Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T06:12:54.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Potential Use of Response Surface Analyses for Weed Management in Soybeans (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Terry C. Keisling ,
Lawrence R. Oliver ,
R. Hugh Crowley  and
Ford L. Baldwin
Terry C. Keisling
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron. and Ext. Agronomist-Soybeans, Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
Lawrence R. Oliver
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701
R. Hugh Crowley
Affiliation:
Velsicol Chemical Corp., Monticello, AR 71655
Ford L. Baldwin
Affiliation:
Coop. Ext. Ser.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In crop/weed interactions a method is needed to reduce the complex data derived from interference research to a simple form which can be utilized immediately. A response surface technique was utilized in analyses involving densities, duration of interference, interference abilities of different species, and weed growth rates. At high weed densities interfering for long durations, multispecies interference is not additive but at low densities additiveness is approached. Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] yield loss from multispecies weed interference was calculated by subtracting the percent yield loss from the most competitive weed and then repeating the same procedure for remaining weeds. Interference data for weed species in which fewer data were available were determined by linear interpolation for densities of more comprehensively researched, closely related species. Polynominal regression curves were utilized to predict weed age and future weed size from weed height. These analyses can produce information to assist soybean producers in recognizing economically detrimental threshold levels of weed infestations which require the initiation of control measures.

Keywords

Xanthium pensylvanicumIpomoea spp.weed interferencecomputer modelsresponse surfaceXANPE
Type
Special Topics
Information
Weed Science , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , July 1984 , pp. 552 - 557
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 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. 1974. Common cocklebur competition in soybeans. Weed Sci. 22:600–603.Google Scholar
2. Barrentine, W. L. and Oliver, L. R. 1977. Competition, threshold levels and control of cocklebur in soybeans. Miss. Agric. and For. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. 83.Google Scholar
3. Chandler, J. M. and Oliver, L. R. 1978. Spurred anoda–A potential weed in southern crops. Agric. Res. Serv.-Educ. Admin. ARS-EA Tech. Bull. Pages 1–19.Google Scholar
4. Coble, H. D. and Ritter, R. L. 1978. Pennsylvania smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum) interference in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 26:556–559.Google Scholar
5. Crowley, R. H., Keisling, T. C., and Oliver, L. R. 1981. Applied weed population management in soybeans using weed competition data to define yield response surfaces. Abstr. Weed Sci. Am. 21:1.Google Scholar
6. Fehr, W. R., Caviness, C. E., Burmood, D. T., and Pennington, J. S. 1971. State of development description for soybeans, Glycine max (L.) Merrill. Crop Sci. 11:929–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Johnson, W. C. III and Coble, H. D. 1981. A new method to determine weed competition. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 34:102.Google Scholar
8. Mathis, W. D. and Oliver, L. R. 1980. Control of six morningglory (Ipomoea) species in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 28:409–415.Google Scholar
9. McClelland, M. R., Oliver, L. R., Mathis, W. D., and Frans, R. E. 1978. Responses of six morningglory (Ipomoea) species to bentazon. Weed Sci. 26:459–464.Google Scholar
10. Oliver, L. R. 1979. Influence of soybean (Glycine max) planting date on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) competition. Weed Sci. 27:183–188.Google Scholar
11. Oliver, L. R., Frans, R. E., and Talbert, R. E. 1976. Field competition between tall morningglory and soybeans. I. Growth analysis. Weed Sci. 24:482–488.Google Scholar
12. Patterson, M. G., Buchanan, G. A., Street, J. E., and Crowley, R. H. 1980. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) competition with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 28:327–329.Google Scholar
13. Reynolds, Daniel B., Oliver, L. R., and Crowley, R. H. 1982. Johnsongrass interference with soybeans. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 35:312.Google Scholar
14. Schoney, R. A., Bay, T. F., and Moncrief, J. F. 1981. Use of computer graphics in the development and evaluation of response surfaces. Agron. J. 73:437–442.Google Scholar
15. Wilson, H. P. and Cole, R. H. 1966. Morningglory competition in soybeans. Weeds 14:49–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Zimdahl, R. L. 1980. Weed-Crop Competition: A Review. International Plant Protection Center. Oreg. State Univ., Corvallis, OR. 195 pp.Google Scholar