Normalized difference vegetation index for desiccation evaluation with glyphosate + 2,4-D in magnetized spray solution

Abstract Water magnetization and geoprocessing are increasingly utilized tools in weed management. Our objective was to study the influence of water magnetization on herbicide efficiency and to verify whether there is a relationship between control scores and the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). In the laboratory experiment, water was subjected to magnetization and evaluated with respect to four characteristics. In the field experiment, plots of Brachiaria grass were subjected to treatments in a factorial scheme (6 × 2 + 1). Six herbicidal factors (doses of glyphosate and glyphosate + 2,4-D) and the magnetization or absence of magnetization of the spray solution were evaluated and compared against the control treatment (without spraying). Weed control assessments were carried out six times. Images were obtained using an embedded multispectral camera to determine the NDVI values. Data related to water characteristics were analyzed using the t test. Weed control and NDVI data were subjected to analysis of variance and are presented in regression graphs. Dispersion analysis of NDVI data was performed according to the control scores. The magnetization process decreased the pH of the water and increased the surface tension, but it did not influence the control scores or the NDVI. As the glyphosate dose was increased, the control scores were higher and the NDVI values were lower. Magnetized water did not affect the biological efficiency of the herbicides, and there was a strong correlation between the control scores and the NDVI values.

Download Full-text

Reflectance indices as a diagnostic tool for weed control performed by multipurpose equipment in precision agriculture

Planta Daninha ◽

10.1590/s0100-83582012000200024 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 30 (2) ◽

pp. 437-447 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

A. Merotto JR. ◽

C. Bredemeier ◽

R.A. Vidal ◽

I.C.G.R. Goulart ◽

E.D. Bortoli ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Precision Agriculture ◽

Weed Management ◽

Dry Matter ◽

Vegetation Index ◽

Near Infrared ◽

Normalized Difference Vegetation Index ◽

Weed Interference ◽

Reflectance Indices ◽

The Relationship

Several tools of precision agriculture have been developed for specific uses. However, this specificity may hinder the implementation of precision agriculture due to an increasing in costs and operational complexity. The use of vegetation index sensors which are traditionally developed for crop fertilization, for site-specific weed management can provide multiple utilizations of these sensors and result in the optimization of precision agriculture. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between reflectance indices of weeds obtained by the GreenSeekerTM sensor and conventional parameters used for weed interference quantification. Two experiments were conducted with soybean and corn by establishing a gradient of weed interference through the use of pre- and post-emergence herbicides. The weed quantification was evaluated by the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and the ratio of red to near infrared (Red/NIR) obtained using the GreenSeekerTM sensor, the visual weed control, the weed dry matter, and digital photographs, which supplied information about the leaf area coverage proportions of weed and straw. The weed leaf coverage obtained using digital photography was highly associated with the NDVI (r = 0.78) and the Red/NIR (r = -0.74). The weed dry matter also positively correlated with the NDVI obtained in 1 m linear (r = 0.66). The results indicated that the GreenSeekerTM sensor originally used for crop fertilization could also be used to obtain reflectance indices in the area between rows of crops to support decision-making programs for weed control.

Download Full-text

Weed Management in Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Grown in Two Row Spacings

Weed Science ◽

10.1017/s0043174500068909 ◽

1983 ◽

Vol 31 (2) ◽

pp. 236-241 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

John H. Miller ◽

Lyle M. Carter ◽

Charles Carter

Keyword(s):

Gossypium Hirsutum ◽

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Sandy Loam ◽

Sandy Loam Soil ◽

Control Treatment ◽

Planting Pattern ◽

Fine Sandy Loam ◽

Loam Soil

Tillage plus trifluralin (α,α,α-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine) and prometryn [2,4-bis (isopropylamino)-6-(methylthio)-s-triazine] and tillage plus trifluralin and fluometuron [1,1-dimethyl-3-(α,α,α-trifluoro-m-tolyl)urea] applied as soil-incorporated preplanting treatments were compared with tillage alone in cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) grown in 51-cm and 102-cm rows on fine sandy loam soil. Over 3 yr, cotton grown in 51-cm rows yielded 15% more than cotton grown in 102-cm rows. Final cotton emergence was not altered by weed-control treatment or by planting pattern. Weed-control treatments with herbicides provided essentially complete, season-long control of grass and broadleaf weeds. At cotton layby, more weeds were in no-herbicide plots with 51-cm rows compared with 102-cm rows, but at cotton harvest numbers of weeds in both row patterns were essentially equal.

