Soybean row spacing and weed emergence time influence weed competitiveness and competitive indices

Weed Science

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 38-46

  Hock, Shawn M ^a   Knezevic, Stevan Z ^b   Martin, Alex R ^a   Lindquist, John L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA   (United States)

Author keywords

Competitive index; Integrated weed management; Plant volume; Weed competition

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); CROP YIELD; DRY MATTER; FIELD METHOD; HERBICIDE; SOYBEAN; WEED;

NEBRASKA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

GLYCINE MAX; HELIANTHUS; HELIANTHUS ANNUUS;

EID: 33750331372     PISSN: 00431745     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1614/WS-05-011R.1     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bauer, T. A., D. A. Mortensen, G. A. Wicks, T. A. Hayden, and A. R. Martin. 1991. Environmental variability associated with economic thresholds for soybeans. Weed Sci. 39:564-569.
2. Chikoye, D., S. F. Weise, and C. J. Swanton. 1995. Influence of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) time of emergence and density on white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Sci. 43:375-380.
3. Coble, H. D. and D. A. Mortensen. 1992. The threshold concept and its application to weed science. Weed Technol. 6:191-195.
4. Cousens, R., L. G. Firbank, A. M. Mortimer, and R.G.R. Smith. 1988. Variability in the relationship between crop yield and weed density for winter wheat and Bromus sterilis. J. Appl. Ecol. 25:1033-1044.
5. Evans, S. P., S. Z. Knezevic, J. L. Lindquist, C. A. Shapiro, and E. E. Blankenship. 2003. Nitrogen application influences the critical period for weed control in corn. Weed Sci. 51:408-417.
6. Forcella, F., R. P. King, S. M. Swinton, D. D. Buhler, and J. L. Gunsolus. 1996. Multi-year validation of a decision aid for integrated weed management in row crops. Weed Sci. 44:650-661.
7. Gunther, P., W. Pestemer, T. K. James, and A. Rahman. 1993. Testing the German herbicide advisory system HERBASYS under different edaphic and climatic conditions in New Zealand. Pages 777-784 in 8th EWRS Symposium, Quantitative Approaches in Weed and Herbicide Research and Their Practical Applications. Braunschweig, Germany: European Weed Research Society.
8. Knezevic, S. Z., S. P. Evans, E. E. Blankenship, R. C. van Acker, and J. L. Lindquist. 2002. Critical period for weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Sci. 50:773-786.
9. Knezevic, S. Z., S. P. Evans, and M. Mainz. 2003. Row spacing influences the critical timing for weed removal in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 17:666-673.
10. Knezevic, S. Z., M. J. Horak, and R. L. Vanderlip. 1997. Relative time of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) emergence is critical in pigweed-sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] competition. Weed Sci. 45:502-508.
11. Knezevic, S. Z., S. F. Weise, and C. J. Swanton. 1995. Comparison of empirical models depicting density of Amaranthus retroflexus L. and relative leaf area as predictors of yield loss in maize. Weed Res. 35: 207-214.
12. Lindquist, J. L., D. A. Mortensen, P. Westra, et al. 1999. Stability of corn (Zea mays)-foxtail (Setaria spp.) interference relationships. Weed Sci. 47:195-200.
13. Lotz, L.A.P., S. Christensen, D. Cloutier, et al. 1996. Prediction of the competitive effects of weeds on crop yields based on the relative leaf area of weeds. Weed Res. 36:93-101.
14. Martin, A. R., J. L. Haffield, D. D. Buhler, and B. A. Stewart. 1997. Models for weed management (in-field management tools). Pages 63-68 in Weed Biology, Soil Management and Weed Management. Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor Press.
15. Medd, R. W. and S. Pandey. 1993. Compelling grounds for controlling seed production in Avena species (wild oats). Pages 769-776 in 8th EWRS Symposium, Quantitative Approaches in Weed and Herbicide Research and Their Practical Applications. Braunschweig, Germany: European Weed Research Society.
16. Neeser, C., J. A. Dille, G. Krishnan, D. A. Mortensen, J. T. Rawlinson, A. R. Martin, and L. B. Bills. 2004. WeedSOFT®: a weed management decision support system. Weed Sci. 52:115-122.
17. Regnier, E. E. and S. K. Harrison. 1993. Compensatory responses of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) to partial shading. Weed Sci. 41:541-547.
18. Regnier, E. E. and E. W. Stoller. 1989. The effects of soybean (Glycine max) interference on the canopy architecture of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), jimsonweed (Datura stramonium), and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 37:187-195.
19. Ritchie, S. W., J. J. Hanway, and G. O. Benson. 1993. How a Soybean Plant Develops. Special Rep. 53. Ames, IA: Iowa State University. 20 p.
20. [SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1999. SAS OnLine Doc. Version 8. Gary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.
21. Schweizer, E., L. Wiles, D. Lybecker, and P. Westra. 1994. Bioeconomic Modeling for Weed Management Decisions in Crops. Great Plains Agriculture Council Bull. 150, pp. 135-141.
22. Stigliani, L. and C. Resina. 1993. SELOMA: expert system for weed management in herbicide-intensive crops. Weed Technol. 7:550-559.
23. Webster, T. M., M. M. Loux, E. E. Regnier, and S. K. Harrison. 1994. Giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida) canopy architecture and interference studies in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 8:559-564.
24. Wilkerson, G. G., S. A. Modena, and H. D. Coble. 1991. HERB: decision model for postemergence weed control in soybean. Agron. J. 83:413-417.