Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T06:46:44.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Competition of Common Cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum) with Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charles E. Snipes
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Auburn Univ., AL 36849
Gale A. Buchanan
Affiliation:
Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., AL 36849
Joe E. Street
Affiliation:
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Expt. Stn., Stoneville, MS 38776
John A. Mcguire
Affiliation:
Res. Data Anal., Auburn Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., AL 36849

Abstract

To determine the competitiveness of common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum Wallr.) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. 'Stoneville 213′), experiments were conducted on a Lucedale fine sandy loam from 1978 through 1980. Common cocklebur dry weight increased with increasing density up to 16 plants/15 m of row. No further increase in dry matter occurred beyond this density. Regression analysis showed that common cocklebur produced an average of 342 kg/ha of dry weight for each plant per 15-m row. Seed-cotton yields decreased as weed density increased up to 16 common cocklebur plants/15 m of row. Regression equations revealed yield losses ranging from 72 to 115 kg/ha for hand-harvested seed cotton and 57 to 90 kg/ha for machine-harvested seed cotton for each common cocklebur plant/15 m of row. Cotton stem diameter and height were reduced by weed competition in the same manner as seed cotton yields, but reductions were not as pronounced, indicating that these parameters were not good indicators of common cocklebur competition.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 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. Anonymous. 1980. Report of the 1979 Cotton Weed Loss Committee. Proc. Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. pp. 134136.Google Scholar
2. Barrentine, W. L. 1974. Common cocklebur competition in soybeans. Weed Sci. 22:600603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1971. Influence of weed competition on cotton. I. Sicklepod and tall morningglory. Weed Sci. 19:576579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1971. Influence of weed competition on cotton. II. Cocklebur and redroot pigweed. Weed Sci. 19:580582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., and McLaughlin, R. D. 1977. Competition of prickly sida with cotton. Weed Sci. 25:106110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. A. 1980. Competition of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum . Weed Sci. 28:258262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Buchanan, G. A. and McLaughlin, R. D. 1975. Influence of nitrogen on weed competition in cotton. Weed Sci. 23:324328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Gossett, B. J. 1971. Cocklebur-soybean's worst enemy. Weeds Today 2(2):911.Google Scholar
9. Patterson, M. G., Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., and Crowley, R. H. 1980. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) competition with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum . Weed Sci. 28:327329.Google Scholar
10. Peterson, R. G. 1977. Use and misuse of multiple comparison procedures. Agron. J. 66:205207.Google Scholar