scholarly journals Efficacy and economics of integrated weed management in groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 116 (1) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Oludamilola ADEMABAYOJE ◽  
Joseph ADIGUN ◽  
Olusegun ADEYEMI ◽  
Olumide DARAMOLA ◽  
Godwin AJIBOYE
Keyword(s):  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Gross Margin ◽  
Subsequent Increase ◽  
Early Season ◽  
Arachis Hypogea ◽  
Pod Yield ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio

<p>Weed management is an important and expensive step in groundnut production. Field experiments were conducted in the early and late wet seasons of 2017 to evaluate the effectiveness and profitability of weed management using hoe weeding, herbicides or their combination in groundnut production. Butachlor and propaben at 2.0 kg a.i (active ingredient) ha<sup>-1 </sup>each followed by (fb) supplementary hoe-weeding (shw) at 6 weeks after sowing (WAS) significantly reduced weed cover and biomass with subsequent increase in groundnut pod yield similar to hoe-weeding treatments and better than either herbicide applied alone. The highest groundnut pod yield (1485.7 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>) and revenue ($1639.2) in the early season was obtained with three hoe weeding passes. However, in the late season, the highest groundnut pod yield (1146.3 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>) was obtained with propaben plus hoe-weeding and the highest revenue ($1264.8) obtained with butachlor plus hoe-weeding. Although three hoe-weedings gave the highest revenue in the early season, the gross margin and cost-benefit ratio obtained with hoe weeding treatments was lower than those of herbicides fb shw. This study showed that integrated weed management with butachlor or propaben and fb shw will improve weed control, productivity and profitability of groundnut production. Multiple hoe weeding, however, did not guarantee the highest profit but rather increased the cost of production.</p>

scholarly journals Efficacy and economics of integrated weed management in okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench)

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 199-206
Author(s):  
Olumide Samuel Daramola ◽  
Joseph Aremu Adigun ◽  
Olusegun Raphael Adeyemi
Keyword(s):  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Fruit Yield ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Gross Margin ◽  
Subsequent Increase ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio ◽  
Density And Biomass

AbstractWeed management is one of the most important and expensive steps in okra production. Field experiments were therefore conducted in the early and late wet seasons of 2015 to evaluate the effectiveness and profitability of weed management using hoe weeding, herbicides or their combination in okra production. Propaben or butachlor at 2.0 kg a.i. (active ingredient) ha–1 followed by (fb) supplementary hoe weeding (shw) at 6 weeks after sowing (WAS) significantly (P < 0.05) reduced weed density and biomass with subsequent increase in okra fruit yield similar to three hoe weedings and better than two hoe weedings or either herbicide applied alone in both early and late wet seasons. Although three hoe weedings provided the highest okra fruit yield (3590 and 4102 kg ha–1) and total revenue ($991.7 and $1699.7 ha–1), the gross margin ($186.4 and $931.6 ha–1) and cost-benefit ratio (0.2 and 1.2) obtained were lower than those obtained with herbicide treatments. Highest gross margin ($470.8 and $1224.9 ha–1) and cost-benefit ratio (1.2 and 3.0) in the early and late wet seasons, respectively, were achieved with propaben at 2.0 kg a.i ha–1 fb shw at 6 WAS. The results of this study suggest that integrated weed management with propaben followed by supplementary hoe weeding will improve weed control, productivity and profitability of okra. Multiple hoe weeding, however, did not guarantee highest profit but rather increased the cost of production.

Evaluation of Herbicide Programs for Use in a 2,4-D–Resistant Soybean Technology for Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri)

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 366-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Ryan Miller ◽  
Jason K. Norsworthy
Keyword(s):  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Palmer Amaranth ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Amaranthus Palmeri ◽  
Early Season ◽  
Fully Integrated ◽  
Soil Seedbank ◽  
High Level ◽  
Herbicide Programs

Two separate field experiments were conducted over a 2-yr period in Fayetteville, AR, during 2012 and 2013 to (1) evaluate POST herbicide programs utilizing a premixture of dimethylamine (DMA) salt of glyphosate + choline salt of 2,4-D in a soybean line resistant to 2,4-D, glyphosate, and glufosinate and (2) determine efficacy of herbicide programs that begin with PRE residual herbicides followed by POST applications of 2,4-D choline + glyphosate DMA on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth. In the first experiment, POST applications alone that incorporated the use of residual herbicides with the glyphosate + 2,4-D premixture provided 93 to 99% control of Palmer amaranth at the end of the season. In the second experiment, the use of flumioxazin, flumioxazin + chlorimuron methyl, S-metolachlor + fomesafen, or sulfentrazone + chloransulam applied PRE provided 94 to 98% early-season Palmer amaranth control. Early-season control helped maintain a high level of Palmer amaranth control throughout the growing season, in turn resulting in fewer reproductive Palmer amaranth plants present at soybean harvest compared to most other treatments. Although no differences in soybean yield were observed among treated plots, it was evident that herbicide programs should begin with PRE residual herbicides followed by POST applications of glyphosate + 2,4-D mixed with residual herbicides to minimize late-season escapes and reduce the likelihood of contributions to the soil seedbank. Dependent upon management decisions, the best stewardship of this technology will likely rely on the use multiple effective mechanisms of action incorporated into a fully integrated weed management system.

Herbicide and Cover Crop Residue Integration forAmaranthusControl in Conservation Agriculture Cotton and Implications for Resistance Management

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 490-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Price ◽  
Kip S. Balkcom ◽  
Leah M. Duzy ◽  
Jessica A. Kelton
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Conservation Tillage ◽  
Conservation Agriculture ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Early Season ◽  
Density And Biomass

Conservation agriculture (CA) practices are threatened by glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth. Integrated control practices including PRE herbicides and high-residue CA systems can decreaseAmaranthusemergence. Field experiments were conducted from autumn 2006 through crop harvest in 2009 at two sites in Alabama to evaluate the effect of integrated weed management practices onAmaranthuspopulation density and biomass, cotton yield, and economics in glyphosate-resistant cotton. Horizontal strips included four CA systems with three cereal rye cover crop seeding dates and a winter fallow (WF) CA system compared to a conventional tillage (CT) system. Additionally, vertical strips of four herbicide regimes consisted of: broadcast, banded, or no PRE applications ofS-metolachlor (1.12 kg ai ha−1) followed by (fb) glyphosate (1.12 kg ae ha−1) applied POST fb layby applications of diuron (1.12 kg ai ha−1) plus MSMA (2.24 kg ai ha−1) or the LAYBY application alone. Early-seasonAmaranthusdensity was reduced in high-residue CA in comparison to the CA WF systems in 2 of 3 yr.Amaranthusdensities in herbicide treatments that included a broadcast PRE application were lower at three of five sampling dates compared to banding early-season PRE applications; however, the differences were not significant during the late season and cotton yields were not affected by PRE placement. High-residue conservation tillage yields were 577 to 899 kg ha−1more than CT, except at one site in 1 yr when CT treatment yields were higher. CA utilizing high-residue cover crops increased net returns over CT by $100 ha−1or more 2 out of 3 yr at both locations. High-residue cover crop integration into a CA system reducedAmaranthusdensity and increased yield over WF systems; the inclusion of a broadcast PRE application can increase early-seasonAmaranthuscontrol and might provide additional control when glyphosate-resistantAmaranthuspopulations are present.

Compatibility and Efficiency of In-Row Cultivation for Weed Management in Corn (Zea mays)

1995 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 754-760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J. Vangessel ◽  
Edward E. Schweizer ◽  
Donald W. Lybecker ◽  
Phil Westra
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Bioeconomic Model ◽  
Gross Margin ◽  
Early Season ◽  
Annual Weeds ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Management Tactics

Information on the effects of multiple weed management tactics in corn is needed to develop integrated weed management systems. The effectiveness and compatibility of an in-row cultivator as compared to a standard interrow cultivator used with reduced rates of a soil-applied herbicide, rotary hoeing, and/or a bioeconomic model for POST herbicide selection was examined. Weed control with a single rotary hoeing at corn emergence controlled annual weeds similarly to two rotary hoeings. One-third recommended use rate of alachlor controlled weeds similarly to a two-thirds rate. Reduced rates of alachlor controlled more weeds than rotary hoeing over 2 yr. The in-row cultivator required early-season weed control (rotary hoeing or reduced alachlor rate) for optimum efficacy. The in-row cultivator provided better weed control than the standard cultivator while the cost of operating the two cultivators was similar. Thus, the in-row cultivator was more efficient than the standard cultivator. Furthermore, less intensive early-season weed control was required with the in-row cultivator for maximum weed control as compared to the standard cultivator. Rotary hoeing plus the in-row cultivator provided similar weed control to other weed management tactics that required both soil-applied and POST herbicides. Gross margin was influenced more by corn yield than cost of weed management tactics.

scholarly journals Effect of integrated weed management on groundnut (Arachis hypogea)

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 404-408
Author(s):  
J. P. Bholane ◽  
Y. R. Patil ◽  
V. M. Bhale
Keyword(s):  
Weed Management ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Bacterial Count ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Free Condition ◽  
Arachis Hypogea ◽  
Pod Yield ◽  
Randomized Block Design ◽  
Soil Actinomycetes ◽  
Hand Weeding

An experiment on integrated weed management in groundnut (Arachis hypogea) was conducted at Department of Agronomy during 2009-10. Ten treatments which included three herbicides viz., Pendimethalin, Quizolofop ethyl, Imazethapyr with mechanical weeding were studied in Randomized Block Design. Complete weed free condition recorded highest dry pod yield (1786 kgha-1). Pre-emergence application of Pendimethalin 1.0 kg a.i./ha followed by one hand weeding at 15 days after sowing, recorded 10.8 pods/plant as against 4.97 pods/plant and 60.0 nodule per plant as against 37.5 in unweeded control. Preemergence application of Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha followed by post-emergence Imazethapyr @ 75 g a.i./ha at 15 days after sowing increased pod yield (1255 kgha-1), shelling % and 100 kernal weight. Application of Pendimethalin recorded increased soil fungal count 16.0X104 cfu g-1, soil actinomycetes count 15.67X106 cfu g-1 and soil bacterial count 20.33X10 cfu g-1 compared to unweeded control.

Halauxifen-methyl controls glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) but not giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida) in winter wheat

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 607-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Quinn ◽  
Nader Soltani ◽  
Jamshid Ashigh ◽  
David C. Hooker ◽  
Darren E. Robinson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Winter Wheat ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
The United States ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Conyza Canadensis ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Ambrosia Trifida ◽  
Giant Ragweed

AbstractHorseweed is a competitive summer or winter annual weed that produces up to 230,000 small seeds per plant that are capable of traveling more than 500 km via wind. Giant ragweed is a tall, highly competitive summer annual weed. Glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed and GR giant ragweed pose significant challenges for producers in the United States and Ontario, Canada. It is thought that an integrated weed management (IWM) system involving herbicide rotation is required to control GR biotypes. Halauxifen-methyl is a new selective broadleaf POST herbicide registered for use in cereal crops; there is limited information on its efficacy on horseweed and giant ragweed. The purpose of this research was to determine the efficacy of halauxifen-methyl applied POST, alone and in a tank mix, for the control of GR horseweed and GR giant ragweed in wheat across southwestern Ontario. For each weed species, an efficacy study consisting of six field experiments was conducted over a 2-yr period (2018, 2019). At 8 wk after application (WAA), halauxifen-methyl, fluroxypyr/halauxifen-methyl, fluroxypyr/halauxifen-methyl + MCPA EHE, fluroxypyr + MCPA ester, 2,4-D ester, clopyralid, and pyrasulfotole/bromoxynil + ammonium sulfate controlled GR horseweed >95%. Fluroxypyr and MCPA provided only 86% and 37% control of GR horseweed, respectively. At 8 WAA, fluroxypyr, fluroxypyr/halauxifen-methyl, fluroxypyr/halauxifen-methyl + MCPA EHE, fluroxypyr + MCPA ester, fluroxypyr/halauxifen-methyl + MCPA EHE + pyroxsulam, 2,4-D ester, clopyralid, and thifensulfuron/tribenuron + fluroxypyr + MCPA ester controlled GR giant ragweed 87%, 88%, 90%, 94%, 96%, 96%, 98%, and 93%, respectively. Halauxifen-methyl and pyroxsulam provided only 45% and 28% control of GR giant ragweed, respectively. Halauxifen-methyl applied alone POST in the spring controlled GR horseweed but not GR giant ragweed in winter wheat.

scholarly journals Response of Barley Genotypes to Weed Interference in Australia

Agronomy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gulshan Mahajan ◽  
Lee Hickey ◽  
Bhagirath Singh Chauhan
Keyword(s):  
Negative Correlation ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Yield Loss ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Relative Yield ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Weed Interference ◽  
Barley Genotypes

Weed-competitive genotypes could be an important tool in integrated weed management (IWM) practices. However, weed competitiveness is often not considered a priority for breeding high-yielding cultivars. Weed-competitive ability is often evaluated based on weed-suppressive ability (WSA) and weed-tolerance ability (WTA) parameters; however, there is little information on these aspects for barley genotypes in Australia. In this study, the effects of weed interference on eight barley genotypes were assessed. Two years of field experiments were performed in a split-plot design with three replications. Yield loss due to weed interference ranged from 43% to 78%. The weed yield amongst genotypes varied from 0.5 to 1.7 Mg ha−1. Relative yield loss due to weed interference was negatively correlated with WTA and WSA. A negative correlation was also found between WSA and weed seed production (r = −0.72). Similarly, a negative correlation was found between WTA and barley yield in the weedy environment (r = −0.91). The results suggest that a high tillering ability and plant height are desirable attributes for weed competitiveness in the barley genotypes. These results also demonstrated that among the eight barley genotypes, Commander exhibited superior WSA and WTA parameters and therefore, could be used in both low- and high-production systems for weed management. Westminster had a superior WSA parameter. Therefore, it could be used for weed management in organic production systems. These results also implied that genotypic ranking on the basis of WSA and WTA could be used as an important tool in strengthening IWM programs for barley.

Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed in Winter Wheat

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 868-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kris J. Mahoney ◽  
Kristen E. McNaughton ◽  
Peter H. Sikkema
Keyword(s):  
Population Density ◽  
Winter Wheat ◽  
Crop Rotation ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Aboveground Biomass ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Control Population ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Giant Ragweed ◽  
Herbicide Treatments

Four field experiments were conducted over a 2-yr period (2012 and 2013) in winter wheat to evaluate POST herbicides for the control of glyphosate-resistant (GR) giant ragweed. POST herbicides were evaluated for winter wheat injury and GR giant ragweed control, population density, and aboveground biomass. The herbicides used in this study provided 54 to 90% and 51 to 97% control of GR giant ragweed at 4 and 8 wk after treatment (WAT), respectively. At 8 WAT, auxinic herbicide treatments or herbicide tank mix/premix treatments that contained auxinics provided 78 to 97% control of GR giant ragweed. Reductions in GR giant ragweed population density and aboveground biomass were 62 to 100% and 83 to 100%, respectively, and generally reflected the level of control. The results of this research indicate that Ontario, Canada, corn and soybean growers should continue to incorporate winter wheat into their crop rotation as one component of an integrated weed management (IWM) strategy for the control of GR giant ragweed.

scholarly journals Crop Allelopathy for Sustainable Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Knowing the Present with a View to the Future

Agronomy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 2104
Author(s):  
Aurelio Scavo ◽  
Giovanni Mauromicale
Keyword(s):  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Allelopathic Potential ◽  
Cover Cropping ◽  
The Face ◽  
As Stress

In the face of yield losses caused by weeds, especially in low-input agricultural systems, and environmental pollution due to the excessive use of synthetic herbicides, sustainable weed management has become mandatory. To address these issues, allelopathy, i.e., the biochemical phenomenon of chemical interactions between plants through the release of secondary metabolites into the environment, is gaining popularity. Although many important crops are known for their allelopathic potential, farmers are still reluctant to use such knowledge practically. It is therefore important to assist advisors and farmers in assessing whether allelopathy can be effectively implemented into an eco-friendly weed management strategy. Here, we aim to give a comprehensive and updated review on the herbicidal potential of allelopathy. The major findings are the following: (1) Crops from different botanical families show allelopathic properties and can be cultivated alone or in combination with other non-allelopathic crops. (2) Many allelopathic tools can be adopted (crop rotation, intercropping, cover cropping as living or dead mulches, green manuring, use of allelochemical-based bioherbicides). (3) These methods are highly flexible and feature increased efficiency when combined into an integrated weed management strategy. (4) Recent advances in the chemistry of allelopathy are facilitating the use of allelochemicals for bioherbicide production. (5) Several biotechnologies, such as stress induction and genetic engineering techniques, can enhance the allelopathic potential of crops or introduce allelopathic traits de novo. This review shows how important the role of allelopathy for sustainable weed management is and, at the same time, indicates the need for field experiments, mainly under an integrated approach. Finally, we recommend the combination of transgenic allelopathy with the aforementioned allelopathic tools to increase the weed-suppressive efficacy of allelopathy.

scholarly journals Management of Pod fly, Melanagromyza obtusa on Pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan L.)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Sreekanth ◽  
M. Seshamahalakshmi ◽  
M. V. Ramana
Keyword(s):  
Grain Yield ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Research Station ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Grain Damage ◽  
Cost Benefit Ratio

Background: Pod fly, Melanagromyza obtusa is one of the most obnoxious pest causing grain damage ranging from 10-80% with a monitory loss of US$ 256 million annually. Being an internal feeder, infested pods do not show any external symptoms of damage until the fully grown maggots chew the pod wall, leaving a thin papery membrane intact called as window, through which adults exit from the pod. Several field studies were conducted to determine the efficacy of insecticides for the control of pod fly. However, these findings did not find acceptability and led to partial success. Insecticides that should leave lesser residues and pose lesser environmental threat have become imperative. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of certain new insecticide molecules against pod fly in pigeonpea ecosystem. Methods: Two field experiments were conducted at Regional Agricultural Research Station, Lam, Guntur during Kharif, 2012 and 2013 in a randomized block design (RBD) using pigeonpea cv. ICPL 85063 (Lakshmi) with 17 treatments including untreated control and 3 replications. Two sprays were given at 10 days interval starting from pod initiation stage. At maturity, number of pods showing pod fly damage were recorded and expressed as percentage. Grain yield was recorded and cost–benefit ratio was worked out. Result: Among different insecticides, thiacloprid 21.7 SC, followed by diafenthiuron 50 WP, flubendiamide 480 SC and dimethoate 30 EC were very effective against pod fly with more grain yield and registered highest incremental cost benefit ratio (ICBR). It was further suggested that effective insecticides may be alternated in order to avoid development of resistance to pod fly in pigeonpea.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document