Interferences of common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. in two planting patterns of corn

Subject Areas : Agroecology Journal

Mahmoud Pouryousef ¹ , aziz javanshir ² , adel Dabbage Mohammadi Nasab ³ , abdollah Hasanzadeh Ghurt Tappe ⁴

1 - 1. Ph.D. Student of Agronomy, Islamic Azad University of Tehran, Science and Research Branch, and Scientific Board of Mahabad Branch.
2 - Associate Professor in Agronomy, Tabriz University.
3 - Assistant Professor in Agronomy, Tabriz University.
4 - Assistant Professor of Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Azarbayejan e Gharbi Province, Iran.

Received: 2008-11-06 Accepted : 2009-05-25 Published : 2009-08-23

Keywords: competition, corn, Zea mays, Interference, Chenopodium album, Planting patterns, Weed density, Common lambsquarters,

Abstract :

In order to study of eco-physiological aspects of interferences of different lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. densities in two planting patterns of single cross corn 704 and competitive effects of the weed on yield quality and quantity of corn, an experiment was conducted at Miyandoab agricultural research station from 2004 to 2005. The experimental design was factorial in a rondomized complete block design with three replications. The treatments were: a combination of three levels of lambsquarters population (4, 10, 16 plants per meter of corn row) and two planting patterns (common and two zigzag row) of corn. The treatments lacking corn weed in two planting patterns were considered as control. Seeds were planted on the sides and end of corn rows in zigzag between corn plants. Results showed that the competition of lambsquarters caused significant decrease in grain yield, biological yield and harvest index. Seed protein content of corn was decreased but seed oil content increased. The effects of weed density on studied characteristics of corn was greater than those of different planting patterns. Competitition of weed significantly decreased LAI in comparison to the control. This decrease was considerable in  higher weed densities. It was also greater in conventional planting pattern than two zigzag row planting pattern.

References:

1- اصغری، ج. و ا. محمودی. 1378. علف‏های هرز مهم در مزارع و مراتع ایران. انتشارات دانشگاه گیلان، 157ص.

2- اصغری، ج.، ش. امیرمرادی و ب. کامکار. 1380. فیزیولوژی علف‌های هرز (ترجمه). جلد اول : تولید مثل و اکوفیزیولوژی. انتشارات دانشگاه گیلان، 260 ص.

3- باغستانی میبدی، م. ع.،  ا. زند و م. آقابیگی .1385. تأثیر تراکم و زمان نسبی سبز شدن سلمه‌تره بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد ذرت دانه‌ای. مجله آفات و بیماری‏های گیاهی، 74 (1): 36-25.

4- بذرافشان، ف.، ق. فتحی، س. ع. سیادت، ا. آینه بند و خ. عالمی سعید. 1384. بررسی اثرات الگوی کاشت و تراکم بوته بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد ذرت شیرین. مجله علمی کشاورزی، 28 (2) : 126-117.

5- بی‏نام. 1384. آمار محصولات کشاورزی. مؤسسه فناوری اطلاعات و آمار وزارت جهاد کشاورزی، 1384.

6- سید شریفی، ر.، ع. جوانشیر، م. ر. شکیبا، ک. قاسمی گلعدانی و س. ا. محمدی. 1384. ارزیابی مراحل نموی ذرت متأثر از تراکم و دوره‌های مختلف تداخلی سورگوم. مجله دانش کشاورزی، 15 (3) : 56-45.

7- سید شریفی، ر.، ع. جوانشیر، م. شکیبا، ر. ک. قاسمی گلعدانی و س. ا. محمدی. 1385. آنالیز رشد ذرت متأثر از سطوح تراکم و دوره‌های مختلف تداخل سورگوم. مجله بیابان، 11(1): 156-143.

8- صابرعلی، س. ف.، س. ا. سادات نوری، ا. حجازی، ا. زند و م. ع. باغستانی میبدی. 1386. تأثیر تراکم و آرایش کاشت بر روند رشد و عملکرد ذرت تحت شرایط رقابت با سلمه‌تره. مجله پژوهش و سازندگی، 20 (1) : 152-143.

9- فاتح، ا.، ف. شریف‏زاده، د. مظاهری، م. ع. باغستانی میبدی. 1385. ارزیابی رقابت سلمه‌تره و الگوی کاشت ذرت روی عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد ذرت دانه‌ای سینگل کراس 704. مجله پژوهش و سازندگی، 19 (4): 95-87.

10- کهنسال، ا. و م. مجاب. 1385. بررسی اثر تنش رطوبتی بر علف هرز و عملکرد ذرت. مجله دانش کشاورزی، 15 (4): 92-86 .

11- محمودی، س. 1382. مطالعه اکوفیزیولوژیک رقابت بین ذرت و سلمه‌تره. رساله دکتری زراعت، دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تهران، 227 ص.

12- مظاهری، د. و م. آقا علیخانی. 1378. بوم‏شناسی گیاهان گرمسیری (ترجمه). انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، 506 ص.

13. Banman, D. T. 2001. Competitive suppression of weeds in a leek-celery intercropping system. Ph.D. Thesis. Wageningen Agricultural University. The Netherlands.

14. Buhler, D. D. 2002. Challenges and opportunities for integrated weed management. Weed Science 50:273-280.

15. Burrows, V. S., and Olsen, P. J. 1955. Reaction of small grain to various densities of wild mustard and the results obtained after their removal with 2-4-D or by hand, I. Experiments with wheat. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Science 35: 68-75.

16. Clarence, J., and Swanton, J. 2002. Determination of the critical period of weed interference in corn (Zea mays L.) and soybeans (Glycine max L.). Department of Crop Science, Ontario, Canada.

17. Corre-Hellou, G., and Crozat, Y. 2004. N₂ fixation and N supply in organic pea (Pisum sativum L.) cropping system as affected by weeds and pea weevil (Sitona lineatus L.). European Journal of Agronomy 22: 449-458.

18. Fischer, R. A., and Miles, R. E. 1973. The role of spatial pattern in the competition  between crop plants and weeds. a theoretical analysis. Math. Biology Science 18: 35.

19. Fryer, J. D. 1981. Weed control practices and changing weed problems, in: Thresh, J. M., (Ed.): Proceeding of Associated Applied Biology Conference: Pest, Pathogens and Vegetation, York, England, 403. 

20. Hall, M.C., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in corn (Zea mays L.). Weed Science 40: 441-447.

21. Hartley, M. J. 1992. Competition between three species and two crops. Proceedings of the I^st International weed control congress 2: 203-207.

22. Holm, L. G., Pluckett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The world's worst weeds. East-west center book, University press of Hawaii, Honolulu. P. 609.

23. Knezevic, S. Z., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994. Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Science 42: 568-573.

24. Kropff, M. J., and Lotz, L. A. P. 1992. System approaches to quantify crop-weed interactions and their application in weed management. Agricultural Systems 40: 265-282.

25. Lindqnist, J. L., Martensen, D. A., Clay, S. A., Schemenk, R., and Kells, J. J. 1996. Stability of corn (Zea mays), velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference relationships. Weed Science 44: 309-313.

26. Manthey, F. A., Harelaiid, G. A., Zollinger, R. K., and Hiiseby, D. J. 1996. Kochia (Kochia scoparia) interference with oat (Avena fatua). Weed Technology 10: 522-525.

27. Massinga, R. A., Currie, R. S. Horak, M. J., and Boyer, J. 2001. Interference of palmer amarabth in corn. Weed Science 49: 202-208.

28. Mc Mullan, P. M., Daun, J. K., and DeClercq, D. R. 1994. Effect of wild mustard (Brassica kaber) competition on yield and quality of triazine- tolerant and triazine-susceptible canola (Brassica napus and Brassica rapa), Canadian Journal of Plant Science 74: 369-374

29. Parker, C., and Fryer, J. D. 1975. Weed control problems causing major reduction in world food supplies. In: Levett, M. P. (ed.): effects of various hand weeding programs on yield and component of yield of sweet potato(Impoea batatas) grown in the tropical lowlands of pupua new guinea. Journal of Agricultural Science 118: 63-70

30. Radosovich,  S.  R. 1984.  Methods to study interactions among crops and weeds. Weed Technology. 1: 190-198.

31. Rafael. A. M., Randall, S. C., Michael, J. H., and John, B. J. 2001. Interference of palmer amaranth in corn. Weed Science 49: 202-208.

32. Sarkar, P. A., and Moody, K. 1983. Effects of stand esiablishment techniques on weed population in rice, in Proceeding of IRRIIIWSS Conference weed control in rice. Los Bafios, Philippines, 57.

33. Tollenaar, M. 1983. Potential vegetative productivity in Canada. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 63: 1-10.

34. Tollenaar, M., and Wu, J. 1999. Yield Improvement in temperate maize is attributable to greater stress tolerance. Crop Science 39: 1597-1604.

35. Tollenaar, M., Dibo, A. A., Aguilera, A., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994. Effect of crop density on weed interference in maize. Agronomy Journal 86: 591-595.

36. Tranel, T., Weaver, T. S., and Milberg, P. 2003. Interference by the weed Parthenium hysterophorus L. with grain sorghum: Influence of weed density and duration of competition. International Journal of Pest Management 48(3): 183-188.

37. Troyer. A. F. 1990. A retrospective view of corn genetic resources. Journal of Hered 81: 17-24

38. Van Gessel, M. J., and Renner, K. A. 1995. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus ) and bamyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galli) interference in potatoes (Solarium tuberosum). Weed Science 38: 338-343.

39. Walker, R. H., and Buchanan, G. A. 1982. Crop manipulation in integrated weed management systems, Weed Science 30: 17.