Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:50:04.749Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

California arrowhead is a weak competitor in water-seeded rice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kevin D. Gibson ,
John L. Breen ,
James E. Hill ,
Barney P. Caton  and
Theodore C. Foin
John L. Breen
Affiliation:
Ogori Development Center, Dow AgroSciences, Japan Korea Technology Development
James E. Hill
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Range Science, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Barney P. Caton
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Range Science, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Theodore C. Foin
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Range Science, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

California arrowhead is a broadleaf weed widespread in water-seeded rice. Bensulfuron is the only herbicide currently available for use throughout the California rice growing region that provides complete control of California arrowhead; however, resistance to bensulfuron has been detected in California arrowhead and in several other weed species. Growers have herbicide alternatives for weed species other than California arrowhead but continue to use bensulfuron year after year for control because they believe California arrowhead reduces rice yields. However, damage thresholds have not been determined for this weed, and the crop may be able to tolerate relatively high California arrowhead densities. In this work, the damage thresholds for California arrowhead were determined in field and greenhouse experiments. Water-seeded rice was grown in mixture with California arrowhead in a 1992 greenhouse experiment and in field experiments in 1992 and 1998. Rice tiller density and grain yields were not affected by California arrowhead densities up to 200 plants m−2 in any year. Rice was taller than California arrowhead throughout the growing season in all experiments, and the weed senesced well before rice maturity. The ability of the crop to overtop the weed and grow weed-free during the latter part of the season may explain why California arrowhead is such a weak competitor with water-seeded rice. The results suggest that growers may be able to tolerate California arrowhead densities up to 200 plants m−2 without detectable yield losses. Implications for weed management are discussed.

Keywords

Bensulfuron, California arrowhead, Sagittaria montevidensis Cham. and Schlect SAGMOrice, Oryza sativa L.Herbicide resistanceyield lossdamage threshold
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , June 2001 , pp. 381 - 384
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Barrett, S.C.H. and Seaman, D. E. 1980. The weed flora of California rice fields. Aquat. Bot. 9:351–376.Google Scholar
Bayer, D. E. and Hill, J. E. 1993. Weeds. Pages 27–48 In Flint, M. L., ed. Integrated Pest Management for Rice. University of California publication 3280. Oakland, CA: ANR Publications.Google Scholar
Caton, B. P., Foin, T. C., and Hill, J. E. 1997. Mechanisms of competition for light between rice (Oryza sativa) and redstem (Ammannia spp.). Weed Sci. 45:269–275.Google Scholar
Coble, H. D. and Mortensen, D. A. 1992. The threshold concept and its application to weed science. Weed Technol. 6:191–195.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985. An empirical model relating crop yield to weed and crop density and a statistical comparison with other models. J. Agric. Sci. (Cambridge) 105:513–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, K. D., Hill, J. E., Foin, T. C., Caton, B. P., and Fischer, A. J. 2001. Cultivar interference with the growth of watergrass (Echinochloa species) in water-seeded rice. Agron. J. In press.Google Scholar
Hill, J. E. and Hawkins, L. S. 1996. Herbicides in United States rice production: lessons for Asia. Pages 37–52 In Naylor, R., ed. Herbicides in Asian Rice; Transitions in Weed Management. Palo Alto, CA: Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, and Manila: International Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Holt, J. S. and LeBaron, H. M. 1990. Significance and distribution of herbicide resistance. Weed Technol. 4:141–149.Google Scholar
Jordan, N. 1992. Weed demography and population dynamics: implications for threshold management. Weed Technol. 6:184–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, M. D. 1979. Evolution of California rice culture. Pages 79–133 In Wilson, J. H., ed. Rice in California. Butte County. Richvale, CA: Rice Growers Association.Google Scholar
Smith, R. J., Flinchum, W. T., and Seaman, D. E. 1977. Weed Control in U.S. Rice Production. Pages 51–52 In USDA Agricultural Handbook 497. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar