Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:40:51.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Systems Approach to Weed Management in Irrigated Crops

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Edward E. Schweizer ,
Donald W. Lybecker  and
Robert L. Zimdahl
Edward E. Schweizer
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Crops Res. Lab.
Donald W. Lybecker
Affiliation:
Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523
Robert L. Zimdahl
Affiliation:
Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The impact of four weed management systems on weed seed reserves in soil, yearly weed problem, and production of barley, corn, pinto bean, and sugarbeet was assessed where these crops were grown in rotation for 4 consecutive years in four cropping sequences. Weeds were controlled in each crop with only conventional tillage or conventional tillage plus minimum, moderate (system 1), and intensive (system 2) levels of herbicides. Seed of annual weeds from 11 genera were identified, with barnyardgrass and redroot pigweed comprising 66 and 19%, respectively, of the initial 90 million weed seed/ha present in the upper 25 cm of the soil profile. After the fourth cropping year, overall decline in total number of weed seed in soil was 53% when averaged over four cropping sequences and four weed management systems. Over the 4-yr period, about 10 times more weeds escaped control in system 1 than in system 2; and within a crop, the fewest number of weeds escaped control annually in barley. System 2 had the highest herbicide use in each cropping sequence, the fewest weeds at harvest, and the smallest adjusted gross return over the 4-yr period in three of four cropping sequences.

Keywords

Barley, Hordeum vulgare L. ‘Steptoe’barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. # ECHCGcorn, Zea mays L. ‘Pioneer 3565’pinto bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. ‘Olathe’redroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREsugarbeet, Beta vulgaris L. ‘Mono Hy A4’Integrated weed management systemsweed seed banksBeta vulgarisHordeum vulgarePhaseolus vulgarisZea mays
Type
Special Topics
Information
Weed Science , Volume 36 , Issue 6 , November 1988 , pp. 840 - 845
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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. Association of Official Agriculture Chemists. 1955. Official Methods of Analysis. 8th ed. Washington, DC. Pages 564–578.Google Scholar
2. Carruthers, A. and Oldfield, J.F.T. 1961. Methods for the assessment of beet quality. Int. Sugar J. 63:72–74, 103–105, 137–139.Google Scholar
3. Dotzenko, A. D., Ozkan, M., and Storer, K. R. 1969. Influence of crop sequence, nitrogen fertilizer and herbicides on weed seed populations in sugarbeet fields. Agron. J. 61:34–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Dowler, C. C., Hauser, E. W., and Johnson, A. W. 1974. Cropherbicide sequences on a Southeastern Coastal Plain soil. Weed Sci. 22:500–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Dunham, R. S., Robinson, R. G., and Andersen, R. N. 1958. Crop rotation and associated tillage practices for controlling annual weeds in flax and reducing the weed seed population of the soil. Minn. Agric. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. 230. 20 pp.Google Scholar
6. Lybecker, D. W., King, R. P., Schweizer, E. E., and Zimdahl, R. L. 1984. Economic analysis of two weed management systems for two cropping rotations. Weed Sci. 32:90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and King, R. P. 1988. Economic analysis of four weed management systems. Weed Sci. 36:846–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Roberts, H. A. 1968. The changing population of viable weed seeds in arable soil. Weed Res. 8:253–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Schweizer, E. E. and Zimdahl, R. L. 1984. Weed seed decline in irrigated soil after six years of continuous corn (Zea mays) and herbicides. Weed Sci. 32:76–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Schweizer, E. E. and Zimdahl, R. L. 1984. Weed seed decline in irrigated soil after rotation of crops and herbicides. Weed Sci. 32:84–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Shaw, W. C. 1982. Integrated weed management systems technology for pest management. Weed Sci. 30:2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Wilson, R. G., Kerr, E. D., and Nelson, L. A. 1985. Potential for using weed seed content in the soil to predict future weed problems. Weed Sci. 33:171–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar