Perpendicular Cultivation for Improved In-Row Weed Control in Organic Peanut Production

Intensive cultivation in organic peanut is partially effective, but in-row weed control remains problematic. In an attempt to improve in-row weed control, irrigated trials were conducted from 2011 to 2013 near Ty Ty, GA to determine the feasibility of early-season cultivation perpendicular to row direction using a tine weeder when integrated with other weed-control practices. Combinations of perpendicular cultivation (cultivation perpendicular to row direction), parallel cultivation (cultivation in the same direction of the rows), and banded applications of herbicides derived from natural sources were compared. Perpendicular cultivation improved overall weed control and peanut yield (two years of three), but this benefit was independent of weed control from any form of parallel cultivation. Additionally, tractor tire tracks from perpendicular cultivation across the rows repeatedly crushed peanut seedlings. Parallel cultivation with the tine weeder was generally more effective than parallel cultivation with sweeps, particularly for southern crabgrass and Texas millet. Herbicides derived from natural products were inconsistent in controlling dicot weeds, ineffective in controlling annual grasses, and did not protect peanut yield from weed interference.

Download Full-text

Potential Weed Management Systems for Organic Peanut Production

Peanut Science ◽

10.3146/ps01-007.1 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 35 (1) ◽

pp. 67-72 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

W. Carroll Johnson ◽

Benjamin G. Mullinix

Keyword(s):

Acetic Acid ◽

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Management Systems ◽

Clove Oil ◽

Poor Control ◽

Early Season ◽

Annual Grasses ◽

Peanut Production ◽

Four Levels

Abstract Studies were conducted near Tifton, GA to develop weed management systems for organic peanut production. Trials in 2004 and 2005 evaluated row patterns (two levels), remedial weed control (four levels), and cultivation (three levels). Row patterns were wide rows (91 cm apart) and narrow rows (30 cm apart). Remedial weed control was early-season applications of clove oil, citric plus acetic acid, broadcast propane flaming, and a nontreated control. Cultivation regimes were 1X or 2X sweep cultivation and a non-cultivated control. The experimental sites had heavy natural infestations of annual grasses and broadleaf weeds. None of the treatment combinations effectively controlled weeds season-long and resulting peanut yields were poor. Annual grasses were particularly troublesome due to ineffective control from flaming and citric plus acetic acid. Clove oil was slightly more effective in controlling annual grasses than the other remedial treatments, but annual grass control was still unacceptable. Dicot weeds were not effectively controlled by mid-season, although clove oil and flaming controlled the seedling weeds early season. The lack of residual weed control by the remedial weed control treatments resulted in heavy weed infestations by mid-season. Poor control of annual grasses, no residual weed control, and high cost of remedial treatments indicates that these systems of weed management in organic peanut production are not suited to sites with heavy weed infestations.

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

Annual Grass Control in Strip-Tillage Peanut Production with Delayed Applications of Pendimethalin

Weed Technology ◽

10.1614/wt-08-133.1 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 24 (1) ◽

pp. 1-5 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

W. Carroll Johnson ◽

Eric P. Prostko ◽

Benjamin G. Mullinix

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Control Efficacy ◽

Control Programs ◽

Time Of Application ◽

Annual Grasses ◽

Peanut Production ◽

Strip Tillage ◽

Herbicide Programs ◽

A Current ◽

Dinitroaniline Herbicides

In strip-tillage peanut production, situations occur when dinitroaniline herbicides are not applied in a timely manner. In these cases, dinitroaniline herbicides would be applied days or weeks after seeding. However, there is no information that documents the effects of delayed applications on weed control. Trials were conducted in 2004, 2005, and 2007 in Georgia to determine the weed control efficacy of delayed applications of pendimethalin in strip-tillage peanut production. Treatments included seven timings of pendimethalin application and three pendimethalin-containing herbicide combinations. Timings of application were immediately after seeding (PRE), vegetative emergence of peanut (VE), 1 wk after VE (VE+1wk), VE+2wk, VE+3wk, VE+4wk, and a nontreated control. Pendimethalin containing herbicide programs included pendimethalin plus paraquat, pendimethalin plus imazapic, and pendimethalin alone. Among the possible treatment combinations was a current producer standard timing for nonpendimethalin weed control programs in peanut, which was either imazapic or paraquat alone applied VE+3wk. Pendimethalin alone did not effectively control Texas millet regardless of time of application (69 to 77%), whereas southern crabgrass was controlled by pendimethalin alone PRE (87%). Delayed applications of pendimethalin controlled Texas millet and southern crabgrass when combined with either paraquat or imazapic, with imazapic being the preferred combination due to better efficacy on southern crabgrass than paraquat at most delayed applications. Peanut yield was improved when any of the herbicide combinations were applied PRE compared to later applications. Across all times of application, pendimethalin plus imazapic effectively maximized peanut yield with interference from annual grasses.

Download Full-text

Flumioxazin for Weed Control in Texas Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.)1

Peanut Science ◽

10.3146/i0095-3679-23-1-6 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 23 (1) ◽

pp. 30-36 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

W. James Grichar ◽

A. Edwin Colburn

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Arachis Hypogaea ◽

Field Experiments ◽

Early Season ◽

Ipomoea Hederacea ◽

Ipomoea Lacunosa ◽

Arachis Hypogaea L ◽

Pitted Morningglory ◽

Annual Grasses ◽

Herbicide Programs

Abstract Field experiments were conducted in 1991 and 1993 to evaluate flumioxazin alone and in various herbicide programs for weed control in peanut. Flumioxazin alone provided inconsistent control of annual grasses, while the addition of pendimethalin or trifluralin improved control considerably. Pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa L.) and ivyleaf morningglory [Ipomoea hederacea (L.) Jacq.] control was > 75% when flumioxazin was used alone. Flumioxazin caused early season peanut stunting with some recovery within 4 to 6 wk. Postemergence applications of imazethapyr or lactofen increased peanut stunting.

Download Full-text

A Review of Weed Management Challenges in Organic Peanut Production

Peanut Science ◽

10.3146/ps18-12.1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 46 (1) ◽

pp. 56-66 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

W. Carroll Johnson

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Cropping System ◽

Organic Production ◽

Integrated System ◽

Integrated Weed Management ◽

Annual Grasses ◽

Peanut Production ◽

Certified Organic ◽

Mechanical Weed Control

ABSTRACT Organic peanut production is a high-risk cropping system, largely due to difficulties in managing weeds using methods acceptable for certified-organic production. In contrast with conventional peanut production that relies heavily on synthetic herbicides, organic peanut production must use an integrated system to manage weeds. The foundation for an integrated weed management system is cultural weed control which is a system of production practices that promote uniform peanut growth to suppress weeds. Cultural weed control includes practices that promote vigorous early-season peanut growth and lessen chances for weed escapes. Mechanical weed control is based on repeated cultivation using a tine weeder and sweep cultivator to control weeds before they emerge. However, weed control consistency from cultivation is affected by rainfall that can delay scheduled cultivations and hinder implement function. Handweeding is also a form of mechanical weed control that is used to supplement other weed control efforts by controlling escapes. Herbicides derived from natural products and thermal weed control using propane flaming have limited value in organic peanut production due to limited weed control spectra, specifically poor control of annual grasses and perennial weeds. Successful weed management in certified organic peanut production will depend on an integrated system, not a single form of weed control.

Download Full-text

Seed Protectants Safen Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) Against Chloroacetamide Herbicide Injury

Weed Technology ◽

10.1017/s0890037x00026592 ◽

1990 ◽

Vol 4 (4) ◽

pp. 886-891 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Chester L. Foy ◽

Harold L. Witt

Keyword(s):

Sorghum Bicolor ◽

Weed Control ◽

Field Experiments ◽

Grain Sorghum ◽

Severe Injury ◽

Early Season ◽

Minor Injury ◽

Crop Injury ◽

Annual Grasses ◽

Serious Injury

Alachlor at 3.4 and 6.7 kg ha-1, metolachlor at 2.8 and 5.6 kg ha-1, and propachlor at 4.5 and 9.0 kg ha-1were applied to grain sorghum in field experiments conducted in 1981 and 1982. ‘Dekalb E-59’ and ‘Pioneer 8311’ grain sorghum were tested with and without the seed protectants cyometrinil and flurazole in both experiments. ‘Funk's G-1350’ was tested with and without cyometrinil and CGA-92194 in one experiment. Alachlor and metolachlor caused serious injury (stunting and, in some instances, reductions in stand and yield) to grain sorghum without the seed protectants. Less severe injury to grain sorghum occurred with alachlor and metolachlor at high rates even in the presence of the seed protectants. The three seed protectants were equally effective in preventing crop injury. Only minor injury to grain sorghum, with or without the seed protectants, occurred with propachlor at both rates. Overall, early-season weed control was 81 to 100%; however, propachlor at the rates tested was noticeably weaker than alachlor and metolachlor against some annual grasses.

Download Full-text

Integrating cultivation using a tine weeder with herbicides in conventional peanut production

Weed Technology ◽

10.1017/wet.2018.114 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 33 (2) ◽

pp. 374-379

Author(s):

W. Carroll Johnson ◽

Xuelin Luo

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Integrated System ◽

Weed Species ◽

Rainfall Events ◽

Time Period ◽

Annual Grasses ◽

Peanut Production ◽

Effective Component

AbstractResearch from the 1980s reported sweep cultivation being a cost-effective component in an integrated system to manage weeds in peanut. Previous weed management research conducted on organic peanut indicated that repeated cultivation with a tine weeder was an effective component in that production system. Studies were conducted in Tifton, GA, from 2014 through 2017 to determine whether tine weeding can be integrated with herbicides in conventional peanut production to supplement herbicides. Experiments evaluated a factorial arrangement of eight herbicide combinations and two levels of cultivation using a tine weeder. Herbicides were labeled rates of ethalfluralin PRE, S-metolachlor PRE, imazapic POST, ethalfluralin PRE + S-metolachlor PRE, ethalfluralin PRE + imazapic POST, S-metolachlor PRE + imazapic POST, ethalfluralin PRE + S-metolachlor PRE + imazapic POST, and a nontreated control. The herbicides chosen were based on knowledge of the weed species composition at the research sites and their common use in peanut. Cultivation regimes were cultivation with a tine weeder (six times at weekly intervals) and a noncultivated control. Benefits of tine weeding supplementing control from herbicides varied according to herbicide and weed species. For example, annual grasses were effectively controlled (88% to 97%) by ethalfluralin or S-metolachlor and did not need cultivation to supplement control provided by the herbicides. However, imazapic alone did not effectively control (54% to 75%) annual grasses and needed supplemental control from cultivation with the tine weeder. Similarly, imazapic effectively controlled (84% to 93%) smallflower morningglory and did not require cultivation to supplement control from the herbicide. However, cultivation with the tine weeder improved smallflower morningglory control (76% to 95%) when supplementing ethalfluralin or S-metolachlor. Peanut yields did not respond to any of the herbicide combinations integrated with cultivation using the tine weeder. During the time period when peanut was cultivated, there was greater total rainfall and more days of rainfall events in 2014 and 2017 compared with the other years. Rainfall and wet soils reduced the performance and weed control benefits of the tine weeder. This highlights the risk of depending on cultivation for weed control.

Download Full-text

Weed Management in Peanuts

EDIS ◽

10.32473/edis-wg008-2020 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Pratap Devkota

Keyword(s):

Weed Control ◽

Weed Management ◽

Management Practices ◽

Application Rate ◽

Good Management ◽

Peanut Production

Successful weed control in peanuts involves use of good management practices in all phases of peanut production. This 11-page document lists herbicide products registered for use in Florida peanut production, their mode of actions group, application rate per acre and per season, and reentry interval. It also discusses the performance of these herbicides on several weeds under Florida conditions. Written by J. A. Ferrell, G. E. MacDonald, and P. Devkota, and published by the UF/IFAS Agronomy Department, revised May 2020.

Download Full-text