The Competitive Response Investigation of Eighteen Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Cultivars with Wild Mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.)

پژوهش های حفاظت گیاهان ایران

Article 3, Volume 31, Issue 4 - Serial Number 38, December 2018, Pages 581-591   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jpp.v31i4.52552

Authors

fatemeh abdollahi^* ; hamidreza mohamadduost; ali asghari

University of Mohaghegh Ardabili

Abstract

Introduction: The crop competitive ability is an important and profitable factor for increment impact on the weeds, and decreasing their yield loss. Characteristics such as height, leaf area, growth rate and tillering ability could be effective on competitive ability of cultivar ability. Primary growth rate is important on competitiveness, and any other factors that provides fast establishment of crops growth can be effective too. Thus, utilization of cultivars with height competitiveness ability is one of the considerable strategies for integrated weed managements. Many studies had shown that there are high correlation between crop height and its competitiveness ability. Asef et al (2) reported that tall cultivars reduced weed biomass more than dwarf cultivars due to light intercept and shading. Safahani- langrodi et al (32) in competition condition tall cultivars had high weed tolerance and cause to decrease weed biomass and set seed. There are an important relationship between LAI and weed competition. Hiffle et al. (13) showed cultivars with higher leaf area index had a greater yield stability. Dianat et al. (10) reported that in weed competitive conditions, there are significant difference in the number of tillers among wheat cultivars, while competitor and non-competitor cultivars have most and lowest tiller numbers respectively. Nadery and Ghadiri (25) showed that increasing wild mustard density decreased tiller number and more yield loss in weed competition have caused by decreased number of tillers.
Materials and Methods: Experiment was conducted in order to study morphological characteristics and yield of wheat (T. aestivum) cultivars in wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) competition in greenhouse, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, during 2013-2014. Treatments were 18 wheat cultivars [Karkheh, Alborz, Azadi, Shahpasand, Sepahan, Flat, Ghods, Roshan, Sorkh‌tokhm, Moghan3, Alvand, MS-81-14, Yarvarus, Shahriyar, Golestn, Bam, Niknajad, Karaj3] with and without competition. Treatments were arranged in a factorial experiment based on randomized complete block design with three replications. Each pot was filled with almost 5 kg soil mixture of sand and manure. In each pot 15 wheat seeds along or with wild mustard seeds had sown. In the spring after establishment of wheat seedlings, pots were thinned and 6 wheat seedling in each pots and only one established wild mustard was remained. At tillering stage, tillering numbers in 3 wheat plants were counted. Leaf area was calculated by Ross (28) and Pearcy et al. (27) method at heading stage then leaf area index was estimated by following equation.
Leaf area= K× (leaf length × maximum leaf width)
In which: K is constant coefficient (K = 0.75).
Light penetration within canopy and soil surface was measured by Lux meter version (LX-101). Wheat and wild mustard coverage were assessed visually (34, 23). All trails that involving yield such as (spike number, seeds number per spike and thousand seeds weight), at ripening stage of all wheat in the pots measured and weighted. Data were subjected to ANOVA, and means were separated using Fisher’s Protected LSD test at 0.05 probability (P ≤ 0.05).
Results: Analysis showed that wheat cultivars had a significant effect on tillers number, but wild mustard competition had no significant effect (P ≤ 0.05). Means comparison showed that Alvand, Alborz, and Bam cultivars have 8 tillers and Flat only 2 tillers. Also, wheat cultivars at the stem elongation had significant difference on the leaf area but, wild mustard competition effects and interaction effects were did not a significant effects on the mentioned factor (P ≤ 0.05). Between wheat cultivars Alvand had maximum (1.09) and Alborz, Sepahan, Roshan and Flat had minimum leaf area. Wheat coverage at both tillering and stem elongation was different between wheat cultivars. At tillering stage, wheat coverage ranged 7.16 – 53.3, so Alvand and Bam had maximum and Flat and Ghods had lowest amount. Results revealed that, there was significant difference between cultivars light penetration percentage within canopy and soil surface. Wheat yield was influenced under wheat cultivars and wild mustard competition and interaction effects (P ≤ 0.05).
Conclusion: It has been hypothesized that increased crop density and spatial distribution and uniformity can increase weed suppression and thereby play an important role in weed management. This study results showed that, the means of light penetration percentage into soil surface on wild mustard competition were %9.82 in weed free and %13.69 in weedy treatments, also biological and economic yield reduced by %13.5 and %26, respectively. Although cultivars recommendation for each specific local area requires too long term studies (in time and site), but results of this study, well documented canopy architecture in view of more tillering potency for Alvand, Bam and Albors cultivars and %50 light penetration reached up to canopy middle for other cultivars such as Karkh, Alborz, Golestn and MS-81-14, which appear to be implemented in integrated weed managements design options.

