Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:00:21.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Net Returns from Cheat (Bromus secalinus) Control in Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Greg G. Justice ,
Thomas F. Peeper ,
John B. Solie  and
Francis M. Epplin
Greg G. Justice
Affiliation:
Okla. State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Thomas F. Peeper
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Okla. State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
John B. Solie
Affiliation:
Dep. Agric. Eng., Okla. State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Francis M. Epplin
Affiliation:
Dep. Agric. Econ., Okla. State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In field experiments, wheat row spacing, seeding rate, and herbicide treatment affected cheat seed content of harvested wheat, wheat yield, and net returns. No individual practice or combination of practices consistently increased net returns from cheat-infested wheat. Net returns frequently were increased and never decreased by applying metribuzin at 420 g ha−1 or chlorsulfuron + metsulfuron at 21.9 + 4.4 g ha−1 or by increasing the seeding rate compared to baseline inputs. The data indicate that herbicide rates should not be reduced when row spacing is decreased and/or seeding rates increased.

Keywords

Chlorsulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]benzenesulfonamidemetsulfuron, 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoic acidmetribuzin, 4-amino-6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-onecheat, Bromus secalinus L. # BROSEwheat, Triticum aestivum L.Enterprise budgetschlorsulfuron plus metsulfuronmetribuzin
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , June 1993 , pp. 459 - 464
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 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. Anonymous. 1988. Grain Inspection Handbook. Book II, Wheat. U.S. Dep. Agric., Fed. Grain Inspec. Serv. Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. 1991. Lexone Supplemental Labeling. DuPont de Nemours, Wilmington, DE 19898.Google Scholar
3. Anderson, K. and Sanders, L. D. 1990. Farm level analysis of budget cutting options in the pending 1990 farm bill. Insert in Agricultural Policy's Economic Issues 5:8. Coop. Ext. Serv. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078.Google Scholar
4. Appleby, A. P. and Morrow, L. A. 1990. The Pacific Northwest. Chap. 10 in Donald, W. W., ed., Systems of Weed Control in Wheat in North America. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL 61820.Google Scholar
5. Belles, W. S. 1989. Control of broadleaf weeds in winter wheat with dicamba-sulfonyl-urea combinations. Res. Prog. Rep., West. Soc. Weed Sci., p. 356–357.Google Scholar
6. Cuperus, G., Thompson, R., Tucker, B., Coppock, S., Williams, E., Stiegler, J., Bloome, P., Greer, H., Pitts, J., and Fain, D. 1985. Wheat production and pest management in Oklahoma. Cir. E-831. Coop. Ext. Serv. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078.Google Scholar
7. Dial, M. J. and Thill, D. C. 1989. Postplant preemergence weed control in winter wheat. Res. Prog. Rep., West. Soc. Weed Sci. p. 366–367.Google Scholar
8. Epplin, F. M., Allread, V. K., Solie, J. B., Peeper, T. F., and Koscelny, J. A. 1992. Economics of ultranarrow row planting for hard red winter wheat production in Oklahoma. J. Prod. Agric. 5:427–431.Google Scholar
9. Epplin, F. M., Tice, T. F., Handke, S. J., Peeper, T. F., and Krenzer, E. G. Jr. 1983. Cost estimates of alternative wheat production systems for Garfield County. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. B-766. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078.Google Scholar
10. Ferreira, K. L., Peeper, T. F., and Epplin, F. M. 1990. Economic returns from cheat (Bromus secalinus) control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 4:306–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Justice, G. G., Peeper, T. F., Driver, J. E., and Koscelny, J. A. 1990. Finesse for cheat suppression in Oklahoma wheat. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:113.Google Scholar
12. Koscelny, J. A., Peeper, T. F., Solie, J. B., Solomon, S. G. Jr. 1990. Effect of wheat (Triticum aestivum) row spacing, seeding rate, and cultivar on yield loss from cheat (Bromus secalinus). Weed Technol. 4:487–492.Google Scholar
13. Koscelny, J. A., Peeper, T. F., Solie, J. B., and Solomon, S. G. Jr. 1991. Seeding date, seeding rate, and row spacing affect wheat (Triticum aestivum) and cheat (Bromus secalinus). Weed Technol. 5:707–712.Google Scholar
14. Miller, S. D., Dalrymple, A. W., and Ball, D. A. 1989. Weed control in winter wheat with fall or spring herbicide treatments. Res. Prog. Rep., West. Weed Sci. Soc. p. 230–231.Google Scholar
15. Nalewaja, J. D. and Arnold, W. E. 1970. Weed control methods, losses and costs due to weeds, and benefits of weed control in wheat and other small grains. 1st FAO Int. Conf. Weed Control, Davis, CA 95616. p. 1–16.Google Scholar
16. Peeper, T. F. and Morrow, L. A. 1990. Substituted ureas, triazines, and triazinones. Chap. 20 in Donald, W. W., ed., Systems of Weed Control in Wheat in North America. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL 61820.Google Scholar
17. Ratliff, R. and Peeper, T. 1987. Bromus control in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with the ethylthio analog of metribuzin. Weed Technol. 1:235–241.Google Scholar
18. Solie, J. B., Solomon, S. G. Jr., Self, K. P., Peeper, T. F., Koscelny, J. A. 1991. Reduced row spacing for improved wheat yields on weed-free and weed-infested fields. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 34:1654–1660.Google Scholar
19. Thompson, C. R. and Thill, D. C. 1992. Interrupted windgrass and broadleaf weed control in soft white winter wheat. Res. Prog. Rep., West. Weed Sci. Soc., Sec. III—Weeds of Agronomic Crops. p. 175–176.Google Scholar
20. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1990. Agriculture Prices. Agriculture Statistics Board Publications, Washington, DC 20520.Google Scholar