Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-11T11:44:13.169Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Giant sensitiveplant interference in cassava

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Bamidele S. Alabi ,
Albert O. Ayeni ,
Akinola A. Agboola  and
Bradley A. Majek
Bamidele S. Alabi
Affiliation:
Federal College of Agriculture, Moor Plantation, Ibadan, Nigeria
Akinola A. Agboola
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria
Bradley A. Majek
Affiliation:
Rutgers Agricultural Research and Extension Center, 121 Northville Road, Bridgeton, NJ 08302
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Giant sensitiveplant interference at different population densities in cassava established at 10,000 plants ha−1 was investigated on a Ferric Luvisol in a humid tropical environment. Interference for 12 mo was compared at 0, 10,000, 20,000, 30,000, and 40,000 plants ha−1 and at natural populations (averaging 630,000 plants ha−1) in four randomized complete blocks. Results showed that the order of cassava growth parameter response to giant sensitiveplant interference for 12 mo was leaf number > height > stem girth > leaf size = petiole length. The natural population density of giant sensitiveplant reduced growth faster and more than populations of 10,000 to 40,000 plants ha−1 in cassava. All giant sensitiveplant populations from 10,000 plants ha−1 and higher reduced storage root yield in cassava 12 mo after planting. Yield reduction increased as giant sensitiveplant population increased and the highest reduction of 85% occurred in the natural population of giant sensitiveplant.

Keywords

Cassava, ‘TMS 30572’, Manihot esculenta Crantzgiant sensitiveplant, Mimosa invisa Mart. MIMINCassava productionhumid tropical environmentsouthwestern Nigeriaweed interference
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , April 2001 , pp. 171 - 176
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

Akobundu, I. O. 1980. Weed control in cassava cultivation in the subhumid tropics. Trop. Pest Manag. 26:420–426.Google Scholar
Akobundu, I. O. 1983. Weed control in no-tillage cassava (Cassava) in the subhumid and humid tropics. Pages 119–126 In Akobundu, I. O. and Deutsch, A. E., eds. No-Tillage Crop Production in the Tropics. Corvallis: International Plant Protection Center, Oregon State University.Google Scholar
Akobundu, I. O. 1987. Weed Science in the Tropics: Principles and Practices. Chichester, Great Britain: J Wiley. pp. 362–363.Google Scholar
Akobundu, I. O. and Agyakwa, C. H. 1998. A Handbook of West African Weeds. Ibadan, Nigeria: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. pp. 312–313.Google Scholar
Alabi, B. S., Ayeni, A. O., and Agboola, A. A. 1999. Effect of selected herbicides on the control of thorny mimosa in cassava. Niger. J. Weed Sci. 12:51–57.Google Scholar
Aldrich, R. J. and Kremer, R. J. 1997. Principles in Weed Management. 2nd ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press. pp. 169–202.Google Scholar
Ambe, J. T., Agboola, A. A., and Hahn, S. K. 1992. Studies of weeding frequency in cassava in Cameroon. Trop. Pest Manag. 38:302–304.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1979. Selected Methods for Soil and Plant Analysis. IITA Manual Series 1. Ibadan, Nigeria: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. 70 p.Google Scholar
Asadu, C.L.A. and Enete, A. A. 1997. Food crop yields and soil properties under population pressure in sub-Saharan Africa: the case of cassava in southeast Nigeria. Outlook Agric. 26:29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[CBN] Central Bank of Nigeria. 1998. Annual Agricultural Surveys and Returns from the Federal Ministry of Agriculture. Lagos, Nigeria: Central Bank of Nigeria. p. 117.Google Scholar
[FAO] Food and Agricutural Organization of the United Nations. 2000. FAOSTAT Agricultural Data. http://apps.fao.org/lim500/nphwrap.pl?production.crops.primary&domain=sua&servlet= 1. Accessed August 2000.Google Scholar
[FAO/UNESCO] Food and Agricutural Organization of the United Nations/United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. 1989. Soil Map of the World. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Revised Legend, International Soil Reference and Information Centre. p. 119.Google Scholar
[FOS] Federal Office of Statistics. 1997. Annual Abstracts of Statistics. Abuja, Nigeria: FOS. pp. 242–243.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii. pp. 328–331.Google Scholar
[IITA] International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. 1998. Annual Report. Ibadan, Nigeria: IITA. pp. 19–22, 63–64.Google Scholar
Lutaladio, N. B. 1986. Planting Periods and Associated Agronomic Practices for Cassava Production in Southeastern Zaire. , University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. 374 p.Google Scholar
Mahungu, N. M., Chheda, H. R., Aken’Ova, M. E., and Hahn, S. K. 1994. Correlated response and use of selection index in cassava. Acta Hortic. 380:114–117.Google Scholar
McCarty, M. T. and Coble, H. D. 1983. Grass interference in peanut and soybeans. Page 51 In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Southern Weed Science Society. Raleigh, NC: SWSS. p. 51.Google Scholar
Moody, K. 1985. Weed control in cassava, a review. J. Plant Prot. Trop. 2:27–40.Google Scholar
Neary, P. E. and Majek, B. A. 1990. Common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) interference in snap beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Technol. 4:743–748.Google Scholar
Ngeve, J. M. 1994. Yield stability parameters for comparing cassava varieties. Acta Hortic. 380:138–145.Google Scholar
Nzegbule, E. C. and Ogunremi, S. 1995. The effect of different densities of Chromolaena odorata on cassava root yield in two cropping systems. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Niger. 23:21.Google Scholar
Okoli, O. O., Hossain, M. A., Kissiedu, A.F.K., and Asare-Bediako, A. 1996. Effect of planting dates and growth habits of cassava and cowpea on their yield and compatibility. Trop. Agric. 73:169–174.Google Scholar
Olasantan, F. O., Ezumah, H. C., and Lucas, E. O. 1997. Response of cassava and maize to fertilizer application, and a comparison of the factors affecting their growth during intercropping. Nutrient Cycling Agroecosyst. 46:215–223.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W., Harrison, S. K., Wax, L. M., Regnier, E. E., and Nafziger, E. D. 1987. Weed competition in soybeans (Glycine max). Rev. Weed Sci. 3:155–181.Google Scholar
Ugwu, B. 1996. Increasing cassava production in Nigeria and prospects for sustaining trend. Outlook Agric. 25:179–185.Google Scholar
Unamma, R.P.A. and Ene, L.S.O. 1984. Weed interference in cassava-maize intercrop in the rain forest of Nigeria. Pages 59–62 In Terry, E. R., ed. Tropical Root Crops: Production and Uses in Africa. Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Center.Google Scholar
Unamma, R.P.A., Ene, L.S.O., Odurukwe, S. O., and Enyinnia, T. 1986. Integrated weed management for cassava intercropped with maize. Weed Res. 26:9–17.Google Scholar
Westbrooks, R. G. 1981. Introduction of foreign noxious plants into the United States. Weeds Today 12:116–117.Google Scholar