A Relational Database as Decision Support System in Chemical Weed Control

1996 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 781-794 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Stigliani ◽  
Giuseppe Santospirito ◽  
Nicola Cardinale ◽  
Cosimo Resina
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Relational Database ◽  
Information Access ◽  
Critical Parameters ◽  
Limiting Factor ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Information Format ◽  
Available Information

Decision making in weed control is complex and time-consuming. Moreover, the structure of the available information does not facilitate the comparison of different herbicides. Indeed, information format can be the limiting factor in the performance of sophisticated computer programs intended to supply appropriate advice on weed control treatments. A relational database for decision support on chemical weed control has been developed. It uses a detailed structure by subdividing the information where possible. The database includes programs for entering, updating, and printing data, as well as programs for retrieving information and giving treatment advice. The information access on herbicides is organized around searches based on a specific crop and multiple weed species at their respective growth stages. Optimization of the selected herbicides is carried out and supplies the lowest number of herbicides controlling all the chosen weeds. Information on critical parameters for herbicide application such as varietal restrictions, rotational crops, and compatibility with other products is also interactively available.

scholarly journals Format of a Weed Control Database

1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
George W. Mueller-Warrant
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Growth Stage ◽  
Information Access ◽  
Database Systems ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Complete Control ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Effect Level

Access to detailed descriptions of the effects of applying specific rates of herbicides to crops and weeds in various growth stages is hampered by the format in which the relevant information is stored. Compared to traditional formats of journal articles and herbicide registration labels, computer database systems could easily cross-reference data from large numbers of experiments and answer specific questions concerning herbicide performance under particular conditions. Availability of this type of information could have far-reaching consequences for herbicide users, consultants, researchers, and regulators. A preliminary format for storing weed control information in IBM-PC compatible computers was developed, including procedures to enter data and retrieve information. Weed control efficacy or crop injury data for all rates of a herbicide or tank-mixture applied at a specific growth stage in a single test are used to generate dose/response equations by means of regression analysis routines. The best fitting of these equations is then used to estimate herbicide rates that would provide ten categories of control, ranging from a “no observable effect level” (NOEL) up to complete control. Rates are estimated only for those categories either within or bordering the range of the observed data, the remaining categories are empty. The estimated rates are stored in the database, along with the original data and other qualifying information. Access to information is organized around searches for a single herbicide, plant species, or pair of species. Search output is presented in a tabular format listing species, growth stage, herbicide name, and herbicide rates for the ten categories: NOEL, 10, 30, 50, 70, 83, 90, 95, 98, and 100% control or injury.

Weed Control Efficacy and Pinto Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) Tolerance to Early Season Mechanical Weeding

1995 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J. Vangessel ◽  
Lori J. Wiles ◽  
Edward E. Schweizer ◽  
Phil Westra
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Seed Weight ◽  
Growth Stage ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Control Efficacy ◽  
Pinto Bean

An integrated approach to weed management in pinto bean is needed since available herbicides seldom adequately control all weed species present in a field. A two-year study was conducted to assess weed control efficacy and pinto bean tolerance to mechanical weeding from a rotary hoe or flex-tine harrow at crook, unifoliolate, and trifoliolate stages of bean development. Weed control was similar for both implements and all timings in 1993. In 1994, mechanical weeding at trifoliolate and both crook and trifoliolate stages controlled more weeds than at other growth stages, regardless of type of implement. Using the flex-tine harrow reduced pinto bean stand, but results based on growth stage were not consistent each year. Damage to pinto bean hypocotyls and stems was observed with the flex-tine harrow used at both crook and trifoliolate stages in 1994. Rotary hoeing did not reduce pinto bean stand or cause injury. Yield and seed weight did not differ among treatments in either year.

