Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T09:27:45.451Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Competition and Control in Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

E. W. Stoller
Affiliation:
Dep., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
L. M. Wax
Affiliation:
Dep., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
F. W. Slife
Affiliation:
Dep., Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801

Abstract

Competition of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) with corn (Zea mays L.) was evaluated in the field at various yellow nutsedge densities over a 3-yr period. A relationship between yellow nutsedge density (shoots/m2) and percentage yield reduction revealed an 8% yield reduction for every 100 shoots/m2. Two 3-yr studies were conducted to determine the most effective combination of preplant-incorporated, postemergence, or postemergence-directed treatments for yellow nutsedge control in corn. The preplant incorporated treatments were alachlor [2-chloro-2′,6′-diethyl-N-(methoxymethyl)acetanilide], EPTC (S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate), or nothing; postemergence treatments were bentazon [3-isopropyl-1H-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-(4) 3H-one 2,2-dioxide], two cultivations, or nothing; and the postemergence-directed treatments were ametryn [2-(ethylamino)-4-(isopropylamino)-6-(methylthio)-s-triazine] or nothing. One preplant-incorporated treatment of EPTC or alachlor prevented yield reductions from yellow nutsedge competition. When no control was practiced, yields were reduced 17% in a moderate yellow nutsedge infestation (initially infested with 300 tubers/m2) and 41% in a heavy infestation (initially infested with 1200 tubers/m2). Yields were reduced 7 to 8% in the moderate infestation when no preplant-incorporated treatments were used regardless of whether postemergence or postemergence-directed treatments were also used. After 1 yr, all control measures resulted in less tuber density than no control measures, but all control treatments had essentially similar tuber densities. After the second year, several herbicide treatments were as effective as hand weeding in reducing tuber density. At least 2 yr of effective control treatments were required to reduce tubers to 20% of the original density, and 3 yr of treatment to reduce the density to 15% of the original density. No combination of treatments, including hand weeding, eliminated tubers after 3 yr.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1979 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. Armstrong, T. F. 1975. The problem: Yellow nutsedge. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 30:120121.Google Scholar
2. Bell, R. S., Lachman, W. H., Rahn, E. M., and Sweet, R. D. 1962. Life history studies as related to weed control in the Northeast. I. Northern nutgrass. Rhode Island Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 364. 33 pp.Google Scholar
3. Hauser, E. W., Dowler, C. C., Jellum, M. D., and Cecil, S. R. 1974. Effects of herbicide-crop rotation on nutsedge, annual weeds, and crops. Weed Sci. 22:172176.Google Scholar
4. Smith, E. V. and Mayton, E. L. 1942. Nutgrass eradication studies. III. The control of nutgrass, Cyperus rotundus L., on several soil types by tillage. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 34:151159.Google Scholar
5. Stoller, E. W. and Wax, L. M. 1973. Yellow nutsedge shoot emergence and tuber longevity. Weed Sci. 21:7681.Google Scholar
6. Tumbleson, M. E. and Kommedahl, T. 1961. Reproductive potential of Cyperus esculentus by tubers. Weeds 9:646653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1972. Extent and cost of weed control with herbicides and an evaluation of important weeds, 1968. ARS-H-1. 227 pp.Google Scholar
8. William, R. D. 1976. Purple nutsedge: Tropical scourge. Hortic. Sci. 11:357364.Google Scholar