Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-6c8bd87754-5dxdz Total loading time: 0.169 Render date: 2022-01-20T03:08:55.819Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Article contents

Modeling the integrated management of velvetleaf in a corn–soybean rotation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Chris M. Boerboom
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to model the influence of herbicides, wilt disease, and mechanical treatments on velvetleaf population dynamics, annualized net return (ANR), and economic optimum threshold (EOT) in a 20-yr rotation involving alternate years of corn and soybean. Mechanical treatments were interrow cultivation in corn and rotary hoeing in soybean. Herbicides at a quarter (¼×) rate or lower did not reduce velvetleaf seed banks without mechanical treatments in the absence of wilt. Herbicides at full (1×) and half (½×) rates decreased velvetleaf seed banks 95% within 6 and 20 yr, respectively, when there was no wilt. Herbicides at ½× rates with mechanical treatments reduced the seed bank 95% in only 10 yr, but mechanical treatments did not increase the rate of seed bank decline with 1× rates. Wilt infection had to occur annually to reduce velvetleaf seed banks as effectively as herbicides at 1× rates alone. ANR was maximized with herbicides at reduced rates, even though they were not as effective at reducing seed banks as were 1× rates. The herbicide rate required to maximize ANR increased as the initial velvetleaf seed bank density increased. Mechanical treatments and wilt decreased the herbicide rate required to maximize ANR. In fact, wilt infection increased the ANR of herbicides at reduced rates. The EOT was 0.55 and 0.4 seedlings m−2 when velvetleaf was managed with herbicides at 1× and ½× rates, respectively. Mechanical treatment had no effect on EOT, but wilt increased the EOT. Herbicides at reduced rates should only be used to manage velvetleaf in fields with a low seed bank density when integrated with mechanical treatments or when the field has a history of wilt. Herbicides should be used at 1× rates when fields have a large velvetleaf seed bank and when integrated management practices are not used.

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

Anonymous. 1992. Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics—1992. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics Service.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1994. Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics—1994. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics Service.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1996. Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics—1996. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics Service.Google Scholar
Bauer, T. A. and Mortensen, D. A. 1992. A comparison of economic and economic optimum thresholds for two annual weeds in soybeans. Weed Technol. 6:228235.Google Scholar
Boerboom, C. M., Doll, J. D., Flashinski, R. A., Grau, C. R., and Wedberg, J. L. 1997. Field crops pest management in Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Cooperative Ext. Bull. A3646.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Doll, J. D., Proost, R. T., and Visocky, M. R. 1994. Interrow cultivation to reduce herbicide use in corn following alfalfa without tillage. Agron. J. 86:6672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussan, A. J. 1997. Predicted population dynamics of pigweed, giant foxtail, and velvetleaf as influenced by herbicides at reduced rates in corn and soybean. . University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 287 p.Google Scholar
Bussan, A. J., Boerboom, C. M., and Stoltenberg, D. E. 2000. Response of Setaria faberi demographic processes to herbicide rates. Weed Sci. 48:445453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussan, A. J., Boerboom, C. M., and Stoltenberg, D. E. 2001. Response of velvetleaf demographic processes to herbicide rate. Weed Sci. 49:2230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardina, J., Norquay, H. M., Stinner, B. R., and McCartney, D. A. 1996. Postdispersal predation of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) seeds. Weed Sci. 44:534539.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann Appl. Biol. 107:239252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R., Doyle, C. J., Wilson, B. J., and Cussans, G. W. 1986. Modelling the economics of controlling wild oat in winter wheat. Pestic. Sci. 17:112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeFelice, M. S., Brown, W. B., Aldrich, R. J., Sims, B. D., Judy, D. T., and Guethle, D. R. 1989. Weed control in soybean (Glycine max) with reduced rates of postemergence herbicides. Weed. Sci. 37:365374.Google Scholar
Devlin, D. L., Long, J. H., and Maddux, L. D. 1991. Using reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 5:834840.Google Scholar
Eaton, B. J., Russ, O. G., and Feltner, K. C. 1976. Competition of velvetleaf, prickly sida, and Venice mallow in soybeans. Weed Sci. 24:224228.Google Scholar
Fuller, E., Lazarus, W., and Peterson, A. 1995. Minnesota farm machinery economic cost estimates for 1995. University of Minnesota Cooperative Ext. Bull.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Andujar, J. L. and Fernandez-Quintanilla, C. 1991. Modelling the population dynamics of Avena sterilis under dry-land cereal cropping systems. J. Appl. Ecol. 28:1627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, J. L., Reynolds, D. B., Vidrine, P. R., and Saxton, A. M. 1992. Common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) control with reduced rates of soil and foliar-applied imazaquin. Weed Technol. 6:847851.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. C. III, Cardina, J., and Mullinix, B. G. Jr. 1994. Dynamics of subeconomic threshold populations of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) in a peanut-cotton-corn rotation. Weed Sci. 42:364368.Google Scholar
King, R. P., Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and Zimdahl, R. L. 1986. Bioeconomic modelling to simulate weed control strategies for continuous corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 34:972979.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., and Matthews, J. L. 1993. The effect of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) plant height on control with six postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 7:491494.Google Scholar
Kropff, M. J. and Lotz, L.A.P. 1992. Optimization of weed management systems: the role of ecological models of interplant competition. Weed Technol. 6:462470.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Maxwell, B. D., Buhler, D. D., and Gunsolus, J. L. 1995a. Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) recruitment, survival, seed production, and interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 43:226232.Google Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Maxwell, B. D., Buhler, D. D., and Gunsolus, J. L. 1995b. Modeling the population dynamics and economics of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) control in a corn (Zea mays)-soybean (Glycine max) rotation. Weed Sci. 43:269275.Google Scholar
Lueschen, W. E. and Andersen, R. N. 1980. Longevity of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) seeds in soil under agricultural practices. Weed Sci. 28:341346.Google Scholar
Lybecker, D. W., Schweizer, E. E., and King, R. P. 1991. Weed management decisions in corn based on bioeconomic modeling. Weed Sci. 39:124129.Google Scholar
Mulder, T. A. 1992. Corn weed management systems: attempting to reduce herbicide use and increase effectiveness of mechanical weed control. . University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Mulder, T. A. and Doll, J. D. 1993. Integrating reduced herbicide use with mechanical weeding in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 7:382389.Google Scholar
Mulugeta, D. and Stoltenberg, D. E. 1997. Weed and seed bank management with integrated methods as influenced by tillage. Weed Sci. 45:706715.Google Scholar
Prostko, E. P. and Meade, J. A. 1993. Reduced rates of postemergence herbicides in conventional soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 7:365369.Google Scholar
Rabaey, T. L. and Harvey, R. G. 1994. Efficacy of corn (Zea mays) herbicides applied at reduced rates impregnated in dry fertilizer. Weed Technol. 8:830835.Google Scholar
Rudolph, B. A. 1931. Verticillium hadromycosis. Hilgardia 5:197353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sickinger, S. M. 1981. Factors influencing Verticillium dahliae Kleb. in soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) and soybean (Abutilon theophrasti Medic.) causal agent of Verticillium wilt. Pages 112114 In The effects of Verticillium dahliae (Kleb.) on Abutilon theophrasti (Abutilon theophrasti) and crops. M. . University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Steckel, L. E., DeFelice, M. S., and Sims, L. D. 1990. Integrating reduced rates of postemergence herbicides and cultivation for broadleaf weed control in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 38:541545.Google Scholar
Wilkerson, G. G., Modena, S. A., and Coble, H. D. 1991. HERB: decision model for postemergence weed control in soybean. Agron. J. 83:413417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zanin, G. and Sattin, M. 1988. Threshold level and seed production of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medicus) in maize. Weed Res. 28:347352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10
Cited by

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.

Modeling the integrated management of velvetleaf in a corn–soybean rotation
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.

Modeling the integrated management of velvetleaf in a corn–soybean rotation
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.

Modeling the integrated management of velvetleaf in a corn–soybean rotation
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? *