Integrating cultivation using a tine weeder with herbicides in conventional peanut production

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 374-379
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Xuelin Luo
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Integrated System ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Rainfall Events ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Effective Component

AbstractResearch from the 1980s reported sweep cultivation being a cost-effective component in an integrated system to manage weeds in peanut. Previous weed management research conducted on organic peanut indicated that repeated cultivation with a tine weeder was an effective component in that production system. Studies were conducted in Tifton, GA, from 2014 through 2017 to determine whether tine weeding can be integrated with herbicides in conventional peanut production to supplement herbicides. Experiments evaluated a factorial arrangement of eight herbicide combinations and two levels of cultivation using a tine weeder. Herbicides were labeled rates of ethalfluralin PRE, S-metolachlor PRE, imazapic POST, ethalfluralin PRE + S-metolachlor PRE, ethalfluralin PRE + imazapic POST, S-metolachlor PRE + imazapic POST, ethalfluralin PRE + S-metolachlor PRE + imazapic POST, and a nontreated control. The herbicides chosen were based on knowledge of the weed species composition at the research sites and their common use in peanut. Cultivation regimes were cultivation with a tine weeder (six times at weekly intervals) and a noncultivated control. Benefits of tine weeding supplementing control from herbicides varied according to herbicide and weed species. For example, annual grasses were effectively controlled (88% to 97%) by ethalfluralin or S-metolachlor and did not need cultivation to supplement control provided by the herbicides. However, imazapic alone did not effectively control (54% to 75%) annual grasses and needed supplemental control from cultivation with the tine weeder. Similarly, imazapic effectively controlled (84% to 93%) smallflower morningglory and did not require cultivation to supplement control from the herbicide. However, cultivation with the tine weeder improved smallflower morningglory control (76% to 95%) when supplementing ethalfluralin or S-metolachlor. Peanut yields did not respond to any of the herbicide combinations integrated with cultivation using the tine weeder. During the time period when peanut was cultivated, there was greater total rainfall and more days of rainfall events in 2014 and 2017 compared with the other years. Rainfall and wet soils reduced the performance and weed control benefits of the tine weeder. This highlights the risk of depending on cultivation for weed control.

scholarly journals A Review of Weed Management Challenges in Organic Peanut Production

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Cropping System ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Integrated System ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Certified Organic ◽  
Mechanical Weed Control

ABSTRACT Organic peanut production is a high-risk cropping system, largely due to difficulties in managing weeds using methods acceptable for certified-organic production. In contrast with conventional peanut production that relies heavily on synthetic herbicides, organic peanut production must use an integrated system to manage weeds. The foundation for an integrated weed management system is cultural weed control which is a system of production practices that promote uniform peanut growth to suppress weeds. Cultural weed control includes practices that promote vigorous early-season peanut growth and lessen chances for weed escapes. Mechanical weed control is based on repeated cultivation using a tine weeder and sweep cultivator to control weeds before they emerge. However, weed control consistency from cultivation is affected by rainfall that can delay scheduled cultivations and hinder implement function. Handweeding is also a form of mechanical weed control that is used to supplement other weed control efforts by controlling escapes. Herbicides derived from natural products and thermal weed control using propane flaming have limited value in organic peanut production due to limited weed control spectra, specifically poor control of annual grasses and perennial weeds. Successful weed management in certified organic peanut production will depend on an integrated system, not a single form of weed control.

Weed Management with Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Based Systems in PHY 485 WRF Cotton

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared R. Whitaker ◽  
Alan C. York ◽  
David L. Jordan ◽  
A. Stanley Culpepper
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Fiber Quality ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Crop Tolerance ◽  
The North ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Resistance Trait ◽  
Cotton Belt

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth has become a serious pest in parts of the Cotton Belt. Some GR cotton cultivars also contain the WideStrike™ insect resistance trait, which confers tolerance to glufosinate. Use of glufosinate-based management systems in such cultivars could be an option for managing GR Palmer amaranth. The objective of this study was to evaluate crop tolerance and weed control with glyphosate-based and glufosinate-based systems in PHY 485 WRF cotton. The North Carolina field experiment compared glyphosate and glufosinate alone and in mixtures applied twice before four- to six-leaf cotton. Additional treatments included glyphosate and glufosinate mixed withS-metolachlor or pyrithiobac applied to one- to two-leaf cotton followed by glyphosate or glufosinate alone on four- to six-leaf cotton. All treatments received a residual lay-by application. Excellent weed control was observed from all treatments on most weed species. Glyphosate was more effective than glufosinate on glyphosate-susceptible (GS) Palmer amaranth and annual grasses, while glufosinate was more effective on GR Palmer amaranth. Annual grass and GS Palmer amaranth control by glyphosate plus glufosinate was often less than control by glyphosate alone but similar to or greater than control by glufosinate alone, while mixtures were more effective than either herbicide alone on GR Palmer amaranth. Glufosinate caused minor and transient injury to the crop, but no differences in cotton yield or fiber quality were noted. This research demonstrates glufosinate can be applied early in the season to PHY 485 WRF cotton without concern for significant adverse effects on the crop. Although glufosinate is often less effective than glyphosate on GS Palmer amaranth, GR Palmer amaranth can be controlled with well-timed applications of glufosinate. Use of glufosinate in cultivars with the WideStrike trait could fill a significant void in current weed management programs for GR Palmer amaranth in cotton.

Combinations of Corn Gluten Meal, Clove Oil, and Sweep Cultivation are Ineffective for Weed Control in Organic Peanut Production

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Mark A. Boudreau ◽  
Jerry W. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Control Treatment ◽  
Clove Oil ◽  
Corn Gluten Meal ◽  
Corn Gluten ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Poor Efficacy

Weed control in organic peanut is difficult and lack of residual weed control complicates weed management efforts. Weed management systems using corn gluten meal in combination with clove oil and sweep cultivation were evaluated in a series of irrigated field trials. Corn gluten meal applied in a 30 cm band over the row at PRE, sequentially at PRE+2 wk after emergence, and PRE+2wk+4wk did not adequately control annual grasses and smallflower morningglory. Similarly, a banded application of clove oil applied POST did not adequately control weeds. The only treatment that improved overall weed control was sweep cultivation. Peanut yields were not measured in 2006 due to heavy baseline weed densities and overall poor weed control. Peanut yields were measured in 2007 and were not affected by any weed control treatment due to poor efficacy. While sweep cultivation improved weed control, weeds were controlled only in the row middles and surviving weeds in-row reduced peanut yield. Even when used in combination with sweep cultivation, corn gluten meal and clove oil were ineffective and offer little potential in a weed management system for organic peanut production.

scholarly journals Weed control efficiency and productivity in rice-fish-duck integrated farming system

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Prafulla Kumar Nayak ◽  
Bipin Bihari Panda ◽  
Sunil Kumar Das ◽  
Koroda R Rao ◽  
Upendra Kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Wiener Index ◽  
Integrated System ◽  
Ceratophyllum Demersum ◽  
Rice Farming ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Control Efficiency ◽  
Weed Control Efficiency ◽  
Rice Fish

Rice farming integrated with fish and ducks potentially provides ecological services and supports effective management of weeds which cause rice yield losses due to growth competitiveness with the available resources and productivity. Present study investigated the efficacy of integrating fish and duck in rice farming for controlling weed infestations and their impacts on productivity and economics of the system. Appraisal on diversity of weeds indicated that grassy weeds (Echinochola colona, Echinochola crusgalli) and sedges (Cyperus difformis, Cyperus iria, Fimbristylis miliacea) were prevalent in rice during tillering stages, while broad leaf (Ludwigia adscendens, Sphenoclea zeylanica) and aquatic weeds (Marsilia quadrifolia, Otellia alismoides, Vallisneria spiralis, Limnophila indica, Ceratophyllum demersum, Hydrilla verticillata) were abundant during active tillering and panicle initiation stages of rice. A significant reduction in weed density and weed biomass was observed in rice-fish (RF), rice-duck (RD) and rice-fish - duck (RFD) integration. However, weed control efficiency (WCE %) was significantly (p<0.05) higher in RFD. The weed biodiversity in terms of species richness (Simpson’s index) and species diversity (Shannon-Wiener index) decreased significantly, while Pielou evenness community index increased in RFD, signifying weed community composition was highly diversified with reduction of formerly dominant weed species. Rice agronomic characteristics, productivity and economic returns were higher in integrated system indicating over all improvements in ecology and productivity. Better growth of fishes accrued with RFD integrated system, possibly, due to the better nutrient availability. Thus, fish and duck can be used as bio-control agents for weed management in rice farming for enhancing productivity in areas where application of chemical herbicides may be partially or totally eliminated in transplanted lowland system.

scholarly journals Potential Weed Management Systems for Organic Peanut Production

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Carroll Johnson ◽  
Benjamin G. Mullinix
Keyword(s):  
Acetic Acid ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Clove Oil ◽  
Poor Control ◽  
Early Season ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Four Levels

Abstract Studies were conducted near Tifton, GA to develop weed management systems for organic peanut production. Trials in 2004 and 2005 evaluated row patterns (two levels), remedial weed control (four levels), and cultivation (three levels). Row patterns were wide rows (91 cm apart) and narrow rows (30 cm apart). Remedial weed control was early-season applications of clove oil, citric plus acetic acid, broadcast propane flaming, and a nontreated control. Cultivation regimes were 1X or 2X sweep cultivation and a non-cultivated control. The experimental sites had heavy natural infestations of annual grasses and broadleaf weeds. None of the treatment combinations effectively controlled weeds season-long and resulting peanut yields were poor. Annual grasses were particularly troublesome due to ineffective control from flaming and citric plus acetic acid. Clove oil was slightly more effective in controlling annual grasses than the other remedial treatments, but annual grass control was still unacceptable. Dicot weeds were not effectively controlled by mid-season, although clove oil and flaming controlled the seedling weeds early season. The lack of residual weed control by the remedial weed control treatments resulted in heavy weed infestations by mid-season. Poor control of annual grasses, no residual weed control, and high cost of remedial treatments indicates that these systems of weed management in organic peanut production are not suited to sites with heavy weed infestations.

Weed Control, Environmental Impact, and Economics of Weed Management Strategies in Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christie L. Stewart ◽  
Robert E. Nurse ◽  
Laura L. Van Eerd ◽  
Richard J. Vyn ◽  
Peter H. Sikkema
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Visible Injury ◽  
The One ◽  
Gross Margins ◽  
Herbicide Programs

With the number of glyphosate-resistant weed species increasing in North America and a lack of new herbicide chemistries being developed, growers are shifting toward using older herbicides that are more expensive and may be less environmentally friendly. Therefore, to determine which weed management strategies are most cost effective and have the lowest impact on the environment we evaluated the efficacy, environmental impact, and the profitability of several weed management strategies in glyphosate-resistant soybean over a 3-yr period (2007 to 2009) at three locations in southwestern Ontario, Canada. No visible injury to soybean was observed with the herbicide treatments evaluated. A sequential application of glyphosate consistently provided high levels of weed control (99 to 100%) at 56 d after treatment in comparison with one- or two-pass herbicide programs. Soybean yield did not differ between the two-pass herbicide programs and glyphosate applied early POST; however, a yield benefit was found with a sequential application of glyphosate or a PRE herbicide followed by glyphosate compared with glyphosate applied only at late POST. The two-pass herbicide programs had higher environmental impact (EI) (> 23) than the one-pass herbicide programs (< 15), except when imazethapyr was followed by or tank-mixed with glyphosate, which had an equivalent EI (∼ 14) to the one-pass herbicide programs. Not surprisingly because of the low purchase price of glyphosate, gross margins were highest for treatments that included glyphosate. However, to reduce the selection pressure on glyphosate-resistant weed biotypes, to reduce environmental impact, and to increase gross margins a combination of glyphosate with another mode of action would be most beneficial. In this study glyphosate + imazethapyr was the best alternative to a sequential two-pass glyphosate program.

Weed Management in Peanuts

EDIS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pratap Devkota
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Application Rate ◽  
Good Management ◽  
Peanut Production

Successful weed control in peanuts involves use of good management practices in all phases of peanut production. This 11-page document lists herbicide products registered for use in Florida peanut production, their mode of actions group, application rate per acre and per season, and reentry interval. It also discusses the performance of these herbicides on several weeds under Florida conditions. Written by J. A. Ferrell, G. E. MacDonald, and P. Devkota, and published by the UF/IFAS Agronomy Department, revised May 2020.

Bio-efficacy of post emergence herbicides in boro rice nursery as well as main field and their residual effects on non-target microorganisms

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-210
Author(s):  
Rajib Kundu ◽  
Mousumi Mondal ◽  
Sourav Garai ◽  
Ramyajit Mondal ◽  
Ratneswar Poddar
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Resistance Index ◽  
Residual Effects ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Main Field ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Similar Treatment

Field experiments were conducted at research farm of Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Kalyani, West Bengal, India (22°97' N latitude and 88°44' E longitude, 9.75 m above mean sea level) under natural weed infestations in boro season rice (nursery bed as well as main field) during 2017-18 and 2018-19 to evaluate the herbicidal effects on weed floras, yield, non-target soil organisms to optimize the herbicide use for sustainable rice-production. Seven weed control treatments including three doses of bispyribac-sodium 10% SC (150,200, and 250 ml ha-1), two doses of fenoxaprop-p-ethyl 9.3% EC (500 and 625 ml ha-1), one weed free and weedy check were laid out in a randomized complete block design, replicated thrice. Among the tested herbicides, bispyribac-sodium with its highest dose (250 ml ha-1) resulted in maximum weed control efficiency, treatment efficiency index and crop resistance index irrespective of weed species and dates of observation in both nursery as well as main field. Similar treatment also revealed maximum grain yield (5.20 t ha-1), which was 38.38% higher than control, closely followed by Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl (625 ml ha-1) had high efficacy against grasses, sedge and broadleaf weed flora. Maximum net return (Rs. 48765 ha-1) and benefit cost ratio (1.72) were obtained from the treatment which received bispyribac-sodium @ 250 ml ha-1. Based on overall performance, the bispyribac-sodium (250 ml ha-1) may be considered as the best herbicide treatment for weed management in transplanted rice as well as nursery bed.

Impact of cultivars and herbicides on weed management in alfalfa

2006 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 875-885 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Moyer ◽  
S. N. Acharya
Keyword(s):  
British Columbia ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Forage Quality ◽  
Western Canada ◽  
Downy Brome ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Standard Type ◽  
Southern Alberta ◽  
Medicago Sativa L

Weeds, especially dandelion (Taraxacum officinale Weber in F.H. Wigg.), tend to infest a forage alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) stand 2 to 4 yr after establishment. To develop better weed management systems, experiments were conducted at Lethbridge, Alberta, from 1995 to 2002 and Creston, British Columbia, from 1998 to 2001, which included the alfalfa cultivars Beaver (standard type) and AC Blue J (Flemish type) and annual applications of metribuzin and hexazinone. These herbicides are registered for weed control in irrigated alfalfa in Alberta and alfalfa grown for seed. In addition, two sulfonylurea herbicides, metsulfuron and sulfosulfuron, and glyphosate were included. All of the herbicides except glyphosate controlled or suppressed dandelion and mustard family weeds. Metsulfuron at 5 g a.i. ha-1 almost completely controlled dandelion at both locations. However, after metsulfuron application at Lethbridge, dandelion was replaced with an infestation of downy brome, which is unpalatable for cattle. None of the herbicides increased total forage (alfalfa + weed) yield, and in some instances herbicides reduced forage quality by causing a shift from a palatable to an unpalatable weed species. However, it was observed that AC Blue J consistently yielded more than Beaver, and weed biomass was consistently less in the higher-yielding cultivar. AC Blue J was developed primarily for the irrigated area in southern Alberta and for southern British Columbia. Therefore, additional experiments should be conducted to determine which alfalfa cultivars have the greatest ability to compete with weeds in other regions of western Canada. Key words: Alfalfa yield, dandelion, forage quality, weed control

Alternatives to Atrazine for Weed Management in Processing Sweet Corn

Weed Science ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zubeyde Filiz Arslan ◽  
Martin M. Williams ◽  
Roger Becker ◽  
Vincent A. Fritz ◽  
R. Ed Peachey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Application Timing ◽  
Production Areas

Atrazine has been the most widely used herbicide in North American processing sweet corn for decades; however, increased restrictions in recent years have reduced or eliminated atrazine use in certain production areas. The objective of this study was to identify the best stakeholder-derived weed management alternatives to atrazine in processing sweet corn. In field trials throughout the major production areas of processing sweet corn, including three states over 4 yr, 12 atrazine-free weed management treatments were compared to three standard atrazine-containing treatments and a weed-free check. Treatments varied with respect to herbicide mode of action, herbicide application timing, and interrow cultivation. All treatments included a PRE application of dimethenamid. No single weed species occurred across all sites; however, weeds observed in two or more sites included common lambsquarters, giant ragweed, morningglory species, velvetleaf, and wild-proso millet. Standard treatments containing both atrazine and mesotrione POST provided the most efficacious weed control among treatments and resulted in crop yields comparable to the weed-free check, thus demonstrating the value of atrazine in sweet corn production systems. Timely interrow cultivation in atrazine-free treatments did not consistently improve weed control. Only two atrazine-free treatments consistently resulted in weed control and crop yield comparable to standard treatments with atrazine POST: treatments with tembotrione POST either with or without interrow cultivation. Additional atrazine-free treatments with topramezone applied POST worked well in Oregon where small-seeded weed species were prevalent. This work demonstrates that certain atrazine-free weed management systems, based on input from the sweet corn growers and processors who would adopt this technology, are comparable in performance to standard atrazine-containing weed management systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document