Effects of pre‐ and post‐emergence weed harrowing on annual weeds in peas and spring cereals

Lundkvist, Anneli

doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.2009.00718.x

Cited by 38 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The analysis of variance for the variables related to weed presence and their biodiversity it is not resulted statistically significant, but the average number of weed plants for each crops variety (Table 4) it is in line with other experiments on field bean in Tuscany (Barberi et al, 2004) and pea (Lundkvist, 2009) in organic farming systems and white lupin (Carruthers et al, 2008) in conventional one. The number of weeds seems not to affect the yield of the field pea and field bean, which are in line with the yields expected.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Performance of organic grain legumes in Tuscany

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2005-2007 growing season, few varieties of field bean, high protein pea and white lupin were compared in an organic farm of Central Italy (Mugello area, Tuscany), to evaluate their agronomic performance in terms of grain yield, nutritional quality and competitive ability against weeds. The experiment was performed under rain-fed conditions. Furthermore, grain legumes features were compared between two different sowing seasons (autumnal vs late-winter) for two years, in order to get information on the best time of sowing of these species, and the stability of yields of different genotypes in those climatic and soil conditions. These legumes could be an alternative protein source to external soybean, a high-risk alimentary source of genetically modified organisms, in the organic livestock sector. The main findings indicate that higher yields in grain and crude protein were obtained with the pea species and in particular with cultivars Hardy (4.0 t/ha grain yield; 626 kg/ha crude protein yield) and Classic (3.1 t/ha grain yield; 557 kg/ha crude protein yield); followed by field bean cv. Chiaro di Torre Lama (2.9 t/ha grain yield; 624 kg/ha crude protein yield) and cv. Vesuvio (2.5 t/ha grain yield; 549 kg/ha crude protein yield). Furthermore the field bean is interesting for the stability of yield in both years despite climatic conditions rather different. The white lupin has showed the lower yield but the best values of grain quality, with higher values in lupin Multitalia for dry matter, crude protein and ether extract and in lupin Luxe also for crude fibre, respect to the other legumes analysed. Among lupin varieties, lupin Multitalia showed the best yield results for the pedo-climatic conditions of Mugello area (0.9 t/ha lupin Multitalia; 0.2 t/ha lupin Luxe). The total yield of organic grain legumes, in the experimental site, is resulted higher with an autumnal seeding respect to the late-winter seeding (2.8 t/ha vs 1.9 t/ha).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Performance of organic grain legumes in Tuscany

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The lack of pre-emergence tillage effect on weed density contradicts the findings of Lundkvist (2009) who reported that pre-emergence harrowing reduced wild mustard density in field pea by 18 to 84% although results in spring wheat and oats (Avena sativa L) were variable. In New Zealand, Dastgheib (2004) reported a 40 to 50% reduction in weed density from preemergence harrowing in field pea.…”

Section: Weed Density and Biomasscontrasting

confidence: 54%

“…Yields of both the pre-emergence tillage treatments at the mid-May seeding date were 81% of the early May DH treatment. The improvement in field pea yield from pre-emergence tillage contradicts studies conducted in Sweden by Lundkvist (2009) who reported that pre-emergence harrowing reduced weed density, but had no effect on field pea yield. In New Zealand, Dastgheib (2004) reported that pre-emergence harrowing improved field pea yields by 54 to 59% compared with untreated controls, which is slightly higher than the mean yield response (33%) reported in this study.…”

Section: Weed Density and Biomassmentioning

confidence: 91%

Pre-emergence mechanical weed control in field pea (Pisum sativum L.)

Johnson¹,

Holm²

2010

Can. J. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2010. Pre-emergence mechanical weed control in field pea (Pisum sativum L.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 90: 133Á138. Producers who wish to adopt organic or pesticide-free crop production are seeking alternatives to herbicides. A field experiment was conducted at Scott, SK, from 1999 to 2001 to determine the combination of seeding date (early-May, mid-May, and late-May) and weed management system (shallow-seeded untreated, shallow-seeded with preemergence tillage, shallow-seeded herbicide, deep-seeded untreated, deep-seeded with pre-emergence tillage, and deepseeded herbicide) that would optimize yield of field pea grown without the use of herbicides. The shallow and deep seeded pre-emergence tillage treatments were a 2.5-cm seeding depth followed by two sequential harrow passes and a 7.5-cm seeding depth followed by two sequential rod-weeder passes, respectively. None of the weed management systems had a significant effect on field pea density. The herbicide treatments were the only treatments that had a significant effect on weed density as the application timing was more synchronous with weed emergence than were the tillage treatments. The preemergence tillage treatments reduced weed biomass when seeding was delayed until mid-May following weed emergence. Deep seeding followed by pre-emergence rod-weeding was more efficacious in reducing weed fresh weight than shallow seeding followed by pre-emergence harrowing; however, they both provided similar yield responses at the mid-May seeding date. Delayed seeding until late May resulted in a 30 to 35% reduction in field pea yield compared with early or mid-May seeding, respectively. Early-seeded field peas followed by an in-crop herbicide application resulted in the highest field pea yields with the best seeding date by pre-emergence tillage combination achieving 81% of these yields. A strategy for field pea producers who choose not to use herbicides would be to delay seeding until some weeds emerge and seed at a 7.5-cm depth followed by two sequential rod-weeding passes prior to crop emergence.Key words: Field pea, seeding date, seed depth, pre-emergence tillage Johnson, E. N. et Holm, F. A. 2010. De´sherbage me´canique avant leve´e dans les champs de pois de grande culture (Pisum sativum L.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 90: 133Á138. Les cultivateurs qui de´sirent passer a`la culture biologique ou sans pesticides cherchent des solutions de rechange aux de´sherbants. Les auteurs ont effectue´une expe´rience sur le terrain a`Scott, en Saskatchewan, de 1999 a`2001, pour de´terminer la combinaison qui donnerait le meilleur rendement pour la culture sans herbicide du pois, entre la date des semis (de´but mai, mi-mai ou fin de mai) et la me´thode de de´sherbage (semis peu profonds sans traitement, semis peu profonds avec travail du sol avant la leve´e, semis peu profonds avec herbicide, semis profonds sans traitement, semis profonds avec travail du sol avant la leve´e et semis profonds avec herbicide). Les semis peu profonds et profonds avec travail du sol avant la leve´e consistaient ...

show abstract

“…The late emerging annual weed species C. album and Polygonum lapathifolium were most effectively controlled when pre-emergence weed harrowing was combined with one or two weed harrowing treatments after crop emergence. The best weed control was obtained by a combination of pre-and post-emergence harrowing, but these treatments also caused yield losses of 12-14% in spring cereals, while no yield losses were observed in peas (Lundkvist, 2009 Table 3. Total number of weed plants (m -2 ) in the 4 field experiments with peas treated with different combinations of pre-(pre-wh) and post-weed harrowing (post-wh) at Enköping (En) and at Uppsala (Ua) in (Lundkvist, 2009.…”

Section: Weed Harrowingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Post-emergence harrowing (postwh) occurs after the crop has emerged and is challenging because both weeds and crop may be damaged by the harrow (Rasmussen et al, 2008) and the most sensitive development stage for mechanical disturbance often coincides for both the crop and the weeds. Given the increasing need for harrowing as a means of weed control and the lack of information on the effectiveness of the many combinations of pre-wh and post-wh treatments that are possible, particularly with respect to field sites in far northern Europe, a project was initiated to study the effects of different combinations of weed harrowing before and after crop emergence on weed control in field sites in Sweden (Lundkvist, 2009). The major hypotheses were (i) that combinations comprising both pre-wh and post-wh provide better weed control effect against annual weed infestations than treatments containing only pre-emergence harrowing, and (ii) that pre-emergence harrowing alone or in combination with post-emergence harrowing provides better control of early emerging weed species versus post-emergence harrowing alone.…”

Section: Weed Harrowingmentioning

confidence: 99%