Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:57:51.364Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Burning postharvest sugarcane residue for control of surface-deposited divine nightshade (Solanum nigrescens) and itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis) seed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2019

Douglas J. Spaunhorst Open the ORCID record for Douglas J. Spaunhorst [Opens in a new window] ,
Albert J. Orgeron  and
Paul M. White Jr.
Douglas J. Spaunhorst*
Affiliation:
Research Agronomist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Sugarcane Research Unit, Houma, LA, USA
Albert J. Orgeron
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Paul M. White Jr.
Affiliation:
Research Soil Scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Sugarcane Research UnitHouma, LA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Douglas J. Spaunhorst, USDA-ARS, SRU, 5883 USDA Road, Houma, LA, 70360. Email: Douglas.Spaunhorst@ars.usda.gov
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Burning postharvest sugarcane residue is a standard practice to remove extraneous leaf material before spring regrowth. Live-fires were simulated from field-collected postharvest sugarcane residue and seeds of divine nightshade and itchgrass were exposed to dry and moistened postharvest residue (PHR) at four densities (6.1, 12.1, 18.2, and 24.2 Mg ha−1) and a nonburned control. The moisture content of residue exposed to simulated rainfall was 14% more in Experiment 2 than Experiment 1; however, burning PHR with 44% moisture when wind speeds were lower allowed the fire to continue and created a smoldering effect that reduced weed emergence by 23% when compared with burning PHR with 30% moisture during breezy conditions. The moistened 6.1 Mg ha−1 PHR treatment resulted in 53% more divine nightshade and itchgrass emergence when compared with dry 6.1 Mg ha−1 PHR after burning, and greater emergence was attributed to more seed survival for divine nightshade than itchgrass. The PHR moisture condition failed to influence the burn duration; however, the burn duration increased 103% and 56% as the amount of PHR increased from 6.1 to 12.1 Mg ha−1 and 12.1 to 18.2 Mg ha−1, respectively. The combination of high wind speeds and moistened PHR did not enhance the maximum burn temperature near the soil surface, but surface-deposited divine nightshade and itchgrass seeds were susceptible to prolonged exposure times at 100 C. Burning PHR from fields with poor stands or older ratoon, especially when PHR is abundantly wet, will not produce temperatures lethal to divine nightshade and itchgrass seeds. The fluid-filled and fleshy content that comprises divine nightshade fruit protected seed from short durations of high temperatures, but may not insulate seeds long enough when exposed to a smoldering fire.

Keywords

Daniel Stephenson, Louisana State University Agricultural CenterDivine nightshade, Solanum nigrescens M. Martens & Galeottiitchgrass, Rottboellia cochinchinensis (Lour.) Claytonsugarcane, Saccharum spp. interspecific hybridsLethal durationlive-firemoistened postharvest residueprescribed burningweed seedbank.
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 33 , Issue 5 , October 2019 , pp. 693 - 700
Creative Commons
This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States.
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019

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

Archontoulis, SV, Miguez, FE (2015) Nonlinear regression models and applications in agriculture research. Agron J 107:786–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolfrey-Arku, GE-K, Chauhan, BS, Johnson, DE (2011) Seed germination ecology of itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis). Weed Sci 59:182–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, W, Grundy, AC (2001) Non-chemical weed management in organic farming systems. Weed Res 41:383–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVore, JD, Norsworthy, JK, Brye, KR (2012) Influence of deep tillage and a rye cover crop on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) emergence in cotton. Weed Technol 26:832–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gascho, GH (1985) Water–sugarcane relationship. Sugar J 48:11–17Google Scholar
Gravois, K, LeBlanc, BD, Sheffield, R, Nix, KE (2017) Sugarcane Environmental Best Management Practices: BMPs. Baton Rouge, LA: LSU AgCenter. 11 pGoogle Scholar
Griffin, JL, Lencse, RJ (1992) Preemeergence control of itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis) in sugarcane. J Am Soc Sugar Cane Technol 12:65–70Google Scholar
Heap, I (2019) The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org/Details/Case.aspx?ResistID=11029. Accessed: June 7, 2019Google Scholar
Holm, LG, Plucknett, DL, Pancho, JV, Herberger, JP (1977) The World’s Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. Pp 139–143Google Scholar
Judice, WE, Griffin, JL, Etheredge, LM Jr., Jones, CA (2007) Effects of crop residue management and tillage on weed control and sugarcane production. Weed Technol 21:606–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lencse, RJ, Griffin, JL (1991) Itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis) interference in sugarcane (Saccharum sp.). Weed Technol 5:396–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loux, MM, Dobbels, AF, Bradley, KW, Johnson, WG, Young, BG, Spaunhorst, DJ, Norsworthy, JK, Palhano, M, Steckel, LE (2017) Influence of cover crops on management of Amaranthus species in glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant soybean. Weed Technol 31:487–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, DJ, Huggins, DR, Spring, JF (2016) Windrow burning eliminates Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne ssp. multiflorum) seed viability. Weed Technol 30:279–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millhollon, RW (1992) Effect of itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis) interference on growth and yield of sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids). Weed Sci 40:48–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millhollon, RW (1993) Preemergence control of itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis) and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) in sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids) with pendimethalin and prodiamine. Weed Sci 41:621–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orgeron, AJ, Schilling, EE, Urbatsch, LE, Ma, Q, Spaunhorst, DJ (2018) Solanum nigrescens: a potentially problematic nightshade weed species in Louisiana sugarcane. J Am Soc Sugar Cane Technol 38:23–43Google Scholar
Owen, MDK (2016) Diverse approaches to herbicide-resistant weed management. Weed Sci 64(SP1):31–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perez, FGM, Masiunas, JB (1990) Eastern black nightshade (Solanum ptycanthum) interference in processing tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) Weed Sci 38:385–388Google Scholar
Richard, EP Jr. (1993) Preemergence herbicide effects on bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) interference in sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids). Weed Technol 7:578–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richard, EP Jr. (1998) Control of perennated bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) in sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids). Weed Technol 12:128–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richard, EP Jr. (1999) Management of chopper harvester-generated green cane trash blankets: a new concern for Louisiana. Proc Int Soc Sugar Cane Technol 19:284–297Google Scholar
Sandhu, HS, Gilbert, RA, Kingston, G, Subiros, JF, Morgan, K, Rice, RW, Baucum, L, Shine, JM Jr., Davis, L (2013) Effects of sugarcane harvest method on microclimate in Florida and Costa Rica. Agric For Meteorol 177:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spaunhorst, DJ, Orgeron, AJ (2018) Performance of synthetic auxin and HPPD-inhibiting herbicides for control of divine nightshade (Solanum nigrescens Mart. & Gal.) in Louisiana sugarcane [abstract]. J Am Soc Sugar Cane Technol 38:45Google Scholar
Spaunhorst, DJ, Orgeron, AJ (2019) Dry heat and exposure time influence divine nightshade and itchgrass emergence. Agron J, 10.2134/agronj2019.02.0072Google Scholar
Vermeire, LT, Rinella, MJ (2009) Fire alters emergence of invasive plant species from soil surface-deposited seeds. Weed Sci 57:304–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viator, RP, Dalley, CD, Richard, EP Jr. (2011) Late-season glyphosate ripener application coupled with post-harvest residue retention impacts subsequent ratoon yields. Int Sugar J 113:66–71Google Scholar
Viator, RP, Johnson, RM, Grimm, CC, Richard, EP Jr. (2006) Allelopathic, autotoxic, and hormetic effects of postharvest sugarcane residue. Agron J 98:1526–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viator, RP, Johnson, RM, Richard, EP Jr. (2005) Challenges of post-harvest residue management in the Louisiana sugarcane industry. Proc Int Soc Sugar Cane Technol 25:238–244Google Scholar
Viator, RP, Johnson, RM, Richard, EP Jr. (2009) Effects of mechanical removal and incorporation of post-harvest residue on ratoon sugarcane yields. Sugar Cane Int 27:149–152Google Scholar
Viator, HP, Wang, JJ (2011) Effects of residue management on yield after three production cycles of a long-term sugarcane field trial in Louisiana. J Am Soc Sugar Cane Technol 31:15–25Google Scholar
Walsh, M, Newman, P (2007) Burning narrow windrows for weed seed destruction. Field Crops Res 104:24–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Aves, C, Powles, SB (2017) Harvest weed seed control systems are similarly effective on rigid ryegrass. Weed Technol 31:178–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webber, CL III, White, PM Jr., Landrum, DS, Spaunhorst, DJ, Wayment, DG, Dorvil, E (2017) Sugarcane field residue and root allelopathic impact on weed seed germination. J Agric Sci 10:66–72Google Scholar
Webber, CL III, White, PM Jr., Spaunhorst, DJ, Wayment, DG, Landrum, DS (2018) Sugarcane crop residue and bagasse allelopathic impact on oat (Avena sative L.), tall morningglory (Ipomoea purpurea L. Roth), and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) germination. J Agric Sci 10:15–22Google Scholar
White, SN, Boyd, NS (2016) Effect of dry heat, direct flame, and straw burning on seed germination of weed species found in lowbush blueberry fields. Weed Technol 30:263–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiggins, MS, McClure, MA, Hayes, RM, Steckel, LE (2015) Integrating cover crops and POST herbicides for glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) control in corn. Weed Technol 29:412–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, FL, Ogg, AG, Dotray, PA (1990) Effect of postharvest field burning on jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica) germination. Weed Technol 4:12–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar