Weed control in peanuts in north Queensland

1981 ◽  
Vol 21 (109) ◽  
pp. 218
Author(s):  
D Hawton ◽  
IDG Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Active Ingredient ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Single Application ◽  
Monetary Value ◽  
Hyptis Suaveolens ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Foliar Damage

Experiments conducted over two seasons with Virginia Bunch peanuts on krasnozem soils in north Queensland showed that cultivation controlled weeds sufficiently to prevent significant reduction of crop value. In one of these experiments two cultivations made 2 and 5 weeks after sowing increased the percentage of edible kernel by a mean of 4.8%. A range of herbicides tested in conjunction with cultivation did not significantly increase crop yields or weed control over that obtained by cultivation. Most of the herbicide treatments had no adverse effects on crop yield although some foliar damage occurred on plants treated with vernolate, MCPB, 2,4-DB and dinoseb. Vernolate, incorporated before planting at 4.78 kg active ingredient ha-1 caused a reduction in yield of nut-in-shell and in crop value when compared with the hand weeded, cultivated control. In both experiments, uncontrolled weeds markedly reduced crop yields (by a mean of 69%) and their monetary value (by a mean of 68%). In a third experiment a single application of 2,4-DB plus dinbseb (0.5 kg acid equivalent ha-1 each) made 3 weeks after sowing, with or without multiple applications of 2,4-DB (0.5 kg acid equivalent ha-1) made at 6,9 and 12 weeks, did not significantly reduce crop yields or values, and increased the control of Hyptis suaveolens and other broad-leaved weeds when compared with a standard trifluralin-plus cultivation treatment.

Effect of row width on herbicide and cultivation requirements in row crops

1992 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 161-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Forcella ◽  
Mark E. Westgate ◽  
Dennis D. Warnes
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Row Crops ◽  
Low Input ◽  
Application Rates ◽  
Row Width ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Herbicide Use

AbstractCrops grown in narrow rows (NR, 0.25 to 0.38 m) shade weed seedlings more than do those grown in traditional wide rows (WR, 0.76 m). NR crops may require less herbicide and interrow cultivation than WR crops for equally effective weed control. This hypothesis was tested by comparing weed control and crop yield in NR and WR crops when the following percentages of recommended application rates (RAR) of standard herbicides were applied: soybean, 0, 50 and 100%; sunflower, 0, 25, 50, and 100%; and corn, 0, 33, and 100% in three separate sets of experiments conducted over 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively. In all treatments with 100% RAR, excellent weed control prevented reductions in crop yield. When only 25 to 50% RAR was applied, weed control was consistently high in NR (82 to 99% control), but variable in WR (42 to 99% control). Weed control and crop yields typically were lowest in NR without herbicides. Interrow cultivation controlled 0 to 81% of weeds in WR crops. In reduced herbicide treatments (25 to 50% RAR), yields of NR soybean and sunflower typically were about equal to those in WR with 100% RAR, but NR corn yields were about 10% less. Considering the reduced herbicide use and lower weed control costs, planting corn, soybean, and sunflower in narrow rows may represent a practical form of low-input production of these important crops.

scholarly journals Effect of Preemergent Herbicides on Growth of Dwarf Nandina, Eleagnus, Asiatic Jasmine, Bradford Pear, and Arizona Ash

HortScience ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 484c-484
Author(s):  
H. Brent Pemberton ◽  
William E. Roberson ◽  
Garry V. McDonald
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Active Ingredient ◽  
Deleterious Effect ◽  
Dry Weight ◽  
Shoot Length ◽  
Single Application ◽  
Pyrus Calleryana ◽  
Root Dry Weight ◽  
Shoot Dry Weight ◽  
Herbicide Treatments

