The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) Yield
A field trial was conducted (2020–2021) in a randomized complete block design arranged according to the split-plot design to evaluate the integrated effects of an alternative fertilization practice based on the application of a microbial biostimulant in combination with different weed control method...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-10-01
|
Series: | Agronomy |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4395/13/10/2614 |
_version_ | 1797575056019161088 |
---|---|
author | Ioannis Gazoulis Panagiotis Kanatas Nikolaos Antonopoulos Metaxia Kokkini Anastasia Tsekoura Triantafyllia Demirtzoglou Ilias Travlos |
author_facet | Ioannis Gazoulis Panagiotis Kanatas Nikolaos Antonopoulos Metaxia Kokkini Anastasia Tsekoura Triantafyllia Demirtzoglou Ilias Travlos |
author_sort | Ioannis Gazoulis |
collection | DOAJ |
description | A field trial was conducted (2020–2021) in a randomized complete block design arranged according to the split-plot design to evaluate the integrated effects of an alternative fertilization practice based on the application of a microbial biostimulant in combination with different weed control methods on weed growth and maize productivity. Two fertilization practices, conventional (CF) and alternative (AF), formed the main plots. The CF supplied maize with 160 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup>. The AF included a foliar application of the biostimulant NitroStim<sup>®</sup>, which contains N<sub>2</sub>-fixing bacteria (1 × 10<sup>12</sup> colony forming units; CFU L<sup>−1</sup>) along with a 50% lower fertilizer incorporation rate (80 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup>). Four weed control treatments formed the subplots: one inter-row mechanical cultivation (M1), two inter-row mechanical cultivations (M2), tembotrione application (99 g a.i. ha<sup>−1</sup>; H), and an untreated control (CON). Combined over the years (<i>p</i> ≥ 0.05), fertilization, weed control, and their interactions affected (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05) weed density and biomass, maize grain yield, and nitrogen partial factor productivity (PFP<sub>N</sub>). The AF reduced weed biomass by 28% compared to the CF. M1 resulted in a high value (389 g m<sup>−2</sup>). M2 and H reduced weed biomass compared to (M1 ≥ 70%). Weed biomass dropped below 35 g m<sup>−2</sup> in the AF × H and AF × M2 subplots. Observations on weed density were similar. The AF resulted in 12 and 56% higher maize grain yield and PFP<sub>N</sub> than the CF, respectively. M2 increased grain yield by 18 and 25% compared to M1 and CON, respectively, and was not different from H. Moreover, AF × H and AF × M2 were the highest-yielding interactions (≥12,000 kg grain ha<sup>−1</sup>). AF × M2 increased PFP<sub>N</sub> by 56, 58, 64, and 67% compared to CF × H, CF × M2, CF × M1, and CF × CON, respectively, while AF × H resulted in similar PFP<sub>N</sub>. |
first_indexed | 2024-03-10T21:30:55Z |
format | Article |
id | doaj.art-feba993b68af452a90db791c0f37f23d |
institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
issn | 2073-4395 |
language | English |
last_indexed | 2024-03-10T21:30:55Z |
publishDate | 2023-10-01 |
publisher | MDPI AG |
record_format | Article |
series | Agronomy |
spelling | doaj.art-feba993b68af452a90db791c0f37f23d2023-11-19T15:22:39ZengMDPI AGAgronomy2073-43952023-10-011310261410.3390/agronomy13102614The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) YieldIoannis Gazoulis0Panagiotis Kanatas1Nikolaos Antonopoulos2Metaxia Kokkini3Anastasia Tsekoura4Triantafyllia Demirtzoglou5Ilias Travlos6Laboratory of Agronomy, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, GreeceLaboratory of Sustainable Waste Management Technologies, Hellenic Open University, 26335 Patra, GreeceLaboratory of Agronomy, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, GreeceLaboratory of Agronomy, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, GreeceBenaki Phytopathological Institute, 14561 Kifisia, GreeceR&D Department of HUMOFERT S.A., 14452 Athens, GreeceLaboratory of Agronomy, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, GreeceA field trial was conducted (2020–2021) in a randomized complete block design arranged according to the split-plot design to evaluate the integrated effects of an alternative fertilization practice based on the application of a microbial biostimulant in combination with different