Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:04:54.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preemergence herbicide delays the critical time of weed removal in popcorn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2019

Ethann R. Barnes ,
Stevan Z. Knezevic ,
Nevin C. Lawrence ,
Suat Irmak ,
Oscar Rodriguez  and
Amit J. Jhala Open the ORCID record for Amit J. Jhala [Opens in a new window]
Ethann R. Barnes
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
Stevan Z. Knezevic
Affiliation:
Professor, Northeast Research and Extension Center, Haskell Agricultural Laboratory, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Concord, NE, USA
Nevin C. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Panhandle Research and Extension Center, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Scottsbluff, NE, USA
Suat Irmak
Affiliation:
Harold W. Eberhard Distinguished Professor, Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
Oscar Rodriguez
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
Amit J. Jhala*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Amit J. Jhala, PhD, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 279 Plant Science Hall, PO Box 830915, Lincoln, NE 68583. Email: Amit.Jhala@unl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding the critical time of weed removal (CTWR) is necessary for designing effective weed management programs in popcorn production that do not result in yield reduction. The objective of this study was to determine the CTWR in popcorn with and without a premix of atrazine and S-metolachlor applied PRE. Field experiments were conducted at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, South Central Agricultural Laboratory near Clay Center, NE in 2017 and 2018. The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design with PRE herbicide as the main plot and weed removal timing as the subplot. Main plots included no herbicide or atrazine/S-metolachlor applied PRE. Subplot treatments included a weed-free control, a non-treated control, and weed removal timing at V3, V6, V9, V15, and R1 popcorn growth stages and then kept weed free throughout the season. A four-parameter log-logistic function was fitted to percentage popcorn yield loss and growing degree days separately to each main plot. The number of growing degree days, when 5% yield loss was achieved, was extracted from the model and compared between main plots. The CTWR was from the V4 to V5 popcorn growth stage in absence of PRE herbicide. With atrazine/S-metolachlor applied PRE, the CTWR was delayed until V10 to V15. It is concluded that, to avoid yield loss, weeds must be controlled before the V4 popcorn growth stage when no PRE herbicide is applied, and PRE herbicide, such as atrazine/S-metolachlor in this study, can delay the CTWR until the V10 growth stage.

Keywords

Aaron Hager, University of IllinoisAtrazineS-metolachlorpopcorn, Zea mays (L.) var. evertaCritical time for weed removalgrowth stageresidual herbicideweed interferenceyield loss
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 33 , Issue 6 , December 2019 , pp. 785 - 793
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 

