Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:44:28.232Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predicting Decreases in Canola (Brassica napus and B. rapa) Oil and Meal Quality Caused by Contamination by Brassicaceae Weed Seeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jim B. Davis ,
Jack Brown ,
Jeffrey S. Brennan  and
Donn C. Thill
Jim B. Davis*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Science, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-2339
Jack Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Science, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-2339
Jeffrey S. Brennan
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Science, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-2339
Donn C. Thill
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Science, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-2339
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Canola (edible rapeseed) crops are often infested by related weed species. This paper addresses effects that seeds from various Brassicaceae weeds may have on canola oil and meal quality. Seeds of common Brassicaceae weeds were collected from canola fields throughout northern Idaho. These were wild mustard, black mustard, birdsrape mustard, shepherd's-purse, flixweed, tumble mustard, and field pennycress. Collected seeds were physically described by weight, size, and shape and were analyzed for oil concentration, fatty acid composition, and glucosinolate concentration. Seed weights ranged from 0.1 to 2 g/1,000 seed. Oil concentration in the weed seeds ranged from 25 to 38%, with erucic acid levels ranging from less than 1 to 47%. Glucosinolate concentration in the mustard weed seeds was over 100 μmol/g oil-free meal, except for shepherd's-purse, which had only 3.4 μmol/g. Using these data, a simple model predicts that both canola oil and seed meal quality can be adversely affected by contamination with weed seeds. Increased erucic acid concentration in modeled admixtures was the most likely oil quality problem associated with weed seed contamination. Glucosinolate concentration in modeled admixtures was higher than acceptable only in those admixtures that also had erucic acid levels that exceeded canola quality standards. Canola-quality oil and seed meal can be maintained with conspicuous weed seed mixtures up to the 2% maximum allowed in U.S. No. 1 canola. However, canola-quality oil and seed meal was not achieved when a 5% weed seed mixture allowed in No. 2 canola was evaluated with the model.

Keywords

Birdsrape mustard, B. rapa L. #BRSRAblack mustard, B. nigra (L.) W.J.D. Koch # BRSNIflixweed, Descurainia sophia (L.) Webb. ex Prantl # DESSOfield pennycress, Thlaspi arvense L. # THLARshepherd's-purse, Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medic. # CAPBPtumble mustard, Sysimbrium altissimum L. # SSYALwild mustard, Brassica kaber (DC.) L.C. Wheeler # SINARrapeseed, Brassica napus L. and Brassica rapa L.Canolarapeseed erucic acidlinolenic acidglucosinolatecrop grading
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 239 - 243
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 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.)

Footnotes

1

Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station Publication 98702.

Current address of third author. Technical Service Representative, American Cyanamid Co., Agricultural Group, PO. Box 193, Belgrade, MT 59714.

References

Literature Cited

Blackshaw, R. E., Anderson, G. W., and Dekker, J. 1987. Interference of (Sinapis arvensis L.) and (Chenopodium album L.) in spring rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Weed Res. 27:207–213.Google Scholar
Brennan, J. S. 1995. Assessment of weed competition in spring-planted canola (Brassica napus L.). . Department of Plant Soil and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. 78 p.Google Scholar
Brown, J. and Caligari, P.D.S. 1988. POTSTAT Users Manual. Scotland, UK: S.C.R.I. Pentlandfield. 155 p.Google Scholar
Christie, W. W. 1992. Preparation of fatty acid methyl esters. Inform 3:1031–1034.Google Scholar
Daun, J. K., DeClercq, D. R., and McGregor, D. I. 1989. Glucosinolate Analysis of Canola and Rapeseed. Method of the Canadian Grain Commission Grain Research Lab. 3rd ed. Winnipeg, ON: Agriculture Canada. 9 p.Google Scholar
Dew, D. A. and Keys, C. H. 1976. An index of competition for estimating loss of rape due to wild oat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 56:1005–1006.Google Scholar
Hammond, E. G. 1991. Organization of rapid analysis of lipids in many individual plants. In Linskens, H. F. and Jackson, J. F., eds. Modern Methods of Plant Analysis. Volume 12. Essential Oils and Waxes. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. pp. 321–330.Google Scholar
Howard, H. K. and Daun, J. K. 1991. Oil concentration determination in oilseeds by NMR, Method of the Canadian Grain Commission Grain Research Laboratory. Winnipeg, ON: Agriculture Canada. 5 p.Google Scholar
Marshall, G., Morrison, I. N., Friesen, L., and Rother, W. 1989. Effects of volunteer wheat and barley on the growth and yield of rapeseed. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:445–453.Google Scholar
McMullan, P. M., Daun, J. K., and DeClercq, D. R. 1994. Effects of wild mustard (Brassica kaber) competition on yield and quality of atrazinetolerant and atrazine-susceptible canola (Brassica napus and Brassica rapa). Can. J. Plant Sci. 74:369–374.Google Scholar
Raney, J. P., Love, H. K., Rakow, G.F.W., and Downey, R. K. 1987. An apparatus for rapid preparation of oil and oil-free meal from Brassica seed. Fett Wiss. Technol./Fat Sci. Technol. 6:235–237.Google Scholar
Rose, S. P. and Bell, J. M. 1982. Reproduction of mice fed low erucic acid rapeseed oil contaminated with weed seed oils. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:617–624.Google Scholar
Shires, A., Bell, J. M., Keith, M. O., and McGregor, D. I. 1982. Rapeseed dockage, effects of feeding raw and processed wild mustard and stink-weed on growth and feed utilization of mice. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:275–285.Google Scholar
Thomas, P., ed. 1995. Canola varieties. In Canola Growers Manual. Winnipeg, ON: Canola Council of Canada. pp. 210–217.Google Scholar
USDA. 1979. Agricultural Handbook No. 8-4. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
USDA. 1997. Grain Inspection Handbook Book 2. Grain Grading Procedures; Canola. Chapter 3. Washington DC: Federal Grain Inspection Service. pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
Yaniv, Z., Elber, Y., Zur, M., and Schafferman, D. 1991. Differences in fatty acid composition of oils of wild Cruciferae seed. Phytochemistry 30:841–843.Google Scholar