List of major rice weeds in paddy field
1. Introduction
Rice (
Allelopathy is described as the ability of plants to inhibit or stimulate growth of other plants in the environment by exuding chemicals. The concept of allelopathy was first raised by Hans Molisch to describe both the beneficial and the detrimental chemical interactions of plants and microorganisms [3]. Since then, the term “allelopathy” has undergone several changes and it has been described as any direct or indirect harmful or beneficial effects of one plant on another through the production of chemical compounds that it releases into the environment [4]. The subject of allelopathy currently receives much attention from scientists; the increasing interest in allelopathy in recent years has been stimulated by the recognition that agro-ecological applications of allelopathy may provide alternatives to synthetic herbicides for weed management [5] and with the evidence that allelopathy has the potential for weed control [6-7].
The overuse of agrochemicals has caused environmental degradation, pest tolerance and human health concerns. Agriculture worldwide is currently using about 3 million tons of herbicides annually, and herbicide-resistant weeds have become more prolific, which has further expanded the use of herbicides [8]. To solve these problems, it is necessary to develop sustainable weed management systems that may reduce both herbicide dependency and the burden of manual weeding. With attempts to exploit rice’s allelopathic properties for weed control in rice growing, research into rice allelopathy was begun in the early 1970s and has been widely studied in the USA, Europe, Japan, Korea, India and China. If the allelopathic property of crops can be improved, it implies that the competitive ability of crops against weeds can be strengthened, the amount of applied herbicides lowered and environmental risks reduced. Improved crops’ allelopathic potential may be useful for rice and all other crops [9]. Crop allelopathy may be a successful tool to manage weed infestations in agricultural production, if it can be exploited appropriately in a rotational cropping system [10]. However, in the case of rice, it is difficult to rotate different crops in a paddy field; therefore, enhancing weed suppression by rice itself may be among the most feasible means of controlling weeds. The isolation and identification of allelochemicals responsible for weed suppression by rice plants may be helpful for understanding the chemical interactions of rice. The introduction of allelopathic traits into cultivated rice via a breeding program may give the possibility of utilizing rice allelopathy in agricultural production.
The aims of this chapter are to present some aspects of integration of allelopathy to control weeds in rice that is pertinent to sustainable agriculture. The following points are discussed: (i) role of allelopathy in weed management; (ii) methodology of allelopathy utilization in rice; (iii) incorporation of higher plants with strong allelopathy to control weeds; (iv) developing allelochemicals and their derivatives for weed management; (v) effort to utilize rice allelopathy for rice weed control; (vi) benefits from allelopathy integrated into sustainable agriculture.
2. Rice weeds
Weeds cause major yield losses in crops and also reduce their quality. Without weed management, rice yield may be reduced by 16 to 86%, or even 100% [11]. Worldwide more than 1000 weed species have been reported in rice [12]. However, 13 species are the most serious weeds spp.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Role of allelopathy in weed management
Agriculture worldwide has struggled to control weed interference and the appearance of herbicide-resistant weeds that require the development of new herbicides, and increasing doses of synthetic herbicides in practice. There are about 30000 species of weeds affecting food crops, which cause great losses of crop yields worldwide [17]. In the USA alone, about $20 billion worth of crops are lost each year, accounting for 10% of production [18]. Many high-yield crops have been bred, but this simultaneously increases the heavy dependence on agro-chemicals. The desire for safer control of weeds with less environmental impact has become a worldwide concern. In this regard, integrating allelopathy can be a source of new methods for sustainability of agriculture systems.
4. Weed control by allelopathy
Weeds compete with crops for nutrients, water, space, and requirements for photosynthesis, which reduces crop yield. Synthetic herbicides can control weeds effectively and reduce labor in weeding but can cause numerous detriments to the environment and humans, and increase the occurrence of herbicide-resistant weeds. Since it is known that plants can self-regulate their densities and distribution in nature via allelopathic interactions, scientists have attempted to exploit these characteristics of crops and weeds in agriculture. The use of allelopathy for biological control of weeds in agriculture practice has attracted the interest of many agronomic scientists [1].
One approach of utilizing the allelopathic property of crops is to screen accessions to examine their potential for weed suppression [11, 19]. To place crops in a more favourable competitive position in relation to allelopathy over weeds is important for the establishment of sustainable agriculture [20]. The strategy for using allelopathy for weed management could be either through directly exploiting natural allelopathic interactions, especially of crop plants, or applying allelochemicals as a source of natural herbicides. Derivatives of allelochemicals from plants used as herbicides with environmental properties include mesotrione [21-22] and citronella and bilanaphos oil [21]. Several microbial allelochemical products are marketed worldwide, such as glufosinate and bialaphos.
