Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T12:53:30.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modeling the Effects of Weed Interference Periods and Insects on Bell Peppers (Capsicum annuum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. Ray Frank ,
Paul H. Schwartz Jr.  and
William E. Potts
J. Ray Frank
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Foreign Disease-Weed Sci. Res., Bldg. 1301, Ft. Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702
Paul H. Schwartz Jr.
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Pesticide Assess. Lab., Beltsville, MD, 20705
William E. Potts
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS/Univ. Maryland Statistical Consulting Serv., Beltsville, MD 20705
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted at Frederick, MD, in 1985 and 1986 to determine effects of weed-interference periods and insects on bell peppers. Weed-interference periods of approximately 40 and 60 d reduced both bell pepper fruit number and weight 10 and 50%, respectively. Bell pepper foliage weight was reduced 10 and 50% with approximately 20- and 50-day weed-interference periods. In 1985 and 1986, insect populations were low with an average of 10 and 3% of the pepper fruit infested, respectively. Most infested fruit was damaged by European corn borer. No significant differences in insect infestation of fruit as related to time of weed-interference periods were noted.

Keywords

Bell pepper, Capsicum annuum L. cv.‘Yolo Wonder′European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Hubner)Insect population densityweed densityinterferencecompetitionyield reductioncorn borer
Type
Special Topics
Information
Weed Science , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , June 1992 , pp. 308 - 312
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 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. Baltajar, A. M., Monaco, T. J., and Peele, D. M. 1984. Bentazon selectivity in hot pepper (Capsicum chinense) and sweet pepper (Capsicum annuum). Weed Sci. 32:243–246.Google Scholar
2. Brindley, T. A., Sparks, A. N., Showers, W. B., and Guthrie, W. D. 1975. Recent research advances on the European corn borer in North America. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 20:221–239.Google Scholar
3. Chandler, J. M., Hamil, A. S., and Thomas, A. G. 1984. Crop losses due to weeds in Canada and the United States. Special Report of the Losses Due to Weeds Committee. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., 309 W. Clark St., Champaign, IL 61820. 22 pp.Google Scholar
4. Eshel, Y., Katan, J., and Palevitch, D. 1973. Selection action of diphenamid and napropamide in pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) and weeds. Weed Res. 13:379–384.Google Scholar
5. Frank, J. R., Schwartz, P. H. Jr., and Bourke, J. B. 1988. Insect and weed interactions on bell peppers (Capsicum annuum). Weed Technol. 2:423–428.Google Scholar
6. Friesen, G. H. 1979. Weed interference in transplanted tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum). Weed Sci. 27:11–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Glaze, N. C. and Phatak, S. C. 1981. Herbicide evaluation in direct-seeded peppers for transplant production. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 34:112–121.Google Scholar
8. Hofmaster, R. N., Bray, D. F., and Ditman, L. P. 1960. Effectiveness of insecticides against the European com borer and green peach aphid on peppers. J. Econ. Entomol. 53:624–626.Google Scholar
9. Labrada, R. and Santos, J. 1977. Período crítico de competencia de malas hierbas en tomate de transplante. Agrotécnia de Cuba 9(2): 111–119.Google Scholar
10. Roberts, H. A. 1976. Weed competition in vegetable crops. Ann. Appl. Biol. 83:321–324.Google Scholar
11. Seber, G.A.F. and Wild, C. J. 1989. Pages 21–90 in Nonlinear Regression. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
12. Singh, G., Bhan, V. H., and Tripathi, S. S. 1984. Effect of herbicides alone and in combination with weeding on tomato and associated weeds. Indian J. Weed Sci. 16(4):262–266.Google Scholar
13. Tamura, R. N., Nelson, L. A., and Naderman, G. C. 1988. An investigation of the validity and usefulness of trend analysis for field plot data. Agron. J. 80:712–718.Google Scholar
14. Weaver, S. E. and Tan, C. S. 1983. Critical period of weed interference in transplanted tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum): growth analysis. Weed Sci. 31:476–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Weinbaum, Z. and Milbrath, G. M. 1976. The isolation of tobacco vetch viruses from bell pepper and weeds in southern Illinois. Plant Dis. Rep. 60(6):469–471.Google Scholar