Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:33:06.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interactions Between Soybean (Glycine max) Cultivars and Selected Weeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

David W. Monks  and
Lawrence R. Oliver
David W. Monks
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Lawrence R. Oliver
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Competition of weeds was characterized by determining the distance down the soybean row that a weed affects soybean biomass and yield. Field studies were conducted for 2 yr to compare competitive effects of common cocklebur, johnsongrass, Palmer amaranth, sicklepod, and tall morningglory on ‘Forrest’ and ‘Centennial’ soybeans. The weeds did not significantly reduce soybean biomass for 6 weeks after emergence. Palmer amaranth, common cocklebur, and tall morningglory had the greatest biomass by 6 weeks after emergence. However, only competition from common cocklebur and Palmer amaranth measurably reduced soybean biomass during the growing season. Biomass of Forrest and Centennial soybeans was reduced when these cultivars were growing within 12.5 and 50 cm of common cocklebur, respectively. Johnsongrass, sicklepod, and tall morningglory grew more slowly than the other weeds and had no measurable competitive effects on soybean biomass. Soybean competition reduced biomass of all weeds 90 to 97%. Soybean cultivar influenced the level and duration of competitiveness depending on the weed species present. Biomass of both soybean cultivars was reduced when they were growing within 50 cm of Palmer amaranth. Soybean seed yield was reduced when soybeans were growing within 25 cm of common cocklebur and Palmer amaranth and also when they were growing within 12.5 cm of tall morningglory. Sicklepod had no effect on soybean seed yield.

Keywords

Soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.common cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. #3 XANSTjohnsongrass, Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. # SORHAPalmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. # AMAPAsicklepod, Cassia obtusifolia L. # CASOBand tall morningglory, Ipomoea purpurea (L.) Roth. # PHBPUCompetitionsoybean biomassyieldXanthium strumariumSorghum halepenseAmaranthus palmeriCassia obtusifoliaIpomoea purpureaXANSTSORHAAMAPACASOBPHBPU
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 36 , Issue 6 , November 1988 , pp. 770 - 774
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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. Barrentine, W. L. and Oliver, L. R. 1977. Competition, threshold levels, and control of cocklebur in soybeans. Miss. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 83:1–27.Google Scholar
2. Brown, D. A. and Scott, H. D. 1984. Dependence of crop growth and yield on root development and activity. Pages 101–136 in Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Crop Sci. Soc. Am., and Am. Soc. Agron., ed. Roots, Nutrient, and Water Influx, and Plant Growth. Madison, WI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Davis, R. G., Weise, A. F., and Pafford, J. L. 1965. Root moisture extraction profiles of various weeds. Weeds 13:98–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Dawson, J. H. 1965. Competition between irrigated sugarbeets and annual weeds. Weeds 13:245–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Donald, C. M. 1958. The interaction of competition for light and nutrients. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 9:421–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Fehr, W. R., Caviness, C. E., Burwood, D. T., and Pennington, J. S. 1971. Stage of development description for soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill]. Crop Sci. 11:929–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Fischer, R. A. and Miles, R. E. 1973. The role of spatial pattern in the competition between crop plants and weeds. A theoretical analysis. Math. Biosci. 18:335–350.Google Scholar
8. Grime, J. P. 1979. Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 222 pp.Google Scholar
9. Gunsolus, J. L. and Coble, H. D. 1985. Interference on weed and soybean growth and development. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 38:82.Google Scholar
10. Harper, J. L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. Academic Press, New York. 892 pp.Google Scholar
11. Hinson, K. and Hanson, W. D. 1962. Competition studies in soybeans. Crop Sci. 2:117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. McWhorter, C. G. and Hartwig, E. E. 1972. Competition of johnsongrass and cocklebur with six soybean varieties. Weed Sci. 20:56–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Oliver, L. R., Frans, R. E., and Talbert, R. E. 1976. Field competition between tall morningglory and soybean. I. Growth analysis. Weed Sci. 24:482–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Radosevich, S. R. and Holt, J. S. 1984. Weed Ecology Implications for Vegetation Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 265 pp.Google Scholar