Response of Barley Genotypes to Weed Interference in Australia
Open accessAbstract
Weed-competitive genotypes could be an important tool in integrated weed management (IWM) practices. However, weed competitiveness is often not considered a priority for breeding high-yielding cultivars. Weed-competitive ability is often evaluated based on weed-suppressive ability (WSA) and weed-tolerance ability (WTA) parameters; however, there is little information on these aspects for barley genotypes in Australia. In this study, the effects of weed interference on eight barley genotypes were assessed. Two years of field experiments were performed in a split-plot design with three replications. Yield loss due to weed interference ranged from 43% to 78%. The weed yield amongst genotypes varied from 0.5 to 1.7 Mg ha−1. Relative yield loss due to weed interference was negatively correlated with WTA and WSA. A negative correlation was also found between WSA and weed seed production (r = −0.72). Similarly, a negative correlation was found between WTA and barley yield in the weedy environment (r = −0.91). The results suggest that a high tillering ability and plant height are desirable attributes for weed competitiveness in the barley genotypes. These results also demonstrated that among the eight barley genotypes, Commander exhibited superior WSA and WTA parameters and therefore, could be used in both low- and high-production systems for weed management. Westminster had a superior WSA parameter. Therefore, it could be used for weed management in organic production systems. These results also implied that genotypic ranking on the basis of WSA and WTA could be used as an important tool in strengthening IWM programs for barley.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Barley yield loss is estimated to range from 43% to 78% in Australia.
“Barley yield loss is estimated to range from 43% to 78% in Australia (Mahajan et al., 2020).”
From Genetic resources and precise gene editing for targeted improvement of barley abiotic stress tolerance (2023) · cites this paper as Mahajan et al., 2020
Wild oats, annual ryegrass, and flaxleaf fleabane are the common weeds in barley paddocks.
“Wild oats, annual ryegrass, and flaxleaf fleabane are the common weeds in barley paddocks (Mahajan et al., 2020), while ryegrass, wild radish, brome grass, and wild oats are reported to be among the costliest to control in Australia (Llewellyn et al., 2016).”
From Genetic resources and precise gene editing for targeted improvement of barley abiotic stress tolerance (2023) · cites this paper as Mahajan et al., 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
On the Adaptive Significance of Leaf Height in Forest Herbs
Givnish, T. J. (1982) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283995 · Cited by 468 · see citing works
The potential for selecting wheat varieties strongly competitive against weeds
Lemerle, D., Verbeek, B., Cousens, R. D., et al. (1996) · Weed Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.1996.tb01679.x · Cited by 368 · see citing works
Effects of Different Resource Additions of Species Diversity in an Annual Plant Community
Goldberg, D. E., & Miller, T. E. (1990) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1940261 · Cited by 287 · see citing works
Competitive Effects and Responses Between Plant Species in a First‐Year Old‐Field Community
Miller, T. E., & Werner, P. A. (1987) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1939204 · Cited by 221 · see citing works
Coleman, R., Gill, G., & Rebetzke, G. J. (2001) · Australian Journal of Agricultural Research · doi:10.1071/ar01055 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Differential Weed Suppression Ability in Upland Rice Cultivars
Garrity, D. P., Movillon, M. M., & Moody, K. (1992) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj1992.00021962008400040009x · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Competitive Ability of Winter Wheat Cultivars with Wild Oat (Avena ludoviciana)
Balyan, R. S., Malik, R. K., Panwar, R. S., et al. (1991) · Weed Science · doi:10.1017/s0043174500071393 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Genotypic variation for competitive ability in spring wheat
Huel, D. G., & Hucl, P. J. (1996) · Plant Breeding · doi:10.1111/j.1439-0523.1996.tb00927.x · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Competition Between Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Cultivars and Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum)
Challaiah, Burnside, O. C., WICKS, G. A., et al. (1986) · Weed Science · doi:10.1017/s0043174500067692 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
O'Donovan, J. T., Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., & Hall, L. M. (2000) · Weed Technology · doi:10.1614/0890-037x(2000)014[0624:woafii]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Differential genetic influences on competitive effect and response in Arabidopsis thaliana
