Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:57:20.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Herbicide-Crop Rotation on Nutsedge, Annual Weeds, and Crops

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

E. W. Hauser ,
C. C. Dowler ,
M. D. Jellum  and
S. R. Cecil
E. W. Hauser
Affiliation:
Agr. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. of Agr., Tifton, GA 31794
C. C. Dowler
Affiliation:
Agr. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. of Agr., Tifton, GA 31794
M. D. Jellum
Affiliation:
Georgia Sta., Experiment, GA 30212
S. R. Cecil
Affiliation:
Georgia Sta., Experiment, GA 30212
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a 3 year herbicide-crop rotation involving corn (Zea mays L. ‘Coker 811A’), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Carolina Queen’), and peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L. ‘Argentine’), uncontrolled yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) and annual weeds drastically reduced all crop yields. By the end of the rotation sequences, intensive cultivation throughout the rotation killed 97 to 99% of the nutsedge tubers, but this level of control depended on hand-weeding the cotton. Moderate application of herbicides killed from 78 to over 99% of the yellow nutsedge tubers, while intensive treatment with herbicides produced at least 99% kill. In addition, all annual weeds present when the experiment was initiated were controlled satisfactorily by intensive herbicide applications except Florida beggarweed [Desmodium tortuosum (Sw.) DC.] in peanuts. The major change in composition of the weed population was a reduction in yellow nutsedge and in the total number of weeds; however, certain other population shifts also seemed affected by the weed control treatments. Compared to intensive cultivation, the investment in intensive herbicide treatment produced maximum yields and highest gross profit per acre. None of the treatments affected the market grade or organoleptic characteristics of peanuts. The fatty acid content of corn and cotton changed significantly only in 1967.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , March 1974 , pp. 172 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 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. Dowler, C. 1969. A cucumber bioassay test for the soil residues of certain herbicides. Weed Sci. 3:309–310.Google Scholar
2. Ennis, W.B. Jr., Shaw, W.C., Danielson, L.L., Klingman, D.L., and Timmons, F.L. 1963. Impact of chemical weed control on farm management practices. Advan. Agron. 15:161–210.Google Scholar
3. Hodgson, J.M. 1958. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense Scop.) control with cultivation, cropping, and chemical sprays. Weeds 6:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Hauser, E.W., Jellum, M.D., Dowler, C.C., and Marchant, W.H. 1972. Systems of weed control for soybeans in the Coastal Plain. Weed Sci. 20:592–598.Google Scholar
5. Hauser, E.W., Cecil, S.R., and Dowler, C.C. 1973. Systems of weed control for peanuts. Weed Sci. 21:176–180.Google Scholar
6. Robinson, E.L., Dale, J.E., and Shaw, W.C. 1967. Herbicide-crop rotation for witchweed control. Weeds 15:243–245.Google Scholar