6 results
Weed management practices in Argentina crops
- Julio Alejandro Scursoni, Alejandra Carolina Duarte Vera, Fernando Hugo Oreja, Betina Claudia Kruk, Elba Beatriz de la Fuente
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 33 / Issue 3 / June 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 June 2019, pp. 459-463
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Data from surveys are used to help quantitatively diagnose the relative importance of chemical and nonchemical management practices, identify weed problems, and provide potential solutions. However, to our knowledge, such surveys have not been conducted in Argentina. In 2016, advisors and crop producers from cropping areas across Argentina were surveyed through email with the objectives to identify the main weed species problems and assess the use of chemical and nonchemical weed management practices in different crop production areas in Argentina. Fleabane, pigweed, johnsongrass, fingergrass, goosegrass, barnyardgrass, and ryegrass were considered the most important weeds. More than 53% of the producers used only chemical options; 86% used chemical fallow (i.e., keeping weed free with chemical application); 62% used full herbicide rates; 46% used proper herbicide timing; 41% used multiple modes of action; and 32% used rotation of herbicide modes of action. The main nonchemical practices used were crop rotation (45%); avoiding seed production during (31%) and after (25%) the crop cycle; narrow row spacing (19%); and cultivars with greater competitive ability (18%). Less than 15% of the people surveyed used increased crop densities or altered date of sowing. There is a high dependence on chemical control in the main crops grown in Argentina. Extension efforts are needed to emphasize the importance of integrated weed management.
Teaching Seed Bank Ecology in an Undergraduate Laboratory Exercise
- Emilie E. Regnier
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 9 / Issue 1 / March 1995
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 12 June 2017, pp. 5-16
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The study of weed life cycles, reproductive strategies, and the soil seed bank is emphasized in the undergraduate weed science course at Ohio State University as central to an understanding of the survival of weeds in the environment. A laboratory exercise was conducted every spring and fall academic quarter from 1991 to 1993 to demonstrate the effects of long-term cropping and soil disturbance histories on weed seed banks and aboveground weed communities. Five sites with diverse histories of culture were sampled; these included a field cultivated in vegetables under continuous conventional tillage for 59 yr, a field cultivated in field corn under continuous no-tillage for 11 yr, a 24 yr-old turfgrass research farm, a 70 yr-old forest, and a section of the forest border. Students conducted a survey of the weeds growing at the sites and separated and identified seeds from soil samples over a 3-wk period in weekly 2-h laboratory periods. Students wrote reports interpreting the data based on their knowledge of the site histories, weed life cycles, and weed seed production and longevity characteristics. The data were consistent over academic quarters as well as with published research, indicating that the survey and soil sampling techniques provided a reasonably accurate representation of the weed flora and soil seed populations. Weeds found growing at the sites were primarily summer annuals at the vegetable site, and a mix of summer and winter annuals, biennials, and perennials at the remaining sites. Annual weeds dominated the seed banks of all sites with common lambsquarters, pigweed spp., and common purslane being the most commonly found seeds. The presence of most seeds in the soil could be explained by a combination of species seed production and seed longevity characteristics and species abundance in the standing community. Interpretation of the data required students to integrate and apply lecture material and provided an excellent thinking exercise.
Management of Pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) in Glufosinate-Resistant Soybean in the Midwest and Mid-South
- Thomas R. Butts, Jason K. Norsworthy, Greg R. Kruger, Lowell D. Sandell, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, Mark M. Loux, Kevin W. Bradley, Shawn P. Conley, David E. Stoltenberg, Francisco J. Arriaga, Vince M. Davis
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 30 / Issue 2 / June 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 355-365
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Pigweeds are among the most abundant and troublesome weed species across Midwest and mid-South soybean production systems because of their prolific growth characteristics and ability to rapidly evolve resistance to several herbicide sites of action. This has renewed interest in diversifying weed management strategies by implementing integrated weed management (IWM) programs to efficiently manage weeds, increase soybean light interception, and increase grain yield. Field studies were conducted across 16 site-years to determine the effectiveness of soybean row width, seeding rate, and herbicide strategy as components of IWM in glufosinate-resistant soybean. Sites were grouped according to optimum adaptation zones for soybean maturity groups (MGs). Across all MG regions, pigweed density and height at the POST herbicide timing, and end-of-season pigweed density, height, and fecundity were reduced in IWM programs using a PRE followed by (fb) POST herbicide strategy. Furthermore, a PRE fb POST herbicide strategy treatment increased soybean cumulative intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (CIPAR) and subsequently, soybean grain yield across all MG regions. Soybean row width and seeding rate manipulation effects were highly variable. Narrow row width (≤ 38 cm) and a high seeding rate (470,000 seeds ha−1) reduced end-of-season height and fecundity variably across MG regions compared with wide row width (≥ 76 cm) and moderate to low (322,000 to 173,000 seeds ha−1) seeding rates. However, narrow row widths and high seeding rates did not reduce pigweed density at the POST herbicide application timing or at soybean harvest. Across all MG regions, soybean CIPAR increased as soybean row width decreased and seeding rate increased; however, row width and seeding rate had variable effects on soybean yield. Furthermore, soybean CIPAR was not associated with end-of-season pigweed growth and fecundity. A PRE fb POST herbicide strategy was a necessary component for an IWM program as it simultaneously managed pigweeds, increased soybean CIPAR, and increased grain yield.
U.S. Grower Views on Problematic Weeds and Changes in Weed Pressure in Glyphosate-Resistant Corn, Cotton, and Soybean Cropping Systems
- Greg R. Kruger, William G. Johnson, Stephen C. Weller, Micheal D. K. Owen, David R. Shaw, John W. Wilcut, David L. Jordan, Robert G. Wilson, Mark L. Bernards, Bryan G. Young
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 23 / Issue 1 / March 2009
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 162-166
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Corn and soybean growers in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, and North Carolina, as well as cotton growers in Mississippi and North Carolina, were surveyed about their views on changes in problematic weeds and weed pressure in cropping systems based on a glyphosate-resistant (GR) crop. No growers using a GR cropping system for more than 5 yr reported heavy weed pressure. Over all cropping systems investigated (continuous GR soybean, continuous GR cotton, GR corn/GR soybean, GR soybean/non-GR crop, and GR corn/non-GR crop), 0 to 7% of survey respondents reported greater weed pressure after implementing rotations using GR crops, whereas 31 to 57% felt weed pressure was similar and 36 to 70% indicated that weed pressure was less. Pigweed, morningglory, johnsongrass, ragweed, foxtail, and velvetleaf were mentioned as their most problematic weeds, depending on the state and cropping system. Systems using GR crops improved weed management compared with the technologies used before the adoption of GR crops. However, the long-term success of managing problematic weeds in GR cropping systems will require the development of multifaceted integrated weed management programs that include glyphosate as well as other weed management tactics.
Changes in the Prevalence of Weed Species in the Major Agronomic Crops of the Southern United States: 1994/1995 to 2008/2009
- Theodore M. Webster, Robert L. Nichols
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 60 / Issue 2 / June 2012
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 145-157
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Changes in the weed flora of cropping systems reflect the impacts of factors that create safe sites for weed establishment and facilitate the influx and losses to and from the soil seedbank. This analysis of the annual surveys of the Southern Weed Science Society documents changes in the weed flora of the 14 contiguous southern states since the advent of transgenic, herbicide-resistant crops. In 1994 and 2009, the top five weeds in corn were morningglories, Texas millet, broadleaf signalgrass, johnsongrass, and sicklepod; in this same period Palmer amaranth, smartweeds, and goosegrass had the greatest increases in importance in corn. In cotton, morningglories and nutsedges were among the top five most troublesome weeds in 1995 and 2009. Palmer amaranth, pigweeds, and Florida pusley were also among the five most troublesome species in 2009; the weeds with the largest increases in importance in cotton were common ragweed and two species with tolerance to glyphosate, Benghal dayflower and Florida pusley. In soybean, morningglories, nutsedges, and sicklepod were among the top five weed species in 1995 and 2009. Two species with glyphosate resistance, Palmer amaranth and horseweed, were the second and fourth most troublesome weeds of soybean in 2009. In wheat, the top four weeds in 2008 were the same as those in 1994 and included Italian ryegrass, wild garlic, wild radish, and henbit. Crop production in the southern region is a mosaic of various crop rotations, soil types, and types of tillage. During the interval between the surveys, the predominant change in weed management practices in the region and the nation was the onset and rapid dominance of the use of glyphosate in herbicide-resistant cultivars of corn, cotton, and soybean. Because of the correspondence between the effects of glyphosate on the respective weed species and the observed changes in the weed flora of the crops, it is likely the very broad use of glyphosate was a key component shaping the changes in weed flora. Only eight of the top 15 most troublesome weeds of cotton and soybean, the crops with the greatest use of glyphosate, were the same in 1995 and 2009. In contrast, in corn and wheat where adoption of glyphosate-resistant cultivars lags or is absent, 12 of the 15 most troublesome weeds were the same in 1994 and 2008. These findings show on a regional scale that weeds adapt to recurrent selection from herbicides, currently the predominant weed management tool. Future research should seek methods to hinder the rapid spread of herbicide-tolerant and evolution of herbicide-resistant weed species. As new tools are developed, research should focus on ways to preserve the efficacy of those tools through improved stewardship.
Weed Management in Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Resistant Sugar Beet
- Nathan J. Kemp, Erin C. Taylor, Karen A. Renner
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 23 / Issue 3 / September 2009
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 416-424
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Field experiments were conducted to determine the critical period of weed interference in glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant sugar beet, and to determine if PRE herbicides increased weed control or sugar beet root yield when glufosinate, glyphosate, or conventional POST herbicides were applied. Glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant sugar beet root yields were reduced by up to 66 and 67%, respectively, when weeds remained all season in the weedy control treatment compared with yields when weed removal occurred as soon as the weeds were 2.5 cm tall, approximately 2 to 3 wk after planting (WAP). A critical period of weed interference did not occur in this research. The critical time of weed removal was approximately 8 WAP in 1998 and beyond 11 WAP in 1999. Weeds averaged 20 cm in height at 8 WAP and weed densities were greater in 1998 compared with 1999. The critical weed-free period for glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant sugar beet was 4.5 to 5 WAP in 1998. In 1999, the critical weed-free period at the Michigan Sugar location was 1.5 WAP in glyphosate-resistant sugar beet, and 6.5 WAP in glufosinate-resistant sugar beet for the Michigan Sugar site. Glyphosate or glufosinate POST provided better weed control and resulted in greater sugar beet root yield compared with conventional POST herbicides when data were combined over PRE herbicide treatments. PRE herbicides improved the control of common lambsquarters and Amaranthus species in some of the site-years when data were combined over POST treatments, but sugar beet yield did not increase. Our research suggests that PRE herbicides will not be necessary in glyphosate- or glufosinate-resistant sugar beet. To avoid sugar beet yield loss, multiple POST applications of glyphosate or glufosinate will be needed until 6 to 9 WAP to prohibit yield loss from weeds emerging after the last POST application.