 2007. 2007 National organic research agenda. Soil–Pests–Livestock–Genetics: Outcomes from the Scientific Congress on Organic Agricultural Research (SCOAR). 20 June 2007. 〈http://ofrf.org/publications/pubs/nora2007.pdf〉.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. and Mohler, C. L. 1993. Light transmittance, soil temperature, and soil moisture under residue of hairy vetch and rye. Agron. J. 85:673–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, J. R., Mangum, R. W., Radhakrishnan, J., and Cavigelli, M. A. 2004. Weed seedbank dynamics in three organic farming crop rotations. Agron. J. 96/5:1429–1435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. and Pillai, P. 2005. Contribution of ammonium to stimulation of smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus L.) germination by extracts of hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth) residue. Weed Biol. Manage. 5:19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toth, S. J., Melton, T., Monks, D. W., Schultheis, J. R., and Sorensen, K. A. 1997. Sweetpotato pesticide use survey in North Carolina. Data report for the Southern Region Pesticide Impact Assessment Program. Raleigh, NC North Carolina State University. 1–91.Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture 1981. U. S. Standards for Grades of Sweetpotatoes. Washington, DC U. S. Department of Agricultural Marketing Service.Google Scholar
[USDA, AMS] U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Agricultural Marketing Service 2002. National Organic Standards. Docket No. TMD-00-02-FR. 10 Jan. 2004. 〈http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/indexIE.htm〉.Google Scholar
[USDA, ERS] US Department of Agriculture and the Economic Research Service 2003. Sweetpotato Statistics. Report No. 03001. 20 Jan. 2004. 〈http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/usda.html〉.Google Scholar
Varco, J. J., Frye, W. W., Smith, M. S., and MacKown, C. T. 1989. Tillage effects on nitrogen recovery by corn from a N-15 labeled legume cover crop. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 53/3:822–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walz, E. 1999. Final results of the third biennial national organic farmer's survey. Santa Cruz, CA Organic Farming Research Foundation. 19.Google Scholar
Wilson, G. L., Averre, C. W., Baird, J. V., Beasley, E. O., Bonanno, A. R., Estes, E. A., and Sorensen, K. A. 1989. Growing and marketing quality sweetpotatoes. Agricultural Extension Service Publication No. AG-09.Google Scholar
Yennish, J. P., Worsham, A. D., and York, A. D. 1996. Cover crops for herbicide replacement in no-tillage corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 10:815–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar