Feasibility of Organic Weed Management in Sweet Corn and Snap Bean for Processing

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 544-550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi J. Johnson ◽  
Jed B. Colquhoun ◽  
Alvin J. Bussan ◽  
Richard A. Rittmeyer
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Scale Production ◽  
Snap Bean ◽  
Organic Weed Management ◽  
Market Saturation ◽  
Organic Premium

There is significant interest from processors in producing organic sweet corn and snap bean. However, large-scale production is necessary for this to be a practical and economical venture for processors. This study focused on the feasibility of managing weeds in organic sweet corn and snap bean, utilizing methods that are practical in large hectarage. Tactics such as rotary hoe, interrow cultivation, and a stale seedbed were evaluated alone or in combination. Hand-weeded and herbicide-based treatments were included for each crop for comparison. Percentage weed control, weed biomass, and crop yield were quantified, and net profit was calculated for each treatment. Organic weed management was feasible in snap bean, with yields similar among several of the organic treatments and the herbicide treatment in all 3 yr of the study. Interrow cultivation was the most effective means of organic weed control in snap bean. Organic weed management was possible in snap bean because it is a short-season crop and an effective competitor with weeds in the crop row. Organic weed management was more difficult in sweet corn because of the longer crop season and poor competition with weeds in the crop row. In sweet corn, the organic treatment involving three interrow cultivations was the only one consistently similar in yield to the herbicide treatments. Higher net profits were attained for most of the organic treatments in both crops because of the organic premium. Market saturation and organic premium adjustments are factors for grower consideration in this potential industry, particularly for sweet corn production.

Alternatives to Atrazine for Weed Management in Processing Sweet Corn

Weed Science ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zubeyde Filiz Arslan ◽  
Martin M. Williams ◽  
Roger Becker ◽  
Vincent A. Fritz ◽  
R. Ed Peachey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Field Trials ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Application Timing ◽  
Production Areas

Atrazine has been the most widely used herbicide in North American processing sweet corn for decades; however, increased restrictions in recent years have reduced or eliminated atrazine use in certain production areas. The objective of this study was to identify the best stakeholder-derived weed management alternatives to atrazine in processing sweet corn. In field trials throughout the major production areas of processing sweet corn, including three states over 4 yr, 12 atrazine-free weed management treatments were compared to three standard atrazine-containing treatments and a weed-free check. Treatments varied with respect to herbicide mode of action, herbicide application timing, and interrow cultivation. All treatments included a PRE application of dimethenamid. No single weed species occurred across all sites; however, weeds observed in two or more sites included common lambsquarters, giant ragweed, morningglory species, velvetleaf, and wild-proso millet. Standard treatments containing both atrazine and mesotrione POST provided the most efficacious weed control among treatments and resulted in crop yields comparable to the weed-free check, thus demonstrating the value of atrazine in sweet corn production systems. Timely interrow cultivation in atrazine-free treatments did not consistently improve weed control. Only two atrazine-free treatments consistently resulted in weed control and crop yield comparable to standard treatments with atrazine POST: treatments with tembotrione POST either with or without interrow cultivation. Additional atrazine-free treatments with topramezone applied POST worked well in Oregon where small-seeded weed species were prevalent. This work demonstrates that certain atrazine-free weed management systems, based on input from the sweet corn growers and processors who would adopt this technology, are comparable in performance to standard atrazine-containing weed management systems.

A Survey of Weed Management in Organic Small Grains and Forage Systems in the Northwest United States

Weed Science ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 513-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole E Tautges ◽  
Jessica R Goldberger ◽  
Ian C Burke
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Organic Farm ◽  
Lack Of Information ◽  
Program Diversity ◽  
Certified Organic ◽  
Organic Weed Management

A lack of information regarding weed control, relative to conventional systems, has left organic growers largely on their own when devising weed management systems for organic crops. As interest in organic weed management increases, researchers need more information regarding the type and number of weed control practices undertaken on organic farms. A survey of certified organic growers was conducted in five states in the northwest United States to identify organic weed management programs and what grower and farm-operation characteristics were factors in weed management program design. Three types of weed management programs, with varying diversity in weed control practices, were identified. Stepwise binary logistic regression indicated that the likelihood of an organic grower using a more-diverse weed management program increased if the grower engaged in grain production and as the number of crops produced on an organic farm operation in 1 yr increased. The probability of operating a more-diverse weed management program also increased as a grower's education level increased. Organic hectarage operated was positively correlated with weed management program diversity, and with the adoption of cultural controls. Additionally, awareness of weeds as a factor causing yield loss was correlated with increased weed management program diversity. An increased awareness among researchers of the differing needs and abilities of organic growers in managing weeds on their farms will improve communication and outreach efforts when assisting growers with designing organic weed management programs.

An Evaluation of Two Novel Cultivation Tools

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 316-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glenn J. Evans ◽  
Robin R. Bellinder ◽  
Russell R. Hahn
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Environmental Data ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Growth Stages ◽  
Operational Parameters ◽  
Crop Response ◽  
Weed Growth ◽  
Operational Variables ◽  
Organic Weed Management

Cultivation is a critical component of organic weed management and has relevance in conventional farming. Limitations with current cultivation tools include high costs, limited efficacy, and marginal applicability across a range of crops, soil types, soil moisture conditions, and weed growth stages. The objectives of this research were to compare the weed control potential of two novel tools, a block cultivator and a stirrup cultivator, with that of a conventional S-tine cultivator, and to evaluate crop response when each tool was used in pepper and broccoli. Block and stirrup cultivators were mounted on a toolbar with an S-tine sweep. In 2008, the tripart cultivator was tested in 20 independently replicated noncrop field events. Weed survival and reemergence data were collected from the cultivated area of each of the three tools. Environmental data were also collected. A multivariable model was created to assess the importance of cultivator design and environmental and operational variables on postcultivation weed survival. Additional trials in 2009 evaluated the yield response of pepper and broccoli to interrow cultivations with each tool. Cultivator design significantly influenced postcultivation weed survival (P < 0.0001). When weed survival was viewed collectively across all 20 cultivations, both novel cultivators significantly increased control. Relative to the S-tine sweep, the stirrup cultivator reduced weed survival by about one-third and the block cultivator reduced weed survival by greater than two-thirds. Of the 11 individually assessed environmental and operational parameters, 7 had significant implications for weed control with the sweep; 5 impacted control with the stirrup cultivator, and only 1 (surface weed cover at the time of cultivation) influenced control with the block cultivator. Crop response to each cultivator was identical. The block cultivator, because of its increased effectiveness and operational flexibility, has the potential to improve interrow mechanical weed management.

scholarly journals (416) Weed Management in Organic Sweet Corn

HortScience ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 1071E-1072
Author(s):  
Anthony Silvernail
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Control Methods ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Corn Gluten ◽  
And Control ◽  
Smooth Pigweed

Organic weed control in direct seeded vegetables depends on management strategies that control weed germination or growth which depletes the weed seedbank. In 2004, a randomized complete-block experiment conducted on land transitioning to organic production examined the effects of tillage and control treatments on weed pressure in sweet corn [Zeamays (L.) cv. Silver Queen]. The two tillage treatments consisted of conventional (moldboard and rototill) and spader tillage. Weed control treatments included a weed free control, a spring-tine weeder, rolling cultivator, row flamer, stale seedbed, and corn gluten meal. In August, the weed infestation was primarily goose grass [Eleusineindica (L.) Gaertn.], crab grass [Digitariasanguinalis (L.) Scop.], giant foxtail (Setariafaberi Herrm.), and smooth pigweed [Amaranthushybridus (L.)] species. Dried weed weights indicated that smooth pigweed constituted about 80% of the total weed biomass in all but the control and flamer treatments. Plots managed with the spring-tine weeder or corn gluten had twice the weed biomass of those managed with the rolling cultivator and flamer. The rolling cultivator and control treatments produced equivalent husked corn yields (6.9 t·ha-1); yields were reduced by the other weed control methods. At 5.4 t·ha-1, yields in the flamer treatment were the lowest among all weed control methods. The flamer suppressed both weeds and the crop, which may preclude its utility for sweet corn production. Results demonstrated that the rolling cultivator provided the best weed control without negatively affecting potential yields.

Hydrocarbon Biodegradation Using Agro-Industrial Wastes as Co-Substrates

2017 ◽  
pp. 155-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Mohammed El Mahdi ◽  
Hamidi Abdul Aziz
Keyword(s):  
Industrial Waste ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Industrial Wastes ◽  
Hydrocarbon Biodegradation ◽  
Scale Production ◽  
Microbial Biodegradation ◽  
Current Area ◽  
The Cost

The diversity of agro industrial wastes makes them an attractive group of organic wastes for potential use in a wide variety of industrial and biotechnological applications. The new stimulating development in this current area of research approaches in combination with the technologies of large-scale production and biotechnology engineering, agro industrial wastes will be economically successful materials of the future. Increased public awareness of issues related to hydrocarbon pollution strongly influences the development of technologies that speed up cleaning hazardous contaminants. The cost of biodegradation technology and the low bioavailability including mass transfer limitations of hydrocarbons, especially those recalcitrant components, from various mediums into the aqueous phase for effective enzyme-based microbial biodegradation still constitute major challenges. Sustainable replacement of traditional microbiological media with agroindustrial wastes as substrates for biosurfactant production holds great potential; thereby decrease numerous management problems of handling industrial waste. These organic nitrogen-rich nutrients (biostimulation) are an effective means to enhance the bioremediation process and widely available as wastes in the environment; hence, they can serve as “natural waste-to-environmental clean-up.” However, current chapter have focused on the combined use of biosurfactants and enzymes produced from renewable resources such as agro-industrial waste, through assisted biostimulation and bioaugmentation, for hydrocarbon biodegradation.

Evaluation of Organic Weed Management Practices on Growth, Yield and Weed Control Efficiency in Soybean-chickpea Sequence under Irrigated Condition

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.A. Chavan ◽  
W.N. Narkhede ◽  
H.S. Garud
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Growth Yield ◽  
Soil Solarization ◽  
Rabi Season ◽  
Free Treatment ◽  
Weed Control Efficiency ◽  
Hand Weeding ◽  
Organic Weed Management

Background: Weeds are widely reported as a key constraint in organic agriculture. Soybean-chickpea is important cropping sequence adopted in Maharashtra State under irrigated condition. Weed management is a serious problem in both the crop and it mostly controlled through chemical weed control. Today, widespread use of herbicides has resulted in purporated environmental and health problem as well as residual problems to succeeding crops. Now a days residue free food requirement is high. In organic farming cultural and mechanical methods are necessary to break the weed cycle. So, keeping this point in view present investigation was carried out to evaluate organic weed management practices on growth, yield and weed control in soybean-chickpea sequence under irrigated condition. Methods: A field experiment was conducted during Kharif and rabi seasons of 2017-18 and 2018-19. The present investigation consisted of ten weed management practices viz. two hand weeding at 20-25 and 45-50 DAS, one hoeing 20-25 DAS + one hand weeding at 45-50 DAS, soybean + sunhemp incorporation after 35-40 DAS in kharif season and chickpea + safflower (2:1) in rabi season, stale seed bed + reduced spacing + 2 tonne of wheat straw + one hand weeding at 25 DAS, soil mulch at the time of sowing + one hand pulling at 25 DAS, incorporation of neem cake 1.5 tonne/ ha 15 days before sowing + one hand weeding at 25 DAS, soil solarization with 25 μ polythene mulch during summer + one hand weeding at 25 DAS, mulching with straw, weed free and weedy check. Result: The higher values of growth attributes was recorded by weed free treatment which was on par with two hand weeding at 20-25 and 45-50 DAS and soil solarization with 25 μ polythene mulch during summer + one hand weeding at 25 DAS and significantly superior over rest of the treatments during both the year study. Application of stale seed bed with reduced spacing and 2 tonne of wheat straw along with one hand weeding 25 DAS recorded higher soybean equivalent yield followed by soybean + sunhemp incorporation (35-45DAS) in kharif and chickpea + safflower (2:1) in rabi season during both the year. The lower weed density, dry weight and highest weed control efficiency at 40 days after sowing for both monocot and dicot weeds was recorded by weed free treatment followed by soil solarization with 25 μ polythene mulch during summer + one hand weeding at 25 DAS in soybean and chickpea during both the year.

Efficacy and Crop Response to Glufosinate-Based Weed Management in PAT-Transformed Sweet Corn (Zea mays)

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee R. Van Wychen ◽  
R. Gordon Harvey ◽  
Mark J. Vangessel ◽  
Thomas L. Rabaey ◽  
David J. Bach
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Crop Response ◽  
Control Efficacy ◽  
Common Ragweed ◽  
Common Lambsquarters ◽  
Proso Millet

