Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-08T22:46:10.861Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Seeding Rate on Weed-Suppression Activity and Yield of Indica and Tropical Japonica Rice Cultivars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2017

David R. Gealy  and
Sara Duke
David R. Gealy*
Affiliation:
Research Plant Physiologist, Dale Bumpers National Rice Research Center, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), USDA-ARSStuttgart, AR 72160
Sara Duke
Affiliation:
Area Statistician, USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Area, College Station, TX 77845
*
*Corresponding author’s E-mail: david.gealy@ars.usda.gov
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Weeds are ubiquitous and economically damaging in southern U.S. rice systems. Barnyardgrass has consistently been one of the most prevalent and troublesome of these. Although most rice cultivars do not suppress weeds dramatically, certain Indica cultivars and commercial hybrids are known to suppress barnyardgrass aggressively in conventional, drill-seeded rice systems in the southern United States. A field study was conducted to determine the degree to which either reducing or increasing standard seeding rates would affect natural suppression of weeds by conventional inbred and weed-suppressive cultivars. Five cultivars were evaluated at three seeding rates (160 [low], 320 [medium; conventional recommendation for inbred cultivars], and 480 [high] seeds m−2) and two weed levels (weed-free and weedy). Cultivars included a conventional, non–weed suppressive long-grain, ‘Wells’; high-tillering weed-suppressive cultivars ‘PI312777,’ ‘Rondo,’ and ‘4612’ from Asia; and the commercial hybrid ‘XL723.’ Overall, PI 312777 produced the most tillers, whereas XL 723 exhibited the greatest midseason shoot biomass and the greatest weed suppression. Yields of PI 312777 and 4612, both of which are Indica cultivars considered to be good weed suppressors, changed minimally across all seeding rates when compared with the other cultivars and thus tolerated weeds at the low rate nearly as well as at the high rate. Such a tolerance to weeds might be useful in the maintenance of weed suppression at reduced rice-seeding rates and suggests that reduced seeding rates of PI 312777 and 4612 would be less risky for yield loss when compared with the other cultivars tested. Visual suppression ratings were positively correlated with rice yield within weed-infested plots, suggesting that yield performance under weed pressure might be a good indicator of weed-suppression ability of cultivars in these systems. In contrast with PI 312777 and 4612, yields of the conventional inbred cultivar and commercial hybrid appeared to benefit from the high seeding rate. Overall, moderate to high seeding rates are likely to be needed for consistent weed suppression for all of the cultivar types evaluated in this study.

Keywords

Barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.rice, Oryza sativa L.Allelopathic ricecrop–weed interferencehybrid riceIndica riceseeding densitytropical Japonica riceweed-suppressive rice.
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 65 , Issue 5 , September 2017 , pp. 659 - 668
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2017 

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

Associate Editor for this paper: Muthukumar V. Bagavathiannan, 806 Texas A&M University

References

Literature Cited

Bastiaans, L, Kropff, MJ, Kempuchetty, N, Rajan, A, Migo, TR (1997) Can simulation models help design rice cultivars that are more competitive against weeds? Field Crop Res 51:101–111 Google Scholar
Chauhan, BS, Abugho, SB (2013) Effects of water regime, nitrogen fertilization, and rice plant density on growth and reproduction of lowland weed Echinochloa crus-galli . Crop Protection 54:142–147 Google Scholar
Chauhan, BS, Johnson, DE (2011) Phenotypic plasticity of Chinese sprangletop (Leptochloa chinensis) in competition with seeded rice. Weed Technol 25:652–658 Google Scholar
Chauhan, BS, Singh, VP, Kumar, A, Johnson, DE (2011) Relations of rice seeding rates to crop and weed growth in aerobic rice. Field Crop Res 121:105–115 Google Scholar
Chen, XH, Hu, F, Kong, CH (2008) Varietal improvements in rice allelopathy. Allelopathy J 22:379–384 Google Scholar
Dilday, RH, Yan, WG, Moldenhauer, KA, Gibbons, JW, Lee, FN, Bryant, RJ (2001) Chinese and other foreign germplasm evaluation. Pages 1–12 in Norman RJ & Meullenet J-F, eds. Bobby R. Wells Rice Research Studies 2000. Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station Series 485. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Google Scholar
Dotray, PA (2004) The southern states 10 most common and troublesome weeds in rice. Southern Weed Science Society Proceedings 57:415 Google Scholar
Fang, CX, He, HB, Wang, QS, Qiu, L, Wang, HB, Zhuang, YE, Xiong, J, Lin, WX (2010) Genomic analysis of allelopathic response to low nitrogen and barnyardgrass competition in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Growth Regul 61:277–286 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gealy, DR, Anders, M, Watkins, KB, Duke, S (2014) Crop performance and weed suppression by weed-suppressive rice cultivars in furrow- and flood-irrigated systems under reduced herbicide inputs. Weed Sci 62:303–320 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gealy, DR, Moldenhauer, KAK (2012) Use of 13C isotope discrimination analysis to quantify distribution of barnyardgrass and rice roots in a four-year study of weed-suppressive rice. Weed Sci 60:133–142 Google Scholar
Gealy, DR, Moldenhauer, KAK, Duke, S (2013a) Root distribution and potential interactions between allelopathic rice, sprangletop (Leptochloa spp.), and barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) based on 13C isotope discrimination analysis. J Chem Ecol 39:186–203 Google Scholar
Gealy, DR, Moldenhauer, KAK, Jia, MH (2013b) Field performance of STG06L-35-061, a new genetic resource developed from crosses between weed-suppressive indica rice and commercial southern U.S. long-grains. Plant Soil 370:277–293 Google Scholar
Gealy, DR, Wailes, EJ, Estorninos, LE Jr, Chavez, RSC (2003) Rice cultivar differences in suppression of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) and economics of reduced propanil rates. Weed Sci 51:601–609 Google Scholar
Gealy, DR, Yan, WG (2012) Weed suppression potential of ‘Rondo’ and other indica rice germplasm lines. Weed Technol 26:517–524 Google Scholar
Harker, KN, Clayton, GW, Blackshaw, RE, O’Donovan, JT, Stevenson, FC (2003) Seeding rate, herbicide timing and competitive hybrids contribute to integrated weed management in canola (Brassica napus). Can J Plant Sci 83:433–440 Google Scholar
Ho, TL, Lin, C-H, Smeda, RJ, Leigh, ND, Wycoff, WG, Fritschi, FB (2014) Isolation and identification of an allelopathic phenylethylamine in rice. Phytochemistry 108:109–121 Google Scholar
Hoad, S, Topp, C, Davies, K (2008) Selection of cereals for weed suppression in organic agriculture: a method based on cultivar sensitivity to weed growth. Euphytica 163:355–366 Google Scholar
Khanh, TD, Zuan, TD, Chung, IM (2007) Rice allelopathy and the possibility for weed management. Ann Appl Biol 151:325–339 Google Scholar
Kong, CH, Chen, XH, Hu, F, Zhang, SZ (2011) Breeding of commercially acceptable allelopathic rice cultivars in China. Pest Manag Sci 67:1100–1106 Google Scholar
Kong, CH, Hu, F, Wang, P, Wu, JL (2008) Effect of allelopathic rice varieties combined with cultural management options on paddy field weeds. Pest Manag Sci 64:276–282 Google Scholar
Kong, CH, Li, HB, Hu, F, Xu, XH, Wang, P (2006) Allelochemicals released by rice roots and residues in soil. Plant Soil 288:47–56 Google Scholar
Ma, HJ, Shin, DH, Lee, IJ, Koh, JC, Park, SK, Kim, KU (2006) Allelopathic potential of K21, selected as a promising allelopathic rice. Weed Biol Manag 6:189–196 Google Scholar
Moldenhauer, KAK, Lee, FN, Bernhardt, JL, Norman, RJ, Slaton, NA, Wilson, CE, Anders, MM, Cartwright, RD, Blocker, MM (2007) Registration of ‘Wells’ rice. Crop Sci 47:442–443 Google Scholar
Murphy, KM, Dawson, JC, Jones, SS (2008) Relationship among phenotypic growth traits, yield and weed suppression in spring wheat landraces and modern cultivars. Field Crop Res 105:107–115 Google Scholar
Ni, H, Moody, K, Robles, RP, Paller, EC Jr, Lales, JS (2000) Oryza sativa plant traits conferring competitive ability against weeds. Weed Sci 48:200–204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Bond, J, Scott, RC (2013) Weed management practices and needs in Arkansas and Mississippi rice. Weed Technol 27:623–630 Google Scholar
Pérez de Vida, FB, Laca, E, Mackill, D, Fernandez, GM, Fischer, A (2006) Relating rice traits to weed competitiveness and yield: a path analysis. Weed Sci 54:1122–1131 Google Scholar
Reynolds, DB (2000) The southern states 10 most common and troublesome weeds in rice. Southern Weed Science Society Proceedings 53:261–262 Google Scholar
Saito, K, Futakuchi, K (2014) Improving estimation of weed-suppressive ability of upland rice varieties using substitute weeds. Field Crop Res 162:1–5 Google Scholar
Seal, AN, Pratley, JE (2010) The specificity of allelopathy in rice (Oryza sativa). Weed Res 50:303–311 Google Scholar
Song, B, Xiong, J, Fang, C, Qiu, L, Lin, R, Liang, Y, Lin, W (2008) Allelopathic enhancement and differential gene expression in rice under low nitrogen treatment. J Chem Ecol 34:688–695 Google Scholar
Vandeleur, RK, Gill, GS (2004) The impact of plant breeding on the grain yield and competitive ability of wheat in Australia. Aus J Agric Res 55:855–861 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vencill, WK (2008) The southern states 10 most common and troublesome weeds in rice. Southern Weed Science Society Proceedings 61:234 Google Scholar
Webster, TM (2012) The southern states 10 most common and troublesome weeds in rice. Southern Weed Science Society Proceedings 65:278 Google Scholar
Wilson, CE Jr, Wamishi, Y, Lorenz, G, Hardke, J (2013) Rice stand establishment. Pages 31–40 in Hardke JT, ed. Arkansas Rice Production Handbook-MP192-2M-11-13RV. Little Rock: University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service Google Scholar
Worthington, M, Reberg-Horton, C (2013) Breeding cereal crops for enhanced weed suppression: optimizing allelopathy and competitive ability. J Chem Ecol 39:213–231 Google Scholar
Xuan, TD, Eiji, T, Shinkichi, T, Khanh, TD (2004) Methods to determine allelopathic potential of crop plants for weed control. Allelopathy J 13:149–164 Google Scholar
Yan, WG, McClung, AM (2010) ‘Rondo,’ a long-grain indica rice with resistances to multiple diseases. J Plant Reg 4:131–136 Google Scholar
Zhao, DL, Atlin, GN, Bastiaans, L, Spiertz, JHJ (2006) Developing selection protocols for weed competitiveness in aerobic rice. Field Crop Res 97:272–285 Google Scholar
Zhao, DL, Bastiaans, L, Atlin, GN, Spiertz, JHJ (2007) Interaction of genotype x management on vegetative growth and weed suppression of aerobic rice. Field Crop Res 100:327–340 Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Gealy and Duke supplementary material

Gealy and Duke supplementary material 1

Download Gealy and Duke supplementary material(File)
File 135 KB