Effects of inter‐row hoeing and fertilizer placement on weed growth and yield of winter wheat

Abstract

Inter-row hoeing is known to control tap-rooted and erect weed species more effectively in winter wheat than weed harrowing. However, little is known about its effectiveness for use in the spring in winter wheat grown at wide row spacing (240 mm) under the influence of different placement of fertilizer. Two field experiments, one in 1999 and one in 2000, were conducted to study the influence of fertilizer placement, timing of inter-row hoeing, and driving speed on the weeding effect on different weed species and crop growth. Placement of fertilizer below the soil surface improved crop growth and grain yield in both years compared with placement on the surface, but the more vigorous crop did not give any better suppression of the weeds surviving hoeing. Timing was not important in one experiment, whereas hoeing twice beginning in early April was more effective in the other experiment where weed growth over the winter had been vigorous. Driving speed had no influence on either the weeding effect or the yield, except for one case where increasing speed reduced the control of well-developed weeds. Compared with unweeded reference treatments, inter-row hoeing reduced total weed biomass by 60-70% and tap-rooted and erect weed species in particular by 50-90%. Sowing at 240 mm row spacing yielded less than 120 mm (Danish standard), and inter-row hoeing for winter wheat needs to be adapted to narrower row spacing to avoid such yield decreases.

Adjustment of Weed Hoeing to Narrowly Spaced Cereals

“…At a tractor driving speed of 6 km·h −1 , the yield for the NTS treatment was lower, with an average of 9 t·ha −1 . Treatments GFS (4) and DSK showed similar high results of 9.5 and 9.2 t·ha −1 , respectively. Manual weed removal recorded an average grain yield of 9.7 t·ha −1 .…”

“…Moreover, narrowly seeded cereals can better suppress weed infestation compared to wider sowing [7][8][9]. This emphasizes the need to develop new hoeing systems for narrowly spaced cereal systems [4]. Row widths below 200 mm demand adjusted weeding blades and steering technologies to fit into the narrow row spaces and to guide the blades between the crop rows [10].…”

“…Larger weeds, perennial species and monocot weed species, in particular, are less affected by the harrowing. Due to these limitations, the interrow spaces between crop rows could be treated with more aggressive methods, such as hoeing [2][3][4]. Interrow hoeing is practiced in organic cereal farming, with row distances of at least 200 mm in Northern Europe.…”

Optimal Placement of Meat Bone Meal Pellets to Spring Oats

“…Other studies have examined weed survival after hoeing depending on fertilization, with variable results. For example, Melander et al (2002) obtained higher yield of winter wheat when nitrogen fertilizer was incorporated into soil, but no effect on weeds surviving hoeing. Rasmussen (2002) studied the effect of weed control depending on slurry application strategy to spring cereals and found that both mechanical and chemical weed control were more efficient if the slurry was injected rather than surface-applied.…”

Benefits of Precision Farming Technologies for Mechanical Weed Control in Soybean and Sugar Beet—Comparison of Precision Hoeing with Conventional Mechanical Weed Control

“…Weed control efficacies were slightly higher than in the studies by Dierauer and Stöppler-Zimmer [21], and almost equal to chemical weed control strategies. Melander et al [29] suggested that hoeing at higher speed could increase soil coverage of intra-row weeds and thus may lead to higher weed suppression. We could prove this hypothesis in our study.…”