scholarly journals Development of a Field Robot Platform for Mechanical Weed Control in Greenhouse Cultivation of Cucumber

Author(s):  
Amid Heravi ◽  
Desa Ahmad ◽  
Ibrahim A. Hameed ◽  
Redmond Ramin Shamshiri ◽  
Siva K. Balasundram ◽  
...  
1992 ◽  
Vol 117 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-259
Author(s):  
Brian A. Kahn ◽  
Raymond Joe Schatzer

The herbicides paraquat, trifluralin, and metolachlor were compared for efficacy of weed control in cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] with and without cultivation as a supplemental strategy. Herbicides also were compared against a no cultivation-no herbicide treatment (control) and against cultivation without an herbicide. Cultivation had no significant effect on seed yield, biological yield, or harvest index of cowpea. Paraquat, applied before seeding but after emergence of weeds, was ineffective for weed control and usually did not change cowpea yield from that obtained without an herbicide. Trifluralin and metolachlor more than tripled cowpea seed yield compared with that obtained without an herbicide in 1988, when potential weed pressure was 886 g·m-2 (dry weight). The main effects of trifluralin and metolachlor were not significant for cowpea seed yield in 1989, when potential weed pressure was 319 g·m-2 (dry weight). However, in 1989, these two herbicides still increased cowpea seed yield compared with that of the control and increased net farm income by more than $300/ha compared with the income obtained from the control. Chemical names used 1,1'-dimethyl-4,4' -bipyridlnium salts (paraquat); 2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl) benzenamine (trifluralin); 2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6 -methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-l-methylethyl) acetamide (metolachlor).


2020 ◽  
Vol 176 ◽  
pp. 105638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jannis Machleb ◽  
Gerassimos G. Peteinatos ◽  
Benjamin L. Kollenda ◽  
Dionisio Andújar ◽  
Roland Gerhards

2020 ◽  
Vol 245 ◽  
pp. 107648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandr S. Alba ◽  
Lena D. Syrovy ◽  
Hema S.N. Duddu ◽  
Steven J. Shirtliffe

2014 ◽  
Vol 121 (5) ◽  
pp. 223-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia Cirujeda ◽  
Ana Isabel Marí ◽  
Joaquín Aibar ◽  
Sonsoles Fenández-Cavada ◽  
Gabriel Pardo ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine A. Stanley ◽  
Steven J. Shirtliffe ◽  
Dilshan Benaragama ◽  
Lena D. Syrovy ◽  
Hema S. N. Duddu

AbstractInterrow cultivation is a selective, in-crop mechanical weed control tool that has the potential to control weeds later in the growing season with less crop damage compared with other in-crop mechanical weed control tools. To our knowledge, no previous research has been conducted on the tolerance of narrow-row crops to interrow cultivation. The objective of this experiment was to determine the tolerance of field pea and lentil to interrow cultivation. Replicated field experiments were conducted in Saskatchewan, Canada, in 2014 and 2015. Weekly cultivation treatments began at the 4-node stage of each crop, continuing for 6 wk. Field pea and lentil yield linearly declined with later crop stages of cultivation. Cultivating multiple times throughout the growing season reduced yield by 15% to 30% in both crops. Minimal yield loss occurred when interrow cultivation was conducted once at early growth stages of field pea and lentil; however, yield loss increased with delayed and more frequent cultivation events.


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 2485-2492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Lejman ◽  
Rafał Ogórek ◽  
Piotr Sobkowicz

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document