Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T13:43:25.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Candidate Tools for Integrated Weed Management in Soybean at the Northern Frontier of Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 September 2018

Charles M. Geddes Open the ORCID record for Charles M. Geddes [Opens in a new window]  and
Robert H. Gulden
Charles M. Geddes
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, University of Manitoba, Department of Plant Science, Winnipeg, MB, Canada; current: Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge Research and Development Centre, Lethbridge, AB, Canada
Robert H. Gulden*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, University of Manitoba, Department of Plant Science, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
*
*Author for correspondence: Robert H. Gulden, University of Manitoba, Department of Plant Science, 222 Agriculture Building, 66 Dafoe Road, Winnipeg MB R3T 2N2, Canada. (Email: Rob.Gulden@umanitoba.ca)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The development of early-maturing soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] varieties has led to an increase in soybean production in canola (Brassica napus L.)-dominant crop rotations in western Canada. Herbicide-resistant (HR) volunteer B. napus can be difficult to manage in HR soybean using herbicides alone. In 2013 and 2014, four field experiments were conducted in Manitoba, Canada, to evaluate soybean row spacing, seeding density, nitrogen supply, and interrow tillage as candidate nonchemical weed management tools for an integrated program to manage volunteer B. napus in soybean. Among treatments and sites, volunteer B. napus produced about 830 seeds plant−1 and resulted in large seedbank inputs (averaging about 20,300 seeds m−2). Volunteer B. napus seedling recruitment differed among sites, and resulted in two distinct classes of sites based on average seedling densities of 39 and 89 plants m−2. Weed management tools were more effective at the sites with higher volunteer B. napus densities. At these sites, soybean yield was greater when using an increased soybean-seeding density (44% greater yield using a seeding density of 682,500 vs. 455,000 seeds ha−1) or interrow tillage (36% greater yield with vs. without using interrow tillage). Soybean row spacing (19 vs. 38 vs. 76 cm) did not affect soybean yield, unless the reduction in row spacing was combined with an increased seeding density (65% greater yield with narrow-row soybean seeded at 682,500 vs. wide-row soybean seeded at 455,000 seeds ha−1). At the sites with higher volunteer B. napus densities, seed production of canola volunteer B. napus was greater when nitrogen fertilizer was applied to simulate an environment with greater nitrogen supply (77% greater number of volunteer B. napus seeds produced with vs. without broadcast application of 23 kg N ha−1 urea). In northern climates, seeding soybean at increased densities using narrow-row spacing in fields with limited soil inorganic nitrogen and using interrow tillage in wide-row production systems are effective strategies that could augment chemical weed management in an integrated program for management of volunteer B. napus, and perhaps also other competitive early-season weeds.

Keywords

Martin M. Williams II, University of Illinois Urbana-ChampaignFecundityherbicide resistanceinterrow tillagenitrogen supplyplant densityrow spacingseed rainseedbank inputsseeding ratespatial arrangement.
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 66 , Issue 5 , September 2018 , pp. 662 - 672
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2018 

