Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-r8t2r Total loading time: 0.384 Render date: 2022-07-03T19:29:35.429Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

Effects of Preplant and Postplant Rotary Hoe Use on Weed Control, Soybean Pod Position, and Soybean Yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

George T. Place
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
S. Chris Reberg-Horton*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Michael G. Burton
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: chris_reberg-horton@ncsu.edu

Abstract

Demand for organic food products has consistently increased for more than 20 yr. The largest obstacle to organic soybean production in the southeastern United States is weed management. Current organic soybean production relies on mechanical weed control, including multiple postplant rotary hoe uses. Although postplant rotary hoe use is effective at the weed germination stage, its efficacy is severely compromised by delays due to weather. Preplant rotary hoeing is also a practice that has been utilized for weed control but the effectiveness of this practice to reduce the need for multiple postplant rotary hoeing for organic soybean production in the southeastern United States has not been investigated. Preplant rotary hoe treatments included a weekly rotary hoeing 4 wk before planting, 2 wk before planting, and none. Postplant rotary hoe treatments consisted of zero, one, two, three, and four postplant rotary hoe uses. Weed control was increased with preplant rotary hoeing at Plymouth in 2006 and 2007 but this effect disappeared with the first postplant rotary hoeing. Multiple postplant rotary hoe uses decreased soybean plant populations, decreased soybean canopy height, lowered soybean pod position, and decreased soybean yield. Plant mapping revealed that the percentage of total nodes and pods below 30 cm was increased by increased frequency of postplant rotary hoe use.

