Read time: 4 minutes

Understanding weed competitive traits in barley

WeedSmart Scientific Partner

Barley is known as a fairly competitive crop, but not all genotypes are equal when it comes to weed suppression and weed tolerance.

To un-pick the complex mechanisms behind competitive ability in barley, QAAFI weed researchers Gulshan Mahajan and Bhagirath Chauhan, and cereal plant breeder Lee Hickey, teamed up to quantify the effect of weed interference on commercial and elite-line barley genotypes.

Their two-year field trial compared the competitive ability of eight barley genotypes against a mimic weed (oats) by measuring weed biomass, weed seed production and barley yield.

  • Weeds can cause huge yield losses in barley – between 43 and 78 per cent difference between weedy and weed-free growing conditions for the eight genotypes tested.
  • There is considerable variation in the weed competitive ability of current and elite breeding lines of barley in Australia.
  • The most weed suppressive variety, Westminster, reduced weed seed production by 73%, compared with that of LaTrobe. Similarly, weed biomass of Westminster reduced by 55%, compared with that of LaTrobe.
  • There is scope for the development of high-yielding weed-competitive barley genotypes through additional screening of elite lines in weedy conditions.
  • Higher panicle production in barley appears to be a strong indicator of a genotype’s competitive ability.

When it comes to using a crop to compete with weeds there are two discreet mechanisms –

  1. weed suppression, where the growth and seed production of weed plants is reduced and
  2. weed tolerance, where crop yield is maintained, even in weedy conditions.

The most competitive genotypes will use both of these mechanisms and knowing which mechanisms are at play is valuable information when planning an integrated weed control program. Competitive genotypes are a powerful non-herbicide weed control tactic and growers will gain significant benefits if they can plant a strong weed-suppressive crop into a weedy situation, particularly if they do not have to sacrifice yield.

While yield and malt quality have driven the barley breeding program to date in Australia, this research suggests that there is great advantage in understanding the response of the variety to weed pressure.

Observations on the competitive ability of the four commercial varieties tested:

  • Commander barley is both weed suppressive and weed tolerant. If sown with an effective pre-emergent herbicide, Commander is probably the best choice to maintain low weed numbers.
  • Westminster is the most weed suppressive and might be a better choice if weed numbers are starting to increase, or for use in low input and organic production systems. Westminster is not weed tolerant, so a significant yield penalty should be expected in weedy situations.
  • Although Compass is tall and has a droopy architecture (like Commander and Westminster) it is not weed suppressive or weed tolerant, and should only be chosen for weed-free situations.
  • LaTrobe is the least weed seed suppressive but is weed tolerant, maintaining a reasonable yield in the presence of weeds.

The competitive ability of a particular genotype may vary in different locations, seasons and management systems, and in the presence of different weed species.

Experimental design features

The experiments were conducted in 2017 and 2018 at the University of Queensland research station at Gatton. The crops were sown at a depth of 5 cm in rows 35 cm apart on 17 May 2017 and 23 May 2018. The crops were irrigated to maintain field capacity and were harvested on 4 November 2017 and 28 October 2018.

There were eight barley genotypes, weedy and weed-free treatments and three replicates.

Four of the barley genotypes are commercial varieties and four are elite breeding lines being assessed prior to commercial release. Like most other plant breeding programs, Australian barley varieties are usually screened in a weed-free environment with a focus on yield and malting qualities.

In this experiment, each genotype was sown at the recommended seeding rate (125 kg/ha) in a weedy and weed-free environment. Oats was used as a mimic for wild oats, a serious weed in barley. Wild oats could not be used because it has non-uniform germination and sheds its seed before barley harvest.

The plot size was 8 by 1.4 m. The weedy plots were sown with a commercial oat variety at a target density of 40 plants/m2.

There was no significant seasonal effects so data from the two seasons could be analysed together.

Weed infestation and genotype influenced the number of panicles produced per metre row length of the barley crop and crop yield. Only genotype influenced crop plant height.

