Subscribe Now Subscribe Today
Abstract
Fulltext PDF
References
Research Article
 

Trials for Controlling Weeds and Improving Fruiting in Red Globe Vineyards



A.A.B. Masoud and Ahmed M.K. Abdel Aal
 
ABSTRACT

During 2012 and 2013 seasons soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets and sawdust, chemical control with Round up, hand hoeing as well as application of humic acid and Effective Microorganisms (EM1) were examined for their positive action on killing weeds and improving yield and quality of Red Globe grapes. Results revealed that soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets or sawdust, chemical control and hand hoeing either applied alone or in combined with application of humic acid and EM1 was very effective in reducing dry weight of annual weeds and enhancing growth characters, nutrients in the leaves, yield as well as physical and chemical characteristics of the grapes in relative to control. The best means for controlling weeds and improving productivity of the vines was soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets followed by sawdust, hand hoeing and chemical control, in descending order. Controlling weeds by weeds control treatments along with application of humic acid and EM1 was superior than using weed control treatments alone in this respect. Soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets as well as application of humic acid and EM1 each at 5 mL per vine is suggested for controlling weeds and improving productivity of Red Globe vineyards.

Services
Related Articles in ASCI
Similar Articles in this Journal
Search in Google Scholar
View Citation
Report Citation

 
  How to cite this article:

A.A.B. Masoud and Ahmed M.K. Abdel Aal, 2014. Trials for Controlling Weeds and Improving Fruiting in Red Globe Vineyards. Asian Journal of Crop Science, 6: 214-225.

DOI: 10.3923/ajcs.2014.214.225

URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=ajcs.2014.214.225
 
Received: November 08, 2013; Accepted: January 24, 2014; Published: April 14, 2014

INTRODUCTION

Extension and improvement of the Egyptian grape industry demands overcoming all production problems. Weed competition is one of these chronic problems. It restricts growth directly and severely limits the ability of grapevines to respond to favourable nutritional and soil moisture conditions, resulting in poor growth and reduced yields (Oran, 1988; Tomasi et al., 2001). Controlling of weeds by soil mulching, chemical control and hand hoeing was reviewed by El-Shammaa and Hassan (2001), Erhart and Hartl (2002), Hansen (2005), Yao et al. (2005), Dilley (2007), Linjian-Jiang (2010) and Abdelaal (2011). Effective microorganisms (EM1) contains a mixture of lactic acid bacteria, lactobacillus plantorium, Candida utilis and Streptomyces albus (Higa, 1991). Previous studies showed that using EM1 and Humic acid was very effective in enhancing soil fertility and uptake of elements (Mengel, 1984; Higa, 1995; Wood et al., 1997; Simon et al., 1999). The promotion effect of EM1 on fruiting was supported by the findings of Bogatyre (2000), Kannaiyan (2002), Farag (2006), Ahmed et al. (2012), Allam-Aida et al. (2012) and El-Khafagy (2013). The Results of Omar and Abd El-Aal (2005), Saleh et al. (2006), Eman et al. (2008), Kabeel et al. (2008), Abada (2009), Abd El-Aziz (2011) and Mekawy (2012) emphasized the beneficial effects of humic acid on fruiting of different grapevine cvs.

This experiment was carried out for examining the effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on annual weeds, growth characters, vine nutritional status, yield as well as some physical and chemical characteristics of Red Globe grapes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was carried out during 2012 and 2013 seasons on 60 uniform in vigour 6 years old Red Globe grapevines grown in a private vineyard located at Matay district, Minia Governorate. The texture of the tested vineyard soil is clay (Table 1). The selected vines are planted at 1.5x3.0 m apart and trained with the cordonic method using Gable supporting system. Vine load was 48 eyes (12 fruiting spursx3 eyes plus 6 replacement spursx2 eyes. Surface irrigation system was followed.

All the selected vines received the usual horticultural practices which are commonly used in the vineyard.

This experiment included the following ten treatments:

Unweeded control
Unweeded control+humic acid+effective microorganisms (EM1) each at 5 mL vine-1
Soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets
Soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets+humic acid+EM1
Soil mulching with sawdust
Soil mulching with sawdust+humic acid+EM1
Chemical control with Round up at 2 L fed-1
Chemical control with Round up+humic acid+EM1
Hand hoeing three times
Hand hoeing three times+humic acid+EM1

Therefore, this experiment included ten treatments, each treatment was replicated three times, two vines per each. Hand hoeing was carried out three times at the first week of March, April and May.

Table 1: Analysis of the tested soil

Table 2: Weed density (measured as fresh weigh g-1 as well as percentages) in the experimental vineyard in 2012 and 2013 seasons just before treatment

Black polyethylene sheets (120 micron thick) were used to cover the area around vine trunk and under the vine canopy (0.143 kg m-2). Sawdust mulch was settled in a layer about 15 cm height around vine trunk and under vine canopy (4.4 kg m-2). Round up (glyphosate) as systemic post emergence herbicide at 2 L fed-1. was applied twice at the middle of March and again at one month later and this amount was added to 200 L water fed-1. Humogen (10% humic acid) as a source of humic acid EM1 (1 mL contains 107 cells) were applied once via soil just before growth start. This experiment was set up in a randomized complete block design.

The spectrum of annual and perennial weeds infesting the experimental vineyard area was recorded (in m2) just before the application of different weed control treatments (Table 2). However, the effect of the tested weed control treatments on the associated weeds was evaluated through calculating dry weights of annual weeds per sequre meter.

During both seasons, the following parameters were recorded, dry weight of annual weeds (g), leaf area (cm2) according to Ahmed and Morsy (1999); main shoot length (cm); leaf content of N, P, K, Mg and Ca (as%) and Zn, Fe, Mn and Cu (as ppm) according to Cottenie et al. (1982); berry setting%; No. of clusters vine-1; yield (kg), cluster weight (kg) and dimensions (cm), berry weight (g) and dimensions (longitudinal and equatorial in cm); T.S.S%; total sugars% and total acidity% (as g tartaric acid/100 mL juice) (AOAC, 1995).

Statistical analysis was done using new LSD test at 5% (Mead et al., 1993).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Dry weights of annual weeds: It is clear from the data in Table 3 that controlling weeds by soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets or sawdust, chemical control and hand hoeing either alone or in combined with using humic acid and EM1 significantly depressed the dry weights of annual weeds m-2 in relative to unweeded control. Controlling the weeds with the studied means along with using humic acid and EM1 was significantly favourable for controlling weeds rather than using weed control treatments alone. Using black polyethylene sheets surpassed the application of sawdust in controlling weeds. Soil mulching was preferable than using any means in this connection/Hand hoeing was superior than using chemical control in this respect. Controlling weeds by soil mulching with polyethylene sheets besides the application of humic acid and EM1 gave the minimum dry weights of annual weeds. Unweeded control gave the maximum values. These results were true during both seasons.

Table 3: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on dry weight of annual weeds m-2, leaf area (cm2) and main shoot length (cm) of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid, EM1: Effective microorganisms

Table 4: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on percentages of N, P and K in the leaves of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid, EM1: Effective microorganisms

Growth characters and leaf content of N, P, K, Mg, Ca, Fe, Zn, Mn and Cu: It is clear from the data in Table 3-6 and Fig. 1 that controlling weeds by soil mulching, chemical control and hand hoeing with or without humic acid and EM1 significantly was very effective in stimulating the two growth characters namely leaf area and main shoot length and all nutrients in the leaves (N, P, K, Mg, Ca, Fe, Zn, Mn and Cu) in relative to the check treatment. All weed control treatments (mulching, chemical control or hand hoeing) besides using humic acid and EM1 was superior than using weed control treatments alone in improving growth and vine nutritional status. Using soil mulching for controlling weeds was significantly preferable than using chemical or hand hoeing in this connection. Hand hoeing was preferable than using chemical control in this respect. The maximum values were recorded on the treatment that included soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets plus application of humic acid and EM1. Unweeded control gave the lowest values. Similar results were announced during both seasons.

