Physical and Cultural Weed Control Working Group of - European ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

9 th EWRS Workshop on Physical and Cultural Weed Control 78 Samsun, Turkey, 28 – 30 March 2011 Table 5. Regression parameters for fresh weight production for each plant species at 7 d after treatment as influenced by time of day (Figure 2). Regression parameters are estimated using Equation 2. a,b Species Regression parameters (± SE) B C D I50 Corn 8.2 (2.7) 10.9 (1.0) 11.9 (0.5) 8 (1) Green foxtail 5.6 (1.9) 3.8 (0.8) 5.7 (0.5) 9 (1) Soybean 8.5 (1.2) 1.5 (0.4) 2.6 (0.4) 6 (1) Velvetleaf 14.4 (2.6) 1.6 (0.5) 2.7 (0.4) 4 (1) a Abbreviations: B, the slope of the line at the inflection point; C, the lower limit; D, the upper limit; I50, the hour after sunrise resulting in a 50% response between the upper and lower limit. b No treatment-by-experimental run interaction occurred; therefore, the data were pooled over two experimental runs. There was no propane dose by time of day interaction; therefore, the data were averaged across propane doses.
9 th EWRS Workshop on Physical and Cultural Weed Control 79 Samsun, Turkey, 28 – 30 March 2011 Weed control with flaming and cultivation in maize S.Knezevic a , A.Datta a , S.Stepanovic a , C.Bruening b , B.Neilson b , and G.Gogos b a Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Northeast Research and Extension Center, 57905 866 Road, Concord, NE 68728-2828, USA b Mechanical Engineering, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68588-0656, USA Weed management is a major constraint in organic crop production. Propane flaming and cultivation could be combined into a single operation as an additional tool for weed control in organic maize (Zea mays L.) Field experiments were conducted at the Haskell Agricultural Laboratory of the University of Nebraska, Concord, NE in 2010, and will be repeated in 2011 to determine the level of weed control and maize response to propane flaming utilized alone, or in combination with inter-row cultivation. Total of seven treatments were applied at several growth stages of maize (V3 (3-leaf) and V6 (6-leaf) with the propane doses of 20 and 45 kg/ha for the banded and broadcast flaming , respectively. Flaming and cultivation treatments were applied utilizing a custom built research flamer-cultivator mounted on the back of a tractor moving at a constant speed of 6.4 km h –1 . The weed control ratings and response of maize was evaluated at 7, 14, 28, and 60DAT (days after treatment-DAT). Overall, weed control and maize response varied among treatments and growth stages. Cultivation at the V3 stage only, provided the poorest weed control (20%) and the lowest yield (9.7 t/ha) due to weed competition from uncontrolled weeds. The best treatment was a combination of cultivation and banded flaming conducted twice, at the V3 and V6 stages of maize. Such treatmentprovided above 95% weed control and yielded about 27% more than cultivation alone conducted at the same time (12.6 t/ha vs. 9.9 t/ha). All other treatments provided significantly lower weed control levels, ranging from 20-80%. Based on data from just the first year of this study, it appears that the most promising season-long weed control was achieved with a combination of flaming and cultivation treatment applied twice in field maize, at V3 and V6 stages.
Page 2 and 3:
Disclaimer The contents of these pr
Page 4 and 5:
9 th EWRS Workshop on Physical and
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 11 and 12:
General presentations
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38: 9 th EWRS Workshop on Physical and
Page 87: 9 th EWRS Workshop on Physical and
Page 107: 9 th EWRS Workshop on Physical and
show all

Physical and Cultural Weed Control Working Group of - European ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?