Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:18:23.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) to Glyphosate Application Timing and Rate in Glyphosate-Resistant Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Peter H. Sikkema ,
Christy Shropshire ,
Allan S. Hamill ,
Susan E. Weaver  and
Paul B. Cavers
Peter H. Sikkema
Affiliation:
Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON N0P 2C0, Canada
Christy Shropshire*
Affiliation:
Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON N0P 2C0, Canada
Allan S. Hamill
Affiliation:
Greenhouse and Processing Crops Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow, ON N0R 1G0, Canada
Susan E. Weaver
Affiliation:
Greenhouse and Processing Crops Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow, ON N0R 1G0, Canada
Paul B. Cavers
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted over 3 yr at two locations to evaluate the effects of glyphosate rate and application timing on barnyardgrass control, seed production, seed viability, and seedbank density the year after herbicide application in glyphosate-resistant corn. Glyphosate was applied at 0, 112, 225, 450, 675, or 900 g ai/ha when barnyardgrass was at the two-, four-, or six-leaf stage of growth. Visual estimates of percent control increased whereas density, dry weight, seed production, and seedbank density the year after treatment decreased as the rate of glyphosate was increased from 0 to 450 g/ha. Increasing the rate of glyphosate from 450 to 900 g/ha (registered rate) had no further effect on any measured parameter. Seed viability was not affected by glyphosate rate nor application timing. Corn yield declined only at a glyphosate rate of 225 g/ha and below. Barnyardgrass control improved as application was delayed to the six-leaf stage because this weed had an extended period of emergence. There was no interaction between glyphosate rate and application timing on any parameter, and yield was not affected by glyphosate-application timing. The use of extremely low glyphosate rates (112 or 225 g/ha) resulted in reduced corn yields, increased barnyardgrass seed production, and seedbank density the year after application.

Keywords

Glyphosatebarnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. # ECHCGcorn, Zea mays L. ‘PrideG4286’, ‘DeKalb 493RR’Reduced ratesweed controlweed seed productionweed seedbank densityDAA, days after application
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , December 2005 , pp. 830 - 837
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

Alex, J. F. 1964. Weeds of tomato and corn fields in two regions of Ontario. Weed Res. 4:308–318.Google Scholar
Bosnic, A. C. and Swanton, C. J. 1997a. Influence of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) time of emergence and density on corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 45:276–282.Google Scholar
Bosnic, A. C. and Swanton, C. J. 1997b. Economic decision rules for postemergence herbicide control of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 45:557–563.Google Scholar
Cardina, J., Norquay, H. M., Stinner, B. R., and McCartney, D. A. 1996. Postdispersal predation of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) seeds. Weed Sci. 44:534–539.Google Scholar
Chism, W. J., Birch, J. B., and Bingham, S. W. 1992. Nonlinear regressions for analyzing growth stage and quinclorac interactions. Weed Technol. 6:898–903.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, J. H. and Bruns, V. F. 1962. Emergence of barnyardgrass, green foxtail, and yellow foxtail seedlings from various soil depths. Weeds 10:136–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, K. L. 1990. A comparison of methods for estimating seed numbers in the soil. J. Ecol. 78:1079–1093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamill, A. S. and Thomas, A. G. 1985. Survey for weeds and their competitive effects in corn and soybean fields of Essex and Kent Counties in Ontario. Weed survey series Publication 85-2 Regina, SK, Canada: Agriculture Canada, 6 p.Google Scholar
Hamill, A. S., Weaver, S., Ferguson, G., Sikkema, P., Tardif, F., and Swanton, C. 2002. Economic benefit and potential risks of Publication 75 (most efficacious approach) and Ontario HADSS (most economic approach) for weed management strategies in corn and soybeans. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Report. 33 p.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii. 609 p.Google Scholar
Honek, A. and Martinkova, Z. 1991. Competition of maize and barnyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galli) and its effect on aphids and their predators. Aceta OEcol. 12:741–751.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Young, B. G., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 2001. Influence of weed competition and herbicides on glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 15:530–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 1996. Control of annual weeds with glyphosate. Weed Technol. 10:957–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marino, P. C., Gross, K. L., and Landis, D. A. 1997. Weed seed loss due to predation in Michigan maize fields. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 66:189–196.Google Scholar
Maun, M. A. and Barrett, S. C H. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds, 77: Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. Can. J. Plant Sci. 66:739–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menalled, F. D., Marino, P. C., Renner, K. A., and Landis, D. A. 2000. Post-dispersal weed seed predation in Michigan cop fields as a function of agricultural landscape structure. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 77:193–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitich, L. W. 1990. Intriguing world of weeds—barnyardgrass. Weed Technol. 4:918–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, R. F. 1992. Case history for weed competition/population ecology: barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) in sugar beets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Technol. 6:220–227.Google Scholar
Norris, J. L., Shaw, D. R., and Snipes, C. E. 2001. Weed control from herbicide combinations with three formulations of glyphosate. Weed Technol. 15:552–558.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. Jr. and Dawson, J. H. 1984. Time of emergence of eight weed species. Weed Sci. 32:327–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sikkema, P. H., Shropshire, C., Hamill, A. S., Weaver, S. E., and Cavers, P. B. 2004. Response of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) to glyphosate application timing and rate in glyphosate-resistant corn. Weed Technol. 18:908–916.Google Scholar
Spitters, C. J T., Kropff, M. J., and de Groot, W. 1989. Competition between maize and Echinochloa crus-galli analyzed by a hyperbolic regression model. Ann. Appl. Biol. 115:541–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tharp, B. E., Schabenberger, O., and Kells, J. J. 1999. Response of annual weed species to glufosinate and glyphosate. Weed Technol. 13:542–547.Google Scholar
Vangessel, M. J., Ayeni, A. O., and Majek, B. A. 2001a. Glyphosate in double-crop no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean: role of preplant applications and residual herbicides. Weed Technol. 15:703–713.Google Scholar
Vangessel, M. J., Ayeni, A. O., and Majek, B. A. 2001b. Glyphosate in full season no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean: role of preplant applications and residual herbicides. Weed Technol. 15:714–724.Google Scholar
Weaver, S. E. 2001. Impact of lamb's-quarters, common ragweed, and green foxtail on yield of corn and soybean in Ontario. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:821–828.Google Scholar