Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T01:24:08.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition of Setaria faberii with Corn and Soybeans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ellery L. Knake  and
Fred W. Slife
Ellery L. Knake
Affiliation:
Agronomy, Department of Agronomy, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois
Fred W. Slife
Affiliation:
Agronomy, Department of Agronomy, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois
Get access

Abstract

The treatments in this 3-year study consisted of 54, 12, 6, 3, 1, ½, and no foxtail plants per foot of crop row. Yield reductions for the heaviest stand of foxtail averaged 25% for corn and 28% for soybeans. For both corn and soybeans, the increase in foxtail dry matter was proportional to the decrease in the dry matter from the crop; the combined yield did not vary significantly. As stand of foxtail increased, there was a decrease in yields of grain, cobs, stalks or straw, diameter of cornstalks, ear weight, light intensity beneath the crop, soil temperatures under corn, and number of soybean pods. There was little or no significant effect on moisture content of grain, height of crop, shelling percentage of corn, oil or protein content of beans, weight of 100 beans or number of beans per pod. Increased corn lodging was associated with increasing foxtail stand in one of three years.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , January 1962 , pp. 26 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © 1962 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. Clements, F. E., Weaver, J. E., and Hanson, H. C. 1929. Plant competition—an analysis of community function. Carnegie Institute. Washington, D. C. Google Scholar
2. Hamner, K. C. 1940. Interrelation of light and darkness in photoperiodic induction. Botan. Gaz. 101:658–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Kurtz, T., Melsted, S. W., and Bray, R. H. 1952. The importance of nitrogen and water in reducing competition between intercrops and corn. Agron. J. 44:13–17.Google Scholar
4. Osvald, H. 1953. On antagonism between plants. Proc. 7th Intern. Botan. Congr., Stockholm. 7:167–171.Google Scholar
5. Staniforth, D. W. 1953. Levels of weed infestations as related to yield losses and control practices in corn. Proc. NCWCC 10:44–46.Google Scholar
6. Staniforth, D. W. 1957. Effects of annual grass weeds on the yield of corn. Agron. J. 49:551–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Staniforth, D. W. and Weber, C. R. 1956. Effects of annual weeds on the growth and yield of soybeans. Agron. J. 48:467–471.Google Scholar
8. Vengris, J., Colby, W.G., and Drake, M. 1955. Plant nutrient competition between weeds and corn. Agron. J. 47:213–216.Google Scholar
9. Wollny, E. 1881. Untersuchungen uber der Einfluss des Standraumes auf die Entwicklung und die Ertage der Kulturpflanzen. J. Landw. 29:25–62, 217–255, 493–536.Google Scholar