Agronomy and Horticulture, Department of
Document Type
Article
Date of this Version
2018
Citation
PeerJ 6:e5082
Abstract
The objectives of this research were to identify alternatives to glyphosate for intra- row (under-trellis) vineyard floor management and to evaluate the potential for intra- row and inter-row (alleyway) groundcovers to reduce vegetative vigor of `Marquette' grapevines (Vitis spp.) in a southeast Nebraska vineyard. The experiment was a randomized factorial design with five intra-row treatments (crushed glass mulch [CG], distillers' grain mulch [DG], creeping red fescue [CRF], non-sprayed control [NSC], and glyphosate [GLY]) and three inter-row treatments (creeping red fescue [CRF], Kentucky bluegrass [KB], and resident vegetation [RV]). Treatments were established in 2010-2011 and measurements were conducted during 2012 and 2013 on 5- and 6-year- old vines. Soil temperatures were mostly higher under mulches and lower under intra- row groundcovers, compared to GLY. Weed cover in CG, DG, and CRF treatments was the same or less than GLY. At most sampling dates, inter-row soil moisture was lowest under KB. Intra-row soil moisture was highest under DG mulch and lowest under CRF and NSC; CG had the same or lower soil moisture than GLY. Surprisingly, we did not detect differences in mid-day photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) reflectance, despite visual differences among the intra-row treatments. Mid-day vine water potential did not differ among treatments. We concluded it is not necessary to maintain a bare soil strip under established vines in this region, where soil fertility and moisture are non-limiting.
Included in
Agricultural Science Commons, Agriculture Commons, Agronomy and Crop Sciences Commons, Botany Commons, Horticulture Commons, Other Plant Sciences Commons, Plant Biology Commons
Comments
2018 Bavougian and Read
Open access
DOI 10.7717/peerj.5082