Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:56:33.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Weed Management in Peanut Using Stale Seedbed Techniques

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

W. Carroll Johnson III
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS and Agric. Res. Statistician, Coastal Plain Exp. Stn., Tifton, GA 31793-0748
Benjamin G. Mullinix Jr.
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS and Agric. Res. Statistician, Coastal Plain Exp. Stn., Tifton, GA 31793-0748

Abstract

Field studies were conducted from 1991 through 1993 to determine the effects of stale seedbed management practices on weed control in peanut. Main plots were four levels of stale seedbed management: deep till (23 cm) and plant the same day (standard system), deep till 6 wk early and shallow till (7.6 cm) at 2 wk intervals prior to planting, deep till 6 wk early and application of glyphosate (1.1 kg ai ha−1) 1 wk prior to planting, and deep till 6 wk early without additional treatment prior to planting. Sub-plots were three levels of weed management following peanut planting; intensive, basic, and cultivation alone. Stale seedbed management practices stimulated weed emergence when followed by other control measures prior to planting. Populations of Florida beggarweed, Texas panicum, and yellow nutsedge were lower when stale seedbeds were shallow tilled at 2 wk intervals prior to planting, resulting in greater peanut yields. Weeds on nontreated stale seedbeds were difficult to control once peanut was planted and reduced yields. Stale seedbed management practices generally had no effect on the quantity of foreign material contaminants originating from weeds, soil, or peanut plant in harvested peanut. These results indicate that shallow tillage on stale seedbeds can reduce weed populations prior to planting and increase peanut yields.

Type
Weed Management
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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. 1994. Crop protection chemicals reference. p. F50. 10th ed. Chemical and Pharmaceutical Publ. Corp., New York, NY.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. 1991. Mechanical weed control: keys to getting yields while reducing or eliminating the use of herbicides. Land Stewardship Project. Lewiston, MN. 8 pp.Google Scholar
3. Bond, W. and Baker, P. J. 1990. Patterns of weed emergence following soil cultivation and its implications for weed control in vegetable crops. in Br. Crop Prot. Council. p. 6368. Monograph No. 45. Organic and Low Input Agric. Google Scholar
4. Buchanan, G. A., Murray, D. S., and Hauser, E. W. 1983. Weeds and their control in peanuts. Pages 206249 in Pattee, H. E. and Young, C. T. (eds.) Peanut Sci. and Technol. Am. Peanut Res. Educ. Soc., Yoakum, TX.Google Scholar
5. Burnside, O. C., Wicks, G. A., and Carlson, D. R. 1980. Control of weeds in an oat (Avena sativa)-soybean (Glycine max) ecofarming rotation. Weed Sci. 28:4650.Google Scholar
6. Cardina, J. and Hook, J. E. 1989. Factors influencing germination and emergence of Florida beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum). Weed Technol. 3:402407.Google Scholar
7. Cardina, J., Regnier, E., and Harrison, K. 1991. Long-term tillage effects on seed banks in three Ohio soils. Weed Sci. 39:186194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Chancellor, R. J. 1985. Tillage effects of annual weed germination. World Soy. Res. Conf. III: Proc. 3:11051111.Google Scholar
9. Dowler, C. C. 1992. Weed survey—southern states, broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. So. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:392407.Google Scholar
10. Egley, G. H. and Williams, R. D. 1990. Decline of weed seeds and seedling emergence over five years as affected by soil disturbance. Weed Sci. 38:504510.Google Scholar
11. Forcella, F. and Lindstrom, M. J. 1988. Weed seed populations in ridge and conventional tillage. Weed Sci. 36:500503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Forcella, F., Eradat-Oskoui, K., and Wagner, S. W. 1993. Applications of weed seedbank ecology to low-input crop management. Ecol. Appl. 3:7483.Google Scholar
13. Gunsolus, J. L. 1990. Mechanical and cultural weed control in corn and soybeans. Am. J. Alter. Agric. 5:114119.Google Scholar
14. Heatherly, L. G. and Elmore, C. D. 1983. Response of soybeans (Glycine max) to planting in untilled, weedy seedbed on clay soil. Weed Sci. 31:9399.Google Scholar
15. Heatherly, L. G., Elmore, C. D., and Wesley, R. A. 1990. Weed control and soybean response to preplant tillage and planting time. Soil Tillage Res. 17:199210.Google Scholar
16. Noll, C. J. 1978. Chemical weeding of cucumber grown in a stale seedbed. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 32:230232.Google Scholar
17. Noll, C. J. 1975. Herbicide weeding of cucumber grown in a stale seedbed. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 29:262263.Google Scholar
18. Roberts, H. A. and Feast, P. A. 1972. Fate of seeds of some annual weeds in different depths of cultivated and undisturbed soil. Weed Res. 12:316324.Google Scholar
19. Robinson, R. G. 1978. Control by tillage and persistence of volunteer sunflower and annual weeds. Agron. J. 70:10531056.Google Scholar
20. Smith, E. V. and Mayton, E. L. 1938. Nut grass eradication studies: II. The eradication of nut grass, Cyperus rotundus L., by certain tillage treatments., J. Am. Soc. Agron. 30:1821.Google Scholar
21. Tripp, T. N., Oliver, L. R., and Baldwin, F. L. 1988. Use of imazaquin and chlorimuron plus metribuzin in stale seedbed soybeans. Proc. So. Weed Sci. Soc. 41:38.Google Scholar
22. Warnes, D. D. and Andersen, R. N. 1984. Decline of wild mustard (Brassica kaber) seeds in soil under various cultural and chemical practices. Weed Sci. 32:214217.Google Scholar