Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T05:38:37.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Shoot Removal During Tuberization on Volunteer Potato (Solanum tuberosum) Tuber Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Martin M. Williams II  and
Rick A. Boydston
Martin M. Williams II*
Affiliation:
Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Washington State University, Prosser, WA 99350-9687
Rick A. Boydston
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350-9687
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Volunteer potato can be a host of serious pest problems in potato and could provide a source of inoculum for subsequent potato crops. Volunteer potato can also be difficult to control in many rotational crops. Potato shoots were removed once, twice, and throughout the growing season, beginning at early and late tuberization. Compared with no shoot removal, two or more shoot removal treatments reduced the number of tubers 42% or more. A single shoot removal treatment at early tuberization reduced tuber biomass 37%, compared with 65% when shoot removal was initiated several weeks later. Regardless of timing, a single shoot removal increased the number and biomass of small tubers (≤ 57 g each). Control tactics that remove or kill volunteer potato shoots require repeated application or integration with other management practices to suppress the weed.

Keywords

Volunteer potato, Solanum tuberosum L.potato, Solanum tuberosum L. ‘Russet Burbank’Groundkeepertime of removal
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , September 2002 , pp. 617 - 619
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

Bevis, A. J. and Jewel, S. N. 1986. Preliminary results from the use of chemicals or cultivations to control potato groundkeepers. Asp. Appl. Biol. 13: 201–208.Google Scholar
Bond, W. 1993. Evaluation of ioxynil, fluroxypyr, and clopyralid for the control of volunteer potato in vegetable crops. Asp. Appl. Biol. 35: 123–130.Google Scholar
Boydston, R. A. 2001. Volunteer potato (Solanum tuberosum) control with herbicides and cultivation in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 15: 461–466.Google Scholar
Denny, F. E. 1929. Role of mother tuber in growth of potato plant. Bot. Gaz. 87: 157–194.Google Scholar
Ellis, P. J. 1992. Weed hosts of beet western yellows virus and potato leafroll virus in British Columbia. Plant Dis. 76: 1137–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headford, D. W. R. 1962. Sprout development and subsequent plant growth. Eur. Potato J. 5: 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iritani, W. M., Thornton, R., Weller, L., and O'Leary, G. 1972. Relationships of seed size, spacing, stem numbers to yield of Russet Burbank potatoes. Am. Potato J. 49: 463–469.Google Scholar
Lutman, P. J. W. 1977a. Investigations into some aspects of the biology of potatoes as weeds. Weed Res. 17: 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutman, P. J. W. 1977b. The effect of tuber size on the susceptibility of potatoes to metoxuron. Potato Res. 20: 331–335.Google Scholar
Runham, S. R. and Davies, J. S. 1993. Weed control strategies for volunteer potatoes in leeks (Allium porri). Asp. Appl. Biol. 35: 105–112.Google Scholar
Thomas, P. E. 1983. Sources and dissemination of potato viruses in the Columbia Basin of the Northwestern United States. Plant Dis. 67: 744–747.Google Scholar
Wakankar, S. M. 1944. Influence of size and seed piece upon the yield of potatoes. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 36: 32–36.Google Scholar