Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:35:04.933Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of nitrogen fertilization timing on the demographic processes of wild oat (Avena fatua) in barley (Hordeum vulgare)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Julio A. Scursoni  and
Roberto Benech Arnold
Roberto Benech Arnold
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Vegetal, Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Av. San Martín, 4453 (1417) Buenos Aires, Argentina
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wild oat is the most important weed in Argentine barley and one of the worst weeds in wheat and barley worldwide. During 1997 and 1998, field experiments were performed to determine the response of wild oat to N fertilizer at planting and at early tillering at 55 kg ha−1 with and without the use of diclofop-methyl. Seedling emergence and survival rate, individual fecundity, and preharvest seed dispersal rate of wild oat were assessed. The effect on the individual growth of wild oat was also studied. N fertilizer increased both wild oat seedling survival rate and fecundity, especially when it was applied at early tillering. However, the effect of N fertilization was negligible with diclofop-methyl treatment. In addition, the application of N fertilizer reduced the seed dispersal rate immediately before crop harvest. Quantification of the effects of each agronomic practice, such as N fertilization, is useful to develop simulation models that predict the population dynamics. When N was applied at sowing, the annual growth rate of the wild oat population was almost 25% lower than when applied at early tillering.

Keywords

Diclofopwild oat, Avena fatua L. AVEFAbarley, Hordeum vulgare L.wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Integrated weed managementpopulation dynamicsseed dispersalseed productionseed survivalsoil seed bank
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 50 , Issue 5 , October 2002 , pp. 616 - 621
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

Adkins, S. W., Lowen, M., and Symons, S. J. 1987. Variation within pure lines of wild oats (Avena fatua) in relation to temperature of development. Weed Sci. 35:169–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, T. and Milberg, P. 1998. Weed flora and the relative importance of site, crop, crop rotation, and nitrogen. Weed Sci. 46:30–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, R. L., Tanaka, D. L., Black, A. L., and Scheizer, E. 1998. Weed community and species response to crop rotation, tillage, and N fertility. Weed Technol. 12:531–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt, R., Janzen, H. H., and Blackshaw, R. E. 2000. Ranking weed response to added nitrogen and phosphorous. Abstracts of the III International Weed Science Congress; Foz do Iguassu, Brazil; 6–11 June, 2000. 26 p.Google Scholar
Carlson, H. L. and Hill, J. E. 1986. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition with spring wheat: effects of nitrogen fertilization. Weed Sci. 34:29–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catullo, J., Rodríguez, M. L., and Colombo, I. 1982. Efecto de la Avena fatua L. sobre el cultivo de trigo: influencia de la fertilización. Congr. Nac. Malezas, San Miguel de Tucumán, Argentina. 2:16–21.Google Scholar
Cromar, H. E., Murphy, S. D., and Swanton, C. J. 1999. Influence of tillage and crop residue on postdispersal predation of weeds seed. Weed Sci. 47:184–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. 1995. Approaches for improving crop competitiveness through the manipulation of fertilization strategies. Weed Sci. 43:491–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez Quintanilla, C., Navarrete, L., Gonzalez Andujar, J. L., Fernández, A., and Sanchez, M. J. 1986. Seedling recruitment and age-specific survivorship and recruitment in populations of Avena sterilis spp. ludoviciana . J. Appl. Ecol. 23:945–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forcella, F. 1984. Wheat and ryegrass competition for pulses of mineral nitrogen. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 24:421–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, A. B. and Bauer, A. 1996. Temperature, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide effects on spring wheat development and spikelet numbers. Crop Sci. 36:659–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez Ponce, R. 1998. Competition between barley and Lolium rigidum for nitrate. Weed Res. 38:453–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jornsgard, B., Rasmussen, K., Hill, J., and Christiansen, J. L. 1996. Influence of nitrogen on competition between cereals and their natural weed populations. Weed Res. 36:461–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kegode, G., Forcella, F., and Clay, S. 1999. Influence of crop rotation, tillage, and management inputs on weed seed production. Weed Sci. 47:175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S., Evans, S., Shapiro, C., and Lindquist, J. 2000. Effect of nitrogen on critical period of weed control in corn. Abstracts of the III International Weed Science Congress; 6–11 June, 2000; Foz do Iguassu, Brazil. 52 p.Google Scholar
Kirkland, K. and Beckie, H. 1998. Contribution of nitrogen fertiliser placement to weed management in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 12:507–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donovan, J. T., McAndrew, D. W., and Thomas, G. 1997. Tillage and nitrogen influence weed population dynamics in barley (Hordeum vulgare). Weed Technol. 11:502–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Satorre, E. H. and Snaydon, R. W. 1992. A comparison of root and shoot competition between spring cereals and Avena fatua L. Weed Res. 32:45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scursoni, J. 1995. Relevamiento de malezas en cultivos de cebada cervecera (Hordeum vulgare L.) en la Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Rev. Fac. Agron. La Plata 71:235–243.Google Scholar
Scursoni, J., Benech Arnold, R., and Hirchoren, H. 1999. Demography of wild oat (Avena fatua L.) in barley crops: effect of crop, crop density and herbicide treatment. Agron. J. 91:478–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sindel, B. M. 1991. A review of the ecology and control of thistles in Australia. Weed Res. 31:189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. 1969. Biometry: The Principles and Practices of Statistics in Biological Research. San Francisco: Freeman. pp. 380–387.Google Scholar
Thill, D. C., O’Donovan, J. T., and Mallory Smith, C. A. 1994. Integrated weed management strategies for delaying herbicide resistant in wild oats. Phytoprotection 75 (Suppl.): 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, B. J. 1972. Studies of the fate of Avena fatua seeds on cereal stubble as influenced by autumn treatment. Pages 242–247 in Proceedings of the 11th British Weed Control Conference; Brighton, U.K. Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J. 1985. Effect of seed age and cultivation on seedling emergence and seed decline of Avena fatua L. in winter barley. Weed Res. 25:213–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, B. J. and Cussans, G. W. 1975. A study of the population dynamics of Avena fatua L. as influenced by straw burning, seed shedding and cultivation. Weed Res. 15:249–258.Google Scholar
Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T., and Konzak, C. 1974. A decimal code for the growth stage of cereals. Weed Res. 14:415–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar