Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T10:22:06.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Wild Mustard (Brassica kaber) and Wild Oat (Avena fatua) Interference in Sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Abdelouhab Mesbah
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil Insect Sci., Univ. Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071
Stephen D. Miller
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil Insect Sci., Univ. Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071
K. James Fornstrom
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil Insect Sci., Univ. Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071
David E. Legg
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil Insect Sci., Univ. Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071

Abstract

Two furrow irrigated field experiments were conducted for two years at the Research and Extension Center, Powell, WY to determine the influence of various mixed densities and durations of wild oat and wild mustard interference in sugarbeet. Sugarbeet root yields were reduced by competition from all examined densities of wild oat and wild mustard, alone and in combination. Root yield reduction was less than additive with mixed densities of wild oat and wild mustard. Root yields decreased as the duration of interference after sugarbeet emergence from a mixed density of wild oat and wild mustard increased. Sucrose content of sugarbeet was not altered by competition. Based on regression analysis, the minimum time that a mixed density of 0.8 wild mustard and 1 wild oat/m of row can interfere with sugarbeet before causing an economic root yield loss was approximately 1.6 weeks after sugarbeet emergence.

Type
Research
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. Bell, A. R. and Nalewaja, J. D. 1968. Competition of wild oat in wheat and barley. Weed Sci. 16:505508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Dexter, A. G. and Evans, R. R. 1985. Environmental factors affecting weed number threshold. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. p. 59.Google Scholar
3. Donald, C. M. 1961. Competition for light in crops and pastures. p. 282313 in Mechanisms in Biological Competition. Soc. Exp. Biol. Symposia 15. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
4. Durgan, B. S. and Miller, S. D. 1982. Wild oat competition in sunflower. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 37:1718.Google Scholar
5. Evans, R. R. and Dexter, A. G. 1981. Competition of wild oat surviving barban and diclofop in sugarbeets. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 36:109.Google Scholar
6. Johnson, R. T., Alexander, J. T., Rush, G. E., and Hawkes, R. H. 1969. Advances in Sugarbeet Production: Principles and Practices. The Iowa State Univ Press, Ames, Iowa. p. 7680.Google Scholar
7. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberi with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:2629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Rathman, D. P. and Miller, S. D. 1981. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 29:410411.Google Scholar
9. Schweizer, E. E. 1973. Predicting sugarbeet root losses based on kochia densities. Weed Sci. 21:565567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Schweizer, E. E. 1981. Broadleaf weed interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 29:128133.Google Scholar
11. Stewart, J. F. 1977. Competition between sugarbeets and wild oat. M.S. thesis, North Dakota State Univ., Fargo. p. 1526.Google Scholar
12. Weisberg, S. 1980. Applied Linear Regression, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York. p. 162172.Google Scholar
13. Zimdahl, R. L. and Fertig, S. N. 1967. Influence of weed competition on sugarbeets. Weeds 15:336339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar