Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T06:29:49.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Impacts on Yield, Harvesting, and Ginning in Dryland Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Dudley T. Smith ,
Roy V. Baker  and
Gregory L. Steele
Dudley T. Smith*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474
Roy V. Baker
Affiliation:
Cotton Harvesting and Ginning Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Lubbock, TX 79401
Gregory L. Steele
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The impact of Palmer amaranth on mechanical harvesting, ginning, and fiber quality in dryland cotton was documented. Only the highest Palmer amaranth density (3,260 weeds/ha) reduced lint and seed yields. However, all weed densities increased harvesting time 2- to 3.5-fold. Two factors increased the time required for stripper harvesting: slower ground speeds due to large weeds and work stoppages that required hand removal of weed stems lodged in the harvester. Ninety-eight percent of the weedy plant material was discarded in the field by the harvester, and the remaining 2% was successfully removed in ginning and lint-cleaning processes. Weed infestations did not result in any differences in moisture content of seed cotton, ginning time, fiber quality, or the percentage of cleaned lint.

Keywords

Cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. # AMAPACompetitionfiber qualityPPI, preplant incorporated
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 122 - 126
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

Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., Street, J. E., and McGuire, J. A. 1980. Competition of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 28: 258–262.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C., Wicks, G. A., Warnes, D. D., Somerhalder, B. R., and Weeks, S. A. 1969. Effects of weeds on harvesting efficiency in corn, sorghum, and soybeans. Weed Sci. 17: 438–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coble, H. D. and Byrd, J. D. 1992. Interference of weeds with cotton. In McWhorter, C. G. and Abernathy, J. R., eds. Weeds of Cotton: Characterization and Control. Memphis, TN: The Cotton Foundation. pp. 73–82.Google Scholar
Crowley, R. H. and Buchanan, G. A. 1978. Competition of four morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) species with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 26: 484–488.Google Scholar
Elmore, C. D., ed. 1987. Weed Identification Guide-Palmer amaranth. Champaign, IL: Southern Weed Science Society.Google Scholar
Findley, D. S. 1992. 1992 Texas Custom Rates Statistics. Texas Agricultural Statistics Service. Bul. 251 (3). 25 p.Google Scholar
Nave, W. R. and Wax, L. M. 1971. Effect of weeds on soybean yield and harvesting efficiency. Weed Sci. 19: 533–535.Google Scholar
Rushing, D. W., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1985a. Weed interference with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). I. Buffalobur (Solanum rostratum). Weed Sci. 33: 810–814.Google Scholar
Rushing, D. W., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1985b. Weed interference with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). II. Tumble pigweed (Amaranthus albus). Weed Sci. 33: 815–818.Google Scholar
Street, J. E., Snipes, C. E., McGuire, J. A., and Buchanan, G. A. 1985. Competition of a binary weed system with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 33: 807–809.Google Scholar