Claim · model-written summary
M. chamomilla was more sensitive to biochemical effects of cover crops than other tested weeds.
Verbatim
e0“Das Unkraut M. chamomilla wies eine erhöhte Empfindlichkeit gegenüber den biochemischen Effekten dieser Zwischenfrüchte im Vergleich zu den anderen getesteten Unkräutern auf.”
e1“Zuckerrüben”
Title
Cover cropping in integrated weed management
Dominic J. Sturm University writing server of the University of Hohenheim (University of Hohenheim) 2018
Other claims from this paper (13)
- Intervention effect Cover crop mixtures controlled weeds more effectively than single species.
- Mechanism Mixtures had more stable and greater biomass, contributing to better weed suppression.
- Observation Allelopathic substances were detected in cover crops.
- Intervention effect Altering cover crop sowing time and fertilization significantly affected weed and cover crop biomass.
- Intervention effect Early cover crop sowing five and three weeks before wheat harvest significantly improved weed control in one year.
- Intervention effect Spring cover crop mulch suppressed up to 83% of weeds.
- Intervention effect Mixture mulch suppressed weed density by 56% on average.
- Intervention effect Cover crops, mulch and undersowing significantly reduced herbicide use in the main crop.
- Observation Five named cover crop extracts had the strongest weed growth inhibition.
- Association Laboratory growth inhibition and field weed suppression were strongly positively correlated.
- Intervention effect Activated carbon changed the competitive weed suppressive effect of cover crops.
- Observation Specific cover crops had effects on particular weed species.
- Recommendation The authors conclude that chemical or mechanical control remains necessary, especially for sugar beet.
Triticum aestivum
Matricaria chamomilla