Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rngvg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T09:29:07.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Strategies to terminate summer cover crops for weed management in no-tillage vegetable production in southeast Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2021

Roberto Botelho Ferraz Branco*
Affiliation:
Researcher, Agronomic Institute, Department of Horticulture (IAC/APTA), Ribeirão Peto, SP, Brazil
Fernando de Carvalho
Affiliation:
Agronomist, Agronomy College, University Moura Lacerda, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
João Paulo Oliveira
Affiliation:
Agronomist, Agronomy College, University Moura Lacerda, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
Pedro Luis da Costa Alves
Affiliation:
Professor, São Paulo State University (UNESP), School of Agricultural and Veterinarian Sciences, Department of Biology Applied to Agriculture, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil
*
Author for correspondence: Roberto Botelho Ferraz Branco, Instituto Agronômico, Department of Horticulture (IAC/APTA), Rodovia Antonio Duarte Nogueira, km 321, Code:14032-800, Ribeirão Peto, SP, Brazil. (Email: roberto.branco@sp.gov.br)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cover crop residue left on the soil surface as organic mulch in no-tillage crop production provides several environmental benefits, including weed suppression. Thus, many farmers who use cover crops attempt to reduce the use of agricultural inputs, especially herbicides. Therefore, our objectives were to study the potential of different cover crop species to suppress weeds and produce an in situ organic mulch and to evaluate the effect of the organic mulch with and without spraying glyphosate on weed suppression for vegetable (tomato [Solanum lycopersicum L.] and broccoli [Brassica oleracea L. var. botrytis]) growth and yield. Five cover crop treatments (sunn hemp [Crotalaria juncea L.], jack bean [Canavalia ensiformis (L.) DC.], pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.], forage sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench ssp. bicolor], and no cover crop [control]) were used in the main plots; and glyphosate was or was not sprayed on the flattened cover crop in the subplots of this split-plot experimental design. Organic mulch from pearl millet, sorghum, and sunn hemp resulted in lower weed biomass during the early seasons of both tomato and broccoli than mulch from jack bean and no cover crop (control). Spraying glyphosate after roller-crimping reduced weed biomass by 103 g m−2 and 20 g m−2 by 45 and 60 d after transplanting (DATr) of tomato, respectively, and resulted in a better tomato yield compared with not spraying. Glyphosate reduced weed biomass by 110 g m−2 in the early season of broccoli (30 DATr) but did not affect yield. Terminating high-biomass cover crops with a roller-crimper is a promising technique for weed management in vegetable crops that has the potential to reduce or even eliminate the need for herbicide.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Weed Science Society of America
Figure 0

Table 1. Climatic conditions of the averages of maximum and minimum temperatures (T), rainfall, and days with rain during the growing of summer cover crops and vegetable crops.

Figure 1

Table 2. Shoot dry biomass (SDB), weed density (WD), and weed dry biomass (WB) at 60 d after cover crop sowing over two cover crop (CC) growing seasons (2016 and 2017).a

Figure 2

Table 3. Weed density (WD) and weed dry biomass (WB) measured at 45 and 60 d after transplanting tomato (DATr) in the cover crop (CC) treatments with and without glyphosate spraying.a

Figure 3

Figure 1. Interaction of cover crop (CC) and herbicide treatment on weed dry biomass (g m−2) at 45 d after transplanting tomato; different lowercase and uppercase letters indicate, respectively, difference between herbicide treatments and among cover crops, according to the Tukey test at a 0.05 level of significance.

Figure 4

Table 4. Tomato dry biomass (TB) at 45 and 60 d after transplanting (DATr) and tomato commercial yield (CY) in the cover crop (CC) treatments with and without glyphosate spraying.a

Figure 5

Figure 2. Interaction of cover crop (CC) and herbicide treatment on tomato shoot dry biomass (g plant−2) at 45 d after transplanting tomato; different lowercase and uppercase letters indicate, respectively, difference between herbicide treatments and among cover crops, according to the Tukey test at a 0.05 level of significance.

Figure 6

Table 5. Weed density (WD) and weed dry biomass (WB) at 30 and 50 d after transplanting (DATr) of broccoli in the cover crop (CC) treatments with and without glyphosate spraying.a

Figure 7

Figure 3. Interaction of cover crop (CC) and herbicide treatment on weed dry biomass (g m−2) at 30 d after transplanting broccoli; different lowercase and uppercase letters indicate, respectively, difference between herbicide treatments and among cover crops according to the Tukey test at a 0.05 level of significance.

Figure 8

Table 6. Broccoli dry biomass (BB) at 30 and 50 d after transplanting (DATr) and broccoli commercial yield (CY) in the cover crop (CC) treatments with and without glyphosate spraying.a