08.06.2015 Views

Vol. 51—1997 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

Vol. 51—1997 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

Vol. 51—1997 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

95<br />

COMMON P<br />

SLANE AS A LIVING MULCH IN VEGETABLE CROP PRODUCTION<br />

D.R. Ellis!, R.G. Adams' and K Guillard"<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

Many of th characteristics of common purslane (portulaca oleracea L.) that categorize this<br />

species as a "w " have been described as desirable traits for a living mulch. These characteristics<br />

include: 1) aggr ssive growth during late spring and summer months; 2) establishment of a dense,<br />

prostrate canop 3) vegetative reproduction by adventitious root formation on fragmented stems;<br />

and, 4) prolific production. Common purslane was investigated as a living mulch in vegetable<br />

crops and camp red with conventional methods of weed management, which included mechanical<br />

and chemicalme ods as well as the use ofblack plasticin broccoli. Field trials were conducted from<br />

1993 to 1994 i Storrs, Connecticut on spring broccoli (Brassica oleracea L. 'Packman') and sna~<br />

beans h vul&arisL. 'Gator Green'). Common purslane seed was broadcast over the soil 1o<br />

to 14 days prior to transplanting broccoli or sowing snap beans. Fresh weight yields, harvest date,<br />

leaf developme and soiltemperatures were determinedfor each crop. Plots in each treatment were<br />

rated for weed ntrol and percent ground cover by common purslane. Noncrop biomass, which was<br />

comprised of c mmon purslane and weed biomass, was measured under each method of weed<br />

management. ritical levels of weed control and noncrop biomass for optimum crop yields were<br />

estimated using linear-plateau model.<br />

Springbroc li and snap bean yieldsfrom plantsgrown in purslane living mulch were comparable<br />

to yieldsfrom pI ts grown under conventional methods of weed management. No differences were<br />

found in harvest ate or leaf development for either crop across all methods of weed management in<br />

comparison wi h control treatments where weeds were not managed. Late afternoon soil<br />

temperatures ere significantly lower under purslane living mulch in comparison with soil<br />

temperatures w .ch occurred when either crop was grown under mechanical weed management Of<br />

when spring bro coli was grown under black plastic. Common purslane as a living mulch was able<br />

to effectivelyco pete with weeds in spring broccoli and snap beans when between-row areas were<br />

kept relatively eed-free during the first two weeks after transplanting or sowing. High levels of<br />

weed control a d ground cover occurred through the establishment of common purslane between<br />

crop rows. Sp ng broccoli and snap bean plants were tolerant of purslane living mulch and weeds<br />

up to critical th eshold levels, without any significant reductions in yield.<br />

A periodic Itivation of common purslane and/or weeds between crop rows during the critical<br />

weed-free peri d in the first two weeks after spring broccoli transplanting or snap bean seedling<br />

emergence pro .ded a minimal level of weed management which produced acceptable crop yields.<br />

Noncrop biom s measured under purslane living mulch was below critical threshold levels and<br />

therefore did no reduce yield. While the inclusion of a purslane living mulch into a spring broccoli<br />

or snap bean cr p production system may be a novel approach to controlling weeds, the strategies<br />

involved in this system rely on basic weed management principles, as presented in the study.<br />

'Program Spec' list, Dept. of Plant <strong>Science</strong>, Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269<br />

2Assist.Dir., C operative Extension System, Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269<br />

3Assoc. Prof, ept. of Plant <strong>Science</strong>, Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!