Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T01:52:26.039Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Deep Tillage and Glyphosate-Reduced Redvine (Brunnichia ovata) and Trumpetcreeper (Campsis radicans) Populations in Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Krishna N. Reddy*
Affiliation:
Southern Weed Science Research Unit, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, P.O. Box 350, Stoneville, MS 38776

Abstract

Field studies were conducted during the years 2000 to 2003 at Stoneville, MS, to determine the efficacy of fall deep tillage and glyphosate applications on redvine and trumpetcreeper populations and soybean yield in glyphosate-resistant soybean. Fall deep (≈45 cm) tillage for 1, 2, and 3 yr reduced redvine density by 95, 88, and 97%, respectively, compared with shallow (≈15 cm) tillage, but deep tillage did not reduce trumpetcreeper density. Glyphosate applied preplant reduced trumpetcreeper density (25 to 44%), but not redvine density, compared to that with no glyphosate. Glyphosate early postemergence (EPOST) either alone (45 to 67%) or followed by (fb) late postemergence (LPOST; 59 to 83%) reduced density of trumpetcreeper, but not of redvine, compared to that with no herbicide. However, dry biomass of both vines was reduced with glyphosate EPOST or LPOST compared to that with no herbicide. Soybean yields were higher with deep tillage vs. shallow tillage, glyphosate preplant application vs. no glyphosate, and glyphosate EPOST either alone or fb LPOST vs. no herbicide. Redvine did not reestablish in 2003, which was after skipping fall deep tillage for 1 yr following three consecutive years of deep tillage compared with shallow tillage. It is possible to manage redvine infestations with fall deep tillage and trumpetcreeper infestations with glyphosate preplant and postemergence (POST) in-crop applications. Integration of fall deep tillage and glyphosate POST applications could be an effective strategy to manage combined infestations of these vines in glyphosate-resistant soybean.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Akin, D. S. and Shaw, D. R. 2004. In-season applications of glyphosate for control of redvine (Brunnichia ovata) in glyphosate-resistant soybean. Weed Technol. 18:325331.Google Scholar
Bradley, K. W., Hagood, E. S. Jr., and Davis, P. H. 2004. Trumpetcreeper (Campsis radicans) control in double-crop glyphosate-resistant soybean with glyphosate and conventional herbicide systems. Weed Technol. 18:298303.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D. and Reddy, K. N. 2000. Factors affecting Campsis radicans seed germination and seedling emergence. Weed Sci. 48:212216.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D. and Reddy, K. N. 2004. Pelargonic acid and rainfall effects on glyphosate activity in trumpetcreeper (Campsis radicans). Weed Technol. 18:6672.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D. and Reddy, K. N. 2005. Factors affecting sprouting and glyphosate translocation in rootstocks of redvine (Brunnichia ovata) and trumpetcreeper (Campsis radicans). Weed Technol. 19:141147.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D., Reddy, K. N., and Elmore, C. D. 2001. Characterization of leaf surface, wax composition, and control of redvine and trumpetcreeper with glyphosate. Weed Sci. 49:156163.Google Scholar
DeFelice, M. S. and Oliver, L. R. 1980. Redvine and trumpetcreeper control in soybeans and grain sorghum. Ark. Farm Res. 29:5.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. T. and Oliver, L. R. 2001. Interference and control of trumpetcreeper (Campsis radicans) in soybean. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:130131.Google Scholar
Elmore, C. D. 1984. Perennial vines in the Delta of Mississippi. Mississippi State, MS: Mississippi State University, Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experimental Station Bull 927. 9 p.Google Scholar
Elmore, C. D., Heatherly, L. G., and Wesley, R. A. 1989. Perennial vine control in multiple cropping systems on a clay soil. Weed Technol. 3:282287.Google Scholar
Heatherly, L. G., Spurlock, S. R., and Reddy, K. N. 2004. Weed management in nonirrigated glyphosate-resistant and nonresistant soybean following deep and shallow fall tillage. Agron. J. 96:742749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, K. N. 2000. Factors affecting toxicity, absorption, and translocation of glyphosate in redvine (Brunnichia ovata). Weed Technol. 14:457462.Google Scholar
Reddy, K. N. and Chachalis, D. 2004. Redvine (Brunnichia ovata) and trumpetcreeper (Campsis radicans) management in glufosinate- and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 18:10581064.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R. and Mack, R. E. 1991. Application timing of herbicides for the control of redvine (Brunnichia ovata). Weed Technol. 5:125129.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R., Mack, R. E., and Smith, C. A. 1991. Redvine (Brunnichia ovata) germination and emergence. Weed Sci. 39:3336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems. 2001. Software version 7.00. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2000. Weed survey—southern states, grass crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:247274.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2001. Weed survey—southern states, broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:244259.Google Scholar
Yonce, M. H. and Skroch, W. A. 1989. Control of selected perennial weeds with glyphosate. Weed Sci. 37:360364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar