Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2015 Jun;55(3):239-248.
doi: 10.1111/wre.12137. Epub 2015 Jan 26.

A review of the potential for competitive cereal cultivars as a tool in integrated weed management

Affiliations
Review

A review of the potential for competitive cereal cultivars as a tool in integrated weed management

I K S Andrew et al. Weed Res. 2015 Jun.

Abstract

Competitive crop cultivars offer a potentially cheap option to include in integrated weed management strategies (IWM). Although cultivars with high competitive potential have been identified amongst cereal crops, competitiveness has not traditionally been considered a priority for breeding or farmer cultivar choice. The challenge of managing herbicide-resistant weed populations has, however, renewed interest in cultural weed control options, including competitive cultivars. We evaluated the current understanding of the traits that explain variability in competitive ability between cultivars, the relationship between suppression of weed neighbours and tolerance of their presence and the existence of trade-offs between competitive ability and yield in weed-free scenarios. A large number of relationships between competitive ability and plant traits have been reported in the literature, including plant height, speed of development, canopy architecture and partitioning of resources. There is uncertainty over the relationship between suppressive ability and tolerance, although tolerance is a less stable trait over seasons and locations. To realise the potential of competitive crop cultivars as a tool in IWM, a quick and simple-to-use protocol for assessing the competitive potential of new cultivars is required; it is likely that this will not be based on a single trait, but will need to capture the combined effect of multiple traits. A way needs to be found to make this information accessible to farmers, so that competitive cultivars can be better integrated into their weed control programmes.

Keywords: cultural weed control; plant functional traits; suppression; tolerance.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aerts R (1999) Interspecific competition in natural plant communities: mechanisms, trade‐offs and plant‐soil feedbacks. Journal of Experimental Botany 50, 29–37.
    1. Appleby AP, Olson PD & Colbert DR (1976) Winter‐wheat yield reduction from interference by Italian ryegrass. Agronomy Journal 68, 463–466.
    1. Auskalniene O, Psibisauskiene G, Auskalnis A & Kadzys A (2010) Cultivar and plant density influence on weediness in spring barley crops. Zemdirbyste‐Agriculture 97, 53–60.
    1. Bertholdsson NO (2005) Early vigour and allelopathy – two useful traits for enhanced barley and wheat competitiveness against weeds. Weed Research 45, 94–102.
    1. Bertholdsson NO (2011) Use of multivariate statistics to separate allelopathic and competitive factors influencing weed suppression ability in winter wheat. Weed Research 51, 273–283.

LinkOut - more resources