Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T18:36:18.870Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Combining Cultural Practices and Herbicides to Control Wild-Proso Millet (Panicum miliaceum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

R. Gordon Harvey  and
Gregory R. McNevin
R. Gordon Harvey
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Wis., Madison, WI 53706
Gregory R. McNevin
Affiliation:
Sandoz Crop Prot., 1300 E. Touhy Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies evaluated the effects of crop, crop rotation, planting date, row spacing, no-till planting, and herbicides on wild-proso millet control. Benefin and EPTC reduced wild-proso millet biomass in new seedings of alfalfa, and the combination of herbicides and forage harvest prevented wild-proso millet seed production in that crop. Wild-proso millet seedling populations were reduced and corn yields increased when corn followed 1 to 4 yr of alfalfa. Apparent effectiveness of herbicides in corn increased after cropping with alfalfa. Germination of buried wild-proso millet seed decreased approximately 90% after 54 months which is equivalent to 4-yr prior cropping to alfalfa. Wild-proso millet control and field and sweet corn yields increased when the crops were planted late season (May 17) rather than early season (April 27). Planting sweet corn in rows spaced 76 cm rather than 108 cm apart also increased sweet corn yields. EPTC plus dichlormid (EPTC+) plus cyanazine always controlled wild-proso millet equal to or better than EPTC+ alone. When field corn was planted no-till into killed alfalfa sod, combinations of pendimethalin plus simazine and pendimethalin plus cyanazine provided the best wild-proso millet control and corn yields. But the following year when corn was no-till planted into corn stubble of the identical plots, wild-proso millet control from the same treatments tended to be lower and corn yields were reduced.

Keywords

Benefin, N-butyl-N-ethyl-2,6-dinitro-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenaminecyanazine, 2-[[4-chloro-6-(ethylamino)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-2-methylpropanenitriledichlormid, 2,2-dichloro-N,N-di-2-propenylacetamideEPTC, S-ethyl dipropyl carbamothioatependimethalin, N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenaminesimazine, 6-chloro-N,N-diethyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diaminewild-proso millet, Panicum miliaceum L. ssp. ruderale (Kitagawa) Tzevelev. ♯3 PANMIalfalfa, Medicago sativa L.corn, Zea mays L.Crop rotationgerminationplanting daterow spacingalachloratrazinebenefincyanazinedichlormidEPTCpendimethalinsimazinePANMI
Type
Symposium
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 1990 , pp. 433 - 439
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Carpenter, J. L., and Hopen, H. J. 1985. A comparison of the biology of wild and cultivated proso millet (Panicum miliaceum). Weed Sci. 33:795–799.Google Scholar
2. Colosi, J. C., Cavers, P. B., and Bough, M. A. 1988. Dormancy and survival in buried seeds of proso millet (Panicum miliaceum). Can. J. Bot. 66:161–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Fawcett, J. A., and Harvey, R. G. 1988. Proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) control in corn (Zea mays) with postemergence-directed herbicides. Weed Sci. 36:215–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Harvey, R. G. 1979. Serious new weed threat: wild-proso millet. Crops Soils Mag. 31(2):10–13.Google Scholar
5. Harvey, R. G., and Doersch, R. E. 1979. Comparison of herbicides for conventional and conservation tillage. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 34:55.Google Scholar
6. Harvey, R. G., McNevin, G. R., Albright, J. W., and Kozak, M. E. 1986. Wild-proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) control with thiocarbamate herbicides on previously treated soils. Weed Sci. 34:773–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Harvey, R. G., Dekker, J. H., Fawcett, R. S., Roeth, F. W. and Wilson, R. G. 1987. Enhanced biodegradation of herbicides in soil and effects on weed control. Weed Technol. 1:341–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Luellen, W. R. 1982. Wild-proso millet: Will you recognize it before it is too late? Crops Soils Mag. 34(7):9–11.Google Scholar
9. McNevin, G. R. 1982. Wild-proso millet (Panicum miliaceum) control in processing peas and soybeans. Weed Sci. 30:365–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. O'Toole, J. J., and Cavers, P. B. 1983. Input to seed banks of proso millet (Panicum miliaceum). Can J. Plant Sci. 63:1023–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Rahman, A., and James, T. K. 1983. Decreased activity of EPTC + R-25788 following repeated use in some New Zealand soils. Weed Sci. 31:783–789.Google Scholar
12. Wilson, R.G. 1984. Accelerated degradation of thiocarbamate herbicides in soil with prior thiocarbamate herbicide exposure. Weed Sci. 32:264–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar