Effect of Weeds and Cultural Practices on Sorghum Yields

Wiese, A. F.; Collier, J. W.; Clark, L. J.; Havelka, U. D.

doi:10.2307/4040731

Cited by 33 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect was on the yields rather than on the numbers of weeds. This is in accordance with earlier studies of competition between weeds and cultivated plants, which likewise have demonstrated that dense stands of cultivated crops are effective in reducing weed yields (Winifred and Brenchley 1917, Granström 1962, Nelson and Nylund 1962, Weber and Staniforth 1957, Wiese et al 1964. Nitrogen fertilization has been found to increase the numbers and yields of weeds in cereal crops (Suomela and Paatela 1962).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Growth of weeds in cereal populations

Erviö

1972

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The weeds in this study consisted mainly of Chenopodium album, Stellaria media, Viola arvensis, Polygonum convolvulus, P. aviculare and P. lapathifolium. Increasing cereal seed rates reduced the numbers, individual weights and total yields of the most abundant species, Chenopodium album. The decreases in plant weight and total yield of the weeds were very steep when the cereal seed rate was raised from 25 to 200 kg/ha. Increases in the seeding rate reduced the total yields of weeds rather than their numbers. The effect of the cereal on weeds became apparent as soon as heading of the cereal was complete and was further enhanced by prolonged competition. Added nitrogen raised the weed yields at cereal seed rates of 25—100 kg/ha but reduced them at higher seed rates. Nitrogen also raised the yield and individual plant weight of C. album. Cereal seed rate did not affect the nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium and magnesium contents of the weeds grown among the crop. Due to larger total weed yields, however, the amounts of these nutrients in the weeds were higher in sparse than in dense cereal populations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Growth of weeds in cereal populations

Erviö

1972

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may have been due to the lower level of weed infestations and the distribution of rainfall in 1980. This is in agreement with Wiese et al (1964) who found that in well managed sorghum fields grown with relatively low weed pressure, one or two interrow cultivations were adequate for maintaining high sorghum yields, unless rain occurs shortly after planting.…”

Section: Effect Of In-the-row Weed Management On the Grain Yield Ofsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…In years of adequate rainfall, weed growth is often abundant and yield losses from weed interference have been estimated at 25 to 29% of total production (Upadhyay and Munde, 1974). In other countries, sorghum yield losses due to uncontrolled weed growth have varied from 8 to 41% (Wiese et al, 1964;Burnside and Wicks, 1969;Phillips, 1970).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

In‐the‐row weed management in sorghum

Korwar

Friesen

1985

Tropical Pest Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field experiments on sorghum, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench., hybrid CSH-6, demonstrated the importance of in-therow weed management in this crop when grown under rainfed conditions in south-central India. In-the-row weeds reduced sorghum grain yields by up to 30% when only inter-row weeding was carried out. A single hand weeding at any time between 2 and 5 weeks after crop sowing was equal to repeated hand weeding in maintaining high grain yields. Atrazine applied preemergence to the crop or isoproturon applied 3 weeks after crop sowing resulted in sorghum grain yields equal to those obtained from hand weeding. Over the row band applications of these herbicides were equal to broadcast applications, provided two interrow cultivations were carried out; and herbicide costs were reduced by two-thirds.

show abstract

“…For example, increased seeding rates and decreased row spacing increase crop resource uptake under weed-infested conditions by increasing crop biomass early in growth (Walker andBuchanan 1982, Minotti 1990). Marked decreases in weed growth in narrow (~20 em) vs. wide (~75 em) row spacing have been observed in many major crops, e.g., 55 and 37% in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.; Buchanan and Hauser 1980) and grain sorghum (Wiese et al 1964), respectively. However, extremely narrow row spacing may prevent cultivation operations important to control of certain weeds (Martinet al 1977).…”

Section: Increasing Crop Interference By Crop Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospects for Weed Control Through Crop Interference

Jordan¹

1993

Ecological Applications

150

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crop interference with weed growth is a fundamental method of nonchemical weed control. Crop interference, entailing weed suppression, should be distinguished from crop tolerance of weeds, i.e., relatively small yield loss due to the presence of weeds. Tolerance is less desirable than interference in that it may lead to increases in weed seed populations that can cause future yield losses. Ideally, interference should occur as early as possible in growth to prevent resource consumption by weeds. A path analysis of crop-weed interference is presented. The model can be used to estimate the relative magnitude of early vs. later crop interference with weed growth, and to identify crop traits that contribute to the interference with weed growth. Such analysis can identify crop varieties that show strong early interference with weed growth, and traits associated with strong early interference. For illustrative purposes, the model is applied to characterize differences among soybean varieties in interference with common cocklebur. Weed control by crop interference could be enhanced by crop breeding and management. However, several benefits and costs of interference should be evaluated before undertaking such approaches. First, the degree to which crop interference can substitute for other forms of weed control must be determined. Second, yield costs associated with interference should be measured; these may occur in crop varieties that interfere strongly with weeds, particularly when water, temperature, and mineral nutrients are limiting. A more mechanistic understanding of crop interference is needed so that interference can be enhanced through crop breeding and management while minimizing yield costs.

show abstract

Effect of Weeds and Cultural Practices on Sorghum Yields

Cited by 33 publications

References 2 publications

Growth of weeds in cereal populations

Growth of weeds in cereal populations

In‐the‐row weed management in sorghum

Prospects for Weed Control Through Crop Interference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About