Download Full-text

Combinations of Corn Gluten Meal, Clove Oil, and Sweep Cultivation are Ineffective for Weed Control in Organic Peanut Production

Weed Technology ◽

10.1614/wt-d-12-00140 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 27 (2) ◽

pp. 417-421 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

W. Carroll Johnson ◽

Mark A. Boudreau ◽

Jerry W. Davis

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Field Trials ◽

Control Treatment ◽

Clove Oil ◽

Corn Gluten Meal ◽

Corn Gluten ◽

Annual Grasses ◽

Peanut Production ◽

Poor Efficacy

Weed control in organic peanut is difficult and lack of residual weed control complicates weed management efforts. Weed management systems using corn gluten meal in combination with clove oil and sweep cultivation were evaluated in a series of irrigated field trials. Corn gluten meal applied in a 30 cm band over the row at PRE, sequentially at PRE+2 wk after emergence, and PRE+2wk+4wk did not adequately control annual grasses and smallflower morningglory. Similarly, a banded application of clove oil applied POST did not adequately control weeds. The only treatment that improved overall weed control was sweep cultivation. Peanut yields were not measured in 2006 due to heavy baseline weed densities and overall poor weed control. Peanut yields were measured in 2007 and were not affected by any weed control treatment due to poor efficacy. While sweep cultivation improved weed control, weeds were controlled only in the row middles and surviving weeds in-row reduced peanut yield. Even when used in combination with sweep cultivation, corn gluten meal and clove oil were ineffective and offer little potential in a weed management system for organic peanut production.

Download Full-text

Weed Control in a Newly Established Organic Vineyard

HortTechnology ◽

10.21273/horttech.22.6.757 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 22 (6) ◽

pp. 757-765 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Mercy Olmstead ◽

Timothy W. Miller ◽

Callie S. Bolton ◽

Carol A. Miles

Keyword(s):

Winter Wheat ◽

Weed Control ◽

Perennial Ryegrass ◽

Weed Management ◽

Cover Crop ◽

Shoot Growth ◽

Organic Production ◽

Pinot Noir ◽

Control Treatment ◽

Hand Weeding

Consumer demand for organic and sustainably produced products has increased the interest in organic wine grape (Vitis vinifera) production. However, organic production can be challenging, and weed management is a critical issue during the establishment of an organic vineyard. In 2009, the effectiveness of five cover crop treatments and cultivation regimes was evaluated for two years for weed control in a newly established organic vineyard of ‘Pinot noir précoce’ and ‘Madeleine angevine’ grape cultivars in northwestern Washington State. Alleyway management treatments were cultivation in alleyways with hand weeding in the vine row (control), grass cover crop which included perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne ssp. perenne) and red fescue (Festuca rubra ssp. arenaria) seeded in the alleyway and in-row tillage with a specialty offset-type cultivator, winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) cover crop with in-row string-trimming, austrian winter pea (Pisum sativum ssp. sativum var. arvense) cover crop with in-row string-trimming, and winter wheat–austrian winter pea cover crop mix with in-row string-trimming. In 2009, weed dry biomass was lowest in the alleyway of the control (0.8 g·m−2) and offset cultivator treatments (6.3 g·m−2) on 3 Aug. and tended to be lowest in the alleyway of the control (4.8 g·m−2) and offset cultivator treatments (16.0 g·m−2) on 27 Sept. In the second year of establishment (2010), winter wheat and austrian winter pea were eliminated from the plots by mid-July, and white clover (Trifolium repens) and perennial ryegrass were the dominant weed species and accounted for a majority of the total weeds. On average over the two-year period, the control treatment required the most time for alleyway management (92 h·ha−1) followed by the offset cultivator treatment (64 h·ha−1), while the winter wheat, austrian winter pea, and winter wheat–austrian winter pea mixture required 32 to 42 h·ha−1. ‘Madeline angevine’ produced more shoot growth than ‘Pinot noir précoce’ in Sept. 2010 (42.3 and 25.9 cm respectively), and shoot growth of both cultivars in the control treatment was significantly longer (125.0 cm) than under any other treatment (55.4 to 93.0 cm), illustrating the importance of weed control during vineyard establishment. In this study, the most effective weed management regime, although also the most time consuming, included a vegetative-free zone around the vines (e.g., in-row) maintained by hand weeding and a cultivated alleyway.

