Cropping system effects on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) demography: II. Retrospective perturbation analysis

Abstract Cropping system characteristics affect weed management by altering key demographic rates of weeds, including recruitment, seedling survival, fecundity, and seed survival. To facilitate the design and improvement of cropping systems that limit weed population growth, analytical methods are needed to identify weed management “choke points” (weed life stages that vary in response to management and whose variation strongly affects weed population growth rate). The objectives of this study were to (1) determine whether wheat–red clover green manure can limit giant foxtail population growth rate (λ) in a wheat–corn–soybean crop sequence and (2) identify choke points in the giant foxtail life cycle with respect to the green manure treatment. Demographic data were used to construct a periodic matrix model of giant foxtail population growth in a wheat–corn–soybean crop sequence, with either a wheat sole crop (W) or a wheat–red clover intercrop (R) in the wheat phase. Identification of choke points was accomplished by adapting the life-table response experiment (LTRE) design for retrospective perturbation analysis of the periodic matrix model. The difference in λ (Δλ) between the two treatments was decomposed into contributions from each parameter in each rotation phase of the periodic model. Each LTRE contribution was equal to the product of the sensitivity of λ to changes in a given parameter by the treatment difference in that parameter. Those parameters making large contributions to Δλ represented weed management choke points. Giant foxtail population growth rate in the simulation was more than twice as great in the W treatment (λ = 2.54) than in the R treatment (λ = 1.16). Retrospective perturbation analysis indicated that the proportion of seeds surviving predation in the wheat phase made the largest LTRE contribution (0.55) to Δλ, followed by seedling recruitment in the soybean (0.41) and corn (0.20) phases. By identifying weed management choke points within a given system, retrospective perturbation analysis can target research and management efforts for greater reductions in weed population growth. Nomenclature: Giant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm. SETFA; corn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3512’; red clover, Trifolium pratense L. ‘Cherokee’; soybean, Glycine max L. ‘IA 2039’; spring wheat, Triticum aestivum L. ‘Sharp’.

[1]  K. Gross,et al.  Experimental studies of seed predation in old-fields , 1984, Oecologia.

[2]  Douglas A. Landis,et al.  Post-dispersal weed seed predation in Michigan crop fields as a function of agricultural landscape structure. , 2000 .

[3]  Hal Caswell,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis of Periodic Matrix Models , 1994 .

[4]  Clarence J. Swanton,et al.  Influence of tillage and crop residue on postdispersal predation of weed seeds , 1999, Weed Science.

[5]  J. González-Andújar,et al.  Modelling the population dynamics of Avena sterilis under dry-land cereal cropping systems , 1991 .

[6]  Nicholas R. Jordan,et al.  Weed Prevention: Priority Research for Alternative Weed Management , 1996 .

[7]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[8]  Jeffrey L. Gunsolus,et al.  Integrated Weed Management Techniques to Reduce Herbicide Inputs in Soybean , 1992 .

[9]  D. O. Logofet.  Matrix Population Models: Construction, Analysis, and Interpretation , 2002 .

[10]  M. Liebman,et al.  Nitrogen source influences wild mustard growth and competitive effect on sweet corn , 2001, Weed Science.

[11]  Matt Liebman,et al.  Effects of red clover (Trifolium pratense) green manure and compost soil amendments on wild mustard (Brassica kaber) growth and incidence of disease , 2004, Plant and Soil.

[12]  Jerry D. Doll,et al.  Integrating Reduced Herbicide Use with Mechanical Weeding in Corn (Zea mays) , 1993, Weed Technology.

[13]  Matt Liebman,et al.  Cropping system effects on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) demography: I. Green manure and tillage timing , 2003, Weed Science.

[14]  J. Goudriaan,et al.  Design of weed management systems with a reduced reliance on herbicides poses new challenges and prerequisites for modeling crop–weed interactions , 2000 .

[15]  L. Wiles,et al.  A New Soil Sampler and Elutriator for Collecting and Extracting Weed Seeds from Soil , 1996, Weed Technology.

[16]  F. Forcella,et al.  Limiting Green and Yellow Foxtail (Setaria viridis and S. glauca) Seed Production Following Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Harvest , 1999, Weed Technology.

[17]  H. Caswell.  PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE PERTURBATION ANALYSES: THEIR ROLES IN CONSERVATION BIOLOGY , 2000 .

[18]  J. Heesterbeek,et al.  WEED POPULATIONS AND CROP ROTATIONS: EXPLORING DYNAMICS OF A STRUCTURED PERIODIC SYSTEM , 2002 .

[19]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model Selection and Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach , 2001 .

[20]  M. Liebman,et al.  9 – Many Little Hammers: Ecological Management of Crop-Weed Interactions , 1997 .

[21]  R. Hartzler,et al.  Emergence and persistence of seed of velvetleaf, common waterhemp, woolly cupgrass, and giant foxtail , 2001, Weed Science.

[22]  H. de Kroon,et al.  Effects of fine‐scale disturbances on the demography and population dynamics of the clonal moss Hylocomium splendens , 2001 .

[23]  D. Stoltenberg,et al.  Response of Setaria faberi demographic processes to herbicide rates , 2000, Weed Science.

[24]  A. Davis.  Cropping system effects on giant foxtail demography , 2002 .

[25]  David A. Mortensen,et al.  Simulation analysis of crop rotation effects on weed seedbanks. , 1995 .