Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T17:22:11.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fall Panicum Interference in Peanuts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

A.C. York  and
H.D. Coble
A.C. York
Affiliation:
Crop Sci. Dep., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27607
H.D. Coble
Affiliation:
Crop Sci. Dep., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27607
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L. ‘Florigiant’) seed yield was reduced 25% by a fall panicum (Panicum dichotomiflorum Michx.) density of one weed per 4.9 m of row. Greater weed densities resulted in greater yield losses. Peanut seed yield was reduced by fall panicum interference for 2 weeks or more after peanut emergence. Peanuts kept weed-free for 8 weeks after emergence failed to yield as well as those kept weed-free all season. However, control for the first 2 weeks appeared to be the most critical.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , January 1977 , pp. 43 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 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. Ambrose, L.G. and Coble, H.D. 1975. Fall panicum competition in soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 28:36.Google Scholar
2. Bell, A.R. and Nalewaja, J.D. 1968. Effect of duration of wild oat competition in flax. Weed Sci. 16:509–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Bhan, V.M., Singh, M., and Maurya, R.A. 1971. Crop weed competition studies in groundnut. Indian J. Weed Sci. III:32–36.Google Scholar
4. Black, C.C., Chen, T.M., and Brown, R.H. 1969. Biochemical basis for plant competition. Weed Sci. 17:338–344.Google Scholar
5. Bleasdale, J.K.A. 1960. Studies on plant competition. Pages 133–142 in Harper, J.L., ed. The Biology of Weeds. Blackwell Scientific Publications. Oxford, England.Google Scholar
6. Bowden, B.A. and Friesen, G. 1967. Competition of wild oats in wheat and flax. Weed Res. 7:349–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Buchanan, G.A. and Burns, E.R. 1971. Weed competition in cotton. II. Cocklebur and redroot pigweed. Weed Sci. 19:580–582.Google Scholar
8. Burnside, O.C. and Colville, W.L. 1964. Soybean and weed yields as affected by irrigation, row spacing, tillage, and amiben. Weeds 12:109–112.Google Scholar
9. Burnside, O.C. and Juricek, C. 1968. Weed removal studies in soybeans. Res. Report N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 25:159–160.Google Scholar
10. Burnside, O.C. and Wicks, G.A. 1967. The effect of weed removal treatments on sorghum growth. Weed Sci. 15:204–207.Google Scholar
11. Hauser, E.W., Buchanan, G.A., and Ethredge, W.J. 1975. Competition of Florida beggarweed and sicklepod with peanuts. I. Effects of periods of weed-free maintenance or weed competition. Weed Sci. 23:368–372.Google Scholar
12. Hauser, E.W. and Parham, S.A. 1969. Effects of annual weeds and cultivation on the yield of peanuts. Weed Res. 9:192–197.Google Scholar
13. Hill, L.V. and Santelmann, P.W. 1969. Competitive effects of annual weeds on Spanish peanuts. Weed Sci. 17:1–2.Google Scholar
14. Knake, E.L. and Slife, F.W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberii with corn and soybeans. Weeds 13:331–334.Google Scholar
15. Knake, E.L. and Slife, F.W. 1965. Giant foxtail seeded at various times in corn and soybeans. Weeds 13:331–334.Google Scholar
16. Knake, E.L. and Slife, F.W. 1969. Effect of time of giant foxtail removal from corn and soybeans. Weed Sci. 17:281–283.Google Scholar
17. Krenzer, E.G. Jr. and Moss, D.N. 1969. Carbon dioxide compensation in grasses. Crop Sci. 9:619–621.Google Scholar
18. Le Clerg, E.L., Leonard, W.H., and Clark, A.G. 1962. Field plot technique, 2nd edition. Burgess Pub. Co., Minnesota. 373 pp.Google Scholar
19. McWhorter, C.G. and Barrentine, W.L. 1975. Cocklebur control in soybeans as affected by cultivars, seeding rates, and methods of weed control. Weed Sci. 23:386–390.Google Scholar
20. McWhorter, C.G. and Hartwig, E.E. 1972. Competition of johnsongrass and cocklebur with six soybean varieties. Weed Sci. 20:56–59.Google Scholar
21. Moolani, M.K., Knake, E.L., and Slife, F.W. 1964. Competition of smooth pigweed with corn and soybeans. Weeds 12:126–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Oram, P.A. 1961. Experiments on the control of weeds in groundnuts in Tripolitania. Weed Res. 1:211–228.Google Scholar
23. Pavlychenko, T.K. and Harrington, J.B. 1934. Competitive efficiency of weeds and cereal crops. Can. J. Res. 10:77–94.Google Scholar
24. Scott, R.K. and Moisey, F.R. 1972. The effects of weeds on the sugar beet crop. Brit. Weed Control Conf. Proc. Res. Report 11:491–498.Google Scholar
25. Selleck, G.W. 1975. The distriqution of fall panicum (Panicum dichotomiflorum Michx.). Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 29:1–6.Google Scholar
26. Smith, D.T. 1974. How weeds influence the crop environment. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 27:24–28.Google Scholar
27. Smith, R.J. Jr. 1968. Weed competition in rice. Weed Sci. 16:252–255.Google Scholar
28. Staniforth, D.W. 1961. Responses of corn hybrids to yellow foxtail competition. Weeds 9:132–136.Google Scholar
29. Staniforth, D.W. 1962. Response of soybean varieties to weed competition. Agron. J. 54:11–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Staniforth, D.W. 1965. Competitive effects of three foxtail species on soybeans. Weeds 13:191–193.Google Scholar
31. Thurlow, D.L. and Buchanan, G.A. 1972. Competition of sicklepod with soybeans. Weed Sci. 20:379–384.Google Scholar
32. Wax, L.M. and Pendleton, J.W. 1968. Effect of row spacing on weed control in soybeans. Weed Sci. 16:462–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Wicks, G.A., Johnston, D.M., Nuland, D.S., and Kinbacker, E.J. 1973. Competition between annual weeds and sweet Spanish onions. Weed Sci. 21:436–439.Google Scholar
34. William, R.D. and Warren, G.F. 1975. Competition between purple nutsedge and vegetables. Weed Sci. 23:317–323.Google Scholar