Critical Period for Weed Control in Grafted and Nongrafted Watermelon Grown in Plasticulture

Weed Science ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew B. Bertucci ◽  
Katherine M. Jennings ◽  
David W. Monks ◽  
Jonathan R. Schultheis ◽  
Frank J. Louws ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Citrullus Lanatus ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Seedless Watermelon ◽  
Common Purslane ◽  
Weed Removal

AbstractField experiments determined the critical period for weed control (CPWC) in grafted and nongrafted watermelon [Citrullus lanatus(Thumb.) Matsum. & Nakai] grown in plasticulture. Transplant types included ‘Exclamation’ seedless watermelon as the nongrafted control as well as Exclamation grafted onto two interspecific hybrid squash (ISH) rootstocks, ‘Carnivor’ and ‘Kazako’. To simulate weed emergence throughout the season, establishment treatments (EST) consisted of two seedlings each of common purslane (Portulaca oleraceaL.), large crabgrass [Digitaria sanguinalis(L.) Scop.], and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentusL.) transplanted in a 15 by 15 cm square centered on watermelon plants at 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6 wk after watermelon transplanting (WATr) and remained until the final watermelon harvest at 11 WATr. To simulate weed control at different times in the season, removal treatments (REM) consisted of two seedlings of the same weed species transplanted in a 15 by 15 cm square centered on watermelon plants on the same day of watermelon transplanting and allowed to remain until 2, 3, 4, 6, and 11 WATr, at which time they were removed. Season-long weedy and weed-free controls were included for both EST and REM studies in both years. For all transplant types, aboveground biomass of weeds decreased as weed establishment was delayed and increased as weed removal was delayed. The predicted CPWC for nongrafted Exclamation and Carnivor required only a single weed removal between 2.3 and 2.5 WATr and 1.9 and 2.6 WATr, respectively, while predicted CPWC for Kazako rootstock occurred from 0.3 to 2.6 WATr. Our study results suggest that weed control for this mixed population of weeds would be similar between nongrafted Exclamation and Exclamation grafted onto Carnivor. But the observed CPWC of Exclamation grafted onto Kazako suggests that CPWC may vary with specific rootstock–scion combinations.

Critical Period for Weed Control in Grafted and Nongrafted Fresh Market Tomato

Weed Science ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 523-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sushila Chaudhari ◽  
Katherine M. Jennings ◽  
David W. Monks ◽  
David L. Jordan ◽  
Christopher C. Gunter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Tomato Plant ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Plant Biomass ◽  
Relative Yield ◽  
Fresh Market ◽  
Yield Data ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Common Purslane

Field experiments were conducted to determine the critical period for weed control (CPWC) in nongrafted ‘Amelia’ and Amelia grafted onto ‘Maxifort’ tomato rootstock grown in plasticulture. The establishment treatments (EST) consisted of two seedlings each of common purslane, large crabgrass, and yellow nutsedge transplanted at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 12 wk after tomato transplanting (WAT) and remained until tomato harvest to simulate weeds emerging at different times. The removal treatments (REM) consisted of the same weeds transplanted on the day of tomato transplanting and removed at 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 12 WAT to simulate weeds controlled at different times. The beginning and end of the CPWC, based on a 5% yield loss of marketable tomato, was determined by fitting log-logistic and Gompertz models to the relative yield data representing REM and EST, respectively. In both grafted and nongrafted tomato, plant aboveground dry biomass increased as establishment of weeds was delayed and tomato plant biomass decreased when removal of weeds was delayed. For a given time of weed removal and establishment, grafted tomato plants produced higher biomass than nongrafted. The delay in establishment and removal of weeds resulted in weed biomass decrease and increase of the same magnitude, respectively, regardless of transplant type. The predicted CPWC was from 2.2 to 4.5 WAT in grafted tomato and from 3.3 to 5.8 WAT in nongrafted tomato. The length (2.3 or 2.5 wk) of the CPWC in fresh market tomato was not affected by grafting; however, the CPWC management began and ended 1 wk earlier in grafted tomato than in nongrafted tomato.

Solarization for Weed Control

Weed Science ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Menashe Horowitz ◽  
Yael Regev ◽  
Geza Herzlinger
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Soil Depth ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Conyza Canadensis ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Summer Maximum ◽  
Black Plastic ◽  
Common Purslane ◽  
Annual Weeds

Solarization is a method of heating moist soil by covering it with plastic sheets to trap solar radiation. In field experiments in Israel during the summer, maximum soil temperature under plastic cover at the 5-cm depth averaged 46 to 49C. No weeds emerged under the plastic cover during solarization and weed emergence was reduced after its removal. The heating effect from solarization decreased with soil depth. Concentration of O2 in soil under plastic was similar to that in uncovered controls, but the concentration of CO2 was markedly higher than in control soil, rising up to 2.4%. Higher temperatures and better residual weed control were produced by transparent than by black plastic, with best results from thin (0.03 mm), transparent polyethylene. Under Israeli summer conditions, 2 to 4 weeks of solarization produced effective control of annual weeds that was still appreciable after 1 yr. Narrow sheets of 20 to 50 cm produced effective weed control in bands. on soil irrigated once before placing the plastic sheets, there was no need to irrigate during solarization. The response of weed species to solarization differed. Many annual weeds, both summer species such as pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) and common purslane (Portulaca oleracea L.) and winter species as henbit (Lamium amplexicaule L.) were well controlled by solarization. Broomrape (Orobanche crenata Forsk.) was controlled in one experiment. on the other hand, horseweed [Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq.] and bull mallow (Malva niceaensis All.) were relatively resistant, and established perennials escaped the treatment.

Weed Management in Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Resistant Sugar Beet

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 416-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan J. Kemp ◽  
Erin C. Taylor ◽  
Karen A. Renner
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Root Yield ◽  
Beet Root ◽  
Weed Interference ◽  
Sugar Beet Root ◽  
Weed Removal

Field experiments were conducted to determine the critical period of weed interference in glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant sugar beet, and to determine if PRE herbicides increased weed control or sugar beet root yield when glufosinate, glyphosate, or conventional POST herbicides were applied. Glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant sugar beet root yields were reduced by up to 66 and 67%, respectively, when weeds remained all season in the weedy control treatment compared with yields when weed removal occurred as soon as the weeds were 2.5 cm tall, approximately 2 to 3 wk after planting (WAP). A critical period of weed interference did not occur in this research. The critical time of weed removal was approximately 8 WAP in 1998 and beyond 11 WAP in 1999. Weeds averaged 20 cm in height at 8 WAP and weed densities were greater in 1998 compared with 1999. The critical weed-free period for glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant sugar beet was 4.5 to 5 WAP in 1998. In 1999, the critical weed-free period at the Michigan Sugar location was 1.5 WAP in glyphosate-resistant sugar beet, and 6.5 WAP in glufosinate-resistant sugar beet for the Michigan Sugar site. Glyphosate or glufosinate POST provided better weed control and resulted in greater sugar beet root yield compared with conventional POST herbicides when data were combined over PRE herbicide treatments. PRE herbicides improved the control of common lambsquarters andAmaranthusspecies in some of the site-years when data were combined over POST treatments, but sugar beet yield did not increase. Our research suggests that PRE herbicides will not be necessary in glyphosate- or glufosinate-resistant sugar beet. To avoid sugar beet yield loss, multiple POST applications of glyphosate or glufosinate will be needed until 6 to 9 WAP to prohibit yield loss from weeds emerging after the last POST application.

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.

scholarly journals Modeling the Competitive Effect of Euphorbia dracunculoides and Astragalus sp. in Zero Input Rainfed Chickpea

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
R.M. IKRAM ◽  
A. TANVEER ◽  
R. MAQBOOL ◽  
M.A. NADEEN
Keyword(s):  
Protein Content ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Seed Protein ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Seed Protein Content ◽  
Yield Losses ◽  
Competition Period ◽  
Crop Competition ◽  
Weed Removal

ABSTRACT: Brown chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is one of the two chickpea types grown in Pakistan and other countries. The critical period for weed removal in a rainfed chickpea system is an important consideration in devising weed management strategies. Field experiments were conducted in the winter season of 2011 and 2012 to determine the extent of yield loss with different periods of weed crop competition. Seven weed crop competition periods (0, 45, 60, 75, 90, 105 and 160 days after sowing - DAS) were used to identify the critical period for weed removal in rainfed chickpea. Experimental plots were naturally infested with Euphorbia dracunculoides and Astragalus sp. in both years. Individual, composite density and dry weights of E. dracunculoides and Astragalussp. increased significantly with an increase in the competition period. However, yield and yield-contributing traits of chickpea significantly decreased with an increase in the competition period. Chickpea seed yield loss was 11-53% in different weed crop competition periods. Euphorbia dracunculoides and Astragalus sp. removed 39.9 and 36.9 kg ha-1 of N, 9.61 and 7.27 kg ha-1 of P and 38.3 and 36.9 kg ha-1 of K, respectively. Season long weed competition (160 days after sowing) resulted in 19.5% seed protein content compared with 24.5% seed protein content in weed-free chickpea. A Logistic equation was fitted to yield data in response to increasing periods of weed crop competition. The critical timing of weed removal at 5 and 10% acceptable yield losses were 26 and 39 DAS, respectively. The observed critical period suggests that in rainfed chickpea, a carefully timed weed removal could prevent grain yield losses.

Evaluation of Imazethapyr for Weed Control in Leafy Vegetable Crops

1996 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan A. Dusky ◽  
William M. Stall
Keyword(s):  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Relative Sensitivity ◽  
Leafy Vegetable ◽  
Field Conditions ◽  
Vegetable Crops ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Common Lambsquarters ◽  
Common Purslane

Imazethapyr was evaluated PRE and POST in five lettuce types and chicory under Florida field conditions. The relative sensitivity of leafy crop vigor (most sensitive to most tolerant) to imazethapyr PRE, based on 20% inhibition determined using regression analysis, was as follows: Boston > bibb > crisphead > romaine > leaf > escarole > endive. Leafy crop injury increased as the rate of imazethapyr applied POST increased, with all leafy crops responding in a similar manner. Surfactant addition increased imazethapyr phytotoxicity. Imazethapyr PRE treatments at 0.067 kg ai/ha provided greater than 80% control of livid amaranth, common purslane, flatsedge, and common lambsquarters. Imazethapyr POST at 0.067 kg/ha, with surfactant provided control greater than 85% of all weed species. Greater than 85% spiny amaranth control was provided by imazethapyr POST at 0.017 kg/ha. Use of surfactant with imazethapyr did not improve spiny amaranth control over imazethapyr with no surfactant. POST treatments did not decrease leafy crop yield compared with the hand-weeded check. Imazethapyr applied PRE reduced crop yield compared to the POST treatments and the hand-weeded control.

scholarly journals Effect of duration of weed competition and weed control on the yield of Indian spinach

1970 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 623-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
MSA Khan ◽  
MA Hossain ◽  
M Nurul Islam ◽  
SN Mahfuza ◽  
MK Uddin
Keyword(s):  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Cyperus Rotundus ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Maximum Benefit ◽  
Hand Weeding ◽  
Crop Weed Competition

