Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T12:31:37.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Orchard Floor Management Influence on Summer Annual Weeds and Young Peach Tree Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robert D. Belding,
Bradley A. Majek,
Gail R. W. Lokaj,
Jeffrey Hammerstedt and
Albert O. Ayeni
Robert D. Belding*
Affiliation:
Rutgers Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Rutgers University, 121 Northville Road, Bridgeton, NJ 08302
Bradley A. Majek
Affiliation:
Rutgers Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Rutgers University, 121 Northville Road, Bridgeton, NJ 08302
Gail R. W. Lokaj
Affiliation:
Rutgers Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Rutgers University, 121 Northville Road, Bridgeton, NJ 08302
Jeffrey Hammerstedt
Affiliation:
Rutgers Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Rutgers University, 121 Northville Road, Bridgeton, NJ 08302
Albert O. Ayeni
Affiliation:
Rutgers Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Rutgers University, 121 Northville Road, Bridgeton, NJ 08302
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: belding@aesop.rutgers.edu
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study compared the effect of weed control and orchard floor management (OFMA) options including organic mulch on summer annual weed interference in a newly established peach orchard. Weed interference where no preemergence (PRE) herbicides were applied, including vole damage, caused 29% peach tree mortality, reduced tree trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA) 62% by the fourth year of orchard establishment, and reduced fruit yield and fruit number in 1999 by 73 and 75%, respectively, but had no effect on fruit size. Compared with a no-till or conventionally tilled orchard floor, the population of grassy weeds within the tree row was greater in killed perennial ryegrass sod (PRS) plus hard fescue residue mulch treatments but was less in killed PRS plus tall fescue residue mulch treatments. Among the no-PRE treatments, the tree row broadleaf weed populations were suppressed in killed PRS with or without the addition of fescue residue mulch to the tree row when compared with the no-till or conventionally tilled orchard floor treatments. PRE herbicide treatments strongly affected peach fruit yield and TCSA but not average fruit size. There was no effect among the killed PRS, with or without hard or tall fescue residue mulch treatments, on peach fruit yield, TCSA, or average fruit size when compared with the no-till or conventionally tilled orchard floor treatment options. All treatments with herbicide had higher yields in 1999 than those without herbicides.

Keywords

Hard fescue, Festuca longifolia var. Reliantperennial ryegrass, Lolium perenne L.tall fescue, Festuca arundinaceae Schreb. var. Kentucky-31vole, Microtus sp.peach, Prunus persica (L.) Batsch var. CandorDrive roworchard floor managementsummer annual weedstree rowOFMA, orchard floor managementPRE, preemergencePRS, perennial ryegrass sodSAW, summer annual weedTCSA, trunk cross-sectional area

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 2004, pp. 215 - 222
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

Belding, R. D. 1997–1998. New Jersey Commercial Tree Fruit Production Guide. E002J, E002K. Cook College, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Cooperative Extension. Pp. 43–54.Google Scholar
Belding, R. D. and Lokaj, G. R. W. 1999. New Jersey Commercial Tree Fruit Production Guide 1999. E002L. Cook College, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Cooperative Extension. Pp. 55–66.Google Scholar
Childers, N. F. 1949. Fruit Science, Orchard and Small Fruit Management. New York: J. B. Lippincott. Pp. 95–98.Google Scholar
Childers, N. F., Morris, J. R., and Sibbett, G. S. 1995. Modern Fruit Science. Gainesville, FL: Horticultural Publications. 248 p.Google Scholar
Derr, J. F. 2001. Biological assessment of herbicide use in apple production I. Background and current use estimates. Hortic. Technol. 11:11–19.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. R. and Kluchinski, D. 1996. Chemical composition of municipal leaf waste and hand collected urban leaf litter. J. Environ. Qual. 25:355–362.Google Scholar
Merwin, I., Ray, J. A., and Curtis, P. D. 1999. Orchard groundcover management systems affect meadow vole populations and damage to apple trees. HortScience. 34:271–274.Google Scholar
Merwin, I., Ray, J. A., Steenhuis, T. S., and Boll, J. 1996. Groundcover management systems influence fungicide and nitrate-N concentrations in leachate and runoff from a New York orchard. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 121:249–257.Google Scholar
Merwin, I., Rosenberger, D., Engle, C., Rist, D., and Fargione, M. 1995. Comparing mulches, herbicides, and cultivation as orchard groundcover management systems. HortTechnology. 5:151–158.Google Scholar
Merwin, I. and Stiles, W. C. 1994a. Orchard groundcover management impacts on apple tree growth and yield, and nutrient availability and uptake. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 119:209–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merwin, I. and Stiles, W. C. 1994b. Orchard groundcover management impacts on soil physical properties. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 119:216–222.Google Scholar
Miller, S. S. 1983. Response of young “Topred Delicious” apple trees to orchard floor management and fertilization [yield efficiency]. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 108:638–642.Google Scholar
Naor, A., Hupert, H., Greenblat, Y., Peres, M., Kaufman, A., and Klein, I. 2001. The response of nectarine fruit size and midday stem water potential to irrigation level in stage III and crop load. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 126:140–143.Google Scholar
Neilsen, G. H. and Hogue, E. J. 1992. Long-term effects of orchard soil management on tree vigor and extractable soil nutrients. Can. J. Soil Sci. 72:617–621.Google Scholar
Parker, M. L. and Meyer, J. R. 1996. Peach tree vegetative and root growth respond to orchard floor management. HortScience. 31:330–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1999–2000. SAS System for Windows. Release 8.01. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Sullivan, T. P. and Hogue, E. J. 1987. Influence of orchard floor management on vole and pocket gopher populations and damage in apple orchards. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 112:972–977.Google Scholar
Welker, W. V. and Glenn, D. M. 1985. The relationship of sod proximity to the growth and nutrient composition of newly planted peach trees. HortScience. 20:417–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welker, W. V. and Glenn, D. M. 1988. Growth response of young peach trees and changes in soil characteristics with sod and conventional planting systems. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 113:652–656.Google Scholar
Welker, W. V. and Glenn, D. M. 1990. Peach tree growth as influenced by grass species used in a killed sod planting system. HortScience. 25:514–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar