ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The effectiveness of weed regulation methods in spring wheat cultivated in Integrated, conventional and organic crop production systems
 
More details
Hide details
1
Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation – State Research Institute Czartoryskich 8, 24-100 Puławy, Poland
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Beata Feledyn-Szewczyk
Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation – State Research Institute Czartoryskich 8, 24-100 Puławy, Poland
Submission date: 2012-04-02
Acceptance date: 2012-11-02
 
Journal of Plant Protection Research 2012;52(4):486–493
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The research was conducted from 2008 to 2010, and compared the influence of different weed control methods used in spring wheat on the structure of the weed communities and the crop yield. The study was carried out at the Experimental Station of the Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation – State Research Institute in Osiny as part of a long-term trial where these crop production systems had been compared since 1994. In the conventional and integrated systems, spring wheat was grown in a pure stand, whereas in the organic system, the wheat was grown with undersown clover and grasses. In the conventional system, her - bicides were applied two times in a growing season, but in the integrated system – only once. The effectiveness of weed manage - ment was lower in the organic system than in other systems, but the dry matter of weeds did not exceed 60 g/m 2 . In the integrated system, the average dry matter of weeds in spring wheat was 4 times lower, and in the conventional system 10 times lower than in the organic system. Weed diversity was the largest in spring wheat cultivated in the organic system. In the conventional and integrated systems, compensation of some weed species was observed ( Viola arvensis, Fallopia convolvulus, Equisetum arvense ). The comparison of weed communities using Sorenson’s indices revealed more of a similarity between systems in terms of number of weed species than in the number of individuals. Such results imply that qualitative changes are slower than quantitative ones. The yield of grain was the biggest in the integrated system (5.5 t/ha of average). It was 35% higher than in the organic system, and 20% higher than in conventional ones.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have declared that no conflict of interests exist.
 
REFERENCES (34)
1.
Adamczewski K., Dobrzański A. 1997. Weed control management in integrated crop production. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin. 37 (1): 58–65.
 
2.
Adamczewski K., Matysiak K. 2005. Klucz do określania faz rozwojowych roślin jedno- i dwuliściennych w skali BBCH [K. Adamczewski, K. Matysiak – translation and adaptation]. 2nd ed. Inst. Ochr. Roślin, Poznań, 134 pp.
 
3.
Barberi P., Silvestri N., Bonari E. 1997. Weed communities of winter wheat as influenced by input level and rotation. Weed Res. 37: 301–313.
 
4.
Dobrzański A., Adamczewski K. 2006. Progress in mechanical methods of weed management in integrated and organic farming systems. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin. 46 (1): 11–18.
 
5.
Dobrzański A., Adamczewski K. 2009. The influence of weed control on agrophytocenosis biodiversity. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin, 49 (3): 982–995.
 
6.
Doucet C., Weaver S.E., Hamill A.S., Zhang J. 1999. Separating the effects of crop rotation from weed management on weed density and diversity. Weed Sci. 47: 729–735.
 
7.
Dyer W.E. 1995. Exploiting weed seed dormancy and germination requirements through agronomic practices. Weed Sci. 43: 498–503.
 
8.
Duer I. 1996. Zachwaszczenie i sposoby jego ograniczania w rolnictwie integrowanym. Mat. Szkol. 46/96, IUNG Puławy, 36 pp.
 
9.
Eisele J.-A. 1998. Organic farming as a sustainable system: Weed management strategies in organic farming. p. 599–602 In: “Sustainable Agriculture for Food, Energy and Industry”. (N. El Bassam, R.K. Behl, B. Prochnow, eds.). Proc. Intern. Conference: SustainableAgriculture for Food, Energy and Industry, Braunschweig, Germany, 22–28 June 1997, London: James & James Ltd, 1 200 pp.
 
10.
Falińska K., Jankowska-Błaszczuk M., Szydłowska J. 1994. Bank nasion w glebie a dynamika roślinności. Wiad. Bot. 38 (1/2): 35–46.
 
11.
Feledyn-Szewczyk B., Duer I. The influence of crop production system on the soil seed bank. Oddziaływanie systemu produkcji na glebowy bank nasion. Pam. Puł. 2004, 138: 19–33.
 
12.
Feledyn-Szewczyk B., Duer I. 2006. Effectiveness of weed regulation methods in spring barley cultivated in different crop production systems. Prog. Plant Protection/Post. Ochr. Roślin. 46 (1): 45–52.
 
13.
Feledyn-Szewczyk B., Duer I. 2007. The weed infestation of spring wheat cultivated in organic system in comparison with other crop production systems. Zachwaszczenie pszenicy jarej uprawianej w ekologicznym systemie produkcji w porównaniu z innymi systemami produkcji rolnej. J. Res. Applic. Agricult. Eng. 52 (3): 40–44.
 
14.
Forcella F., Eradat-Oskoui K., Wagner S.W. 1993. Application of weed seedbank ecology to low-input crop management. Ecol. Applic. 3 (1): 74–83.
 
15.
Hucl P. 1998. Response to weed control by four spring genotypes differing in competitive ability. Can. J. Plant Sci. 78: 171–173.
 
16.
Hauggaard-Nielsen H., Ambus P., Bellostas N., Boisen S., Brisson N., Corr-Hellou, Crozat Y., Dahlmann C., Dibet A., Fragstein P., Gooding M., Kasyanova E., Launay M., Monti M., Pristeri A., Jensen E.S. 2006. Intercropping of pea and barley for increased production, weed control, improved product quality and prevention of nitrogen-looses in European organic farming systems. Bibl. Fragm. Agronom. 11 (III): 53–60.
 
17.
Janczak-Tabaszewska D., Tyburski J. 1999. Zachwaszczenie pszenicy jarej i ziemniaków w gospodarstwach ekologicznych i konwencjonalnych. p. 49–54. In: “Porównanie ekologicznych i konwencjonalnych gospodarstw rolnych w Polsce” (M. Górny, ed.). Wyd. SGGW, Warszawa, 113 pp.
 
18.
Jensen K.F., Nielsen P.R. 2000. PC-Plant Protection – a decision support system for Danish agriculture. The weed module. Pam. Puł. 120: 185–193.
 
19.
Kapeluszny J. 1994. Kształtowanie się struktury plony i łanu jęczmienia jarego i jarej pszenicy w zależności od stopnia zachwaszczenia. p. 95–100. In: XVII Krajowa Konferencja nt. “Przyczyny i źródła zachwaszczenia pól uprawnych”. Olsztyn-Bęsia 28–29.06.1994, Wyd. ART., 151 pp.
 
20.
Kuś J. 1995. Systemy gospodarowania w rolnictwie. Rolnictwo integrowane. Mat. Szkol. 42/95. Wyd. IUNG Puławy, 38 pp.
 
21.
Kuś J. 1999. Zasady agrotechniki w gospodarstwach ekologicznych. p. 49–78. In: „Przyrodnicze aspekty rolnictwa ekologicznego i jakość jego produktów” (H. Runowski, ed.). Wyd. SGGW, Warszawa, 183 pp.
 
22.
Melander B., Rasmussen I.A., Barberi P. 2005. Integrating physical and cultural methods of weed control examples from European Research. Weed Sci. 53: 369–381.
 
23.
O’Donovan J.T., Blackshaw R.E., Harker K.N., Clayton G.W., Moyer J.R., Dosdall L.M., Maurice D.C., Turkington T.K. 2007. Integrated approaches to managing weeds in spring sown crops in western Canada. Crop Prot. 26: 390–398.
 
24.
Odum E.P., Park T.Y., Hutcheson K. 1994. Comparison of the weedy vegetation in old-fields and crop fields on the same site reveals the fallowing crop fields does not result in seedbank buildup of agricultural weeds. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 3 (3): 247–252.
 
25.
Parylak D., Zawieja J., Jędruszczak M., Stupnica-Rodzynkiewicz E., Dąbkowska T., Snarska K. 2006. Use of the mixed crops, cultivar properties or allelopathy in weed control. Prog. Plant Protection/ Post. Ochr. Roślin, 46(1): 33–44.
 
26.
Rola J., Rola H., Badowski M. 2000. Segetal weed communities on ecological and conventional farms within Lower Silesia. Zbiorowiska segetalne na polach gospodarstw ekologicznych i tradycyjnych Dolnego Śląska. Pam. Puł. 122: 21–29.
 
27.
Rola H. 2002: Ecological and production aspects of plant protection against weeds. Ekologiczne i produkcyjne aspekty ochrony roślin przed chwastami. Pam. Puł. 130: 635–645.
 
28.
Rutkowski L. 2004. Klucz do oznaczania roślin naczyniowych Polski niżowej. Wyd. PWN, 814 pp.
 
29.
Stevenson F.C., Johnston A.M., Brandt S.A., Townley-Smith L. 2000. An assessment of reduced herbicide and fertilizer inputs on cereal grain yield and weed growth. Am. J. Alternative Agric. 15 (2): 60–67.
 
30.
Stupnicka-Rodzynkiewicz E., Stępnik K., Lepiarczyk A. 2004. Effect of the rotation, tillage method and herbicides on the biodiversity of weed communities. Wpływ zmianowania, sposobu uprawy roli i herbicydów na bioróżnorodność zbiorowisk chwastów. Acta Sci. Pol., Agricultura 3 (2): 235–245.
 
31.
Thill D.C., Lish J.M., Callihan R.H., Bechinski E.J. 1991. Integrated weed management – a component of integrated pest management: a critical review. Weed Technol. 5: 648–656.
 
32.
Tyr Š., Lacko-Bartošova M. 1998. Weed infestation of spring barley in integrated and ecological arable farming systems. p. 129–130. In: Proc. V Congress of European Society for Agronomy. Nitra, The Slovak Republic, 28 June–2 July 1998, 378 pp.
 
33.
Zanin G., Mosca G., Catizone P. 1992. A profile of the potential flora in maize fields of the Po Valley. Weed Res. 32: 407–418.
 
34.
Zanin G., Otto S., Riello L., Borin M. 1997. Ecological interpretation of weed flora dynamics under different tillage systems. Agric., Ecosyst. Environ. 66: 177–188.
 
eISSN:1899-007X
ISSN:1427-4345