Download Full-text

Efficacy, Energy Budgeting, and Carbon Footprints of Weed Management in Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.)

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su132313239 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (23) ◽

pp. 13239

Author(s):

Gurdeep Singh Malhi ◽

M. C. Rana ◽

Suresh Kumar ◽

Muhammad Ishaq Asif Rehmani ◽

Abeer Hashem ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Energy Use ◽

Maximum Energy ◽

Control Treatment ◽

Carbon Footprints ◽

Energy Use Efficiency ◽

Weed Growth ◽

Use Efficiency ◽

Unit Output

Weed management in blackgram is one of the most efficient ways to improve its yield, as uncontrolled weed growth causes a significant decrease in crop yield. A field experiment was performed at Berthin, Himachal Pradesh, India, to investigate the efficacy, energy use efficiency (EUE), and carbon footprints of weed management tactics. Twelve weed control treatments were tested applied alone or in combination at pre and post emergence stages. The most prominent weeds were Cyperus iria, Dactyloctenium aegyptium, and Echinochloa colona, which caused a 68.1% loss in unweeded conditions. The application of weed control treatments reduced the weed count at 60 DAS from around 50% to 90%. The most efficient weed control treatment was pre-emergence (PRE) use of ready mix imazethapyr 35% + imazamox 35% WG @ 80 g ha−1, which resulted in a minimum weed infestation (i.e., weed count and weed biomass) and consequently highest yield. Its efficacy in weed control treatment was on par with PRE use of ready mix imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG @ 70 g ha−1. Maximum energy use efficiency was also obtained upon PRE use of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) @ 80 g ha−1 (8.27), trailed by PRE use of imazethapyr + imazamox @ 70 g ha−1 (7.84), mainly because of the higher yield obtained in these treatments which shows their efficiency in energy conversion. The carbon footprints were observed to be the lowest in ready mix combination of imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 80 g ha−1 (0.11 kg CE kg−1 yield), followed by imazethapyr (35%) + imazamox (35% WG) applied at 70 g ha−1 (0.12 kg CE kg−1 yield), as it resulted in the lowest emission per unit output production.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of chemical and cultural weed management practices on nutrient uptake in black gram (Phaseolus mungo)

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES ◽

10.15740/has/ijas/17-aaebssd/121-125 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 17 (AAEBSSD) ◽

pp. 121-125

Author(s):

Kavita D. Rajput ◽

J. P. Bholane ◽

A.S. Latkar ◽

V.M. Bhale

Keyword(s):

Nutrient Uptake ◽

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Management Practices ◽

Cultural Practices ◽

Block Design ◽

Control Treatment ◽

Black Gram ◽

Randomized Block Design ◽

Hand Weeding

The results of the field experiment carried out during kharif season of 2010 at agronomy department farm, Dr.P.D.K.V.,Akola revealed that N,P,K uptake by black gram (Phaseolus mungoL.) and weeds were significantly higher under weed free and weedy check treatments among all of the weed control treatments. The experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design replicated three times with thirteen treatments, in that chemical and cultural treatments were compared with weedy check and weed free control. Herbicide application in general and pre-emergence application of pendimethalin @1.5kg/ha in particular reduced the nutrients removal by weeds and enhanced the nutrient uptake by the crop followed by cultural practices of two hand weeding at 15 & 30 days after sowing. The pre-emergence application of pendimethalin in @ 1.5 kg/ha recorded highest nutrient uptake in grain (34.92, 6.50, 34.16 NPK kg/ha resp.) and strover (63.26, 10.60, 57.60 NPK kg/ha resp.) among all the weed control treatment except weed free treatment. The crude protein content of grain was the highest with pre-emergence application of pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha (21.65) followed by pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha (21.55).

