Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T06:59:19.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nitrogen source influences wild mustard growth and competitive effect on sweet corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Adam S. Davis and
Matt Liebman
Matt Liebman
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469-5722
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Manipulations of the soil environment can affect the growth and competitive ability of annual weeds because of the large influence that soil conditions exert on seedlings early in the growing season. Our objective was to identify soil nitrogen (N) management systems with weed suppression potential. We hypothesized that competition from wild mustard against sweet corn would be weaker when N was supplied by organic sources (organic) or a split application of NH4NO3 fertilizer applied at planting and 4 wk thereafter (split) than when NH4NO3 fertilizer was applied in a single dose at planting (early). This hypothesis was tested in a 2-yr field experiment conducted in central Maine. Wild mustard's maximal relative growth rate (RGR) was 12% lower (P < 0.05) in 1997 and 1998, and the amount of time needed to achieve maximal RGR was delayed by 0.8 d (P < 0.05) in 1997 in the organic compared to the early treatment. The competitive effect of wild mustard on sweet corn yield was lower in the organic treatment than in the early and split treatments in 1 of 2 yr. In 1997, competition from wild mustard reduced marketable ear yields of sweet corn by 30%, but the magnitude of yield reduction did not differ between the three N addition treatments. In contrast, in 1998, sweet corn yield in the organic treatment was not reduced by weed competition, whereas yield loss in the early and split treatments was 20 and 35%, respectively. The mechanisms underlying selective suppression of weeds, but not crops, by organic N sources require further attention.

Keywords

Red clover, Trifolium pratense L., ‘Mammoth’; spring wheat, Triticum aestivum L., ‘Belvedere’sweet corn, Zea mays L. ‘Clockwork’wild mustard, Brassica kaber (D.C.) L.C. Wheeler SINARAllelopathycompostgreen manurenutrient competitionphytotoxicitysoil organic amendmentsweed competition

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 4 , August 2001, pp. 558 - 566
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Alkämper, J., Pessips, E., and Long, D. V. 1979. Einfluss der Düngung auf die Entwickelung und Nahrstoffnahme verschiedener Unkräuter in Mais. Pages 181–192 In Proceedings of the European Weed Research Society Symposium, Mainz, Germany. Paris: European Weed Research Society.Google Scholar
Angonin, C., Caussanel, J. P., and Meynard, J. M. 1996. Competition between winter wheat and Veronica hederifolia: influence of weed density and the amount and timing of nitrogen application. Weed Res. 36:175–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, D. A., Wynsocki, D. J., and Chastain, T. G. 1996. Nitrogen application timing effects on downy brome (Bromus tectorum) and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) growth and yield. Weed Technol. 10:305–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benbrook, C. M. 1996. Pest Management at the Crossroads. Yonkers, NY: Consumers Union. pp. 5–7.Google Scholar
Bridges, D. C. and Anderson, R. L. 1992. Crop losses to weeds in the United States by crop and region. Pages 61–74 In Bridges, D. C., ed. Crop Losses Due to Weeds in the United States, 1992. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Dabney, S. M., Schreiber, J. D., Rothrock, C. S., and Johnson, J. R. 1996. Cover crops affect sorghum seedling growth. Agron. J. 88:961–970.Google Scholar
Dyck, E. and 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, E., Liebman, M., and Erich, M. S. 1995. Crop-weed interference as influenced by a leguminous or synthetic fertilizer source: I. Double-cropping experiments with crimson clover, field corn, and lambsquarters. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 56:93–108.Google Scholar
Eghball, B. and Power, J. F. 1999. Composted and noncomposted manure application to conventional and no-tillage systems: corn yield and nitrogen uptake. Agron. J. 91:819–825.Google Scholar
Fox, R. H. and Piekielek, W. P. 1988. Fertilizer N equivalence of alfalfa, birdsfoot trefoil, and red clover for succeeding corn crops. J. Prod. Agric. 1:313–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grime, J. P. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. Am. Nat. 111:1169–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanway, J. J. 1963. Growth stages of corn. Agron. J. 55:487–492.Google Scholar
Harper, J. L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. London: Academic Press. pp. 111–147.Google Scholar
Hunt, R. 1982. Plant Growth Curves: The Functional Approach to Growth Analysis. London: Edward Arnold. pp. 51–54, 128–135.Google Scholar
Liebman, M. and Davis, A. S. 2000. Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low-external-input farming systems. Weed Res. 40:27–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebman, M. and Ohno, T. 1998. Crop rotation and legume residue effects on weed emergence and growth: applications for weed management. Pages 181–210 In Hatfield, J. L., Buhler, D. D., and Stewart, B. A., eds. Integrated Soil and Weed Management. Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor Press.Google Scholar
Magdoff, F. 1991. Understanding the Magdoff pre-sidedress nitrate test for corn. J. Prod. Agric. 4:297–305.Google Scholar
Mahler, R. L. 1990. Soil sampling fields that have received banded fertilizer applications. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 21:13–16.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. 1996. Ecological bases for the cultural control of weeds. J. Prod. Agric. 9:468–474.Google Scholar
Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., and Wasserman, W. 1996. Applied linear statistical models. Chicago: Irwin. pp.112–114, 230–231, 736–738, 1010–1013, 1106–1108.Google Scholar
Ohno, T., Doolan, K., Zibilske, L. M., Liebman, M., Gallandt, E. R., and Berube, C. 2000. Phytotoxic effects of red clover amended soils on wild mustard seedling growth. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 78:187–192.Google Scholar
Organic Farming Research Foundation. 1998. Third biennial national organic farmers’ survey. Santa Cruz, CA: Organic Farming Research Foundation. p. 5.Google Scholar
Ozores-Hampton, M., Stoffella, P. J., Bewick, T. A., Cantliffe, D. J., and Obreza, T. A. 1999. Effect of age of composted MSW and biosolids on weed seed germination. Comp. Sci. Util. 7:51–57.Google Scholar
Pieters, A. J. 1927. Green Manuring: Principles and Practice. New York: J. Wiley. pp. 10–15.Google Scholar
Seibert, A. C. and Pearce, R. B. 1993. Growth analysis of weed and crop species with reference to seed weight. Weed Sci. 41:52–56.Google Scholar
Shipley, B. and Keddy, P. A. 1988. The relationship between relative growth rate and sensitivity to nutrient stress in twenty-eight species of emergent macrophytes. J. Ecol. 76:1101–1110.Google Scholar
Toussoun, T. A. and Patrick, Z. A. 1963. Effect of phytotoxic substances from decomposing plant residues on root rot of bean. Phytopathology 53:265–269.Google Scholar
Vernon, A. J. and Allison, J.C.S. 1963. A method of calculating net assimilation rate. Nature (London) 200:814.Google Scholar
Westoby, M., Leishman, M., and Lord, J. 1996. Comparative ecology of seed size and dispersal. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., B 351:1309–1318.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, L., Hill, M., Miceli, S., Howe, P., and Vang, E. 1992. SYSTAT for the Macintosh. Version 5.2. Evanston, IL: SYSTAT.Google Scholar