Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T04:43:22.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nitrogen Competition between Corn and Weeds in Soils under Organic and Conventional Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Hanna J. Poffenbarger,
Steven B. Mirsky,
John R. Teasdale,
John T. Spargo,
Michel A. Cavigelli and
Matthew Kramer
Hanna J. Poffenbarger
Affiliation:
Environmental Science and Technology Department, University of Maryland, 1443 Animal Sciences Building, College Park, MD 20742
Steven B. Mirsky*
Affiliation:
Sustainable Agricultural Systems Lab, U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Building 001 BARC-West, 10300 Baltimore Avenue, Beltsville, MD 20705
John R. Teasdale
Affiliation:
Sustainable Agricultural Systems Lab, U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Building 001 BARC-West, 10300 Baltimore Avenue, Beltsville, MD 20705
John T. Spargo
Affiliation:
Agricultural Analytical Services Lab, College of Agricultural Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, Tower Road, University Park, PA 16802
Michel A. Cavigelli
Affiliation:
Sustainable Agricultural Systems Lab, U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Building 001 BARC-West, 10300 Baltimore Avenue, Beltsville, MD 20705
Matthew Kramer
Affiliation:
Biometrical Consulting Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Building 005 BARC-West, 10300 Baltimore Avenue, Beltsville, MD 20705
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: steven.mirsky@usda.ars.gov
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Crop yields can be similar in organic and conventional systems even when weed biomass is greater in organic systems. Greater weed tolerance in organic systems may be due to differences in management-driven soil fertility properties. The goal of this experiment was to determine whether soil collected from a long-term organic cropping system with a diverse crop rotation and organic fertility inputs would support higher soil nitrogen (N) resource partitioning, as indicated by overyielding of corn–weed mixtures, than a cropping system with a less diverse crop rotation and inorganic N inputs. A replacement series greenhouse experiment was conducted using corn : smooth pigweed and corn : giant foxtail proportions of 0 : 1, 0.25 : 0.75, 0.5 : 0.5, 0.75 : 0.25, and 1 : 0 and harvested at 29, 40, or 48 d after experiment initiation (DAI). The monoculture density of corn was 4 plants pot−1 and the monoculture density of each weed species was 36 plants pot−1. Corn was consistently more competitive than both weed species at 40 and 48 DAI when soil inorganic N was limiting to growth. Corn–smooth pigweed mixtures had greater shoot biomass and shoot N content than expected based on the shoot biomass and shoot N content of monocultures (i.e., overyielding) at the onset of soil inorganic N limitation, providing some evidence for N resource partitioning. However, soil management effects on overyielding were infrequent and inconsistent among harvest dates and corn–weed mixtures, leading us to conclude that management-driven soil fertility properties did not affect corn–weed N resource partitioning during the early stages of corn growth.

Keywords

Giant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm. SETFAsmooth pigweed, Amaranthus hybridus L. AMACHcorn, Zea mays L.De Wit replacement seriesoveryieldingresource partitioning

Information

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 63 , Issue 2 , June 2015, pp. 461 - 476
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

References

Literature Cited

Alkamper, J, Pessips, E, Van Long, D (1979) Einfluss der dungung auf die entwicklung und nahr-stoffaufnahme verschiedener unkrauter in mais. Pages 181–192 in Proceedings of the 3rd European Weed Research Society Symposium. Mainz, Germany European Weed Research Society Google Scholar
Anderson, RL (1991) Timing of nitrogen application affects downy brome (Bromus tectorum) growth in winter wheat. Weed Technol. 5:582–585 Google Scholar
Ashton, IW, Miller, AE, Bowman, WD, Suding, KN (2010) Niche complementarity due to plasticity in resource use: plant partitioning of chemical N forms. Ecology. 91:3252–3260 Google Scholar
Blackshaw, RE (2005) Nitrogen fertilizer, manure, and compost effects on weed growth and competition with spring wheat. Agron J. 97:1612–1621 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, RE, Brandt, RN (2008) Nitrogen fertilizer rate effects on weed competitiveness is species dependent. Weed Sci. 56:743–747 Google Scholar
Blackshaw, RE, Brandt, RN, Janzen, HH, Entz, T, Grant, CA, Derksen, DA (2003) Differential response of weed species to added nitrogen. Weed Sci. 51:532–539 Google Scholar
Blackshaw, RE, Semach, G, Janzen, HH (2002) Fertilizer application method affects nitrogen uptake in weeds and wheat. Weed Sci. 50:634–641 Google Scholar
Bol, R, Ostle, NJ, Petzke, KJ (2002) Compound specific plant amino acid δ15N values differ with functional plant strategies in temperate grassland. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci. 165:661–667 Google Scholar
Buhler, DD (2002) Challenges and opportunities for integrated weed management. Weed Sci. 50:273–280 Google Scholar
Cavigelli, MA, Teasdale, JR, Conklin, AE (2008) Long-term agronomic performance of organic and conventional field crops in the mid-Atlantic region. Agron J. 100:785–794 Google Scholar
Connolly, J, Wayne, P, Bazzaz, FA (2001) Interspecific competition in plants: how well do current methods answer fundamental questions? Am Nat. 157:107–125 Google Scholar
Connolly, J, Wayne, P, Murray, R (1990) Time course of plant–plant interactions in experimental mixtures of annuals: density, frequency, and nutrient effects. Oecologia. 82:513–526 Google Scholar
Curran, WS, Lingenfelter, DD, Tooker, JF, Dillon, JM, Bohnenblust, EW (2013) Pest Management, Penn State Agronomy Guide. State College, PA Penn State Cooperative Extension Google Scholar
Davis, AS, Hall, J, Jasieniuk, M, Locke, MA, Luschei, E, Mortensen, DA, Riechers, DE, Smith, RG, Sterling, TM, Westwood, JH (2009) Weed science research and funding: a call to action. Weed Sci. 57:442–448 Google Scholar
Davis, AS, Liebman, M (2001) Nitrogen source influences wild mustard growth and competitive effect on sweet corn. Weed Sci. 49:558–566 Google Scholar
Davis, AS, Renner, KA, Gross, KL (2005) Weed seedbank and community shifts in a long-term cropping systems experiment. Weed Sci. 53:296–306 Google Scholar
Delate, K, Cambardella, CA (2004) Agroecosystem performance during transition to certified organic grain production. Agron J. 96:1288–1298 Google Scholar
de Wit, CT (1960) On competition. Versl lanbouwk onderz. 66:1–82 Google Scholar
Dyck, E, Liebman, M (1994) Soil fertility management as a factor in weed control: the effect of crimson clover residue, synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, and their interaction on emergence and early growth of lambsquarters and sweet corn. Plant Soil. 167:227–237 Google Scholar
Dyck, E, Liebman, M, Erich, M (1995) Crop–weed interference as influenced by a leguminous or synthetic fertilizer nitrogen source: I. Doublecropping experiments with crimson clover, sweet corn, and lambsquarters. Agr Ecosyst Environ. 56:93–108 Google Scholar
Ellern, SJ, Harper, JL, Sagar, GR (1970) A comparative study of the distribution of the roots of Avena fatua and A. strigosa in mixed stands using a C-labelling technique. J Ecol. 58:865–868 Google Scholar
Fowler, N (1982) Competition and coexistence in a North Carolina grassland. III. Mixtures of component species. J Ecol. 70:77–92 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, LA (1962) The variance of the product of K random variables. J Am Stat Assoc. 57:54–60 Google Scholar
Hall, RL (1974) Analysis of the nature of interference between plants of different species. I. Concepts and extension of the de Wit analysis to examine effects. Aust J Agric Res. 25:639–747 Google Scholar
Harbur, MM, Owen, MDK (2004) Response of three annual weeds to corn population density and nitrogen fertilization timing. Weed Sci. 52:845–853 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, JL (1977) Population Biology of Plants. London Academic Google Scholar
Harrison, KA, Bol, R, Bardgett, RD (2007) Preferences for different nitrogen forms by coexisting plant species and soil microbes. Ecology. 88:989–999 Google Scholar
Hauggaard-Nielsen, H, Gooding, M, Ambus, P, Corre-Hellou, G, Crozat, Y, Dahlmann, C, Dibet, A, von Fragstein, P, Pristeri, A, Monti, M, Jensen, ES (2009) Pea–barley intercropping for efficient symbiotic N2-fixation, soil N acquisition and use of other nutrients in European organic cropping systems. Field Crop Res. 113:64–71 Google Scholar
Horneck, DA, Miller, RO (1998) Determination of total nitrogen in plant tissue. Pages 75–84 in Kalra, YP, ed. Handbook and Reference Methods for Plant Analysis. New York CRC Google Scholar
Jensen, ES (1996) Grain yield, symbiotic N2 fixation and interspecific competition for inorganic N in pea–barley intercrops. Plant Soil. 182:25–38 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R, Kuby, P (2008) Just the Essentials of Elementary Statistics. 10th edn. Mason Cengage Learning. 944 pGoogle Scholar
Jumpponen, A, Högberg, C, Huss-Danell, P, Mulder, CPH (2002) Interspecific and spatial differences in nitrogen uptake in monocultures and two-species mixtures in north European grasslands. Funct Ecol. 16:454–461 Google Scholar
Klute, A (1986) Water retention: laboratory methods. Pages 636–662 in Klute, A, ed. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods. 2nd edn. Madison, WI American Society of Agronomy CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mallory, EB, Griffin, TS (2007) Impacts of soil amendment history on nitrogen availability from manure and fertilizer. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 71:964–973 Google Scholar
Marose, BH, Dively, G, Hellman, J, Grybauskus, A (1991) Maryland Integrated Pest Management Scouting Guidelines. College Park, MD University of Maryland Cooperative Extension Google Scholar
McKane, RB, Grigal, DF (1990) Spatiotemporal differences in 15N uptake and the organization of an old-field plant community. Ecology. 71:1126–1132 Google Scholar
Melander, B, Cirujeda, A, Jorgensen, MH (2003) Effects of inter-row hoeing and fertilizer placement on weed growth and yield of winter wheat. Weed Res. 43:428–438 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menalled, FD, Gross, KL, Hammond, M (2001) Weed aboveground and seedbank community responses to agricultural management systems. Ecol Appl. 11:1586–1601 Google Scholar
Mortensen, DA, Bastiaans, L, Sattin, M (2000) The role of ecology in the development of weed management systems: an outlook. Weed Res. 40:49–62 Google Scholar
Mulvaney, RL (1996) Nitrogen—inorganic forms. Pages 1129–1131, 1151–1159 in Sparks, DL, ed. Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3. Madison, WI Soil Science Society of America Google Scholar
Parrish, JAD, Bazzaz, FA (1976) Underground niche separation in successional plants. Ecology. 57:1281–1288 Google Scholar
Pella, E (1990) Elemental organic analysis part 1. Am Lab. 22:116–125 Google Scholar
R Development Core Team (2013) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria R Foundation for Statistical Computing Google Scholar
Ryan, MR, Mortensen, DA, Bastiaans, L, Teasdale, JR, Mirsky, SB, Curran, WS, Seidel, R, Hepperly, PR, Wilson, DO (2010) Elucidating the apparent maize tolerance to weed competition in long-term organically managed systems. Weed Res. 50:25–36 Google Scholar