Keywords

environmental pollution; Competitive cultivars; Sustainable production; weed management

References

1- Ahmad khan I., Hasan G., Marvat kh B., Daur I., Meher Ali Shah S., Ullah khan N., and Ahmad khan S. 2010. Interaction of wild oat with divergent wheat cultivar. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 42: 1051-1056.

2- Anonymous. 2014. Available: http://www.ardabilmet.ir/

3- Asif M., Iqbel M., Randhawa H., and Spaner D. 2014. Managing & Breeding wheat fororganic systems (Enhancing Competitiveness Agains Weeds). Springer. 82 pp.

4- Bauman D. T., Bastiaans L., Goadriaan J., Vanlaar H. H., and Kropff M. J. 2001. Analysis crop yield and plant quality in an intercropping system using an eco-physiological model for interplant competition. Agriculture System. 3: 23 – 31.

5- Baghestani M., and Zand E. 2004. Assess the competitiveness of different wheat genotypes against weeds .Abstract articles Sixteenth Congress of Medical Plant. Tabriz University.

6- Baghestani M. A., Lemieux C., and Leroux G. 2005. Early root and shoot competition between spring cereal cultivars and wild mustard (Brassica kaber). Weed Science. 1: 19- 40.

7- Blackshaw R. E., Moyer J. R., Doram R. C., and Boswell A. L. 2001. Yellow sweet clover, green manure, and its residues effectively suppress weed during fallow. Weed Science. 49:406-413.

8- Blackshaw R.E., Molnar L.J., and Janzen H.H. 2004. Nitrogen fertilizer timing and application method affect weed growth and competition with spring wheat. Weed Science. 52: 614-622.

9- Coleman R., and Gill G. 2003. Trends in yielding ability and weed competitiveness of Australian wheat cultivars. Proceedings 2003 eleventh Australian Agronomy Conference, Geelong.

10- Darren C.B., Kenzevik S.T., Martin A.R., and Lindquist J.L. 2006. Effect of nitrogen addition on the comparative productivity of corn and velvet leaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Science. 54: 354-363.

11- Dianat M., Rahimian Mashhadi H., Baghestani M.A., Alizadeh H.M., and Zand E. 2007. Evaluation of Iranian cultivars of bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) for competitive ability against Rye (Secale cereale). Agriculture Science. 23: 267-280. (In Persian with English abstract).

12- Davis A.S., and Liebman M. 2001. Nitrogen source influences wild mustard growth and competitive effect on sweet com. Weed Science. 49: 558-566.

13- Ebahimpor norabadi F., Ayineband A., Normohammadi Gh., Mosavinyia H., And Mesgarbashei M. 2006. Evaluation of some physiological characteristics of wheat in competition with wild oat (Avena ludoviciana). Research and development. 73: 1-9. (In Persian with English abstract).

14- Heafele S.M., Johnson D.E., M’Bodj D., Wopereis M.C.S., and Miezan K.M. 2004. Field screening of diverse rice genotypes for weed competitiveness in irrigated lowland ecosystems. Field Crops Research. 88: 39–56.

15- Ghadiri H., and Ebrahimi M. 2008. Effect of wild oat (Avena fatua L.) densities and nitrogen on morphophysiological traits of several Iranian wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. Paper presented at the proceeding of the 5th international weed science congress. Van Can. 283-289.

16- Ghaderi A., Eversonn E. H., and Cress C. E. 1980. Classification of environments and genotypes in wheat. Crop Science. 15: 700-704.

17- Gill B. S., Rupp W. J., Sharma H. C., and Browder L. B. 1986. Resistance in Aegilops squarrosa to wheat leaf rust, wheat powodeny mildew, greenbuy and Hession fly. Plant Disease. 70: 553-555.

18- Giunta F., Motzo R., and Pruneddu G. 2007. Trends since 1900 in the yield potential of Italian – bred durum wheat cultivars. Journal Agronomy. 27:12-24.

19- Korres N. E., and Froud-willians R. J. 2002. Effects of winter wheat cultivars and seed rate on the biological characteristics of naturally occurring weed flora. Weed Research. 42: 417-428.

20- Knezevic S. Z., Evans S. P., Blankenship E.E., Van Acker R.C., and Lindquist J.L. 2002. Critical Period for Weed Control: The Concept and Data Analysis. Weed Science. 50: 773–786

21- Mohammaddost‌chamanabad H. R., and Asghari A. 2009. Effect of crop rotation, fertilizer and herbicides to control weeds in winter rye. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources. 13 (47): 601-610. (In Persian with English abstract).

22- Mohammaddost‌chamanabad H. R., Hemati Kh., Asghari. A., and Barmaki M. 2013. The effect of nitrogen and weed interference on some agronomic traits, yield and yield components of five wheat cultivars. Agricultural science and sustainable production.23 (4): 131-140. (In Persian with English abstract).

23- Moss S. R., Marshall R., Hull R., and Alarcon-Reverte R. 2011. Current status of herbicide-resistant weeds in the United Kingdom. Applied Biology. 106: 1–10.

24- Major J., Steiner C., Ditommaso A., Falcao N. P. S., and Lehmann J. 2005. Weed competition and cover after three years of soil fertility management in the central Brazilian Amazon: compost, fertilizer, manure and charcoal applications. Weed Biology and Management. 5: 69-76.

25- Naderi R., and Ghadiri H. 2011. Competition of Wild Mustard (Sinapis arvense L.) Densities with Rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) under Different Levels of Nitrogen Fertilizer. Agriculture Science Technology. 13: 45-51.

26- Ngouajio M., Mcgiffen M. E., and Hembree J.J. 2001. Tolerance of tomato cultivars velvetleaf interference. Weed Science. 49:91-98.

27- Onofri A., Carbonell E.A., Piepho H.P., Mortimer A.M., and Cousens R.D. 2010. Current statistical issues in weed res. Weed Research. 50: 5–24.

28- Pearcy R.W., Ehlernger J., Mooney H.A., and Rundel P.W. 1989. Plant physiological ecology. Chap man and Hall Pub. 457pp.

29- Ross J. 1981. The radiation regime and architecture of plant stands. Junk. The Hague. 391 pp.

30- Rabert K. M., and Vaker J. 1994. Introduction to the physiology of crop yield. Translation. Yahya I. and Niknajad. V. Publications University of Shiraz.

31- Rezvani H., Asghari J., Ehteshami M. R., and Kamkar B. 2013. Study reaction yield wheat cultivars in competition with the weed in Gorgan. 6(4): 178-214. (In Persian with English abstract).

32- Saberali F., Hejazi S., Sadatenori A., Baghestani M. A., and Zand A. 2005. Evaluation of LAI changes of Cynopuduim Alba in corn planting density and makeup. Abstract collection of Weed Science Conference. Tehran 5 to 6 February. Pages 194-199.

33- Safahani Langrodi A., Kamkar B., Zand E., Bagherani Meybodi N., and Bagheri M. 2007. Reaction of grain yield and its components of canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivars in competition with wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) in Gorgan. Crop Science. 9: 356-370. (In Persian with English abstract).

34- Siyahpoosh A., Zand E., Bakhshande A., and Gharineh M.H. 2012. Competitive of different densities of two wheat cultivars with wild mustard weed species (Sinapis arvensis) in different densities. Weed Science. 20: 748-752.

35- Tulikov A. M. 1974. Methods studding and predict of weeds in agro-ecosystems. M. TCHMA. 51pp.

36- Van Acker R. C., and Oree R. 2004. Wild oat (Avena fatua L.) and wild mustard (Brassica kaber) wheller interference in canola (Brassica napus). Weed Science. 39: 210-221.

37- Vazen S., and Najafi H. 2010. Competitive study of two wheat cultivars with four weeds under greenhouse conditions. Journal of Field Crops Research weeds. 2(2): 71-83. (In Persian with English abstract).

38- Zimdal R. L. 2004. Weed-Crop competition. Sscond edition. Blackwell pubishing. 220 pp.

39- Zarefeyzabadi A., Sareban H., Rajabzade M., and Khazayi H. 2009. Competitive response in 3 different densities of wild oat cultivars. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research.7 (2): 465-472. (In Persian with English abstract).