Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-4thr5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T06:47:16.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Affecting Timothy (Phleum pratense) Yield Loss Due to Weeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Claudel Lemieux ,
Alan K. Watson  and
Jean-Marc Deschenes
Claudel Lemieux
Affiliation:
Res. Stn., Agric. Canada, 2560 Hochelaga Blvd., Sainte-Foy, Québec, Canada G1V 2J3 and Dep. Plant Sci., Macdonald College, McGill Univ., 21111 Lakeshore Rd, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, Québec, Canada H9X 1C0
Alan K. Watson
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Sci., Macdonald College
Jean-Marc Deschenes
Affiliation:
Plant Res. Ctr., Agric. Canada, Central Exp. Farm, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Data obtained from two experiments were used to identify and describe factors affecting crop loss due to weeds in forage stands. Timothy (Phleum pratense L. ‘Champ′) was established in presence or absence of barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Bruce′), red clover (Trifolium pratense L. ‘Florex′), broadleaf weeds, and grass weeds. Botanical composition, soil water, soil nutrients, light interception, and plant cover were determined 4 and 6 weeks after seeding, and crop yield was determined at periodic forage harvest dates. Principal components analyses permitted the extraction of 12 factors and regression analyses demonstrated that these factors can be used to describe crop yield. Each factor can be estimated either by obtaining the rotated factor scores or by selecting a representative variable that can be substituted for the rotated factor scores in the regression models. The approach described in this paper should be tested with other crops and other weed complexes. It is suggested to use weed density in combination with weed and crop cover data to predict crop loss.

Keywords

Competitioncomponent analysismodelingbroadleaf weedsgrass weedsHordeum vulgareTrifolium pratenseSPRARSETLU
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , September 1987 , pp. 654 - 662
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by the 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

1. Ali, A. D., Reagan, T. E., Kitchen, L. M., and Flynn, J. L. 1986. Effects of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) density on sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) yield. Weed Sci. 34:381–383.Google Scholar
2. 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.Google Scholar
3. Cerny, B. A. and Kaiser, H. F. 1977. A study of a measure of sampling adequacy for factor-analytic correlation matrices. Multivariate Behavioral Res. 12:43–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Chandler, J. M., Hamill, A. S., and Thomas, A. G. 1983. Crop losses due to weeds in Canada and United States. Special report of the losses due to weeds committee. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
5. Dawson, J. H. and Holstun, J. T. 1971. Estimating losses from weeds in crops. Pages 3.2.2/1–3.2.2/4 in FAO Manual on the Evaluation and Prevention of Crop Losses by Pests, Diseases and Weeds. FAO, CAB. Slough, UK.Google Scholar
6. Harman, H. H. 1976. Modern Factor Analysis. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
7. Kaiser, H. F. and Rice, J. 1974. Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educ. Psych. Measure. 34:111–117.Google Scholar
8. Klingman, D. L. 1971. Measuring weed density in crops. Pages 3.1.5/1–3.1.5/5 in FAO Manual on the Evaluation and Prevention of Crop Losses by Pests, Diseases and Weeds. FAO, CAB. Slough, UK.Google Scholar
9. Laforge, H. 1981. Analyse Multivariée pour les Sciences Sociales et Biologiques avec Applications des Logiciels BMD, BMDP, SPSS, SAS. Editions études vivantes, Montréal, Québec.Google Scholar
10. Lemieux, C., Watson, A. K., and Deschênes, J. M. Effect of barley, red clover, and weeds on yield and forage quality of timothy during establishment and subsequent production years. Can. J. Plant Sci. (In press).Google Scholar
11. Lemieux, C., Watson, A. K., and Deschênes, J. M. Weed population dynamics in recently established timothy stands: growth and physiognomy of the weed components. Can. J. Plant Sci. (In press).Google Scholar
12. May, M. J., Harvey, R. N., and Wright, K. J. 1985. An infrared photographic technique for the rapid assessment of weed and crop seedlings in field experiments. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:511–514.Google Scholar
13. O'Sullivan, P. A., Weiss, G. M., and Kossatz, V. C. 1985. Indices of competition for estimating rapeseed yield loss due to Canada thistle. Can. J. Plant Sci. 65:145–149.Google Scholar
14. Page, A. L., ed. 1982. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Number 9 in Series of Agronomy. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
15. Patterson, D. T. 1985. Comparative Ecophysiology of Weeds and Crops. Pages 101–129 in Duke, S. O., ed. Weed Physiology. Vol. 1. Reproduction and Ecophysiology. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
16. SAS Institute Inc. 1985. SASR User's Guide: Statistics. (Version 5 ed.) SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
17. Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1980. Statistical Methods. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
18. Spitters, C.J.T. and Van Den Berg, J. P. 1982. Competition Between Crop and Weeds: A System Approach. Pages 137–148 in Holzner, W. and Numata, N., eds. Biology and Ecology of Weeds. W. Junk Publ., The Hague.Google Scholar
19. Zimdahl, R. L. 1980. Weed Crop Competition. A Review. The Int. Plant Protection Ctr., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR.Google Scholar