Cahill, J. F., Kembel, S. W., & Gustafson, D. J. (2005) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2005.01013.x · Cited by 109 · see citing works
The impact of plant breeding on the grain yield and competitive ability of wheat in Australia
Vandeleur, R. K., & Gill, G. (2004) · Australian Journal of Agricultural Research · doi:10.1071/ar03136 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Fischer, A. J., Ramírez, H. V., Gibson, K. D., et al. (2001) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj2001.935967x · Cited by 96 · see citing works
The ability of 29 barley cultivars to compete and withstand competition
Watson, P. R., Derksen, D. A., & Acker, R. C. V. (2006) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-05-020r3.1 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Variation Between Barley Cultivars in Early Response to Weed Competition
Didon, U. M. E. (2002) · Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science · doi:10.1046/j.1439-037x.2002.00566.x · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Crop weed competition and herbicide performance in cereal species and varieties
Christensen, S. (1994) · Weed Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.1994.tb01970.x · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Owen, M. J., & Powles, S. B. (2009) · Australian Journal of Agricultural Research · doi:10.1071/cp08178 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Cousens, & MOKHTARI (1998) · Weed Research · doi:10.1046/j.1365-3180.1998.00097.x · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Competitive ability of Australian canola (Brassica napus) genotypes for weed management
Lemerle, D., Luckett, D. J., Lockley, P., et al. (2014) · Australian Journal of Agricultural Research · doi:10.1071/cp14125 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Guneyli, E., Burnside, O. C., & Nordquist, P. T. (1969) · Crop Science · doi:10.2135/cropsci1969.0011183x000900060011x · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Near-isogenic lines forTriticum aestivumheight and crop competitiveness
Seefeldt, S. S., Ogg, A. G., & Hou, Y. (1999) · Weed Science · doi:10.1017/s0043174500091839 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Genotypic Differences for Water‐Use Efficiency and Weed Competitiveness in Dry Direct‐Seeded Rice
Mahajan, G., Ramesha, M. S., & Chauhan, B. S. (2015) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj14.0508 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationZerner, M. C., Rebetzke, G. J., & Gill, G. (2016) · Australian Journal of Agricultural Research · doi:10.1071/cp15198 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
The competitive interactions between winter barley andAvena sterilisare site‐specific
RUIZ, D., Barroso, J., Hernáiz, P. J., et al. (2008) · Weed Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.2008.00596.x · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Christensen, S. Herbiciddosering i relation til kornarter og sorter. Tid.ukriftfor Plall/ead. 1992, 86, 107-121.
- Andres, A.; Concenço, G.; Schreiber, F.; Teló, G.M.; Fagundes, P.R.R.; Magalhães, A.M., Jr.; Moisinho, I.S.; Martins, M.B.; Coradini, M.C. Habilidade competitiva de genótipos de arroz irrigado com capim-arroz [Competitive ability of rice genotypes against barnyardgrass]. In Boletim de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento; Embrapa Clima Temperado: Pelotas, Brazil, 2017; Volume 281, p. 54.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Karunarathne, S., Walker, E., Sharma, D., Li, C., & Han, Y. (2023) · Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE B · doi:10.1631/jzus.b2200552 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
“Barley yield loss is estimated to range from 43% to 78% in Australia (Mahajan et al., 2020).”
InfluentialWeed interference period and economic threshold level in barley
(2023) · Journal of Plant Protection Research · doi:10.24425/jppr.2022.140295 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mahajan, G., Hickey, L., & Chauhan, B. S.
- Affiliations
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Mahajan, Gulshan
- Venue
- Agronomy
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2020-01-09
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 99
- ISSN
- 2073-4395 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2999269041
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 2.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- dx.doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Agronomy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Weed Control and Herbicide Applications
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Allelopathy and phytotoxic interactions
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
- Keywords
- barley, weed competition, weed competitiveness, integrated weed management, yield loss, tillering, plant height, weed seed production, barley breeding, organic production systems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
