Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T17:05:15.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Patch expansion of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) with and without polyethylene mulch

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Theodore M. Webster
Theodore M. Webster*
Affiliation:
Crop Protection and Management Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, GA 31793-0748; [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Purple and yellow nutsedge are the most troublesome weeds of vegetable crops in the southeast United States. Elimination of methyl bromide use will require alternative management programs to suppress nutsedge growth and interference in vegetables. Polyethylene mulch is an effective barrier for most weeds; however, nutsedges can proliferate in beds covered with polyethylene mulch. The influence of polyethylene mulch on shoot production and lateral expansion patterns of single tubers of purple nutsedge and yellow nutsedge over time was evaluated in field studies. Purple nutsedge patch size was similar in the black mulch treatment and nonmulched control after 8 and 16 wk after planting (WAP). By the end of the growing season, purple nutsedge patch size in the black mulch treatment was nearly twice that in the nonmulched control. At 32 WAP, there were 1,550 shoots in the 16.1 m2 patch in the black mulch treatment and 790 shoots in the 8.1 m2 patch in the nonmulched control. In contrast, yellow nutsedge growth was suppressed in the black mulch treatment, relative to the nonmulched control. Compared with the black mulch treatment at 16 and 24 WAP, the nonmulched control produced nearly three times as many yellow nutsedge shoots (140 shoots at 16 WAP and 210 shoots at 24 WAP) and patches that were twice the size (0.10 m2 at 16 WAP and 0.18 m2 at 24 WAP). These data indicate that there are significant differences in the growth habits of the two nutsedges species in mulched vegetable systems. The differences in response to black mulch will likely lead to purple nutsedge becoming a greater problem, relative to yellow nutsedge, in vegetable systems. The rapid expansion of a single purple nutsedge shoot to form a patch that is 22.1 m2 and containing 3,440 shoots at 60 WAP illustrates the importance of managing this species.

Keywords

Purple nutsedge, Cyperus rotundus L. CYPROyellow nutsedge, Cyperus esculentus L. CYPESPolyethylene mulchessolarizationweed patches
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 53 , Issue 6 , December 2005 , pp. 839 - 845
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

Buker, R. S., Stall, W. M., Olson, S. M., and Schilling, D. G. 2003. Season-long interference of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) with direct-seeded and transplanted watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). Weed Technol 17:751–754.Google Scholar
Cardina, J., Sparrow, D. H., and McCoy, E. L. 1995. Analysis of spatial distribution of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in no-till soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci 43:258–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardina, J., Webster, T. M., Herms, C. P., and Regnier, E. E. 1999. Development of weed IPM: levels of integration for weed management. Pages 239–267 in Buhler, D. D. ed. Expanding the Context of Weed Management. New York: Haworth.Google Scholar
Chase, C. A., Sinclair, T. R., and Locascio, S. J. 1999. Effects of soil temperature and tuber depth on Cyperus spp. control. Weed Sci 47:467–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csinos, A. S., Sumner, D. R., Johnson, W. C., Johnson, A. W., McPherson, R. M., and Dowler, C. C. 2000. Methyl bromide alternatives in tobacco, tomato and pepper transplant production. Crop Prot 19:39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vries, F. T. 1991. Chufa (Cyperus esculentus, Cyperaceae)—a weedy cultivar or a cultivated weed. Econ. Bot 45:27–37.Google Scholar
Defelice, M. S. 2002. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.)—snack food of the gods. Weed Technol 16:901–907.Google Scholar
Desaeger, J. A. J., Eger, J. E. Jr., Csinos, A. S., Gilreath, J. P., Olson, S. M., and Webster, T. M. 2004. Movement and biological activity of drip-applied 1,3-dichloropropene and chloropicrin in raised mulched beds in the southeastern United States. Pest Manag. Sci 60:1220–1230.Google Scholar
Gilreath, J. P. and Santos, B. M. 2004. Herbicide dose and incorporation depth in combination with 1,3-dichloropropene plus chloropicrin for Cyperus rotundus control in tomato and pepper. Crop Protection 23:205–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Jones, J. P., Santos, B. M., and Overman, A. J. 2004a. Soil fumigant evaluations for soilborne pest and Cyperus rotundus control in fresh market tomato. Crop Prot 23:889–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilreath, J. P., Noling, J. W., and Santos, B. M. 2004b. Methyl bromide alternatives for bell pepper (Capsicum annuum) and cucumber (Cucumis sativus) rotations. Crop Prot 23:347–351.Google Scholar
Godfrey, G. H. 1939. The control of nutgrass with chloropicrin. Soil Sci 47:391–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, E. W. 1962a. Development of purple nutsedge under field conditions. Weeds 10:315–321.Google Scholar
Hauser, E. W. 1962b. Establishment of nutsedge from space-planted tubers. Weeds 10:209–211.Google Scholar
Henson, I. E. and Little, E. C. S. 1969. Penetration of polyethylene film by the shoots of Cyperus rotundus . PANS 15:64–66.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1965. Data on the biology and chemical control of the nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) in Israel. PANS 11:389–416.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1972. Growth, tuber formation and spread of Cyperus rotundus L. from single tubers. Weed Res 12:348–363.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1992. Mechanisms of establishment and spreading of Cyperus rotundus—the worst weed of warm regions. Proc. 1st Int. Weed Cont. Congr 1:94–97.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, C. M., McGiffen, M. E., Sims, J. J., and Becker, J. O. 2004. Fumigant combinations for Cyperus esculentus L. control. Pest Manag. Sci 60:369–374.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. III and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 1999. Cyperus esculentus interference in Cucumis sativus . Weed Sci 47:327–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. C. III and Webster, T. M. 2001. A modified power tiller for metham application on cucurbit crops transplanted to polyethylene-covered seedbeds. Weed Technol 15:387–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julian, J. W., Sullivan, G. H., and Weller, S. C. 1998. Assessment of potential impacts from the elimination of methyl bromide in the fruit and vegetable trade. Hortscience 33:794–797.Google Scholar
Majek, B. A. and Neary, P. E. 1991. Selective wavelength transmitting mulch for yellow nutsedge control. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf 1:263–268.Google Scholar
Miles, J. E., Nishimoto, R. K., and Kawabata, O. 1996. Diurnally alternating temperatures stimulate sprouting of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) tubers. Weed Sci 44:122–125.Google Scholar
Miles, J. E., Kawabata, O., and Nishimoto, R. K. 2002. Modeling purple nutsedge sprouting under soil solarization. Weed Sci 50:64–71.Google Scholar
Morales-Payan, J. P., Santos, B. M., Stall, W. M., and Bewick, T. A. 1997. Effects of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) on tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) and bell pepper (Capsicum annuum) vegetative growth and fruit yield. Weed Technol 11:672–676.Google Scholar
Mulligan, G. A. and Junkins, B. E. 1976. Biology of Canadian weeds: 17 Cyperus esculentus L. Can. J. Plant Sci 56:339–350.Google Scholar
Nishimoto, R. K. 2001. Purple nutsedge tuber sprouting. Weed Biol. Manag 1:203–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1998. Suppression of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) with polyethylene film mulch. Weed Technol 12:275–280.Google Scholar
Ragsdale, N. N. and Wheeler, W. B. 1995. Methyl bromide: risks, benefits, and current status in pest control. Rev. Pestic. Toxicol 3:21–44.Google Scholar
Santos, B. M., Bewick, T. A., Stall, W. M., and Shilling, D. G. 1997. Competitive interactions of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) and nutsedges (Cyperus spp). Weed Sci 45:229–233.Google Scholar
Schippers, P., Ter Borg, S. J., Van Groenendael, J. M., and Habekotte, B. 1993. What makes Cyperus esculentus (yellow nutsedge) an invasive species? a spatial model approach. Proc. Brighton Crop Prot. conf.: 495–504.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. M., Rosskopf, E. N., Leesch, J. G., Chellemi, D. O., Bull, C. T., and Mazzola, M. 2003. United States Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service research on alternatives to methyl bromide: pre-plant and post-harvest. Pest Manag. Sci 59:814–826.Google Scholar
Standifer, L. C., Wilson, P. W., and Porche-Sorbet, R. 1984. Effects of solarization on soil weed populations. Weed Sci 32:569–573.Google Scholar
Tumbleson, M. E. and Kommedahl, T. 1961. Reproductive potential of Cyperus esculentus by tubers. Weeds 9:646–653.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2002. Weed survey—southern states: vegetable, fruit and nut crops subsection. P. A. Dotray (ed). Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc 55:237–258.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2005. Mulch type affects growth and tuber production of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) and purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus). Weed Sci 53:834–838.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. and MacDonald, G. E. 2001. A survey of weeds in various crops in Georgia. Weed Technol 15:771–790.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Cardina, J., and Woods, S. J. 2000. Spatial and temporal expansion patterns of Apocynum cannabinum patches. Weed Sci 48:728–733.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Csinos, A. S., Johnson, A. W., Dowler, C. C., Sumner, D. R., and Fery, R. L. 2001. Methyl bromide alternatives in a bell pepper-squash rotation. Crop Prot 20:605–614.Google Scholar
William, R. D. 1976. Purple nutsedge—tropical scourge. Hortscience 11:357–364.Google Scholar
Wills, G. D. 1998. Comparison of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) from around the world. Weed Technol 12:491–503.Google Scholar