Energy for Conservation Tillage in Coastal Plain Soils

Khalilian, Ahmad; Garner, T. H.; Musen, H. L.; Dodd, Roy B.; Hale, Steve

doi:10.13031/2013.30866

Cited by 20 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Both tillage practices and herbicide programs affect weed management and the type of species associated with cropping systems (Bararpour and Oliver 1998;Buhler and Mester 1991;Légère and Bai 1999). On the Southeastern Coastal Plain, no-tillage systems are used sparingly because deep tillage implements, which shatter the E horizon, are essential for optimum crop yields (Khalilian et al 1988). Even so, conservation tillage is possible because of minimum surface disturbance with these implements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers¹

Norsworthy

2003

Weed Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soybean producers of South Carolina were surveyed in 2000 through mail and on-farm visits to determine which production practices limit seed yields the most. Production systems have direct implications on weed management practices, difficulties, and future problems. When asked to describe two extension and research focus areas that would improve current soybean production, the number one response was improved weed control strategies. Fifty-seven percent of the respondents indicated that weeds were the pest that most limited soybean yield. Sicklepod, Palmer amaranth, morningglory species, common cocklebur, yellow nutsedge, and Texas panicum were considered the most problematic weeds. More than half the producers (68%) used glyphosate-resistant soybean, with one-half of these farmers producing soybean in row widths > 51 cm. Of the farmers who grew conventional soybean, 10% used narrow rows (≤ 51 cm), whereas 22% used wide rows (> 51 cm). Only 27% of the farmers who planted glyphosate-resistant soybean used a soil-applied herbicide. Forty-three percent of farmers based the need for a postemergence herbicide on weed size, 21% used no repeatable method, 21% relied on days after soybean emergence, 11% depended on soybean size or groundcover, and only 4% used a combination of weed density and size. Thirty-five percent of the farmers did not rotate soybean with another crop. In fields where soybean parasitic nematodes reduced soybean growth or caused plant death, late-season weed infestations were often exacerbated, especially in the absence of nonresidual herbicides. Specific reasons for difficulty in managing weeds in soybean may include a diverse weed spectrum, which is difficult to control with a single herbicide, the use of wide-row soybean, the lack of crop rotation, the prevalence of nematodes that directly affect crop development and, in turn, weed management, the lack of an appropriate criterion for timing postemergence herbicide applications, and the greater attention paid to production of more valuable crops. Educational efforts addressing weed management problems and association of such problems with other production practices are needed if weed management is to be improved and weed-induced yield losses minimized.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers¹

Norsworthy

2003

Weed Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These shanks are thought to require slightly more energy than straight shanks, but their use is advised primarily because they leave the soil surface relatively undisturbed (Anonymous, 1999). Some research, however, has found that similar amounts of draft force are required for bentleg shanks as for straight shanks (Khalilian et al, 1988).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Force Requirements and Soil Disruption of Straight and Bentleg Subsoilers for Conservation Tillage Systems

Raper¹

2005

Applied Engineering in Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For PAM induced aggregation to be cost effect, it would have to be permanent or semi-permanent eliminating or significantly reducing the need for deep tillage which costs an estimated $30 to $50 per ha per year plus adjustments for fuel cost increases (Khalilian et al, 2002). To be cost effective, aggregation from PAM would have to eliminate tillage for at least 6 years.…”

Section: Aggregationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organic matter and polyacrylamide amendment of Norfolk loamy sand

Busscher¹,

Novak²,

Caesar‐TonThat

2007

Soil and Tillage Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy for Conservation Tillage in Coastal Plain Soils

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers¹

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers¹

Force Requirements and Soil Disruption of Straight and Bentleg Subsoilers for Conservation Tillage Systems

Organic matter and polyacrylamide amendment of Norfolk loamy sand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Energy for Conservation Tillage in Coastal Plain Soils

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers1

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers1

Force Requirements and Soil Disruption of Straight and Bentleg Subsoilers for Conservation Tillage Systems

Organic matter and polyacrylamide amendment of Norfolk loamy sand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers¹

Use of Soybean Production Surveys to Determine Weed Management Needs of South Carolina Farmers¹