Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-p566r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T09:27:58.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cover-Crop Species as Distinct Biotic Filters in Weed Community Assembly

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Richard G. Smith*
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, 56 College Road, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
Lesley W. Atwood
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, 56 College Road, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
Fredric W. Pollnac
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, 56 College Road, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
Nicholas D. Warren
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, 56 College Road, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: richard.smith@unh.edu.

Abstract

Cover crops represent a potentially important biological filter during weed community assembly in agroecosystems. This filtering could be considered directional if different cover-crop species result in weed communities with predictably different species composition. We examined the following four questions related to the potential filtering effects of cover crops in a field experiment involving five cover crops grown in monoculture and mixture: (1) Do cover crops differ in their effect on weed community composition? (2) Is competition more intense between cover crops and weeds that are in the same family or functional group? (3) Is competition more intense across weed functional types in a cover-crop mixture compared with cover crops grown in monocultures? (4) Within a cover-crop mixture, is a higher seeding rate associated with more effective biotic filtering of the weed community? We found some evidence that cover crops differentially filtered weed communities and that at least some of these filtering effects were due to differential biomass production across cover-crop species. Monocultures of buckwheat and sorghum–sudangrass reduced the number of weed species relative to the no-cover-crop control by an average of 36 and 59% (buckwheat) and 25 and 40% (sorghum–sudangrass) in 2011 and 2012, respectively. We found little evidence that competition intensity was dependent upon the family or functional classification of the cover crop or weeds, or that cover-crop mixtures were stronger assembly filters than the most effective monocultures. Although our results do not suggest that annual cover crops exert strong directional filtering during weed community assembly, our methodological framework for detecting such effects could be applied to similar future studies that incorporate a greater number of cover-crop species and are conducted under a greater range of cover-cropping conditions.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
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

Al-Khatib, K, Libbey, C, Boydston, R (1997) Weed suppression with Brassica green manure crops in green pea. Weed Sci. 45:439445 Google Scholar
Anderson, JM (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Aust Ecol 26:3246 Google Scholar
Anderson, JM, Walsh, DCI (2013) PERMANOVA, ANOSIM, and the Mantel test in the face of heterogeneous dispersions: what null hypothesis are you testing? Ecol Monogr 83:557574 Google Scholar
Beltran, E, Valiente-Banuet, A, Verdu, M (2012) Trait divergence and indirect interactions allow facilitation of congeneric species. Ann Bot. 110:13691379 Google Scholar
Booth, BD, Swanton, CJ (2002) Assembly theory applied to weed communities. Weed Sci. 50:213 Google Scholar
Buhler, DD (1995) Influence of tillage systems on weed population dynamics and management in corn and soybean in the central USA. Crop Sci. 35:12471258 Google Scholar
Busey, P (2003) Cultural management of weeds in turfgrass: a review. Crop Sci. 43:18991911 Google Scholar
Cahill, JF, Kembel, SW, Lamb, EG, Keddy, PA (2008) Does phylogenetic relatedness influence the strength of competition among vascular plants? Perspect Plant Ecol 10:4150 Google Scholar
Cardina, J, Herms, CP, Doohan, DJ (2002) Crop rotation and tillage system effects on weed seedbanks. Weed Sci. 50:448460 Google Scholar
Dufrene, M, Legendre, P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345366 Google Scholar
Elton, CS (1958) The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. London Methuen Google Scholar
Fargione, J, Brown, CS, Tilman, D (2003) Community assembly and invasion: an experimental test of neutral versus niche processes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:89168920 Google Scholar
Freyre, R, Loy, JB (2000) Evaluation and yield trials of tomatillo in New Hampshire. HortTechnol 10:374377 Google Scholar
Fridley, JD, Stachowicz, JJ, Naeem, S, Sax, DF, Seabloom, EW, Smith, MD, Stohlgren, TJ, Tilman, D, Von Holle, B (2007) The invasion paradox: reconciling pattern and process in species invasions. Ecology. 88:317 Google Scholar
Fried, G, Kazakou, E, Gaba, S (2012) Trajectories of weed communities explained by traits associated with species' response to management practices. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 158:147155 Google Scholar
Grace, JB (1995) On the measurement of plant competition intensity. Ecology. 76:305308 Google Scholar
Grime, JP, Thompson, K, Hunt, R, Hodgson, JG, Cornelissen, JHC, Rorison, IH, Hendry, GAF, Ashenden, TW, Askew, AP, Band, SR, Booth, RE, Bossard, CC, Campbell, BD, Cooper, JE, Davison, AW, Gupta, PL, Hall, W, Hand, W, Hannah, MA, Hillier, SH, Hodkinson, DJ, Jalili, A, Liu, Z, Mackey, JML, Matthews, N, Mowforth, MA, Neal, AM, Reader, RJ, Reiling, K, Ross-Fraser, W, Spencer, RE, Sutton, F, Tasker, DE, Thorpe, PC, Whitehouse, J (1997) Integrated screening validates primary axes of specialization in plants. Oikos 79:259281 Google Scholar
Gunton, RM, Petit, S, Gaba, S (2011) Functional traits relating arable weed communities to crop characteristics. J Veg Sci. 22:541550 Google Scholar
Johansson, ME, Keddy, PA (1991) Intensity and asymmetry of competition between plant pairs of different degrees of similarity: an experimental study on two guilds of wetland plants. Oikos 60:2734 Google Scholar
Jolliffe, PA (2000) The replacement series. J Ecol 88:371385 Google Scholar
Knops, JMH, Tilman, D, Haddad, NM, Naeem, S, Mitchell, CE, Haarstad, J, Ritchie, ME, Howe, KM, Reich, PB, Siemann, E, Groth, J (1999) Effects of plant species richness on invasion dynamics, disease outbreaks, insect abundances and diversity. Ecol Lett 2:286293 Google Scholar
Lavorel, S, McIntyre, S, Landsberg, J, Forbes, TDA (1997) Plant functional classifications: from general groups to specific groups based on response to disturbance. Trends Ecol Evol 12:474478 Google Scholar
Levine, JM, D'Antonio, CM (1999) Elton revisited: a review of the evidence linking diversity and invasibility. Oikos 87:1526 Google Scholar
MacArthur, R, Levins, R (1967) The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species. Am Nat. 101:377385 Google Scholar
Magurran, AE (1988) Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. Princeton, NJ Princeton University Press. 192 pGoogle Scholar
Markham, JH, Chanway, CP (1996) Measuring plant neighbor effects. Funct Ecol 10:548549 Google Scholar
McCune, B, Grace, JB (2002) Analysis of Ecological Communities. Gleneden Beach, OR MjM Software Design. 300 pGoogle Scholar
McCune, B, Mefford, MJ (2011) PC-ORD. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data. Version 6.12. Gleneden Beach, OR MjM Software Google Scholar
Navas, ML (2012) Trait-based approaches to unravelling the assembly of weed communities and their impact on agro-ecosystem functioning. Weed Res 52:479488 Google Scholar
Owen, MDK (2008) Weed species shifts in glyphosate-resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci. 64:377387 Google Scholar
Radosevich, SR, Holt, JS, Ghersa, CM (2007) Ecology of Weeds and Invasive Plants: Relationship to Agriculture and Natural Resource Management. 3rd edn. Hoboken, NJ J. Wiley. 472 pGoogle Scholar
Romero, A, Chamorro, L, Sans, FX (2008) Weed diversity in crop edges and inner fields of organic and conventional dryland winter cereal crops in NE Spain. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 124:97104 Google Scholar
Smith, RG (2006) Timing of tillage is an important filter on the assembly of weed communities. Weed Sci. 54:705712 Google Scholar
Smith, RG, Atwood, LW, Warren, ND (2014) Increased productivity of a cover crop mixture is not associated with enhanced agroecosystem services. PLoS ONE. 9 (5):e97351. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0097351Google Scholar
Smith, RG, Gross, KL (2007) Assembly of weed communities along a crop diversity gradient. J Appl Ecol 44:10461056 Google Scholar
Snapp, SS, Swinton, SM, Labarta, R, Mutch, D, Black, JR, Leep, R, Nyiraneza, J, O'Neil, K (2005) Evaluating cover crops for benefits, costs and performance within cropping system niches. Agron J. 97:322332 Google Scholar
Storkey, J, Moss, SR, Cussans, JW (2010) Using assembly theory to explain changes in weed flora in response to agricultural intensification. Weed Sci. 58:3946 Google Scholar
Teasdale, JR (1996) Contribution of cover crops to weed management in sustainable agricultural systems. J Prod Agric. 9:475479 Google Scholar
Tilman, D, Wedin, D, Knops, J (1996) Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 379:718720 Google Scholar
van Ruijven, J, De Deyn, GB, Berendse, F (2003) Diversity reduces invasibility in experimental plant communities: the role of plant species. Ecol Lett 6:910918 Google Scholar
Violle, C, Nemergut, DR, Pu, Z, Jiang, L (2011) Phylogenetic limiting similarity and competitive exclusion. Ecol Lett 14:782787 Google Scholar
Weigelt, A, Jolliffe, P (2003) Indices of plant competition. J Ecol 91:707720 Google Scholar
Weiher, E, Keddy, PA (1999) Assembly rules as general constraints on community composition. Pages 251271 in Weiher, E, Keddy, PA, eds. Ecological Assembly Rules: Perspectives, Advances, Retreats. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press Google Scholar
Wortman, SE, Lindquist, JL, Haar, MJ, Francis, CA (2010) Increased weed diversity, density and above-ground biomass in long-term organic crop rotations. Renew Agric Food Syst. 25:281295 Google Scholar
Zimdahl, RL (2004) Weed–Crop Competition: A Review. Ames, IA Blackwell Google Scholar