Assessment of Chemical and Manual Weed Control Approaches for Effective Weed Suppression and Maize Productivity Enhancement Under Maize-Wheat Cropping System

In the rice–wheat (RW) systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia, conservation tillage practices, including zero-tillage (ZT), are being promoted to address emerging problems such as (1) shortages of labor and water, (2) declining factor productivity, (3) deterioration of soil health, and (4) climate change. Despite multiple benefits of ZT, weed control remains a major challenge to adoption, resulting in more dependence on herbicides for weed control. Alternative management strategies are needed to reduce dependence on herbicides and minimize risks associated with their overuse, including evolution of herbicide resistance. The objectives of this review are to (1) highlight and synthesize research efforts in nonchemical weed management in ZT RW systems and (2) identify future weed ecology and management research needs to facilitate successful adoption of these systems. In ZT RW systems, crop residue can play a central role in suppressing weeds through mulch effects on emergence and seed predation. In ZT rice, wheat residue mulch (5 t ha−1) reduced weed density by 22 to 76% and promoted predation of RW weeds, including littleseed canarygrass and barnyardgrass seeds. For ZT wheat, rice residue mulch (6 to 10 t ha−1) in combination with early sowing reduced emergence of littleseed canarygrass by over 80%. Other promising nonchemical approaches that can be useful in suppressing weeds in ZT RW systems include use of certified seeds, weed-competitive cultivars, stale seedbed practices, living mulches (e.g., sesbania coculture), and water and nutrient management practices that shift weed–crop competition in favor of the crop. However, more research on emergence characteristics and mulching effects of different crop residues on key weeds under ZT, cover cropping, and breeding crops for weed suppression will strengthen nonchemical weed management programs. Efforts are needed to integrate multiple tactics and to evaluate long-term effects of nonchemical weed management practices on RW cropping system sustainability.

Download Full-text

Spring-planted cover crops for weed control in soybean

Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems ◽

10.1017/s1742170521000107 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-8

Author(s):

Katja Koehler-Cole ◽

Christopher A. Proctor ◽

Roger W. Elmore ◽

David A. Wedin

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Biomass Production ◽

Cover Crops ◽

Weed Management ◽

Block Design ◽

Weed Suppression ◽

Crop Species ◽

Cold Temperatures ◽

Weed Biomass ◽

Small Grains

Abstract Replacing tillage with cover crops (CC) for weed management in corn (Zea mays L.)-soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] systems with mechanical weed control has many soil health benefits but in the western Corn Belt, CC establishment after harvest is hampered by cold temperatures, limited labor and few compatible CC species. Spring-planted CC may be an alternative, but information is lacking on suitable CC species. Our objective was to evaluate four spring-planted CC with respect to biomass production and weed suppression, concurrent with CC growth and post-termination. Cover crop species tested were oat (Avena sativa L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), brown mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.] and yellow mustard (Brassica hirta Moench). They were compared to no-CC treatments that were either tilled pre- and post-planting of soybean (no-CC tilled) or not tilled at all (no-CC weedy). CC were planted in late March to early April, terminated 52–59 days later using an undercutter, and soybean was planted within a week. The experiment had a randomized complete block design with four replications and was repeated for 3 years. Mustards and small grains produced similar amounts of biomass (1.54 Mg ha−1) but mustard biomass production was more consistent (0.85–2.72 Mg ha−1) than that of the small grains (0.35–3.81 Mg ha−1). Relative to the no-CC weedy treatment, mustards suppressed concurrent weed biomass in two out of 3 years, by 31–97%, and small grains suppressed concurrent weed biomass in only 1 year, by 98%. Six weeks after soybean planting, small grains suppressed weed biomass in one out of 3 years, by 79% relative to the no-CC weedy treatment, but mustards did not provide significant weed suppression. The no-CC tilled treatment suppressed weeds each year relative to the no-CC weedy treatment, on average 87%. The ineffective weed control by CC reduced soybean biomass by about 50% six weeks after planting. While spring-planted CC have the potential for pre-plant weed control, they do not provide adequate early season weed suppression for soybean.

Download Full-text

Weed Control with Reduced Rates of Chlorimuron Plus Metribuzin and Imazethapyr in No-Till Narrow-Row Soybean (Glycine max)

Weed Technology ◽

10.1017/s0890037x00042536 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. 32-36 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

William G. Johnson ◽

Jeffrey S. Dilbeck ◽

Michael S. Defelice ◽

J. Andrew Kendig

Keyword(s):

Glycine Max ◽

Weed Control ◽

Field Studies ◽

Weed Suppression ◽

Crop Response ◽

Soybean Production ◽

No Till ◽

Giant Foxtail ◽

The Difference ◽

Narrow Row

Field studies were conducted at three locations in 1993 and 1994 to evaluate weed control and crop response to combinations of glyphosate, metolachlor, 0.5 X and 1 X label rates of chlorimuron plus metribuzin applied prior to planting (PP), and 0.5 X and 1 X label rates of imazethapyr applied early postemergence (EPOST) or postemergence (POST) in no-till narrow-row soybean production. Giant foxtail densities were reduced with sequential PP followed by (fb) EPOST or POST treatments. Large crabgrass was reduced equivalently with all herbicide combinations involving chlorimuron plus metribuzin PP fb imazethapyr. Common cocklebur control was variable but was usually greater with treatments that included imazethapyr. Ivyleaf morningglory densities were not reduced with any herbicide combinations. Sequential PP fb EPOST or POST treatments tended to provide slightly better weed suppression than PP-only treatments, but the difference was rarely significant. Soybean yields with treatments utilizing 0.5 X rates were usually equal to 1 X rates.

Download Full-text

Russian Thistle (Salsola iberica) and Kochia (Kochia scoparia) Control in Dryland Corn (Zea mays)

Weed Technology ◽

10.1017/s0890037x00026117 ◽

1990 ◽

Vol 4 (3) ◽

pp. 631-634 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

R. E. Blackshaw

Keyword(s):

Zea Mays ◽

Weed Control ◽

Crop Production ◽

Production Systems ◽

Cropping System ◽

Field Studies ◽

Kochia Scoparia ◽

Field Corn ◽

Salsola Iberica

Field studies were conducted in 1987, 1988, and 1989 at Lethbridge, Alberta to determine suitable herbicides for the control of Russian thistle and kochia in field corn grown in a dryland cropping system. Soil-applied atrazine or cyanazine provided inconsistent control of these weeds under dryland conditions. Combining inter-row tillage or 2,4-D applied postemergence with soil-applied atrazine improved the consistency of weed control over years. Postemergence atrazine and dicamba plus 2,4-D controlled Russian thistle and kochia in all years. Corn yields reflected the level of weed control attained with each treatment. The suitability of the various treatments for weed control in corn grown under dryland crop production systems is discussed.

Download Full-text

Effect of integrated nutrient management and weed control practices on growth and yield attributes of rice (Oryza sativa L.) in rice-groundnut cropping system

The Pharma Innovation ◽

10.22271/tpi.2021.v10.i3d.5771 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. 217-222

Author(s):

Lalita Kumar Mohanty ◽

Sankarsan Nanda ◽

Lalita Mohan Garnayak

Keyword(s):

Oryza Sativa ◽

Weed Control ◽

Nutrient Management ◽

Oryza Sativa L ◽

Cropping System ◽

Growth And Yield ◽

Integrated Nutrient Management ◽

Yield Attributes

Download Full-text

Chemical weed control as an element in the cropping system.

Weeds and weed management on arable land: an ecological approach ◽

10.1079/9780851996516.0197 ◽

2009 ◽

pp. 197-213

Author(s):

S. Hakansson

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Cropping System

Download Full-text

Weed-sensing technology modifies fallow control of rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea)

Weed Technology ◽

10.1017/wet.2020.76 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 34 (6) ◽

pp. 857-862

Author(s):

Jacob W. Fischer ◽

Mark E. Thorne ◽

Drew J. Lyon

Keyword(s):

