Weed Suppression in Only-Legume Cover Crop Mixtures

被引:21
|
作者
Elsalahy, Heba [1 ,2 ]
Doering, Thomas [3 ]
Bellingrath-Kimura, Sonoko [1 ,4 ]
Arends, Danny [5 ]
机构
[1] Humboldt Univ, Dept Agron & Crop Sci, Albrecht Thaer Weg 5, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
[2] Assiut Univ, Fac Sci, Bot & Microbiol Dept, Assiut 71516, Egypt
[3] Univ Bonn, Agroecol & Organ Farming Grp, Hugel 6, D-53121 Bonn, Germany
[4] Leibniz Ctr Agr Landscape Res ZALF, Res Area Land Use & Governance, Eberswalder Str 84, D-15374 Muncheberg, Germany
[5] Humboldt Univ, Albrecht Daniel Thaer Inst Agr & Hort Sci, Anim Breeding Biol & Mol Genet, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
来源
AGRONOMY-BASEL | 2019年 / 9卷 / 10期
关键词
asynchrony; crop diversification; forage legume; functional traits; interspecific interaction; mixed cropping; weed control; SPECIES EVENNESS; PLANT DIVERSITY; LIVING MULCHES; INTERCROPS; INVASION; YIELD; PRODUCTIVITY; DENSITY; MANAGEMENT; DYNAMICS;
D O I
10.3390/agronomy9100648
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Weed suppression is a potential benefit of cover crop mixtures, as species diversity may allow for combining early and late-season competition with weeds. Here, we studied if this is possible for only-legume mixtures containing species with different growth rates, by testing two legumes, alsike clover (AC; Trifolium hybridum L.) and black medic (BM; Medicago lupulina L.) in two field trials sown in 2016 and 2017. Five AC:BM ratios (100:0, 67:33, 50:50, 33:67, and 0:100) were grown at three densities (50%, 100%, and 150% of recommended seed density). Cover crop and weed aboveground biomass (CCB and WB, respectively) were harvested three times, after establishment in spring (H1), in summer (H2), and in autumn after mulching (H3). Compared to fallow plots, all monocultures and mixtures showed early-season weed suppression in terms of biomass production and more efficiency over time with an average reduction of 42%, 52%, and 96% in 2016, and 39%, 55%, and 89% in 2017 at H1, H2, and H3, respectively. Out of 54 mixture treatments, only eight mixtures showed stronger weed suppression than monocultures. Mixtures reduced WB by 28%, as an average value, in 2017 compared to the respective monocultures, but not significantly in 2016, indicating that the crop diversity effect on weeds was dependent on the growing environment. Weed suppression was significantly higher at 100% and 150% seed density than 50%, but no significant differences were determined between 100% and 150% seed density. After mulching, no density effect was observed on CCB and WB. In conclusion, AC and BM can be used as a keystone species on weed suppression for sustainable agriculture as they possess plasticity to suppress weeds when higher biomass productivity is limited by environmental conditions. However, their diversity effects are time and condition dependent. Appropriate seed density and mulching can successfully be employed in weed management, but seed density may not have an effect after mulching.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Grass-Legume Proportions in Forage Seed Mixtures and Effects on Herbage Yield and Weed Abundance
    Sanderson, Matt A.
    Brink, Geoffrey
    Stout, Robert
    Ruth, Leah
    AGRONOMY JOURNAL, 2013, 105 (05) : 1289 - 1297
  • [42] Spring-Planted Cover Crop Impact on Weed Suppression, Productivity, and Feed Quality of Forage Crops in Northern Kazakhstan
    Stybayev, Gani
    Zargar, Meisam
    Serekpayev, Nurlan
    Zharlygassov, Zhenis
    Baitelenova, Aliya
    Nogaev, Adilbek
    Mukhanov, Nurbolat
    Elsergani, Mohamed Ibrahim Mohamed
    Abdiee, Aldaibe Ahmed Abdalbare
    AGRONOMY-BASEL, 2023, 13 (05):
  • [43] Selective weed suppression by cover crop residues: effects of seed mass and timing of species' sensitivity
    Kruidhof, H. M.
    Gallandt, E. R.
    Haramoto, E. R.
    Bastiaans, L.
    WEED RESEARCH, 2011, 51 (02) : 177 - 186
  • [44] Spring-planted cover crop effects on weed suppression, crop yield, and net returns in no-tillage dryland crop production
    Obour, Augustine K.
    Dille, Johanna
    Holman, John
    Simon, Logan M.
    Sancewich, Brian
    Kumar, Vipan
    CROP SCIENCE, 2022, 62 (05) : 1981 - 1996
  • [45] Cover Crop Management and Weed Control in Corn
    Moraes, P. V. D.
    Agostinetto, D.
    Vignolo, G. K.
    Santos, L. S.
    Panozzo, L. E.
    PLANTA DANINHA, 2009, 27 (02) : 289 - 296
  • [46] Planting legume cover crop as a strategy to replace synthetic N fertilizer applied for sugarcane production
    Otto, Rafael
    Pereira, Greice Leal
    Tenelli, Sarah
    Nunes Carvalho, Joao Luis
    Lavres, Jose
    Quassi de Castro, Saulo Augusto
    Lisboa, Izaias Pinheiro
    Sermarini, Renata Alcarde
    INDUSTRIAL CROPS AND PRODUCTS, 2020, 156
  • [47] Species Choice Influences Weed Suppression, N Sharing and Crop Productivity in Oilseed Rape-Legume Intercrops
    Dayoub, Elana
    Piva, Guillaume
    Shirtliffe, Steven J.
    Fustec, Joelle
    Corre-Hellou, Guenaelle
    Naudin, Christophe
    AGRONOMY-BASEL, 2022, 12 (09):
  • [48] Rhizospheric Microbiome Responses to Cover Crop Suppression Methods
    Morales, Marianela E.
    Allegrini, Marco
    Iocoli, Gaston A.
    Basualdo, Jessica
    Villamil, Maria B.
    Zabaloy, Maria C.
    AGRONOMY-BASEL, 2022, 12 (10):
  • [49] Managing the trade off between nitrogen supply and retention with cover crop mixtures
    White, Charles M.
    DuPont, S. Tianna
    Hautau, Mena
    Hartman, Dave
    Finney, Denise M.
    Bradley, Brosi
    LaChance, James C.
    Kaye, Jason P.
    AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT, 2017, 237 : 121 - 133
  • [50] Effects of Seeding Rate and Poultry Litter on Weed Suppression from a Rolled Cereal Rye Cover Crop
    Ryan, Matthew R.
    Curran, William S.
    Grantham, Alison M.
    Hunsberger, Laura K.
    Mirsky, Steven B.
    Mortensen, David A.
    Nord, Eric A.
    Wilson, Dave O.
    WEED SCIENCE, 2011, 59 (03) : 438 - 444