Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684bc48f8b-l9xz9 Total loading time: 22.253 Render date: 2021-04-11T06:46:17.893Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Article contents

Validation of Four Bioeconomic Weed Management Models for Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John M. Shribbs
Affiliation:
ICI Americas Inc., P.O. Box 760, Mt. View, CA 94042
Edward E. Schweizer
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Crops Res. Lab., 1701 Center Ave., Fort Collins, CO 80526
Lauren Hergert
Affiliation:
Western Sugar Co., P.O. Box 643, Alliance, NB 69301
Donald W. Lybecker
Affiliation:
Dep. Agric. and Res. Econ., Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO 80523

Abstract

The performance of four sequential weed management models that assumed either low or high risk was compared to the performance of two sugarbeet consultants, one who assumed low risk and the other high risk. Weed management recommendations were performed over one growing season at two locations, each with several levels of weed populations. Recommendations for preplant, postemergence, and layby herbicide treatments or late-season handweeding differed among the four weed management levels. The high-risk management level was labor intensive and the low-risk management level was herbicide intensive. Weed populations at harvest, recoverable sucrose, and net return above weed control costs were not different among the four weed management levels. Weeds can be controlled in sugarbeets by employing weed management practices based on bioeconomic modeling.

Type
Special Topics
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

1. Anonymous. 1984. Crop losses due to weeds in Canada and the United States. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL. 22 pp.Google Scholar
2. Association of Official Agriculture Chemists. 1955. Official Methods of Analysis. 8th ed. Washington, DC. Pages 564578.Google Scholar
3. Carruthers, A. and Oldfield, J.F.T. 1961. Methods for the assessment of beet quality. Int. Sugar J. 63:7274, 103-105, 137-139.Google Scholar
4. Cousens, R., Moss, S. R., Cussans, G. W., and Wilson, B. J. 1987. Modeling weed populations in cereals. Rev. Weed Sci. 3:93112.Google Scholar
5. King, R. P., Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and Zimdahl, R. L. 1986. Bioeconomic modeling to simulate weed control strategies for continuous corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 34:972979.Google Scholar
6. Marra, M. C. and Carlson, G. A. 1983. An economic threshold model for weeds in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 31:604609.Google Scholar
7. McWhorter, C. G. and Shaw, W. C. 1982. Research needs for integrated weed management systems. Weed Sci. 30:4045 (Suppl. 1).Google Scholar
8. Schweizer, E. E. and Dexter, A. G. 1987. Weed control in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris) in North America. Rev. Weed Sci. 3:113133.Google Scholar
9. Shribbs, J. M., Schweizer, E. E., and Lybecker, D. W. 1990. Bioeconomic weed management models for sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) production. Weed Sci. 38:436444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Walker, P. T. 1987. Quantifying the relationship between insect populations, damage, yield, and economic thresholds. Pages 114125 in Teng, P. S., ed. Crop Loss Assessment and Pest Management. APS Press, St Paul. Google Scholar
11. Wilkerson, G. G., Modena, S. A., and Coble, H. D. 1988. HERB V2.0: Herbicide decision model for postemergence weed control in soybeans–User's Manual. Bulletin No. 113. Crop Sci. Dep., North Carolina State Univ. 98 p.Google Scholar
12. Zadoks, J. C. 1985. On the conceptual basis of crop loss assessment: threshold theory. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 23:455473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 5 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 12th June 2017 - 11th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Validation of Four Bioeconomic Weed Management Models for Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) Production
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Validation of Four Bioeconomic Weed Management Models for Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) Production
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Validation of Four Bioeconomic Weed Management Models for Sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) Production
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *