Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T01:20:18.728Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Glyphosate-Resistant Alfalfa Response to Harvest Frequency and Weed Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Doo-Hong Min ,
Timothy S. Dietz ,
Wesley J. Everman ,
Andrew J. Chomas ,
James J. Kells  and
Richard H. Leep
Doo-Hong Min
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, 286 Plant and Soil Sciences Building, East Lansing, MI 48824
Timothy S. Dietz
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, 286 Plant and Soil Sciences Building, East Lansing, MI 48824
Wesley J. Everman
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
Andrew J. Chomas
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, 286 Plant and Soil Sciences Building, East Lansing, MI 48824
James J. Kells*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, 286 Plant and Soil Sciences Building, East Lansing, MI 48824
Richard H. Leep
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, 286 Plant and Soil Sciences Building, East Lansing, MI 48824
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: kells@msu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) alfalfa offers growers new options for weed control in alfalfa. One potential benefit of using GR alfalfa is increased longevity of an alfalfa stand under frequent harvests. It was hypothesized that GR alfalfa would have a greater longevity because of removal of weed interference with minimal crop injury. To study GR alfalfa yield, weed invasion, alfalfa stand persistence, and relative forage quality (RFQ), a field experiment with three weed control methods (no herbicide, glyphosate, and hexazinone) under two harvest frequencies (high and moderate) was established in August 2003 at the Michigan State University Agronomy Farm in East Lansing, MI. Forage yield of established alfalfa was not adversely affected by herbicide treatments. There were no differences in weed biomass between alfalfa treated with glyphosate and that treated with hexazinone, except in 2007. Average GR alfalfa stand density decreased approximately 90% (from 236 to 27 plant m−2), and yield decreased approximately 30% (from 11.04 to 7.87 Mg ha−1) during the 7-yr period (2004 to 2010) of the experiment. Stand density of GR alfalfa showed natural thinning during the 7-yr period regardless of harvest intensity or herbicide treatment. In most production years (4 out of 5 yr), relative forage quality of GR alfalfa was higher under a high-intensity harvesting system (4 to 5 harvests yr−1) than it was with a moderate intensity harvesting system (3 to 4 harvests yr−1). Relative forage quality was not affected by weed removal with herbicides in most years. Weed removal and harvest intensity in established GR alfalfa had no effect on stand persistence.

La alfalfa resistente al glyphosate (GR) ofrece a los agricultores nuevas opciones para el control de malezas en este cultivo. Uno de los beneficios potenciales de usar alfalfa GR es que incrementa la longevidad de las plantaciones de alfafa con cosechas frecuentes. Se planteó la hiipotésis de que la alfalfa GR tendría una mayor longevidad debido a la eliminación de la interferencia de malezas con un daño mínimo al cultivo. Para estudiar el rendimiento de esta leguminosa, la invasión de malezas, la persistencia de las plantaciones y la calidad relativa del forraje (RFQ), se estableció un experimento de campo con tres métodos de control de malezas (sin herbicida, con glyphosate y con hexazinone) bajo dos frecuencias de cosecha (alta y moderada) en agosto de 2003 en la finca agronómica de la Universidad Estatal de Michigan en East Lansing, Michigan, USA. El rendimiento de forraje de una plantación establecida no se afectó adversamente por los tratamientos con herbicidas. No hubo diferencia en la biomasa de las malezas entre la alfalfa tratada con glyphosate y con hexazinone excepto en 2007. La densidad promedio de la plantación de alfalfa disminuyó aproximadamente 90% (de 236 a 27 plantas m−2) y el rendimiento también disminuyó aproximadamente 30% (de 11.04 a 7.87 Mg ha−1) durante el período de 7 años (2004–2010) del experimento. La densidad de plantas de alfalfa GR mostró un raleo natural durante el período de 7 años, sin importar la intensidad de la cosecha o el tratamiento de herbicida. En la mayoría de los años de producción (4 de los 5 años), la calidad relativa del forraje fue mayor bajo un sistema de cosecha de alta intensidad (4–5 cosechas por año) que en un sistema de cosecha de intensidad moderada (3–4 cosechas por año). La calidad relativa del forraje no se vio afectada por la eliminación de malezas usando herbicidas en la mayoría de los años. La eliminación de malezas y la intensidad de la cosecha en alfalfa GR establecida no tuvo ningún efecto en la persistencia de la plantación.

Keywords

Glyphosatehexazinonealfalfa, Medicago sativa L.Established alfalfaforage qualityalfalfa stand persistence
Type
Weed Management—Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 399 - 404
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

Becker, R. L., Sheaffer, C. C., Miller, D. W., and Swanson, D. R. 1998. Forage quality and economic implications of systems to manage giant foxtail and oat during alfalfa establishment. J. Prod. Agric. 11:300–308.Google Scholar
Berg, W. K., Cunningham, S. M., Brouder, S. M., Joern, B. C., Johnson, K. D., Santini, J., and Volenec, J. J. 2005. Influence of phosphorus and potassium on alfalfa yield and yield components. Crop Sci. 45:297–304.Google Scholar
Bradley, K., Kallenbach, R., and Roberts, C. A. 2010. Influence of seeding rate and herbicide treatments on weed control, yield and quality of spring-seeded glyphosate-resistant alfalfa. Agron. J. 102:751–758.Google Scholar
Cooper, C. S., Ditterline, R. L., and Welty, L. E. 1979. Seed size and seeding rate effects upon stand density and yield of alfalfa. Agron. J. 71:83–85.Google Scholar
Dillehay, B. L. and Curran, W. S. 2010. Comparison of herbicide programs for weed control in glyphosate-resistant alfalfa. Weed Technol. 24:130–138.Google Scholar
Doll, J. D. 1984. Effects of common dandelion on alfalfa drying time and yield. Proc. North. Central Weed Control Conf. 39:113–144.Google Scholar
Glaspie, C. F., McCordick, S. A., Dietz, T. S., Kells, J. J., Leep, R. H., and Everman, W. J. 2011. Effect of seeding rate and weed control on glyphosate-resistant alfalfa establishment. Weed Technol. 25:230–238.Google Scholar
Hach, C. C., Brayton, S. V., and Kopelove, A. B. 1985. A powerful Kjeldahl nitrogen method using peroxymonosulfuric acid. J. Agric. Food Chem. 33:1117–1123.Google Scholar
Hall, M. H., Nelson, C. J., Coutts, J. H., and Stout, R. C. 2004. Effect of seeding rate on alfalfa stand longevity. Agron. J. 96:717–722.Google Scholar
Hall, M. H., Herbrock, N. S., Pierson, P. P., Caddel, J. L., Owens, V. N., Sulc, R. M., Undersander, D. J., and Whitesides, R. E. 2010. The effects of glyphosate-tolerant technology on reduced alfalfa seeding rates. Agron. J. 102:911–916.Google Scholar
Kalu, B. A. and Fick, G. W. 1983. Morphological stages of development as a predictor of alfalfa herbage quality. Crop Sci. 23:1167–1172.Google Scholar
Kephart, K. D., Twidwell, E. K., Bortnem, R., and Boe, A. 1992. Alfalfa yield and component responses to seeding rate several years after establishment. Agron. J. 84:827–831.Google Scholar
Lissbrant, S., Stratton, S., Cunninghum, S. M., Brouder, S. M., and Volenec, J. J. 2009. Impact of long-term phosphorus and potassium fertilization on alfalfa nutritive value-yield relationships. Crop Sci. 49:1116–1124.Google Scholar
Lloveras, J., Chocarro, C., Freixes, O., Arque˘, E., Moreno, A., and Santiveri, F. 2008. Yield, yield components, and forage nutritive value of alfalfa as affected by seeding rate under irrigated conditions. Agron. J. 100:191–197.Google Scholar
Marten, G. C., Sheaffer, C. C., and Wyse, D. L. 1987. Forage nutritive value and palatability of perennial weeds. Agron. J. 79:980–986.Google Scholar
McCann, M. C., Rogan, G. J., Fitzpatrick, S., Trujillo, W. A., Sorbet, R., Hartnell, G. F., Riodan, S. G., and Nemeth, M. A. 2006. Glyphosate-tolerant alfalfa is compositionally equivalent to conventional alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 54:7187–7192.Google Scholar
McCordick, S. A., Hilger, D. E., Leep, R. H., and Kells, J. J. 2008a. Forage quality of glyphosate-resistant alfalfa as influenced by establishment systems. Weed Technol. 22:635–640.Google Scholar
McCordick, S. A., Hilger, D. E., Leep, R. H., and Kells, J. J. 2008b. Establishment systems for glyphosate-resistant alfalfa. Weed Technol. 22:22–29.Google Scholar
Moore, J. E. and Undersander, D. J. 2002. Relative forage quality: alternative to relative feed value and quality index. Pp. 16–32. in Proceedings of the 13th Annual Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium. Gainesville, FL University of Florida and the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.Google Scholar
Moyer, J. R. 1985. Effect of weed control and companion crop on alfalfa and sainfoin establishment, yields and nutrient composition. Can. J. Plant Sci. 65:107–116.Google Scholar
Moyer, J. R. 1991. Alfalfa yields in establishment and subsequent years after herbicide and phosphorus application during establishment. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72:619–625.Google Scholar
Moyer, J. R. and Acharya, S. N. 2006. Impact of cultivars and herbicides on weed management in alfalfa. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86:875–885.Google Scholar
Moyer, J. R., Fraser, J., Rode, L. M., and Topinka, A. K. 1998. Effect of growth-stage-based alfalfa harvest on weed encroachment and resultant quality. Can. J. Plant Sci. 79:243–247.Google Scholar
Moyer, J. R., Hironaka, R., Kozum, G. C., and Bergen, P. 1990. Effect of herbicide treatments on dandelion, alfalfa and sainfoin yields and quality. Can. J. Plant Sci. 70:1105–1113.Google Scholar
Muenscher, W. C. 1949. Weeds. New York Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sheaffer, C., Undersander, D. J., and Becker, R. L. 2007. Comparing Roundup Ready and conventional systems of alfalfa establishment. Forage Grazinglands. DOI:10.1094/FG-2007-0724-01-RS. http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/fg/research/2007/alfalfa/.Google Scholar
Sprankle, P., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. Rapid inactivation of glyphosate in the soil. Weed Sci. 1975. 23:224–228.Google Scholar
Steckel, L. E., Hayes, R. M., Montgomery, R. F., and Mueller, T. C. 2007. Evaluating glyphosate treatments on roundup ready alfalfa for crop injury and feed quality. Forage Grazinglands. DOI:10.1094/FG-2007-0201-01-RS. http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/fg/research/2007/glyphosate/.Google Scholar
Stout, D. G., Acharya, S. N., Huang, H. C., and Hanna, M. R. 1992. Alfalfa plant death during the summer versus the winter in interior British Columbia. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72:931–936.Google Scholar
Suzuki, M. 1991. Effects of stand age on agronomic, morphological and chemical characteristics of alfalfa. Can. J. Plant Sci. 71:445–452.Google Scholar
Temme, D. G., Harvey, R. S., Fawcett, R. S., and Young, A. W. 1979. Effects of annual weed control on alfalfa forage quality. Agron. J. 71:51–54.Google Scholar
Troelsen, J. E. and Campbell, J. B. 1969. The effect of maturity and leafiness on the intake and digestibility of alfalfas and grasses fed to sheep. J. Agric. Sci 73:145–154.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. and Robertson, J. B. 1985. Analysis of forages and fibrous foods. Volume AS613 in A Laboratory Manual for Animal Science. Ithaca, NY Department of Animal Science, Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wakefield, R. C. and Skaland, N. 1965. Effects of seeding rate and chemical weed control on establishment and subsequent growth of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.). Agron. J. 57:547–550.Google Scholar
Watkins, K. L., Veum, T. L., and Krause, G. F. 1987. Total nitrogen determination of various sample types: a comparison of the Hach, Kjeltec, and Kjeldahl methods. J. Assoc. Anal. Chem. 70:410–412.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G. 1981. Weed control in established dryland alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Weed Sci. 29:615–618.Google Scholar