Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T08:51:32.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Managing Weeds in Commercial Edamame Production: Current Options and Implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Martin M. Williams II
Martin M. Williams II*
Affiliation:
Global Change and Photosynthesis Research, U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, 1102 South Goodwin Avenue, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Edamame, a specialty food-grade soybean popular among health-conscious consumers, is growing in popularity worldwide. Despite a well-developed soybean industry, most edamame consumed in the United States is imported from Asia. Considerable interest exists in growing edamame domestically; however, weed interference is a major problem, and until recently, only a single herbicide was registered for use on the crop. The objectives of this work were (1) to compare effectiveness of weed management treatments that utilize herbicides currently registered for use on edamame or that may be registered in the near future, (2) to determine the significance of edamame cultivar on performance of these treatments, and (3) to identify potential relationships between the crop and weed. Ten different weed management treatments were tested in three edamame cultivars over a 3-yr period. All weed management treatments increased marketable pod yield relative to the nontreated control, but only treatments with saflufenacil or S-metolachlor combinations were comparable to the hand-weeded weed-free treatment. Of the treatments studied, S-metolachlor followed by imazamox was among the greatest yielding, had the least weed density and biomass, and did not reduce crop population density. Also, cultivars differed in their weed-suppressive ability. Path analysis indicated certain relationships were consistent across cultivars, such as weed population density having a direct negative association with crop biomass; however, other edamame–weed interactions were not identical across cultivars. Although more improvements are needed, the vegetable industry is beginning to have nascent weed management options in edamame, which will likely reduce reliance on hand weeding and result in crop-production costs that are more competitive in the global market.

Keywords

ImazamoxS-metolachlorsaflufenaciledamame, Glycine max (L.) Merr.Competitive cultivarshand weedingimmature soybean seedminor cropvegetable soybean
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 63 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 954 - 961
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Akey, WC, Jurik, TW, Dekker, J (1991) A replacement series evaluation of competition between velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Res 31:63–72.Google Scholar
Anonymous. (1990). Minnesota takes a bite out of Japanese snack food market. AURI News (Minnesota). Pages 5 p.Google Scholar
Dong, D, Fu, X, Yuan, F, Chen, P, Zhu, S, Li, B, Yang, Q, Yu, X, Zhu, D (2014) Genetic diversity and population structure of vegetable soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) in China as revealed by SSR markers. Genet Resour Crop Evol 61:173–183.Google Scholar
Fennimore, SA, Doohan, DJ (2008) The challenges of specialty crop weed control, future directions. Weed Technol 22:364–372.Google Scholar
[FAOSTAT] Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (2014) http://faostat3.fao.org/faostat-gateway/go/to/download/Q/QC/E. Accessed April 16, 2014.Google Scholar
Haas, PW, Gilbert, LC, Edwards, AD (1982) Fresh green soybeans: analysis of field performance and sensory qualities. Kutztown, PA Rodale Research Center and Rodale Test Kitchen No. NC-81-89. 25 p.Google Scholar
Heap, I (2014) International survey of herbicide resistant weeds. http://www.weedscience.org/summary/home.aspx. Accessed April 29, 2014.Google Scholar
IR-4 Project. (2012). Index of crops/crop groups/crop subgroups, and crop definitions. http://ir4.rutgers.edu/Other/CropGroup.htm. Accessed April 14, 2014.Google Scholar
Jordan, N (1992) Differential interference between soybean (Glycine max) varieties and common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium): a path analysis. Weed Sci 40:614–620.Google Scholar
Jordan, N (1993) Prospects for weed control through crop interference. Ecol Appl 3:84–91.Google Scholar
McPherson, RM, Johnson, WC, Fonsah, EG, Roberts, PM (2008) Insect pests and yield potential of vegetable soybean (edamame) produced in Georgia. J Entomol Soc 43:225–240.Google Scholar
Miller, RT, Soltani, N, Robinson, DE, Kraus, TE, Sikkema, PH (2012) Soybean (Glycine max) cultivar tolerance to saflufenacil. Can J Plant Sci 92:1319–1328.Google Scholar
Mimura, M, Coyne, CJ, Bambuck, MW, Lumpkin, TA (2007) SSR diversity of vegetable soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). Genet Resour Crop Evol 54:497–508.Google Scholar
Mitchell, RJ (2001) Path analysis: pollination. Pages 217–234 in Scheiner SM, Gurevitch J, eds. Design and analysis of ecological experiments. New York Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Monks, DW, Oliver, LR (1988) Interactions between soybean (Glycine max) cultivars and selected weeds. Weed Sci 36:770–774.Google Scholar
Morse, WJ (1930) Soybeans in the Orient. Proceedings of the American Soybean Assoc. 3:96–100.Google Scholar
Morse, WJ (1937) Soybean variety studies of the United States Department of Agriculture. Proceedings of the American Soybean Assoc ., p 16–18.Google Scholar
National Agriculture Statistics Service (2014) Statistics by subject. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_Subject/index.php?sector=CROPS. Accessed April 16, 2014.Google Scholar
Neter, J, Kutner, MH, Nachtsheim, CJ, Wasserman, W (1996) Applied linear statistical models. 4th ed. Chicago Irwin. 1408 pGoogle Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Oliver, LR (2001) Effect of seeding rate of drilled glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max) on seed yield and gross profit margin. Weed Technol 15:284–292.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Ward, SM, Shaw, DR, Llewellyn, RS, Nichols, RL, Webster, TM, Bradley, KW, Frisvold, G, Powles, SB, Burgos, NR, Witt, WW, Barrett, M (2012) Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Sci Spec Iss 60:31–62.Google Scholar
Place, GT, Reberg-Horton, SC, Dickey, DA, Carter, TE (2011) Identifying soybean traits of interest for weed competition. Crop Sci 51:2642–2654.Google Scholar
Rao, MSS, Bhagsari, AS, Mohamed, AI (2002) Fresh green seed yield and seed nutritional traits of vegetable soybean genotypes. Crop Sci 42:1950–1958.Google Scholar
Rose, SJ, Burnside, OC, Specht, JE, Swisher, BA (1984) Competition and allelopathy between soybeans and weeds. Agron J 76:523–528.Google Scholar
Sánchez, E, Kelley, K, Butler, L (2005) Edamame production as influenced by seedling emergence and plant population. HortTechnol 15:672–676.Google Scholar
Shurtleff, W, Aoyagi, A (2009) History of edamame, green vegetable soybeans, and vegetable-type soybeans (1275–2009): Extensively annotated bibliography and sourcebook. Lafayette, CA Soyinfo Center. 764 pGoogle Scholar
Williams, M, Herman, T, Nelson, R (2012) Edamame Cultivar Report—2011. Midwestern Vegetable Variety Trial Report for 2011, Purdue University, AES Bulletin. http://www.hort.purdue.edu/fruitveg/rep_pres/2011-12/toc11.shtml. Accessed March 1, 2012.Google Scholar
Williams, MM II, Nelson, RL (2014) Vegetable soybean tolerance to bentazon, fomesafen, imazamox, linuron, and sulfentrazone. Weed Technol 28:601–607.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, RL (2004) Weed–crop competition. 2nd ed. Ames, IA Blackwell Publishing. 220 p.Google Scholar