Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T11:27:31.486Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corn–Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) Interference Is Affected by Sublethal Doses of Postemergence Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Brescia R. M. Terra ,
Alexander R. Martin  and
John L. Lindquist
Brescia R. M. Terra
Affiliation:
Du Pont do Brasil S.A., Divisao Pioneer Sementes, Santa Cruz do Sul, RS 96810-971, Brazil
Alexander R. Martin
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
John L. Lindquist*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jlindquist1@unl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Injury to weeds from sublethal doses of POST herbicides may reduce the effect of weed interference on crop yield. Information on how herbicide dose influences weed mortality, growth, and seed production is needed to assess the potential benefit of applying reduced herbicide doses. Field experiments were conducted at Mead, NE, in 2001 and 2002 to quantify velvetleaf mortality, growth, and corn–velvetleaf interference in response to varying doses of three POST herbicides. Untreated velvetleaf at six densities (0, 1, 3, 6, 12, and 20 plants m−1 corn row) was grown in mixture with corn to establish a baseline corn–velvetleaf interference relationship. Treated velvetleaf at a density of 20 plants m−1 row received one of five doses of dicamba, halosulfuron, or flumiclorac. Untreated velvetleaf height, biomass, and seed capsule production were greater in 2002 than 2001 and declined with increasing velvetleaf density in both years. Corn yield was not affected by untreated velvetleaf in 2001, but yield loss increased with increasing velvetleaf density in 2002. Mortality of herbicide-treated velvetleaf was 56% greater in 2001 than 2002 and increased with increasing herbicide dose. Maximum height of treated velvetleaf was similar for all treatments in 2001 but declined with increasing herbicide dose in 2002. Biomass and seed production of treated velvetleaf varied among herbicides in 2002 and decreased with increasing dose. Corn yield was not influenced by velvetleaf in 2001, but yield loss in response to herbicide-treated velvetleaf declined with increasing herbicide dose in 2002. Results show that the assumption that weeds surviving herbicide application are as competitive as untreated weeds is incorrect. Reduction in growth and resource consumption by herbicide-damaged weeds reduced the negative effects of weeds on corn.

Keywords

DicambahalosulfuronflumicloracvelvetleafAbutilon theophrasti Medic. ABUTHcornZea mays L.Efficacyreduced ratedose responsecompetitionweed escape
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 55 , Issue 5 , October 2007 , pp. 491 - 496
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

Bridges, D. C. 1992. Crop losses due to weeds in the United States—1992. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 403.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Philbrook, B. D., and Oplinger, E. S. 1990. Velvetleaf and giant foxtail control for solid-seeded soybean production in three tillage intensities. J. Prod. Agric. 3:302–308.Google Scholar
Clay, S. A., Kleinjan, J., Clay, D. E., Forcella, F., and Batchelor, W. 2005. Growth and fecundity of several weed species in corn and soybean. Agron. J. 97:294–302.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:239–252.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. and Mortimer, M. 1995. Dynamics of Weed Populations. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press. 86–133.Google Scholar
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
Devlin, D. L., Long, J. H., and Maddux, L. D. 1991. Using reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in soybeans. Weed Technol. 5:834–840.Google Scholar
Devore, J. and Peck, R. 1986. Statistics: The Exploration and Analysis of Data. St. Paul, MN West Publishing. 639–640.Google Scholar
Dieleman, J. A., Hamill, A. S., Fox, G. C., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Decision rules for postemergence control of pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 44:126–132.Google Scholar
Dieleman, J. A. and Mortensen, D. A. 1998. Influence of weed biology and ecology on development of reduced dose strategies for integrated weed management systems. Pages 333–362. in Hatfield, J.L., Buhler, D.D., Stewart, B.A. eds Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor Press.Google Scholar
Ehleringer, J. R. and Monson, R. K. 1993. Evolutionary and ecological aspects of photosynthetic pathway variation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 24:411–439.Google Scholar
Evans, S. P., Knezevic, S. Z., Lindquist, J. L., Shapiro, C. A., and Blankenship, E. E. 2003. Nitrogen application influences the critical period for weed control in corn. Weed Sci. 51:408–417.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G. and Battles, B. A. 2001. Reduced fitness of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) surviving glyphosate. Weed Technol. 15:492–496.Google Scholar
Klirinomos, J. N. 2002. Feedback with soil biota contributes to plant rarity and invasiveness in communities. Nature. 417:67–70.Google Scholar
Koide, R. T. and Schreiner, R. P. 1994. Alteration of leaf movement of Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae) by mycorrhizal infection. Funct. Ecol. 8:384–388.Google Scholar
Kremer, R. J. and Schulte, L. K. 1989. Influence of chemical treatment and Fusarium oxysporum on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Technol. 3:369–374.Google Scholar
Liebman, M., Mohler, C. L., and Staver, C. P. 2001. Ecological management of agricultural weeds. Pages 1–39. in Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 532.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L. and Knezevic, S. Z. 2001. Quantifying crop yield response to weed population: Applications and limitations. Pages 205–232. in Peterson, R.K.D., Higley, L.G. eds. Biotic Stress and Yield Loss. Boca Raton, FL CRC Press.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Maxwell, B. D., Buhler, D. D., and Gunsolus, J. L. 1995. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) recruitment, seed production, and interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed. Sci. 43:226–232.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Mortensen, D. A., Clay, A., Schmenk, R., Kells, J. J., Howatt, K., and Westra, P. 1996. Stability of corn (Zea mays)–velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference relationships. Weed Sci. 44:309–313.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Mortensen, D. A., and Johnson, B. E. 1998. Mechanisms of corn tolerance and velvetleaf suppressive ability. Agron. J. 90:787–792.Google Scholar
Liphadzi, K. B. and Dille, J. A. 2006. Annual weed competitiveness as affected by preemergence herbicide in corn. Weed Sci. 54:156–165.Google Scholar
Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., and Wolfinger, R. D. 1996. SAS system for mixed models. Cary, NC Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 31 and 171.Google Scholar
Martin, A. R., Mortensen, D. A., and Lindquist, J. L. 1998. Decision support models for weed management: in-field management tools. Pages 363–369. in Hatfield, J.L., Buhler, D.D., Stewart, B.A. eds. Integrated Weed and Soil Management. Chelsea, MI Ann Arbor Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, C. A. and Lindquist, J. L. 2002. Growth response of velvetleaf to three postemergence herbicides. Weed Sci. 50:364–369.Google Scholar
Neeser, C., Rawlinson, J. T., Martin, A. R., Bills, L. B., Dille, J. A., Krishnan, G., and Mortensen, D. A. 2004. WeedSOFT: a weed management decision support system. Weed Sci. 52:115–122.Google Scholar
Niekamp, J. W. and Johnson, W. G. 2001. Weed management with sulfentrazone and flumioxazin in no-tillage soybean (Glycine max). Crop Prot. 20:215–220.Google Scholar
Sattin, M., Zanin, G., and Berti, A. 1992. Case history for weed competition/population ecology: velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 6:213–219.Google Scholar
Sickinger, S. M., Grau, C. R., and Harvey, R. G. 1987. Verticillium wilt of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Plant Dis. 71:415–418.Google Scholar
Warwick, S. I. and Black, L. D. 1988. The biology of Canadian weeds. 90. Abutilon theophrasti . Can. J. Plant. Sci. 68:1069–1085.Google Scholar