Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-42vt5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-01T16:54:18.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Crop Rotation, Cover Crop, and Weed Management Effects on Weed Seedbanks and Yields in Snap Bean, Sweet Corn, and Cabbage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Daniel C. Brainard ,
Robin R. Bellinder ,
Russell R. Hahn  and
Denis A. Shah
Daniel C. Brainard
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Robin R. Bellinder*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Russell R. Hahn
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Denis A. Shah
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, NY 14456
*
Corresponding author's email: rrb3@cornell.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three major hypotheses were examined in this study: (1) the density of summer annual weeds is reduced in crop rotation systems that include winter wheat compared to those with strictly summer annual crops, (2) the integration of a red clover in cropping systems reduces weed seedbank densities, and (3) changes in weed seedbanks due to crop rotation system have greater impact on future crops that are managed with cultivation alone, compared to those managed with herbicides. To test these hypotheses, five 3-yr rotation sequences were examined in central New York state: continuous field corn (FC); field corn with red clover (FC + CL); field corn–oats–wheat (FC/O/W); sweet corn–peas–wheat (SC/P/W), and SC/P/W with red clover (SC/P/W + CL). In the fourth year, sweet corn, snap beans, and cabbage were planted in subplots with three levels of weed management as sub-subplots: cultivation alone, reduced-rate herbicides (1/2×), and full-rate herbicides (1×). The trial was carried out in two separate cycles, from 1997 to 2000 (cycle 1) and from 1998 to 2001 (cycle 2). Crop rotations with strictly summer annual crops (FC) did not result in consistently higher weed seedbank densities of summer annual weeds compared to rotations involving winter wheat (FC/O/W; SC/P/W; SC/P/W + CL). Integration of red clover in continuous field corn resulted in higher weed seedbanks (cycle 1) or emergence (cycle 2) of several summer annual weeds compared to field corn alone. In contrast, integration of red clover in the SC/P/W rotation led to a 96% reduction in seedbank density of winter annuals in cycle 1, although this effect was not detected in cycle 2. Observed changes in weed seedbank density and emergence due to crop rotation resulted in increased weed biomass in the final year in only one case (sweet corn, cycle 2), and did not result in detectable differences in crop yields. In contrast, final year weed management had a strong effect on weed biomass and yield; cultivation alone resulted in yield losses for sweet corn (32 to 34%) and cabbage (0 to 7%), but not snap beans compared to either 1/2× or 1× herbicides.

Keywords

Corn, Zea mays L.cabbage, Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.snap beans, Phaseolus vulgaris L.oats, Avena sativa L.peas, Pisum sativum L.winter wheat, Triticum aestivum L.red clover, Trifolium pratense L.Integrated weed managementreduced-rate herbicidescultivationlegume green manure

Information

Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 56 , Issue 3 , June 2008 , pp. 434 - 441
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Bowman, G., Shirley, C., and Cramer, C. 1998. Managing Cover Crops Profitably. 2nd ed. Sustainable Agriculture Network Handbook Series, Book 3. Beltsville, MD Sustainable Agriculture Network.Google Scholar
Brainard, D. C. and Bellinder, R. R. 2004. Assessing variability in fecundity of Amaranthus powellii using a simulation model. Weed Res. 44:203–217.Google Scholar
Brust, G. E. and Stinner, B. R. 1991. Crop rotation for insect, plant pathogen, and weed control. Pages 217–236. in Pimentel, D. CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture I. Second edition. Boca Raton, FL CRC.Google Scholar
Cardina, J. E., Herms, C. P., and Doohan, D. J. 2002. Crop rotation and tillage system effects on weed seedbanks. Weed Sci. 50:448–460.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. and Liebman, M. 2003. Cropping systems effects on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) demography: 1. Green manure and tillage timing. Weed Sci. 51:919–929.Google Scholar
Dorado, J., Del Monte, J. P., and Lopez-Fando, C. 1999. Weed seedbank response to crop rotation and tillage in semiarid agroecosystems. Weed Sci. 47:67–73.Google Scholar
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. Agron. J. 61:34–37.Google Scholar
Gross, K. L. and Renner, K. A. 1989. A new method for estimating seed numbers in the soil. Weed Sci. 37:836–839.Google Scholar
Guldan, S. J., Martin, C. A., Cueto-Wong, J., and Steiner, R. L. 1996. Dry-matter and nitrogen yields of legumes interseeded into sweet corn. HortScience. 31:206–208.Google Scholar
Hartl, W. 1989. Influence of undersown clovers on weeds and on the yield of winter wheat in organic farming. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 27:389–396.Google Scholar
Lentner, M. and Bishop, T. 1986. Experimental Design and Analysis. Blacksburg, VA Valley Book Company.Google Scholar
Liebman, M. and Dyck, E. 1993. Crop rotation and intercropping strategies for weed management. Ecol. Appl. 3:92–122.Google Scholar
Liebman, M. and Staver, C. P. 2001. Crop diversification for weed management. Pages 322–374. in Liebman, M., Mohler, C. L., and Staver, C. P. Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. New York Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., Wolfinger, R. D., and Schabenberger, O. 2006. SAS® for Mixed Models. 2nd ed. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. 2001. Mechanical management of weeds. Pages 139–209. in Liebman, M., Mohler, C. L., and Staver, C. P. Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. New York Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nordell, E. 1992. Crop rotations today. Small Farm J. 16:29–31.Google Scholar
Rauch, B. J., Bellinder, R. R., and Brainard, D. C. 2007. Using common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) control as a basis for reduction of fomesafen use in snap and dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) 21:623–628. Weed Technol.Google Scholar
Sawma, J. T. and Mohler, C. L. 2002. Evaluating seed viability by an unimbibed seed crush test with comparison to the tetrazolium test. Weed Technol. 16:781–786.Google Scholar
Sumner, D. R. 1982. Crop rotation and plant productivity. Pages 273–313. in Rechcigl, M. CRC Handbook of Agricultural Productivity. Boca Raton, FL CRC.Google Scholar
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 Res. 6:67–80.Google Scholar
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 Sci. 50:461–465.Google Scholar