Ryan, MR, Mortensen, DA, Wilson, DO, Hepperly, PR (2008) Organic weed management: what farmers think. Pages 17 in Proceedings of Northeastern Weed Science Society. Philadelphia, PA Northeast Weed Science Society Google Scholar
Ryan, MR, Smith, RG, Mortensen, DA, Teasdale, JR, Curran, WS, Seidel, R, Shumway, DL (2009) Weed–crop competition relationships differ between organic and conventional cropping systems. Weed Res. 49:572–580 Google Scholar
Sackville Hamilton, NR (1994) Replacement and additive designs for plant competition studies. J Appl Ecol. 31:599–603 Google Scholar
Salas, ML, Hickman, MV, Huber, DM, Schreiber, MM (1997) Influence of nitrate and ammonium nutrition on the growth of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi). Weed Sci. 45:664–669 Google Scholar
SAS Institute (2008) SAS/STAT® 9.2 User's Guide. Cary, NC SAS Institute Google Scholar
Siebert, AC, Pearce, RB (1993) Growth analysis of weed and crop species with reference to seed weight. Weed Sci. 41:52–56 Google Scholar
Smith, RG, Mortensen, DA, Ryan, MR (2010) A new hypothesis for the functional role of diversity in mediating resource pools and weed-crop competition in agroecosystems. Weed Res. 50:37–48 Google Scholar
Spargo, JT, Cavigelli, MA, Mirsky, SB, Maul, JE, Meisinger, JJ (2011) Mineralizable soil nitrogen and labile soil organic matter in diverse long-term cropping systems. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst. 90:253–266 Google Scholar
Taylor, DR, Aarssen, LW (1989) On the density dependence of replacement-series competition experiments. J Ecol. 77:975–988 Google Scholar
Teasdale, JR, Coffman, CB, Mangum, RW (2007) Potential long-term benefits of no-tillage and organic cropping systems for grain production and soil improvement. Agron J. 99:1297–1305 Google Scholar
Teasdale, JR, Mangum, RW, Radhakrishnan, J, Cavigelli, MA (2004) Weed seedbank dynamics in three organic farming crop rotations. Agron J. 96:1429–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teyker, RH (1992) Seedling response to band applied NH4OH rates and to N form in two maize hybrids. Plant Soil. 144:289–295 Google Scholar
Teyker, RH, Hoelzer, HD, Liebl, RA (1991) Maize and pigweed response to N supply and form. Plant Soil. 135:287–292 Google Scholar
University of Maryland Cooperative Extension (2009) Agronomic Crop Nutrient Recommendations Based on Soil Tests and Yield Goals. College Park, MD Maryland Cooperative Extension Google Scholar
[USDA-NASS] U.S. Department of Agriculture–National Agricultural Statistics Service (2010) Agricultural Chemical Use Program: 2010 Corn, Upland Cotton, and Fall Potatoes Data Tables. Washington, DC USDA-NASS Google Scholar
Wander, MM, Traina, SJ, Stinner, BR, Peters, SE (1994) Organic and conventional management effects on biologically active soil organic matter pools. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 58:1130–1139 Google Scholar
Wang, WJ, Smith, CJ, Chen, D (2004) Predicting soil nitrogen mineralization dynamics with a modified double exponential model. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 68:1256–1265 Google Scholar
Williams, AC, McCarthy, BC (2001) A new index of interspecific competition for replacement and additive designs. Ecol Res. 16:29–40 Google Scholar
Wilson, JB (1988) Shoot competition and root competition. J Appl Ecol. 25:279–296 Google Scholar
Wilson, RS, Hooker, N, Tucker, M, LeJeune, J, Doohan, D (2009) Targeting the farmer decision making process: a pathway to increased adoption of integrated weed management. Crop Prot. 28:756–764 Google Scholar
Wortman, SE, Davis, AS, Schutte, BJ, Lindquist, JL (2011) Integrating management of soil nitrogen and weeds. Weed Sci. 59:162–170 Google Scholar
Zimdahl, RL (2004) Definition of plant competition. Pages 6–8 in Zimdahl, RL, ed. Weed–Crop Competition: A Review, Second Edition. Ames, IA Blackwell Publishing Professional CrossRefGoogle Scholar