Evaluation of Some Characteristics Affecting Competitiveness of Eight Iranian Wheat Cultivars with Rocket Weed

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Abstract

Crops that better tolerate weed competition or preempt resources from weeds may reduce dependence on herbicides and benefit an integrated weed management program. A field trail was conducted to determine the morphophysiological characteristics affecting tolerance and weed suppressive ability of some winter wheat cultivars in competition with Rocket. The experimental treatments consisted of eight wheat cultivars; kept under weed free and weed infested conditions in a randomized complete block design with a factorial arrangement.  The results indicated that Correspondence to: deihim59@yahoo.comand deihim@sbu.ac.ir cultivars with greater harvest index (HI) or ability to prevent HI losses in competition with Rocket could balance yield losses and consequently increase their tolerance.  Height increase in more competitive cultivars in competition with Rocket, was important in the competitive ability (CA) of these cultivars (as both tolerance and   suppressive ability). Those cultivars with higher CA, were taller or had greater rate of stem elongation.  Enhancement rate of stem elongation caused an earlier closure of canopy in more competitive cultivars, and consequently through shading on weed, suppressed the Rocket growth.  In conclusion, more competitive cultivars possessed a set of characteristics that contribute to their strong competitive ability including high leaf area and vertical leaf area distribution, taller and greater rate of stem elongation, and high early vigor (viability and speed of germination).

Keywords

References

Allen, J. R. 1983. Leaf number and maturity in hybrid corn. Agronomy Journal 65: 233-235.
 
Altieri, M. A. 1999. The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 74: 19–31.
 
Banik, P. and Bagchi, D. K. 1994. Evaluation of rice (Oryza sativa) and legume intercropping in upland situation of Bihar plateau. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 64: 364–368.
 
Banik, P. Midya, A., Sarkar, B. K. and   Ghose, S. S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: Advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325–332.
 
Brummer, E. C. 1998. Diversity, stability, and sustainable American agriculture.   Agronomy Journal 90: 1–2.
 
Baumann, D. T., Kropff, M. J. and Bastiaans, L. 2000. Intercropping leek to suppress weeds. Weed Research 40(4): 359-374.
 
Carruthers, K. Prithiviraj, B., Cloutier, Q. Fe. D., Martin, R.C. and Smith, D. L. 2000. Intercropping corn with soybean, lupin and forages: yield component responses. European Journal of Agronomy 12: 103-115.
 
Carruthers, K., Cloutier, F.E. and Smith, D. L. 1998. Intercropping corn with soybean, lupin and forages: Weed control by intercrops combined with interrow cultivation. European Journal of Agronomy. 8: 225-238.
 
Evans, L. T. 1998. Feeding the Ten Billion, plants and population growth. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
 
Exner, D. N. and Cruse, R.M. 1993. Interseeded forage legume potential as winter ground cover, nitrogen source, and competition. Journal of Production of Agriculture. 6: 226–231.
 
Fukai, S. and Trenbath, B. R. 1993. Processes determining intercrop productivity and yields of component crops. Field Crops Research 34: 247–271.
 
Giller, K.E. Cadisch, G. 1995. Future benefits from biological nitrogen fixation:  An ecological approach to agriculture. Plant Soil 174: 225–277.
 
Hauggaard-Nielsen, H. Andersen, M. K., Jørnsgaard, B. and Jensen, E. S.  2006. Density and relative frequency effects on competitive interactions and resource use in pea–barley intercrops.  Field Crops Research 95: 256–267.
 
Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Ambus, P. and Jense, E. S. 2001. Interspecific competition, N use and interference withweeds in pea-barley intercropping. Field Crops Research. 70: 101-109.
 
Hayder, G., Mumtaz,  S. S., Khan, A.  and Khan, S. 2003. Maize and soybean intercropping under various levels of soybean seed rates. Asian Journal of Plant Science. 2(3): 339-341.
 
Holm, L. Doll, J. Holm, E. Pancho, J. and Herberger J. 1996. World weed, natural histories and disribution. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
 
   Hume, D. F., Shanmugasundaram, S.  and Beversdorf, W. I. D.  1985. Soyabean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill ). In: Summerfield R.J., Roberts, E.H. (Eds.), Grain Legume Crops. William Collins, London, pp. 391–432.
 
Jeyabal, A. and Kuppuswamy, G. 2001. Recycling of organic wastes for the production of vermicompost and its response in rice–legume cropping system and soil fertility. European Journal of Agronomy 15: 153–170.
 
Li, L., Sun, J., Zhang, F., Li, X., Yang, S. and Rengel, Z. (2001). Wheat/maize or wheat/soybean strip intercropping, I. Yield advantage and interspecific interactions on nutrients. Field Crops Research  71: 123-137.
 
Liebman, M. and Dyck. E. 1993. Crop rotation and intercropping strategies for weed management. Ecology Applied 3(1):92-122.
 
     Liebman, M. and Davis, A. S. 2000. Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low-input farming systems. Weed Research 40: 27– 47.
 
Maingi, M. J., Shisanya, A.C., Gitonga, M. N. and Hornetz, B. 2001. Nitrogen fixation by common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in pure and mixed stands in semi arid South east Kenya. European Journal of Agronomy 14: 1–12.
 
Marchiol, L., Miceli, F., Pinosa, M. and Zerbi, G. 1992. Intercropping of soybean and maize for silage in northern Italy. Effect of nitrogen level and plant density on growth, yield, and protein content. European Journal of Agronomy 1: 207–211.
 
Martin, R. C., Voldeng, H. C. and Smith, D. L. 1990. Intercropping corn and soybean in a cool temperate region: yield, protein and economic benefits. Field Crops Research 23:295–310.
 
 Morris, R. A. and Garrity, D. P. (1993). Resource capture and utilization in intercropping: non-nitrogen nutrients. Field Crops Research 34: 303-317.
 
Poggio, S. L. 2005.  Structure of weed communities occurring in monoculture and intercropping of field pea and barley. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment. 109:48–58.
 
Regnier; E. E. and Stoller, E. W.  1989. The Effects of Soybean (Glycine max) Interference on the Canopy Architecture of Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), Jimsonweed (Datura stramonium), and Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Science 37: 187-195.
 
   SAS Institute, (2002). SAS User’s Guide: Statistics. Version 8, SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
 
   Singh, N. B., Singh, P.P. and Nair, K. P. P. 1986. Effect of legume intercropping on enrichment of soil nitrogen, bacterial activity and productivity of associated maize crops. Experimental Agriculture 22: 339–344.
 
   Tetio-Kagho, F. and Gardner, F. P. 1988. Response of maize to plant population. II: Reproductive development on yield and yield adjustment. Agronomy Journal 80: 935-945.
 
  Thiyagarajan, C. R. 1994. Studies on the quality of seeds of component crops in maize based intercropping. Madras Agricultural Journal 81: 46-47.
 
Van Kessel, C. and Hartley, H. 2000. Agricultural management of grain legumes: Has it led to an increase in nitrogen fixation. Field Crops Research 65: 165-181.
 
Vandermeer, J. 1989. The Ecology of intercropping. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
 
Vandermeer, J. 1995. The ecological basis of alternative agriculture. Annual Review Ecological Systems 26: 201–224.
 
   Vandermeer, J., Van Noordwijk, M., Anderson, J., Ong, C. and Perfecto, I. 1998. Global change and multi-species agroecosystems: Concepts and issues. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 67: 1–22.
 
Weil, R. R. and Mc Fadden, M. E. 1991. Fertility and weed stress effects on performance of maize/soybean intercrop. Agronomy Journal. 83:717-721.
 
Zimdahl, R. L. 1993. Fundamentals of weed Science. Academic Press, New York.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Iranian Journal of Weed Science
Volume 3, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
No 1 & 2
September 2007
Pages 59-78

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics