Effects of Seedbed and Wheat Density on Weed Control, Growth and Yield of Wheat

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• Sh Jafarbeygi ¹
• E Zeidali ²
• R Moradi ³
• Y Alizade

¹ Ilam University

² Ilam

³ Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman

10.22067/gsc.v16i4.69146

Abstract

Introduction
Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is the prominent cereal food grain and major staple food in Iran. However, weed infestation is a major bottleneck to higher wheat productivity, and accounts for more than 48% loss of potential wheat yield. Weeds are omnipresent pests that compete with crops for water, nutrients, space, and light; host pests and diseases; and release allelochemicals into the rhizosphere. The magnitude of weed-related losses, however, depends on the type and density of a particular weed species, its time of emergence, and the duration of interference. Yield losses are most severe when resources are limited and weeds and crops emerge simultaneously. Crop yields decrease with increasing weed competition. A strong relationship exists between the duration of competition and the competition pressure exerted on the crop, which reduces yield. Stale seedbeds are a long-established practice that can be used with supplemental herbicides in conventional systems or without them in organic systems. The aim of the study was assessing the effect of various seedbed and wheat density on weed control, and growth and yield of wheat.
Materials and Methods
The experiment was conducted in a split plot arrangement based on randomized complete block design with three replications. The seedbed (false, stale and conventional seedbed) were assigned to main plots and wheat density (150, 200 and 250 kg seed ha-1) were randomized in subplot. The spacing between the planting rows was 20 cm. The required fertilizers were applied based on the results of soil analysis and by phosphate di-ammonium (150 kg ha-1) and urea (250 kg ha-1). Also, other planting operations such as irrigation were applied uniformly to all treatments. Weed control was not carried out in growth stages.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that dry weight and density of weed, plant height, number of tiller, 1000-seed weight, grain yield and seed protein contents were affected by interaction of seedbed and plant density. Simple effect of seedbed and plant density had a significant effect on number of spike and lodging percentage of wheat. Using false and stale seedbeds led to reducing weed density and dry weight, and increasing number of tiller, number of spike, biological and grain yield and protein contents rather than conventional planting conditions, significantly. Increasing plant density had a positive effect on weed control. It seems that increasing wheat density increased the competitiveness of plant species by decreasing access to enough light and nutrients, and led to eliminating the weeds. The highest grain yield (6.95 t ha-1) was assigned to stale seedbed and density of 150 kg seed ha-1. Grain yield in densities of 150 and 250 kg seed ha-1 was higher than density of 250 kg seed ha-1.
Conclusions
In general, application of false and stale seedbeds with planting 150-200 kg seed ha-1 is recommended.

Keywords

• False seedbed
• Lodging
• Protein Content
• Stale seedbed

20.1001.1.20081472.1397.16.4.7.4

---

References

1. Barzali, M., Javanshir, A., Ghalavand, A., Yusef-Naseri, M., and Musavi, S. 2000. Effect of various tillage systems on weed crowd in second planting of soybean. 6th congress of Agronomy and Plant Breeding. 26-28 August. Mazandaran University. Pp. 24-28. (in Persian with English abstract).

2. Blackshaw, R. E., Molnar, L. J., Muendel, H. H., Saindon, G., and Li. X. 2000. Integration of cropping practices and herbicides improves weed management in Dry Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Technology 14: 327-336.

3. Dimitri, C. 2008. USDA Economic research service. http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/organic/March 23, 2008.

4. Dogan, M. N., Unay, A., Boz, O., and Ogut, D. 2009. Effect of pre-sowing and pre-emergence glyphosate applications on weeds in stale seedbed cotton. Crop Protection 28: 503-507.

5. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2015. FAOSTAT. .http://faostat3.fao.org/home/index.html.

6. Gharineh, M. H., Ghassemi- Golezani, K., Bakhshandeh, A., Valizadeh, M., and Javanshir, A. 2004. Effects of seed density and seed quality of wheat cultivars on the growth and development of weeds. Agricultural Science 14 (2): 21-29. (in Persian with English abstract).

7. Gholi Beygian, M., Zarghami, R., Nasri, M., Zargari, K., and Seyedhadi, M. 2010. Effect of plant density and N-fertilizer on radiation use efficiency and extinction coefficient in milk thistle (Silybum marianum) as a medicinal plant. Journal dynamic agriculture 1: 1-12. (in Persian with English abstract).

8. Gopinath, K. A., Kumar, N., Mina, B. L., Srivastva, A. K., Gupta, H. S. 2008. Evaluation of mulching, stale seedbed, hand weeding and hoeing for weed control in organic garden pea (Pisum sativum sub sp. Hortens L.). Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 55: 115-123.

