Mathematical and biological analysis of the models for estimating culture yield losses due to weed interference;Análise matemática e biológica dos modelos de estimativa de perdas de rendimento na cultura devido à interferência de plantas daninhas

Planta Daninha

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-12

  Adati, C ^a   Oliveira, V A ^a   Karam, D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b EMBRAPA MILHO E SORGO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Mathematical models; Weeds; Yield loss

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646748258     PISSN: 01008358     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s0100-83582006000100001     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. BAUER, T. A.; MORTENSEN. D. A. A comparison of economic optimum thresholds for two annual weeds in soybeans. Weed Technol., v. 6, n. 1, p. 228-235, 1992.
2. BUSSLER, B. H.; MAXWELL, B. D.; PUETTMANN, K. J. Using plant volume to quantify interference in corn (zea mays) neighborhoods. Weed Sci., v. 43, n. 4, p. 586-594, 1995.
3. CHEMALE , V. M.; FLECK, N. G. Avaliação de cultivares de soja (Glycine max (L) Merril) em competição com Euphorbia heterophylla L. sob três densidades e dois períodos de ocorrência. Planta Daninha, v. 5, n. 2, p. 36-45, 1982.
4. CONLEY, S. P.; STOLTENBERG, D. E.; BINNING, L. K. Predicting soybean yield loss in giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) communities. Weed Sci., v. 51, n. 3, p. 402-407, 2003.
5. COUSENS, R. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol., v. 107, n. 3, p. 239-252, 1985a.
6. COUSENS, R. An empirical model relating crop yield to weed crop density and a statistical comparison with other models. J. Agric. Sci., v. 105, n. 3, p. 513-521, 1985b.
7. COUSENS, R. et al. The use biologically realistic equations to describe the effects of weed density and relative time of emergence on crop yield. Weed Sci., v. 35, n. 5, p. 720-725, 1987.
8. COUSENS, R.; MORTIMER, M. Dynamics of weed populations. Cambridge: University Press, 1995. 332 p.
9. DEEN, W. et al. An evaluation of four crop: weed competition models using a common data set. Weed Res., v. 43, n. 2, p. 116-1299, 2003.
10. FLOREZ, J. A.; FISCHER, A. J.; RAMIREZ, H.; DUQUE, M. C. Predicting rice yield losses caused by multispecies weed competition. Agron. J., v. 91, n. 1, p. 87-92, 1999.
11. GONZÁLEZ-ANDÚJAR, J. L. et al. Spatial distribution and mapping of crenate broomrape infestations in continuous broad bean cropping. Weed Sci., v. 49, n. 6, p. 773-779, 2001.
12. HARVEY, R. G.; WAGNER, C. R. Using estimates of weed pressure to establish crop yield loss equations. Weed Technol., v. 8, n. 1, p. 114-118, 1994.
13. HARVEY, R. G. A simple technique for predicting future weed problems and choosing the best weed management. IRome: Plant Production Division Food and Protection Agricultural Organization of the United States Nation, FAO, 1997. p. 33-39.
14. KARAM, D.; CRUZ, M. B. Sem concorrentes - manter o terreno limpo, sem invasoras é o primeiro passo para garantir o desenvolvimento. Cultivar Grandes Culturas, v. 6, n. 63, p. 1-10, 2004.
15. KIM, D. S. et al. Modeling herbicide dose and weed density effects on crop: weed competition. Weed Res., v. 42, n. 1, p. 1-13, 2002.
16. KROPFF, M. J.; SPITTERS, C. J. T. A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations on relative leaf area of the weeds. Weed Res., v. 31, n. 2, p. 97-105, 1991.
17. KROPFF, M. J.; WEAVER, S. E.; SMITS, M. A. Use of ecophysiological models for crop-weed interference: relations amongst weed density, relative time of weed emergence, relative leaf area, and yield loss. Weed Sci., v. 40, n. 2, p. 296-301, 1992.
18. KROPFF, M. J.; LAAR, H. H. Modelling crop-weed interactions. London: CAB International, 1993. 274 p.
19. LOTZ, L. A. P. et al. Prediction of yield loss based on relative leaf cover of weeds; Proc. First Inter. Weed Control Congress, v. 2, p. 290-292, 1992.
20. LOTZ, L. A. P. et al. Techniques to estimate relative leaf area and cover of weeds in crops for yield loss prediction. Weed Res., v. 34, n. 3, p. 167-175, 1994.
21. LOTZ, L. A. P. et al. Prediction of the competitive effects of weeds on crop yields based on the relative leaf area of weeds. Weed Res., v. 36, n. 1, p. 93-101, 1996.
22. MOECHNING, M. J.; STOLTENBERG, D. E.; BINING, L. K. Empirical corn yield loss estimation from common lambsquartes (Chenopodium album) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) in mixed communities. Weed Sci., v. 51, n. 3, p. 386-393, 2003.
23. MURPHY, C. et al. Use of density to predict crop yield loss between variable seasons. Weed Res., v. 42, n. 5, p. 377-384, 2002.
24. NGOUJIO, M.; LEROUX, G. D.; LEMIEUX, C. A flexible model relating crop yield to weed relative leaf cover and its comparison with nested models, Weed Research, v. 39, n. 4, p. 329-343, 1999.
25. PARK, S. E.; BENHAMIN, L. R.; WATKINSON, A. R. The theory and application of plant competition models: an agronomic perspective. Ann. Bot., v. 92, n. 6, p. 741-748, 2003.
26. RIZZARDI, M. A. et al. Previsão da perda de rendimento de grãos de soja causada pela infestação de plantas daninhas utilizando variáveis foliares relativas. Planta Daninha, v. 21, n. 1, p. 45-54, 2003a.
27. RIZZARDI, M. A. et al. Ajuste de modelo para quantificar o efeito de plantas daninhas e época de semeadura no rendimento de soja. Pesq. Agropec. Bras., v. 38, n. 1, p. 35-43, 2003b.
28. RIZZARDI, M. A.; FLECK, N. G. Métodos de quantificaçã o da cobertura foliar da infestação de plantas daninhas e da cultura de soja. Ci. Rural, v. 34, n. 1, p. 13-18, 2004.
29. SAKAI, K. Nonlinear dynamics and chaos in agricultural systems. The Netherlands: Elsevier, 2003. p. 47-56.
30. SPITTERS, C. J. T. An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experimenters. 1. Estimation of competition effects, Neth. J. Agric. Sci., v. 31, n. 2, p. 1-11, 1983.
31. SWINTON, S. M.; LYFORD, C. P. et al. A test for choice between hyperbolic and sigmoidal models of crop yield response to weed density. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Statistics, v. 44, n. 1, p. 97-106, 1996.
32. VITTA, J. I.; QUINTANILLA, C. F. Canopy measurements as predictors of weed competition. Weed Sci., v. 44, n. 3, p. 511-516, 1996.
33. WU, J. Optimal weed control under static and dynamic decision rules. Agric. Econ., v. 25, n. 1, p. 119-130, 2001.