Weed surveys in different tillage systems in southwestern

ontario field crops

B. Frickl and A. G. Thomas2
l
Crop Development Centre, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,
Canada S7N 0W0; and2Agriculture Canada, Research Station, Box 440, Regina,
Saskatchewan, Canada S4P 3A2. Received 22 Nov. 1991, accepted 14 May 1992.
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24

Frick, B. and Thomas, A. G. 1992. Weed surveys in different tillage systems in southwestern Ontario
field crops. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72: 1337-134'7. A weed survey of593 corn, soybean and winter wheat
fields in southwestern Ontario was conducted during 1988 and 1989 to determine the abundance and
distribution of weeds under a variety of tillage systems. The survey was conducted after all weed-control
measures had been carried out. A totat of 82 weed species and groups of species were recorded. Many
weeds were found infrequently. The most abundant weeds were green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv.),
lamb's-quarters (Chenopodium album L.), quack grass (Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.), redroot pig-
weed (Amaranthus retroJlexus L.), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisifolia L.) and dandelion
(Tararacum fficinale Weber). These weeds accounted for 54% of the total relative abundance. Weed
communities in individual fields were highly variable. Most fields had fewer than 10 species, and nearly
half of the fields had fewer than 6 weeds m -'. Six weeds, yellow foxtall (Setaria glauca (L.) Beauv.),
quack grass, crab grass spp. (Digitaria spp.), lamb's-quarters, green foxtail and chickweed (Stellaria
media\L.) Vill.),-occurred at d"ensities gi"ut". than i00 planti or shoots m-2 in at least one field.
Similar weed communities were found in fields that had different titlage histories. Annual weeds were
found at higher densities and perennial weeds at lower densities in reduced tillage than in conventional
tillage. Weeds were found at highest total densities in fields with no tillage. The six most abundant
weeds in the current study were present in Ontario prior to the 1900s.

Key words: Weed survey, reduced tillage, green foxtail, lamb's-quarters, quack grass, redroot pigweed

Frick, B. et Thomas, A. G. 1992. Enqu0tes malherbologiques sous divers rdgimes de travail du sol
danslesud-ouestdel'Ontario. Can. J. PlantSci.72: 1337-1347. Uneenqu6temalherbologiquedans
593 champs de mais de soja et de bl6 d'hiver du sud-ouest de I'Ontario a 6t6 r6a1is6e en 1988 et 1989,
pour d6terminer l'abondance et la distribution des mauvaises herbes dans divers r6gimes de travail du
sol. L'enquOte 6tait r6alis6e une fois que toutes les mesures de d6sherbage avaient 6t6 prises. On a relev6
la pr6sence de 82 espbces ou groupes d'especes de mauvaises herbes, dont beaucoup dtaient peu fr6quentes.
Lei plus abondantes dtaient la s6taire verte (Setaria viridis L.) Beauv.), le chou-gras (Chenopodium aLbum
L.), Ie chiendent (Agropyron repens (L) Beauv.), l'amarante ir racine rotge (Amaranthus retroJlexus
L.), la petite herbe d poux (Ambrosia artemisifolia L.) eI le pissenlit (Taraxacum fficinale Weber.).
Ces espbces comptaient pour 54% de I'abondance relative totale. Les communautds de mauvaises herbes
variaient grandement d un champ a I'autre. La plupart des champs portaient moins de 10 espdces, et
presque la moiti6 de ces champs avaient moins de 6 mauvaises herbes par mbtre carr6. Six mauvaises
herbes, Ia s6taire giauque (Setaria glaucaL.) Beauv.), le chiendent, les digitaires (Digitaria spp.), le
chou-gras, la s6taire verte et la stellaire moyenne (Stellaria media (L.) Vill.) s'observaient d une densit6
supdrieure ir 100 plantes ou pousses par mdtre carr6 dans au moins un champ. Les mOmes communautds
de mauvaises herbes se retrouvaient dans des champs h ant6c6dents culturaux diff6rents. Les mauvaises
herbes annuelles 6taient plus denses et les vivaces moins denses dans les r6gimes ir travail r6duit du sol
qu'en r6gime du travail classique. Les plus fortes densitds totales de mauvaises herbes ont 6t6 obseN6es
dans les champs sans travail du sol. Les six espdces les plus abondantes consign6es dans la pr6sente
enqu6te 6taient d6jd bien install6es en Ontario dds avant le d6but du 20'sidcle.

