Weed suppression by cover crops: comparative on‐farm experiments under integrated and organic conservation tillage

Dorn, Brigitte; Jossi, W.; Heijden, Marcel G. A. van der

doi:10.1111/wre.12175

Cited by 54 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(35 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The cover crops that had the lowest dry matter content (MUC and LAB) are vines and exhibit high amounts of soil cover during their vegetative phase and deposit large amounts of senescent material on the soil. Similar results were found by Teodoro et al (2011) LAB, exert more pressure on spontaneous plant species (Dorn et al, 2015) and quickly protect the soil from erosion (Durán Zuazo and Rodríguez Pleguezuelo, 2008).…”

Section: Dry Matter Production and Nutrient Accumulation In The Phytosupporting

confidence: 81%

Decomposition and Nutrient Release Dynamics of Shoot Phytomass of Cover Crops in the Recôncavo Baiano

Xavier

Oliveira

Silva

2017

Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Evaluating the decomposition dynamics of vegetative residues from cover crops can provide a better understanding of nutrient release, which is fundamental when choosing a species that is adapted to local conditions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the decomposition rates and nutrient release dynamics of the shoot phytomass of different cover crops that have potential for agricultural use in the Recôncavo Baiano, Brazil. Crop residues of the following species were analyzed: sunn hemp (Crotalaria juncea L.) -CROT; velvet bean (Mucuna aterrima L.) -MUC; lab lab (Dolichos lab lab L.) -LAB; jack bean (Canavalia ensiformis [L.] DC.) -JB; white lupin (Lupinus albus L.) -WLUP; and Guinea grass (Urochloa maxima (Jacq.) R. Webster) -GRAS. The experiment was conducted in a randomized block design with four replications. The decomposition and nutrient release dynamics were evaluated using litter bags, and the remaining dry matter and the nutrient content of litter from each cover crop were quantified. The accumulation of macronutrients in the phytomass was in the following order: N > K > Ca > Mg > P > S. The highest decomposition rates of the phytomass occurred in the species JB, with half-life (t 1/2 ) of 36 days, and GRAS, with t 1/2 of 41 days. K was the element with the shortest t 1/2 , suggesting a rapid transfer rate to the soil. Organic residues from the CROT and WLUP cover crops had lower decomposition rates and are, therefore, recommended for protecting soil in the region. Sunn hemp, unlike WLUP, also had residue of high chemical quality and, thus, it is an excellent nutrient recycler. Jack bean released nutrients into the soil the fastest due to its rapid decomposition rate; therefore, it is not recommended for ground cover.

show abstract

Section: Dry Matter Production and Nutrient Accumulation In The Phytosupporting

confidence: 81%

Decomposition and Nutrient Release Dynamics of Shoot Phytomass of Cover Crops in the Recôncavo Baiano

Xavier

Oliveira

Silva

2017

Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Globally, the adoption of cover crops is gaining more attention, especially in reduced and no-tillage systems, partly due to increasing interest in reducing the development of herbicide-resistant weeds, and enhancing the sustainability of agroecosystems (Teasdale, 1993;Dorn et al, 2015;SARE/CTIC, 2017). Globally, the adoption of cover crops is gaining more attention, especially in reduced and no-tillage systems, partly due to increasing interest in reducing the development of herbicide-resistant weeds, and enhancing the sustainability of agroecosystems (Teasdale, 1993;Dorn et al, 2015;SARE/CTIC, 2017).…”

