Effects of Soil Tillage and Post-Emergence Weed Control on Weed Biomass and Maize Yield

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 177-184
Author(s):  
Mira Knežević ◽  
Marija Đurkić ◽  
Ivan Knežević ◽  
Oleg Antonić ◽  
Sven Jelaska
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Maize Yield ◽  
Soil Tillage ◽  
Weed Biomass

scholarly journals Spring-planted cover crops for weed control in soybean

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Katja Koehler-Cole ◽  
Christopher A. Proctor ◽  
Roger W. Elmore ◽  
David A. Wedin
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Biomass Production ◽  
Cover Crops ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Weed Suppression ◽  
Crop Species ◽  
Cold Temperatures ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Small Grains

Abstract Replacing tillage with cover crops (CC) for weed management in corn (Zea mays L.)-soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] systems with mechanical weed control has many soil health benefits but in the western Corn Belt, CC establishment after harvest is hampered by cold temperatures, limited labor and few compatible CC species. Spring-planted CC may be an alternative, but information is lacking on suitable CC species. Our objective was to evaluate four spring-planted CC with respect to biomass production and weed suppression, concurrent with CC growth and post-termination. Cover crop species tested were oat (Avena sativa L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), brown mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.] and yellow mustard (Brassica hirta Moench). They were compared to no-CC treatments that were either tilled pre- and post-planting of soybean (no-CC tilled) or not tilled at all (no-CC weedy). CC were planted in late March to early April, terminated 52–59 days later using an undercutter, and soybean was planted within a week. The experiment had a randomized complete block design with four replications and was repeated for 3 years. Mustards and small grains produced similar amounts of biomass (1.54 Mg ha−1) but mustard biomass production was more consistent (0.85–2.72 Mg ha−1) than that of the small grains (0.35–3.81 Mg ha−1). Relative to the no-CC weedy treatment, mustards suppressed concurrent weed biomass in two out of 3 years, by 31–97%, and small grains suppressed concurrent weed biomass in only 1 year, by 98%. Six weeks after soybean planting, small grains suppressed weed biomass in one out of 3 years, by 79% relative to the no-CC weedy treatment, but mustards did not provide significant weed suppression. The no-CC tilled treatment suppressed weeds each year relative to the no-CC weedy treatment, on average 87%. The ineffective weed control by CC reduced soybean biomass by about 50% six weeks after planting. While spring-planted CC have the potential for pre-plant weed control, they do not provide adequate early season weed suppression for soybean.

Effect of Imazethapyr on Legumes and the Effect of Legumes on Weeds

1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 536-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Red Clover ◽  
The Other ◽  
Birdsfoot Trefoil ◽  
Weed Biomass

A three-year experiment was conducted near Scottsbluff, NE, to evaluate the selectivity of POST-applied imazethapyr for weed control in alfalfa, birdsfoot trefoil, cicer milkvetch, red clover, sainfoin, and yellow sweetclover. Imazethapyr injured all legumes 15 DAT. Imazethapyr also reduced the height of birdsfoot trefoil, cicer milkvetch, red clover, and yellow sweeclover 28 DAT. Legume first cutting yields were not reduced by imazethapyr and with alfalfa, birdsfoot trefoil, cicer milkvetch, and sainfoin, first cutting yields were increased by imazethapyr. Imazethapyr reduced weed biomass in all legume seedings. Weed biomass in new seedings of alfalfa was reduced more than that of the other legumes.

Influence of a Rye Cover Crop on the Critical Period for Weed Control in Cotton

Weed Science ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 346-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas E. Korres ◽  
Jason K. Norsworthy
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Weed Density ◽  
Presence And Absence ◽  
Weed Removal

Cover crops are becoming increasingly common in cotton as a result of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth; hence, a field experiment was conducted in 2009 and 2010 in Marianna, AR, with a rye cover crop used to determine its effects on the critical period for weed control in cotton. Throughout most of the growing season, weed biomass in the presence of a rye cover crop was lesser than that in the absence of a rye cover crop. In 2009, in weeks 2 through 7 after planting, weed biomass was reduced at least twofold in the presence of a rye cover compared with the absence of rye. In 2009, in both presence and absence of a rye cover crop, weed removal needed to begin before weed biomass was 150 g m−2, or approximately 4 wk after planting, to prevent yield loss > 5%. Weed density was less in 2010 than in 2009, so weed removal was not required until 7 wk after planting, at which point weed biomass values were 175 and 385 g m−2in the presence and absence of a cover crop, respectively.

Maize MAIZE YIELD AS AFFECTED BY METHODS OF TILLAGE AND WEED MANAGEMEMNT

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-66
Author(s):  
Haseeb Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
Grain Yield ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Dry Weight ◽  
Maize Yield ◽  
Control Methods ◽  
Fresh Weight ◽  
Maize Crop

An experiment entitled: Maize yield as affected by methods of tillage and weed control methods was conducted at Agronomy Research Farms, The University of Agriculture Peshawar during summer 2016. The study was conducted in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with split plot arrangement having four replications. Tillage practices 1) Chisel plough + rotavator 2) Mouldboard plough + rotavator 3) Cultivator + rotavator and 4) Rotavator were assigned to main plots. Weed management practices included 1) Control, 2) Hoeing 15 days after sowing 3) Hoeing 15 and 30 days after sowing 4) Hoeing 15, 30 and 45 days after sowing, and 4) Herbicide (nicosulfuron) were kept into the subplots. The results revealed that chisel plough + rotavator has significantly reduced weeds m-2 (122, 101 and 125 weeds m-2), weeds fresh weight (19.73 g m-2, 116.35 g m-2 and 252.56 g m-2) and weeds dry weight (6.83 g m-2, 38.69 g m-2 and 80.61 g m-2) at 30, 45 and 60 days after sowing, respectively. The operation of chisel plough + rotavator has produced tallest plants (221.22 cm) with maximum grain rows ear-1 (16), grain yield (3586 kg ha-1) and shelling percentage (78.14%). Among weed control methods, hoeing 15, 30 and 45 days after sowing revealed maximum plant height (226.41 cm), grain rows ear-1 (16), grain yield (3604 kg ha-1) and shelling percentage (79.11%). All weed control methods have showed significant reduction in weeds m-2, weeds fresh weight and weeds dry weight. Interaction was also found significant for weeds m-2 at 60 DAS and grain yield of maize. Lowest weeds (56 weeds m-2) at 60 DAS and highest grain yield (4569 kg ha-1) was recorded when seedbed was prepared with chisel plough + rotavator with 3 hoeings (hoeing 15, 30 and 45 days after sowing). It is concluded that treatment of chisel plough + rotavator and hoeing 15, 30 and 45 days after sowing has significantly produced maximum grain yield of maize crop.

Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda) Response to Weed Control in Central Louisiana

1988 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 490-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Haywood
Keyword(s):  
Pinus Taeda ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Loblolly Pine ◽  
Untreated Control ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Growing Seasons ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Herbaceous Weed Control

Herbaceous weed control was studied on a loblolly pine planting site in central Louisiana. Pine growth was enhanced without eradicating weeds; reducing weed biomass about 50% increased the mean inside bark volume of loblolly pine saplings 53% on the weeded treatments compared to the untreated control after five growing seasons in the field. Pines receiving both preplant weed control with glyphosate or disking and postplant weed control with a series of yearly treatments (1982, atrazine plus simazine; 1983, atrazine plus oxyfluorfen; 1984, hexazinone; and 1985, hexazinone) had 62% greater volume than pines on the preplant-only treatments. So, the best gains in loblolly pine volume required postplant weed control.

Herbicide Timing and Rate Effects on Weed Management in Three Herbicide-Resistant Canola Systems

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 1006-1012 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Neil Harker ◽  
George W. Clayton ◽  
John T. O'Donovan ◽  
Robert E. Blackshaw ◽  
F. Craig Stevenson
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Leaf Stage ◽  
Rate Effects ◽  
Herbicide Timing ◽  
Weed Removal

Herbicide-resistant canola dominates the canola market in Canada. A multiyear field experiment was conducted at three locations to investigate the effect of time of weed removal (two-, four-, or six-leaf canola) and herbicide rate (50 or 100% recommended) in three herbicide-resistant canola systems. Weeds were controlled in glufosinate-resistant canola (GLU) with glufosinate, in glyphosate-resistant canola (GLY) with glyphosate, and in imidazolinone-resistant canola (IMI) with a 50:50 mixture of imazamox and imazethapyr. Canola yields were similar among the three canola cultivar–herbicide systems. Yields were not influenced by 50 vs. 100% herbicide rates. Timing of weed removal had the greatest effect on canola yield, with weed removal at the four-leaf stage giving the highest yields in most cases. Percent dockage was often greater for GLU and IMI than for GLY. In comparison with the other treatments, dockage levels doubled for GLU after application at 50% herbicide rates. The consistency of monocot weed control was usually greater for GLY than for GLU or IMI systems. However, weed biomass data revealed no differences in dicot weed control consistency between IMI and GLY systems. Greater dockage and weed biomass variability after weed removal at the six-leaf stage or after low herbicide rates suggests higher weed seed production, which could constrain the adoption of integrated weed management practices in subsequent years.

Efficacy and Economics of Cultivation for Weed Control in Potato (Solanum tuberosum)

1997 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte V. Eberlein ◽  
Paul E. Patterson ◽  
Mary J. Guttieri ◽  
Jeffrey C. Stark
Keyword(s):  
Solanum Tuberosum ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Control Efficacy ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Common Lambsquarters ◽  
Hairy Nightshade ◽  
Green Foxtail ◽  
One Year ◽  
Control Net

A 3-year study was conducted in irrigated potato to compare weed control efficacy and economics of hilling plus one or two cultivations with the standard treatment of hilling plus a preemergence application of pendimethalin plus metribuzin. Trials were conducted under both weedy and weed-free conditions. Common lambsquarters and redroot pigweed were present in weedy treatments each year; significant populations of hairy nightshade and green foxtail also were present one year. When weed populations were low or moderate (< 45 plants/m2), total weed biomass in the hilling plus one cultivation treatment was reduced 98 to 99% relative to the weedy control, and U.S. No. 1 tuber yields were equal to the standard treatment. However, when weed populations were high (145 plants/m2), hilling plus one cultivation and hilling plus two cultivations provided only 30% and 61% reduction in weed biomass, respectively, and U.S. No. 1 tuber yields were 35% and 13% less, respectively, than the standard treatment. The standard treatment provided 99% reduction in total weed biomass each year, and yields were equal to the weed-free, hill plus no cultivation control. Net return was $37 to $100/ha higher for the hilling plus one cultivation treatment compared to the standard treatment when weed populations were moderate or low, but was $808/ha less than the standard treatment when weed populations were high.

Increased seeding rate and multiple methods of mechanical weed control reduce weed biomass in a poorly competitive organic crop

2020 ◽  
Vol 245 ◽  
pp. 107648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandr S. Alba ◽  
Lena D. Syrovy ◽  
Hema S.N. Duddu ◽  
Steven J. Shirtliffe
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Seeding Rate ◽  
Multiple Methods ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Mechanical Weed Control
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document