Weed management practices in glyphosate-tolerant and conventional cotton fields in Australia

2006 ◽  
Vol 46 (9) ◽  
pp. 1177 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. Werth ◽  
C. Preston ◽  
G. N. Roberts ◽  
I. N. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Herbicide Application ◽  
Resistance Development ◽  
Roundup Ready ◽  
Use Patterns ◽  
Management Techniques ◽  
Cotton Fields ◽  
Herbicide Use

Forty growers in 4 major cotton-growing regions in Australia were surveyed in 2003 to investigate how the adoption of glyphosate-tolerant cotton (Roundup Ready) had influenced herbicide use, weed management techniques, and whether changes to the weed spectrum could be identified. The 10 most common weeds reported on cotton fields were the same in glyphosate-tolerant and conventional fields in this survey. Herbicide use patterns were altered by the adoption of glyphosate-tolerant cotton with up to 6 times more glyphosate usage, but 21% fewer growers applying pre-emergence herbicides in glyphosate-tolerant fields. Other weed control practices such as the use of post-emergence herbicides, inter-row cultivation and hand hoeing were only reduced marginally. However, growers indicated that management practices are likely to change over time, especially with the introduction of enhanced glyphosate tolerance technology (Roundup Ready Flex), and anticipate a 32% decrease in the number of growers using alternative weed management practices. To date, management practices other than glyphosate use have not changed markedly in glyphosate-tolerant cotton indicating a conservative approach by growers adopting this technology and reflecting the narrow window of herbicide application. The range of weed control options still being employed in glyphosate-tolerant cotton would not increase the risk of glyphosate resistance development.

A grower survey of weeds and herbicide use in the New South Wales cotton industry

1991 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 387 ◽  
Author(s):  
GW Charles
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Cotton Industry ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Irrigation Channels ◽  
Herbicide Use ◽  
Grower Survey

In 1989, 52 cotton growers from the 7 major cotton areas of New South Wales were surveyed regarding their weed-control costs, major weed problems and herbicide use. This paper presents and discusses the major results from this survey. On average, weed control costs the cotton grower $A187/ha annually, the major components being $76/ha for cotton herbicides and $67/ha for hand chipping. The major cotton weeds are Xanthium occidentale, X. spinosum, Cyperus spp., Physalis spp. and Ipomoea lonchophylla. Although these weeds affect a large proportion of the cotton-growing area, their incidence is generally stable or declining under the current management systems. However, Cyperus spp., which presently affect 15% of the cotton area, are escaping the weed management practices and rapidly becoming the major weed problem in many fields. Diplachne fusca is a major weed on irrigation channels and is not controlled by the registered herbicides. Trifluralin, diuron and fluometuron herbicides are used in cotton by over 60% of cotton growers. Glyphosate is used by 59% of growers in fallows prior to cotton, and atrazine, diuron and glyphosate are used on irrigation channels by over 60% of growers. Generally, cotton growers are dissatisfied with t h e high cost of weed control and the ineffectiveness of control of some problem weeds such as Cyperus spp.

Reducing herbicide use for weed control in soybean (Glycine max) grown in two soil types in southwestern Ontario

1995 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 283-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan S. Hamill ◽  
Jianhua Zhang ◽  
Clarence J. Swanton
Keyword(s):  
Glycine Max ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Growth Conditions ◽  
Soil Types ◽  
Herbicide Application ◽  
Economic Return ◽  
Environmental Variations ◽  
Temporal And Spatial ◽  
Herbicide Use

The rate, application method and (or) combination of herbicides, with or without cultivation for soybean production, were studied during several years at Ridgetown and Woodslee, Ontario. One cultivation combined with a herbicide application at reduced rates of metribuzin (e.g., 0.42 kg a.i. ha−1) not only provided effective weed control but also maintained reliable economic return over the years. When used alone, however, neither of them provided satisfactory results. The success of a given weed management system appeared to depend on temporal and spatial environmental variations. In years of adequate rainfall, neither cultivation nor herbicide treatment significantly enhanced the soybean yield or economic return at Woodslee, despite greater weed control than with plots receiving no herbicide or cultivation. Thus, weed control is probably more critical in years of sub-favourable growth conditions than in years of favourable growth conditions. Key words: Cultivation, efficacy, economy, herbicide, reliability, soybean, Glycine max

scholarly journals Economic analysis of integrated weed management in field bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (No. 4) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Štefanić ◽  
ŠtefanićI ◽  
A.J. Murdoch
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Field Bean ◽  
Herbicide Application ◽  
The North ◽  
Late Emergence ◽  
Residual Herbicide