The list of species that are known to tolerate the use of Factor® (prodiamine), a preemergent herbicide, in a containerized production system is limited. Plants of swarf nandina (Nandina domestica `Firepower'), eleagnus (Eleagnus × eggingei), and Asiatic jasmine (Trachelospermum asiaticum) growing in 3.8-L containers were obtained from a local nursery and treated with herbicide treatments to determine effects on growth. Plants were treated with one or two applications of Factor® 65WG at either 0, 1.4, 2.8, or 5.5 kg·ha–1 (0.9, 1.8, or 3.6 kg·ha–1 active ingredient, respectively). The first application was made on 10 Aug. 1995 and the second application was made on 19 Oct. 1995. Plants were grown under 30% Saran shade and watered and fertilized as needed. Plants of Arizona ash (Fraxinus sp.) and Bradford Pear (Pyrus calleryana `Bradford') ptted in 19-L containers were treated with herbicide treatments on 25 Oct. 1995 for fall weed control at a local nursery. Treatments included a single application of Factor® 65WG at either 0, 1.4, 1.8, or 2.8 kg·ha–1 (0.9, 1.2, or 1.8 kg·ha–1 active ingredient, respectively) with or without Gallery® (isoxaben) at 1.2 kg·ha–1 (0.9 kg·ha–1 active ingredient). There was no effect of the herbicide treatments on growth of eleagnus. Herbicide treatments did not affect shoot dry weight and did not have a deleterious effect on shoot length and root dry weight of Asiatic jasmine or affect trunk caliper growth of the two tree species. Factor® did affect the growth of dwarf nandina. Plant height and shoot and root dry weight were not affected. However, plant width was decreased by all Factor® treatments when compared to untreated plants.

Rates of Herbicides in Irrigated Cotton

Weed Science ◽  
1975 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-181
Author(s):  
H. F. Arle ◽  
K. C. Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Gossypium Hirsutum ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Fiber Fineness ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Boll Weight ◽  
Annual Weeds

Rates of trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine) applied preplanting were combined with rates of diuron [3-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea] applied postemergence in cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL. ‘Deltapine 16’). In another experiment, two levels of these herbicides were applied in three populations of cotton. All herbicide combinations improved weed control, compared to that of cultivated checks. Applications of 0.28, 0.42, and 0.56 kg/ha of trifluralin combined with 0.56 kg/ha of diuron controlled annual weeds and produced the highest cotton yields. Herbicide treatments had more influence than crop spacing on weed control and crop yield. Weed competition on cultivated checks affected boll weight, seed per boll, and fiber fineness.

Manipulation of sunflower population density and herbicide rate for economical and sustainable weed management

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 2751-2758
Author(s):  
EDITA ŠTEFANIĆ ◽  
SLAVICA ANTUNOVIĆ ◽  
BOŽICA JAPUNDŽIĆ-PALENKIĆ ◽  
DINKO ZIMA
Keyword(s):  
Population Density ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Control Efficacy ◽  
Economic Return ◽  
Crop Density ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Weed Infestation

Field study tested weed control efficacy, crop yield and economic return using various weed management strategies in sunflower growing with different population density. Treatments included four rates of PRE emergence application of S-metolachlor + fluchloridon and one POST emergence application of flumioxazin + quizalofop-pethyl. PRE-em application (1.4 + 2.4 and 1.2 + 2.0) provided at the higher crop densities (70 000) best weed control. However, PRE- em treatments with lower doses (0.8 + 1.6 and 1.0 + 1.8) and POST- em application did not maintain acceptable control of dominant weeds. Grain yield increased with the crop density, but did not statistically differ between applied herbicide treatments. Finally, the implication of this study demonstrated that sole application of tested herbicide treatments at higher crop sowing density (60 000 and 70 000) was found to be economically the best alternative strategy for reducing weed infestation and achieving a better yield.

Evaluating Soil Solarization for Weed Control and Strawberry (Fragariaxananassa) Yield in Annual Plasticulture Production

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 455-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayesh B. Samtani ◽  
Jeffrey Derr ◽  
Mikel A. Conway ◽  
Roy D. Flanagan
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Soil Solarization ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Weed Density ◽  
Growing Seasons

