Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:23:10.474Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

No-tillage altered weed species dynamics in a long-term (36-year) grain sorghum experiment in southeast Texas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2020

Prabhu Govindasamy Open the ORCID record for Prabhu Govindasamy [Opens in a new window] ,
Debalin Sarangi Open the ORCID record for Debalin Sarangi [Opens in a new window] ,
Tony Provin ,
Frank Hons  and
Muthukumar Bagavathiannan Open the ORCID record for Muthukumar Bagavathiannan [Opens in a new window]
Prabhu Govindasamy
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA; current: Division of Crop Production, ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP, India
Debalin Sarangi
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA; current: Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, USA
Tony Provin
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA
Frank Hons
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA
Muthukumar Bagavathiannan*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Muthukumar Bagavathiannan, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX77843-2474. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tillage regimes can influence weed population dynamics and, consequently, the choice of appropriate weed management practices. Studies were conducted in 2016 and 2017 in a long-term (36-yr) grain sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench ssp. bicolor] experiment at Texas A&M University, College Station, to determine the impact of long-term no-till (NT) and conventional till (CT) systems on weed species dynamics. Higher densities of johnsongrass [Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.], prostrate spurge [Chamaesyce humistrata (Engelm. ex A. Gray) Small], waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer], and henbit (Lamium amplexicaule L.) were recorded in the NT system compared with the CT system. Further, the NT system showed greater weed diversity (Shannon-Wiener index, H = 0.8) and species richness (S = 6.2), compared with the CT system (H = 0.6, S = 4.2). Seedling emergence of some dominant weed species was also delayed in the NT system. In the CT system, 50% emergence of S. halepense (8.5 C base temperature) and waterhemp (10 C base temperature) occurred at 59 and 63 growing degree days (GDD), respectively, whereas 68 and 75 GDD, respectively, were required in the NT system. Further, a greater proportion (61%) of the viable seedbank was present at the top 5 cm of the soil in the NT system compared with the CT system (46%). Overall, findings from this 36-yr-long tillage experiment have revealed that the NT system had greater weed densities (especially of the perennial weed S. halepense) and a high proportion of weed seeds (particularly small-seeded annuals) on the topsoil layer, corroborating some earlier reports that were based on short-term investigations. Findings indicate that growers transitioning to NT systems should be mindful of potential shifts in weed species dominance and develop appropriate management tactics.

Keywords

Conservation tillageno-tillageweed indicesweed seedbankweed shift
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 68 , Issue 5 , September 2020 , pp. 476 - 484
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2020

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Sharon Clay, South Dakota State University

References

Arnold, RB, Ghersa, CM, Sanchez, RA, Insausti, P (1990) A mathematical model to predict Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. seedling emergence in relation to soil temperature. Weed Res 30:91–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asgarpour, R, Ghorbani, R, Khajeh-Hosseini, M, Mohammad, E, Chauhan, BS (2015) Germination of spotted spurge (Chamaesyce maculata) seeds in response to different environmental factors. Weed Sci 63:502–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagavathiannan, MV, Norsworthy, JK, Smith, KL, Neve, P (2012) Seed production of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) in response to time of emergence in cotton and rice. J Agric Sci 150:717–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barberi, P, Lo Cascio, B (2001) Long-term tillage and crop rotation effects on weed seedbank size and composition. Weed Res 41:325–34010.1046/j.1365-3180.2001.00241.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benvenuti, S (2007) Weed seed movement and dispersal strategies in the agricultural environment. Weed Biol Manag 7:141–15710.1111/j.1445-6664.2007.00249.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanco-Canqui, H, Wortmann, CS (2020) Does occasional tillage undo the ecosystem services gained with no-till? A review. Soil Tillage Res 198:10453410.1016/j.still.2019.104534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, DD, Mester, TC, Kohler, KA (1996) The effect of maize residues and tillage on emergence of Setaria faberi, Abutilon theophrasti, Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album. Weed Res 36:153–16510.1111/j.1365-3180.1996.tb01811.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, DD, Stoltenberg, DE, Becker, RL, Gunsolus, JL (1994) Perennial weed populations after 14 years of variable tillage and cropping practices. Weed Sci 42:205–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, MG, Mortensen, DA, Marx, DB, Lindquist, JL (2004) Factors affecting the realized niche of common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in ridge-tillage corn. Weed Sci 52:779–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardina, J, Herms, CP, Doohan, DJ (2002) Crop rotation and tillage system effects on weed seedbanks. Weed Sci 50:448–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, JC, MacMahon, JA, Haefner, JH (1991) Seed entrapment in alpine ecosystems: effects of soil particle size and diaspore morphology. Ecology 72:1668–167710.2307/1940966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauhan, BS, Gill, G, Preston, C (2006) Factors affecting seed germination of annual sowthistle (Sonchus oleraceus) in southern Australia. Weed Sci 54:854–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, DR, Benott, DL, Murphy, SD, Swanton, CJ (1996) Tillage effects on weed seed return and seedbank composition. Weed Sci 44:314–32210.1017/S0043174500093942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, DR, Weise, SF, Swanton, CJ (1994) Integrated weed management and weed species diversity. Phytoprotection 75:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conn, JS, Beattie, KL, Blanchard, A (2006) Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 19.7 years of burial in Alaska. Weed Sci 54:464–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, WJ, Zobel, RW, Van Es, HM, Otis, DJ (1990) Tillage effects on some soil physical and corn physiological characteristics. Agron J 82:80610.2134/agronj1990.00021962008200040030xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dang, YP, Moody, PW, Bell, MJ, Seymour, NP, Dalal, RC, Freebairn, DM, Walker, SR (2015) Strategic tillage in no-till farming systems in Australia’s northern grains-growing regions: II. Implications for agronomy, soil and environment. Soil Tillage Res 152:115–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darlington, HT, Steinbauer, GP (1961) The eighty-year period for Dr. Beal’s seed viability experiment. Am J Bot 48:321–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derpsch, R, Friedrich, T, Kassam, A, Li, H (2010) Current status of adoption of no-till farming in the world and some of its main benefits. Int J Agric Biol Eng 3:1–25Google Scholar
Dobberstein, J (2014) No-till movement in U.S. continues to grow. No-Till Farmer, August 1, 2014. https://www.no-tillfarmer.com/articles/489-no-till-movement-in-us-continues-to-grow?v=preview. Accessed: May 20, 2018Google Scholar
Dorado, J, Del Monte, JP, Lopez-Fando, C (1999) Weed seedbank response to crop rotation and tillage in semiarid agroecosystems. Weed Sci 47:67–7310.1017/S0043174500090676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabrizzi, KP, Garcıa, FO, Costa, JL, Picone, LI (2005) Soil water dynamics, physical properties and corn and wheat responses to minimum and no-tillage systems in the southern Pampas of Argentina. Soil Tillage Res 81:57–6910.1016/j.still.2004.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, JA, Bradley, KW, Young, BG, Steckel, LE, Johnson, WG, Norsworthy, JK, Davis, VM, Loux, MM (2017) Influence of tillage method on management of Amaranthus species in soybean. Weed Technol 31:10–2010.1614/WT-D-16-00061.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmore, EC, Rogers, JS (1958) Heat units as a method of measuring maturity in corn. Agron J 50:611–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Govindasamy, P, Mowrer, J, Rajan, N, Provin, T, Hons, F, Bagavathiannan, M (2020) Influence of long-term (36 years) tillage practices on soil physical properties in a grain sorghum experiment in southeast Texas. Arch Agron Soil Sci (in press), doi:10.1080/03650340.2020.1720914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, EC, Renner, KA, Sprague, CL (2014) Henbit (Lamium amplexicaule), common chickweed (Stellaria media), shepherd’s-purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris), and field pennycress (Thlaspi arvense): fecundity, seed dispersal, dormancy, and emergence. Weed Sci 62:97–10610.1614/WS-D-13-00074.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, L, Tessier, S, Dyck, FB (1991) Tillage and rotation influences on weed community composition in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in southwestern Saskatchewan. Can J Plant Sci 71:783–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janson, S, Vegelius, J (1981) Measures of ecological association. Oecologia 49:371–376CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krebs, CJ, ed (1985) Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance. 3rd ed. New York: Harper and Row. 800 pGoogle Scholar
Lal, RF, Kimble, J, Cole, CV (1999) Managing U.S. cropland to sequester carbon in soil. J Soil Water Conserv 54:374–381Google Scholar
Legere, A, Stevenson, FC, Benoit, DL (2011) The selective memory of weed seedbanks after 18 years of conservation tillage. Weed Sci 59:98–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leon, RG, Owen, MD (2004) Artificial and natural seed banks differ in seedling emergence patterns. Weed Sci 52:531–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, DG, Butler, DG (1993) Statistical validation. Ecol Model 68:21–3210.1016/0304-3800(93)90105-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGillion, T, Storrie, A (2006) Integrated Weed Management in Australian Cropping Systems—A Training Resource for Farm Advisors. Adelaide: CRC for Australian Weed Management. 248 pGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, CG, Hartwig, EE (1965) Effectiveness of preplanting tillage in relation to herbicides in controlling johnsongrass for soybean production. Agron J 57:385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moyer, JR, Roman, ES, Lindwall, CW, Blackshaw, RE (1994) Weed management in conservation tillage systems for wheat production in North and South America. Crop Prot 13:243–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, MJ, Norsworthy, JK (2006) Pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) germination and emergence as affected by environmental factors and seeding depth. Weed Sci 54:910–91610.1614/WS-06-068R.1.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pardo, G, Cirujeda, A, Perea, F, Verdú, A, Mas, M, Urbano, J (2019) Effects of reduced and conventional tillage on weed communities: results of a long-term experiment in southwestern Spain. Planta Daninha 37:e019201336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patil, VN, Dadlani, M (2009) Tetrazolium test for seed viability and vigour. Handbook of seed testing. For Ecol Manag 255:3351–3359Google Scholar
Pielou, EC (1966) The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J Theor Biol 13:131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimentel, D, Harvey, C, Resosudarmo, P, Sinclair, K, Kurz, D, Mcnair, M, Crist, S, Shpritz, L, Fitton, L, Saffouri, R, Blair, R (1995) Environmental and economic costs of soil erosion and conservation benefits. Sci 267: 1117–1123CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Refsell, DE, Hartzler, RG (2009) Effect of tillage on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) emergence and vertical distribution of seed in the soil. Weed Technol 23:129–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribera, LA, Hons, FM, Richardson, JW (2004) An economic comparison between conventional and no-tillage farming systems in Burleson County, Texas. Agron J 96:415–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roman, ES, Murphy, SD, Swanton, CJ (2000) Simulation of Chenopodium album seedling emergence. Weed Sci 48:217–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, D, Irmak, S, Lindquist, JL, Knezevic, SZ, Jhala, AJ (2016) Effect of water stress on the growth and fecundity of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis). Weed Sci 64:42–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schabenberger, O, Tharp, BE, Kells, JJ, Penner, D (1999) Statistical tests for hormesis and effective dosages in herbicide dose response. Agron J 91:713–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosnoskie, LM, Herms, CP, Cardina, J (2006) Weed seedbank community composition in a 35-yr-old tillage and rotation experiment. Weed Sci 54:263–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southwood, TRE (1978) Ecological Methods. 3rd ed. London: Chapman and Hall. 565 pGoogle Scholar
Spiess, AN, Neumeyer, N (2010) An evaluation of R2 as an inadequate measure for nonlinear models in pharmacological and biochemical research: a Monte Carlo approach. BMC Pharmacol 10:6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL, Stoller, EW, Wax, LM, Simmons, FW (2007) Tillage, cropping system, and soil depth effects on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) seed-bank persistence. Weed Sci 55:235–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanton, CJ, Shrestha, A, Roy, RC, Ball-Coelho, BR, Knezevic, SZ (1999) Effect of tillage systems, N, and cover crop on the composition of weed flora. Weed Sci 47:454–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triplett, GB, Dick, WA (2008) No-tillage crop production: a revolution in agriculture. Agron J 100:153–16510.2134/agronj2007.0005cCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuesca, D, Puricelli, E, Papa, JC (2001) A long-term study of weed flora shifts in different tillage systems. Weed Res 41:369–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uscanga-Mortera, E, Clay, SA, Forcella, F, Gunsolus, J (2007) Common waterhemp growth and fecundity as influenced by emergence date and competing crop. Agron J 99:1265–1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture (2012) Census of Agriculture, Highlights. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2 pGoogle Scholar
West, TO, Post, WM (2002) Soil organic carbon sequestration rates by tillage and crop rotation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:1930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, FL, Thorne, ME (2004) Weed-species dynamics and management in no-till and reduced-till fallow cropping systems for the semi-arid agricultural region of the Pacific Northwest, USA. Crop Prot 23:1097–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar