Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55b6f6c457-rfl4x Total loading time: 0.236 Render date: 2021-09-24T05:48:10.132Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Efficacy and Economics of Cultivation for Weed Control in Potato (Solanum tuberosum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Charlotte V. Eberlein
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Aberdeen, ID 83210
Paul E. Patterson
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Idaho, Idaho Falls, ID 83402
Mary J. Guttieri
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Aberdeen, ID 83210
Jeffrey C. Stark
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological Sciences, University of Idaho, Aberdeen, ID 83210

Abstract

A 3-year study was conducted in irrigated potato to compare weed control efficacy and economics of hilling plus one or two cultivations with the standard treatment of hilling plus a preemergence application of pendimethalin plus metribuzin. Trials were conducted under both weedy and weed-free conditions. Common lambsquarters and redroot pigweed were present in weedy treatments each year; significant populations of hairy nightshade and green foxtail also were present one year. When weed populations were low or moderate (< 45 plants/m2), total weed biomass in the hilling plus one cultivation treatment was reduced 98 to 99% relative to the weedy control, and U.S. No. 1 tuber yields were equal to the standard treatment. However, when weed populations were high (145 plants/m2), hilling plus one cultivation and hilling plus two cultivations provided only 30% and 61% reduction in weed biomass, respectively, and U.S. No. 1 tuber yields were 35% and 13% less, respectively, than the standard treatment. The standard treatment provided 99% reduction in total weed biomass each year, and yields were equal to the weed-free, hill plus no cultivation control. Net return was $37 to $100/ha higher for the hilling plus one cultivation treatment compared to the standard treatment when weed populations were moderate or low, but was $808/ha less than the standard treatment when weed populations were high.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bellinder, R. R., Wallace, R. W., and Wilkins, E. D. 1996. Reduced rates of herbicides following hilling controlled weeds in conventional and reduced tillage potatoes. Weed Technol. 10:311316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callihan, R. H. and Bellinder, R. R. 1993. Management of weeds. In Rowe, R. C., ed. Potato Health Management. St. Paul, MN: American Phytopathology Society. pp. 95102.Google Scholar
Chitsaz, M. and Nelson, D. C. 1983. Comparison of various weed control programs for potatoes. Am. Potato J. 60:271280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dallyn, S. L. 1971. Weed control methods in potatoes. Am. Potato J. 48:116128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dallyn, S. L. and Fricke, D. H. 1974. The use of minimum tillage plus herbicides in potato production. Am. Potato J. 51:177184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dallyn, S. and Sweet, R. 1970. Weed control methods, losses, and costs due to weeds and benefits of weed control in potatoes. Proceedings of the Food Agriculture Organization International Conference on Weed Control, University of California. pp. 210228.Google Scholar
Dean, B. B. 1994. Anatomy and morphology: growth and development. In Dean, B. B. Managing the Potato Production System. New York: Food Products Press. pp. 5168.Google Scholar
Eberlein, C. V., Al-Khatib, K., Guttieri, M. J., and Fuerst, E. P. 1992. Distribution and characteristics of triazine-resistant Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii) in Idaho. Weed Sci. 40:507512.Google Scholar
Love, S. L., Eberlein, C. V., Stark, J. C., and Bohl, W. H. 1995. Cultivar and seedpiece spacing effects on potato competitiveness with weeds. Am. Potato J. 72:197213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mallory-Smith, C., Thill, D., and Morishita, D. 1993. Herbicide resistant weeds and their management. Pacific Northwest Bulletin No. 437. 4 p.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. C. and Giles, J. F. 1989. Weed management in two potato (Solanum tuberosum) cultivars using tillage and pendimethalin. Weed Sci. 37:228231.Google Scholar
Patterson, P. E., Bohl, W. H., and Smathers, R. L. 1995. Southeastern Idaho crop costs and returns estimate for Russet Burbank commercial potatoes: no storage. EBB4-Pol-95. University of Idaho Cooperative Extension System. 4 p.Google Scholar
Pereira, H. C. 1941. Studies in soil cultivation. Part IX. The effect of inter-row tillage on the yield of potatoes. J. Agric. Sci. 31:212231.Google Scholar
Rioux, R., Comeau, J. E., and Genereux, H. 1979. Effect of cultural practices and herbicides on weed population and competition in potatoes. Can. J. Plant Sci. 59:367374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vangessel, M. J. and Renner, K. A. 1990. Effect of soil type, hilling time, and weed interference on potato development and yield. Weed Technol. 4:299305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
USDA. 1994, Idaho Agricultural Statistics. Boise, ID: Idaho Agricultural Statistics Service. 72 p.Google Scholar
16
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.

Efficacy and Economics of Cultivation for Weed Control in Potato (Solanum tuberosum)
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.

Efficacy and Economics of Cultivation for Weed Control in Potato (Solanum tuberosum)
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.

Efficacy and Economics of Cultivation for Weed Control in Potato (Solanum tuberosum)
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? *