Paper · 2018 · Weed Technology

Rolled Winter Rye–Hairy Vetch Cover Crops for Weed Control in No-till Pumpkin

David Miville; Gilles D. Leroux

8
claims
14
verbatim quotes
15
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Weed control is a challenging aspect of pumpkin production. Winter rye mulches may offer growers a means to manage weeds in pumpkin; however, rye degradation leads to an immobilization of soil nitrogen. Combining winter rye with a nitrogen fixing legume such as hairy vetch is an interesting option that may solve this problem. Twelve combinations including three hairy vetch seeding rates, two termination dates and the use or not of glyphosate before rolling cover crops were studied during the 2013 and 2014 growing seasons at the Laval University Agronomic Station in Saint-Augustin-de-Desmaures, Quebec, Canada to evaluate weed control and effects on pumpkin production. Adding hairy vetch to winter rye provided no benefits because of severe winterkill of the legume. Using glyphosate was necessary to prevent rye regrowth. Pumpkin growth was better and yields were higher than in the plots were no glyphosate was used. Mulches established at flowering (Zadoks 69) provided about 2,000 kg ha −1 more aboveground dry biomass than at early heading (Zadoks 51). This high biomass was essential in glyphosate treated plots in order to maintain excellent weed control throughout the growing season. When compared with the no-mulch weed-free control, yield in Zadoks 69+glyphosate treatment was lower in 2013 but comparable in 2014.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adding hairy vetch to winter rye gave no benefit because of winterkill.

Taxon
pumpkint0
Treatment
Adding hairy vetch to winter ryee0
Interactor
hairy vetchVicia villosae0weed
Outcome
no benefitse0
Direction
no benefitse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vicia villosa
Vicia villosa · InteractorNo machine-readable author provided. Fabelfroh assumed (based on copyright claims). · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Adding hairy vetch to winter rye provided no benefits because of severe winterkill of the legume.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 685–782 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pumpkin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–77 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glyphosate prevented rye regrowth.

Taxon
Pumpkint0
Treatment
glyphosatee0
Interactor
ryeSecale cerealee0weed
Outcome
rye regrowthe0
Direction
prevente0

Not reportedComparator

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

Secale cereale
Secale cereale · InteractorLSDSL · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Using glyphosate was necessary to prevent rye regrowth.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 783–838 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pumpkin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–77 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pumpkin growth improved with glyphosate relative to no glyphosate.

Taxon
Pumpkine0
Treatment
glyphosatee0
Outcome
Pumpkin growthe0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
no glyphosatee0

Verbatim

e0

“Pumpkin growth was better and yields were higher than in the plots were no glyphosate was used.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 839–934 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pumpkin yields were higher with glyphosate than without.

Taxon
Pumpkine0
Treatment
glyphosatee0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
no glyphosatee0

Verbatim

e0

“Pumpkin growth was better and yields were higher than in the plots were no glyphosate was used.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 839–934 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flowering-stage mulch supplied about 2,000 kg ha −1 more biomass than early-heading mulch.

Taxon
Pumpkint0
Treatment
flowering (Zadoks 69)e0
Outcome
aboveground dry biomasse0
Direction
moree0
Value
2,000 kg ha −1e0
Comparator
early heading (Zadoks 51)e0

Verbatim

e0

“Mulches established at flowering (Zadoks 69) provided about 2,000 kg ha −1 more aboveground dry biomass than at early heading (Zadoks 51).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 935–1073 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pumpkin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–77 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High mulch biomass maintained excellent weed control in glyphosate-treated plots.

Taxon
Pumpkint0
Treatment
glyphosatee0
Outcome
excellent weed controle0
Qualifier
throughout the growing seasone0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“This high biomass was essential in glyphosate treated plots in order to maintain excellent weed control throughout the growing season.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1074–1208 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pumpkin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–77 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zadoks 69 plus glyphosate yielded less than the weed-free control in 2013.

Taxon
Pumpkint0
Treatment
Zadoks 69+glyphosate treatmente0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
lowere0
Qualifier
2013e0
Comparator
no-mulch weed-free controle0

Verbatim

e0

“When compared with the no-mulch weed-free control, yield in Zadoks 69+glyphosate treatment was lower in 2013 but comparable in 2014.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1209–1341 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pumpkin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–77 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zadoks 69 plus glyphosate yield was comparable to the weed-free control in 2014.

Taxon
Pumpkint0
Treatment
Zadoks 69+glyphosate treatmente0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
comparablee0
Qualifier
2014e0
Comparator
no-mulch weed-free controle0

Verbatim

e0

“When compared with the no-mulch weed-free control, yield in Zadoks 69+glyphosate treatment was lower in 2013 but comparable in 2014.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1209–1341 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pumpkin”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–77 · show in text ↑

glyphosate · yield · Cucurbita (pumpkins)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

glyphosate · growth · Cucurbita (pumpkins)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

glyphosate · Secale cereale · Cucurbita (pumpkins)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

stage · growth · Cucurbita (pumpkins)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.