Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-k8lnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T06:28:49.045Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of an Integrated Weed Management System in No-Till Soybean and Corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Elina M. Snyder ,
William S. Curran ,
Heather D. Karsten ,
Glenna M. Malcolm ,
Sjoerd W. Duiker  and
Jeffrey A. Hyde
Elina M. Snyder
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
William S. Curran*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
Heather D. Karsten
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
Glenna M. Malcolm
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
Sjoerd W. Duiker
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
Jeffrey A. Hyde
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology, and Education, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: wcurran@psu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate weed control, crop yields, potential soil loss, and net returns to management of an integrated weed management system in no-till corn and soybean compared to an herbicide-based strategy. The integrated weed management system reduced herbicide inputs by delayed cover crop termination, herbicide banding, and high-residue cultivation (reduced herbicide [RH]), while the other system used continuous no-tillage and herbicides to control weeds (standard herbicide [SH]). Research was conducted within the Penn State Sustainable Dairy Cropping Systems Experiment, where corn and soybean are each planted once in a 6-yr crop rotation. In this 3-yr study, weed density and biomass were often greater under RH management, but weed biomass never exceeded 19 g m–2 in corn and 21 g m–2 in soybean. Corn yield and population did not differ in any year, and net returns to management were $33.65 ha–1 higher in RH corn due to lower herbicide costs and slightly, though not significantly, higher yields. Soybean yield was lower in RH compared to SH in 2 of 3 yr, and was correlated with soybean population and cover crop residue. Net financial returns were $43.69 ha–1 higher in SH soybean compared to RH. Predicted soil loss never exceeded T (maximum allowable soil loss) for any treatment and slope combination, though soil loss was 100% greater on a 10% slope under RH management (vs. SH) due to cultivation.

Keywords

cereal rye (Secale cereale L.)corn (Zea mays L.)soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]Cover cropscropping systemsno-tillhigh-residue cultivatorpartial budgetroller-crimpersoil loss

Information

Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 64 , Issue 4 , December 2016 , pp. 712 - 726
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Associate Editor for this paper: Anita Dille, Kansas State University

