About Us | Help Videos | Contact Us | Subscriptions
 

Abstract

 

This article in AJ

  1. Vol. 98 No. 1, p. 107-119
     
    Received: June 6, 2005


    * Corresponding author(s): harkerk@agr.gc.ca
 View
 Download
 Alerts
 Permissions
Request Permissions
 Share

doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0168

Persistence of Glyphosate-Resistant Canola in Western Canadian Cropping Systems

  1. K. N. Harker *a,
  2. G. W. Claytona,
  3. R. E. Blackshawb,
  4. J. T. O'Donovanc,
  5. E. N. Johnsond,
  6. Y. Gane,
  7. F. A. Holmf,
  8. K. L. Sapsfordf,
  9. R. B. Irvineg and
  10. R. C. Van Ackerh
  1. a Agric. and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), Lacombe Res. Center, 6000 C&E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
    b AAFC, Lethbridge Res. Center, Box 3000, Lethbridge, AB, Canada T1J 4B1
    c AAFC, Beaverlodge Exp. Farm, Box 29, Beaverlodge, AB, Canada T0H 0C0
    d AAFC, Scott Res. Farm, Box 10, Scott, SK, Canada S0K 4A0
    e AAFC, Semiarid Prairie Agric. Res. Center, Box 1030, Swift Current, SK, Canada S9H 3X2
    f Dep. of Plant Sci., Univ. of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 5A8
    g AAFC, Brandon Res. Center, Box 1000A, R.R. 3, Brandon, MB, Canada R7A 5Y3
    h Dep. of Plant Sci., Univ. of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3T 2N2. Lacombe Res. Centre Paper no. 1080

Abstract

Canola (Brassica napus L.) is the most important oilseed crop in western Canada. Its prevalence across the Canadian Prairies influences the occurrence and impact of canola volunteers as weeds. Here we determined the persistence of canola seed in cropping systems so effective volunteer management strategies can be developed. In mid- to late-October of 2000, approximately 770 seeds m−2 of glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine]–resistant (GR) canola were scattered on plot areas at seven western Canadian sites. From 2001 to 2003 the plots were seeded to a wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)–field pea (Pisum sativum L.)–barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) rotation or a fallow–field pea–fallow rotation in five different seeding systems involving seeding dates and soil disturbance levels, and monitored four times each year for canola plant density. Crop seeding date did not consistently influence volunteer canola density. With some exceptions, higher levels of soil disturbance led to higher volunteer canola densities. The vast majority of canola seedlings were recruited in the year following seed dispersal (2001). Across all locations, rotations, and seeding systems, and averaged over preplanting (PREP) and in-crop prespray (PRES) intervals, canola densities were 6.2, 0.7, and 0.0 plants m−2 in 2001, 2002, and 2003, respectively. Canola volunteers were usually most abundant at PREP and PRES intervals; total recruitment at those intervals averaged across all seeding systems in the continuous cropping rotation was 3% (25 plants m−2). Preventing seed production in new canola volunteers in 2001 reduced canola densities in subsequent years (2002 and 2003) below those required to mitigate weed–crop competition influences in most crops.

  Please view the pdf by using the Full Text (PDF) link under 'View' to the left.

Copyright © 2006. American Society of AgronomyAmerican Society of Agronomy