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

AGVISE Laboratories (2016) Nutrient Summary Canada 2016. https://www.agvise.com/soil-test-summaries. Accessed: August 02, 2017Google Scholar
Arce, GD, Pedersen, P, Hartzler, RG (2009) Soybean seeding rate effects on weed management. Weed Technol 23:17–22 Google Scholar
Bardella, GR (2016) Phosphorus Management Practices for Soybean Production in Manitoba. M.Sc thesis. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: University of Manitoba. 209 pGoogle Scholar
Beckie, HJ, Harker, KN (2017) Our top 10 herbicide-resistant weed management practices. Pest Manag Sci 73:1045–1052 Google Scholar
Bélanger, G, Ziadi, N, Pageau, D, Grant, C, Lafond, J, Nyiraneza, J (2015) Shoot growth, phosphorus-nitrogen relationships, and yield of canola in response to mineral phosphorus fertilization. Agron J 107:1458–1464 Google Scholar
Blackshaw, RE, Brandt, RN, Janzen, HH, Entz, T, Grant, CA, Derksen, DA (2003) Differential response of weed species to added nitrogen. Weed Sci 51:532–539 Google Scholar
Butts, TR, Norsworthy, JK, Kruger, GR, Sandell, LD, Young, BG, Steckel, LE, Loux, MM, Bradley, KW, Conley, SP, Stoltenberg, DE, Arriaga, FJ, Davis, VM (2016) Management of pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) in glufosinate-resistant soybean in the Midwest and Mid-South. Weed Technol 30:355–365 Google Scholar
Canola Council of Canada (2017) Clubroot. http://www.canolacouncil.org/canola-encyclopedia/diseases/clubroot. Accessed: April 25, 2018Google Scholar
Carkner, MK, Entz, MH (2017) Growing environment contributes more to soybean yield than cultivar under organic management. Field Crops Res 207:42–51 Google Scholar
Cavalieri, A, Harker, KN, Hall, LM, Gulden, RH (2016) Evaluation of the causes of on-farm harvest losses in canola in the northern Great Plains. Crop Sci 56:2005–2015 Google Scholar
Cavalieri, A, Lewis, DW, Gulden, RH (2014) Pod drop and pod shatter are not closely related in canola. Crop Sci 54:1194–11188 Google Scholar
Chandler, K, Shrestha, A, Swanton, CJ (2001) Weed seed return as influenced by the critical weed-free period and row spacing of no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean. Can J Plant Sci 81:877–880 Google Scholar
Cox, WJ, Cherney, JH (2011) Growth and yield responses of soybean to row spacing and seeding rate. Agron J 103:123–128 Google Scholar
Dalley, CD, Kells, JJ, Renner, KA (2004) Effect of glyphosate application timing and row spacing on weed growth in corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 18:177–182 Google Scholar
De Bruin, JL, Pedersen, P (2009) New and old soybean cultivar responses to plant density and intercepted light. Crop Sci 49:2225–2232 Google Scholar
Di Tomaso, JM (1995) Approaches for improving crop competitiveness through the manipulation of fertilization strategies. Weed Sci 43:491–497 Google Scholar
Duncan, WG (1986) Planting patterns and soybean yields. Crop Sci 36:584–588 Google Scholar
Egli, DB (2010) Soybean yield physiology: principles and processes of yield production. Pages 113–141 in Singh G, ed. The Soybean: Botany, Production, and Uses. London, UK: CABI Google Scholar
Friesen, LF, Nelson, AG, Van Acker, RC (2003) Evidence of contamination of pedigreed canola (Brassica napus) seedlots in western Canada with genetically engineered herbicide resistance traits. Agron J 95:1342–1347 Google Scholar
Geddes, CM, Gulden, RH (2017) Early autumn soil disturbance decreases persistence of volunteer summer-annual oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Weed Res 57:182–192 Google Scholar
Green-Tracewicz, E, Page, ER, Swanton, CJ (2012) Light quality and the critical period for weed control in soybean. Weed Sci 60:86–91 Google Scholar
Gregoire, PMJ (2017) Volunteer Canola (Brassica napus L.) Interference with Soybean (Glycine max L. [Merr]). M.Sc thesis. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: University of Manitoba. 114 pGoogle Scholar
Gulden, RH, Shirtliffe, SJ, Thomas, AG (2003) Secondary seed dormancy prolongs persistence of volunteer canola in western Canada. Weed Sci 51:904–913 Google Scholar
Haile, TA, Holzapfel, CB, Shirtliffe, SJ (2014) Canola genotypes and harvest methods affect seedbank addition. Agron J 106:236–242 Google Scholar
Hall, L, Topinka, K, Huffman, J, Davis, L, Good, A (2000) Pollen flow between herbicide-resistant Brassica napus is the cause of multiple-resistant B. napus volunteers. Weed Sci 48:688–694 Google Scholar
Harder, DB, Sprague, CL, Renner, KA (2007) Effect of soybean row spacing and population on weeds, crop yields and economic return. Weed Technol 21:744–752 Google Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Evans, SP, Mainz, M (2003) Row spacing influences the critical timing for weed removal in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 17:666–673 Google Scholar
Kratochvil, RJ, Pearce, JT, Harrison, MR (2004) Row-spacing and seeding rate effects on glyphosate-resistant soybean for Mid-Atlantic production systems. Agron J 96:1029–1038 Google Scholar