Evaluation of sequential applications of quizalofop-P-ethyl and florpyrauxifen-benzyl in acetyl CoA carboxylase-resistant rice

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Tameka L. Sanders ◽  
Jason A. Bond ◽  
Benjamin H. Lawrence ◽  
Bobby R. Golden ◽  
Thomas W. Allen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Rice Yield ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Acetyl Coa Carboxylase ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Rough Rice ◽  
Sequential Treatments ◽  
Acetyl Coenzyme A Carboxylase ◽  
Grass Weed

Abstract Information on performance of sequential treatments of quizalofop-P-ethyl with florpyrauxifen-benzyl on rice is lacking. Field studies were conducted in 2017 and 2018 in Stoneville, MS, to evaluate sequential timings of quizalofop-P-ethyl with florpyrauxifen-benzyl included in preflood treatments of rice. Quizalofop-P-ethyl treatments were no quizalofop-P-ethyl; sequential applications of quizalofop-P-ethyl at 120 g ha−1 followed by (fb) 120 g ai ha−1 applied to rice in the 2- to 3-leaf (EPOST) fb the 4-leaf to 1-tiller (LPOST) growth stages or LPOST fb 10 d after flooding (PTFLD); quizalofop-P-ethyl at 100 g ha−1 fb 139 g ha−1 EPOST fb LPOST or LPOST fb PTFLD; quizalofop-P-ethyl at 139 g ha−1 fb 100 g ha−1 EPOST fb LPOST and LPOST fb PTFLD; and quizalofop-P-ethyl at 85 g ha−1 fb 77 g ha−1 fb 77 g ha−1 EPOST fb LPOST fb PTFLD. Quizalofop-P-ethyl was applied alone and in mixture with florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 29 g ai ha−1 LPOST. Visible rice injury 14 d after PTFLD (DA-PTFLD) was no more than 3%. Visible control of volunteer rice (‘CL151’ and ‘Rex’) 7 DA-PTFLD was similar and at least 95% for each quizalofop-P-ethyl treatment. Barnyardgrass control with quizalofop-P-ethyl at 120 fb 120 g ha−1 LPOST fb PTFLD was greater (88%) in mixture with florpyrauxifen-benzyl. The addition of florpyrauxifen-benzyl to quizalofop-P-ethyl increased rough rice yield when quizalofop-P-ethyl was applied at 100 g ha−1 fb 139 g ha−1 EPOST fb LPOST. Sequential applications of quizalofop-P-ethyl at 120 g ha−1 fb 120 g ha−1 EPOST fb LPOST, 100 g ha−1 fb 139 g ha−1 EPOST fb LPOST, or 139 g ha−1 fb 100 g ha−1 EPOST fb LPOST controlled grass weed species. The addition of florpyrauxifen-benzyl was not beneficial for grass weed control. However, because quizalofop-P-ethyl does not control broadleaf weeds, florpyrauxifen-benzyl could provide broad-spectrum weed control in acetyl coenzyme A carboxylase–resistant rice.

Growth Stage-Influenced Differential Response of Foxtail and Pigweed Species to Broadcast Flaming

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santiago M. Ulloa ◽  
Avishek Datta ◽  
Stevan Z. Knezevic
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Dry Matter ◽  
Growth Stage ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Common Waterhemp ◽  
Species Response ◽  
Redroot Pigweed ◽  
Green Foxtail

Propane flaming could be an effective alternative tool for weed control in organic cropping systems. However, response of major weeds to broadcast flaming must be determined to optimize its proper use. Therefore, field experiments were conducted at the Haskell Agricultural Laboratory, Concord, NE in 2007 and 2008 using six propane doses and four weed species, including green foxtail, yellow foxtail, redroot pigweed, and common waterhemp. Our objective was to describe dose–response curves for weed control with propane. Propane flaming response was evaluated at three different growth stages for each weed species. The propane doses were 0, 12, 31, 50, 68, and 87 kg ha−1. Flaming treatments were applied utilizing a custom-built flamer mounted on a four-wheeler (all-terrain vehicle) moving at a constant speed of 6.4 km h−1. The response of the weed species to propane flaming was evaluated in terms of visual ratings of weed control and dry matter recorded at 14 d after treatment. Weed species response to propane doses were described by log-logistic models relating propane dose to visual ratings or plant dry matter. Overall, response of the weed species to propane flaming varied among species, growth stages, and propane dose. In general, foxtail species were more tolerant than pigweed species. For example, about 85 and 86 kg ha−1were the calculated doses needed for 90% dry matter reduction in five-leaf green foxtail and four-leaf yellow foxtail compared with significantly lower doses of 68 and 46 kg ha−1of propane for five-leaf redroot pigweed and common waterhemp, respectively. About 90% dry matter reduction in pigweed species was achieved with propane dose ranging from 40 to 80 kg ha−1, depending on the growth stage when flaming was conducted. A similar dose of 40 to 60 kg ha−1provided 80% reduction in dry matter for both foxtail species when flaming was done at their vegetative growth stage. However, none of the doses we tested could provide 90% dry matter reduction in foxtail species at flowering stage. It is important to note that foxtail species started regrowing 2 to 3 wk after flaming. Broadcast flaming has potential for control or suppression of weeds in organic farming.

scholarly journals The effect of herbicides on Chenopodium album L. phenology in fodder beet, spring wheat and faba bean crops

2012 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-164
Author(s):  
Marian Wesołowski ◽  
Elżbieta Harasim
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Spring Wheat ◽  
Faba Bean ◽  
Control Method ◽  
Alluvial Soil ◽  
Weather Conditions ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Crop Species ◽  
Fodder Beet

The objective of the study was to determine the time of occurrence of the emergence, budding, fruiting and seed shedding stages, as well as the degree of advancement of the white goosefoot fruiting and diaspores shedding stages in fodder beet, spring wheat and faba bean crops under mechanical and chemical weed control. Phenological observations were conducted in the years 2000-2002 at 10-day intervals, starting from the day of crop sowing on alluvial soil made of light loam. Chemically weed controlled objects were treated with herbicides: fodder beet - lenacil 80%; spring wheat - MCPA 30% + dicamba 4%; faba bean - linuron 50%. It was proven that the times of occurrence and the scale of the studied phenological stages of white goosefoot depended on the crop species, the in-crop weed control method and the pattern of weather conditions in the study years. White goosefoot had the most favourable conditions of growth in the fodder beet crop. The herbicides in the fodder beet and faba bean crops delayed the emergence and the time of occurrence of successive white goosefoot growth stages. These agents also decreased the degree of diaspores shedding by the weed species studied. The most white goosefoot specimens shed fruits on the mechanically weed controlled plots. The diaspores dissemination was promoted by a warm and moist growing season.

scholarly journals Selectivity of Propane Flamer as a Means of Weed Control

HortScience ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 820C-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.D. Leroux ◽  
J. Douheret ◽  
M. Lanouette ◽  
M. Martel
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Plant Protection ◽  
Chenopodium Album ◽  
Amaranthus Retroflexus ◽  
Threshold Temperature ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Higher Temperature ◽  
And Control ◽  
Brassica Kaber

With growing public concern about environmental quality, farmers must turn to new plant protection alternatives that minimize the use of agrochemicals. Flaming has been practiced for several years as a means of weed control in noncropped areas (railroad, ditches, etc.), but its selectivity toward crops has yet to be defined. Experiments were conducted in the ICG-Propane laboratory at Laval Univ. to determine the temperature needed to kill weeds and the temperature that corn could tolerate. Four weed species were studied: Amaranthus retroflexus, Brassica kaber, Chenopodium album, and Setaria viridis and each species was tested at three growth stages: 0–2, 4–6, and >8 leaves. Corn tolerance was tested at four growth stages: coleoptile, 0–2, 4–6, >8 leaves. All plants were grown in the green-house and were submitted to different combinations of operation speeds and of propane pressures, giving 10 temperature intensities ranging from 110 to 390C. The response of each species was evaluated by measuring its height and dry biomass 2 weeks after treatment. The threshold temperature for corn was below 200C; above this temperature, significant corn injury occurred at all growth stages tested. The corn growth stages most tolerant to heat were coleoptile and >8 leaves. While the most sensitive was 4–6 leaves. All weeds tested were sensitive to heat at 0–2 leaf stage. Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album were controlled until six leaves with temperatures that were not harmful to corn. Weeds with more than eight leaves needed higher temperature, and control rarely reached 60%. Flaming could be a selective method of weed control if operated at a temperature of 170C. Selectivity can be increased by creating a growth differential between corn and weeds.

