Paper · 1975 · Weed Research

The control of wild oats in wheat by winter fallowing and summer cropping

H. PHILPOTTS

6
claims
10
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Summary: Résumé: Zusammenfassung The density of wild oats in subsequent wheat crops in the northern wheat belt of New South Wales, Australia was measured after 1, 2 and 3 years of winter fallowing and summer cropping. The effect of wild oat population on wheat establishment and yield was also measured. One winter fallow resulted in a 96·6% reduction (from 93·3 to 3·2 plants/m 2 ) in the wild oat population present in the subsequent wheat crop. Two consecutive winter fallows reduced the wild oat density to less than 0·2 plants/m 2 but a third year without wheat gave no additional decrease. Wheat establishment was only affected by very high wild oat densities. Wild oats reduced wheat yields by up to 77% and a highly significant negative relationship was found between wheat yield and wild oat density. La jachère hivernale et la récolte esticale, moyens de hitte contre la folle‐avoine dans le blè. La densité de la folle‐avoine dans des cultures de blé suivantes dans la région céréalière au nord de la Nouvelie Galle du Sud, en Australie, a été mesurée après une, deux ou trois années de jachère hivernale et de récolte estivale. L'effet de la population de folle‐avoine sur l'implantation du blé et sur son rendement a étéégalement évalué. Une jachère hivemale a provoqué une réduction de 96,6% (de 93,3 è 3,2 plantes au m 2 ) de la population de folle‐avoine présente dans la culture de blé suivante. Deux jachères hivernales consécutives ont réduit la densité de la folle‐avoine è moins de 0,2 plantes au m 2 , mais une troisième année sans blé n'a pas donné de diminution supplémentaire. L'implantation du blé a été affectée seulement par des densités trés élevées de folle‐avoine. La folle‐avoine a réduit les récoltes de blé dans des proportions allant jusquè 77% et une relation négative hautement significative a été constatée entre le rendement du blé et la densité de la folle‐avoine. Die Bekämpfung von Flughafer in Weizen durch Winterbrache und Anbau von Sommerung Es wurde die Besatzdichte von Flughafer bei aufeinanderfolgendem Weizenanbau in New South Wales. Australien, nach einem, zwei und drei Jahren Winterbrache und Anbau von SommtTung festgestellt. Desgleichen wurde die Aus‐wirkung des Flughaferbesalzes auf die Enlwicklung und den Ertrag des Weizens erfasst. Eine Winterbrache bewirkte einen Ruckgang des Flughafers im danach angebauten Weizen um 96·6% (von 93·3 auf 3·2 Pflanzen je m 2 ). Zwei Winterbrachen hinlereinander verminderlen den Besatz auf weniger als 0·2 Pflanzen je m 2 , aber ein drittes Jahr ohne Weizenanbau verursachte keinen weiteren Rückgang. Die Entwicklung des Weizens wurde nur bei sehr hohen Flughafcrdichten beein‐trächtigt. Flughafer verminderte die Weizenerlrage bis zu 77% und zwischen Weizenertrag und Flughaferdichte wurde eine hoch signifikante negative Korrelation festgestellt.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

One winter fallow reduced wild oat density by 96.6 percent.

Treatment
One winter fallowe0
Interactor
wild oate0weed
Outcome
wild oat populatione0
Direction
reductione0
Value
96·6%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wild oats in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–33 · show in text ↑
e0

“One winter fallow resulted in a 96·6% reduction (from 93·3 to 3·2 plants/m 2 ) in the wild oat population present in the subsequent wheat crop.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 304–447 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two consecutive fallows reduced wild oat density below 0.2 plants per square metre.

Treatment
Two consecutive winter fallowse0
Interactor
wild oate0weed
Outcome
wild oat densitye0
Direction
reducede0
Value
less than 0·2 plants/m 2e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wild oats in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–33 · show in text ↑
e0

“Two consecutive winter fallows reduced the wild oat density to less than 0·2 plants/m 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 448–535 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A third year without wheat gave no further wild oat density decrease.

Treatment
a third year without wheate0
Interactor
wild oatsAvenat0weed
Outcome
additional decreasee0
Direction
no additional decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Avena
Avena · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Sendelbach ( talk ) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wild oats in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–33 · show in text ↑
e0

“a third year without wheat gave no additional decrease.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 540–595 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat establishment was affected only at very high wild oat density.

Interactor
wild oate0weed
Outcome
Wheat establishmente0
Qualifier
very high wild oat densitiese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“wild oats in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–33 · show in text ↑
e0

“Wheat establishment was only affected by very high wild oat densities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 596–666 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wild oats reduced wheat yield by up to 77 percent.

Interactor
Wild oatsAvenae0weed
Outcome
wheat yieldse0
Direction
reducede0
Value
up to 77%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Avena
Avena · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Sendelbach ( talk ) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wild oats reduced wheat yields by up to 77%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–710 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield was significantly negatively related to wild oat density.

Interactor
wild oate0weed
Outcome
wheat yielde0
Direction
negativee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a highly significant negative relationship was found between wheat yield and wild oat density.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 715–809 · show in text ↑

rotation · pest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 9 positive, 9 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.