Paper · 2000 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

Tillage, fertiliser and glyphosate timing effects on foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum) management in wheat

R. E. Blackshaw; G. Semach; X. Li; et al.

9
claims
15
verbatim quotes
35
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum L.) is becoming a more severe weed problem as conservation tillage becomes widely adopted on the southern Canadian prairies. A 5-yr field study was conducted to determine the combined effects of tillage, N rate, N placement and application timing of glyphosate to manage foxtail barley in spring wheat. Wide-blade tillage conducted in fall and spring, compared to zero-till, reduced foxtail barley biomass and seed production in all yr and increased wheat yield in 4 of 5 yr. Foxtail barley was highly competitive with wheat for added N. N fertiliser placed mid-row in 10-cm-deep bands reduced foxtail barley growth in 2 of 5 yr and increased wheat yield in 3 of 5 yr compared with soil surface broadcast N. Wheat yield sometimes was similar when N was banded at 60 kg ha −1 or broadcast at 120 kg ha −1 , indicating the large advantage of banding N in some situations. Glyphosate at 800 g ha −1 applied preharvest or postharvest gave similar levels of foxtail barley control in 2 of 3 yr. Results indicate that foxtail barley can be adequately managed in wheat production systems utilizing conservation tillage. Key words: Foxtail barley, Hordeum jubatum, glyphosate, integrated weed management, nitrogen placement, zero tillage

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fall and spring wide-blade tillage reduced foxtail barley biomass versus zero tillage.

Treatment
Wide-blade tillage conducted in fall and springe0
Interactor
foxtail barleyHordeum jubatume0weed
Outcome
foxtail barley biomasse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
zero-tille0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Hordeum jubatum
Hordeum jubatum · InteractorAndré Karwath aka Aka · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wide-blade tillage conducted in fall and spring, compared to zero-till, reduced foxtail barley biomass”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–437 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fall and spring wide-blade tillage reduced foxtail barley seed production.

Treatment
Wide-blade tillagee0
Interactor
foxtail barleyHordeum jubatume0weed
Outcome
seed productione0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
zero-tille0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Hordeum jubatum
Hordeum jubatum · InteractorAndré Karwath aka Aka · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wide-blade tillage conducted in fall and spring, compared to zero-till, reduced foxtail barley biomass and seed production in all yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–467 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage increased wheat yield in four of five years.

Treatment
Wide-blade tillagee0
Outcome
wheat yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
4 of 5 yre0
Comparator
zero-tille0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wide-blade tillage conducted in fall and spring, compared to zero-till, reduced foxtail barley biomass and seed production in all yr and increased wheat yield in 4 of 5 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–506 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foxtail barley competed strongly with wheat for added nitrogen.

Interactor
Foxtail barleyHordeum jubatume0weed
Outcome
highly competitivee0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Hordeum jubatum
Hordeum jubatum · InteractorAndré Karwath aka Aka · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Foxtail barley was highly competitive with wheat for added N”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 508–568 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mid-row banded nitrogen reduced foxtail barley growth in two of five years versus surface broadcast nitrogen.

Treatment
N fertiliser placed mid-row in 10-cm-deep bandse0
Interactor
foxtail barleyHordeum jubatume0weed
Outcome
foxtail barley growthe0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
soil surface broadcast Ne2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Hordeum jubatum
Hordeum jubatum · InteractorAndré Karwath aka Aka · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“N fertiliser placed mid-row in 10-cm-deep bands reduced foxtail barley growth in 2 of 5 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 570–660 · show in text ↑
e1

“in spring wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 318–333 · show in text ↑
e2

“compared with soil surface broadcast N”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 700–738 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mid-row banded nitrogen increased wheat yield in three of five years.

Treatment
N fertiliser placed mid-row in 10-cm-deep bandse1
Outcome
wheat yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
soil surface broadcast Ne0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“increased wheat yield in 3 of 5 yr compared with soil surface broadcast N”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 665–738 · show in text ↑
e1

“N fertiliser placed mid-row in 10-cm-deep bands”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 570–617 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield was sometimes similar for 60 kg ha−1 banded versus 120 kg ha−1 broadcast nitrogen.

Treatment
N was banded at 60 kg ha −1e0
Outcome
Wheat yielde0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
broadcast at 120 kg ha −1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wheat yield sometimes was similar when N was banded at 60 kg ha −1 or broadcast at 120 kg ha −1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 740–835 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preharvest and postharvest glyphosate gave similar foxtail barley control in two of three years.

Treatment
Glyphosate at 800 g ha −1 applied preharveste0
Interactor
foxtail barleyHordeum jubatume0weed
Outcome
foxtail barley controle0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
postharveste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Hordeum jubatum
Hordeum jubatum · InteractorAndré Karwath aka Aka · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Glyphosate at 800 g ha −1 applied preharvest or postharvest gave similar levels of foxtail barley control in 2 of 3 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 902–1020 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 100–105 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Foxtail barley can be adequately managed under conservation tillage in wheat.

Interactor
foxtail barleyHordeum jubatume0weed
Outcome
adequately managede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Hordeum jubatum
Hordeum jubatum · InteractorAndré Karwath aka Aka · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“foxtail barley can be adequately managed in wheat production systems utilizing conservation tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1044–1143 · show in text ↑

glyphosate · Hordeum jubatum · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

1,414 papers: 1,116 positive, 298 negative or no effect

1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

1,410 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 papers →

fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

3,434 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.