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

Adigun, J, Osipitan, AO, Lagoke, ST, Adeyemi, RO, Afolami, SO (2014) Growth and yield performance of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) as influenced by row-spacing and period of weed interference in South-West Nigeria. J Agric Sci 6:188–198 Google Scholar
Andrade, FH, Vega, C, Uhart, S, Cirilo, A, Cantarero, M, Valentinuz, O (1999) Kernel number determination in maize. Crop Sci 39:453–459 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2014) Bicep II Magnum herbicide product label. Greensboro, NC: Syngenta, Research.Google Scholar
Anonymous (2016) Corvus herbicide product label. Research Triangle Park, NC: Bayer CropScience Google Scholar
Barnes, ER, Jhala, AJ, Knezevic, SZ, Sikkema, PH, Lindquist, JL (2018) Common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) interference with soybean in Nebraska. Agron J 110:1–8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, E, Werle, R, Sandell, L, Lindquist, J, Knezevic, SZ, Sikkema, P, Jhala, AJ. (2017) Influence of tillage on common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) emergence pattern in Nebraska. Weed Technol 31:623–631 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertalmio, G, Cook, M, Duty, R, Eisley, B, Green, T, Hacker, M, Hoffman, G, Iverson, J, Jess, L, Koinzan, S, Linn, D, Miyazaki, S, Mueller, D, Mueller, J, Obermeyer, J, Pike, D, Pritchett, G, Reynolds, B, Robbins, M, Schleisman, M, Sieg, E, Sleaford, D, Weaver, J, Ziegler, K (2003) Crop profile for corn (pop) in the United States (North Central Region). North Central Integrated Pest Management Center, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. https://ipmdata.ipmcenters.org/source_report.cfm?sectionid=40&sourceid=393. Accessed: July 4, 2019Google Scholar
Bukun, B (2004) Critical periods for weed control in cotton in Turkey. Weed Res 44:404–412 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, OC, Wiens, MJ, Holder, BJ, Weisberg, S, Ristau, EA, Johnson, MM, Cameron, JH (1998) Critical periods for weed control in dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Sci 46:301–306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cathcart, RJ, Swanton, CL (2004) Nitrogen and green foxtail (Setaria viridis) competition effects on corn growth and development. Weed Sci 52:1039–1049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chahal, PS, Ganie, ZA, Jhala, AJ (2018a) Overlapping residual herbicides for control of photosystem II and 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibitor-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Watson) in glyphosate-resistant maize. Front Plant Sci 8:2231 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chahal, PS, Irmak, S, Gaines, T, Amundsen, K, Jugulam, M, Jha, P, Travlos, IS, Jhala, AJ (2018b) Control of photosystem II–and 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase inhibitor–resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in conventional corn. Weed Technol 32:326–335 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, WJ, Hahn, RR, Stachowski, PJ (2006) Time of weed removal with glyphosate affects corn growth and yield components. Agron J 98:349–353 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaton, BJ, Russ, OG, Feltner, KC (1976) Competition of velvetleaf, prickly sida, and Venice mallow in soybeans. Weed Sci 24:224–228 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elezovic, I, Datta, A, Vrbnicanin, S, Glamoclija, D, Simic, M, Malidza, G, Knezevic, SZ (2012) Yield and yield components of imidazolinone-resistant sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) are influenced by pre-emergence herbicide and time of post-emergence weed removal. Field Crops Res 128:137–146 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, SP, Knezevic, SZ, Lindquist, JL, Shapiro, CA, Blankenship, EE (2003a) Nitrogen application influences the critical period for weed control in corn. Weed Sci 51:408–417 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, SP, Knezevic, SZ, Lindquist, JL, Shapiro, CA (2003b) Influence of nitrogen and duration of weed interference on corn growth and development. Weed Sci 51:546–556 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everman, WJ, Clewis, SB, Thomas, WE, Burke, IC, Wilcut, JW (2008) Critical period of weed interference in peanut. Weed Technol 22:63–68 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geier, PW, Stahlman, PW, Regehr, DL, Olson, BL (2009) Preemergence herbicide efficacy and phytotoxicity in grain sorghum. Weed Technol 23:197–201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmore, EC, Rogers, RS (1958) Heat units as a method of measuring maturity in corn. Agron J 50:611–615 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grichar, WJ, Besler, BA, Brewer, KD, Palrang, DT (2003) Flufenacet and metribuzin combinations for weed control and corn (Zea mays) tolerance. Weed Technol 17:346–351 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafson, TC, Knezevic, SZ, Hunt, TE, Lindquist, JL (2006a) Early-season insect defoliation influences the critical time for weed removal in soybean. Weed Sci 54:509–515 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafson, TC, Knezevic, SZ, Hunt, TE, Lindquist, JL (2006b) Simulated insect defoliation and duration of weed interference affected soybean growth. Weed Sci 54:735–742 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halford, C, Hamill, AS, Zhang, J, Doucet, C (2001) Critical period of weed control in no-till soybean and corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 15:737–744 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, MR, Swanton, CJ, Anderson, GW (1992) The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 40:441–447 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[ISAAA] International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (2018) GM Approval Database http://www.isaaa.org/gmapprovaldatabase/. Accessed: July 31, 2018Google Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Datta, A (2015) The critical period for weed control: revisiting data analysis. Weed Sci 63:188–202 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Elezovic, I, Datta, A, Vrbnicanin, S, Glamoclija, D, Simic, M, Malidza, G (2013) Delay in the critical time for weed removal in imidazolinone-resistant sunflower (Helianthus annuus) caused by application of pre-emergence herbicide. Int J Pest Manag 59:229–235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Evans, SP, Blankenship, EE, Van Acker, RC, Lindquist, JL (2002) Critical period of weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Sci 50:773–786 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Evans, SP, Mainz, M (2003) Row spacing influences the critical timing for weed removal in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 17:666–673 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Streibig, J, Ritz, C (2007) Utilizing R software package for dose–response studies: the concept and data analysis. Weed Technol 21:840–848 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LI-COR Biosciences (2016) LAI-2200c Plant Canopy Analyzer Instruction Manual. Lincoln, NE: LI-COR Biosciences Google Scholar
Maddonni, GA, Otegui, ME (2004) Intra-specific competition in maize: early establishment of hierarchies among plants affects final kernel set. Field Crops Res 85:1–13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddonni, GA, Otegui, ME, Bonhommie, R (1998) Grain yield components in maize: II. Postsilking growth and kernel weight. Field Crops Res 56:257–264 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, SG, Van Acker, RC, Friesen, LF (2000) Critical period of weed control in spring canola. Weed Sci 49:326–333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, DG, Butler, DG (1993) Statistical validation. Ecol Model 68:21–32 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolte, SA, Young, BG (2002) Efficacy and economic return on investment for conventional and herbicide-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 16:371–378 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Oliveira, MJ (2004) Comparison of the critical period for weed control in wide- and narrow-row corn. Weed Sci 52:802–807 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurse, RE, Swanton, CJ, Tardif, F, Sikkema, PH (2006) Weed control and yield are improved when glyphosate is preceded by a residual herbicide in glyphosate-tolerant maize (Zea mays). Crop Prot 25:1174–1179 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otegui, ME (1997) Kernel set and flower synchrony within the ear of maize: II. Plant population effects. Crop Sci 37:448–455 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pike, D, Pritchett, G, Reynolds, B, Cook, M, Mueller, J, Green, T, Linn, D, Koinzan, S, Eisley, B, Obermeyer, J, Hoffman, G, Robbins, M, Sleaford, D, Schleisman, M, Sieg, E, Weaver, J, Ziegler, K, Duty, R, Iverson, J, Miyazaki, S, Jess, L, Burr, W (2002) North Central region popcorn PMSP. North Central Integrated Pest Management Center, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. https://ipmdata.ipmcenters.org/source_report_pdf.cfm?sourceid=1004 Accessed: July 5, 2019Google Scholar
Popcorn Board (2019) Industry facts. https://www.popcorn.org/Facts-Fun/Industry-Facts. Accessed: June 7, 2019Google Scholar
R Core Team (2018) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing Google Scholar
Ritz, C, Baty, F, Streibig, JC, Gerhard, D (2015) Dose-response analysis using R. PLoS One 10:e0146021 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roman, ES, Murphy, SD, Swanton, CJ (2000) Simulation of Chenopodium album seedling emergence. Weed Sci 48:217–224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, D, Irmak, S, Lindquist, JL, Knezevic, SZ, Jhala, AJ (2015) Effect of water stress on the growth and fecundity of common waterhemp. Weed Sci 64:42–52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarangi, D, Jhala, AJ (2018) Comparison of a premix of atrazine, bicyclopyrone, mesotrione, and S-metolachlor with other pre-emergence herbicides for weed control and corn yield in no-tillage and reduced-tillage production systems in Nebraska, USA. Soil Till Res 178:82–91 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuster, CL, Smeda, RJ (2007) Management of Amaranthus rudis S. in glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). Crop Prot 26:1436–1443 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL, Hager, AG (2002) Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) control in corn (Zea Mays) with single preemergence and sequential applications of residual herbicides. Weed Technol 16:755–761 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, GL, Porpiglia, PJ, Chandler, JM (2005) Efficacy of KIH-485 on Texas panicum (Panicum texanum) and selected broadleaf weeds in corn. Weed Technol 19:866–869 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanton, CJ, Gulden, RH, Chandler, K (2007) A rationale for atrazine stewardship in corn. Weed Sci 55:75–81 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor-Lovell, S, Wax, LM (2001) Weed control in field corn (Zea mays) with RPA 201772 combinations with atrazine and S-metolachlor. Weed Technol 15:249–256 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tollenaar, M (1977) Sink-source relationships during reproductive development in maize. A review. Maydica 22:49–75 Google Scholar
Trezzi, MM, Vidal, RA, Patel, F, Miotto, JrE, Debastiani, F, Balbinot, JrAA, Mosquen, R (2015) Impact of Conyza bonariensis density and establishment period on soyabean grain yield, yield components and economic threshold. Weed Res 55:34–41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tursun, N, Datta, A, Sakinmaz, MS, Kantarci, Z, Knezevic, SZ, Chauhan, BS (2016) The critical period of weed control in three corn (Zea mays L.) types. Crop Prot 90:59–65 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (2019) Quick stats. https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/ Accessed: June 7, 2019Google Scholar
Van Acker, RC, Swanton, CJ, Weise, SF (1993) The critical period of weed control in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Weed Sci 41:194–200 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh, JP, Bulson, HAJ, Stopes, CE, Froud-Williams, RJ, Murdoch, AJ (1999) The critical weed-free period in organically-grown wheat. Ann App Biol 134:315–320 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whaley, CM, Armel, GR, Wilson, HP, Hines, TE (2009) Evaluation of S-metolachlor and S-metolachlor plus atrazine mixtures with mesotrione for broadleaf weed control in corn. Weed Technol 23:193–196 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, MM (2006) Planting date influences critical period of weed control in sweet corn. Weed Sci 54:928–933 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziegler, KE (2001) Popcorn. Pages 199–234 in Hallauer, AR, ed. Specialty Corns. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group Google Scholar
Zimdahl, RL (1988) The concept and application of the critical weed-free period. Pages 145–155 in Altieri, MA and Liebmann, M, eds. Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group Google Scholar