PLANTING METHOD, WEED CONTROL AND SEEDING RATE EFFECTS

ON TWIN SOFT WHITE SPRING WHEAT

Mylen Bohle
Central Oregon Agricultural Research Center, Madras, Oregon
Russ Karow
Dept. Of Crop and Soil Science, Corvallis, Oregon
Abstract

A planting method x weed control x seeding rate trial with Twin soft white spring wheat
was established at COARC Powell Butte site in Oregon. The objective was to test if higher
seeding rates with different methods of planting could decrease the need for applying
herbicides. Grain yield, test weight, height, lodging, and grain N uptake were all
significantly higher with the drill method of planting compared to broadcast and rotovate.
Yield was not affected in any way by either weed control or seeding rate. Higher seeding
rates with no weed control tended to increase percent protein.

Introduction

Lower input, sustainable agriculture and use of less chemical pesticides is the focus of many
producers as society becomes more concerned about our environment and the food we eat. If less
pesticides were used without a decrease in production, the farmer would obtain a profit. The
consumer perceives that this is safer, knowing that less pesticides are being applied to the food
they eat with less potential damage to the environment. This trial was set out to determine if
seeding rate or planting method would have any effect upon weed control and thus yield and
quality of soft white spring wheat. If producers could obtain excellent weed control by increasing
seeding rate and/or narrowing the space between wheat plants, the wheat would out-compete the
weeds without the application of expensive herbicides.
Materials and Methods
Twin soft white spring wheat was planted on April 13, 1990 at the COARC Powell Butte site.
The design was a three factor factorial in a randomized block with four replications. The three
factors were seeding rates, planting method, and weed control. The seeding rates were 30, 45,
and 60 seeds/if (97, 145, and 194 lb/ac respectively). Planting was done with an eight inch row
spacing cone type experimental drill or broadcasting the seed by hand and rotovating. Weed
control was practiced on half of the plots with an application of 2 pints of Bronate on June 5. The
weed control plots were also hand weeded on June 13. The plots were fertilized with 80 lb N/ac
(239 lb of ammonium nitrate material) and 60 lb S/ac (400 lb of gypsum material). The first
irrigation was on May 5 and the last irrigation occurred on August 4. The planted plots, 5 x 20

128
feet and 5 x 15 feet, were harvested with a Hege plot combine on September 6, 1990.

Yield, test weight, protein, height, lodging, and grain N uptake data were collected. The percent
protein was predicted with near infrared reflectance spectrometry (NIRS) by the OSU Crop and
Soil Science Dept. All data are presented on an air dry moisture basis.

Results and Discussion

Yield, test weight, height, and grain N uptake were all positively affected by the method of
planting (Table 1). Yield, test weight, height, lodging, and grain N uptake were increased by 21.8
bu/ac, 0.3 lb/bu, 2 inches and 22 pounds by drilling compared to broadcasting and rotovating.
There was no advantage to higher seeding rates or in weed control, on yield, height, and grain N
uptake. There was no advantage from a yield standpoint to applying herbicide. Test weight was
increased by using chemical weed control (55.6 vs 55.3, P=.03).

Table 1. Planting method effect on the yield, test weight, protein, height, lodging, and grain N
uptake on Twin soft white spring wheat planted in 1990 at COARC, Powell Butte, Oregon.

Planting Test Grain N

Method Yield Weight Protein Height Lodging Uptake
bu/a lb/bu % in % lb/a

Drilled 83.7 55.6 10.6 39 14 93.3

Broadcast 61.9 55.3 10.9 37 4 71.3

Prob. .001 .011 NS .009 .093 .001

CV% 13.2 0.9 7.4 5.1 219.7 15.5

Protein and lodging were affected by a seeding rate and weed control interaction (Table 2). For
the 60 seeds/ft' seeding rate without weed control, percent protein was significantly lower than
the 45 and 30 seeds/ft' seeding rate without weed control. However, the high seeding rate with
weed control gave a significantly higher percent protein than treatment without weed control.
There was a trend for lower lodging with the no weed control plots with increasing seeding rates
whereas the weed control plots reacted inversely. It appears that the plants in the higher seeding
rate plots were more uniformly distributed and helped hold each other up. There seemed to be a
trend for higher protein with greater lodging. The CV's for lodging were very high and reveal a
lot of variability in the treatment plots.

129
Table 3 contains all the treatment means as well as the statistics for the trial.

Table 2. Weed control (W.C.) x seeding rate (S.R.) effect on the percent protein and percent
lodging of Twin soft white wheat planted in 1990 at COARC, Powell Butte, OR.

Treatment Protein Lodging

W.C. S.R. % %

+ 30 10.8 4
+ 45 10.4 0
+ 60 11.0 16
30 11.2 22
45 10.9 10
60 10.2 1
Prob. .048 .050
PLSD .10 0.7 16.3
PLSD .05 0.8 19.6
CV% 7.4 219.7

130
Table 3. Planting method x weed control x seeding rate effects on the yield, test weight, protein,
height, lodging and grain N uptake on Twin soft white spring wheat planted in 1990 at COARC,
Powell Butte, Oregon.

Protein Lodging Grain N

Treatment Yield Test Wt. Height Uptake
PMWCSR bu/ac ib/bu in lb/ac

D + 30 88.6 56.0 10.7 39.3 6 99.7

D + 45 83.5 55.9 10.0 39.0 0 87.7

D + 60 83.4 55.8 10.8 39.5 19 94.1
D + 30 77.3 55.1 11.0 38.5 34 89.7
D + 45 87.4 55.4 10.8 40.3 21 98.6
D + 60 81.9 55.7 10.4 37.5 1 89.9
B - 30 58.7 55.4 11.0 36.8 1 68.5
B - 45 58.3 55.3 10.8 37.8 0 66.2
B - 60 65.9 55.4 11.2 37.8 13 78.3
B - 30 60.5 55.1 11.5 37.3 10 73.5
B - 45 63.9 55.4 11.0 37.0 0 74.1
B - 60 64.1 55.0 10.0 38.3 0 67.4
Mean 72.8 55.5 10.7 38.3 9 82.3
Prob.
R NS NS .052 .026 .009 .018
SM .001 .011 NS .009 .093 .001
WC NS .030 NS NS NS NS
SMxWC NS NS NS NS NS NS
SR NS NS NS NS NS NS
SMxSR NS NS NS NS NS NS
WCxSWTS NS .048 NS .050 NS
SMxWCxSR NS NS NS NS NS NS
CV% 13.2 0.9 7.4 5.1 219.7 15.5

P.M. = planting method, D = drill, B = broadcast and rotovate; W.C. = weed control, + with, -
without; S.R. = seeding rate lb/a; R= reps

131