Wild oat (Avena fatua L.) time of emergence and density influence tame oat (Avena sativa L.) yield and quality

Non-Peer Reviewe

Can tillage and agronomy be integrated with herbicide application to control resistant weeds?

Non-Peer ReviewedThe prevalence of group 2 resistant broadleaved weeds threatens successful lentil production on the Canadian Great Plains. The objective of this study was to develop an integrated weed management strategy combining physical, cultural and chemical weed control methods for lentil producers dealing with group 2 resistant wild mustard. The study was conducted for 3 years between 2011 and 2013 at 2 locations at Saskatoon and Scott, Saskatchewan. It was a randomized two way factorial with weed control method and seeding rate as the main effects. Weed control treatments tested consisted of a control treated with a glyphosate burnoff, saflufenacil (Heat ™) herbicide, rotary hoeing, half rate metribuzin (Sencor ™) herbicide, a fully integrated treatment, and a full herbicide treatment. Three seeding rates representing 1, 2, and 4 times the recommended seeding rate were tested (130, 260, and 520 plants m-2). Increasing seeding rate consistently lowered mustard biomass at both locations. The full herbicide treatment provided the greatest reduction in mustard biomass followed by the integrated treatment. The integrated treatment relied more on increased seeding rate to reduce mustard biomass and produce yield, and at the highest seeding rate it was able to provide equivalent yield to the full herbicide system. The results of this study show that an integrated system utilizing an increased seeding rate can control resistant weeds and maintain yields to a similar level as a strategy that relies only on herbicides for weed control

Evaluating the competitive ability of semi-leafless field pea cultivars

Non-Peer ReviewedField pea (Pisum sativum L.) is an important grain legume in Western Canada. Growers can, however, be reluctant to include pulse crops in their rotation because they are poor competitors with weeds. Developing more competitive field pea cultivars is important to mitigate weed competition. The identification of competitive cultivars and the traits conferring competitive ability should lead to the development of more competitive field pea cultivars. The objective of this research was to evaluate the ability of semi-leafless field pea cultivars to suppress and withstand weed competition and to identify traits that may confer competitive ability in field pea. Field experiments were conducted in 2012 and 2013 at Floral, Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan and St. Albert, Alberta. Fourteen semi-leafless field pea cultivars were seeded at a target density of 75 plants m-2 under weedy and weed-free conditions. Imidazolinone-tolerant wheat (c.v. CDC Imagine) and canola (c.v. 45H73) were planted as pseudo weeds in the weedy plots. There was no cultivar by treatment interaction for all of the measured variables thus, cultivars did not differ in the presence or absence of weed competition. CDC Dakota produced the greatest pea yield and Reward produced the poorest pea yield at Saskatchewan. CDC Dakota and CDC Striker were among the best for pea biomass production at Saskatchewan, compared to Reward, which was among the worst. CDC Centennial and CDC Mozart were significantly better at Saskatchewan for their ability to withstand competition, while CDC Dakota, CDC Patrick, and CDC Meadow were statistically the best in their ability to compete with the pseudo weeds. At Alberta, CDC Striker and CDC Dakota were statistically best in their ability to compete with the pseudo weeds, versus Cooper and Stratus, who were among the poorest. At both Saskatchewan and Alberta, no correlations were strong enough to show which traits are conferring competitiveness in semi-leafless field pea cultivars

Evaluating the competitive ability of semi-leafless field pea cultivars

Non-Peer ReviewedField pea (Pisum sativum L.) is an important grain legume in Western Canada. Growers can, however, be reluctant to include pulse crops in their rotation because they are poor competitors with weeds. Developing more competitive field pea cultivars is important to ameliorate weed competition. The identification of competitive cultivars and the traits conferring competitive ability should lead to the development of more competitive field pea cultivars. The objective of this research was to evaluate the ability of semi-leafless field pea cultivars to suppress and withstand weed competition and to identify traits that may confer competitive ability in field pea. Field experiments were conducted in 2012 at Floral, Saskatchewan and St. Albert, Alberta. Fourteen semi-leafless field pea cultivars with divergent pedigree, vine length, seed size, and market classes were seeded at a target density of 75 plants m-2 under weedy and weed-free conditions. Imidazolinone-tolerant wheat (c.v. CDC Imagine) and canola (c.v. 45H73) were planted as pseudo weeds at a target density of 20 plants m-2 in the weedy plots. Variables measured were leaf area index, plant height, pea biomass, weed biomass, pea yield, and weed seed production. Data were subjected to ANOVA using the mixed model procedure in SAS. There was no cultivar by treatment interaction for pea yield at Floral, so cultivars did not differ under treatments. CDC Dakota produced the greatest pea yield and Reward produced the poorest pea yield. CDC Dakota was among the best for pea biomass production at both sites, compared to CDC Leroy, which was among the worst at both sites. CDC Dakota was also among the best for the low weed seed production at Floral. CDC Mozart, CDC Patrick, and Cutlass were among the best at Floral for ability to withstand competition at Floral. While, CDC Dakota, CDC Meadow, and CDC Patrick were among the best for their ability to compete at Floral. At both sites, no correlations were strong enough to show which traits are conferring competitiveness in semi-leafless field pea cultivars

Iinfluence of lentil seeding rate on dose response of wild mustard to fluthiacet-methyl

Non-Peer ReviewedIn recent years concern over the development of herbicide resistant weeds has lead to interest in integrated weed management systems that seek to relieve selection pressure for herbicide resistance by utilizing mechanical and cultural controls in addition to herbicides. The cultural practice of increasing crop seeding rate has been identified as having potential to provide non-chemical weed control and enhance the effects of herbicide application. The objective of this study was to examine the interaction between increasing seeding rate and the dose response relationship of weeds to herbicide application. Lentil was chosen to represent the crop, with wild mustard as the weed, and fluthiacet-methyl the herbicide. The experiment was a factorial design with four levels of seeding rate (70, 140, 280, and 560 plants m-2) and seven levels of herbicide application rate (0, 0.94, 1.87, 3.75, 7.5, 15, and 30 g ai ha-1). The study was conducted at two locations near Saskatoon, Sk. in 2012. Results of the experiment show that increasing lentil seeding rate decreased the total mustard biomass when herbicides were not applied or were applied at low rates. In addition increasing lentil seeding rate lowered the herbicide dose required to result in a 50% reduction in mustard biomass. Doubling seeding rate from the recommended rate to 280 plants m-2 reduced reliance on herbicide application to maintain lentil yield. These results suggest that the practice of increasing seeding rate can work with herbicide application to reliably and effectively control weeds, even in situations where herbicides alone may not achieve good control

Monitoring of the Building Envelope of a Heritage House - A Case Study

The paper describes the long-term monitoring of the hygrothermal performance of the building envelope of a heritage house located in Ottawa. The house, once the residence of two of Canada's Prime Ministers, now serves as a museum. To preserve the historical artifacts within the building, the specified temperature and relative humidity for the indoor air are 21C and 35% to 50% respectively. As the house must also be preserved, there was concern about the effect of the high indoor relative humidity (moisture) on the durability of the building structure. The main objective of the monitoring was to assess the effect of the conditioned air on the building envelope