Mots cl6s: Enqu0te malherbologique, travail.r6duit du sol, s6taire verte, chou-gras, chiendent, amarante
rouge

Can. J. Pfant Sci. 72: 1337-1347 (Oct.1992)

IJJ /
 I 338 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE
Weed surveys provide weed biologists with
the quantitative information on weed com-
munities that is required in developing
integrated weed-management strategies.
Surveys provide baseline information for
measuring and evaluating changes in the
weed flora in the future. To date, accounts
of the weed flora in Canada includins
Saskatchewan (Thomas 1985; Dale and
Thomas 1987), Manitoba (Goodwin et al.
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24
1986; Thomas 1991; Thomas and Dale 1991;
Thomas and Donaghy 1991), Quebec (Doyon
and Bouchard 1981; Doyon er al. 1982;
Lemieux et al. 1987a-c), Prince Edward
Island (Thomas and Ivany 1990) and Nova
Scotia (McCully et al. 1991) have been
published.
Published quantitative weed-survey data
are unavailable for most crops and regions
in Ontario, but a few studies have provided
some information for southwestern Ontario.
Data on the distribution and abundance
ofweeds occurring in tomato and sweet
corn fields of Essex, Kent and Prince Edward
counties were summarized by Alex (1964).
More recent surveys have included corn,
soybean, white bean and cereal fields in
Kent, Middlesex and Perth counties durins
1977 (Richards 1979) and corn. soybean.
cereal and tomato fields in Essex and
Kent counties during 1978 and 1979 (Hamill
et al. 1983). In each of these studies, only
a small proportion of the province was
included. Conventional tillage systems were
assumed to have been used in the surveyed
fields.
New quantitative data on weed populations
throughout southwestern Ontario are needed
to reflect changing tillage practices. The
results from a survey of I 1 counties during
1988 and 1989 are presented in this paper.
The objectives are 1. to document the fre-
quency, uniformity, density and relative abun-
dance of weeds occurring in corn, soybean
and winter wheat crops; 2. to compare the
weed flora found during 1988-1989 with that
described in previous surveys of southwestern
Ontario; and 3. to compare the frequency and
density of weeds in fields managed with
different tillage systems.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Description of the Area
The 1988 survey included seven counties: Essex,
Kent, Lambton, Elgin, Middlesex, Huron and
Perth. In addition, Waterloo, Wellington, Oxford
and Brant counties were surveyed in 1989.
The survey area is bounded by Lake Erie on the
south and by the Detroit River, Lake St. Clair, St.
Clair River and Lake Huron on the west. The area
extends to 44'N latitude and to 80'W longitude.
All the area was subjected to glacial erosion and
deposition during the Pleistocene (Chapman and
Putnam 1966). Soils in the region are Luvisols and
Gleysols, ranging in texture from sandy loam to
clay and formed on glacial till or lacustrine
deposits. The topography varies from very gently
undulating to rolling with elevations ranging from
175 m above sea level along Lake Erie to 500 m
on the northern limit of the study area.
The survey area extends across seven climatic
regions (Brown et al. 1968). Agronomically impor-
tant climate data are summarized for the study area
in Table 1. Temperatures during the growing
season were near normal for both survey years,
but 1988 was generally dry throughout the survey
area, especially during Aprii, May and June. The
second year was wetter, pafticularly in the extreme
south ofthe area, where flooding delayed seeding
or necessitated a second seeding operation in
several fields.
Table 1. Long-term average and 1988 and 1989 values
for climatic variables in the study area @rown et al. 1968;
Atmospheric Environment Service 1988, 1989)
Variable Range of
values
Mean temperature, April ("C)
Long-term 5-8
1988 5-8
1989 4-7
Mean temperature, May ("C)
Long-term ll-14
1988 12-16
1989 t2-t4
Mean corn heat units 2300-3700
Mean frost-free period (d) 120- I 80
Mean annual precipitation (mm) 760-970
April-June precipitation (mm)
Long-term 218-318
1988 85-t62
1989 200-316
Mean annual evapotranspiration (mm) 560-660
 FRICK AND THOMAS WEEDS IN SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO
-
Sampling Procedure
The names of farm operators were obtained from
soil and crop advisors with the Ontario Ministry
of Agriculture and Food (OMAF), from OMAF
conservation advisors, from Conservation
Authority agronomists, and from other farmers.
This approach, rather than a random sampling, was
used to ensure that fields managed with some form
of reduced tillage were included in reasonably large
number. An attempt was made to locate similar
numbers of fields in each combination of county,
