Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T03:23:07.702Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

2,4-D deposition is reduced and more variable immediately adjacent to cereal rye cover crop rows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2019

Erin R. Haramoto Open the ORCID record for Erin R. Haramoto [Opens in a new window] ,
Austin D. Sherman  and
Jonathan D. Green
Erin R. Haramoto*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
Austin D. Sherman
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
Jonathan D. Green
Affiliation:
Extension Professor, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Erin Haramoto, Assistant Professor, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky, 1405 Veterans Drive #411, Lexington, KY 40546. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Horseweed, also known as marestail, is a problematic weed for no-till soybean producers that can emerge from late summer through the following spring. Overwintering cover crops can reduce both the density and size of fall-emerged weeds such as horseweed and reduce further spring emergence, although typically cover crops do not provide complete control. Cover crops may be integrated with additional spring herbicide applications to control emerged horseweed, and selective herbicides such as 2,4-D may be used to target horseweed while maintaining small grain cover crop growth. However, cover crops may affect herbicide deposition, which could reduce their efficacy to control weeds. The objective of this study was to determine how the amount and variability of 2,4-D ester spray solution deposition, measured with water-sensitive paper, was affected by a cereal rye cover crop and fall-applied saflufenacil. We also examined deposition at the soil surface relative to the cereal rye row position. In a year with greater cereal rye biomass accumulation, there was 44% less coverage and average deposit size was 45% smaller immediately adjacent to cereal rye rows compared with between rows and areas without cereal rye. Greater variability in these measurements was also noted in this position. Percent spray solution coverage was also 22% greater in plots that received saflufenacil in the fall, and deposits were 28% larger. In a year with less cover crop and winter weed biomass, no differences in spray deposition were observed. This suggests that small horseweed plants and other weeds immediately adjacent to cereal rye cover crop rows may be more likely to survive early spring herbicide applications, though the suppressive effects of cover crops may mitigate this concern.

Keywords

Amit Jhala, University of Nebraska, Lincoln2,4-DsaflufenacilhorseweedErigeron canadensis L. ERICAsoybeanGlycine max L. Merr.cereal ryeSecale cereale Lintegrated weed managementweed emergenceweed biologyapplication technology
Type
Note
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , February 2020 , pp. 147 - 152
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 

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

Brainard, DC, Bakker, J, Noyes, DC, Myers, N (2012) Rye living mulch effects on soil moisture and weeds in asparagus. Hortic Sci 47:58–63 Google Scholar
Bybee-Finley, KA, Mirsky, SB, Ryan, MR (2017) Crop biomass not species richness drives weed suppression in warm-season annual grass-legume intercrops in the Northeast. Weed Sci 65:669–680 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornelius, C, Bradley, K (2017) Influence of various cover crop species on winter and summer annual weed emergence in soybean. Weed Technol 31:503–513 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creech, CF, Henry, RS, Hewitt, AJ, Kruger, GR. (2018) Herbicide spray penetration into corn and soybean canopies using air-induction nozzles and a drift control adjuvant. Weed Technol 32:72–79 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, VM, Kruger, GR, Young, BG, Johnson, WG (2010) Fall and spring preplant herbicide applications influence spring emergence of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Technol 24:11–19 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finney, DM, White, CM, Kaye, JP (2016) Biomass production and carbon/nitrogen ratio influence ecosystem services from cover crop mixtures. Agron J 108:39–52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, JD, Haramoto, ER, Legleiter, TL (2018). Weed management. Pages 39–46 in Knott, C, Lee, C, eds. A Comprehensive Guide to Soybean Management in Kentucky. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension. http://www2.ca.uky.edu/agcomm/pubs/ID/ID249/ID249.pdf. Accessed: September 17, 2019Google Scholar
Haramoto, ER (2019) Species, seeding rate, and planting method influence cover crop services prior to soybean. Agron J 111:1–11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayden, ZD, Brainard, DC, Henshaw, B, Ngouajio, M (2012) Winter annual weed suppression in rye–vetch cover crop mixtures. Weed Technol 26:818–825 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, PK, Spliid, NH (2002) Deposition of spray liquid on the soil below cereal crops after applications during the growing season. Weed Res 43:362–370 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, DS, Marshall, EJP, Brain, P, Caseley, JC (2011) Effects of crop canopy structure on herbicide deposition and performance. Weed Res 51:310–320 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loux, M, Johnson, WG (2010) Control of Horseweed in No-till Soybeans. Purdue University Extension and Ohio State University Extension. 4 p Google Scholar
Mirsky, SB, Curran, WS, Mortensen, DM, Ryan, MR, Shumway, DL (2011) Timing of cover crop management effects on weed suppression in no-till planted soybean using a roller-crimper. Weed Sci 59:380–389 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nandula, VK, Eubank, TW, Poston, DH, Koger, CH, Reddy, KN (2006) Factors affecting germination of horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Sci 54:898–902 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, MR, Mirsky, SB, Mortensen, DA, Teasdale, JR, Curran, WS (2011) Potential synergistic effects of cereal rye biomass and soybean planting density on weed suppression. Weed Sci 59:238–246 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, CA, Rasband, WS, Eliceiri, KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9:671–675 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sharpe, SM, Boyd, NS, Dittmar, PJ, MacDonald, GE, Darnell, RL, Ferrell, JA (2018) Spray penetration into a strawberry canopy as affected by canopy structure, nozzle type, and application volume. Weed Technol 32:80–84 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, AD (2018) Hindering horseweed: An integrated approach for soybeans in Kentucky. Pages 73–74 in Proceedings of the 73rd Annual North Central Weed Science Society Annual Meeting. Milwaukee: North Central Weed Science Society.Google Scholar
Stanton, VL, Haramoto, ER (2019) Effect of cover crop biomass on the summer annual weed density and biomass in soybean. Proceedings of the Weed Science Society of America Annual Meeting. New Orleans, February 11–14, 2019Google Scholar
Van Wychen, L (2016) 2016 Survey of the Most Common and Troublesome Weeds in Broadleaf Crops, Fruits & Vegetables in the United States and Canada. Weed Science Society of America National Weed Survey Dataset. http://wssa.net/wp-content/uploads/2016-Weed-Survey_Broadleaf-crops.xlsx. Accessed: September 17, 2019Google Scholar
Webster, TM, Simmons, DB, Culpepper, AS, Grey, TL, Bridges, DC, Scully, BT (2016) Factors affecting potential for Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) suppression by winter rye in Georgia, USA. Field Crops Res 192:103–109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werle, R, Burr, C, Blanco-Canqui, H (2017) Cereal rye cover crop suppresses winter annual weeds. Can J Plant Sci 98:498–500 Google Scholar