9. Hassazadeh, M. 2002. Designing the ideal type of wheat in competition with weed. PhD thesis, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch of Tehran.

10. Khajehpoor, M. R. 2003. Principles of Agriculture. Second edition. Jihad Daneshgahi Press. Technology University of Isfahan. 386 p.

11. Khazaei, H., Teymoori, M. S., and Najafi, F. 2007. Assessing effect of different irrigation regimes and seed density on yield, yield component and quality of isabgol (Plantago ovate). Iranian Field Crops Researches 5: 77-84. (in Persian with English abstract).

12. Kristensen L., Olsen, J., and Weiner, J. 2008. Crop density, sowing pattern, and nitrogen fertilization effects on weed suppression and yield in spring wheat. Weed Science 56: 97-102.

13. Lonsbary, S. K., O'Sullivan, J., and Swanton, C. J. 2003. Stale-seedbed as a weed management alternative for machine-harvested cucumbers (Cucumis sativus). Weed Technology 17 (4): 724-730.

14. Malek- Maleki, F., N. Majnonhoseini, and H. Alizade. 2013. A survey on the effects of weed control treatments and plant density on lentil growth and yield. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 6: 135-148. (in Persian with English abstract).

15. Monaco, T. J., Weller, S. C., and Ashton, F. M. 2002. Weed Science: principles and practices, 4th edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.

16. Mortimer, M. 1997. The need for studies on weed ecology to improve weed management. Expert consolation on weed ecology and management. F.A.O. Report.

17. Nabavi kalat, S. M., Karimi, M., Noormohammadi Gh., Sadrabadi, R., and Aziz. M. 2005. Determination of Suitable Planting Date and Plant Population in Autumn Cultivation of Safflowers in Jovain–Sabzevar. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 11: 154-156. (in Persian with English abstract).

18. Nelson, D. W., and Sommers, L. E. 1973. Determination of total nitrogen in plant material. Agronomy Journal 65: 109-112.

19. Ozoni-Davaji, A., Esfahani, M., Sami Zadeh, H., and Rabiei, M. 2008. Effect of planting pattern and plant density on growth indices and radiation use efficiency of apetalous and petalled flowers rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Iranian Journal of Crop Science 4: 382-400. (in Persian with English abstract).

20. Parvaneh, B., Chitband, A., Zeidali, E., and Siahfar, M. 2013. Evaluation of seeding rate on forage and grain yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in dual purpose cultivation in Khorramabad. Cereal Research 3: 83-94. (in Persian with English abstract).

21. Rastegar, M. A. 1999. Weed and controlling methods. Academic publishing press. 413 p.

22. Riemens, M. M., Van Der Weide, R. Y., Bleeker, P. O., and Lotz, L. A. P. 2007. Effect of stale seedbed preparations and subsequent weed control in lettuce (cv. Iceboll) on weed densities. Weed Research 47: 149-156.

23. Sadeghi, M., and Miri, H. R. 2014. Evaluation of different level of cholromeqat cholorid (CCC) and plant density on lodging control in bread wheat. Journal of Plant Ecophysiology 19: 30-44. (in Persian with English abstract).

24. Shakarami, Gh., Zeidali, E., and Musavi, K. 2010. Weed control. Islamic Azad University, Khorram Abad branch press. 211 p.

25. Siadat, S. A., and Noormohammadi, Gh. 2001. Cereal. Shahid Chamran Ahvaz press. 389 p.

26. Torabi-Jefroodi A., Fayaz Moghaddam. A., and Hasanzadeh Ghoort Tapeh. A. 2005. An Investigation of the Effect of Plant Population Density on Yield and its Components in Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science 36: 25-34. (in Persian with English abstract).

27. Walker, S. R., Medd, R. W., Robinson, G. R., and Cullis, B. R. 2002. Improved management of Avena ludoviciana and Phalaris paradoxawith more densely sown wheat and less herbicide. Weed Research 42: 257-270.

28. Yousefi, A. R., and Peri, M. A. 2015. Use of false seedbed and reduced doses of imazethapyr for weed management in common bean (Phaseolus vulgari L.). Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 6: 108-116. (in Persian with English abstract).

29. Zand, E. 2000. Study the physiological characteristics of Iranian wheat cultivars as morphology, physiology, competition within and between species. Agronomy PhD thesis. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

30. Zand, E., Baghestani, M. A., and Mighani, F. 2009. Sustainable management of weeds. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Press. 453 p.

31. Zeidali, E., Azadbakht, N., and Musavi, K. 2007. Restrictions of the herbicides application, biological control valve to sustainable agriculture. Conference on sustainability management technology, production, supply and consumption of agricultural inputs, Tehran. (in Persian with English abstract).