Section: Review and Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Cover Crop Management on Level of Weed Suppression: A Meta‐Analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted a previous systematic and meta‐analysis review that showed differences in results from studies that evaluated the effectiveness of cover crops for weed suppression in cropping systems; these differences were largely due to management approaches used in growing the cover crop and main crop. The current meta‐analysis provides a quantitative review on how cover crop and main crop management practices influence the impact of cover crops on weed suppression. The meta‐analysis used observations from 53 studies published from 1990 to 2018. Cover crop biomass was inversely related to the amount of weed biomass (r2 = 0.67) and weed density (r2 = 0.64). In general, the meta‐analysis shows that cover crops provided a range of weed suppression depending on management decisions such as choice of cover crop species, cover crop sowing season (fall or spring), sowing dates within seasons, seeding rate, termination date, delay in main crop planting date after cover crop termination, tillage system under which the cover crop was produced, and integrating the cover crop with other weed control inputs. For example, grass cover crop species provided greater weed suppression than broadleaf species. Fall‐sown cover crops provided greater weed suppression (weighted mean of response ratio [R*] = 0.19) than spring‐sown cover crops (R* = 0.48) by the summer. Weed suppression increased by increasing seeding rate of cover crops from 1× (R* = 0.50) to 2× (R* = 0.27) or 3× (R* = 0.10). In addition, cover crops provided greater weed suppression in reduced tillage systems (R* = 0.19) than no tillage (R* = 0.29). The differential weed suppression provided by these management approaches suggests that a cover crop management approach should be rightly selected for weed suppression benefits.

show abstract

“…Additionally, Brennan and Smith [9] and Dorn et al [54] suggest that rapid plant development after sowing is more important than the final CC biomass [32]. For some examples, these results can be referred to the data presented.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Weed Control Ability of Single Sown Cover Crops Compared to Species Mixtures

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To achieve efficient weed control through cover cropping, the plant species chosen needs particular consideration. Combing different cover crop (CC) species in mixtures may increase the number of provided ecosystem services, including reliable suppression of weeds. We tested the weed suppression ability of single CC species and CC mixtures in a field trial during the autumn-to-winter growing season of 2016 and 2017. Anethum graveolens L. (dill), Raphanus sativus var. oleiformis Pers. (oilseed radish), Avena strigosa Schreb. (black oat), Carthamus tinctorius L. (safflower), Vicia sativa L. (vetch) and Phacelia tanacetifolia Benth. (phacelia) were sown in monocultures, as well as in mixtures with three or six species. Treatments with favorable establishment and above-average biomass yields tended to suppress weeds by showing lower weed dry matter and weed numbers. The highest weed control efficacy within the monocultures was reached in 2017 by black oat and oilseed radish with 72% and 83%, respectively. The mixture treatments reached a generally lower soil cover, aboveground dry matter and weed control efficacy (with an average of 57% in 2017). Even though mixtures were not as effective as the best performing single sown CCs, species combinations increased resilience against adverse weather conditions, an advantage to achieving efficient weed control over a long-term period. Therefore, species composition within mixtures is more relevant than the number of species included.Agronomy 2019, 9, 294 2 of 12 are left on the soil surface, they additionally act as a physical layer that small weed seedlings need to penetrate [13,14]. This slows down the development of the weed populations in spring after the main crop has already been sown [15]. Therefore, CCs are able to affect weed populations from their sowing date until a certain time after the subsequent main crop is established [16]. Naturally, the weed suppressive ability of a CC depends on several environmental influences that determine, e.g., the level and activity of allelochemicals [17], the speed of CC development and the build-up of biomass [18]. Under unfavorable conditions, a single sown CC might not be able to provide a sufficient level of weed suppression.Crop stands of single CC species are not able to buffer rapidly changing environmental conditions. Therefore, many studies have investigated the adaptability of mixtures [19][20][21]. Higher species diversity increases the likelihood that some of the species in a mixture are more productive, because they are better adapted to a certain set of environmental conditions (sampling effect) [22,23]. The CC species Vicia sativa L. and Phacelia tanacetifolia Benth. were not germinating well under high temperatures, whereas Guizotia abyssinica (L.f.) Cass. performed well [24]. Combinations of contrasting species in regard to environmental conditions, therefore, might provide resilience to weather conditions and provide stability in their service provision. The conditions that drive CC species performance are also d...

show abstract

Weed suppression by cover crops: comparative on‐farm experiments under integrated and organic conservation tillage

Cited by 54 publications

References 28 publications

Decomposition and Nutrient Release Dynamics of Shoot Phytomass of Cover Crops in the Recôncavo Baiano

Decomposition and Nutrient Release Dynamics of Shoot Phytomass of Cover Crops in the Recôncavo Baiano

Impact of Cover Crop Management on Level of Weed Suppression: A Meta‐Analysis

Weed Control Ability of Single Sown Cover Crops Compared to Species Mixtures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About