Field studies were conducted at Arlington, WI, in 1996 and 1997 and at Georgetown, DE, and LeSueur, MN, in 1997 to determine weed control efficacy, crop injury, and yield response of PAT-transformed sweet corn to glufosinate-based weed management. Sequential applications of glufosinate 10 to 18 d apart at 0.4 and 0.3 kg ai/ha controlled common lambsquarters, common ragweed, velvetleaf, wild-proso millet, and fall panicum 90% or better at all locations. Weed control varied little among 0.3, 0.4, or 0.3 and 0.3 (sequential) kg/ha glufosinate rates. Glufosinate applied alone, with, or following atrazine controlled velvetleaf 90% or greater but was less consistent on common ragweed and common lambsquarters (73 to 100%). Atrazine plus metolachlor applied preemergence (PRE) and glufosinate applied alone postemergence (POST) provided inconsistent wild-proso millet and fall panicum control (43 to 99%). Metolachlor followed by glufosinate improved consistency of grass control (> 76%). Glufosinate followed by cultivation provided 80% or greater control of velvetleaf and wild-proso millet. Glufosinate did not injure or delay maturity of PAT-transformed sweet corn. Sweet corn treated with glufosinate resulted in yields greater than or equal to the sweet corn that was hand-weeded or received a standard herbicide treatment.

Variation in Wild Proso Millet (Panicum miliaceum) Fecundity in Sweet Corn Has Residual Effects in Snap Bean

Weed Science ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 502-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam S. Davis ◽  
Martin M. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Population Density ◽  
Crop Yield ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Seedling Recruitment ◽  
Residual Effects ◽  
Snap Bean ◽  
Weed Population ◽  
Proso Millet

Bioeconomic models are predicated upon the relationship between weed fecundity and crop yield loss in consecutive growing seasons, yet this phenomenon has received few empirical tests. Residual effects of wild proso millet (WPM) fecundity in sweet corn upon WPM seedling recruitment, weed management efficacy, and crop yield within a subsequent snap bean crop were investigated with field experiments in Urbana, IL, in 2005 and 2006. WPM fecundity in sweet corn showed strong positive associations with WPM seedbank density, seedling recruitment, and demographic transitions within snap bean. A negative exponential relationship between WPM initial seedling density and seedling survival of a single rotary hoe pass indicated that the rotary hoe was ineffective at low weed population densities, but its efficacy increased with increasing weed population density to a maximum of 75% seedling mortality. Efficacy of postemergent chemical control of WPM was unaffected by WPM population density. Path analysis models demonstrated dependence between WPM fecundity in sweet corn, WPM seedling recruitment in snap bean, and reductions in snap bean yield in subsequent growing season, mediated by negative impacts of WPM seedling establishment on snap bean stand. These results underscore the importance of expanding integrated weed management programs to include management of annual weed populations both at the end of their life cycle, by reducing fecundity and seed survival, and at the very beginning of their life cycle, by reducing seedling recruitment and establishment.

Planting date influences critical period of weed control in sweet corn

Weed Science ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 54 (5) ◽  
pp. 928-933 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin M. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Sweet Corn ◽  
Relative Yield ◽  
Planting Date ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Yield Losses ◽  
Yield Data ◽  
Weed Interference

The critical period for weed control (CPWC) identifies the phase of the crop growth cycle when weed interference results in unacceptable yield losses; however, the effect of planting date on CPWC is not well understood. Field studies were conducted in 2004 and 2005 at Urbana, IL, to determine CPWC in sweet corn for early May (EARLY) and late-June (LATE) planting dates. A quantitative series of treatments of both increasing duration of interference and length of weed-free period were imposed within each planting-date main plot. The beginning and end of the CPWC, based on 5% loss of marketable ear mass, was determined by fitting logistic and Gompertz equations to the relative yield data representing increasing duration of weed interference and weed-free periods, respectively. Weed interference stressed the crop more quickly and to a greater extent in EARLY, relative to LATE. At a 5% yield-loss level, duration of weed interference for 160 and 662 growing-degree days (GDD) from crop emergence marked the beginning of the CPWC for EARLY and LATE, respectively. When maintained weed-free for 320 and 134 GDD, weeds emerging later caused yield losses of less than 5% for EARLY and LATE, respectively. Weed densities exceeded 85 plants m−2for the duration of the experiments and predominant species included barnyardgrass, common lambsquarters, common purslane, redroot pigweed, and velvetleaf. Weed canopy height and total aboveground weed biomass were 300% and 500% higher, respectively, for EARLY compared with LATE. Interactions between planting date and CPWC indicate the need to consider planting date in the optimization of integrated weed management systems for sweet corn. In this study, weed management in mid-June–planted sweet corn could have been less intensive than early May–planted corn, reducing herbicide use and risk of herbicide carryover to sensitive rotation crops.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document