Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T01:24:09.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Weed Control in Soybean (Glycine max) with Green Manure Crops

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Gopal Krishnan
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
David L. Holshouser
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
Scott J. Nissen
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915

Abstract

Greenhouse and field experiments were initiated to evaluate rapeseed and mustard species as green manure crops for weed suppression. Under greenhouse conditions incorporating 20 g fresh wt leaf and stem tissue of rapeseed, two white mustards, and brown mustard into 450 g Sharpsburg, silty clay loam soil resulted in significant reductions in weed emergence, biomass, and height. Kochia, shepherd's-purse, and green foxtail emergences were reduced by all green manure crops. Redroot pigweed emergence was reduced by all green manure crops except brown mustard, and velvetleaf emergence was reduced by white mustards only. Kochia and shepherd's-purse fresh weights were reduced by all green manure crops, while redroot pigweed and velvetleaf fresh weights were reduced by brown mustard and white mustard var. Salvo. Green foxtail fresh weight was reduced by all green manure crops except rapeseed. With the exception of shepherd's-purse, no relationship between glucosinolate content of the incorporated green manure and suppression of weed growth was found. Under field conditions, early spring-planted green manure crops reduced early season weed biomass in soybean at one of the two locations. Mustard species as green manure crops reduced total weed biomass in soybean by 40% 4 weeks after emergence (WAE) and 49% 6 WAE. Soybean biomass and yield were sometimes reduced by the incorporation of green manure crops in treatments containing weeds; however, hand-weeded plots with green manure treatments yielded similar to hand-weeded plots without green manure.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by the 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

Bell, D. T., and Muller, C. H. 1973. Dominance of California annual grasslands by <i>Brassica nigra</i>. Am. Midl. Nat. 90:277299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialy, Z., Oleszek, W., Lewis, J., and Fenwick, G. R. 1990. Allelopathic potential of glucosinolates (mustard oil glysides) and their degradation products against wheat. Plant Soil 129:277281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boydston, R. A., Al-Khatib, K., Hang, A., Krishnan, G., and Nissen, S. 1994, Weed control with rapeseed (<i>Brassica napus</i>) and white mustard (<i>Brassica hirta</i>) as green manure crops. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 34:89.Google Scholar
Boydston, R. A., and Hang, A. 1995. Rapeseed (<i>Brassica napus</i>) green manure crop suppresses weeds in potato (<i>Solanum tuberosum</i>). Weed Technol. 9:669675.Google Scholar
Brown, P. D., and Morra, M. J. 1993. Fate of ionic thiocyanate (SCN-) in soil. J. Agric. Food Chem. 41:978982.Google Scholar
Brown, P. D., Morra, M. J., McCaffrey, J. P., Auld, D. L., and Williams, L. I. 1991. Allelochemicals produced during glucosinolate degradation in soil. J. Chem. Ecol. 17:20212034.Google Scholar
Chew, F. S., 1988. Biological effects of glucosinolates. <i>In</i> Cutler, H. G., ed. Biologically Active Natural Products. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. pp. 155181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clossais-Besnard, N., and Larher, F. 1991. Physiological role of glucosinolates in <i>Brasssica napus</i> concentration and distribution pattern of glucosinolates among plant organs during a complete life cycle. J. Sci. Food Agric. 56:2538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, J. E., 1986. Decline in phytotoxicity of benzyl isothiocyanate formulated as granules. Weed Sci. 34:325327.Google Scholar
Erickson, C. G., and Duke, W. B. 1978. Release of phytotoxic residues from wild mustard (<i>Brassica kaber</i> (D.C) L.C. Wheeler). Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:70.Google Scholar
Fenwick, G. R., Heaney, R. K., and Mawson, R. 1989. Glucosinolates. <i>In</i> Cheeke, P. R., ed. Toxicants of Plant Origin. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 142.Google Scholar
Fenwick, G. R., Heaney, R. K., and Mullin, W. J. 1982. Glucosinolates and their breakdown products in food and food plants. <i>In</i> Furia, T. E., ed. CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 123201.Google Scholar
Josefsson, E., 1968. Method for quantitative determination of p-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate in digests of seed meal of <i>Sinapis alba</i> L. J. Sci. Food Agric. 19:192194.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G., and Barrentine, W. L. 1988. Research priorities in weed science. Weed Technol. 2:211.Google Scholar
Mojtahedi, H., Santo, G. S., Hang, A. N., and Wilson, J. H. 1991. Suppression of root-knot nematode populations with selected rapeseed cultivars as green manure. J. Nematol. 23:170174.Google Scholar
Muehlchen, A. M., Rand, R. E., and Parke, J. L. 1990. Evaluation of crucifer green manure crops for controlling Aphanomyces root rot of peas. Plant Dis. 64:651654.Google Scholar
Putnam, A. R., 1983. Allelopathic chemicals. Chem. Eng. News 61:3445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, A. R., and Duke, W. B. 1978. Allelopathy in agroecosystems. <i>In</i> Annual Review of Phytopathology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews Inc. pp. 431451.Google Scholar
Smelt, J. H., and Leistra, M. 1974. Conversion of metham-sodium to methyl isothiocyanate and basic data on the behavior of methyl isothiocyanate in soil. Pestic. Sci. 5:401407.Google Scholar
Teasdale, J. R., and Taylorson, R. B. 1986. Weed seed response to methyl isothiocyanate and metham. Weed Sci. 34:520524.Google Scholar
Tholen, J. T., Shifeng, S., and Truscott, R.J.W. 1989. The thymol method for glucosinolate determination. J. Sci. Food Agric. 49:157165.Google Scholar
Tollsten, L., and Bergstrom, G. 1988. Headspace volatiles of whole plants and macerated plant parts of <i>Brassica</i> and <i>Sinapis</i>. Phytochemistry 27:40134018.Google Scholar
Van Etten, C. H., and Tookey, H. L. 1979. Chemistry and biological effect of glucosinolates. <i>In</i> Rosenthal, G. A. and Janzen, D. H., eds. Herbivores: Their Interaction with Secondary Plant Metabolites. New York: Academic Press. pp. 471500.Google Scholar
Vaughn, S. F., Spencer, G. F., and Loria, R. 1993. Inhibition of <i>Helminthosporium solani</i> strains by natural isothiocyanates. Am. Potato J. 70:852853.Google Scholar
Waddington, J., 1978. Growth of barley, bromegrass and alfalfa in the greenhouse in soil containing rapeseed and wheal residues. Can. J. Plant Sci. 58:241248.Google Scholar
Wolf, R. B., Spencer, G. F., and Kwolek, W. F. 1984. Inhibition of velvetleaf (<i>Abutilon theophrasti</i>) germination and growth by benzyl isothiocyanate, a natural toxicant. Weed Sci. 32:612615.Google Scholar
Worsham, A. D., 1989. Current and potential techniques using allelopathy as an aid in weed management. Proceedings of the Symposium of Phytochemical Ecology: Allelochemicals, Mycotoxins and Insect Pheromones and Allomones. Taipei, Taiwan, R.D.C. pp. 275289.Google Scholar
Worsham, A. D., 1991. Allelopathic cover crops to reduce herbicide inputs. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:5869.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L., 1980. Weed–Crop Competition—A Review. The International Plant Protection Center. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. p. 195.Google Scholar