The influence of some herbicides on grain yield and yield components of some cereals

Krzysztof Klimont

k.klimont@ihar.edu.pl
Krajowe Centrum Zasobów Genowych, Instytut Hodowli i Aklimatyzacji Roślin, Radzików (Poland)

Abstract

The influence of three herbicides: Aminopielik D (3l/ha), Chwastox D (3l/ha in barley and triticale; 5 l/ha winter and spring wheat) and Granstar 75 DF (30 g/ha) on yield and some morphological traits of four cereals: winter wheat cv. Elena, spring wheat cv. Torka, spring barley cv. Rataj, spring triticale cv. Wanad was studied in field trials in the years 1997–1998. The experiments were conducted on degraded chernozem classified as a very good wheat soil type, using the complete randomized blocks design with four replicates. All the applied herbicides limited weed growth in all the studied cereals, which resulted in higher number of earing stems and higher yields in relation to the control objects. The highest advantages were noted when Granstar 75 DF was applied on winter wheat, spring wheat and triticale: the yields increased to 5.27, 4.64 and 5.26 t/ha respectively. Application of Aminopielk D in winter wheat gave an increase of 5.02t/ha, in triticale 5.01 t/ha and Chwastox D in spring wheat produced a surplus of 4.53 t/ha. The respective yields of controls amounted 4.65, 3.97 and 4.66 t/ha. In the case of barley, the highest yield was achieved when Chwastox D was used. All the herbicides reduced height of earing stems in all the cereals, except for Granstar 75 DF in spring wheat and Chwastox D in barley and influenced positively ear length (except for Aminopielik D in spring barley), number of kernels per ear and thousand kernels weight.


Keywords:

grain, herbicides, spring barley, spring wheat, spring triticale, winter wheat

Adamczewski R., Praczyk T., Szwed R. 1991. Dobór herbicydów do zwalczania chwastów w uprawie pszenżyta jarego. Mat. XXXI Sesji Nauk. IOR cz. I. Referaty, Poznań: 131 — 136.
Google Scholar

Adamczewski R., Augiewicz U., Urban M. 1995. Reakcja odmian jęczmienia na herbicydy. Mat. XXXV Sesji Nauk., IOR cz. II Postery, Poznań: 221 — 223.
Google Scholar

Czerniakowski Z., Czerniakowski W. 1993. Herbicydy. AR Kraków.
Google Scholar

Grzesiuk S. 1973. Uboczny wpływ pestycydów na wartość biologiczną nasion. Post. Nauk Roln., 3/140: 45 — 60.
Google Scholar

Klimont K., Dul S. 1998. Ocena chwastobójczego działania preparatu Lintur 70 WG oraz jego wpływ na plon i wartość siewną ziarna jęczmienia jarego. Biul. IHAR 207: 93 — 98.
Google Scholar

Klimont K., Osińska. 2004. Wpływ herbicydów na plon ziarna i cechy morfologiczne zbóż. Biul. IHAR 233: 59 — 71.
Google Scholar

Krążel K. 1992. Wpływ sposobu pielęgnowania na zachwaszczenie i plony pszenżyta ozimego Mat. XXII Sesji Nauk. IOR cz. I. Referaty, Poznań: 93 — 98.
Google Scholar

Lista Opisowa Odmian – Rośliny Rolnicze, 2002. COBORU. Słupia Wielka.
Google Scholar

Lupu C., Oaucea F., Sandulescu N. 1993. Biochemical and morphophysiological changes induced by butyl ate in the maize plant. Weed Abstract, 42/ 11: 569.
Google Scholar

Mazurek I., Grabiński I. 1996. Plonowanie odmian pszenżyta ozimego w warunkach ograniczonego nawożenia i zużycia pestycydów. Symp. Nauk. „Hodowla, uprawa i wykorzystanie pszenżyta”. Międzyzdroje: 65.
Google Scholar

Murkowski A., Maciorowski R., Piech M. 1995. Reakcja odmian pszenżyta ozimego na herbicydy mocznikowe oceniane przy zastosowaniu metod luminoscencyjnych. Biul. IHAR 195/196: 177 — 182.
Google Scholar

Nowicka B., Rola J. 1993. reakcja odmian pszenicy ozimej Almari, Kamila, Nike, Oda, Parada, Rada na herbicydy. Mat. XXXIII Sesji Nauk. IOR Cz. II. Postery, Poznań: 176 — 179.
Google Scholar

Noworolnik R. 1998. Wpływ właściwości odmian i czynników siedliskowych na reakcję jęczmienia jarego na gęstość siewu i nawożenie azotem. Biul. IHAR 207: 63 — 68.
Google Scholar

Pawłowska I. 1989. Reakcja odmian zbóż na preparat chwastobójczy Glean 75 DF. Mat. XXIX Sesji Nauk. IOR Cz. II. Postery, Poznań: 217 — 221.
Google Scholar

Podlaska G. 1997. Reakcja nowych odmian i rodów pszenicy ozimej na wybrane czynniki agrotechniczne. Cz. II. “Wpływ terminu siewu na plon i strukturę plonu nowych odmian i rodów pszenicy ozimej. Biul. IHAR 204: 163 — 167.
Google Scholar

Pruszyński S. (red.). 1995. Zalecenia ochrony roślin na rok 1995/1996. IOR Poznań.
Google Scholar

Rola J., Nowicka B. 1989. Reaction of winter wheat varieties to herbicides. British Crop Protection Conf. Weeds: 389 — 392.
Google Scholar

Rola J. 1991. Ekologiczno-ekonomiczne podstawy chemicznej walki z chwastami na polach uprawnych. Mat. XXXI Sesji Nauk., IOR cz. I, Referaty, Poznań: 110 — 124.
Google Scholar

Rola J., Domoradzki K., Sobczak T. 1993. Przydatność herbicydu Compete 240EC do odchwaszczania zbóż. Mat. XXX Sesji Nauk., IOR Cz. I Referaty, Poznań: 114 — 121.
Google Scholar

Stankowski S., Podolska G., Stypuła G. 2001. Wpływ wybranych sposobów ochrony roślin na plon i jakość ziarna pszenicy ozimej. Biul. IHAR 218/219: 155 — 159.
Google Scholar


Published
2007-03-30

Cited by

Klimont, K. (2007) “The influence of some herbicides on grain yield and yield components of some cereals”, Bulletin of Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute, (243), pp. 69–81. doi: 10.37317/biul-2007-0072.

Authors

Krzysztof Klimont 
k.klimont@ihar.edu.pl
Krajowe Centrum Zasobów Genowych, Instytut Hodowli i Aklimatyzacji Roślin, Radzików Poland

Statistics

Abstract views: 64
PDF downloads: 30


License

Copyright (c) 2007 Krzysztof Klimont

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Upon submitting the article, the Authors grant the Publisher a non-exclusive and free license to use the article for an indefinite period of time throughout the world in the following fields of use:

  1. Production and reproduction of copies of the article using a specific technique, including printing and digital technology.
  2. Placing on the market, lending or renting the original or copies of the article.
  3. Public performance, exhibition, display, reproduction, broadcasting and re-broadcasting, as well as making the article publicly available in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice.
  4. Including the article in a collective work.
  5. Uploading an article in electronic form to electronic platforms or otherwise introducing an article in electronic form to the Internet or other network.
  6. Dissemination of the article in electronic form on the Internet or other network, in collective work as well as independently.
  7. Making the article available in an electronic version in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice, in particular via the Internet.

Authors by sending a request for publication:

  1. They consent to the publication of the article in the journal,
  2. They agree to give the publication a DOI (Digital Object Identifier),
  3. They undertake to comply with the publishing house's code of ethics in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), (http://ihar.edu.pl/biblioteka_i_wydawnictwa.php),
  4. They consent to the articles being made available in electronic form under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, in open access,
  5. They agree to send article metadata to commercial and non-commercial journal indexing databases.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>