Field experiments were conducted at the research farm of Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute, Joydebpur during kharif-1 (March to July) seasons of 2005 and 2006 to identify the critical period of crop-weed competition for Indian spinach. Major weed species were Paspalurn commersoni, Echinochlaa crusgalli. Lie nv/nc india. Cyanotis axillaris and Cyperus rotundus. The lowest weed dry matter was 76.3 g m-2 in 2005 and l01.60 g m-2 in 2006 from the plots weeded up to 40 days after transplanting (DAT). The highest yields were obtained (74.82 t ha in 2005 and 48.48 t ha in 2006) from the weed free plots. The fresh yield of Indian spinach did not vary among no weeding upto 20, 30 and 40 DAT in 2006. But weeded plot upto 30 and 40 DAT produced identical yield in 2005. Maximum BCR (4.52) was obtained from weeded plots upto 30 DAT in 2005 but BCR (2.60) was same from weeded upto 30 and 40 DA F in 2006. On an average, highest BCR (3.55) was recorded from weeding upto 30 DAT. Results revealed that the critical period of crop weed competition lies between 20 and 30 DAT and two times hand weeding would be necessary within 30 DAT for maximum benefit. Key Words: Crop-weed competitions, critical period, weed management and Indian spinach. doi: 10.3329/bjar.v33i4.2306 Bangladesh J. Agril. Res. 33(4) : 623-629, December 2008

Weed Management in Southeastern Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) with AC 263,222

1996 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
John S. Richburg ◽  
John W. Wilcut ◽  
Daniel L. Colvin ◽  
Gerald R. Wiley
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Arachis Hypogaea ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Common Ragweed ◽  
Yellow Nutsedge ◽  
Application Rates ◽  
Ac 263,222

Field experiments conducted at four locations in Georgia and two locations in Florida during 1992 and 1993 evaluated AC 263,222 application rates and timings, systems, and mixtures for weed control, peanut injury, and yield. All rates of AC 263,222 applied early POST (EPOST) or POST controlledIpomoeamorningglories and smallflower morningglory at least 90%, and purple and yellow nutsedge at least 81%. Florida beggarweed and sicklepod control generally was highest when metolachlor was applied PPI followed by AC 263,222 applied EPOST at 71 g/ha, AC 263,222 at 27 or 36 g/ha plus bentazon plus paraquat applied POST, or with bentazon plus paraquat applied EPOST followed by AC 263,222 applied POST at 36 or 53 g/ha. Acifluorfen and acifluorfen plus bentazon reduced Florida beggarweed and sicklepod control at several locations when applied in mixture with AC 263,222. Common ragweed and hairy indigo control were 85 to 95% with bentazon plus paraquat applied EPOST followed by AC 263,222 applied POST at 36 or 53 g/ha. Highest peanut yields were obtained with treatments providing high levels of weed control.

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.

scholarly journals The Critical Period for Weed Control (CPWC) in Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dogan ISIK ◽  
Adem AKCA ◽  
Emine KAYA ALTOP ◽  
Nihat TURSUN ◽  
Husrev MENNAN
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Control Period ◽  
Relative Yield ◽  
Yield Data ◽  
Weed Interference

Accurate assessment of crop-weed control period is an essential part for planning an effective weed management for cropping systems. Field experiments were conducted during the seasonal growing periods of potato in 2012 and 2013 in Kayseri, Turkey to assess critical period for weed control (CPWC) in potato. A four parameter log-logistic model was used to assist in monitoring and analysing two sets of related, relative crop yield. Data was obtained during the periods of increased weed interference and as a comparison, during weed-free periods. In both years, the relative yield of potato decreased with a longer period of weed-interference whereas increased with increasing length of weed free period. In 2012, the CPWC ranged from 112 to 1014 GDD (Growing Degree Days) which corresponded to 8 to 66 days after crop emergence (DAE) and between 135-958 GDD (10 to 63 DAE) in the following year based on a 5% acceptable yield loss. Weed-free conditions needed to be established as early as the first week after crop emergence and maintained as late as ten weeks after crop emergence to avoid more than 5% yield loss in the potato. The results suggest that CPWC could well assist potato producers to significantly reduce the expense of their weed management programs as well as improving its efficacy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document