Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-fz5kh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-10T01:51:00.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Accepted manuscript

Weed Population Impacts Using Targeted Herbicide Applications with See & Spray™ in Soybean over a Three-year Period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2025

Tristen H. Avent
Affiliation:
Senior Graduate Research Assistant, formerly, Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
Jason K. Norsworthy
Affiliation:
Distinguished Professor and Elms Farming Chair of Weed Science, Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
Thomas R. Butts
Affiliation:
Clinical Assistant Professor, Extension Weed Scientist, Department of Botany & Plant Pathology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA
Gerson Drescher
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
Lawton L. Nalley
Affiliation:
Professor and Department Head, Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR
Alan R. Vazquez
Affiliation:
Research Professor, School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey, NL, Mexico
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Targeted herbicide applications have the potential to reduce herbicide inputs but pose an inherent risk of missing weeds resulting in late-season escapes. Furthermore, relying on targeted residual herbicides may increase weed emergence relative to broadcast applications. Research was conducted over a three-year period in Keiser, AR, to compare traditional broadcast applications to targeted postemergence applications in glyphosate-, glufosinate-, and dicamba-resistant soybean. The herbicide program was consistent across treatments with a broadcast-applied preemergence residual, and a postemergence program including glufosinate + glyphosate + S-metolachlor followed by glufosinate + acetochlor, both broadcast- or target applied at the highest and lowest spray sensitivities. The soil seedbank was similar at trial initiation across treatments, and there was no increase over three years for broadcast and targeted applications at the highest sensitivity. Averaged over application timing, the lowest sensitivity increased the weed density from 867 plants ha-1 to 2,870 plants ha-1 in year two, to 11,300 plants ha-1 in year three. This response is likely due to more Palmer amaranth escapes at harvest (averaged over years) with >1,000 plants ha-1 compared to the highest sensitivity and broadcast treatments. Targeted applications did improve profitability by reducing herbicide use and increasing application efficiency, providing averaged savings of USD $43.22 ha-1 to $129.19 ha-1 relative to broadcast postemergence cost of $227.22 ha-1. Area sprayed was reduced by 20% to 90%, with the average at early-postemergence being 41.3% and 57.9% and at mid-postemergence equaling 48.1% and 49.3% for the lowest and highest sensitivities, respectively. The only difference in the area sprayed between sensitivity settings occurred early postemergence. Based on the results of this experiment, producers could utilize targeted applications postemergence in soybean to increase profitability, but the lowest sensitivity resulted in unacceptable increases to the weed seedbank, which could impact management in future years.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Weed Science Society of America