Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:59:52.662Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Buckwheat Residue Effects on Emergence and Growth of Weeds in Winter-Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Cropping Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Virender Kumar ,
Daniel C. Brainard ,
Robin R. Bellinder  and
Russell R. Hahn
Virender Kumar
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Daniel C. Brainard*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Robin R. Bellinder
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Russell R. Hahn
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: brainar9@msu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field and pot studies were conducted in Central New York to determine the potential weed-management benefits of a buckwheat cover crop grown before winter wheat. Specific objectives were to determine buckwheat residue effects on (1) emergence and growth of winter annual weeds; (2) wheat establishment and yield; and (3) emergence of summer annual weeds in the spring following overwinter seed burial. In a field study, buckwheat was sown at two timings (July or August), mowed, and either incorporated or left on the soil surface. Winter wheat was drilled into buckwheat residue in September and weed and crop growth were monitored. In a complementary pot study, four winter annual weeds were sown in soil removed from buckwheat and bare-soil plots at 0 or 15 d after incorporation and monitored for emergence and early growth. To assess buckwheat residue effects on spring emergence from overwintering seeds, seeds of three weed species were buried in buckwheat residue and bare-soil plots in the fall, exhumed in April, and evaluated for emergence. To investigate the mechanism for possible effects of buckwheat residue on overwintering seeds, two levels each of seed treatment (none or fungicide) and fertilization (none or 170 kg ha−1) were applied before burial. Buckwheat residue had no negative effect on wheat yields but suppressed emergence (22 to 72%) and growth (0 to 95%) of winter annual weeds, although effects were often small and inconsistent. Buckwheat residue had no effect on the emergence of buried weed seeds in spring. However, fungicide treatment enhanced the emergence of Powell amaranth seeds by 12.5 to 25.5% and of barnyardgrass seeds by 0 to 12%. Our results suggest that buckwheat residue can contribute to weed management in wheat cropping systems, but that further studies investigating the mechanistic basis for the inconsistent selective effects of buckwheat residue on weeds are needed before buckwheat use can be optimized.

Keywords

Powell amaranth = green pigweed, Amaranthus powellii S. Wats. AMAPOhairy galinsoga, Galinsoga ciliata (Raf.) Blake GASCIbarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. ECHCGcommon chickweed, Stellaria media (L.) Vill. STEMEyellow rocket, Barbarea vulgaris Ait. f. BARVUcorn chamomile, Anthemis arvensis L. ANTARshepherd's-purse, Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medik. CAPBPwinter wheat, Triticum aestivum Lbuckwheat, Fagopyrum esculentum MoenchEmergencegrowthgreen manurecover cropresidue effectsweed seed mortality
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 59 , Issue 4 , December 2011 , pp. 567 - 573
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: International Rice Research Institute—India, NASC Complex, Pusa, New Delhi.

Current address: Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-1325.

References

Literature Cited

Amann, C. and Amberger, A. 1989. Phosphorous efficiency of buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum). Zeits. Pflanz.hrung Bodenk. 152:181–189.Google Scholar
Björkman, T., Bellinder, R., Hahn, R., and Shail, J. W. Jr. 2008. Buckwheat Cover Crop Handbook. Ithaca, NY Cornell University Press. 17 p.Google Scholar
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. 54:435–442.Google Scholar
Bugg, R. L. and Ellis, R. T. 1990. Insects associated with cover crops in Massachusetts. Biol. Agric. Hortic. 7:47–68.Google Scholar
Carr, P. M., Horsley, R. D., and Poland, W. W. 2003. Tillage and seeding rate effects on wheat cultivars: II. Yield components. Crop Sci. 43:210–218.Google Scholar
Chee-Sanford, J. C., Williams, M. M. II., Davis, A. S., and Sims, G. K. 2006. Do microorganisms influence seed-bank dynamics? Weed Sci. 54:575–587.Google Scholar
Clark, A. 2007. Managing Cover Crops Profitably. 3rd ed. Handbook Series Book 3. Beltsville, MD Sustainable Agriculture Network. 244 p.Google Scholar
Colosi, J. C., Cavers, P. B., and Bough, M. A. 1988. Dormancy and survival in buried seeds of proso-millet. Can. J. Bot. 66:161–168.Google Scholar
Creamer, N. G. and Baldwin, K. R. 2000. An evaluation of summer cover crops for use in vegetable production systems in North Carolina. HortScience. 35:600–603.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. 2007. Nitrogen fertilizer and crop residue effects on seed mortality and germination of eight annual weed species. Weed Sci. 55:123–128.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. and Liebman, M. 2003. Cropping system effects on Setaria faberi seedbank dynamics. Aspects Appl. Biol. 69:83–91.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. 1989. Some effects of nitrate-treated soils upon the sensitivity of buried redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) seeds to ethylene, temperature, light and carbon dioxide. Plant Cell Environ. 12:581–588.Google Scholar
Fennimore, S. A. and Jackson, L. E. 2003. Organic amendment and tillage effects on vegetable field weed emergence and seedbanks. Weed Technol. 17:42–50.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, C. B., Butler, B. R., Davis, M. G., and Coffman, C. B. 2003. New cover crops and cover crop management for organic vegetable producers in Maryland. in Organic Farming Research Foundation Project Report. Santa Cruz, CA Organic Farming Research Foundation. 11 p.Google Scholar
Froud-Williams, R. J., Chancellor, R. J., and Drennan, D.S.H. 1983. Influence of cultivation regime upon buried weed seeds in arable cropping systems. J. Appl. Ecol. 20:199–208.Google Scholar
Gallandt, E. R., Fuerst, E. P., and Kennedy, A. C. 2004. Effects of tillage, fungicide seed treatment, and soil fumigation on annual mortality of Avena fatua . Weed Sci. 52:597–604.Google Scholar
Gallandt, E. R., Liebman, M., and Huggins, D. R. 1999. Improving soil qualities: implications for weed management. J. Crop Prod. 2:95–121.Google Scholar
Golisz, A., Ciarka, D., and Gawronski, S. W. 2002. Allelopathy activity of buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum Moench). Page 161 in Fujii, Y., Hidarate, S., and Araya, H., eds. Proceedings III World Congress on Allelopathy. Tsukuba City, Ibaraki, Japan Sato Printing.Google Scholar
Haramoto, E. R. and Gallandt, E. R. 2005. Brassica cover cropping: I. Effects on weed and crop establishment. Weed Sci. 53:695–701.Google Scholar
Iqbal, Z., Hiradate, S., Noda, A., Isojima, S., and Fuji, Y. 2003. Allelopathic activity of buckwheat: isolation and characterization of phenolics. Weed Sci. 51:657–662.Google Scholar
Kumar, V., Brainard, D. C., and Bellinder, R. R. 2008. Suppression of Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii), shepherd's-purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris), and corn chamomile (Anthemis arvensis) by buckwheat residues: role of nitrogen and fungal pathogens. Weed Sci. 56:271–280.Google Scholar
Kumar, V., Brainard, D. C., and Bellinder, R. R. 2009a. Effects of spring-sown cover crops on establishment and growth of hairy galinsoga (Galinsoga ciliata) and four vegetable crops. HortScience. 44:730–736.Google Scholar
Kumar, V., Brainard, D. C., and Bellinder, R. R. 2009b. Suppression of Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii) by buckwheat residues: role of allelopathy. Weed Sci. 57:66–73.Google Scholar
Leishman, M. R., Masters, G. J., Clarke, I. P., and Brown, V. K. 2000. Seed bank dynamics: the role of fungal pathogens and climate change. Funct. Ecol. 14:293–299.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, W. M. 1993. Losses from the seed bank of Mimosa pigra: soil micro-organisms vs. temperature fluctuations. J. Appl. Ecol. 30:654–660.Google Scholar
Pitty, A., Staniforth, D. W., and Tiffany, L. H. 1987. Fungi associated with caryopses of Setaria species from field-harvested seeds and from soil under two tillage systems. Weed Sci. 35:319–323.Google Scholar
SAS Institute. 2001. SAS/STAT User's Guide Version 8-1. Cary, NC SAS Institute. 1030 p.Google Scholar
Tanaka, D. L. 1989. Spring wheat plant parameters as affected by fallow methods in the northern Great Plains. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 53:1506–1511.Google Scholar
Tominaga, T. and Uezu, T. 1995. Weed suppression by buckwheat. Pages 693–697 in Matano, T. and Ujihasa, A., eds. Current Advances in Buckwheat Research. Volume 2. Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium of Buckwheat. Nagano, Japan Shinshu University Press.Google Scholar
Westoby, M., Leishman, M., and Lord, J. 1996. Comparative ecology of seed size and dispersal. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 351:1309–1318.Google Scholar
Xuan, T. D. and Tsuzuki, E. 2004. Allelopathic plants: buckwheat. Allelopathy J. 13:137–148.Google Scholar
Zorner, P. S., Zimdahl, R. L., and Schweizer, E. E. 1984. Sources of viable seed loss in buried dormant and nondormant population of wild oat (Avena fatua L.) seed in Colorado. Weed Res. 24:143–150.Google Scholar