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24
crop (corn, soybean, winter wheat), tillage system
(conventional tillage: soil inversion by moldboard
plow; reduced tiilage: some tillage, but no soil
inversion; no tillage: no fall or pre-seeding tillage),
and tillage system duration (new: I yr; transitional:
2 or 3 yr; established: > 4 yr) to provide an overall
view of the weed flora in southwestern Ontario.
During 1988, 59 farm operators with a total of
228 fields were surveyed: during 1989, 100 farm
operators with 365 fields were surveyed. Some of
the 365 fields may have been the same in 1989 as
in 1988; some ofthe 100 operators certainly were.
The number of fields surveyed per county per year
varied from 2'7 to 41. Corn, soybean and winter
wheat were represented in the survey by 247 ,223
and 123 fields, respectively. These crops account
for 29,17 andS% ofthe farm land in the survey
area, respectively (Statistics Canada 1987). Con-
ventional, reduced and no tillage systems were
represented by 163, 235 and 195 fields, respec-
tively, for the 2 yr combined. In 1989, 13% of the
cropland in southwestern Ontario was in a tillage
system that left >30% surface residue; a further
1l% of land had 15-30% surface residue
(Lammers 1989). There were 222, 136 and 233
fields for new. transitional and established dura-
tions of the tillage systems. The numbers of fields
surveyed per crop, per tillage system or per til-
lage duration were not equal, because we were not
able to locate equal numbers of fields in all
combinations.
The weeds in the fields were counted between
27 July and 23 September 1988 and between 1 1
July and 28 August 1989. Corn and soybean fields
were surveyed in crop. Winter wheat fields were
surrreyed in crop, or after the crop was cut ifweeds
in the stubble could be identified and ifthere were
no or few weeds that emerged following harvest.
This time frame was chosen so that the weed counts
reflected the impact of the agronomic management
decisions made by the farm operator in producing
the surveyed crop. A field was sampled for weeds
using an inverted W-pattern as described b;r
Thomas (1985), with five quadrats, each 0.25 m',
I 339
located equidistant along each ofthe four arms of
the pattern. The number of plants was counted in
each quadrat, except where separation of
individuals was difficult. For a perennial grass,
such as quack grass (Agropyron repens (L )
Beauv.), or a perennial herbaceous species such
as Canada thistle (Cirsium atnense (L.) Scop.), the
number of shoots was recorded. A tillered annual
grass, such as green foxtall (Setaria viridis (L.)
Beauv.), was considered a singie plant. In some
instances, identification of species was not possible
and similar species were grouped by genera. Al1
identifications made by the surveyors were
accepted as recorded on the submitted field forms'
Treatment of the Data
The data from fields in different years, counties,
crops, tillage systems and durations of tillage
system were combined and summarized using fre-
quency, field uniformity and density measures.
Frequency is defined as the number of fields in
which a weed occurred, expressed as a percentage
of the total number of surveyed fields, and is an
estimate of the geographic extent of the weed in
the study area. Field uniformity is defined as the
number of quadrats in which a weed occurred,
expressed as a percentage of the totai number of
quadrats, and is an indication of the amount of land
in an area that contains a given species' Density
is defined as the mean number ofplants per square
metre. Two measures of weed density are
presented. Mean density is obtained by summing
all the densities of a weed and dividing by the total
number of fields. Mean occurrence field density
is obtained by summing all the densities of a weed
and dividing by the number of fields in which the
weed occurred. To detect the existence ofpossible
groups in the weed flora, a scatter plot of frequency
versus mean occuffence freld density was prepared.
A synthetic relative abundance index was cal-
culated according to the procedure detailed by
Thomas (1985). This index, which is based on fre-
quency, field uniformity and mean density, is used
to rank the contribution of individual species to the
weed community and to compare the contribution
of groups of species. The sum of the relative abun-
dance indices of all species equals 300. The advan-
tage of a relative index is that it allows compar-
isons to be made among data collected for weed
communities in various years and locations'
Data from fields in a given tillage system were
combined over crops and tillage durations. The
same weeds were common in each crop, though
some individual weeds were more abundant in one
 I 340 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE

o 9^
'E og q .9 1 \ q ! F: vl c-! -:_ _{ n _ q tr: 9v?q1c9.:r:-
n;-=C ..-NOn60C) @@@@€€S@nr i$$-NdNd
todd---

ooo'--\or n!<\o$--ro+€N6No-NNFi
r,NF,N-OC O-OOOOO_OOOOOOOOOO
>3;
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24

E
cl \!? n q9 c? q
$NOO€n+
c q \\ -1 ct q qn q q I - - - q
<-No-odN-d---:---*o
oq

\r--O$€-
?\ 9 I oq n .l q q qn --'09q qq "1 n 09 9- qP n
VhSS-,NN f:n€@+@+Nn*O€n€*<fA
6
€
6
!

@ ,oo
m
6 <<R<<K< <<<R<ii< <<nK<<<i<<
t
4

! =t
!
- i.,+:.: i i .
i_,1=.:=,!!3 ::t,_E.l '* 5
!

3
?S:, a

r
i!FiEss$s.:ii;Si;rftE€i
ir i€; s S::€ S si
E
a ss$ssssisisss$ssss=sss3s s

d
€.=
F o
d =E Eg EE srzeig :53,E Z-
zziiETEEEi
'sii15 E t ; i
gSE;
=is??u:i=?IEZEtf sri ;
E
o
U EEEs €eES
=
-NoSn€f €6O*d-tn€r€O\O-No<f +-NNdNNN n
 FRICK AND THOMAS WEEDS IN SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO 1341
-
crop than in another. The frequency and density
qqqog\vlvl=t"?c.lqr were determined for each weed within each tillage
N--- ---o system. The weed data were highly variable. For
instance, the coefficients ofvariation for total weed
density were 135, 168 and 189%, respectively, for
conventional, reduced and no tillage fields. One
!
of the main objectives of this study was to com-
-d-N pare fields managed with different tillage systems.
VV c Further divisions of the data would have weakened
! our ability to meet this objective.
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24

3
9 Changes in the Weed Flora over Time
The weed flora of southwestern Ontario described
-€€€@r@tn\ooo -o in this study was compared with those in early
5
Ontario weed reports. The earliest studies list
d-
tr h/) weedy species and estimate the relative size of the
infestations or the importance of the weeds. Both
.;
annual and perennial crops and ruderal habitats
O1dr*6+nrrOnO were included in some of these reports. One of the
-+noooNNoNON earliest repofis (Fletcher 1897) contains a list of
the species considered as weeds. The most common
6B were designated as "bad" weeds. During the
1920s, the most important weeds found in Ontario
; were described in a bulletin by Howitt (1928). Groh
ll<i <n<<o<<< E.9 and Frankton (1949) noted the presence of weeds
in 947 survey sites in the central Ontario region
from 76"W to 83'W longitude. The frequency of
o a weed was calculated as the percentage of sur"rey
-o sites in which it occurred. For the purposes of com-
tril parison, we have considered a species common if
U]
u) i-
;E it occurred in more than2% of the survey sites.
'5 More recent surveys have been specific to por-
. i -=SF t tions of the study area and have used quantitative
-i=
c !
!s'sa r€rjh
:-::4!z
E>
@
methods. A sur"rey of tomato and corn fields in
Si,*Fiilrtir
;::.!3.SsE.-i\b ii
"3f, E
5i
Essex and Kent counties provided estimates of the
most abundant weeds during the early 1960s (Alex

g;:iSl:
rl;:
ii
.i,i *,\.! i A :?)F
r: 1= rs
S +s. -i9 B
1964). From 19'77 to 1979, surveys ofcorn, soy-
bean and cereal crops in southwestern Ontario by
<UNF<vX-.-.1 o:t ! Richards (1979) and Hamill et al. (1983), using
v- i: methodology similar to that in the present study,
i K ,n
tLh s= provided data for comparison.
i.=

Eo ,:uoF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

sib EF
e o 9"i
& X . oi Characterization of the Weed Flora
;>;i,_
..\_E
6 0 o::* 3q In the 593 fields surveyed, 82 weed types
Y
-d.69..=
^.:+- U ;:-6 were recorded. Most of these were single spe-
Ea*7-F.=i=ZZz :!€"U cies, but some, such as the smartweeds (Poly-
.--gfr=L'ae3;ei
EE t
Zi ,E E=z=E
?ciiC6>do>tr>6,
Oae o -
gonum lapathfolium L. and Poly gonum p er'
sicaria L.) and crab grasses (Digitaria spp.),
u=*-F represent congeneric groupings that were
cE9EF difficult to distinguish in the field, and the
€r@OO*dotn€r : 9,=E
NdNdooooo-mo d<d;F(J group designated as "unidentified grasses"
likely represented several genera.
 t342 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE
Many weeds were found infrequently.
Forty-five weeds occurred in less than2% of
the fields and accounted for only 3% of the
total relative abundance (Frick et al. 1990).
Another 3 I species occurred in 2-25% ol
fields and accounted for 43% ofthe total rela-
tive abundance (Table 2). Only six species
were found in more than 25% of fields:
green foxtail, lamb's-quarters (Chenopodium
album L.), quack grass, redroot pigweed
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24
(Amaranthus retroflexus L.), common rag-
weed (Ambrosia artemisifolia L.) and dan-
d,elion (Taraxacum fficinale Weber). These
six accounted for 54% of the total relative
abundance. Lamb's-quarters had the highest
frequency, occurring in52% ofthe surveyed
fields. The flora was not strongly dominated
by a single, or a few, species as indicated by
a gradual decrease in abundance with rank of
the most common specles.
All of the weeds, including the most
common, were unevenly distributed within
and among fields. Only the six species that
occurred in more than25% of fields occurred
at field uniformities greater than 5%. Only
three species, green foxtail, lamb's-quarters
and redroot pigweed, occurred at field uni-
formities greater than l0%.
Annual species were more prevalent than
perennials; biennials were infrequent (Table 2).
Annual broad-leaved weeds accounteA,for 43%
of the total relative abundance. The diverse
collection of annual broadleaved olants con-
sidered as common weeds in this srudy (present
in 2% or more of helds) consisted of 16 spe-
cies representing 11 taxonomic families. Seven
Table 3. Frequency distribution of the number of species per field and the total weed density in 593 fields during
the 1988 and 1989 surveys
Number of species Number of fields
per field in class
0 20
ta
107
3-4 r67
5-6 138
7-8 88
9-10 44
>10 29
annual grass species occurred in2% or more
of fields and accounted for 25% of the total
relative abundance. Unidentified grasses
accounted for l% of the total. In terms of
number of species and relative abundance,
Poaceae was the most important taxonomic
family. The perennial broadleaved weeds were
also diverse. Nine species in seven families
occurred in morethan2% of the surveyed fields
and accounted for 15% of the total relative
abundance. Some perennial broad-leaved
weeds are capable of extensive vegetative
spread. Dandelion, common yellow wood
sorrel (Omlis dillenii Jacq.), broadJeaved plan-
tain (Plantago major L.) and mouse-eared
chickweed (Cerastium vulgatum L.) are
primarily dependent on seed for reproduction.
Other perennial weeds, including quack grass,
yellow nut sedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) and
field horsetall (Equisetum arvense L.),
accounted for l37o ofthe relative abundance.
Com(Zeamays L.) was the only volunteer crop
that was considered a common weed,
accounting for l% of the total relative
abundance.
Although 82 different weed species in total
rvere found in fields in the survey, most fields
had fewer than 10 species (Table 3). No weeds
were recorded in the quadrats of 20 fields. The
total weed density per field ranged from 0 to
greater than 320 plants m-' (Table 3). Nearf
half of the frelds had fewer than 6 plants m-r.
D^ensities of six species exceeded 100 plants
m 'in at least one field. Although only l0 of
37 species considered common were grasses,
four of the six species with high individual
Total density Number of fields
(no. m ') in class
0 20
1-5 214
6- l0 84
lr-20 95
21-40 77
41-80 59
81- 160 34
r60-320 8
>320 2
 FRICK AND THOMAS WEEDS IN SOUTHWESTERN ONTARTO I 343

densities were grasses. Yellow foxtatl (Setaria
glauca (L.) Beauv.), crab grasses, lamb's-
quarters, green foxtail and chickweed (Srel-
laria media (L.) Vill.) had maximum field
densities of 459 , 238 , 214, 2 1 I and I 55 plants
m-2, respectively. Quack grass had a max-
imum field density of286 shoots m-r. Seven
species, mouse-eared chickweed, prostrate
knotweed (Polr-gonum aviculare L.), field
violet (Viola arvensis Murr.), alfalfa
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24
syriaca L.) and wild mustard (Sinapis nrvensis
L.) had maximum single field_ densities of 8,
6, 6, 6, 5, 4 and 2 plants m -', respectively.
Comparison with Previous Survey Results
Twenty of the 36 most abundant species were
recognized as weeds in Ontario prior to 1900
(Fletcher 1897). Field bindweed (Convolvulus
arvensis L.), chickweed, Canada thistle, wild
mustard and stinkweed (Thlaspi arvense L.)

(Medicago sativn L.), wild carrot (Daucus were classed as "bad" weeds (Table 4). The
carota L.), common milkweed (Asclepias most abundant weeds in the current survey
Table 4. Occurrence of the 36 most abundant weeds (unidentitied grasses excluded) in the present surveys compared
with their occurrence in previous reports and surveys from southwestern Ontario
Groh and Richards (1979)
Fletcher Howitt Frankton Alex and Hatnill et al.
Species (1897) (re28) (1919) (t964) (1983)
Green foxtail P L C (_ C
Lamb's-quarters P L
Quack grass P C C
Redroot pigweed P C L C C
Common ragweed P C C C
Dandelion P (_ P (_

Pale smartweed and lady'sthumb P C C L

Velvetleaf P C C
Crab grass species C C C C
Barnyard grass C C C
Field bindweed C C C t- C
Wild buckwheat P C L
Common milkweed C C C
Yellow nut sedge P C
Yellow foxtail P C C t.
Witch grass P C C C (_

Chickweed C L L
Common yellow wood sorrel P C
Broad-leaved plantain P C C P C
Eastern black nightshade P P
Fall panicum C
Prostrate knotweed P C P L
Field horsetail C C P C
Green pigweed v C
Alfalfa C L C
Canada thistle C (-
Volunteer corn P
Clover species L^ P L
Black medick C C P C
Mouse-eared chickweed P C C
Cocklebur P (_ t- P
Giant foxtail
Wild carrot P C L P L
Field violet P v
Wild mustard C L C L
stinkweed C C C

P. species was present in the survey but was not considered a serious weed problem; C, species was considered
a common weed problem (the "bad" weeds of Fletcher, the weeds discussed by Howitt, the weeds of Alex with
"average abundance where present" values greater than 2, or greater than 2% of the fields where quantitative data
were available); species was not included or was not found in the survey.
-,
 t344 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE
were present but not considered "bad" in
Fletcher's (1897) survey. Howitt (1928)
included most of the same species as Fletcher
in the list of weeds of Ontario but added crab
grass, barnyard grass (Echinochloa crusgalli
(L.) Beauv.), common milkweed, field horse-
tail and black medick (Medicago lupulinaL.).
The cumulative summary of weeds by Groh
and Frankton (1949) recognized the presence
of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medic.),
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24
common yellow wood sorrel, black night-
shade (assumed to include Eastern: Solanum
ptycanthum Dun.), and field violet in the
Ontario region. A survey of tomato and corn
fields in Essex and Kent counties by Alex
(1964) included yellow nut sedge and green
pigweed (Amaranthus powellii S. Wats.) as
part of the weed flora in this area. During the
period 1977-1979, surveys by Richards
(1979) and Hamill et al. (1983) added fall
panicum (P ani cum di chotomifl o rum Michx.)
and volunteer corn. Giant foxtail (Setaria
faberii Herrm.) was not included in the list
ofweeds until the 1988-1989 survey reported
here.
From qualitative data it is difficult to deter-
mine if the increase in number and severity
of problem weeds is real (resulting perhaps
from introductions of new species or from
changes in farming practice) or simply reflects
the authors' different perceptions of the
importance of weeds. The addition of volun-
teer corn to the weed flora in the late 1970s
is likely a change in the perceptions of the
authors. We assume that other additions
reflect real changes in the weed flora.
Weed Communities Associated with
Different Tillage Regimes
Weed communities were similar despite
differences in the tillage systems used. The
frequency and mean occurrence field density
of the 37 most abundant weed species are indi-
cated in Fig. 1. Three groups have been
arbitrarily distinguished. Species in group I
occurred in 30-55% of the fields and at mean
occurrence field densities of 2-12 olants
m -2. This group includes green foxtail.
lamb's-quarters, quack grass, redroot pig-
weed and common ragweed in conventional,
reduced and no tillage fields. These five
species were the most abundant in each tillage
system. Dandelion is included in group I in
fields with no tillage. Dandelion was the sixth
most abundant species in reduced and no
tillage fields, and the tenth most abundant spe-
cies in conventionally tilled fields. Dandelion
may have been more common in fields with
reduced or no tillage because dandelion con-
trol is facilitated by intensive tillage or
because the increased residue in reduced and
especially no tillage fields aids in trapping
wind-borne seeds.
None of the six species in group I was found
at consistently high densities. Some have
higher density in reduced tillage fields. Green
foxtail in fields with reduced tillage and green
foxtail and quack grass in fields with no tillage
have higher densities than in conventional
fields, while retaining high frequencies. These
species are potential problems.
The species in group II occurred in approx-
imately l0% of all fields and had mean den-
sities greater than 8 plants m -2. The species
of group II might be considered the most
locally troublesome weeds found in the
survey, since they were found at the highest
mean occurrence field densities and had
escaped effective control in a few ofthe fields
for some reason. The members of group II
were not the same in all tillage systems.
Group II included giant foxtail, fall panicum,
chickweed and witch grass (Panicum capillare
L.) in conventional tillage; chickweed, crab
grasses and yellow nut sedge in reduced
tillage; and yellow foxtail, crab grasses,
clovers (.Trfolium spp.), Canada thistle and
yellow nut sedge in no tillage. Most species
in group II had high occurrence field densities
as the result ofone or only a very few fields.
Thus, it is likely that the differences seen
among tillage types is a chance occurrence.
Species in group III occurred in2-25% of
the fields and at densities less than 8 m -2. ln
conventional tillage, many of the species in
group III occurred at frequencies below l0%
and at densities below 5 m-'. In reduced
tillage, the separation of groups I and III is
less pronounced than in conventional tillage;
in no tillage, groups II and III are not well
 FRICK AND THOMAS WEEDS IN SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO t345

separated. This suggests a slightly more Perennial weeds were a greater percentage of
diverse weed community in reduced and no the total weed density in conventional fields
tillage systems. (5.ll17 .0, or 30%) than in no tillage
The total density of weeds per field was , ot 23%) or reduced tillage fields
(7 .4131.7
higher in reduced than conventional fields and (3.9124.1, or 16%). This finding contradicts
highest in fields with no tillage (Table 5). the conventional wisdom that a reduction in
tillage will result in increased perennial weed
problems (Kells and Meggitt 1985).
Conventionol tillooe In our study, dandelion density was a
greater percentage of the total weed density
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24

