Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:07:56.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of corn on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) growth and fecundity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Dawn E. Nordby  and
Robert G. Hartzler
Robert G. Hartzler
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Four experiments were conducted in central Iowa during 2001 and 2002 to determine the effects of weed emergence time and corn row spacing on common waterhemp growth and fecundity. Four common waterhemp emergence cohorts were established in each experiment and corresponded to the VE, V3, V5, and V8 stages of corn grown in rows spaced 38 and 76 cm apart. Common waterhemp mortality averaged 20, 56, 97, and 99% for the first, second, third, and fourth cohorts, respectively. Mean mature common waterhemp height for the first cohort was 140 cm, whereas plants emerging at the V8 corn stage were only 5 cm tall. Biomass of the first cohort was 20% less in 38-cm rows than in 76-cm rows, but later cohorts were not affected by row spacing. Biomass and seed production of waterhemp emerging at the V3, V5, and V8 corn stages decreased 80, 97, and 99%, respectively in comparison with the first cohort. Overall results indicate that common waterhemp biomass, survival, and fecundity decline sharply with delayed emergence relative to corn, but weeds emerging at or before the V5 corn stage may still contribute significantly to the seed bank.

Keywords

Common waterhemp, Amaranthus rudis Sauer AMATAcorn, Zea mays L.Delayed emergencerow spacingfecundity
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , April 2004 , pp. 255 - 259
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

Alessi, J. and Power, J. F. 1974. Effects of plant population, row spacing, and relative maturity on dryland corn in the northern plains. I. Corn forage and grain yield. Agron. J 66:316–319.Google Scholar
Anderson, D. D., Roeth, F. W., and Martin, A. R. 1996. Occurrence and control of triazine-resistant common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 10:570–575.Google Scholar
Bello, I. A., Owen, M. D. K., and Hatterman-Valenti, H. M. 1995. Effect of shade on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) growth, seed production, and dormancy. Weed Technol 9:452–455.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. 1992. Population dynamics and control of annual weeds in corn (Zea mays) as influenced by tillage system. Weed Sci 40:241–248.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Hartzler, R. G. 2001. Emergence and persistence of seed of velvetleaf, common waterhemp, woolly cupgrass, and giant foxtail. Weed Sci 49:230–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farnham, D. E. 2001. Row spacing, plant density, and hybrid effects on corn grain yield and moisture. Agron. J 93:1049–1053.Google Scholar
Foes, M. J., Liu, L., Tranel, P. J., Wax, L. M., and Stoller, E. W. 1998. A biotype of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) resistant to triazine and ALS herbicides. Weed Sci 46:514–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hager, A. G., Wax, L. M., Simmons, F. W., and Stoller, E. W. 1997. Waterhemp Management in Agronomic Crops Bull. X855. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G., Battles, B. A., and Nordby, D. E. 2004. Effect of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) emergence date on growth and fecundity in soybean. Weed Sci. 52:242–245.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G., Buhler, D. D., and Stoltenberg, D. E. 1999. Emergence characteristics of four annual weed species. Weed Sci 47:578–584.Google Scholar
Hinz, J. R. R. and Owen, M. D. K. 1997. Acetolactate synthase resistance in a common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) population. Weed Technol 11:13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, G., Hoverstad, T., and Greenwald, R. 1998. Integrated weed management using narrow corn row spacing, herbicides, and cultivation. Agron. J 90:40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z. and Horak, M. J. 1998. Influence of emergence time and density on redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci 46:665–672.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Vanderlip, R. L., and Horak, M. J. 2001. Relative time of redroot pigweed emergence affects dry matter partitioning. Weed Sci 49:617–621.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994. Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 42:568–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuehl, R. O. 2000. Design of Experiments: Statistical Principles of Research Design and Analysis. 2nd ed. Pacific Groves, CA: Danbury. p. 132.Google Scholar
Legere, A. and Schreiber, M. M. 1989. Competition and canopy architecture as affected by soybean (Glycine max) row width and density of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci 37:84–92.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Maxwell, B. D., Buhler, D. D., and Gunsolus, J. L. 1995. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) recruitment, survival, seed production, and interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci 43:226–232.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Mortensen, D. A., and Johnson, B. E. 1998. Mechanisms of corn tolerance and velvetleaf suppressive ability. Agron. J 90:787–792.Google Scholar
Lutz, J. A., Camper, H. M., and Jones, G. D. 1971. Row spacing and population effects on corn yields. Agron. J 63:12–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massinga, R. A., Currie, R. S., Horak, M. J., and Boyer, J. 2001. Interference of Palmer amaranth in corn. Weed Sci 49:202–208.Google Scholar
McLachlan, S. M., Tollenaar, M., Swanton, C. J., and Weise, S. F. 1993. Effect of corn-induced shading on dry matter accumulation, distribution, and architecture of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci 41:568–573.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. and Calloway, M. B. 1992. Effects of tillage and mulch on the emergence and survival of weeds in sweet corn. J. Appl. Ecol 29:21–34.Google Scholar
Murphy, S. D., Yakubu, Y., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Effect of planting patterns and inter-row cultivation on competition between corn (Zea mays) and late emerging weeds. Weed Sci 44:856–870.Google Scholar
Nieto, J. J. and Staniforth, D. W. 1961. Corn-foxtail competition under various production conditions. Agron. J 53:1–5.Google Scholar
Norris, J. L., Shaw, D. R., and Snipes, C. E. 2002. Influence of row spacing and residual herbicides on weed control in glufosinate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 16:319–325.Google Scholar
Nunez, R. and Kamprath, E. 1969. Relationships between N response, plant population, and row width on growth and yield of corn. Agron. J 61:279–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ottman, M. J. and Welch, L. F. 1989. Planting patterns and radiation interception, plant nutrient concentration, and yield in corn. Agron. J 81:167–174.Google Scholar
Pammel, L. H. 1913. Weed Flora of Iowa. Des Moines, IA: Iowa Geological Survey. P. 52.Google Scholar
Patzoldt, W. L., Hager, A. G., and Tranel, P. J. 2002. An Illinois waterhemp biotype with resistance to PPO-, ALS-, and PSII-inhibitors. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 57:161.Google Scholar
Porter, P. M., Hicks, D. R., Lueschen, L. E., Ford, J. H., Warnes, D. D., and Hoverstad, T. R. 1997. Corn response to row width and plant population in the northern corn belt. J. Prod. Agric 10:293–300.Google Scholar
Steckel, L. E. and Sprague, C. L. 2002. Late-season common waterhemp interference in corn. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc 57:143.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. 1991. Integrated weed management: the rationale and approach. Weed Technol 5:657–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, J. R. 1998. Influence of corn (Zea mays) population and row spacing on corn and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) yield. Weed Sci 46:447–453.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E. and Kells, J. J. 2001. Effect of glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) population and row spacing on light interception, corn yield, and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) growth. Weed Technol 15:413–418.Google Scholar
Westgate, M. E., Forcella, F., Reicosky, D. C., and Somsen, J. 1997. Rapid canopy closure for maize production in the northern US corn belt: radiation-use efficiency and grain yield. Field Crops Res 49:249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. R., Raper, C. D. Jr., and Rufty, T. W. Jr. 1999. Comparative responses of soybean (Glycine max), sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia), and Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to root zone and aerial temperatures. Weed Sci 47:167–174.Google Scholar
Young, B. G., Young, J. M., Gonzini, L. C., Hart, S. E., Wax, L. M., and Kapusta, G. 2001. Weed management in narrow- and wide-row glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 15:112–121.Google Scholar