Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T15:32:37.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hemp sesbania interference in drill-seeded glyphosate-resistant soybean

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jason K. Norsworthy  and
Lawrence R. Oliver
Lawrence R. Oliver
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted at Fayetteville, AR, in 1997, 1998, and 1999 to evaluate the degree of interspecific interference between drill-seeded, glyphosate-resistant soybean and hemp sesbania as influenced by soybean population, hemp sesbania density, and a single glyphosate application. Soybean was planted at 247,000, 430,000, and 618,000 seed ha−1 with early-season emergence of 217,000, 371,000, and 521,000 plants ha−1. Hemp sesbania densities were 0, 4, 10, and 16 plants m−2 in combination with 0 and 1.12 kg ai ha−1 glyphosate applied at the V4 to V6 soybean growth stage. Untreated hemp sesbania produced a maximum of 49 million seed ha−1 with 217,000 soybean ha−1, whereas seed production of glyphosate-treated hemp sesbania ranged from 2.8 to 0.6 million seed ha−1 with 217,000 and 521,000 soybean ha−1, respectively. Soybean seed yield was reduced 43% by 16 untreated hemp sesbania m−2, while glyphosate-treated hemp sesbania did not reduce seed yield. Averaged over all untreated hemp sesbania densities, soybean yield loss was reduced from 44 to 22% by increasing the soybean population from 217,000 to 521,000 plants ha−1. Because of the absence of soybean yield loss at 521,000 soybean ha−1, this density appears beneficial when using a single application of glyphosate to provide season-long weed control. However, a single glyphosate application in combination with a high soybean density did not completely prevent hemp sesbania seed production, and the seeding rate required to achieve a stand of 521,000 plants ha−1 would not be affordable; thus, alternate management methods targeting hemp sesbania must be employed to prevent an increase in the number of seed in the soil seedbank and to prevent a potential shift in the weed spectrum.

Keywords

Glyphosatehemp sesbania, Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rydb. ex A.W. Hill SEBEXsoybean, Glycine max L.Base temperaturecompetitiongrowing degree dayslight interception
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , February 2002 , pp. 34 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Akey, W. C., Jurik, T. W., and Dekker, J. 1990. Competition for light between velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Res. 30:403–411.Google Scholar
Aldrich, R. J. 1984. Weed-Crop Ecology—Principles in Weed Management. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. p. 164.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. and Moomaw, R. S. 1977. Control weeds in narrow-row soybeans. Agron. J. 69:793–796.Google Scholar
Dowler, C. 1997. Weed survey—southern states: broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 48:290–325.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. and Chandler, J. M. 1983. Longevity of weed seed after 5.5 years in the Stoneville 50-year buried-seed study. Weed Sci. 31:264–270.Google Scholar
Flint, E. P., Patterson, D. T., Mortensen, D. A., Riechers, G. H., and Beyers, J. L. 1984. Temperature effects on growth and leaf production in three weed species. Weed Sci. 32:655–663.Google Scholar
Geier, P. W., Maddux, L. D., Moshier, L. J., and Stahlman, P. W. 1996. Common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 10:317–321.Google Scholar
Johnston, T. J., Pendleton, J. W., Peters, D. B., and Hicks, D. R. 1969. Influence of supplemental light on apparent photosynthesis, yield and yield components of soybeans (Glycine max L.). Crop Sci. 9:577–581.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., York, A. C., Griffin, J. L., Clay, P. A., Vidrine, P. R., and Reynolds, D. B. 1997. Influence of application variables on efficacy of glyphosate. Weed Technol. 11:354–362.Google Scholar
Keisling, T. C., Oliver, L. R., Crowley, R. H., and Baldwin, F. L. 1984. Potential use of response surface analyses for weed management in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 32:552–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, C. A. and Purcell, L. C. 1997. Interference between hemp sesbania (Hemp sesbania) and soybean (Glycine max) in response to irrigation and nitrogen. Weed Sci. 45:91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knake, E. L. 1972. Effect of shade on giant foxtail. Weed Sci. 20:588–592.Google Scholar
Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberi with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:26–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanie, A. J., Griffin, J. L., Vidrine, P. R., and Reynolds, D. B. 1994. Herbicide combinations for soybean (Glycine max) planted in stale seedbed. Weed Technol. 8:17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorenzi, H. J. and Jeffery, L. S. 1987. Weeds of the United States and their Control. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. p. 180.Google Scholar
Lovelace, M. L. and Oliver, L. R. 2000. Effects of interference and tillage on hemp sesbania and pitted morningglory emergence and seed production. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:202.Google Scholar
McWhorter, C. G. and Anderson, J. M. 1979. Hemp sesbania (Sesbania exaltata) competition in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 27:58–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K. and Oliver, L. R. 2002. Pitted morningglory interference in drill-seeded glyphosate-resistant soybean. Weed Sci. 50:26–33.Google Scholar
Oliver, L. R. 1979. Influence of soybean (Glycine max) planting date on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) competition. Weed Sci. 27:183–188.Google Scholar
Oliver, L. R., Frans, R. E., and Talbert, R. E. 1976. Field competition between tall morningglory and soybean. I. Growth analysis. Weed Sci. 24:482–488.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1979. The effects of shading on the growth and photosynthetic capacity of itchgrass (Rottboellia exaltata). Weed Sci. 27:549–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1982. Shading responses of purple nutsedges (Cyperus rotundus and C. esculentus). Weed Sci. 30:25–30.Google Scholar
Radosevich, S., Holt, J., and Ghersa, C. 1997. Weed Ecology: Implications for Management. New York: J. Wiley. pp. 144–145.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1989. SAS User's Guide. Version 6, 4th ed, Volume II. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1997. SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements Through 6.12. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Shibles, R. M. and Weber, C. R. 1965. Leaf area, solar radiation interception and dry matter production by soybeans. Crop Sci. 5:575–577.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W., Harrison, S. K., Wax, L. M., Regnier, E. E., and Nafziger, E. D. 1987. Weed interference with soybeans (Glycine max). Rev. Weed Sci. 3:155–181.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Woolley, J. T. 1985. Competition for light by broadleaf weeds in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 33:199–202.Google Scholar
Wood, M. L., Murray, D. S., Westerman, R. B., Verhalen, L. M., and Claypool, P. L. 1999. Full-season interference of Ipomoea hederacea with Gossypium hirsutum . Weed Sci. 47:693–696.Google Scholar
Zhang, L. X., Wang, R. F., and Hesketh, J. D. 1995. Separating photoperiod and temperature effects on growing degree day requirement for floral events in soybean. Biotronics 24:59–64.Google Scholar