Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-15T13:17:20.560Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition of Smooth Pigweed with Corn and Soybeans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Moti K. Moolani ,
Ellery L. Knake  and
Fred W. Slife
Moti K. Moolani
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India Department of Agronomy, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois
Ellery L. Knake
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois
Fred W. Slife
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois
Get access

Abstract

Yield reductions from the heaviest stand of smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus L.) averaged 39% for corn and 55% for soybeans. For corn the increase in pigweed dry matter about equalled the decrease in the dry matter from the crop; the total dry matter yield was relatively constant. Pigweed grew taller than soybeans, and the dry weight of crop plus pigweeds was 1⅓ times that of weed-free soybeans. As stand of pigweed was increased, there was a decrease in yield of grain, cobs and stalks or straw, diameter of cornstalks, height of crop, and soybean pods per plant. Yield reductions obtained emphasize the importance of both chemical and cultural measures for reducing competition between row crops and weeds.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , April 1964 , pp. 126 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © 1964 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.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Blackman, G. E. and Templeman, W. G. 1938. The nature of competition between cereal crops and annual weeds. J. Agr. Sci. 28:247–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Clements, F. E., Weaver, J. E., and Hanson, H. C. 1929. Plant competition—an analysis of community function. Carnegie Institute, Washington, D. C. Google Scholar
3. Jorge, N. H. and Staniforth, D. W. 1961. Corn-foxtail competition under various production conditions. Agron. J. 53:1–5.Google Scholar
4. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberii with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:26–29.Google Scholar
5. Pavlychenko, T. K. and Harrington, J. B. 1934. Competitive efficiency of weeds and cereal crops. Canadian J. Res. 10:77–94.Google Scholar
6. Robinson, R. G. 1949. Annual weeds, their viable seed population in soil and their effects on yield of oats, wheat, and flax. Agron. J. 41:513–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Staniforth, D. W. 1953. Levels of weed infestations as related to yield losses and control practices in corn. Proc. NCWCC 10:44–46.Google Scholar
8. Staniforth, D. W. 1957. Effects of annual grass weeds on the yield of corn. Agron. J. 49:551–555.Google Scholar
9. Staniforth, D. W. and Weber, C. R. 1956. Effects of annual weeds on the growth and yield of soybeans. Agron. J. 48:467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Vengris, J., Colby, W. G., and Drake, M. 1955. Plant nutrient competition between weeds and corn. Agron. J. 47:213–216.Google Scholar
11. Wollny, E. 1881. Untersuchungen uber der Einfluss des Standraumes auf die Entwicklung und die Ertage der Kulturpflanzen. J. Landw. 29:25–62, 217–255, 493–536. Google Scholar