Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:04:08.945Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of site-specific weed management using a direct-injection sprayer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Heather J. Goudy ,
Kenneth A. Bennett ,
Ralph B. Brown  and
François J. Tardif
Heather J. Goudy
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada
Kenneth A. Bennett
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada
Ralph B. Brown
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Targeting weed patches for site-specific herbicide applications potentially represents cost savings for operators, reduction in environmental herbicide effects, and increased efficiency of weed control. An experiment was initiated in a no-till corn field in Ontario, Canada, in 1998 and was continued in rotation with no-till soybeans in 1999. Weeds were intensively scouted, and distribution maps of the most common weeds (field horsetail, spiny sowthistle, dandelion, and common lambsquarters) were generated for both years. A prescription map for each plot was made using the weed density maps. Treatment decisions were based on a weed threshold value of 1 shoot m−2. Four herbicide treatments were compared: a conventional broadcast, a site-specific application targeting weed patches only, and two combinations of broadcast and site-specific applications. Treatments were applied using a direct-injection sprayer. Efficacy of weed control and yield were compared among treatments. In 1998 and 1999 there were no differences in the level of weed control or yield among treatments. The average percent area sprayed was reduced as much as 26% in the site-specific treatment in 1998 and up to 59% in the site-specific and broadcast combination treatments in 1999. For those species present in the field, patches ranged from highly aggregated to completely random, and patch stability ranged from very stable to very unstable over the 2 yr.

Keywords

Common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. CHEALcorn, Zea mays L.dandelion, Taraxacum officinale Weber. TAROFfield horsetail, Equisetum arvense (L.) EQUARsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.spiny sowthistle, Sonchus asper (L.) Hill. SONASSpatial dynamicsmappingprecision farmingpatcheskrigingstability
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , June 2001 , pp. 359 - 366
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Bassett, I. J. and Crompton, C. W. 1978. The Biology of Canadian Weeds. 32. Chenopodium album . Can. J. Plant Sci. 58:1061–1072.Google Scholar
Bennett, K. A. 1997. Development of a Herbicide Direct Injection System for Precision Farming. . University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario. 116 p.Google Scholar
Bennett, K. A. and Brown, R. B. 1999. Field evaluation of a site specific direct injection herbicide sprayer. American Society of Agricultural Engineers Annual International Meeting, Paper 99–1102. St. Joseph, MI: ASAE.Google Scholar
Brown, R. B. and Steckler, J.P.G.A. 1995. Prescription maps for spatially variable herbicide application in no-till corn. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 38 (6): 1659–1666.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Mester, T. C., and Kohler, K. A. 1996. The effect of maize residues on emergence of Setaria faberii, Abutilon theophrasti, Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album . Weed Res. 36:153–165.Google Scholar
Christensen, S., Walter, A. M., and Heisel, T. 1999. The patch treatment of weeds in cereals. Pages 591–600 In Proceedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. D. and Woolcock, J. L. 1997. Spatial dynamics of weeds: an overview. Pages 613–618 In Proceedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council.Google Scholar
Dieleman, J. A., Mortensen, D. A., Martin, A. R., and Wyse-Pester, D. Y. 1999. Influence of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and common sunflower (Helianthus annuus) density variation on weed management outcomes. Weed Sci. 47:81–89.Google Scholar
Gerhards, R., Sökefeld, M., Schulze-Lohne, K., Mortensen, D. A., and Kühbauch, W. 1997a. Site specific weed control in winter wheat. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 178:219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerhards, R., Wyse-Pester, D. Y., Mortensen, D. A., and Johnson, G. A. 1997b. Characterising spatial stability of weed populations using interpolated maps. Weed Sci. 45:108–119.Google Scholar
Heisel, T., Christensen, S., and Walter, M. 1996. Weed managing model for patch spraying in cereals. Pages 999–1007 In Robert, P. C., Rust, R. H., and Larson, W. E., eds. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Precision Agriculture, June 23–26, 1996, Minneapolis, MN. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy/Crop Science Society of America/Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, I., Colosi, J., and Lewin, R. A. 1984. The biology of Canadian weeds. 63. Sonchus asper (L.) Hill and Sonchus oleraceus L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 64:731–744.Google Scholar
Isaaks, E. H. and Srivastava, R. M. 1989. An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics. New York: Oxford University Press. 561 p.Google Scholar
Johnson, G. A., Mortensen, D. A., and Gotway, C. A. 1996. Spatial and temporal analysis of weed seedling populations using geostatisics. Weed Sci. 44:704–710.Google Scholar
Johnson, G. A., Mortensen, D. A., and Martin, A. R. 1995. A simulation of herbicide use based on weed spatial distribution. Weed Res. 35:197–205.Google Scholar
Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., and Wolfinger, R. D. 1996. SAS system for mixed models. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. pp. 171–228.Google Scholar
Lutman, P.J.W. and Perry, N. H. 1999. Methods of weed patch detection in cereal crops. Pages 627–634 In Proceedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds. Farnham, UK: British Crop Protection Council.Google Scholar
Marshall, G. 1986. Growth and development of field horsetail (Equisetum arvense L.). Weed Sci. 34:271–275.Google Scholar
Mortensen, D. A. and Dieleman, J. A. 1998. Why weed patches persist: dynamics of edges and density. Pages 14–19 In Medd, R. W. and Pratley, J. E., eds. Proceedings of Precision Weed Management in Crops and Pasture, Wagga Wagga, Australia.Google Scholar
Mortensen, D. A., Dieleman, J. A., and Johnson, G. A. 1998. Weed spatial variation and weed management. Pages 293–309 In Hatfield, J. L., Buhler, D. D., and Stewart, B. A., eds. Integrated Weed and Soil Management. Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor Press.Google Scholar
Roman, E. S., Murphy, S. D., and Swanton, C. J. 1999. Effect of tillage on Zea mays on Chenopodium album seedling emergence and density. Weed Sci. 47:551–556.Google Scholar
Stafford, J. V. and Miller, P.C.H. 1997. Spatially variable treatment of weed patches. Pages 465–473 In Robert, P. C., Rust, R. H., and Larson, W. E., eds. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Precision Agriculture, June 23–26, 1996, Minneapolis, MN. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy/Crop Science Society of America/Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J., Clements, D. R., and Derksen, D. A. 1993. Weed succession under conservation tillage: hierarchical framework for research and management. Weed Technol. 7:286–297.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. 1991. Integrated weed management: the rationale and approach. Weed Technol. 5:657–663.Google Scholar
Walter, A. M. 1996. Temporal and spatial stability of weeds. Pages 125–130 in Proceedings of the Second International Weed Control Congress, Flakkebjerg, Denmark.Google Scholar
Williams, M. M. II, Gerhards, R., and Mortensen, D. A. 1999. Spatiotemporal outcomes of site-specific weed management on maize. Pages 897–906 In Stafford, J. V., ed. Precision Agriculture, Odense, Denmark. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, B. J. and Brain, P. 1991. Long-term stability of distribution of Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. within cereal fields. Weed Res. 31:367–373.Google Scholar