While genotype had a significant impact on weed biomass, weed seed yield, weed-tolerance ability and weed-suppressive ability, phenotypic traits are not always a reliable indicator of a genotype’s weed suppressive ability or weed tolerance ability.



In this experiment, panicle number was a good indicator of both weed suppressive ability and weed tolerance ability, but plant height and architecture were not reliable indicators.

Left: Weed seed yield in weedy treatment for each barley genotype.
Right: Effect of barley genotype and weed treatment on barley grain yield.

Other factors, such as lodging and harvest index, will also need to be considered in a variety selection process but were not measured in this experiment.

Some genotypes possess both mechanisms for competing successfully with weeds while others possess one but not the other, and some have poor suppression and tolerance.

Table: Plant attributes and mean values for the weed-tolerance ability and weed-suppressive ability of the eight tested barley genotypes.

This research suggests that screening barley varieties in a weedy situation may provide valuable information to growers seeking to choose varieties that will provide the greatest weed suppression and or weed tolerance in weedy paddocks. It is not possible to screen for competitive ability in a weed-free environment and there is clearly scope for the development of high-yielding weed-competitive barley varieties in Australia.

In the face of increasing herbicide resistance in key weed species, the value of non-herbicide weed control tactics increases considerably.

The real value of crop competition (narrow rows, high seeding rate, weed-competitive genotypes) comes to the fore a few weeks after planting and through the main growing season to suppress late emerging weeds. Herbicides will remain the main tool for weed control in preparation for planting and to provide a weed-free environment for the crop to establish and rapidly achieve canopy closure.

This research was conducted and funded by the University of Queensland, a WeedSmart scientific partner.

Related resources:

Related Articles

View all
Article
News

Never cut the herbicide application rate

Scientific studies have demonstrated that resistance can rapidly evolve in weeds subjected to low doses of herbicide. Some weeds can develop resistance within a few generations. Full rates when mixing herbicides too! When mixing herbicides it is important that each product is still applied at the full label rate to ensure high mortality. Applying different chemicals in one mix can provide an additive advantage. It is important to understand the mode of action of each herbicide on the plant when preparing a herbicide mix. This is just as important for pre-emergent grass weed mixes as it is for post-emergent mixes aimed at broadleaf weed control. ALWAYS READ THE LABEL. Surrounding weed seeds with a combination of pre-emergent herbicides with different modes of action can give a high level of control and help extend the useful life of all the chemicals used. The high level of control must be supported with additional control measures for all survivors. All products with different modes of action must be applied at full label rates for this to be an effective strategy.   Mixing two chemicals with the same mode of action can achieve some additional efficacy, however, the mix should deliver the combined full rate to ensure a lethal dose. The amount of stubble present and crop safety are all important considerations when mixing chemicals. For example, when using a tank mix of Avadex® and trifluralin to control ryegrass in wheat, the rates used will vary depending on the sowing system and level of stubble retention. Be sure to get good advice. Many herbicides on the market are a combination of two or more modes of action within the one product. These products must be applied at the full label rate to be effective. Having dual action does not negate the need to change herbicide products and rotate modes of action. Repeated use of any single strategy will reduce the effectiveness of that strategy over time.  
Article
News

