ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Biodiversity of segetal weed communities when chlorsulfuron-based weed control is being used on continuous winter wheat
 
More details
Hide details
1
University of Natural Sciences and Humanities in Siedlce, Prusa 14, 08-110 Siedlce, Poland
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Zbigniew Pawlonka
University of Natural Sciences and Humanities in Siedlce, Prusa 14, 08-110 Siedlce, Poland
 
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2014;54(3):300–305
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the study was to determine the relationship between herbicide rate and weed community biodiversity in continuous wheat. A six-year field experiment was conducted to examine the effect of four chlorsulfuron rates in comparison with untreated (the control) plots, on the status and severity of weed infestation – in successive study years of cultivating winter wheat in monoculture. In addition, the following indices were calculated: Shannon-Wiener and Simpson’s index of biodiversity, and Simpson’s index of domination. A total of 36 weedy species were identified in the experimental plots. The richest segetal communities were established in the control plots. An application of herbicide reduced the biodiversity of the grophytocensosis. A short-term monoculture did not impoverish the species richness of the weed community established in winter wheat. The average number of species in the community was significantly greater in the second study year. In the initial study years of monoculture, the biodiversity of the segetal community increased markedly compared with rotation-based cultivation. The calculated indices of biodiversity were not significantly affected by herbicide rate or monoculture but the indices confirmed the trends outlined by an analysis of the status and level of weed infestation.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (15)
1.
Adamiak E., Adamiak J., Przybylski R. 2011. Znaczenie płodozmianu w regulacji zachwaszczenia zbóż ozimych. [Significance of crop rotation on the regulation weed infestation in winter cereales]. Prog. Plant Prot./Post. Ochr. Roślin 51 (2): 817–821.
 
2.
Anyszka Z., Kohut M. 2011. Bioróżnorodność zbiorowisk chwastów segetalnych w uprawach wybranych gatunków warzyw. [Biodiversity of segetal weed communities in cultivations of selected vegetable crops]. Prog. Plant Prot./Post. Ochr. Roślin 51 (3): 1219–1223.
 
3.
Dobrzański A. 2009. Biologiczne i agrotechniczne aspekty regulowania zachwaszczenia. [Biological and agronomic aspects regulate weed]. http://www.agengpol.pl/LinkCli... [Accessed: January 21, 2014].
 
4.
Jastrzębska M., Bogucka B., Hruszka M. 2007. Następstwo roślin i proekologiczne sposoby regulacji zachwaszczenia a bioróżnorodność chwastów w bobiku. [Crop sequence and environment-friendly weed control methods versus weed biodiversity in faba bean fields]. Acta Agrophys. 10 (2): 357–371.
 
5.
Jędruszczak M., Antoszek R. 2004. Sposoby uprawy roli a bioróżnorodność zbiorowisk chwastów w monokulturze pszenicy ozimej. [Tillage systems and biodiversity of weed communities in winter wheat monoculture]. Acta Sci. Pol., Agricultura 3 (2): 47–59.
 
6.
Kwiatkowski C., Wesołowski M., Stępień A. 2004. Bioróżnorodność chwastów w trzech odmianach jęczmienia jarego uprawianych w siedmioletniej monokulturze i zmianowaniu. [Biodiversity of weeds in three cultivars of spring barley grown in seven-year monoculture and crop rotation]. Acta Sci. Pol., Agricultura 3 (2): 109–117.
 
7.
Ługowska M., Rzymowska Z. 2014. The effect of the application of the exact and approximate methods on values of selected ecological indices. Acta Agrobot. 67 (1): 39–46. DOI: 10.5586/aa.2014.0.
 
8.
Mirek Z., Piękoś-Mirkowa H., Zając A., Zając M. 2002. Flowering plants and pteridophytes of Poland – a checklist. p. 1–188. In: “Biodiversity of Poland” (Z. Mirek, ed.). W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, 442 pp.
 
9.
Rychcik B. 2006. Wpływ herbicydów i następstwa roślin na zachwaszczenie kukurydzy (Zea mays L.). [Effect of herbicides and crop sequence on weed infestation of maize (Zea mays L.)]. Prog. Plant Prot./Post. Ochr. Roślin 46 (2): 170–173.
 
10.
Rzymowska Z., Ługowska M., Skrzyczyńska J. 2013. Species diversity of segetal communities in tuber crops and in winter and spring cereals. Acta Agrobot. 66 (3): 95–102. DOI: 10.5586/aa.2013.043.
 
11.
Shannon C.E. 1948. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical J. 27: 379–423, 623–656.
 
12.
Simpson E.H. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature 163: 688.
 
13.
Skrzyczyńska J., Ługowska M. 2008. Dominacja gatunków i bioróżnorodność zbiorowisk agrocenoz ziemniaka Doliny Środkowej Wisły. [Species domination and biodiversity in weed communities of agrocenoses of the middle Vistula valley]. Zesz. Prob. Post. Nauk Rol. 530: 105–115.
 
14.
Stupnicka-Rodzynkiewicz E., Stępnik K., Lepiarczyk A. 2004. Wpływ zmianowania, sposobu uprawy roli i herbicydów na bioróżnorodność zbiorowisk chwastów. [Effect of the crop rotation, tillage method and herbicides on the biodiversity of weed communities]. Acta Sci. Pol., Agricultura 3 (2): 235–245.
 
15.
Trętowski J., Wójcik A.R., 1992. Metodyka doświadczeń rolniczych. [Methodology of agricultural experiments]. Wyższa Szkoła Rolniczo-Pedagogiczna, Siedlce, 538 pp.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345