Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:15:32.784Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition of a Binary Weed System with Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Joe E. Street ,
Charles E. Snipes ,
John A. McGuire  and
Gale A. Buchanan
Joe E. Street
Affiliation:
Delta Branch, Miss. Agric. and For. Exp. Stn., Stoneville, MS 38776
Charles E. Snipes
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Path. and Weed Sci., Miss. State, MS 39762
John A. McGuire
Affiliation:
Res. Data Anal., Auburn Univ., Auburn, AL 36849
Gale A. Buchanan
Affiliation:
Ala. Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn Univ., Auburn, AL 36849
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Stoneville 213’) was grown on Lucedale fine sandy loam with sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia L. ♯ CASOB) and a complex of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L. ♯ AMARE) and smooth pigweed (A. hybridus L. ♯ AMACH) in all possible combinations of 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 weeds of each species per 7.5 m of row. Seed cotton yields decreased as a quadratic function of increasing weed density. One pigweed and one sicklepod plant per 7.5 m of row reduced yields by 9 and 9.7% in 1979 and 1980, respectively. At low levels of infestation (≤4 weeds/7.5 m of row), the competitive effect of pigweed and sicklepod was additive; however, at the high densities, the competitive effect was not additive. Mechanical harvesting efficiency and cotton maturity were not decreased by any weed density. Sicklepod was more competitive than pigweed in both years.

Keywords

Weed biologyAmaranthus retroflexusAmaranthus hybridusCassia obtusifolia
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 33 , Issue 6 , November 1985 , pp. 807 - 809
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 by the 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

1. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., and McLaughlin, R. D. 1977. Competition of prickly sida with cotton. Weed Sci. 25:106–110.Google Scholar
2. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., and McGuire, J. A. 1980. Competition of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) with cotton (Gossypium birsutum). Weed Sci. 28:258–262.Google Scholar
3. Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., McGuire, J. A., and Crowley, R. H. 1980. Establishment of threshold effects of weeds with cotton. Beltwide Cotton Production Res. Conf.: 294–297.Google Scholar
4. Chandler, J. M. 1977. Competition of spurred anoda, velvetleaf, prickly sida, and venice mallow in cotton. Weed Sci. 25:151–158.Google Scholar
5. Crowley, R. H. and Buchanan, G. A. 1978. Competition of four morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) species with cotton (Gossypium birsutum). Weed Sci. 26:484–487.Google Scholar
6. Keeley, P. E. and Thullen, R. J. 1975. Influence of yellow nutsedge competition on furrow-irrigated cotton. Weed Sci. 23:171–175.Google Scholar
7. Patterson, M. G., Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., and Crowley, R. H. 1980. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) competition with cotton (Gossypium birsutum). Weed Sci. 28:327–329.Google Scholar
8. Peterson, R. G. 1977. Use and misuse of multiple comparison procedures. Agron. J. 69:205–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Snipes, C. E., Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. A. 1982. Competition of common cocklebur (Xantbium pensylvanicum) with cotton (Gossypium birsutum). Weed Sci. 30:553–556.Google Scholar
10. Zimdahl, R. L. 1980. Weed-crop competition – a review. International Plant Protection Center, Oreg. State Univ., Corvallis, OR 97331. 196 pp.Google Scholar