Relationship between speed, soil movement into the cereal row and intra-row weed control efficacy by weed harrowing

Field trials were carried out at a single Danish and two Spanish locations. In Denmark, winter wheat was sown at 24‐cm row spacing allowing hoeing in the inter‐row area. Hoeing speeds of 2, 5 and 8 km h^?1 were tested at the end of tillering, at the beginning of stem elongation or on both occasions. The crop was harrowed immediately after hoeing at the same speed. At the Spanish locations the winter barley was sown at a 12‐cm row spacing and harrowed only, at either pre‐emergence plus post‐emergence, or once post‐emergence at mid‐tillering at 2, 4, 6 and 8 km h^?1. The depth of the soil layer thrown into the cereal row was measured at all locations. This layer ranged between 0.4 and 1.4 cm, depending on the site and on the treatment, but was generally higher following a single harrow treatment at all sites. The soil layer only tended to increase with faster speeds at the Danish location. On a more sandy soil and soil rolled prior to treatment, less soil was thrown into the cereal row. When two hoe + harrowing treatments were made, a finer soil structure was achieved. However, this did not affect the weed control. At the Danish location, initial intra‐row weeding efficacy of Brassica napus, based on plant number before and 7 days after treatment, was found to be low (21–41%) but increased to 74–79% when assessed after 45 days. Partial burial and bending of B. napus, together with crop competition, probably suppressed weed growth and enhanced final mortality. Uprooting was probably a more important cause of mortality for Stellaria media. At the Spanish locations, weeding efficacy of Papaver rhoeas was similar, ranging between 58% and 83% and this was achieved soon after harrowing. A thicker soil layer did not result in a greater weed kill. It was therefore suggested that burial alone could not be the main factor responsible for weed control in any of the cases studied. No reduction in wheat biomass, measured at the end of May, was found with increasing speed, or with repeated passes of the harrow. The results suggested that faster harrowing, which is economically more attractive for farmers, could be recommended. The soil layer thrown into the row was not found to be a useful parameter to predict the weed control efficacy in the cases presented.     

Effects of inter-row hoeing and fertilizer placement on weed growth and yield of winter wheat

Inter‐row hoeing is known to control tap‐rooted and erect weed species more effectively in winter wheat than weed harrowing. However, little is known about its effectiveness for use in the spring in winter wheat grown at wide row spacing (240 mm) under the influence of different placement of fertilizer. Two field experiments, one in 1999 and one in 2000, were conducted to study the influence of fertilizer placement, timing of inter‐row hoeing, and driving speed on the weeding effect on different weed species and crop growth. Placement of fertilizer below the soil surface improved crop growth and grain yield in both years compared with placement on the surface, but the more vigorous crop did not give any better suppression of the weeds surviving hoeing. Timing was not important in one experiment, whereas hoeing twice beginning in early April was more effective in the other experiment where weed growth over the winter had been vigorous. Driving speed had no influence on either the weeding effect or the yield, except for one case where increasing speed reduced the control of well‐developed weeds. Compared with unweeded reference treatments, inter‐row hoeing reduced total weed biomass by 60–70% and tap‐rooted and erect weed species in particular by 50–90%. Sowing at 240 mm row spacing yielded less than 120 mm (Danish standard), and inter‐row hoeing for winter wheat needs to be adapted to narrower row spacing to avoid such yield decreases.     

Automatic adjustment of harrowing intensity in cereals using digital image analysis

Precision farming technologies were implemented into a commercial harrow to increase selectivity of weed harrowing in spring cereals. Digital cameras were mounted before and after the harrow measuring crop cover. Crop soil cover (CSC) was computed out of these two images. Eight field experiments were carried out in spring cereals. Mode of harrowing intensity was changed in four experiments by speed, number of passes and tine angle. Each mode was varied in five intensities. In four experiments, only intensity of harrowing was changed. Weed control efficacy (WCE) and CSC were measured immediately after harrowing. Crop recovery was assessed 14 days after harrowing. Modes of intensity were not significantly different. However, intensity had significant effects on WCE and CSC. Cereals recovered from 10% CSC, and selectivity was in the constant range at 10% CSC. Therefore, 10% CSC was the threshold for the decision algorithm. If the actual CSC was below 10% CSC, intensity was increased. If the actual CSC was higher than 10%, intensity was decreased. Image analysis, decision support system and automatic control of harrowing intensity by hydraulic adjustment of tine angle were installed on a controller mounted on the harrow. The new system was tested in an additional field study. Threshold values for CSC were set at 10%, 30% and 60%. Automatic tine angle adjustment precisely realised the three different CSC values with variations of 1.5% to 3%. This development contributes to selective weed control and supports farmers during harrowing.     

Selective uprooting by weed harrowing on sandy soils

Uprooting by weed harrowing and the potential of the uprooting process for selective weed control at early crop growth stages was studied. Effects of working depth, seed depth, soil moisture content and working speed on uprooting of Lolium perenne L., Lepidium sativum L. and Chenopodium quinoa Willd. were investigated in laboratory harrowing experiments on a sandy soil. Harrowing uprooted on average 51% of the emerging plants and 21% of the plants in the seedling stage. Seventy per cent of all uprooted plants were completely covered by soil. An increase in working depth from 10 mm to 30 mm doubled the average fraction of uprooted plants. Uprooting was also promoted by higher soil moisture contents and higher working speeds. Average uprooting selectivity (=fraction of uprooted emerging plants/fraction of uprooted seedlings of the same species) varied between 2.0 (deep tillage and high speed) and 5.6 (dry soil). If tines could keep a distance of more than 3 mm from the crop and weed plants, the average selectivity of all treatments would improve from 2.4 to 5.5 and the average fraction of uprooted seedlings would decrease from 21% to 8%. This study indicates that uprooting may be a more important weed control mechanism than commonly believed. If working depth and the path of the harrow tines in relation to crop rows could be accurately controlled, uprooting could be a relatively selective weed control mechanism at early crop growth stages.     

Consequences of narrow crop row spacing and delayed Echinochloa colona and Trianthema portulacastrum emergence for weed growth and crop yield loss in maize

Echinochloa colona and Trianthema portulacastrum are weeds of maize that cause significant yield losses in the Indo‐Gangetic Plains. Field experiments were conducted in 2009 and 2010 to determine the influence of row spacing (15, 25 and 35 cm) and emergence time of E. colona and T. portulacastrum (0, 15, 25, 35, 45 and 55 days after maize emergence; DAME) on weed growth and productivity of maize. A season‐long weed‐free treatment and a weedy control were also used to estimate maize yield and weed seed production. Crop row spacing as well as weed emergence time had a significant influence on plant height, shoot biomass and seed production of both weed species and grain yield of maize in both years. Delay in emergence of weeds resulted in less plant height, shoot biomass and seed production. However, increase in productivity of maize was observed by delay in weed emergence. Likewise, growth of both weed species was less in narrow row spacing (15 cm) of maize, as compared with wider rows (25 and 35 cm). Maximum seed production of both weeds was observed in weedy control plots, where there was no competition with maize crop and weeds were in rows 35 cm apart. Nevertheless, maximum plant height, shoot biomass and seed production of both weed species were observed in 35 cm rows, when weeds emerged simultaneously with maize. Both weed species produced only 3–5 seeds per plant, when they were emerged at 55 DAME in crop rows spaced at 15 cm. Infestation of both weeds at every stage of crop led to significant crop yield loss in maize. Our results suggested that narrow row spacing and delay in weed emergence led to reduced weed growth and seed production and enhanced maize grain yield and therefore could be significant constituents of integrated weed management strategies in maize.     

Anoda cristata control with glyphosate in narrow- and wide-row soyabean

Experiments evaluated the effect of glyphosate rate and Anoda cristata density, on crop and weed biomass and weed seed production in wide (70 cm) and narrow rows (35 cm) glyphosate‐resistant soyabean (Glycine max). Soyabean density was higher at 35 cm row spacing as an increase in planting rate in narrow‐row soyabean is recommended for producers in Argentina. Soyabean biomass at growth stage V4 (four nodes on the main stem with fully developed leaves beginning with the unifoliate leaves) was higher when grown on narrow than in wide‐rows but was not affected by the presence of A. cristata. At growth stage R5 (seed initiation – seed 3 mm long in a pod at one of the four uppermost nodes on the main stem, with a fully developed leaf and full canopy development), crop biomass was greater in narrow rows compared with wide rows with 12 plants m^?2 of A. cristata. In narrow‐row soyabean, a single application of a reduced rate of glyphosate maintained soyabean biomass at R5 and provided excellent weed control regardless of weed density. In wide‐row soyabean control was reduced at the high weed density. Regardless of row spacing, A. cristata biomass and seed production were severely reduced by half of the recommended dose rate of glyphosate but the relationship between biomass and seed production was not altered. Glyphosate rates as low as 67.5 g a.e. ha^?1 in narrow rows or 540 g a.e. ha^?1 in wide rows provided excellent control of A. cristata. To minimize glyphosate use, planting narrow‐row soyabean are effective where A. cristata density is low.     

