Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T01:30:30.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) Competition and Time of Removal in Soybeans (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Teresa M. Crook  and
Karen A. Renner
Teresa M. Crook
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Karen A. Renner
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop and Soil Sci., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1987 and 1988 to evaluate the control and competitiveness of common lambsquarters in soybeans when present at four densities and when removed at four time intervals. Common lambsquarters were removed by hand or treated with a postemergence herbicide application of bentazon plus acifluorfen. Common lambsquarters could remain 10 weeks following soybean emergence before a 20% soybean yield reduction occurred when weeds were removed by hand. When treatment was attempted with postemergence herbicides, a 20% yield reduction occurred in 1987 if application was not made prior to 5 weeks after emergence. In 1988, all postemergence herbicide applications failed to control lambsquarters due to drought conditions. The postemergence herbicide's degree of control was reflected in the number of remaining lambsquarters plants. Common lambsquarters seed production and germination was not influenced by postemergence herbicide application. There was a strong correlation between dry weight of uncontrolled common lambsquarters plants and seed produced per plant.

Keywords

Bentazon, 3-(1-methylethyl)-(1H)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-4(3H)-one 2,2-dioxideacifluorfen, 5-[2-[chloro-4-trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acidcommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. # CHEALsoybeans, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Corsoy 79’ GLYMABentazonacifluorfeneconomic thresholdseed productionChenopodium albumGlycine maxCHEAL
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 38 , Issue 4-5 , September 1990 , pp. 358 - 364
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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

Literature Cited

1. Basset, E. J. and Crompton, C. W. 1978. The biology of Canadian weeds. Chenopodium album . Can. J. Plant Sci. 58:1061–1072.Google Scholar
2. Beckett, T. H., Stoller, E. W., Wax, L. M. 1988. Interference of four annual weeds in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 36:764–769.Google Scholar
3. Bhowmik, P. C. and Reddy, K. N. 1988. Interference of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in transplanted tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum). Weed Technol. 2:505–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Blumhorst, M. R. and Kapusta, G. 1987. Mefluidide as an enhancing agent for postemergence broadleaf herbicides in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 1:149–153.Google Scholar
5. Conn, J. S. and Thomas, D. L. 1987. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) interference in spring barley. Weed Technol. 1:312–313.Google Scholar
6. Ervio, Lella-Rutla. 1971. The effect of intraspecific competition on the development of Chenopodium album . Weed Res. 11:124–134.Google Scholar
7. Hagood, E. S. Jr., Bauman, T. T., Williams, J. L. Jr., and Schreiber, M. M. 1980. Growth analysis of soybeans (Glycine max) in competition with velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 28:729–734.Google Scholar
8. Hagood, E. S. Jr., Bauman, T. T., Williams, J. L. Jr., and Schreiber, M. M. 1981. Growth analysis of soybeans (Glycine max) in competition with jimsonweed (Datura stamonium). Weed Sci. 29:500–504.Google Scholar
9. Harrison, S. K. 1989. Common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L., interference in soybeans. WSSA Abstr. 128.Google Scholar
10. Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. East-West Center Book, Univ. Press of Hawaii, Honolulu. Pages 84–91.Google Scholar
11. Ritter, R. L. and Coble, H. D. 1981. Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the activity of acifluorfen. Weed Sci. 29:480–485.Google Scholar
12. Roberts, H. A. and Dawkins, P. A. 1967. Effect of cultivation on the numbers of viable weed seeds in soil. Weed Res. 7:290–301.Google Scholar
13. Roberts, H. A. and Ricketts, M. E. 1979. Quantitative relationship between the weed flora after cultivation and the seed population in the soil. Weed Res. 19:269–275.Google Scholar
14. Schweizer, E. E. 1983. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 31:5–8.Google Scholar
15. Sibuga, K. P. and Bandeen, J. D. 1985. Effects of green foxtail and lamb's-quarters interference in corn. Can. J. Plant Sci. 60:1419–1425.Google Scholar
16. Shurtleff, J. L. and Coble, H. D. 1985. Interference of certain broadleaf weed species in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 33:654–657.Google Scholar
17. Sorensen, V. M. 1984. The interaction of acifluorfen and bentazon in herbicidal combinations. Ph.D. Thesis. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI. 181 pp.Google Scholar
18. Steele, R. and Torrie, J. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach, pp 239–284 McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.Google Scholar
19. Taylor, F. E., Davies, L. E., and Cobb, A. H. 1981. An analysis of the epicuticular wax of Chenopodium album leaves in relation to environmental change, leaf wettability, and the penetration of the herbicide bentazon. Ann. Appl. Biol. 98:471–478.Google Scholar
20. Wilson, R. G., Kerr, E. D., and Nelson, L. A. 1985. Potential for using weed seed content in the soil to predict future weed problems. Weed Sci. 33:171–175.Google Scholar