Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:58:44.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interference of Redroot Pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) in Corn (Zea mays)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Stevan Z. Knezevic ,
Stephan F. Weise  and
Clarence J. Swanton
Stevan Z. Knezevic
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
Stephan F. Weise
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
Clarence J. Swanton
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Redroot pigweed is a major weed in corn throughout Ontario. Field experiments were conducted at two locations in 1991 and 1992 to determine the influence of selected densities and emergence times of redroot pigweed on corn growth and grain yield. Redroot pigweed densities of 0.5, 1, 2, 4 and 8 plants per m of row were established within 12.5 cm on either side of the corn row. In both years, redroot pigweed seeds were planted concurrently and with corn at the 3- to 5-leaf stage of corn growth. A density of 0.5 redroot pigweed per m of row from the first (earlier) emergence date of pigweed (in most cases, up to the 4-leaf stage of corn) or four redroot pigweed per m of row from the second (later) emergence date of pigweed (in most cases, between the 4- and 7-leaf stage of corn) reduced corn yield by 5%. Redroot pigweed emerging after the 7-leaf stage of corn growth did not reduce yield. Redroot pigweed seed production was dependent upon its density and time of emergence. The time of redroot pigweed emergence, relative to corn, may be more important than its density in assessing the need for postemergence control.

Keywords

Corn, Zea mays (L.) ‘Pioneer 3902,’ ‘Pioneer 3925’redroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) # AMAREIntegrated weed managementweed densitydamage functionsleaf areathresholdAMARE
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , December 1994 , pp. 568 - 573
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. Alex, J. F. 1964. Weeds of tomato and corn fields in two regions of Ontario. Weed Res. 4:308–318.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous, 1991. Field crop recommendations, publication 296. Ont. Minist. Agric. Food. 91 pp.Google Scholar
3. Bellinder, R. R. and Wallace, R. W. 1991. An integrated production approach to weed control in potatoes. Page 623 in Pimentel, D., ed., CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture, 2nd ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
4. Brimhall, P. B., Chamberlain, E. W., and Alley, H. P. 1967. Competition of annual weeds and sugarbeets. Weeds 13:33–35.Google Scholar
5. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. M. 1980. Competition of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 28:258–262.Google Scholar
6. Cardina, J., Regnier, E., and Harrison, K. 1992. Long-term tillage effects on seed banks in three Ohio soils. Weed Sci. 39:186–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Coble, H. D. and Mortensen, D. A. 1992. The threshold concept and its application to weed science. Weed Technol. 6:191–195.Google Scholar
8. Cousens, R. 1985. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:239–252.Google Scholar
9. Cousens, R. 1987. Theory and reality of weed control thresholds. Plant Prot. 2:13–20.Google Scholar
10. Cousens, R. 1988. Misinterpretation of results in weed research through inappropriate use of statistics. Weed Res. 28:281–289.Google Scholar
11. Cousens, R. 1991. Aspects of the design and interpretation of competition (interference) experiments. Weed Technol. 5:664–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Cousens, R., Brain, P., O'Donovan, J. T., and O'Sullivan, P. A. 1987. The use of biologically realistic equations to describe the effects of weed density and relative time of emergence on crop yield. Weed Sci. 35:720–725.Google Scholar
13. Frick, B. and Thomas, A. G. 1992. Weed surveys in different tillage systems in southwestern Ontario field crops. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72:1337–1347.Google Scholar
14. Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., and Anderson, G. W. 1992. The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays L.). Weed Sci. 40:441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Kropff, M. J. 1988. Modelling the effects of weeds on crop production. Weed Res. 28:465–471.Google Scholar
16. Kropff, M. J. and Spitters, C.J.T. 1991. A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations on relative leaf area of the weeds. Weed Res. 31:97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Kropff, M. J. and Lotz, L. A. P. 1992. Systems approaches to quantify crop-weed interactions and their application in weed management. Agric. Systems 40:265–282.Google Scholar
18. Kropff, M. J., Weaver, S. E., and Smits, M. A. 1992. Use of ecophysiological models for crop-weed interference: Relations amongst weed density, relative time of weed emergence, relative leaf area, and yield loss. Weed Sci. 40:296–301.Google Scholar
19. Légère, A. and Deschenes, J. M. 1989. Effects of time of emergence, population density and interspecific competition on hemp-nettie (Galeopsis tetrahit) seed production. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:185–194.Google Scholar
20. Légère, 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
21. Marra, M. C. and Carlson, G. A. 1983. An economic threshold model for weeds in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 31:604–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. McLachlan, M. S., 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 L.). Weed Sci. 41:568–573.Google Scholar
23. McLachlan, M. S., Swanton, C. J., Weise, S. F., and Tollenaar, M. 1993. Effect of corn-induced shading on rate of leaf appearance in redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.). Weed Sci. 41:590–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Moolani, M. K., Knake, E. L., and Slife, F. W. 1964. Competition of smooth pigweed with corn and soybeans. Weeds 12:126–128.Google Scholar
25. Nelson, D. C. and Giles, J. F. 1989. Weed management in two potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) cultivars using tillage and pendimethalin. Weed Sci. 37:228–232.Google Scholar
26. Orwick, P. L. and Schreiber, M. M. 1979. Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and robust foxtail (Setaria viridis var. robusta-alba or var. robusta-purpurea) in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 27:665–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Shaw, W. C. 1982. Integrated weed management systems technology for pest management. Weed Sci. Suppl. 30:2–12.Google Scholar
28. Shurtleff, J. L. and Coble, H. D. 1985. Interference of certain broadleaf weed species in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 33:654–657.Google Scholar
29. Spitters, C.J.T. 1983. An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiments. I. Estimation of competitive effect. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 31:1–11.Google Scholar
30. Street, J. E., Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., and McGuire, J. M. 1981. Influence of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) densities on competitiveness of pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) and sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia). Weed Sci. 29:253–256.Google Scholar
31. Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. 1991. Integrated weed management: The rationale and approach. Weed Technol. 5:657–663.Google Scholar
32. Tollenaar, M., Daynard, T. B., and Hunter, R. B. 1979. Effect of temperature on rate of leaf appearance and flowering date in maize. Crop Sci. 19:363–366.Google Scholar
33. Van Acker, R. C., Swanton, C. J. and Weise, S. F. 1993. The critical period of weed control in soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). Weed Sci. 41:194–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. Vangessel, M. J. and Renner, K. A. 1990. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) interference in potatoes (Solanum tuberosum). Weed Sci. 38:338–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. Walker, R. H. and Buchanan, G. A. 1982. Crop manipulation in integrated weed management systems. Weed Sci. Suppl. 30:17–24.Google Scholar
36. Weaver, S. E. 1984. Differential growth and competitive ability of Amaranthus retroflexus, A. powellii, and A. hybridus . Can. J. Plant Sci. 64:715–724.Google Scholar
37. Weaver, S. E. 1986. Factors affecting thresholds levels and seed production of Jimson weed (Datura stramonium) in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Res. 26:215–23.Google Scholar
38. Weaver, S. E. 1991. Size-dependent economic thresholds for three broadleaf weed species in soybeans. Weed Technol. 5:674–679.Google Scholar
39. Woolley, B. L., Michaels, T. E., Hall, M. R., and Swanton, C. J. 1993. The critical period of weed control in white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Sci. 41:180–184.Google Scholar
40. Zanin, G. and Sattin, M. 1988. Threshold level and seed production of velvet leaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medicus) in maize. Weed Res. 28:347–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar