Growing degree days and cover crop type explain weed biomass in winter cover crops

  • Barbara BaraibarEmail author
  • David A. Mortensen
  • Mitchell C. Hunter
  • Mary E. Barbercheck
  • Jason P. Kaye
  • Denise M. Finney
  • William S. Curran
  • Jess Bunchek
  • Charles M. White
Research Article


Cover crops are increasingly being adopted to provide multiple ecosystem services, including weed suppression. Understanding what drives weed biomass in cover crops can help growers make the appropriate management decisions to effectively limit weed pressure. In this paper, we use a unique dataset of 1764 measurements from seven cover crop research experiments in Pennsylvania (USA) to predict, for the first time, weed biomass in winter cover crops in the fall and spring. We assessed the following predictors: cover crop biomass in the fall and spring, fall and spring growing degree days between planting and cover crop termination, cover crop type (grass, brassica, legume monocultures, and mixtures), system management (organic, conventional), and tillage before cover crop seeding (no-till, tillage). We used random forests to develop the predictive models and identify the most important variables explaining weed biomass in cover crops. Growing degree days, cover crop type, and cover crop biomass were the most important predictor variables in both the fall (r2 = 0.65) and spring (r2 = 0.47). In the fall, weed biomass increased as accumulated growing degree days increased, which was mainly related to early planting dates. Fall weed biomass was greater in legume and brassica monocultures compared to grass monocultures and mixtures. Cover crop and weed biomass were positively correlated in the fall, as early planting of cover crops led to high cover crop biomass but also to high weed biomass. In contrast, high spring cover crop biomass suppressed weeds, especially as spring growing degree days increased. Grass and brassica monocultures and mixtures were more weed-suppressive than legumes. This study is the first to be able to predict weed biomass in winter cover crops using a random forest approach. Results show that weed suppression by winter cover crops can be enhanced with optimal cover crop species selection and seeding time.


Cover crop mixtures Grass Legume Brassica Weed suppression Cover crop biomass Random forest 



We are grateful to the diverse research teams from Penn State University and the staff of the Russell E. Larson Agricultural Research Center for planting, managing, and assisting in data collection in our experimental plots, and to many undergraduate assistants for their assistance with data collection.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

This work was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the Organic Research and Extension Initiative under Project PENW-2015-07433, Grant No. 2015-51300-24156, Accession No. 1007156, and the National Science Foundation Grant No. DGE1255832. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Baraibar B, Hunter MC, Schipanski ME, Hamilton A, Mortensen DA (2018) Weed suppression in cover crop monocultures and mixtures. Weed Sci 66:121–133. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhowmik PC, Inderjit S (2003) Challenges and opportunities in implementing allelopathy for natural weed management. Crop Prot 22:661–671. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Björkman T, Lowry C, Shail JW Jr, Brainard DC, Anderson DS, Masiunas JB (2015) Mustard cover crops for biomass production and weed suppression in the Great Lakes region. Agron J 107:1235. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanco-Caqui H, Shaver TM, Lindquist JL, Shapiro CA, Elmore RW, Francis CA, Hergert GW (2015) Cover crops and ecosystem services: insights from studies in temperate soils. Agron J 107:2449. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brainard DC, Bellinder RR, Kumar V (2011) Grass–legume mixtures and soil fertility affect cover crop performance and weed seed production. Weed Technol 25:473–479. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breiman L, Friedman J, Stone CJ, Olshen RA (1984) Classification and regression trees (The Wadsworth Statistics/Probability Series.). CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  7. Brennan EB, Smith RF (2005) Winter cover crop growth and weed suppression on the central coast of California. Weed Technol 19:1017–1024. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dieleman A, Mortensen DA, Martin AR (1999) Influence of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) density variation on weed management outcomes. Weed Sci 47:81Google Scholar
  9. Dorn B, Jossi W, Van der Heijden MGA (2015) Weed suppression by cover crops: comparative on-farm experiments under integrated and organic conservation tillage. Weed Res 55:586–597. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Finney DM, White CM, Kaye JP (2016) Biomass production and carbon/nitrogen ratio influence ecosystem services from cover crop mixtures. Agron J 108:39. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fisk JW, Hesterman OB, Shrestha A, Kells JJ, Harwood RR, Squire JM, Sheaffer CC (2001) Weed suppression by annual legume cover crops in no-tillage corn. Agron J 93:319. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gfeller A, Herrera JM, Tschuy F, Wirth J (2018) Explanations for Amaranthus retroflexus growth suppression by cover crops. Crop Prot 104:11–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hamilton A (2016) Maximizing the on-farm benefits of cover crops: comparing management intentions and ecosystem service provisioning. Master’s thesis. Pennsylvania State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  14. Hayden ZD, Brainard DC, Henshaw B, Ngouajio M (2012) Winter annual weed suppression in rye–vetch cover crop mixtures. Weed Technol 26:818–825. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ishwaran H, Kogalur UB (2018) Random forests for survival, regression, and classification (RF-SRC), R package version 2.6.1Google Scholar
  16. Lawley YE, Teasdale JR, Weil RR (2012) The mechanism for weed suppression by a forage radish cover crop. Agron J 104:205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lawson A, Cogger C, Bary A, Fortuna AM (2015) Influence of seeding ratio, planting date and termination date on rye-hairy vetch cover crop mixture performance under organic management. PLoS One 10:e0129597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Malcolm GM, Camargo GGT, Ishler VA, Richard TL, Karsten HD (2015) Energy and greenhouse gas analysis of northeast U.S. dairy cropping systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 199:407–417. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marshall EJP, Brown VK, Boatman ND, Lutman PJW, Squire GR, Ward LK (2003) The role of weeds in supporting biological diversity within crop fields. Weed Res 43:77–89. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mirsky SB, Gallandt ER, Mortensen DA, Curran WS, Shumway DL (2010) Reducing the germinable weed seedbank with soil disturbance and cover crops. Weed Res 50:341. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Murrell E, Schipanski ME, Finney DM, Hunter MC, Burgess M, LaChance JC, Baraibar B, White CM, Mortensen DA, Kaye JP (2017) Achieving diverse cover crop mixtures: effects of planting date and seeding rate. Agron J 109(1).
  22. Myers MW, Curran WS, VanGessel MJ, Calvin DD, Mortensen DA, Majek BA, Karsten HD, Roth GW (2004) Predicting weed emergence for eight annual species in the northeastern United States. Weed Sci 52:913–919. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. O’Connell SO, Grossman JM, Hoyt GD, Shy W, Bowen S, Marticorena DC, Fager KL, Creamer NG (2014) A survey of cover crop practices and perceptions of sustainable farmers in North Carolina and the surrounding region. Renew Agric Food Syst 30:550–562. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Olsen J, Kristensen L, Weiner J (2006) Influence of sowing density and spatial pattern of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) on the suppression of different weed species. Weed Biol Manag 6:165–173. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Orloff N, Mangold J, Miller Z, Menalled F (2018) A meta-analysis of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.) and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense L.) management in organic agricultural systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 254:264–272. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. R Core Team (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for StatisticalGoogle Scholar
  27. Ringselle B, Prieto-Ruiz I, Andersson L, Aronsson H, Bergkvist G (2017) Elymus repens biomass allocation and acquisition as affected by light and nutrient supply and companion crop competition. Ann Bot 119:477–485. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Storkey J, Döring T, Baddeley J, Collins R, Roderick S, Jones H, Watson C (2015) Engineering a plant community to deliver multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Appl 25:1034–1043. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Strobl C, Malley J, Tutz G (2009) An introduction to recursive partitioning: rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. Psychol Methods 14:323–348. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. USDA (2012) Plant hardiness zones. Accessed 13 Mar 2018
  31. Wallace JM, Williams A, Liebert JA, Ackroyd VJ, Vann RA, Curran WS, Keene CL, VanGessel MJ, Ryan MR, Mirsky SB (2017) Cover crop-based, organic rotational no-till corn and soybean production systems in the Mid- Atlantic United States. Agriculture 7, 34.
  32. White CM, DuPont ST, Hautau M, Hartman D, Finney DM, Bradley B, LaChance JC, Kaye JP (2017) Managing the tradeoff between nitrogen supply and retention with cover crop mixtures. Agric Ecosyst Environ 237:121–133. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wittwer RA, Dorn B, Jossi W, Van Der Heijden MGA (2017) Cover crops support ecological intensification of arable cropping systems. Sci Rep 7.

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Baraibar
    • 1
    Email author
  • David A. Mortensen
    • 1
  • Mitchell C. Hunter
    • 1
  • Mary E. Barbercheck
    • 2
  • Jason P. Kaye
    • 3
  • Denise M. Finney
    • 4
  • William S. Curran
    • 1
  • Jess Bunchek
    • 1
  • Charles M. White
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant SciencePenn State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.Department of EntomologyPenn State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  3. 3.Department of Ecosystem Science and ManagementPenn State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  4. 4.Biology DepartmentUrsinus CollegeCollegevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations