Does the shade avoidance response contribute to the critical period for weed control in maize (Zea mays)?

Weed Research ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 563-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
E R PAGE ◽  
M TOLLENAAR ◽  
E A LEE ◽  
L LUKENS ◽  
C J SWANTON
Keyword(s):  
Zea Mays ◽  
Avoidance Response ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Shade Avoidance

The Critical Period of Weed Control in Grain Corn (Zea mays)

Weed Science ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Hall ◽  
Clarence J. Swanton ◽  
Glenn W. Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Zea Mays ◽  
Leaf Area ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Southern Ontario ◽  
Leaf Stage ◽  
Individual Leaf ◽  
Logistic Equations ◽  
Weed Interference

Field studies were conducted in southern Ontario to determine the critical period of weed control in grain corn and the influence of weed interference on corn leaf area. The Gompertz and logistic equations were fitted to data representing increasing durations of weed control and weed interference, respectively. The beginning of the critical period varied from the 3- to 14-leaf stages of corn development However, the end of the critical period was less variable and ended on average at the 14-leaf stage. Weed interference reduced corn leaf area by reducing the expanded leaf area of each individual leaf and accelerating senescence of lower leaves. In addition, weed interference up to the 14-leaf stage of corn development impeded leaf expansion and emergence in 1989.

Light Quality and the Critical Period for Weed Control in Soybean

Weed Science ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Green-Tracewicz ◽  
Eric R. Page ◽  
Clarence J. Swanton
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Light Quality ◽  
Morphological Changes ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Leaf Number ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Weed Competition ◽  
Shade Avoidance

The critical period for weed control (CPWC) is an integral component of integrated weed management strategies. Several studies have defined the CPWC in soybean under varying agronomic conditions, yet none have described the mechanisms involved in crop yield losses caused by weed competition. We hypothesized that under nonresource-limiting conditions, morphological changes resulting from the expression of shade avoidance could be used to define a period of developmental sensitivity to low red-to-far-red ratio (R : FR) that would overlap with the defined CPWC in soybean. Two experiments (a sequential harvest and a weed addition/removal series) were conducted in 2008 and 2009 under controlled environmental conditions to address this hypothesis. Two light-quality treatments were used: (1) high R : FR ratio (i.e., weed-free), and (2) low R : FR ratio (i.e., weedy). The low R : FR ratio treatment induced shade avoidance responses in soybean, which included increases in height, internode length, and the shoot : root ratio, as well as a reduction in biomass accumulation and leaf number. Using the morphological changes in biomass and leaf number observed in the weed addition/removal series, a period of developmental sensitivity to low R : FR was defined between the first trifoliate (V1) and third trifoliate (V3) stages of soybean development. This period was found to be very similar to the CPWC previously defined by field studies of soybean–weed competition.

scholarly journals Duration of Weed Presence Influences the Recovery of Photosynthetic Efficiency and Yield in Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew G. McKenzie-Gopsill ◽  
Sasan Amirsadeghi ◽  
Sherry Fillmore ◽  
Clarence J. Swanton
Keyword(s):  
Phaseolus Vulgaris ◽  
Common Bean ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Photosynthetic Efficiency ◽  
Calvin Cycle ◽  
Shade Avoidance ◽  
High Photosynthetic Capacity ◽  
Photosynthetic Responses ◽  
Highly Correlated

Photosynthetic responses of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to increasing durations of weed-free and weedy environments were investigated using a critical period for weed control study under field conditions. The presence of weeds induced the shade avoidance response and was accompanied by a reduced red to far-red ratio (R/Fr) of reflected light supporting previous assertions it is an important signal regulating crop-weed interactions. Despite increases in stomatal conductance and leaf intercellular [CO2] with increasing duration of weed presence, CO2 assimilation and photosynthetic efficiency continually declined. This coincided with reduced Calvin cycle capacity suggesting induction of biochemical rather than stomatal limitations on photosynthesis. Weed removal prior to reproductive stages resulted in maintenance of high photosynthetic capacity. When weed presence extended to reproductive stages and beyond the critical period for weed control, however, CO2 assimilation and photosynthetic efficiency never recovered. Yield was highly correlated with photosynthetic efficiency and in a similar manner, declined with increasing durations of weed presence through reduced seeds per plant. We conclude that the lasting consequence of weed competition is impairment of photosynthesis, which may provide an important mechanism to explain yield loss.

The critical period for weed control in three corn (Zea mays L.) types

2016 ◽  
Vol 90 ◽  
pp. 59-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nihat Tursun ◽  
Avishek Datta ◽  
Mahmut Sami Sakinmaz ◽  
Zekeriya Kantarci ◽  
Stevan Z. Knezevic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Zea Mays ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Zea Mays L

Critical Period of Weed Control in No-Till Soybean (Glycine max) and Corn (Zea mays)1

2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 737-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHRIS HALFORD ◽  
ALLAN S. HAMILL ◽  
JOHN ZHANG ◽  
COLLEEN DOUCET
Keyword(s):  
Zea Mays ◽  
Glycine Max ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
No Till

Safety and efficacy of linuron with or without an adjuvant or S-metolachlor for POST control of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in sweetpotato

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Levi D. Moore ◽  
Katherine M. Jennings ◽  
David W. Monks ◽  
Ramon G. Leon ◽  
David L. Jordan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nonionic Surfactant ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Total Yield ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Amaranthus Palmeri ◽  
Foliar Injury ◽  
Protoporphyrinogen Oxidase ◽  
Safety And Efficacy

Abstract Field studies were conducted to evaluate linuron for POST control of Palmer amaranth in sweetpotato to minimize reliance on protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO)-inhibiting herbicides. Treatments were arranged in a two by four factorial where the first factor consisted of two rates of linuron (420 and 700 g ai ha−1), and the second factor consisted of linuron applied alone or in combinations of linuron plus a nonionic surfactant (NIS) (0.5% v/v), linuron plus S-metolachlor (800 g ai ha−1), or linuron plus NIS plus S-metolachlor. In addition, S-metolachlor alone and nontreated weedy and weed-free checks were included for comparison. Treatments were applied to ‘Covington’ sweetpotato 8 d after transplanting (DAP). S-metolachlor alone provided poor Palmer amaranth control because emergence had occurred at applications. All treatments that included linuron resulted in at least 98 and 91% Palmer amaranth control 1 and 2 wk after treatment (WAT), respectively. Including NIS with linuron did not increase Palmer amaranth control compared to linuron alone, but increased sweetpotato injury and subsequently decreased total sweetpotato yield by 25%. Including S-metolachlor with linuron resulted in the greatest Palmer amaranth control 4 WAT, but increased crop foliar injury to 36% 1 WAT compared to 17% foliar injury from linuron alone. Marketable and total sweetpotato yield was similar between linuron alone and linuron plus S-metolachlor or S-metolachlor plus NIS treatments, though all treatments resulted in at least 39% less total yield than the weed-free check resulting from herbicide injury and/or Palmer amaranth competition. Because of the excellent POST Palmer amaranth control from linuron 1 WAT, a system including linuron applied 7 DAP followed by S-metolachlor applied 14 DAP could help to extend residual Palmer amaranth control further into the critical period of weed control while minimizing sweetpotato injury.

Influence of Application Method on the Activity of Butylate and EPTC in Reduced-Tillage Corn (Zea mays)

Weed Science ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas D. Buhler
Keyword(s):  
Zea Mays ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
The Other ◽  
Growth Chamber ◽  
Reduced Tillage ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Liquid Fertilizer ◽  
Application Method ◽  
Control Growth ◽  
Application Methods

Weed control in reduced-tillage corn (Zea maysL. ‘Pioneer 3732′) with butylate [S-ethyl bis(2-methylpropyl) carbamothioate] and EPTC (S-ethyl dipropyl carbarnothioate) was not reduced when these herbicides were applied jointly with dry or liquid fertilizer. In most cases, application with fertilizer resulted in weed control similar to that observed when the herbicide was applied in water at 285 L/ha. Butylate applied as a granular formulation also gave weed control similar to the spray at 285 L/ha. Application in 95 L/ha of water consistently resulted in reduced weed control. Corn injury was not greatly influenced by application method, and differences in corn yield appeared to be due to differences in weed control. Growth chamber bioassays indicated that both butylate and EPTC dissipated more rapidly when applied in 95 L/ha of water than the other application methods, which may explain differences in weed control observed in the field.

Critical period for weed control in sesame production

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-128
Author(s):  
Zeynep Karnas ◽  
Doğan Isik ◽  
Nihat Tursun ◽  
Khawar Jabran
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period

scholarly journals Determining the critical period for weed control in high-yielding cotton using common sunflower as a mimic weed

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 800-807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham W. Charles ◽  
Brian M. Sindel ◽  
Annette L. Cowie ◽  
Oliver G. G. Knox
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Growing Degree Days ◽  
Degree Days ◽  
Weed Density ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Planting Season

AbstractField studies were conducted over six seasons to determine the critical period for weed control (CPWC) in high-yielding cotton, using common sunflower as a mimic weed. Common sunflower was planted with or after cotton emergence at densities of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, and 50 plants m−2. Common sunflower was added and removed at approximately 0, 150, 300, 450, 600, 750, and 900 growing degree days (GDD) after planting. Season-long interference resulted in no harvestable cotton at densities of five or more common sunflower plants m−2. High levels of intraspecific and interspecific competition occurred at the highest weed densities, with increases in weed biomass and reductions in crop yield not proportional to the changes in weed density. Using a 5% yield-loss threshold, the CPWC extended from 43 to 615 GDD, and 20 to 1,512 GDD for one and 50 common sunflower plants m−2, respectively. These results highlight the high level of weed control required in high-yielding cotton to ensure crop losses do not exceed the cost of control.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document