Leeson, JY, Gaultier, J, Grenkow, L (2017a) Manitoba Weed Survey of Annual Crops in 2016. Weed Survey Series Publication 17-2. Saskatoon, SK, Canada: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 203 pGoogle Scholar
Leeson, JY, Gaultier, J, Hall, L, Neeser, C (2017b) Residual weed population shifts in the Prairie Provinces—1973 to 2017. Page 43 in Proceedings of the 71st Canadian Weed Science Society—Societe canadienne de malherbologie. Saskatoon, SK, Canada: Canadian Weed Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
Légère, A, Schreiber, MM (1989) Competition and canopy architecture as affected by soybean (Glycine max) row spacing and density of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci 37:84–92 Google Scholar
Littell, RC, Milken, GA, Stroup, WW, Wolfinger, RD, Schabenberger, O (2006) SAS for Mixed Models. 2nd ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. 834 pGoogle Scholar
Lund, RE (1975) Tables for an approximate test for outliers in linear models. Technometrics 17:473–476 Google Scholar
Markowski, A (1988) Sensitivity of different species of field crops to chilling temperature. Part II. Germination, growth and injuries of seedlings. Acta Physiol Plant 10:275–283 Google Scholar
Munger, P, Bleiholder, H, Hack, H, Hess, M, Stauss, R, van den Boom, T, Weber, E (1997) Phenological growth stages of the soybean plant (Glycine max L. MERR.): Codification and description according to the BBCH scale. J Agron Crop Sci 179:209–217 Google Scholar
Nadler, AJ (2007) An Agroclimatic Risk Assessment of Crop Production on the Canadian Prairies. M.Sc thesis. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: University of Manitoba. 239 pGoogle Scholar
Nice, GR, Buehring, NW, Shaw, DR (2001) Sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia) response to shading, soybean (Glycine max) row spacing, and population in three management systems. Weed Technol 15:155–162 Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Frederick, JR (2002) Reduced seeding rate for glyphosate-resistant, drilled soybean on the southeastern coastal plain. Agron J 94:1282–1288 Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Ward, SM, Shaw, DR, Llewellyn, RS, Nichols, RL, Webster, TM, Bradley, KW, Frisvold, G, Powles, SB, Burgos, NR, Witt, WW, Barrett, M (2012) Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Sci 60:31–62 Google Scholar
O’Donovan, JT, Blackshaw, RE, Harker, KN, Clayton, GW, Moyer, JR, Dosdall, LM, Maurice, DC, Turkington, TK (2007) Integrated approaches to managing weeds in spring-sown crops in western Canada. Crop Prot 26:390–398 Google Scholar
Osborne, SL, Riedell, WE (2006) Starter nitrogen fertilizer impact on soybean yield and quality in the northern Great Plains. Agron J 98:1569–1574 Google Scholar
Rao, AS, Reddy, KS (2010) Nutrient management in soybean. Pages 161–190 in Singh G, ed. The Soybean: Botany, Production, and Uses. London: CABI Google Scholar
Reddy, KN (2001) Glyphosate-resistant soybean as a weed management tool: Opportunities and challenges. Weed Biol Manag 1:193–202 Google Scholar
Rich, AM, Renner, KA (2007) Row spacing and seeding rate effects on eastern black nightshade (Solanum ptycanthum) and soybean. Weed Technol 21:124–130 Google Scholar
Salvagiotti, F, Cassman, KG, Specht, JE, Walters, DT, Weiss, A, Dobermann, A (2008) Nitrogen uptake, fixation and response to fertilizer N in soybeans: A review. Field Crops Res 108:1–13 Google Scholar
Schaarschmidt, F, Vaas, L (2009) Analysis of trials with complex treatment structure using multiple contrast tests. HortScience 44:188–195 Google Scholar
Seerey, NJ, Shirtliffe, SJ (2010) Commercial generations of Brassica napus cause greater yield loss in Triticum aestivum, than volunteer B. napus generations. Can J Plant Sci 90:777–783 Google Scholar
Soy Canada (2018) Growing Areas. http://soycanada/industry/growing-areas/ Accessed: April 18, 2018Google Scholar
Statistics Canada (2017) Table 001-0010—Estimated areas, yield, production and average farm price of principal field crops in metric units, annual, CANSIM [database]. www5.statcan. gc.ca. Accessed: September 9, 2017Google Scholar
Taylor, AJ, Smith, CJ, Wilson, IB (1991) Effect of irrigation and nitrogen fertilizer on yield, oil content, nitrogen accumulation and water use of canola (Brassica napus L.). Fertil Res 29:249–260 Google Scholar
Taylor, HM, Mason, WK, Bennie, ATP, Rowse, HR (1982) Responses of soybeans to two row spacings and two soil water levels. I. An analysis of biomass accumulation, canopy development, solar radiation interception and components of seed yield. Field Crops Res 5:1–14 Google Scholar
Tkachuk, CF (2017) Evaluation of soybean (Glycine max) planting dates and plant densities in northern growing-regions of the northern Great Plains. M.Sc thesis. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: University of Manitoba. 171 pGoogle Scholar
Willcott, J, Herbert, SJ, Zhi-Yi, L (1984) Leaf area display and light interception in short-season soybeans. Field Crops Res 9:173–182 Google Scholar
Yelverton, FH, Coble, HD (1991) Narrow row spacing and canopy formation reduces weed resurgence in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 5:169–174 Google Scholar