Floristic study of weed species in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) fields of Azna

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

• Abdolreza Ahmadi ¹
• Majid Rostami ²

¹ Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Lorestan University, Iran

² Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Malayer University, Iran

10.22067/ijpr.v9i1.50439

Abstract

Introduction
There are many different factors that affect yield and quality of agricultural crops, including weed management. The abundance, distribution, density and composition of weed species in a cropped field varies due to the nature of the crop, cultural practices and cropping pattern/system, soil type, moisture availability, location and season, therefore identification of weed flora is important to identify the proper weed control options and enables farmers to use the best management strategies. Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is an increasingly important cash crop for growers in western provinces of Iran. Due to the lack of basic information about the weed diversity in common bean fields in Lorestan province which is the mean producer of bean in Iran), the current study was conducted for exact identification of flora condition of weeds.
 
Materials & Methods
The present investigation was carried out to find out weed floristic composition in common bean fields of Azna (33°45΄ N latitude, 49°45΄ E longitude, with a mean altitude of 1871 m above sea level), in the North of Lorestan province during 2014. In this study, 34 fields of bean using method of stratified random-sampling, and by assigning the suitable number of the samples for each level, were selected. The longitude and latitude and sea level of different fields were recorded exactly by global positioning system (GPS). In order to determine the density and composition of weeds, sampling in each field done using the pattern of W. According to the pattern of the W, 9 points in each field were selected and the distance between two sampling points was 20 meters and in each point by using a 0.5 m × 0.5m quadrate the density and composition of weed species was determined. For data analysis of weed flora in the fields, frequency, abundance index, distribution uniformity and mean density were calculated using appropriate equations. Weed frequency indicates the proportion of fields where the species was found. The diversity of weed species was described by species richness and weed density was determined by counting the number of plants in each sampling quadrate. Cluster analysis was done by JMP software using the data related to species richness index, species diversity and similarity.
 
Results & Discussion
In the current experiment, 23 weed species from 14 families were collected and identified at the different bean fields in the studied region. The highest number of weed species belongs to Poaceae family (five species) and Asteraceae family (three species). Based on results, 78% and 22% of weed species were dicotyledonous and monocotyledon respectively. Among the identified weed about 65% were annual and the remaining species were biennial or perennial. It seems that intensive and high input cultivation of common bean in the studied region affected the composition and diversity and density of weeds. Previous studies also showed that perennial weed communities under less cultivation and reduced tillage systems are often more frequent whearase in conventional systems the annual weed are dominant. Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.), Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) and Redroot Pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) had the highest and Black Nightshade (Solanum nigrum L.) and Goat's Beard (Tragopogon pratensis L.) had the lowest density, uniformity and abundance in the common bean fields. The density of the weed species varied considerably in the different fields and the maximum density of weed (5.5 plants. m²) in the fields was recorded for Hibiscus trionum. The most important noxious weed of studied regions were Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), (Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.)، (Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.) and (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.). The highest value of species richness index (27.5) and Simpsons diversity index (0.94) were recorded for Southwest, whereas the lowest value of species richness index (17.14) and Simpsons diversity index (0.86) calculated for Southeast regions. Results of another study showed that species richness is related to geographical condition and increase with the height. Decrease of species richness in plain areas suggests that agronomic management has a strong effect on species diversity and weed abundance during the time.
 
Conclusion
The occurrence of numerous weed species in bean fields means that different methods of weed control must be selected because some of these weeds such as redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) can produce a lot of small seed which may increase the problem of weeds in further years. The higher number of dicotyledonous weeds means that special cautions for the use of chemical herbicides is necessary because many of recommended herbicides for broadleaf weeds could result in serious damages to the common bean fields. It seems that in these conditions considering the integrated weed management (IWM) methods is justified.

Keywords

• Diversity
• Frequency
• Similarity index
• Species richness

---

References

1. Ahmadi, A., Rashed Mohasel, M.H., Khazaei. H.R., Ghanbari. A., Ghorbani, , and Mousavi, S.K. 2011. Weed floristic composition in Lentil (Lens culinaris) farms in Khorramabad. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 11(1): 45-53 (in Persian).
2. Arnold, R.N., Murray, M.W., Gregory, E.J., and Smeal, D. 1993. Weed control in pinto beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) with imazethapyr combinations. Weed Technololoy 7: 361-364.
3. Arun Kumar, S., Bhattacharya, M., Sarkar, B., and Arunachalam, V. 2007. Weed floristic composition in palm gardens in Plains of Eastern Himalayan region of West Bengal. Current Science 92: 1434-1439.
4. Azizi, E., Alimoradi, L., and Ghorbani, R. 2015. Diversity of weed communities in the areas of forage plants in different provinces of the country. Journal of Agroecology 6(4): 701-718. (in Persian).
5. Barberi, P.N., Silvestri, and Bonari, E. 1997. Weed communities of winter wheat as influenced by input level and rotation. Weed Researche 37: 301-313.
6. Baskin, C.C., Milberrg, P., Andersson, L., and Baskin, J.M. 2004. Germination ecology of seeds of the annual weeds Capsella bursa-pastoris and Descurainia Sophia originating from high northern latitudes. Weed Research 44: 60-68.
7. Blackshaw, R.E. 2002. Weed management in bean. Agriculture and Agrifood Canada، Lethridge. www.pulse.ab.ca/news-letter/02 spring /bean.html
8. Brand, J., Yaduraju, N.T., Shivakumar, B.G., and McMurray, L. 2007. Weed Management. In: S.S. Yadav, D.L. McNeil and C. Stevenson (Eds). Lentil: an Ancient Crop for Modern Times. Springer.
9. Eshaghi Rad, J., Manthey, M., and Mataji, A. 2009. Comparison of plant species diversity with different plant communities in deciduous forests. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 6 (3): 389-394.
10. FAO. 2013. http://www.fao.org
11. Fried, G., Norton, L.R., and Reboud, X. 2008. Environmental and management factors deter mining weed species composition and diversity in France. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 128: 68-76.
12. Garcia, M.A. 1995. Relationships between weed community and soil seed bank in a tropical agroecosyestem. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 55: 139-146.
13. Grime, J.P. 1979. Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 222 pp.
14. Hassan, G., Khan, I., and Ahmad Khan, I. 2006. Studies on floristic compositio of chickpea weeds in district Karak, Pakistan. Iranian journal of Weed Science 2: 69-81.
15. Jurado-Exposito, M., Lopez-Granados, F., Gonzalez-Andujar, J.L., and Garcia-Torres, L. 2005. Characterizing population growth rate of Convolvulus arvensis in wheat-sunflower no-tillage system. Crop Science 45(5): 2106-2112.
16. Karkanis, A., Bilalis, D., and Efthimiadou, A. 2007. Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) infection by branched broomrape (Orobanche ramosa) as influenced by irrigation system and fertilization, under East Mediterranean conditions. Agronomy Journal 6: 37-402.
17. Lamb,D.W., and Brown, R.B.. 2001. Remote-sensing and mapping weed. Crops Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 78: 117-125.
18. Lass, L.W., and Callhan, R.H. 1993. GPS and GIS for weed survey and management. Weed Technology 7: 249-254.
19. Magurran, A.E. 1988. Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. London: Croom Helm.
20. Major, G., Ditommaso, A., Lehmann, G., and Falcaob, N.P.S. 2005. Weed dynamics on Amazonian Dark Earth and adjacent soil of Brazil. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 11: 1-12.
21. Mehrafarin, A., Meighani, F., Baghestanim, M.A., Mirhadi, M.J., Labafi, M., and Labafi, M.R. 2011. Study of morphysiological characteristic of field binweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.) population biotypes in Karaj using multivariates analysi methods. Iranian Journal of Biology 24(2) : 282-292.
22. Minbashi, M., Baghestanii, M.A., and Rahimian, H. 2008. In traducing abundance index for assessing weed flora in survey studies. Weed Biology and Management 8: 172-(In Persian with English Summary).
23. Mousavi, S.K., Souri, N., Zeidali, E., Azadbakht, N., and Ghiasvand, M. 2010. Comparison of weed floristic composition in fruit gardens in Khorramabad. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 8: 252-269. (In Persian).
24. Patrick, I., and Tranela, M. 2003. Variation in soybean (Glycine max L.) Merr. interference among common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) accessions. Crop production 2: 375-380.
25. Patterson, D.T. 1995. Comparative ecophysiology of weeds and crops. In: S.O. Duke (Ed.). Weed Physiology 1. Reproduction and Ecophysiology. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, pp. 101-129.
26. Poggio, S.L., Satorre, E.H., and Fuente, E.B. 2004. Structure of weed communities occurring in pea and wheat crops in the Rolling Pampa (Argantina). Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 103: 225-235.
27. Pushak, S., Peterson, , and Stahlman P.W. 1999. Field Bindweed Control in Field Crops. New York. John Wiley & Sons, INK.
28. Rask, A.M., Larsen, S.U., Andreasen, C., and Kristoffersen, P. 2013. Determining treatment frequency for controlling weeds on traffic islands using chemical and non-chemical weed control. Weed Research 53(4): 249-258.
29. Renne, I.J, and Tracy, B.F. 2007. Disturbance persistence in managed grasslands: shifts in above ground community structure and the weed seed bank. Plant Ecology 190: 71-80.
30. Rice, P.M., and Toney, D.J. 2007. Bedunah and growth form responses to herbicide application for centaurea maculosa. Journal of Applied Ecology 4: 1397-1412.
31. Sikkema, P., Shropshire, H., and Soltani, N. 2007. Dry bean respons to pre emergence-applied KIH- 485. Weed Technology 21: 230-234.
32. Storky, J. 2006. A functional group approach to the management of UK arable weeds to support biological diversity. Weed Research 46: 513-522.
33. Streibig, J.C., and Andreasen, C. 1993. Crop management affects the community dynamics of weed. Brighton Crop Protection Conference-Weeds. p: 487-494.
34. Tamado, T., and Milberg, P. 2000. Weed flora in arable fields of eastern Ethiopia with emphasis on the occurrence of Parthenium hysterophorus. Weed Research 40: 507-521.
35. Thomas, A.G. 1991. Floristic composition and relative abundance of weeds in annual crops of Manitoba. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 71: 831-839.
36. Uddin, K.M., Juraimi., Begum, A.S., Ismail, M., Rahim M.R., and Othman, R. 2009. Floristic composition of weed community in turf grass area of west peninsular Malaysia. International Journal of Agricultural Biology 11: 13-20.
37. Villers-Ruiz, L., Trejo-Vazquez, I., and Lopez-Blanco, J. 2003. Dry vegetation in relation to the physical environment in the Baia California Peninsula. Mexico Journal of Vegetation Science 14: 517-524.
38. Williams, J.A., and West, C.J. 2000. Environmental weeds in Australia and New Zealand: issues and approaches to management. Australian Ecology 25: 425-444.