Abstract
Effective in-season weed management options are limited for organic cereal farmers. Two alternatives to current farmer practices are improving efficacy of physical weed control through use of interrow cultivation or increasing the competitive ability of the crop through elevated seeding rates and more uniform spatial planting patterns. It is unknown how these two methods affect yield, quality, and economic returns. Field experiments were conducted in the northeast United States to determine whether the yield gain from increased weed control from these contrasting weed management strategies resulted in increased net returns and how these different systems affected grain quality. Wheat was planted at two seeding rates (400 and 600 plants m −2 ), in three row spacings (11, 18, and 23 cm). A fourth crop arrangement that approaches a more uniform spatial distribution through a combination of drilling and broadcasting seed was included. For weed control, treatments received tine harrowing. Wheat sown in wide rows also received interrow cultivation. Each system was sown in the presence and absence of condiment mustard, which was sown as a surrogate weed. Increased seeding rate reduced weed density 64% compared to a crop-free check and 30% compared to regional farmers' practices of 18-cm rows and 400 plants m −2 . Increased seeding rates lowered grain protein 5% compared to standard seeding rates. Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivation, reduced weed density 62%, increased yield 16%, and net returns 19% compared to regional organic practices. Significant increases in grain N were limited to weed-free plots. While increased seeding rates improved weed suppression, the high input cost of organic seed make this an unsatisfactory alternative to interrow cultivation and current farmer practices, as yield would need to be. 15 t ha −1 higher at elevated density to offset the extra cost of seed.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Higher seeding rate reduced weed density 64% versus a crop free check.
- Taxon
- Spring Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- Increased seeding ratee0
- Outcome
- weed densitye0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 64%e0
- Comparator
- crop-free checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“Increased seeding rate reduced weed density 64% compared to a crop-free check”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher seeding rate reduced weed density 30% versus regional farmer practice.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Increased seeding ratee0
- Outcome
- weed densitye0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 30%e0
- Comparator
- regional farmers' practicese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“Increased seeding rate reduced weed density 64% compared to a crop-free check and 30% compared to regional farmers' practices of 18-cm rows and 400 plants m −2”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher seeding rate lowered grain protein 5% versus standard rate.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Increased seeding ratese0
- Outcome
- grain proteine0
- Direction
- lowerede0
- Value
- 5%e0
- Comparator
- standard seeding ratese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“Increased seeding rates lowered grain protein 5% compared to standard seeding rates”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide rows with interrow cultivation reduced weed density 62% versus regional organic practice.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivatione0
- Outcome
- weed densitye0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 62%e0
- Comparator
- regional organic practicese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivation, reduced weed density 62%, increased yield 16%, and net returns 19% compared to regional organic practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide rows with interrow cultivation increased yield 16%.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivatione0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 16%e0
- Comparator
- regional organic practicese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivation, reduced weed density 62%, increased yield 16%, and net returns 19% compared to regional organic practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide rows with interrow cultivation increased net returns 19%.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivatione0
- Outcome
- net returnse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 19%e0
- Comparator
- regional organic practicese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“Wide rows, in combination with interrow cultivation, reduced weed density 62%, increased yield 16%, and net returns 19% compared to regional organic practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Significant grain nitrogen increases were confined to weed free plots.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- grain Ne0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Qualifier
- weed-free plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“Significant increases in grain N were limited to weed-free plots”
Claim · model-written summary
High seed input costs made elevated seeding rates unsatisfactory versus interrow cultivation and current practice.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- elevated densitye0
- Outcome
- unsatisfactory alternativee0
- Value
- 15 t ha −1e0
- Comparator
- interrow cultivation and current farmer practicese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“the high input cost of organic seed make this an unsatisfactory alternative to interrow cultivation and current farmer practices, as yield would need to be. 15 t ha −1 higher at elevated density to offset the extra cost of seed”
The same questions in other papers
density · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →density · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
36 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 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.