Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T14:49:50.768Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interference between corn and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) from seed or rhizomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Michalis B. Mitskas ,
Christos E. Tsolis ,
Ilias G. Eleftherohorinos  and
Christos A. Damalas
Michalis B. Mitskas
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Agronomy, University of Thessaloniki, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece
Christos E. Tsolis
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Agronomy, University of Thessaloniki, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece
Christos A. Damalas
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Agronomy, University of Thessaloniki, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1999 and 2000 in northern Greece to study interference between johnsongrass from seed or rhizomes and three corn hybrids (‘Dunia’, ‘Papea’, and ‘Costanza’). Fresh weight of each corn hybrid was lower with greater duration of johnsongrass interference, and it was lower for corn grown with johnsongrass from rhizomes than from seed. Corn-silage yield and corn-grain yield were 10 to 14% less than weed-free corn yield when grown with johnsongrass plants from rhizomes 4 wk after sowing (WAS) or from seed 6 WAS. Regression analysis indicated that a corn-grain yield loss of 10% was associated with an interference period of 2.6 to 2.7 WAS for johnsongrass from rhizomes and 4.3 to 5.1 WAS for johnsongrass from seed compared with weed-free corn. Corn-silage yield with season-long interference by johnsongrass from rhizomes or from seed was 83 and 62% lower, respectively, than was weed-free corn yield. Similarly, corn-grain yield with season-long interference by johnsongrass from rhizomes or from seed was 88 and 57% lower, respectively, than was the yield from weed-free corn. Corn-ear length of each hybrid was more affected by johnsongrass interference than was 1,000-seed weight. Johnsongrass plants from rhizomes emerged earlier, grew faster, and produced greater fresh weight than did plants from seed. However, fresh weight and stem number of johnsongrass plants from either seed or rhizomes were not affected by corn hybrids.

Keywords

Johnsongrass, Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. SORHAcorn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer Costanza’, ‘Pioneer Dunia’, ‘Pioneer Papea’Noxious weedremoval timeweed–crop competitionweed density
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , August 2003 , pp. 540 - 545
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.)

References

Literature Cited

Anderson, L. E., Appleby, A. P., and Weseloh, J. W. 1960. Characteristics of johnsongrass rhizomes. Weeds 8:402–406.Google Scholar
Bendixen, L. E. 1986. Corn (Zea mays) yield in relationship to johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) population. Weed Sci. 34:449–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridges, D. C. and Chandler, J. M. 1987. Influence of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) density and period of competition on cotton yield. Weed Sci. 35:63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eleftherohorinos, I. G. and Kotoula-Syka, E. 1995. Influence of herbicide application rate and timings for post-emergence control of Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. in corn. Weed Res. 35:99–103.Google Scholar
Foy, C. L. and Witt, H. L. 1990. Johnsongrass control with DPX-V9360 and CGA-136872 in corn (Zea mays) in Virginia. Weed Technol. 4:615–619.Google Scholar
Friedman, T. and Horowitz, M. 1970. Phytotoxicity of subterranean residues of three perennial weeds. Weed Res. 10:382–385.Google Scholar
Ghosheh, H. Z., Holshouser, D. L., and Chandler, J. M. 1996a. Influence of density on johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) interference in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 44:879–883.Google Scholar
Ghosheh, H. Z., Holshouser, D. L., and Chandler, J. M. 1996b. The critical period of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 44:944–947.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. pp. 54–61.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1973. Spatial growth of Sorghum halepense . Weed Res. 13:200–208.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. 1961. Morphology and development of johnsongrass plants from seeds and rhizomes. Weeds 9:558–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. 1972. Factors affecting johnsongrass rhizome production and germination. Weed Sci. 20:41–45.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. 1989. History, biology, and control of johnsongrass. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:85–121.Google Scholar
Monaghan, N. 1979. The biology of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense). Weed Res. 19:261–267.Google Scholar
Mueller, J. P., Lewis, W. M., Green, J. T., and Burns, J. C. 1993. Yield and quality of silage corn as altered by johnsongrass infestation. Agron. J. 85:49–52.Google Scholar
Obrigawitch, T. T., Kenyon, W. H., and Kuratle, H. 1990. Effect of application timing on rhizome johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) control with DPX-V9360. Weed Sci. 38:45–49.Google Scholar
Strahan, R. E., Griffin, J. L., Reynolds, D. B., and Miller, D. K. 2000. Interference between Rottboelia cochinchinensis and Zea mays . Weed Sci. 48:205–211.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. 1991. Integrated weed management: the rationale and approach. Weed Technol. 5:657–663.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M. and Dwyer, L. M. 1999. Physiology of corn. Pages 169–204 In Smith, D. L. and Hamel, C., eds. Crop Yield Physiology and Processes. Berlin, Heildeberg: Springler-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, S. I. and Black, L. D. 1984. The biology of Canadian weeds. 61. Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. Can. J. Plant Sci. 63:997–1014.Google Scholar
Weaver, S. E., Kropff, M. J., and Groeneveld, R.M.W. 1992. Use of ecophysiological models for crop-weed interference: the critical period of weed interference. Weed Sci. 40:302–307.Google Scholar