Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:34:11.403Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ecology and Interference of Proso Millet (Panicum miliaceum) in Semi-Arid Corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Randy L. Anderson
Randy L. Anderson*
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS Central Great Plains Research Station, Akron, CO 80720. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Producers in the semi-arid Great Plains are starting to grow corn in sequence with winter wheat and proso millet. However, volunteer proso millet (hereafter referred to as proso) is difficult to control in corn with conventional practices. This study characterized growth and interference of proso in corn to aid producers in developing control strategies. Proso seedlings began emerging May 18 with 78% of seasonal emergence occurring by June 22; initial proso emergence occurred within 2 wk of corn emergence in all years. Seed production was related to time of emergence; proso seedlings emerging in mid-May produced approximately 2,800 seeds per plant, whereas seedlings emerging 4 wk later produced 88% fewer seeds. Controlling proso in late June prevented loss of corn grain yield caused by competition. When corn was planted in early May, the height difference between corn and proso was sufficient to allow postemergence-directed applications of graminicides for proso control. Corn yield was highest when planted in early May.

Keywords

Proso millet, Panicum milaceum L. # PAMILcorn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer hybrid 3732’wheat, Triticum aestivum LCritical period of interferenceemergence periodtransgenic cornPAMILGDD, growing degree days
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 45 - 50
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

Aldrich, S. R., Scott, W. O., and Leng, E. R. 1978. In Modern Corn Production. Champaign IL: A & L Publications. pp. 35–37.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. L. and Greb, B. W. 1987. Residual herbicides for weed control in proso millet. Crop Protect. 6: 61–63.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. L., Bowman, R. A., Nielsen, D. C., Vigil, M. F., Aiken, R. A., and Benjamin, J. B. 1999. Alternative crop rotations for the central Great Plains. J. Prod. Agric. 12: 95–99.Google Scholar
Bauer, A., Smika, D., and Black, A. 1983. Correlation of Five Wheat Growth Stage Scales in the Great Plains. USDA-ARS Advanced Agricultural Technology Bull. AT-NC-7. Peoria, IL: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 17 p.Google Scholar
Carey, B. J. and Kells, J. J. 1995. Timing of postemergence herbicide applications to maximize weed control and corn (Zea mays) yield. Weed Technol. 9: 356–361.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. 1986. Stimulation of weed seed germination in soil. Rev. Weed Sci. 2: 67–89.Google Scholar
Fawcett, J. A. and Harvey, R. G. 1988. Proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) control in corn (Zea mays) with postemergence-directed herbicides. Weed Sci. 36: 215–220.Google Scholar
Firbank, L. G. and Watkinson, A. R. 1986. Modelling the population dynamics of an arable weed and its effect upon crop yield. J. Applied Ecol. 23: 147–159.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Andujar, J. L. and Fernandez-Quintanilla, C. 1991. Modelling the population dynamics of Avena sterilis under dry-land cereal cropping systems. J. Applied Ecol. 28: 16–27.Google Scholar
Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 40: 441–447.Google Scholar
Holt, J. S. and LeBaron, H. M. 1990. Significance and distribution of herbicide resistance. Weed Technol. 4: 141–149.Google Scholar
Kishore, G. M., Padgette, S. R., and Fraley, R. T. 1992. History of herbicide-tolerant crops, methods of development and current state of the art—emphasis on glyphosate tolerance. Weed Technol. 6: 626–634.Google Scholar
Kleppe, C. D. and Harvey, R. G. 1991. Postemergence-directed herbicides control proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) in sweet corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 5: 746–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, D. J., Miller, S. D., and Wicks, G. A. 1996. The future of herbicides in weed control systems of the Great Plains. J. Prod. Agric. 9: 209–215.Google Scholar
Neal, J. C., Bhowmik, P. C., and Senesac, A. F. 1990. Factors influencing fenoxaprop efficacy in cool-season turfgrass. Weed Technol. 4: 272–278.Google Scholar
Peterson, G. A., Westfall, D. G., and Cole, C. V. 1993. Agroecosystem approach to soil and crop management research. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57: 1354–1360.Google Scholar
Peterson, G. A., Schegel, A. J., Tanaka, D. L., and Jones, O. R. 1996. Precipitation use efficiency as affected by cropping and tillage systems. J. Prod. Agric. 9: 180–186.Google Scholar
Retzinger, E. J. and Mallory-Smith, C. 1997. Classification of herbicides by site of action for weed resistance management strategies. Weed Technol. 11: 384–393.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. A. and Feast, P. M. 1973. Emergence and longevity of annual weeds in cultivated and undisturbed soil. J. Appl. Ecol. 10: 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreiber, M. M., Warren, G. F., and Orwick, P. L. 1979. Effects of wetting agents, stage of growth, and species on the selectivity of diclofop. Weed Sci. 27: 679–683.Google Scholar
Swinton, S. M. and King, R. P. 1994. A bioeconomic model for weed management in corn and soybean. Agric. Syst. 44: 313–335.Google Scholar
Tapia, L. S., Bauman, T. T., Harvey, R. G., et al. 1997. Postemergence herbicide application timing effects on annual grass control and corn (Zea mays) grain yield. Weed Sci. 45: 138–143.Google Scholar
Westra, P., Wilson, R. G., and Zimdahl, R. L. 1990. Wild-proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) control in central Great Plains irrigated corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 4: 409–414.Google Scholar
Wiles, L. J., King, R. P., Schweizer, E. E., Lybecker, D. W., and Swinton, S. M. 1996. GWM: General Weed Management model. Agric. Syst. 50: 355–376.Google Scholar