Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T16:54:07.414Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interference from Established Stands of Silverleaf Nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium) on Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Lint Yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Brenda S. Smith ,
John A. Pawlak ,
Don S. Murray ,
Laval M. Verhalen  and
J. D. Green
Brenda S. Smith
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
John A. Pawlak
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Don S. Murray
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Laval M. Verhalen
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
J. D. Green
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 1985 and 1986 under eight environments to evaluate the population dynamics of a range of silverleaf nightshade densities and to measure the effects of those populations on cotton lint yield. Dry weed weights of silverleaf nightshade stands were influenced by growing conditions among years, but were positively related to initial densities as long as 2 yr after establishment. Stem numbers increased as initial densities and stand age increased. A negative linear relationship existed between cotton lint yield and weed biomass and between cotton lint yield and stem number from both 1- and 2-yr-old weed stands. For each 1 kg/10 m of row increase in dry weed weight from 1- and 2-yr-old stands, a 9 and 21% lint yield loss/ha was predicted, respectively. For each stem/10 m of row, a 0.35 and 0.31% yield loss was predicted, respectively. Late-planted cotton was less vulnerable to yield reductions by silverleaf nightshade; however, its yield potential was also less.

Keywords

Silverleaf nightshade, Solanum elaeagnifolium Cav. ♯ SOLELcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Westburn M’ and ‘Paymaster 145’Population dynamicsperennial weedcompetitionweed biomassSOLEL
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , March 1990 , pp. 129 - 133
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 by the 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

1. Abernathy, J. R. 1975. New weed problems for High Plains cotton. Proc. West. Cotton Prod. Conf. Page 71.Google Scholar
2. Boyd, J. W. and Murray, D. S. 1982. Growth and development of silverleaf nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium). Weed Sci. 30:238–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Boyd, J. W., Murray, D. S., and Tyrl, R. J. 1984. Silverleaf nightshade, Solanum elaeagnifolium, origin, distribution, and relation to man. Econ. Bot. 38:210–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Brown, S. M., Whitwell, T., and Street, J. E. 1985. Common bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) competition in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 33:503–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1971. Weed competition in cotton. II. Cocklebur and redroot pigweed. Weed Sci. 19:580–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Green, J. D., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1987. Full-season interference of silverleaf nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 35:813–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Hackett, N. M., Murray, D. S., and Weeks, D. L. 1987. Interference of horsenettle (Solanum carolinense) with peanuts (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 35:780–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Koch, W. 1988. Weed science in Germany. Weed Technol. 2:388–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Putwain, P. D., Machin, D., and Harper, J. L. 1968. Studies in the dynamics of plant populations. II. Components and regulation of a natural population of Rumex acetosella L. J. Ecol. 56:421–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Rushing, D. W., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1985. Weed interference with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). I. Buffalobur (Solanum rostratum). Weed Sci. 33:810–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Rushing, D. W., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1985. Weed interference with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). II. Tumble pigweed (Amaranthus albus). Weed Sci. 33:815–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Schreiber, M. M. 1982. Modeling the biology of weeds for integrated weed management. Weed Sci. Suppl. 30:13–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Smith, D. T. 1973. Weed control in dry land and irrigated cotton. Proc. West. Cotton Prod. Conf. Pages 55–57.Google Scholar
14. White, J. and Harper, J. L. 1970. Correlated changes in plant size and number in plant populations. J. Ecol. 58:467–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar