Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:14:49.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competitive Potential and Economic Analysis of a Glyphosate-Tolerant/Conventional Soybean (Glycine max) Mix

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jason K. Norsworthy  and
Lawrence R. Oliver
Jason K. Norsworthy*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72704
Lawrence R. Oliver
Affiliation:
Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72704
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jnorswo@clemson.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1997 and 1999 to determine the effect of a broadcast-seeded glyphosate-tolerant/conventional soybean seed mix on soybean seed yield, gross profit margin from weed management, and early-season weed suppression prior to a single glyphosate application. Tests were established by broadcasting and incorporating 494,000 seeds/ha glyphosate-tolerant soybean in combination with 0 to 1,976,000 seeds/ha conventional soybean. Glyphosate at 1.12 kg ai/ha was applied at the V5 to V6 soybean growth stage to kill all conventional soybean plants and emerged weeds. The broadcast planting technique was effective in establishing a soybean stand on a silt loam but was ineffective on a silty clay soil. Hemp sesbania and pitted morningglory control, resulting from interference with soybean, were correlated with percent soybean groundcover (R 2 = 0.961 to 0.971) and population (R 2 = 0.821 to 0.860) at the V5 to V6 soybean growth stage. Although not significant, increased yield and gross profit margin of dryland soybean occurred as the total seeding rate of the seed mix increased from 494,000 to 741,000 seeds/ha. A dryland seeding rate of 741,000 compared to 494,000 seeds/ha resulted in 438 kg/ha and $93.78/ha increase in seed yield and gross profit margin, respectively. Interference between the two soybean cultivars at 1,976,000 seeds/ha reduced yield. Irrigated soybean at 988,000 seeds/ha produced the greatest seed yield and gross profit margin at 2,987 kg/ha and $555.86/ha, respectively. Maximum yields were attributed to early-season weed suppression.

Keywords

Glyphosatehemp sesbania, Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rybd. ex A. W. Hill #3 SEBEXpitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLAsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Delta King 5961 RR’Broadcast-seeded soybeanlow-input agricultureRoundup Ready soybeansafe sitesoybean groundcoverAmaranthus hybridusAmaranthus palmeriAMACH, AMAPADAP, days after plantingWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2001 , pp. 177 - 183
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

Akhter, M. and Sneller, C. H. 1996. Yield and yield components of early maturing soybean genotypes in the mid-South. Crop Sci. 36: 877–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashley, D. A. and Ethridge, W. J. 1978. Irrigation effects on vegetative and reproductive development of three soybean cultivars. Agron. J. 70: 467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, F. L. 1995. Weed control in Roundup tolerant soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 48:46.Google Scholar
Ball, R. A., Purcell, L. C., and Vories, E. D. 2000. Yield compensation in response to plant population and water regime for short-season soybean production. Crop Sci. 40: 757–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Board, J. E., Kang, M. S., and Harville, B. G. 1999. Path analyses of the yield formation process for late-planted soybean. Agron. J. 91: 128–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1979. Soybean (Glycine max) growth as affected by weed removal, cultivar, and row spacing. Weed Sci. 27: 562–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeFelice, M. S. and Oliver, L. R. 1980. Redvine and trumpetcreeper control in soybeans and grain sorghum. Ark. Farm Res. 29 (3): 5.Google Scholar
Egli, D. B. and Yu, Z. W. 1991. Crop growth rate and seeds per unit area in soybean. Crop Sci. 31: 439–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fehr, W. R., Caviness, C. E., Burmood, D. T., and Pennington, J. S. 1971. Stage of development descriptions for soybeans [Glycine max (L.) Merrill]. Crop Sci. 11: 929–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, L. D. and Hoag, D. L. 1998. Reduced chemical input cropping systems in the southeastern United States. III. Economic analysis. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 13: 12–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knake, E. L. 1972. Effect of shade on giant foxtail. Weed Sci. 20: 588–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 1996. Control of annual weeds with glyphosate. Weed Technol. 11: 354–362.Google Scholar
Lich, J. M., Renner, K. A., and Penner, D. 1997. Interaction of glyphosate with postemergence soybean (Glycine max) herbicides. Weed Sci. 45: 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mickelson, J. A. and Renner, K. A. 1997. Weed control using reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in narrow and wide row soybean. J. Prod. Agric. 10: 431–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, L. R., Taylor, S. E., and Gander, J. R. 1996. Influence of application timing and rate of glyphosate on weed control in soybean. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:57.Google Scholar
Payne, S. A. and Oliver, L. R. 2000. Weed control programs in drilled glyphosate-tolerant soybean. Weed Technol. 14: 413–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, D. R. and Mack, R. E. 1991. Redvine (Brunnichia ovata) germination and emergence. Weed Sci. 39: 33–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, J. W. and Cox, W. J. 1998. Agronomics of corn production under different crop rotations in New York. J. Prod. Agric. 11: 462–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoller, E. W., Harrison, S. K., Max, L. M., Regnier, E. E., and Nafziger, E. D. 1987. Weed interference with soybeans (Glycine max). Rev. Weed Sci. 3: 155–181.Google Scholar
Wax, L. M. and Pendleton, J. W. 1968. Effect of row spacing on weed control in soybeans. Weeds 16: 462–465.Google Scholar
Wax, L. M., Nave, N. R., and Cooper, R. L. 1977. Weed control in narrow and wide row soybeans. Weed Sci. 25: 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, T. M. and Cardina, J. 1999. Apocynum cannabinum seed germination and vegetative shoot emergence. Weed Sci. 47: 524–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yelverton, F. H. and Coble, H. D. 1991. Narrow row spacing and canopy formation reduces weed resurgence in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 5: 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
York, A. C. 1995. Weed management with Roundup Ready™ soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 48: 34–35.Google Scholar