Effects of Fertility Amendments on Weed Growth and Weed–Crop Competition: A Review

• Published in: Weed science Vol. 69; no. 2; pp. 132 - 146
• Main Authors: Little, Neith G., DiTommaso, Antonio, Westbrook, Anna S., Ketterings, Quirine M., Mohler, Charles L.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York, USA The Weed Science Society of America 01.03.2021; Cambridge University Press
• Subjects: Agricultural production; Amaranthus retroflexus; Best practice; Chenopodium album; Competition; Compost; Contamination; Cost control; Crop yield; Cropping systems; Crops; Echinochloa crus-galli; Ecological effects; Environmental factors; Fertility; Fertilization; Fertilizers; Herbicides; intercropping; macronutrients; manure; Monoculture; nitrogen; Nutrient dynamics; Nutrient release; Nutrient sources; Nutrients; organic amendments; Phosphorus; potassium; REVIEW; Seeds; Soil fertility; System effectiveness; Trends; Weed control; Weeds; weed–crop competition; Compost; potassium; intercropping; manure; fertilizers; nitrogen; organic amendments; macronutrients; weed–crop competition; phosphorus
• ISSN: 0043-1745; 1550-2759
• DOI: 10.1017/wsc.2021.1

Macronutrient inputs to annual cropping systems can benefit weeds as well as crops, sometimes decreasing or eliminating the benefits of fertilization. This interaction between fertility management and integrated weed management is becoming increasingly important as these fields increase their focus on efficiency and prevention, respectively. The risk of increased weed competition reflects the fact that weed biomass and height may be highly responsive to nitrogen, phosphorus, and/or potassium. This generalization is supported by monoculture studies of species such as redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.), common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.), and barnyardgrass [Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv.] and by ecological theory. However, field studies indicate variation in the effects of macronutrients on weed–crop competition and crop yield, even within species groups. To address challenges in interpreting, comparing, and extrapolating from these diverse reports, we propose a conceptual framework that summarizes the mechanisms underlying observed variation within and between studies. This framework highlights functional traits and trends that help predict yield outcomes in binary weed–crop interactions. Important factors include timing of emergence, maximum heights of the weed and crop, and relative responsiveness to the added nutrient. We also survey recent work on the effects of nutrient source (e.g., the composition of organic amendments) on weed–crop competition. Because different sources vary in their nutrient release dynamics and supplied nutrient ratios, they may have dramatically different effects on weed–crop competition and crop yield. Finally, we offer a guide to best practices for studies of fertility effects on weed–crop competition. Although this review highlights several topics requiring further research, including fertility effects on multispecies interactions and interactions with other environmental factors, emerging methods offer considerable promise. Ultimately, an improved understanding of nutrient effects on weed–crop competition will contribute to the efficient and effective management of diverse cropping systems.