Type
Weed Management
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

Archer, D. W., Jaradat, A. A., Johnson, J. M. F., Weyers, S. L., Gesch, R. W., Forcella, F., and Kludze, H. K. 2007. Crop productivity and economics during the transition to alternative cropping systems. Agron. J. 99:15381547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balsari, P., Berruto, R., and Ferrero, A. 1994. Flame weed control in lettuce crop. Acta Hort. 372:213222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Board, J. 2000. Light interception efficiency and light quality affect yield compensation of soybean at low plant pPopulations. Crop Sci. 40:12851294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, G. 1997. Steel in the Field: A Farmer's Guide to Weed Management Tools. Burlington, VT Sustainable Agriculture Publications, University of Vermont.Google Scholar
Boyd, N. S. and Brennan, E. B. 2006. Weed management in a legume-cereal cover crop with the rotary hoe. Weed Technol. 20:733737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, N. S., Brennan, E. B., and Fennimore, S. A. 2006. Stale seedbed techniques for organic vegetable production. Weed Technol. 20:10521057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Gunsolus, J. L. 1996. Effect of date of preplant tillage and planting on weed populations and mechanical weed control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 44:373379.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Gunsolus, J. L., and Ralston, D. F. 1992. Integrated weed management techniques to reduce herbicide inputs in soybean. Agron. J. 84:973978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, B. and Mohler, C. L. 2001. Stale seedbed practices for vegetable production. Hortscience. 36 (4):703705.Google Scholar
Cavigelli, M. A., Teasdale, J. R., and Conklin, A. E. 2008. Long-term agronomic performance of organic and conventional field crops in the mid-atlantic region. Agron. J. 100:785794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitri, C. 2008. USDA Economic Research Service. http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Organic/. Accessed: March 23, 2008.Google Scholar
Draper, N. R. and Smith, H. 1981. Applied Regression Analysis. New York Wiley. 3342. 511.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. T. and Purcell, L. T. 2005. Soybean yield and biomass responses to increasing plant population among diverse maturity groups: I. Agronomic characteristics. Crop Sci. 45:17701777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forcella, F. 2000. Rotary hoeing substitutes for two-thirds rate of soil-applied herbicide. Weed Technol. 14:298303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, K. 1998. When does the spatial pattern of weeds matter? Predictions from neighborhood models. Ecol. Appl. 8:1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunsolus, J. L. 1990. Mechanical and cultural weed control in corn and soybean. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 5:114119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, M., Burton, M., Weisz, R., and York, A. 2007. North Carolina Organic Grain Production Guide. North Carolina State University. http://www.cefs.ncsu.edu/PDFs/organicgrainfinal.pdf. Accessed: July 30, 2008. 29 p.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M. and Rzewnicki, P. 2007. North Carolina Organic Grain Production Guide. North Carolina State University. http://www.cefs.ncsu.edu/PDFs/organicgrainfinal.pdf. Accessed: July 30, 2008. 3 p.Google Scholar
Herbek, J. H. and Bitzer, M. J. 1997. Soybean Production in Kentucky, Part V: Harvesting, Drying, Storage and Marketing. Cooperative Extension Service Publication AGR 132, University of Kentucky College of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Hooker, D. C., Vyn, T. J., and Swanton, C. J. 1997. Effectiveness of soil-applied herbicides with mechanical weed control for conservation tillage systems in soybean. Agron. J. 89:579587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. C. and Mullinix, B. G. 1995. Weed management in peanut using stale seedbed techniques. Weed Sci. 43:293297.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. and Mullinix, B. G. 1998. Stale seedbed weed control in cucumber. Weed Sci. 46:698702.Google Scholar
Lazarus, W. and Selley, R. 2005. Farm machinery economic cost estimates for late 2005. St. Paul, MN University of Minnesota Extension Service. http://www.apec.umn.edu/faculty/wlazarus/mf2005late.pdf. Accessed: June 11, 2008.Google Scholar
Leblanc, M. L. and Cloutier, D. C. 2001. Susceptibility of row-planted soybean (Glycine max) to the rotary hoe. J. Sust. Agric. 18 (4):5361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leblanc, M. L., Cloutier, D. C., and Stewart, K. A. 2006. Rotary hoe cultivation in sweet corn. Horttechnology. 16 (4):583589.Google Scholar
Lotijonen, T. and Mikkola, H. 2000. Three mechanical weed control techniques in spring cereals. Agric. Food Sci Fin. 9 (4):269278.Google Scholar
Lovely, W. G., Weber, C. R., and Staniforth, D. W. 1958. Effectiveness of the rotary hoe for weed control in soybeans. Agron. J. 50:621625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melander, B., Rasmussen, I. A., and Bàrberi, P. 2005. Integrating physical and cultural methods of weed control—examples from European research. Weed Sci. 53:369381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulson, A. 2006. As ‘organic’ goes mainstream, will standards suffer. Christian Science Monitor. May 17, 2006 edition.Google Scholar
Peters, E. J., Klingman, D. L., and Larson, R. E. 1959. Rotary hoeing in combination with herbicides and other cultivations for weed control in soybeans. Weeds. 7:449458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasmussen, J., Bibby, B. M., and Schou, A. P. 2008. Investigating the selectivity of weed harrowing with new methods. Weed Res. 48:523532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweizer, E. E., Westra, P., and Lybecker, D. W. 1992. Controlling weeds in corn (Zea mays) rows with an in-row cultivator versus decisions made by a computer model. Weed Sci. 42:593600.Google Scholar
Sharma, S. K., Pandey, D. K., Gangwar, K. S., and Chaudhry, V. P. 2008. Effect of weed management practices on productivity and profitability of direct-sown unpuddled rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) system. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 78 (4):277280.Google Scholar
Vangessel, M. J., Schweizer, E. E., Lybecker, D. W., and Westra, P. 1995. Compatibility and efficiency of in-row cultivation for weed management in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 9:754760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, R., Burton, J. W., and Kilen, T. C. 1993. Soybean growth and light interception: response to differing leaf and stem morphology. Crop Sci. 33:520524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@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 saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.

Effects of Preplant and Postplant Rotary Hoe Use on Weed Control, Soybean Pod Position, and Soybean Yield
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save 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 used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Effects of Preplant and Postplant Rotary Hoe Use on Weed Control, Soybean Pod Position, and Soybean Yield
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save 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 used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Effects of Preplant and Postplant Rotary Hoe Use on Weed Control, Soybean Pod Position, and Soybean Yield
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *