33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A review of the potential for competitive cereal cultivars as a tool in integrated weed management

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Competitive crop cultivars offer a potentially cheap option to include in integrated weed management strategies ( IWM). Although cultivars with high competitive potential have been identified amongst cereal crops, competitiveness has not traditionally been considered a priority for breeding or farmer cultivar choice. The challenge of managing herbicide‐resistant weed populations has, however, renewed interest in cultural weed control options, including competitive cultivars. We evaluated the current understanding of the traits that explain variability in competitive ability between cultivars, the relationship between suppression of weed neighbours and tolerance of their presence and the existence of trade‐offs between competitive ability and yield in weed‐free scenarios. A large number of relationships between competitive ability and plant traits have been reported in the literature, including plant height, speed of development, canopy architecture and partitioning of resources. There is uncertainty over the relationship between suppressive ability and tolerance, although tolerance is a less stable trait over seasons and locations. To realise the potential of competitive crop cultivars as a tool in IWM, a quick and simple‐to‐use protocol for assessing the competitive potential of new cultivars is required; it is likely that this will not be based on a single trait, but will need to capture the combined effect of multiple traits. A way needs to be found to make this information accessible to farmers, so that competitive cultivars can be better integrated into their weed control programmes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Why have no new herbicide modes of action appeared in recent years?

          Herbicides with new modes of action are badly needed to manage the evolution of resistance of weeds to existing herbicides. Yet no major new mode of action has been introduced to the market place for about 20 years. There are probably several reasons for this. New potential products may have remained dormant owing to concerns that glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops have reduced the market for a new herbicide. The capture of a large fraction of the herbicide market by glyphosate with GR crops led to significantly diminished herbicide discovery efforts. Some of the reduced herbicide discovery research was also due to company consolidations and the availability of more generic herbicides. Another problem might be that the best herbicide molecular target sites may have already been discovered. However, target sites that are not utilized, for which there are inhibitors that are highly effective at killing plants, suggests that this is not true. Results of modern methods of target site discovery (e.g. gene knockout methods) are mostly not public, but there is no evidence of good herbicides with new target sites coming from these approaches. In summary, there are several reasons for a long dry period for new herbicide target sites; however, the relative magnitude of each is unclear. The economic stimulus to the herbicide industry caused by the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds, especially GR weeds, may result in one or more new modes of action becoming available in the not too distant future. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Breeding cereal crops for enhanced weed suppression: optimizing allelopathy and competitive ability.

            Interest in breeding grain crops with improved weed suppressive ability is growing in response to the evolution and rapid expansion of herbicide resistant populations in major weeds of economic importance, environmental concerns, and the unmet needs of organic producers and smallholder farmers without access to herbicides. This review is focused on plant breeding for weed suppression; specifically, field and laboratory screening protocols, genetic studies, and breeding efforts that have been undertaken to improve allelopathy and competition in rice, wheat, and barley. The combined effects of allelopathy and competition determine the weed suppressive potential of a given cultivar, and research groups worldwide have been working to improve both traits simultaneously to achieve maximum gains in weed suppression. Both allelopathy and competitive ability are complex, quantitatively inherited traits that are heavily influenced by environmental factors. Thus, good experimental design and sound breeding procedures are essential to achieve genetic gains. Weed suppressive rice cultivars are now commercially available in the U.S. and China that have resulted from three decades of research. Furthermore, a strong foundation has been laid during the past 10 years for the breeding of weed suppressive wheat and barley cultivars.
              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Journal
              Weed Res
              Weed Res
              10.1111/(ISSN)1365-3180
              WRE
              Weed Research
              John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
              0043-1737
              1365-3180
              26 January 2015
              June 2015
              : 55
              : 3 ( doiID: 10.1111/wre.2015.55.issue-3 )
              : 239-248
              Affiliations
              [ 1 ] Department of AgroecologyRothamsted Research Harpenden HertfordshireUK
              [ 2 ]University of Nottingham Sutton Bonington LeicestershireUK
              [ 3 ]WUR the Netherlands
              Author notes
              [*] [* ] Correspondence: Izzadora Andrew, Department of Agroecology, Rothamsted Research, West Common, Harpenden, Hertfordshire AL5 2JQ, UK. Tel: (+44) 1582 763133; Fax: (+44) 1582 760981; E‐mail: izzadora.andrew@ 123456rothamsted.ac.uk
              Article
              WRE12137
              10.1111/wre.12137
              4950144
              27478257
              8495b852-b6a4-4a17-bbcd-1f400960e47c
              © 2015 The Authors. Weed Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Weed Research Society.

              This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

              History
              : 15 April 2014
              : 18 November 2014
              Page count
              Pages: 10
              Funding
              Funded by: UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC)
              Funded by: Home Grown Cereals Authority (HGCA)
              Funded by: BBSRC
              Categories
              Review Paper
              Review Papers
              Custom metadata
              2.0
              wre12137
              June 2015
              Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:4.9.2 mode:remove_FC converted:19.07.2016

              cultural weed control,plant functional traits,suppression,tolerance

              Comments

              Comment on this article