Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-pnlb5 Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-10-30T09:42:11.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determination of the Critical Period for Weed Control in Corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Geoffroy Gantoli ,
Victor Rueda Ayala  and
Roland Gerhards
Geoffroy Gantoli
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Science, University of Hohenheim, Otto-Sander-Str. 5, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Victor Rueda Ayala
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Science, University of Hohenheim, Otto-Sander-Str. 5, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Roland Gerhards*
Affiliation:
Department of Weed Science, University of Hohenheim, Otto-Sander-Str. 5, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: gerhards@uni-hohenheim.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in western Atakora, Benin, to determine the critical time period of weed competition in hand-weeded corn. Weeds were removed until different crop growth stages and then allowed to reemerge. Other treatments began weed control at different growth stages (four-, eight-, and ten-leaf stages and flowering) and were maintained until harvest. One treatment was permanently kept weed-free and one treatment was uncontrolled until harvest. Yields without weed competition ranged from 2.8 to 3.4 t ha−1. As expected, yield loss increased with duration of weed infestation and ranged from 38 to 65% compared to permanent weed-free plots. In three out of four site-years, the critical period for weed control started at the four- to six-leaf stage and continued until ten-leaf stage or flowering of corn. Approximately four hand-weeding applications were required in this critical period of weed control.

Se realizaron experimentos de campo en el oeste de Atakora, Benin, para determinar el período crítico de competencia de malezas en maíz manejado con deshierba manual. Las malezas fueron removidas durante diferentes estados de desarrollo del cultivo y luego se les dejó re-emerger. Otros tratamientos iniciaron el control de malezas en diferentes estados de desarrollo (cuatro, ocho y diez hojas y floración) y luego se mantuvieron libres de malezas hasta la cosecha. Un tratamiento fue mantenido libre de malezas permanentemente y otro tratamiento no tuvo control de malezas hasta la cosecha. Los rendimientos sin competencia de malezas fueron de 2.8 a 3.4 t ha−1. Como se esperaba, la pérdida de rendimiento incrementó con la duración de la infestación de malezas y varió entre 38 y 65% al compararse con las parcelas libres de malezas. En tres de los cuatro sitios-años, el período crítico para el control de malezas inició entre los estados de cuatro a seis hojas y continuó hasta el estado de 10 hojas o de floración del cultivo. Aproximadamente, cuatro deshierbas manuales fueron requeridas en este período crítico de control de malezas.

Keywords

CornZea mays L.Benincritical period for weed controlcrop-weed interactionyield loss

Information

Type
Weed Management—Major Crops
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 63 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © 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

References

Literature Cited

Akobundu, I. O. 1987. Weed science in the cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) in the humid tropics. Weed Sci. 30 :331–334.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2003. ONASA, Office National d'Appui à la Sécurité National: Evaluation de la Production Vivrière en 2002 et les Perspectives Alimentaires pour 2003. Cotenou, Benin, 96 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2010. MAEP, Ministère de l' Agriculture de l'Elevage et de la Pêche. www.countrystat.org/ben/fr. Accessed February 5, 2012.Google Scholar
Braun-Blanquet, J. 1928. Pflanzensoziologie, Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde. 1st ed, Volume 7. Berlin : Biologische Studienbücher. 137 p.Google Scholar
Ferrero, A., Crivellari, A., Tesio, F., and Vidotto, F. 2010. Critical period of weed competition in maize in North-Western Italy. Page 192 in Proceedings of the 15th European Weed Research Society Symposium 2010. Kaposvár, Hungary. 192 p.Google Scholar
Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain maize (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 40 :441–447.Google Scholar
Harsch, E. 2004. Farmers embrace African ‘miracle' rice: high-yielding ‘Nerica' varieties to combat hunger and rural poverty. Africa Recovery 17 :10.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Evans, S. P., Blankenship, E. E., Van Acker, R. C., and Lindquist, J. L. 2002. Critical period for weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Sci. 50 :773–786.Google Scholar
Koch, W. and Kemmer, A. 1980. Schadwirkung von Unkräutern gegenüber Mais in Abhängigkeit der Konkurrenzdauer und Unkrautdichte. Med. Fac. Landbouww. Rijksuniv. Gent 45 :1099–1109.Google Scholar
Kropff, M. and Spitters, C. J. T. 1991. A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations on leaf area of the weeds. Weed Res. 31 :97–105.Google Scholar
Lancaster, P. D., Bleiholder, H., Langeludecke, P., Stauss, R., van den Boom, T., Weber, E., and Witzen-Berger, A. 1991. A uniform decimal code for growth stages of crops and weeds. Ann. Appl. Biol. 119 :561–601.Google Scholar
Li, M. Y. 1960. An evaluation of the critical period and the effects of weed competition on oats and corn. Ph.D Dissertation. New Brunswick, NJ : State University of New Brunswick, 119 p.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Dieleman, J. A., Mortensen, D. A., Johnson, G. A., and Wyse-Pester, D. Y. 1998. Economic importance of managing spatially heterogeneous weed populations. Weed Technol. 12 :7–13.Google Scholar
Liu, J., Mahoney, K., Sikkema, P., and Swanton, C. J. 2009. The importance of light quality in crop–weed competition. Weed Res. 49 :217–224.Google Scholar
Meier, U. 2001. Growth stages of mono- and dicotyledonous plants. BBCH Monograph. 2. Ed. Braunschweig, Germany : Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry. Pp. 25–27.Google Scholar
Nieto, J. H., Brando, M. A., and Gonzales, J. T. 1968. Critical periods of crop growth cycle for competition from weeds. Pest Artic. News Summ. 14 :159–165.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K. and Oliveira, M. J. 2004. Comparison of the critical period for weed control in wide- and narrow-row corn. Weed Sci. 52 :802–807.Google Scholar
Oerke, E. C. 2006. Centenary review crop losses to pests. J. Agric. Sci. 144 :31–43.Google Scholar
Page, E. R., Cerrudo, D., Westra, P., Loux, M., Smith, K., Foresman, C., Wright, H., and Swanton, C. J. 2012. Why early season weed control is important in maize. Weed Sci. 60 :423–430.Google Scholar
Page, E. R., Tollenaar, M., Lee, E. A., Lukens, L., and Swanton, C. J. 2009. Does the shade avoidance response contribute to the critical period for weed control in maize (Zea mays)? Weed Res. 49 :563–571.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2009. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed October 16, 2012.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. 1991. Integrated weed management: the rationale and approach. Weed Technol. 5 :648–656.Google Scholar
Vissoh, P. V., Gbéhoungou, G., Ahantchédé, A., Kuyper, T. W., and Rolling, N. G. 2004. Weeds as agricultural constraint to farmers in Benin: results of a diagnostic study. NJAS – Wageningen J. Life Sci. 52 :308–329.Google Scholar
Williams, M. M. II. 2006. Planting date influences critical period of weed control in sweet corn. Weed Sci. 54 :928–933.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. 1981. The concept and application of the weed-free period. Pages 145–154 in Altieri, M. A. and Liebman, M., eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. New York : CRC Press.Google Scholar