The effect of sowing date, stale seedbed, row width and mechanical weed control on weeds and yields of organic winter wheat

Three field experiments were carried out in organically grown winter wheat in Denmark. The treatments were sowing time (normal or late sowing) and false seedbed, row width (12 and 24 cm) and weed control method [untreated; mechanical weed control (weed harrowing at 12 cm supplemented with inter‐row hoeing at 24 cm); and herbicide weed control]. Weed biomass in midsummer was greatest on plots sown at the normal sowing time (compared with delayed sowing) and was reduced by mechanical or chemical weed control (compared with untreated plots). Row width alone had no influence on weed biomass, but in the experiment with high weed pressure, the more intensive mechanical weed control used at a row width of 24 cm reduced weed biomass. Normal sowing time tended to give higher yields, but this was only statistically significant in one of the three experiments. Wide rows gave a yield decrease in the experiment with low weed pressure. The effect of weed control on yield was dependent on the weed pressure. At low weed pressure, mechanical weed control caused a yield decrease compared with untreated or herbicide treated. At intermediate weed levels there were no differences, whereas at high weed pressure, mechanical weed control and herbicide treatment caused a yield increase compared with untreated. False seedbeds were shown to contribute to a decrease in the soil seed reserve.     

Innovation in mechanical weed control in crop rows

Weed control within crop rows is one of the main problems in organic farming. For centuries, different weed removal tools have been used to reduce weeds in the crop rows. Stimulated by the demand from organic farmers, research in several European countries over the last decade has focused on mechanisation using harrowing, torsion finger weeding and weeding with compressed air (Pneumat). Intelligent weeders are now being developed which offer more advanced ways to control weeds, including larger ones and to leave the crop plants unharmed. One of the first commercially available intelligent weeders, the Sarl Radis from France, has a simple crop detection system based on light interception, which guides a hoe in and out of the crop row, around the crop plants. The inclusion of innovative technologies, including advanced sensing and robotics, in combination with new cropping systems, might lead to a breakthrough in physical weed control in row crops leading to significant reductions, or even elimination, of the need for hand weeding.     

Effects of pre- and post-emergence weed harrowing on annual weeds in peas and spring cereals

To assess the effects of timing and frequency of weed harrowing on weed abundance and crop yield, different pre- and post-emergence weed harrowing sequences were applied to spring cereals and peas in field experiments performed during 2003 and 2004 in Sweden. Post-emergence harrowing was performed at crop growth stages 2–3 and 5–6 true leaves respectively. The best weed control was obtained by a combination of pre- and post-emergence harrowing, but these treatments also caused yield losses of 12–14% in spring cereals, while no yield losses were observed in peas. Pre-emergence weed harrowing treatments alone or combined with weed harrowing shortly after crop emergence proved to be most effective against the early emerging annual weed species Sinapis arvensis and Galeopsis spp. Post-emergence harrowing alone in peas had no effect on S. arvensis . The late emerging annual weed species Chenopodium album and Polygonum lapathifolium were most effectively controlled when pre-emergence weed harrowing was combined with one or two weed harrowing treatments after crop emergence.     

Selectivity of weed harrowing in lupin

Three field experiments were conducted in lupin in 1997, 1998 and 1999 to study two aspects of selectivity of post‐emergence weed harrowing; the ability of the crop to resist soil covering (the initial damage effect), and the ability of the crop to tolerate soil covering (the recovery effect). Each year soil covering curves and crop tolerance curves were established in three early growth stages of lupin. Soil covering curves connected weed control and crop soil cover in weedy plots, and crop tolerance curves connected crop yield and crop soil cover in weed‐free plots. The experiments showed that both resistance and tolerance were unaffected by the growth stage of lupin within the range from the cotyledon to the 7–8 leaf growth stages. Tolerance to soil covering was also unaffected by year whereas the ability of the crop to resist soil covering was highly affected by year. Lupin showed high tolerance to soil covering but a rather low ability to resist soil covering. Harrowing at multiple growth stages supported the finding that lupin is fairly tolerant to soil covering. Advantages and disadvantages of using soil covering as a measure of crop damage is discussed. In conclusion, weed harrowing in lupin showed positive prospects because of high tolerance to crop soil cover.     

Weed suppression ability of three winter wheat varieties at different row spacing under organic farming conditions

For three seasons, six field trials were conducted in winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum ) at different sites in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. The aim was to evaluate the performance of three varieties, which differ in their shading behaviour, in suppressing weeds under organic farming (Ökologischer Landbau) conditions and grown at three row spacings. The experimental factors were cultivar, row width and row orientation. Key parameters of crop and weed development, including ground cover and biomass, were assessed at different growth stages and analysed with anova . Growth of the site-specific weed vegetation was significantly affected in five of six trials. Weed growth was reduced by cvs Astron and Pegassos compared with cv. Greif, and was lower at 12 cm compared with 24 cm row spacing. No effect of row orientation (East-West, North-South) on weed growth was observed. The more competitive cultivars Astron and Pegassos were taller than the less competitive cv. Greif and had higher ground cover and light interception, presumably induced by planophile leaf inclination and partly, in the case of cv. Astron, because of higher leaf area index (LAI). Narrow row spacing (12 cm), resulting in a more even spatial plant distribution, increased crop ground cover, LAI, dry matter and light interception. In two trials, the variety with planophile leaf inclination performed better at wider row spacing, suggesting that planophile wheat cultivars may be advantageous in wider row stands.     

Barley seed vigour and mechanical weed control

Two field experiments investigated the influences of crop seed vigour on the effect of weed harrowing and crop:weed interactions in spring barley. Artificially reduced seed vigour, which was similar to the variation within commercial seed lots, caused a reduction in germination rate, delayed time of emergence and, consequently, caused reduced competitive ability against weeds. During both years, the reduced seed vigour increased the average weed biomass by 169% and 210%, and reduced the average crop yield by 16% and 21%. Without the influence of weeds, the yield reduction was estimated to be 8% and 10%. A three‐times harrowing strategy reduced the weed biomass by 75% and 72% on average. However, it also caused damage to the crop and reduced yield. There was no clear interaction between barley seed vigour and weed harrowing in the experiments but, in one year, reduced seed vigour tended to decrease the effect of weed harrowing and also increased crop damage. Results in both years, however, indicate potential possibilities for successful integrated weed control by adding the use of high seed quality to a weed harrowing strategy.     

Modelling population dynamics of Sinapis arvensis in organically grown spring wheat production systems

Although we know that alterations in crop density, crop spatial pattern and inclusion of more selective weed control can improve weed suppression for organic growers, it is unknown whether these result in changes to the weed seedbank that increase cropping system profitability over time. Data collected from field trials conducted in 2009 and 2010 in Maine, USA, comparing regional grower practices (Standard) with management that aimed to (i) facilitate better physical weed control through the use of wide row spacing and inter‐row cultivation (Wide) or (ii) enhance crop–weed competition through increased seeding rate and narrow inter‐row spacing (Narrow HD), were used to construct a matrix population model with an economic sub‐model. Using field measurements of grain yield and weed survival and fecundity, we investigated the lasting implications of employing alternative organic spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) production practices on Sinapis arvensis population dynamics. In most scenarios, the model indicated that regional production practices were not sufficient to prevent an increase in the weed seedbank, even with excellent weed control. The two alternative methods, on the other hand, were able to limit weed population growth when initial densities were low or cultivation efficacy was >80%. Due to higher seed costs in the Narrow HD system, net returns were still lower after 10 years of simulation in this system compared with wide rows with cultivation, despite a lower weed seedbank.     

Increased density and spatial uniformity increase weed suppression by spring wheat

It has been hypothesized that increased crop density and spatial uniformity can increase weed suppression and thereby play a role in weed management. Field experiments were performed over 2 years to investigate the effects of the density and spatial arrangement of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) on weed biomass and wheat yield in weed-infested fields. We used three crop spatial patterns (normal rows, random and uniform) and three densities (204, 449 and 721 seeds m⁻²), plus a fourth density (1000 seeds m⁻²) in the random pattern. Increased crop density reduced weed biomass in all three patterns. Weed biomass was lower and crop biomass higher in wheat sown in the random and uniform patterns than in normal rows in both years. At 449 seeds m⁻², weed biomass was 38% lower in the uniform and 27% lower in the random pattern than in rows. There was evidence of decreasing grain yield due to intraspecific competition only at 1000 seeds m⁻². The results not only confirm that increasing density and increasing crop spatial uniformity increase the suppression of weeds, but also suggest that a very high degree of spatial uniformity may not be necessary to achieve a major increase in weed suppression by cereal crops. Rows represent a very high degree of spatial aggregation. Decreasing this aggregation increased weed suppression almost as much as sowing the crop in a highly uniform spatial pattern. While the random pattern produced as much crop biomass and suppressed weeds almost as well as the uniform pattern, the uniform pattern gave the highest yield.     

Row spacing impacts the critical period for weed control in cotton (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Gossypium hirsutum</Emphasis>)

The knowledge on the critical crop-weed competition period is important for designing an efficient weed management program. Field studies were conducted in 2012 and 2013 at the Agricultural Research Institute, Kahramanmaras, Turkey to determine the effects of three row spacing (50, 70 and 90 cm) on the critical period for weed control (CPWC) in cotton. A four parameter logistic equation was fit to data relating relative crop yield to both increasing duration of weed interference and length of weed-free period. The relative yield of cotton was influenced by the duration of weed-infested or weed-free period, regardless of row spacing. In cotton grown at 50 cm row spacing, the CPWC ranged from 117–526 growing degree days (GDD) (V2–V11 growth stages) in 2012 and 124–508 GDD (V2–V10) in 2013 based on the 5% acceptable yield loss level. At 70 cm row spacing, the CPWC ranged from 98–661 GDD in 2012 (V2–V13) and 144–616 GDD (V2–V12) in 2013. At 90 cm row spacing, the CPWC ranged from 80–771 GDD in 2012 (V1–V14) and 83–755 GDD (V1–V14) in 2013. In order to obtain a 95% weed-free yield, the weed management should start at 16 days after crop emergence (DAE) and continued until 52 DAE (V2–V11) for crops grown in 50 cm row spacing, 15 and 60 DAE (V2–V13) for 70 cm row spacing and 11 and 67 DAE (V1–V14) for crops grown in 90 cm row spacing. This suggests that cotton grown in narrow row spacing (50 cm) had greater competiveness against weeds compared with wider row spacing (70 and 90 cm). Cotton growers can benefit from these results by improving cost of weed control through better timing of weed management.     

Agronomic evaluation of precise mechanical hoeing and chemical weed control in sugar beet

Most herbicide applications to sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) are made to the whole crop area, but there is the opportunity to restrict applications to the crop row, decreasing the usage of herbicide by up to 70%. However, this would require greater use of mechanical weed control between rows. Experiments were performed in two seasons to evaluate the weed control performance of a novel, vision‐guided, inter‐row hoe in sugar beet crops grown on a peat fen soil. Hoe lateral placement was within ±30 mm. A precise hoeing and band spraying treatment was compared with overall herbicide use, and with treatments in which the herbicide applications were replaced by hand weeding to minimize competition between crop and weeds. Two hoe passes were made in each season, at crop growth stages of two and 10–12 true leaves in the first season and four and eight true leaves in the second season. Plant population density was not affected by treatment, indicating that none of the treatments caused crop plant loss. Use of the guided hoe controlled weeds better than overall spraying. Crop yields were not significantly different between treatments, indicating that weed control prevented competition with the crop in all treatments.     

Influence of intra-row cruciferous surrogate weed growth on crop yield in organic spring cereals

In Northern Europe, inter-row hoeing has become a popular tactic for controlling weeds in organic cereals. Hoeing is highly effective and can be implemented from crop emergence until stem elongation to maintain a nearly weed-free inter-row zone. However, hoeing has a lesser effect on weeds growing in the intra-row zone, where crop–weed proximity results in heightened competition. In the hoed cereal system, it is investigated whether tall-growing, competitive, cruciferous weeds in the intra-row zone affect crop biomass, yield and thousand kernel weight (TKW). An additive experimental design is employed to enable the fitting of rectangular hyperbolas, describing and quantifying the effects of increasing intra-row surrogate weed density on crop growth parameters. Regressions were studied under the influence of crop (spring barley and spring wheat), row spacing (narrow [12.5 or 15.0 cm] and wide [25.0 cm]) and nitrogen rate (50 and 100 kg NH₄-N/ha). Cruciferous surrogate weeds were found to impact crop yield and quality severely. For example, ten intra-row plants/m² of surrogate weed Sinapis alba reduced grains yields by 7%–14% in spring barley and by 7%–32% in spring wheat with yield losses becoming markedly greater in wheat compared to barley as weed density increases. Compared to wheat, barley limited yield and quality losses and suppressed intra-row weed growth more. Row spacing did not have a consistent effect on crop or weed parameters; in one of six experiments, the 25 cm row spacing reduced yields and increased intra-row weed biomass in wheat. Nitrogen rate did not affect crop or weed parameters. Results warrant the implementation of additional tactics to control intra-row weeds and limit crop losses.     

Reduction in field emergence and seedbank density of Galinsoga quadriradiata and other weeds after contrasting false seedbed strategies in organic vegetable fields

Mechanical weed control in low competitive, organic vegetable production systems is challenging, particularly in fields with large populations of Galinsoga spp. (Asteraceae). Various false seedbed techniques are used prior to crop planting or sowing to prevent weed emergence, albeit with variable success. This study investigated the impact of machinery type (flamer, hoe and harrow), number of passes (2 and 4), tillage depth (1–4 cm) and intensity (double and single hoeing, and hoeing with or without additional harrowing) on weed emergence and seedbank density in 0–5 cm topsoil of organic vegetable fields. False seedbed machinery that did not or minimally disturb the soil was most appropriate for preventive control of Galinsoga quadriradiata (Hairy galinsoga) and total weed seeds, with reductions in seedling emergence up to 99% and 73%, respectively, for flaming, and 74% and 67%, respectively, for 1 cm deep hoeing, 1 month after false seedbed creation. Compared with 1 cm deep hoeing, 1 cm deep harrowing was 16% less effective in the control of emerged seedlings, while flaming was highly effective in preventing weed seedling emergence, even after a low number of passes. Tillage intensity was less important than tillage depth for the reduction in weed emergence and seedbank density. Overall, tillage was more effective for seedbank reduction than flaming.     

Assessment of leaf cover and crop soil cover in weed harrowing research using digital images

Objective assessment of crop soil cover, defined as the percentage of leaf cover that has been buried in soil because of weed harrowing, is crucial to further progress in post‐emergence weed harrowing research. Up to now, crop soil cover has been assessed by visual scores, which are biased and context‐dependent. The aim of this study was to investigate whether digital image analysis is a feasible method to estimate crop soil cover in the early growth stages of cereals. Two main questions were examined: (i) how to capture suitable digital images under field conditions with a standard high‐resolution digital camera and (ii) how to analyse the images with an automated digital image analysis procedure. The importance of light conditions, camera angle, size of recorded area, growth stage and direction of harrowing were investigated, in order to establish a standard for image capture and an automated image analysis procedure based on the excess green colour index was developed. The study shows that the automated digital image analysis procedure provided reliable estimations of leaf cover, defined as the proportion of pixels in digital images determined to be green, which were used to estimate crop soil cover. A standard for image capture is suggested and it is recommended that digital image analysis be used to estimate crop soil cover in future research. The prospects of using digital image analysis in future weed harrowing research are discussed.     

Tolerance of competitive spring barley cultivars to weed harrowing

Two experiments were conducted in 14 spring barley cultivars to investigate if crop tolerance to post‐emergence weed harrowing is related to morphological traits that reflect competitiveness. The experiments were carried out in organically grown fields where low weed densities and biomass production were assumed to be without significant influence on crop growth. The experiments showed that different cultivars responded differently to post‐emergence weed harrowing in terms of yield reduction. Taller and higher yielding cultivars with high leaf area index (LAI) tended to be less tolerant to post‐emergence weed harrowing than shorter and lower yielding cultivars with low LAI. This conclusion, however, is only valid for 13 of 14 cultivars because one very tall cultivar was tolerant to harrowing. Although the tallest and highest yielding cultivars were damaged the most, they remained the highest yielding cultivars after weed harrowing. This study is the first attempt to relate competitiveness of cereal cultivars to tolerance to harrowing, and it is thought provoking that competitiveness and tolerance is found to be counterproductive.