Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:10:59.403Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Land Rolling on Weed Emergence in Field Pea, Barley, and Fallow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Andrew W. Lenssen
Andrew W. Lenssen*
Affiliation:
Northern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory, 1500 North Central Avenue, Sidney, MT 59720
*
Author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the northern Great Plains, fields are land rolled after the planting of annual pulse and forage crops to push rocks back into the soil to prevent damage to harvest equipment. Field trials were conducted in 2004 and 2005 to determine if land rolling influenced weed density or biomass associated with field pea, forage barley, and summer fallow. The experiment included two planting dates, conventional and delayed, for both barley and pea. Separate fallow plots were included with each planting date. Preplant tillage was conducted with a field cultivator for all treatments. Across years, crops, and planting dates, land rolling approximately doubled densities of tumble mustard, Russian thistle, kochia, and redroot pigweed shortly after crop emergence and at harvest compared with nonrolled. Land rolling increased density of early-emerging green foxtail but density at harvest was not affected. Wild oat densities were not influenced by rolling. Weed biomass at harvest was greater after land rolling than nonrolled. Land rolling after planting decreased subsequent pea yield by 330 kg/ha, but did not influence water use or water use efficiency. Land rolling is advantageous by hastening depletion of soil broadleaf weed seed banks in forage barley, but may increase problematic broadleaf weeds in pea.

Keywords

Green foxtail, Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. SETVIkochia, Bassia scoparia (L.) A.J. Scott KCHSCredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. AMARERussian thistle, Salsola iberica Sennen & Pau SASKRtumble mustard, Sisymbrium altissimum L. SSYALwild oat, Avena fatua L. AVEFAbarley, Hordeum vulgare L.pea, Pisum sativum L.Cultural controlintegrated weed managementplanting dateweed seed banks
Type
Weed Management—Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 23 - 27
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

Anderson, R. L. 1999. Cultural strategies reduce weed densities in summer annual crops. Weed Technol 13:314–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, R. L. 2000. A cultural system approach can eliminate herbicide need in semiarid proso millet (Panicum miliaceum). Weed Technol 14:602–607.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. L. 2008. Diversity and no-till: keys for pest management in the U.S. Great Plains. Weed Sci 56:141–145.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. 2006. When does it make sense to target the weed seed bank. Weed Sci 54:558–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Djokoto, I. K., Bigsby, F. W., and Lal, R. 1971. Soil compaction by agricultural land packers and models. Can. Agric. Eng 13:46–50.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. 1986. Stimulation of weed seed germination in soil. Rev. Weed Sci 2:67–89.Google Scholar
Gallandt, E. R. 2006. How can we target the weed seedbank. Weed Sci 54:588–596.Google Scholar
Gregoire, T. 2008. Rolling soybean. Web page: http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/procrop/syb/rollsy06.htm. Accessed: July 21, 2008.Google Scholar
Harker, K. N., Kirkland, K. J., Baron, V. S., and Clayton, G. W. 2003. Early harvest barley (Hordeum vulgare) silage reduces wild oat (Avena fatua) densities under zero tillage. Weed Technol 17:102–110.Google Scholar
Hatfield, J. L., Sauer, T. J., and Prueger, J. H. 2001. Managing soils to achieve greater water use efficiency: a review. Agron. J. 93:271–280.Google Scholar
Lenssen, A. W. 2008. Planting date and preplant weed management influence yield, water use, and weed seed production in herbicide-free forage barley. Weed Technol 22:486–492.Google Scholar
Olson, M., Lopetinsky, K., Winchell, W., and Sauchuk, C. 2004. Land rolling guidelines for pulse crops in western Canada. Agdex 142/21-1. Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta Agriculture, Food, and Rural Development. Web page: http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex8817opendocument. Accessed July 21, 2008.Google Scholar
Sanyal, D., Bhowmik, P. C., Anderson, R. L., and Shrestha, A. 2008. Revisiting the perspective and progress of integrated weed management. Weed Sci 56:161–167.Google Scholar
Saskatchewan Pulse Growers 2000. Chapter 2. General production. In:. Pulse Production Manual. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. Web page: http://www.saskpulse.com/media/pdfs/ppm-general-production.pdf. Accessed July 21, 2008.Google Scholar
Watson, P. R., Derksen, D. A., and Van Acker, R. C. 2006. The ability of 29 barley cultivars to compete and withstand competition. Weed Sci 54:783–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widtsoe, J. A. 1913. Dry-farming. A System of Agriculture for Countries under a Low Rainfall. New York: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T. T., and Konzak, C. F. 1974. A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res 14:415–421.Google Scholar