Download Full-text

RESPONSE OF BITTER GOURD (Momordica charantia) TO CULTURAL AND CHEMICAL WEED CONTROL METHODS

JOURNAL OF WEED SCIENCE RESEARCH ◽

10.28941/pjwsr.v26i3.851 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 27 (2) ◽

pp. 343-347

Author(s):

Mohammad Ilyas

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Environmental Safety ◽

Fruit Weight ◽

Bitter Gourd ◽

Control Treatment ◽

Control Methods ◽

Weed Biomass ◽

Hand Weeding ◽

Herbicide Use

Experiments were conducted at the farm of the University of Agriculture Peshawar in 2012 and 2013 to evaluate the effect of different weed control methods in bitter gourd. The treatments comprised of four mulches (Rumex crispus, Silybum marianum, news papers, and saw-dust), a herbicide i.e. Stomp 330 EC (pendimethalin) applied as pre-emergence, a hand weeding and a control treatment (weedy check). Data were collected on weed biomass, number of plants ha-1 and fruit weight. The parameters were significantly affected by the applied treatments during both the years. Weed biomass in 2012 and 2013 was the highest (2971 and 3595 kg ha-1, respectively in the weedy check treatments and lowest in hand weeded plots (68 and 83 kg ha-1) in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Moreover the effect of the mulching treatments and the herbicide treatment were statistically at par with each other and different from the weedy check. The highest number of plants ha-1 (9773 and 8077) and fruit weight plant-1 (756 and 657 g) were recorded in the hand weeded treatments in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Hand weeding was followed by the treatment of Stomp 330 EC with the respective values in the two years as 8834 and 7301 plants ha-1, and 667 and 580 g plant-1 in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Moreover, the performance of the mulching treatments was also significantly more effective than the weedy check plots. Mulches of S. marianum and R. crispus reduced the weed biomass to 1072 and 1615 kg in 2012 and 1297 and 1954 kg in 2013 as compared to the weedy control with weed biomass of 2971 and 3595 kg ha-1 in 2012 and 2013, respectively. The respective no. of plants ha-1 for the mulches of S. marianum and R. crispus were 8548 and 8489 in 2012 and 7065 and 7016 in 2013 whereas and the fruit weight plant-1 was 435 and 396 in 2012 and 378 and 344 g in 2013. Keeping in view the good performance of weed biomass as mulches, the cost of production and the environmental safety, the hand weeding and herbicide use cannot be preferred alone for use as weed management tools. Therefore, the herbicide use and hand weeding should be used only on casual basis or in emergency; and the mulching methods should be adopted in the long run as mulching method is not only good for weed control but also for maintaining the soil fertility, moisture conservation, and environmental safety.

Download Full-text

Benefits and Risks of Economic vs. Efficacious Approaches to Weed Management in Corn and Soybean

Weed Technology ◽

10.1614/wt-03-166r ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 18 (3) ◽

pp. 723-732 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Allan S. Hamill ◽

Susan E. Weaver ◽

Peter H. Sikkema ◽

Clarence J. Swanton ◽

Francois J. Tardif ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Seed Production ◽

Weed Management ◽

Crop Yields ◽

Profit Maximization ◽

Control Treatment ◽

High Efficacy ◽

Weed Seed ◽

Weed Density ◽

Yield Maximization

A 3-yr study was conducted on nine farms across southern Ontario to evaluate the risks and benefits of different approaches to weed management in corn and soybean. Weed control decisions were based on field scouting and recommendations from the Ontario version of HADSS™, the herbicide application decision support system. Treatments were selected to maximize profit (economic threshold approach) or to maximize yield (highest treatment efficacy). Reduced rates of the high efficacy treatment for each field also were included. Weed density before and after treatment, crop yields, weed seed return, and the effect of weed control decisions on weed density 1 yr after treatment were assessed. Crop yield varied among years and farms but was not affected by weed control treatment. Weed control at 28 d after treatment (DAT) was often lower and weed density, biomass, and seed production 70 DAT were often higher with the profit maximization approach compared with the yield maximization approach. However, weed density 1 yr later, after each cooperator had applied a general weed control program, did not vary significantly among the previous year's weed control treatments. Reduced rates of the high efficacy treatments did not lead to increased weed problems the next year, despite lower weed control and increased weed seed production in some years. During the 3 yr of the study, weed control costs with the profit maximization approach were approximately Can$45/ha less than with the yield maximization approach.

Download Full-text

Response of 110 Kentucky Bluegrass Varieties and Winter Annual Weeds to Methiozolin

Weed Technology ◽

10.1614/wt-d-16-00089.1 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 30 (4) ◽

pp. 965-978 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Sandeep S. Rana ◽

Shawn D. Askew

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Vegetation Index ◽

Normalized Difference Vegetation Index ◽

Kentucky Bluegrass ◽

Annual Bluegrass ◽

Turf Quality ◽

Relative Cover ◽

Winter Annual ◽

Winter Annual Weeds ◽

Annual Weeds

Methiozolin is a new isoxazoline herbicide that has scarcely been tested in Kentucky bluegrass turf. A field trial was conducted in Blacksburg, VA, to determine response of 110 Kentucky bluegrass varieties and winter annual weeds to sequential fall applications of methiozolin. At 1.5 and 6 mo after initial treatment (MAIT), Kentucky bluegrass injury I30values (predicted methiozolin rate that causes 30% Kentucky bluegrass injury) ranged between 3.4 to more than 10 times the recommended methiozolin rate for annual bluegrass control. Methiozolin at all rates reduced cover of annual bluegrass, common chickweed, corn speedwell, hairy bittercress, mouseear chickweed, and Persian speedwell but increased cover of parsley-piert. For all varieties, methiozolin at 2 kg ai ha−1increased Kentucky bluegrass cover, turf quality, and turf normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) relative to the nontreated check at 6 MAIT. Kentucky bluegrass relative cover change (RCC) was attributed primarily to weed control but was inversely correlated with methiozolin rates because of increased weed control and reduced Kentucky bluegrass growth. Despite the decline in RCC with increasing methiozolin rates, most Kentucky bluegrass varieties treated with the highest methiozolin rate (6 kg ha−1) still had greater Kentucky bluegrass cover than the nontreated check at 6 MAIT. Results from this study indicate that two fall applications of methiozolin at rates beyond that previously reported for annual bluegrass control can safely be applied to a broad range of Kentucky bluegrass varieties spanning most of the known genetic classifications.

Download Full-text

Weed infestation of spring common wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grown in monoculture depending on the cover crop and weed control method

Acta Agrobotanica ◽

10.5586/aa.2012.015 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 65 (3) ◽

pp. 119-126

Author(s):

Dorota Gawęda ◽

Cezary A. Kwiatkowski

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Cover Crops ◽

Weed Management ◽

Cover Crop ◽

Control Method ◽

Dry Weight ◽

Control Treatment ◽

Wheat Crop ◽

Control Methods ◽

White Mustard

The aim of this 3-year field study was to evaluate the effect of some stubble crops and in-crop weed control methods on the species composition, number and air-dry weight of weeds in a wheat crop grown in short-term monoculture. The study was conducted in the period 2009-2011 in the Uhrusk Experimental Farm on mixed rendzina soil classified as very good rye soil complex. It included various types of stubble crops ploughed in each year (control treatment without cover crop, white mustard, lacy phacelia, a mixture of legumes – narrow-leaf lupin + field pea) and methods of weed control in spring wheat (mechanical, mechanical and chemical, chemical weed control). On average during the study period, all stubble crops used reduced the air-dry weight of weds in the treatments with mechanical weed management relative to the control treatment. Irrespective of the weed control method, the number of weeds in the wheat crop was significantly lower only after the ploughing in of white mustard. Mechanical weed management proved to be less effective in reducing the number and dry weight of weeds compared to other weed control methods. The white mustard and legume mixture cover crops had a reducing effect on the number of weed species in relation to the treatment without cover crops. The highest floristic diversity of weed communities was found in the spring wheat crop in which only mechanical weeding alone was used.

Download Full-text