Effect of weeding management on the performance of local maize populations

  • J. Peña-Asin Estación Experimental de Aula Dei, EEAD-CSIC, Apdo. 13034, 50080 Zaragoza
  • A. Costar Estación Experimental de Aula Dei, EEAD-CSIC, Apdo. 13034, 50080 Zaragoza
  • A. Alvarez Estación Experimental de Aula Dei, EEAD-CSIC, Apdo. 13034, 50080 Zaragoza
Keywords: Zea mays L, local cultivars, improved populations, weed interferences, weed competition

Abstract

One of the most important stress factors in maize (Zea mays L.) fields is weed competition, which reduces the crop yield. Weeds chiefly interfere with maize and establish considerable competition for light, water and nutrients. To avoid these harmful effects, there are different agronomic measures and factors among which, the most relevant are the interactions between crop and weed, weed management practices and type of germplasm. This study attempts to evaluate maize germplasm for tolerance to weed competition in order to achieve competitive ability and suitability for farming. Ten genotypes of maize, classified into two groups, i.e. improved populations and traditional cultivars, were grown under four types of weed management practices (mechanical harrowing control, chemical control, combination of harrowing and chemical control and untreated control as check) for three years (from 2009 to 2011) in Zaragoza (Spain). We found that the effect of weed management practices was not significantly different, whereas the genotype effect was highly significant, with genotype EZS34 (mean yield of 7.7 Mg ha-1) showing the highest yield. Other traits, such as earliness, displayed a good behaviour under weed competition. On the other hand, harrowing management proved to be the most effective method of weed control although it did not show a significant response. The best results are associated with some maize genotypes that have a specific adaptation to local conditions, according to their genetic background.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

J. Peña-Asin, Estación Experimental de Aula Dei, EEAD-CSIC, Apdo. 13034, 50080 Zaragoza
DEPARTAMENTO DE GENETICA Y PRODUCCION VEGETAL

References

Bakhtiar G, Marwat KB, Saeed M, Hussain Z, Ali H, 2011. Impact of tillage, plant population and mulches on weed management, and grain yield of maize. Pak J Bot 43: 1603-1606.

Begna SH, Hamilton RI, Dwyer LM, Stewart DW, Cloutier D, Assemat L, Foroutan K, Smith DL, 2001. Morphology and yield response to weed pressure by corn hybrids differing in canopy architecture. Eur J Agron 14: 293-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(01)00092-2

Berkowitz AR, 1988. Competition for resources in weed crop-mixtures. In: Weed management in agroecosystems: ecological approaches (Altieri MA, Liebman M, eds.), CRD Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. pp: 89-119.

Cao A, Santiago R, Ramos AJ, Marín S, Reid LM, Butrón A, 2013. Environmental factors related to fungal infection and fumonisin accumulation during the development and drying of white maize kernels. Int J Food Microbiol 164: 15–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2013.03.012 PMid:23587708

Carruthers K, Fe Q, Cloutier D, Smith DL, 1998. Intercropping corn with soybean, lupin and forages: weed control by intercrops combined with interrow cultivation. Eur J Agron 8: 225-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(97)00062-2

Cavero J, Zaragoza C, Suso ML, Pardo A, 1999. Competition between maize and Datura stramonium in an irrigated field under semi-arid conditions. Weed Res 39: 225-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3180.1999.00140.x

Christensen S, 1994. Crop weed competition and herbicide performance in cereal species and varieties. Weed Res 34: 29-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.1994.tb01970.x

Christensen S, 1995. Weed suppression ability of spring barley varieties. Weed Res 35: 241-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.1995.tb01786.x

Cirujeda A, Aibar J, Zaragoza C, 2011. Remarkable changes of weed species in Spanish cereal fields from 1976 to 2007. Agron Sustain Dev 31: 675-688. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0030-4

Derksen DA, Lafond GP, Thomas AG, Loeppky HA, Swanton CJ, 1993. Impact of agronomic practices on weed communities: tillage system. Weed Sci 41: 409-417.

Dhima KV, Eleftherohorinos IG, Vasilakoglou IB, 2000. Interference between Avena sterilis, Phalaris minor and five barley cultivars. Weed Res 40: 549-559. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00213.x

Didon UME, 2002. Variation between barley cultivars in early response to weed competition. J Agron Crop Sci 188: 176-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-037X.2002.00566.x

Djemel A, Revilla P, Hanifi-Mekliche L, Malvar RA, Álvarez A, Khelifi P, 2012. Maize (Zea mays L.) from the Saharan oasis: adaptation to temperate areas and agronomic performance. Genet Resour Crop Evol 59: 1493-1504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10722-011-9778-2

FAO, 2012. FAOSTAT, Statistical databases. Available in http://faostat.fao.org [15 January 2013].

Fried G, Norton LR, Reboud X, 2008. Environmental and management factors determining weed species composition and diversity in France. Agr Ecosyst Environ 128: 68-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2008.05.003

Garrido T, Costa C, Fraile J, Orejudo E, Ni-erola M, Ginebreda A, Olivella L, Figuieras M, 1998. Análisis de la presencia de plaguicidas en diversos acuíferos de Catalu-a. Proc. Jornadas sobre contaminación de las aguas subterráneas: un problema pendiente. AIH-GE, Valencia, Spain, pp: 127-133.

Goudriaan J, 1988. The bare bones of leaf-angle distribution in radiation models for canopy photosynthesis and energy balance. Agric For Meteorol 43: 155–189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(88)90089-5

Govaerts B, Sayre KD, Deckers J, 2005. Stable high yields with zero tillage and permanent bed planting? Field Crop Res 94: 33-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2004.11.003

Hansen PK, Kristensen K, Willas J, 2008. A weed suppressive index for spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) varieties. Weed Res 48: 225-236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.2008.00620.x

Karunatilake U, van Es HM, Schindelbeck RR, 2000. Soil and maize response to plow no-tillage after alfalfa-to-maize conversion on a clay loam soil in New York. Soil Till Res 55(1-2): 31-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(00)00096-9

Oerke EC, Dehne HW, Schonbeck F, Weber A, 1994. Crop production and crop protection-estimated losses in major food and cash crops. Elsevier Sci., Amsterdam.

Oliveira AM, Silva PSL, Albuquerque CC, Azevedo CMSB, Cardoso MJ, Oliveira OF, 2011. Weed control in corn via intercropping with gliricidia sown by broadcasting. Planta Daninha 29: 535-543. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582011000300007

Pardo G, Cirujeda A, Aibar J, Cavero J, Zaragoza C, 2008. Weed harrowing in winter cereal under semi-arid conditions. Span J Agric Res 6: 661-670. http://dx.doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2008064-358

Romay MC, Malvar RA, Campo L, Alvarez A, Moreno-Gonzalez J, Ordas A, Revilla P, 2010. Climatic and genotypic effects for grain yield in maize under stress conditions. Crop Sci 50: 51-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2008.12.0695

Ruíz de Galarreta JI, Álvarez A, 2008. Divergent mass selection for different flowering times in a Spanish synthetic maize population. Span J Agric Res 6: 56-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2008061-303

Sánchez-Monge E, 1962. Razas de maíz en Espa-a. Serie Premios Nacionales de Investigación Agraria, Monografía nº 13. Publicaciones del Ministerio de Agricultura, Secretaría General Técnica, Madrid, Espa-a.

Santiago S, Cao A, Malvar RA, Reid LM, Butrón A, 2013. Assessment of corn resistance to fumonisin accumulation in a broad collection of inbred lines. Field Crop Res 149: 193-202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.04.011

SAS, 2005. The SAS system, SAS Online DocL, version 9, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.

Seaver GP, Wright KJ, 1995. Potential for weed control by suppressive cereal cultivars. Proc. Brighton Crop Protection Conference –Weeds, Brighton, pp: 737-742.

Shrestha A, Knezevic SZ, Roy RC, Ball-Coelho BR, Swanton CJ, 2002. Effect of tillage, cover crops and crop rotation on the composition of weed flora in a sandy soil. Weed Res 42: 76-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3180.2002.00264.x

Sibuga KP, Bandeen JD, 1980. Effects of green foxtail and lamb’s-quarter interference in field corn. Can J Plant Sci 60: 1419-1425. http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/cjps80-196

Silva PSL, Damasceno APAB, Silva KMB, Oliveira OF, Queiroga RCF, 2009. Growth and yield of corn grain and green ear in competition with weeds. Planta Daninha 27: 947-955. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-83582009000500008

Steel RGD, Torrie JH, Dickey DA, 1997. Principles and procedures of statistics: biometrical approach, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, USA.

Swanton CJ, Shrestha A, Knezevic SZ, Roy RC, Ball-Coelho BR, 1999. Effect of tillage system, N, and cover crop on the composition of weed flora. Weed Sci 47: 454-461.

Tollenaar M, Dibo AA, Aguilera A, Weise SF, Swanton CJ, 1994. Effect of crop density on weed interference in maize. Agron J 86: 591-596. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1994.00021962008600040003x

Tollenaar M, Aguilera A, Nissanka SP, 1997. Grain yield reduced more by weed interference in an old than a new maize. Agron J 89: 239-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1997.00021962008900020014x

Travlos IS, Economou G, Kanatas PJ, 2011. Corn and barnyardgrass competition as influenced by relative time of weed emergence and corn hybrid. Agron J 103: 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2010.0245

Published
2013-11-13
How to Cite
Peña-Asin, J., Costar, A., & Alvarez, A. (2013). Effect of weeding management on the performance of local maize populations. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 11(4), 1078-1084. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2013114-4027
Section
Plant breeding, genetics and genetic resources