Abstract:This chapter addresses the complexity of managing cover crops in selected growing regions of the world. It focuses on the contributions that cover crops can make to weed management and the trade-offs that may be required between achieving weed management, crop production, and environmental benefits. Since cover crops can play a significant role in mitigating environmental impacts worldwide, interactions between weed management and management to enhance environmental protection are emphasized.
“…In other words, including a living mulch in a cropping system can contribute to weed suppression by occupying the niche that would normally be filled by weeds (Teasdale 1998). Once established, living mulches can rapidly occupy the open space between the rows of the main crop and use the light, water, and nutritional resources that would otherwise be available to weeds.…”
Section: Mechanisms By Which Living Mulches Can Suppress Weedsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Much of the research with living mulches has focused on documenting and alleviating this problem (Liebman and Staver 2001;Teasdale, 1998). Many studies in the North Central U.S. on legume interseeding in established corn stands report grain yield losses that are attributed to moisture stress (Kurtz et al 1952;Pendleton et al 1957), N deficiency (Scott et al 1987;Triplett 1962), and reduced corn populations associated with wider row spacing (Schaller and Larson 1955;Stringfield and Thatcher 1951).…”
Section: Competition Between Living Mulch and Main Cropmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the presence of living mulches leads to greater seed mortality of weeds by favoring predators (Cromar et al 1999). Teasdale (1998) also suggested that living-mulch suppression of weeds occurs through resource competition, promoting conditions that are unfavorable for germination and establishment, retaining living mulch residues as ground cover, and by means of allelopathy.…”
Section: Mechanisms By Which Living Mulches Can Suppress Weedsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Weed seed germination can be negatively affected by quality and quantity of light and the smaller amplitude of soil temperature fluctuation that result from the presence of living mulches (Gallagher et al 1999;Teasdale 1998). Germination of weed seeds may be inhibited by complete light interception (Phatak 1992) by the living mulch or by secretion of allelochemicals (White et al 1989;Overland 1966).…”
Section: Mechanisms By Which Living Mulches Can Suppress Weedsmentioning
“…In other words, including a living mulch in a cropping system can contribute to weed suppression by occupying the niche that would normally be filled by weeds (Teasdale 1998). Once established, living mulches can rapidly occupy the open space between the rows of the main crop and use the light, water, and nutritional resources that would otherwise be available to weeds.…”
Section: Mechanisms By Which Living Mulches Can Suppress Weedsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Much of the research with living mulches has focused on documenting and alleviating this problem (Liebman and Staver 2001;Teasdale, 1998). Many studies in the North Central U.S. on legume interseeding in established corn stands report grain yield losses that are attributed to moisture stress (Kurtz et al 1952;Pendleton et al 1957), N deficiency (Scott et al 1987;Triplett 1962), and reduced corn populations associated with wider row spacing (Schaller and Larson 1955;Stringfield and Thatcher 1951).…”
Section: Competition Between Living Mulch and Main Cropmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the presence of living mulches leads to greater seed mortality of weeds by favoring predators (Cromar et al 1999). Teasdale (1998) also suggested that living-mulch suppression of weeds occurs through resource competition, promoting conditions that are unfavorable for germination and establishment, retaining living mulch residues as ground cover, and by means of allelopathy.…”
Section: Mechanisms By Which Living Mulches Can Suppress Weedsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Weed seed germination can be negatively affected by quality and quantity of light and the smaller amplitude of soil temperature fluctuation that result from the presence of living mulches (Gallagher et al 1999;Teasdale 1998). Germination of weed seeds may be inhibited by complete light interception (Phatak 1992) by the living mulch or by secretion of allelochemicals (White et al 1989;Overland 1966).…”
Section: Mechanisms By Which Living Mulches Can Suppress Weedsmentioning
“…The high temperatures in the early months after planting could have influenced the fast growth of velvet bean resulting to high biomass. Teasdale et al (2007) also supports that velvet bean is well adapted to dry hot conditions. Cowpea is said to be well adapted in acidic soils however, it gave the lowest biomass accumulation in Bergville.…”
Soil health is important for sustainable crop production. Frequent soil cultivation has a negative impact on soil health, resulting in loss of soil macrofauna. Conservation agriculture can be practiced to improve soil health by improving the abundance of soil macrofauna. Three leguminous cover crops were tested for soil macrofauna abundance Vigna unguiculata, (cowpea) Lablab purpureus L. (dolichos lablab) and Mucuna pruriens (L.) DC (velvet bean). The experiment was done in two contrasting experimental sites of KwaZulu-Natal (Ukulinga and Bergville) in a randomised complete block design replicated three times. Bare plot and herbicide treatments served as controls. Natural fallow was used to make a comparison to all the other treatments. Cowpea (39 species) had the highest soil macrofauna abundance in Bergville. Lablab (57 species) had the highest soil macrofauna in Ukulinga. Cowpea (0.75 species) and lablab (0.61 species) improved soil macrofauna diversity respectively in Bergville. Natural fallow (0.46 species) had the lowest soil macrofauna diversity in Bergville. Lablab (0.56 species) and velvet bean (0.74 species) had high soil macrofauna species diversity in Ukulinga. Bare plot (0.3 species) had the lowest soil macrofauna species diversity respectively. It can be concluded that cowpea and lablab can be recommended for improving soil macrofauna abundance in conservation agriculture.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.