Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T11:13:06.501Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of Time of Planting and Distance from the Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Row of Pitted Morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa), Prickly Sida (Sida spinosa), and Redroot Pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) on Competitiveness with Cotton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

G. A. Buchanan
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Auburn Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn, AL 36830
J. E. Street
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Soils, Auburn Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn, AL 36830
R. H. Crowley
Affiliation:
Univ. of AR Southeast Res. Ext. Center, Monticello, AR 71655

Abstract

Influence of time of planting and distance from the cotton row of pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa L.), prickly sida (Sida spinosa L.), and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) on yield of seed cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Stoneville 213’) was determined on Decatur clay loam during 1975 through 1978. Weed growth was measured in 1977 and 1978. Seeds of the three weed species were planted 15, 30, or 45 cm from the cotton row at time of planting cotton or 4 weeks later. Weeds planted 4 weeks after planting cotton grew significantly less than did weeds planted at the same time as cotton. When planted with cotton, redroot pigweed produced over twice as much fresh weight as did prickly sida or pitted morningglory. The distance that weeds were planted from the cotton row did not affect weed growth in 1978, but did in 1977. The distance that weeds were planted from the cotton row did not affect their competitiveness in any year as measured by yield of cotton. However, in each year, yields of cotton were reduced to a greater extent by weeds planted with cotton than when planted 4 weeks later. In 3 of 4 yr, there were significant differences in competitiveness of each of the three weed species with cotton.

Type
Research Article
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

1. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1970. Influence of weed competition on cotton. Weed Sci. 18:149154.Google Scholar
2. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1970. When do weeds compete. Highlights of Agric. Res., Auburn Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. 17:8.Google Scholar
3. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1971. Weed competition in cotton. I. Sicklepod and tall morningglory. Weed Sci. 19:576579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Buchanan, G. A. and Burns, E. R. 1971. Weed competition in cotton. II. Cocklebur and redroot pigweed. Weed Sci. 19:580582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Buchanan, G. A., Crowley, R. H., and McLaughlin, R. D. 1976. Competition of prickly sida with cotton. Weed Sci. 25:106110.Google Scholar
6. Buchanan, G. A. and McLaughlin, R. D. 1975. Influence of nitrogen on weed competition in cotton. Weed Sci. 23:324328.Google Scholar
7. Chandler, J. M. 1977. Competition of spurred anoda, velvetleaf, prickly sida, and Venice mallow in cotton. Weed Sci. 25:151158.Google Scholar
8. Chen, T. M., Brown, R. H., and Black, C. C. 1970. CO2 compensation concentration, rate of photosynthesis, and carbonic anhydrase activity in plants. Weed Sci. 18:399403.Google Scholar
9. Crowley, R. H. and Buchanan, G. A. 1978. Competition of four morningglory (Ipomoea spp.) species with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum . Weed Sci. 26:484488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Ivy, H. W. and Baker, R. S. 1972. Prickly sida control and competition in cotton. Weed Sci. 20:137139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Robinson, E. L. 1976. Yield and height of cotton as affected by weed density and nitrogen level. Weed Sci. 24:4042.Google Scholar
12. Robinson, E. L. 1976. Effect of weed species and placement on seed cotton yields. Weed Sci. 24:353355.Google Scholar
13. Thurlow, D. L. and Buchanan, G. A. 1972. Competition of sicklepod with soybeans. Weed Sci. 20:379384.Google Scholar