Winter Wheat ◽

Weed Control ◽

Cropping System ◽

Economic Loss ◽

Yield Potential ◽

Perennial Weed ◽

Sensing Technology ◽

Contract Expiration ◽

Eastern Washington ◽

Rush Skeletonweed

AbstractRush skeletonweed is an aggressive perennial weed that establishes itself on land in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and persists during cropping following contract expiration. It depletes critical soil moisture required for yield potential of winter wheat. In a winter wheat/fallow cropping system, weed control is maintained with glyphosate and tillage during conventional fallow, and with herbicides only in no-till fallow. Research was conducted for control of rush skeletonweed at two sites in eastern Washington, Lacrosse and Hay, to compare the effectiveness of a weed-sensing sprayer and broadcast applications of four herbicides (aminopyralid, chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron, clopyralid, and glyphosate). Experimental design was a split-plot with herbicide and application type as main and subplot factors, respectively. Herbicides were applied in the fall at either broadcast or spot-spraying rates depending on sprayer type. Rush skeletonweed density in May was reduced with use of aminopyralid (1.1 plants m−2), glyphosate (1.4 plants m−2), clopyralid (1.7 plants m−2), and chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron (1.8 plants m−2) compared with the nontreated check (2.6 plants m−2). No treatment differences were observed after May 2019. There was no interaction between herbicide and application system. Area covered using the weed-sensing sprayer was, on average, 52% (P < 0.001) less than the broadcast application at the Lacrosse location but only 20% (P = 0.01) at the Hay location. Spray reduction is dependent on foliar cover in relation to weed density and size. At Lacrosse, the weed-sensing sprayer reduced costs for all herbicide treatments except aminopyralid, with savings up to US$6.80 per hectare. At Hay, the weed-sensing sprayer resulted in economic loss for all products because of higher rush skeletonweed density. The weed-sensing sprayer is a viable fallow weed control tool when weed densities are low or patchy.

Download Full-text

Yield tradeoffs and weed suppression in a winter annual oilseed relay‐cropping system

Agronomy Journal ◽

10.1002/agj2.20160 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 112 (4) ◽

pp. 2485-2495 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Cody Hoerning ◽

M. Scott Wells ◽

Russ Gesch ◽

Frank Forcella ◽

Donald Wyse

Keyword(s):

Cropping System ◽

Weed Suppression ◽

Winter Annual ◽

Relay Cropping

Download Full-text

Influence of Shading by Soybeans (Glycine max) on Weed Suppression

Weed Science ◽

10.1017/s0043174500063839 ◽

1981 ◽

Vol 29 (5) ◽

pp. 610-615 ◽

Cited By ~ 35

Author(s):

T. R. Murphy ◽

B. J. Gossett

Keyword(s):

South Carolina ◽

Glycine Max ◽

Weed Control ◽

Field Studies ◽

Weed Suppression ◽

Planting Dates ◽

Early Season ◽

Soybean Yield ◽

Annual Weeds

Field studies were conducted at Florence and Clemson, South Carolina to measure the influence of soybean [Glycine max(L.) Merr.] planting dates on the length of early-season weed control needed to prevent yield reductions, the rate of shade development, and suppression of annual weeds by soybeans. The rate of shade development was similar for both planting dates during the 9- to 11-week period after planting for Florence and Clemson, respectively. The period of weed-free maintenance required to prevent soybean yield reductions was not affected by planting dates. With cultivation between rows, early- and late-planted soybeans required 3 weeks of weed-free maintenance to achieve maximum yields. Lower weed weights resulted from late than early soybean plantings. At Clemson, 3 weeks of weed-free maintenance for early and late plantings reduced weed weights 97 and 91%, respectively. Weed weights at Florence were reduced 85% with 3 weeks of weed-free maintenance for the late plantings, whereas 5 weeks were required to reduce weed weights 88% for early plantings.

Download Full-text

Weed Control in Maize-Cowpea Intercropping System Related to Environmental Resources Consumption

Notulae Scientia Biologicae ◽

10.15835/nsb315609 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 57-60 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Hamdollah ESKANDARI ◽

Kamyar KAZEMI

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Block Design ◽

Cropping System ◽

Resource Consumption ◽

Environmental Resources ◽

Planting Pattern ◽

Environmental Resource ◽

Sole Crop ◽

Nutrients Uptake ◽

Replacement Design

A field experiment was carried out in Ramhormoz, Iran during the 2008-2009 growing season to investigate the effects of different planting pattern of intercropping on environmental resource consumption and weed biomass. A randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications was employed to compare the treatments. Treatments included maize sole crop (M), cow pea sole crop (C), within row intercropping (I1), row intercropping (I2) and mix cropping (I3). The density of intercropping was according to replacement design (one maize replaced by three cow pea plants). The results showed that environmental resource consumption was significantly (P?0.05) affected by cropping system, where PAR interception, moisture and nutrients uptake were higher in intercropping systems compared to sole crop systems. Regarding to weed control, intercrops were more effective than sole crops and it was related to lower availability of environmental resources for weeds in intercropping systems.

Download Full-text