Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T18:55:54.769Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of Wild Blueberry Harvesters on Weed Seed Dispersal within and between Fields

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Nathan S. Boyd  and
Scott White
Nathan S. Boyd*
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Sciences, Nova Scotia Agricultural College, Truro, Nova Scotia, B2N 5E3, Canada
Scott White
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Sciences, Nova Scotia Agricultural College, Truro, Nova Scotia, B2N 5E3, Canada
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Agricultural equipment can disperse weed seeds over large distances. Efforts to minimize or prevent equipment-mediated dispersal should be a key component in any integrated weed management plan. Several experiments were initiated in commercial wild blueberry fields to examine the potential impact of harvesting equipment on weed seed dispersal within and between blueberry fields. Seed loads were examined on harvesting equipment between fields and results suggest that harvesting equipment is a major vector of seed dispersal. Seed loads were 397,000 in 2006 and 194,000 in 2007. Of all seeds located on the harvester, 66 to 79% were located on the belts or affiliated components. In 2006, a second experiment was established to examine within-field seed dispersal. A sampling grid was established over multiple distinct poverty oatgrass patches with seed heads at 44% of all sampling points. Following harvest, seeds were located at 67% of all sampling points. In 2006 and 2007, short-distance secondary dispersal of poverty oatgrass by harvesting equipment was measured. The relationship between distance from patch perimeter and seeds per unit area on the side approached by harvesting equipment and the far side of the patch was adequately modeled with an exponential decay model. Secondary dispersal within blueberry fields by harvesting equipment is inevitable. Dispersal may be reduced by avoiding dense weed patches, or altering harvest timing. Periodic cleaning of harvesting equipment between fields will help prevent the spread of weed seed.

Keywords

Poverty oatgrass, Danthonia spicata (L.) Beauv. ex Roemer & J. A. Schultes DANSPwild blueberry, Vaccinium angustifolium Ait. and Vaccinium myrtilloides Michx.Preventive weed controlpatch dynamicsgrasseshorticulture
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 57 , Issue 5 , October 2009 , pp. 541 - 546
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.)

References

Literature Cited

Ballaré, C. L., Scopel, A. L., Ghersa, C. M., and Snchez, R. A. 1987. The demography of Datura ferox (L.) in soybean crops. Weed Res. 27:91–102.Google Scholar
Barroso, J., Navarrete, L., Sanchez del Arco, M. J., Fernandez-Quintanilla, C., Lutman, P. J. W., Perry, N. H., and Hull, R. I. 2006. Dispersal of Avena fatua and Avena sterilis patches by natural dissemination, soil tillage and combine harvesters. Weed Res. 46:118–128.Google Scholar
Blanco-Moreno, J. M., Chamorro, L., Masalles, R. M., Recasens, J., and Sans, F. X. 2004. Spatial distribution of Lolium rigidum seedlings following seed dispersal by combine harvesters. Weed Res. 44:375–387.Google Scholar
Ghersa, C. M. and Roush, M. L. 1993. Searching for solutions to weed problems. Do we study competition or dispersion? BioScience. 43:104–109.Google Scholar
Howard, C. L., Mortimer, A. M., Gould, P., and Putwain, P. D. 1991. The dispersal of weeds: seed movement in arable agriculture. Pages 821–828. in. Proceedings of the 1991 Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds. Brighton, UK: British Crop Protection Council.Google Scholar
Humston, R., Mortensen, D. A., and Bjørnstad, O. N. 2005. Anthropogenic forcing on the spatial dynamics of an agricultural weed: the case of the common sunflower. 2005. J. Appl. Ecol. 42:863–872.Google Scholar
Jensen, K. I. N. and Yarborough, D. E. 2004. An overview of weed management in the wild lowbush blueberry—past and present. Small Fruits Rev. 3:229–255.Google Scholar
McCanny, S. J. and Cavers, P. B. 1988. Spread of proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) in Ontario, Canada. II. Dispersal by combines. Weed Res. 28:67–72.Google Scholar
McCully, K. V., Sampson, M. G., and Watson, A. K. 1991. Weed survey of Nova Scotia lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) fields. Weed Sci. 39:180–185.Google Scholar
McIsaac, D. 1997. Growing Wild Lowbush Blueberries in Nova Scotia. http://www.nsac.ca/wildblue/facts/grow.asp. Accessed: January 15, 2009.Google Scholar
Nadeau, L. B. and King, J. R. 1991. Seed dispersal and seedling establishment of Linaria vulgaris Mill. Can. J. Plant Sci. 71:771–782.Google Scholar
Salisbury, R. 1961. Weeds and Aliens. London Collins. 384.Google Scholar
Shirtliffe, S. J. and Entz, M. H. 2005. Chaff collection reduces seed dispersal of wild oat (Avena fatua) by a combine harvester. Weed Sci. 53:465–470.Google Scholar
Woolcock, J. L. and Cousens, R. 2000. A mathematical analysis of factors affecting the rate of spread of patches of annual weeds in an arable field. Weed Sci. 48:27–34.Google Scholar
Yarborough, D. E. and Bhowmik, P. C. 1989. Effect of hexazinone on weed populations and on low bush blueberries in Maine. Acta Hort. 241:344–349.Google Scholar