Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T12:17:59.758Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Has Breeding Improved Soybean Competitiveness with Weeds?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2017

Devin J. Hammer ,
David E. Stoltenberg ,
Jed B. Colquhoun  and
Shawn P. Conley
Devin J. Hammer*
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Professor, and Professor, Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI 53706
David E. Stoltenberg
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Professor, and Professor, Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI 53706
Jed B. Colquhoun
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI 53706
Shawn P. Conley
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Professor, and Professor, Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI 53706
*
*Corresponding author’s E-mail: djhammer9@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Soybean yield gain over the last century has been attributed to both genetic and agronomic improvements. Recent research has characterized how breeding efforts to improve yield gain have also secondarily impacted agronomic practices such as seeding rate, planting date, and fungicide use. To our knowledge, no research has characterized the relationship between weed–soybean interference and genetic yield gain. Therefore, the objectives of this research were to determine whether newer cultivars would consistently yield higher than older cultivars under increasingly competitive environments, and whether soybean breeding efforts over time have indirectly increased soybean competitiveness. Field research was conducted in 2014, 2015, and 2016 in which 40 maturity group (MG) II soybean cultivars released between 1928 and 2013 were grown season-long with three different densities of volunteer corn (0, 2.8, and 11.2 plants m−2). Soybean seed yield of newer cultivars was higher than older cultivars at each volunteer corn density (P<0.0001). Soybean seed yield was also higher in the weed-free treatment than at low or high volunteer corn seeding rates. However, soybean cultivar release year did not affect late-season volunteer corn shoot dry biomass at either seeding rate of 2.8 or 11.2 seeds m−2. The results indicate that while soybean breeding efforts have increased yield potential over time, they have not increased soybean competitiveness with volunteer corn. These results highlight the importance of other cultural practices such as planting date and crop row spacing for weed suppression in modern soybean production systems.

Keywords

Corn, Zea mays L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.Crop–weed competitiongenetic gain
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 66 , Issue 1 , January 2018 , pp. 57 - 61
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: Sharon Clay, South Dakota State University.

References

Literature Cited

Andersen, RN, Geadelmann, JL (1982) The effect of parentage on the control of volunteer corn (Zea mays) in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci 30:127–131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, TH, Stoller, EW (1988) Volunteer corn (Zea mays) interference in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci 36:159–166 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullock, D, Khan, S, Rayburn, A (1998) Soybean yield response to narrow rows is largely due to enhanced early growth. Crop Sci 38:1011–1016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussler, BH, Maxwell, BD, Puettmann, KJ (1995) Using plant volume to quantify interference in corn (Zea mays) neighborhoods. Weed Sci 43:586–594 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cober, ER, Morrison, MJ, Ma, B, Butler, G (2005) Genetic improvement rates of short-season soybean increase with plant population. Crop Sci 45:1029–1034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquhoun, J, Stoltenberg, DE, Binning, LK, Boerboom, CM (2001) Phenology of common lambsquarters growth parameters. Weed Sci 49:177–183 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conley, SP, Binning, LK, Boerboom, CM, Stoltenberg, DE (2002) Estimating giant foxtail cohort productivity and fecundity in soybean based on weed density, leaf area, or volume. Weed Sci 50:72–78 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Bruin, JL, Pedersen, P (2008) Effect of row spacing and seeding rate on soybean yield. Agron J 100:704–710 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Bruin, JL, Pedersen, P (2009) New and old soybean cultivar responses to plant density and intercepted light. Crop Sci 49:2225–2232 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deen, W, Hamill, A, Shropshire, C, Soltani, N, Sikkema, PH (2006) Control of volunteer glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays) in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 20:261–266 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SK, Evans, SP, Mainz, M (2003) Row spacing influences the critical timing for weed removal in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 17:666–673 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marquardt, P, Krupke, C, Johnson, WG (2012) competition of transgenic volunteer corn with soybean and the effect on western corn rootworm emergence. Weed Sci 60:193–198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rincker, K, Nelson, R, Specht, J, Sleper, D, Cary, T, Cianzio, SR, Casteel, S, Conley, S, Chen, P, Davis, V, Fox, C, Graef, G, Godsey, C, Holshouser, D, Jiang, GL, Kantartzi, SK, Kenworthy, W, Lee, C, Mian, R, McHale, L, Naeve, S, Orf, J, Poysa, V, Schapaugh, W, Shannon, G, Uniatowski, R, Wang, D, Diers, B (2014) Genetic improvement of U.S. soybean in maturity groups II, III, and IV. Crop Sci 54:1–14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowntree, SC, Suhre, JJ, Weidenbenner, NH, Wilson, EW, Davis, VM, Naeve, SL, Casteel, SN, Diers, BW, Esker, PD, Specht, JE, Conley, SP (2013) Genetic gain x management interactions in soybean: I. planting date. Crop Sci 53:1128–1138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Specht, JE, Hume, DJ, Kumudini, SV (1999) Soybean yield potential—a genetic and physiological perspective. Crop Sci 39:1560–1570 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suhre, JJ, Weidenbenner, NH, Rowntree, SC, Wilson, EW, Naeve, SL, Conley, SP, Casteel, SN, Diers, BW, Esker, PD, Specht, JE, Davis, VM (2014) Soybean yield partitioning changes revealed by genetic gain and seeding rate interactions. Agron J 106:1631–1642 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service (2017) Quick Stats. https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/results/70E45139-5E90-3981-AD01-932E3B1BB73F?pivot=short_desc. Accessed January 23, 2017Google Scholar
Ustun, A, Allen, FL, English, BC (2001) Genetic progress in soybean of the U.S. Midsouth. Crop Sci 41:993–998 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yelverton, FH, Coble, HD (1991) Narrow row spacing and canopy formation reduces weed resurgence in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol 5:169–174 CrossRefGoogle Scholar