Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T10:49:57.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Tillage Systems on Annual Weed Densities and Control in Solid-seeded Soybean (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Douglas D. Buhler  and
Edward S. Oplinger
Douglas D. Buhler
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., Dep. Agron. Plant Genetics, Univ. Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Edward S. Oplinger
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field research was conducted at Arlington, WI, and Janesville, WI, in 1986 and 1987 to evaluate the effect of conventional-tillage, chisel plow, and no-till systems on the density and control of annual weed species in solid-seeded soybean. Common lambsquarters densities were not greatly influenced by tillage systems, but redroot pigweed densities were generally highest in the chisel plow system. Conventional tillage always had greater velvetleaf densities than no-till and no-till always had greater giant foxtail densities than conventional tillage. Giant foxtail and redroot pigweed became more difficult to control when tillage was reduced, while velvetleaf became less of a problem. This response was not observed with all herbicide treatments evaluated and several herbicide treatments provided excellent weed control. Soybean yield was not affected by tillage systems under weed-free conditions and differences in soybean yield appeared to be due to differences in weed control.

Keywords

Common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. ♯ CHEALgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm. ♯ SETFAredroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. ♯ AMAREvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medik. ♯ ABUTHsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Hardin’Alachlorchlorambenclomazoneconservation tillageimazaquinmetolachlormetribuzinno-tillpendimethalinGlycine maxChenopodium albumSetaria faberiAmaranthus retroflexusAbutilon theophrastiABUTHAMARECHEALSETFA
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , March 1990 , pp. 158 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Banks, P. A. and Robinson, E. L. 1982. The influence of straw mulch on the soil reception and persistence of metribuzin. Weed Sci. 30:164–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bauman, T. T. and Ross, M. A. 1983. Effect of three tillage systems on the persistence of atrazine. Weed Sci. 31:423–426.Google Scholar
3. Buhler, D. D. and Daniel, T. C. 1988. Influence of tillage systems on giant foxtail, Setaria faberi, and velvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti, density and control in corn, Zea mays . Weed Sci. 36:642–647.Google Scholar
4. Freed, B. E., Oplinger, E. S., and Buhler, D. D. 1987. Velvetleaf control for solid-seeded soybean in three corn residue management systems. Agron. J. 79:119–123.Google Scholar
5. Gebhardt, M. R., Daniel, T. C., Schweizer, E. E., and Allmaras, R. R. 1985. Conservation tillage. Science 230:625–630.Google Scholar
6. Gebhardt, M. R. and Minor, H. C. 1983. Soybean production systems for claypan soils. Agron. J. 75:532–537.Google Scholar
7. Hartwig, R. O. and Laflen, J. M. 1978. A meterstick method for measuring crop residue cover. J. Soil Water Conserv. 33:90–91.Google Scholar
8. Kapusta, G. 1979. Seedbed tillage and herbicide influence on soybean (Glycine max) weed control and yield. Weed Sci. 27:520–526.Google Scholar
9. Koskinen, W. C. and McWhorter, C. G. 1986. Weed control in conservation tillage. J. Soil and Water Conserv. 41:365–370.Google Scholar
10. LaCroix, L. J. and Staniforth, D. W. 1964. Seed dormancy in velvetleaf. Weeds 12:171–174.Google Scholar
11. Mester, T. C. and Buhler, D. D. 1987. The effect of soil temperature, seeding depth, and cyanazine placement on the germination, emergence, and early seedling growth of giant foxtail and velvetleaf. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. No. 118.Google Scholar
12. Moomaw, R. S. and Burnside, O. C. 1979. Corn residue management and weed control in close-drilled soybeans. Agron. J. 71:78–80.Google Scholar
13. Murphy, T. R. and Gossett, B. J. 1981. Influence of shading by soybean (Glycine max) on weed suppression. Weed Sci. 29:610–615.Google Scholar
14. Parks, W. L. 1983. Soybean row width more important than plant spacing within row. Better Crops Plant Food 67:20–23.Google Scholar
15. Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. Pages 99–131. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.Google Scholar
16. Triplett, G. B. Jr. and Lytle, G. D. 1972. Control and ecology of weeds in continuous corn grown without tillage. Weed Sci. 20:453–457.Google Scholar
17. Wax, L. M., Nave, W. R., and Cooper, R. L. 1977. Weed control in narrow- and wide-row soybeans. Weed Sci. 25:73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Werling, V. L. and Buhler, D. D. 1988. Influence of application time on clomazone activity in no-till soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 36:629–635.Google Scholar
19. Winkle, M. E., Leavitt, J.R.C., and Burnside, O. C. 1981. Effects of weed density on herbicide absorption and bioactivity. Weed Sci. 29:405–409.Google Scholar
20. Wrucke, M. A. and Arnold, W. E. 1985. Weed species distribution as influenced by tillage and herbicides. Weed Sci. 33:853–856.Google Scholar