Field studies were initiated in the 2013-14 and 2014-15 growing seasons to evaluate the potential of soil solarization (SS) treatments for their efficacy on weed control and crop yields and to compare SS to 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D)+chloropicrin (Pic) fumigation. Each replicate was a bed with dimension 10.6 m long by 0.8 m wide on top. The center 4.6 m length of each bed, referred to as plots, was used for strawberry plug transplanting and data collection. Treatments included: i) 1,3-D+Pic (39% 1,3-dichloropropene+59.6% chloropicrin) that was shank-fumigated in beds at 157 kg ha−1and covered with VIF on August 30 in both seasons; ii) SS for a 6 wk duration initiated on August 15, 2013 and August 21, 2014 by covering the bed with 1 mil clear polyethylene tarp; iii) SS for a 4wk duration initiated on September 6, 2013 and September 3, 2014; iv) SS 4 wk treatment initiated September 6, 2013 and September 3, 2014 and replaced with black VIF on October 4, 2013 and October 1, 2014 and v) a nontreated control covered with black VIF on October 4, 2013 and October 1, 2014. In both seasons, following completion of the preplant treatments, ‘Chandler’ strawberry was planted in two rows at a 36 cm in-row spacing in plots during the first wk of October. Over both seasons, the 6 wk SS treatment consistently lowered the weed density compared to the nontreated control. Weed density in the 6wk SS treatment was not statistically different from the 4wk SS treatments in the 2013-14 growing season. In both seasons, crop yield in the 4 wk SS was significantly lower than other treatments.

EFFECT OF WEED COMPETITION AND WEED CONTROL PROGRAMS ON RUTABAGA YIELD

1980 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 917-922 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. IVANY
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Test Area ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Control Programs ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Hand Weeding ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Weed Removal

The effects of different periods of weed competition and of trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine), niclofen (2,4-dichloro-phenyl-p-nitrophenyl ether), and cultivations were studied for effects on yield of rutabaga (Brassica napobrassica Mill. ’York’). Delaying weed removal for 4 wk after crop emergence significantly reduced yields of marketable and total roots compared with plots kept weed-free all season. Delayed weeding beyond 4 wk resulted in progressively greater reductions in yield. Rutabagas kept weed-free for 2, 4, 6, and 8 wk from crop emergence by once-weekly weeding gave yields comparable to those kept weed-free all season. Herbicide treatments without hand-weeding gave significantly lower yields than those with one hand-weeding. The use of three hand-weedings with herbicides was not significantly better than herbicides with one hand-weeding. Level of weed control was dependent on weed species present in the test area; however, a combination of trifluralin and niclofen gave a broader spectrum of control and better crop yields than either used alone.

Chemical weed control options for zero-tillage spring barley

1996 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 383-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathalie Samson ◽  
Anne Légère ◽  
Romain Rioux
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Conservation Tillage ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Spring Barley ◽  
Zero Tillage ◽  
No Till ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Control Options ◽  
Postemergence Herbicides

The need for yearly applications of non-selective and postemergence herbicides was evaluated in zero-tillage barley cropping systems in eastern Québec. The effects of six glyphosate treatments, fall-applied, at several rates and frequencies, and four postemergence herbicide treatments, on weed populations and crop yields, were measured over 2 yr in a zero-tillage spring barley monoculture. Yearly fall applications of glyphosate at rates at or above 0.5 kg a.i. ha−1 combined with postemergence herbicide treatments controlled most weed groups and provided optimum barley yields. Key words: Zero-tillage, no-till, conservation tillage, weed control, barley

Integrated weed management using row arrangements and herbicides in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) in Australia

2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (8) ◽  
pp. 676
Author(s):  
Gulshan Mahajan ◽  
Rao C. N. Rachaputi ◽  
Bhagirath Singh Chauhan
Keyword(s):  
Grain Yield ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Cajanus Cajan ◽  
Untreated Control ◽  
First Year ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Single Application ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Weed Flora ◽  
Second Year

In Australia, efforts are under way to revive the pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.) industry, which has high export potential because of an increased demand in the international market. However, weeds are a major constraint to achieve high yield in pigeonpea. This study was designed to assess the effect of row arrangement and herbicide treatment on weed suppression and pigeonpea grain yield. Row arrangements included row spacing (narrow, 25 cm; wide, 50 cm) and paired rows (rows 25 cm apart within a pair, each pair separated from the next by 75 cm). Herbicide treatments were: untreated control; pre-emergent pendimethalin at 910 g a.i. ha–1; post-emergent imazapic at 84 g a.i. ha–1; and pre-emergent pendimethalin followed by post-emergent imazapic (rates as above). In the first year, Trianthema portulacastrum was the dominant weed, and infestation was 100% in the non-treated control plots. In the second year, other weeds (Setaria viridis, Eragrostis cilianensis and Chloris virgata) comprised 30% of the weed population. Averaged over row arrangements, grain yield varied from 2088 to 2689 kg ha–1 in 2017 and from 835 to 2145 kg ha–1 in 2018, and was lowest in the untreated control and highest in the plots treated with the sequential application of pendimethalin and imazapic. Averaged over years and herbicide treatments, yield was lower in paired rows (1850 kg ha–1) than in narrow (2225 kg ha–1) and wide (2165 kg ha–1) row spacings. In the first year, all herbicide treatments provided >50% control of T. portulacastrum in the narrow and wide row spacings and increased yield by >22% over the untreated control. In the second year, the single application of imazapic proved inferior for controlling weeds, resulting in a 21% reduction in grain yield compared with sequential application of pendimethalin and imazapic. In both years, grain yield was similar for the single application of pendimethalin and sequential application of pendimethalin and imazapic. Despite the complex weed flora in 2018, the single application of imazapic provided acceptable weed control only when the crop was planted at 25 cm row spacing. Our results suggest that the single application of pendimethalin was effective on T. portulacastrum. However, in a complex weed flora situation, the sequential application of pendimethalin and imazapic provided effective weed control and resulted in improved yield.

Improving the field efficacy of manuka oil using tank-mixes with surfactants and commercial organic herbicides

2018 ◽  
Vol 98 (6) ◽  
pp. 1349-1356
Author(s):  
Sierra Harris ◽  
Zhenyi Li ◽  
Rachel Riddle ◽  
John O’Sullivan ◽  
Rene Van Acker
Keyword(s):  
Essential Oil ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Efficacy Data ◽  
Planting Dates ◽  
Cinnamon Oil ◽  
Herbicide Treatments ◽  
Field Efficacy ◽  
Manuka Oil

Manuka oil was applied in combination with surfactants and other organic herbicides for a total of 10 different treatments. Three surfactants (Nu Film P, Agral 90, and yucca extract) and two essential oil based organic herbicides (clove–cinnamon oil and citrus oil) were tank-mixed with manuka oil. Herbicide treatments were analyzed against two checks (weedy and weed-free) in eight unique scenarios to determine what tank-mix options enhanced the preemergence (PRE) and postemergence (POST) efficacy of manuka oil. The eight unique scenarios included two locations (Simcoe and Ridgetown, ON), two crops (sweet corn and tomatoes), and two planting dates (early and late). Crop yield and visual weed efficacy data indicated that manuka oil had very weak PRE herbicidal properties in field scenarios. Manuka oil based treatments caused minimal crop injury on recently transplanted tomatoes and newly emerging sweet corn seedlings. Manuka oil was able to provide good weed control when applied POST either alone or in tank-mixes. The efficacy of manuka oil increased when manuka oil was used as a tank-mix partner compared with manuka oil applied alone.

Chemical weed control in the Ord River Valley. 2. Rice

1964 ◽  
Vol 4 (15) ◽  
pp. 316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rijn PJ van
Keyword(s):  
Crop Yield ◽  
Active Ingredient ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Good Control ◽  
Dry Season ◽  
Research Station ◽  
Wet Season ◽  
Japonica Variety ◽  
Indica Variety ◽  
Increase Crop Yield

Three herbicides, CIPC (Isopropyl-N-(3-chloropheny1)-carbamate) EPTC (Ethyl-NN-dipropylthiol- carbamate) and Stam F-34 (3,4-Dichloropropionanilide), were tested for the control of barnyard grasses, Echinochloa colonum (L.) Link and Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv., in rice at Kimberley Research Station. The herbicides were tested at different rates and times of application on land lightly and heavily infested with weeds in crops of dry season rice, japonica variety Caloro, and wet season rice indica variety Meli No. 2 or Sircna. CIPC gave good control of weeds but did not increase crop yield ; furthermore, it was unreliable in its action and in one experiment reduced crop yield. EPTC, at 1 lb an acre active ingredient applied pre-sowing, gave good control of weeds but no increases in crop yield. Stam F-34, at 3-6 lb an acre active ingredient applied two to three weeks after crop emergence, gave good control of weeds in both wet and dry season rice and, as a result, crop yields increased.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document