Limited research has been directed at evaluating the ability of single cover crop plantings to suppress weeds in crops beyond the initial field season. Thus, this experiment was conducted to investigate the ability of a second-year self-regenerated annual and second-year perennial cover crop planting to suppress weeds during the critical period for weed control (CPWC) in soybean crops. Whole-plot treatments included 1) conventional till, 2) no-till with cover crop residue, 3) living mulch + cover crop residue, and 4) living mulch + winter-killed residue. Subplot treatments involved weed management intensity: a) no weed management (weedy), b) weeds manually removed through the CPWC (third node soybean stage; V3), and c) weeds manually removed until soybean canopy closure (weed-free). Overall, total annual cover crop biomass during the second field season was comparable to biomass obtained from direct seeded stands during the initial field season. All cover crop treatments reduced total weed biomass through the CPWC compared to conventional till. Soybean yield was low across all treatments in this experiment. Still, yield was similar between cover crop and conventional till treatments at one site-year, however, yields were lower in all cover crop treatments at the other site-year.

Field studies were conducted near Lewiston–Woodville and Rocky Mount, NC to evaluate the effects of mixed weed species on peanut yield. A combination of broadleaf and grass weeds were allowed to interfere with peanut for various intervals to determine both the critical timing of weed removal and the critical weed-free period. These periods were then combined to determine the critical period of weed control in peanut. The effects of various weedy intervals on peanut yield were also investigated. The predicted critical period of weed control, in the presence of a mixed population of weeds, was found to be from 3 to 8 wk after planting (WAP). Peanut yield decreased as weed interference intervals increased, demonstrating the need for weed control throughout much of the growing season in the presence of mixed weed populations.

Weed interference with crop growth is often attributed to water, nutrient, or light competition; however, specific physiological responses to these stresses are not well described. This study's objective was to compare growth, yield, and gene expression responses of corn to nitrogen (N), low light (40% shade), and weed stresses. Corn vegetative parameters from V2 to V12 stages, yield parameters, and gene expression using transcriptome (2008) and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) (2008/09) analyses at V8 were compared among the stresses and with nonstressed corn. N stress did not affect vegetative parameters, although grain yield was reduced by 40% compared with nonstressed plants. Shade, present until V2, reduced biomass and leaf area > 50% at V2, and recovering plants remained smaller than nonstressed plants at V12. However, grain yields of shade-stressed and nonstressed plants were similar, unless shade remained until V8. Weed stress reduced corn growth and yield in 2008 when weeds remained until V6. In 2009, weed stress until V2 reduced corn vegetative growth, but yield reductions occurred only if weed stress remained until V6 or later. Principle component analysis of differentially expressed genes indicated that shade and weed stress had more similar gene expression patterns to each other than they did to nonstressed or N-stressed tissues. However, corn grown in N-stressed conditions shared 252 differentially expressed genes with weed-stressed plants. Ontologies associated with light/photosynthesis, energy conversion, and signaling were down-regulated in response to all three stresses. Shade and weed stress clustered most tightly together, based on gene expression, but shared only three ontologies, O-METHYLTRANSFERASE activity (lignification processes), POLY(U)-BINDING activity (posttranscriptional gene regulation), and stomatal movement. Based on morphologic and genomic observations, weed stress to corn was not explained by individual effects of N or light stress. Therefore, we hypothesize that these stresses share limited signaling mechanisms.

The critical period of weed control (CPWC) for ‘Pardina’ and ‘Brewer’ lentil was determined in field experiments near Pullman, WA, in 2008 and 2009. Trial treatments were kept either weed free for periods of 0, 14, 25, 35, 45, 60, 75, or ∼90 d after emergence (DAE), or weeds were allowed to grow before removal for periods of 0, 14, 25, 35, 45, 60, 75, or ∼90 DAE. Averaged across varieties, lentil with season-long weed interference had 29.5 and 32% seed yield reduction compared to weed-free lentils in 2008 and 2009, respectively. When measured at crop maturity, a 1% loss in lentil seed yield resulted from each 5.68 g m−2 of dry weed biomass. Based on a 5% yield loss threshold, the CPWC for lentil was estimated to be from 270 to 999 growing degree days (GDD), 22 to 57 DAE, or crop growth stage (CGS) 7 to the early pod stage during 2008. In 2009, the CPWC was 624 to 650 GDD, with no occurrence of a CPWC when estimated using DAE and CGS. Spiny sowthistle emerged and competed with the lentil crop later in the growing season than mayweed chamomile, indicating that mayweed chamomile may be an earlier and stronger competitor than spiny sowthistle.