5. Methodology of allelopathy utilization
5.1. Crop rotation
Crop rotation is one of the traditional practices whereby some crops, particularly leguminous species, are grown in short rotation with the main crops [1]. Crop rotation implies growing different crops in systematic and recurring sequence on the same land. This rotational system can help minimize the interference of weeds, fungi, pathogens, insects, and nematodes, and improve soil physical properties, fertility, and organic matter content and reduce soil erosion and heal soil sickness, and crop yields are therefore increased. Allelopathy and crop selection may play a key role in management strategies of weeds and pests. Use of allelopathy in a cropping system relies on better knowledge of the chemicals involved and their behaviour in the agro-ecosystem [23]. Lampkin, 1994 [24] suggested that the principles of selecting crops for rotational sequences should be: (i) alternating between autumn and spring germinating crops, (ii) rotating between annual and perennial crops, (iii) replacing between closed and dense crops, which shade out weeds and open crops such as maize (
5.2. Cover crops, green manure, mulch and intercropping
The term ‘cover crop’ is defined as crops cultivated with regular cropping for soil and moisture conservation, promotion of nutrient recycling, biomass production, temperature lowering, nuisance weed inhibition, and forage supply [32, 33, 34]. Cover crops may be referred to as either green manure crops or sometimes implied catch crops [35]. Popular allelopathic crops used as cover crops are: barley (
6. Incorporation of higher plants with strong allelopathy to control weeds in rice
6.1. Direct use of plant materials in rice fields
Many plants in the plant ecosystem exert significant allelopathic potential, and when they were incorporated into paddy fields, it resulted in excellent weed reduction. Our research, conducted during 1999–2006, was mainly exploring allelopathic potential of plants in Southeast Asia and Japan for paddy weed control. The preliminary screening for the allelopathic potential of plants in the plant ecosystem should be made with the following requirements: (i) an assessment of their invasiveness and area in the plant ecosystem; (ii) ensuring the plants have less natural weed density in their canopy and surroundings than other plants in their ecosystem; and (iii) using those are traditionally used as green manure, weed or pest management by local farmers [48-49]. Minimizing the hazardous impacts of pesticides (herbicides, insecticides, nematicides and fungicides) in agriculture is the current trend in modern agriculture. Many plants with strong allelopathic properties inhibited the growth of indicator test plants in our laboratory and greenhouse studies. Afterwards, plant species with strong weed suppression were examined against weeds grown in paddy fields. The direct incorporation of allelopathic plant materials into rice fields remarkably reduced the weed interference [48-49].
Southeast Asia has a rich diversity in plant ecosystems; hence, we tested a few hundred plants. More than 30 species including crops strongly inhibited the emergence of pathogens and weeds. In a preliminary investigation, we separated leaves, stems and roots of plants to test their effects on germination and growth of indicator plants (lettuce, radish) and noxious weeds in paddy fields [
|
|
|
|
80.8 | 20.9 |
|
78.4 | 17.0 |
|
91.0* | − |
|
81.8 | 23.3 |
|
74.7 | 23.3 |
|
75.8 | 23.3 |
|
87.9 | 23.3 |
|
77.8 | 17.0 |
|
84.8 | 7.0 |
|
70.0 | − |
|
85.9 | 23.3 |
|
86.9 | 4.7 |
|
74.5 | 19.5 |
|
70.0 | − |
cv. Rasen | 80.0 | 80.6 |
cv. Yuba | 65.0 | 29.0 |
|
72.7 | 23.3 |
|
||
Hulls | 51.7 | 19.4 |
Bran | 25.1 | -6.5* |
Hulls +Rasen | 88.3 | 77.4 |
Bran+Yuba | 53.1 | 29.0 |
|
86.3* | − |
|
75.1 | 21.5 |
|
72.7 | 34.5 |
|
84.1 | 9.9 |
|
72.0 | 25.8 |
|
91.9 | 23.3 |
Herbicide (5L ha-1)** | 77.8 | 11.6 |
Hand weeding | 71.7 | 25.6 |
6.2. Dose of application
The application of 1-2 tons ha-1 biomass of alfalfa (
6.3. Methods of application
The ability of allelopathic plants to reduce weeds in paddy fields depends on the treatment method. The plants with strong weed suppressing ability in the screening should be exploited for paddy weed control [51, 53-54]. The leaves of the screened plants are commonly used to provide a large biomass; however, their nutrient contents should be monitored before conducting field trials. Spreading plant materials evenly on the surface of paddy field, 1-5 days after saturating with water at 1 ton ha-1 causes greatest weed biomass reduction. Application of allelopathic materials in fields, 7 days after adding water did not influence paddy weed emergence. Major paddy weeds (
7. Developing allelochemicals and their derivatives to control weeds in rice
7.1. Role of allelochemicals in paddy fields
The allelochemicals released from the plants incorporated into paddy soil play a crucial role in inhibiting the paddy weed growth. Many weed growth inhibitors identified from
Observations from laboratory, greenhouse and field trials showed that the effects of plant materials on weed species are selective [48]. Different plant materials may possess different quantities and types of toxins, of which the amount released into soil after incorporation, is also species dependent. Despite the identification of many growth inhibitors, their fates after penetrating the soil, how they accumulate at phytotoxic levels and influence the weed growth, the interaction of these compounds with soil factors such as nutrients, pH, minerals and soil microbes, have not yet been fully understood. Even though these issues are complex, we need to understand the actual mode of action of allelochemicals in the environment, so that their efficacies can be increased and become more helpful to develop novel bioactive herbicides.
7.2. Syntheses of novel compounds
Searching the growth inhibitors from plants and testing their efficacies against weeds in the laboratory, greenhouse and fields are just the initial steps to developing bioactive herbicides. However, it is necessary to develop bioactive herbicides, because: (i) direct use of allelochemicals as herbicides is not successful as these compounds are degraded in nature, before reaching the targets, (ii) to isolate allelochemicals from plants is complex, promising compounds for weed suppression exist in low quantities in plants, hence, it is too costly to use as herbicides and (iii) despite the promising weed reduction by direct application of plant materials to paddy soils, it requires a very high amount of plant biomass, therefore, does not meet the current requirements of trend in agricultural production in many countries. However, despite obtaining numerous compounds with herbicidal activities, very few constituents from plants have been marketed as herbicides than from bacteria and fungi [65]. Further, most reported secondary metabolites with strong herbicidal activity have complex chemical structures, hence, may not be processed as novel herbicides, because of difficulties in their synthesis and thus become costly. Thus searching for compounds having a simple form with strong herbicidal activities should be a priority. The synthesis of compounds derived from allelochemicals, attached with further functional groups and possessing herbicidal activities, is indispensable to developing novel bioactive herbicides.
Dihydro-5,6-dhydrokawain (DDK) (Figure 1) is a major compound in all parts of Alpinia (
8. Effort to utilize rice allelopathy for rice weed control
Reducing weed infestation by exploiting the allelopathic properties of rice may be the most important goal of research involved in rice allelopathy and has been a hope of many agronomists. The direct use of rice residues and genetic control of rice allelopathy via breeding programmes to enhance weed suppression may be the most feasible strategy.
Allelopathic activity has been shown to be variety-dependent and origin-dependent, where Japonica rice shows greater allelopathic activity than Indica and Japonica-Indica hybrid. Extensive efforts of researchers worldwide to clarify allelopathic activities among rice cultivars have been made. They provided important information for further work such as genetic analyses, gene mapping of allelopathic characteristics and breeding new rice cultivars with strengthened weed suppression ability [10].
8.1. Rice residue
Utilization of rice residues in paddy fields has long been recognised as an important source to improve the organic matter status of soil and was also reported to reduce the emergence of weeds. In Asia, farmers are often left with a large amount of rice residues, leaves, stubble and straw in the paddy fields after harvest. Incorporating the residues of rice with high allelopathic activity minimised rice flatsedge (
To date, decomposition of rice straw and stubble has reduced the occurrence of both broadleaved and grassy weeds [73]. Leaf plus straw and hulls of some rice cultivars with strong allelopathic property dramatically inhibited weed interference about 60–95% [74]. A pot study of soil incorporation of a mixture of stubble and straw in 15 cm of soil in the pots (7.4 tons ha-1 of blended stubble and straw) revealed inhibition on growth of weed density and decrease of the dry biomass of weeds [73]. Straw, leaves and hulls of some rice cultivars suppressed the germination of field bind weed (
8.2. Molecular research in rice allelopathy and breeding
Allelopathy is one of the last areas of plant science to use molecular biology as a tool in understanding the phenomena. Allelopathic competition, which may be defined as the unequal sharing of resources such as nutrition, light and water, is dependent on several physiological and phenological traits, and its allelopathy is polygenic and quantitatively inherited [82-84]. To be able to breed a more competitive crop with strong allelopathic potential, it is crucial to know which genes are involved in crop competitiveness and allelopathic potential. Molecular marker-aided genetics is presently the best tool for identifying quantitative traits, mapping the genes involved onto the chromosomes with a reasonable level of precision and analysing the relationship between the traits of interest and other important agronomic traits [82]. Allelopathic activity in rice has demonstrated to be a polygenic trait that is only slightly correlated with yield or other agronomic features. The quantitative inheritance of rice allelopathy curbed the breeding of allelopathic rice cultivars against paddy weeds under varying environmental condition [84, 86-87]. Recent research of Xu et al 2012 [85] has provided the evidence that diterpenoid momilactones (allelochemical) isolated from a rice cultivar plays a novel genetic for natural product-mediated allelopathy and furnished a molecular target for breeding and metabolic engineering of a rice cultivar. The selection of rice cultivars with strong weed suppression ability through transgenic and breeding programmes may successfully utilise rice allelopathy for weed control. Allelopathic activity of rice varies among cultivars and origins and correlates with some growth characteristics; therefore, the existence of genes determining rice allelopathy is presumed and should be detected. It was proposed that allelopathic activity may be a polygenic trait slightly correlated with yield or other agronomic features. Allelopathic potential in rice was demonstrated to be quantitatively inherited, but the allelopathic traits were not identified [83].
8.3. Genomic analysis and gene mapping
Despite research on rice allelopathy beginning in the early 1970s, the genetic allelopathy control programme started only in 1996 [88]. Dilday et al. (1998) [89] crossed the allelopathic rice cultivar PI312777 (PI) with another non-allelopathic rice cultivar Lemont and noted that the F2 was allelopathic against
8.4. Breeding new rice allelopathic cultivars
To breed new rice cultivars having strong competitiveness against weeds may bring important benefits to farmers in rice-cultivating nations. In the breeding programme, both traditionally bred and hybrid rice with allelopathy may be feasible. Courtois & Olofsdotter (1998) [88] indicated that if a high number of QTLs with low effect are involved, a traditional breeding method can be a reasonable alternative, in which two parents with contrasting behaviour are crossed and RILs are derived through the single seeded descent method (SSD). Kim & Shin (2003) [106] crossed Donginbyeo (a non-allelopathic cultivar, but a high yielding rice of good quality) and Kouketsumochi (an allelopathic cultivar, close to a wild type) and advanced by SSD breeding method. The F5 of this cross exhibited allelopathic potential in bioassays and was continuously examined under field conditions. The three-line hybrid rice widely cultivated in China may be a good source because of its rapid and profuse vegetative growth in comparison with an inbred line [106]. Lin et al. (2000) [107] applied a simultaneous backcrossing and self-breeding method to develop a hybrid rice with allelopathic activity and, its counter-part, an isogenic hybrid rice with no allelopathic effect on weeds. Three lines of rice Kouketsumochi, Rexmont and IR24 were used as the allelopathic donors, non-allelopathic and restoring genes, respectively. The selected restorer lines were crossed with cytoplasm-sterile lines and tested for the outcross rate. This work illustrated a scheme for developing hybrid rice having allelopathic potential. On the other hand, the heterotic effect on rice allelopathy was positively significant, showing higher heterosis over the mid-parent. This specific hybrid rice showed a suppressive effect on barnyardgrass, exhibiting a large deviation from the resource competition curve [107]. Hybrid rice with stronger weed suppression ability could be bred, but the quality factors associated with rice allelopathy should be carefully considered in the breeding programme as an important standard for the new cultivars. A newly bred rice, namely K21 showed highly allelopathic and agronomically fit. This cultivar inherited its good agronomic performance from the female parents (Dongjibyeo) and attained its potent allelopathic potential from male parent (Koutetsumochi) [108-109]. Moreover, Kim and Shin, 2008 [108] suggested that identified allelochemicals and genes which responsible for allelopathic activity can further be incorporated into the cultivars via breeding or genetic engineering. For instance, the diterpenoid momilactones and phenolics in rice work as the major inhibitor substances to suppress weeds, which are able to be produced in a conventional rice cultivar by inserting the genes CA4H and OsDTS2 for
9. Benefits from allelopathy integrated into sustainable agriculture
If allelopathy can be integrated into sustainable agriculture appropriately, the heavy dependence on synthetic pesticides and other agrochemicals can be significantly minimized. Mono culture has caused imbalances in agricultural production, and this would be replaced by a more ecological and sustainable cropping system. In modern agriculture with its shortage of labour, it is difficult to completely alter the use of agrochemicals, but the biological characteristics of crops including allelopathy and strength of competition should be exploited to reduce the amount of pesticides and agrochemicals used. Furthermore, unsafe pesticides and agrochemicals must be replaced by safer bioactive products, which are derived from living organisms such as plants, fungi, bacteria, and micro-organisms. The detrimental effects from allelopathy integration into agricultural production should also be noted, as only their benefits have been detailed [37]. The competition and chemical interaction of crops can effectively inhibit weeds and other pests, but they may also have harmful effects for crops in the next cropping seasons. Allelochemicals released from living plants and decomposition includes many toxins, which may suppress growth of useful bacteria, fungi, and micro-organisms, but they may cause problems to mineralization and nitrification in soils. This issue can be excluded with common crops, but should be examined when plant (other than common crops and legumes) materials are incorporated into soils. This style of application is still useful in many developing countries, in which a major proportion of the population is still involved in agricultural production. The modes of action of allelochemicals need further research to exploit novel allelochemicals and their derivatives in the development of bioactive pesticides. However, in addition, the extent to which they cause detrimental effects to crops and soils needs careful examination. Despite the fact that many hypotheses have been developed and discussed, and many experiments have been carried out to test them, the actual modes of action of allelopathy in nature are still somewhat unclear, unlike the allelopathic phenomena that we could easily observe. The allelopathic characteristics of plants have been known for centuries, and extensive research worldwide has been conducted for more than 40 years to elucidate the mode of allelopathy as well as efforts to utilize allelopathy more effectively in agricultural production. However, it can be said that farmers have not yet received much efficacy from what has been observed and reported. Much knowledge on plant allelopathy has been documented, but few approaches have already been successfully applied in agricultural practice. There is no doubt that organic and sustainable agricultural practices are indispensable forms of resource management, with the source of knowledge being traditional agriculture throughout the world [37,110]. What we have researched and discussed about multiple cropping, the use of cover crops, organic compost, and biological controls of pests has been traditionally conducted by farmers without knowledge of allelopathy. Therefore, our achievements on allelopathy should be carefully incorporated with the traditional practices of farmers to create sustainable agriculture integrated with allelopathy. Otherwise, this system will never be feasible for farmers to adopt for economic reasons and in the complex ecological conditions of the tropics, these practices would be inappropriate [110]. In our modern agriculture, ecological and sustainable factors are indispensable. Therefore, what crop species are used and how they are applied in the cropping system are important. Of which, both crop allelopathy and nutrient cycle should be further studied to enhance biological characteristics of crops in the agricultural production. The establishment of allelopathy-integrated sustainable agriculture is obviously varied among cultivating regions, of which opinions of farmers regarding traditional cropping system should be referred, and should be carefully examined and repeated before introducing to farmers for agricultural practices. An agricultural production that is sustainable, economical, less labour-intensive, can be easily implemented by farmers, and supported by local authorities could be helpful for farmers in developing countries to eliminate poverty. To date, a number of phytotoxins involved in the allelopathic activities of worldwide rice cultivars have been identified and isolated, and the fate of these compounds in the environment has been gradually understood, and mode of allelopathy is therefore much clearer. Many novel secondary metabolites have been synthesized and marketed as bioactive pesticides, which effectively aid the integration of sustainable agriculture with allelopathy. The use of allelopathy as a tool for a more bio-rational management of natural resources is not a simple panacea for the solution of ecological problems in agro-ecosystems or in natural ecosystems. It is necessary to develop a scientific approach based on the disciplines of botany, ecology, chemistry, microbiology, agronomy, entomology, and biochemistry, and to work together to clarify these bio-chemical interactions from a holistic point of view, as well as utilize them for beneficial purposes in the management of natural resources in agro-ecosystems [37, 110]. The application of crop rotation, cover crop, mulch, green manure, and incorporation of plant materials with strong allelopathic potential may be more effective in the agricultural practice. The integration of allelopathy via breeding and/or genetic manipulation in rice cultivars may clearly provide specific opportunities for successful implementation of alternative weed management systems [111]. However, knowledge about allelopathy for weed and pest management and establishment of sustainable agriculture integrated with allelopathy should be further introduced to local extension workers and farmers. The modification of allelopathy-integrated sustainable agriculture is needed to allow it to be suitable for different regions. Undoubtedly, the integration of allelopathy in rice will benefit from worldwide collaboration with ecologists, plant breeders, and molecular biologists leading to the successful utilization of new tools for selection of rice cultivars with weed-suppressive traits.
References
- 1.
Khanh TD, Chung IM, Xuan TD, Tawata S. The exploitation of crop allelopathy in sustainable agricultural production. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 2005; 191 172–184. - 2.
Olofsdotter M, Navarez D, Moody K. Allelopathy potential in rice ( Oryza sativa L.) germplasm. Annals of Applied Biology 1995; 127 543–560. - 3.
Molisch H. Der Einfluss einer Pflanze auf die andere—Allelopathie. Jena, Germany: Gustav Fischer; 1937. - 4.
Rice EL. Allelopathy. Physiological Ecology. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1974. - 5.
Romeo JT, Weidenhamer JD. Bioassays for allelopathy in terrestrial plants. In: Eds. Haynes KF and Millar JG. (eds.) Methods in Chemical Ecology. MA: Kluwer Academic Publishing; 1999. p179–211. - 6.
Rice EL. Allelopathy. Physiological Ecology. Orlando, FL: Academic Press; 1984 - 7.
An M, Pratley JE, Haig T, Jellett P. Genotypic variation of plant species to the allelopathic effect of vulpia residues. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 1997; 37 647–660. - 8.
Shibayama H. Weeds and weed management in rice production in Japan. Weed Biology and Management 2001 1 53–60. - 9.
Olofsdotter M, Navarez D, Rebulanan M, Streibig JC. Weed suppressing rice cultivars—does allelopathy play a role? Weed Research 1999; 39 441–454. - 10.
Khanh TD, Xuan TD, Chung IM. Rice allelopathy and the possibility for weed management. Annals of Applied Biology 2007; 151 324-339. - 11.
Khanh TD, Elzaawely AA, Chung IM, Ahn JK, Tawata S, Xuan TD. Role of allelochemicals for weed management in rice. Allelopathy Journal 2007; 19 85-96. - 12.
Baltaza AM and Dedatta SK. Weed management in rice. Weed abstract 1992. 41 495-497. - 13.
Aliotta G, Cafiero G, Otero AM. Weed germination, seedling growth and their lesson from allelopathy in agricultural. In: Reigosa MJ, Redrol N, Gonzales L. (eds.) Allelopathy: A Physiological Process with Ecological Implications. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer Publisher; 2006. p 285-299. - 14.
Holm LG, Plucknett DL, Pancho JV, Herberger JP. The World’s Word weeds distribution and biology. The University Press of Hawaii: Honodulu; 1991. p 609. - 15.
McIntyre S, Finlayson CM, Ladiges PY, Mitchell DS. Weed community composition and rice husbandry practices in New South Wales, Australia. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 1991; 34 27-45. - 16.
Heap IM. The occurrence of herbicides-resistant weeds worldwide. Pesticide Science 1997; 51 235-243. - 17.
Anaya AL. Allelopathic organisms and molecules: promising bio-regulators for the control of plant diseases, weeds, and other pests. In: Inderjit, Mukerji KG. (eds.) Allelochemicals: Biological Control of Plant Pathogens and Diseases. Springer Dordrecht: The Netherlands; 2006. p 31–79. - 18.
IFIC. International Food Information Council. Agriculture and Food Production, Background on Agriculture and Food Production; 2007. http://www.ific.org/ food/agriculture/index.cfm (accessed 25 November 2012). - 19.
Kohli RK, Batish D, Singh HP. Allelopathy and its implication in agroecosystems. Journal of Crop Production 1998; 1 169–202. - 20.
Worsham AD. Current and potential techniques using allelopathy as an aid in weed management. In: Chou CH, Waller GR. (eds.) Phytochemical Ecology: Allelochemical, Mycotoxins and Insect Pheromones and Allomones. Monograph Series, No. 9, Institute of Botany, Academia Sinica, Taipei, ROC; 1989. p 275–89. - 21.
Duke SO, Dayan FE, Rimando AM. Natural products and herbicide discovery. In: Cobb HS, Kirkwood RC. (eds.) Herbicides and their Mechanism of Action. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield: UK; 2000. p 105–33. - 22.
Mitchell G, Bartlett DW, Fraser TEM, Hawkes TR, Holt DC, Townson JK et al. Mesotrione: a new selective herbicide for use in maize. Pest Management Science 2001; 57 20–28. - 23.
Mamolos AP, Kalburtji KL. Significance of allelopathy in crop rotation. Journal of Crop Production 2001; 4 197–218. - 24.
Lampkin L. Organic Farming. Farming Press, Ltd, Ipswich: UK; 1994. - 25.
Horst WJ, Haerdter R. Rotation of maize with cowpea improves yield and nutrition use of maize compared to maize monocropping in an alfalfa soil in Northern Guinea Savanna of Ghana. Plant and Soil 1994; 160 171–183. - 26.
Kessavalou A, Walters DT. Winter rye as a cover crop following soybean under conservation tillage. Agronomy Journal 1997; 89 68–74. - 27.
Patrick ZA, Koch LW. 1963 The adverse influence of phytotoxic substances from decomposing plant residues on resistance of tobacco to black root rot. Canadian Journal of Botany 1963; 41 747–758. - 28.
Chou CH. Allelopathy in relation to agricultural productivity in Taiwan: problems and prospects. In: Rizvi SJH, Rizvi V. (eds.) Allelopathy: Basic and Applied Aspects. Chapman and Hall: London; 1992. p 179–204. - 29.
Johnson AW. Specific crop rotation effects combined with cultural practices and nematicides. In: Sasser JN, Carter CC. (eds.) An Advanced Treatise on Meloidogyne. North Carolina State University Press: Raleigh NC; 1985. p283–301. - 30.
Rizvi SJH, Rizvi V. Exploitation of allelochemicals in improving crop productivity. In: Rizvi SJH, Rizvi V. (eds.) Allelopathy, Basic and Applied Aspects. Chapman and Hall: London; 1992. p 443–73. - 31.
Narwal SS. Allelopathy in ecological sustainable agriculture. In: Reigosa MJ, Pedrol N, Gonzalez L. (eds) Allelopathy – A Physiological Process with Ecological Implications. Springer Dordrecht: The Netherlands; 2006.p 512–37. - 32.
Batish DR, Singh HP, Kohli RK, Kaur S. Crop allelopathy and its role in ecological agriculture. Journal of Crop Production 2001; 4 121–62. - 33.
Swanton CJ, Murphy SD. Weed science beyond the weeds: the role of integrated management (IWM) in agroecosystem health. Weed Science 1996; 44 437–445. - 34.
Gallandt ER, Liebman M, Huggins DR. Improving soil quality: implications for weed management. Journal of Crop Production 1999; 2 95–121. - 35.
Fageria NK, Baligar VC, Bailey BA. Role of cover crop in improving soil and row crop productivity. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 2005; 26 2733–2757. - 36.
Worsham AD, Blum U. Allelopathic cover crops to reduce herbicide inputs in cropping systems. In: Richardson RG. (ed.) Proceedings of the First International. Weed Control Congress. Weed Science Society of Victoria : Melbourne,VIC Australia; 1992. p 577–579. - 37.
Khanh TD, Chung IM, Tawata S, Xuan TD. Allelopathy for weed management in sustainable agriculture. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 2007; 2 (034). - 38.
Foley MC. Genetic approach to the development of cover crops for weed management. Journal of Crop Production 1999; 2(1) 77–93. - 39.
Frick B, Johnson E. Using allelopathic and cover crops to suppress weeds. Research Report – Scott Research Farm; 2002. p. 125–126. - 40.
Boydston RA, Al-Khatib K, Hang A, Krishnan G, Nissen S. Weed control with rapeseed (Brassica napus) and white mustard ( Brassica hirta ) as green manure crops. Weed Science Society of American, Abstract 1994; 34 89. - 41.
Al-Khatib K, Boydston R. Weed control with Brassica green manure crop. In: Narwal SS. (ed.) Allelopathy Update, Vol. 2. Basic and Applied Aspects. Oxford and IBH: New Delhi, India; 1999. p 255–227. - 42.
Kohli RK, Batish DR, Singh HP. Allelopathic interactions in agroecosystems. In: Reigosa MJ, Pedrol N, Gonzalez L. (eds.) A Physiological Process with Ecological Implication. Springer; 2006. p 465–493. - 43.
Nava RV, Fernandez LE, Del Amo RS. Allelopathic effects of green fronds of Pteridium aquilinum on cultivated plant, weeds, phytopathogenic fungi and bacteria. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 1987;18 357–379. - 44.
Hartwig NL, Hoffman LD. Suppression of perennial legume and grass cover crop for no-tillage corn. Proceedings of the Northeastern Weed Science Society 1975; 29 82–88. - 45.
Vaughan SF, Boydston RA. Volatile allelochemicals released by crucifer green manures. Journal of Chemical Ecology 1997;23 2107–2116. - 46.
Bantilan RT, Palada MC, Harwood RK. Integrated weed management. I. Key factors affecting crop weed balance. Philippines Weed Science Bulletin 1974; 1 14–36. - 47.
Gliessman SR. Allelopathy and agricultural sustainability. In: Chou CH, Walter GR. (eds.) Phytochemical Ecology: Allelochemicals, Mycotoxins, Insect Pheromones and Allomones. Monograph No. 9. Institute of Botany Academia Sinica: Taipei, Taiwan; 1989. p 69–80. - 48.
Xuan TD, Tawata S, Khanh TD, Chung IM. Biological control of weeds and plant pathogens in paddy rice by exploiting plant allelopathy: an overview. Crop Protection 2005;24 197–206. - 49.
Khanh TD, Xuan TD, Chin DV, Chung IM, Elzaawely AA, Tawata S. Current status of biological control of paddy weeds in Vietnam. Weed Biology and Management 2006; 6 1–9. - 50.
Hong NH, Xuan TD, Tsuzuki E, Khanh TD. Paddy weed control by higher plants from South East Asia. Crop Protection 2004; 23 255-261. - 51.
Khanh TD, Hong NH, Xuan TD, Chung IM. Paddy weed control by medicinal leguminous plants from Southeast Asia. Crop Protection 2005; 24 421-431. - 52.
Xuan TD, Tsuzuki E, Terao H, Matsuo M, Khanh TD. Alfalfa, rice by-products, and their incorporation for weed control in rice. Weed Biology and Management 2003; 3 137-144. - 53.
Xuan TD, Tsuzuki E, Terao H, Matsuo M, Khanh TD, Chung IM. Evaluation on phytotoxicity of neem ( Azadirachta indica . A. Juss) to crops and weeds. Crop Protection 2004; 23 335-345. - 54.
Xuan TD, Tsuziki E, Tawata S, Khanh TD. Methods to determine allelopathic potential of crop plants for weed control. Allelopathy Journal 2004; 13 149-164. - 55.
Xuan TD , Tsuzuki E. Effects of application of alfalfa pellet on germination and growth of weeds. Journal of Crop Production 2001; 4 303-312. - 56.
Khanh TD, Chung IM, Tawata S, Xuan TD. Weed suppression by Passiflora edulis and its potential allelochemicals. Weed Research 2006; 46 296-303. - 57.
Xuan TD, Tawata S, Hong NH, Khanh TD, Chung IM. Assessment of phytotoxic action of Ageratum conyzoides L. (billy goat weed) on weeds. Crop Protection 2004; 23 335-345. - 58.
Deba F, Xuan T D, Yasuda M, Tawata S. Herbicidal and fungicidal activities and identification of potential phytotoxins from Bidens pilosa. var. Radiata. Weed Biology and Management 2007; 7 77-83. - 59.
Xuan TD, Tsuzuki E, Matsuo M, Khanh TD. Correlation between inhibitory exhibition and suspected allelochemicals in alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.). Plant Production Science 2003; 6 165-171. - 60.
Xuan TD, Tawata S, Khanh TD, Chung IM. Decomposition of allelopathic plants in soil. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 2005; 191 162-171. - 61.
Khanh TD, Hong NH, Nhan DQ, Kim SL, Chung IM, Xuan TD. Herbicidal activity of Stylosanthes guianensis and its phytotoxic components. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 2006; 192 427-433. - 62.
Chung IM, Kim JT, Kim SH. Evaluation of allelopathic potential and quantification of momilactone A, B from rice hull extracts and assessment of inhibitory bioactivity on paddy field weeds. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2006; 54 2527-2536. - 63.
Xuan TD, Elzaawely AA, Fukuta M, Tawata S. Herbicidal and antifungal activities of lactones in kava ( Piper methysticum ). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2006; 54 720-725. - 64.
Xuan TD, Elzaawely AA, Deba F, Fukuta M, Tawata S. Mimosine as a potent herbicide. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2006; 26 89-97. - 65.
Duke SO, Dayan FE, Romagni JG, Rimando AM. Natural products as sources of herbicides: current status and future trends. Weed Research 2000; 40 99-111. - 66.
Zhu J, Majikina M, Tawata S. Syntheses and biological activities of pyranyl-substituted cinnamates. Bioscience Biotechnology and Biochemistry 2001; 65 161-163. - 67.
Tawata S, Taira S, Kobamoto S, Ishihara M, Toyama S. Syntheses and biological activities of dihydro-5,6-dehydrokawain derivatives. Bioscience Biotechnology and Biochemistry 1996; 60 1643-1645. - 68.
Tawata, S., Taira, S., Kobamoto, N., Zhu, J., Ishihara, M. and Toyama, S. (1996). Synthesis and antifungal activity of cinnamic acid esters. Bioscience Biotechnology and Biochemistry 60: 909-910. - 69.
Lin J Jr, Smith RJ, Dilday RH. Allelopathic activity of rice germplasm on weed. Proceedings in Southern Weed Science Society; 1992 45 99. - 70.
Khan AH, Vaishya RD. Allelopathic effects of different crop residues on germination and growth of weeds. In: Tauro P, Narwal SS.(eds.) Proceedings of National Symposium on Allelopathy in Agroecosystem, 12–14 February 1992, CCS Haryana Agricultural University. Hisar, India: Indian Society of Allelopathy; 1992.p 59–60. - 71.
Young CC, Zhu C, Throne LR, Waller GR. Phytotoxic potential of soils and wheat straw in rice rotation cropping systems of subtropical Taiwan. Plant Physiology 1989; 120 95–101. - 72.
Tamak JC, Narwal SS, Singh L, Singh I. Effect of aqueous extract of rice stubble and straw + stubble on the germination and seedling growth of wheat, oat, berseem and lentil. Crop Research 1994; 8 180–185. - 73.
Narwal SS. Weed management in rice: wheat rotation by allelopathy. Critical Reviews in Plant Science 2000; 19 249–266. - 74.
Jung WS, Kim KH, Ahn JK, Hahn SJ, Chung IM. Allelopathic potential of rice ( Oryza sativa L.) residues againstEchinochloa crus-galli . Crop Protection 2004; 23 211–218. - 75.
Ahn JK, Chung IM. Allelopathic potential of rice hulls on germination and seedling growth of barnyard grass. Agronomy Journal 2000; 92 1162–1167. - 76.
Inderjit, Rawat D, Foy CL. Multifaceted approach to determine rice straw phytotoxicity. Canadian Journal of Botany 2004; 82 168–176. - 77.
Pheng S, Olofsdotter M, Jahn G, Adkins S. Use of phytotoxic crop residues for weed management. Weed Biology and Management 10; 176-184 - 78.
Chou CH. Allelopathic researches in subtropical vegetation in Taiwan. Comparative Physiology and Ecology 1980; 5: 222–234. - 79.
Singh HP, Daizy R, Batish DR, Kohli RK. Autotoxicity: concept, organism, and ecological significance. Critical Reviews in Plant Science 1999; 18 757–772. - 80.
Chou CH. Allelopathy and sustainable agriculture. In: Inderjit, Dakshini KMM, Einhellig FA. (eds.) Allelopathy: Organisms, Processes and Application . ASC Symposium Series No. 582. Washington, DC: American Chemistry Society; 1995. p 211–223. - 81.
Kuk YI. Evaluation of rice by-products for weed control. Weed Science 2001; 49 141–147. - 82.
Olofsdotter M. Getting closer to breeding for competitive ability and the role of allelopathy—an example from rice ( Oryza sativa ). Weed Technology 2001; 15 798–806. - 83.
Olofsdotter M. Rice-a step toward use of allelopathy. Agronomy Journal 2001; 93 3–8. - 84.
Kong CH, Chen XH, Hu F, Zhang SZ. Breeding of commercially acceptable allelopathic rice cultivars in China. Pest Management Science 2011; 67 1100-1106. - 85.
Xu M, Galhano R, Wiemann P, Bueno E, Tiernan M, Wu W, Chung IM, Gershenzon J, Tudzynski B, Sesma A, Peter RJ. Genetic evidence for natural product-mediated plant-plant allelopathy in rice ( Oryza sativa ). New Phytologist 2012; 193 570-575. - 86.
Belz RG. Allelopathy in crop/weed interactions – an update. Pest Management Science 2007; 63:308–326. - 87.
Dilday RH, Mattice JD, Moldenhauer AK. An overview of rice allelopathy in the USA. In: Kim KU, Shin DH. (eds.) Rice Allelopathy. Kyungpook National University, Taegu, Korea; 2000. p 15–26. - 88.
Courtois B, Olofsdotter M. (1998) Incorporating the allelopathy trait in upland rice breeding program. In Pro-ceedings of Workshop on Allelopathy in Rice, 25–27 November 1996, Makati City, pp. 57–67. Ed M. Olofsdotter. Manila, The Philippines: International Rice Research Institute. - 89.
Dilday RH, Yan WG, Moldenhauer AK, Gravois KA. Allelopathic activity in rice for controlling major aquatic weeds. In: Olofsdotter M. (ed.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Allelopathy in Rice, 25–27 November 1996, Makati City, Manila, The Philippines: International Rice Research Institute; 1998.p 7–26. - 90.
Jensen LB, Courtois B, Shen L, Li Z, Olofsdotter M, Mauleon RP. Locating genes controlling allelo-pathic effects against barnyardgrass in upland rice. Agronomy Journal 2001; 93 16–21. - 91.
Okuno K, Ebana K. Identification of QTL controlling allelopathic effects in rice: genetic approaches to biological control of weeds. Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly 2003; 37 77–81. - 92.
Okuno K, Ebana K, Hegab M. Challenges for biological weed control using genetic diversity of rice-QTL and candidate compounds associated with allelopathic effect. CS2–S1, 5th International Crop Science Congress and Exhibition (ICSC 2008); 2008. - 93.
Zeng DL, Qian Q, Teng S, Dong GJ, Fujimoto H, Yasufumi K, Zhu LH. Genetic analysis of rice allelopathy. Chinese Science Bulletin 2003; 48 265–268. - 94.
Lee SB, Seo KI, Koo JH, Hur HS, Shin JC. QTLs and molecular markers associated with rice allelopathy. In: Harper JDI, An M, Wu H, and Kent JH. (eds.) Fourth World Congress on Allelopathy ‘‘Establishing the Scientific Base’’Wagga Wagga, Australia: CharlesSturt University2005. p 505–507 - 95.
Lin WX, He HQ, Chen XX, Song BQ, Liang YY, Liang KJ. Use of ISSR molecular markers approach to estimate genetic diversity in rice and barley allelopathy. In: Harper JDI, An M, Wu H, Kent JH. (eds). Proceedings of World Fourth Congress on Allelopathy. Wagga Wagga, Australia: Charles Sturt University; 2005.p 168–174. - 96.
Harushima Y, Yano M, Shomura A, Sato M, Shimano T, Kuboki Y, Yamamoto T, Lin SY, Antonio BA, Parco A, Kajiya H, Huang N, Yamamoto K, Nagamura Y, Kurata N, Khush GS, Sasaki T. A high-density rice genetic linkage map with 2275 markers using a single F2 population. Genetics 1998; 148 479–494. - 97.
Junaedi A, Jung WS, Chung IM, Kim KH. Differentially expressed genes of potentially allelopathic rice in response against barnyardgrass. Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology 2008; 10 231–236. - 98.
Maqbool N, Wahid A, Farooq M, Cheema ZA, Siddique KHM. Allelopathy and abiotic stress interaction in crop plants. In: Allelopathy, Cheema ZA et al. (eds.) Springer-Verlag Berlin: Heidelberg 2013. P 451-468. - 99.
Xiong J, Wang HB, Qiu L, Wu HW, Chen RS, He HB, et al. qRT-PCR analysis of key enzymatic genes related to phenolic acid metabolism in rice accessions ( Oryza Sativa L.) exposed to low nitrogen treatment. Allelopathy Journal 2010; 25 345–356. - 100.
Wang HB, He HB, Ye CY, Lu JC, Chen RS, Liu CH, et al. Molecular physiological mechanism of increased weed suppression ability of allelopathic rice mediated by low phosphorus stress. Allelopathy Journal 2010; 25 239–248. - 101.
Song B, Xiong J, Fang C, Qiu L, Lin R, Liang Y, Lin W. Allelopathic enhancement and diferential gene expression in rice under low nitrogen treatment, Journal of Chemical Ecology 2008; 34 688–695. - 102.
Lin W, He H, Shen L, Chen X, Ke Y, Guo Y, He H. A proteomic approach to analysing rice allelopathy on barnyard grass ( Echinochloa crus-galli L.) Proceedings of the 4th International Crop Science Congress, Brisbane: Australia; 2004 http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/2/4/1/1414_xionglw.htm (accessed 26 November 2012). - 103.
Jabran K, Farooq M. Implication of potential allelopathic crops in agricultural systems. In: Cheema ZA et al. (eds.) Allelopathy. Springer-Verlag : Berlin Heidelberg; 2013. p 349-385. - 104.
De Albuquerque MB, Dos Santos RC, Lima LM, Melo Filho PA, Nogueira RJMC, Da Camara CAG, Ramos AR. Allelopathy, an alternative tool to improve cropping systems. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2011; 31 379-395. - 105.
He HQ, Shen LH, Xiong J, Jia XL, Lin WX, Wu H. Conditional genetic effect of allelopathy in rice ( Oryza sativa L.) under different environmental conditions. Plant Growth Regul 2004; 44 211–221. - 106.
Kim KU, Shin DH. The importance of allelopathy in breeding new cultivars. In: Labrada R. (ed.) Weed Management for Developing Countries. Addendum 1—FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 120, Rome, Italy: Food Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2003. p 290. - 107.
Lin W, Kim KU, Liang K, Guo Y. Hybrid rice with allelopathy. In Kim KU, Shin DH. (eds.) Rice Allelopathy, Proceedings of the International Workshop in Rice Allelopathy, 17–19 August 2000, Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology, Kyungpook National University, Taegu, Korea: Chan-Suk Park; 2000. p 49–56. - 108.
Kim KU, Shin DH. Progress and prospect of rice allelopathy research. In: Zeng RS, Malik AU, Luo SM (eds.) Allelopathy in sustainable agriculture and forestry. Springer: The Netherlands; 2008. p 189–213. - 109.
Ma HJ, Shin DH, Lee IJ, Koh JC, Park SK, Kim KU. Allelopathic K21 selected as promising allelopathic rice. Weed Biology and Management 2006; 6 189–196. - 110.
Anaya AL. Allelopathy as a tool in management of biotic resources. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 1999;18 697–39. - 111.
Bertin C, Weston LA, Kaur H. Allelopathic crop development: Molecular and traditional plant breeding approaches. In: Janick J. (ed.) Plant Breeding Review; 2008. p 231-254.