Finger-Harrowing of Durum Wheat under Different Tillage Systems

ABSTRACT The effect of finger-harrowing (FH) on weed control and yield of durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf) grown under conventional tillage (CT) or no-tillage (NT) was studied in 1995–96. Mechanical weeding—eight combinations between four tine adjustments and two treatment intensities (one or two passes)—was compared with post-emergence herbicide spraying and an unweeded control. Tine working depth was higher in CT than in NT due to lower soil dry bulk density, and increased with the theoretical aggressiveness of tine adjustments, but its correlation with short- and long-term effects on crop and weeds overall was poor, suggesting that tine adjustment was not a major factor involved. In 1995, durum wheat grain yield in FH was very low, because of high weed development in both tillage systems. In 1996, lower weed pressure resulted in FH grain yield, on average 3982 kg ha−1 for CT and 2809 kg ha−1 for NT, comparable with that obtained with herbicides. Durum wheat grain yield and weed biomass were much more affected by tillage system than by tine adjustment or harrowing intensity, and seemed mostly dependent on the lower crop competitive ability in NT, caused by reduced emergence, higher weed abundance and presence of aggressive weed species, Ammi majus in 1995 and Lolium multiflorum in 1996. Dependence of FH effect upon soil and weed conditions encountered seasonally in the two tillage systems suggests that, in low-input durum wheat, mechanical methods alone would not always guarantee adequate weed control and grain yield.

[1]  Mary Ann Sprague,et al.  No-tillage and surface-tillage agriculture: the tillage revolution: John Wiley & Sons , 1986 .

[2]  Jesper Rasmussen,et al.  Testing harrows for mechanical control of annual weeds in agricultural crops , 1992 .

[3]  R. Froud-Williams,et al.  Potential changes in weed floras associated with reduced-cultivation Systems for cereal production in temperate regions , 1981 .

[4]  J. Rasmussen,et al.  Weed control in organic farming systems. , 1995 .

[5]  J. Zadoks A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals , 1974 .

[6]  R. Hartzler,et al.  On-Farm Evaluation of Mechanical and Chemical Weed Management Practices in Corn (Zea mays) , 1993, Weed Technology.

[7]  J. Frisch,et al.  Integrating Mechanical and Chemical Weed Management in Corn (Zea mays) , 1994, Weed Technology.

[8]  A. Bohrnsen,et al.  Several years results about mechanical weeding in cereals , 1994 .

[9]  H. Bleiholder,et al.  Use of the extended BBCH scale—general for the descriptions of the growth stages of mono; and dicotyledonous weed species , 1997 .

[10]  Jerry D. Doll,et al.  Integrating mechanical weeding with reduced herbicide use in conservation tillage corn production systems , 1995 .

[11]  R. Butler,et al.  The effect of different frequencies of harrowing in the autumn or spring on winter wheat, and on the control of Stellaria media (L.) vill., Galium aparine L. and Brassica napus L. , 1993 .

[12]  M. L. Leblanc,et al.  Réduction de ľutilisation des herbicides dans le maïs-grain par une application ?herbicides en bandes combinée à des sarclages mécaniques , 1995 .

[13]  Torbjörn Rydberg,et al.  Weed Harrowing—the Influence of Driving Speed and Driving Direction on Degree of Soil Covering and the Growth of Weed and Crop Plants , 1994 .

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