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous (2010) Valor XLT© herbicide product label. Walnut Creek, CA: Valent USA. 12 pGoogle Scholar
Bates, R, Gallagher, RS, Curran, WS, Harper, JK (2012) Integrating mechanical and reduced chemical weed control in conservation tillage corn Agron J 104:507–517 Google Scholar
Blevins, RL, Smith, MS, Thomas, GW (1984) Changes in soil properties under no-tillage. Pages 190–230 in Phillips, RE, Phillips, SH, eds. No-tillage Agriculture: Principles and Practices. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, Inc.Google Scholar
Caswell, K, Snyder, E, Curran, W, Karsten, H, Malcom, G (2015) Impact of adaptive management on weed control in a long-term dairy cropping system. Page 49 (32) in Proceedings of the 69th Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Weed Science Society (NEWSS). Williamsburg, VA: NEWSS Google Scholar
Davis, AS, Renner, K, Sprague, C, Dyer, LM (2005) Integrated Weed Management: “One Year's Seeding …”. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. Pp 45–54 Google Scholar
Donald, WD, Archer, D, Johnson, WG, Nelson, K (2004) Zone herbicide application controls annual weeds and reduces residual herbicide use in corn Weed Sci 52:821–833 Google Scholar
Douglas, MR, Tooker, JR (2012) Slug (Mollusca: Agriolimacidae, Arionidae) ecology and management in no-till field crops, with an emphasis on the mid-Atlantic region J Integ Pest Manag 3:1–9 Google Scholar
Fernandez-Cornejo, J, Weschler, S, Livingston, M, Mitchell, L (2014) Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States. Economic Research Report No 162. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture. http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/1282246/err162.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2016Google Scholar
Gianessi, LP (2008) Economic impacts of glyphosate-resistant crops Pest Manag Sci 64:346–352 Google Scholar
Hansen, NC, Moncrief, JF, Gupta, SC, Capel, PD, Olness, AE (2001) Herbicide banding and tillage system interactions on runoff losses of alachlor and cyanizine J Environ Qual 30:2120–2126 Google Scholar
Harder, DB, Sprague, CL, Renner, KA (2007) Effect of soybean row width and population on weeds, crop yield, and economic return Weed Technol 21:744–752 Google Scholar
Hayes, TB, Collins, A, Lee, M, Mendoza, M, Noriega, N, Stuart, AA, Vonk, A (2002) Hermaphroditic, demasculinized frogs after exposure to the herbicide atrazine at low ecologically relevant doses Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:5476–5480 Google Scholar
Heap, I (2015) International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.com. Accessed June 15, 2015Google Scholar
Heydel, L, Benoit, M, Schiavon, M (1999) Reducing atrazine leaching by integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays). Eur J Agron 11:217–225 Google Scholar
Hooker, DC, Vyn, TJ, Swanton, CJ (1997) Effectiveness of soil-applied herbicides with mechanical weed control for conservation tillage systems in soybean Agron J 89:579–587 Google Scholar
Hudson, N (1995) Soil Conservation. 3rd edn. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. 333 pGoogle Scholar
Kay, RD, Edwards, WM, Duffy, PA (2004) Farm Management. 5th edn. New York: McGraw Hill. 391 pGoogle Scholar
Kegode, GO, Forcella, F, Clay, S (1999) Influence of crop rotation, tillage, and management inputs on weed seed production Weed Sci 47:175–183 Google Scholar
Kowalchuck, RK, Keselman, HJ, Algina, J, Wolfinger, RD (2004) The analysis of repeated measurements with mixed-model adjusted F tests Educ Psychol Meas 64:224–242 Google Scholar
Lazarus, WF (2010) Farm Machinery Repair and Maintenance Cost Estimator. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension. Available at http://wlazarus.cfans.umn.edu/william-f-lazarus-farm-machinery-management/. Accessed July 2013Google Scholar
Liebman, M, Gibson, LR, Sundberg, DN, Heggenstaller, AH, Westerman, PR, Chase, CA, Hartzler, RG, Menalled, FD, Davis, AS, Dixon, PM (2008) Agronomic and economic performance characteristics of conventional and low-external-input cropping systems in the central corn belt Agron J 100:600–610 Google Scholar
Liebman, M, Mohler, CL, Staver, CP (2001) Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. 1st edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 532 pGoogle Scholar
Lightle, DT, Weesies, G (1998) Default slope parameters. In Memorandum to Scott Guthrie (RTI) from D. T. Lightle and Glenn Weesies. West Lafayette, IN: USDA-NRCS Google Scholar
Malcolm, GM, Camargo, GGT, Ishler, VA, Richard, TL, Karsten, HD (2015) Energy and greenhouse gas analysis of northeast U.S. dairy cropping systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 199:407–417 Google Scholar
Mickelson, JA, Renner, KA (1997) Weed control using reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in narrow and wide row soybean J Prod Agric 10:431–437 Google Scholar
Mirsky, SB, Curran, WS, Mortensen, DA, Ryan, MR, Shumway, DL (2011) Timing of cover-crop management effects on weed suppression in no-till planted soybean using a roller-crimper Weed Sci 59:380–389 Google Scholar
Mischler, RA, Curran, WS, Duiker, SW, Hyde, JA (2010) Use of a rolled-rye cover crop for weed suppression in no-till soybeans Weed Technol 24:253–261 Google Scholar
Mohler, CL, Frisch, JC, Mt. Pleasant, J (1997) Evaluation of mechanical weed management programs for corn (Zea mays L.) Weed Technol 11:123–131 Google Scholar
Mohler, CL, Teasdale, JR (1993) Response of weed emergence to rate of Vicia villosa Roth and Secale cereale L residue. Weed Res 33:487–499 Google Scholar
Mt. Pleasant, J, Burt, RF, Frisch, JC (1994) Integrating mechanical and chemical weed management in corn (Zea mays L.) Weed Technol 8:217–223 Google Scholar
Mulder, TA, Doll, JD (1993) Integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays L.) Weed Technol 7:382–389 Google Scholar
[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service (2007) Pennsylvania RUSLE 2 Instructions and Users Guide. Harrisburg, PA: USDA-NRCS. 27 pGoogle Scholar
[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service (2011) Conservation Practice Standard (Pennsylvania). Residue and Tillage Management, No Till/Strip Till/Direct Seed. Washington, DC: USDA-NRCS. 3 pGoogle Scholar
Neter, J, Wasserman, W, Kutner, MH (1990) Applied Linear Statistical Models. Regression, Analysis of Variance and Experimented Designs. 3rd edn. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc. Pp 407–411 Google Scholar
Nord, EA, Curran, WS, Mortensen, DA, Mirsky, SB, Jones, BP (2011) Integrating multiple tactics for managing weeds in high residue no-till soybean Agron J 103:1542–1551 Google Scholar
Peterson, DE (1999) The impact of herbicide-resistant weeds on Kansas agriculture Weed Technol 13:632–635 Google Scholar
Posner, JL, Baldock, JO, Hedtcke, JL (2008) Organic and conventional production systems in the Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems Trials: I. Productivity 1990–2002. Agron J 100:253–260 Google Scholar
Ryan, MR, Mirsky, SB, Mortensen, DA, Teasdale, JR, Curran, WS (2011) Potential synergistic effects of cereal rye biomass and soybean planting density on weed suppression Weed Sci 59:238–246 Google Scholar
Ryan, MR, Mortensen, DA, Bastiaans, L, Teasdale, JR, Mirsky, SB, Curran, WS, Seidel, R, Wilson, DO, Hepperly, PR (2010) Elucidating the apparent maize tolerance to weed competition in long-term organically managed systems Weed Res 50:25–36 Google Scholar
Shipitalo, MJ, Owens, LB (2006) Tillage system, application rate, and extreme event effects on herbicide losses in surface runoff J Environ Qual 35:2186–2194 Google Scholar
Smith, RG, Gross, KL (2007) Assembly of weed communities along a crop diversity gradient J Appl Ecol 44:1046–1056 Google Scholar
Sosnoskie, LM, Culpepper, AS (2014) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) increases herbicide use, tillage, and hand-weeding in Georgia cotton Weed Sci 62:393–402 Google Scholar
Teasdale, JR, Magnum, RW, Radhakrishnan, J, Cavigelli, MA (2004) Weed seedbank dynamics in three organic farming crop rotations Agron J 96:1429–1432 Google Scholar
The Pennsylvania State University (2011) Penn State Agronomy Guide 2011–2012. University Park, PA: Publications Distribution Center, The Pennsylvania State University. 393 pGoogle Scholar
University of Illinois (2012) Machinery Cost Estimates: Field Operations. http://www.farmdoc.illinois.edu/manage/machinery/field%20operations%202012.pdf. Accessed January 2016Google Scholar
Uri, ND (2000) Perceptions of the use of no-till farming in production agriculture in the United States: an analysis of survey results Agric Ecosyst Environ 77:263–266 Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (2012) Milk Cow Herd Size by Inventory and Sales. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_1_State_Level/Pennsylvania/st42_1_017_019.pdf. Accessed July 2013Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (2013) QuickStats 2.0. https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/. Accessed July 2013Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (2014) Tillage Practices Released. Harrisburg, PA: USDA-NASS. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Pennsylvania/Publications/Survey_Results/tillage_practices14.pdf. Accessed January 2016Google Scholar
VanGessel, M (2001) Glyphosate-resistant horseweed from Delaware Weed Sci 49:703–705 Google Scholar
Willis, JC, Bohan, DA, Powers, SJ, Choi, YH, Park, J, Gussin, E (2008) The importance of temperature and moisture to the egg-laying behaviour of a pest slug, Deroceras reticulatum Ann App Biol 153:105–115 Google Scholar
Wischmeier, WH, Smith, DD (1978) Predicting rainfall erosion losses: a guide to conservation planning. Agricultural Handbook No 537. Washington, DC: USDA-ARS. 65 pGoogle Scholar
Young, BG (2006) Changes in herbicide use patterns and production practices resulting from glyphosate-resistant crops Weed Technol 20:301–307 Google Scholar
Young, BG, Young, JM, Gonzini, LC, Hart, SE, Wax, LM, Kapusta, G (2001) Weed management in narrow- and wide-row glyphosate-resistant soybean Weed Technol 15:112–121 Google Scholar