Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T02:33:26.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanical Termination of Diverse Cover Crop Mixtures for Improved Weed Suppression in Organic Cropping Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Sam E. Wortman ,
Charles A. Francis ,
Mark A. Bernards ,
Erin E. Blankenship  and
John L. Lindquist
Sam E. Wortman*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
Charles A. Francis
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
Mark A. Bernards
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Western Illinois University, Macomb, IL 61455
Erin E. Blankenship
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
John L. Lindquist
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: sam.wortman@huskers.unl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cover crops can provide many benefits in agroecosystems, including the opportunity for improved weed control. However, the weed suppressive potential of cover crops may depend on the species (or mixture of species) chosen, and the method of cover crop termination and residue management. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of cover crop mixture and mechanical termination method on weed biomass and density, and relative crop yield in an organic cropping system. A field experiment was conducted from 2009 to 2011 near Mead, NE, where spring-sown mixtures of two, four, six, and eight cover crop species were included in a sunflower–soybean–corn crop rotation. Cover crops were planted in late March, terminated in late May using a field disk or sweep plow undercutter, and main crops were planted within 1 wk of termination. Terminating cover crops with the undercutter consistently reduced early-season grass weed biomass, whereas termination with the field disk typically stimulated grass weed biomass relative to a no cover crop control (NC). The effects of cover crop mixture were not evident in 2009, but the combination of the undercutter and the eight-species mixture reduced early-season weed biomass by 48% relative to the NC treatment in 2010. Cover crops provided less weed control in 2011, where only the combination of the undercutter and the two-species mixture reduced weed biomass (by 31%) relative to the NC treatment. Termination with the undercutter resulted in relative yield increases of 16.6 and 22.7% in corn and soybean, respectively. In contrast, termination with the field disk resulted in a relative yield reduction of 13.6% in soybean. The dominant influence of termination method highlights the importance of appropriate cover crop residue management in maximizing potential agronomic benefits associated with cover crops.

Keywords

Common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. CHEALgreen foxtail, Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. SETVIredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. AMAREvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medik. ABUTHconfectionary sunflower, Helianthus annuus Lmaize, Zea mays Lsoybean, Glycine max (L.) MerrOrganic farmingallelopathymechanical weed controlecological weed managementphysical weed suppressionbiodiversity
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 61 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 162 - 170
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

Aarssen, L. W. and Taylor, D. R. 1992. Fecundity allocation in herbaceous plants. Oikos 65: 225–232.Google Scholar
Al-Khatib, K., Libbey, C., and Boydston, R. 1997. Weed suppression with Brassica green manure crops in green pea. Weed Sci. 45: 439–445.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. P. and Putnam, A. R. 1986. Evidence for allelopathy by residues and aqueous extracts of rye (Secale cereale). Weed Sci. 86: 384–390.Google Scholar
Bialy, Z., Oleszek, W., Lewis, J., and Fenwick, G. R. 1990. Allelopathic potential of glucosinolates (mustard oil glycosides) and their degradation products against wheat. Plant Soil. 129: 277–281.Google Scholar
Branca, F., Li, G., Goyal, S., and Quiros, C. F. 2002. Survey of glucosinolates in Sicilian wild and cultivated Brassicaceae. Phytochemistry 59: 717–724.Google Scholar
Creamer, N. G., Plassman, B., Bennett, M. A., Wood, R. K., Stinner, B. R., and Cardina, J. 1995. A method for mechanically killing cover crops to optimize weed suppression. Am. J. Alternative Agric. 10: 157–162.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. 2010. Cover-crop roller-crimper contributes to weed management in no-till soybean. Weed Sci. 58: 300–309.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. and Liebman, M. 2003. Cropping system effects on giant foxtail demography I. Green manure and tillage timing. Weed Sci. 51: 919–929.Google Scholar
Dyck, E., Liebman, M., and Erich, M. S. 1995. Crop-weed interference as influenced by a leguminous or synthetic fertilizer nitrogen source. I. Double cropping experiments with crimson clover, sweet corn and lambsquarters. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 56: 93–108.Google Scholar
Gallandt, E. R., Molloy, T., Lynch, R. P., and Drummond, F. A. 2005. Effect of cover-cropping systems on invertebrate seed predation. Weed Sci. 53: 69–76.Google Scholar
Geier, P. W., Maddux, L. D., Moshier, L. J., and Stahlman, P. W. 1996. Common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 10: 317–321.Google Scholar
Haramoto, E. R. and Gallandt, E. R. 2005. Brassica cover cropping. II. Effects on growth and interference of green bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci. 53: 702–708.Google Scholar
Jolliffe, P. A. 2000. The replacement series. J. Ecol. 88: 371–385.Google Scholar
Kegode, G. O., Forcella, F., and Clay, S. 1999. Influence of crop rotation, tillage, and management inputs on weed seed production. Weed Sci. 47: 175–183.Google Scholar
Klironomos, J. N. 2002. Feedback with soil biota contributes to plant rarity and invasiveness in communities. Nature 417: 67–70.Google Scholar
Leather, G. R. 1983. Sunflowers (Helianthus annuus) are allelopathic to weeds. Weed Sci. 31: 37–42.Google Scholar
Liebl, R., Simmons, F. W., Wax, L. M., and Stoller, E. W. 1992. Effect of rye (Secale cereale) mulch on weed control and soil moisture in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 6: 838–846.Google Scholar
Liebman, M. and Davis, A. S. 2000. Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low-external-input farming systems. Weed Res. 40: 27–47.Google Scholar
Louda, S. M. and Rodman, J. E. 1983. Ecological patterns in the glucosinolate content of a native mustard, Cardamine cordifolia, in the Rocky Mountains. J. Chem. Ecol. 9: 397–422.Google Scholar
Mirsky, S. B., Curran, W. S., Mortensen, D. A., Ryan, M. R., and Shumway, D. L. 2009. Control of cereal rye with a roller/crimper as influenced by cover crop phenology. Agron. J. 101: 1589–1596.Google Scholar
Mischler, R. A., Curran, W. S., Duiker, S. W., and Hyde, J. A. 2010. Use of a rolled-rye cover crop for weed suppression in no-till soybeans. Weed Technol. 24: 253–261.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Malik, M. S., Jha, P., and Riley, M. B. 2007. Suppression of Digitaria sanguinalis and Amaranthus palmeri using autumn-sown glucosinolate-producing cover crops in organically grown bell pepper. Weed Res. 47: 425–432.Google Scholar
Reberg-Horton, S. C., Burton, J. D., Danehower, D. A., Ma, G., Monks, D. W., Murphy, J. P., Ranells, N. N., Williamson, J. D., and Creamer, N. G. 2005. Changes over time in the allelochemical content of ten cultivars of rye (Secale cereale L.). J. Chem. Ecol. 31: 179–193.Google Scholar
Reddy, K. N., Zablotowicz, R. M., Locke, M. A., and Koger, C. H. 2003. Cover crop, tillage, and herbicide effects on weeds, soil properties, microbial populations, and soybean yield. Weed Sci. 51: 987–994.Google Scholar
Rice, C. P., Cai, G., and Teasdale, J. R. 2012. Concentrations and allelopathic effects of benzoxazinoid compounds in soil treated with rye (Secale cereale) cover crop. J. Agric. Food Chem. 60: 4471–4479.Google Scholar
Rosa, E., Heaney, R., Fenwick, G., and Portas, C. 1997. Glucosinolates in crop plants. Pp. 99–215 in Janick, J., ed. Horticultural Reviews. Volume 19. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Sarrantonio, M. and Gallandt, E. R. 2003. The role of cover crops in North American cropping systems. J. Crop Prod. 8: 53–73.Google Scholar
Shearin, A. F., Reberg-Horton, S. C., and Gallandt, E. R. 2008. Cover crop effects on the activity-density of the weed seed predator Harpalus rufipes (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Weed Sci. 56: 442–450.Google Scholar
Shrestha, A., Knezevic, S. Z., Roy, R. C., Ball-Coelho, B. R., and Swanton, C. J. 2002. Effect of tillage, cover crop and crop rotation on the composition of weed flora in a sandy soil. Weed Res. 42: 76–87.Google Scholar
Sosnoskie, L. M., Herms, C. P., and Cardina, J. 2006. Weed seedbank composition in a 35-year-old tillage and rotation experiment. Weed Sci. 54: 263–273.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R., Beste, C. E., and Potts, W. E. 1991. Response of weeds to tillage and cover crop residue. Weed Sci. 39: 195–199.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R., Brandsaeter, L. O., Calegari, A., and Skora Neto, F. 2007. Cover crops and weed management. Pages 49–64 in Upadhyaya, M. K., and Blackshaw, R. E., eds. Non-chemical Weed Management. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. and Mohler, C. L. 1993. Light transmittance, soil temperature, and soil moisture under residue of hairy vetch and rye. Agron. J. 85: 673–680.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. and Pillai, P. 2005. Contribution of ammonium to stimulation of smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus L.) germination by extracts of hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth) residue. Weed Biol. Manage. 5: 19–25.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. and Taylorson, R. B. 1986. Weed seed response to methyl isothiocyanate and metham. Weed Sci. 34: 520–524.Google Scholar
Tilman, D., Reich, P. B., Knops, J., Wedin, D., Mielke, T., and Lehman, C. 2001. Diversity and productivity in a long-term grassland experiment. Science 294: 843–845.Google Scholar
White, R. H., Worsham, A. D., and Blum, U. 1989. Allelopathic potential of legume debris and aqueous extracts. Weed Sci. 37: 674–679.Google Scholar
Wortman, S. E., Francis, C. A., Bernards, M., Drijber, R., and Lindquist, J. L. 2012a. Optimizing cover crop benefits with diverse mixtures and an alternative termination method. Agron. J. 104: 1425–1435.Google Scholar
Wortman, S. E., Francis, C. A., and Lindquist, J. L. 2012b. Cover crop mixtures for the western Corn Belt: opportunities for increased productivity and stability. Agron. J. 104: 699–705.Google Scholar
Yenish, J. P., Doll, J. D., and Buhler, D. D. 1992. Effects of tillage on vertical distribution and viability of weed seed in soil. Weed Sci. 40: 429–433.Google Scholar