weed control methods on weed growth and maize productivity. Two fertilization practices, conventional (CF) and alternative (AF), formed the main plots. The CF supplied maize with 160 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup>. The AF included a foliar application of the biostimulant NitroStim<sup>®</sup>, which contains N<sub>2</sub>-fixing bacteria (1 × 10<sup>12</sup> colony forming units; CFU L<sup>−1</sup>) along with a 50% lower fertilizer incorporation rate (80 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup>). Four weed control treatments formed the subplots: one inter-row mechanical cultivation (M1), two inter-row mechanical cultivations (M2), tembotrione application (99 g a.i. ha<sup>−1</sup>; H), and an untreated control (CON). Combined over the years (<i>p</i> ≥ 0.05), fertilization, weed control, and their interactions affected (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05) weed density and biomass, maize grain yield, and nitrogen partial factor productivity (PFP<sub>N</sub>). The AF reduced weed biomass by 28% compared to the CF. M1 resulted in a high value (389 g m<sup>−2</sup>). M2 and H reduced weed biomass compared to (M1 ≥ 70%). Weed biomass dropped below 35 g m<sup>−2</sup> in the AF × H and AF × M2 subplots. Observations on weed density were similar. The AF resulted in 12 and 56% higher maize grain yield and PFP<sub>N</sub> than the CF, respectively. M2 increased grain yield by 18 and 25% compared to M1 and CON, respectively, and was not different from H. Moreover, AF × H and AF × M2 were the highest-yielding interactions (≥12,000 kg grain ha<sup>−1</sup>). AF × M2 increased PFP<sub>N</sub> by 56, 58, 64, and 67% compared to CF × H, CF × M2, CF × M1, and CF × CON, respectively, while AF × H resulted in similar PFP<sub>N</sub>.https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4395/13/10/2614NitroStim<sup>®</sup>nitrogen partial factor productivity (PFP<sub>N</sub>)nitrogen fertilizationinter-row cultivationtembotrione |
spellingShingle | Ioannis Gazoulis Panagiotis Kanatas Nikolaos Antonopoulos Metaxia Kokkini Anastasia Tsekoura Triantafyllia Demirtzoglou Ilias Travlos The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) Yield Agronomy NitroStim<sup>®</sup> nitrogen partial factor productivity (PFP<sub>N</sub>) nitrogen fertilization inter-row cultivation tembotrione |
title | The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) Yield |
title_full | The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) Yield |
title_fullStr | The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) Yield |
title_full_unstemmed | The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) Yield |
title_short | The Integrated Effects of Biostimulant Application, Mechanical Weed Control, and Herbicide Application on Weed Growth and Maize (<i>Zea mays</i> L.) Yield |
title_sort | integrated effects of biostimulant application mechanical weed control and herbicide application on weed growth and maize i zea mays i l yield |
topic | NitroStim<sup>®</sup> nitrogen partial factor productivity (PFP<sub>N</sub>) nitrogen fertilization inter-row cultivation tembotrione |
url | https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4395/13/10/2614 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ioannisgazoulis theintegratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT panagiotiskanatas theintegratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT nikolaosantonopoulos theintegratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT metaxiakokkini theintegratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT anastasiatsekoura theintegratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT triantafylliademirtzoglou theintegratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT iliastravlos theintegratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT ioannisgazoulis integratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT panagiotiskanatas integratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT nikolaosantonopoulos integratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT metaxiakokkini integratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT anastasiatsekoura integratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT triantafylliademirtzoglou integratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield AT iliastravlos integratedeffectsofbiostimulantapplicationmechanicalweedcontrolandherbicideapplicationonweedgrowthandmaizeizeamaysilyield |