Table 5: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on percentages of Mg and Ca in the leaves of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid, EM1: Effective microorganisms

Table 6: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on some nutrients in the leaves of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid, EM1: Effective microorganisms

Berry setting%, yield and cluster characters: It is revealed from the data in Table 7 and 8 and Fig. 2 and 3 that berry setting%, yield expressed in weight and No. of clusters vine-1 and cluster weight and dimensions (length and width) were significantly improved in response to weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments in relative to unweeded control. Soil mulching (black polyethylene sheets or sawdust), hand hoeing and chemical control, in descending order was significantly very effective in improving berry setting%, yield and cluster characters. Using humic acid and EM1 plus weed control treatments were significantly favourable than using weed control treatments in this respect. Hand hoeing was significantly favourable than chemical control in improving berry setting, yield and cluster characters. These results were true during both seasons.

From economical point of view, the best results with regard to yield were obtained with soil mulching using black polyethylene sheets besides humic acid and EM1.

Fig. 1: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on leaf area (cm2) of red

Fig. 2: Effect os some weed control, himic acid and EM1 treatment on berry setting% of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013

Fig. 3: Effect os some weed control, himic acid and EM1 treatment on yield (kg) of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons

Table 7: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on berry setting%, No. of clusters vine-1 and yield (kg) of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid EM1: Effective microorganisms

Under such promised treatment, yield per vine (Table 7) reached 28.2 and 37.5 kg compared to 21.7 and 21.7 kg produced by unweeded control per vine during both seasons, respectively. The percentages of increase on the yield over the check treatment reached 29.25 and 72.81% during both seasons, respectively.

Table 8: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on some cluster characters of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid, EM1: Effective microorganisms

Table 9: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on some physical characteristics of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid, EM1: Effective microorganisms

Some physical and chemical characteristics of the berries: Table 9 and 10 and Fig. 4 and 5 show that controlling weeds by soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets or sawdust, chemical control or hand hoeing with or without using humic acid and EM1 significantly improved quality of the berries in terms of increasing berry weight and dimensions (longitudinal and equatorial), T.S.S% and total sugars% and decreasing total acidity in relative to unweeded control. Mulching was favourable than hand hoeing and chemical control in enhancing fruit quality. The addition of both humic acid and EM1 besides weed control treatments significantly was accompanied with promoting fruit quality rather than application of weed control treatments alone. The best results with regard to quality of the fruits were obtained with controlling weeds by soil mulching with black polyethylene sheets along with using humic acid and EM1. Unfavourable effects on quality of the berries were observed on untreated vines. Similar results were announced during both seasons.

Fig. 4:
Effect os some weed control, himic acid and EM1 treatment on berry weight (g) of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons

Fig. 5:
Effect os some weed control, himic acid and EM1 treatment on percentage of total soluble solides (TSS %) of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons

Table 10: Effect of some weed control, humic acid and EM1 treatments on some chemical characteristics of red globe grapevines during 2012 and 2013 seasons
H.A: Humic acid, EM1: Effective microorganisms

CONCLUSION

Controlling weeds in vineyards was beneficial for protecting the vines from insects and diseases, competition on nutrients, light and water and root damage (Oran, 1988). Therefore, there are many methods of weed control including mulching, chemical control and hand hoeing. The beneficial of mulching for controlling weeds and improving yield and fruit quality of Red Globe grapevines might be attributed to its positive action on conserving soil moisture and changing temperature conditions of the soil and of the air lying just above soil, reducing of soil erosion and reflecting light of the appropriate spectrum (Tomasi et al., 2001). These results are in agreement with those obtained by El-Shammaa and Hassan (2001), Erhart and Hartl (2002), Hansen (2005), Yao et al. (2005), Dilley (2007), Tesic et al. (2007), Derr (2008) and Linjian-Jiang (2010).

The positive action of using EM1and humic acid in improving soil fertility in terms of increasing water retention soil aggregation, soil water content, organic matter, nutrient uptake and activity of microflora and reducing soil pH (Mengel, 1984; Higa, 1995; Wood et al., 1997; Simon et al., 1999) surely reflected on enhancing growth and fruiting of Red Globe grapevines. These results are in harmony with those obtained by Bogatyre (2000), Kannaiyan (2002), Farag (2006), Ahmed et al. (2012), Allam-Aida et al. (2012) and El-Khafagy (2013) who worked on EM1, as well as, Omar and Abd El-Aal (2005), Saleh et al. (2006), Eman et al. (2008), Kabeel et al. (2008), Abada (2009), Abd El-Aziz (2011) and Mekawy (2012) who worked on humic acid.

REFERENCES
AOAC, 1995. Official Methods of Analysis. 12th Edn., Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington DC., USA, pp: 490-510.

Abada, M.A.M., 2009. Reducing the amount of inorganic N fertilizers in Superior grape vineyard by using organic and biofertilizers and humic acid. Egypt. J. Agric. Res., 87: 317-344.

Abd El-Aziz, Y.Z., 2011. Response of Thompson seedless grapevines to application of organic fertilizer humic acid and some biofertilizers. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Minia University, Egypt.

Abdelaal, M.A., 2011. The beneficial effects of biofertilization and weed control on fruiting of Superior grapevines. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Assiut, AL-Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt.

Ahmed, F.F. and M.H. Morsy, 1999. A New methods for measuring leaf area in different fruit species. Minia J. Agric. Res. Dev., 19: 97-105.

Ahmed, F.F., M.A. Ragab, E.A.M. Merwad and A.Y. Mekawy, 2012. Improving productivity of Thompson seedless grapevine by application of some vitamins, humic acid and farmyard manure extract. Minia J. Agric. Res. Dev., 32: 131-145.

Allam-Aida, M.A., F.F. Ahmed, N.N. El-Hefnawy, M.A. El-Hewety and H.A. El-Khafagy, 2012. Impact of inorganic N and compost enriched with some bacterial strains on fruiting of Superior and Flame seedless grapevines as well as dehydrogenase activity in the soil. Minia J. Agric. Res. Dev., 32: 115-130.

Bogatyre, A.N., 2000. What are we do to eat or how to live longer? Pishchevaya Promyshlennost, 78: 34-35.

Cottenie, A., M. Verloo, L. Kiekens, G. Velgh and R. Camerlynck, 1982. Chemical Analysis of Plant and Soils. Laboratory of Analytical and Agrochemistry, State University of Gent, Belgium, pp: 63.

Derr, J.F., 2008. Vineyard Weed Management. In: Wine Grape Production Guide for Eastern North America, Wolf, T. (Ed.). Natural Resource, Agriculture and Engineering Service (NRAES) Cooperative Extension, Ithaca, NY., USA., pp: 262-271.

Dilley, C.A., 2007. Soil quality in strawberry and vineyard agroecosystems maintained under conventional and alternative weed management systems. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Horticulture, Iowa State University, USA.

El-Khafagy, H.A.E., 2013. Physiological study on productivity and quality of some grape varieties under bio- organic fertilization. Ph.D. Thesis, Environmental Studies and Research Institute, Minufiya University, Egypt.

El-Shamma, M.S. and A.A.A. Hassan, 2001. A comparative study of some weed control methods on Thompson seedless vines. Assiut J. Agric. Sci., 32: 145-155.

Eman, A., A. Abd El-Monem, M.M.S. Saleh and E.A.M. Mostafa, 2008. Minimizing the quantity of mineral nitrogen fertilizers on grapevine by using humic acid, organic and biofertilizers. Res. J. Agric. Biol. Sci., 4: 46-50.

Erhart, E. and W. Hartl, 2002. Weed suppression in viticulture with mulch from shredded shrubs, coarse compost fraction and immature compost. Mitt. Klosterneuburg, 52: 89-96.

