Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Organic Weed Management in Field Crops with a Propane Flamer and Rotary Hoe

  • Erin C. Taylor (a1), Karen A. Renner (a1) and Christy L. Sprague (a1)

The weed management needs of organic producers are unique because they rely primarily on cultural and physical management strategies. Recommendations regarding commonly used tools for weed management could benefit this sector of agriculture. The objectives of this research were to (1) determine the optimum time of day for propane flaming to achieve maximum weed reductions while minimizing corn damage; (2) assess whether flaming, rotary hoeing, or a combination of the two tools best manages early-season weeds without injuring dry beans; and (3) evaluate the use of growing degree days (GDD) to optimize rotary hoe timing. Experiments were carried out between 2006 and 2009 in Hickory Corners and East Lansing, MI. Flaming reduced broadleaf weed densities by at least 82% when done in the morning to midafternoon but only reduced densities by 58% when weeds were flamed in the evening. Common lambsquarters, redroot pigweed, and velvetleaf were easier to control by flaming than common ragweed and common purslane. Flaming did not reduce grass weed densities. When comparing flaming and rotary hoeing, the two treatments that achieved the highest level of weed control and highest dry bean yields were flaming prior to bean emergence followed by two rotary hoeings and rotary hoeing three times (no flaming). However, the added cost of the flamer may only be justified when wet conditions make rotary hoeing ineffective. Flaming dry beans POST resulted in significant injury and yield reductions of 60%; therefore this practice is not recommended. Timing rotary hoe passes every 300 GDD (base 3.3 C) from the time of soybean or dry bean planting resulted in fewer passes compared with the 7-d or 150 GDD treatments, while maintaining similar levels of weed control and yields similar to the weed-free treatment in 1 of 2 yr for each crop.

Las necesidades de manejo de malezas de los productores orgánicos son únicas porque ellos dependen primordialmente de estrategias culturales y físicas. Las recomendaciones que consideren herramientas comúnmente utilizadas para el manejo de malezas podrían beneficiar a este sector de la agricultura. Los objetivos de esta investigación fueron: (1) determinar el momento óptimo del día para quemar con llamas de propano y alcanzar reducciones máximas en las poblaciones de malezas al tiempo que se minimiza el daño al maíz; (2) evaluar si las llamas, el cultivador rotativo, o la combinación de estas dos herramientas brinda el mejor manejo de malezas en la etapa temprana del cultivo sin dañar al frijol común; y (3) evaluar el uso de grados días de crecimiento (GDD) para optimizar el momento de uso del cultivador rotativo. Entre 2006 y 2009, se realizaron experimentos en Hickory Corners y East Lansing, MI. La quema con llamas realizada entre la mañana y media tarde redujo las densidades de malezas de hoja ancha en al menos 82%, pero solamente redujo las densidad en 58% cuando las malezas fueron quemadas en la noche. El control con llamas de Chenopodium album, Amaranthus retroflexus y Abutilon theophrasti fue más sencillo que el control de Ambrosia artemisiifolia y Portulaca oleracea. La quema con llamas no redujo las densidades de malezas gramíneas. Al comparar la quema con llamas con el cultivador rotativo, los dos tratamientos que alcanzaron el mayor nivel de control de malezas y el mayor rendimiento del frijol común fueron: quema con llamas antes de la emergencia del frijol seguida por dos pases del cultivador rotativo y tres pases del cultivador rotativo (sin quema). Sin embargo, el costo extra del quemador de llamas se justificaría solamente cuando condiciones húmedas limitan la efectividad del cultivador rotativo. El exponer el frijol común a las llamas POST resultó en daños significativos y reducciones en el rendimiento de 60%; por esta razón esta práctica no es recomendada. El realizar los pases del cultivador rotativo cada 300 GDD (base 3.3 C) desde el momento de la siembra de la soya o el frijol común resultó en menos pases en comparaciín con los tratamientos de 7 días o 150 GDD, al mismo tiempo que se mantuvieron niveles de control de malezas y de rendimiento similares al tratamiento libre de malezas en 1 de los 2 años de cada cultivo.

Corresponding author
Corresponding author's E-mail:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

M. D. Amador-Ramirez , R. G. Wilson , and A. R. Martin 2002. Effect of in-row cultivation, herbicides, and dry bean canopy on weed seedling emergence. Weed Sci. 50 :370377.

J. Ascard 1994. Dose-response models for flame weeding in relation to plant size and density. Weed Res. 34 :377385.

J. Ascard 1995. Effects of flame weeding on weed species at different developmental stages. Weed Res. 35 :397411.

W. Bond and A. C. Grundy 2001. Non-chemical weed management in organic farming systems. Weed Res. 41 :383405.

J. J. Cisneros and B. H. Zandstra 2008. Flame weeding effects on several weed species. Weed Technol. 22 :290295.

T. M. Dale and K. A. Renner 2005. Timing of postemergence micro-rate applications based on growing degree days in sugar beet. J. Sugar Beet Res. 42 :87100.

W. C. Johnson III, and B. G. Mullinix Jr. 2008. Potential weed management systems for organic peanut production. Peanut Sci. 35 :6772.

M. L. Leblanc and D. C. Cloutier 2001a. Susceptibility of dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, cranberry bean) to the rotary hoe. Weed Technol. 15 :224228.

K. Mohr , B. A. Sellers , and R. J. Smeda 2007. Application time of day influences glyphosate efficacy. Weed Technol. 21 :713.

R. L. Parish , W. C. Porter , and P. R. Vidrine 1997. Flame cultivation as a complement to mechanical and herbicidal control of weeds. J. Veg. Crop Prod. 3 :6583.

E. J. Peters , D. L. Klingman , and R. E. Larson 1959. Rotary hoeing in combination with herbicides and other cultivations for weed control in soybeans. Weeds 7 :449458.

D.W.M. Pullen and P. A. Cowell 1997. An evaluation of the performance of mechanical weeding mechanisms for use in high speed inter-row weeding of arable crops. J. Agr. Eng. Res. 67 :2734.

K. A. Renner and J. J. Woods 1999. Influence of cultural practices on weed management in soybean. J. Prod. Agric. 12 :4853.

S. J. Steinmaus , T. S. Prather , and J. S. Holt 2000. Estimation of base temperatures for nine weed species. J. Exp. Bot. 51 :275286.

C. L. Stewart , R. E. Nurse , and P. H. Sikkema 2009. Time of day impacts postemergence weed control in corn. Weed Technol. 23 :346355.

S. M. Ulloa , A. Datta , and S. Z. Knezevic 2010a. Tolerance of selected weed species to broadcast flaming at different growth stages. Crop Prot. 29 :13811388.

S. M. Ulloa , A. Datta , and S. Z. Knezevic 2010c. Growth stage-influenced differential response of foxtail and pigweed species to broadcast flaming. Weed Technol. 24 :319325.

S. M. Ulloa , A. Datta , C. Bruening , G. Gogos , T. J. Arkebauer , and S. Z. Knezevic 2012. Weed control and crop tolerance to propane flaming as influenced by the time of day. Crop Prot. 31 :17.

A. L. Wszelaki , D. J. Doohan , and A. Alexandrou 2007. Weed control and crop quality in cabbage (Brassica oleracea (capitata group)) and tomato (Lycopersican lycopersicum) using a propane flamer. Crop Prot. 26 :134144.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Weed Technology
  • ISSN: 0890-037X
  • EISSN: 1550-2740
  • URL: /core/journals/weed-technology
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 10 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 47 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 20th January 2017 - 23rd September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.