in reduced tillage and especially no tillage

fields than in conventional tillage fields
(0.6124.1, ot 2.4%; 1.1131.1, or 3.5%; and
II
0.2111.0, or l.l%, respectively; Table 5).
t35 '. Quack grass density contributed the greatest
i8 otz" percentage to the total weed density in con-
-l_--.
ventional tillage fields (3.9117.0, or 23%
..-n'|
+
3 \ compared with 4.6131.J, or l5%, in no
'jo
\-gt--------6;^! tillage fields and 1.8124.7, or J %, in reduced
N tillage). A reduction in the relative density of
IU fragmenting perennials that regenerate vege-
L Reduced tilloge tatively, like quack grass, may be associated
ci
c 20 ,'6"
\
with no and reduced tillage systems because
;tz
tl the management system does not spread
rl and rejuvenate the plants to the same extent
P JR It
m I 't ll as conventional tillage. Changes in the rela-
c(I) tirl tive importance of perennial and annual
IU
'i so \ weeds with tillage in different studies may
rl
O ..?lii reflect the type of perennials that dominate
O in those studies. In our study quack grass was
c lll
oc o the most common perennial weed.
L- g^Jt OA The densities of minor species were higher
:l oo-
o^
ov
o o
in fields with no tillage than those with
reduced or conventional tillage. Again, this
15 No tilloge
suggests that no tillage fields may support a
more diverse weed community.

9o
,'i'-lt\
io29 to t
t\-o27o.'
rl- -.- ri
,J
!
1!

20 i
Fig. 1. Frequency and mean occurrence density
ofthe 37 most abundant weeds for different tillage
systems in southwestern Ontario. Groups of
i +oj
"jo !o:^ ,/
species occurring with high frequency and with
large occurrence density are delineated by dashed
s38o \:_"-,'
lines. Individual species in these groups are
identified by a number corresponding to their
10 20 30 40 50 OU
relative abundance ranking given in Table 1. The
Frequency (%) occurrence de-nsity of yellow foxtail (15) is
47 plants m ' in fields with no tillage and
exceeds the vertical scale.
 1346 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE

Table 5. Total density of weeds in fields managed with various tillage systems during the 1988 and 1989 survey
Deniity in tillage system {no. m 2t

Species Conventional Reduced No

Based on relative abundance rankingz

1 Green foxtail J.Z 6.0 5.3
2 Lamb's quarters l.+ 3.3
3 Quack grass 3.9 1.8 4.6
4 Redroot pigweed 1A 2.0 2.8
5 Common ragweed 0.9 1.6 1.3
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24

6 Dandelion 0.2 0.6 l.l

1-37 3.3 5.9 7.2
38-82 2.7 3.1 6.1

Based on life cl,cls far 37 top-ranked weeds

Annual broad-leaved 1.1 9.4 9.9

Annual grass 4.5 8.2 8.3
Perennial 3.9 an
5.1
Total density 17.0+ 1.8] 24.1 +2.1 3t.7 +4.3

'Rank of species indicated in Table l.

Y
Standard error.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Doyon, D., and Bouchard, C. J. 1981. A survey

We thank D. Derksen, M. Devine, K. Foster,
F. A. Holm, S. Weaver, J. Waddington and two
anonymous reviewers for their comments on var-
ious drafts. We thank T. Hawkes. E. Schuster and
M. Padoin, for data collection and entry, and R.
Wise for data summarization. We also thank the
people who helped us locate fields, and especially
the f'armers who allowed us to survey their fields.
This study was funded through the Technology
Evaluation and Development subprogram of the
Soil and Water Environmental Enhancement Pro-
gram (a joint Canada-Ontario program).
Alex, J. F. 1964. Weeds of tomato and corn fields
in two regions of Ontario. Weed Res. 4: 308-318.
Atmospheric Environment Service. 1988.
Monthly record meteorological observations in
Canada. Environment Canada.
Atmospheric Environment Service. 1989.
Monthly record meteorological observations in
Canada. Environment Canada.
Brown, D. M., McKay, G. A. and Chapman,
L. J. 1968. The climate of southern Ontario.
Department of Transport, Queen's Printer, Ottawa,
ON. Climatological Studies No. 5. 50 pp.
Chapman, L. J. and Putnam, D. F. 1966. The
physiography ofsouthern Ontario. 2nd ed. Univer-
sity of Toronto Press, Toronto, ON. 386 pp.
Dale, M. R. T. and Thomas, A. G. 1987. The
structure of weed communities in Saskatchewan
fields. Weed Sci. 35: 348-355.
of weeds found in fields of grain corn in St-
Hyacinthe county, Quebec. Phytoprotection 62:
1-10.
Doyon, D., Desch6nes, J., Bouchard, C. J. and
Rioux, R. 1982. Les inventaires de mauvaises
herbes dans les principales cultures au Qu6bec. l.
Buts et methodologie. Phytoprotection 63: 10-21.
Fletcher, J. 1897. Weeds. Canada Department of
Agriculture, Ottawa, ON. Bull. 28. 43 pp.
Frick, 8., Thomas, A. G. and Wise, R. F. 1990.
Weeds of corn, soybean and winter wheat fields
under conventional, conservation and no-till
management systems in southwestern Ontario 1988
and 1989. Agriculture Canada, Research Station,
Regina, SK. Weed Survey Series Publ. 90-1.
239 pp.
Goodwin, M. S., Morrison, I. N. and Thomas,
A. G. 1986. A weed survey of pedigreed alfalfa
seed fields in Manitoba. Can. J. Plant Sci. 66:
413-416.
Groh. H. and Frankton. C.1949. Canadian weed
survey. Canada Department of Agriculture,
Ottawa, ON. 7th Report. 144 pp.
Hamill, A. S., Wise, R. F. and Thomas, A. G.
1983. Weed survey of Essex and Kent counties
1978 and 1979. Agriculture Canada, Research
Station, Regina, SK. Weed Survey Series Publ.
83-1. 134 pp.
Howitt, J. E. 1928. The weeds of Ontario. Ontario
Department of Agriculture, Toronto, ON. Bull.
188. lll pp.
 FRICK AND THOMAS WEEDS IN SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO
-
Kells, J. J. and Meggitt' W. F. 1985. Conserva-
tion tillage and weed control. Pages 123 129 in
F. M. D'Itri, ed. A system approach to conserva-
tion tillage. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI.
Lammers, H. 1989. Ontario survey of conserva-
tion tillage practices. Soil and Water Conservation
Information Bureau and Ontario Ministry of
Agriculture and Food. University of Guelph,
Guelph, ON.
Lemieux, C., L6gbre, A., Desch0nes J'-M' and
Rioux, R. 1987a, Inventaire des mauvaises herbes
Can. J. Plant Sci. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by 105.102.160.29 on 01/12/24
au Qu6bec: c6r6ales pures et c6r6ales plante-abri.
Bulletin d'extension 2. Agriculture Canada, Sta-
tion de Recherches de Sainte-Foy, Sainte-Foy, PQ.
84 pp.
Lemieux, C., Ldgbre, A., Desch€nes J'-M. and
Rioux, R. L987b. Inventaire des mauvaises herbes
au Qu6bec: mais, pommes de terre, fraises.
Bulletin d'extension 3. Agriculture Canada, Sta-
tion de Recherches de Sainte-Foy, Sainte-Foy, PQ.
45 pp.
Lemieux, C., Ldgbre, A., Desch0nes J.-M. and
Rioux. R. 1987c. Inventaire des mauvaises herbes
au Qu6bec: prairies en implantation, prairies
6tablies, pAturages. Bulletin d'extension 4.
Agriculture Canada, Station de Recherches de
Sainte-Foy, Sainte-Foy, PQ. 6a PP.
1347
McCully, K. V., Sampson, M. G. and Watson'
A. K. 1991. Weed survey of Nova Scotia lowbush
blueberry (V ac c i nium an gu s t ifo I ium) fields. Weed
Sci. 39: 180-185.
Richards, R. A. 1979. Survey of weeds in three
counties in southern Ontario. M.Sc. Thesis,
Depaftment of Environmental Biology, University
of Gueiph, Guelph, ON. 300 PP.
Statistics Canada. 1987. Canada census 1986.
Agriculrure. Ontario. Supply and Services Canada,
Ottawa. ON.
Thomas, A. G. 1985. Weed survey system used
in Saskatchewan for cereal and oilseed crops. Weed
Sci. 33: 34-43.
Thomas, A. G. 1991. Floristic composition and
relative abundance of weeds in annual crops of
Manitoba. Can. J. Plant Sci. 7l: 831-839.
Thomas, A. G. and Dale, M. R' T. 1991. Weed
community structure in spring-seeded crops in
Manitoba. Can. J. Plant Sci. 71: 1069-1080.
Thomas, A. G. and Donaghy, D. I. 1991. A
survey of the occurrence of seedling weeds in
spring annual crops in Manitoba. Can. J. Plant Sci.
71: 81 l-820.
Thomas, A. G. and Ivany, J. A. 1990. The weed
flora of Prince Edward lsland cereal fields. Weed
Sci.38: ll9-124.