Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T20:33:46.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Frequency and Persistence of Volunteer Canola (Brassica napus) in Québec Cropping Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Marie-Josée Simard ,
Anne Légère ,
Denis Pageau ,
Julie Lajeunesse  and
Suzanne Warwick
Marie-Josée Simard*
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre, 2560 Boulevard Hochelaga, Sainte-Foy, Québec, Canada G1V 2J3
Anne Légère*
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre, 2560 Boulevard Hochelaga, Sainte-Foy, Québec, Canada G1V 2J3
Denis Pageau
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ferme de Recherche de Normandin, 1468 St-Cyrille, Normandin, Québec, Canada G8M 4K3
Julie Lajeunesse
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ferme de Recherche de Normandin, 1468 St-Cyrille, Normandin, Québec, Canada G8M 4K3
Suzanne Warwick
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, K. W. Neatby Building, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0C6
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The presence of volunteer canola is becoming a significant agro-ecological concern, given the large-scale use of herbicide-tolerant varieties in some areas. Our goal was to estimate the frequency and persistence of volunteer canola in Québec cropping systems by surveying fields that included a single canola crop since 1995. A survey was conducted in 131 fields in the main canola-growing areas of Québec: in the Saguenay-Lac Saint-Jean region and the Québec City–La Pocatière area. Volunteer canola plants were counted in 0.25-m2 quadrats every 10 m along a W pattern, and every 15 m along the margins of 88 fields. Volunteer canola plants were found in 90% of the fields surveyed and in a wide range of crops, including cereal, corn, and soybean. Average densities of 4.9 and 3.9 plants/m2 were found 1 yr after canola production in fields and field margins, respectively. Volunteer canola densities decreased significantly over time. However, volunteer plants were still present at low densities 4 and 5 yr after production. Dense stands of volunteer canola were found before postemergence herbicide application in no-till fields (9.8 ± 4.1 plants/m2), suggesting that, contrary to what was suggested in the literature, seeds could become dormant in no-till as well as in tilled systems. A small proportion of the volunteer canola plants observed in no-till fields near Québec City and Ottawa included plants that had overwintered, either originating from fall-germinated seedlings, harvested adult plants that had grown new leaves before the onset of winter, or spring regrowth from the base of unharvested adult plants from experimental plots. The presence and persistence of low densities of volunteer canola may not have been a cause of concern until now. However, producers should be made more aware of the potential short-and long-term problems associated with potential gene flow between different herbicide-tolerant canola (HT canola) varieties and also between HT canola and related weed species.

Keywords

CanolaBrassica napus L.; cornZea mays L.; soybeanGlycine max (L.) MerrHerbicide-tolerant canolaoilseed rapeweed surveyHT, herbicide-tolerant (canola)
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , June 2002 , pp. 433 - 439
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

Beversdorf, W. D., Weiss-Lerman, J., Erikson, L. R., and Souza-Machado, V. 1980. Transfer of cytoplasmically-inherited triazine resistance from bird's rape to cultivated oilseed rape (Brassica campestris and B. napus). Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 22: 167–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. and Brown, A. P. 1996. Gene transfer between canola (Brassica napus L. and B. campestris L.) and related weed species. Ann. Appl. Biol. 129: 513–522.Google Scholar
Canola Council of Canada. 2001. An Agronomic and Economic Assessment of Transgenic Canola. Report. Winnipeg, Manitoba: Canola Council of Canada. 55 p.Google Scholar
Champolivier, J., Messéan, A., and Gasquez, J. 1997. Crop management of transgenic rapeseed: risk assessement of gene flow. Bull. GCIRC 14: 63–66.Google Scholar
Colbach, N., Meynard, J. M., Clermont-Dauphin, C., and Messéan, A. 1999. GeneSys: a model of the effects of cropping system on gene flow from transgenic rapeseed. In Gene Flow and Agriculture: Relevance for Transgenic Crops, Staffordshire. Symp. Proc. No. 72. pp. 89–94.Google Scholar
Conover, W. J. 1999. Practical Nonparametric Statistics. 3rd ed. New York: J. Wiley. 584 p.Google Scholar
Derksen, D. A., Harker, K. N., and Blackshaw, R. E. 1999. Herbicide-tolerant crops and weed population dynamics in western Canada. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf.—Weeds 417–422.Google Scholar
Ecological Stratification Working Group. 1995. A national ecological framework for Canada. Report and National Map. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Research Branch, Centre for Land and Biological Resources Research and Environment Canada, State of the Environment Directorate, Ecozone Analysis Branch. Scale 1:7,500,000.Google Scholar
Environment Canada. 2000. Above normal temperatures for most of Canada this past winter. Web page: http://www.ec.gc.ca/press/000316_m_e.htm. Accessed: November 22, 2001.Google Scholar
Gulden, R. H. and Shirtliffe, S. J. 2000. Genetic and environmental differences among Canadian canola cultivars (Brassica napus and B. rapa) in their ability to be induced into secondary dormancy. [abstract]. In Abstr. Third Int. Weed Sci. Cong.; 2000 Jun 6-11; Foz do Iguassu, Brazil. CDROM. Available from: International Weed Science Society, Oxford, MS. pp. 9–10.Google Scholar
Hall, L., Topinka, K., Huffman, J., Davis, L., and Good, A. 2000. Pollen flow between herbicide-resistant Brassica napus is the cause of multiple-resistant B. napus volunteers. Weed Sci. 48: 688–694.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, R. B. and Andersen, B. 1994. Spontaneous hybridization between oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and weedy B. campestris (Brassicaceae): a risk of growing genetically modified oilseed rape. Am. J. Bot. 81: 1620–1626.Google Scholar
Knott, C. M. 1993. Control of volunteer oilseed rape in peas. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf.—Weeds. 889–894.Google Scholar
Leach, J. E., Darby, R. J., Williams, I. H., Fitt, B.D.L., and Rawlinson, C. J. 1994. Factors affecting growth and yield of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus), 1985-89. J. Agric. Sci. 122: 405–413.Google Scholar
Légère, A., Simard, M.-J., Thomas, A. G., Pageau, D., Lajeunesse, J., Warwick, S. I., and Derksen, D. A. 2001. Presence and persistence of volunteer canola in Canadian cropping systems. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf.—Weeds 143–148.Google Scholar
López-Granados, F. and Lutman, P.J.W. 1998. Effect of environmental conditions on the dormancy and germination of volunteer oilseed rape seed (Brassica napus). Weed Sci. 46: 419–423.Google Scholar
Lutman, P.J.W. 1993. The occurrence and persistence of volunteer oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Aspects Appl. Biol. 35: 29–36.Google Scholar
Lutman, P.J.W. and López-Granados, F. 1998. The persistence of seeds of oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Aspects Appl. Biol. 51: 147–152.Google Scholar
Maltais, B. and Bouchard, C. J. 1978. Bird's rape (Brassica rapa L.) resistant to atrazine. Phytoprotection 59: 117–119.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C., Hewitt, J.D.J., and Lutman, P.J.W. 1998. Cultural control of volunteer oilseed rape (Brassica napus). J. Agric. Sci. 130: 155–163.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C., Lane, P. W., and Lutman, P.J.W. 1999. Modelling the potential for gene escape in oilseed rape via the soil seed bank: its relevance for genetically modified cultivars. In Gene Flow and Agriculture: Relevance for Transgenic Crops, Staffordshire. Symp. Proc. No. 72. pp. 101–106.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C. and Lutman, P.J.W. 1998. The influence of post-harvest cultivation on the persistence of volunteer oilseed rape. Aspects Appl. Biol. 51: 113–118.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C., Lutman, P.J.W., and López-Granados, F. 1996. Population dynamics of volunteer rape and possible means of control. Proc. Second Int. Weed Contr. Congr., Copenhagen 4: 1223–1228.Google Scholar
Rieger, M. A., Preston, C., and Powles, S. B. 1999. Risks of gene flow from transgenic herbicide-tolerant canola (Brassica napus) to weedy relatives in southern Australian cropping systems. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 50: 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauermann, W. 1993. Einflüsse auf den Glucosinolatgehalt—Εrgebnisse 2-jähriger Untersuchungen aus den Landessortenversuchen. Raps 11: 82–86.Google Scholar
Simard, M.-J. and Légère, A. 2001. How weedy can canola be? The case of overwintering volunteers in no-till. In Expert Committee on Weeds: proceedings; 2001 November; Québec, QC. Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC: ECW. In press.Google Scholar
Sparrow, S. D., Conn, J. S., and Knight, C. W. 1990. Canola seed survival over winter in the field in Alaska. Can. J. Plant Sci. 70: 799–807.Google Scholar
Sprent, P. 1989. Applied Nonparametric Statistical Methods. New York: Chapman and Hall. 259 p.Google Scholar
Squire, G. R. 1999. Temperature and heterogeneity of emergence time in oilseed rape. Ann. Appl. Biol. 135: 439–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, G. R., Burn, D., and Crawford, J. W. 1997. A model for the impact of herbicide tolerance on the performance of oilseed rape as a volunteer weed. Ann. Appl. Biol. 131: 315–338.Google Scholar
StatsCan. 2001. Seeded area and production of field crops. Statistics Canada: Webpage: http://www.statcan.ca/english/pgdb/economy/primary/prim11a.htm. Accessed: November 22, 2001.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. L., Breve, M. A., and Raymer, P. L. 1991. Influence of timing and method of harvest on rapeseed yield. Am. Soc. Agron. 4: 266–272.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Frick, B. L., and Hall, L. M. 1998. Alberta Weed Survey of Cereal and Oilseed Crops in 1997. Weed Survey Series Publ. 98-2. Saskatoon, SK, Canada: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Kelner, D. J., Wise, R. F., and Frick, B. L. 1997. Manitoba Weed Survey Comparing Zero and Conventional Crop Production Systems. Weed Survey Series Publ. 97-1. Carman, MB, Canada: Manitoba Agriculture.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G. and Leeson, J. Y. 1999. Persistence of volunteer wheat and canola using weeds survey data [abstract]. In Proceedings of the 1999 Expert Committee on Weeds; 1999 Nov 29 to Dec 1; Ottawa, ON, Canada. Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, Canada: Expert Committee on Weeds. p. 94.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Wise, R. F., Frick, B. L., and Juras, L. T. 1996. Saskatchewan Weed Survey of Cereal, Oilseed and Pulse Crops in 1995. Weed Survey Series Publ. 96-1. Saskatoon, SK, Canada: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.Google Scholar
U, N. 1935. Genomic analysis in Brassica with special reference to the experimental formation of B. napus and peculiar mode of fertilization. Jpn. J. Bot. 7: 389–452.Google Scholar
Warwick, S. I., Beckie, H. J., and Small, E. 1999. Transgenic crops: new weed problems for Canada. Phytoprotection 80: 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, S. I., Francis, A., and Mulligan, G. A. 2000. Brassicaceae of Canada. Minister of Public Works and Government Services, AAFC-ECORC Contribution No. 981317.1255: Web page: http://res.agr.ca/ecorc/cwmt.crucican. Accessed: November 22, 2001.Google Scholar