Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T16:27:17.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrated cultural and biological control of Canada thistle in conservation tillage soybean

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Eric V. Hoeft ,
Nicholas Jordan ,
Jianhua Zhang  and
Donald L. Wyse
Eric V. Hoeft
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Jianhua Zhang
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Donald L. Wyse
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1996 and 1997 to evaluate the efficacy of combined cultural and biological weed control for management of Canada thistle in conservation tillage soybean production. For cultural control, we used a highly weed-competitive soybean variety (cv. ‘Kato’). The biological control agent was the phytopathogenic bacterium Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis (PST). The application of PST reduced Canada thistle survivorship, height growth, and seed production, although these reductions were usually less than those resulting from bentazon application. Only bentazon application resulted in significant reduction of biomass of Canada thistle plants that survived all season. These results suggest the value of PST for management of Canada thistle in conservation tillage systems due to its negative effects on survival, growth, and reproduction. However, the weed-competitive soybean variety did not affect Canada thistle performance differently than a less competitive variety used for comparison, and there was no indication of synergy between the effects of the two control methods.

Keywords

BentazonimazethapyrCanada thistle, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. CIRARsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Kato’, ‘Evans’Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetisWeed ecologyintegrated weed managementconservation tillagephytopathogenicweed-competitive soybean varieties
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 5 , October 2001 , pp. 642 - 646
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

Brown, H. J., Cruse, R. M., and Colvin, J. S. 1989. Tillage system effects on crop growth and production costs for a corn-soybean rotation. J. Prod. Agric. 2:273–279.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Oplinger, E. S. 1990. Influence of tillage systems on annual weed densities and control in solid-seeded soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 38:158–165.Google Scholar
Burdon, J. J. 1987. Diseases and Plant Population Biology. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 8–27.Google Scholar
Bussan, A. J., Burnside, O. C., and Orf, J. H. 1993. Selection for weed competitiveness in soybean cultivars. Proc. North Central Weed Sci. Soc. 48:76.Google Scholar
Coffman, C. B. and Frank, J. R. 1991. Weed-crop responses to weed management systems in conservation tillage corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 5:76–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, D. R., Mannering, J. V., and Box, J. E. 1986. Soil and moisture management with reduced tillage. Pages 19–58 In Sprague, M. A. and Triplett, G. B., eds. No-Tillage and Surface Tillage Agriculture. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
Gulya, T. J. 1992. Apical chlorosis of sunflower caused by Pseudomonas syringae pv tagetis . Plant Dis. 66:589–600.Google Scholar
Gunsolus, J. L. 1990. Mechanical and cultural weed control in corn and soybeans. J. Altern. Agric. 5:114–119.Google Scholar
Gunsolus, J. L., Becker, R. L., Durgan, B. R., Lueschen, W., and Dexter, A. G. 1998. Cultural & Chemical Weed Control in Field Crops. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service BU-3157-S.Google Scholar
Hairston, J. E., Stanford, J. O., Hates, J. C., and Reinschmiedt, L. L. 1984. Crop yield, soil erosion, and net returns from five tillage systems in the Mississippi Blackland Prairie. J. Soil Water Conserv. 39:391–395.Google Scholar
Hoeft, E. V. 1998. Integrated Weed Management for the Control of Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) with Pseudomonus syringae pv. tagetis and a Weed-Competitive Soybean (Glycine max) Cultivar. . University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. 60 p.Google Scholar
Jannink, J. L. 1999. Feasibility of Breeding Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) for High Weed Suppressive Ability. . University of Minnesota. St. Paul, MN. 101 p.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. R. and Wyse, D. L. 1991. Use of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis for control of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Proc. North Central Weed Sci. Soc. 46:14.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. R. and Wyse, D. L. 1992. Biological control of weeds with Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis . Proc. North Central Weed Sci. Soc. 47:16.Google Scholar
Jordan, N. 1993. Prospects for weed control through crop interference. Ecol. Appl. 3:84–91.Google Scholar
Jordan, N. 1996. Weed prevention: priority research for alternative weed management. J. Prod. Agric. 9:435–490.Google Scholar
Liebman, M. and Gallandt, E. R. 1997. Many little hammers: ecological approaches for the management of crop-weed interactions. Pages 291–343 In Jackson, L. E., ed. Ecology in Agriculture. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lukens, J. H. and Durbin, R. D. 1985. Tagetitoxin affects plastid development in seedlings of wheat. Planta 165:311–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lukens, J. H., Mathews, D. E., and Durbin, R. D. 1987. Effect of tagetitoxin on the levels of ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase, ribosomes and RNA in plastids of wheat leaves. Plant Physiol. 84:808–813.Google Scholar
Mathews, D. E. and Durbin, R. D. 1990. Tagetitoxin inhibits RNA polymerases from chloroplasts and Escherichia coli J. Biol. Chem. 265:493–498.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Patterson, D. T. 1979. Ecological factors affecting weed competition in soybeans. Pages 379–392. In Corbin, F. T., ed. Proceedings of the World Soybean Research Conference II. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Pester, T. A. 1996. Quantifying Soybean (Glycene max) Weed Competitiveness in Field and Greenhouse Experiments. . University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. 88 p.Google Scholar
Rhodehamel, N. H. and Durbin, R. D. 1985. Host range of strains of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis . Plant Dis. 69:589–591.Google Scholar
Rose, S. J., Burnside, O. C., Specht, J. E., and Swisher, B. A. 1984. Competition and allelopathy between soybeans and weeds. Agron. J. 76:523–528.Google Scholar
Shane, W. W. and Baumer, J. S. 1984. Apical chlorosis and leaf spot of Jerusalem artichoke incited by Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis . Plant Dis. 68:257–260.Google Scholar
Staniforth, D. W. 1958. Soybean foxtail competition under varying soil moisture conditions. Agron. J. 50:13–15.Google Scholar
Steinberg, T. H., Mathews, D. E., Durbin, R. D., and Burgess, R. R. 1990. Tagetitoxin: a new inhibitor of eukaryotic transcription by RNA polymerase III. J. Biol. Chem. 265:499–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Styer, D. J. and Durbin, R. D. 1982a. Common ragweed: a new host of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis . Plant Dis. 66:71.Google Scholar
Styer, D. J. and Durbin, R. D. 1982b. Isolation of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis from sunflower in Wisconson. Plant Dis. 66:601.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. 1991. Integrated weed management: the rationale and approach. Weed Technol. 5:657–663.Google Scholar
Templeton, G. E. 1988. Biological control of weeds. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 3 (2): 69–72.Google Scholar
Wax, L. M. and Pendleton, J. W. 1968. Effect of row spacing on weed control in soybeans. Weeds 16:462–464.Google Scholar