Field experiments were conducted in field bean in the north-eastern part of theRepublicofCroatiato compare weed control and crop response under different management practices within the critical period of field bean production. The practices consisted in broadcast application of labelled rate of preemergence herbicide (pre) and postemergence herbicide application: (post) broadcast, band application over the rows, and band application combined with mechanical cultivation using of different herbicide doses recommended by the manufacturer (2×, 1×, 1/2×, 1/4×, 1/8×). In 1999, weed control with pre application of pendimethalin was superior to post bentazone application due to late emergence of weeds and lack of residual herbicide control. In 2000 bentazone combined with cycloxydim controlled weeds in field bean better than pre herbicide application. Based on the results of this research, single pre or post application of herbicide did not control a broad spectrum of weeds and did not provide the commercially acceptable full season control. Reduced rates of herbicide are not advisable under high weed pressure.

scholarly journals Rhizobacteria as Biocontrol Agents of Weeds

1996 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Kremer ◽  
Ann C. Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Biological Control ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Biocontrol Agents ◽  
Residue Management ◽  
Weed Growth ◽  
Deleterious Rhizobacteria ◽  
Herbicide Use

There is a current need to develop alternative weed management techniques in response to demands for reduction in herbicide use due mainly to health and environmental concerns. Therefore, all possible nonchemical strategies for weed control should be considered, including biological control. Deleterious rhizobacteria (DRB), largely overlooked as potential biological control agents for weeds until recently, are able to colonize root surfaces of weed seedlings and suppress plant growth. Limited field studies indicate that DRB suppressed weed growth, and reduced weed density, biomass, and seed production. In this manner, crops out-compete the suppressed weeds for growth requirements, eliminating the necessity for eradication of weeds in the crop. Establishment of DRB as a viable biological control strategy initially will require integration with other weed control approaches including other biocontrol agents, agrichemicals, and cultural and residue management practices. To achieve success, more in-depth research is needed on ecology of bacteria-plant relationships, mechanisms of action (including characterization of phytotoxins), inocula formulations, and methods to enhance crop competition.

Integrating Reduced Herbicide Use with Mechanical Weeding in Corn (Zea mays)

1993 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 382-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Mulder ◽  
Jerry D. Doll
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Minimal Risk ◽  
Economic Returns ◽  
Growing Seasons ◽  
Herbicide Use

Concern about the effects of pesticides on the environment and the desire to reduce purchased inputs are stimuli to reduce herbicide use. Field research was conducted at two locations for two growing seasons to identify integrated weed management practices in corn that are effective and economical. Weed control treatments included PRE application of a herbicide mixture of 1.8 kg ai ha−1of atrazine plus 2.2 kg ai ha−1of metolachlor alone, this mixture broadcast or band-applied at a reduced rate in combination with mechanical weeding, and mechanical weeding alone. Weed control, corn yield, and economic returns were generally higher in treatments combining herbicides and mechanical weeding than those using only mechanical measures. Without herbicides, timeliness of rotary hoeing was critical. Herbicide use can be reduced 50 to 75% in integrated systems with minimal risk of yield loss due to uncontrolled weeds.

Weed Management in Small Grains Harvested for Grain

EDIS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Ferrell ◽  
Gregory MacDonald ◽  
Pratap Devkota
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Chemical Control ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Good Management ◽  
Small Grains ◽  
Crop Competition

Successful weed control in small grains involves using good management practices in all phases of production. In Florida, winter weeds compete with small grains for moisture, nutrients, and light, with the greatest amount of competition occurring during the first six to eight weeks after planting. Weeds also cause harvest problems the following spring when the small grain is mature. This 4-page publication discusses crop competition, knowing your weeds, and chemical control. Written by J. A. Ferrell, G. E. MacDonald, and P. Devkota, and published by the UF/IFAS Agronomy Department, revised May 2020.

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.

Postemergence Control of Italian Ryegrass in Hazelnut Orchards

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Marcelo L. Moretti
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Early Spring ◽  
Italian Ryegrass ◽  
Specific Response ◽  
Record Keeping ◽  
Effective Option ◽  
Contrast Analysis ◽  
Herbicide Use

Abstract Italian ryegrass has become a problematic weed in hazelnut orchards of Oregon because of the presence of herbicide-resistant populations. Resistant and multiple-resistant Italian ryegrass populations are now the predominant biotypes in Oregon; there is no information on which herbicides effectively control Italian ryegrass in hazelnut orchards. Six field studies were conducted in commercial orchards to evaluate Italian ryegrass control with POST herbicides. Treatments included flazasulfuron, glufosinate, glyphosate, paraquat, rimsulfuron, and sethoxydim applied alone or in selected mixtures during early spring when plants were in the vegetative stage. Treatment efficacy was dependent on the experimental site. The observed range of weed control 28 d after treatment was 13 to 76 % for glyphosate, 1 to 72% for paraquat, 58 to 88% for glufosinate, 16 to 97 % for flazasulfuron, 8 to 94% for rimsulfuron, and 25 to 91% for sethoxydim. Herbicides in mixtures improved control of Italian ryegrass compared to single active ingredients based on contrast analysis. Herbicides in mixture increased control by 27% compared to glyphosate, 18% to rimsulfuron, 15% to flazasulfuron, 19% to sethoxydim, and 12% compared to glufosinate when averaged across all sites, but mixture not always improved ground coverage of biomass reduction. This complex site-specific response highlights the importance of record-keeping for efficient herbicide use. Glufosinate is an effective option to manage Italian ryegrass. However, the glufosinate-resistant biotypes documented in Oregon may jeopardize this practice. Non-chemical weed control options are needed for sustainable weed management in hazelnuts.

The Influence of Weed Management in Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Stubble on Weed Control in Corn (Zea mays)

1998 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 522-526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore M. Webster ◽  
John Cardina ◽  
Mark M. Loux
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Giant Foxtail ◽  
Giant Ragweed ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Postharvest Treatment ◽  
Full Rate ◽  
Wheat Stubble

The objectives of this study were to determine how the timing of weed management treatments in winter wheat stubble affects weed control the following season and to determine if spring herbicide rates in corn can be reduced with appropriately timed stubble management practices. Field studies were conducted at two sites in Ohio between 1993 and 1995. Wheat stubble treatments consisted of glyphosate (0.84 kg ae/ha) plus 2,4-D (0.48 kg ae/ha) applied in July, August, or September, or at all three timings, and a nontreated control. In the following season, spring herbicide treatments consisted of a full rate of atrazine (1.7 kg ai/ha) plus alachlor (2.8 kg ai/ha) preemergence, a half rate of these herbicides, or no spring herbicide treatment. Across all locations, a postharvest treatment of glyphosate plus 2,4-D followed by alachlor plus atrazine at half or full rates in the spring controlled all broadleaf weeds, except giant ragweed, at least 88%. Giant foxtail control at three locations was at least 83% when a postharvest glyphosate plus 2,4-D treatment was followed by spring applications of alachlor plus atrazine at half or full rates. Weed control in treatments without alachlor plus atrazine was variable, although broadleaf control from July and August glyphosate plus 2,4-D applications was greater than from September applications. Where alachlor and atrazine were not applied, August was generally the best timing of herbicide applications to wheat stubble for reducing weed populations the following season.

scholarly journals Weed Control in Eggplant

EDIS ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 2006 (17) ◽  
Author(s):  
William M. Stall
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Fact Sheet

Revised! HS-191, a 3-page fact sheet by William M. Stall, describes effective weed management practices for eggplant in Florida and provides a table listing herbicides available to growers for chemical weed control. This publication updates the 2003 table to reflect current recommendations. Published by the UF Department of Horticultural Sciences, October 2006. HS191/WG030: Weed Management in Eggplant (ufl.edu)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document