Spray well – correct nozzles, adjuvants and water rates

Spray application is a technical field and growers need to make sure their equipment and application techniques are spot-on. The GRDC Spray Application GrowNote provides detailed information and about 80 videos to demonstrate key skills. Prevent spray-drift The focus of spraying herbicide needs to be on doing the job right so the weeds receive the correct dose and die, and this includes reducing the air borne fraction to a bare minimum. Bill Gordon’s 10 Tips for Reducing Spray Drift Choose all products in the tank mix carefully. Understand the product mode of action and coverage requirements. Select (and check) the coarsest spray quality that will provide effective control. Expect that surface temperature inversions will form as sunset approaches and will likely persist overnight and even beyond sunrise on many occasions. DO NOT SPRAY. Use weather forecasts to inform your spray decisions. Only start spraying when the sun is about 20 degrees above the horizon and when the wind speed has been above 4–5 km/hr for more than 20–30 minutes, and clearly blowing away from any adjacent sensitive crops or areas. Set the boom height to achieve a double overlap of the spray patterns. Avoid higher spraying speeds. Leave buffers unsprayed if necessary and come back. Continue to monitor conditions, particularly wind speed, at the site during the spray operation High water rates don’t have to slow you down Some growers are concerned that increasing the water rate when applying herbicide will slow down their spray operation and cost them money. However, the biggest financial loss during spraying usually comes from a failed spray job. To keep your spray operation as time efficient as possible when using more effective and reliable application volumes, you can: Use nurse tanks around the farm to reduce the time spent travelling back to a central re-fill point. Use a larger pump, e.g. 2.5 inch, to make re-filling quicker. Pre-mix the batch while the sprayer is operating. Many mixes can be held in the mixing tank for up to 6 hours. However, wettable granules and suspension concentrates will need agitation to keep them in solution. For pre-emergent herbicides in high stubble situations, carrier volume has a large effect on the level of control achieved. Across four trial sites Dr Borger’s research demonstrated that ryegrass control with trifluralin or Sakura® increased from 53% control when the carrier volume was 30 L/ha to 78% control when the carrier volume was increased to 150 L water/ha in high Water quality and mixing order Water quality is often overlooked as a possible contributor to herbicide failure and can lead to confusion over the herbicide resistance status of weeds on a property. Water should be considered as one of the chemicals in any mix, given that water quality varies markedly depending on its source. Getting the mixing order right is essential for effective spray results. Don’t start mixing until the water quality is right Podcast – Mixing herbicides Adjuvants Sometimes adding an adjuvant is beneficial and sometimes it is detrimental; and there is an art to knowing how to best deploy these additives. When weeds are susceptible to the applied herbicides, the effectiveness of adjuvants generally goes un-noticed. Correctly applied adjuvants can reduce the impact of low level herbicide resistance by helping to maximise the amount of herbicide taken up by the plant.
Article
News

Clean borders – avoid evolving resistance on the fence line

About one-quarter of glyphosate-resistant populations within broadacre cropping situations across Australia come from fencelines and other non-cropping areas of the farm. Along paddock borders, where there is no crop competition, weeds can flourish and, if not controlled, set lots of seed. The traditional approach has been to treat these weeds with glyphosate to keep borders clean but after 20-odd years this option is now failing and paddock borders are becoming a significant source of glyphosate-resistant weed seed. Weed researcher Eric Koetz said the limited options for managing weeds along irrigation infrastructure and other non-crop areas is a problem and is putting additional pressure on knock-down herbicides in irrigated systems. In some situations, cultivation can be used to kill the weeds and provide a firebreak, but on light soils this may pose an erosion risk and mowing or slashing may be safer options. Another possible tactic is to continue using herbicides but to ensure that a clean-up operation is carried out before any survivors can set seed. Some growers are choosing to increase the heat on weeds along the borders by planting the crop right to the fence and then baling the outside lap and spraying with a knockdown herbicide to kill any weeds and provide a firebreak. Another good option in some situations is to maintain a healthy border of vegetation using non-invasive grasses. In Queensland, buffel grass is a good example of a grass that can outcompete other weeds while not invading crop lands. If only herbicides are used on fencelines, resistance is inevitable. Surviving weeds on fencelines have no competition and access to plenty of soil moisture, so they set a lot of seed and resistance can easily flow into neighbouring paddocks. Other resources It’s time for a glyphosate intervention Farm hygiene cottons on – Cleave Rogan, St George What’s new in management of herbicide resistant weeds on fencelines? Keeping the farm clean – Graham Clapham, Norwin Don’t jeopardise glyphosate for clean fencelines Keeping fencelines clean Resistance risk to knock-down herbicides on irrigated cotton farms

Subscribe to the WeedSmart Newsletter