The Effect of Cutting off the Wild Barley (Hordeum spontaneum C. Koch) Spike in Wheat on Its Population in Chickpea under a Crop Rotation System

پژوهش های حفاظت گیاهان ایران

Article 8, Volume 33, Issue 4 - Serial Number 46, December 2020, Pages 441-451   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jpp.v33i4.73370

Author

Seyed Karim Mousavi^*

Plant Protection Research Department, Lorestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, AREEO, Khorramabad, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Transient and persistence of weed seed banks impact on weed population dynamics. Therefore, any management tools with having a reducing role can affect weed population size. Reduction of weed seed rain using effective control tools can reduce weed density. The seed bank density is the main factor corresponding to seedling density. Decline of seed bank is critical to success in crop production, so that,   poor performance in weed control only for a season cause to rain weed seeds and to improve soil seed bank. Most of the commonly used herbicides recommended for controlling weeds in wheat fields are not efficiently able to control the wild barley (Hordeum spontaneum C. Koch). Hence, utilizing appropriate agronomic strategies to control this weed is critical. Evaluation the effect of wild barley spike cut-off in the previous wheat field, and the effects of chickpea planting date and chemical weed control in chickpea cultivation in rotation on wild barley weed population in chickpea cultivation are among the aims of this study.
Materials and Methods: The effect of wild barley spike cut-off in the previous wheat field, and sowing date and management strategies in chickpea on its population in chickpea for the following years was evaluated in Khorramabad, Lorestan, Iran during 2009-10 and 2010-11 growing seasons. The experiment was arranged in a factorial split plot in a completely randomized block design with three replications.  The wild barley spike cut-off in wheat (at two levels: No cut-off and with cut-off) and chickpea planting date in the next season (at two levels: early planting and late planting) were assigned into the main plots. Chickpea weed management treatments (at five levels: pre emergence application of metribuzin at 0.7 kg per hectare, pre emergence application of imazethapyr 0.7 litter per hectare, post emergence application of Clethodim 1 liter per hectare, weed free treatment, and weedy infest)was assigned into the sub plots.
Results and Discussion: Wild barley spike cut-off in previous wheat reduced 71% of the density and biomass of this weed in chickpea cultivation in the following years. This suggests the importance of recent year's wild barley seeding rain in the completion of the soil seed bank for the next season. Early planting of chickpea compared to late planting decreased the wild barley density by 75%. It was mainly related to the ineffectiveness of planting operations in full control of the large wild barley plants in the late planting treatment. Early planting of chickpea under wild barley weed spike cut-off in previous wheat crop condition, was completely free of wild barley. Accordingly, the prevention of wild barley seed rain and the completion of the soil seed bank in the previous year, along with the timely planting of chickpea led to full control of this weed. Triple interaction effects of experiment factors on wild barley biomass in chickpea was statistically significant. This suggests the difference of wild barley biomass response to weed management treatments in different planting date of chickpea in spike cut-off and without spike cut-off of wild barley in the previous wheat crop. In addition to manual weeding treatments in different conditions, all weed management practices, even uncontrolled weedy check, in early chickpea planting under spike cut-off of wild barley conditions in wheat cultivation in the previous year, did not emerged any wild barley seedling. This indicates the high efficiency of spike cut-off of wild barley in the previous year and the prevention of seeding and the timely planting of chickpeas in the management of this weed.
Conclusion: Thus, it seems that the major part of the growing population of this weed is dependent on previous year seed rain. In the other words, the wild barley population dynamics is largely dependent on the temporary transient seed bank instead of a persistent seed bank. This suggests the possibility of managing problematic wild barley and reducing its population below the economic damage threshold through prevention of seed rain and soil seed bank management.

Keywords

Chickpea; weed management; wheat; wild barley

References

1- Bastiaans L., Kropff M.J., Goudriaan J., and Van Laar H.H. 2000. Design of weed management systems with reduced reliance on herbicides poses new challenges and prerequisites for modeling crop-weed interactions. Field Crops Research 67: 161-179.

2- Brainard D.C., Bellinder R.R., Hahn R.R., and Shah D.A. 2008. Crop rotation, cover crop, and weed management effects on weed seedbanks and yields in snap bean, sweet corn, and cabbage. Weed Science 56: 434-441.

3- Brust G.E., and Stinner B.R. 1991. Crop rotation for insect, plant pathogen, and weed control. Page 217–236 in D. Pimentel, ed. CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture I. Second edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.

4- Buhler D.D. 1999. Weed population responses to weed control practices. I. Seed bank, weed populations, and crop yields. Weed Science 47: 416-422.

5- Bussan A.J., and Boerboom C.M. 2001. Modeling the integrated management of velvetleaf in a corn–soybean rotation. Weed Science 49: 31-41.

6- Cavers P.B., and Benoit D.L. 1989. Seed banks in arable land. Pages 309-328 in M.A. Leck, V.T. Parker, and R.L. Simpson, eds. Ecology of Soil Seed Banks. San Diego, CA: Academic.

7- Conn J.S., and Deck R.E. 1995. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 9.7 years of burial in Alaska. Weed Sci. 43: 583–585.

8- Cousens R., and Mortimer M. 1995. Dynamics of Weed Populations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 332 p.

9- Davis A.S., and Williams M.M. 2007. Variation in wild proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) fecundity in sweet corn has residual effects in snap bean. Weed Science 55: 502-507.

10- Davis A.S., and Ngouajio M. 2005. Introduction to the symposium beyond thresholds: applying multiple tactics within integrated weed management systems. Weed Science 53: 368.

11- Davis A.S., Dixon P.M., and Liebman M. 2004. Using matrix models to determine cropping system effects on annual weed demography. Ecological Applications 14: 655-668.

12- Derksen D.A., Anderson R.L., Blackshaw R.E., and Maxwell B. 2002. Weed dynamics and management strategies for cropping systems in the northern Great Plains. Agronomy Journal 94: 174-185.

13- Dotzenko A.D., Ozkan M., and Storer K.R. 1969. Influence of crop sequence, nitrogen fertilizer and herbicides on weed seed populations in sugar beet fields. Agronomy Journal 61: 34-37.

14- Hanson J., Dismukes R., Chambers W., Greene C., and Kremen A. 2004. Risk and risk management in organic agriculture: views of organic farmers. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 19: 218-227.

15- Harlan J.R., and Zohary D. 1966. Distribution of wild wheats and barley. Science 153: 1074-1080.

16- Jamali M., and Termeh F. 1998. Identification of Graminae weeds in fields, gardens and pastures of Fars province. In: Proceedings 1998 the 13th Iranian Plant Protection Congress, Karaj, Iran, 23-27.

17- Jordan N., Morkensen D.A., Prenzlow D.M., and Cox K.C. 1995. Simulation analysis of crop rotation effects on weed seedbanks. American Journal of Botany 82: 390-398.

18- Kleemann S.G.L., Preston C., and Gill G.S. 2016. Influence of management on longterm seedbank dynamics of rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) in cropping systems of southern Australia. Weed Science 64: 303-311.

19- Kleemann S.G., and Gill G. 2018. Seed Germination and Seedling Recruitment Behavior of Winged Sea Lavender (Limonium lobatum) in Southern Australia. Weed Science 1-9.

20- Liebman M., and Gallandt E.R. 1997. Many little hammers: ecological approaches for management of crop-weed interactions. Pages 291-343 in L. E. Jackson, ed. Ecology in Agriculture. San Diego: Academic Press.

21- Lutman P.J.W., Cussans G.W., Wright K.J., Wilson B.J., Wright G.M., and Lawson H.M. 2002. The persistence of seeds of 16 weed species over six years in two arable fields. Weed Res. 42: 231–241.

22- Martini E.A., Buyer J.S., Bryant D.C., Hartz T.K., and Denison R.F. 2004. Yield increases during the organic transition: improving soil quality or increasing experience? Field Crops Res. 86: 255-266.

23- Maxwell B.D., Smith R.G., and Brelsford M. 2007. Wild oat (Avena fatua) seed bank dynamics in transition to organic wheat production systems. Weed Science 55(3): 212-217.

24- Mertens S.K., Yearsley J.M., van den Bosch F., and Gilligan C.A. 2006. Transient population dynamics in periodic matrix models: methodology and effects of cyclic permutations. Ecology 87: 2338-2348.

25- Mohler C.L. 1996. Ecological bases for the cultural control of weeds. Journal of Production Agriculture 9: 468-474.

26- Mortensen D.A., Bastiaans L., and Sattin M. 2000. The role of ecology in the development of weed management systems: an outlook. Weed Research 40: 49-62.

27- Murphy S.D., Clements D.R., Belaoussoff S., Kevan P.G., and Swanton C.J. 2006. Promotion of weed species diversity and reduction of weed seedbanks with conservation tillage and crop rotation. Weed Science 54: 69-77.

28- Nevo E., Kaplan D., Storch N., and Zohary D. 1986. Genetic diversity and environmental associations of wild barley, Hordeum spontaneum (Poaceae), in Iran. Plant Systematics and Evolution 153: 141-164.

29- Nordell E. 1992. Crop rotations today. Small Farm Journal 16: 2-31.

30- Norris R.F. 1999. Ecological implications of using thresholds for weed management. Pages 31–58 in D.D. Buhler, ed. Expanding the Context of Weed Management. New York: Haworth.

31- Peters N.C.B. 1991. Seed dormancy and seedling emergence studies in Avena fatua L. Weed Research, 31: 107-116.

32- Rasmussen I.A., and Holst N. 2003. Computer model for simulating the longterm dynamics of annual weeds: from seedlings to seeds. Aspects of Applied Biology 69: 277-284.

33- Smith R.G., and Gross K.L. 2006. Rapid change in the germinable fraction of the weed seed bank in crop rotations. Weed Science 54: 1094-1100.

34- Sumner D.R. 1982. Crop rotation and plant productivity. Page 273-313 in M. Rechcigl, ed. CRC Handbook of Agricultural Productivity. Boca Raton, FL: CRC.

35- Teasdale J.R., Mangum R.W., Radhakrishnan J., and Cavigelli M.A. 2004. Weed seedbank dynamics in three organic farming crop rotations. Agronomy Journal 96: 1429-1435.

36- Thurston J.M. 1962. The effect of competition from cereal crops on the germination and growth of Avena fatua in a naturally infested field. Weed Research 6: 67-80.

37- Walenta D.L., Yenish J.P., Young F.L., and Ball D.A. 2002. Vernalization response of plants grown from spikelets of spring and fall cohorts of jointed goatgrass. Weed Science 50: 461-465.

38- Webster T.M., Cardina J., and White A.D. 2003. Weed seed rain, soil seedbanks, and seedling recruitment in no-tillage crop rotations. Weed Science 51: 569-575.

39- Zohary D., Hopf M., and Weiss E. 2012. Domestication of Plants in the Old World: The origin and spread of domesticated plants in Southwest Asia, Europe, and the Mediterranean Basin. Fourth Edition. Oxford University.