Farag, S.G., 2006. Minimizing mineral fertilizers in grapevines farms to reduce the chemical residuals in grapes. M.Sc. Thesis, Institute of Environmental Studies Research, Ain Shams University, Egypt.

Hansen, D.W., 2005. Impact of vineyard soil management on soil physical properties and vine response. M.Sc. Thesis, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Adelaide, University, Australia.

Higa, T., 1991. Effective Microorganisms: A Biotechnology for Mankind. In: The First International Conference on Kyusei Nature Farming, Parr, J.F., S.B. Hornick and C.E. Whitman (Eds.). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington D.C., USA., pp: 8-14.

Higa, T., 1995. Effective microorganisms: Their role in Kyusei in Nature farming and sustainable agriculture. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Kyusei Nature Farming, June, 1995, Paris, France -.

Kabeel, H., A.E F.M. Atif and M.S.M. Baza, 2008. Growth, fruiting and nutritional status of Le-Conte pear trees in response to mineral and humate fertilizers. Ann. Agric. Sci. Moshtohor, 46: 139-156.

Kannaiyan, S., 2002. Biotechnology of Biofertilizers. Alpha Science International Ltd, Pangabourne England, pp: 1-275.

Linjian-Jiang, M.S., 2010. Simonize treated mulch an integrated management tool for Vinifera grape (Vitis vinifera L.) production. Ph.D. Thesis, Ohio State University, USA.

Mead, R., R.N. Currow and A.M. Harted, 1993. Statistical Methods in Agricultural and Experimental Biology. 2nd Edn., Chapman and Hall, London, UK., ISBN-13: 9780412354809, pp: 10-20.

Mekawy, A.Y.H., 2012. Attempts for improving yield quantitively and qualitatively of Thompson seedless grapevines by application of some antioxidants with humic acid and farmyard manure extract. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture Minia University, Egypt.

Mengel, K., 1984. Nutrition and Metabolism of Plants. Fisher Verlage, Stuttgart and New York, pp: 100-140.

Omar, A.H. and A.H. Abd El-Aal, 2005. Influence of sulphuric acid, humic acid, sulphur and irrigation water on growth and productivity of Superior seedless grapevines grown under saline conditions. J. Agric. Sci., Mansoura Univ., 30: 6951-6961.

Oran, Y., 1988. A new approach to weed control in orchards. Phytopaarasitica, 16: 386-386.

Saleh, M.S., S. El-Ashry and A.M. Gomaa, 2006. Performance of Thompson seedless grapevines as influenced by organic fertilizer, humic acid and biofertilizers under sandy soil conditions. Res. J. Agric. Biol. Sci., 2: 467-741.

Simon, S., N. Corroyer, F.X. Getti, T. Girard, F. Combe, J. Fauriel and C. Bussi, 1999. Organic farming: Otimization of techniques. Arboriculture Fruitier, 533: 27-32.

Tesic, D., M. Keller and R. Hutton, 2007. Influence of vineyard floor management practices on grapevine vegetative growth, yield and fruit composition. Am. J. Enol. Vitic, 58: 1-11.
Direct Link  |  

Tomasi, D., P. Belvini, A. Zago and L.D. Costa, 2001. Effect of mulching and nitrogen fertilizer on root and above-ground plant development in a vineyard. Formatore Agrario, 28: 129-139.

Wood, M.T., R. Miles and P. Tahora, 1997. EM fermented plant extract and EMs for controlling pickleworm (Diaphania nitidalis) in organic cucumber. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Kyusei Nature Farming, October 23-26, 1997, Bangkok, Thiland. -.

Yao, S.R., I.A. Merwin, G.W. Bird, G.S. Abawi and J.E. Thies, 2005. Orchard floor management practices that maintain vegetative or biomass groundcover stimulate soil microbial activity and alter soil microbial community composition. Plant Soil, 271: 377-389.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

©  2019 Science Alert. All Rights Reserved
Fulltext PDF References Abstract