Loading…
Effects of crop management practices on Echinochloa crus-galli and Chenopodium album seed production in a maize/soyabean rotation
Seed production of residual weed populations needs to be taken into account when estimating the long‐term impact of low‐input agronomic practices. The objective of this study was to measure the effects and interactions of crop, weed control, tillage practice and nutrient source on the seed productio...
Saved in:
Published in: | Weed research 2000-12, Vol.40 (6), p.535-547 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4040-10086ac5f1cd882aba749ddef91346d54e191b9b202611d9ce29ccdfe06494743 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4040-10086ac5f1cd882aba749ddef91346d54e191b9b202611d9ce29ccdfe06494743 |
container_end_page | 547 |
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 535 |
container_title | Weed research |
container_volume | 40 |
creator | Perron, F Légère, A |
description | Seed production of residual weed populations needs to be taken into account when estimating the long‐term impact of low‐input agronomic practices. The objective of this study was to measure the effects and interactions of crop, weed control, tillage practice and nutrient source on the seed production of the dominant residual weed species in a maize/soyabean rotation at two sites: Echinochloa crus‐galli (L.) Beauv. on a Sainte‐Rosalie clay and Chenopodium album L. on a Duravin clay loam. Seed production per unit area was estimated in each experimental unit. Weed seed production was greater under mechanical weed control compared with chemical weed control. In 1997, E. crus‐galli seed production reached over 326 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical weed control treatments, but averaged less than 500 seeds m–2 in the chemical weed control treatments. Chenopodium album produced in the range of 766 000 and 73 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical and chemical weed control treatments respectively. Very few or no weed seeds were produced in soyabean under chemical control. Tillage intensity and nutrient source did not affect seed production of either weed species, with the exception that E. crus‐galli produced more seeds in chisel than in mouldboard plough tillage in soyabean. Weed control method had more impact on seed production than tillage intensity and nutrient source in a maize/soyabean rotation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00210.x |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1839926083</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1839926083</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4040-10086ac5f1cd882aba749ddef91346d54e191b9b202611d9ce29ccdfe06494743</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc-LEzEUx4MoWFf_h4Dn6SaTTDoBL1LqKqwriNJjeJO8bFOnSZ3MYOvN_9yMleLRSxL4_niPTwihnC05k-p2v-RCNZXgLVvWjLElY3XRTk_I4io8JQvGpKj4Sqyekxc574tRKa0X5NfGe7RjpslTO6QjPUCERzxgHOlxADsGi0WMdGN3ISa76xMU45SrR-j7QCE6ut5hTMfkwnSg0HflzIiuxJObSkEJh0ihNIefeJvTGTqESIc0wiy-JM889Blf_b1vyNd3my_r99X9p7sP67f3lZVMsooz1iqwjefWtW0NHaykdg695kIq10jkmne6q1mtOHfaYq2tdR6ZklqupLghry-9Za_vE-bR7NM0xDLS8FZoXSvWiuJqL64CI-cBvTkO4QDD2XBmZuBmb2auZuZqZuDmD3Bz-mcAZAu9HyDakK_5VtVc6uJ6c3H9CD2e_7vdbD9vyqPEq0s85BFP1zgM34wqv9uY7cOdaba60R8ftNmK35Ito24</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1839926083</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effects of crop management practices on Echinochloa crus-galli and Chenopodium album seed production in a maize/soyabean rotation</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><creator>Perron, F ; Légère, A</creator><creatorcontrib>Perron, F ; Légère, A</creatorcontrib><description>Seed production of residual weed populations needs to be taken into account when estimating the long‐term impact of low‐input agronomic practices. The objective of this study was to measure the effects and interactions of crop, weed control, tillage practice and nutrient source on the seed production of the dominant residual weed species in a maize/soyabean rotation at two sites: Echinochloa crus‐galli (L.) Beauv. on a Sainte‐Rosalie clay and Chenopodium album L. on a Duravin clay loam. Seed production per unit area was estimated in each experimental unit. Weed seed production was greater under mechanical weed control compared with chemical weed control. In 1997, E. crus‐galli seed production reached over 326 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical weed control treatments, but averaged less than 500 seeds m–2 in the chemical weed control treatments. Chenopodium album produced in the range of 766 000 and 73 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical and chemical weed control treatments respectively. Very few or no weed seeds were produced in soyabean under chemical control. Tillage intensity and nutrient source did not affect seed production of either weed species, with the exception that E. crus‐galli produced more seeds in chisel than in mouldboard plough tillage in soyabean. Weed control method had more impact on seed production than tillage intensity and nutrient source in a maize/soyabean rotation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0043-1737</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-3180</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00210.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: WEREAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford UK: Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Biological and medical sciences ; chisel plough tillage ; Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General agronomy. Plant production ; Generalities, botany, ecology, damages, economic importance ; Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns ; low-input agriculture ; manure ; mechanical weed control ; Parasitic plants. Weeds ; Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection ; Weeds</subject><ispartof>Weed research, 2000-12, Vol.40 (6), p.535-547</ispartof><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4040-10086ac5f1cd882aba749ddef91346d54e191b9b202611d9ce29ccdfe06494743</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4040-10086ac5f1cd882aba749ddef91346d54e191b9b202611d9ce29ccdfe06494743</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=862149$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Perron, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Légère, A</creatorcontrib><title>Effects of crop management practices on Echinochloa crus-galli and Chenopodium album seed production in a maize/soyabean rotation</title><title>Weed research</title><description>Seed production of residual weed populations needs to be taken into account when estimating the long‐term impact of low‐input agronomic practices. The objective of this study was to measure the effects and interactions of crop, weed control, tillage practice and nutrient source on the seed production of the dominant residual weed species in a maize/soyabean rotation at two sites: Echinochloa crus‐galli (L.) Beauv. on a Sainte‐Rosalie clay and Chenopodium album L. on a Duravin clay loam. Seed production per unit area was estimated in each experimental unit. Weed seed production was greater under mechanical weed control compared with chemical weed control. In 1997, E. crus‐galli seed production reached over 326 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical weed control treatments, but averaged less than 500 seeds m–2 in the chemical weed control treatments. Chenopodium album produced in the range of 766 000 and 73 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical and chemical weed control treatments respectively. Very few or no weed seeds were produced in soyabean under chemical control. Tillage intensity and nutrient source did not affect seed production of either weed species, with the exception that E. crus‐galli produced more seeds in chisel than in mouldboard plough tillage in soyabean. Weed control method had more impact on seed production than tillage intensity and nutrient source in a maize/soyabean rotation.</description><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>chisel plough tillage</subject><subject>Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General agronomy. Plant production</subject><subject>Generalities, botany, ecology, damages, economic importance</subject><subject>Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns</subject><subject>low-input agriculture</subject><subject>manure</subject><subject>mechanical weed control</subject><subject>Parasitic plants. Weeds</subject><subject>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</subject><subject>Weeds</subject><issn>0043-1737</issn><issn>1365-3180</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkc-LEzEUx4MoWFf_h4Dn6SaTTDoBL1LqKqwriNJjeJO8bFOnSZ3MYOvN_9yMleLRSxL4_niPTwihnC05k-p2v-RCNZXgLVvWjLElY3XRTk_I4io8JQvGpKj4Sqyekxc574tRKa0X5NfGe7RjpslTO6QjPUCERzxgHOlxADsGi0WMdGN3ISa76xMU45SrR-j7QCE6ut5hTMfkwnSg0HflzIiuxJObSkEJh0ihNIefeJvTGTqESIc0wiy-JM889Blf_b1vyNd3my_r99X9p7sP67f3lZVMsooz1iqwjefWtW0NHaykdg695kIq10jkmne6q1mtOHfaYq2tdR6ZklqupLghry-9Za_vE-bR7NM0xDLS8FZoXSvWiuJqL64CI-cBvTkO4QDD2XBmZuBmb2auZuZqZuDmD3Bz-mcAZAu9HyDakK_5VtVc6uJ6c3H9CD2e_7vdbD9vyqPEq0s85BFP1zgM34wqv9uY7cOdaba60R8ftNmK35Ito24</recordid><startdate>200012</startdate><enddate>200012</enddate><creator>Perron, F</creator><creator>Légère, A</creator><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Science</general><general>Blackwell Scientific Publications</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>JQCIK</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200012</creationdate><title>Effects of crop management practices on Echinochloa crus-galli and Chenopodium album seed production in a maize/soyabean rotation</title><author>Perron, F ; Légère, A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4040-10086ac5f1cd882aba749ddef91346d54e191b9b202611d9ce29ccdfe06494743</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>chisel plough tillage</topic><topic>Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General agronomy. Plant production</topic><topic>Generalities, botany, ecology, damages, economic importance</topic><topic>Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns</topic><topic>low-input agriculture</topic><topic>manure</topic><topic>mechanical weed control</topic><topic>Parasitic plants. Weeds</topic><topic>Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection</topic><topic>Weeds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Perron, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Légère, A</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 33</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><jtitle>Weed research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Perron, F</au><au>Légère, A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effects of crop management practices on Echinochloa crus-galli and Chenopodium album seed production in a maize/soyabean rotation</atitle><jtitle>Weed research</jtitle><date>2000-12</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>535</spage><epage>547</epage><pages>535-547</pages><issn>0043-1737</issn><eissn>1365-3180</eissn><coden>WEREAT</coden><abstract>Seed production of residual weed populations needs to be taken into account when estimating the long‐term impact of low‐input agronomic practices. The objective of this study was to measure the effects and interactions of crop, weed control, tillage practice and nutrient source on the seed production of the dominant residual weed species in a maize/soyabean rotation at two sites: Echinochloa crus‐galli (L.) Beauv. on a Sainte‐Rosalie clay and Chenopodium album L. on a Duravin clay loam. Seed production per unit area was estimated in each experimental unit. Weed seed production was greater under mechanical weed control compared with chemical weed control. In 1997, E. crus‐galli seed production reached over 326 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical weed control treatments, but averaged less than 500 seeds m–2 in the chemical weed control treatments. Chenopodium album produced in the range of 766 000 and 73 000 seeds m–2 in mechanical and chemical weed control treatments respectively. Very few or no weed seeds were produced in soyabean under chemical control. Tillage intensity and nutrient source did not affect seed production of either weed species, with the exception that E. crus‐galli produced more seeds in chisel than in mouldboard plough tillage in soyabean. Weed control method had more impact on seed production than tillage intensity and nutrient source in a maize/soyabean rotation.</abstract><cop>Oxford UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Ltd</pub><doi>10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00210.x</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0043-1737 |
ispartof | Weed research, 2000-12, Vol.40 (6), p.535-547 |
issn | 0043-1737 1365-3180 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1839926083 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection |
subjects | Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions Biological and medical sciences chisel plough tillage Cropping systems. Cultivation. Soil tillage Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology General agronomy. Plant production Generalities, botany, ecology, damages, economic importance Generalities. Cropping systems and patterns low-input agriculture manure mechanical weed control Parasitic plants. Weeds Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection Weeds |
title | Effects of crop management practices on Echinochloa crus-galli and Chenopodium album seed production in a maize/soyabean rotation |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T22%3A43%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effects%20of%20crop%20management%20practices%20on%20Echinochloa%20crus-galli%20and%20Chenopodium%20album%20seed%20production%20in%20a%20maize/soyabean%20rotation&rft.jtitle=Weed%20research&rft.au=Perron,%20F&rft.date=2000-12&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=535&rft.epage=547&rft.pages=535-547&rft.issn=0043-1737&rft.eissn=1365-3180&rft.coden=WEREAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00210.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1839926083%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4040-10086ac5f1cd882aba749ddef91346d54e191b9b202611d9ce29ccdfe06494743%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1839926083&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |