Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Trials identify soybean traits enhancing competitiveness against invasive weeds, suggesting new breeding targets.
Invasive weed species pose a significant challenge to soybean production due to their adaptability and competitiveness, and selecting more competitive cultivars may contribute to their more efficient management. The aim of this study was to identify important soybean traits that contribute to competitiveness against selected invasive weeds. Trials were conducted from 2020 to 2022 using a split–split-plot design with four replications. The experiment included three soybean cultivars differing in leaf morphology and plant height, and three invasive weed species ( Abutilon theophrasti Medik., Ambrosia artemisiifolia L . , and Xanthium strumarium L . ) established at increasing densities, including a weed-free control. Aboveground dry biomass of soybean and weeds, plant height, canopy cover, and soybean grain yield were evaluated. The results of this research suggest that the cultivar with rapid early growth, oval leaves, and greater plant height exhibited faster canopy development, higher biomass production, and lower yield losses. This study significantly contributed to enhancing soybean competitiveness against invasive weed species. These traits may represent important breeding targets for improving soybean competitive ability in both conventional and organic soybean production. Future research should focus on evaluating more genetically diverse germplasm and on integrating additional competitive traits as selection criteria in breeding programs to support the development of sustainable weed management strategies. • Taller, oval-leafed soybean cultivar showed greater competitiveness against invasive weeds. • The competitive cultivar achieved canopy closure up to 2.5 times faster than others. • Trait–yield correlation confirmed the competitive advantage of this cultivar. • Analyzed traits may represent potential breeding targets for soybean competitiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Krstić et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: