Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:35:59.892Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competitive Abilities of Six Corn (Zea mays L.) Hybrids with Four Weed Control Practices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Garry Tyron Ford  and
Jane Mt. Pleasant
Garry Tyron Ford
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Breed. and Soil, Crop, and Atmos. Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY 14850
Jane Mt. Pleasant
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Breed. and Soil, Crop, and Atmos. Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY 14850
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Six corn hybrids were studied in field experiments in 1989 and 1990 to identify hybrids and corn plant characteristics that may be valuable in systems using reduced levels of weed control. Four weed control treatments (no-control, cultivation-only, band herbicide-plus-cultivation, and broadcast herbicide) represented main plots and maize hybrids were subplots. Medium-season hybrids with differences in height, early-season vigor, and leafiness were used. There were significant differences among hybrids in leaf angle, leaf width, leaf number, plant height, leaf area index (LAI), plant dry matter (DM) and grain and stover yields. Lower yielding hybrids had grain yields that ranged from 87 to 91% of the highest yielding hybrid. Aboveground corn characteristics were not correlated with weed numbers, weed cover, or weed biomass. A significant interaction between hybrid and weed control for grain yields was observed in 1989, suggesting that some hybrids are more competitive when weed pressure is high.

Keywords

Corn, Zea mays L.Band herbicidebiomasscompetitioncultivationgrain yieldleaf area indexreduced-input agriculture
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , March 1994 , pp. 124 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Anderson, R. L. and Humberg, N. E. 1987. Field duration of chlorsulfuron bioactivity in the central great plains. J. Environ. Qual. 16:263–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Baker, D. B. 1985. Regional water quality impacts of intensive row-crop agriculture: A Lake Erie Basin case study. J. Soil Water Conserv. 40:125–132.Google Scholar
3. Bergstrom, G. C., Cox, W. J., Dethier, B. E., Ferguson, G. A., Hahn, R. R., Klausner, S. D., Lucey, R. F., Pardee, W. D., Reid, W. S., Seaney, R. R., Shields, E. J., and Wright, M. J. 1989. Cornell recommends for field crops. Cornell Cooperative Extension Publication, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
4. Chandler, J. M. and Meredity, W. R. Jr. 1983. Yields of three cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) cultivars as influenced by spurred anoda (Anoda cristata) competition. Weed Sci. 31:303–307.Google Scholar
5. Gunsolus, J. L. 1990. Mechanical and cultural weed control in corn and soybeans. J. Altern. Agric. 5:114–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberii with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:26–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Moolani, M. K., Knake, E. L., and Slife, F. W. 1964. Competition of smooth pigweed with corn and soybeans. Weeds 12:126–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Newcomer, D. T., Giraudo, L. J., and Banks, P. A. 1986. Soybean (Glycine max) cultivar as a factor of weed control in no-till double-cropped production following wheat (Triticum aestivum). Res. Rep., Ga. Agric. Exp. Sta. (No. 508). P. 16.Google Scholar
9. Ramsel, R. E. and Wicks, G. A. 1988. Control of weeds with corn hybrids, planting dates, and irrigation scheduling. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. P. 61.Google Scholar
10. Rhode, W. A., Asmussen, L. E., Hansen, E. W., Hester, J. L., and Allison, H. P. 1981. Atrazine persistence of soil and transport in surface and subsurface runoff from plots in the coastal plain of the southern United States. Agro-Ecosystems 7:226–238.Google Scholar
11. Rose, S. J., Burnside, O. C., Specht, J. E., and Swisher, B. A. 1984. Competition and allelopathy between soybean and seeds. Agron. J. 76:523–528.Google Scholar
12. Sloneker, L. L. and Moldenhauer, W. C. 1977. Measuring the amounts of crop residue remaining after tillage. J. Soil Water Conserv. 32:231–236.Google Scholar
13. Sweet, R. D., Yip, C. P., and Sieczka, J. B. 1974. Crop varieties: Can they suppress weeds? New York's Food and Life Sciences Quarterly 7:3–5.Google Scholar
14. Wu, T. L., Correll, D. L., and Remenapp, H. E. H. 1983. Herbicide runoff from experimental watersheds. J. Environ. Qual. 12:330–336.Google Scholar
15. Young, F. L., Wyse, D. L., and Jones, R. J. 1984. Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) interference on corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 32:226–234.Google Scholar