Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T09:29:44.503Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Compatibility and Efficiency of In-Row Cultivation for Weed Management in Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Mark J. Vangessel ,
Edward E. Schweizer ,
Donald W. Lybecker  and
Phil Westra
Mark J. Vangessel
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. and Weed Sci., Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, CO 80523
Edward E. Schweizer
Affiliation:
Water Manage. Res., Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, CO 80523
Donald W. Lybecker
Affiliation:
Dep. Agric. and Res. Econ., Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, CO 80523
Phil Westra
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Pathol. and Weed Sci., Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, CO 80523
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Information on the effects of multiple weed management tactics in corn is needed to develop integrated weed management systems. The effectiveness and compatibility of an in-row cultivator as compared to a standard interrow cultivator used with reduced rates of a soil-applied herbicide, rotary hoeing, and/or a bioeconomic model for POST herbicide selection was examined. Weed control with a single rotary hoeing at corn emergence controlled annual weeds similarly to two rotary hoeings. One-third recommended use rate of alachlor controlled weeds similarly to a two-thirds rate. Reduced rates of alachlor controlled more weeds than rotary hoeing over 2 yr. The in-row cultivator required early-season weed control (rotary hoeing or reduced alachlor rate) for optimum efficacy. The in-row cultivator provided better weed control than the standard cultivator while the cost of operating the two cultivators was similar. Thus, the in-row cultivator was more efficient than the standard cultivator. Furthermore, less intensive early-season weed control was required with the in-row cultivator for maximum weed control as compared to the standard cultivator. Rotary hoeing plus the in-row cultivator provided similar weed control to other weed management tactics that required both soil-applied and POST herbicides. Gross margin was influenced more by corn yield than cost of weed management tactics.

Keywords

Alachlor, 2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamidecorn, Zea mays L.Bioeconomic weed management modelintegrated weed managementreduced herbicide ratesrow-crop cultivatorrotary hoeWEEDCAMAmaranthus retroflexusEchinochloa crus-galliEuphorbia dentataSolanum sarrachoidesAMAREECHCGEPHDESOLSA
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , December 1995 , pp. 754 - 760
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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. Buchholtz, K. P. and Doersch, R. E. 1968. Cultivation and herbicides for weed control in corn. Weed Sci. 16:232–234.Google Scholar
2. Buhler, D. D., Doll, J. D., Proost, R. T., and Visocky, M. A. 1994. Interrow cultivation to reduce herbicide use in corn following alfalfa without tillage. Agron. J. 86:66–72.Google Scholar
3. Buhler, D. D., Gunsolus, J. L., and Ralston, D. F. 1992. Integrated weed management techniques to reduce herbicide inputs in soybeans. Agron. J. 84:973–978.Google Scholar
4. Dalsted, N. L., Gutierrez, P. H., Schaubert, D. L., Sharp, R. L., and Holman, K. L. 1990. Selected 1988–1989 Crop Enterprise Budgets for Colorado. DARE Information Report Number IR:90–151. Dep. Agric. and Nat. Res. Econ., Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO. 181 p.Google Scholar
5. DeFelice, M. S., Brown, W. B., Aldrich, R. J., Sims, B. D., Judy, D. T., and Guethle, D. R. 1989. Weed control in soybeans (Glycine max) with reduced rates of postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 37:365–374.Google Scholar
6. Gunsolus, J. L. 1990. Mechanical and cultural weed control in corn and soybeans. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 5:114–119.Google Scholar
7. King, R. P., Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and Zimdahl, R. L. 1986. Bioeconomic modeling to simulate weed control strategies for continuous corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 34:972–979.Google Scholar
8. Lovely, W. G., Weber, C. R., and Staniforth, D. W. 1958. Effectiveness of rotary hoeing for weed control in soybeans. Agron. J. 50:621–625.Google Scholar
9. Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and King, R. P. 1991. Weed management decisions in corn based on bioeconomic modeling. Weed Sci. 39:124–129.Google Scholar
10. Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and Westra, P. 1991. Computer aided decisions for weed management in corn. Proc. West. Agric. Econ. Assoc., Portland, OR. p. 234–239.Google Scholar
11. Mt. Pleasant, J., Burt, R. F., and Frisch, J. C. 1994. Integrating mechanical and chemical weed management in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 8:217–223.Google Scholar
12. Mulder, T. A. and Doll, J. D. 1993. Integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 7:382–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Peters, E. J., Klingman, D. L., and Larson, R. E. 1959. Rotary hoeing in combination with herbicides and other cultivations for weed control in soybeans. Weeds 7:449–458.Google Scholar
14. Peters, E. J., Davis, F. S., Klingman, D. L., and Larson, R. E. 1961. Interrelations of cultivations, herbicides, and methods of application for weed control in soybeans. Weeds 9:639–645.Google Scholar
15. Schweizer, E. E., Westra, P., and Lybecker, D. W. 1994. Controlling weeds in corn (Zea mays) rows with an in-row cultivator versus decisions made by a computer model. Weed Sci. 42: 593–600.Google Scholar
16. Shaw, D. R., Newson, L. J., and Smith, C. A. 1991. Influence of cultivation timing on chemical control of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 39:67–72.Google Scholar
17. Swinton, S. M. and King, R. P. 1994. A bioeconomic model for weed management in corn and soybean. Agric. Systems 44:313–335.Google Scholar
18. Wilkerson, G. G., Modena, S. A., and Coble, H. D. 1991. HERB: Decision models of postemergence weed control in soybean. Agron. J. 83:413–417.Google Scholar