Problem Weed Control in Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean with Glyphosate Tank Mixes and Soil-Applied Herbicides

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 507-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stevan Z. Knezevic ◽  
Avishek Datta ◽  
Jon Scott ◽  
Robert N. Klein ◽  
Jeff Golus
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Early Growth ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Herbicide Application ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Common Lambsquarters ◽  
Field Bindweed ◽  
Crop Planting

Although glyphosate controls many plant species, certain broadleaf weeds in Nebraska's cropping systems exhibit various levels of tolerance to the labeled rates of this herbicide, including ivyleaf morningglory, Venice mallow, yellow sweetclover, common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, kochia, Russian thistle, and field bindweed. Therefore, two field studies were conducted in 2004 and 2005 at Concord and North Platte, NE, to evaluate performance of (1) seven preemergence (PRE) herbicides and (2) glyphosate tank mixes applied postemergence (POST) at three application times for control of eight weed species that are perceived as problem weeds in glyphosate-resistant soybean in Nebraska. The PRE herbicides, including sulfentrazone plus chlorimuron, pendimethalin plus imazethapyr, imazaquin, and pendimethalin plus imazethapyr plus imazaquin provided more than 85% control of most weed species tested in this study 28 d after treatment (DAT). However, sulfentrazone plus chlorimuron and pendimethalin plus imazethapyr plus imazaquin were the only PRE treatments that provided more than 80% control of most weed species 60 DAT. In the POST glyphosate tank-mix study, the level of weed control was significantly affected by the timing of herbicide application; control generally decreased as weed height increased. In general, glyphosate tank mixes applied at the first two application times (early or mid-POST) with half label rates of lactofen, imazamox, imazethapyr, fomesafen, imazaquin, or acifluorfen, provided more than 80% control of all species that were 20 to 30 cm tall except ivyleaf morningglory, Venice mallow, yellow sweetclover, and field bindweed. Glyphosate tank mixes applied late POST with lactofen, imazethapyr, or imazaquin provided more than 70% control of common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, kochia, and Russian thistle that were 30 to 50 cm tall. Overall, glyphosate tank mixes with half label rates of chlorimuron or acifluorfen were the best treatments; they provided more than 80% control of all the studied weed species when applied at early growth stages. Results of this study suggested that mixing glyphosate with other POST broadleaf herbicides, or utilizing soil-applied herbicides after crop planting helped effectively control most problematic weeds in glyphosate-resistant soybean in Nebraska.

Decision Support System for Optimized Herbicide Dose in Spring Barley

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mette S⊘nderskov ◽  
Per Kudsk ◽  
Solvejg K. Mathiassen ◽  
Ole M. B⊘jer ◽  
Per Rydahl
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Support System ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Spring Barley ◽  
Control Level ◽  
Crop Protection ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Treatment Frequency

Crop Protection Online (CPO) is a decision support system, which integrates decision algorithms quantifying the requirement for weed control and a herbicide dose model. CPO was designed to be used by advisors and farmers to optimize the choice of herbicide and dose. The recommendations from CPO for herbicide application in spring barley in Denmark were validated through field experiments targeting three levels of weed control requirement. Satisfactory weed control levels at harvest were achieved by a medium control level requirement generating substantial herbicide reductions (∼ 60% measured as the Treatment Frequency Index (TFI)) compared to a high level of required weed control. The observations indicated that the current level of weed control required is robust for a range of weed scenarios. Weed plant numbers 3 wk after spraying indicated that the growth of the weed species were inhibited by the applied doses, but not necessarily killed, and that an adequate level of control was reached later in the season through crop competition.

scholarly journals Smart Harrowing—Adjusting the Treatment Intensity Based on Machine Vision to Achieve a Uniform Weed Control Selectivity under Heterogeneous Field Conditions

Agronomy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1925
Author(s):  
Michael Spaeth ◽  
Jannis Machleb ◽  
Gerassimos G. Peteinatos ◽  
Marcus Saile ◽  
Roland Gerhards
Keyword(s):  
Grain Yield ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Field Conditions ◽  
Yield Reduction ◽  
Treatment Intensity ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Control Efficacy ◽  
Decision Algorithm ◽  
Crop Biomass

Harrowing is mostly applied with a constant intensity across the whole field. Heterogeneous field conditions such as variable soil texture, different crop growth stages, variations of the weed infestation level, and weed species composition are usually not considered during the treatment. This study offers a new approach to sensor-based harrowing which addresses these field variations. Smart harrowing requires the continuous adaptation of the treatment intensity to maintain the same level of crop selectivity while ensuring a high weed control efficacy. Therefore, a harrow was equipped with a sensor-system to automatically adjust the angle of the harrow tines based on a newly developed decision algorithm. In 2020, three field experiments were conducted in winter wheat and spring oats to investigate the response of the weed control efficacy and the crop to different harrowing intensities, in Southwest Germany. In all experiments, six levels of crop soil cover (CSC) were tested. The CSC determines the balance between crop damage and weed removal. Each experiment contained an untreated control and an herbicide treatment as a comparison to the harrowing treatments. The results showed an increase in the weed control efficacy (WCE) with an increasing CSC threshold. Difficult-to-control weed species such as Cirsium arvense L. and Galium aparine L. were best controlled with a CSC threshold of 70%. However, 70% CSC caused up to 50% crop biomass loss and up to 2 t·ha−1 of grain yield reduction. With a CSC threshold of 20% it was possible to control up to 98% of Thlaspi arvense L. The highest crop biomass, grain yield, and selectivity were achieved with an CSC threshold of 20–25% at all locations. With this harrowing intensity, grain yields were higher than in the herbicide plots and a WCE of 68–98% was achieved. Due to the rapid adjustment of tine angle, the new sensor-based harrow allows users to apply the most selective harrowing intensity in every location of the field. Therefore, it can achieve equal weed control efficacies as using herbicide applications.

scholarly journals Early Postemergence Control of Woodland Bittercress (Cardamine flexuosa With.) and Yellow Woodsorrel (Oxalis stricta L.) with Dithiopyr and Isoxaben Combinations1

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 114-118
Author(s):  
Debalina Saha ◽  
S. Christopher Marble ◽  
Annette Chandler
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Growth Stage ◽  
Early Growth ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Fresh Weight ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Leaf Stage ◽  
Large Growth ◽  
Cardamine Flexuosa ◽  
Weight Data

Abstract The objective of this research was to evaluate dithiopyr and isoxaben combinations and indaziflam (Marengo) for early postemergence control of woodland bittercress (Cardamine flexuosa) and yellow woodsorrel at 4 different early growth stages. Herbicides evaluated included sprayable formulations of isoxaben, dithiopyr + isoxaben, dithiopyr, indaziflam, and prodiamine + isoxaben without any surfactants. Woodland bittercress growth stages included seed production (extra-large), recently flowered (large), 6 to 9 leaf (medium) or in 2 to 5 leaf stage (small), while yellow woodsorrel growth stages included 8 to 12 leaf stage (extra-large), 4 to 6 leaf stage (large), 2 to 4 leaf stage (medium) and cotyledon to 1 leaf stage (small). Shoot fresh weight data showed all treatments provided ≤98% of woodland bittercress at the small stage. Dithiopyr + isoxaben (98%), isoxaben (90%), and indaziflam (93%) provided the highest level of woodland bittercress control at the medium stage and were the only treatments providing acceptable control (≥80%). In the large stage, dithiopyr + isoxaben provided acceptable control (80%) and outperformed other treatments. All treatments with the exception of isoxaben generally provided acceptable control of yellow woodsorrel up to the large growth stage. Only indaziflam (86% control) provided acceptable control at the extra-large stage. Index words: herbicide, postemergence weed control, container-grown plants, phytotoxic damages. Herbicides used in this study: isoxaben (Gallery® 4SC) N-[3-(1-ethyl-1-methylpropyl)- 5-isoxazolyl]-2,6-dimethoxybenzamide; dithiopyr (Dimension® 2EW) S,S'-dimethyl 2-(difluoromethyl)-4- (2-methylpropyl)-6-(trifluoromethyl)- 3,5-pyridinedicarbothioate; indaziflam (Specticle® FLO) N-[(1R,2S)-2,3-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-1H-inden-1-yl]-6-(1-fluoroethyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine; prodiamine + isoxaben (Gemini® SC) 2,4-dinitro-N3,N3-dipropyl-6-(trifluoromethyl)-1,3-benzenediamine + N-[3-(1-ethyl-1-methylpropyl)- 5-isoxazolyl]-2,6-dimethoxybenzamide; dithiopyr + isoxaben (Dimension® + Gallery®) S,S'-dimethyl 2-(difluoromethyl)-4- (2-methylpropyl)-6-(trifluoromethyl)- 3,5-pyridinedicarbothioate + N-[3-(1-ethyl-1-methylpropyl)- 5-isoxazolyl]-2,6-dimethoxybenzamide. Weed species evaluated: woodland bittercress (flexuous bittercress) (Cardamine flexuosa With.); yellow woodsorrel (Oxalis stricta L.).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document