Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T18:31:43.851Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Spotted Spurge (Euphorbia maculata) Interference with Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Mohammad T. Bararpour ,
Ronald E. Talbert  and
Robert E. Frans
Mohammad T. Bararpour
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Ronald E. Talbert
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Robert E. Frans
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted from 1988 through 1990 in Fayetteville, AR, to measure competitiveness of spotted spurge in cotton. Population levels were established by transplanting seedlings from other field areas. There was a positive linear relationship between cotton boll numbers and seed cotton yield. Percent reduction in cotton height, leaf area, dry weight, boll numbers, and seed cotton yield increased as spotted spurge densities increased. Seed cotton yield reduction was 47, 57, and 85% for spotted spurge densities of 5, 10, and 50 spotted spurge plants m–1 of row.

Keywords

Spotted spurge, Euphorbia maculata L. # EPHMAcotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Arkot 518.’Cotton yieldweed densitiesEPHMA
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , December 1994 , pp. 553 - 555
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1970. Influence of weed competition on cotton. Weed Sci. 18:149–154.Google Scholar
2. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1971. Influence of weed competition on cotton. I. Sicklepod and morningglory. Weed Sci. 19:576–579.Google Scholar
3. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1971. Influence of weed competition on cotton. II. Cocklebur and redroot pigweed. Weed Sci. 19:580–582.Google Scholar
4. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. A. 1980. Competition of sicklepod and redroot pigweed with cotton. Weed Sci:28:258–262.Google Scholar
5. Chandler, J. M. 1977. Competition of spurred anoda, velvetleaf, prickly sida and venice mallow in cotton. Weed Sci. 25:151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Crowley, R. H. and Buchanan, G. A. 1978. Competition of the morningglory species with cotton. Weed Sci. 26:484–488.Google Scholar
7. Mayeux, J. V., Illum, V. L., and Beach, R. A. 1987. Effect of burst yield booster on cotton yield components and yields. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. Memphis, TN, p. 76–78.Google Scholar