Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:14:25.303Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Powell Amaranth (Amaranthus powellii) Interference in Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Edward E. Schweizer  and
Thomas C. Lauridson
Edward E. Schweizer
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Crops Res. Lab., Fort Collins, CO 80523
Thomas C. Lauridson
Affiliation:
Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Interference of Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii S. Wats. ♯ AMAPO) in sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy A4’) was determined in field experiments. Yield of sugarbeet roots and recoverable sucrose/ha decreased as the density of Powell amaranth increased. At densities of 6, 12, 18, and 24 Powell amaranth plants/30 m of row, root yields were reduced 8, 14, 24, and 25%, respectively, and recoverable sucrose yields were reduced 7, 13, 23, and 24%, respectively. The minimum number of Powell amaranth plants required per 30 m of row to reduce sugarbeet root yields was estimated to be nine in 1982 and 11 in 1983.

Keywords

Weed lossesweed thresholdscompetition
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , July 1985 , pp. 518 - 520
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 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. Anonymous. 1975. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 12th ed. Washington, DC. Pages 567–568.Google Scholar
2. Carruthers, A. and Oldfield, J.F.T. 1961. Methods for the assessment of beet quality. Int. Sugar J. 63:72–74, 103–105, 137–139.Google Scholar
3. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberii with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:26–29.Google Scholar
4. Moolani, M. K., Knake, E. L., and Slife, F. W. 1964. Competition of smooth pigweed with corn and soybeans. Weeds 12:126–128.Google Scholar
5. Schweizer, E. E. 1973. Predicting sugarbeet root losses based on kochia densities. Weed Sci. 21:565–567.Google Scholar
6. Schweizer, E. E. 1981. Broadleaf weed interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 29:128–133.Google Scholar
7. Schweizer, E. E. and Bridge, L. D. 1982. Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 30:514–519.Google Scholar
8. Schweizer, E. E. 1983. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 31:5–8.Google Scholar
9. Zimdahl, R. L. 1980. Weed-crop competition, a review. Int. Plant Prot. Ctr., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis. 195 pp.Google Scholar