Modelling rotations: can crop sequences explain arable weed seedbank abundance?
Article first published online: 15 APR 2011
© 2011 Rothamsted Research. Weed Research © 2011 European Weed Research Society
Volume 51, Issue 4, pages 422–432, August 2011
How to Cite
BOHAN, D. A., POWERS, S. J., CHAMPION, G., HAUGHTON, A. J., HAWES, C., SQUIRE, G., CUSSANS, J. and MERTENS, S. K. (2011), Modelling rotations: can crop sequences explain arable weed seedbank abundance?. Weed Research, 51: 422–432. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3180.2011.00860.x
- Issue published online: 5 JUL 2011
- Article first published online: 15 APR 2011
- Received 15 July 2010 Revised version accepted 21 February 2011 Subject Editor: José Gonzalez-Andujar, CSIC, Spain
Appendix S1 Farmers reported the cropping sequence in each field for up to 9 years prior to the FSE experimental cropping year, t. The crop grown and the number of times this crop occurred in any year of all crop sequences (NC) are presented. NC might give a subjective indication of the importance of a crop in GB cropping sequences. Where two or more crops were reported, this was because the field had been split during that year. The crop and management factors, as used for crop amalgamation, are also presented. The three factors are the Season of sowing (Spring, Winter or Miscellaneous), the Type of crop [Vegetable (including roots), Cereal, Ley, Oilseed, Set-Aside or Various] and the weed-type Target for herbicide control (Grass, Broad-leaved, None or Both). The factor levels reflect what we believe to be the predominant values appropriate to each crop, or set of crops, in current, conventional management practice. The factor level ‘Miscellaneous’ was assigned to crops grown either where the Season of sowing was not reported by the farmer (as in the case of ‘Barley’) or where the crops might be grown in either season (for example ‘Forage Beans and Grass Ley’), or both. The factor level ‘Various’ was used where more than one crop was grown, belonging to one or more different Type. The factor level ‘Both’ was assigned to a crop where both types of weeds might be targeted, either because the crop might allow this (such as in ‘set-aside’) or because more than one crop was sown in the field, each of which having a different herbicide Target (such as ‘Fodder Beet and Maize’).
Appendix S2 Estimated initial seedbank [y(t)], by weed group, for each of the 3-year rotations encountered using the amalgamated crop sequences model. The number of observed seedbanks (n), for each rotation, is presented. The 3-year triplet for each management classification should be read left to right, from year t−1 to year t−3, year t−1 being the most recent crop prior to the seedbank being modelled. The seedbanks are presented on the log10 scale, with standard errors, and as back-transformed counts per square metre.
Appendix S3 Estimated initial [y(t)] and follow-up [y(t + 1)] seedbank abundances, by weed group, for each corresponding 3-year rotation encountered using the amalgamated crop sequences model. The estimated seedbanks are presented on the log10 scale, with 95% confidence intervals along with the number of observed seedbanks for each rotation. Initial and follow-up seedbank estimates that differ significantly given the 95% confidence intervals are denoted by an asterisk. The 3-year triplet for each management classification should be read left to right, from year t−1 to year t−3, year t−1 being the most recent crop prior to the seedbank being modelled.
|WRE_860_sm_AppendixS1-S3.doc||854K||Supporting info item|
Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.